EPTPlease bring back the reaver for LotV - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Weavel
Finland9221 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On November 10 2014 14:13 SmileZerg wrote: 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. What was the Lurker's role and functions in SC1? Allow Zerg to be able to kill Terran's MnM packs. Stimmed Marines with upgrades and a large number of medics destroy anything that aren't sunkens or hive tech units / cracklings. Allow Zerg to be able to deal with Terran's bionic armies when going for a ranged composition (hydralurk); becomes gradually ineffective as Terran increases tank count and supply count. Allows a transition in PvZ from a Hydralisk heavy midgame to deal with large numbers of zealots / templar / archons; forces Protoss to diversify his composition to include more Dragoons. Give Zerg the ability to control space and territory on the map; especially strong above ramps vs MnM or holding ramps in general. Consequently, gives Zerg the ability to contain / pressure an opponent. Low supply worker harassment (either late game or dependent on the Zerg player's build choices). Are any of these roles fulfilled in SC2? Banelings are fully utilized when dealing with MMM armies vs Terran when going for Ling/Bling/Mutalisks. Banelings: low supply harassment vs Terran with a couple Zerglings along for the ride. Roach Hydralisk, the primary bread and butter of the Zerg's ranged composition in SC2 vs Terran, also deals with MMM armies very well (especially with upgrades!). Roach Hydralisk also becomes ineffective when Terran's siege tank count increases just as Hydralurk becomes ineffective in SC1 as Terran has more and more siege tanks to complement their bionic army. The Roach Hydralisk player will try to circumvent increasing siege tank count with some sort of tech, whether it's Brood Lords/Swarm Hosts to attack the army without being hit by the tank fire, Vipers for blinding cloud, or some combination of both as the game goes longer. Similarly, HydraLurk Zerg will try to circumvent the siege tanks in with Guardians to attack the army without being hit by the tank fire, Defilers for dark swarm (and plague) or some combination of the two. Swarm Hosts, whether they are actually made within the PvZ matchup or not, forces Protoss to account for them in their compositon; any kind of heavy Zealot / Templar composition would be shredded by Roaches or Roach Hydra, Swarm Hosts would completely wreck that army. Protoss has to start including more Collosus into his deathball if there are Swarm Hosts on the map otherwise he will not be able to move his army swiftly enough (Locusts take at least 4 Collosus to clean through efficiently without losing too many units). Swarm Hosts: allow Zerg to siege, control space / territory and apply pressure on opponents in general. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/328391-developers-update-heart-of-the-swarm The swarm host is still serving well as a zerg siege unit that can burrow and pressure the enemy from a distance (in a very zergy way), but the viper has some slightly different new abilities. In addition to Abduct, the viper also has the ability to blind biological units in an area of effect. Blinded units have their range reduced to 1. This is obviously effective against terran infantry as well as zerg roach and hydra armies. The viper can also regain energy by feeding off of minerals. This locks up the mineral patch and prevents it from being harvested, so you want to use this ability away from your base. So Swarm Hosts had this role (previously held by the Lurker) intended from the start right? "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." "Taking a bit more of an aggressive role in harassment... Massing swarm hosts will not be an option." http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/470781-legacy-of-the-void-announced Swarm Hosts: No longer need to burrow to launch locusts, can upgrade locusts to be flying. Blizzard made a point of saying that mass Swarm Host will no longer be a viable strategy due to lower spawn timers for the locusts. Locusts must be spawned manually. Sorry I missed how this pushes Swarm Host away from the Lurker's role that it played before considering that the lurker was used as harassment as well... And considering that they want to have Swarm Hosts out on the field be complimentary to the Zerg army instead of the core component this makes it even more like the Lurker... "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." So hey. Roaches right? They're ranged units. Hydralisks... subsequently Lurkers. They're ranged units. Hydralisks... they're up in the tech tree being a lair unit. Roaches are Hatchery tech. You knew this right? WoL... HOTS... either game you don't go to Hydralisks straight away because you'll die to Roaches... so you make Roaches... LOTV. Do Hydralisks come out before Roaches? Do Lurkers come out before Hydralisks? Do Lurkers come out before Roaches? lol. Why don't you fuck off before you accuse someone of being an idiot, because clearly you need to take your own advice when you choose to do this and use baseless logic to project. Don't be one of those idiots. + Show Spoiler + "But wait what about Mutalisks vs Mutalisks!!" you ask ZvZ in SC1 (which is mostly Mutalisk vs Mutalisk)... you don't go Lurkers because of this. ZvZ in SC1 where one player goes for non Mutalisks (for whatever reason)... you don't build Lurkers... because they don't shoot up!! Lurkers in SC2: PROBABLY WON'T SHOOT UP. | ||
|
Heartland
Sweden24580 Posts
