Suggestion: Replace thor with an Anti-Air Siege tank

[n00bonicPlague]

It removes/limits one of the major draws of the Viking

Even with the fact that it can NOT transform until it gets that upgrade? I'd say that's pretty strong drawback, considering that unless you research that upgrade you will have no basic light/medium AtA support -- none. Plus, once the upgrade is done, the anti-air attack leaves ground mode and goes back to air mode.

[MattII]

No it isn't. It does 5/8th damage vs battlecruisers, just a hair over half. It deals a total of 25 damage to battlecruisers and 40 to each mutalisk/viking/void ray/other relatively small air unit in the AoE. That's a massive difference. Given the thor's high costs, it is simply inefficient vs such targets.

It's 8 attacks at 5 damage each, not 5 attacks at 8 damage, it only does 16 vs. BCs in a full cycle.

[ManjiSanji]

The big fat simple matter of the fact is (this is from some old interview) that the art team (Samwise) said to the design team (Browder), "Ok, you've asked us to make some things to put in the game, well, we've made something we want you to put in the game. Make it work."

That "thing" was the Thor. It has been pushed and moved around a lot. They've tried very hard to change it to make it work. It could work. Even though I fucking hate the unit, it could work. The biggest problem with the Thor is its god-damned size. Size implies high cost, toughness, low speed, transportation issues, etc.

The GtA units for other races are small, fairly inexpensive, and mobile. The Thor is exactly the opposite of that. Is it bad? Not necessarily; we need to see it in Beta to really figure out if it works. However, a big, clunky unit designed to destroy highly mobile, quick air units is not a smart idea, unless the range on its attack is extremely long.

The real truth of this unit is that all of us, every one of us, are blah blah blahing, uncertain as to whether or not the unit in its current incarnation is useful and fun, or if it's neither (and it needs to be both). Frankly, I think we should petition Blizzard to show us demonstrations of the current unit being effective in a real game, or they need to go back to the drawing board with it.

[Kimera757]

It's 8 attacks at 5 damage each, not 5 attacks at 8 damage, it only does 16 vs. BCs in a full cycle.

Thanks for the assist. It's worse than I thought vs BCs. It did used to be better, that's probably why they changed the damage calculations.

The big fat simple matter of the fact is (this is from some old interview) that the art team (Samwise) said to the design team (Browder), "Ok, you've asked us to make some things to put in the game, well, we've made something we want you to put in the game. Make it work."

Yes.

That "thing" was the Thor. It has been pushed and moved around a lot.[/quote[

Yes. I'd just like to point out it hasn't significantly changed in over a year.

However, a big, clunky unit designed to destroy highly mobile, quick air units is not a smart idea, unless the range on its attack is extremely long.

It has a range of 10. That's better than a goliath. I think that's the same range as a Yamato Gun.

Frankly, I think we should petition Blizzard to show us demonstrations of the current unit being effective in a real game, or they need to go back to the drawing board with it.

Find those WWI 2008 videos. (To be fair, they only showed it's anti-ground role.)

[MattII]

Personally I think the biggest problem with the Thor has always been the design team's unwillingness to change the Siege Tank, I mean even the Battlecruiser has seen an attack-pattern change (1*25 -> 8*8).

[Nicol Bolas]

It comes way too late in the tech tree

ARMORY! The Armory is not "too late" in the tech tree by any stretch of the imagination.

I think it would be best to get rid of the Thor, move the Viking to the Factory (built in ground mode), and allow the Viking to shoot its anti-air missiles from the ground.

So you want the Goliath back, only it should be able to fly. Do you understand how important it is to making air units viable that the Goliath is gone?

It's not really good as an anti-air unit, and the Terran need a decent Tier-2 air defense unit.

No, the Thor is perfectly capable of warding off groups of units, or lower-Hp/armored air units. The Terrans most certainly should not have a better GtA unit than that. Otherwise, it starts to break air combat.

The GtA units for other races are small, fairly inexpensive, and mobile. The Thor is exactly the opposite of that.

The Thor is not a GtA unit. It has GtA attacks, but it also has a very strong single-target GtG attack. It also has lots of Hp.

The Thor does many things.

I think we should petition Blizzard to show us demonstrations of the current unit being effective in a real game, or they need to go back to the drawing board with it.

Wow, the arrogance behind that statement is just appalling. Blizzard has to prove to us that a unit belongs in the game, or they should scrap it? Who the hell do you think you are?

[ManjiSanji]

Wow, the arrogance behind that statement is just appalling. Blizzard has to prove to us that a unit belongs in the game, or they should scrap it? Who the hell do you think you are?

What did I tell you?
Ignore my goddamn posts.

I'm putting you on ignore. Don't bother replying to mine in the future.

[n00bonicPlague]

So you want the Goliath back, only it should be able to fly.

......

Correction -- I want the Goliath back, only that, after Transformation is researched at a Tech-Lab (attached to a Starport), it gains the ability to fly but loses its GtA attack for an AtA attack.

[Kimera757]

If you got a goliath back, what would do about its harmful effects on AtG units?

[Nicol Bolas]

I want the Goliath back, only that, after Transformation is researched at a Tech-Lab (attached to a Starport), it gains the ability to fly but loses its GtA attack for an AtA attack.

Why would you ever research that? Why would you give up the perfect GtA shield that is the Goliath in favor of a flying unit that's now susceptible to Corruptors and Phoenixes?