On November 10 2014 11:12 Lumi wrote: Colossus in a deathball is one thing.. we've all experienced the horror. But imagine 6-8 reavers vs a zerg army... are you kidding me... OW NO.
Well in any event, I believe Collosus and Reavers cannot co-exist (especially with the inclusion of the Disrupter.) One or both would have to go for the Reaver to be included. But being horrified about the thought of Reavers, Collosus, and Disrupters in the same army, has little bearing on whether Shuttle-Reaver is a better set of unit interactions. No unit can be introduced whole-sale without changing how the rest of the army interacts. So it makes little sense to assume the idea is just to throw Reavers in with zero changes to anything else about the Protoss army. I doubt anyone would argue for that.
On November 10 2014 11:12 Lumi wrote: Colossus in a deathball is one thing.. we've all experienced the horror. But imagine 6-8 reavers vs a zerg army... are you kidding me... OW NO.
A zerg army could run away on SC2 creep from the reavers. They are really really slow. A collossus army can chase you :O
I love the reaver but I'm fine with it not being added... as long as the colossus gets a revamp, and the disruptor is more than a glorified mine.
What I'd like for the disruptor is some utility, not just a single minded AoE bomb.
Some ideas: - For the basic ability (the detonate), have it be a chargeable ability (sort of like Nunu's ultimate in LoL), where it drains mana the longer you charge it, but bigger aoe/more damage in return. Let this ability be symbolized by a red glow. - Give it a second ability where it can perhaps function as a mobile shield battery or mana transfer unit, something supportish so it can have a use even if you dont want to run it head first into the enemy. Let this ability be symbolized by a blue glow. - Perhaps something akin to immolation? I.E Damage over time to units surrounding it, in return for constant mana drain. Let this be symbolized by a green glow.
<- None of these are super well thought out ideas, just off the top of my head. They are just meant to be examples of the kind of unit I'd prefer over a single ability quasi-suicide bomb.
I don't think they should bring some old units back for the sake of "it was fun in bw", I think we will see lurker in lotv will be quite a boring unit and not anything you liked in bw.
On November 10 2014 11:40 Liquid`Jinro wrote: I love the reaver but I'm fine with it not being added... as long as the colossus gets a revamp, and the disruptor is more than a glorified mine.
What I'd like for the disruptor is some utility, not just a single minded AoE bomb.
Some ideas: - For the basic ability (the detonate), have it be a chargeable ability (sort of like Nunu's ultimate in LoL), where it drains mana the longer you charge it, but bigger aoe/more damage in return. Let this ability be symbolized by a red glow. - Give it a second ability where it can perhaps function as a mobile shield battery or mana transfer unit, something supportish so it can have a use even if you dont want to run it head first into the enemy. Let this ability be symbolized by a blue glow. - Perhaps something akin to immolation? I.E Damage over time to units surrounding it, in return for constant mana drain. Let this be symbolized by a green glow.
<- None of these are super well thought out ideas, just off the top of my head. They are just meant to be examples of the kind of unit I'd prefer over a single ability quasi-suicide bomb.
The one thing you mentioned in there I really felt would be added in the final expansion was shield battery. I would love to see it brought back.
On November 10 2014 11:42 ETisME wrote: I don't think they should bring some old units back for the sake of "it was fun in bw", I think we will see lurker in lotv will be quite a boring unit and not anything you liked in bw.
I didn't watch much pro BW, but wasn't the defiler very important to have in combination with the lurkers with dark swarm? I kinda wish blinding cloud was changed for dark swarm for this purpose. Blinding cloud isn't used that much anyway.
Anyway, back on the topic of the reaver being added back. I agree with Jinro - the Disruptor should just have a secondary ability instead of the reaver being reintroduced as the sc2 engine is too "perfect" for the latter to work well I feel. That being said, I like the Starbow approach to balancing the reaver by marking the unit targetted by the scarab so the defender can pull it away and avoid massive splash damage but I had very limited experience with it.
hmm I would like to see the reaver instead of the disruptor. I think I like the old colossi idea pre WoL where they showed some videos of it targetting single units. Imagine a battle takes place, you spread out, do the obligatory a-move lol, use colossi to target the massive units and then drop reavers and target fire in the middle of the army while keeping the prism active (and re-fixing army positioning or storming if there are hts etc....). That way, you can still keep the colossi and add in the reaver in place of the disruptor.
On November 10 2014 10:55 mishimaBeef wrote: The new self destruct unit seems like a reaver whose scarab you control.
Therefore not quite as interesting. A lot of the micro came from the pick up and dropping in very precise positions. This is particularly the case when you look at how the damage works in comparison. Disrupter splashes out in all directions, so the goal would be get it into the middle, any middle will do, and destruct.
Scarab splashed back, so it was better to pick back targets to splash back to the forward targets. Therefore targetting specific units was a big deal. Also keeping the shuttle moving so that it wouldn't deaccelerate before you pick up your reaver again. In addition, dropping a zealot to absorb the tank shot so the reaver could get its shot off and sniping the tank without dying immediately. Shuttle-reaver is really its own micro game.
I wonder with the worker changes, how well a reaver would actually do in practice. On the one hand, there will be less workers at each base? (Reavers work best when units are clumped together- an over-saturated base is a prime target.) But if you bump up the splash to deal with spread out worker lines, military units clump up way more easily. But the damage must be big for a reaver, or reaver equivalent (reaver-analog, if you will) to work. The reason why you don't see collosus-warp-prism micro to the same extent as reaver-shuttle is at least partially because Collosus needs to fire continously for a period of time before killing anything.
