EPTThanks.
The Archon
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
Thanks. | ||
|
theqat
United States2856 Posts
| ||
|
oxxo
988 Posts
Same way tanks were 'bad' in the beginning, but are now 'OP'... when all that's changed is 10 hp (and slight splash change). For some reason there are people that think tanks didn't have splash in the first place. Metagame is changing. | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
| ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
| ||
|
Denarius Jay
42 Posts
Think of the Archon as the Zergs ultralisk, look great on paper or in small skirmishes, but generally just terrible all around... | ||
|
pyr0ma5ta
United States458 Posts
Also, their range and size is hilaribad. | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
| ||
|
Two_DoWn
United States13684 Posts
| ||
|
G3nXsiS
United States656 Posts
| ||
|
Elite00fm
United States548 Posts
| ||
|
tarsier
United Kingdom223 Posts
| ||
|
Esseim
34 Posts
| ||
|
GWash
United States153 Posts
| ||
|
Alou
United States3748 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
| ||
|
DarkShadowz
Sweden321 Posts
| ||
|
Jarvs
Australia639 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:50 Elite00fm wrote: It's not meant to be a powerful combat unit, but instead an option for when you have energy-less templars This is the reality as Blizzard have said this themselves. I feel that is poorly inspired design, frankly. | ||
|
lyk503
United States261 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar castin feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? What does that have to do with the Archon? | ||
|
pyr0ma5ta
United States458 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:50 tarsier wrote: they get roflstomped by emp... because emping the same unit 4 times is made of win? Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you? | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
I'm saying you can feedback the ghosts so they can't EMP your Archons. That way they can be much more effective in battle. | ||
|
graphene
Finland211 Posts
| ||
|
Failsafe
United States1298 Posts
PvP: Infantry support. High HP. High damage PvZ: Best ground unit for defending against Mutalisks (Dragoons were insufficient). Fighting Ultra + Ling. In SC2, by contrast, there are simply better units for those roles. PvP: Colossi are waaay better anti-ground support. They don't suffer from the Reaver's deficiencies PvZ: Colossi are again way better than general anti-ground support Cannons are better against Mutalisk than they were in SCBW Archons are not as good against Mutalisk as they were in SCBW Templar Archives is not as common against Zerg Zerg no longer uses Ultraling | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
i would not spend all of my energy on 2 ghosts to get 1 archon down to 10 hp. thats like having 2 ghosts for no other reason than casting 16 snipes on an ultralisk to bring it down. | ||
|
The_Pacifist
United States540 Posts
Pretty terrible in every other scenario, though. And the above should only ever happen to you once at most. | ||
|
Tone_
United Kingdom554 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:50 Elite00fm wrote: It's not meant to be a powerful combat unit, but instead an option for when you have energy-less templars No, that's exactly what it does not want to end up as, a waste. Each unit is going to need to have a real purpose not a last resort may as well situation. Archons in BW were viable against late game ultra / defiler and pushes with zealots. | ||
|
Hammy
France828 Posts
If blizzard wants the archon to be a fast-response combat unit, this change is exactly what they were supposed to do. What's the big deal? Do protoss need a buffed archon as a core unit to their armies? | ||
|
AJ-
United States316 Posts
if you want good splash damage for your army, you tech to storm or colossi zealots for the cost are better tanks and your gas is better spent for your tech units or the templar before them that being said, if you have archons from leftover battles they do pretty well nonetheless as two_down mentions | ||
|
Willes
Germany199 Posts
if you think they suck against ghost, dont build them in pvt, if you want to use templars in pvt its also better to morph archons and deal/tank dmg instead of templars without mana for spells.... iirc from my ~300 zerggames until now i had maybe 2 vsP with archons, they really can hurt zerglings ( like in bw ) after the two templars have casted the storms, so i dont get it if someone complains about archons, 1 archon dont cost you 300 gas, you tech for storms and maybe feedback, archons are a bonus when you quickly need reinforcements... | ||
|
Morayfire73
United States298 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. IMO if they changed cost of say DT around to make it cost be a little less gas intensive , like being 200 mins and 50 gas you could get archons for a high mineral cost 400 minerals 100 gas, or a high gas cost with HT 100 minerals 300 gas, or for a balanced price of 200 minerals 200 gas (by combining both types of templar). This would make them cost wise 100 minerals cheaper then a colossus, as well as providing splash. | ||
|
Renaissance
Canada273 Posts
| ||
|
RyanRushia
United States2748 Posts
| ||
|
Kezzer
United States1268 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:53 pyr0ma5ta wrote: Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you? um no. waste 4 emps on a single archon? ...really? | ||
|
Phisk
166 Posts
For a unit made when another has passed all usefulness, it isnt as terrible as it is made out to be. This. I find archons useful when my templars have used up all their energy, but unlike in BW its pretty ineffecient to warp in templars just to turn them into archons and are only something that makes templar useful after their energy is gone (which afaik is what blizzard intended). My guess is that people tried to do Archon builds, realised its not possible and started ranting about how useless archons are just cause you cant go mass archons. Their size is a big problem, but they can at least soak up quite a lot of damage. One of the biggest problem for me about the Archon is that Storm isnt as effective as it was in BW and I often opt for colossi instead. When High Templars gets less effective then so does the archon. I also feel that people are exaggerating about EMP effects. EMP does 100 dmg to shields, less than a 3rd of the Archons total hp, hardly enought to consider the Archon "gone" or "roflstomped" (is a maraduer with 85 hp also gone?). EMP is way more dangerous to tightly packed SSZ balls or Immortals. | ||
|
xinxy
Canada116 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:46 oxxo wrote: Same way tanks were 'bad' in the beginning, but are now 'OP'... when all that's changed is 10 hp (and slight splash change). And build time reduction. | ||
|
ExileStrife
United States170 Posts
| ||
|
EvilSky
Czech Republic548 Posts
| ||
|
Lylat
France8575 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. This, besides Archons shouldnt be slowed down by Marauders and they would be a lot better | ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:05 BDF92 wrote: um no. waste 4 emps on a single archon? ...really? His post about EMP leaving Archons with 10 HP is in regards to how come mass Archons versus Terran in BW could work quite well sometimes, but essentially never works in SC2. No one is suggesting you burn all of a Ghosts energy EMPing one Archon. If Terran is facing a Bio/Templar army, and is surprised with Archons in SC2, its as simple as building some Ghosts (which you should already have given how early you can get them in SC2) and spamming EMP, as stated above spamming EMP on an army of Archons will decimate it, and is far from a poor use of EMP. In BW unless the Terran purposely went for a Sci Lab tech build it would require building that, then the Covert Ops add-on and then getting Ghosts. This is the primary reason that making it look like you're going a Templar army only to get Archons in BW was viable and could work in a number of situations versus Terran. That said I do not believe the Archon should be as under-valued in PvP or PvZ battles, as it is still a good unit versus those races. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:59 Morayfire73 wrote: IMO if they changed cost of say DT around to make it cost be a little less gas intensive , like being 200 mins and 50 gas you could get archons for a high mineral cost 400 minerals 100 gas, or a high gas cost with HT 100 minerals 300 gas, or for a balanced price of 200 minerals 200 gas (by combining both types of templar). This would make them cost wise 100 minerals cheaper then a colossus, as well as providing splash. That's a pretty good point, especially since DTs are also pretty infrequently used. If going DTs also meant you had the ability to make cost effective archons then it could really help the archon out. I kinda get the impression that players don't mess around enough with DTs -> Archons and what possibilities that may have. Zealot -> DT -> Archon seems like it could be really effective. Anyone know how cost effective archons would be against zerg ground (specifically ling/roach)? Without splash it seems like archons aren't too bad vs roaches. | ||
|
AncienTs
Japan227 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:50 G3nXsiS wrote: It attacks slow, has low HP for its cost and overall just not a very cost effective or powerful unit in terms of damage and HP. 1 EMP and its gone. I just want to clarify that EMP does not take away all shields from one blast, but rather 100 shield points... this is a common misconception in SC2. | ||
|
Bane_
United Kingdom494 Posts
| ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:15 SichuanPanda wrote: His post about EMP leaving Archons with 10 HP is in regards to how come mass Archons versus Terran in BW could work quite well sometimes, but essentially never works in SC2. No one is suggesting you burn all of a Ghosts energy EMPing one Archon. If Terran is facing a Bio/Templar army, and is surprised with Archons in SC2, its as simple as building some Ghosts (which you should already have given how early you can get them in SC2) and spamming EMP, as stated above spamming EMP on an army of Archons will decimate it, and is far from a poor use of EMP. In BW unless the Terran purposely went for a Sci Lab tech build it would require building that, then the Covert Ops add-on and then getting Ghosts. This is the primary reason that making it look like you're going a Templar army only to get Archons in BW was viable and could work in a number of situations versus Terran. That said I do not believe the Archon should be as under-valued in PvP or PvZ battles, as it is still a good unit versus those races. You know that SC1 ghosts didn't have EMP, right? And archons were terrible in PvT in BW. Under all possible sircumstances. | ||
|
DorF
Sweden961 Posts
| ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
Warp 2 Templars in (when needed), cast 2 storms, warp in an Archon, and have fun. It's a powerful option when you need it. It's sort of like Terran and their Marines. They don't buy Marines because they're powerful, but rather, because they have extra minerals lying around. Their power is more of an added side-effect. You also make Marines you see Mutas. Same deal with Archons; warp in High Templar, use storm, and create an Archon to finish up the devestation if they aren't dead yet. | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
In SC2 they rarely get a chance to do a lot of damage to a clump of units and they are essentially more expensive because of the added cost of the templar tech route and the lower rate of gas income. | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:28 Percutio wrote: Yeah, idk why you would ever get an Archon. In SC1 even if the Terran didn't have Science Vessels and EMP by then, they would probably have vultures and tanks which own Archons. The most the Archon could do is clear mines and tank. In SC2 they rarely get a chance to do a lot of damage to a clump of units and they are essentially more expensive because of the added cost of the templar tech route and the lower rate of gas income. I thought the REASON Archons were used at all in PvT was because they DIDN'T trigger mines? >.> Also, Archons are essentially FREE. Your mindset should be "I have High Templar, I'll make an Archon in the middle of the battle after I'm done with them," not "Let's warp in High Templar to make an Archon" | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
