Thor Redesign

Concerning the nuke, I was just thinking also that to help balance it the nukes would be stored within the Thor's body chasis - so that when he went to launch them, his chasis would open up somewhat - thus when a Thor assumed 'nuke launching position' he would take somewhat increased damage... this would mean that it was possible to bring an unsupported Thor down with a concerted effort... but yeah, the key would still be to stop it before it got there

and with Thors unable to transport, and slow movement... a good player should know of the Thor coming long before it got there

I like the addition of the melee concept tho, because it would greatly help round out the Terran forces, and it would completely nix any complaints about overlap

 

There may have been examples in history of soldiers that fight with a more, 'slow but powerful' attack style, but if a computer that is the size of the Thor had a melee attack, it would be taking this to the extreme. It would take ages to initiate an accurate melee attack, but it wouldn't even be a powerful attack. It would easily overbalance if it tried to swing as hard as it could at an enemy, and would take ages to recover. Terran excel at ranged attacks, and if they were to make a melee unit, it would not be as big as or as expensive at the Thor. It would be too hard to co-ordinate and too hard to execute the attacks.

 

I really have no clue how you arrive at these conclusions. Right now we use bulldozers, cranes, etc to knock all manner of things over. These machines are capable of targeting something, striking it and maintaining their balance. I don't understand why you believe a futuristic version of humanity would have a lower tech level.

Take ages to initiate an attack? Why? What possible reason is there for a machine to have difficulting moving?

Overbalance? Why? What possible reason is there for a machine being incapable of maintaining its balance, when we have gyroscopes and counterweights with even present tech?

Take ages to recover? Why? I just don't undertand why you think machines have to be clumsy. If a marines combat suit can respond to his muscle movements in a natural and instantaneous manner... why can't a, essentially, giant combat suit do the same?

 

Edited out quotes. Please read the forum rules and refrain from quoting unnecessarily. Do not quote the reply directly above you.


Dude, if you swing something that weighs several tons forward, you won't be able to stop it that easily, it still has it's momentum you know...

 

All of these examples are designed completely different to the Thor. The Thor doesn't have a plough out the front and charge at the enemy, nor does it have a ball and chain to swing. You are right in that those machines are able to target, strike and not overbalance, but the Thor wouldn't be able to.

It is blatant why the Thor wouldn't be able to move quickly. It is extremely heavy and would take an enormous amount of energy to move. This is why it already moves slowly and takes ages to turn around.

It is strikes forwards with the immense force of its weight behind it, there is little that can be done to stop it from falling over forwards. It is obviously a very top-heavy machine, so it would be extremely hard to allow it to take a huge swing at the enemy while keeping balanced.

The Thor is clumsy because of its mass and how heavy it is. It takes a long time and a lot of energy to accelerate an object of that mass and weight, and it also takes a lot of time and fuel to stop a fast-travelling object that is so heavy. As I have already said, this is why the Thor moves so slowly and why it takes a long time for it to turn around. The Marines suit does not have a huge mass, and is controlled in a different way to the Thor. The Thor is operated by pilots/drivers, whereas the Marines suit reacts to the Marines actions. The Thor is not essentially a giant combat suit, it has many people operating the controls inside, just like a Siege Tank or Battlecruiser would.
It is impossible to expect the Thor to have the same mobility and flexibility as the Marine.

 

I'm not arguing with you about whether a melee attack would be "more effective" but I don't think it's required.

With the Nuclear attack and the fact that the Thor is designed to be a meat shield, I think it already differs significantly from either the BC or the Seige Tank.

The BC can't be considered a Meat Shield and if the Thor receives this "double" 30 dmg attack (which would then equal 60 dmg) it would effectively be a Seige Tank but would be much too expensive to be used in the same manner. Therefore it is separated from the ST. It is also separated from the BC in that it has a shorter range and less mobility. The nuke also would set it apart.

The melee attack wouldn't be effective for the unit simply because it already takes so long to get into position and it would neutralize the range effectiveness of the nuke's launch. You would either need to launch the nuke or send it into melee combat.

For this reason I just don't see why it would be more advantageous to the unit or to the strategic ability of the race to have a melee attack rather than a ranged one.

