EPTdont let colossi be able to walk over their ground army OR let lings.blings be able to run under ultras
Evaluating the Colossus - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Vundox
United States182 Posts
dont let colossi be able to walk over their ground army OR let lings.blings be able to run under ultras | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On April 23 2011 01:30 awesomoecalypse wrote: It has average speed. I don't think making it slower changes much, for the same reason taking away cliff walking won't change much. Of course it changes much, just like Reavers being ultra slow necessitated shuttle use. Keep DPS/AOE or buff them, and make it slower so you can't just A-move your army without leaving them unguarded. If you saw War of the Worlds and that thing walked the same speed as a human, you couldn't have taken it seriously. Slower is better for balance, but also for spectating (more anticipation, vulnerability). | ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
| ||
|
mTz
Romania1 Post
This would make dealing with collosi much easier in PvZ and PvT, not so sure about the effect on PvP. I think protoss is not punished enough by bad positioning in battles, forcefields can tilt the balance. Also you can specifically put them in the middle of the ball, but you will have a bigger surface to cover, lings would be more effective, forcefields would need to be better positioned. Just my 2 cents. | ||
|
MrTortoise
1388 Posts
I like the lings blings running under ultras idea | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
F*** the Colossus, Reaver ftw. It's just the perfect solution. With Warp Prism they're a little faster than Colossi, but require absurdly more micro. They're beeing countered approximately the same way by remaining quite vulnerable after the shuttle gets sniped. We'ld also suddenly see a lot more Warp Prisms built, probably. I just don't really see a different way making the game "good". In SC2 the micro during battles is really mostly reduced to positioning and then force fielding a little, but Reavers just require micro in every regard: Sniping them, protecting them from beeing sniped, flying around the air transporter, sniping that... etc. They don't give a reward just by beeing there and a-clicking like Colossi do, but only reward microing players. Shouldn't that be the aim? That units aren't effective just by existing, but by beeing used well? I'm quite disappointed in most balance proposals ultimately beeing only about statistical values, "nurf damage, nurf build time, give me a counter unit" etc., instead of aiming to replace simple, stupid units with hard-to-use units that are only effective when used correctly. With units working the way like Colossi do, which is pretty independend of how they're beeing used, SC2 will never feel or be balanced right. Because every bit of statistical value will immediately show up in the result of a fight, without the buffering element of skill in between. | ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
pvZ in sc2 is different. Protoss can go on 3 base, make 50 cannons, and mass up. You cannot stop it because of cannons and you can't take the map like you can in bw cos it doesn't help you beat the army | ||
|
Snaphoo
United States614 Posts
On April 23 2011 05:59 Kipsate wrote: Slowing the Collosi will in fact reduce the mobility of the Protoss Deathball, allowing multipronged attacks(such as drop play by the Zerg) to be actually quite effective. One of the core problems of the Protoss deathball is that it is not only powerfull but also quite mobile. Are you trolling? Multi-pronged attacks are already extremely effective Protoss. The deathball is incredibly IMMOBILE, that is one of the reasons why drop play is so strong against it, particularly by T. Nydus play with Z has barely been tapped yet; the potential is difficult to understate. | ||
|
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
| ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
Even the most insane tactic has a shred of sanity to it. Tank initial damage with changelings Infestor drop their economy so they cant afford to get the deathball. Broodlord the colossi to lure stalkers and anti air away from them then hit em with corruptors or mutas. Baneling flanks/drops Infest gateway units into banelings/zergling Ultras with Queen transfusions backed by Roach/ling or Roach/Hydra (assuming creep from queens). Constant harass via corruption from Overseers on key production and research facilities, forcing protoss to remain defensive and delay deathball. Perhaps you are not losing when you engage the deathball, but when you allow the Protoss assemble it in the first place. Again, I am not the most qualified player so take this with a grain of salt and I understand of you disregard it completely. Also, I am aware that some of these tactics are flawed but they were just a small tidbit of creative thinking off the top of my head. | ||
