|
On September 15 2012 17:50 GorGor wrote:
The reason why Protoss are so prone to deathball with colossus is because all Protoss ground units share a single upgrade. If robo upgrades were separate from gateway upgrades, (as it is for Terran) then maybe each unit could receive an individual buff and Protoss could be more reminiscent of BW.
It's because of the issues warp gate creates. It has nothing to do with upgrades. At all.
|
Reavers were such a staple unit in SC:BW, would be amazing if it returned, even at the expense of the colossus.
|
i thought the reason the reaver was removed was due to the improvements in pathing scarbs weren't interesting they, would hit 100% of the time. Don't know why this made it unbalanced though.
I would like to see a change or removal of the colossus, one less beam attack. 
|
On September 17 2012 07:14 Big J wrote: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.
Yet its compensated by some of the slowest MS a unit can have in a game, with one of the slowest projectiles to hit enemy units in the game coupled with requiring money for ammo and being a rather low on hitpoints.. (They could have always gone back to the "old" scarab and the way it behaved instead of hitting 100% as well).
I dont think its the case of "too much damage" because that can always be balanced. But its obvious when you compare the reaver to a colssus that the former is much harder to really get its worth via micro.
|
I don't know, Colossus is supposed to be a support unit, yet it does the most dps in the protoss army while the gateway units act like a meatshield. Something is wrong there, isn't it?
What if, instead of the pure dps machine, like the current colossus is now, Protoss had a true support unit built from the robo bay? Here is a little idea that I came up with a moment ago.
===============================================
Here's a pic so my post will draw more attention! Of course the unit should look more protoss-y
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s5ZjA.jpg)
Let's call the unit a Ravager, I know, lame name, whatever.
I don't really know if it should be attackable from both air and ground or what it's movement speed should be - but probably not faster than the colossus so microing it with warp prisms would be rewarding.
The main point is that it would shoot a wide beam of energy in a straight line that would deal minimal damage and apply a stacking debuff to every enemy unit on its path. The units affected by the debuff would receive increased damage for a short amount of time - be it a percentage increase or X damage per hit increase like Devourer in brood war did.
The unit could possibly have an ability that would shot a beam dealing a lot more damage, but firing it would cost resources and require a channel time before the improved beam is shot.
So, in a nutshell, it's a slow hellion with pathetic-dps, siege-range beam attack that makes units affected more vulnerable.
It doesn't do much damage on its own, but combined with stalkers and zealots it is a deadly threat.
Here are some example stats that will probably be heavily op or up:
-hp, shields, armor, resource cost and build time the same as colossus
-attack damage: 12(+1)
-attack range: 10
-beam width: 1 (hellion's is 0.15 and storm's aoe is 1.5)
-cooldown: 2 seconds
-projectile speed: let's say a half of the tempest's one, so you can perhaps use blink micro or dodge it with stimmed bio
-every attack applies a debuff that increases damage taken by 1 per stack, stacks 3 times.
ability overcharge:
costs 75 minerals, 6 seconds channeling time before fire, beam width and range the same as in Ravager's normal attack
deals 60 damage + 80 vs armored and buildings - you can wreck some serious havoc in the worker line or quickly kill defensive buildings; the enemy can see the direction where the beam will travel, so it won't be so easy to kill workers with it, unless you catch the enemy by surprise.
Here you go, pure support 'colossus'! Any feedback?
|
On September 17 2012 07:37 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 07:14 Big J wrote:On September 16 2012 19:21 YyapSsap wrote:Solution: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/ReaverI 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. Yet its compensated by some of the slowest MS a unit can have in a game, with one of the slowest projectiles to hit enemy units in the game coupled with requiring money for ammo and being a rather low on hitpoints.. (They could have always gone back to the "old" scarab and the way it behaved instead of hitting 100% as well). I dont think its the case of "too much damage" because that can always be balanced. But its obvious when you compare the reaver to a colssus that the former is much harder to really get its worth via micro.
Broodlords are very slow and very powerful. I haven't seen anybody yet that said those were very hard to micro.
Similar with Thors or Sieged Tanks or BCs.
