Dragoons or Immortals Which is Better?

Re: Dragoons or Immortals Which is Better???

well the game is still developing there probably do something about that later, but the shield should be activated by how much damage something does no??? Because if not then immortals are only good against those unit types and then you wouldnt need em any more, it would sound better if the shield was activated on certain damage point so focous fire would be harder to use and i would then envlove more strategy. just my opinion.

 

Re: Dragoons or Immortals Which is Better???

I disagree I meen if it was activated by how much damage its taking, well that would defeat the purpose of having a shield that only activated by some thing big, not many little un-ordered hits. Look at it this way: its like shooting a cement bunker with 100 machine gun's or an artilery shell and hiting a siege tank with firebats or a yamato blast, its the type of weapon.

 

Re: Dragoons or Immortals Which is Better???

Immortals are better i like that they kept the overall look of the dragoon which was a cool unit but added to its looks and usefulness, I agree with L0ck and L04d's theory on how the sheild will function definitly by damage type probably similar the the warcraft 3 system of light,medium,heavy armour and hack,pierce,magic,etc damage where a specific damage type will activate the shield. Because the immortals are infact upgraded dragoons what the hell happened to the blue goo? bring it back

P.S.The egyptians-in-space look of the protoss in SC2 is over done and the false beards dont make sense what are the odds that egyptian and protoss cultures would both develop this strange and unique decorative element independantly of eachother especially considering protoss dont have beards.

 

I disagree with the idea that the immortal's hardened shield would be activated by damage type instead of a damage threshold.

If we think about it in SC1 terms, and it was based on damage type instead of a damage threshold, there would be too many units that would activate the hardened shield. Not only that, we would end up having units that should activate it but do not, while a great many units that activate it when they shouldn't.

Based on what we know from SC1, siege tank damage was explosive. It makes very little sense to have the hardened shield activate on all explosive damage instead of a high enough damage threshold close to the siege mode damage of 70. If it was based on damage type, a hydra doing a mere 10 damage per hit would activate the hardened shield, yet a reaver doing 100~125 damage per hit would NOT activate the shield. Makes very little sense.

Of course, it is possible for Blizzard to tweak the attack type vs unit size system in SC2. However, it means Blizzard would have to have all heavy hitters in one category, as well as tweak and fine tune just about everything else instead of just having things works similar to SC1 and simply building on it. They would have to rework all unit stats like HP and armor because of this.

I find this idea very unlikely. Why would they needlessly put focus on completely reinventing the damage type system when it worked very well? There was no complaints about it and most fans liked it just fine, there is no need to fix that when it wasn't broken. Also, if this was true, we should've seen evidence of tweaking unit HP but it doesn't appear that way.

 

As far as looks I like the Immortal better...(though the name could be better) Dragoons were never really my favorite unit in SC...

 

To go back to what Silky2007 said, I actually think that's a great point. I would be upset if my Immortals and Stalkers didn't spill aquamarine and bluegreen goo all over the battlefield after they burst apart haha. It would kind of ruin the whole concept that there are actually former Zealot and Templar warriors manning these machine bodies.
Now, to the gameplay part of the discussion, I actually can see the damage type being a possible way of determining what turns the shield on. Think of the Banelings: Although they will likely do enough damage to activate the shield, I don't think they should, or will. I don't really know all the different units' damage types, so I'm not going to try and debate it with some sort of statistic, I'm just telling it how I see it.
And to end on topic, Dragoons and Immortals aren't really that similar. I really want to know what the range and damage of the Immortal are going to be like, because I think in the gameplay video whoever was controlling them was making them walk right next to those Tanks before opening fire. Also, do we know if the Immortal can attack air yet? In their animation on the starcraft2.com site, they look and point their guns up... it seems logical that they would, but you never know. I like the Immortals more, but are they better? For that, we'll have to wait and see.

