New Thor Thread

If freaking 35HP Zerglings can be microed, then 45HP Reapers can be microed. I see no reason why you can't retreat Reapers to let live and fight another day like Psionicz said.

The point isn't to prevent any Reaper from dying, it's to avoid fights that you can't win and minimize needless Reaper death. If the situation was such that your Reapers are guaranteed to wipe out if they stuck around, but you can take out a significant number of enemy workers, then it might be worth your while to do that. But if not, do what you can and get out of there losing only a few Reapers.

But part of the reason why I think the Reaper would be self-sufficient is because of the Flamethrower suggestion. Make it fast, deadly to Light, but very flimsy to be easily killed in direct confrontations. I love and welcome balancing factors. Weaknesses are not always weaknesses, they are sometimes excuses for being strong in other areas.

 

@ Remy. I never meant to say that the Terran player has a direct control over which Medics are healing what units, I more meant it as they can directly control the amount of healing being done. They won't be ordering Medics to heal a specific Marine or anything as the Medic is probably automatically healing it and if it's not chances are it'll already be dead. Anyway, yeah, the more healers, the more healing, the less dying. The more Marauders, the less melee damage taken, the less dying. The more Thors, the more diverted fire, the less damage taken (excluding the Thor which is supposed to be taking all that damage). That's pretty much what I was getting at, and thinking about it, I probably should have included killing them before they kill you. Regardless, the Terran have it anyway so it's another way in which they take less damage. Healing, tanking, kiting, killing. They Terran should have them all as they're all ways of increasing their survivability.

Just quickly about the Reaper, I don't really see why they need flamethrowers or how that would solve the problem. The way I see it, Reapers barely need their pistols. They're supposed to get in there via a back entrance, do some serious damage with their D8 Charges (not with their pistols), and get out. The only reason for the pistols is basically for economy raids. D8 Charges would not work against Drones, SCV's or Probes, so that's when they use their pistols.

Lastly, about the update saying that Marauders do not have an area of effect attack any more, I definitely think that's a mistake. Slowing individual units would not help at all. The only time I can see it being useful is against Ultralisks, but that's pretty much it.

 

I'm so sorry, but I can't read all of this.

How we got on the subject of reapers I'll never know. Since it's already out there I'll comment.

Reapers are hit and run as we all (I imagine) know and agree. Small arms make sense. You go in and pick off some units. Maybe they are workers, maybe they are casters, maybe you just want to force your enemy to spend more resources and time on keeping your reapers out as a simple faint. They sound like damn good scouting units too. Giving them more fire power than the D8 charges seems like a bit much.

About the Thor.
I don't get what's wrong with the original concept. They hit hard. Very hard. Lots of health. One can do the work of multiple siege tanks. Is there an overlap? Yes. Is that a 100% bad thing? No.

Look at it this way. Thors are a different kind of siege tank.

Tanks: You need multiple factories to build a substantial force. They need to stop and transform in order to do their real damage. Tanks can be transported. A tank push will generally decimate an entire base as the line moves forward. Tanks are prone to friendly fire upon each other. Being cheaper, tanks work better at defending a base's perimiter.

Thors: Are built by SCVs (you always have lots of those anyways). Thors stop and fire without wasting precious seconds locking into a siege mode. Thors can not island hop nor should they be able to (buyer beware). A single Thor or two (accompanied by appropriate units as always) seems to me as more so a wedge attack (kill their economy/ tech/ or production; the choice is yours). You don't use nearly as many Thors so friendly fire upon other Thors is limited. Being more expensive/less mobile Thors are not as effective at defending a bases perimeter.

Put them in different branches of the tech tree and I think you have two very different units for very different circumstances.

If I repeated anyone please refer back to the first line of this post. Also I totally agree with that genius; lets get hammered at a MENSA party together.

 

Overlapping IS a bad thing. Because if you had two different units doing the same job, then it is better to save on resources and time and go with the lower tech unit. And in this specific case, other than any GtA aspect, the Siege Tank is pretty much better than the Thor in every way anyway. Why go out of your way and pay for more tech when you can get the same results with Siege Tanks? The Siege Tanks are the real damage dealers, and with the old design there was little incentive to target Thors first.

