|
So recently, as everyone must have noticed, no-one is using Colossi in PvZ, which is the consequence of redesigning the Swarm Host, thus effectively removing it from the match-up. It is interesting enough in itself that one of the most hated "imba A-move unit" is simply no longer used without any nerf; simply because there is a better alternative in the Blink Stalker-Sentry-Immortal, later Storm, composition. However, I would not like to discuss this, but the implications this might have in Legacy of the Void.
The Colossus in LotV (as of the current beta patch, at least) will be significantly nerfed. I fear that the Colossus may become more extinct than the Swarm Host is now. (Which some of you wouldn't mind, I know, but having a unit in the game that sees no use is just bad in my opinion.)
So the things to consider:
- If literally no-one makes Colossi in PvZ right now, why would anyone do so if they get a range and damage nerf?
- Would having Lurkers and Ravagers in the game somehow justify making Colossi? Remember Lurkers have a longer range then Colossi!
- With the addition of the Disruptor, wouldn't Protoss players rather make Disruptors instead of Colossi?
- If the number of Lurkers gets too high, wouldn't Protoss players (have to) switch to air, possibly using the buffed Carriers?
With those in mind, I'm almost sure that as things stand currently, chances are we will not see a single Colossus in LotV PvZ's. That is not necessarily a problem, but something that, I think, should be avoided if possible.
I also wonder if the reduced damage and range of the Colossus will switch the PvT meta towards Storm and Disruptors. It seems to me that Adepts are pretty much a core unit now in PvT with the shield upgrade, so if you already have a Twilight for the upgrade, you may want to complete the Templar tech with Storm. On the other hand, an Adept/Storm composition would be susceptible to Widow Mines, and Colossi can conviniently snipe Mines from afar (in HotS at least). I still wonder if Colossi would be the choice instead of Disruptors.
Finally, for PvP. Ever since the Tempest nerf, Colossi are more dominant in this match-up than ever, so PvP is the match-up where I least fear for the Colossus going extinct. However, the recent shield damage buff to Disruptors makes them almost one-shot a whole army on a lucky hit, making such a hit almost an immediate win.
Sure, such a hit should not really happen, and the damage of the Disruptor is less reliable than that of the Colossus, but you can still use the Disruptors to harass and to flank an army, landing that money hit.
Now what do you think about it? Because I think the Colossus is going to disappear from PvZ completely (it already has, in fact), and will likely be underused in the other two match-ups as well.
Do you guys agree? Do you think it would be a problem at all?
Yeah, I know this is a bit of theorycrafting and lots of things are still subject to change, but still, I don't want the Colossus to become the new Swarm Host.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm afraid to say it out loud, but maybe some of the nerfs could be reverted?
|
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor.
|
On June 28 2015 22:19 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor.
Not true. In PvP colossi are the most positional-based unit you can find. Late game war of worlds are literally only about positioning and concaves.
|
On June 28 2015 22:19 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor.
There are also other ones too but they are not as bad as the Colossus. Day 9 once said in one of his dailies that the most nooby friendliest units are the Void Ray and the Thor. Maybe Zealots, Roaches and Battle Hellions fall in the same category but I think its ok with these Units since they are more of a meatshield Unit that act as a spearhead during an attack.
They don´t need to completely remove Colossi but rather redesign it so it doesn´t counter a concave. I think that´s the biggest problem with this Unit.
|
Either one of the damage or range nerf was OK (maybe damage nerf too severe), but both ? Are you kidding me ?
|
Right now they want to see some disruptor usage. They'll probably revert some of the nerfs when the game comes out.
I can't say I'm too pleased with the state of protoss splash damage right now because the whole hit or miss aspect of diruptors is very off-putting. I'm eager to see how they are going to rework the disruptor in the next patch.
|
On June 28 2015 23:01 Geiko wrote:
Right now they want to see some disruptor usage. They'll probably revert some of the nerfs when the game comes out.
I can't say I'm too pleased with the state of protoss splash damage right now because the whole hit or miss aspect of diruptors is very off-putting. I'm eager to see how they are going to rework the disruptor in the next patch.
They said they wanted to diminish that hit or miss aspect, and their idea seems decent. I hope you're right and colossi don't just disappear in LotV. I know most people hate them, but when not en masse they introduce interesting dynamics.
|
On June 28 2015 22:50 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 22:19 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor. Not true. In PvP colossi are the most positional-based unit you can find. Late game war of worlds are literally only about positioning and concaves.
Thats still amoving
|
Colossus is negating the use of concaves, is arguably boring and is severely nerfed in LotV. However, I like the visual design, walking over units and cliffs and I would like to see it redesigned ability-wise.
What if Colossus would lose its AOE ability (Adepts kind of imbue the gateway army enough that you can tech to templars and Disruptors and hold your ground) and gain more damage on it's single target beams? This way it would be better vs buildings and bigger units. Range would need to stay as in HotS or even +1 with single target damage.
Something like in this screenshot
+ Show Spoiler +
|
@HotS: They are being played in PvZ, and of course both other matchups. You are dead wrong if you say that noone is playing them in PvZ, they are only played less which is pretty good for the game, given that before they were played in every match.
@LotV: I have no clue what blizzard's intentions exactly are for that unit. I agree that content that has been put in the game should have strategical value and the LotV Colossus does not look like it has any. The obvious solution would be to remove it together with all the other useless and badly designed units. But I feel like blizzard has changed their opinion on useless units and is now quite OK with some of them being left (intentionally?) useless (at the higher ranks).
Personally I would rather like to see a heavily redesigned Colossus, than have the game designed and balanced around the disruptor.
If the solution to making Colossi more viable becomes to restore the status HotS, than I don't really like that either. The Colossus needs to lose its air vulnerability and ability to combat whilst standing on top of other units.
|
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
Volia.
Tons of counter play opportunities. It goes into its "Siege Mode" and Vikings can't damage it from the air? Well they can land very close to it and it can't hit them back. You'll have to nerf the movespeed of Warp Prisms when carrying the Colossus and the pick up range too, but it'd be a fun change.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor.
|
Range nerf is possibly to enable Lurkers.
The only use they have now, is when you're already far ahead, you just add them on and make the Death Ball push.
It's another problem they suddenly have to solve and it's still the best unit for forcing your way into their production.
Having a weaker Colossus, means you keep all the bad traits, while you don't really get to see the good traits of the unit.
Good Traits: Cliff Walking, AtA weakness, Flanking weakness, unique splash AoE.
Mb redesigning it's role as a smaller, weaker, but faster unit that can harass via. cliff walk abuse?
|
The current stats feel like a placeholder, so I think Blizzard will eventually get around to changing it up at some point.
|
On June 29 2015 00:54 eviltomahawk wrote:
The current stats feel like a placeholder, so I think Blizzard will eventually get around to chamging it up at some point.
AGreed... probably done on purpose to force other units to be used first
|
On June 28 2015 23:34 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 22:50 Geiko wrote:On June 28 2015 22:19 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor. Not true. In PvP colossi are the most positional-based unit you can find. Late game war of worlds are literally only about positioning and concaves. Thats still amoving
LOL, no... the example he cited is not a move.
Creating an arc and maintaining it isn't a moving, but it's not just the colo, in pvp maintaining an arc is true for the whole army (for the most part). Nothing really special about colo, I can see how it appears a move to you.
In other match ups I think this is more true.
|
the collossus is the worst designed unit in the game and it should be either removed or kept useless.
Whenever collossi are built the game turns into a dance of two deathballs because the unit creates very onesided engagements. either the vikings/vipers are killed before the collossi are dead and the protoss destroys the terran/zerg or vice versa. Constant trading with collossus based armies is impossible because of this mechanic. You don't want to risk taking a bad engagement vs collossus based army because the one engagement is all that decides the outcome of the game.
Do multiprong aggression and kill 2 bases? Doesn't matter if this forces you into a bad engagement and you lose the game.
Once collossi are on the field all small skirmishes and multiprong harassment become irrelevant and everything that matters is the outcome of this one engagement.
|
On June 28 2015 23:29 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2015 23:01 Geiko wrote:
Right now they want to see some disruptor usage. They'll probably revert some of the nerfs when the game comes out.
I can't say I'm too pleased with the state of protoss splash damage right now because the whole hit or miss aspect of diruptors is very off-putting. I'm eager to see how they are going to rework the disruptor in the next patch. They said they wanted to diminish that hit or miss aspect, and their idea seems decent. I hope you're right and colossi don't just disappear in LotV. I know most people hate them, but when not en masse they introduce interesting dynamics.
