[O]ss of Firebats, HT, ground turret(?) released - Page 3
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Senix
Germany149 Posts
| ||
Jolle
Norway185 Posts
Firebat looks cool tho. But think the "flame" could be more intense? | ||
Jayson X
Switzerland2431 Posts
Haha. When i looked at the screenshots i scrolled down to read comments cause i was confused as hell. Seriously, sc2 screenshots make my mind freeze. No more screenshots please. Let dustin explain everything in a video :D | ||
randombum
United States2378 Posts
| ||
garmule2
United States376 Posts
Of course, it wasn't really Firebats' low hp that made them useless. It was the fact that literally every T army involves siege tanks, and siege tanks kill your firebats. I would like to see Firebats be immune to traditional splash damage. Not only would this explain why your Firebats don't kill eachother, it would allow them to actually attack enemy units without your own tank-splash killing them instantly. I think the only other unit that would be affected is the Colossus, with its thermal lance, against which perhaps the bat could take reduced damage. All of this can be explained simply by Firebats' new big armor, which is a type of metal specifically designed to be heat-resistant. | ||
relaxxl
Japan78 Posts
| ||
lololol
5198 Posts
On November 13 2007 02:32 Ziel wrote: I suppose the screenshot just captured the ht in a wierd pose? lol but yeah it was hard to find them. firebats look awesome *drools* but marines should really lose out that sheild/bayonet visual upgrade...it makes them so less manly. At least firebats are real men and don't carry girly shields and pocket knives. On November 13 2007 05:53 LosingID8 wrote: high templars having an attack is a bad idea. i thought they removed that in SC1 since HTs would get killed so quickly because the AI of other units would return fire. Actually pretty often in pro games the HT move in front of the army(since attack-move is just move for them) and get killed, because of that, so having an attack will definitely be benefical. On November 13 2007 06:38 noobienoob wrote: what are those huge sphere shield-like things by the stalkers? Is that just the shield animation? If it is, it's way too big.. unless they're sharing shields or some complicating shit like that. Read the OP man, it's the Mothership timebomb. | ||
Ziel
Malaysia241 Posts
The turrets are dropped by the Nomad (using energy), acting as decent defenses, and even better harassment, if used by a skilled player. Verified by Karune from http://www.battle.net/forums/thread.aspx?fn=sc2-general&t=82782&p=1&#post82782 And firebats are produced from fac now...wow\ EDIT: oh OP updated his post with all these stuff already lol | ||
Kimera757
Canada129 Posts
| ||
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
On November 13 2007 10:06 relaxxl wrote: Damn....Can someone remind me...why couldnt this be in 2D? Is there a reason it should be? | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 13 2007 09:23 garmule2 wrote: are you serious?I hope that firebats are the counter to Zealots' charge ability. Of course, it wasn't really Firebats' low hp that made them useless. It was the fact that literally every T army involves siege tanks, and siege tanks kill your firebats. I would like to see Firebats be immune to traditional splash damage. Not only would this explain why your Firebats don't kill eachother, it would allow them to actually attack enemy units without your own tank-splash killing them instantly. I think the only other unit that would be affected is the Colossus, with its thermal lance, against which perhaps the bat could take reduced damage. All of this can be explained simply by Firebats' new big armor, which is a type of metal specifically designed to be heat-resistant. firebats aren't used because vultures do the job so much better and cost no gas (ie saving it for siegetanks) and against dragoons they suck sooo bad (and storm).. and against zerg they are completely useless vs lurker (and mutalisk). i don't like the idea for another special armor (immortal anyone?) and simply adds to the confusion... personally i don't see the firebats gaining much use in sc2, they arrive in at the same time as the Cobra (its still in right? just ability changed) and is just a stepping stone away from tanks. Meanwhile, you have the infinitely more agile and effective reapers (vs immortals at least) which more than cover the aspect of the game that the firebats are trying to fill. Tank/Reaper and later adding further tech seems much more viable than firebats - based purely on knowledge from SCI, as range units are generally preferred in terran. However, against a hypothetical zerg their uses will probably be again quite limited. Zerglings will primarily be most feared in the early stages of the game - where the firebat will no longer be placed. The firebat will be too far up the tech tree to adequately counter zerglings. Depending on HP of banelings however, they could be useful (or absolutely dreadful). The may have some use if there is a dark-swarm spell still in the game, as the new improved firebat would be much more capable of dealing the damage to the late game zerglings.. although i think (and i'm sure many protoss's will agree) that you would still wantto engage away from the swarm dispite your splash - so once again the use will probably be quite limited... sorry blizzard, i think that the firebat adds nothing to the terran arsenal as its current position makes its niche overlap with many other terran units - most of which would probably do a better job. They may yet be a viable counter to zealots, we'll see. | ||
useLess
United States4781 Posts
| ||
artofmagic
United States1951 Posts
i have to agree the unit's design feel is a bit better. I guess they kept firebats because they appear in SC1 cinema. But i cant think any reason for them to be produced by the factory. | ||
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
Everyday I feel more that I might just be sticking to BW after playing the campaigns and a few initial months of multiplayer. | ||
IaniAniaN
Canada555 Posts
| ||
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
The overall theme is too much complexity, too grandiose and too much focus on flashy individual features over an elegant whole. Thats just what it seems to me right now though. I pray that I am wrong. | ||
IaniAniaN
Canada555 Posts
EDIT: I just realized that the Firebat could be a cool counter to Banelings, if they could 1 hit kill the banelings you could micro your Firebats up front (probably where they would be anyways) to deal with them and keep your larger units safe. Similar to what people do to save their Science Vessles from scourge these days. Yay micro opportunity. | ||
Loverman
Romania266 Posts
| ||
caution.slip
United States775 Posts
sorry blizzard, i think that the firebat adds nothing to the terran arsenal as its current position makes its niche overlap with many other terran units - most of which would probably do a better job. They may yet be a viable counter to zealots, we'll see. Terran melee unit? | ||
QuanticHawk
United States32008 Posts
On November 13 2007 16:57 Aphelion wrote: I feel like SC2 is turning something simple and elegant into something over-the-top and clunky >.< Everyday I feel more that I might just be sticking to BW after playing the campaigns and a few initial months of multiplayer. As do I... seems they are cramming wayyyy too much shit in there. | ||
| ||