EPTI mean just read the reasoning behind its removal o_O
On a second note: The colossus in the demo seems alot more interesting than what we see now. Sort of like a voidray but different.
how to fix the colossus? - Page 5
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
I mean just read the reasoning behind its removal o_O On a second note: The colossus in the demo seems alot more interesting than what we see now. Sort of like a voidray but different. | ||
|
Fjodorov
5007 Posts
Before the number of vikings and corruptors are large enough, the colossus is the easiest unit to micro. It is huge and can walk over units/cliffs. However, the long range of the unit makes micro irrelevant most times. When viking/corruptor count gets large enough then it is useless to even try to micro the colossus. You are better if maximizing their damage output. Most of the time you will lose most of your colossus either way, so your best bet is to deal as much damage as possible. This does seem like a design flaw to me, since the unit is so microable. The splash damage and a-move aspect of the unit has bad effects on the game in the lower leagues aswell as pro-level. The colossus makes for bad e-sports because of the stale deathball effect it brings to protoss and the turtling that takes place in order to acquire it. Though, it is not OP at pro-level. In the lower leagues the colossus is OP in the sense that the opponent, especially terran, needs to have superior micro and overall control and engagement skills to break the colossus army. One bad step and 3 colossus will damage a bio ball enough that it might cost you the game. Since the colossus is a necessary unit for the protoss and the effects would be to big if it was to be changed drastically, im leaning towards either the idea inolving colossus using air upgrades, or the one with were the colossus fires its beam in a straight line. Air upgrades would not give the colossus a more micro-oriented feeling, but it would make it a bit harder for the protoss to switch between HT/colossus tech so easily. There is probably a better solution outhere somewhere, and i wish blizzard would consider experementing a bit with the colossus. | ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
| ||
|
Zorgaz
Sweden2951 Posts
Remove it from the game in HOTS beta and try it out. | ||
|
chaknow
United States7 Posts
But also I am not a very good player...LOL. | ||
|
Xain
Canada94 Posts
| ||
|
Nagas
Lithuania19 Posts
| ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On September 16 2012 11:11 convention wrote: First, I tried to find the video interview at MLG where all of the pros were asked which unit they disliked the most, all of the said the infestor except nestea saying hydras. But people use the colossus, not because it is sick strong, but because without splash damage protoss just straight up loses. PartinG for instance, will often never get collosi, instead he gets a lot of HT as his form of splash (against terran). Being he is the best PvT player in the world, I would say that the HT style is possibly stronger than the collosi style. Against zerg, there is no other unit that can prevent infestors from moving forward for easy fungals, and the only other unit that is good against lots of ling is zealots, which are very poor units against every other zerg unit (while storms are good in certain situations, they don't have prolonged AOE which you do need against zerg). So you're saying the collussus has splash damage which makes it so the toss doesn't 'just lose'. If this unit singlehandedly can turn a match up like that, my definition of it would be: 'it's sick strong.' On September 16 2012 11:42 Channel Pressure wrote: I dunno wcr. . Nothing in your post really demonstrated why the colossus is such a poorly designed unit. As Convention said, people don't build colossus because its "sick strong" (have you ever tried fighitng with just a colossus?), its a necessairy component to the protoss army after a point, if you are choosing to nagivate the robo tech tree. Protoss units all work very well together with the ultimate goal of collectively dealing damage and trading extremely efficiently with other races, with the possible exception of pvp. It isn't even close to ruining starcraft. . . I would cringe of the colossus disappeared from the protoss unit arsenal. How would we deal with terran 10 minute ish timings? Storm? Well there goes every protoss's win ratio against terran from about diamond down. Its a great unit, its not too strong, at all, entertaining to watch, someone mentioned the ghost-viking/colossus ht positional chess match . . . I totally agree. My opinion doesnt carry much weight but im just not convinced the colossus is some utterly broken unit that needs attention