The Thor's problems up til' now..........

[arthas]

Damage soaker would probably be better.

.

Well at one time it was,but it was quickly scraped...Terrans don't need damage soakers,their speciality has always been ranged and massive damage...SO the Thor is good as it is now,The whole LOS blocker idea sux,i dunno who though of that,it will ruin gameplay...

[Aldrius]

Someone said somewhere else, to give the thor a flak cannon, like an LoS blocker shell. Why shouldn't the thor have a dark swarm type ability? Like a gas bomb...

Because I'm still hoping they give that to the Overseer...

and the Thor is an assault unit, not a spellcaster.

[horror]

Because I'm still hoping they give that to the Overseer...

and the Thor is an assault unit, not a spellcaster.

Yeah, it's an assault unit. That doesn't mean it can't back up other units. You need to look at what hole the thor is trying to fill. As the SC2 team said at one point, the thor isn't and never was meant to be a 1 unit wonder to take out bases. I'd have to agree with Arthas by saying the Terrans aren't about damage soaking. That's Zerg.

In a recent interview, Dustin Browder said:

...its all-round nature helps me against marauders and banshees which are a pretty significant threat in Terran versus Terran games. I have also gotten some use out of the Thor against Zerg opponents who go for Roaches and Mutalisks. Because the Thor's powerful cannons can break a roach line and its anti-air-missiles can thrash a Mutalisk threat. But when I'm facing a lot of Zerglings or a lot of marines or a large force of zealots and immortals, I'm not feeling a lot of love for the Thor.

The thor is, supposedly, and 'all round unit', not a damage soaker. Without backup, it would be useless against larger numbers. so, an ability where it's able to create and LoS blocker, rather than be one, certainly counts as a support-type ability.
By giving the thor an ability like this, doesn't make it a spellcaster. In any RTS, there should be no unit based to be a spellcaster. It's only what is fitting for any one unit. One ability doesn't make a unit a spellcaster.

[pure.Wasted]

Well at one time it was,but it was quickly scraped...Terrans don't need damage soakers,their speciality has always been ranged and massive damage...SO the Thor is good as it is now,The whole LOS blocker idea sux,i dunno who though of that,it will ruin gameplay...

I'm curious... are you aware that Tank vs. Tank is one of the most popular TvT strategies right now?

The thor is, supposedly, and 'all round unit', not a damage soaker.

You've completely misunderstood. Nobody in their right mind would ever suggest that the Thor in its current incarnation is a damage soaker. It obviously is not. What some of us are saying is that 1) it used to be, and 2) the Terrans could really use one. We're not contradicting Browder's interpretation of the Thor as it is. We're saying that's not what it should be.

and the Thor is an assault unit, not a spellcaster.

To be fair, the Vulture was also "not a spellcaster."

[flabortast]

Actually, I'd still consider the Thor a tank. Would you rather your enemies focus fire on you 400 HP unit, or you fragile high DPS marines at the back? Marauder can also be used to soak damage for marines.

[pure.Wasted]

Actually, I'd still consider the Thor a tank. Would you rather your enemies focus fire on you 400 HP unit, or you fragile high DPS marines at the back? Marauder can also be used to soak damage for marines.

The Thor's high HP tag is deceptive. Stalkers, Immortals, Marauders, and Tanks all have +Armored attack bonuses, and because they're all very popular units, Thors in effect have a lot less HP vs. most armies than it would seem.

Thors have something like 0.118 DPS per HP, Marines have something like 0.15. When you take into account the amount of +Armored bonuses, that's bound to raise the Thor's DPS per effective HP, which means he's not going to be far behind a Marine in fragility. Let alone a Marine being healed by a Medivac.

Compare to Marauders' DPS per HP: 0.05, and 0.1 vs. armored. That means your Marauders make far better tanks than your Thors in many situations.

[flabortast]

But if you have a mech heavy strat devoting gas to Thors and Tanks, with the marines peppered in, you may not have Marauders in your line up. Thors are better tanks in a mech heavy strategy. I love the considerable high DPS the Siege Tank's assault mode has. Too bad people still prefer siege mode despite it not having the same uses as in SC1.

[Shadow Archon]

How well do Thors do with automatic repair MULE back-up that can be dropped anywhere?

[Wrocek]

Umm, yea... Kill one of the units and make the other one god so it can take on most of the army. I don't think so. -_-

[phazonjunkie]

But if you have a mech heavy strat devoting gas to Thors and Tanks, with the marines peppered in, you may not have Marauders in your line up.

Considering the rather high gas cost (a bit harder to come by in sc2) and supply requirements, you're unlikely to see large numbers of either in competitive play.

I love the considerable high DPS the Siege Tank's assault mode has. Too bad people still prefer siege mode despite it not having the same uses as in SC1.

People have that sc1 'siege or die' mentality, where they siege at the first sign of the enemy without even attempting tank mode micro. Then again, with exception of a slightly faster attack, siege tanks are more or less the same as in sc1. Of course you could give them a slight buff, but if you make the tank mode TOO effective it might make the Thor redundant (part of my original argument)