Disclaimer: Although I have spent a good amount of time watching streams and replays of the SC2 beta since it came out, I have not ever played it myself.
So after poring over any mentions of 'archon' in the SC2 strategy forum, I've found that whenever someone talks of archons in SC2 it's either when:
a. Theorycrafting, e.g.: - "I guess that means recomendation p vs z is sentry hold out tech to archons with stalker (...) I do not have a beta key"; - "Do archons really counter muta all that well any more?", or
b. They've used the unit, and are disappointed by it: - "I played PvZ when he went like all mutas and I went full Archons and they don't do counter it well. Their attack is so slow."; - "Archons are surprisingly bad vs mutalisks, especially if you have to cover 2 bases."; - "Also is it just me or do cannons seem pretty weak in sc2? Storm+archons do as well.."
Watching the Archons' stats, they seem more or less similar to those of SC1, maybe a bit better: it deals a little more damage to biological units (most of the stuff you wanted to attack with them in SC1 anyway), and a little less damage to non-biological units. Its splash AoE seems weaker to the naked eye, however. Additionally, the archon doesn't seem to be as effective in SC2 in those areas in which it excelled at in SC1 (splash damage on zealots in PvP, killing zerglings and mutas in PvZ, as part of a timing attack in PvZ, lategame plaguuuuu-immune unit in PvZ).
My hypothesis is that archons are kinda weak right now in SC2, and I'd like people who've seen the unit in action firsthand to share their thoughts on this unit:
- When using the archon, has it been effective at countering particular threats? Effective as a general support unit in a specific matchup? Useful as part of a particular build order / strategy? Under which circumstances do you think making archons is a good idea?
- When an enemy Protoss player has used archons against you, have they been a significant threat to your forces? Which units would you not want to use to fight off archons? Which units have been effective at fighting off archons?
On February 24 2010 04:48 TheAntZ wrote: I've used archons several times, and they dont seem to do AoE damage. either that or the AoE is ridiculously minuscule in its range
I can't test it myself, but after watching a replay at the slowest speed, I can confirm archons do have splash damage, although the splash AoE seems really really small- you need units with a small collision size practically hugging one another to see it in action.
I think you quoted me: - "Archons are surprisingly bad vs mutalisks, especially if you have to cover 2 bases."
After playing more, they aren't bad vs small numbers, but because large numbers spread out so much and, as theantz has pointed out, the splash is so freaking tiny you can't really use 1 archon vs 11 mutas like you can in sc1.
They still fare pretty well vs lings, but not nearly as well as in sc1.
I have yet to use templar tech in a pvp, robo/stargate are much faster and safer vs the zealot horde.
I recently used one against 6 Marines, its splash radius isn't too bad, it seems around the size of a Pylon (maybe a little smaller). By the time I killed one Marine, three marines around him were in the red and easily one shotted shortly thereafter. It does seem to attack pretty slow considering how expensive it is.
On February 24 2010 04:48 TheAntZ wrote: I've used archons several times, and they dont seem to do AoE damage. either that or the AoE is ridiculously minuscule in its range
I can't test it myself, but after watching a replay at the slowest speed, I can confirm archons do have splash damage, although the splash AoE seems really really small- you need units with a small collision size practically hugging one another to see it in action.
So zerglings and marines though they'll rarely get into melee range with marines.
On February 24 2010 05:03 Malambis wrote: I recently used one against 6 Marines, its splash radius isn't too bad, it seems around the size of a Pylon (maybe a little smaller). By the time I killed one Marine, three marines around him were in the red and easily one shotted shortly thereafter. It does seem to attack pretty slow considering how expensive it is.
I'd trust this assessment on their splash radius better than my own, since I cannot actually playtest the Archon's AoE.
Could any other beta testers spare some time to give us your take on the archon?