|
ZappaSC
Denmark215 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:24 Slunk wrote: You know that SC1 ghosts didn't have EMP, right? And archons were terrible in PvT in BW. Under all possible sircumstances. He meant science vessels, dont misunderstand on purpose. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar castin feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? So you get HTs to feedback ghosts to make archons? Not bad, since you have a counter if you have HTs before he has ghosts, so whether he addresses the archon issue or not it may still be viable. | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:29 Zeke50100 wrote: I thought the REASON Archons were used at all in PvT was because they DIDN'T trigger mines? >.> Also, Archons are essentially FREE. Your mindset should be "I have High Templar, I'll make an Archon in the middle of the battle after I'm done with them," not "Let's warp in High Templar to make an Archon" That's a lot of money to get eaten by vultures near the mines, besides the fact that I already said it was the only thing you could really use them for in my post. Hell, I only used them when vultures where going to snipe the templar anyways. Otherwise I might as well try to run the templar away, as you might as well do in SC2. 11 build seconds is still too much to really turn the tide of a battle in any significant way. | ||
|
RailGuN
Singapore73 Posts
Was kinda disappointed when I found out blizz wanted Archons to be a unit you only get when HTs are out of energy. Btw was there any reason for removing feedback from the Archon? The only thing I can think of is that HTs have feedback now and if Archons kept feedback that would be slightly imba I guess. Would be cool though. Also, what about a DT rush into 3-4 gate push with archons versus zerg? Archons seem to be ok versus zerg because they deal 35 damage against everything zerg has meaning the one shot zerglings + splash. Just theorycrafting... | ||
|
terranghost
United States980 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:50 tarsier wrote: they get roflstomped by emp... because emping the same unit 4 times is made of win? I wouldnt really call it emp makes them get stomped but the heavy damage siege tanks and thors should be able to cut them to size even after 2. Also it only encourages the terrans to build more ghosts. | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
DTs are fast now so they really give map control and eat roaches to boot. Archons are better against hydras than DTs, but you really need stalkers if you were to do that push, and you probably won't have many because of the cost of DTs. | ||
|
BishopONe
Spain242 Posts
| ||
|
Dawme
France58 Posts
| ||
|
scudst0rm
Canada1149 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:29 Zeke50100 wrote: I thought the REASON Archons were used at all in PvT was because they DIDN'T trigger mines? >.> Also, Archons are essentially FREE. Your mindset should be "I have High Templar, I'll make an Archon in the middle of the battle after I'm done with them," not "Let's warp in High Templar to make an Archon" Good example of this, except transitioning from DTs to archons. I was playing a PvP where a guy went fast DTs and sacked my main. I cannoned up my natural and countered into his main. I took out all of his probes before the DTs killed me. I figured we were about even at this point, since he had no income and only DTs and I had no army, and started rebuilding my base. Then right away he comes into my natural with 10 archons and destroys me. gg. I'm not saying that my opponent had the best strat but it does show how useful it is having the option to transition from DTs to archons. | ||
|
drlame
Sweden574 Posts
With the recent change in splash archons actually fare well against anything the zerg has except for like the hydra. | ||
|
Wire
United States494 Posts
8 chargelots + 2 archon + 4 ht pretty much straight up owned a zerg base that had about 30 lings and 10 mutalisks underused vs zerg imo. I would never specifically tech for archon as terran. maybe meld leftover templar to emp tank, if anything. | ||
|
Full
United Kingdom253 Posts
All is well in the land of SC2. | ||
|
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 States8097 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" | ||
|
brandonc
United States72 Posts
Still... When were Archons ever really used vs terran in sc1 anyway, so dont argue that in sc1 archons were better (vs terran). cant argue cost either, because they were the same in sc1 But yes, archons are still lacking, in sc1 you could get a few templars and archon them right out the gateway for quick muta defense. Now, without muta stack, smaller splash, crappy collision. They dont seem to be very useful against much. | ||
|
Vip3ra
Norway13 Posts
They are not ment to be a main part of your army, they are there so HT without energy can do something. But they are a bit week even for that, but i think a slight range buff could fix that | ||
|
Worm104
England28 Posts
| ||
|
RailGuN
Singapore73 Posts
On June 02 2010 08:13 Vip3ra wrote: I say buff archon attack range from 2 to 3. Would make them more usefull. They are not ment to be a main part of your army, they are there so HT without energy can do something. But they are a bit week even for that, but i think a slight range buff could fix that Range buff would make them more useful as they really aren't fast enough to get up that close. Maybe even an attack speed buff, just a slight one. Maybe interesting stats: -Archons 1 shot zerglings and deal splash -Archons have barely enough range to attack over zealots (send in charge zealots first?) -Archons deal bonus damage against everything zerg has -With +2 weapons archons can 2 shot hydras and again plus splash damage -During an Archons attack cooldown, a hydra can attack 3 times >_> They seem kinda good on paper, but are still not all that useful =/ I'd really like to use them, cause they look really awesome DX | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
scottyyy
United Kingdom796 Posts
Unfortunately I haven't used the Archon much so I don't know anything about it, even though he's one of my favourite BW units. | ||
|
RailGuN
Singapore73 Posts
On June 02 2010 08:24 scottyyy wrote: Does anyone know how big the splash damage is on the Archon? Say compared to a siege tank? Unfortunately I haven't used the Archon much so I don't know anything about it, even though he's one of my favourite BW units. I dunno about siege tanks, but Archon splash radius is like 1, so half their attack range. Edit: Apparently tank spalsh radius is 1.25 | ||
|
puril
United States43 Posts
PvT, bad idea to get archons because bio builds and ghost emp are still very popular. ya it takes 4 emps, but who sends in one archon unit against a terran army? emping the archon will emp the units around it. PvZ, archons are decent to support zealots against lings and small numbers of roaches, but i haven't found it useful against any other unit. PvP, archons are useful but inefficient in this matchup, but the real killer is the introduction to good sentry forcefield placement. i want to add, since it is not a popular unit, there are less innovative strategies that incorporate the archon. so archon lovers be patient. i'm sure a year into the game, people will be doing creative stuff like dropping archons in mineral lines and such. archons kill workers pretty damn fast. as far as changing the unit, maybe shortening the morph time, but i disagree with buffing because it would upset balance against zerg. | ||
|
Dekoth
United States527 Posts
Archon is a situational unit for me. I have and still do use it against Zerg going muta ling if I went templar and don't want to invest into a stargate. They are infact quite effective vs mutas, especially mixed in with stalkers and sentries. | ||
|
Dawme
France58 Posts
| ||
|
Severedevil
United States4838 Posts
On June 02 2010 07:09 UnburrowedLurker wrote: Archons take less damage from EMP than immortals do, and people seem to use them against Terran just fine. You should also remember that shields took 100% damage from all attacks in SC1, now nothing does bonus damage on Archons. While they could certainly be better, they are not the soft gas giants everyone thinks they are. This, it's kind of a big deal. I do think Archons need a point or two of armor, however, or possibly three range (or some sort of gliding shot so they don't bumble around clumsily). I would like to see the Frothing Ball of Psionic Energy side to Archons played up a bit. They ought to be immune to most spell effects (not EMP), and possibly phase through force fields and/or units. | ||
|
KnowMe
Germany228 Posts
about the archon: i actually used it a bit in the early days of the beta as i had trouble to counter mutas in pvz. they arent bad against them but they were somehow countered by lings which was pretty weird. also they have low mobility. after canons are stronger and the splash works better now, i think that they could be pretty usefull in pvz. you obviously need storms against mass hydra then and you might have trouble with roaches. still definetly worth to try em out. additionally i dont think that they were useless before the patch. you have to feedback ghosts before deadly emps anyway and they work pretty well as meatshield and do at least some dmg to bioballs. so now you dont even need the amulet upgrade as fast in pvt as you can just feedback some ravens/ghosts/medivacs and create the archon pretty fast. i think thats actually pretty potent. storm drops with like 2 templars should be stronger now aswell as you might be able to finish some workers with the archon before help arrives. conclusion: pretty intersting change and archons were slightly underused before, not because they were way too weak. | ||
|
KnowMe
Germany228 Posts
actually it could be pretty nice in pvp to counter 4/5 gate by feedbacking some sentrys and then morphing into archon. id love that actually  | ||
|
SkCom
Canada229 Posts
| ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:46 oxxo wrote: Who knows, they might actually be good. Same way tanks were 'bad' in the beginning, but are now 'OP'... when all that's changed is 10 hp (and slight splash change). For some reason there are people that think tanks didn't have splash in the first place. Metagame is changing. Tank Splash was bugged. | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
| ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
| ||
|
Mr.Eternity
United States143 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar castin feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? the EMP of the ghost directly counters hgh templar by completely raping their energy and then easily sniping them in 4 shots | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On June 02 2010 08:30 puril wrote: PvZ, archons are decent to support zealots against lings and small numbers of roaches, but i haven't found it useful against any other unit. i want to add, since it is not a popular unit, there are less innovative strategies that incorporate the archon. so archon lovers be patient. i'm sure a year into the game, people will be doing creative stuff like dropping archons in mineral lines and such. archons kill workers pretty damn fast. as far as changing the unit, maybe shortening the morph time, but i disagree with buffing because it would upset balance against zerg. Sorry for double posting, but definate advice i would have for you in the PvZ matchup. Archons are amazing units against small hydra balls, but i'll concede they are pretty terrible against roaches. The good news however is with decent forcefields, one of the most devastating early game counters to roaches is zeal/sentry/dt, as with +1 Dt's 3hit roaches and forcefields prevent both the roaches microing away and multiple roaches stacking their damage up on the front units (out of range behind forcefield). This unit combination is rather effective and not as heavily mapped out as DT tech seems to be an afterthough to most Protoss' these days. Due to the DT/sentry/zeal > Roach and Archon/sentry/zeal > hydra dynamic, try going Dt's into Archons, rather than HT's into archons. Works wonders in the correct situations | ||