On November 10 2014 16:44 DinoMight wrote: Reaver has no place in SC2. Protoss already has plenty of AoE damage and units clump a lot more in SC2 (making Reavers VERY strong vs. Bio/Hydras). Plus, since it's a ground unit, there would be no way to engage Reavers (unlike how Vikings can shoot at Colossus now). Reaver/Storm would make bio unplayable. A lot of hate targeted at the Colossus in this thread- but take a minute to think about it.. it's okay for SOME units to be big ol' A-move units. Besides at the top level Colossus are hardly A-moved... they're microed forwards/backwards, spread out, clumped up, stutter stepped (depending on the situation) and good players often target down specific units with them (Hydras/Marines, instead of Roach/Marauder). Yeah, and for all the talk about Colossus being "no micro" there is a very real micro war between vikings/corruptors (and occasionally tempests) vs Colossus and blink stalkers. Reavers wouldn't be targeted by corruptors or vikings but just exist in the middle of the Protoss army and untouchable. That'd be way worse than the supposedly a-move colossus. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On November 10 2014 17:49 Heartland wrote: Yeah, and for all the talk about Colossus being "no micro" there is a very real micro war between vikings/corruptors (and occasionally tempests) vs Colossus and blink stalkers. Reavers wouldn't be targeted by colossus or vikings but just exist in the middle of the Protoss army and untouchable. That'd be way worse than the supposedly a-move colossus. Colossi actually do overkill right now. Leave them to their own devices and they'll target the same 5 marines or so. Just make them higher damage, slower attack speed. Like 20 (x2) attack, 2 attack speed. Spread them out manually and they'll one-shot lings and get marines pretty low (especially with upgrades). Keep them clumped up and they'll still do damage, but far short of their potential. | ||
|
yubo56
687 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:17 royalroadweed wrote: The reaver was brought back. Its now called the siege tank. Did nobody else notice this? Enormous splash damage. The thing is that if we actually get some gosu micro done, this will have the same problem as the original BW reaver, "the shuttle that shot scarabs" since the tank has no attack delay when dropped (from what I saw), so it'll literally be a flying seige tank ._. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On November 10 2014 18:05 yubo56 wrote: Did nobody else notice this? Enormous splash damage. The thing is that if we actually get some gosu micro done, this will have the same problem as the original BW reaver, "the shuttle that shot scarabs" since the tank has no attack delay when dropped (from what I saw), so it'll literally be a flying seige tank ._. Soo... we just implement cooldown again? | ||
|
robopork
United States511 Posts
On November 10 2014 17:49 Heartland wrote: Yeah, and for all the talk about Colossus being "no micro" there is a very real micro war between vikings/corruptors (and occasionally tempests) vs Colossus and blink stalkers. Reavers wouldn't be targeted by corruptors or vikings but just exist in the middle of the Protoss army and untouchable. That'd be way worse than the supposedly a-move colossus. I have to strongly disagree with this. A reaver is next to useless without a shuttle to put it in and a capable pair of hands to micro it out of harms way. When blizzard said the colossus filled the role of the reaver I couldn't help laughing, and I don't think I'm the only one. Their movement speed is so incredibly low that they can't operate without a shuttle, and the shuttle micro is so involved that they're functionally unmassable. They are, first and foremost, harassment with longevity and real skill demands *coughoraclecough* and early/midgame base defence, secondarily a supporting unit that requires a crazy amount of skill to use well and not lose to to your opponents anti air or focus fire from the ground. The colossus is a deathball army backbone unit with no real secondary uses that needs the support of a wide array of cheaper units to simply keep it and it's five buddies alive while they kill fucking everything. Two hugely different roles, two hugely different units. And while this is turning into a rant, I'll say that the number of vikings/corruptors necessary to deal with reavers would be a lot lower since you only have to be able to one shot a warp prism, not a very tall order. That micro battle would outstrip what we see between colossus and those same units by miles, and would also free up Z and T supply for more interesting units. It seems like there's a pretty vocal anti reaver crowd that joined after bw, making me think that a lot of them aren't familiar with how they worked and don't want them in the game out of fear that it will just add to the aoe shit storm that protoss armies wind up being after 15 minutes. It suffices to say that the unit's design inherently prevents that. Those fears are probably misplaced. As far as the disruptor goes, someone above astutely observed that it's the reaver without the reaver... a reusable scarab, provided it survives to get reused, which is pretty unlikely. Just look at the widow mine. It's going to be a throw away unit so unless the price point is really low, like the widow mine, they're not going to get built. Higher risk, lower reward, and another unit in the Protoss arsenal that derives all of its strength from spells and doesn't have the brawn to stand against much of anything without a Templar or colossus at it's back. It all sounds pretty flaccid to me. The voice for bringing back the reaver has been so loud since SC2 launched not because a bunch of nostalgic nearing 30 nerds want to play with their childhood toys, but rather because people who actually used the unit and watched the pros use it are generally convinced that its design was a stroke of genius and it genuinely offers something to sc2. I think it could even have its attack be retooled to behave more like the disruptor, but actually be fired from a unit and not suicided into the opposing army. In short, put the reaver back with the scarab and go from there. | ||