 

Actually you're right, I have never fired a gun in my life. Despite this I still think it's much easier for a person to shoot a target the size of a rat 200 yards away than it is for the same person to step on that rat. It's the exact same problem with the Thor, trying to step on something a hundredth your size when the target is extremely agile is extremely difficult, if not impossible. Machines also have a much easier time being precise than humans, as proven by robots that are capable of performing extremely dangerous surgery which would be impossible for a human to do with a reasonable chance of success.

I have no doubt that the Thor would be able to acquire a melee target, what I doubt is that the Thor is able to actually HIT the target (the whole rat thing above). I disagree that it's just as hard to get around it, for all we know Zerglings could move at least 20 ft/s (13.6 mph, not very fast) and so they would easily be able to get around the Thor in a matter of seconds. I highly doubt Terran technology is capable of obtaining a turn rate of 10mph for something as massive as the Thor.

Granted, Marines do show those receptors and their armour does act as an extension of their body, but it wouldn't exactly work the same in the Thor. Marine armour is MUCH less massive than the Thor exoskeleton, and thus it's possible to move said armour as quickly as a human can move at the Terran's current level of technology. The Thor on the other hand is much more massive than the Marine, and so it would require much more sophisticated motors and gears and such to move its arms and legs at the same speed as a human could, which is just not possible with their level of technology currently.

There's one problem with this comparison: knights wearing full plate armour were not trying to kill things less that a quarter their size, they were fighting other knights. Knight armour is very heavy and cumbersome, and so they wouldn't be able to keep up with a rat-sized target, let alone kill it. I would have no problem with a melee Thor should it be fighting primarily against targets it's own size or close to it, but the closest thing the size of the Thor is a building and that's not really a fight at all.

Like ItzaHexGor said, those are completely unrelated. These are demolition machines that are targetting immobile objects that can be several times their size. Try putting these machines in a combat situation and see if they manage to kill anything, or even survive.

 

Well, both Nuclear attack and Yamato gun attack both air and ground. Thor's artillery seems to be made vs. ground only. It is a serious weakness, if you look at it. Most Terran buildings can lift-off, Vikings can lift-off. Infantry can move out of the way. Thor only seems, as it is now, like a counter to Siege-tanks.

 

@ ItzaHexGor - your essential point seems to be concerns over the Thors power source... Given that Starcraft operates in the future, and the Thor is most likely running off some sort of nuclear fuel source, that concern is not realistic

The Thor takes a long time to turn because it's large and its joints only bend so many ways - not because it's clumsy. It moves relatively slowly once again because it's legs are designed for a methodical plodding step - it doesn't have the joints to sprint. But if you watched it's movements to acquire targets and/or it's transformation into Artillery Mode, or the individual movements of its steps... those are not slow movements.

And I'm not saying the Thor is as flexible as a Marine. I'm saying Terrans designed Marine suits which shows that they have the tech to handle all the issues you are claiming exist.

----------------------

I've stomped on plenty of cockroaches. Now I've never stomped on a rat - but I don't see them that often, and I wouldn't want to get my shoe that messy - but the point's the same. It takes a lot more motor control to shoot a roach than it does to stomp on one.

Well granted that peasants aren't 1/4 the size of knights. But primarily knights enjoyed wading into lesser armed and armored foes (less likely to get hurt oneself) and swinging away.

And yes demo machines are attacking immobile objects, but the point was that if current machines can pretty much do the job - why couldn't a futuristic one?

 

Sorry if I lead you to believe that I thought it was the fuel that was the problem, but actually it is Newton's first and second law that are the problem, being the Law of Inertia, and to a lesser extent, the Law of Acceleration. An object of that mass would be near impossible to stop, because of the inertia it carries. It would also be near impossible to swing it quickly, because of the inertia it has, but also because of the vast amounts of forces required to move it, however if they do have enough nuclear-powered fuel to move it quickly, then it would be a problem to stop again. If it was this hard to speed up, stop, and slow down, then it would be extremely hard to stop it from overbalancing, because the forces will always want to continue in the direction they are going. This is why it cannot turn fast, because if it could, then it wouldn't be able to stop turning quick enough. It would be entirely possible for the Terran to give the Thor appropriate limbs to turn and move quickly, but they would be rendered useless because of the forces involved. Also, the legs might be able to move relatively fast when it is walking, but its arms and torso would be much heavier than the legs.

