Thor Redesign

as Kerwyn says, it's not really an argument over possibility, but rather over need

it's silly to argue about whether the Terrans can build an effective melee fighting mech or not, because all things are possible in a fictional environment - whatever the issues, explanations could be made... real argument is whether the design would be useful or not...

I would say that a melee unit does provide a different, and sometimes better, tactical element than a ranged one... particularly for the role the Thor is intended - one may claim that a ranged attacker would function just as well as a 'meat shield', but a melee unit demands more attention psychologically. When you see a Zealot a distance away, you think, "yes! lemme kill it before it can hurt me". When the Zealot weathers your bullets and gets right next to your Marines, you think, "crap! quick kill it! it's hurting me!" The Zealot occupies a larger role in your thoughts and priorities than merely another 2 or 3 attacking Marines do. When you see an opposing force with equal or greater range, you admit casualties and damage in your head before they occur and stop worrying about it. When you see a force with lesser range, you can't help but attempt to keep them out of their range... And therein lies the usefulness of the melee Thor. The Thors whole design is about making a statement, striking fear into the enemy and making them react, being an 'ultimate heavy-assault mech'. The Thor should lead assaults, the Thor belongs in the vanguard. The best way to demonstrate this is to make it melee... it will always be out front - delivering pain directly to the enemy and forcing them to react not just to a potential threat - but to a direct and immediate one. It becomes a giant hammer, not a big gun in the backpack... you tell me which better fits this guy:

[img width=526 height=800]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v316/NateSMZ/thor5web.jpg[/img]

well, I don't have a nuclear power source

I understand that, I just don't see why you're saying it. We weren't talking about redefining the laws of physics... we were talking about whether the laws of physics make something impossible or not. The Thor doesn't have to eliminate any forces. If it can control them - then the issue is settled.

spitting cobras, bombardier beetles and chameleons to name a few

 

There still needs to be an argument over possibility. StarCraft actually has a stong sense of realism to it. Having a huge, heavy piece of metal that would fight efficiently in melee combat would detract from this sense of realism. Possibility does need to be addressed. For example, it would be stupid if Zerg were able Infest a Command Centre, and have that Infested Command Center produce both Infested Terran as well as Infested Protoss. Why? Because it is simply not possible for the Zerg to create Infested Protoss from an Infested Command Center. The argument could be given that 'the building is Infested, so the Zerg could have done anything to it. They could have Infested it for the purpose of producing Infested Protoss.' But this does not mean that it should happen. The Thor could be designed in such a way that it can fight in melee, in the same way that the Command Center could be Infested in such a way that it could produce Infested Protoss. The point is that both of them are near impossible, so neither of them should be implemented into StarCraft2.
An attacking Zealot may make the defender think 'I've got to kill it before it gets into combat', but this would only work if all you have way ranged units. It is the same as saying that an attacking Marine will make a defender who only has melee units think 'I've got to get into combat with before it kills my guys'. There is no unique psychology for melee units. Any psychology that applies to melee units can apply to ranged units as well. It all depends on the situation.
You say that the Thor should be made into a melee unit because then it would be more like the Norse God, but do you think that the Viking should be made into a melee unit because Vikings mainly attacked with axes in melee? Do you think that the Reaper should attack in melee because the Grim Reaper had a scythe? Do you believe that the Cobra should be given a melee attack because cobras attack with their fangs? Do you think that the Vulture should have had a melee attack because vultures attack with their claws and beaks? Also, as you may or may not know, in the actual Norse myths that contain Thor, he throws his axe. I found this extract on Wikipedia:
...He [Thor] would be able to strike as firmly as he wanted, whatever his aim, and the hammer would never fail, and if he threw it at something, it would never miss and never fly so far from his hand that it would not find its way back, and when he wanted, it would be so small that it could be carried inside his tunic.
On top of this he was also the God of Thunder, meaning that he could also throw bolts of lightning. Thor never had to fight in melee combat. He could throw his Hammer and it would always return, or he could strike with lightning bolts. He could fight in melee combat, just like the StarCraft2 Thor could, but they both have much more effective ranged attacks.
Also, if the Thor should lead the attack, then it should move quickly. The Thor dpes not move quickly. Every unit in the game that has a melee attack moves quickly. This is because they are designed to lead the assault, so they need to be fast to stay ahead of the rest of the army. They also need to be fast so that they can close the gap between them and the enemy as fast as they can, otherwise they are being shot at and unable to retaliate in any way shape or form.
About your examples:
Spitting cobra - Blinds its opponent through spitting. This isn't counted as an 'attack'. It blinds them so that it can escape, or so that its opponent can't escape, and is therefore easier to kill through biting. It's attack is the bite. Like I said earlier, if they use any kind of ranged weapon, it is usually just to snare its opponent so that it can fight it in melee.
Chameleon - This is still a melee attack. The tongue is a part of the body, and there is no projectile involved.
Bombardier Beetle - This is more a defense than an attack, it is done so that the beetle can escape. But you are correct in it being ranged. I guess you got me there. Not all animals attack in melee combat. However this has nothing to do with having a melee Thor. Your argument that because elephants can fight in combat, the Thor should be able to as well, is still void.