|
GeminiOne
Germany87 Posts
| ||
|
DuneBug
United States668 Posts
But frankly I just don't like the rock paper scizzors matchup that PvX turns into. Terran/zerg mass units. Protoss gets colossi. Z/T get viking/corruptor. Protoss gets blink stalker. Just feels like a very boring dynamic to me. It also doesn't help that colossus are basically a move units that don't seem to have any 'wow' potential. I guess that's the real problem. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44271 Posts
ZvP: Corruptors, Mutalisks, Roaches PvP: Immortals, Colossi, Void Rays I agree that colossi are a defining factor of the Protoss army, but I certainly don't think that the races need to find more ways to deal damage to them. | ||
|
[MLG]GCA
United States90 Posts
Sitting back and massing an army that Collosus deals with extremely well (Roach/Hydra) and complaining when you lose to it in a straight up engagement is ludicrous. Roach/Hydra is an army that is very powerful in the midgame and becomes weaker later on. If you want to win with Mass Roach or Roach/Hydra, you need to solidify your advantage when it is strongest by agressively denying the Protoss a 3rd and dropping or Nydusing all over the place. If you want to play for a maxed vs maxed engagement, you'd better have plenty of Brood Lords and some Infestors. Is that really too much to ask for? Vikings, with their range of 9, are very well suited to deal with Collosus armies and are produced out of a Reactored Starport which you can also use for Medivacs to compliment Bio. Thor-based Mech armies also do well against Collosus armies, and Robo tech in general. Terran has ample ways to deal with a Collosus based army. Do I agree that a Collosus army is easy to use? Yes. But it is also very limited it it's micro capabilities and doesn't perform nearly as well split up. Find ways to improve your play and stop falling back on the developer to make your life easier. | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:15 DuneBug wrote: ZvP has a bunch of issues.. Part of the reason is the corruptor sucks. The devourer was well-designed. The corruptor is poorly designed and always has been although it was marginally better. But frankly I just don't like the rock paper scizzors matchup that PvX turns into. Terran/zerg mass units. Protoss gets colossi. Z/T get viking/corruptor. Protoss gets blink stalker. Just feels like a very boring dynamic to me. The main issue with that is actually not the army mix, but how the game plays out: Big army ball versus big army ball, even on high level playing. When games would be spread out further on maps and more small group battles would emerge around the map (as often seen in top tier broodwar play), this countering mechanics wouldn't be all that annoying anymore all of the sudden. Apart from that, Blizzard always played with that countering mechanics deliberately, they said so themselves over and over again and adjusted that bonus damage system accordingly... Has been critized ever since Beta, but it seems it required "imba-alert" before many people would notice that. | ||
|
Ezekyle
Australia607 Posts
| ||
|
Horse...falcon
United States1851 Posts
| ||
|
Euronyme
Sweden3804 Posts
On April 23 2011 05:59 Kipsate wrote: Slowing the Collosi will in fact reduce the mobility of the Protoss Deathball, allowing multipronged attacks(such as drop play by the Zerg) to be actually quite effective. One of the core problems of the Protoss deathball is that it is not only powerfull but also quite mobile. God I love when zerg players complain about the collosus being too fast but hydras off creep being so so soooo slow. Fun Fact: Collosi and hydras off creep have the same move speed. Yeah there you go, you can't drop harass because the protoss army that has the move speed of your slowest unit is too mobile? You can't make accurate balance decisions based off of lower level play.. Basically everything should be balanced around what's going on in the grandmaster league or tournaments. | ||
|
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
| ||
|
Striding Strider
United Kingdom787 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:25 ArvickHero wrote: I wonder if BW came out last year, people would complain about the absolute prevalence of Siege Tanks in all TvX matchups They would. And it'd be nerfed into dust. Same with the Reaver everyone's crying out for. Blizzard might give them you, but they'll be nerfed into the ground. Something like a massive damage decrease, only effects up to 3 units etc. | ||
| ||