|
Lumi
United States1612 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
But obviously iam in favor of removing colossus pretty hard. Its impossible to deal with the colossus with your ground armee, you need Vikings/corruptors or Abduct. The game for terran becomes about killing the colossus and protoss job is about killing the vikings. It shouldnt be like this, the 75% of the enemy armee should be relevant. This opens up strategy, tactic, micro and decision making. It creates a much broader uncertainy which blizzard talked about in their multiplayer panel. Viking vs colossus Corruptors vs colossus Has never been exciting. Little micro is required here and that micro i do not call fun. In lotv however, they might fix this. Terran can perhaps finally add tanks now, they have the new cyclone and herz. Zerg has the new lurkers with 9range(upgraded) vs colossus 8range(nerfed). SH might work or not, hard to tell atm. So it seems possibilites are here in unit choice(if it works that is). Hopefully it will be possible to never add vikings as terran anymore vs the colossus play from protoss. However, its still almost impossible microing against the colossus with your ground armee. The unit is to dominant. I only see two options here: Either they tweak the colossus alot, making sure more units work other than viking/corruptor, and other core ground units can micro against it - Against the protoss armee. And they do not make it as dominant as it has been. They add micro required for it. If that doesnt work. Then just remove the unit. We have seen this guy for 4years now, we dont want hardcounters and we do want the armee to matter for each race and not having 1unit be 90% important. If reaver is added: its possible to micro against it with your ground units. Possible to targetfire the warprpism making the reaver very vulnerable. Using it to the full effects do require targetfiring for the protoss. Positives: -The unit cant walk above other units - Like the colossus, making it hard to have all reavers effective in bigger fights -The unit can overkill - Making it possible to do micro such as have 1unit draw the damage. Move the unit that is tagetfire away from your other units. -The unit has a big vulnerability with their extremely slow movement - Making it very vulnerable without warprpism support or just support in general. -The unit is good for defence versus zerg and terran bio. The reaver is great with harass. Requires good positioning to defend and to an extent you need micro to defend. While protoss needs micro to harass. Negatives: The harass wasnt nearly as fun vs zerg as vs terran mech. When reaver harassed versus mech it was alot about positioning and targetfire. Versus zerg it felt like zerg just massed a very big size of units and outnumber the reaver. Felt it was less about micro vs zerg. It sometimes felt as the reaver was to dominant in certain scenarious. Versus zerg and protoss. -- But this isnt broodwar, this is lotv. Alot is different. The reaver doesnt need to be like the broodwar-reaver. The scarab doesnt have to do 100% aoe dmg. The projectile and range doesnt have to be the same. Look at lurker: BW: 125 hp, 6range, 1armor. Lotv: 200Hp, 6range(9 with upgrade), 1armor Their movementspeed and attackspeed differs also i think. Viper: Abduct could be replaced to something more interesting perhaps. And, dont forget, their other spell which reduces range works great vs the reaver. Hope they might look at ghost. I dont know, some cool spell vs mechanical units. | ||
|
wishr
Russian Federation262 Posts
| ||
|
Clonester
Germany2808 Posts
ScII is not Broodwar and will never be it. They dont want Broodwar Economy, they dont want reavers. It is not Broodwar. | ||
|
Crownlol
United States3726 Posts
What Protoss needs is a new, mobile gateway unit that both encourages and rewards aggressively taking expansions. If you want BW so bad, just play Starbow (it's pretty good). | ||
|
Heartland
Sweden24580 Posts
On November 10 2014 21:33 robopork wrote: I have to strongly disagree with this. A reaver is next to useless without a shuttle to put it in and a capable pair of hands to micro it out of harms way. When blizzard said the colossus filled the role of the reaver I couldn't help laughing, and I don't think I'm the only one. Their movement speed is so incredibly low that they can't operate without a shuttle, and the shuttle micro is so involved that they're functionally unmassable. They are, first and foremost, harassment with longevity and real skill demands *coughoraclecough* and early/midgame base defence, secondarily a supporting unit that requires a crazy amount of skill to use well and not lose to to your opponents anti air or focus fire from the ground. The colossus is a deathball army backbone unit with no real secondary uses that needs the support of a wide array of cheaper units to simply keep it and it's five buddies alive while they kill fucking everything. Two hugely different roles, two hugely different units. And while this is turning into a rant, I'll say that the number of vikings/corruptors necessary to deal with reavers would be a lot lower since you only have to be able to one shot a warp prism, not