|
On September 17 2012 13:17 convention wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote: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. Show nested quote +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.
The Broodlord is a siege unit with low mobility. And if you 1A broodlords at a protoss with a mothership, you are going to lose. They still aren't that exciting as a unit, but they also aren't as boring as a Colossus.
|
Its hard to think of ideas that would increase micro but not buff the unit too much. Ideally I'd like a unit to replace the colossus that is still useful at low levels, but could be much more powerful if micro'd well. Increasing the skill gap. Anyway, the only change I can think of that doesn't completely wreck the concept is to change the way the laser beam(s) work. Instead of a-moving and the laser moving around to do splash damage, the laser could be the opposite of a void ray's beam- it gets weaker as it continues to fire. Like maybe the first "beam cross" where the lasers do a semi-circle would be more powerful than the second. They could do a total of three crosses, with the third being the weakest. Then the micro would be target fire, stop command after 1st beam cross, target fire, etc. Just a thought 
|
On September 17 2012 13:32 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 13:17 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote: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. The Broodlord is a siege unit with low mobility. And if you 1A broodlords at a protoss with a mothership, you are going to lose. They still aren't that exciting as a unit, but they also aren't as boring as a Colossus.
Interestingly enough, if you 1A colossi against a protoss with a mothership, and they get vortexed, you are going to lose as well. Just like BLs, and any siege unit for that matter, you need to have a good spread or you risk getting them all killed off by the opponents splash units. And if any of your siege units get caught in front of your army, your expensive units will die. For that matter, colossi function extremely similar to BLs. What exactly is it that makes colossi more boring than BLs?
|
On September 17 2012 05:21 Channel Pressure wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 04:22 Acritter wrote:On September 16 2012 17:17 Spawkuring wrote:On September 16 2012 16:48 Acritter wrote:
The Colossus is already being "fixed" with units like the Viper. By snatching Colossi out of deathballs, the Viper limits the use of the unit. The next things needed are a Terran way to handle the Colossus (I'm liking Lockdown more and more), and a significant buff to Storm so that it can be used against Roaches. 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. 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.
I don't actually think that having the Colossus as a permanent fixture of the army is a good thing. Look at the Reaver in BW PvT, for example. It often serves as an early pin for harassment and AOE against Tanks, but is later phased out for Storm. Similar effect in PvP, but less pronounced as players choose to keep their Reaver count at 2 instead of taking them out entirely. Only in PvZ will the Reaver stay forever, with the hilarious Corsair/Reaver strategy. That timed obsolescence was a good thing. It meant that Protoss had a way to get powerful AOE early to support its units while still having powerful AOE later on in the form of the High Templar. It's only when we deal with the combination of Colossi and Storms at the same time that the two become overpowering, and Storm has to be nerfed down to a pitiful 80 damage. If Colossi are a timing-specific unit, then suddenly Storm can be brought back to the fore.
Oh, and you can still switch back into Colossi after the Terran stops making Lockdown Casters. It's just a little more interesting.
|
Reavers only get "obsolote" because Terrans put defenses against them in place basically everywhere or paid a high price if the Protoss found a hole in the defense and was trying to exploit it.
It would actually be the same with Colossi in SC2 IF Mech/Tanks would truely work... But the Colossi would have like no use anymore at all because it can't harass and in general is not dealing his damage in BIG junks. A reaver firing 3-4 Scarabs could allready be worh it, no matter at what stage in the game...
|
On September 17 2012 14:39 convention wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 13:32 Westy wrote:On September 17 2012 13:17 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote: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. The Broodlord is a siege unit with low mobility. And if you 1A broodlords at a protoss with a mothership, you are going to lose. They still aren't that exciting as a unit, but they also aren't as boring as a Colossus. Interestingly enough, if you 1A colossi against a protoss with a mothership, and they get vortexed, you are going to lose as well. Just like BLs, and any siege unit for that matter, you need to have a good spread or you risk getting them all killed off by the opponents splash units. And if any of your siege units get caught in front of your army, your expensive units will die. For that matter, colossi function extremely similar to BLs. What exactly is it that makes colossi more boring than BLs?
Nothing. Both units are fine. People don't give the Broodlord as much shit because:
The Broodlord is very similar to the Guardian
The Guardian is a Broodwar unit
Everything that was in Broodwar must not be critizised
The Colossus is not similar to a Broodwar unit
A new units mean that SC2 isn't Broodwar with better graphics
Therefore give the Colossus shit
|
The Guardian was one of the most horrible BW units, almost on par with the scout.
