EPTWhile they could certainly be better, they are not the soft gas giants everyone thinks they are.
The Archon - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
UnburrowedLurker
United States41 Posts
While they could certainly be better, they are not the soft gas giants everyone thinks they are. | ||
|
Homeland
Denmark58 Posts
| ||
|
Kambo_Rambo
Australia79 Posts
| ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
| ||
|
Piousflea
United States259 Posts
They are still not an efficient usage of gas, but they are a great way to extend a push - after your psi storm kills a bunch of hydralisks, you merge archons and warp in stalkers and keep pushing the zerg base. Lore-wise it would make sense for Archons to be immune to all slows, stuns and mind controls (similar to the Zerg frenzy spell). The problem is, the last thing PvT needs is templar tech being even more dominant. | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
| ||
|
roemy
Germany432 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:20 Bane_ wrote: Do Archons see much of a boost in performance from the shield upgrades? Or when within range of a sentry's guardian shield? Or both at the same time?  yes: guardian shield is the only thing that can actually reduce damage to 0. alas, with all this evolution of damage, this is (still) only mentionably viable against mutas' 2nd and 3rd glaive. aaaand yes, they may not receive any bonus damage, but alas they're not massive either: they can be lifted by phoenixes and can be slowed by marauders. forcefields hold them back, too  | ||
|
Williowa
129 Posts
They should have a place....hey I want to go zealot, DT, archon so I only have to tech down 1 part of the tree against zerg...which is all biological. Or maybe you could do an archon drop...at their current rate of fire they aren't effective at wiping out a bunch of little units quickly...or buildings for that matter. How sweet would it be if you could compare an archon drop to a thorship? even providing that an archon doesn't have the special ability, if it could just kill drones effectively that would be a plus. If "emergency only" otherwise broken kinda goes against everything Starcraft is known for imo | ||
|
JoelB
Germany311 Posts
maybe it's just me but i always have a bad feeling when i turn high templars to archons  | ||
|
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:53 pyr0ma5ta wrote: Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you? Four emp's for a single unit? That's a lot of energy to be wasting. | ||
|
FortuneSyn
1826 Posts
| ||
|
Bane_
United Kingdom494 Posts
On June 02 2010 07:26 roemy wrote: yes: guardian shield is the only thing that can actually reduce damage to 0. alas, with all this evolution of damage, this is (still) only mentionably viable against mutas' 2nd and 3rd glaive. aaaand yes, they may not receive any bonus damage, but alas they're not massive either: they can be lifted by phoenixes and can be slowed by marauders. forcefields hold them back, too If only sentries didn't also need a lot of gas to produce...it's pretty hard to see them being used in reasonable numbers when you're also building HTs and morphing the occasional archon, although the combination feels like it should be great not just against mutas but any 'ticklers' which do lots of little attacks like lings, marines and so on. Your last couple of sentences are making them seem a bit less awesome though! | ||
Kibibit
United States1551 Posts
| ||
|
Housta
United States57 Posts
| ||
|
pyr0ma5ta
United States458 Posts
On June 02 2010 07:39 Stropheum wrote: Four emp's for a single unit? That's a lot of energy to be wasting. The OP says that he wants to mass Archons. I think that is a silly thing to do. I think I'm right on this one. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8091 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:15 EvilSky wrote: When were archons ever good in PvT in bw lol they floated over mines bro! | ||
|
Twilexia
United States62 Posts
Their main problem isn't their high cost necessary, or their vulnerability to EMP, but rather their low range and slow speed. The SC1 Reaver was compensated for having a super-slow speed, by having an extremely powerful ranged attack. But the Archon is like the Reaver but weaker. It can move semi-fast, but it has a melee attack. In PvZ it's supposed to be for destroying lings and mutas, but is too slow to catch up to either, and will be only useful if the zerg is forced into a direct fight. In PvT, it really has no use except to kill clumped up marines, but will get killed by the time it reaches the main terran army anyway. And if you're making an archon after storming, chances are, by the time you finish making it, either your army's dead, or their army's dead, rarely in-between. So it's a weird unit, it's an emergency unit, and I guess in many ways it's a harass unit. I think the main problem with the archon is that in terms of army composition, it's just not that effective. The Archon's counterpart, the ultralisk, may only be able to attack ground, but for the zerg force to have a tank, that is huge. On the other hand, zealots in themselves are much cheaper, more expendable tanks, and immortals are probably more useful. As a damage dealer, it rarely gets to the enemy army in time, and as an anti-air, it's not nearly mobile enough. The main thing is that protoss already has enough units to solve all their needs, without needing the archon. Edit: I just thought of a good way to buff archons. Make them fly. | ||
|
101TFP
420 Posts
if you try to mass them (i did that several times in placement matches) they get really weird pathing and clumping because of their size. the collision size should be reduced, visual size is fine | ||
|
gdroxor
United States639 Posts
| ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
"Oh shit! He's sending Mutas at my expansion! Let's hope I can gather 600 gas and have 17 seconds (5 to summon HTs, 12 to merge) to create them, within the next 10 seconds" | ||
| ||