|
Mr.Eternity
United States143 Posts
On June 02 2010 09:05 MooiSh wrote: Sorry for double posting, but definate advice i would have for you in the PvZ matchup. Archons are amazing units against small hydra balls, but i'll concede they are pretty terrible against roaches. The good news however is with decent forcefields, one of the most devastating early game counters to roaches is zeal/sentry/dt, as with +1 Dt's 3hit roaches and forcefields prevent both the roaches microing away and multiple roaches stacking their damage up on the front units (out of range behind forcefield). This unit combination is rather effective and not as heavily mapped out as DT tech seems to be an afterthough to most Protoss' these days. Due to the DT/sentry/zeal > Roach and Archon/sentry/zeal > hydra dynamic, try going Dt's into Archons, rather than HT's into archons. Works wonders in the correct situations when do you ever see a SMALL hydra ball by the time you have archons? | ||
|
Sephy90
United States1785 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. pretty much this, and i'd rather suicide my two high templars than make that garbage unit, it does horrible vs non bio and gets slowed -_- and i don't think EMP is ALL that against archons, since they only take 100 shields instead of all your shields like in sc1, but that's the only good thing i see LOL | ||
|
zZygote
Canada898 Posts
On June 02 2010 09:14 Sephy69 wrote: pretty much this, and i'd rather suicide my two high templars than make that garbage unit, it does horrible vs non bio and gets slowed -_- and i don't think EMP is ALL that against archons, since they only take 100 shields instead of all your shields like in sc1, but that's the only good thing i see LOL Still doesn't take away the fact that EMP is still bullshit on SC2. Really, no projectile? I think reducing the build time from 17-12 will entice more Protoss player to make Archons though. Haha, still doesn't take away the fact that every Protoss player is scared to make HT's because of Ghosts. | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On June 02 2010 09:12 Mr.Eternity wrote: when do you ever see a SMALL hydra ball by the time you have archons? I would consider a small hydra ball as anything less then 20-24 hydralisks. And seeing as that costs 2000/1000 it can't just appear out of nowhere. I think what you're mis-interpreting is that this is not a slow tech to DT's as you would see in a conventional game, this is a tech straight to DT's without sacrificing eco / with an expansion thrown in. If you FE --> DT's you will usually be able to crush any Zerg midgame with the appropriate push relevant to his unit composition (so DT's or Archons depending on Roaches or Hydras) if the Zerg tries for any kind of normally timed third base. Admittedly If the Zerg sticks to 2base Hydra / 2 Base Roaches it will be likely that the Zerg is approaching a number in which it can no longer be considered a 'small' ball of units, but in that respect there is no need to push, merely to expand with cannons and secure a macro advantage whilst harrassing with DT's | ||
|
xtfftc
United Kingdom2343 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar castin feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? EMP has more range, is AOE and ghosts also have cloak > really hard to feedback. Feedback is quite useful against medivacs for example but not against ghosts. Archons damage and splash is great but the range and movement speed are just non-existent. They could only work if you have a ton of zealots in front of them to absorb the damage until the archons finally arrive and the opponent does not kite nor focus fire on them. I've also tried archon drops to harras workers they happily run away with minimal loses. They are pretty useful in PvT after you use all your energy for storm/feedback because the terran feels pressured and spends EMPs on them, which leaves the rest of your army in a better position but that's pretty much it. | ||
|
im a roc
United States745 Posts
| ||
|
Arco
United States2090 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:47 pyr0ma5ta wrote: They cost a zillion gas, and get roflstomped by EMP? Also, their range and size is hilaribad. EMP only takes off 100 shields in this game, down from all in BW. Also, don't dismiss Archons too quickly. They are extremely useful in faster Storm tech builds for the unit recycle aspect, particularly when defending with storm. Also, if i go Templar before Collosus in PvZ, I like a timing push involving Immortals, Stalkers, Sentries, Zealots and Archons. (while Storm is upgrading) | ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
| ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
High Templars tank 1 EMP and die Archons tank 4 and die In addition, you can send 2 Templars in, and regardless of whether or not you used Storm, you get to tank an additional 4 EMPs anyways (6 total if they got your HTs with EMP) You just saved 8 Immortals from being Roflstompped by Tanks. + Show Spoiler + And yes, I'm actually being serious. Stop dismissing Archons because they aren't "useful." They are a essentially free units that merge together from units that have already served their purpose. They might not be "lolmutas" anymore, but we have Phoenixes for that now (and by that, I mean that Phoenixes are a better counter to Mutas than Corsairs and Archons were combined). Sure, it's an entirely new tech tree, but did you really think that relying solely on a T3 "giant" unit was going to work? | ||
|
indczn
United States18 Posts
| ||
|
afirlortwo
United States161 Posts
| ||
|
xtfftc
United Kingdom2343 Posts
On June 02 2010 10:20 Zeke50100 wrote: I would bet you anything that someone is going to send one lone Archon in, waste 2 Ghosts' energy completely, then rofl stomp the Terran Mech with Immortals :D High Templars tank 1 EMP and die Archons tank 4 and die Why would anyone waste an EMP on a lone Archon instead of one-shotting it with their army? | ||
|
G3nXsiS
United States656 Posts
| ||
|
UnburrowedLurker
United States41 Posts
Also, you shouldn't waste your high temps on Archons... 250/250 might be worth it, 100/300 is not. Vespene is just too valuable, you'd be better off waiting for another storm. | ||
|
indczn
United States18 Posts
On June 02 2010 12:28 UnburrowedLurker wrote: Someone (read: someone better than me) should try zealots+sentries into dark temps+Archons. I think this might be a relatively powerful build if you can get a strong enough economy early. Archons with a few points in shields+guardian shield would be really powerful against Zerg. Also, you shouldn't waste your high temps on Archons... 250/250 might be worth it, 100/300 is not. Vespene is just too valuable, you'd be better off waiting for another storm. I haven't had much luck going DT tech before HT tech. I find it just takes too long to get the Dark shrine (more gas + twice as long build time), and its a tougher follow up with if the dt's dont accomplish too much. The zerg will have an overseer or 2 or at least lair tech by that point, especially with the threat of VR's. Against terran, they should have a bit of scan, probably will scout the tech, also ghosts + emp make dt's the same fodder ht's are, and 1-1-1 opening leads to ravens easily. Also, i actually prefer the 100/300 for an archon moreso than the 250/250 because the extra mins = more zealots/gateways or earlier expansion. 250/250 is really close to 300/200 for collosus, at which point, collosus are without a doubt better than archons. The zealots/chargelots help immensely. The biggest problem with the dt's is they are expansive, cloaked glass cannons, which just aren't practical after the first few, at which point you have to tech somewhere else anyway. They can win, but its not near as often as a surprisingly chargelot/1 sentry/2 archon ends up being an insta-win. Maybe this changes as people adjust, if more people play like this, as did with void rays (even before range decrease). Until then, ill keep at it. | ||
|
UnburrowedLurker
United States41 Posts
| ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
Archons in sc1 were also an end game unit when all the minerals are mined up. Psionic storms come at no cost and archons are only 100 minerals while assimilaters still gave 2 gas. The combination of the two units are Protoss's only option when all minerals are gone. In sc2, it is rare to get to the point where all minerals are mined out because without high ground advantage, there isn't nearly a big of a home field advantage in defending, so games are much shorter. In sc2, gas is a lot more valuable because you need it for void rays and colossi. In sc1, zealots are standard in all 3 matchups so you do have gas to spend. In sc2, zealots are not used nearly as often. | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
The archon is amazing, it's only "hated" because it only appears when the protoss player decides to go templar tech. however, they're not bad as a unit choice. they are great tanks, as shields no longer take "full" damage from all sources; they have a pretty good damage output, especially when upgraded; additionally, their splash recently got buffed, i believe. they're good units, but they just don't see much use until the HT or DT runs out of usefulness. | ||
|
Chen
United States6344 Posts
On June 02 2010 10:20 Zeke50100 wrote: I would bet you anything that someone is going to send one lone Archon in, waste 2 Ghosts' energy completely, then rofl stomp the Terran Mech with Immortals :D High Templars tank 1 EMP and die Archons tank 4 and die In addition, you can send 2 Templars in, and regardless of whether or not you used Storm, you get to tank an additional 4 EMPs anyways (6 total if they got your HTs with EMP) You just saved 8 Immortals from being Roflstompped by Tanks. And yes, I'm actually being serious. Stop dismissing Archons because they aren't "useful." They are a essentially free units that merge together from units that have already served their purpose. They might not be "lolmutas" anymore, but we have Phoenixes for that now (and by that, I mean that Phoenixes are a better counter to Mutas than Corsairs and Archons were combined). Sure, it's an entirely new tech tree, but did you really think that relying solely on a T3 "giant" unit was going to work? lol no. low # of phoenix hardcounter low #'s of muta. its been tested and proven that 30 mutas beat 20 phoenix straight up. and dont give me the infinite kite crap, it works with 3-6 phoenix vs 10-12 muta but not when you get that giant ass ball. and no zerg is stupid enough to fly after you while you shoot him. archons and corsairs were MUCH better counters to mutas. its not even close. also, who the fuck would emp a lone archon? if you send in a lone archon in terran just kills it and laughs. plus EMP is AOE, so you are probably hitting quite a bit of his army with the archon. unless you are stupid enough to EMP just the archon. the numbers in this case dont lie. most units got a ~5% dps buff from BW to SC2. archon got NERFED by about 40% (15% vs bio) {note this is DPS, not burst damage}, not to mention the large splash radius decrease. they are MUCH less effective now http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=115345 <-- where i got the numbers. i mean what is the sc2 archon good at? ranged terran balls kill it before it does damage, it sucks vs hydras and roaches, and storm is pretty rare pvp as colossi are virtually always better. | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On June 02 2010 13:42 Chen wrote: i mean what is the sc2 archon good at? ranged terran balls kill it before it does damage, it sucks vs hydras and roaches, and storm is pretty rare pvp as colossi are virtually always better. An overwhelming majority of PvZ applications, it is a fundermental part of many strong lategame Protoss army compositions against Z | ||
|
indczn
United States18 Posts