like the warhound did. But thats the feeling im getting from this thread I wasn't describing why it's a terrible unit. There are dozens of threads on teamliquid explaining why it's a terrible unit, but if you can't figure it out for yourself, I guess you are the target audience of these kidns of units. And obviously you'd get a replacement unit, I mean how thick are people? You think you can just remove the collussus or infestor and 'be fine'? Obviously not. The collussus is sick strong, but you can make any badly designed unit sick strong. There's a simple reason why every poll here on teamliquid regarding 'which unit do you absolutely hate/ would you like to see removed' always ends up with collussus at LEAST in the top 3 (as far as I know, number 1 every time). And nobody in here is talking about balancing issues when we mention things like remove infestor, change fungal growth, remove collusus,... We're talking about the entertainment factor for both spectator and player and the validity of starcraft 2 as an e-sport. Sc2 isn't as exciting to watch as BW, everyone with a brain knows that. Or anyone who isn't biased towards 'hur dur "better" graphics and pathing'. I'm not having fun when I'm playing with a collusus or an infestor and I'm nto having fun seeing people use the infestor or collussus, I mean if you have fun seeing a zerg chain fungal someone with 10 infestors, lucky you, I wish I was as easily entertained. | ||
|
chaknow
United States7 Posts
| ||
|
Kranyum
77 Posts
| ||
|
Fjodorov
5007 Posts
| ||
|
Necro)Phagist(
Canada6659 Posts
On September 15 2012 17:34 dynwar7 wrote: Be careful what you wish for. If blizzard remove colossi, most Protoss will truly be so mad since they are so used to a moving such a strong unit. Are you seriously asking blizz to remove colossi? Think more thoroughly please... Casual protoss players would be right pissed off. But if you remove the Colossi and give us the reaver, the more active and hardcore players of every race would rejoice! I for one can easily say I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather have my reavers back in place of colossi! | ||
|
Channel Pressure
United States62 Posts
 . I kinda like the blatant war of the worlds ripoff too. I mean if you're going to go there, the marine is a well-known ripoff of Warhammer space marines, and its become just about as iconic in sc as the warhammer marine is. And thats fine. Blizz has a knack for ripping stuff off and making it cool. Steal from the best as tyra banks once said. .  | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
On September 16 2012 17:17 Spawkuring wrote: I don't want the Colossus to be counterable, it already has plenty of that. It just needs to be fun to use. People hate the Colossus because there's no skill in using it. It's mobility guarantees almost perfect positioning in a deathball just by a-moving it. The maximum micro you get out of them is moving back a few steps when focused by AA. It makes the PvP matchup bore people to tears. It's the number #1 cause of deathball syndrome. It forces the AA of other races to be obscenely strong to counter it, therefore making all Stargate units less viable. It forces the Gateway units to be weaker due to its strength. And it's terribly dull to watch them from a spectator standpoint. I still have yet to see a colossus induce cheers from a crowd anywhere near that of a reaver. People only seem excited about colossi when they die, which should tell you something. The only reason the Colossus is still in the game is because it looks cool, and apparently casuals love its model or something. I honestly think that if SC2 is going to have an iconic unit, it should at least be something unique, and not a War of the Worlds ripoff. The Colossus also plays boring, but Blizzard is probably reluctant to do anything because it's so essential for the Protoss to survive that they don't want to go through the effort of rebalancing it, which I think goes against what Blizzard used to stand for. The thing is, the Colossus ISN'T counterable. There are checks in place for it, and that's all. There are units you integrate into your composition to help deal with the Colossi, but they never eliminate the threat completely. Compare Mutas in BW ZvT. They are rendered completely obsolete by the first Science Vessel hitting the battlefield. That is the appropriate situation for the Colossus, as well. The lack of a hard counter to Colossi is hurting the entire game. Because we rely on soft counters to handle Colossi, the soft counters need to be far more efficiently produced in order for the soft counter reaction to work. This has created the problems with air play we see in SC2. If, on the other hand, each race had a hard counter to Colossi, the Protoss would be forced to immediately transition out-- into, say, Storm, which is far more interesting. Colossi are only 1-A units when you have large mobs of them. Try working with one or two Colossi, and you'll see that there's a fair amount of micro involved (check out the 1 Colo no range all-in in PvP). By making it non-viable to produce large numbers of Colossi, you increase the microability of the unit. | ||