I have multiple filthy casual friends who primarily play Protoss because they think the Colossus is such a cool unit, aesthetically. I feel like we'd end up missing it if it were completely removed.
On June 29 2015 00:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
I'm not sure about that last idea. You might have to flesh it out a bit more, because right now I'm not sure how it would improve the gameplay around the unit. It sounds like you'd just "siege" it whenever the opponent wants to dive in and pick it off with aerial units, and it would completely shut down their efforts to do so, no matter how skillful. The other parts seem like a good idea though, especially if you gave its attacks a bonus against structures. Right now, they're a bit flimsy in that role, even before the LotV nerf.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor.
Increase the number of coin flips, and decrease the weight of each coin, and coin flips start feeling pretty alright if you go far enough. It's the point where luck all kind of blends together and starts being a game of skill over who can manage those risks best, a la a high ground miss chance and the entire game of WC3.
|
On June 29 2015 00:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
Volia.
Tons of counter play opportunities. It goes into its "Siege Mode" and Vikings can't damage it from the air? Well they can land very close to it and it can't hit them back. You'll have to nerf the movespeed of Warp Prisms when carrying the Colossus and the pick up range too, but it'd be a fun change.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor.
Sounds a bit imba to be honest. Put them in warpprism. Siege in front of zerg base and voila.
Making units super strong but with a big drawback (such as very low speed) can be good design but it is VERY hard to balance.
|
It's in a good place now. Has some use but things don't revolve around it anymore. Good unit for noobs to play War of the Worlds fantasy.
|
On June 29 2015 03:14 Charoisaur wrote:
the collossus is the worst designed unit in the game and it should be either removed or kept useless.
Whenever collossi are built the game turns into a dance of two deathballs because the unit creates very onesided engagements. either the vikings/vipers are killed before the collossi are dead and the protoss destroys the terran/zerg or vice versa. Constant trading with collossus based armies is impossible because of this mechanic. You don't want to risk taking a bad engagement vs collossus based army because the one engagement is all that decides the outcome of the game.
Do multiprong aggression and kill 2 bases? Doesn't matter if this forces you into a bad engagement and you lose the game.
Once collossi are on the field all small skirmishes and multiprong harassment become irrelevant and everything that matters is the outcome of this one engagement.
I agree with this. I feel like the moment one side in any vP matchup starts building colossus, both sides start pulling all their units into one deathball. This is followed by total passivity on both sides as they build their ideal 200/200 composition. The only trading that goes on is when both players are donating units that they don't want in their 200/200 composition. After both sides are happy with their deathball, we see them circle each other until one side decides to start the engagement. 15 seconds late, one player GGs.
|
The reason colossus disappeared from top-level play is because of vipers. Not much point in spending for them if they just get yoinked: better to use blink stalker and storm.
You need such good blink-micro skills to handle that composition though.....in HOTS for most people it's more realistic to just get colossus.
|
I think we should change the colossi back like in HotS and see what happens to the meta. There's other big changes in LotV that may nerf colossi use indirectly anyways. And if it does, then I think we should keep the colossi as it is in HotS.
|
On June 28 2015 22:19 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:
I honestly think Colossi should just be removed, Protoss has enough AoE and the unit is just a-move.
I dont think there is another unit more a-move then colossi... you dont even need to make a concave or something, just pull a bit back and then a-move
I would also want Reaver instead of Disruptor.
I mean, there's almost every zerg ground unit...
|
One idea could be -
Halve its speed, increase its damage (above what it was before) revert the range, make Viper abducts only have half the effect. Make massive units immune to recall.
Suddenly you have a positional/ defensive unit - much like a slow siege. Also fits the "destroyer of worlds" concept.
|
On June 29 2015 19:44 weikor wrote:
One idea could be -
Halve its speed, increase its damage (above what it was before) revert the range, make Viper abducts only have half the effect. Make massive units immune to recall.
Suddenly you have a positional/ defensive unit - much like a slow siege. Also fits the "destroyer of worlds" concept.
I was thinking something like this too. Make its weakness its speed. At the moment it keeps up pretty well with the protoss army, but if it moved slower there'd be more strategy involved with its positioning - harder to get into battle, harder to escape, but devastating if in the right place and protected.
|
If they nerfed the colossus that much, can't they just make it so the colossus cannot be hit by vikings and corruptors and anti-air troops, that's a big buff for them
|
Starcraft logic - Nerf the colossus, it's a-move. And nobodys talks about chargelots abomination.
|
On June 29 2015 04:26 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2015 00:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
Volia.
Tons of counter play opportunities. It goes into its "Siege Mode" and Vikings can't damage it from the air? Well they can land very close to it and it can't hit them back. You'll have to nerf the movespeed of Warp Prisms when carrying the Colossus and the pick up range too, but it'd be a fun change.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor. Sounds a bit imba to be honest. Put them in warpprism. Siege in front of zerg base and voila. Making units super strong but with a big drawback (such as very low speed) can be good design but it is VERY hard to balance.
That'd be no different that a bunch of Medivacs unloading some Siege Tanks and them going into Siege mode in front a Zerg base. The difference is that the cost of a bunch of Warp Prisms plus Colossus is extreme, and Warp Prisms will be slower moving across the map. Remember, the damage is no more than the Colossus in HOTS.
As I said, you need to handle the Warp Prism in relation to the Colossus. Give them a long load/unload time, don't allow it to be loaded in "siege mode" and reduce warp prism speed while carrying it, and nerf pick up range and you're there.
I know this because I suggested thing change a long time ago (back in the HOTS Beta) and created a balance map to test it, and if anything Colossus were very hard to use and need more buffs I felt. Pick up them in the Warp Prism and the Vikings/Corrupters will just focus down the slowed Warp Prism. Also, the cost and time required to make a Warp Prism makes them even more expensive if you're going to try and pair every Colossus with a Warp Prism.
What that change does, is makes attacking with the Colossus a lot more difficult, but improve their defensive abilities.
On June 29 2015 22:34 StarscreamG1 wrote:
Starcraft logic - Nerf the colossus, it's a-move. And nobodys talks about chargelots abomination.
Except for the whole thread on Gateway units... yeah.
|
On June 29 2015 20:55 Quineotio wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2015 19:44 weikor wrote:
One idea could be -
Halve its speed, increase its damage (above what it was before) revert the range, make Viper abducts only have half the effect. Make massive units immune to recall.
Suddenly you have a positional/ defensive unit - much like a slow siege. Also fits the "destroyer of worlds" concept. I was thinking something like this too. Make its weakness its speed. At the moment it keeps up pretty well with the protoss army, but if it moved slower there'd be more strategy involved with its positioning - harder to get into battle, harder to escape, but devastating if in the right place and protected.
Not neccasarily. If you just nerf its speed and buff its core stats somehow, it will be even more of a deathball unit than it is now. In order to be a proper positional unit it needs to enter a state where it cannot move/move extremely slowly, which makes it possible to balance its core stats around being insanely strong.
|
Bisutopia19234 Posts
I actually think the colossus itself is kind of cool. Can walk up and down cliffs, has lasers, target able by air and ground. Its attack has been a long standing issue for many people, but there is a ton of potential to get this unit right. The unit is here to stay so let's figure out what works. Here's my idea for the future of the colossus:
- Single Target. Targets specific spot and hits whatever unit remains in its target spot as the attack sequence finishes.
- The laser swipe starts outward and closes in on a target area. This gives the unit in the targeted area an opportunity to micro out of the way before the two lasers converge in the middle.
- Damage + DoT occurs. Enemy unit that has been hit by the colossus suffers significant damage over time.
- Barrage Anti-air ability with cool down. Give the colossus anti air potential with a series of missiles fired out at enemy fliers. The damage from one colossus doesn't need to be significant, but have 3 or 4 could make them formidable.
- Barrage is a non targeting ability that sends missile in the area of nearby fliers, but fliers can maneuver away from the area if the player sees the missile animation begin.
|
Anyone who thinks a Colossus is simply a "stupid a-move unit that counters concaves" hasn't played or watched enough Protoss.
In PvT Colossus use is almost always about making sure you DONT attack into a concave. It's about moving your army around to attack from the optimal side. It's about microing your Colossi back from the Vikings so your Stalkers can shoot them down and bringing the Colos back forward again when he stims his bio and goes in on the Stalkers.
In PvZ Colossi can easily be swarmed by groups of Roaches or picked off by corruptors if the Protoss engages from a bad angle or is surprised by a flank. The Colossi need to stay towards the back of the army to avoid abducts and "roach hugs" but they can't wander too far because the Protoss army is highly reliant on their AoE damage.