And not everything can be balanced. If you want a unit with big damage and big splash like the reaver, it will destroy any form of clumped low tier unit compositions like bio.
Edit: Well, it could probably be balanced, but it would probably destroy something like the viability of bio, or roaches, or it would violate unit design principles and probably have nothing in common with a BW reaver anymore.
|
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The only thing that's broke about it is the way it can stand on top of your army.
If they made it unable to cliffwalk/stand on top of armies then deathballs wouldn't be as bad.
|
On September 17 2012 09:46 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only thing that's broke about it is the way it can stand on top of your army. If they made it unable to cliffwalk/stand on top of armies then deathballs wouldn't be as bad.
I actually agree with this.
Remove cliffwalk, remove walking over units, remove it's vulnerability to AA units. Probably increase it's range 9 to 10 to make up for it's 'loss' of range due to units being in front of tit now?
|
The collosus needs to be removed, or changed into a midgame siege unit. Currently now each race has at least one positional unit that is a "Nope sorry, can't attack here" unit. Siege tanks + widow mines, Swarm hosts + viper dark cloud. Protoss really doesn't have one of these. The tempest is blizzards attempt at giving Protoss a proper "Siege unit", but its horribly situational and does nothing to deal with mass low tech armies.
The Reaver could fill this position. Make it incredibly strong against mass low tech armies, and have it balanced by its extremely low mobility.
But Blizzard could also come up with something new. A mid game siege unit that is easy to use, difficult to master. I for example would love to see some kind of mortar unit. Similar to the Reaver, it has low mobility, and its "mortal shell" would have a second or two delay from when it fires to when it lands. This means that it has great defensive ability. You just sit back and have the mortars. But makes it difficult to attack with as the Terran can kite it fairly easily. It also gives the the opportunity to see some great marine splitting to dodge the mortar shells. This mortar can also have a mode where instead of auto firing, you can target it to fire at a random patch of land so you can fire it preemptively, or set it up somewhere to shell a kitting Terran army. It could also be used as a mid game harass with speed prism.
This mortar idea promotes position play, advanced micro, and would allow many advanced and superior players to use it in a way that lesser players can't. But it can also be easy to use. Not so good at aggression, but fantastic at defense.
Anyone else like this idea?
|
On September 17 2012 09:46 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only thing that's broke about it is the way it can stand on top of your army. If they made it unable to cliffwalk/stand on top of armies then deathballs wouldn't be as bad.
I agree with the person you quoted. And disagree with you. Nobody says "Colossus are broken because of 2 things, cliffwalk, and unit walk (as while you want to combine those, those are 2 completely different mechanics). The colossus is not broken at all, and so the changes in the OP are not trying to suggest changes to make the Colossus more interesting, but rather changes to nerf the colossus because the OP doesn't like them (if you read all the changes you will see every one is a completely unwarranted nerf). Like the above said. It's not broken, it doesn't require fixing, and in all reality it isn't a bad unit, it's just overhyped as one. Sure it does terrible terrible damage with limited micro. And the micro it is able to do (target firing, proper positioning, etc.) is all micro that might go unnoticed to the average spectator. But all races have limited micro units. Think marauder, or line baneling infestor ultra, or brood lords, these units don't take much micro, but because YOU (meaning a lot of people) think they are more pleasing (or for the other amount of people they aren't Protoss and just hate colossus cause they get crushed by them). You think it's warranted to want one to change and not the others. Well the mechanic of a seige unit that is vulnerable to AA (why they designed Vikings to be low health high range anti-armored) is a pretty damn good mechanic. You just want to overlook that because you don't like getting fried by colossus A moving is all. Well let me tell you, a Pro still makes much better use of colossi than the average player, and makes for a very positional game. And to the OP. I think your post is just a big psuedo balance whine and am surprised after all the suggestions you've made on how it needs to be nerfed that this thread wasn't closed.
|
On September 17 2012 07:30 Daylight85 wrote:
Reavers were such a staple unit in SC:BW, would be amazing if it returned, even at the expense of the colossus.
