How tough is Ghost armour?

[drakolobo]

is assumed that kerrigan weakened by exposure to the atmosphere of char to become human and required medical treatment, no ?

[Kimera757]

Most of Char is just barely safe enough for humans. You won't burn in most places.

Ghost armor is not that tough. Generally ghosts rely on speed and stealth to avoid damage. (That takes into account their high hit points; unlike in WarCraft III, ordinary units don't get to have dodge percentages.)

In lore, marine armor is tough and is often portrayed that way in combat in the novels. Hydralisks used to do poor damage to them in-game, due to game balance. But the zerg recipe probably changed.

[topsecret221]

That's not what [a Ghost's] amount of hitpoints suggest...

One thing to keep in mind when comparing health values is that it's not necessarily how many hits they can actually stand, but how much it takes for them to be hit as well. This means factoring other, non-communicated factors in, like cover, agility, the aim from both parties, etc.

It's kind of abstract, but you have to think about it in this kind of manner to even remotely make sense. For example, maybe that marine didn't die from the siege tank shot because there was a small amount of cover between himself and the blast, along with his combat shield. This means he can keep on fighting, but since he's already avoided death once, he's statistically more likely to die (represented by the fact that he is now down to 40 health instead of 55). Similarly, a ghost will kill a marine not because his armor is stronger, but because he's better at not getting hit and is simply a better shot.

On this note, hero units go by the same principle: marine Raynor from brood war used cover more effectively and made himself harder to hit (hence 300 HP) and was a far better shot than his other marine allies (hence 18 damage). Also, having custom armor may have something to do with that health value.

[LestersPetZergling]

aaaaa

[TheEconomist]

Constant drunkenness tends to make one impervious to the laws of physics. Just watch any clip show with drunk drivers.

Oh wait, Raynor being a drunk was just more SC2 foolishness. Apparently, he couldn't handle a couple of emotions. Danger no probs though!

[LestersPetZergling]

aaaaa

[Turalyon]

One thing to keep in mind when comparing health values is that it's not necessarily how many hits they can actually stand, but how much it takes for them to be hit as well. This means factoring other, non-communicated factors in, like cover, agility, the aim from both parties, etc.

It's kind of abstract, but you have to think about it in this kind of manner to even remotely make sense. For example, maybe that marine didn't die from the siege tank shot because there was a small amount of cover between himself and the blast, along with his combat shield.

Similarly, a ghost will kill a marine not because his armor is stronger, but because he's better at not getting hit and is simply a better shot.

All well and good until this theory/abstraction falls apart when you consider that "healing" of hit points to full can take place. So we're supposed to take that Medic's can somehow magically (and potentially infinitely too) restore the breakdown of these non-communicated factors of cover, agility and even aim as well? This is basically what you're saying if hitpoints aren't just a representation of physical durability of the unit.

This means he can keep on fighting, but since he's already avoided death once, he's statistically more likely to die (represented by the fact that he is now down to 40 health instead of 55).

I sense a bit of gambler's fallacy/logic here. Just barely avoiding death doesn't increase one's likelihood of dying again - it's the situation that they're in (that they're in the middle of a battlefield for instance) that increases the likelihood of dying.

On this note, hero units go by the same principle: marine Raynor from brood war used cover more effectively and made himself harder to hit (hence 300 HP) and was a far better shot than his other marine allies (hence 18 damage). Also, having custom armor may have something to do with that health value.

Eh, the logic's a bit wishy-washy and rather arbitrary if you ask me. If the justification for Raynor's "stats" being so good is because "he's just plain better", how come his tactical prowess and leadership not have an effect on his entourage and the other units he controls? Shouldn't all units under his command have more hitpoints according this principle? The answer is no because there's gameplay/story segregation and that it will ruin "balance".

[solidsamurai]

Eh, the logic's a bit wishy-washy and rather arbitrary if you ask me. If the justification for Raynor's "stats" being so good is because "he's just plain better", how come his tactical prowess and leadership not have an effect on his entourage and the other units he controls? Shouldn't all units under his command have more hitpoints according this principle? The answer is no because there's gameplay/story segregation and that it will ruin "balance".

Someone else complained (on here? can't remember), that the gameplay itself dripped into the story and segregated it to the point that it was a major causation in the plot being awful.

So ironically, gameplay and story was segregated to include that, but not enough that the story didn't suck anyway.

[Turalyon]

Someone else complained (on here? can't remember), that the gameplay itself dripped into the story and segregated it to the point that it was a major causation in the plot being awful.

Don't you mean that there would no segregation between gameplay and story if one bled into or influenced the other?

Either way, the argument certainly has traction since all the missions (especially in WoL) feel like you're working through a shopping list rather than feeling or experiencing them like a piece of a story.

[TheEconomist]

Someone else complained

Did this poor, unfortunate individual happen to get drawn into a long, misunderstood debate over this complaint? Good chance that was me.

This is basically what you're saying if hitpoints aren't just a representation of physical durability of the unit.

Not really. Just because a unit's hitpoints goes up 10 points doesn't mean that 10 points of the body had to have been healed. For example, part of the body could be healed which allows for the unit to continue to evade, aim, plan, etc. to justify those hit points.

But, seriously, who the fuck cares? Might I remind there's actually shit that matters to discuss on the internet. Like maybe, hmmm, Syria?