Viking

we're losing because we can't get the right objectives. and we can't get them because we're aiming for the wrong objectives.

 

This somehow went offtopic fast.

I would prefer a continious firering animation for astetical reasons only.

 

First of all, during the tet offensive, around 30,000 North Vietnamese were killed. American losses were about 2,000. Had support not died, and American forces remained, the North would have ultimately lost due to running out of soldiers.

Not only that but the South Vietnamese were doing fine at holding off the North until the US cut the promised 270 million a year in aid in 1975, and after Russia broke its agreement with the US, giving more than 1 billion a year in aid to the north.

 

i'm well aware of heavy loses, it still forced america to pull out

 

You forgot to put the flamethrower in the poll. ;D


I'm talking about the Viking again, for those of you who have no idea what I meant. This topic is about Vikings, right??

 

Flamethrowers makes Viking useless if it is same type as the bat had in sc1. This would mean that pretty much until terrans got to Siege tank we have practically nothing to take out heavier high armor units besides masses of m&m's. Add the fact that tanks are even more costly at 200/150 instead of the old 150/100 and you are putting a serious handicap on terrans. Imagine how hard it would be to take out someone who went fast stalkers. Once vikings punch through shield that flame is practically useless plus its short range. I think this also applies to the low dmg high rate of fire idea.

 

A minigun style constant fire does sound good but it works just fine soI don't really care. What I want is for the Viking to be able to shoot misiles while in ground mode.

 

While I also agree with you that I don't think flamethrowers would be a good idea for vikings, I don't think game balance wise high rate low damage for vikes would really be a problem. In that regard, things are basically as they were in SC1 for Terran.

TvP generally meant fast tech to factory and a mech focused lineup for the Terran, I expect the same in SC2. And as far as placement on the tech trees, stalker is the dragoon and viking is the vulture. Stalker even has the same HP/shield as a SC1 goon. Vulture on the other hand, had concussive damage which was 25% vs goon. So it really wouldn't be any worse for Terran vs Toss if vikes had a high rate low damage attack that is generally better vs basic infantry or small units. And the impact of the marine's shield upgrade vs Toss is yet to be determined.

Since blink would likely remain a researchable upgrade(instead of available by default), there is a timing buffer for the Terran, and a huge swarm of stalkers coming in from the back door while the Terran is utterly unprepared is unlikely. Also, fast tech to blink would qualify as a tech rush, and GG from it vs unprepared opponents(especially ones who don't scout properly) is not unreasonable.

 

Wouldn't the viking be more like the goliath since it can change into a form that attacks air

 

gta attack while in mech form? that would be imba plus your already have the viking fighter(jet form) for air to air attack.

uhm.... give them LASER chain guns in ground form! i wanna see the $*@# coming out! looks more powerful! than invisible bullets. same as with the marines! light effects please!

 

Not in this case, because I was addressing the concern expressed by brc9210, and I did explain that it is in regards to their placement on the tech tree. The goliath isn't immediately producible at the factory and also doesn't have a ground attack that is good vs small but bad vs armored.

 

although on paper the normal damage of goliath in sc1 indicates that it should be as good against small as large. In practice the goliath armies has the upper hand vs zerglings / marines and suffers against dragoons / tanks.

implementing low damage fast fire will further enhance any (dis)advatages and make viking ground attack highly specialized, which is a good thing.

 

Is this definately confirmed? If so, then isn't it basically just a super goon, with same stats except more damage, blink, and the ability to attack ground and air at the same time? Doesn't seem right, as I thought they were splitting the goon into the immortal and the stalker, one with high hp/shields, and one with high damage raiding abilities. (kind of like the Dark templar compared to the Zealot).

Not only that, but didn't the guy in the demo say that the stalker's were not that resilient?

 

We haven't seen what damage everything does yet. It may be that the marine does 12 damage base now and the tank 100

 

I don't know if it has been changed for BlizzCon, but from what we've seen earlier, stalker had dragoon HP/shield. Immortal has more though, so compared to an immortal, a stalker is indeed a pansy. It is also a possibility that the stalker has 0 base armor unlike dragoon which had 1.

 

And Stalkers probably costs more than the usal goon. like 125/50 or something?(since it can blink)

 

i think im a retard i viewed the picture

 

how do you know all of this stuff about sc2

 

We pay attention to the vids, interviews, faqs, whatever else info there is. Not hard, really.

 

just a thought, anyone who knows/has a guess about cost hp and ground damage for the viking? is it like, gonna cost really much gas, or is it quite expendable? And the hp? is it around 100?