EPT[D] Archon overlooked? - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Bune
Germany1 Post
| ||
|
milly9
Canada325 Posts
Cost efficiency: for every Archon you can get 6.2 Roach(s) *** compare that to a zealot Kill rate: one Zealot will kill 1 Roach(s) without dying (70 health left) ** Cost efficiency: for every Roach you can get 1.4 Zealot(s) *** its not hard to see why archons don't work out. (1 Gas is equal to 2.5 Minerals for the calculation.) | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On May 03 2010 01:23 milly9 wrote: Kill rate: one Archon will kill 2 Roach(s) without dying (10 health left) ** Cost efficiency: for every Archon you can get 6.2 Roach(s) *** compare that to a zealot Kill rate: one Zealot will kill 1 Roach(s) without dying (70 health left) ** Cost efficiency: for every Roach you can get 1.4 Zealot(s) *** its not hard to see why archons don't work out. (1 Gas is equal to 2.5 Minerals for the calculation.) whaaat? 1 gas = 2.5 minerals? :S. Also, roaches rape zealots, because they have range, so that doesn't really make sense. | ||
|
Wintermute
United States427 Posts
On May 02 2010 08:46 mahnini wrote: nothing can make you people happy. first everyone was complaining that units were designed with too narrow a purpose and that blizzard shouldn't assign units specific roles. then when people figured out that blizzard just tried to design cool units and let the player figure out where they fit in people still find ways to complain about it. not every unit in the game will see regular use that's just the way it is. The two ideas actually go hand in hand, and aren't contradictory. Niche units are a byproduct of adding new units just to add new units. "Cool" units crowd out functional units because they have to steal some of that functionality or not get used. In any case, bashing on Dustin Browder in a thread that's not about Dustin Browder is pointless. Maybe dNo_O or other posters like that need to take a step back and not let their seething anger about the developer interfere with the ability to discuss the game as it exists. | ||
|
RyanRushia
United States2748 Posts
| ||
|
Champi
1422 Posts
| ||
|
milly9
Canada325 Posts
On May 03 2010 01:31 Kiarip wrote: whaaat? 1 gas = 2.5 minerals? :S. Also, roaches rape zealots, because they have range, so that doesn't really make sense. right, they do. So imagine how badly they rape archons? do you think an archon would get a single kill before the big ball of roaches blows it up in 1 volley? | ||
|
Conris
United States79 Posts
On May 02 2010 20:26 suejak wrote: Somebody do a test of 2 archons vs. however many mutas to get 8 food. How about archons vs. equal food in hydras? I don't think proving that 2 archons loses to 8 roaches proves in itself that archons are useless. should do it yourself  but nevertheless, there is honestly no point in testing it, hydras have range upgrade, if you micro the hydras at all off creep, the archon will probably kill 2? or 3 at most, and maybe put some in the yellow area. you have to understand that the archon was nerfed when it was brought from SC1 to SC2 dps wise, however it's survivability has not changed (350shield 10hp) where as the AI in SC2 for ranged units is much much better(and the fact that units are packed so tight multiple layer arcs are formed so easily) the point of testing archon vs roaches instead of hydras is as follows: 1. a hydra heavy army will always have roaches, or even a massive amount of zerglings, or even mutas if your econ is just that good. so 2 out of the 3, archons will not support efficiently. | ||
|
Conris
United States79 Posts
On May 02 2010 18:50 iounas wrote: I think you are a troll.. Archon is a cool unit but when you factor the price of 100m 300g its a terrible terrible unit.. It doesnt deal 50% more DPS then ultra (!!!) Ultra does more then archon with its bonus.. Where did you get your numbers troll.. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=115345 Ultras also have more hp and some real splash.. Archons have splash when units overlap. Blizz has said that archon is meant to be something you can do with templars out of energy, not a unit you would want to get normally.. ultra vs archon has also been tested. archon at 0/0/1 takes down 1 single ultra, however when upgrades kick in (and i mean full full upgrades) an archon dies when the ultra is at around 60% hp. before this gets flamed, yes i do realize that archons are cheaper relative to ultras, and the fact that it actually won in a 1v1, we should be happy already. however, the point in this is not that they can go toe to toe, but their effectiveness in any army composition. 1. because shield is so expensive to upgrade and that we never really get to 3/3/0 anyway, archons don't have an edge over ultras. 2. ultras have speed upgrade, and they are damn fast, archons do not (i believe any melee unit with movement speed upgrades multiplies their effectiveness by insane degrees.) 3. ultras do as you say, real splash damage at an insane attack speed, not to mention they do ridiculous damage to buildings. 4. ultras have 600 hp with 1 armor, archons have 350+10 with 0 armor or any shield bonus. so to be honest, you can't or won't upgrade archon defense unless you're messing around and started upgrading shield. and shield upgrade lvl 1 is 200/200 where as weapons and armor are 100/100. 