Colossus get used a lot more often because you can A-move and cause a lot of damage with them, yes. Basically any noob can cause hurt with the Colossus, unlike the Reaver. Does that make for good gameplay? Don't think so.

My argument isn't nostalgia. It's that the Colossus is generic laser shooting crap, and that it looks bad when moving (and terrible when going up/down cliffs) to top it off.

MorroW

Sweden3522 Posts

March 02 2010 19:20 GMT

#23

cmon reaver a robotic worm that shoots out crawling bombs?

+ Show Spoiler +

just kidding , i love them both but i think they should add the reaver and make the colosus slower and take down hp slightly

feels like toss missed this harass unit cause ive never seen harass me out of the 120 games i played

if they added reaver they should probably be forced to give it some 'walking mode' to fit in with the sc2 atmosphere :p

jonnyp

United States415 Posts

March 02 2010 19:21 GMT

#24

On March 03 2010 04:03 Puosu wrote:
Its a boring replacement to a very creative unit that has been considered to be one of the funniest unit of SC ever, I can't think many people can seriously defend colossus here. :/

I believe Blizzard is saving lurker, reaver and vulture for the first expansion, they can't seriously be taking them out just like that knowing they're some of the most liked units ever.

And most hated

It's even more sad because the reaver would look awesome in 3d lol

Kurdran

36 Posts

March 02 2010 19:21 GMT

#25

Nostalgia is by far the worst argument ever. Yes reavers were cool, but so are colossus and as some1 already said they spice up the game. Get over it.

Undisputed-

United States379 Posts

March 02 2010 19:22 GMT

#26

I really hate the callouses, I don't think it belongs in starcraft. I see it and just think war of the worlds. Protoss has enough walker type units already anyway.

I don't mind having a new unit I just hate the way the model looks and attacks.

DoomBacon

United States165 Posts

March 02 2010 19:23 GMT

#27

I think that the collosi are the coolest new unit for SC2. Additionally with new unit clustering you have to admit that scarbs would be a little op...

internetwarrior

32 Posts

March 02 2010 19:24 GMT

#28

Kurdran, it doesn't seem like you can read english.
I don't care if the Reaver "has to go", I'd just like to see a GOOD reason for it.
The Colossus is a mediocre unit with a mediocre animation.
And again, you can find a laser shooting tripod in so many places nowadays, I don't see why you'd can a scarab-building robotic caterpillar which is unique to the SC universe for that.

wintergt

Belgium1335 Posts

March 02 2010 19:26 GMT

#29

On March 03 2010 04:19 internetwarrior wrote:
Colossus get used a lot more often because you can A-move and cause a lot of damage with them, yes. Basically any noob can cause hurt with the Colossus, unlike the Reaver. Does that make for good gameplay? Don't think so.

You are forgetting that any AA can hit them and that because they are so devastating vs ground, they will be the first target to be focussed down so you'll need to protect them with other units, strategically retreat them to keep them alive, etc. Not just A-move and win.

My argument isn't nostalgia. It's that the Colossus is generic laser shooting crap, and that it looks bad when moving (and terrible when going up/down cliffs) to top it off.

It looks pretty cool. One of the better new additions definately.

BluzMan

Russian Federation4235 Posts

March 02 2010 19:27 GMT

#30

On March 03 2010 04:08 FictionJV wrote:

Show nested quote +

So you honestly think that warping in multiple Immortal's (depending on your gates) in almost no time is a good idea... ?

Anyway, ontopic.

I actually like the colossus, because it's something new and refreshing.
But at the same time I miss the reaver so much.

In the end if I had to choose between the two I would pick the reaver, but I don't think blizzard is ever just gonna patch the colossus out to put the reaver back in, that's just wishfull thinking.

I honestly think that Immortal is currently on it's way to complete overhaul being the only toss unit able to hurt armored stuff (c'mon, you need to build it to counter tier 1 roaches). No way it will see any play in release, so yeah, I want that unit to be brought to the state when it can be produced from gates, and I think that is likely to happen.

Reaver is just what protoss is about - shitton of damage and slow. It doesn't fill the role of Colossus and is in it's essence much different.

Knee_of_Justice

United States388 Posts

March 02 2010 19:28 GMT

#31

Edit: Once thought of putting immortal on GATEWAY (not warpgate) so that 1) no warp in immortal bullshit and 2) gateways actually have a reason for being built (right now, warpgates are just that much better and you get them for next to nothing).