The only reason they were sligthly interesting was because they were very risky to use, and rarely did any kind of good to the Zerg using them.
Stop assuming people are saying BW units = great, WoL units = bad.
What we ARE saying is: Units with no micro = bad, units with micro/counter micro = good.
Colossi "micro themselves", and need something to make them interesting. The unit concept is exellent, but the execution is horrible.
Other units that needs changing or removal are Marauders (boring unit with an anti micro mechanic), Infesters (fungals kills the micro for your opponent) and Roaches (kinda uninspired jack-of-all-trades unit - think of the old 200 food roach armies and tell me those are exiting).
On the other hand Sentries, Stalkers, Hellions, Vipers, Swarm hosts, Oracles, Widow mines and a lot of the units kept from BW are exiting and fun to see and use. Some of them could use tweaks, but otherwise they are great units (sentries can stop micro though, but in a more fun way than fungals or concussive).
The best design of any unit goes to the BW Tank though. There were simply so many uses for those (and so many counter plays) that they always brought exitement to the field. Its also worth noting that Tanks were quite easy to use if your opponent wasn't much better than you. All in all - easy to learn, hard to master and was exiting.
|
On September 17 2012 17:51 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 14:39 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 13:32 Westy wrote:On September 17 2012 13:17 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote: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. The Broodlord is a siege unit with low mobility. And if you 1A broodlords at a protoss with a mothership, you are going to lose. They still aren't that exciting as a unit, but they also aren't as boring as a Colossus. Interestingly enough, if you 1A colossi against a protoss with a mothership, and they get vortexed, you are going to lose as well. Just like BLs, and any siege unit for that matter, you need to have a good spread or you risk getting them all killed off by the opponents splash units. And if any of your siege units get caught in front of your army, your expensive units will die. For that matter, colossi function extremely similar to BLs. What exactly is it that makes colossi more boring than BLs? Nothing. Both units are fine. People don't give the Broodlord as much shit because: The Broodlord is very similar to the Guardian The Guardian is a Broodwar unit Everything that was in Broodwar must not be critizised The Colossus is not similar to a Broodwar unit A new units mean that SC2 isn't Broodwar with better graphics Therefore give the Colossus shit
The Broodlord is hard to get and very slow with a unique attack, this makes it interesting IMO. Power vs weaknesses
The Colossus doesn't have mobility problems and this makes it just another death ball unit but without to much room for crazy micro. For me, it just isn't exciting...yet all other Protoss units seem to gravitate around it, and this is not the case with the Broodlord.
In general, my problem with the Colossus is that there isn't a lot of stuff a pro can do with it that a silver player can not. This plus it's commonality make it a boring unit. Very low skill cap if you will. For such a big unit that plays such an important role, you would expect to get all excited when they hit the field in a pro game, but that's never the case.
|
My first suggestion would be to make it unable to walk over your own units.
Have you tried playing 2v2 with an ally having a large army and you only your colossus? It doesn't feel as death-ball like then and you need to micro it much more to get of effective shots.
Having the colossus sitting on top of all your other units adds so much to this "Ball" feeling as everything is so stacked up.
I might add, after reading some of the other comments, I think this shouldn't be about imbalanced or not, at least on a numbers' level. It should be about designing units that create interesting and rewarding gameplay. Especially encouraging micro and thoughtful engagement and strategy + counter-strategy from both players. Whereever you can add that without ruining balance in a way that can't be solved with some numbertweaking it should be done imo.