EDIT: One quick question. Nate, why do you want to limit the Thor to having a melee attack? Your suggestions to make the Thor a melee unit would limit its capabilities drastically. Why is this? It already has a weakness, being that it is slow, and takes a long time to turn around. Why do you want to limit it further?

 

The reason I brought up Thor was a stylistic point, not a literal comparison. Thor is direct in his approach. He carries around a giant hammer. The Thor should be direct and function as a giant hammer too. Not as a big gun you pull out of your backpack. To continue the point with other units you mentioned... Vikings were famed for their ability to strike virtually anywhere - nobody was safe.... hence Starcraft Vikings. As far as the Reaper, honestly I don't know what's up with that unit and I don't think Blizzard does either - it feels like they threw two or three completely different concepts together and made one unit. Cobras in the wild strike blindingly fast and use venom... hence the Starcraft Cobra which is fast and uses an alternative attack method (electricity). etc, etc... the names fit the basic identity of the units. Thor is not a big guy who hides in the back. Thor is a macho macho man who gets up close and personal.

Saying every unit in the [former] game who used melee was fast, so therefore melee units must be fast doesn't make sense. No units in the previous game climbed cliffs either - that's irrelevant. As already pointed out, the Ultralisk was not the fastest and certainly not the most agile Zerg unit either.

--------
I call being blinded an attack. If you ran up and threw acid in my eyes, I'd certainly say you attacked me. A chameleons' tongue may be part of its body, but when the effective range is greater even than the size of the creature... I think we can call that a ranged attack. And lastly, you are right, we are getting sidetracked =P

And fine, you don't like elephants because they have 4 legs instead of two... it really has nothing to do with the point that large things can fight effectively in melee, but since you insist: the Emu or Ostrich. Two legs, legs smaller than the body, no arms even - it's at a disadvantage when compared to the Thor... still fights plenty well.

------------
And I've already explained why I think limiting it this way would be good. It completely removes any unit overlap, and adds an entire new layer on to Terran strategy, tactics and capability. The weakening added by this suggestion would be counter-balanced by the benefits offered by the other suggestions which have already received general acceptance. Namely, the Thor-nuke and Thor Liftoff (credit Joneagle_X).

 

i just dont think something as big and powerfull fits the terrans, i think they need something fast with cant turn directly but only 5% per square giving it a circling movement, than i'd like if it attacked with rockets which it can fire at anything in front of it. basically im thinking of an ground unit which fights like a Empire Earth fighter/bomber

 

Okay, Nate and Itza, what's the point of arguing the NAME of a Starcraft unit? You can easily just rename it so that there wouldn't be this issue, but even then a name is just a name.

The Ultralisk still had some speed, especially in Brood War. I agree that the Ultralisk was not the fastest or most agile, but the point is that the Ultralisk IS capable of moving somewhat quickly. It still has the speed to close in with its target before it gets blown to shreds, something that the Thor would never be able to achieve. At it's current speed (which I firmly believe to be its limit) is MUCH too slow to ever catch up to something in melee, especially if the enemy was smart and chose to fall back whenever the Thor came remotely close, inevitably killing it before it could lay a single blow. Even if you wanted to increase it's lifespan by increasing it's armour, it would become even slower than it is right now.

The only way that I can see the Thor being used in melee is in a base siege, which is still pretty useless since usually by the time you get to your opponent's base they're army has been decimated, leaving only buildings left to destroy.

Even if the Thor was capable of hitting its targets in melee (which is still in doubt) it would be much too slow to even come close to the target. Thus it would make much more sense to give it guns so it doesn't have to worry too much about closing in on the enemy.