On February 24 2010 05:03 Malambis wrote: I recently used one against 6 Marines, its splash radius isn't too bad, it seems around the size of a Pylon (maybe a little smaller). By the time I killed one Marine, three marines around him were in the red and easily one shotted shortly thereafter. It does seem to attack pretty slow considering how expensive it is.
im sorry but this is just wrong i tested against 2 lings, with 1 ling distance seperating them, and the 2nd ling never took any damage i'll post screenshot when im back home
On February 24 2010 05:58 chocoed wrote: I've managed to use a few archons against zerg, and they are quite powerful. However, the splash is significantly smaller than SC1, as many have said.
Well, i'd theorycraft since i have no beta key but they probably don't countner lings too well now, since lings surround so well, so the same goes for countering zealots in PnP, they obviously don't counter mutas that hard anymore since mutas don't stack (or they don't stack to the point where it is very effective?) and fighting improved ultras with them may not be that good since you have other counters to ultras (immortals i guess are very good vs them?)
On February 24 2010 06:07 Kaniol wrote: Well, i'd theorycraft since i have no beta key but they probably don't countner lings too well now, since lings surround so well, so the same goes for countering zealots in PnP, they obviously don't counter mutas that hard anymore since mutas don't stack (or they don't stack to the point where it is very effective?) and fighting improved ultras with them may not be that good since you have other counters to ultras (immortals i guess are very good vs them?)
Indeed, as far as theorycrafting goes Archons shouldn't be terribly effective in SC2 unless their stats were significantly improved in some way.
I remember reading archons hit for 25x2 at some point, but they only seem to hit once now. The damage boost seemed like a decent way of getting archons up to date to SC2, but in beta they don't have this anymore- which is why some playtesting experience would be nice to be able to confirm that the unit does indeed suck as it stands right now. If we can establish that the archon isn't worth making under most circumstances, then we can move on to make balance suggestions to make the unit more attractive.
For now, though, additional playtesting feedback on this unit is much appreciated
I make a few Archons late game PvZ when my minerals are running low but I have lots of gas. They actually are quite good vs Roaches and do very good damage to anything they hit (in fact, they're one of the units that seems to cut down Brood Lords quite quickly if they reach them...).
Overall they don't seem great, and they definitely don't play the anti-Muta role well in my experience (nor do they need to--Stalker/Sentry/Phoenix just kills Muta). They seem a bit overshadowed perhaps, but I think they are workable... the main issue is that things like Colossus are so good, Archons seem less worthwhile getting
I think the the templars merge faster the only way I've seen them used is in fights after the opponent ran out of mana to cast storms... This only happened 3 games out of wich i've won 1 and lost 2 in that particular fight.
Actually I'm in the same boat as you OP(watched many Hs of streams and many replays). I wanted to make a thread about this too, but was too afraid of getting flamed to death :|. Anyway, I was quite surprised that the archon wasn't as deadly in Sc2 as they are in SC1, even vs lings (maybe they don't need to be - I don't know haven't played it so bare with my theorycrafting)
Seemed to do decent damage to 1 target, has decent range, good attack speed, but I think it really needs a splash that is worthwhile. Now I see 2 things wrong: Basically to counter mass mutas you need phenixes (don't get me wrong - when you do have them, they do very good damage since mutas are lightly armoured and take the +6 dmg which is more than enough to rape them in +/- equal numbers) or a lot of sentries/stalkers. I dunno maybe I have the image of a strong ground protoss army from sc1 that can take on virtually anything too far ingrained into my brain to actually acknowledge it being any different right now =( - it just doesn't seem right =(.
The other thing I wanted to point out is teching to robotics bay is much more rewarding and safe - you get obs, collosi and immortals which are all solid units. If you go templar archives/dark obelisk you need to get 3 buildings just to get templars. Now HTs and DTs don't seem as rewarding as collosi and obs. Granted storms are a lot easier to cast now, and DTs do 50 base damage which is insane , but for the storm to do 80 damage, it needs to hit for 4 full seconds. I think the nerf to the storm is justified by how much easier it is to cast it, but not the archon nerf. There needs to be a solid unit at the end of this part of the tech tree - a unit that can rival the collosus in terms of usefulness. This is where the archon should shine.