In PvP positioning of Colossus is the single most important thing in late game engagements. How clumped together are they? How big is your concave relative to his? What unist are you focus firing with them? Etc.
While we're on the topic of dumb a-move units.. how about the Roach? Or the Hellbat?
I agree with OP that LotV Colossus is absolutely useless. Unit needs a few tweaks because in its current form there is no incentive to make it over anything else.
|
In PvZ Colossi can easily be swarmed by groups of Roaches or picked off by corruptors if the Protoss engages from a bad angle or is surprised by a flank. The Colossi need to stay towards the back of the army to avoid abducts and "roach hugs" but they can't wander too far because the Protoss army is highly reliant on their AoE damage.
Still goes under the amove category.
In PvP positioning of Colossus is the single most important thing in late game engagements. How clumped together are they? How big is your concave relative to his? What unist are you focus firing with them? Etc.
You also spread out Roaches in ZvZ wars. This is still amove.
In PvT Colossus use is almost always about making sure you DONT attack into a concave. It's about moving your army around to attack from the optimal side. It's about microing your Colossi back from the Vikings so your Stalkers can shoot them down and bringing the Colos back forward again when he stims his bio and goes in on the Stalkers.
During the engagement you don't move Colosuss very much. Instead you can move arcons/stalkers to focus fire Vikings down. 95% of the time you simply amove with the Coloussus.
TLDR: You have a too narrow definition of what amove is. Slight repositions prior to an engagement still fits under amove. The only situation where its not really being amoved is in PvP where one Colossus might get low on HP and you pull it back to save it.
While we're on the topic of dumb a-move units.. how about the Roach? Or the Hellbat?
Noone are saying these units aren't amovish as well. Except the Roach can be used for burrow micro and hellbat for medivac micro. Colossus doesn't synergize with Warp Prism very well on the other hand.
|
Single Target. Targets specific spot and hits whatever unit remains in its target spot as the attack sequence finishes.
The laser swipe starts outward and closes in on a target area. This gives the unit in the targeted area an opportunity to micro out of the way before the two lasers converge in the middle.
Neither are realistic if they are being parts of its auto-attacks. It's simply not practical to manually respond to this type of micro if there are multiple Colossus out on a battle that each fire every other second. These types of effects instead must be part of abilities with significant cooldowns. And honestly, protoss really doesn't need a tier 3 AOE abilitiy on the Robo with the introduction of the Disruptor.
I think there are only two solutions that makes sense for the Colossus:
(1) Zone-control/postiional unit.
(2) Solid single-target unit that is better vs light than armored + has some type of escape tool so it can move out on the map without commiting 100%. Perhaps this can be through the Warp Prism, which implies that it shouldn't be vunerable to AA.
|
On June 29 2015 23:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +In PvZ Colossi can easily be swarmed by groups of Roaches or picked off by corruptors if the Protoss engages from a bad angle or is surprised by a flank. The Colossi need to stay towards the back of the army to avoid abducts and "roach hugs" but they can't wander too far because the Protoss army is highly reliant on their AoE damage. Still goes under the amove category. Show nested quote +
In PvP positioning of Colossus is the single most important thing in late game engagements. How clumped together are they? How big is your concave relative to his? What unist are you focus firing with them? Etc.
You also spread out Roaches in ZvZ wars. This is still amove. Show nested quote +In PvT Colossus use is almost always about making sure you DONT attack into a concave. It's about moving your army around to attack from the optimal side. It's about microing your Colossi back from the Vikings so your Stalkers can shoot them down and bringing the Colos back forward again when he stims his bio and goes in on the Stalkers. During the engagement you don't move Colosuss very much. Instead you can move arcons/stalkers to focus fire Vikings down. 95% of the time you simply amove with the Coloussus. TLDR: You have a too narrow definition of what amove is. Slight repositions prior to an engagement still fits under amove. The only situation where its not really being amoved is in PvP where one Colossus might get low on HP and you pull it back to save it. Show nested quote +While we're on the topic of dumb a-move units.. how about the Roach? Or the Hellbat? Noone are saying these units aren't amovish as well. Except the Roach can be used for burrow micro and hellbat for medivac micro. Colossus doesn't synergize with Warp Prism very well on the other hand.
What on Earth are you talking about? Your argument is basically "nope, still amove."
I've given you a detailed description of exactly all the different kinds of NON a-moves you need to make with your Colossus. A right click back is not an a-move. Focus firing is not an A-move. Kiting bio while moving back with your Colossi and sending your Zealots in is not an A-move.
|
Why the hell would you ever build a single target damage Colossus? What problem does this solve for Protoss? The race that is usually heavily outnumbered in fights... We already have the Tempest for long range single target siege unit. We have strong units that can trade efficiently 1v1 vs most units in the game. What we DO need is ways to kill Terran bio which has an outrageous DPS spread among many many targets and mass Roaches/Hydra which combine for insane health/DPS for their cost when used together.
The unit does a lot of damage but has a couple of GLARING weaknesses that can be exploited by both Zerg and Terran. Honestly I think it's just fine.
Maybe if we had fewer people whining about how "OP" and "a-move" it is and more people actually playing with the damn thing we could have a constructive conversation.
|
The colossus has roughly the same niche as siege tanks, lurkers, disruptors and high templars' psionic storm. Compared to those units, it is A-move.
The unit is just badly designed in how much it promotes deathball play. The disruptor has the potential to be a good replacement.
|
I for one think that it should be okay to make a deathball if you want to.
Various play styles are what make the game interesting. If you have to play a certain style every time the options are limited and the game gets stale. Forcing only small engagements everywhere might not appeal to all players. I have a few friends who like to just make big armies and march across the map. There are people who like this.
Similarly, my own play style is much more harass focused. And the players that I like to watch are usually not the ones who are turtling to a deathball.
But when you nerf the Colossus into oblivion and tell Protoss "you must play this way" you're making the game shallower.
|
On June 30 2015 00:31 DinoMight wrote:
I for one think that it should be okay to make a deathball if you want to.
Various play styles are what make the game interesting. If you have to play a certain style every time the options are limited and the game gets stale. Forcing only small engagements everywhere might not appeal to all players. I have a few friends who like to just make big armies and march across the map. There are people who like this.
Similarly, my own play style is much more harass focused. And the players that I like to watch are usually not the ones who are turtling to a deathball.
But when you nerf the Colossus into oblivion and tell Protoss "you must play this way" you're making the game shallower.
I completely agree about various play styles.
However, the Protoss deathball should be like the Terran MMM deathball or Roach Hydra ball. It should lack big time AOE in a straight up fight, and instead should be mobile. Therefore it loses up straight up to positional based compositions that use the Lurker or Siege Tank.
The Colossus blurs the line between the playstyles, and ends up leaving Protoss in a weird area. The solution as I mentioned is the make the Colossus into a true positional unit, while making some changes to Gateway units and Archons to supplement it.
|
I've given you a detailed description of exactly all the different kinds of NON a-moves you need to make with your Colossus.
The problem is that these moves you are talking about is something you do with every single unit. Even Roaches in ZvZ wars and everyone considers that amoves. Hence, your definition of amoving isn't inline with how the majority of the community views it. Your definition is too literral. Based on my observation from how people typically speak of this unit, the following types of micro must be rewarded for a unit to not be considered amosish:
- Spliting
- Intensive kiting
- Heavy focus fire
- Pull away unit from focus fire
- Using abilities really well
Maintaining a concave and staying far away from enemy units??? Very few people will have that on their list. Some people will also point out that Maurauder is an amove unit, and it actually is in situations where it isn't splitting or facing Zealots - even though you always wanna maintain a concave with the unit.
The Colossus blurs the line between the playstyles, and ends up leaving Protoss in a weird area.
Yes, this is definitely the issue. As a general rule either you give a unit at least 2.75 movement speed or you make it a true positional unit (or spellcaster) that can hold specific locations very well.
2.25 speed units on the other hand (like the Immortal and the Colossus) end up being very deathballish as they cannot retreat from engagements and are also too slow to be microed during engagements. This issue can too an extent be circumvented if they synergize very well with dropships, but Colossus doesn't due to AA-vulnerability.
|
|
|
On June 30 2015 01:56 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +
I've given you a detailed description of exactly all the different kinds of NON a-moves you need to make with your Colossus.
The problem is that these moves you are talking about is something you do with every single unit. Even Roaches in ZvZ wars and everyone considers that amoves. Hence, your definition of amoving isn't inline with how the majority of the community views it. Your definition is way too literral while most people believe that you typically need to split, do intensive kiting, focus fire, pull away from focus fire in order for it not to be amoving. TLDR: Maintaining a concave and staying far away from enemy units doesn't make the unit "not amovish".
