Thor

Nuke = like a big bullet that just hurts. Functions and appears are strict weaponry, efficient and practical.
The problem with Thor is that he looks like someone turned the Barrack alive (like a transformer/antimated building).

A unit that is slow, heavy firepower, good @ sieging, vulernable to air is ALREADY present in the terran army. It doesn't matter if the Terran are imperialistic, they still were the underdogs compared to the power protoss or the swarming zerg. Its not like the zerg/protoss are a minor problem to the terran...they are a major force, and that it's down to just plain efiiciency for the terran to fight back. Sure u can try to expand, but it's all about survival against superior alien forces.
Thor looks extravagant and outrageous.

I dont really care if the Thor can take on a colossus, and i'm sure a team of siege tanks can do just fine.
-------------------
The argument lies in that since the BC is depicted as a "mobile" fortress.. sacrificing some firepower/armour for flight mobility is assumed. Lets say that the Thor is a ground base "mobile" fortress kinda like the BC. We run into the problem that 1 )BC's look like almost a shoo-in for sc2... and 2) Siege tanks are almost a shoo-in for sc2 as well.

 

Well I believe it was recently reported the Mothership currently costs 400 Minerals and Gas... so good luck getting your 100/100 Thor. I'm fine with the Thor personally, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's a huge, mobile, long range weapon that's going to do a whole hell of a lot of damage and will probably cost about as much as two to two and half siege tanks. I don't see what's wrong with that.

 

I feel that this thread is full of unfounded speculation and groundless wild guesses.

While it's true that we speculate much about SC2, a lot of what has been going on here has gone quite a bit overboard.

We know next to nothing about this unit.  There is but a few vague details, some descriptions, and some still pictures.  It is a brand new unit not replacing any other. There are also no other unit that we can even compare it to, be it SC1 or SC2.  Now what is there to complain or worry about?

 

for some reason, people see a big mech with guns and say its gonna replace the tank or be replaced by the tank.

 

Thors won't be good against ground units. They'll most likely have a strong attack with long cooldowns, Perfect for crushing an enemy base.

 

Whats to complain about? You're a big fan of pointing out redundancy in the air. How's about on the ground? Do the terrans REALLY need two siege weapons? I'm pretty sure Siege tank fills the role well enough, and the banshee will more than likely be used similar to the Guardian, so we have both an aerial and ground role for siege, why do we need a giant ass mech thats going to be about as useful as an asshole on an elbow?

 

There is very little detail that we know about the Thor as far as how it would function in real games and what its role is for the Terran.  It is too early to say this or that about it right now.  That is what I'm saying.

Why would Blizzard clean up and streamline much of the old just to turn around and add a redundant unit?  Sure makes no sense to me. If we knew enough about it to even be half way certain that it's redundant I wouldn't mind.  But the truth is, nobody knows jack about it right now.  It a new unit, new role, new abilities, new everything.  It is not at all similar to discussing about revamped units with revamped abilities/spells.

And banshee will not be similar to the guardian, it will be like the wraith.  Guardian was tier 3 air siege, as was carrier and BC.  Wraith was tactical air, along with muta and scout, it's what you use for ATG annoyance, hit-and-run, tech rush, etc.

Hadean, you seem to be hinting that since I talked about overlapping responsibilities with Terran AA and consequently unused units, I should do the same here, but you're wrong.  That was my analysis based on SC1 Terran.  SC1 already happened, we have facts about it.  Here, you are trying to assume the same could be done when it's a completely different scenario.  There is NOTHING that supports the theory of Thor being redudant except for assumptions and assumptions only.  It might turn out to be one way or another, but right now, who's to say which?

 

I agree with Remy; it's still early to debate. Didn't they say Thor is going to be good against buildings and big units? If so,it wouldn't be as useful against swarms of zerglings as a seige tank. Siege tank could be more for long distance attacks, whereas Thor could be specialized for buildings. Who knows? Maybe they are nerfing the siege tank, and the Thor will take the spot as top damage-dealing mechanical unit for Terran? (blasphemy!)

 

Well, speculation or not, I can just see my thor slowly turning, and blowing a colossus right over in a heated battle.

 

Hey Thor would be great for a campaign mission. So far..it looks rather silly for online player vs player.

 

I'm pretty confident that the Thor will take that spot, regardless if they bring down the Siege Tank's damage at all. From what we've heard, it's long cooldown, slow to turn, slow to move, but wreaks hell on enemy forces and buildings. And I don't think it would make much sense to give it 10 huge cannons and have it do less than the Siege Tank's single one.

 

I thought of a better way to express my idea

You know how in real-life, they have multiple types of ammunition for tanks and artillery? There is HE, or high explosive, which is most effective against infantry. They also have AP, or armor-piercing, which is most effective against enemy armor. Then they have a different type for damaging buildings and bunkers too, but I don't know what they call it.

So maybe the siege tank will be the high-explosive tank/artillery, and the Thor will be the AP and/or building destroying artillery...

 

In this High Res Screen Shot We can see a Thor in the top middle in an explosion and another entering near the Mutalisk. Thought I would just inform you of them. Also Note the Main Attack of the Thor seems to be a laser. ;D
http://www.gamemeca.com/game_data/preview/2050/teran-6.jpg Just for your enjoyment.

 

I'm not sure about the Thor as I myself coundn't see any actual projectile or laser in the screenshot.  However, the Planetary Fortress seem to shoot lasers.  You see a red one shot at zerglings.

 

That is a REALLY crappy laser. A tiny little sliver.

What would the cost for the Thor be? Above, below, or around the Battlecruiser cost?

 

probably above/around BC cost.

 

I was preety sure that in the nuke picture that the Planetary Fortress was shooting a gatling gun.

 

you can see one of the red lasers in the air from the planetary fortress.

 

Huh....those better be some fast shooting lasers then! I want to be an ACTUAL fortress

 

i want the lasers to be bigger, they're rather small.