I dunno what to do with it - I'm not a balance designer nor am I playing the beta but, it needs to shine in games just like the colossus is right now, or it won't be worth teching this way, because gas is hard to come by. Maybe give the archon feedback? maelstrom? a new spell - just make it worth teching this way aside from a nerfed storm and DTs.
I used zealot/archon to own up on my zerg opponent in one game. He was going roaches/hydras, so I went speed zs/high templar. Storm is very in SC2, seemingly smaller area and much less damage, but it can sometimes help against mass hydra which don't have a lot of health compared to roaches. The reason I converted my high templar to archons was because he got ultralisks/lings. The high damage of Archons coupled with some splash worked. The ol: Zealot wall with archons behind is still in effect in SC2. I think Zealot Wall + Archons behind is actually better than SC1 because there are no lurkers to tear up the zealots.
On February 24 2010 05:58 chocoed wrote: I've managed to use a few archons against zerg, and they are quite powerful. However, the splash is significantly smaller than SC1, as many have said.
Which units have they been effective against?
Very effective on all the ground units since they're biological, but archons don't work too well against mutas. Lings get shredded.
Edit: Other units are more effective than the archon since it's so far down, but when you're low on minerals and abundant on gas, it only makes sense to create archons to keep up with your opponent.
Archon does splash to air units, but not the ground units. They do 25 base damage, with +10 bonus damage being applied to biological, which means everything Zerg. I am not sure on the splash size, but I believe they fulfill the role of anti-mutalisk as well as you can expect. They won't beat multiple mutas, no, but neither did the archon in SC1 unless they left them all clumped up. In SC1, many Zerg players would split up their mutas to hit an archon, in which case the archon takes down 2-3 before it dies. Considering that mutalisks are 100/100 and archons are 100/300 or 250/250 (ht or dt), it's really a pretty good tradeoff even if they can only take down 2-3!
I gather then that archons are not a pushover in PvZ in general- roaches and zerglings have been mentioned in particular as units the archon fares well against, although I imagine hydras still rip them up as they did in SC1.
What about other matchups? Are archons any good at all in PvP / PvT, or are they as useless as SC1 archons are in PvT?
sorry to bump but im fairly certain that archons do damage along the entire line of its attack much like a hellion as opposed to classic splash damage.
According to that video, the sensor tower was taking about 6-7 points of damage per attack. It's an interesting find no doubt, but I'm not sure how useful that kind of splash damage is, especially if you have to set it up.
yes the damage was very low and i have NO idea if it hits air or whatever. but with a bonus vs bio units it could be good vs lines of workers or lings etc. surely?
OOH oh terrible, terrible damage to that sensor tower it might be going down any minute now. Great move by protoss player by positioning his archon and using splash by targeting rocks behind the target.
On March 29 2010 03:11 xccam wrote: If you are being sarcastic I set it up to show the splash... not to kill the tower fastest.
Yeah.. If that is intended archon splash than its very very weak.. Hellion does splash in a line with full damage no matter if its targeting closest or unit in the back.. Archon splash from the vid is from archon to the thing he fires but there is no way that anybody can micro archons to fire something farther away correctly and if you do the damage is so low that your archon might just be trapped by closer things attacking him trying to chase farther unit.. So if this is intended its laughable.. :D
Archons seem to suffer from several problems. The biggest one in my mind is that everything they are supposed to be good at, another unit is better at.
Archons have a lot of health, (well, shields, but w/e). In theory they could make decent tanks. However a bunch of angry zealots will soak up more damage, get to the enemy faster, and cost a *lot* less.
Their damage is pretty high, (fully upgraded they do what, 47 damage to biological units? ) Nice, but single target high damage is better done by the immortal, and when it comes to splash damage... well no one competes with the colossus. Storms again really outshine archon splash damage, and the only time I ever see archons made is when a group of HTs are out of energy and need to make themselves useful quickly.
Their range is pretty meh. Sure it's enough to attack over a zealot or two, but again, a few colossi can out-DPS them from way in the back of your army.
So how can we fix them? I've got a few ideas, all off the top of my head:
Range 3? Allow them to deal with mutalisks a little better, even if they still aren't doing a lot of splash damage. A few solid hits will ruin any muta's day.