Then by that overly vague and meaningless definition almost every unit in the game is "A-move" and you shouldn't be isolating the Colossus.
It seems the only "problem" with the Colossus is that you don't like dying to it.
Seriously this "everything but Terran bio is a-move" mentality is not healthy.
|
@Bronzeknee re: deathballs
The Protoss Deathball you describe doesn't in fact benefit by being a deathball. As a concept, the deathball needs to move together to work.
The reason the Colossus works well in a deathball is because it's big and expensive and requires a lot of babysitting. But if you can get a solid 140 supply ball of stuff going, it has enough protection to dish out massive damage without dying instantly.
Promoting different styles of play means having units that can work in various roles. The only reason you saw Deathballs is because there was no viable alternative. With the introduction of the disruptor and the adept, you have a Protoss army that is much stronger in small battles and can hold their own vs Terran and Zerg in a scrappy many bases harassy guerilla warfare type game.
Let's leave in the Colossus to provide an alternative to those that don't want to play that style. For every style there will be a style that counters it. And when something is broken beyound counters Blizzard steps in and changes the units/maps accordingly.
More styles of play > fewer styles of play.
|
I'm honestly shocked that people want a stronger Colossus?
Simply from the gameplay point on its super boring to use, doesnt give the opponent a chance for fancy micro or any interesting reactions.
It strongholds the whole Protoss race to deathball and not have small armies here and there since you have to be super protective of it,
its forcing other units to be weaker , similar to forcefield.
It doesnt allow Protoss fun lategame transitions into Carriers for example, simply because the colossus already forces the counter to them, it forces totally 1 dimensional unit responses which just screams boring and bad design to me.
Honestly i want a full redesign(bisudagger had some fun ideas on the last page)
or just a removal (which obviously won't happen this far into the game).
|
More styles of play > fewer styles of play.
More lame styles of play < Fewer lame styles of play.
There was a reason the old SH style was removed, becasue it was lame. Diversity should instead be rewarded through different interesting styles.
|
Then by that overly vague and meaningless definition almost every unit in the game is "A-move" and you shouldn't be isolating the Colossus.
No, check the edit:
- Spliting
- Intensive kiting
- Heavy focus fire
- Pull away unit from focus fire
- Using abilities really well
(hence why I previously wrote that there was a bit of "non-amove"-micro in Colossus vs Colossus wars as it is actually possible to pull back injured Colossus).
The problem with your definition is that you don't keep a distinction between the verb "amove" and the adjective "amove"-unit. Your definition implies that if a unit in a scenario is doing something more than just amoving (the verb) --> Then it cannot be considered an amove"-unit, which simply isn't consistent with how most people use the adjective.
|
@Bronzeknee re: deathballs
The Protoss Deathball you describe doesn't in fact benefit by being a deathball. As a concept, the deathball needs to move together to work.
The reason the Colossus works well in a deathball is because it's big and expensive and requires a lot of babysitting. But if you can get a solid 140 supply ball of stuff going, it has enough protection to dish out massive damage without dying instantly.
Promoting different styles of play means having units that can work in various roles. The only reason you saw Deathballs is because there was no viable alternative. With the introduction of the disruptor and the adept, you have a Protoss army that is much stronger in small battles and can hold their own vs Terran and Zerg in a scrappy many bases harassy guerilla warfare type game.
Let's leave in the Colossus to provide an alternative to those that don't want to play that style. For every style there will be a style that counters it. And when something is broken beyound counters Blizzard steps in and changes the units/maps accordingly.
More styles of play > fewer styles of play.
Agreed. I think if they did bring back the original colo there would have to be some type of Terran counter that they could reach in tier 2. Here is why:
Right now Adepts early harass can be orchestrated that 2 adepts can knock on your door by the time you have 4 marines which means adepts into robo into colo with the current warp prism would have no sincere answer from Terran. There would have to be a MASSIVE trip up by protoss in order for Terran to just get some sense of stability. I like how much protoss would have in terms of versatility if that were the case I can imagine like some serious checkmate moves possible from protoss that would be reminiscent of Blink = win days where 2 terrans were barely able to make it in top 32 GSL.
Edit: I would like to see colossus used like reavers with the warp prism upgrade use them to get in a good position drop to fire on the other army and pick up when they tried to get focused down also a retreating harass. I think that would be perfect TBH. we've seen this style of play with puck and a few others with the other colossus the major adjustment would probably be to allow 2 colo in one warp prism.
|
On June 30 2015 00:31 DinoMight wrote:
I for one think that it should be okay to make a deathball if you want to.
Various play styles are what make the game interesting. If you have to play a certain style every time the options are limited and the game gets stale. Forcing only small engagements everywhere might not appeal to all players. I have a few friends who like to just make big armies and march across the map. There are people who like this.
Similarly, my own play style is much more harass focused. And the players that I like to watch are usually not the ones who are turtling to a deathball.
But when you nerf the Colossus into oblivion and tell Protoss "you must play this way" you're making the game shallower.
I don't. Deathballs should only be effective for players at the casual level or the people who don't have the apm to handle multiple engagements.
Deathballs are terrible for spectators. They lead to a very stale game where nothing happens for huge stretches of time. It doesn't make the game interesting at all for viewers.
I think the biggest disconnect in the SC2 community right now are between the spectators who don't play the game anymore but are still interested in watching awesome games between pro players versus the people who just want an easy way for their chosen race to win (see: people defending swarm hosts).
|
The state of the Colossus is that it should have been removed and Protoss rebalanced accordingly 2-3 years ago.
It is a powerful AOE with a strange crippling weakness vs air that is devoid of micro, skillcap, or spectator fun/viewing.
Remove Colossus from the game, strengthen gateway units accordingly, the Disruptor is already a far superior counterpart to the Colossus for Robotics tech and is in need of a few tweaks more then design changes. All of the design changes in the world couldn't save the Colossus from being the A move noob friendly unit it is now.
Seriously, look at BW (I know I know we are tired of hearing this crap but it is true) to look at how awesome Protoss could be without the Colossus.
|
Deathballs are terrible for spectators. They lead to a very stale game where nothing happens for huge stretches of time. It doesn't make the game interesting at all for viewers.
It's not even that they are bad for spectators. But Colossus are also boring to use and boring to play against.
|
On June 29 2015 04:41 Sapphire.lux wrote:
It's in a good place now. Has some use but things don't revolve around it anymore. Good unit for noobs to play War of the Worlds fantasy. I agree in the sense that I think it's in an acceptable place, for those exact reasons, but I feel that it could be done better.
Here's an idea from the corresponding reddit OP that I thought was probably the most appealing idea I've yet seen on this topic:
"What is the Protoss Lacking? Anti-Air is a big thing that Protoss is missing (and Zerg -_-), as well as zone control unit similar to the Lurker or Siege Tank. They do have SOME zone control in the form of the Sentry, but not in a way that can be Aggressive like the Siege Tank or Lurker. Should the Colossus shoot air somehow? Should it have some sort of immobile, siege option, similar to other races siege options, or maybe the One-Goal Void-Ray from way back when?"
Like a cross between the Void Ray and the Liberator. Seriously, watch it. It's pretty cool to see.
|
On June 30 2015 02:17 DinoMight wrote:
@Bronzeknee re: deathballs
The Protoss Deathball you describe doesn't in fact benefit by being a deathball. As a concept, the deathball needs to move together to work.
But it does? Sentries are pretty useless alone.
Regardless that is a semantical arguement but what I was getting at and what we can probably agree on is that a super strong group of units that synergize well should have some significant drawbacks, as Mech does (Siege Tanks aren't good when not in Siege mode and need protection when in Siege mode). The other races are good template here, Terran has Mech and Bio, while even though Zerg is more mobile in general. it has a similar dynamic between Muta/Ling/Bane play and Roach/Hydra play.
Right now with Protoss there is only one style, stuck somewhere in-between Terran's Mech and Bio. It is very powerful in the straight up fight, but maybe not as powerful as Mech, though much more mobile, but not nearly as mobile as Terran Bio.
And it is a horrible place to be, and makes balancing Terran difficult, because Mech needs to be more powerful than Protoss in a straight up fight, while Bio needs to be extremely mobile to make up for the fact they Protoss is relatively mobile and powerful.
And we've seen the result of this decision, Medivacs flying faster, Hellbats tanking Zealots ect.... stratification of Terran styles (and to a lesser extent Zerg styles) because Protoss has only a single viable style that is supposed to do everything.
