Colossus vs Disruptor

On November 17 2015 20:28 JulDraGoN wrote:
I think Blizzard will change the colossus sooner or later if it is not used.
Colossus is the only Protoss unit with no ability to activate right? Just you wait!

I would not be surprised if they added an ability to make it more versatile. Maybe something along the lines of
- Press c to fire 3 corsairs from the colossus head to fight air units in the targeted area

On November 17 2015 21:43 Sipario wrote:

I don't want another spell-caster unit, i don't have enough hands to use forcefield,storm,blink,disruptor,prysm,adept. Why toss have to manage so different units during engage ??

On November 17 2015 10:56 The_Frozen_Inferno wrote:
Colossus damage nerf was pretty massive. I didn't realize how much it was until I did some closer looking at the numbers:

Previously:
+0 colossus did 15 x2 = 30 linear AoE damage. And with each upgrade, it would get +2 damage per lance
+3 colossus did 21 x2 = 42 damage

Now:
+0 colossus does 12 x2 = 24 damage. And with each upgrade, it only gets +1 damage per lance now.
+3 colossus does 15 x2 = 30 damage.


So a +3 LotV colossus is now the equivalent to a +0 atk HotS colossus.

Further, its attack upgrades no longer outpace armour upgrades.

Furthermost, if upgrades are ever equal, 2 colossi will only do 48 damage. Which is not enough to one-shot a combat-shielded Marine (55HP) - a 50% reduction in efficiency. It's also means a colossus can no longer 1-shot a zergling or even a +1 armour baneling

On November 17 2015 21:43 Sipario wrote:

I don't want another spell-caster unit, i don't have enough hands to use forcefield,storm,blink,disruptor,prysm,adept. Why toss have to manage so different units during engage ??

On November 17 2015 10:56 The_Frozen_Inferno wrote:
Colossus damage nerf was pretty massive. I didn't realize how much it was until I did some closer looking at the numbers:

Previously:
+0 colossus did 15 x2 = 30 linear AoE damage. And with each upgrade, it would get +2 damage per lance
+3 colossus did 21 x2 = 42 damage

Now:
+0 colossus does 12 x2 = 24 damage. And with each upgrade, it only gets +1 damage per lance now.
+3 colossus does 15 x2 = 30 damage.

On November 17 2015 21:43 Sipario wrote:

I don't want another spell-caster unit, i don't have enough hands to use forcefield,storm,blink,disruptor,prysm,adept. Why toss have to manage so different units during engage ??

On November 18 2015 01:38 Startyr wrote:
The games with zest are not a great example as he was mostly trying to play the same style as hots. He was outplayed by someone who had more practice and experience with Lotv.

Another important change worth thinking about is the marauder now has:

damage:5
vs armoured:10
2 attacks

This means with protoss base armour and a guardian shield the marauder would do only 4 total damage to non armoured units. if you are ever 1 armour upgrade ahead then it only does 2 damage vs armour.

Adept sentry/zealot can destroy marines and marauders do very little damage to them, Protoss may not need to be as reliant on rushing to splash.

There are so many possibilities still to explore.

On November 18 2015 01:38 Startyr wrote:
The games with zest are not a great example as he was mostly trying to play the same style as hots. He was outplayed by someone who had more practice and experience with Lotv.

Another important change worth thinking about is the marauder now has:

damage:5
vs armoured:10
2 attacks

This means with protoss base armour and a guardian shield the marauder would do only 4 total damage to non armoured units. if you are ever 1 armour upgrade ahead then it only does 2 damage vs armour.

Adept sentry/zealot can destroy marines and marauders do very little damage to them, Protoss may not need to be as reliant on rushing to splash.

There are so many possibilities still to explore.

On November 18 2015 03:16 Charoisaur wrote:

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAHH. chargelot templar play viable again. sc2 is alive and DK a god!!!
FUUCKK YEAAHHH!

On November 18 2015 04:10 HugoBallzak wrote:
Games been out 7 days and people like dinomight are already begging for protoss buffs. Sounds like this expansion could use more of what basically ruined the previous ones, mass collosus. Apparently storm got nerfed too? Its about time that a-move AOE units got nerfed. People acting like spellcasting micro is so much harder than trying to micro and kite with a stimmed bio ball while trying to snipe/emp while trying to deal with zealot warpins at home with units that need to be queued ahead of time and microd against chargelots. Yeah, I am not buying it actually. It finally feels like protoss has to micro as much as the other 2 races have since the beginning.

