EPTLotV: Dragoon - a good idea for Protoss? - Page 5
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
| ||
|
Vansetsu
United States1454 Posts
On July 25 2015 09:43 Thieving Magpie wrote: Singularity charge was only good because marines needed a range upgrade as well. Imagine the stalker vs marine matchup in Sc2, but with 1 less range on marines. Well that and how pathing worked. But it's a good point I completely forgot. I'd be be down for that to be the case again, kind of like you could kind of kite roaches with stalkers until they gave roaches 1+ range. I'd be down for terrans to have to commit a little harder to bio if they wanted to use it vs p, and would be happy if mech was a more viable option vs p. I'm not talking about going full BW, but the thing that I liked about the dragoon or a stalker with a bit of a range advantage was the ability you had to put pressure out for a period of time. I don't like MSC or sentry snipe/allin as much as I would just like to be able, as protoss, to force out some tech commitment or pressure, without commiting all my gas to sentries. I mean i'm of the opinion to get rid of sentries and ff and wg all together, but, I guess this is just the playstyle i'd prefer and what comes to mind when I think of the dragoon. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On July 25 2015 18:12 Vansetsu wrote: Well that and how pathing worked. But it's a good point I completely forgot. I'd be be down for that to be the case again, kind of like you could kind of kite roaches with stalkers until they gave roaches 1+ range. I'd be down for terrans to have to commit a little harder to bio if they wanted to use it vs p, and would be happy if mech was a more viable option vs p. I'm not talking about going full BW, but the thing that I liked about the dragoon or a stalker with a bit of a range advantage was the ability you had to put pressure out for a period of time. I don't like MSC or sentry snipe/allin as much as I would just like to be able, as protoss, to force out some tech commitment or pressure, without commiting all my gas to sentries. I mean i'm of the opinion to get rid of sentries and ff and wg all together, but, I guess this is just the playstyle i'd prefer and what comes to mind when I think of the dragoon. I miss that too. Marines had 4 range starting, and didn't get +1 from bunkers. This meant 1-2 range goons could apply a LOT of early game pressure requiring bunkers + scv pull to hold off. Moving +1 range for marines to an upgrade and +1 range from bunkers to an upgrade would do a lot to bring that back. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On July 25 2015 18:36 Thieving Magpie wrote: I miss that too. Marines had 4 range starting, and didn't get +1 from bunkers. This meant 1-2 range goons could apply a LOT of early game pressure requiring bunkers + scv pull to hold off. Moving +1 range for marines to an upgrade and +1 range from bunkers to an upgrade would do a lot to bring that back. In BW marines got +2 range when they were inside a bunker. But dragoons with their range upgrade also got +2 so they still had the upper hand. Only when terran upgraded marine range for an additional +1 did marines in bunkers have the same range as dragoons with singularity charge. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On July 25 2015 18:46 RoomOfMush wrote: In BW marines got +2 range when they were inside a bunker. But dragoons with their range upgrade also got +2 so they still had the upper hand. Only when terran upgraded marine range for an additional +1 did marines in bunkers have the same range as dragoons with singularity charge. They got only +1 range in bunker.... BW Marines had 4 range before upgrade,+1 with bunker. (5 when upgraded, like SC2 marines, 6 in bunker) Dragoons had 4 range before upgrade. (6 when upgraded, like SC2 stalkers) Terran Academy was quite like Protoss Cybercore. Dragoon range took 166s vs 100s for Marine Range (and 80 for stim). I think timings were still quite adjusted. But obviously, Bio was fairly weaker since there were no MULES, no Reactors, no Marauders, and Marines had less HP. Bio recieved significant buffs when moving to SC2, and the stupid DPS of Marauders (up to 20 DPS vs armor) hasn't helped diversity and micro, moving to easy to exploit "terrrible terrible damage" and numerical superiority instead. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Bunker But perhaps the site is wrong and it really is just +1. The important point was that they do get something in contrast to what Thieving Magpie wrote. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On July 25 2015 20:22 RoomOfMush wrote: Right here it says they get +2: http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Bunker But perhaps the site is wrong and it really is just +1. The important point was that they do get something in contrast to what Thieving Magpie wrote. I had always thought it was a graphics issue and not an outright buff. The wide size of the bunker and moving the attack animation further out. I did not know it was a straight range upgrade. | ||
|
WGT-Baal
France3467 Posts
They wouldnt fix anything in LotV. Having a new AOE unit would be better for protoss (remove the collossus!), but one that is fun and feels right (not like the disruptor). A reaver like unit would be good but it would need to be tweaked because of the way unit clump in SC2. Perhaps a good defensive AOE unit to be able to keep several expansions... | ||