a very tall order. That micro battle would outstrip what we see between colossus and those same units by miles, and would also free up Z and T supply for more interesting units. It seems like there's a pretty vocal anti reaver crowd that joined after bw, making me think that a lot of them aren't familiar with how they worked and don't want them in the game out of fear that it will just add to the aoe shit storm that protoss armies wind up being after 15 minutes. It suffices to say that the unit's design inherently prevents that. Those fears are probably misplaced. As far as the disruptor goes, someone above astutely observed that it's the reaver without the reaver... a reusable scarab, provided it survives to get reused, which is pretty unlikely. Just look at the widow mine. It's going to be a throw away unit so unless the price point is really low, like the widow mine, they're not going to get built. Higher risk, lower reward, and another unit in the Protoss arsenal that derives all of its strength from spells and doesn't have the brawn to stand against much of anything without a Templar or colossus at it's back. It all sounds pretty flaccid to me. The voice for bringing back the reaver has been so loud since SC2 launched not because a bunch of nostalgic nearing 30 nerds want to play with their childhood toys, but rather because people who actually used the unit and watched the pros use it are generally convinced that its design was a stroke of genius and it genuinely offers something to sc2. I think it could even have its attack be retooled to behave more like the disruptor, but actually be fired from a unit and not suicided into the opposing army. In short, put the reaver back with the scarab and go from there. I think your best point is their low speed and that that would somehow make them less masseable. The rest of your points are a lot weaker. Why is it intrinsically more interesting with prism/reaver vs vikings than colossus vs vikings? Colossus can walk up and down cliffs to be positioned differently, they can and are microed in and out of prisms as well, they have to dance in an intricate way versus Terran armies... You do need a good amount of vikings to one-shot a prism, more than what you have mid-game versus Colossus so those numbers would remain as they are. I just think Reavers will sit in the middle of a Protoss army, surrounded by forcefields and blast apart all infantry. And no-one can do anything to them because of FF's and zealot walls. You won't even need Stalkers as much as you do now because you don't need to fight off enemy flyers from your colossus. In BW Reaver-Shuttle drops were one of the premier Protoss cheeses that was hated just as much as you're spewing hate on Oracles. It's just rose-tinted nostalgia. I've also watched entire reruns of OSL:s and MSL:s, I constantly watch the classic BW Vods, I watch most Sospa-tours and I like Protoss players in BW and in sc2 so I don't think I am the right guy to say I don't know anything about Reavers. | ||
|
ciox
58 Posts
I just think Reavers will sit in the middle of a Protoss army, surrounded by forcefields and blast apart all infantry. And no-one can do anything to them because of FF's and zealot walls. You won't even need Stalkers as much as you do now because you don't need to fight off enemy flyers from your colossus. Aren't scarabs supposed to use pathing and collide with units? It would be very hard for scarabs to make it out if the Reavers are surrounded in a deathball. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
In BW Reaver-Shuttle drops were one of the premier Protoss cheeses that was hated just as much as you're spewing hate on Oracles This is false. Stop talk shit please. About your other points: You are right that forcefields exist. But zerg do have roach with burrow and reaver would not one-shot them in broodwar. Ofcourse, the scarab dmg might change in lotv. Forcefields can be destroyed by ravagers, open up even more options for zerg. Vikings,corruptors to kill the warprism over killing the colossus is very different since this is just an option for terr/zerg and not mandatory. This is to just make the reavers vulnerable. There will still be possible to attack with your ground units against the reaver, doesnt even need to build viking/corruptor. Forcefields+reaver vs terran bio tho. Might open up more gameplay? Might be to strong? Idk, hard to say. With reaver, its possible to just have 1 or 2 and move out. And they are supporting the armee well. The colossus doesnt really work this. To be clear, if you move out with 1 or 2 colossus, you need a big support armee. While with reavers, the armee can be small. | ||
|
Heartland
Sweden24580 Posts
On November 11 2014 00:26 ciox wrote: Aren't scarabs supposed to use pathing and collide with units? It would be very hard for scarabs to make it out if the Reavers are surrounded in a deathball. That's an assumption. I don't think the Starbow ones do that, for example. But it doesn't matter, they can be in the front of a deathball or just in a line. If anything tries to go forward to snipe them, discounting late-game Vipers now, they will get incinerated by Reaver fire and the toss army. I just imagine a situation where we have immortal-all ins except with Reavers instead. That will be fun. | ||
|
syroz
France249 Posts
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. Bring back the reaver (or something close) and remove the colossus! The colossus is iconic but one of the big issue of Sc2. (brings death balls, aoe without enought micro etc) | ||
|
Wpcwe
Russian Federation126 Posts
| ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
| ||
| ||