On June 02 2010 13:38 Chairman Ray wrote: In sc2, gas is a lot more valuable because you need it for void rays and colossi. In sc1, zealots are standard in all 3 matchups so you do have gas to spend. In sc2, zealots are not used nearly as often. I disagree with this. Gas is valuable, but it really depends on what unit composition you are going for. ---- For example against terrans, early game i use the following. 50 gas - stalker (for reapers) 50 gas, warpgates. 100 gas, sentry. The rest is devoted entired to teching to templar archives and immediatly warping in 2 templar for an archon. The extra minerals i have get spent on making gateways and zealots so i have several (sorry, don't have a count right now), and having 4 warpgates by the time the templar archives finish. The terran bio pushes right around the time i have the 1st archon out at about 7 minutes. Either way, if im slow or behind i can stall at the ramp and with zealots, because the terran will micro. After that, i either spend the next 200 on charge, or next 300 on another archon depending on how soon it looks like the terran is going to push. Charge is more important than storm because it makes the mineral fodder zealots worth something, and its crucial to have fodder for the archons and templars, despite concussive shell being somewhat of a pain. Also helps with flanking easily. If the terran is late on his push with MM, ill flank him in the open and he doesnt stand a chance. If he turtles up, ill expand (yay excess minerals) and get more gas which makes templar spam so easy along with map control. I've run into various builds from the terran, and various pushes with some form of MM, marine tank, MMG, Marine ghost. And had success against all i've seen so far, except one who turtled and went mass thor "for fun" but, i played poorly and didnt scout. The main point of opening like this is 1: it stops the annoying bio, often winning quickly (same as VR's used to until terrans adapted). 2:it opens up templar tech quickly (charge), and relatively safely, which is the most versatile tech tree in my opinion. Not to mention, against terran MMM, pretty much dominates between storm and feedback. Usually the terran is committed to 3 rax/whatever at this point, and will cost him alot to transition. Other benefits are: it lets me expand faster than if i went collosus. It's different. I've gotten my fair share of "wtf? seriously? archon rush?" comments. I doubt anyone would have experience with it yet. Quick ghosts don't do anything from what ive seen so far. Emp is annoying, but its 100 sheilds hardly an army breaker at this point in the game, and he will only have 2-3 ghosts that early anyway. enough for maybe 3 emps, hardly a worry if he wants to blow all his energy on the obvious target archon (which obviously should be a bit spread out). Also, archons don't take bonus damage from marauders. Any further in the game really depends on the map and scouting. Other than that for now. any questions or feedback welcome. Misc: Rank 1 diamond (meh, crappy division, but id assume i've played decent players having that spot), solely because of abusing terrans. Horrible pvp and average pvz. I'm by no means great, but id call PvT my best matchup, by far. | ||
|
igotmyown
United States4291 Posts
Toss rolls Maka with a great zealot/ht push. Hts merge into archons, archons are fat enough that they pretty much absorb the entire emp. Toss actually uses multiple hotkeys so his hts aren't grouped with his zealots, so terran has to either emp the zealots or the archon (ht are too far in back) The archons do some damage, but not enough that they're really worth focusing. So they work out to be pretty annoying. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
 )Considering Blizzard's intention for the archon is an emergency unit for if your high templar are out of energy and you need units right away, I don't think its design to have so many shields is very in line with that.After all, having mainly shields ensures the following two things: first, the unit has very high regeneration, and second, the unit will be hard-countered by EMP. I don't understand why an emergency unit needs to have high regeneration since its very purpose is to help right away, not to be a unit that you just 'have' in your army and keep with you from battle to battle. As far as the second part goes, one of the reasons for templars to go out of energy is to be EMP'd, and trying to counter that by turning two expensive high templar into an archon will most likely be less effective since another EMP will counter that unit. Of course, ghosts don't have infinite EMP's, but it's still a weakness for the archon. Given these inconsistencies in the archon I would propose for Blizzard to either tweak them to better serve their current role as emergency fighters, or make them a valid unit to transition to from templar tech that has its own uses besides just a few niche cases. | ||
|
zifoon
Australia4 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:53 pyr0ma5ta wrote: Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you? I wouldn't. Archon doesn't deal that much damage to your army and has a pitiful AOE. Why waste 300 Energy on Archons? If you do use EMP 4 times on the Archon, then the Archon has done his job. | ||
|
bubusls
Romania61 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. Yeah, they'd be good crisis units. | ||
|
ggrrg
Bulgaria2716 Posts
Against zerg they make little sense because of their bad pathing and because for some reason hydra/roach compositions always take out archons first, so even if you have like 5-6 archons most of them won't be able to shoot even once. Archons would be quite nice if zerg would go for ling/ultra like in bw, but this is not the case. | ||
|
Sylvr
United States524 Posts
People here (and on the official forums) are always studying these units in a vacuum... Try to think of units as part of a plan. Or better yet, if you think a unit is useless, try to think up a plan or scenario where that unit is the core and you might surprise yourself. A unit's value is not necessarily derived from what it would do when you put it in massive army A and throw it up against massive army B. | ||
|
Wonderballs
Canada253 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 FrozenArbiter wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. I don't think that makes them better, It makes entire games go longer than needed or promotes mad turt-lin. ...and archons could be WORSE! | ||
|
OffResonance
Germany10 Posts
| ||
|
Drogith
United States1350 Posts
| ||
|
Failsafe
United States1298 Posts
It's at best partially retarded for Archons' primary to be as a contingency once High Templar are out of energy. Stuff dies when it goes to fight. When High Templar go into battle, they die first of all. Everyone knows they have low HP and do enormous damage, so any player who cares to win, makes a point of killing High Templar first of all. If High Templar are expected to expend all their energy in battle before merging into an Archon, then you're just not gonna have Archons. Either you morph an Archon before a battle or you don't morph an Archon. Balance the unit appropriately. I don't know what this thread is on about but the Archon isn't viable. It sucks. It is the worst possible use of a lot of Vespene, possibly even worse than mass Observers. On June 02 2010 23:08 Drogith wrote: I played a few 3v3 games last night using the clot-> DT-> archon approach and I have to say it worked quite effectively. They are definitely complimentary units to have in your army and great to have in quick situations. In PvP your opponent has carriers and you have DTs. You spot the carriers and morph some archons. Your archons now rip apart the carriers as they're splash damage hits the interceptors. What seems to help a lot is to tech ground attack and shield upgrades instead of armor. Even just 1 point in each one makes the archons bigger tanks and better AoE damage, just make sure to keep them behind you clots and in front of your stalkers and watch the pain. Nope On June 02 2010 19:34 Sylvr wrote: When I think of Archons, what I see is a Warp Prism dropping 2-4 HTs near someone's mineral line, dropping 2-4 storms, morphing while the Warp Prism goes into Phase Mode, calls in 3-4 Zealots and finishes whatever the HTs started and possibly takes a chunk out of the player's army when they come running in to repel the harass (Either the Zealots tank for the Archon to get behind them and deal splash, or the Archon tanks for the Zealots to get in close and rip into stuff). If nothing else, you will force your opponent to send stuff back, cause an Archon is just powerful enough that he probably can't just swat it down with whatever he happened to have sitting back at base (like a Reaper, or maybe even a Banshee). People here (and on the official forums) are always studying these units in a vacuum... Try to think of units as part of a plan. Or better yet, if you think a unit is useless, try to think up a plan or scenario where that unit is the core and you might surprise yourself. A unit's value is not necessarily derived from what it would do when you put it in massive army A and throw it up against massive army B. Yeah, and we should design nukes around the premise that they're really good in 2v2 if use them in conjunction with a Mothership's Vortex. Context is one thing but why are you so happy to relegate the Archon to post-drop-kamikaze-support? | ||
|
funk100
United Kingdom172 Posts
| ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On June 02 2010 23:25 Failsafe wrote: Blizzard should stop with their fucking intentions. They didn't intend most of what made SCBW the great game that it is. Blizzard should create units and let us decide what to do with them... ...I don't know what this thread is on about but the Archon isn't viable. It sucks. It is the worst possible use of a lot of Vespene, possibly even worse than mass Observers. Yeah, and we should design nukes around the premise that they're really good in 2v2 if use them in conjunction with a Mothership's Vortex. Context is one thing but why are you so happy to relegate the Archon to post-drop-kamikaze-support? To be honest i don't understand where you get this overly negitive attitude in respect to this unit from and in addition you have completely exaggerated his argument to an obscenity. Slyvr is correctly stating that the archon is regulated to much more of a nieche than other units, and that it's correct uses can only truely be observed in sufficient contextual situations. It is not simply enough to judge a unit by it's stats but observe it's relationship with other units within a realistic game situation, the post - storm drop pressure example he gives is an excellent case of this. I can't force you to like the archon or believe that it has incredible potential and wide contextual uses but i strongly suggest you observe it's interactions in high level games and consider the positional requirements ingame for when they would be highly effective. It is far from a waste of gas but in many cases extremely cost effective when you consider it as a by-product of HT's or DT's. | ||
|
Drogith
United States1350 Posts
On June 02 2010 23:25 Failsafe wrote: Nope Because that sums everything up I'll just have to take your word for it and ignore what I saw with my own eyes. | ||
|
melfice
Austria12 Posts
| ||
|
orthopod
United States3 Posts
archons have the real potential to be a great part of the toss army as the only real ground to air unit that the toss relies on is the stalker. sentries...meh. i say, all it needs is a nice bump to range, rate of fire, and better collision pathing and i wouldn't feel too bad if i morphed 2 of my hts into an archon right out of the gate. | ||
|
Surrealz
United States449 Posts
I really want to see some bigger archon buffs! | ||
|
Bidu
United States29 Posts
Possibly incorporate some new fancy mechanic where it uses shields instead of energy as a resource. But what do i know, im just a little noob  | ||
|
stroggos
New Zealand1543 Posts
| ||
|
CrunkOwns
United States138 Posts
| ||
|
mskaa
Denmark155 Posts
When Archons are done merging they are really just meh.. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
|
mskaa
Denmark155 Posts
| ||
|
melfice
Austria12 Posts
