idea: mobile "bunker" vehicle for terran

Discussion in 'Terran' started by ianiorio, Jan 29, 2009.

idea: mobile "bunker" vehicle for terran

Discussion in 'Terran' started by ianiorio, Jan 29, 2009.

  1. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    Ok Let's say the terran have a new vehicle that can be loaded and unloaded like a dropship or bunker. It's speed could be upgraded, and it's armor could be upgraded (along with other metal). The vehicle can be loaded up with up to four marines (or ghosts etc) boosting it's potential attack power to an infantry unit x3. If the vehicle only has one marine in it, it cannot attack and merely provides a speed boost for the unit to get somewhere (marine or ghost, marauder etc.) and the armor boost for vehicles.

    **potential for a +3 attack (infantry), +6 armor (vehicle) group of infantry units with same speed as vultures in sc1. the harass achieved with such a force could be gnarly. i think it evens out well because as a "dropship" styled unit, it cannot move in the air.

    This new vehicle would effectively act as a plus one-three armor for the marines inside. Hence, an infantry unit with +1 armor in this vehicle with plus 2 armor, would equal a marine with +3 armor. This bonus would apply to all terran units inside, giving the potential (in an extremely late game) for a single vehicle to house 4 marines (ghosts etc) with a +6 armor bonus while inside the vehicle. naturally, like a drop ship, the unit can both be repaired, and if destroyed, all units inside perish. the vehicle itself has no abilities other than being speed upgradable and the ability to apply it's defense boost to units inside it. The vehicle cannot move without a unit inside (and one unit cannot attack while inside)

    What do you guys think???! Let's discuss; i'm very open to anyone's suggestions and think this could be a cool new thought exercise.

    [Let's call this vehicle a Hermes for the sake of this discussion. (Hermes is the god of safe travel, good fortune, trickery, messengers, and truth.)]

    **potential for one Hermes + one medivac + one repair scv set to follow and auto repair = awesome

    **potential for something interesting: if the hermes is attacked by units that can only do biological or psychic damage (psi storm, ghost snipe, etc) the vehicle is unharmed and could be highjacked by opposing terran. (perhaps protoss too but i can't see zealots riding around in a car per se)
     
  2. EonMaster

    EonMaster Eeveelution Master

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    4,154
    Likes received:
    4
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Black City, Unova
    hmm...this is an interesting take on an old idea. I remember coming up with a mobile bunker when I was new to this site, but didn't have the x3 infantry power of fire on the move. The version I remember comming up with was similar to the tank, as it had to stop and deploy in order to fire to keep it from becoming overpowering.

    Problem would be that ppl wouldn't have just 1 of these, but more likely 5+. So they could basically take the fire power of 20 bunkered marines anywhere they want. And for it having x3 attack, that equates to 60 marines from 5 mobile bumkers.
     
  3. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    Originally Posted by EonMaster: And for it having x3 attack, that equates to 60 marines from 5 mobile bumkers.

    It definitely sounds unbalanced when you put it that way. Any ideas on how to make it a viable idea. The strategic implications have my mind reeling. I think a major downside to the Hermes could be that it is light armored. perhaps is has only 80 hp (like the vulture) but costs 300 minerals and 100 gas. We can tweak these numbers to what seems fair. There is a huge risk in loading up your infantry in something so crappily armored and expensive, but that risk comes with so much potential
     
  4. overmind

    overmind Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,188
    Likes received:
    3
    Trophy points:
    38
    From:
    New Zealand
    Remember the KISS rule, keep it simple, stupid.

    In my opinion, a mobile bunker should just work like a mobile bunker, changing around armour systems (well, that's the way i intrepeted your post) would just make it confusing.

    And yes, we've had heaps of mobile bunker ideas, my one was for a rapid insertion type vehicle :) It's quite suprising we haven't even seen concepts of the idea from blizzard.
     
  5. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    Have any of the previous ideas dealt with bio/psy-only damage effect?

    i know i'm late on the mobile bunker idea as a whole, but afterall, this is a thought experiment and the transferrable armor bonuses hopefully make it somewhat refreshing. i indeed mean "changing around armour systems", overmind, at least for this one unit. i think this idea could be maintained with balance if perhaps it was a 2nd tier unit and to in order to attain its speed upgrade, a 3rd tier would be necessary. it could really make Terran infantry viable in the late game. Coupled with the Medivac, it would complement the Terran's already uncanny mobility.

    edit: the bunker is also missing from sc2 so this could "replace" it
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2009
  6. overmind

    overmind Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,188
    Likes received:
    3
    Trophy points:
    38
    From:
    New Zealand
    Bio/psy only damage? The only thing i could think of is blizzards snipe/psi shot.

