Petition: Bring back the Predator!

A unit that can change to attack all types of targets cannot be as powerful in each individual mode as a specified unit would be in the same situation.
If there are two units, one of them (Unit A) attacks purely Ground-to-Air and the other one (Unit B) attacks both Ground-to-Ground and Ground-to-Air. Unit A will always be more effective at taking down an Air unit than Unit B will. The reason is because otherwise there would be no use for Unit A. If Unit B had a Ground-to-Air attack that was just as powerful or even more powerful than Unit A, then Unit A would never be produced, because Unit B is more powerful and more versatile. It doesn't matter whether Unit B has to change modes to get to its other attack, it is still much more versatile. Terran do not need much more Ground support, so why are you still trying to make a versatile unit?

 

AHH YOU FRUSTRATE ME SO MUCH. :||||

1. that makes hardly any sense
2. There isn't 2 units there is one unit
3. The attack types are not simple attacks which are supposed to own everything it can reach as they are variables and the unit's versatility/effectivness depends on your perception to the current status on the battlefield.
4. So, what fills the Cobra spot? What suffices for the Thor having no distinct role in gameplay where it becomes a key stastistic or can greatly change the course of battle?
5. Do you like arguing with no aim or do you just dislike me?
6. State your current point in the argument (a brief one not 800 word essay) as it helps the discussion and keeps it nice and easy.

 

He DOES make sense.

And the two different units were just examples. Point being; The Terrans don't need another all round unit, they need an all-out anti air, wether it's from the ground or the air.
The Viking that now can fire at air from the ground will not be as effective against air as a Goliath would have been, since it can transform. A Goliath in SC1 that could fly would logically be a lot weaker than the actual Goliath was. We need a unit that pwns air without sacrificing strength for great mobility/abilities.

 

I think the majority of people will dislike the fact the Viking attacks air in its ground form.

But this has gone way off topic. Whether you disagree or not its fine by me, I just wanted to get my simple idea out thats all.

Lets look at the smaller offensive air units Terran had:
Wraith- Standard balanced air craft for most situations with a stealthy option to it aslo.
Valkyrie- Specialized air craft best at dealing with tight formations of air units.

Now in sc2 we have Vikings which are not so agile and quick compared to Wraiths and Scouts but do pack a punch but ONLY against air units in its current mode and are more versatile than the other flyers since it can turn into a ground unit.
The other is the Banshee which only attacks ground units.
This now leaves a space in Terran where they don't have that standard air fighter like the Mutalisk and Phoenix. Now they have units which can attack air but nothing basic, either specialized or has to give up something to attack air (Viking), so instead of giving the Terrans that standard air fighter let them keep to that specialized path and give them the Predator and I'd they Terrans have that space covered.

 

If you read the post you'll find that it does make sense. A versatile is unit is the jack of all trades, master of none. On the other hand, a specified units are the jack and master of one trade.

You're suggesting a new unit, aren't you? I'm suggesting another possibility that would fill the role of Anti-Air much more effectively than your suggestion would. How I am able to do this is by getting rid of a versatile attack so that it is able to be more specified towards Anti-Air.

I never said that those attacks were supposed to own everything it can reach. I'm proving that they're actually much weaker than a dedicated Anti-Air unit. There are already tonnes of units that rely on your perception on the battlefield. The Terran do not need more. They need specialized units to fill the gaps in their army. These gaps are currently in the Anti-Air department.

I can see that you're not paying much attention to the progress of StarCraft2. Cobras are not in the current build. The last time we heard of them, they were replaced by the Thor because they overlapped too much. Also, if you're complaining about how the Thor doesn't have a distinct role in the game yet, then why are you suggesting units that also do not have a specific role?

I don't dislike you, I just think that you're rash and impulsive. You never think your ideas through meaning that, more often than not, there are serious flaws in your arguments. Then, once these flaws have been pointed out, you just say that whoever 'doesn't understand what you mean'. Never defending your ideas leads people to think that you don't know what you're talking about. On the other hand, I have a strong opinion, so if there is ever an idea that I don't agree with, I'll let it be heard. You mustn't confuse this with me just announcing what I think. I always think carefully about ideas before posting to make sure that I'm not contradicting myself or just making an invalid post. As you can probably tell, the ideas of someone who is rash and impulsive would not mesh to well with the ideas of someone who is argumentative and opinionated who thinks things through.