|
Channel Pressure
United States62 Posts
On September 17 2012 04:22 Acritter wrote: The thing is, the Colossus ISN'T counterable. There are checks in place for it, and that's all. There are units you integrate into your composition to help deal with the Colossi, but they never eliminate the threat completely. Compare Mutas in BW ZvT. They are rendered completely obsolete by the first Science Vessel hitting the battlefield. That is the appropriate situation for the Colossus, as well. The lack of a hard counter to Colossi is hurting the entire game. Because we rely on soft counters to handle Colossi, the soft counters need to be far more efficiently produced in order for the soft counter reaction to work. This has created the problems with air play we see in SC2. If, on the other hand, each race had a hard counter to Colossi, the Protoss would be forced to immediately transition out-- into, say, Storm, which is far more interesting. Colossi are only 1-A units when you have large mobs of them. Try working with one or two Colossi, and you'll see that there's a fair amount of micro involved (check out the 1 Colo no range all-in in PvP). By making it non-viable to produce large numbers of Colossi, you increase the microability of the unit. Totally agree. Although I disagree with the notion that a hard counter is a good idea. Between ghosts and vikings, the colossus and the HT both have a fairly balanced "counter" to them (so I guess im talking about tvp). That the colossus never becomes obsolete in that matchup makes for very interesting army positioning and strategies, to a level that I believe allows the better player to come out on top (usually). I personally think toss has a much lower margin of error than terran does, but thats not terribly important. A good lategame tvp toss army usually has colossus and storm, as it should, and vs t that winds up leaving you pretty evenly matched. To the first quote, if you a move your colossus during engagements you'll probably end up fresh out of a colossus against someone of even moderate skill. It is by no means a-move and forget unit between protecting your colossus with other units and microing it, especially when losing a colossus means trading inefficiently, especially vs t. | ||
|
convention
United States622 Posts
On September 16 2012 22:27 wcr.4fun wrote: So you're saying the collussus has splash damage which makes it so the toss doesn't 'just lose'. If this unit singlehandedly can turn a match up like that, my definition of it would be: 'it's sick strong.' Marines singlehandedly prevent Terran from just losing, so do infestors, so do lings, banelings, so do medivacs, same with stim as an upgrade. Core units make it so that race does not just straight up lose, which is why they are a core unit to begin with. Every race has those core units to build compositions around, what makes collusus more sick strong than the other core units? | ||
|
Channel Pressure
United States62 Posts
| ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
| ||
|
Entirety
1423 Posts
On September 17 2012 06:58 Cloak wrote: The difficult challenge is making Colossus a good mechanic without nerfing it, because almost every unit in this game is balanced around that splash capability. Marines, Marauders, Zerglings, Roaches, Swarm Hosts, Broodlords, Banelings, Zealots, Corruptors, Vikings, and Vipers would all have to be completely revamped to deal with the power void. This isn't true because we're rolling out HotS which inherently breaks everything in the game. There is no better time than now to completely revamp a unit. Yes, Marines are balanced around Colossi. Without Colossi, Marine/Ghost would probably roll over the Protoss army. However, maybe with the addition of Mothership Core, the Oracle, the Tempest.... aww who am I kidding, the Protoss army would still get rolled over. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 16 2012 19:21 YyapSsap wrote: Solution: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Reaver I mean just read the reasoning behind its removal o_O On a second note: The colossus in the demo seems alot more interesting than what we see now. Sort of like a voidray but different. yeah, Liquipedia is really aweful when it comes down to unit descriptions and usage and stuff like that. The reaver was taken out because it did too much damage. Plain and simple. | ||
| ||