Hex, the very fact that you(or anyone else) can throw out comments like the Reaper not really even needing its pistol is a problem, since that means the Reaper is only there for the D8 and little else. If a unit is good for one thing and one thing only, that usually makes it over-specialized. While specialization is a good thing, over-specialization is not. It limits strategic freedom and possible applications, while also making a unit run out of actual usefulness very quickly.

To be perfectly honest, I've never liked the Firebat personally. I suggest Flamethrowers on the Reaper not because I was fond of the Firebat, not at all. The scope of Firebat's in-game usefulness was extremely limited. I suggest Flamethrowers to give Reapers anti-infantry capabilities. And instead of only being useful with D8s, Reapers can be deadly VS workers but also have other uses.

I also disagree with you on the change on the Marauder. I think changing it from AoE to single target is a good move. Now, at least the player is required to put some thoughts into using the Marauder, instead of just getting a few and have the bases covered. With AoE slow, it means as long as there are a few Marauders around, pretty much all enemy melee is slowed all the time, which is kind of brainless.

 

they said somewhere reaper dose extra dmg to light armored units. i'm not sure what the increase is but you should take that into factor as well. Giving them a flamethrower would just be over the top if there duel guns rip light armored units. The terran gound force i think is looking very well right now. I think they have fair balance but i'm still question the reasons for the loss of the medic. If she was making terrans OP why not nerf her down insted of booting her altogether. Slowing the heal rate would of been nice.

As for the thor, its current role seems a little strange, its a slow moving unit with suprior GTA. the air units can just move away from a thor if they see it so whats the point of the thor? answer, it's a defencive unit. Defencive only. It still moves to slow to have it be an effective offence and i guess it forces a player to play ground and avoid contact with this unit. I'm not sure on the GTA attack range but this should be a big issue if thats what blizzard wants the thor to be used for. I dont know about you guys but if i was massing air and saw an expansion with a few missle turrents and 2 thors you might think twice about attacking if the thor is as good as blizzard has made it to be agenst air. I dont really see the thor as having overlapping problems right now. its an odd defencive unit but it sure wont be my first choice of offence if it still moves as slow as i imagine it.

 

They should give the Thor 2-3 charges of an internal defensive matrix, supply limited. That way when you really need the thor to soak up damage and break defenses you can. It adds more decision making and micro for players to consider what situations need the matrix.

I always that the Thor could be used to attract enough fire for the tanks to get into seige mode, and that the Thors bombard should be short range, area of affect (or a cone), like a sawed off shotty. This way the tanks and thor complement each other rather than overlap.

 

@ Remy. I never said that they didn't need the pistols, I said that they barely need them. I said this because they should never really be in an open fight, unlike Marines and Marauders, etc. They're the perfect raider. They aren't only there for the D8 Charges, as they need their pistols for economy raids, but they're not going to be used for fighting enemies toe-to-toe, like we saw in the Protoss Gameplay Video, which I thought was a very poor demonstration of them, and they're definitely not going to be sitting there trying to gun down an entire building. D8 Charges for the most of buildings, pistols for workers and for the rest of buildings. However this doesn't mean that they're only good for raiding. They'll be able to ambush and break up, or even deal significant damage to, any frontal assaults, any massed Ground units, possibly even used as cheap, early Bunker-busters.

If Reapers get any kind of bonus, it should be against workers to allow them to raid economies much quicker and easier. If they get a bonus against Light targets then they'll overlap with the Ground-to-Ground Viking.

About the Marauder, the slowing area of effect does not have to be so large that it brainlessly slows their entire force. If it had a radius small enough to just get three small units or something, imagine like three Zealots standing in a row, it would be much more effective but would still need to be micro'd well. With single targets you'd need about as many Marauders as units they have on their front line which shouldn't be the case because Marauders are supposed to be support units, not main units.