So by doing what I said to Colossus (and Gateway units in another thread), we'd actually increase the number of playstyles. Either you'd go for Colossus with Blink Stalkers support or Phoenix and Zealot support (with the Phoenixes or Blink Stalkers providing mobility and harass opportunities, like Hellions and Banshees do for Mech) or for Charge Zealots, Sentries, High Templar and Archons with more limited Stalker support. The difference in playstyle would be obvious: with Gateway units only they could be warped in anywhere and moves quickly. But the Colossus playstyle would be slow and methodical.
And the big change here is you wouldn't have to switch out of one style because your opponent wouldn't be able to hard counter it entirely. Currently if you open Colossus you're on a timer until that is hard countered by Vikings and you need HT's, and the same can be said about opening with HT's once Ghosts hit the field you need Colossus.
In that sense, Protoss would be more like Terran with rigid styles (though still not as rigid as Terran due to the upgrade structure) and less like Zerg (who in fact, are at the moment even more rigid than Protoss due to melee vs range upgrades).
I just need to finish up COTH for WC3 and then get around making my own version of SC2.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Imo Colossus should just replace the immortal.
Give it the same stats, an activate-able shield and you've got the same unit just looking MUCH COOLER.
|
Here's an idea from the corresponding reddit OP that I thought was probably the most appealing idea I've yet seen on this topic:
"What is the Protoss Lacking? Anti-Air is a big thing that Protoss is missing (and Zerg -_-), as well as zone control unit similar to the Lurker or Siege Tank. They do have SOME zone control in the form of the Sentry, but not in a way that can be Aggressive like the Siege Tank or Lurker. Should the Colossus shoot air somehow? Should it have some sort of immobile, siege option, similar to other races siege options, or maybe the One-Goal Void-Ray from way back when?"
Like a cross between the Void Ray and the Liberator. Seriously, watch it. It's pretty cool to see.
I think this would be a good exploration but I think it should be one or the other shoot air only or shoot ground only lol (There isn't anyone getting my beloved goliath before Terran -.- LOL)
|
On June 30 2015 03:54 Pirfiktshon wrote:Show nested quote +Here's an idea from the corresponding reddit OP that I thought was probably the most appealing idea I've yet seen on this topic:
"What is the Protoss Lacking? Anti-Air is a big thing that Protoss is missing (and Zerg -_-), as well as zone control unit similar to the Lurker or Siege Tank. They do have SOME zone control in the form of the Sentry, but not in a way that can be Aggressive like the Siege Tank or Lurker. Should the Colossus shoot air somehow? Should it have some sort of immobile, siege option, similar to other races siege options, or maybe the One-Goal Void-Ray from way back when?"
Like a cross between the Void Ray and the Liberator. Seriously, watch it. It's pretty cool to see. I think this would be a good exploration but I think it should be one or the other shoot air only or shoot ground only lol (There isn't anyone getting my beloved goliath before Terran -.- LOL)
Oh jesus, no, that would definitely still only shoot ground if implemented on the Colossus. I should've specified that more clearly. I believe that the Void Ray in OG didn't actually damage both ground and air units at the same time either. In fact, I think that charging effect was limited to when it attacked an area of ground. It was really quite similar to the Liberator.
|
The Colossus will never go extinct because it's an "imba A-move unit," with splash, and has been since WoL Beta. A game without the Colossus is a better game overall. A game with a weaker Colossus and better alternatives is an exponentially better game overall.
|
I havent watch any starcraft for the past 2-3 months and I must say i'm shocked to read that NO ONE is building colossus anymore..
|
Please just remove colossi T_T
|
Goofy idea here, reinstate HOTS stats with a default range of 7 instead of 6, BUT, replace extended thermal lance with an upgrade that makes the colossus shorter so it can't be hit by anti air attacks but still looks fairly tall (about thor height) with this change the colossus is significantly more vulnerable to marine-marauder/roach-hydra but doesn't get murdered by vikings, corruptors etc. with the shortened range
|
On June 30 2015 08:57 sM.Zik wrote:
I havent watch any starcraft for the past 2-3 months and I must say i'm shocked to read that NO ONE is building colossus anymore..
This is absolutely false.
Players are still building Colossi in all matchups. Mass Blink is the new trend in PvZ so Colossus use in that matchup has declined a bit but they are still used extensively in PvT and PvP. And still in PvZ...
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On June 30 2015 22:14 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2015 08:57 sM.Zik wrote:
I havent watch any starcraft for the past 2-3 months and I must say i'm shocked to read that NO ONE is building colossus anymore.. This is absolutely false. Players are still building Colossi in all matchups. Mass Blink is the new trend in PvZ so Colossus use in that matchup has declined a bit but they are still used extensively in PvT and PvP. And still in PvZ...
That's because he's reading in LotV section  In HotS you cannot play without colossi a long macro game as you stated(exception for blink PvZ).
|
On June 30 2015 22:14 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2015 08:57 sM.Zik wrote:
I havent watch any starcraft for the past 2-3 months and I must say i'm shocked to read that NO ONE is building colossus anymore.. This is absolutely false. Players are still building Colossi in all matchups. Mass Blink is the new trend in PvZ so Colossus use in that matchup has declined a bit but they are still used extensively in PvT and PvP. And still in PvZ...
I never said that Colossi are not used in any matchup, only PvZ, which is pretty much the case. "No-one" was obviously a bit of an exaggeration, but I'm pretty convinced that no Colossus is built in 9 out of 10 high level Korean PvZ matches nowadays.
Anyway, the discussion was meant to be directed to LotV mainly, considering the current nerfs.
|
Colossus nerf makes sense given adept is pretty powerful.
But I think it could use some buff, afterall it is the key unit of protoss, you put lots of focus on it rather than watching a bunch of gateway units.
PvZ gateway heavy army vs colossus gateway army feels incredibly different to watch for example.
I personally think it would be cool if protoss can have two different army type, gateway heavy with disruptor; colossus heavy slower adept heavy army.
|
On July 01 2015 01:58 ETisME wrote:
I personally think it would be cool if protoss can have two different army type, gateway heavy with disruptor; colossus heavy slower adept heavy army.
The Colossus isn't good enough right now for any composition I'm afraid.
Also, with Colossi you need antiair given its vulnerability to air units, so it's always going to be accompanied by stalkers, phoenixes or voidrays.
I really hope that they just experiment with removing the walker concept from it at least in some way. I think cliff walking and microing over your units are fine and cool concepts, but sitting on top of your units while attacking is what makes it so annoying to fight.
It's just so well protected that way and the reason why the air vulnerability is so important. That one could also be removed if Colossi would push other ground units away when coming to a halt.
|
On June 29 2015 00:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
Volia.
Tons of counter play opportunities. It goes into its "Siege Mode" and Vikings can't damage it from the air? Well they can land very close to it and it can't hit them back. You'll have to nerf the movespeed of Warp Prisms when carrying the Colossus and the pick up range too, but it'd be a fun change.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor.
This is actually a really cool idea imo. Although maybe 1.4 (BL speed) is a better option, with the larger maps and 1.0 movespeed Colossi could be managed and countered by the time they got to the other side of the map. And Warp Prisms could have some sort of movespeed penalty in addition to some sort of minor graphical change, kinda like how the Thor hangs from underneath the Medivac.
Managing where to put the shields (all to air vs. soft defense for all attacks) is also really fun and something I've always wanted to see in gaming in general. Make "switch all power to front deflector screens" something of a reality.
|
I don't see any real problem with the existing HOTS Colossus. It counters the usual 'concave beats everything' characteristic of most other SCII units, (which is a good thing on the basic of tactical diversity alone), has at least 1 Zerg and Terran hard counter (Viper, Viking), and provides an interesting challenge/opportunity for Protoss unit positional play (the challenge being that in conjunction with other ground units it must be positioned carefully to protect it, the opportunity lies in its high ground vision and cliff stepping mobility.
Between the economy changes, some dubious looking new units and even dafter ideas for existing units (Ghost), LOTV currently bears a striking resemblance to a dog's breakfast. I know it's only early days in the beta but I think Blizzard has given themselves enough to do to pull the already tabled raft of LOTV changes into something coherent without contemplating a major redesign of a reasonably balanced and somewhat iconic existing unit.
I don't understand those who complain that the unit is excessively a-move. StarCraft is actually suppposed to be a strategy game you know, positioning your forces and them being able to do something vaguely useful without having to micro every single one should be viable to an extent. Not every unit has to have the mechanics of a MOBA hero.
I also don't understand the complaint about it promoting deathball play. It's true that it is a deathball style unit, but it does require a deathball with a diverse unit composition to support it and it doesn't force Protoss down the route of the deathball either, they have just as good options for an harass style play as the other races, and if your opponent spots you going deathball heavy then they also have the opportunity to counter with a more harass based style themselves.
