EPTThe phoenix is already an harassing air unit..
New Zerg Unit in Heart of The Swarm - Page 119
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Patate
Canada441 Posts
The phoenix is already an harassing air unit.. | ||
|
No_Roo
United States905 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:09 Patate wrote: I'm currently underwhelmed folks... The phoenix is already an harassing air unit.. I smell an air caster unit, not an AA unit. | ||
|
Dugrok
Canada377 Posts
| ||
|
features
Ireland160 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:09 Patate wrote: I'm currently underwhelmed folks... The phoenix is already an harassing air unit.. If that's the corsair expect the Pheonix to be removed...... it didn't fulfil its role, which was essentially to combat mutas. I do enjoy the graviton beam though..... be sweet if the corsair inherited the spell  | ||
|
WilDMousE
Chile1335 Posts
![[image loading]](http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080909113932/es.pokemon/images/thumb/e/ee/Paras.png/200px-Paras.png) Once seen... can't be unseen. | ||
|
DARKHYDRA
United States303 Posts
On October 18 2011 05:32 Condor Hero wrote: Arbiter was glorious in BW, vs Tanks. I fail to see how it would be good in SC2, perhaps someone could enlighten me. vs Terran it seems by the time it comes out, Terran would just rain down EMPs on the Protoss and every single benefit it would provide is out the window. vs Zerg I guess the stasis would be okay vs Hive tech but but Mothership is already pretty good with vortex. Vs EMP u can split all your arbiters as opposed to just 1 mothership. Vs Zerg its harder to take out multiple arbiters that mass cloak vs 1 mothership + zerg detection took a big hit in the transition to SC2. Vortex may be better than stasis but again you can only have 1 mothership vs multiple arbiters. On October 18 2011 09:50 0neder wrote: Not really. I am a designer and the Colossus is fundamentally boring. I say this objectively. I loved the reaver. I don't care if they don't add more BW units into SC2. I DO care if boring or bad units stay in SC2. You can't keep adding units without diluting racial diversity and excitement. The Colossus should be replaced with a robo splash unit for the following reasons: It looks silly and unrealistic. It is too pointy and too zergy. It's attack visually obstructs the battlefield. It's attack is not exciting enough. Personally my problem with the colossus is not that it is boring, I dont think that at all. My problem is that it deviates too much from the typical characteristics of those types of units(ranged splash damage). For example a siege tank has an average movement speed but to access its ranged splash attack it must become completely immobile, same aplies to the lurker, the reaver in this case can actually move and shoot like a normal unit but to make up for this it has a much slower move rate. Now take a look at the colossus, not only does this unit move and shoot like a normal unit it also moves at a normal rate and if that wasnt enough it can walk through units and cliffs. The colossus is simply too mobile for the type of unit that it is, that to me is the design flaw. | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:26 WilDMousE wrote: I beleive.... it's a paras! Once seen... can't be unseen. nicely done! it really cannot be unseen! | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:10 No_Roo wrote: I smell an air caster unit, not an AA unit. Almost everything Toss has is a caster. Just replace the mothership or the colossus and be done with it. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
[B]On October 18 2011 10:51 DARKHYDRA wrote:[/B Personally my problem with the colossus is not that it is boring, I dont think that at all. My problem is that it deviates too much from the typical characteristics of those types of units(ranged splash damage). For example a siege tank has an average movement speed but to access its ranged splash attack it must become completely immobile, same aplies to the lurker, the reaver in this case can actually move and shoot like a normal unit but to make up for this it has a much slower move rate. Now take a look at the colossus, not only does this unit move and shoot like a normal unit it also moves at a normal rate and if that wasnt enough it can walk through units and cliffs. The colossus is simply too mobile for the type of unit that it is, that to me is the design flaw. I completely agree with this point, in addition to the ones I addressed. Basically everything about it is wrong. | ||
|
Get.Midikem
Sweden312 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:02 0neder wrote: Actually I do. Every day I design products that I don't necessarily want. I design them for other people and their preferences. Designers are able to see things holistically and evaulate them on a practical level. Can you refute any of the three points I made? Or just reply with one liners in the hopes that because they're concise, we will think you are correct? The problem with your argument is that, well, it's not an argument. There's not much that you say "objectively". First off, you state you love the Reaver. That's fine; that's your prerogative. But that's an opinion, not objective analysis. An objective analysis would, at the very least, make a fact-based argument about what the Reaver does that you love so much. All you do is state that you love it and expect the reader to fill in the details. Two of your three points against the Colossus are similarly not objective. Your first point is 100% opinion; to me, it looks like a perfectly Protoss-ish unit. And it certainly fits with the rest of the Protoss units in the game. As for "unrealistic", are you kidding? Yes, the race of psionics with walking quadruped tanks and a large worm that produces balls of energy are totally realistic. The Colossus is no more ridiculous than anything else the Protoss do. Your third point is also opinion. It's attack isn't "exciting" to you. That's fine, but that's not an objective analysis. Personally, I've always loved beam attacks, so seeing a