Whereas a reaver-analog needs to be able to kill small units in one shot burst damage with a slow cool down, and things like tanks in two shots. Otherwise there is little reason to keep on picking up and dropping off the reaver-analog. You would be better off just leaving them on the ground, firing continuously (like the Cyclone.) The playstyle of the reaver-analog is opportunism. Pickup and drop-off where there is an opening, take your pot shot and run. Rarely commit, and usually retreat, loop around, and find a new hole to exploit. But you need that one shot damage to really count for a gamer to sink their apm into it.
edit By the way- reaver duds are not as random as people think. The scarab is on a timer, if the scarab does not reach its target before the timer completes, the scarab explodes. SC2 could create a similar weapon if they called it a Time Bomb. That is essentially what a scarab is. What caused scarabs to 'bug' was the scarab takes up space and therefore needs to find a gap for it to go through, if there is no gap, the scarab must go around. A small gap will bug out the scarab for a little until it tries to go around... and then the timer goes off. With building placement, you could actually create anti-scarab gaps, forcing scarabs to go around the long way, and thereby hopefully running out the timer. The same thing with running worker lines away. Run directly away, and you could run out the timer. Run perpindicular, and the scarab will catch up and blow your workers to smithereens.
To add on scarabs, if you know what unit the scarab is targeting, you can technically hold other units infront of that unit and delay the scarab even further so that you can have the timer run out and it ends up being a dud. Alternative is to just run the unit away from the others to minimize/avoid splash and only have that unit take the damage/die. As mentioned, reavers make for some intense back and forth games even producing a unique style of play: corsair/reaver in PvZ (even PvT as well) with disruption web. It's one strong style of play but you also need to be really active and it's very micro intensive as well.
Hmm as a Protoss, though I really liked Reaver before I still voted no because:
-.Protoss already has harassment units i.e Oracle,DT,Immo Drops. - Would be redundant to Collosus splash damage in your main Army - Hard to make it effective using Prims in battle since SC2 gameplay is just way faster than BW
I want the second protoss unit to be there because it fills a role for the protoss arsenal of LotV, not because there was a cool unit with that name in another game.
On November 10 2014 07:17 nkr wrote: What role would the reaver fill? It doens't make any sense to add reavers while there's the colossus ;/
exactly add the reaver and take out the colossus
I love the direction that they are heading but I think we need more changes. It worries me that this is the last expansion. If its not perfect then 5-10 years down the line we will wish the had made that one more change to make the game more fun. Do we REALLY want to be using collosi for 10 years ? I mean come on its just a boring brainless unit and worse it most definitely encourages deatball ... I mean what else are you going to do with it ? I mean do SOMETHING to it. This is Blizzards chance to make a game that we want to play till the day we die. Its already great and the changes they are making are heading in that direction. I just want them to strive for greatness with this expansion. They are already targeting some of the "boring units" I hope they keep heading in this direction and making changes. If we could let them know we love what they are doing but want just a little more ( maybe a second Toss unit) then this game might be the BW of SC2.
Y'know it dawns on me now that the Colossus is actually the unit I hate to see the most in any game of SC2, regardless of which side I want to win. Even when White-Ra is playing, which is generally one of those times I will cheer for a Protoss player over a Zerg, I still hate to see those things. They just make games turn stale and unwatchable so fast in every match-up.
Even if we don't get the Reaver back, I'd be happy as hell if they just removed the Colossus and buffed the new Disruptor instead.
There needs to be a ranged high dps gateway unit. It's impossible to fight bio lategame without strong AOE so it encourages the deathball crap.
OR
Replace Sentry with a mobile/harass gateway unit like a hellion that protoss can fight for map control with. This way protoss doesn't have to rely on panic forcefields and can threaten zergs that try to overdrone instead of being tempted to allin everygame
On November 10 2014 11:42 ETisME wrote: I don't think they should bring some old units back for the sake of "it was fun in bw", I think we will see lurker in lotv will be quite a boring unit and not anything you liked in bw.
It's role is already filled in by the Baneling and the Swarm Host.
Honestly is there a point building a Lurker considering the cost time and extra action (morph from hydralisk) compared to a cost efficient Swarm Host?
Yeah, maybe it allows you to have faster transition timing between a Hydralisk army, but if your opponent already has an army (Collosus, Siege Tanks) that deals very well with Hydralisks it's probably going to deal very well with Lurkers.
On November 10 2014 11:42 ETisME wrote: I don't think they should bring some old units back for the sake of "it was fun in bw", I think we will see lurker in lotv will be quite a boring unit and not anything you liked in bw.
It's role is already filled in by the Baneling and the Swarm Host.
Honestly is there a point building a Lurker considering the cost time and extra action (morph from hydralisk) compared to a cost efficient Swarm Host?
Yeah, maybe it allows you to have faster transition timing between a Hydralisk army, but if your opponent already has an army (Collosus, Siege Tanks) that deals very well with Hydralisks it's probably going to deal very well with Lurkers.
Don't be one of those idiots who think that the Swarm Host and Lurker ever had a single thing in common besides doing something attack-related while burrowed.
ESPECIALLY don't be one of those guys now that the Swarm Host has been redesigned to be even further away from the niche the Lurker fills.
Also go look up the Blizzon multiplayer panel where David Kim talks about the new units. You'll realize the Lurker doesn't overlap with the Baneling either because one of its main intended roles is to break the Roach vs Roach meta in ZvZ.
EPT