Laser attack needs to go please. The protoss never really used lasers in SC and should not begin to use them in SC2.

But hell, if it HAS to be lasers, at least make them somewhat unique... an explosion or something when the beams come together would at least cover up the lameness that is the laser attack animation.

What is the use of including someone else's great idea in your work if you dont even have the common decency to improve on it in any way?

Captain Peabody

United States3128 Posts

March 02 2010 19:29 GMT

#32

I loves them both; the cute alien slugling and the giant four-legged alien tripod of mega-death. However, Colossi are definitely better for SC2.

Reavers with good scarab pathfinding, no glitching, and Warp Prisms to transport them would be incredibly, incredibly imbalanced. Colossi's air-weakness, cliff-climbing abilities, and line damage fit much better in the SC2 Protoss force in general.
Also, the Colossus is a giant alien tripod of mega-death; anyone who does not appreciate a giant alien tripod of mega-death is not someone I could ever trust.

And is anyone actually saying you couldn't find a Tripod lookalike shooting lasers in just about ANY future themed RTS?.

Yes, yes I am. Certainly, tripods are a well-known icon of science fiction, but they're that not common in video games, nor do most of them look that much like the Colossus. CnC's tripods, for example, look like this:
+ Show Spoiler +

Not nearly as awesome as the Colossus:

theqat

United States2856 Posts

March 02 2010 19:31 GMT

#33

The Colossus isn't a tripod . . . it's a quadruped

FusionCutter

Canada974 Posts

March 02 2010 19:31 GMT

#34

On March 03 2010 04:18 Polis wrote:

Show nested quote +

They should remove fog of war then. How many worse players had won becouse of some supper luck in the uphill miss chance? It is a made up problem.

I don't disagree with you.. I'm just going by what the designers have said...

Deleted User 55994

949 Posts

March 02 2010 19:31 GMT

#35

I feel that the colossus is simply an easier to use reaver. Same general purpose, but faster, no need to keep it loaded with scarabs, and for harrassment purposes you can just cliff jump so you don't need a shuttle. For someone with shitty mechanics like me, it's nice

Polis

Poland1292 Posts

March 02 2010 19:32 GMT

#36

Reaver was more interesting, powerful unit but very slow, and that needs money to produce scarabs.

Collosus, powerful a-move unit that can walk on cliff. I like that you can shoot it with both anty air, anty ground, but no scrouges makes it less interesting then it could had been.

It is not nostalgia. I like the new Ghost, and Raven seem good.

internetwarrior

32 Posts

March 02 2010 19:33 GMT

#37

Wintergt, are you partially blind? Have you looked at its legs when it moves and when it goes up and down cliffs? If that looks like anything, it's called silly, not cool.

"because they are so devastating vs ground, they will be the first target to be focussed down so you'll need to protect them with other units, strategically retreat them to keep them alive, etc. Not just A-move and win."
You can definitely A-move with Colossi and still cause a lot of damage if anything because they shoot instantly when in range, as opposed to the Reaver's scarab travel time. Also lol about AA. Shuttles?

Tyrannon

Germany113 Posts

March 02 2010 19:33 GMT

#38

Searching for Reaver?

I found it! Just play Terran^^

Its called Raven now and shoots Guiding Missiles!!! Well only one thoxD

Captain Peabody

United States3128 Posts

March 02 2010 19:33 GMT

#39

I'm just speculating, but perhaps the reaver was too 'random' for the SC2 designers tastes. They wanted the game to be 100% skill based, (hence they removed the 50% chance up hitting uphill mechanic). Reavers were fun to watch because they we're tense and you never knew how many SCVs you could blow up. But I think they wanted to remove this element of unpredictability, similar to spider mines, to make the game 100% skill based, rather than something like, say 95%.

No, it's the exact opposite. The Reaver in SC1 was so unpredictable because the scarab pathfinding absolutely, completely sucked, and this balanced out its insane splash damage, range, and with-shuttle mobility. A Reaver whose every shot moves smoothly to the target and detonates for full damage is a Reaver which annihilates virtually everything on the ground.

internetwarrior

32 Posts

March 02 2010 19:35 GMT

#40

On March 03 2010 04:29 Captain Peabody wrote:
anyone who does not appreciate a giant alien tripod of mega-death is not someone I could ever trust.

Or simply someone older than 12... :/