5. ultras cost 100 minerals more, and ok, requires hive tech, but then again, HTs are tier 3 as well, so no QQ about you don't need a hive, if you don't need it and you win the game, good on you. ultras all in all is a much better designed unit than the archon, it still gets focused down by antiarmor units quite fast, but the amount of damage they can do at melee range is ridiculous, also that even if there's a couple of antiarmor units in the opposition mix (excluding mass roflauders) it'll probably live through the fight as the rest of the army demolishes them. i apologize for this long post, but before anyone points out that archon is anti bio, and almost every tier 1~1.5 are bio and that if they were buffed in anyway they would rape too hard. lets sit and indulge in this argument. first of all, archon is tier 3, and the only bios that are really that scared of archons are marines/zerglings/maybe zealots but they do enough damage to even out. so a ball of marines without stim, will need to be microed and ok lets say at the worst situation, you lose like 4 marines, archon dead. that's a tier 1 vs a tier 3 and even if you lose some, you still win economically. with stim, i don't even want to talk about it. zerglings, ok fine, this is the one unit archons rape hard, but it was also tested that an archon can't break out of a mass drone surround, and it nearly died, so 1drone=2zerglings, if you honestly wish to kill an archon with lings, you will, and you won't lose as much lings as you think you would. (archon 1shots the targetted ling and damages the 2 lings next to the targetted to 50~55%. you might say wow that means lings just get raped easy, yes, but with SC2 zergling AI, they don't just...sit behind each other giving you the maximum splash, no, they run around and you usually only get into a single layer surround, or double if you have that many lings. i understand that archons should be thought of as a bonus when HTs run out of energy, but the morph time makes it useless in a fight after storm, what, you gonna take on the remaining army with 1 archon and 2 stalkers after the rest of your army's gone? it's nice to have a bonus, but this bonus is near useless, and honestly immortals aren't that great of tanks...the shield gets raped faster than you probably cared to notice. and midgame zealots get raped even with speed by any ranged blob, so yes, the one possible costly meatshield is labeled as a "bonus" so even if it sucks shit, toss players should be happy with it? sidenote: 350/10 that's what, 9 probes? i'll sacrifice 9 probes to soak the damage than 1 archon's cost, probes block better too, so why do we have archons again? | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
I like how Archons work at the moment, as a way to make useless units useful. HTs turning into Archons are more common, since you can pretty much always find a good use for DTs, unless the guy is spamming Spine/Spore crawlers left-right-and-center. Fundamentally, I don't want Archons to be so good that they're a counter to something. When I have to depend on Archons as a counter to something, I'll cry, because 300 gas is a HUUUUUUGE investment. | ||
pigscanfly
Singapore147 Posts
| ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
Or, for being so shield dependent, they should get an ability similar to Hardened Shields or they should just be flat out immune to EMP. Archons need something radical to justify 300 gas. | ||
|
Conris
United States79 Posts
| ||
|
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On May 03 2010 02:29 Conris wrote: 2. ultras have speed upgrade, and they are damn fast, archons do not (i believe any melee unit with movement speed upgrades multiplies their effectiveness by insane degrees.) WHAT?! Ultras are fucking SLOW SLOW SLOW even with the Speed upgrade. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
To explain: Archons have specific uses against more powerful biological units, they can help get a better combat unit/caster unit ratio after a fight, they can help deal damage when your high templars have low mana, but all at the cost of a weaker unit afterwards. It doesn't need to be too cost-ineffective since then the decision is overly punishing and makes the unit barely usable, but it's not that bad is it? | ||
|
Conris
United States79 Posts
On May 03 2010 03:58 Cloak wrote: Has anyone seen the Archon with chain lightning attack in the Galaxy Editor thread? That'd be really cool. Or, for being so shield dependent, they should get an ability similar to Hardened Shields or they should just be flat out immune to EMP. Archons need something radical to justify 300 gas. well immune to EMP is...not necessary, it only takes off 100 anyway, so it's fine(or something like that). i agree with the hardened shield similarity, but not as effective as immortal's. however with 350 shield and a % reduction...that might be kinda too insane, hence maybe we should change the hp/shield ratio. I know we're attuned to the 10 hp archons, but honestly, maybe it's time to change the hp/shield ratio? because ranged units is not how they were before, hence melee units need to be changed correct? ling-increased speed zealot-charge(i really can't say whether it's better or were speedlots better) marauders-well it's the primary unit for T that has a huge impact on melee, so since they change the melee game so much it'll be mentioned as well. so what happened to archons..? can you imagine how sad they were when the stepped through the Warpgate from BroodWar to find marines with shields, ghosts with emps, enormous cockroaches that spit acid, lings on crack(but with running speed this time), dragoons with mounted artillery, zealots with megaman style jetpack shoes, and archons...not only did they not get anything, but they of all the sudden can only use 1 hand to zap at a time now? (i use this as an analogy for it's decreased attack speed). lets go a little off topic now. a list of all the end-end game units of each race and their production speed. Zerg: Ultras: 300/200/6 (70 sec) Broodlords - 300/250/4 (74 sec) Terran: Thors - 300/200/6 (60 sec) Ravens WITH seeker researched - 100/200/2 + 200/200 was it? Protoss: Archon - 100/300/4 Mothership - 400/400/8 (160 sec) Carrier - 350/250/6 (120 sec) Ultras as said before, are very well