 

The fuel source is very key to this discussion.

With our body, you send the order to your muscles to swing - you have enough energy within yourself to send a reverse order to slow and/or stop your swing.

Essentially, your points say that the Thor may be able to initiate a swing, but it wouldn't have the power neccessary to control and/or stop it's swing once started... and that is purely a matter of available power. A skilled machine operator can use even current hydraulic tech quickly and precisely. I've worked in both construction and landscaping and know that a backhoe for instance can move it's arm quite quickly and stop it instantly if the operator so desires... The hydraulics provide the power neccessary.

When we're talking about a Thor, with some advanced power and movement tech... I don't think the issue you're refering to really exists. If it has the power to make a swing/step/movement in the first place, then it can reverse it's power and slow/stop that swing/step/movement just as well.

 

That still doesn't explain the inertia. Even thought the Thor might be able to stop it's arm in a swing, it doesn't mean that the force does not keep going, and because it is top heavy, it will fall in the direction of the swing. No amount of energy or fuel can just get rid of the forces involved. The arm will still have its forwards momentum, and even if the arm can be stopped, the momentum is still there.
With your muscle example, when you try and stop swinging your arm, it doesn't come to an instantaneous halt. There is still a forwards momentum, but your body is easily able to counter it, because it weighs so much more than the arm.

 

To carry on with ItzaHexGor's point, it's like running at full speed and trying to stop instantly. Our body HAS the energy/power to stop itself, no doubt, but it's impossible to stop at a dime (or else wide receivers would be making a lot more touchdowns). The same thing applies to the Thor, if it swung with it's massive arm then it would have trouble keeping its balance, especially since it's so top heavy.

Now did you catch those roaches off guard? Of course it's possible to stomp on something when you catch it by surprise, and if it were trying to evade your foot I'm sure you'd have a harder time trying to kill one. I'm sure a skilled marksman (which we can compare to the Thor, since advanced targeting computers and such would allow it to have very good aim) would be able to shoot small targets easier than trying to step on it.

The point about the knights doesn't really have much to do with my comparison, the peasants are still roughly the same size as the knight. They're fully capable of killing peasants (or even other knights), but my point was that they would be unable to kill rats, or possibly even a coyote. They're just way too slow and restricted in their movements to do so.

 

Great example Wrathbringer, I tried to think of a simple one like yours but I wasn't able to.
Also, I'd like to add to your post, the Thor's pilots or drivers would be able to see where it is shooting, but it would not be able to see where it is stepping. Also, those cockroaches you stepped on were not trying to claw your leg to death, like what a Zergling would do to the Thor's leg. If the cockroach was, you would have a lot more time stepping on it, because there is a chance you will miss and step on the side of your foot or leg or whatever.

 

iunno how to counter statements like that, when I think I've already offered examples of massive things set in motion that can still control that motion... ie: cranes, bulldozers, backhoes, etc

Take another example, the most massive land animal there is: the elephant. How does it fight? Melee. Evidently it works. Now humans are pretty small in comparison to elephants. Would you care to fight one, under the hypothesis that your greater agility will make it impossible for it to strike you? Perhaps you say humans are still close enough in size. Ok, let's grab a weasel - quite the ferocious creature... what odds do you give it? Would you bet on the weasel?

What if the legs were weighted? Same principal as a portable basketball goal. The pole, backboard and rim are much larger... but proportionally more of the weight is in the sand-filled base. Plenty stable.

A valid point. But one could say that a skilled martial artist would have an easier time stomping on bugs than shooting them too =P My claim isn't really that stomping is easier... it's just that stomping is a legitimately valid method of killing things.

Not an issue at all. Modern military craft are rarely directed by line of sight. The pilots are in fact taught to rely on their instruments primarily.

 

That still doesn't eliminate inertia. They can control their motion, but they can't just get rid of all forces acting upon them. They aren't even the close to the design of the Thor, so quit bringing them up.