On June 03 2010 12:01 PrinceXizor wrote: Yesterdays Day9 Daily he showed him losing about 20 HT's to banelings over the course of the game, if he noticed the banelings he can't move away (slow HTs) he could have just archon morphed and absorbed ALL the baneling hits and been up units instead of down. I thought of the same thing. Since Archons are not "light" they would also gotten less damage per each baneling. Maybe I'll check out the math to see how many Archons you have to form to absorb a certain amount of banelings. It clearly is better not to sacrifice all HTs at once, only because to see some banelings rolling. Guarding your HTs with Zealot or Stalker wouldn't be ideal either. | ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
One big problem is that they are too big. They are actually bigger than they look. Which makes it harder for them to get into the battle. They also block each other out which leads to another big problem. Their range. I swear if they had just a tiny bit more range they wouldn't be as bad. Still bad, but not BAD. They're pathing size or whatever its called should be lowered and their range upped. Perhaps even speed increased so they don't die before they get into battle. But one of the main things that should be changed is...... BRING THEIR SWEET SPLASH BACK! | ||
|
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
I think a reasonable argument could be made that Archons are among the most cost-efficient units in the game. | ||
|
Skee
Canada702 Posts
Edit: im aware Archons aren't melee, but they still have to be damn close. | ||
|
Doko
Argentina1737 Posts
Their fire rate or range could use a buff but beyond that I find them awesome to deal with mass ling or mass mutas. Other than that yeah they are kind of lacking. | ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
| ||
|
refmac_cys.cys
United States177 Posts
| ||
|
Pjonkan
Sweden9 Posts
I will give you an example: http://www.starcraftcheese.site90.com/replays.php?DL=52 Its a PvT Diamond 30 min long but no need to watch the whole game, the archons makes their mark in the last min! | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. But instead they decided to make gas "green minerals that are just harder to get" | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates. I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast. A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p | ||
|
Back
Canada505 Posts
| ||
|
bLuR
Canada625 Posts
| ||
|
Skee
Canada702 Posts
| ||
|
Backpack
United States1776 Posts
| ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar casting feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? i ALWAYS have trouble doing this for 2 reasons. 1) EMP has range 10, not to mention the 2 (or just 1.5) range AE. Feedback has range 9. 2) ghosts don't stick out in a marine marauder ball ... templars stick out alot, whatever you have as toss it seems emp'ing is magnitudes easier than feedbacking ghosts. i have yet to find a way to effectively avoid getting emp'ed the shit out of me | ||
|
SpiritAshura
United States1271 Posts
On July 18 2010 14:35 jacen wrote: i ALWAYS have trouble doing this for 2 reasons. 1) EMP has range 10, not to mention the 2 (or just 1.5) range AE. Feedback has range 9. 2) ghosts don't stick out in a marine marauder ball ... templars stick out alot, whatever you have as toss it seems emp'ing is magnitudes easier than feedbacking ghosts. i have yet to find a way to effectively avoid getting emp'ed the shit out of me Seriously, this is one of the things I've struggled with as well...I just can't find them. | ||
|
PhiliBiRD
United States2643 Posts
you realize it takes 4 emps to completely remove an archons shield. | ||
|
sjschmidt93
United States2518 Posts
Okay, why do they suck in PvZ and PvP? | ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
BUT if they simply merged all those templar into archons they would be able to easily clean me up after those storms. zergs entire army is bio and archons do insane dmg to bio. even zerg buildings are bio. archons work very well in zvp honestly. but luckily no one has caught on to this yet otherwise zvp would get alot harder. archons also are pretty damn good against ultras. its a simple matter of actually recycling the templars after they exhausted energy on storms instead of rushing to templars and instantly making archons soon as the templars warp in... | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 18 2010 13:51 ToxNub wrote: I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast. A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs. | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On July 18 2010 14:59 FabledIntegral wrote: You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs. ToxNub, In the Nicest possible way; You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. | ||
|
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
Zealots can do alright vs ranged stuff because of Charge, but Archon's can't close the distance like that. IMO the best thing to do would be to give Archons some sort of spell. Archons would be great if they could cast Maelstrom, for example lol | ||
|
IronV
Canada14 Posts
Note: If I want to make archons, Id rather spend the 50 extra gas for 2 HTs and save 200 minerals and use it to warp in 2 zealots. Plus as I mentioned, there are basicly very few instances where it's worth morphing DTs into archons. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
Ideas
United States8097 Posts
| ||
|
Brokengamer
Philippines116 Posts
Also: those who have been saying that ultralisks are still useless must have been living under a rock | ||
|
leejas
United States440 Posts
A larger issue involves the cost. Archons are either: 250-250 = 2 DTs 175-275 = 1 DT/1 HT 50-300 = 2 HTs This in theory is great! but rarely do we see people tech to both templar types. It isn't practical to develop so much midtier (especially when immortals and colossi are almost a requirement). You'd basically never have enough for both the templar archives and the dark shrine. | ||
|
Phisk
166 Posts
On July 18 2010 15:59 Brokengamer wrote: Archons will soon be popular for countering ultralisks. They might be useless now but sit tight and watch as how the metagame shifts. Yeah I agree to this 100%. This thread is over a month old, the meta game has changed. A large advantage of the Archon is that its only unit type is Psionic, which means they take very little damage from an ultralisk, and they do well against roaches and lings. An archon can tank Ultras REALLY well, and the splash is useful against roach ling. On July 18 2010 14:52 PhiliBiRD wrote: rofl stomped by EMP? you realize it takes 4 emps to completely remove an archons shield. Several people already commented on how it takes 4 EMPs a month ago, and the original discussion on this was about going mass Archons. 4 Emps removes the shield of 1 solo archon, or 6 clumped up archons. | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On July 18 2010 14:59 FabledIntegral wrote: You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs. Is that so? Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo or a marauder. I think for cost, marauder might come out barely on top assuming splashing 1 unit, but roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4 hits. They also decimate lings, leaving your zealots and stalkers, who do crap damage to lings, more time to focus on roach, and they can attack air, unlike either of the other 2 units. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^ | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On June 02 2010 06:24 Slunk wrote: You know that SC1 ghosts didn't have EMP, right? And archons were terrible in PvT in BW. Under all possible sircumstances. You know under all circumstances i really cant agree with that statement. I think archons are absolutely great in SC2, granted my templar die most of the time before i can warp them in, but when i do they provide pretty decent DPS, since they get the +25(i think?) damage against bio which is what most terrans army consists of | ||
|
SoMuchBetter
Australia10606 Posts
| ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
On July 18 2010 16:22 ToxNub wrote: Is that so? Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo and marauder. Roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^ just a heads up here but dps got nothing to do with anything of what counters what. its 100 times more complicated than that afaik archons splash is 1 radius and that isnt gonna reach another roach from a roach, not sure tho archons r horrible and have so little use in the game. they say they wanna only use necessary units for sc2 and not lurker but still they keep archon which literally noone who is top tier makes unless they get out or energy and wants something juicy and temporary remove archon or buff it is my vote, would be totally badass if they moved feedback from ht to archon for a starter so this ht isnt some kind of mighty master with no counter On July 18 2010 16:27 SoMuchBetter wrote: id personally rather keep my dt and empty templars rather than waste them by turning them into a completely useless unit yes thats pretty much how most ppl would say too. making archon its kinda like EMPing and go out of energy and say, alright lets run to the frontline and tank my marines because this ghost is useless now | ||
|
Zombo Joe
Canada850 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 18 2010 16:22 ToxNub wrote: Is that so? Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo or a marauder. I think for cost, marauder might come out barely on top assuming splashing 1 unit, but roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4 hits. They also decimate lings, leaving your zealots and stalkers, who do crap damage to lings, more time to focus on roach, and they can attack air, unlike either of the other 2 units. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^ Doesn't matter if they splash, archon range isn't anywhere near that of a Marauder, and the DPS is much less than an Immortal. Roaches are a direct COUNTER to zealots, especially since they can just burrow and run feature to regen HP after battle. Archon splash is virtually negligible when it comes to Roaches, no you don't deal more DPS. Marauders also have slow. Your entire comments concerning lings and air are incredibly stupid because you were talking about the "hardest counter to roaches." You're wrong, clearly, and yes, I'm nearly positive I know much more than you. | ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
On July 18 2010 15:59 Brokengamer wrote: Archons will soon be popular for countering ultralisks. They might be useless now but sit tight and watch as how the metagame shifts. Also: those who have been saying that ultralisks are still useless must have been living under a rock again that goes back to the original statement that archons are just a way to convert your spent temps into something that's immediately useful rather than a direct counter. | ||
|
Comeh
United States18918 Posts
Whether or not we want Archons to be desirable is up to debate however. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:44 TheAngelofDeath wrote: Thank you, I'm glad there's a topic for that. In late game turtling toss with enough cannons and max out archon ball is quite hard to stop. He'll just walk around the mighty archon ball to each enemy base one by one and destroy them. As zerg you could waste a couple of full waves to this walking wall, or lose your bases before catching them (carriers and BLs are slow).So, after running numerous tests on the unit tester with the Archon. It pretty much dismantles anything in large quantities. + Show Spoiler + The exception being the carrier, and broodlords. The topic is short, but I haven't seen a dedicated topic about the Archon so....why all the hatred towards this unit? What is it that makes the Archon so terrible?? I've used it in real game and it holds up just fine, so why is it that it's never used much at all? | ||
|
Broodie
Canada832 Posts
Well lets see, with two Templars you get 2 or 4+ storms(based on scenario) THEN morph mid battle to provide instant backup? I think 100/300's a fair trade considering in a battle your zealots will tank out upwards of 1k(mid-late) I dunno, I just dont think people are experimenting with them enough to use them effectively and thus properly One thing I would suggest is a range upgrade or not take concussive dmg | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