On November 18 2015 03:04 DinoMight wrote:


Marines + an economy that delays tech and favors massing mineral units.

Game is so broken.

Adept rushes wrecking everyone = "NERF THE ADEPT!"

Protoss struggling to play a basic macro game vs Terran = "LET THEM FIGURE IT OUT."

If only Protoss players got together and collectively bitched as a unit the way Terrans do.

On November 18 2015 05:03 TimeSpiral wrote:


I don't understand this tone, Dino. Terrans have been consistently bent over in this beta. And especially here, on TL, it would appear that Terran players are the minority. Hardly the squeakiest wheel.

TvP feels like a decent matchup, at the moment. It could go either way, with mistakes being much less forgivable. If we fall behind, Toss is unkillable. If Toss fall behind, Terran rolls them.

The real problem is Zerg. We can handle even and favored T and P opponents, but we can't kill a Zerg unless they're a full two leagues below us. Super crazy.

On November 18 2015 05:08 DinoMight wrote:


Perhaps not the squeakiest wheel throughout the later stages of the beta, but certainly in the last 5 years Terrans have done their fair share of whining and it's lead to a lot of design changes for LotV.

I guess we have to wait and see until more pro level tournaments are played out, but generally the economy changes result in more bio and less splash to deal with it.

Also, Liberators are far too strong, I feel. Liberation zone is too wide. Supported by bio, it's really hard to get under them to kill them, and I you don't engage them in the middle of the map then they'll corner you in your own base and it's GG.

At least I can agree with you on XvZ. Matchup is fucking unwinnable.

On November 18 2015 09:25 TimeSpiral wrote:


Really? You're aggregating five years of life and somehow concluding that Terrans have disproportionately influenced LotV design decisions? That's a big, big stretch, even for you.

And you guys will absolutely never be happy with the Liberator. *shrugs* It got supremely nerfed. It's a single-target DPS unit that can't move, lol. I'm not going to get into the "what-if" scenarios with you, because we could both do that forever. Show me a replay where the Liberator is too strong, and we'll talk.

I don't even know what to say about Zerg. In Archon mode it's a laughable lolfest. Was happy to see Kim say that Archon Mode might need separate balancing (because it definitely does).

On November 18 2015 23:54 Charoisaur wrote:

wow a player who loves collossi. Haven't seen many of them.

On November 18 2015 12:07 DinoMight wrote:


Maybe if they shrunk the Liberation Zone a little bit, right now it just feels insanely big for.. what is it.. 90? damage at that rate of fire.

Archon mode simply is going to allow for better multitasking from each race. Whoever can abuse that the most will come out on top. Strategies/builds/etc. will be totally different in Archon mode and it's going to come down to how well does a team communicate and how effectively can they split up unit control (not just I macro, you macro...).

Zerg is a tad stupid right now.

Back on topic - I think there's no reason to make a Disruptor in PvT or a Colossus in PvZ. In the first case Storm is better in the second Disruptors clearly > Colossi.

On November 19 2015 00:44 TimeSpiral wrote:


I think the Lib Zone is about the same radial range as a Marine. Looks about 5 units to me, right? When it's in Defender Mode, it can't move, and none of the attacks can damage structures. Pretty gigantic disadvantages, no? It's casting range is also a double-edged sword, as it leaves the flanks completely wide open, unlike units with radial attack ranges.

On Topic: Disruptor vs. Colossus
From a Terran perspective--in Archon Mode--a critical mass of Disruptors makes it near-impossible to properly engage a Protoss death ball. Then, if you do engage, you have to move command during the fight, dramatically reducing DPS, and you just lose the fight. When one person has sole control over the army, if they have enough disruptors, you can continuously have the nova ball flying out. The Terran must run or take game ending damage, and there is no charging in to snipe the disruptor, because then you're in range of the actual army death ball (and the other disruptors).