 

Why not just shoot each Zealot once, that way they're all slowed with the minimum amount of Marauders.

 

@Itzahexgor, the reaper dose have an increase agenst all like armored units. all works are considered light armored. and on a final note the reaper and viking have a SMALL overlapping issue but its not big enough to scrap or change the unit. Viking is used to attack air and raid while the reaper is bent sole on ground fighting. there is a big difference in the 2 units.

 

So what if two units have the same bonus, that isn't an overlap at all. Reapers are raiders, hit and runners, being available to take advantage of situations they work well in being outnumbering or attacking slow hard hitters. Vikings are basically Goliaths with a light armor bonus and the ability to fly, these are the frontliners.

Both the Valyrie and Wraith did explosive damage, was they an Overlap?
Vultures, Firebats and Ghosts did concussive damage was they an overlap?
SCVs, Marines and Goliaths did normal damage was they an overlap?

http://www.battle.net/scc/GS/damage.shtml

 

thanks Psionicz, you said it better then i did, lol the reaper and viking barly overlap and to be honest the use of viking for raiding might be better since they can just up and fly away while the reaper needs some where to run on ground.

I think reapers can be used for a little more then just raids, I'm not sure about the damage because blizzard works on this unit a little too much. Since almost all units at the start of the game are light except roaches the reaper might pack a punch to the lower units. Now lets add in the marine and maruader factor and we might have a nice little mixed force here. A bunker here or there and your looking at troble. infact a reaper in a bunker vs light armored units sounds like a match made in heaven . This is a unit that i dont hate but i dislike that its getting so much attention. I just wanna playwith it and see how it works. now lets see you cram a viking in a bunker.

 

@Remy

I almost agree with what you said. Don't you still find an offset of having to build one tech building to have to build multiple factories with addons as far as getting the bang for your buck goes.

 

Having two units with the same bonus may not be an overlap, but having two Ground-to-Ground, inter-tier units with the same bonus is. The Walker Mode of Vikings can only attack Ground targets, and it's the same with Reapers, Vikings can avoid terrain obstacles, and so can Reapers, and Vikings have a bonus against Light targets, so if Reapers have one as well, which I wasn't aware they had but I may be wrong, then they'll overlap a fair bit. Both are Ground-to-Ground, both can avoid obstacles and both are more effective against Light targets. It's similar to how the original Thor overlapped with the Siege Mode of the Siege Tank. Now Reapers would be overlapping with the Walker Mode of the Viking.

Valkyries were completely different to Wraiths, Vultures were completely different to Firebats and Ghosts, and SCV's were completely different to Marines and Goliaths. Valkyries dealt area of effect damage, and Wraiths didn't. Wraiths dealt direct damage, could Cloak and also had an Anti-Ground attack. Same goes for Vultures and Firebats, and Ghosts were never used for their usual attack. Only the Ground-to-Ground attack of the Goliath dealt normal damage, and they were mainly meant for their Anti-Air attack. Mentioning SCV's is just stupid.

 

Actually Marines were almost identical to Goliaths except the Goliath has a 'stimmed' air attack and had more armor.
Umm Vultures were renowned for their actual attack and the fact they were extremely microble meaning they were good vs Zealots, Zerglings, Marines and Ghosts.
Why is mentioning an SCV stupid, they did well when used for attack, they could beat a Zergling :]

Reapers will not be used in direct combat, thats an obvious one as Blizzard said in the showcase, something along the lines off ''The Reapers can't take this direct firepower from the cannons and must retreat as they are suited for raiding poorly defended bases''
Vikings are and will be used as frontliners. Yes, they can be used in raids, and so can any unit. Except its just easier for the Viking since it doesn't need a drop. And they are not built specifically for raids, the air mode is to fight armored air fighters and get around the battlefield quickly.
When raiding with a Viking it isn't exactly a raid, its more of an assult since the Vikings can hold their own. Reapers on the other hand are much weaker and easier to kill so they will have higher priority targets, dispatch of them and leave if it gets too hot.