|
On September 17 2012 18:44 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 17:51 Big J wrote:On September 17 2012 14:39 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 13:32 Westy wrote:On September 17 2012 13:17 convention wrote:On September 17 2012 12:32 Chunhyang wrote: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. The Broodlord is a siege unit with low mobility. And if you 1A broodlords at a protoss with a mothership, you are going to lose. They still aren't that exciting as a unit, but they also aren't as boring as a Colossus. Interestingly enough, if you 1A colossi against a protoss with a mothership, and they get vortexed, you are going to lose as well. Just like BLs, and any siege unit for that matter, you need to have a good spread or you risk getting them all killed off by the opponents splash units. And if any of your siege units get caught in front of your army, your expensive units will die. For that matter, colossi function extremely similar to BLs. What exactly is it that makes colossi more boring than BLs? Nothing. Both units are fine. People don't give the Broodlord as much shit because: The Broodlord is very similar to the Guardian The Guardian is a Broodwar unit Everything that was in Broodwar must not be critizised The Colossus is not similar to a Broodwar unit A new units mean that SC2 isn't Broodwar with better graphics Therefore give the Colossus shit The Broodlord is hard to get and very slow with a unique attack, this makes it interesting IMO. Power vs weaknesses The Colossus doesn't have mobility problems and this makes it just another death ball unit but without to much room for crazy micro. For me, it just isn't exciting...yet all other Protoss units seem to gravitate around it, and this is not the case with the Broodlord. In general, my problem with the Colossus is that there isn't a lot of stuff a pro can do with it that a silver player can not. This plus it's commonality make it a boring unit. Very low skill cap if you will. For such a big unit that plays such an important role, you would expect to get all excited when they hit the field in a pro game, but that's never the case.
You don't have to tell me why the Broodlord is cool, I like Broodlords and Colossi. 
And yeah, the Colossus isn't a supermicro intense unit, but I don't see the problem with it. Like siege tanks, the interesting part about Colossus isn't that the unit itself is hard to use, it's the way it influences the strategies of players and the units they use, that make it exciting.
Just look at stuff like: viking vs Colossus and how often games become tense because a Protoss has to expose his colossi in a retreat (I'm hoping for something similar in PvP with the Tempest). Or fungal/tanks/colossi vs colossi, when standing over your own units backfires.
And then just the simple strategic use of Colossus. When to implement how many. People just lose because they cannot walk the thin line that is colossuscount (too many and you lose to the airforces, too few and you can't get the right effect)
Colossus/Immortal play is one of the only things that seems to give Protoss strategical depth, while anything else comes down to outmassing your opponent with gateway units.
That being said, I do agree that the colossus could be improved with some small tweaks to increase it's micropotential. (faster turning, instant damage that allows you to break the animiation and move the colossus, and then some small tweaks to it's stats, like a small damage and health nerf)
|
I guess the best fix would be to make it attack with a beam starting at the colossus feet and moving away in a straight line (think lurkers), so that it can be dodged (potentially breaks the death-ball and encourages flanking with colossus, makes the colossus less effective in big death-balls, and more of a mid-game unit that forces a lot of micro and has to be microed itself). Also increase damage to 55, so that the colossus can one-shoot marines and workers, but decrease its firing rate (makes colossus-prism drops interesting and micro-intensive).
|
On September 17 2012 19:26 Alex1Sun wrote:
I guess the best fix would be to make it attack with a beam starting at the colossus feet and moving away in a straight line (think lurkers), so that it can be dodged (potentially breaks the death-ball and encourages flanking with colossus, makes the colossus less effective in big death-balls, and more of a mid-game unit that forces a lot of micro and has to be microed itself). Also increase damage to 55, so that the colossus can one-shoot marines and workers, but decrease its firing rate (makes colossus-prism drops interesting and micro-intensive).
The Colossus used to have high damage/high cooldown, but Blizzard changed it for who knows what reason.
|
The problem with the colossus its not only his micro efficiency, because the colossus rules the midgame, and they're needed not an option, and are such a bad unit with a lot of drawbacks without bring anything really strong or interesting. Look after 2 years of metagame what colossi brings to protoss,in every match-up....
The problem of this topic is... there's no way to modify the colossus without loose the colossus, it will be an another unit, and for sc2 the colossus its iconic in some way, so hard to remove for blizzard, and blizzard doesnt take new units from the ideas of the community..
Frankly, from a protoss perspective, i will be fine without any huge composition change in hots, if they fix the stargate path and replace the colossus.. but for now, they're in a lot of troubles with warhound, carriers, etc etc..
|
On September 17 2012 19:40 Fig wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 19:26 Alex1Sun wrote:
I guess the best fix would be to make it attack with a beam starting at the colossus feet and moving away in a straight line (think lurkers), so that it can be dodged (potentially breaks the death-ball and encourages flanking with colossus, makes the colossus less effective in big death-balls, and more of a mid-game unit that forces a lot of micro and has to be microed itself). Also increase damage to 55, so that the colossus can one-shoot marines and workers, but decrease its firing rate (makes colossus-prism drops interesting and micro-intensive). The Colossus used to have high damage/high cooldown, but Blizzard changed it for who knows what reason.