designed, and it only takes 70 seconds to build one, on par with the rest of the mondo units. but at a 3 to 4 base game, do you not even consider ultras? i believe you do. Broodlords are just rape, no other words for it, 9.5 range air to surface artillery with decent damage and a free meatshield, 74 seconds from larva to corrupter to broodlord, on par, even on a 3 base game with any muta herass, really? you wouldn't even consider broodlords? of course you would. Thors are nice because they're supposed "anti-air" however do 100 per shot to ground units...idk, just pure awesome all around? however for them to be effective against air they need to reach a critical number, of merely 3. T uses thors anyway, so there's no discussion here of their effectiveness. Ravens are becoming more used for PPD, however seeker missile is still every T tries to squeeze out in every mid/long match up no? the effectiveness is recognized. now to protoss finally. alright so with the info listed, it seems like Toss has more options for late game, really? a pair of carriers is not the most effective thing in the world, but lets say you get them out (because in a normal ladder 1v1 you probably can't support more than 1 stargate) 700/500 so to me that is what, 5 sentries and 4 zealots? i think it is agreed that the trade off is not worthit, not to mention the 2 minute build time. Mothership are awesome, even without tp, even with the massive movement speed nerf, even with the skill nerfs, even if it's air and you normally never get a chance to upgrade air weapons or armor, it is still awesome right? ok, notice in the info above, none of the building costs were included, it's because there's always a 2nd use to it other than ultralisk cavern. But it's only 150 200/65, where as fleet beacon is 300/200/60. so that is debatable, but then again, motherships are slow...and costs a lot more. so motherships is like that poster of a hot girl on your wall, you'll never meet her, you'll never know her, but you know OF her. so we can cross motherships out (and seriously, arbitors did suicide recalls, who the hell you gonna call with that movement speed and that kind of recall time delay?) so now we're at archons. let's get past the idea of, archons are empty HTs put together, HTs had no use anymore anyway. false, i can make them wait for energy for all you know, or simply do 50 energy feedbacks since people are starting to abuse casters more. but lets get past that, let's say archon is a FUCKING UNIT, and we use it for the sake of it being a unit in the starcraft2 universe. i assume it's role is for lategame melee dmg sponge, but we know this isn't true. fine, lets make it a lesser tank, with enormous dmg, we know this isn't true either. so are you telling me unless i throw down my storms, SOMEHOW manage to have my HTs survive (they should be sniped with or without energy) and then WAIT another 17 seconds for them to fart on each other into a ball of gas, and that's supposed to help me in what way? i apologize for this wall of text, but it seems like specific info is needed. on the sidenote, the reason why toss is pulling through in the current ladders is because they have a strong early and mid mid game, anywhere after that, they really start to dwindle versus the two other races. please non of the junk about "you shouldn't allow your opponent T or Z to get to that point, or it's gg" no, then that means the races aren't balanced, it's not about the timing of the game, but about the stages of the game that decides it's balance. at any stage of the game, with equal micro and food count, and equal level in tech and tier, things should break out somewhat even, that's what balancing means, not how you pressure or mess with your opponent. 20 minutes into the game terran is pumping marauders out of what, 7~9 racks? and/or pumping out thors. Zerg is pumping out if not massive anything, broodlords or ultras. so what does toss have not to counter, but to respond to that? a 2 minute build time carrier? a mothership that does 30 damage per volley? or do toss find themselves still warping in zealots at 20 minutes in the game, and have them melt as zergling melted against m/m/m in BroodWar, but this time, melting to everything that has 2+range (yes roaches i'm talking to you) So please, turn your mind away from thinking archons is just a jumbled up trash from 2 washed up HTs, because the role that archons SHOULD serve is very important in a toss's late game army composition. again i apologize for the wall of text. Blizzard, it takes 2 of toss's tier 3 clutch unit to form an archon, you don't need to make them special, just make them work | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
But to make that really useful they should make them merge faster. So I vote for a simple buff : faster merge to make it really useful in combat situation : either both template jump instantly on each other or faster merge. And/Or make the create archon intelligent and automaticly choose your lowest energy templars. | ||
|
blahman3344
United States2015 Posts
archons aren't really worth it because that archon could be 2 Templar, which can storm the crap out of units. besides, when comparing archons to colossi, the colossi will just win out because of the ability to climb up to higher ground, and the fact that it has a huge AoE. Also, when comparing archons to immortals, the immortals have the damage reducing shield for things that do large amoutns of damage, whereas an archon takes full damage from hits, so immortals are capable of taking more. And if the opponent does happen to go muta/anti-air, that's what you make stalkers/sentries for. edit: the point im trying to make here is that archons aren't really worth the cost of gas, which has become a valuable resource in sc2 | ||
|
789
United States959 Posts
| ||
| ||
