Cavez hat sich noch zum Thor geäussert:
Despite what was said, I'm not certain that the Thor assumed the entirety of the Cobra's role; after all, Karune has misworded things before.
The Cobra, as it was before, was only an effective anti-air unit because it was cheap enough to be massed. It was better against large targets than small, and wasn't fast enough to really chase anything (although its slowing attack might have helped). In that regard, the only thing that has changed is the ability to mass, as the Thor is much more expensive.
We know *for certain* that the Thor now has the Cobra's anti-armor bonus, which, from a purely aesthetic view, makes more sense on the Thor anyway. The fate of the Cobra, however, remains in question.
If the Cobra were to remain (which is still a notable possibility), the most sensible role it could fill would be a moderate GtA position. Likely with a medium-strength, no-bonus attack that does reasonably well against the medium units that Marines and the Thor are troubled with, but not as well against small units as Marines, or large units as the Thor.
As for the Artillery Bombardment ability of the Thor overlapping with the Siege Tank, well...that's not entirely accurate. It's longer range than the Tank's Siege Mode, and it does more damage, but it is energy-dependent and, therefore, can only be used to temporarily deny an area, whereas the Tank can cover the same area indefinitely (and with a wider field too). If anything, it overlaps with the Nuke, but it has its own differences with that as well.
Cavez hat geschrieben:The Cobra is out, the Thor is in, but it's not a "replacement" in the ways you guys are thinking of it since the Cobra and the Thor do such very different things.
We are just testing this idea for the Thor. In general I prefer to shield you guys from whacky ideas like this because I know that some of our ideas will be bad, and then you guys will get very grumpy with us for pitching you bad ideas. =(
But here's what I can tell you about the Thor in the current build:
- He is big, but the art is smaller than what we showed in the last demo, so he takes up less space and he can path a little better.
- He turns fairly quickly. Turn speed is not a balance factor.
- He has a lot of health (400 right now).
- He's not super expensive (250/200 right now).
- He has a good bonus vs. armored units on the ground and he tends to waste a lot of damage on small units.
- His AA missiles are effective but not crushing. You can over-whelm him with enough air. His pathing size does limit his mobility when trying to chase fast moving air units.
- His shoulder guns are not currently in opperation. If we keep the current design the art will change.
- He does great against Stalkers, and several secret Terran and Zerg units. He also does well against most (but not all) air units.
- He is balanced so that if you kill him and then leave him disabled while he burns down you will do pretty well. If you fight both the Thor and the Disabled Thor then things tend to go pretty well for the Thor (for cost).
- The current Thor is countered by range, mobility or certain powerful anti-armor units.
Right now he's kind of fun. I don't know if he's fun enough for StarCraft 2 or not. That will take a few more weeks at least.
Der Thread ist gestern vor lauter Battle.net-gespamme untergegangen, weil ich Abends ja extra noch mal geguckt habe...
. Aber wie schon gesagt kann sich noch vieles ändern. Der thor ist also kein ultragroßer supermech mehr, sonder nur eine bisschen grössere variante des goliath, nur noch ein bisschen stärker. Hmmm, mein erster eindruck war irgendwie komisch. Keine artillerie mehr? Hmmm. Irgendwie überrascht mich das. Jetzt find ich den thor gar nicht mehr so interessant. Er wäre meiner meinung besser ein mega-mech geblieben, da es so viel mehr spass machen würde. Habt ihr vieleicht schon mal warhammer gespielt? Natürlich habt ihr. Ihr kennt doch den Juggernault mech vom Imperium. Das ding rockte.[/url]