Colossus burn down Marines with lasers is far more exciting than watching those pitiful Scarabs from the Reaver. But I recognize that as pure opinion; I would never claim that that is an objective analysis of the excitement level between the two units. The closest to objective analysis your post comes is your second point. The beams do obstruct the battlefield. However, that could be toned down with a proper visual effect. A thinner, translucent beam, for example. You could still see it, but it wouldn't be as in-your-face as the current one. You don't have to remove the unit or its attack to fix that problem. Granted, Blizzard isn't going to do that, because there are a lot of visual effects in SC2 that obstruct the battlefield. Void Rays, Banelings, even Tank shots momentarily. That just doesn't seem to be something they're thinking in terms of. Just because you design stuff does not make you a game designer. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:51 DARKHYDRA wrote: Personally my problem with the colossus is not that it is boring, I dont think that at all. My problem is that it deviates too much from the typical characteristics of those types of units(ranged splash damage). For example a siege tank has an average movement speed but to access its ranged splash attack it must become completely immobile, same aplies to the lurker, the reaver in this case can actually move and shoot like a normal unit but to make up for this it has a much slower move rate. Now take a look at the colossus, not only does this unit move and shoot like a normal unit it also moves at a normal rate and if that wasnt enough it can walk through units and cliffs. The colossus is simply too mobile for the type of unit that it is, that to me is the design flaw. To be fair to Blizzard (though not really that fair since they had 3 years to notice this), the Colossus was not originally intended to be an AoE unit. Go track down the original Protoss reveal video from 2007; it was a single-target unit originally. The design was an attempt to have a high-damage, single-target unit that didn't suck against mobs of low-health units. It didn't work out. Less than a year after the Protoss reveal, they changed it to their current AoE attack. I blame this mainly on the fact that someone at Blizzard probably said, "We're keeping the Colossus in the game, because it's a big War of the World's type unit and looks cool." Under that directive, the game designers had to figure out a way to make the unit useful. | ||
|
Seldentar
United States888 Posts
On October 18 2011 08:12 eviltomahawk wrote: New theory. The Protoss unit's preview is slow in arriving. What Protoss unit is excruciatingly slow? That's right. THE REAVER. As a result, I'm pretty sure it's a Reaver or Reaver-variant, or perhaps even a cloaked Reaver assuming that my previous theory is correct. What part of new don't you understand? You are merely using ridiculous logic to explain why the new unit will be something that already exists... Do you really think blizzard would sacrifice innovation to bring back an old unit or something similar? At least I hope they wouldn't do something like that lol... | ||
|
Seldentar
United States888 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:10 No_Roo wrote: I smell an air caster unit, not an AA unit. I believe this may be true and that it will be able to attack air to ground, likely AOE to deal with bio. Would be exactly what I was looking for | ||
|
DARKHYDRA
United States303 Posts
On October 19 2011 03:11 NicolBolas wrote:Your third point is also opinion. It's attack isn't "exciting" to you. That's fine, but that's not an objective analysis. Personally, I've always loved beam attacks, so seeing a Colossus burn down Marines with lasers is far more exciting than watching those pitiful Scarabs from the Reaver. But I recognize that as pure opinion; I would never claim that that is an objective analysis of the excitement level between the two units. Pitiful? o.O Giant hadoukens that melt EVERYTHING on hit... pitiful... The impact sound effect from scarabs is more exciting then anything from sc2 toss.[/EXAGERATION] | ||
|
O.Golden_ne
Australia204 Posts
| ||
|
VoiceOfDecember
Australia206 Posts
Check the first comments of that video between applecider42 and the video poster Triceron00 champ | ||
|
darkest44
United States1009 Posts
Yes, blizzard is hypeing a second ultralisk unit that only looks slightly different and swings his appendages differently, at the cost of being only half as strong as an ultra. They're also adding a new baneling that explodes red instead of green goo, and does half damage, in case anyone didn't like green. | ||
|
People_0f_Color
177 Posts
On October 18 2011 10:04 features wrote: Seriously why are people complaining about the Collosus? Its a bit too powerful in PvP but in the other matchups its the most unreliable unit in the game! Just over compensate with Viking or Corrupter and you'll breeze it, especially in TvP. The Collosus is only really effective in a late game; haha guess what I have all of a sudden! 4 Collosus say bye bye to your army! ........But thats your own fucking fault for not scouting Collosus is a rubbish unit, and as cool as it looks I wouldnt mind to see it removed or tweaked to the point of losing its legs, falling on its back, and shooting strange little blue balls like a big fat multiple amputee boss! I think the point is, that's booring. When a unit is impossible to make major mistakes with (like the colossus) and just annihilates all things and the only strategic options you have is "just kill it as fast as you can", its booooring. Colossus are always less fun to watch than High templars, but they are so good there's almost no reason why you would choose an HT over them. Collossus removes the drama of the fight. The drama is in the build up to the fight/in the production (well, does he have 4 collossus? Okay, does the opponent have 13 corruptors?) That sucks 100% of the time for anyone facing collosus, watching games with collosus or even using colossus. | ||
|
zawk9
United States427 Posts
| ||
| ||