 

the way i hope blizzard will do it is that they ask themselves what attacks they want to activate the sheild (eg, THOR, seige tank, reaver, ultralisk) rather than have it damage based.

 

I don't know why people even want the hardened shield to activate based on damage type or attacking unit.  I don't think most people even understand exactly what that means.

There is really no situation where a low damage hit should activate the shield because that is the damn counter against it.  Then the only thing left is high damage hits to activate the shield, which should be the case universally above a certain threshold.

The way it was described by the SC2 lead designer sounds like damage threshold is what it is anyway.  This is an exact quote, he said "only when struck by a very powerful attack."  No way does that sound like "certain types of attacks" or "attacks from specific types of units."

But the biggest reason why it will be based on a damage threshold is what I've said two posts up, it's what's simple yet works.  It will cover everything that should activated it and weed out everything that shouldn't.  Making it work off of damage type or specific units(absurd) is getting the same result except doing way more work in the process.  It's like Blizzard wanting to go make each unit deal and receive damage differently against EVERY other unit in the game INDIVIDUALLY.  Why would they do that?  They wouldn't because you can get the same result with a universal damage type system.

 

my bad english has got the better of me
i didnt mean attack type as in 'explosive' but rather they say, siege tank will activate sheild in siege mode, THOR's main cannon will activate it, ect.

doing a damage threshhold would be fine, but it would be stupid if when you upgrade to lvl3 attack a unit will activate the sheild when it didnt at lower levels

 

If they designed it to be activated based on a damage threshold, I don't see why they would set it to be something that a unit would be able reach with a lvl 3 attack upgrade.

Attack mods for all the units were all generally 1 or 2, with the strongest units having an attack mod of 3. The only exceptions are siege tank's siege mode being 5 and goliath's air attack mod being 4. The attack mods are all generally very small numbers, not even worth 10 damage with all 3 upgrades. So if that were to happen, it would be a very specific and intentional design choice, but I really don't see why they would do that. I don't think it's something you'd have to worry about.

 

I hope Bizzard doesn't do something like "Oh, Banelings do more than 30 damage. That's gonna set it off. Okay guys?" I want them to actually sit down and go through a list of all damage types and just say yes or no.

 

Siege tank siege mode damage was 70 in SC1. I think we're pretty safe from every little thing activating the hardened shield.

If there are other things that come close to the threshold, it should activate the shield in the first place anyway. Otherwise, then what the hell is the hardened shield good for anyway? Small hits counter it, but it's not always good against heavy hits either? Might as well call it trash in that case.

 

definately the immortals...i mean look at them...they dont act stupid anymore

i remember the dragoons getting stuck in corners and small obsticles.

 

IMO, Blizzard just split the dragoon into the immortal and the stalker. The Immortal is the anti seige late game dragoon, while the dragoon is the micro kind dragoon.

 

The Immortals is going to be a lot more useful then expected. Because in SC2, there seems to be much more heavy weaponed units. Just take a look at the Thor for the example and you will understand.

Immortals are going to be a very powerful tank just like the Ultralisk. Just look at their HP. 100 shield and 240 HP. That is almost the same as an Ultralisk. Not to mention, they could absorb from what I heard, 800 HP of heavy damage before their shield runs out. I think they might just end up as the ultimate sponge/tank in SC2.

 

It doesn't soak up everything though. And 340 goes down fast from large groups of lighter units.

 

True, but combined with other units, it is going to be very powerful. Just like the Ultralisk, you don't send them in alone. But with combined forces, it will give you satisfying results. Same with the Immortals, and from the looks of it, it will most likely surpass the Ultralisk as the ultimate sponge.

 

Immortals VS Bunkered Marines would be a bit of a hassle but you could just bring Colossi up and burn down the Bunkers.

...I think I was trying to prove a point and then shot it down.

 

I don't think you would use the colossus to take down bunkers. To hack down 350 HP and 1 armor, I think the warpray would be more suitable for the job.

 

I like dragoons because they are bloody and gory with blue blood