This has got to be one of the most random statements you have made so far. The Thor works in a completely different way to the elephant (I am appalled that I even had to say this). If you want a melee Terran unit that is based on the elephant, then that's OK, but the Thor works in a completely different way to an elephant. They share little to no similarities. Besides, all animals in nature fight in melee combat. There are small exceptions, like the Archer Fish and the Spitting Spider, but even they don't use a ranged attack. They ensnare their prey so that they are able to attack them in melee combat. If an animal was to develop a ranged attack then it would excel over the other animals, because they could bring down predators or prey before they get into melee combat. The only real example so far of an animal that has developed a ranged attack, is humans. Humans have developed ways to attack over distances, and as a result, they are able to bring down any animal, provided that they are properly equipped.

Weighted legs would not be enough to nullify the forwards momentum. Also, if you got a huge, swingable weight and attached to the portable basketball goal, then swung it forwards as hard as you could, the basketball goal would fall over.

The Thor's weapon does area of effect, meaning that it would only have to fire in a rough area to hit its target. It doesn't have to work like a marksman, because they require pinpoint damage. It would be easier to drop a small explosive near the small target than to try and step on it, not to mention that the explosive device would be able to take out a lot more targets than a foot would. Now I know that your now saying 'then the Thor should do damage to itself when it attacks units that are at its feet', but this isn't the case. The attack would always be angled away from the Thor, meaning that the explosive or flying debris would be directed away from the Thor.

That only occurs when the aircraft knows where its target is. They are usually stationary targets, so they only have to focus on the position of where they are aiming. With melee units in StarCraft2, they would not be in the one place for long. They would constantly move around so the Thor would not know where it is supposed to be aiming.

 

Itza seems to have covered most of it, but I'll comment on the Elephant thing and the skilled martial artist parts.

Elephant Argument: I agree that one weasel would not be able to kill an elephant, but that's exactly like saying that a single Zergling has zero chance of killing a melee Thor, which is also true. What if there were a hundred weasels who were quite pissed off and bent on killing the elephant? If that were to happen I'd definitely bet on the weasels.

Granted if the Thor were redesigned to be quadrupedal instead of bipedal it wouldn't have much of a balance issue, and then there's a chance it could be effective in close combat, but that brings me to my next point...

Martial Artist Argument: It is true that a black belt would be able to kill pretty much anything in close combat, but what I was arguing earlier was that the Terran are completely incapable of making a massive machine close to that sort of agility or grace. Even if they decide to make something closer to, say, an average human in terms of agility it would still require a lot of force to stop the limbs when the machine throws a punch or something (the whole inertia issue argued earlier).

 

I'm sorry... but isn't that an oxymoron?

Several animals use spitting/spraying/coiled tongues for fighting actually... but regardless, humans can bring down any animal with or without ranged weaponry - the difference is our intellect. Any animal can fall victim to a lethal trap, and that has nothing to do with superior range.

That's just being silly now. It all depends on how much weight is in the base. Yes, if you put significantly more weight on the rim and swing it around, it will topple. But if you have more weight in the base, it won't. If little Timmy dunks, the goal will be fine. When Shaq grabs it, it falls over. BUT, if you fill the base with lead, even Shaq won't topple it! Ok, why can't the legs on the Thor be significantly heavier than the physically larger upper portion? No reason, other than you've already decided that the top must be heavier. It's actually intuitive to suppose that the legs are weighted, otherwise the Thor would already experience serious balance issues - especially when delivering an 'Artillery Barrage'.

Well... that's why I specifically said I'm not trying to claim melee is a better overall attack mechanism - I'm saying it's still viable. And the strategic usefulness of it is: The Thor, with its heavy armor and large health reserves, can prevent the enemy from closing with the rest of the Terran forces, who can then unload their firepower into their foe with maximum effectiveness. However, if the Thor is also a ranged attacker, it overlaps several other Terran unit roles and does not work to protect the weaker Terran units. What good is the massive Thor, which is supposed to be leading the assault when the Marines have to stand in front of it? Marines shouldn't be absorbing damage for the Thor, it should be protecting them.

I'm sorry, but that is just not true. The whole point of fighter jets is to shoot down enemy aircraft - which are moving a lot faster than a Zergling. Computers handle the tracking and targeting, line of sight is not necessary.