 

The same thing that you said about the other units, Vikings Reapers, Cobras, etc, can be said about the Thor. In Norse mythology, Thor had the ability to bring down the wrath of the heavens (Bombardment Cannon) and could easily throw his Hammer to pick off any adversary from a distance. I'll repeat part of the extract:
...able to strike as firmly as he wanted, whatever his aim, and the hammer would never fail, and if he threw it at something, it would never miss and never fly so far from his hand that it would not find its way back
Melee units require a fast movement speed. On top of that, units that 'lead the charge' (which is what you say the Thor should do) need to be faster than the rest of the army. The Thor isn't. You say that you want it weakened to make way for other abilities. You say that you want to get rid of overlap, yet you want to replace the Ghost's Nuke, with the Thor's Nuke. Stealing roles is not a way to make sure it doesn't overlap. The Ghost balanced the Nuke perfectly because he could easily be picked off if found in time. This cannot happen with the Thor.

 

Of course if you add the lift up tech to the Thor everybody will use this upgrade. It is like the upgrade of air-ground laser for the wraith in the beta version of Starcraft.

The lift-up option must be automatically added to the Thor.

 

That's the beauty of the Thor... sure the enemy can eternally fall back before it, but that's the point - you're making the enemy run, your entire army gets to chase the enemy simply because you have a Thor or two out front. And what happens when you chase them all the way back to their base? They've got nowhere left to run - and you're now smashing their base. You can neutralize entire armies into a retreating chaos simply by deploying some melee Thors. Whereas if you deployed ranged Thors, most likely the enemy would stay and battle it out - hence, my whole point about the different psychological effects caused by the attack mechanisms.

The enemy is forced to either engage the melee Thor and allow your other units to engage with their full, optimal firepower - or attempt a tactical withdrawal, which ends up turning every engagement into a base siege. If simply building this unit means you get to either use ALL of your other forces optimally, or start destroying the enemy base... it's an extremely valuable player to deploy and worth its expense.

@ ItzaHexGor - I saw what you posted about the lightning and the hammer throwing... did you see what I posted about it being an issue of style rather than direct translation? Whatever method of attack Thor uses, he does not hide in the back - that is the point. He doesn't use his ranged attack to snipe away at his foes... he uses it when his foes are too wussy to engage him toe to toe, or just not worthy of his time.

One word: Guardians.

And I did not say I want it weakened to make way for new abilities. I said I want it perhaps a bit weaker because it provides unique benefits to the Terran roster as a whole... and THEN, that slight weakening can be balanced by some slight benefits.

The Nuke discussion has already been extensively covered. The Ghost is already too powerful with his new abilities and becoming available lower in the tech tree. Replacing Nukes with something like D8 mines fits the special forces image better and balances the unit. Nukes should be an endgame force, not midgame. Secondly, the Nuke perfectly fits the Thor image - reference your own words about the 'wrath of the heavens'.

@ Samir - I doubt everyone would use lift-off... for the most part it would prove rather useless. Lift-Off is slowwwwww. It doesn't really provide any tactical benefits - without an extreme amount of luck and/or skill. Although the possibility is there... All it does is keep a unit from becoming potentially useless.

 

dude, nukes still are endgame, just like the ghost cloak

 

But the other Terran units would not be able to chase the enemy, because (according to you) they need to say behind the Thor, which is leading the 'charge'. The Thor would not lead any charges. At most it would lead a 'crawl'.

Thor (the god), always used his Hammer as a ranged attack, unless his adversary was already in melee combat. There would be no point in running up to someone so that you can attack, if you can do the same attack from a distance. Thor didn't hide in the back. Things can still have a ranged attack without hiding in the back. Take Marines for example. They are ranged, yet they are the front line in a Terran attack force. You say that Thor doesn't snipe away at his opponents with his Hammer, but neither does the Thor. It doesn't snipe. It absolutely obliterates the targeted area.

Guardians do not lead the attack. They are heavy support units, like the Thor. You will never see a Zerg player leading their charge with Guardians. They are far to slow for that. Just like the Thor.

It is clear here that you do not know what you are talking about. Ghosts are in no way overpowered. They have about 40-50 health with no base armor. They are easily picked off once they have been detected, and they are only deadly when they get away with not being detected. D8 charges are designed for base raiders, being the Reaper. The Ghost is not a base raider so the D8 charges wouldn't be very useful to it. There is no reason to say that they are overpowered. The abilities that they have so far are the following:
Nuclear Launch - This is the same as in StarCraft1 and Broodwar. It wasn't overpowered then, because the Ghosts are so fragile. It is only available in late-game, not mid-game.
Drop-Pod - This is the Terran's version of the Warp in and Nydus Wyrm. Both the other teams have a way of instantly teleporting in troops. This is the Terran's way of doing it.
Snipe - Deals 150 damage to a target. Snipe doesn't work on every unit. There are some units that cannot be Sniped. This is really only effective at taking out small to medium units.
Cloak - Same as in StarCraft1 and Broodwar. This is the Ghost's answer to not having much heath or armor. It is the main factor that balances the Ghost.