The point has been made that any kind of deathball style should be designed out of the game completely because it isn't fun to watch. Well I wouldn't concede that point in the first place both because I enjoy watching Colossus play but also because I favour tactical diversity, but putting that to one side consider this, on what basis do you want the game balanced? Do you want it to be balanced in terms of what makes it a fun game to play, or what makes it a more viable gameshow? Personally I'd prefer to see it balanced purely on the basis of gameplay and let those who want to watch it do so, because I for one would not want to watch a game that I didn't want to play.
|
I've wanted a lot of changes for the Colossus before, including giving it a siege like mode or active ability (both mentioned in this thread), but I don't think those are the best changes for the Colossus. The siege mode is not good I think because it makes it a siege tank copy, which seems kind of lazy and takes away from its identity (DK said in an interview that he doesn't want non-Terran units to have mode transformations, I guess the warp prism is an exception but I think I'll let it go), and people are already complaining about the density of active abilities.
I think the best sort of changes would be the following:
-Make it do friendly fire. That would encourage more careful engagements and positioning from the Protoss end and make the unit interesting and tricky (in a good way, I think!) to use.
-Make it slower. This makes positioning and protecting it as you move across the map more important, the army doesn't easily stick together in the widely disliked deathball-fashion.
-Remove the ability to walk over Protoss units. I worry this, again, delves into the territory of taking away the Colossus identity, since the Colossus no longer stands over the other units as a foreboding guardian, but I think it's ultimately a really good change. For one, the end result of this mechanic is that the Colossus clips through other units more often than not, which looks pretty silly. More importantly, this forces the Protoss army to take up more space and position more carefully. Part of the problem with Colossi is if they're out of position, they can just kite the enemy army while retreating behind the other Protoss stuff. While it's still quite bad to have your Colossi out of position, it's dramatically less punishing than if they couldn't walk over the other units. Between this change at the movement speed change, this becomes a lot less feasible making positioning a lot more important.
These are the changes I would like to see tried that make the Colossus more interesting while still being consistent with the idea of what the Colossus had been. Since these changes are all pretty much nerfs, I think the Colossus should get some decent damage or range buffs to go along with it. In the lore, the Colossus is an ancient Protoss invention that was banned since the Protoss basically committed accidental genocide with them. I think the friendly fire change along with some damage buffs helps drive home the idea of the Colossus being a terrifying war machine that the Protoss would rather not use. I think the current changes of making the Colossus be backup emergency splash really does NOT resonate with that idea. While I'd like to see the Colossus be saved like this, I would rather see it removed and totally replaced by the Disruptor than left in its current sad state. If necessary, the Disruptor can fulfill its role.
|
On July 02 2015 10:50 AmicusVenti wrote:
The siege mode is not good I think because it makes it a siege tank copy, which seems kind of lazy and takes away from its identity (DK said in an interview that he doesn't want non-Terran units to have mode transformations
What I mentioned isn't a "siege mode" as much as it is a "defensive mode" (though that doesn't' really fit either). I think it is really important to point that out.
I shouldn't have called it Siege Mode. It wouldn't give extra range or damage, or defense. You'd trade the ability to not to targetable by air to air attacks, but lose shields to ground units, and the ability to move, and have a minimum range.
On July 02 2015 10:50 AmicusVenti wrote:
I think the best sort of changes would be the following:
-Make it do friendly fire. That would encourage more careful engagements and positioning from the Protoss end and make the unit interesting and tricky (in a good way, I think!) to use.
That couldn't happen. Reason is that a Colossus based army would be extremely vulnerable to units dropped on top of itself, far more so than a group of Sieged up tanks. The Colossus splashes a much larger area, therefore a few Marauders or Roaches dropped on top of the army, or Blink Stalkers blinking in to the middle of a Colossus based army would cause critical damage to the force.
And you'd never be able to use Colossus to defend mineral lines from drops. That would force Protoss to defend drops in PvT differently, and open differently in general.
In other words, that change would have much farther reaching effects that giving it a different ability as I discussed above.
On July 01 2015 03:57 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2015 00:35 BronzeKnee wrote:
It's high time to make the Colossus into the positional unit that the Lurker and Siege Tank are. Increase range by 1 (6 to 7 and 9 to 10 with thermal lance), revert the damage nerf, increase shields by 50, and slow the movespeed down to ~1.0.
Then give it a "siege mode" like ability that concentrates it shields against air attacks, making it invulnerable to air units, but the unit can't move while in the mode, has a minimum range of 2-3, and its shields don't protect it against ground attacks.
Volia.
Tons of counter play opportunities. It goes into its "Siege Mode" and Vikings can't damage it from the air? Well they can land very close to it and it can't hit them back. You'll have to nerf the movespeed of Warp Prisms when carrying the Colossus and the pick up range too, but it'd be a fun change.
I don't like the coin flip damage that is the Disruptor. This is actually a really cool idea imo. Although maybe 1.4 (BL speed) is a better option, with the larger maps and 1.0 movespeed Colossi could be managed and countered by the time they got to the other side of the map..
All fine tuning I suggested would of course be subject to change, that movespeed might be way too slow or fast, but the basic idea is there. I suggested this way back during the HOTS Beta...
I have a gift for game design.
|
On July 02 2015 11:29 BronzeKnee wrote:
What I mentioned isn't a "siege mode" as much as it is a "defensive mode" (though that doesn't' really fit either). I think it is really important to point that out.
I shouldn't have called it Siege Mode. It wouldn't give extra range or damage, or defense. You'd trade the ability to not to targetable by air to air attacks, but lose shields to ground units, and the ability to move, and have a minimum range.
The idea that I mentioned and considered was very much like yours, something along the lines of the Colossus crouching down, and I still really don't think it's good. Partly because, as I said, Blizzard doesn't want Protoss units that change modes, and I think they're in the right, partly because it would, well, just sorta look ridiculous. Either they crouch down to avoid air, but I think that would look really absurd, or they're suddenly non-targetable by air attacks for no clear reason. I also suspect that such a mode would be overpowered. I can't imagine your situation with vikings landing on top of them being feasible if there are any Stalkers/Zealots/etc. guarding the Colossi, or even just other Colossi. That hardly ever happens with Tanks. Dropping on top of them I could sort of see, but when you drop on top of Tanks you're mainly doing it to bait out friendly fire, something which you're strongly opposed to.
That couldn't happen. Reason is that a Colossus based army would be extremely vulnerable to units dropped on top of itself, far more so than a group of Sieged up tanks. The Colossus splashes a much larger area, therefore a few Marauders or Roaches dropped on top of the army, or Blink Stalkers blinking in to the middle of a Colossus based army would cause critical damage to the force.
And you'd never be able to use Colossus to defend mineral lines from drops. That would force Protoss to defend drops in PvT differently, and open differently in general.
In other words, that change would have much farther reaching effects that giving it a different ability as I discussed above.
I'm not convinced this is bad. I did almost mention that I think a Hold Fire button would be good if this is implemented, and I think your arguments point towards that, but I'm not sure it's necessary; it is arguably more interesting to need to move command them away. Sure, you would need to keep an eye on your army to prevent drops or blinks on top of you, but that's pretty normal in StarCraft.
I'm also not terribly concerned about the drop defense issue either. Since Colossi are already very rare in LotV anyway, Protoss seems to be having a fine time defending drops without them. For small to normal drops, you probably don't need your Colossi to defend. For massive doom drops, destroying a few probes of your own is probably worth shredding a large portion of you opponents army. This is all pretty moot anyway because you can also run your probes away.I think the situation is similar to Marine-Tank TvT. Whether or not you use your Tanks to defend the drop depends on how big the enemy drop is. And you're probably going to run you workers away well before the army gets home anyway. On top of that, when you've suggested reducing movespeed down to around 1.0-1.4 (for whatever it's worth I think it's far too dramatic), they're not going to be terribly useful against defending drops
I have a gift for game design.
I'm not sure if you're being tongue-in-cheek. I think you've presented some worthwhile ideas that are definitely worth discussing (even if I do disagree to some extent), but it seems staggeringly arrogant and premature to claim this over an idea that has not been tested and proven to be good, to take for granted that your idea truly incredible in a discussion thread of multiple ideas.
Edit: Riperino formatino
|
i think it's fine if it's not used in PvZ,
without being a naysayer, bw pvt, t never went bio,
and the now and then u'll have someone bust out the collosus or have some hyper weird disrupter coll warp prism combo 1-shotting thingsin pvz and we'll all be amazed
|
On July 02 2015 11:29 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2015 10:50 AmicusVenti wrote:
I think the best sort of changes would be the following:
-Make it do friendly fire. That would encourage more careful engagements and positioning from the Protoss end and make the unit interesting and tricky (in a good way, I think!) to use.