The same reason wyh every other splash unit got changed and nerfed:
If you do a lot of damage with the first volley, it doesn't matter that your dps is the same or slightly lower, because you kill so much stuff so early on in the battle, that you simply receive way less damage and therefore the unit is more powerful.
It makes a huge difference, whether after the first Colossus shots you have 40units left or 30units left.
Also it increases the micropotential against Colossus armies, as poking is not as deadly for you.
|
On September 17 2012 19:49 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 19:40 Fig wrote:On September 17 2012 19:26 Alex1Sun wrote:
I guess the best fix would be to make it attack with a beam starting at the colossus feet and moving away in a straight line (think lurkers), so that it can be dodged (potentially breaks the death-ball and encourages flanking with colossus, makes the colossus less effective in big death-balls, and more of a mid-game unit that forces a lot of micro and has to be microed itself). Also increase damage to 55, so that the colossus can one-shoot marines and workers, but decrease its firing rate (makes colossus-prism drops interesting and micro-intensive). The Colossus used to have high damage/high cooldown, but Blizzard changed it for who knows what reason. The same reason wyh every other splash unit got changed and nerfed: If you do a lot of damage with the first volley, it doesn't matter that your dps is the same or slightly lower, because you kill so much stuff so early on in the battle, that you simply receive way less damage and therefore the unit is more powerful. It makes a huge difference, whether after the first Colossus shots you have 40units left or 30units left. Also it increases the micropotential against Colossus armies, as poking is not as deadly for you.
I Agree. This is why if you want to decrease attack speed and increase damage, it's better to combine it with a different (more micro intensive for colossus) and semi-dogdable (more micro-intensive for colossus opponents) attack pattern.
|
On September 17 2012 12:04 Berailfor wrote:Show nested quote +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.
1) I said that in exchange of its friendly fire attack it wont be considered as air unit anymore, meaning you need to get close to the colossus to kill it, making it more micro intensive ( moving it around in the deathball)
2)"battle involving zealots you'll have to focus fire with EVERY SINGLE colossus in order to not splash your zealots" - this will make the colossus from A-move unit to micro intensive unit (and tbh there isnt much units require micro for protoss in a deathball) = aka more fun to watch = more rewarding for better players.
not to mantion in most cases there isnt so many colossus (2-6).
Its like terrans need to focus fire with tanks.
|
On September 17 2012 21:32 Serp87 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 12:04 Berailfor wrote: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. 1) I said that in exchange of its friendly fire attack it wont be considered as air unit anymore, meaning you need to get close to the colossus to kill it, making it more micro intensive ( moving it around in the deathball) 2)"battle involving zealots you'll have to focus fire with EVERY SINGLE colossus in order to not splash your zealots" - this will make the colossus from A-move unit to micro intensive unit (and tbh there isnt much units require micro for protoss in a deathball) = aka more fun to watch = more rewarding for better players. not to mantion in most cases there isnt so many colossus (2-6). Its like terrans need to focus fire with tanks.
so basically collosus would get a superhuge buff in zvp where zealots arent really used and stalker/sentry/collosus push would get even better...
just make it siege or slower and leave the stats as is. easiest thing ever to try in the beta and just patch it back if it doesnt work out.
|
Make the Extended Thermal Lance a siege upgrade. This will make it more taxing to use and reduce the deathball syndrome.
edit: leave everything else as is, ie you can still walk it, but not with extended range which will only be available when in siege mode thus making it behave similar to siege tanks.
|
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...
Yes, I'm asking Blizzard to fix Colossi and Winfestors. They are broken units and need to be removed. Protoss get upset? Who says we can't upset the Protoss?
|
The easiest way would be to make colossi only able to target the ground (and not units themselves). Make it look like a death=star charge-up (so it has attack delay) and only can attack that ground spot until commanded otherwise. Something similar to how the mothership attack looks and works, but in a small spray area as current. Friendly fire (reduced or full) optional.
Pro: Requires micro to get any/largest effectiveness without the micro being too hard. Opponent has ability to micro out of the way of additional shots, as toss would have to guess where you're going next.
Con: uhh ... can't think of any outside of what currently plagues colossi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