Does this mean assult mode tanks overlap with Vikings as they'd be equally adapt for fighting any ground forces cept Zerglings and do more damage vs buildings.

There is no overlap just similarities, every unit has a similarity somewhere.

 

yup so everything is clear now right and by the way FYI

if some of you are wondering why this behemoth class unit is named THOR i might possibly answer that
my wild guess is....

"im about to drop the hammer!!" remember that line from the acrylite siege tank?? it figures that theyd literally named it after the marvel character Thor who is a god with lightning powers like zeus carrying his huge Hammer/Axe... or so i think ^_^

 

right... and what the thor really needs now is an electric or lighting kind of attack. ^^

 

Hex, I gotta say that you're kinda going off into La-La-Land with the whole Reaper thing bro. You mentioned a whole bunch of stuff that countered your own points. I don't know why you think Vulture and Firebat didn't overlap because of single target ragned VS splash, but Flamethrower Reaper and Viking do. How does that make any sense? Also, the Reaper having a normal attack doesn't change anything, even workers all have attacks. The SC1 Ghost's attack was only good VS small, yet you don't see people using Ghosts for its attack.

If the Reaper does in fact have bonus VS Light units, then it's all the more reason to push for Flamethrowers instead. It'll help distinguish the Reaper's GtG against the Viking's, short ranged melee splash VS longer ranged single target. But more importantly, it'll allow the Reaper to have a place in actual open battles by having meaningful damage output. Plus, Flamethrower would mean that it'll deal damage to enemy units under Dark Swarm. Personally, I would like to see early Terran infantry consist of Marines, Medics, and Reapers, and be fully functional that way.

Oh, and BTW, the SCV is a significant combatant early-game in SC1, just wanted to point that out.

I'm sorry BloodHawk, I didn't quite understand what you were saying there.

 

With the Goliath, you were saying that it has a normal attack, just like the Marine, so why don't I think that they overlap when I say that the Viking and Reaper would, right? Well only the Goliath's Ground-to-Ground attack dealt normal damage, while it's Anti-Air attack dealt explosive damage. The Goliath's main use, especially after BroodWar was for its Anti-Air capabilities, so that is why I think it doesn't overlap with the Marine. About the Vulture, I never said that the Vulture wasn't renowned for its normal attack, I said the Ghost wasn't. Lastly, on the SCV, I think you basically answered your own question.

If you understand that Reapers are primarily raiders, and not front-liners like the Viking can be, why does it need a bonus against Light targets? At the moment they're only really going to be used for taking out workers in economy raids, so why not solidify that role by giving them a bonus against worker units, which wouldn't be hard as all they need to do is bring in a worker modifier which I believe they may already have for the Zerg, instead of giving them a bonus against all Light units which would make them more viable in open battles as Anti-Light units which would then start to further overlap with the Viking.

Of course it wouldn't. Anti-Armoured Ground-to-Ground attackers would never overlap with Anti-Light Ground to Ground attackers, just like how Anti-Air attackers don't overlap with Anti-Ground attackers. Two units that specialise in completely different areas don't overlap. The Viking and Reaper on the other hand, if the Reaper is/has been given an attack bonus against Light targets, would definitely start to overlap as they're both Ground-to-Ground, they're both specialised for raiding, and they've both got an Anti-Light attack.

I'm not saying that Reapers and Vikings would be the same unit, but you can't deny that they'd be getting more and more similar. If they completely changed the Thor because it supposedly overlapped with the Siege Tank, I can't imagine that they'd be too happy with the suggested Reaper and Viking.

@ Remy. I didn't contradict myself there, I was talking about the single target Reapers, not the area of effect Reaper. I don't understand how giving the Reapers flamethrowers would help fix anything. They're not supposed to be used for open battles. The Terran already have Marines, Ghosts and Marauders for that. Marines are the backbone of the Terran infantry, the Marauders be brought back to dealing area of effect damage, and Ghosts have the huge bonus against Light targets and priority targets, as well as access to all the other abilities at their disposal.