As for "incredibly stupid" comments regarding the fact that archon does not exist in vacuum, perhaps you have a different understanding of "counter". I hardly expect to have my archons in isolation, and I hardly expect him to have roaches alone. Part of what makes the archon so good against roaches is that it synergizes so well with my other gateway units. It protects my stalkers from speedlings. Immortals are incredibly vulnerable to even a few speedlings, whereas archons almost prefer to fight a ling/roach mix. It also protects my zealots from banelings. It can soak damage and deal damage. And it sometimes deters him from switching to mutalisk, opting to stick with more ground. Since I already have templar tech, I'm well prepared to take hydras. So when I say it's the "hardest counter in the game" I mean if he goes roach when I go archons, the game is not going to go well for him. I don't have that confidence, in say immortals. Because he insta produces a few lings or hydras and suddenly my immortals can't kill those roaches anymore. | ||
|
fatduck
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
Therealdevil
Netherlands1021 Posts
In my opinion the unit is underrated atm, remember that an archon costs as much as 4 roaches, and an archon takes 4 roaches apart. Even more in greater numbers. And before you morph them they can use storm! Its a very viable unit, just not propperly used yet. they also have a bit of a flimsy feeling like ultralisks do when they're in your army, they always seem to have trouble getting in the front. They really do need to put in some "fat units get priority" kind of trigger, would make tank type units so much better. Including the ultralisk! I'm gonna trie some feedback/archon without storm style, just today, might post my findings here after! | ||
|
Rea
Germany88 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:46 oxxo wrote: Same way tanks were 'bad' in the beginning, but are now 'OP'... when all that's changed is 10 hp (and slight splash change). ... and 50 nerfs to other units during beta | ||
|
NastyMarine
United States1252 Posts
| ||
|
Therealdevil
Netherlands1021 Posts
| ||
|
Silu
Finland165 Posts
Several people already commented on how it takes 4 EMPs a month ago, and the original discussion on this was about going mass Archons. 4 Emps removes the shield of 1 solo archon, or 6 clumped up archons. I find this argument absolutely hilarious. So 4 EMPs practically kill an Archon. Whining about that is like saying that "4 storms remove ALL the hp of MANY UNITS!!! So obviously any unit that practically dies to 4 storms is useless! Right?!" Except at the point where Archons roam the battlefield, both the cost and opportunity cost of HTs is smaller than Ghosts, so maybe make that 5 or 6 storms. | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
I was quite satisfied by it as a unit made of empty templars. Now after having tested some confrontation in the tester with equal food (and around same ressources, it is hard to match archon gaz wise if you make 3 or 4) situations and mix armies. I am very confident that this unit will be used more. | ||
|
mmp
United States2130 Posts
| ||
|
Mios
United States686 Posts
if they were way faster and/or had longer range and/or counted as massive they would actually do some damage before dying. maybe having a ton of chargelots tanking the initial damage would be a decent combo for archons, which is why u see ht zealot combos used effectively, archons need zealots. | ||
|
brain_
United States812 Posts
On July 18 2010 17:12 fatduck wrote: Has anyone actually tried to use large quantities of archons in SC2? The combination of shitty range, shitty splash, and horrible unit AI means your archons are barely ever even going to be attacking, so unit tester dps numbers don't mean much at all. Try it out in a real game and you'll see that they're just too big and short-ranged to be effective, and are constantly trying to maneuver around tiny units like zealots (similar to the ultralisk problem, except ultras actually have decent splash radius). I agree. I was facing a Hydra player who rapidly transitioned to Roaches against my 2-base Zealot Templar. Zealots weren't cutting it anymore, and Storm isn't that great against Roaches (not the way it is vs Hydras) so I morphed a bunch of my spare HTs into Archons. They were utterly pathetic. The splash wasn't even noticeable- I was convinced that they didn't even HAVE splash. They weren't even that good of meatshields, especially since +2 armor does absolutely nothing for them. They're an almost useless unit. The Archon does not hard counter anything, and its high cost, huge size, and upgrade incompatibility makes it completely inefficient for countering everything. Buff range, buff splash. That should at least give it a niche role. | ||
|
me_viet
Australia1350 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. Don't be stupid, your not emp'ing ONE single archon obviousli, they'd be with an army, or other archon. Now wouldn't you emp 4 times to get 4+ units to 10hp? | ||
|
Neuuubeh
138 Posts
Anyhow, archons CAN be amazing vs zergs (coming from a zerg player). Obviously useless vs Siege tanks and most terran units, also being extremely vulnerable to emp. But thats clear from the beginning isnt it?? | ||
|
ckw
United States1018 Posts
| ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
| ||
|
Ndugu
United States1078 Posts
| ||
|
Piski
Finland3461 Posts
| ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:47 Denarius Jay wrote: Expensive, gets eaten alive to EMP, bad unit pathing, did I mention expensive? Think of the Archon as the Zergs ultralisk, look great on paper or in small skirmishes, but generally just terrible all around... Actually the Archon is quite resistant to EMP. EMP damage is capped at 100, which is enough for the majority of Protoss units. But the Archon obviously not so. Typically Terrans will EMP enough to cover every or most Protoss units. But now you hit the Archon, surrounding units are drained fully... Do you spend 75 energy to do 100 damage to a single unit now when you could hit another cluster? | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On July 18 2010 18:41 me_viet wrote: Don't be stupid, your not emp'ing ONE single archon obviousli, they'd be with an army, or other archon. Now wouldn't you emp 4 times to get 4+ units to 10hp? Then spread out your archons? Now extra EMPs are just hitting one unit. Wow that was tough stuff. | ||
|
FortuneSyn
1826 Posts
| ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
In pvt, the archon is good against bio balls on paper, but in-game, they suffer from getting kited almost as badly as slow lots, and get focus'd fired pretty easily. They do see some usage in later game pvt's when hts have finished storming. PvP, the most common use is if a player is going for dts, after harrassing, or to add muscle to an army (sentries are the other "gas" unit) for some kind of push. However, later game, the archon seems to get no use, because battles tend to be collosi stalker vs zealot immortal blink stalker. Archons are used only occasionally, you only use them when they're useful. I don't see why 65% of this thread is arguing the point of the archon's value against a bio ghost army. | ||
|
BaaL`
297 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:53 pyr0ma5ta wrote: Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you? 4 EMPs are at least as expensive as an Archon :> Seems pretty good if you use the Templar first, HT/Archon would be ridiculous if Archons were good for their cost. | ||
|
Cofo
United States1388 Posts
| ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. Very true. I really miss this change. It also REALLY hurts zerg who needs to mass expand for gas - lategame zerg has no gas at all and can't do anything but spam lings. I think Archons are a very niche unit in this game. You are only going to make them as a way to recycle templar or as a counter to muta/ling. They actually do very well vs broodlords if they can get to them, and they tank ultras well for your other units. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8097 Posts
| ||
|
DarkwindHK
Hong Kong343 Posts
It is not even a "physical" unit, it is suppose to be a ball of psi energy, it is very absurd to think that you can "slow down" an energy ball with a grenade. Lore-wise, balance-wise Archon should be immune to all harmful spells. | ||
|
shawster
Canada2485 Posts
i'd say wait before we make any rash decisions, the game seems pretty balanced. i have beef with banshees and how abusable they are, but meh build orders will probably gear to a faster lair tech later if that shit keeps happening | ||
|
Pjonkan
Sweden9 Posts
On July 19 2010 08:41 Ideas wrote: archons will most likely never be built "because you want archons" and will only ever be built in case of emergency (need AA fast or something) or just for the hell of it after a big battle and you got some templar leftover. blizzard claims that this is intentional but I cant help but feel that they barely touched protoss all beta and just decided to say it was intentional (archons sucking) while they tried to fix the terran and zerg more (who saw far far more changes in the beta). it would also explain why blizzard is content with carriers and motherships also being pretty useless. Watch the replay, I'd say both archons and mothership is very viable! http://www.starcraftcheese.site90.com/replays.php?DL=52 Tho I guess a emp would stop the vortex, but u could feedback the ghosts first or sneak in with the mothership after engage. Donno wich has longer range, the feedback or the vortex? | ||
|
Ocedic
United States1808 Posts
On July 18 2010 14:50 SpiritAshura wrote: Seriously, this is one of the things I've struggled with as well...I just can't find them. Just show health bars when encountering the ball. Their energy bar will stick out like a sore thumb. | ||
|
Meatloaf
Spain664 Posts
| ||
|
makoplux
88 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:47 pyr0ma5ta wrote: They cost a zillion gas, and get roflstomped by EMP? Also, their range and size is hilaribad. how do they get roflstomped by emp? you need 4 EMPs to clear an archons shield.. | ||
|
bleh
85 Posts
| ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:48 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So wouldn't high templar castin feedback on the ghosts help solve the EMP issue? EMP has longer range and Ghosts can cloak. Feedback effects 1 target, EMP is AoE. | ||
|
Inkarnate
Canada840 Posts
On July 19 2010 14:47 Meatloaf wrote: everyone complains about EMP , but in SC1 EMP was way more effective to archons than in SC2 where it only takes like 100 shields. EMP in SC2 is cheap barracks tech instead of expensive high tier SC1 EMP/ | ||
|
LeDuck
Germany152 Posts
| ||
|
lamamitasche
Germany11 Posts
in the 2. game TLO vs. HuK , HuK warps in 3 high templer (before getting the khaydarian amulet) and imminently warps 2 of them into an archon. isn't that a waist of gas? because he had the dark shrine up in the back of his base and he could have warped in two DTs instead of the ht... i dont see the point a lot of people a afraid aof going mass archons because of the amount of gas 2 dt = 250/250 = 1 archon 2 ht = 100/300 = 1 archon the fact that his gas was high at that point in the game might be the reason for that but in the late game he has like 10 archons and the 500 gas, he could have saved there, could have been very useful.. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
| ||
|
Arnu
Canada96 Posts
| ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
| ||
|
Fenrir-Vice
United States123 Posts
On July 20 2010 16:14 Grond wrote: Shortly thereafter you will watch your 900 gas worth of Archons get roflstomped by 300 gas worth of Marauders, assuming he just doesn't EMP you. I think Archons will need a range of 4 and immunity to slow before it's a worthwhile unit. I don't see this happening as blizzard has already stated that they don't intend archons to be a staple in armies like it was in sc1, but rather a clutch move to make when HT's run out of energy | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
| ||
|
gdroxor
United States639 Posts
| ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
| ||
|
Scruff
Singapore509 Posts
I think the unit is fine as it is, or well if you want them to power up archon maybe it should cost energy for morphing. | ||