Remove colossus, add reaver. Reaver + warp prisms = fun pvp :D
|
colossi are perfect the way they are, and im saying this as a terran dying a gazillion times to colossi
the only problem i see in colossi, if there are some, is the way they fit into the protoss arsenal:
protoss has such a balanced army, hardy yet cheap meatshields, 2 very gimmicky casters that can help your AE or even make up for bad positioning (forcefields) and its still pretty mobile
i mean its so well designed that i admire the work blizzard did there
same can be said of zerg, where you have the choice to go for strong medium mobile units, superfast harass units and/or strong casters which all transitions very nicely into hive without any real sacrifies
i miss that kind of compositions in many terran games, especially in tvp where you are forced to play a highly agressive uber mobile style.
there is almost no room for so many cool units that could be made out of a factory or a starport
|
I much prefer reavers. More micro involved, much more fun to play.
Would also make PvP a hell of a lot better.
|
how about making its attacks damage friendly units, this might seems like a small change but it will force the protoss moving his collosi around to avoid killing its own zealots , in exchange they could remove its AA vulnerability (the collosi would have to move foward to hit infront of the zealots) , also its realy small change not realy changing any match up , just make it abit more micro intesnive unit while taking advantage its" walking over units " mechanism
|
On September 17 2012 11:52 Serp87 wrote:
how about making its attacks damage friendly units, this might seems like a small change but it will force the protoss moving his collosi around to avoid killing its own zealots , in exchange they could remove its AA vulnerability (the collosi would have to move foward to hit infront of the zealots) , also its realy small change not realy changing any match up , just make it abit more micro intesnive unit while taking advantage its" walking over units " mechanism
Again you are posting this assuming colossi in it's current state are IMBALANCED. And nobody at high level play or any of blizzards designer feel like the unit is imbalanced. I can understand people wanting it to be more interesting/fun to watch. But your suggestion is an absolute nerf (suggesting imbalance with the unit.) not only that but a terrible terrible nerf. You can't make a unit like that do splash damage to their own units. Then in PvP you'd blink on top of your opponents army, and in any battle involving zealots you'll have to focus fire with EVERY SINGLE colossus in order to not splash your zealots. Which would invariably cause you to just roll over and die for overkilling with colossus on top of overextending them to not hit the front lines the zealots are attacking.
Like I said again. The colossus is not considered imbalanced, just considered BORING. There is a BIG BIG difference. Which is why I said in my previous post that this whole thread I'm surprised isn't closed. Every change the OP suggested is a nerf (suggesting imbalance, and the OP balance whining) on top of the name "How to FIX the colossus". Clearly a balance whine thread.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I agree to you. As much as I want SC2 to be a micro intensive in battles, there's no really other way you can fight late game T/Z with without collosus, unless your'e way ahead in army supply and upgrades. It would be more broken if Protoss will only rely in storms in terms of AoE damage (if they want collosus to be removed) versus Z/T's armored units. Collosus is fragile enough alreayd imo, the only match-up it will fix if its is removed is PvP. I agree its boring, but Protoss really has no choice but to make a deathball to win in late game 'most' of the time.
|
On September 17 2012 11:08 Berailfor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 09:46 Qikz wrote:On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only thing that's broke about it is the way it can stand on top of your army. If they made it unable to cliffwalk/stand on top of armies then deathballs wouldn't be as bad. I agree with the person you quoted. And disagree with you. Nobody says "Colossus are broken because of 2 things, cliffwalk, and unit walk (as while you want to combine those, those are 2 completely different mechanics). The colossus is not broken at all, and so the changes in the OP are not trying to suggest changes to make the Colossus more interesting, but rather changes to nerf the colossus because the OP doesn't like them (if you read all the changes you will see every one is a completely unwarranted nerf). Like the above said. It's not broken, it doesn't require fixing, and in all reality it isn't a bad unit, it's just overhyped as one. Sure it does terrible terrible damage with limited micro. And the micro it is able to do (target firing, proper positioning, etc.) is all micro that might go unnoticed to the average spectator. But all races have limited micro units. Think marauder, or line baneling infestor ultra, or brood lords, these units don't take much micro, but because YOU (meaning a lot of people) think they are more pleasing (or for the other amount of people they aren't Protoss and just hate colossus cause they get crushed by them). You think it's warranted to want one to change and not the others. Well the mechanic of a seige unit that is vulnerable to AA (why they designed Vikings to be low health high range anti-armored) is a pretty damn good mechanic. You just want to overlook that because you don't like getting fried by colossus A moving is all. Well let me tell you, a Pro still makes much better use of colossi than the average player, and makes for a very positional game. And to the OP. I think your post is just a big psuedo balance whine and am surprised after all the suggestions you've made on how it needs to be nerfed that this thread wasn't closed.