    Yes, the tranferrable armour is a nice change of pace however it seems to me to be a little complex and might be a bit difficult to read ingame. Although changing it so that it can attack with any number of units inside it as a bunker might help with that, that may just be my illusioned opinion :rolleyes:

    Also, bunker is in. It was never out of starcraft 2, as far as i know.
     
  7. Arvendragon

    Arvendragon Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    578
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    16
    From:
    Canada
    Mobile bunker = APC

    Bunker is still available.

    Bio/Psi (sp.), I believe, is like Zerg organic units, and Protoss psiconic damage from Archons, etc.
     
  8. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 29, 2009
  9. aem1

    aem1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    263
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Cali
    like the Humvee from C&C generals. i always wanted something like this in starcraft.

    anyways its a good idea, its just that you need one unit to drive it? and that it doesn't move w/o a unit inside?...ok

    imo what we know as the "medivac" should be one of two upgrades for the dropship that it can be upgraded into the medivac or an attack ship which would only hold mauraders, marines and ghosts who than can attack inside the ship

    kind of like the bc ability
     
  10. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    http://www.starcraft2forum.org/forums/showthread.php?t=7905&page=5

    In opposition to the other recent discussion at the above link, let's allow the ghost to drop a nuke from the Hermes. What I ACTUALLY mean is allow units to use abilities while within the vehicle. Though It wouldn't be very useful to nuke with (the Hermes couldn't move while a nuke its being called from within it and cannot cloak) but imagine the Hermes speeding towards the enemy base at top speed, a ghost in the passenger seat saving all her energy until the last possible moment, cloaking herself while still in the vehicle, then exiting the vehicle undetected. that could provide a bit of an advantage boost to a newly trained ghost with very little energy stored up. It would certainly be much safer than walking to the enemy base uncloaked until the last moment.

    aem1, i have no arguments against your optional upgrades for the medivac ship as an alternative
     
  11. 10-Neon

    10-Neon New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,713
    Likes received:
    4
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Gainesville, FL
    Cloaking shortly before exiting the vehicle and cloaking shortly after exiting the vehicle are barely distinguishable. It wouldn't really be enough of an advantage to warrant an entire unit.
     
  12. LxMike

    LxMike New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    280
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    i think i still have the concept drawing for that idea somewhere
     
  13. ianiorio

    ianiorio New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Atlanta
    any word on that concept drawing, LxMike?
     
  14. PancakeChef

    PancakeChef New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    756
    Likes received:
    3
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    United States
    They actually had a similar unit for Nod in Command and Conquer 3. It was a mobile vehicle that could pack in and out of a bunker that infantry could shoot out of. It was only useful in very specific situations and wasn't really used much by players from what I can remember. So personally I am kind of against the idea.
     
  15. Symph0ny

    Symph0ny New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Dallas
    Seems like a cool idea, but the firepower multiplication and immunity to bio attacks seems designed to be abused and broken. Take out the damage multiplier and maybe just reduce the bio damage?
     
  16. Hayden351

    Hayden351 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    465
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    If this idea is used it would almost be as if the bunker could lift off.
     
  17. Symph0ny

    Symph0ny New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Dallas
    Flying bunkers? Dear god.

    I don't want them to go too far with bunkers this time around, because Terran seems to be based around recon and mobility, and static bunkers don't mesh too well with that.
     
  18. Hayden351

    Hayden351 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    465
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    It seams that the terran are really mobile and can really get a compact turtle it seam that they can move with ease and they can stay where they are with ease terran is almost like a opisite of itself. :unsure:
     
  19. Cotcan

    Cotcan New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    237
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    That's true. Terran need that mobility, and recon. It's what they are built around. But I think this would be a good idea. It would be a great counter for the zerg's worms, and the protoss warp-in. A fast, cheep unit. That can carry 4 units. The units can attack, and recharge energy. But the unit is weak. Best with quick attacks, like the GLA in C&C Generals. Maybe the unit costs 100 minerals, and 50 gas. If it was like that, it should be in.
     
  20. Hayden351

    Hayden351 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    465
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    But they gave the mobile ability to the Zerg. It didn't work for Protoss also i doubt that they would change it right now, and why would they give it to Terran?