The 'wrath of the heavens' should not be a single attack. Lightning storms never just hit for one second, and then disappear. The Bombardment ability lasts for a while, which gives the image of a violent or turbulent storm, much like the High Templar's Psionic Storm. The Nuke does one hit. One impact and then it's gone. This doesn't really give the impression of the heavens crashing down upon them.
I don't think that the Thor will ever get a Lift-Off ability. Lift-Off would increase the Thor's mobility drastically, when its mobility is supposed to be its weakness.

 

Erm, that doesn't actually help your argument out much. Like Itza said Guardians don't lead the charge, and on top of that they're much too slow to do much other than support. Being extremely slow also meant that they needed some way to make up for it, which in SC1 was its massive range. The Thor then can be compared to the Guardian since it's extremely slow as well, and therefor it should have quite the range to make up for it.

A tactical withdrawal does not turn every engagement into a base siege. A smart player would fall back just enough for the enemy to outrun its own Thor and then engage the units without the threat of the Thor reaching combat. If the enemy chooses to keep its Thor in front then they'd still be subject to the hit and run tactics that I discussed earlier. The only way that the Thor would be able to get into base siege is if it's built quite close to the enemy without being discovered, or the enemy is already defeated and all that's left to do is polish off their base.

 

When NateSMZ said 'attempt a tactical withdrawal' it never even occurred to me that he meant 'retreat all the way back to base'. I assumed he meant slowly move the troops backwards, so that the Thor can't hit them (because it's melee) but they can attack the Thor. Think is just common sense.
Another thing that I'd like to add is that if the Thor is leading the charge, then why would the other player retreat backwards, to their base? A smart player would retreat to the side, so it the Thor is going to go for their base, it would expose the whole army behind it to the enemy. Another thing that could happen, unless they had a couple of Thors, would be to split your army, so no matter which half of the army the Thor decides to follow, it would, again, leave the army behind it exposed.
Something that the Zerg player could do is send one Zergling at a time to get into melee combat with it, while keeping ranged units attacking from a distance. Because the Thor would have such a slow attack, it would mean that it wastes a lot of time stopping, and attacking each Zergling, that it would have no time to advance forwards. This would easily give the Zerg player enough time to destroy the Thor, so that it wouldn't even get close to their base.

 

As I've said several times in this thread the Thor-nuke and Thor Liftoff (not even my idea), have already been extensively discussed. I don't feel like talking about them if you haven't bothered to run a search and see what's already been said. The consensus (not what I think, what most people agreed on), was that both ideas would be useful and balanced. The forum has already posted about those ideas for pages... repeating the same posts for another hunk of pages is foolish. I shouldn't have responded to posts on those topics at all, but now I'm saying - do a search, I'm tired of repeating things that have already been said.

-------------------
You're right, the Thor would lead a crawl... who cares about semantics? It's still effective. An unstoppable, methodical advance is just as frightening to the enemy as a lightning strike. They both have their advantages. While a blitzkrieg may catch the enemy off guard, it can also lead to over-extension. While a deliberate grind may allow them time to marshal their forces, it can also completely dishearten them.

And if we're going to talk about what smart players COULD do, we'll be here all day trading strategies back and forth. If you, as the smart player, retreated to the side - I, also as a smart player, would send my Thors, Siege Tanks, Nomads and 1/2 my Vikings to pin you down momentarily off to the side. Then with nothing between me and your base, as a smart player, I would send everything else I had to trash your economy, technology and reinforcement centers... and possibly even the entire base.

The point isn't that it's an auto-win strategy. Every plan of attack requires modification upon engagement. The point is that it provides the Terrans with options they don't currently have, and that it could function effectively. That's it.