Increased splash radius/damage? Would make them more useful certainly, but again, aren't they still competing with the colossus?
Increase base shield armor? Make them a tidbit more durable?
Some sort of shield-recharging ability? "I am a giant swirling ball of energy and death, and my shields are purely powered by my awesome mind." Either let their shields recharge extra fast compared to the rest of the protoss army, or allow them to like "meditate" or channel for a few seconds and recharge their shields!
Bonus damage vs psionic units, or reduced damage taken from psionic units? "Oh you've got some psychic powers? That's cute. I'm a giant ball of psionic death."
Finally, the number one change that archons NEED 100% absolutely needs to be fixed is their attack animation. They just sort of limp-wristedly gesture at an enemy, and a few small blue lines shoot it. MAKE THEM FEEL LIKE THE ANGRY BALLS OF DEATH THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE!! Also, their attack sound should be a lot scarier, lol.
On March 29 2010 04:04 Haemonculus wrote: Some sort of shield-recharging ability? "I am a giant swirling ball of energy and death, and my shields are purely powered by my awesome mind." Either let their shields recharge extra fast compared to the rest of the protoss army, or allow them to like "meditate" or channel for a few seconds and recharge their shields!
Yeah, give it a Shield Recharge ability. Technically, SC2 Archons have the same statistics as in BW. But in SC2, the shield mechanic has been changed wherein they won't charge as fast during battle. This means Archons are in fact a lot weaker now. Giving them an ability to recharge their shields would help them a lot. Heck, have them able to recharge the shields of allies would be sick.
Shield recharge in combat on them was insignificant, the major effect was when you have no shields and regen 1 point, with 3 shield upgrades, the next enemy attack would be reduced by 4 points, which doesn't really happen with archons and their 10 hp. The shield change actually benefits them, since they have the most shields of any protoss unit, so they can actually recharge a significant amount between fights.
In BW their attack cooldown is 20, for comparison zealots had 22 and rines had 15. In SC2 they have 1.754, zealots have 1.2 and marines have 0.8608 So they attack much slower relatively to other units.
They don't have "light" or "armored" as an armor type, so they are much better tanks against all units with bonus damage than they were in BW against units with explosive or concussive damage.
Edit: "have the most shields", not "have the most hp", dunno what was I thinking.
On March 29 2010 04:10 iounas wrote: ^ Yeah and remove the armor.. Is it some dude with glow or a ball of energy..
True, I miss the sc1 archon model, that big ball of blue light with like a guy in it, it was just my favorite unit.
Now he's just this bunch of armor with some blue glow, bad animations and just nothing really special about him now.
But yes atm the archon is where he should be, blizzard just wants him to be something that you make out of your 2 HT's when they are out of energy and nothing more, so unless people can convince blizzard otherwise, that the archon should be more then that, I don't think we are gonna see any changes at all to him.
With the strength of storm against bio terran right now the last thing blizzard wants is archons that are as good as the SC1 version. It's just an extra bit of punch to your army when you used all your HT mana, that's all. They could make them as weak as a broodling and really people would still make templars.
it's possible their splash has a cap. That would explain them doing less splash against a ton of clumped air units but decent splash against marines. Someone should test for this
The Colossus sort of makes the archon redundant. The reason you used an archon and not a reaver:
-you could use left over HTs -it attacked air -it was wayyyy more mobile and attacked faster and didn't have crappy scarab AI -it had a ton of HP
Point 3 has been totally reversed. The colossus is like a reaver that doesn't suck without a shuttle, and compared to the archon the colossus is the one that is wayyy more mobile. And you can attack from a ridiculous range, too. If you need to tear up things like lings or zealots you would just rather use that. It leaves the other points (attacks air, etc.), but that's one of the reasons I feel the archon is downplayed somewhat.
IMO there's no real need for the SC1 archon role with the advent of the Colossus and the other counters to mutalisks toss has. It should be more of a Dark Archon type then.
EPT
, but for the storm to do 80 damage, it needs to hit for 4 full seconds.