|
UnburrowedLurker
United States41 Posts
And this isn't even to mention how dangerous they are to a Zerg army. | ||
|
tarsier
United Kingdom223 Posts
by the way, EMP radius is only slightly larger than the archon hitbox, so 2-3 archons are the maximum you can hit with a single EMP. if you have archon's and a load of zealots then the terran EMP's the archon and doesn't have any energy to weaken the zealots. the real problem with archon's is that they're stupidly slow. they must be the slowest (almost) melee unit in the game. not even counting concussive shell, they're still too slow. they really need to be like upgraded zealot speed imo. people moan about every protoss unit versus EMP, it's quite pathetic. really, immortal is the only unit which the EMP totally cripples. EMP'd immortal becomes an expensive stalker that's slow and can't shoot air.... imo immortal shield should be immune to EMP, then TvP would be well balanced because a single ghost couldn't render the 'armor counter' horrifically useless. | ||
|
x7i
United Kingdom122 Posts
- won and reinforcing/holding back in which case ht most likely can safely recharge energy for more storms - decimated the enemy and immediately pushing further, its safe to morph but you can win wo archons and you dont have to wait for morphing x), still its the best scenario - lost by a margin, slim chance of success with 12 second morph, even if morph completes rest of your forces have either died or retreated already... - got decimated, obviously no go there now, if morphing took some 3 seconds on faster... | ||
|
TDC
United States197 Posts
archons are (practically) melee unit, and with its 2 range, it's weak against most ranged units. but what does most standard play based on? ranged units. MNM, Stalker+immortal, Roach Hydra. when archon will show its true power is when the opponent goes for some melee combination. Ultraling definitely would be great with archons, which any other protoss combination can't deal with efficiently. or if you're zealot heavy against a MnM ball, you could add the archon to take the damage so your chargelots wont die so easily. emp would only do 100 damage unlike in SC1 which took away all the shields. making them useful than 2 emped high templars. although if you're too low on HT, you won't have any storm at all after the emp, which would be bad. but yea i definitely think that archons can be useful, but not against ANY unit combination. people didn't go for mass archon against a terran mech which was fully ranged (and took full damage from all mech units) | ||
|
nam nam
Sweden4672 Posts
| ||
|
jamesr12
United States1549 Posts
| ||
|
Jenslyn87
Denmark527 Posts
| ||
|
fatduck
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
dogen
Belgium108 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Jarvs wrote: This is the reality as Blizzard have said this themselves. I feel that is poorly inspired design, frankly. You sound like Heimerdinger in LoL ^^ and on topic; archons are pretty good in pvz; they don't even have to be 'recycled' from templars (thats just sounds so bad). they are very good vs roach/ling with chargezeals, and are certainly fairly better vs hydras than in brood war, if they are paired with chargezeals; because of the better pathing and the chargeskill, chargezeals wont get in the archon's way too much so they can actually engage a clustered hydraball a lot easier. They also still absolutely rape mutalisks. | ||
|
v3chr0
United States856 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. This, and On June 02 2010 05:51 Jarvs wrote: This is the reality as Blizzard have said this themselves. I feel that is poorly inspired design, frankly. this. In the beginning of beta, I hated the Archon, especially considering there was no "Dark Archon". But once you come to accept the units place among everything else, it starts to make using that unit a lot easier. Archons serve the same purpose as a Zealot, they are there to eat up all that damage and EMP so your more important units won't have to. You can argue 'tanking' isn't the Zealots job also, but in all fictional reality, that's what it does best aside from cutting marauders in half. The tactful use of Archons hasn't really been explored, people will stand by Blizzards word's and say that the unit has no purpose except when you have low energy HT's. Against a bio army, or Zerg, this is already not true. Archons 'counter' bio. I have never seen a good player try to encounter a Protoss army directly when there are Archons in the front, why not make use of this scare tactic and use your 'useless' Archons to force your opponent to do something they wouldn't like. Archons probably have the fastest ground movement speed in SC2, and they do splash damage in a line. This being said, Archons are great with charge Zealots to flank and tank. There are a lot of uses for Archons, I could go on, I truthfully think they are fine as is, the only change I'd like to see is with the morphing or the HT/DT tech. When you are controlling your Archons, you can instantly kill lines of units. 3 to 4 Archons will 1 shot most units when focused, and if you focus your fire on a bio unit in the 4th row, most likely units from the first 3 rows are dieing too. Archons may look totally fucking awesome and feel like they should do more, but they are there to make use of 2 units you wouldn't be able to make use of, and give you 1 monstrous tank CAPABLE of terrible terrible damage. If you don't agree with 2 HT = 1 Archon, then don't morph it and complain about it, save your HT energy like you said is better. IMO, Archons kick many an ass, you just have to know when to use them. | ||
|
brandonc
United States72 Posts
Everyone is saying, HT oom = archon, or why would u morph HTs into archons before the battle because you could storm and morph instantly, why take away the potential (even though u may be emped) to do great AE damage. But in sc2, DTs morph into archons (not news to anyone) but no one has discussed how that could be useful? DTs into base kill few scvs morph? or sneak into back and morph? its like an insta archon somewhere random. This also means you do not have to build a Templar archives (since dts, unlike in bw, come out a diff building) Yes the argument is if you want an archon you would build a HT because its cheaper as opposed to spending more to get the same unit. but just saying, anyone thought of this? | ||
|
v3chr0
United States856 Posts
On July 21 2010 02:46 brandonc wrote: Here is a question/discussion starter! Everyone is saying, HT oom = archon, or why would u morph HTs into archons before the battle because you could storm and morph instantly, why take away the potential (even though u may be emped) to do great AE damage. But in sc2, DTs morph into archons (not news to anyone) but no one has discussed how that could be useful? DTs into base kill few scvs morph? or sneak into back and morph? its like an insta archon somewhere random. This also means you do not have to build a Templar archives (since dts, unlike in bw, come out a diff building) Yes the argument is if you want an archon you would build a HT because its cheaper as opposed to spending more to get the same unit. but just saying, anyone thought of this? Eh, when it comes to Archons from DT's it really is hard to find a use that is efficient or as efficient. If you are going to use the Archon to harass, why not just use the Dark Templar? DT's do 50damage a swing, are invisible, are smaller, are as fast/almost as an Archon, they just can't hit air. DT's will force detection, scans, and unit relocation. The only use I can see morphing 2 DT to a Archon is if you have too many DT's, or extra/non active DT's and needed more tanks/AA. Also, I can see DT's being used to make Archons if your opponent has mobile detection and you don't want your DT's in your army to be owned immediately, but that seems like a preference. In all though, I think nobody makes Archons from DT's because going DT is pretty specific, and you want the DT's, not an Archon, the HT seem way more suited to be morphed to an Archon, as they have a state in which they are useless, plus HT's are slow as shit. | ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
The archons won me the game right then and there because I used my zealots to prevent my HT from getting sniped, cleaned up most of his army with mass serial storms and used my archons to kill the remainder of his army. Archons are incredibly good use of expended templar becuase a templar heavy army typically lacks direct firepower to finish up enemy units and press your advantage - archons do exactly this. When my opponent seems those archon balls warping in they should be going "OH SHIT WHERE IS MY ARMY" not "dohohoh I have a giant army anyways, it wouldn't matter if those were battlecruisers warping in" | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On July 20 2010 18:38 tarsier wrote: so much bull**** in this thread. who seriously thinks that a terran would make mass ghost just to EMP an archon 4 times. by the way, EMP radius is only slightly larger than the archon hitbox, so 2-3 archons are the maximum you can hit with a single EMP. if you have archon's and a load of zealots then the terran EMP's the archon and doesn't have any energy to weaken the zealots. the real problem with archon's is that they're stupidly slow. they must be the slowest (almost) melee unit in the game. not even counting concussive shell, they're still too slow. they really need to be like upgraded zealot speed imo. people moan about every protoss unit versus EMP, it's quite pathetic. really, immortal is the only unit which the EMP totally cripples. EMP'd immortal becomes an expensive stalker that's slow and can't shoot air.... imo immortal shield should be immune to EMP, then TvP would be well balanced because a single ghost couldn't render the 'armor counter' horrifically useless. I don't see why you wouldn't get Ghosts vs Protoss. They nullify HTs and Immortals which puts him at a severe disadvantage and are still quite useful against everything else. | ||
|
revy
United States1524 Posts
| ||
|
jamesr12
United States1549 Posts
On July 21 2010 04:28 revy wrote: I like how 90% of posts say "they get owned by emp". As if that matters vs zerg or is any different than in SC1. it is different then sc1, they actually dont get owned nearly as bad by emp as they used to | ||
|
Belegorm
United States330 Posts
On July 21 2010 02:55 v3chr0 wrote: Eh, when it comes to Archons from DT's it really is hard to find a use that is efficient or as efficient. If you are going to use the Archon to harass, why not just use the Dark Templar? DT's do 50damage a swing, are invisible, are smaller, are as fast/almost as an Archon, they just can't hit air. DT's will force detection, scans, and unit relocation. The only use I can see morphing 2 DT to a Archon is if you have too many DT's, or extra/non active DT's and needed more tanks/AA. Also, I can see DT's being used to make Archons if your opponent has mobile detection and you don't want your DT's in your army to be owned immediately, but that seems like a preference. In all though, I think nobody makes Archons from DT's because going DT is pretty specific, and you want the DT's, not an Archon, the HT seem way more suited to be morphed to an Archon, as they have a state in which they are useless, plus HT's are slow as shit. I think you missed his point; basically when you dt rush frequently when that's done you'll have some dt's left over which will be pretty useless for a good while after that. His idea is instead of letting them sit around, morphing them into archons and adding them to your main army | ||
|
CrunkOwns
United States138 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
blastedt
United States29 Posts
Then again, I know nothing about balance so this would probably make roaches violently overpowered. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
| ||
|
Tone_
United Kingdom554 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:44 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So, after running numerous tests on the unit tester with the Archon. It pretty much dismantles anything in large quantities. The exception being the carrier, and broodlords. The topic is short, but I haven't seen a dedicated topic about the Archon so....why all the hatred towards this unit? What is it that makes the Archon so terrible?? I've used it in real game and it holds up just fine, so why is it that it's never used much at all? Thanks. In experience, it legitimately doesn't do well. | ||
