Mobile Bunker

But it would still have the same problem that the other Mobile Bunkers have.

 

I understand that.... Slightly shaking vehicles.
Well, maybe the units inside the Mobile Bunkers do half the damage when the MB is moving? When it stands still, they do full damage again. Maybe not the best idea... I just cant think of anything right now.

Maybe the springs are even better in the future, letting the bunker on top stay still (picture 1 and 2).

 

or maybe let them have 4 legs instead of 2 for stability like in my drawing?

 

Yeah. btw, my first design also has 4 legs. :good:

 

I would personally prefer some sort of APC, with some special abilities like walking on rough terrain or having a cloaking device or something. Mobile bunker sounds kind of corny

 

i think the mobile bunker would look alot better if it didnt have the dome top

 

Maybe the mobile bunker would be special in the sense it takes minerals to build but can be pack up and rebuilt for no cost. Gives it the meaning of mobile.

Say, you've got 2 mobile bunkers at home. You don't feel that they are at the appropriate place. So you pack them up and set them down somewhere. While they are packed up nothing can be loaded into them, but the rebuild time is aroudn 1/4 of the original time. However, in pack up mode they have around 50hp only. The bunkers start rolling towards the enemy, set up somewhere else and you build supply depots over there, ready to start thoring.

This might make bunker rush imba, so let's change it's cost and tech. First, it requires a factory (lorewise to build its caterpillar tracks) and it cost a little gas (to power it). However, the bunker does not require minerals to be repaired. This ensures the enemy does not mass build mobile bunkers then try bunkering your base.

Why use mobile bunkers? Because bunkers can become useless if the enemy has finished his task of that certain area. Also, mobile bunkers can be comboed with sensor towers. When your sensor tower comes underattack and it's a dud, move your bunkers away and prepare for the real assault. Mobile bunkers also can ensure you don't stick your thor in and have to salvage your bunker to let it out. Although I wonder if the thor's coming out in beta.....

How is it different from phase cannons? Mobile bunkers can be repaired while moving, but phase cannons cannot be regenerated in mobile form. Also, mobile bunkers take longer to be set up but do not require power. Phase cannons cannot go into attack form without a pylon. In fact, it cannot change form without a pylon. But mobile bunkers do not require anything to change into immobile form.

A mobile bunker would have the same hp as an immobile bunker, but cost more gas. When being set up (that's the ability if you still do not know that I suggest)the hp increases as it gets nearer to finishing being set up. It can be repaired as it is being set up. While packing up the bunker loses max until the unit has finished packing up. It can still be repaired.

The speed would be the same as a marine's.

 

LOL, thor w/ bunker sounds like an overlord tank from c&c generals

id prefer the third one

 

I like 2 and 3 they are both cool!
I like the design of 3 more than 2 however 2 seems to be a very good yet simple

 

So i google mobile bunker and i found these:
[img width=573 height=437]http://www.yojoe.com/vehicles/90/mobilebattlebunker/mbb_close_left.jpg[/img]
[img width=640 height=480]http://team-res.alteredpast.com/Portals/0/QuakeWars/Vehicles/h-MCP.jpg[/img]

i think the mobile bunker should be more squarish

 

I think the mobile bunker pictures you found look like a tank.

I just had an idea, how about instead of a bunker, the terrans have a new kind of tank, no siege mode, but it can hold up to 6 marines and its attack and attack speed are based on how many marines are in it.

mobile tank
cost 100 min 50 gas
150 life
base attack 0
movement speed- very fast
armor 1

1 marine
attack: 10
attack speed: slow

2 marines
attack: 20
attack speed: slow-medium

3 marines
attack: 30
attack speed: medium

4 marines
attack: 40
attack speed medium fast

5 marines
attack: 50
attack speed: fast

6 marines
attack: 60
attack speed: very fast

special ability
barage: double its damage for 30 seconds at the cost of 20 life

 

Why not just pay extra for a bunker with lift-off that can't attack in the air? Then you wouldn't need an entirly new unit/building that would deny the Terran something more unique.

 

Deny something more unique? This idea is unique.

The lifting off and landing sounds too much like the viking for my taste. I love tanks, and would like there to be more variety on the types I could use, which was the main reason I got bored of the terran so easily.

 

strategy wise, i think this idea is actually good because this unit can act as an anti-[personnel/light aircraft] armor unit. Plus you can pack a scv or two. I approve of attack specs EonMaster

The only fault that i found in this idea is that it somewhat overlaps the vikings when they are on foot and the cobras

Somebody put this on battle.net forum so you can get their attention. I really like this idea now i think about it

 

I do see what you mean about the overlap.

Unfrtunately I can't post it on b-net forum because I don't know what my CD key is and I'm not sure how I can find out.

 

http://www.thehelper.net/download.php

download the "all in one" it located under diablo, but it has a function to extract cd-key from starcraft folders

 

cool! i'm really likeing the idea of a mobile bunker. I think the way it should roll is a tank, lets say it does 10 normal damage but can't attack air. Then it can turn into "bunker mode" which is pretty much "seige mode" in a sence. The tank stops moving completely and turns into a bunker with lots of hit points. This allows infantry to be put in and whatnot. it shouldn't be allowed to be mobile with accual units in it becuase that's pretty imba. It's like saying u get a moving sunken or a moving photon cannon.

 

It says it can't find the correct version and aborts trying to find the key. My version is 1.15.1. Ideas?

 

http://www.yellowchrome.org/1com/galaxytribune/sos.html
Do not follow what the instruction say in the link, this link is only good for visual help.
Steps:
1.) Go to run and type "regedit"
2.)Locate Starcraft folder which located: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Blizzard Entertainment\Starcraft
3.) One of those file in that folder might say key or something (im very positive it a file that plainly label "key") and just open it and it will give you your cd-key number without the dashes

 

@ Lavitar's idea. I don't like the idea of your Mobile Bunker. If Terran are to relocate their Bunkers then it should cost more for each time, and take the same amount of time to re-setup as it would to build a new Bunker. With your idea, because it only take a quarter of the original time to unpack it, it would be easy for Terran players to fortify in their opponents, by moving their Bunkers in, and quickly setting up them up again. If effect, this could happen with all Mobile Bunker ideas. It would be like Zerg being able to instantly create Sunken and Spore Colonies directly outside their opponents base, or like Protoss using their Photon or Phase Cannons as offensive units.
The best way to stop Terran players from fortifying their opponents in but still allowing them to, in effect, relocate their Bunkers is through Salvaging. If they could Salvage their Bunkers for about 50% to 75% their original cost, then they would still be able to move/relocate them, but the cost to do it would be 25% to 50% the original cost of a Bunker. Also, when building the new Bunkers, they would still take the same amount of time, so they couldn't be used to build in an opponent.