Mechanics of Starcraft: Hellion

General Discussion
Post Limit:
Prev 1 4 5 6
01/09/2013 10:19 AMPosted by BrockLanders
In order to have range and be a weapon it would have to be a heavy fuel.
I see your point, however a heavier fuel would also leave a more lasting effect, which is not something that we see in game. A lighter fuel would also be more conducive to a faster raiding vehicle, answer your previous questions. For now, i CAN answer the "but they don't burn very hot" question by pointing out the necessity of the thermite seeding upgrade, as a method of increasing the damage possible.

01/09/2013 10:19 AMPosted by BrockLanders
There are always joints. Always.
Correct, but as it happens, I was talking to my dear sweet mother today, who actually is a mechanical engineer who designs parts Heavy Transport Vehicles for the U.S. military. The U.S. military actually has rather strict standards of "escapability" which require the more sensitive parts, such as joints, axles, etc. to be able to sustain a certain amount of damage without it having a significant impact on the ability of the units to be operable.

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&sa=N&tbo=d&biw=1800&bih=995&authuser=0&tbm=isch&tbnid=kSlAg5Bd_5C_ZM:&imgrefurl=http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php%3F76503-Dutch-military-pictures/page709&docid=ro98GJb2g7LG0M&imgurl=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AgYr9Qf466Q/TbW5-z92eFI/AAAAAAAAFqk/o2rJfaVc6fo/s1600/fennek_mrat_spike_mr_atgw_reconnaissance_netherlands_armed_forces_02.jpg&w=800&h=600&ei=p9jtUNmXFpDm9gS634DoCg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=199&vpy=127&dur=2807&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=117&ty=76&sig=109871663265204074777&page=1&tbnh=140&tbnw=188&start=0&ndsp=55&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0,i:94

Hidden in this massive link, is a picture of the MRAT, a military vehicle that is a kind of standard in military design, as a method of protecting critical parts. Now, light vehicles, like say, the hellion, might not have that level of protection, so they would take additional damage, like you say. It is also important to note that your point would be more valid if the hellion had a heavier fuel, that would smother the exposed points and sit on said joints and burn through them.

Solid fuel is weight efficient
Be that as it may, it's still heavy, especially if you oxygenate it. However, your point about carrying little fuel as it is a short life expectancy raider, is very valid.

Protoss units utilitize some kind of energy attack which is completely unreliant on chemical reactions of any kind,
I wouldn't go that far, the protoss weapons are incredibly varied, and i think that as we do episodes for various protoss units, we will see that some of them do use chemical reactions.

01/09/2013 12:09 PMPosted by AlexTheGreat
Burning is a chemical reaction, molten is just extremely hot.
However, the defense against both of these is essentially the same, you want a heat resistant material with no gaps to allow the heat in.

01/09/2013 12:09 PMPosted by AlexTheGreat
Rawr.
Ahhh, you scared me.
Thanks for sharing! I'm looking forward to seeing which unit you'll examine next.
01/09/2013 01:01 PMPosted by Aldrexus
Thanks for sharing! I'm looking forward to seeing which unit you'll examine next.
Yay! We actually recorded a siege tank episode last night, so look forward to that!
There is preliminary done on zerg tactics, as well as roach finished recording. Should be up on the channel shortly.
01/09/2013 01:04 PMPosted by zappy
Yay! We actually recorded a siege tank episode last night, so look forward to that!
*cough* carrier *cough*
01/09/2013 01:01 PMPosted by Aldrexus
Thanks for sharing! I'm looking forward to seeing which unit you'll examine next.


YEEEEEEEEEEAH BLUE POST
Funny, I edited that post shortly after making it.

I actually realized the error in saying that protoss attacks don't use a chemical reaction, and instead modified to say they appear fundamentally different from the ballistics that terrans use.
------------------------------
Despite it being off topic, I want to take offense at the anatomy of the zergling done a few days ago by Ponera.

1: You assume that zerg muscles function the same way that earth life-forms do, and that they attach to anchor points in the same way.

2. You overlook the fact that this creature evolved to be a soldier. It isn't an animal outfitted to be a soldier (like a human would be). There are growths on the zergling that you dismiss as being pointless, like the carapace over the shoulder and legs, but I see a clear purpose for them: Armor. The leg and arm growths cover a huge amount of the zergling's body, and protect vital joints at the arms and legs from shots fired from the front. The wings on the zergling are obviously not to grant the zergling flight, but rather improve it's speed in short bursts - like a flying fish.

3. You take offense to the extra set of arms that hang overhead, saying they accomplish the same thing as the forearm claws. The zergling evolved to maximize damage on the battlefield for the short time it is alive, which extra claws would accomplish. Consider also that these claws can actually serve different purposes: the retractable claws on the lower arms seem better for grabbing and holding, while the upper arms look more appropriate for slashing and stabbing. Scorpions use their pincers to hold and their tails to kill, why couldn't a zergling do something similar?

4. The tusks sticking out from the zergling's neck seem to serve no purpose, which I agree with, but I wouldn't call them cosmetic. Even though zerg lifeforms evolve absurdly rapidly, they do seem to evolve to stimuli the same way that earth life forms do. It stands to reason that some things may get carried along that serve no purpose. Whales have tiny legs encased in their blubber. Humans have tails that never see the light of day, now just simply a growth on the base of the spine. Maybe the tusks are left over as some form of defense that the dune runners relied on, but were not powerful enough to be a major threat. Or, considering how fast zerglings are, the tusks are a ramming weapon. (like a lance) They would need to do little more than ram into an opponent to lacerate it a dozen ways, which is good when your combat life expectency is a second and a half.