 

This topic is called "Thor Redesign". There is no reason why we can't talk about its other abilities as well, because they are a part of the design.
Having to crawl in your army would require so much effort to micro that it would even be worth it. You would constantly have so stop your faster moving units so that your Thor can catch up. Imagine doing this on a large map, it would just be so pointless. Having the Thor as a ranged unit means that it doesn't need to that fast, because it will never need to lead the charge, not would it have to close the distance between it and its enemies.
Your counter-tactic would not work well. If the Thor was designed to be a meat-shield and absorb the incoming damage, it would mean that the rest of the Terran army would have to be weaker, to balance it out. This means that if you split your force, no matter which way army you send your Thor after, it will make the rest of your army extremely vulnerable to attacks from the other half of the army. This is just a more elaborate way of explaining hit-and-run type tactics, like Wrathbringer said, so that a defending player can eliminate the majority of the incoming army before it has a chance to threaten their base. Inter-tier and flying units would also be able to pick off units in undefended areas, weakening the whole force. The units would have to be bunched together so that no stragglers are picked off, and when this happens Cloaked Banshees will make short work of the incoming force. As we have seen in the game-play trailers, Banshees are extremely effective at taking out bunched ground units. They would be able to take out plenty of units before the attacking player has a chance to use a Scanner Sweep. If they have a Nomad or something accompanying them as a Detector, a small squadron of Vikings would make short work of it so that you can then bring in the Banshees. Long story short, it would be extremely easy to wear away at a slow moving, incoming force, because there would be so much time for the defending player to do so. Attacks should be much quicker, land close the gap between their own base and the opposing base as quickly as possible. Terran players would not be able to do this with a Thor leading the charge/crawl.

 

It's my topic, lol... I think I know what it's supposed to be about...

And as I said, it's pointless to type strategies and counter-strategies back and forth. That's what the game is for. Any tactic you type, a competent player can type a counter-tactic. It's silly to sit here typing what imaginary armies would do. If you don't think forcing the enemy to react is an effective tool of warfare... iunno what to say. All I can tell you is that it is.

 

I'm not usually the one to come up with complex strategies, so these strategies aren't actually that hard. I'll repeat myself:

Once the opposing, army that is being lead by one of the slowest Terran units is roughly halfway between your and their base, then they're sitting ducks. The Thor would end up being a disadvantage to use.

 

I didn't say your strategies were complex - I said it's silly to sit here saying:

"my robot tears off your robots arm!"
"yeah? well my robot kicks your robot in the groin!"
"no fair! my robot pokes your robot in the eye!"
"cheater! my robot pulls your robots head off and I win!"
"nuh uh! nuh uh! my robot has a second brain and sets your robot on fire!, I win!, I WIN!,"
*plugs ears*

and good luck "wearing away" at the 900 hit point, base 3 or 4 armor unit who has two methods of fast healing (SCV's and Nano-Repair)

 

It is not the Thor that is being worn away. It is the entire army. Every Marine, Firebat, Reaper, Medic, Ghost, Siege Tank, Cobra, Viking, Dropship, Banshee, Nomad or Battlecruiser would be extremely vulnerable because they have such a long time in which they could be picked off. Then again, the defender could always just Nuke the incoming army before it reaches their base. The Thor wouldn't have enough time to get out of the blast radius, and with it dead or, at least, extremely crippled it would leave the whole incoming army exposed to counter attacks. There isn't a real reason for the Thor to be stripped of its Cannons and have them replaced with blunt clubs. As you said in another topic:

So why would they design a mech that is designed go literally, toe-to-toe with the Protoss? The Terran already have much longer range than any Protoss unit, so logically they would try and blast them off the face of the planet before the Protoss have a chance to reach the Terran base or attack force.

 

I don't like Thor's Bombardment mode. It should have many 'ray' long range weapons - lasers, lightning bolts, chainguns, missiles, rails and so on... At the beginning thor would have two weapons and the other two would be accesible through upgrades, each weapon system shooting indepedently. These weapons aren't for purpose of siege. Their purpose is to wipe enemy units out! Siege Tank 'attacks ground' (right, with buildings on it ) And Alpha Strike ability to mass damage ability and crush enemy hordes.

 

Terran don't have ray-like attacks though, that's for the Protoss. Terran either have bullets, missiles, shells, fire, etc. The only exception is the Battlecruiser, who has a plasma attack, which wouldn't suit the Thor. Also, the Thor shouldn't have a whole lot of firing systems where each system shoots independently, because it would nullify the Thor's weakness to an extent. The Thor isn't that maneuverable and is weak to attacks from the flanks and rear, so if all the weapons could fire separately, then the Thor would hardly need to move. The Thor is already designed for taking units out instead of buildings. It only has one ability that is designed for siege, being the Bombardment, and it isn't able to be used constantly. It's like how the Queen had Spawn Broodling, which instantly killed a unit, but it isn't actually designed for taking out units, it was designed for a whole range of tasks. The Thor is already designed for taking out units, but it also has an ability which can be used for siege. Remember Bombardment can also be used against units, it isn't purely siege.