Again, I don't understand how giving the Reaper an area of effect attack would help. It's the Marauder that should be given the area of effect attack for the Terran infantry, because it will boost its effectiveness against biological units. Even if the slowing radius was extremely small and also if it was only half of the full damage radius, it would fill both kiting and area of effect roles at once without having to make such a defined units less specialised.

 

AH guys, this is a thread for the Thor, i think we are gettin a bit carried away with the Reapers and Vikings

 

Workers are light armored.
Why would you bring in AtA fighters in comparison to the GtG attackers we are talking about? No one every compared a GtG unit to a AtA unit, thats just stupid.
The assult mode siege tank and Viking are pretty similar, just cuz they have a different bonus does not mean they are not similar, primarily they actually have the same goal, to eliminate enemy forces with range. Put why don't you note that as an overlap as where the Viking gets the bonus vs a Zealot or something, the tank makes up for it with sheer firepower.

Also the Reaper and Viking comparison is supringly the same as the Marine and Goliath one. Reapers dealt light bonus as Vikings do, but when the Viking goes air it does 'explosive' damage as the Goliath would. In sc1 groups of Goliaths were very effective playing the Marine's role as you'd say, as they had good armor and a fast rate of fire.
Reapers are basically Marines except they are weaker against a wide range of units with their weapon being light armor specialized, but this is sufficed with speed and some abilities.
Vikings are Goliaths with a specialized attack vs light armor also, now this being sc2 we can clearly see Zealots > Marines (on their own, even worse with charge), this is where the Viking comes in, they are tough enough to stand up to those Zealots while dealing a considerable amount of damage back, which the Reaper could not do as Zealots would easy them.
Now with the Reaper being light armor strong, it is good for outnumbering enemy units just like Zerglings, they are speedy so you can put them into good positions to eat away that armor of light fighters and increasing that effectivness with added micro.

So as you can see there is really no overlap, Vikings and Reapers clearly have their uses. Now you can argue that Reapers can fight anything the Viking can, but thats only with skill. A standard player would not be able to dance around a group of 10 Reapers while evading charging Zealots.

To me its simply like this:
Vikings have the fire power and staying power. If it gets too tough they can retreat. They way they retreat can also prove useful as they can easily flank the enemy, making the Vikings a very tactical unit, meaning they shouldn't be used blindly as a Marine could.
Reapers are the oppotunists since they can and will take advantage of situations since they have a wide range of uses but to use them to their best effect it would take more skill, so while the Reapers have their basic obvious uses, being: quick flanking, ambushing, raiding, hit and runners and of course the fact they own Immortals. They also have that availability when skill is added to be used in scenarios where you'd think they couldn't, such as fighting a number of Zealots or being used vs a Thor.
To put it simply, Reapers are the flys which won't go away.

I'd also like to note that the Reapers fit in to those places where the Vikings can't hold their own, such as fighting Stalkers. Stalkers beat Vikings no matter what (when used correctly), they have the bonus attack, stronger, more life, more microble, attack air, so even if the Viking tried to retreat, the Stalkers would still get them.
Enter Reapers, they are fast enough, numorous enough to stand a chance against Stalkers. Now you are thinking, why don't I mention Marines?
Because Stalkers are much more manouverable against Marines, and if they decide to stim and chase the Stalkers, it simply blinks away meaning the Marines wasted a whole 10 hitpoints which is a lot when fighting ranged units with 20 damage, which would be 15 vs Marines. But the Reaper is fast enough to keep up with the Stalkers and even throw mines at the destinations in which they can blink.

You don't know why they changed the Thor, the only overlap was its bombard ability, that could have easily been changed as it has.

Anyway. IMO Marauders need to be cut, I'd openly except Reaper Firebats instead of Marauders. They'd both accomplish the same task, as any skilled player would have to break up his forces when these fast and numorous splash damage units are flying around anyway, so in effect it does halt the enemy movement passivly and this can be more effective when skill is improved, without some stupid ability.
This also fulfills that critera of the Reapers being raiders, ever dropped a few 8+ Firebats into a mineral line and stimmed them?
It was complete destruction.