First off, not all arguments can be explained in few words. Arguments need to be backed up and proven. It is pointless just saying 'I believe it should be like this' without any further proof or evidence.
My current point in the argument is that we needn't worry about whether Blizzard will give Terran an Anti-Air unit, because it is obvious that they will. Worrying about that is like worrying whether Zerg will get a ranged ground unit. They obviously will and they'd need to be a bunch of slackers to release StarCraft2 without realizing that Terran need more Anti-Air. No-one needs to petition the return of the Predator. There was obviously a reason it was scrapped. They don't just roll a dice to see which unit they'll scrap this week. It either didn't fit in with the rest of the Terran, either lore-wise or gameplay-wise, or they were having balancing issues with it. No matter what the reason for it being scrapped is, bringing it back without drastic changes will just result in it being scrapped again.

 

Can we stop this huge pointless argument where you are trying to prove me wrong on what I've said is a simple opinion. Also on that unit I made it was directed @Zeratul when he said most people want Terran to have a GtA unit so I gave a unit which takes the Cobras role not POSITION and fulfills that lack in decent air defense.

Also my ideas are pretty much thought through it just depends on the viewers ability to relate it to the current issues being addressed.

Most of these ideas I have speculated upon were based on having dynamic units that allows choices to be made when attacking/defending. And the aim of having a unit(s) like this is to increase tactics within the game so it doesn't become linear with each unit having it's obvious effect on the battlefield. In other words units can be used in various ways which are not always related to its inital use.

But, anyway, care to meet me in the chat to discuss this without plaguing the forums with this argument which has multiple directions at once so it will never come to a conclusion. I will be waiting.

 

This isn't particularly off-topic. The topic is about bringing back an Anti-Air unit, so talking about what type of unit that could or could not be is still, more or less, on topic.

So I'm not able to comment on your opinion? If you don't want people to challenge, attack or prove your opinion wrong, why did you post it in the first place?

I never said your idea was to take the Cobra's position. I just mentioned that it had been taken out because it's role wasn't necessary. That is the role you're trying to fill with this unit. If you wanted to give a suggestion that fills the Ground-to-Air role, why not suggest a purely Ground-to-Air unit?

If you've thought them through then defend them. Don't just say the viewer doesn't understand, because if the viewer can't understand, then it is entirely likely that you're explaining it incorrectly.

If a unit has too many choices then it destroys any tactics. You've suggested a unit that was effective against every unit type (large ground, small ground, large air, small air) depending on what mode it's in and how far away it is. So no matter what you they're defending with, you can easily counter it. That doesn't sound too tactical to me.

You always seem to try to get the last post, and then stop the conversation. There isn't a reason why we can't continue the conversation here. This topic is about wanting a Terran Anti-Air unit, and we're discussing your ideas on how you suggested that this could be achieved. It is still on topic. If we started talking about a suggested Ground-to-Ground unit, then yes, it makes sense to stop the conversation.
My point is that why are you suggesting an Anti-Air unit that can also attack ground targets? Terran already have plenty of Anti-Ground support that allows for a lot of tactics. Need proof about the all the ground supports' tactics? Just look at the gameplay blogs and see what they say about it. In a topic about wanting the Predator back, which is a pure Air-to-Air fighter, why is it that you made your suggestion able to attack ground?

 

In Starcraft BW terran had 3 mechs: Goliath, Tank and vulture. In this build they have 3 too, Viking, Thor and Tank. And why does the factory need to have 3 units?

 

In StarCraft: BroodWar they had three units produced from the Factory, Goliath, Tank and Vulture. In the last build, they had three too, Viking, Firebat and Tank. The Firebat has been removed so why wouldn't something fill its spot in the Factory?

 

Why should something fill the spot? In SC 1 they had 4 units in the Barracks, in one of the builds earlier, only 3 units could be build in the Barracks (ghost marine and medic (reaper was build at the merc heaven), and no one was arguing that they were missing a spot...

 

No-one was arguing that they were missing a spot because no-one was arguing that they weren't.

 

Opinions can't be proved wrong only changed, as it woulnd't be an opinion.

I was kind pf expressing twi ideas at once, while giving an example of which can imploy more tactics without being too overpowered since it requires the skill of the player to be used most effectivly.

Nah seriously, a lot of things you say (not all) are hard to understand, maybe its my fault or maybe its your fault who knows. Also you don't make your aim very clear you just combat everything which is said, and not only with me IMO.

Eh? so you're telling me the less options you have when using a unit the more tactics you have?
That seems weird to me cuz having more options gives you that choice on how and when you're going to use the unit's abilities/attributes.
If you was stuck with a spoon and you had to eat steak you can't do much. But if you have the spoon and a knife n fork you are effectivly eating the steak while ready to take on dessert.
Also its not two many choices, it just depends how you look at it. The GtA mode forces a player to make a decision on whether to unveil its possible location to the enemy, so that creates the tactic of waiting for a group of flyers to cluster up so the warhead missle can do its full potential.