|
Trucifer
United States108 Posts
| ||
|
sebsation
Sweden33 Posts
| ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On July 21 2010 04:50 Belegorm wrote: I think you missed his point; basically when you dt rush frequently when that's done you'll have some dt's left over which will be pretty useless for a good while after that. His idea is instead of letting them sit around, morphing them into archons and adding them to your main army But unless if you need them in your army for tanking or AA, you're better on running the dts in your army instead. Their DPS will be much higher, and the enemy will still be forced to use scans everywhere you go. Yes, they can be sniped inside your army, but even if thats the case, thats time and micro your opponent is spending while you can take out his priority targets (or micro DTs to the back of your army and then bring them back right after). The same goes for vZ, with forcing Overseers (and sniping them to keep the zerg on his toes), though vZ they at least do decent damage with their bonus vs bio. For their cost and dps, 2 DTs (250/250) aren't worth morphing to an archon most of the time (except for AA in emergencies or needing more tanks to beef up your army). 2 HTs (100/300) are more so, but even then its only once they've served their primary function (Feedback/Storm) and you want to get more of them right then and there, though vZ depending on army composition, HT -> archon off the bat makes sense sometimes. This isn't to say that you should never merge DTs, but just that its pretty situational. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On July 21 2010 04:52 andrewlt wrote: Yeah, I don't get why people are bringing up all sorts of Terran counters in this thread. Marauder/EMP counters them but it's not like Archons were used in PvT in BW anyway. I think its general frustration with the current state of Protoss vs Terran. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:02 Grond wrote: I think its general frustration with the current state of Protoss vs Terran. +1. Feed back is not as advertised (a spell which allows there to be spell tension between HT's and ghost). On another note, I think a double archon drop would be killer on the mineral line, ESPECIALLY in the late game, where archons with the +3 upgrade 1shot scvs unless they have maxed armor. I have yet to see this in actual play, but on paper, it's looking pretty sweet. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
Kinda hard to pull off though, cz normally templars aren't alone in the back as the other bun of the sandwich, nor is the archon movespeed very good for it. what if archon move speed was improved to go along with it? | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:38 Chronopolis wrote: +1. Feed back is not as advertised (a spell which allows there to be spell tension between HT's and ghost). On another note, I think a double archon drop would be killer on the mineral line, ESPECIALLY in the late game, where archons with the +3 upgrade 1shot scvs unless they have maxed armor. I have yet to see this in actual play, but on paper, it's looking pretty sweet. Double archon drop (i.e. 4 HT's or 4 DT's worth of units) won't do much, at least outside copper leagues, since players will pull scvs within seconds and then demolish your 2 large target units. There's a reason why storm drops are king (which only need 1-2 HTs btw), since your storms can destroy most of the scvs before the player has much of a chance to react, not to mention the fact that you will storm on their 'exit' path, so there's really no getaway. 2 Archons (200/600 from 4 HTs, or 500/500 from 4 DTs) are a HUGE investment, and will not be worth the handful of scvs you will kill, not even on paper. Hell, you're better off with a simple DT drop and hope the player doesn't notice or scan in time. | ||
|
jackofclubs81
United States196 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. I still don't understand why blizzard changed this part of the game... I believe it adds to the game by creating an interesting late late game dynamic where all of a sudden minerals are worth more than gas. | ||
|
v3chr0
United States856 Posts
Zealot: Movement Speed: 2.25w/o--2.75with charge Archon Movement Speed 2.8125 Reaper/Zergling Movement Speed 2.9531w/o Archons are quite fast for such a big unit. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:44 moopie wrote: Double archon drop (i.e. 4 HT's or 4 DT's worth of units) won't do much, at least outside copper leagues, since players will pull scvs within seconds and then demolish your 2 large target units. There's a reason why storm drops are king (which only need 1-2 HTs btw), since your storms can destroy most of the scvs before the player has much of a chance to react, not to mention the fact that you will storm on their 'exit' path, so there's really no getaway. 2 Archons (200/600 from 4 HTs, or 500/500 from 4 DTs) are a HUGE investment, and will not be worth the handful of scvs you will kill, not even on paper. Storm drops don't exactly kill that many workers cause the splash radius is quite small. Storming on the exact path is rather dangerous because it usually puts you dead in the middle of thier base, hard to retreat. Also storms are rather valuable, where as archons are not so much (in a battle situation). It's similiar to an immortal drop. You are basically abusing the 2-6 seconds before the player can react and start sending units, I don't see how you could get around 4-8 worker kills in that time spawn. The most important thing is that the archon drop is repeatable, you threaten to come back any time, not just when you have gas/energy on your templars. | ||
|
palanq
United States761 Posts
| ||
|
Mr.Eternity
United States143 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:59 palanq wrote: King of the Beta, Huk vs. TLO, game 2: archons not all that strong against tanks and battlecruisers =/ thats not a surprise at all since neither of those are biological... so i dont understand why you brought this up, unless you wanted to show that archons have a counter just like all units... | ||
|
pzea469
United States1520 Posts
Now, i understand its a competitive game and doesnt need to follow lore, but there really should be a way to incorporate it into the game as a unit that is good vs something rather than just an extra meatshield. | ||
|
Tookie22
United States187 Posts
| ||
|
wankey
98 Posts
Make archons all shield (no hp) Speed them up slightly. Give them +1 range boost. Make them massive. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:59 palanq wrote: King of the Beta, Huk vs. TLO, game 2: archons not all that strong against tanks and battlecruisers =/ This is what I wish happened in that game: | ||
|
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:45 theqat wrote: to summarize: 100/300 for a unit with poor damage vs. non-bio that gets slowed by Marauders More like a free unit with lots of HP, no modifiers, and good splash dmg vs bio balls. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On July 21 2010 07:54 Chronopolis wrote: Storm drops don't exactly kill that many workers cause the splash radius is quite small. Storming on the exact path is rather dangerous because it usually puts you dead in the middle of thier base, hard to retreat. Also storms are rather valuable, where as archons are not so much (in a battle situation). It's similiar to an immortal drop. You are basically abusing the 2-6 seconds before the player can react and start sending units, I don't see how you could get around 4-8 worker kills in that time spawn. The most important thing is that the archon drop is repeatable, you threaten to come back any time, not just when you have gas/energy on your templars. I think the key part of this post is storms are valuable and Archons are not and yet it takes 2 HT's to make an Archon. | ||
|
Chronopolis
Canada1484 Posts
On July 21 2010 10:55 Grond wrote: I think the key part of this post is storms are valuable and Archons are not and yet it takes 2 HT's to make an Archon. Ah, I see your point, I was unawaringly carrying over the fact that archon zealot pushes are pefectly good in PvZ, but not so much in PvT bio ball army. But perhaps against a PvT meching army, where storm is not so great, and archons way be preferable. Maybe you won't merge HT's specifically to drop them, but if you have them left over from a previous push or circumstance (to defend a push or some point, storm is too late), this could be a way to get additional ultility out of archons. | ||
|
Kratisto
United States199 Posts
| ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On July 21 2010 09:02 wankey wrote: Speed them up slightly. Give them +1 range boost. Make them massive. this. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Zombo Joe
Canada850 Posts
On July 21 2010 12:31 Kratisto wrote: It would be interesting if you could un-warp an Archon into its constituent templar. That would create a lot of interesting gameplay. | ||
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
pileopoop
Canada317 Posts
On July 21 2010 15:35 zhul4nder wrote: what would the benefit be by making archons massive? Not slowed by marauders. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
| ||
|
Pocketokun
Canada74 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:51 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Archons would be a lot better if depleted gases still gave 1-2 gas instead of 0, like in SC1. Jinro just hit the spot... many heavy gas builds arent viable on just the idea of the fully depletion of the gas and thus forcing you to expand if you want more gas.... | ||
|
OPSavioR
Sweden1465 Posts
| ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On July 21 2010 16:13 OPSavioR wrote: Archons are good vs muta.... Not with proper micro, since mutas outrange archons and are faster. Also, sentry/stalker are more cost effective and are also useful in your army outside of mutas, where as archons are situational depending on your opponent's army composition and positioning. | ||
|
BabyFarkMcgeeZax
Canada47 Posts
On June 02 2010 05:46 oxxo wrote: Who knows, they might actually be good. Same way tanks were 'bad' in the beginning, but are now 'OP'... when all that's changed is 10 hp (and slight splash change). So true! Same deal with the Archon's. Watch, when the game is released someone will have found a way to make Archon's look "OP". | ||
|
SmoKe93
Germany162 Posts
Did i seriously just spend 5 thousand dollars on a jacket? | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
On July 21 2010 16:31 Paradox_92 wrote: Yesterday i bought an audi for 5 thousand dollars it came with a nice jacket on it. Did i seriously just spend 5 thousand dollars on a jacket? If you turned the audi into the jacket after it ran out of gas then yes you spent 5 thousand dollars on a jacket. | ||
|
SmoKe93
Germany162 Posts
On July 21 2010 16:37 Percutio wrote: If you turned the audi into the jacket after it ran out of gas then yes you spent 5 thousand dollars on a jacket. Not really, if that was the case, i would have recycled my >useless< audi into a jacket | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
On July 21 2010 16:42 Paradox_92 wrote: Not really, if that was the case, i would have recycled my >useless< audi into a jacket Yes, because you totally turn your audi into a jacket rather than refuel it. That makes perfect sense which is why I see audi's at gas stations and not at the tailor's. | ||
|
Zealotdriver
United States1557 Posts
| ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On July 21 2010 17:22 Zealotdriver wrote: Give archons cloaking and detection. overlap with dt's. overlap with observers. there's better ways to fix em. what if archons while warping were very very strong, kind of like eggs are? granted it doesnt solve the core issues, but they can be useful while warping. decomposition back into HT i think is one of the more promising ideas though... if they don't find a way to truly make the archon good as an archon. | ||
| ||