------------------
@ Wriathbringer - 100 weasels? Well, we're both getting kinda silly with our examples now, so I'll stop before we type 5 pages on whether weasels can beat elephants or not, lol.

and about the agility/grace point - I agree Terran tech can't make a machine move gracefully - but my point is, it doesn't have to. brutal, powerful movements are an effective combat technique also... it's like the difference between 'hard' martial arts and 'soft'. Agility and grace can be strong combat styles.... but so can power and precision.

 

This thread doesn't seem to be working because we people keep mixing real world mechanics, in game mechanics/balance, in game roles, and unit lore/starcraft logic.

Now barring real world mechanics, in game mechanics/balance, and in game roles because first this is starcraft not the real world they are close not alike, second in game balance is variable, and third whether or not the Thor is melee or ranged it still will have the role of a meatshield if it stays in the game at all. So I guess the question becomes which one makes more sense within the startcraft lore/logic.

Now given what we know, the Terrans do have the technology to build sophisticated mechanized units but they are still lacking the ability to have them work "gracefully". So we know that the Terrans can make the Thor be either ranged or melee and either way its going to be like using a cannon to kill a mosquito (or wrecking ball in the case of the melee version). The question becomes why would the Terrans want a melee version over a ranged version?

With everything else equal what is the advantage of killing something in melee over range? I think the answer is, "there is none" but not everything is equal in this case. Assuming the Thor is still have a design that is very similar to its current one the design would be much more suited to ranged combat because for one the guns would sit really high up so the Thor would have an extremely long range and second a Thor fighting in melee combat runs the risk of losing its balance. (Yes, Nate you could put enough weight in the legs to make it very unlikely to fall over but think of how much weight you would need. The arms alone must be composed of dozens of tons of metal in order to counter balance the legs would need to weigh substantially more but then how could the Thor possibly move with that much weight on the legs it would be equivalent to you walking around with your legs made out of lead. It wouldn't work. Now I know the argument exists that humans can fight just fine without losing there balance, but we can do because we have achieved a level of grace that the Terrans haven't come close to for their larger mechs.)
Both of those arguments lend even more heavily towards the Thor being a ranged unit.

Finally ,lets just look at the Terran theme in general. The Terrans love to fight at range in SC1 every single one of there units were ranged (the firebat had a very short range). Look at the current Terran theme, the Terrans love big units with lots of armor and the biggest damn gun possible and the current ranged Thor is the avatar of that.

 

No Nate. It's not. You can control the forces acting upon you, but you cannot eliminate them. I don't see why you can't understand that.

Give an example. All animals fight in melee combat. If they use any kind of ranged weapon, it is usually just to snare its opponent so that it can fight it in melee.

LordKerwyn has pretty much explained this, but another thing you have to consider is that the base of a portable basketball goal has a much larger relative capacity to the rest of the goal, than the Thor has to the rest of its body. The base takes up a large area, whereas the Thor's foot/legs, take up a very small area. It is easier to balance a brick on one of its flat surfaces, (which has a large area to balance on) than a pin on its point (which has a very small area to balance on).

As you can already see when the Thor is operating its Bombardment ability (http://starcraft2.com/features/terran/thor.xml), is that it spends time to fortify itself in its position so that it is as stable and as balanced as possible. When the cannons actually fire, they all have huge shock absorbers. Each cannon retracts as it fires to absorb the majority of the impact. this is why it is able to fire its Bombardment Cannons without overbalancing. This wouldn't work for a melee attack, because when it fortifies itself it would become immobile, meaning that all melee units can retreat, and it is a sitting duck for ranged units.

Why does the Thor need to take the damage for other units? The official StarCraft2 website difine the Thor as an 'Ultimate Heavy-assault Mech'. It doesn't say 'Giant Meat-Shield'. Yes, it does have the health and armor, but this is because the Terran wouldn't design something so powerful to be so flimsy. The Thor will naturally act as a meat-shield anyway because every opposing unit will target it to bring it down as quickly as possible. Being a melee unit wouldn't work, because it would be so easy to kite, because it is so slow. It wouldn't improve its abilities to act as a meat-shield.

The Thor wouldn't be able to use radar or anything to locate where the melee units are, because it would cover them with its massive size. On the radar, the units would appear under the Thor, so they wouldn't know the exact location. It is better just to blast the cr@p out of a general area, so that even if you don't hit it directly, you will still hit it with the blast radius.