Actually, this topic was on bringing back to predator and getting a number of votes to prove we want the Predator back which has been done so far. I simply threw an idea to Zeratul then you combated it for whatever reason now we are here.
And when I gave the idea about the ground attack mode it was simply to show how more tactics can be given which lead me to thinking up the air mode. It was your choice to focus your fire on the offtopic thing which was meant to be a quick yes no ok.

 

nah bring back the wraith

 

The wraith was kinda useless, all it was good at was stealth attacks, and it sucked at AtA. We need a good AtA.

 

Ignore that guys posts, he should be banned.

 

Oh...
Sorry for the misunderstanding

 

You said 'Can we stop this huge pointless argument where you are trying to prove me wrong on what I've said is a simple opinion'. That's why I said 'challenge, attack or prove your opinion wrong'.

If you can't understand what I'm saying then ask me to clarify it. Also, it would probably have something to do with my choice of words seeing as I, unlike a lot of people, use proper grammar and spelling.
[/quote]

Having different units that have less options requires more tactics than having one unit that has all options.

Just having a spoon is like having an entire army consisting of Ground-to-Air. You need a diverse army. A diverse army can conquer separate things individually, very much like having the knife, fork and spoon. Having all your options in one is more like having a Splayd (a Spork with sharp sides for cutting). If you had three Splayds to get through your steak and dessert you'd have a lot of trouble. It'd be easier if you had a specialist team of spoons, knifes and forks.
An specialized army of units that can only do one thing, is like having three spoons. They're all only able to do one thing and can't do anything else.
A diverse army has a lot of specialized units, is like having one spoon, one knife and one fork. They're each able to do their own thing extremely well.
An army of units that can do everything is like having three Splayds (Knife, spoon and fork in one). They're able to do everything, but not as well as the diverse army of specialized units are.

Why do you want the Predator back before you've seen its replacement?

Terran already have enough Ground-to-Ground tactics, why try to invent a unit that makes even more than they need? They need Ground-to-Air and Air-to-Air tactics now.

 

Half of what you said what I was going to say, thank you :]

@quote 1: You obviously don't listen as you tried to justify 'proving an opinion wrong' and its nice you directly say you are attacking my OPINIONS

@quote2: I've asked you many times to sum up your point but you never have.

@quote3: That is true but what I said on that is still true.

@quote 4: You make reference to nothing except adding more to the equation which I did not state. Also you backed up my point exactly by saying it can't take on the units as well as others could but the attribute of its attack is what makes it a spoon with variables not one set rule.

@quote 5: A Predator, another AtA unit. Same thing anyway... Still fills the role they are lacking.

@quote 6: It was an example. And I know what they need hence bringing back the Predator and a possible unit which is exclusivly GtA unit.

Its good to know you're getting there :]

 

Read the whole thing. This was the original comment and response:
Zergalicious: Can we stop this huge pointless argument where you are trying to prove me wrong on what I've said is a simple opinion.
ItzaHexGor: So I'm not able to comment on your opinion? If you don't want people to challenge, attack or prove your opinion wrong, why did you post it in the first place?
Ok? It was you who first brought up me proving you wrong. I never said that I did nor did I say that I was trying to. I've haven't tried to tell you that your opinion is wrong.

I have, whenever you requested for me to sum up my point, replied by said, 'My point is... etc.'
You've asked me in this thread and another thread where we've been arguing and I have summed up my opinion each time.
In this thread:
http://www.starcraft2forum.org/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=47&topic=5985.msg151900#msg151900
I've also, in another topic, summed up the holes in your ideas for new weaponry when you asked me to, in dot points: http://www.starcraft2forum.org/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=47&topic=5988.msg151925#msg151925
How can you say that I've never summed anything up for you?

I made a reference to your parallel of using utensils. I added more to the equation because you left stuff out.

So do you think that Blizzard is going to leave out and Terran Air-to-Air units? We haven't seen all of the Terran units yet. It's obvious that they're going to have an Air-to-Air unit. If that's all this thread is about then it's as useful as a thread saying that Zerg need more ranged Ground-to-Ground fighters.

You still haven't explained why you included a Ground-to-Ground attack in an example of a Ground-to-Air unit.

Don't patronize me. I have been lenient enough towards you already.

 

CALLING FOR MOD (see the last 6 posts).
Cant you two stop arguing please???