As far as which one to build? It's amazingly effective to have both. Two colossus and four disruptors feels like the magic numbers. I agree that opening colossus is probably the way to go, because you need that a-click splash, and bio cannot attack into colossus early on, especially if there are adepts and/or PO.

I think you're super wrong about the Disruptor in TvP. I don't really buy the "micro is too hard" argument. It's a point and click death spell, on cool down, that can hit burrowed units without a detector, and can damage buildings. It should be at least a little hard to use, lol.

I have no idea about PvZ, I don't play Toss enough to know.

Go play Archon Mode. Simplifying the difference to "just multitasking" is to incredibly understate the difference, considering that multitasking is SC2.

On November 19 2015 00:54 DinoMight wrote:


You must be doing something wrong to let your opponent mass that many disruptors.

On November 19 2015 01:49 TimeSpiral wrote:


Or you must be doing something wrong ; ) That claim easily cuts both ways, friend.

Or we're both doing many things wrong (most likely scenario). Look at the guy directly above you. Protoss can definitely beat Terran, often, and vice versa. I think it's a pretty good match up, atm. Whereas, I'm not convinced that anyone can be an evenly-skilled Zerg, atm.

On November 17 2015 21:43 Sipario wrote:

I don't want another spell-caster unit, i don't have enough hands to use forcefield,storm,blink,disruptor,prysm,adept. Why toss have to manage so different units during engage ??

But I do feel like I have to try harder vs T. I'm dropping them everywhere, setting traps with stasis, flanks with storm, etc... and they're mostly just parade pushing me.

On November 19 2015 03:54 Beelzebub1 wrote:


Because Protoss is less demanding sheer mechanics wise so it's balanced by more complex army management.

Disruptor so infinitely better to play against, I feel like when Protoss wrecks me with them they wrecked me with skill compared to A move Colossus, Disruptor is good for the game, Colossus should just be removed.

On November 19 2015 04:42 SaVing wrote:


Disruptors will deal handily with parade pushes. If they're actually just a-moving their army into your base then the disruptors will take out a sizable chunk of their army.

On November 19 2015 04:42 SaVing wrote:


Disruptors will deal handily with parade pushes. If they're actually just a-moving their army into your base then the disruptors will take out a sizable chunk of their army.

On November 19 2015 05:01 TimeSpiral wrote:


I think by "parade push" he just means a committed attack, with a supply line (reinforcements moving across the map). This, opposed to a squad-type attack, with a "macro army" back at home.

The technical response to a "parade push" is to attack the supply line, or counter attack their base and force the reinforcements to turn around. This is obviously a challenging thing to do.

On November 19 2015 05:03 DinoMight wrote:


I've been doing this successfully with Adept/Zealot warpins at their base. The key is just not spreading myself too thin. Sometimes I harass with too many units and end up dying to the push.

But yeah, the constant harass style and lots of bases to protect = smaller engagements which makes disruptor play less viable IMO.

On November 19 2015 05:20 Elentos wrote:

He said it's easier based on sheer mechanics. So let's exclude micro mechanics for the time being. Missing a production cycle for whatever reason as Terran outright loses you games, for Protoss this is not as much of an issue, especially pre-LotV, just look at all the money Zest usually banks before deciding to warp in new units. Plus with the old chrono, even missing build time on key units (colossi) could be compensated. It's not necessarily easier, or less demanding per se, but it's certainly more forgiving (for slower players). Pre-LotV, as noted. Because I have no idea how this changed with the new chrono, haven't offraced yet.

On November 19 2015 05:40 DinoMight wrote:


Again, I think you're wrong.

Terran just has to keep pressing A. Protoss actually needs to be aware of what's going on at all times to know IF he should warp in units or not.

If you're excluding fight micro then it's definitely ambitious to say Terran obviously requires more skill.

On November 19 2015 05:50 TimeSpiral wrote:


Such a pointless argument, Dino. Both races are mechanically challenging to play. To simplify Terran mechanics as pressing A just makes you look silly. Suggesting that knowing what is going on is somehow the domain of a Protoss also makes you look silly.

On November 19 2015 08:41 FreeZEternal wrote:
Hmm, so I tried going colossus vs terran....got wrecked... I was winning most of my fights with HT but ghosts started to show up so I moved to colossus and boy....those mauraders do not die lol.