5. I don't see the zergling's mouth and teeth as being part of their arsenal. If you watch the zergling's attack animation, it doesn't actually bite. It flays with its claws and tusks. Consider that the zergling is the smallest combat unit, so it would have to bite opponents that are much larger. Even marines are easily double the size of a zergling. Do you know why killer whales only eat the tongue of whales they kill? It's because their mouthes are too small to get a good grip on the giant rubbery mass that is the body of a great whale. They can only get solid bites on the soft lips and tongue. It isn't because their jaws are too weak, but too small. A zergling trying to bite a siege tank would find no place for its teeth to find purchase. Their teeth would only come into play for eating dead or defensely opponents, in which case their tusks would clearly get in the way and make consumption difficult. Maybe zerglings are not expected to live very long, on or off the battlefield. Consumption may be impossible for them.


1: You assume that zerg muscles function the same way that earth life-forms do, and that they attach to anchor points in the same way.


Uniformitarianism. Otherwise anything can be anything and nothing can be analysed. There is no reason why they wouldn't be similar if they look similar.

2. You overlook the fact that this creature evolved to be a soldier. It isn't an animal outfitted to be a soldier (like a human would be). There are growths on the zergling that you dismiss as being pointless, like the carapace over the shoulder and legs, but I see a clear purpose for them: Armor. The leg and arm growths cover a huge amount of the zergling's body, and protect vital joints at the arms and legs from shots fired from the front. The wings on the zergling are obviously not to grant the zergling flight, but rather improve it's speed in short bursts - like a flying fish.


I didn't overlook any such thing. This creature would need to actually function, since it's a scout as well as a swarming soldier. They are no doubt there for armour, but they could do a better job of placement; this was the point I was making. I don't think the zergling wings are effective, considering the weight of a zergling as well as the wing structure- flying fish work in such a way because physics works slightly different based on size. They are several orders of magnitude smaller than a zergling and also function as fins for use in the ocean; therefore the comparison is rather inappropriate. I know it shows it in-game and it could help in lower gravity environments, but since the upgrade is called metabolic boost, finding a way in which the wings are actually metabolically effective is imperative.

3. You take offense to the extra set of arms that hang overhead, saying they accomplish the same thing as the forearm claws. The zergling evolved to maximize damage on the battlefield for the short time it is alive, which extra claws would accomplish. Consider also that these claws can actually serve different purposes: the retractable claws on the lower arms seem better for grabbing and holding, while the upper arms look more appropriate for slashing and stabbing. Scorpions use their pincers to hold and their tails to kill, why couldn't a zergling do something similar?


They could do something similar, but there is an issue with counter productiveness in moving in every habitat causing them to get hung up on things and etc. So it's a cost-benefit issue; why not just remove the superfluous part instead of worrying about balancing it? It'd be less resource intensive, which is what the zerg are all about.

4. The tusks sticking out from the zergling's neck seem to serve no purpose, which I agree with, but I wouldn't call them cosmetic. Even though zerg lifeforms evolve absurdly rapidly, they do seem to evolve to stimuli the same way that earth life forms do. It stands to reason that some things may get carried along that serve no purpose. Whales have tiny legs encased in their blubber. Humans have tails that never see the light of day, now just simply a growth on the base of the spine. Maybe the tusks are left over as some form of defense that the dune runners relied on, but were not powerful enough to be a major threat. However, considering how fast zerglings are, they would need to do little more than ram into an opponent to lacerate it a dozen ways, which is good when your combat life expectency is a second and a half.


So on one hand you are using uniformiatrianism, comparing evolution to life on Earth, but earlier you tried to smack my nose for applying the principle uniformly? If those neck horns are vestigial, I'd hate to see what they were before. You don't ever see them ram things in such a way in their animation, so why would we assume that's what they do? It seems to me that if they ram something, they would get stuck on whatever it is. Not exactly the most cost effective strategy.

5. I don't see the zergling's mouth and teeth as being part of their arsenal. If you watch the zergling's attack animation, it doesn't actually bite. It flays with its claws and tusks. Consider that the zergling is the smallest combat unit, so it would have to bite opponents that are much larger. Even marines are easily double the size of a zergling. Do you know why killer whales only eat the tongue of whales they kill? It's because their mouthes are too small to get a good grip on the giant rubbery mass that is the body of a great whale. They can only get solid bites on the soft lips and tongue. It isn't because their jaws are too weak, but too small. A zergling trying to bite a siege tank would find no place for its teeth to find purchase. Their teeth would only come into play for eating dead or defensely opponents, in which case their tusks would clearly get in the way and make consumption difficult. Maybe zerglings are not expected to live very long, on or off the battlefield. Consumption may be impossible for them.


Killer whales don't just eat the tongue...They have conical teeth well adapted for piercing even large prey. It just so happens that in that one case where they only ate the tongue they were more than likely just being jerks. Killer whales are notorious for playing with their food or being remarkably non resourceful as far as exploiting food to the fullest (yet strangely, they are very resourceful in hunting strategies.) If consumption is impossible, why not remove the teeth altogether? The net resource saving would be worthwhile if you consider that millions of them are made. Their teeth are well adapted to lacerating- why wouldn't they use them? Doesn't make sense, especially since it's not a particular burden (as opposed to the derpy upper arms with pathetic muscle attachment sites) to keep them and use them.
Despite it being off topic, I want to take offense at the anatomy of the zergling done a few days ago by Ponera.

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7592199715
You're welcome.
I'll move over there.

Arg, you found unforeseen hypocrisy in my argument with latin words!

Touche sir

Join the Conversation