View Poll Results: Do you like the Warhound unit model?

Voters
38. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. I like the Warhound as a gritty mech.

    12 31.58%
  • No. I would prefer a non-bipedal unit model.

    26 68.42%
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 67 of 67

Thread: Warhound Model Poll

  1. #61

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    Why is blizzard obsessed about Terran having transformers and bipedal machines? And shields?

    Why?
    Why, indeed. There is only one reason: rule of cool. Plus, it's in keeping with the current brighter and cartoonier take on SC in general.
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  2. #62

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    I have a feeling that "transformer" vehicles should at least have a reason to have those tech spent upon and designed with. Say, a car would transform to a spider like design to allow for traversing difficult terrain.

    Bipedal seems inefficient and require a lot more systems than other designs.

    And isn't being armored mechanical supposed to be the "shield" in that the vehicle itself is as a whole a "shield" in itself? It seems giving a robot another part to serve as shield is redundant and a waste. Or is it?

  3. #63

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    Why is blizzard obsessed about Terran having transformers and bipedal machines? And shields?

    Why?
    Because there's a generation that grew up when Transformers (dis)graced the television screen. Now that they're old enough to be Art Directors and Project Leads, we're going to see a lot more mechs and transformers crammed into our fiction before it gets better.

  4. #64

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    I have a feeling that "transformer" vehicles should at least have a reason to have those tech spent upon and designed with.
    I agree. The siege tank was a simple and very effective way of demonstrating a need for an alternative, transforming mode.

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    Say, a car would transform to a spider like design to allow for traversing difficult terrain.

    Bipedal seems inefficient and require a lot more systems than other designs.
    So it'd be okay if it had more legs? The Goliath works well on two legs. As you said though, "walking" as a mode of vehicular mobility is impractical (would be very easy to knock over given that stability, mobility and weight distribution is solely dependant on the legs making them very obvious weakpoints) and inefficient (would require more energy to move, create more wear and tear and the sophistication of its mechanics would make it a nightmare to repair). If the aim was to cross difficult/uneven terrain then the Terrans can use the anti-grav/hover tech they already possess in the Vulture and Diamondback.

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    And isn't being armored mechanical supposed to be the "shield" in that the vehicle itself is as a whole a "shield" in itself? It seems giving a robot another part to serve as shield is redundant and a waste. Or is it?
    The shield is possibly part of the vehicular form's chassis. In order for it to transform into the walker mode, it probably has to detach part of itself to do so. Since it has nowhere else to put these parts of its chassis, they then become its "shields".

    The thing I'm unsure of is whether this transformed form is supposed to have more health because that wouldn't make much sense given that both forms should theoretically have the same mass and armour no matter what configuration.
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  5. #65

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    Yes. Thus my point. Bipedal robots require more system faculties to maintain balance. Slight changes in it's weight distribution along a vertical plain will require subtle adjustments that can be ignored when using say a quadruped design.

    Given of course that we must build a machine with limbs and cannot use anti-grav.

  6. #66

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    (would be very easy to knock over given that stability, mobility and weight distribution is solely dependant on the legs making them very obvious weakpoints)
    Well, actually the goliath's center of gravity appears to hover in between the 'hips'. And the legs are spread apart with a solid axel in between (nothing like a pelvic series of bones for humans). Goliaths basically move like chickens. If it gets knocked over, maybe one of the legs alone is strong enough to spread out, reverse bend at the 'knee', and lift it up.

    If the aim was to cross difficult/uneven terrain then the Terrans can use the anti-grav/hover tech they already possess in the Vulture and Diamondback.
    I have the impression that terran tech doesn't travel across worlds. That's why different tech springs up in the same battle group. Basically, a technology is received and praised by one world, but another world is paying more money for a different tech - and so an entire different product is produced and incorporated into the new military from different worlds. This even affects the 'multinational' corporations.

    The goliath was produced in Moria for urban fighting (or something), and then confederate investors got excited and bought into it. So any tech from some confederate worlds that could have provided the same function (maybe, I dunno, a hovering tank with long bolt missile turret attached to it and capable of transforming into a thinner and faster ATV thing for getting through the mean streets), was ignored, because the marines had made their budget decision. And then great war rolls around and factories everywhere are producing goliaths instead of long bolt missile tank thingies.

    Given of course that we must build a machine with limbs and cannot use anti-grav.
    Engineers at World Y don't know understand the principles of anti-grav, simply because their course load didn't include it. While engineers on world X do, but simultaneously don't understand the potential of something else (ie. a way to incorporate reapers and other mercenaries into a commander's mining base without completely jipping). Technology comes together without any middle man - just 'will it make to/through the assembly line?'. Sort of fits the dystopic universe.
    Last edited by solidsamurai; 08-27-2012 at 03:53 AM.

  7. #67

    Default Re: Warhound Model Poll

    I understand, but I don't think the Korpulu is as huge as the Galactic scope of Starwars for example. Or, is it?

Similar Threads

  1. My Reaction to the Warhound
    By TheProgramer in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 10-27-2011, 11:18 PM
  2. .M3 -> .OBJ Model Convertor
    By Triceron in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-03-2011, 09:32 AM
  3. Thor Re-Model
    By don in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 05-17-2010, 02:44 PM
  4. New Nullifier Model
    By KDraconis in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 02:12 PM
  5. Broodlord Model
    By XSOLDIER in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-30-2009, 09:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •