THOR — just too much?

[n00bonicPlague]

The Thor bothers me quite a bit. It just seems to have too many roles surrounding it. Not only is it a meat shield used to absorb damage and block the paths of the enemy, but it is also has competent weaponry against heavily armored ground units (particle cannons), lightly armored air units (AoE missiles), and massive units/buildings (single-target bombardment ability). Is it imba? I don't know, and that's not the point I'm trying to make. I'm worried that it is just too all around good and that it overlaps with too many other units.

The role of taking out heavily armored ground units seems to already be well covered by Marauders and Tanks (mostly Marauders). The role of taking out lightly armored air units has supposedly been covered by Vikings, Battlecruisers (Missile Barrage), and even — as Karune himself has told us — Marines and Ghosts. The role of massive unit/building destruction is definitely taken care of by Tanks (Siege Mode), Reapers (D-8 Charges), Ravens (Hunter-Seeker Missile), and Battlecruisers (Yamato Cannon).

So I guess my question is:
If all of its roles are already well covered by other units, then why is the Thor still around?

If any of those roles it fills are even remotely needed, they are the meat shield and StA roles. But, do all three races have to have a meat shield unit? The Terrans got along just fine in SC:BW without one — even while the Protoss and Zerg each had one themselves (Archon and Ultralisk respectively). So why must the Terrans have a meat shield now?

And so far as the StA role goes, why not just create a simple fix or stat adjustment? A suggestion: bump the Viking down to the Factory and allow it to fire its anti-air from the ground; however, prevent it from going into air mode until a starport is built, and give it a slight nerf while using its missiles from the ground. This nerf should most likely exist as either a range reduction (justified by using a portion of the fuel to fight gravity) or a fire rate reduction (justified by a rearranged structure deoptimizing the efficient use of missiles in favor of the autocannons) or even both.

And before you call "OMG GOLIATH" — need I remind you that all the Thor is is a Goliath/Tank on Steroids? The "goliathized" Viking would at least provide a clear role that doesn't overlap with other units. Also, with the nerfed missiles in StA mode, the player would need to weigh the (dis)advantages of StA (limited mobility and firepower and exposed to heavy anti-ground, but safer vs heavy anti-air and able to counter ground units) vs AtA (high mobility and firepower and safe from heavy anti-ground, but exposed to heavy anti-air and unable to counter ground).

Anyway, there could be all sorts of possibilities. Having a goliathized Viking is not the only solution.
What do you think?

DISCLAIMER: These are my educated opinions and personal tastes — not necessarily facts or mass opinion.

[Tigger]

The main reason that the Thor is in the game still is probably because the unit just looks cool.

Giving the Terrans a meatshield now doesn't seem so bad, since now the Protoss have immortals and the Ultralisk has 200 more hp.

idk what to say about unit overlap part. ^____^

[mgcemir]

pardon my ignorance, but does thors normal attack trigger immortals shields?

[n00bonicPlague]

pardon my ignorance, but does thors normal attack trigger immortals shields?

I think so, but it's attack is technically four shots of 14 points iirc, so the effect isn't all that strong as it could be.

[Kimera757]

The role of taking out heavily armored ground units seems to already be well covered by Marauders and Tanks (mostly Marauders).

You're definitely right about the "mostly marauders". Siege tanks do ground splash, have incredible range, a minimum range, and don't have the toughness to do the job...

Honestly, I think Blizzard just wants to stealthily remove the siege tank, which could explain why marauders and thors exist in the game.

The role of taking out lightly armored air units has supposedly been covered by Vikings, Battlecruisers (Missile Barrage), and even — as Karune himself has told us — Marines and Ghosts.

On this I disagree, even with what Karune said. Thors are much more efficient than any of the units you just named at taking out light air.* Their splash is something only the battlecruiser can replicate, and that's even higher tier, even more expensive, and has a bunch of other options the player might want instead.

*Because of the splash, naturally. Ironically, the Viking is about the same tier as the Thor, since it requires just a starport, but is much better at killing ships like the battlecruiser.

IMO, Missile Barrage is a self-defense mechanic for the battlecruiser (to keep void rays, vikings and corruptors from eating them alive), rather than something you use to defend a base. And of course, it costs energy.

The role of massive unit/building destruction is definitely taken care of by Tanks (Siege Mode), Reapers (D-8 Charges),

In the latter case, it depends on how powerful D-8 charges. They're good at blowing up roaches, not necessarily good at killing buildings. Also, reapers have very little stamina for their cost (and are, of course, much more mobile).

Ravens (Hunter-Seeker Missile), and Battlecruisers (Yamato Cannon).

Ravens and Yamato Cannon require energy. The first can't even target buildings last I heard and has a bunch of limitations (it's a lot weaker than in Battle Report 2 as well).

So I guess my question is:
If all of its roles are already well covered by other units, then why is the Thor still around?

I suppose I just don't agree. It's anti-ground abilities (basic weapons and special weapons) do overlap with the marauder, yamato cannon and siege tank, but I think the tank should be left out of the analysis due to its unique abilities and limitations. Also, it's the only one of the group designed to be a meatshield, as far as I can tell.

If any of those roles it fills are even remotely needed, they are the meat shield and StA roles. But, do all three races have to have a meat shield unit? The Terrans got along just fine in SC:BW without one — even while the Protoss and Zerg each had one themselves (Archon and Ultralisk respectively). So why must the Terrans have a meat shield now?

It's a different way of taking out bases, and it might be a big deal since tanks aren't very accessible now. That'll take beta testing to tell for sure.

And so far as the StA role goes, why not just create a simple fix or stat adjustment? A suggestion: bump the Viking down to the Factory and allow it to fire its anti-air from the ground; however, prevent it from going into air mode until a starport is built, and give it a slight nerf while using its missiles from the ground. This nerf should most likely exist as either a range reduction (justified by using a portion of the fuel to fight gravity) or a fire rate reduction (justified by a rearranged structure deoptimizing the efficient use of missiles in favor of the autocannons) or even both.

Makes no difference. Vikings aren't that good against light air and can't do splash either. Change that and then you're talking... but then you have something that can't pwn battlecruisers, carriers or motherships.

The original unit holding that role was the predator, which vanished long ago. I don't see any way of getting rid of the thor's GtA role without introducing a new unit, which seems to defeat the purpose of your thread. Want to bring the predator back and take away the thor's GtA? Fine. But now you've added an extra unit.

And before you call "OMG GOLIATH"

Which it isn't. It's stronger vs ground than vs air, far tougher, did splash (unlike goliaths) and specialized vs light air (where goliaths were specialized vs heavy air and basically slaughtered all air units except mutalisks and observers.)

— need I remind you that all the Thor is is a Goliath/Tank on Steroids? The "goliathized" Viking would at least provide a clear role that doesn't overlap with other units.

Clear yes, but it's still leaving a gaping hole in terran defenses; they're just not efficient enough at killing muta balls and possibly void rays and banshees. (I'd love to see the exact cooldown on those units to see if, cost for cost, who wins in a battle between thors and void rays or banshees.)

I think your "campaign" against the thor as an anti-ground unit would work better. If you could convince Blizzard to bring back the Predator, you could maybe toss the Thor. However, the Predator is worse, IMO, since terrans wouldn't have a big meatshield and it can only attack air. (Yes, pet peeve, but I think for a good reason. AtA-only is purely reactive, unless you're hunting overlords/overseers.)

Apparently as of BlizzCon 2009 the thor makes two attacks at 30 damage, so each would do 10 damage to an immortal's shields (basically 20 damage a shot). Only one third the damage, but that's twice as good as what a siege tank gets vs an immortal.

[spychi]

guys I played the game and I will say again what I said before; the Thor is powerfull but not OP or imba!
It's expensive but in return you get a unit with 400 HP (BlizzCon 09 build) 30 dmg vs ground units, one great ability. It will probably get few tweaks in the future but I don't see any reason to remove or change the unit totaly!

[n00bonicPlague]

@ Kimera757

Good points. Like you said, most of the overlap I see lies within its anti-ground roles and not so much within its anti-air role. But of course I imagine what Blizzard thought is: "How can you have a huge ground unit that is extremely powerful against air but can barely defend itself vs ground?" I believe that is why the Thor is the way it is now.

@ spychi

Like I said, I'm not necessarily saying that it is imba or OP.
I'm just saying that it goes against my tastes for what the Terrans should have.

————

Another option besides the whole Viking thing is to change the Hellion attack (or remove it entirely) and give the Thor a powerful AoE weapon against lightly armored ground unit. Something along the lines of a massive shotgun comes to mind (starts at a small spread with high power but increases spread and decreases damage with distance).

[Nicol Bolas]

The role of taking out heavily armored ground units seems to already be well covered by Marauders and Tanks (mostly Marauders). The role of taking out lightly armored air units has supposedly been covered by Vikings, Battlecruisers (Missile Barrage), and even — as Karune himself has told us — Marines and Ghosts. The role of massive unit/building destruction is definitely taken care of by Tanks (Siege Mode), Reapers (D-8 Charges), Ravens (Hunter-Seeker Missile), and Battlecruisers (Yamato Cannon).

Siege Tanks are only good at taking out armored targets when you have a lot of them. And even then, the Thor is better. STs are best for their AoE damage against groups, not specifically armored units. As for Marauders, they're better at Immortals, but that's about it.

HSM is not a good ability for destroying high-Hp targets; they don't do enough damage to a single target for their cost. D8 Charges are good for taking out smaller buildings, but it would take 16 D8's to take out 1000Hp of building. And Ultralisks can easily run away form D8's.

Vikings are not for dealing with light air. They're generalists. They get a bonus specifically to Massive units, and they get much of their benefit against other targets from their range. Marines are useful for dealing with light air, but Ghosts are terrible at it.

The point of the Thor is that it can do all of those things. So it becomes a unit that Terrans can rely on.

The Thor is the new Siege Tank: it goes great with everything

The important part of the Thor is that it can't do it all by itself. You can't just build Thors and win; they may have many roles, but these roles are all support roles. It acts as a Meatshield for something else. Or it acts as GtA support for something else. Or it acts as a high Hp unit smasher for something else.

The Terrans got along just fine in SC:BW without one — even while the Protoss and Zerg each had one themselves (Archon and Ultralisk respectively). So why must the Terrans have a meat shield now?

"fine" is not how the Terrans got along without a meatshield. They got along without one by building up enough STs to kill anything that approached, and putting a thin wall of expendable Vultures between them and the enemy, for the sole purpose of slowing them down so the STs could finish them off. Mines were also vital to this, as they helped thin out the herd.

This is one way to play. But it should not be the only way the Terrans have that works.

The Thor is the key to keeping Terrans from being a wall of static guns and mines.

And before you call "OMG GOLIATH" — need I remind you that all the Thor is is a Goliath/Tank on Steroids?

And since it's a fusion of two units that is "on steroids", it is neither a Goliath nor a Tank. It is a multi-role, versatile unit. And therefore "replacing" it with a pigeonholed unit is not a good thing.

pardon my ignorance, but does thors normal attack trigger immortals shields?

How Hardened Shields Work.

When an attack hits the shields, the shield "armor" is subtracted, thus reducing the damage. Then the Hardened effect kicks in. If the reduced damage is greater than 10, it will be clamped to 10.

The Thor's attack is a double attack, with each shot doing 30 damage. Therefore, while the Thor would do 60 damage to most units, it will only do 20 damage to an Immortal with shields. 5 Thor shots will punch through an Immortal's shields; 8 Thor shots will kill an Immortal.

[Blazur]

The Thor always has been my least favorite unit of SC2. There is nothing about that thing I like, from the visuals to the purpose it serves.

[Pandonetho]

I don't like the Thor much either, I'm firmly stuck in the traditional theme of the Terrans, no meat shields, strength in numbers, weak individuals.

Every race now has a "tank."

We have the Thor, we have the Marauder, we have the Immortal, Ultralisk, Roach, Brood Lord, man this is like "Tank" overload.

In SC1 the only tank in the game was the Ultralisk.