|
Samx
Singapore149 Posts
SC2 marines have more health, more dps and have marauders which hard counter stalkers. This is essence is why dragoons felt awesome and stalkers felt meh to Protoss players. But no worries, protoss players have always found a way in sc2. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
I thought that the stalker had the Same range, same dps, slightly less shields, and are cheaper. | ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On July 26 2015 02:41 WrathSCII wrote: Stalkers are Dragoons that were nerfed to oblivion compared to what they were due to Warp Gates, Force Fields, and Blink. Thus due to their weakness, Immortals were introduced to help filling the gap of missing superior fire power against armored units. Stalkers attack twice as fast as goons for half the damage. And because of the reductive nature of BW's system, Dragoons only deal the same amount of damage to "Large/Armored" units, and actually deal less damage to everything else compared to Stalkers. They both have 80 hitpoints They both have the same relative speed the only real difference is Stalkers have Blink while Dragoons have 20 shields. The fact that Dragoons need an upgrade to get to 6 range makes them even worse than stalkers pre-singularity charge. | ||
|
winsonsonho
Korea (South)143 Posts
| ||
|
Leviance
Germany4079 Posts
On May 23 2015 20:44 okto wrote: Give the stalker an optional gold skin. Problem fixed. The units are essentially the same. /thread | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
| ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On July 27 2015 05:55 [F_]aths wrote: I really don't understand why many thread starters seem to believe it is a good idea to bring an existing BW unit back. Of course, since it is still Starcraft, each race needs it iconic tier 1 unit and some other units. But every old unit is a passed opportunity for a new unit. I would guess the idea is that blizzard has shown time and time again that many of their "new units" suck balls. There are plenty of new SC2 units that are either loathed or ignored by players. The concept is: If you try something new and it doesnt work you go back to something old that you know did. Note however that I personally am NOT in favor of bringing old units back. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Coffeee
Switzerland17 Posts
in starcraft 2, such a unit would just be massed and then set an amove. this isnt interesting nor fun to watch. where as in broodwar it was like the tvt early game (where you micro so much with a small amount of units) im against this propose | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On July 27 2015 07:39 Coffeee wrote: well the problem is, the only reason this unit was interesting and good in brood war is that you had such small armies it was about the smallarmy micro managment. in starcraft 2, such a unit would just be massed and then set an amove. this isnt interesting nor fun to watch. where as in broodwar it was like the tvt early game (where you micro so much with a small amount of units) im against this propose The reason ranged goons were interesting in BW was because Marines only had 4 range and needed an upgrade + bunker to be able to fight them. This lead to early game PvT where 1-3 Dragoons could apply pressure to a FE terran long enough to safely expand themselves, but still be unable to just walk past the terran bunkers since it was their range they could exploit and not their power as a unit itself. The slow cooldown of their attacks also made it easier to kite with them, but only because the things you needed to kite were slow enough to be kited. Stalkers are better and more interesting than Dragoons and the only things preventing them from playing the same is marauders, Creep Spread, and 5 range marines. | ||
|
Kharnage
Australia920 Posts
Make zealots charge more accessable. Either give it to them by default or move charge to cyber core and cost 100/100. Charge makes zealots much better and allows protoss to actually push back small groups instead of just defending. Basically if protoss make zealots in the early game then attacking the protoss will get you punished instead of it being very low risk with high potential reward. Secondly I would like to see stalkers get a + damage vs flying units, either again as a flat buff or when blink is researched or even a seperate late game upgrade. I don't care, but stalkers have terrible dps and they are pretty much the only unit protoss has which can shoot up. Other general thoughts on the state of protoss: I like the adept, I think it gives protoss the tools their need to shut down early bio aggression, especially once people really start working out the right 'mix' of gateway units. Protoss have been desperately needing something which does good damage vs light units and this fits the bill. The disruptor is ok, but it only works out when your opponent is distracted. In a straight up engagement it will never, ever do anything. This means it's a harassment tool. It's not going to keep you alive vs a huge roach hydra push etc. The elephant in the room is the fact that nerfing the colossus sucks. It's worse in every way and still just as expensive as it always was. The disruptor does NOT fill the role of the colossus. It can't. Honestly I think that if the colossus does less damage and has less potential with the loss of range then both the colossus and the range upgrade should cost less. | ||
| ||