Then they'll buff some other part of Protoss, like bring back KA. Much better than having a unit that's ultra-efficient in battle without even trying.
|
What about Broodlords? They're even more A-move and less interesting to watch. They're like the least micro'd unit ever. Let's remove the Broodlord too. If we're going to start the a-move witch hunt, let's remove all those other units too that have very basic micro capabilities.
|
On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 11:08 Berailfor wrote:On September 17 2012 09:46 Qikz wrote:On September 17 2012 08:46 ampson wrote:
The colossus can't be fixed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only thing that's broke about it is the way it can stand on top of your army. If they made it unable to cliffwalk/stand on top of armies then deathballs wouldn't be as bad. I agree with the person you quoted. And disagree with you. Nobody says "Colossus are broken because of 2 things, cliffwalk, and unit walk (as while you want to combine those, those are 2 completely different mechanics). The colossus is not broken at all, and so the changes in the OP are not trying to suggest changes to make the Colossus more interesting, but rather changes to nerf the colossus because the OP doesn't like them (if you read all the changes you will see every one is a completely unwarranted nerf). Like the above said. It's not broken, it doesn't require fixing, and in all reality it isn't a bad unit, it's just overhyped as one. Sure it does terrible terrible damage with limited micro. And the micro it is able to do (target firing, proper positioning, etc.) is all micro that might go unnoticed to the average spectator. But all races have limited micro units. Think marauder, or line baneling infestor ultra, or brood lords, these units don't take much micro, but because YOU (meaning a lot of people) think they are more pleasing (or for the other amount of people they aren't Protoss and just hate colossus cause they get crushed by them). You think it's warranted to want one to change and not the others. Well the mechanic of a seige unit that is vulnerable to AA (why they designed Vikings to be low health high range anti-armored) is a pretty damn good mechanic. You just want to overlook that because you don't like getting fried by colossus A moving is all. Well let me tell you, a Pro still makes much better use of colossi than the average player, and makes for a very positional game. And to the OP. I think your post is just a big psuedo balance whine and am surprised after all the suggestions you've made on how it needs to be nerfed that this thread wasn't closed. Then they'll buff some other part of Protoss, like bring back KA. Much better than having a unit that's ultra-efficient in battle without even trying.
If you bring back KA, no protoss would ever lose against terran. You could just remove collosi from the game at that point. We never saw the true power of KA since it was removed at a time when a very few people were using HT. You also can't buff gateway units very much otherwise protoss would all switch to PartinG style against terran (mass gateway units) and pretty easily dominate, and do nothing but blink stalker/8 gate all-ins against zerg. The game is pretty well balanced at this point, so making a huge nerf to collosi would have everything spiral out of control really quickly.
On September 17 2012 12:33 Cloak wrote:
What about Broodlords? They're even more A-move and less interesting to watch. They're like the least micro'd unit ever. Let's remove the Broodlord too. If we're going to start the a-move witch hunt, let's remove all those other units too that have very basic micro capabilities.
I have to say, I've always wondered about this to. BL require by far the least amount of micro of every unit, but yet it is collosi that people complain as being too a-move friendly. I think people tend to lose more often to collosi because they don't produce enough corruptors/vikings more often then they do from BLs, so they whine more about that unit. And at the end of the day, this thread is a balance whine. Those polls on the first page are obviously biased being the thread title implies the collosi is the major problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