That couldn't happen. Reason is that a Colossus based army would be extremely vulnerable to units dropped on top of itself, far more so than a group of Sieged up tanks. The Colossus splashes a much larger area, therefore a few Marauders or Roaches dropped on top of the army, or Blink Stalkers blinking in to the middle of a Colossus based army would cause critical damage to the force. And you'd never be able to use Colossus to defend mineral lines from drops. That would force Protoss to defend drops in PvT differently, and open differently in general. In other words, that change would have much farther reaching effects that giving it a different ability as I discussed above.
Take this with a grain of salt, because I've fallen out of touch with StarCraft for a solid year, but what about if Colossus only did friendly fire to units without shields?
|
That would be a bit weird mechanically though.
I still think returning Colossus to one of the earlier patches, where it did more damage per swipe but with slower attack time, and maybe a short delay in splash time (since the lance takes a while to swipe from side to side), would encourage more intelligent use of the Colossus. So it would still be powerful, but only with proper positioning and control comparable to other Protoss splash units like the Disruptor or High Templar.
Say the damage was raised from 15x2 to maybe 18x2 (or higher. 24x2 with +2 per upgrade? Then a fully upgraded Colossus could kill a shielded marine with only 2 armor, making +3 attack/armor respecively more crucial for both races). Now in PvZ it one-shots Zerglings. But if all the Colossi are bunched up, and the Zerglings go forth, all of the Colossi will target the same patch of lings, each kill one and maybe 1-2 stragglers with the splash, but most of the contingent will go unharmed, and can inflict massive damage in the seconds while the Colossus gets ready for its next shot. Same in PvT. Colossi kill like 6 marines, the rest can stim and pick off the Colossi better. Players would have to spread their Colossi to make sure they were all whittling down individual groups of marines, with Zealots/Stalkers/Immortals cleaning up the survivors. The spread also encourages Protoss to not completely abandon the deathball where Colossi are involved, but spread it out a bit, weakening it.
|
Upgraded damage and slower rate of fire seems interesting.
Make it do friendly fire and give it a minimum range of 1 or 2 would clip it's wings against zerglings too.
|
On June 29 2015 00:07 _indigo_ wrote:Colossus is negating the use of concaves, is arguably boring and is severely nerfed in LotV. However, I like the visual design, walking over units and cliffs and I would like to see it redesigned ability-wise. What if Colossus would lose its AOE ability (Adepts kind of imbue the gateway army enough that you can tech to templars and Disruptors and hold your ground) and gain more damage on it's single target beams? This way it would be better vs buildings and bigger units. Range would need to stay as in HotS or even +1 with single target damage. Something like in this screenshot + Show Spoiler +
That's a terrible idea. Reason why people get Colossus is for the splash.
|
I have always maintained that the problem with Colossus is that it's just too fast. Protoss armies don't sacrifice enough speed for its power. Other races' siege units are either crazy slow or need to become immobile (burrow or siege mode). Having a siege unit that moves around normally is bizarre, and the cliffwalk only makes it worse.
Honestly, if it was slower, it could probably be made to be even more powerful and turn into a much more interesting positional unit. But right now, you can use it pretty easily in an army and walk around the map with it. You don't need warp prisms to move them around like reavers did.
People talk about 'babysitting colossi' and honestly it's just because Protoss get so careless with their 2.25-move siege unit. They're usually able to reposition it or move it away in time. Terran and Zerg are forced to be way more careful and cognizant of their tanks and broodlords. If Colossi were slower, Protoss would be much more careful about using them.
|
Protoss armies don't sacrifice enough speed for its power. Other races' siege units are either crazy slow or need to become immobile (burrow or siege mode). Having a siege unit that moves around normally is bizarre, and the cliffwalk only makes it worse.
Honestly, if it was slower, it could probably be made to be even more powerful and turn into a much more interesting positional unit. But right now, you can use it pretty easily in an army and walk around the map with it. You don't need warp prisms to move them around like reavers did.
Reducing its speed without making it a proper positional unit only makes it even more boring and deathballish.
The problem with all of these 1.5-2.25 speed units (like Colossus, BC, Tempest, Carrier and Broodlord) is that they are in the "middle-of-the road" category where they are remotely close to being a positional unit while still being too slow to be out on the map and do "aggressive" non-allinish stuff.
To become a proper positional unit, it needs to be "sieged up" (read: locked into an immobilized state) where it becomes extremely cost efficient against a larger army size. But that's just not a small speed and numbers change, but a complete redesign. The only other alternative solution is to actually make it faster and balance it around being able to move out on the map while retreating if outnumbered.
|
Why try and fix a bad design? I think the Colossus has too many flaws to fix. Sometimes it's better to cut your losses and start again from fresh to make something 'better'.
|
On July 08 2015 05:44 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Protoss armies don't sacrifice enough speed for its power. Other races' siege units are either crazy slow or need to become immobile (burrow or siege mode). Having a siege unit that moves around normally is bizarre, and the cliffwalk only makes it worse.
Honestly, if it was slower, it could probably be made to be even more powerful and turn into a much more interesting positional unit. But right now, you can use it pretty easily in an army and walk around the map with it. You don't need warp prisms to move them around like reavers did. Reducing its speed without making it a proper positional unit only makes it even more boring and deathballish. The problem with all of these 1.5-2.25 speed units (like Colossus, BC, Tempest, Carrier and Broodlord) is that they are in the "middle-of-the road" category where they are remotely close to being a positional unit while still being too slow to be out on the map and do "aggressive" non-allinish stuff. To become a proper positional unit, it needs to be "sieged up" (read: locked into an immobilized state) where it becomes extremely cost efficient against a larger army size. But that's just not a small speed and numbers change, but a complete redesign. The only other alternative solution is to actually make it faster and balance it around being able to move out on the map while retreating if outnumbered.
1.5 is not even close to 2.25. It's way way different. Unstimmed marines are 2.25. The Colossus moves significantly faster than BCs, Tempests, Carriers, Broodlords, and Thors. To just lump them all together is missing my entire point. Broodlords, Tempests, Carriers, and Reavers do not siege up and yet they are positional units so that's just random. (I would prefer not to get sidetracked into a discussion of what a 'positional unit' is. I'm not suggesting a complete redesign by any means.)
If the colossus moved nearly as slow as any of those other units, then its movement would be way more committed, and the army movement would be way more committed. It would be far more restrictive in terms of Protoss army movement in general. It would make the choice of Templar have more of a significant mobility advantage (at the cost of raw power), especially in PvP. Right now this advantage (if there is one) comes entirely from warp in.
Movement speed is a big change, and totally changes the feel of the unit. I do not consider it a minor change at all. The fact is that the colossus is strictly more mobile than the siege tank (which is also speed 2.25 but has to siege).
|
Colossi is how it should be in LOTV. With a heavy adept comp, it's actually still quite good. Terran thinks they can just rush Colossi Maru style, but heavy adepts will shred you while doing so.
I swear, I say it all the time now, but it really seems like people that complain most about the game don't play enough to fully know what they're talking about. Super annoying.
|
1.5 is not even close to 2.25. It's way way different.
Yes and its way worse because it just becomes even more deathballish. Ask your self this, can you justify a Colossus that moves at 1.5 as a unit that is extremely strong positional? Otherwise it will just be a slow moving deathball unit.
Broodlords, Tempests, Carriers, and Reavers do not siege up and yet they are positional units so that's just random.
Your using the term positional incorrectly in this context. In the context of siege units, postionally = Can defend one position extremely efficiently while relying as little as possible on critical mass.
Broods, Tempests, Thors, Carriers.... whatever you can name here are not capable of that. Reaver obviously moved even slower (around 1 movement speed I believe) so you could almost argue that the combination of a warp prism and a Reaver had some type of siege/unsiege-functionalty. On top of that, it was also different in design in several other ways from the Colossus and also benefited from being part of a different game.
Just nerfing the Colossus speed somewhat and buffing its core stats (somewhat) is a receipt for a disaster. If you have a very detailed plan on how you want to make the unit positional, that's great. But trust me, you have to go much further down than 1.5, and the safest solution is to let it be completely immobile once it enters its "High cost efficiency"-state.
But given the current design of the Colossus, it's essential to understand that the main reason for it being so amovish and deathballish is due to its lack of movement speed (not vice versa).
If the colossus moved nearly as slow as any of those other units, then its movement would be way more committed, and the army movement would be way more committed.
Wanna know why terran bio can move out on the map easily and protoss cannot with their robo units? Because bio units can escape and defend multiple locations at once due to their mobility. Colossus can't escape on the other hand. In fact, the protoss player has the most "commited" army out of any races.
If the Colossus was strong enough positionally so you could split them out all over the map --> That's one possible solution, but it requires huge design changes in multiple ways from its current state.
|
Remove them from the game, they're boring and force stupid unit compositions.
On July 01 2015 01:58 ETisME wrote:
Colossus nerf makes sense given adept is pretty powerful.
But I think it could use some buff, afterall it is the key unit of protoss, you put lots of focus on it rather than watching a bunch of gateway units.
I really disagree with your idea here.
I feel like the gateway army gets a much more integral and fun role in the game due to the addition of the Adept and the fact that the Disruptor is a supplement to my main army, not the other way around (gateway army as a meatshield for the Colossus)
|
On July 02 2015 14:42 AmicusVenti wrote:
...but it seems staggeringly arrogant and premature to claim this over an idea that has not been tested and proven to be good, to take for granted that your idea truly incredible in a discussion thread of multiple ideas.
My Colossus idea was tested and refined during the HOTS Beta. Seems odd that you'd prematurely and arrogantly claim it wasn't... right? I also tested the Colossus splash, and it is as bad as Baneling splash hitting friendly units would be. You don't think someone with a gift for game design wouldn't skip testing, do you?
I am staggeringly arrogant to many people and believe in myself more than you believe in yourself. I guarantee it.
But that isn't a bad thing.
|
Yes and its way worse because it just becomes even more deathballish. Ask your self this, can you justify a Colossus that moves at 1.5 as a unit that is extremely strong positional? Otherwise it will just be a slow moving deathball unit.
The units that are great in deathballs are all medium-or-faster speed units, not slow units. Like hydra/roach balls. Throwing in Broodlords makes it way less deathbally and more strategic. People don't talk about "Mech balls" because they don't exist. They don't work that way.
Just nerfing the Colossus speed somewhat and buffing its core stats (somewhat) is a receipt for a disaster. If you have a very detailed plan on how you want to make the unit positional, that's great. But trust me, you have to go much further down than 1.5, and the safest solution is to let it be completely immobile once it enters its "High cost efficiency"-state.
But given the current design of the Colossus, it's essential to understand that the main reason for it being so amovish and deathballish is due to its lack of movement speed (not vice versa).
The phrase "trust me" is a little bizarre when we're having an argument.
The fact is that A-move sucks with slow units. A-moving is only effective with units because they have reasonable speed. There are some very powerful slow units in SC2 and if you notice, they totally suck in deathballs. They get crushed. A deathball that is slower becomes a lot scarier to use because it's much more vulnerable to counterattacks, surrounds, and getting caught out of position.
Wanna know why terran bio can move out on the map easily and protoss cannot with their robo units? Because bio units can escape and defend multiple locations at once due to their mobility. Colossus can't escape on the other hand. In fact, the protoss player has the most "commited" army out of any races.
If the Colossus was strong enough positionally so you could split them out all over the map --> That's one possible solution, but it requires huge design changes in multiple ways from its current state.
??? the comparison of Terran's most mobile composition to Protoss's least mobile composition is pointless. The proper comparison would be Protoss deathball compared to Terran mech. And we both know that Protoss deathball is way way way more mobile and way way less committed than Terran mech, so this is just silly.
Colossus is too mobile. It moves around the map too easily. This makes it a much less risky unit to use, and that's what makes it boring and a-movey. If it has more risk to it, more clunky to use, then it would be engaging and funner to play with and play against.
|
The main thing that bothers me about Protoss is that there seems to be only one dominant late game play style ... Skytoss. I would love to see a changeup that similar to what Blizzard did with the Terrans, Make Robo, and Gateway play styles an equally viable path as opposed to just taking to the air in the late game.
Nothing coming out of the robotics facility can currently hit air. If Blizzard changed the Disruptor role to be an AOE anti-Air unit I think it would make Colossi viable again, not compete with the former or the High templar for function. And open up more robotics based builds. I also think the immortal would need a buff of some sort to not make them fall to marines so easily, or something like a range, or speed upgrade, or lengthening the current shield ability. Personally I would love to see a unit that restores shields like the shield battery in SC1
I would love to see the late game improve for gateway units as well by adding more tier 3 abilities, most likely to Archons, and DTs. I would love to see blink archons, or a range upgrade, or something that improves their use vs death balls and mech. So there needs such a heavy reliance on stargate units or to a lesser extent robo units to win the day. Maybe make a tier 3 ability for adepts to possess a unit like banshee's in Warcraft 3. Or make an upgrade option to Sentries so Hallucinations actually do damage similar to the units they mimic, to give the protoss a better ability to counter Raven, and Infestor/Swarmhost armies.
The goal would be to make a gateway army and a robo army as equally effective as a skytoss army.
|
On July 08 2015 08:27 Hider wrote:Yes and its way worse because it just becomes even more deathballish. Ask your self this, can you justify a Colossus that moves at 1.5 as a unit that is extremely strong positional? Otherwise it will just be a slow moving deathball unit.
I disagree. A slow moving unit is less a-move and less deathball. Why? Because a slow moving unit can not retreat when it gets into a bad position.
Your enemy can easily surround you or snipe your bases while you are too slow to catch up. With a slow moving unit you have to be very very careful where you want to put it. Moving out is always a risk. Protecting one base with it means it can not protect the other bases because it is too slow to get there in time.
Just think about the Reaver in BW, its the slowest unit ever and it was the pure anti-deathball unit. You got single Reaver harassment or you were using Reavers in shuttles at the front of your army to fire off 1 or 2 shots before the rest marches in. Or you have Reaver defenses with super heavy micro investments.
If Reavers could move as fast as Dragoons they would suddenly become a deathball unit and be massed. But since they were so slow they needed shuttles to be moved and since shuttles required high APM to be used you could never get too many Reavers at once. You were simply not physically capable of actually using them.
Meanwhile the most deathballish armies in SC2 consist entirely of fast or semi-fast moving units.
|
I disagree. A slow moving unit is less a-move and less deathball. Why? Because a slow moving unit can not retreat when it gets into a bad position.
Your enemy can easily surround you or snipe your bases while you are too slow to catch up. With a slow moving unit you have to be very very careful where you want to put it. Moving out is always a risk. Protecting one base with it means it can not protect the other bases because it is too slow to get there in time.
Just think about the Reaver in BW, its the slowest unit ever and it was the pure anti-deathball unit. You got single Reaver harassment or you were using Reavers in shuttles at the front of your army to fire off 1 or 2 shots before the rest marches in. Or you have Reaver defenses with super heavy micro investments.
If Reavers could move as fast as Dragoons they would suddenly become a deathball unit and be massed. But since they were so slow they needed shuttles to be moved and since shuttles required high APM to be used you could never get too many Reavers at once. You were simply not physically capable of actually using them.
Meanwhile the most deathballish armies in SC2 consist entirely of fast or semi-fast moving units.
This is actually a very good analogy imo. There are some drawbacks but I think that the if the speed is reduced then so should the $ for it...
|
On July 11 2015 05:16 Pirfiktshon wrote:Show nested quote +I disagree. A slow moving unit is less a-move and less deathball. Why? Because a slow moving unit can not retreat when it gets into a bad position.
Your enemy can easily surround you or snipe your bases while you are too slow to catch up. With a slow moving unit you have to be very very careful where you want to put it. Moving out is always a risk. Protecting one base with it means it can not protect the other bases because it is too slow to get there in time.
Just think about the Reaver in BW, its the slowest unit ever and it was the pure anti-deathball unit. You got single Reaver harassment or you were using Reavers in shuttles at the front of your army to fire off 1 or 2 shots before the rest marches in. Or you have Reaver defenses with super heavy micro investments.
If Reavers could move as fast as Dragoons they would suddenly become a deathball unit and be massed. But since they were so slow they needed shuttles to be moved and since shuttles required high APM to be used you could never get too many Reavers at once. You were simply not physically capable of actually using them.
Meanwhile the most deathballish armies in SC2 consist entirely of fast or semi-fast moving units. This is actually a very good analogy imo. There are some drawbacks but I think that the if the speed is reduced then so should the $ for it...
Well what I was suggesting is that the speed is reduced but maybe the power/damage get raised.
But I guess if they're going to nerf it in LotV anyway, they might as just nerf just the speed rather than the power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.freakygaming.com/gallery/strategy_games/starcraft_2/colossus_ownage.jpg)
