| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Gyro_SC2
Canada540 Posts
I think bringing back the lurker is the best thing they could make for the zerg. The lurker is an iconic unit and make me feel like "good'ol broodwar days". They should do the same for the reaver. The Reaver is literally the only thing I'm asking for Poll: Protoss should gets Reaver in LotV Yes (547) No (370) 917 total votes Your vote: Protoss should gets Reaver in LotV | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
| ||
|
nkr
Sweden5451 Posts
| ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Although if the tank change remains I might just play Terran because medivac+tank plays very similarly to the reaver+prism. 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 ;/ Good question. Functionally, it allows Blizzard to retune the Colossus to fulfill a more specific niche rather than multi-purpose destroy everything unit. Reavers in BW weren't ever something that you could mass to ridiculous numbers except in certain circumstances -- slow fire rate and the slow speed of scarabs meant that too many reavers would fire on the same target and a lot of the extra shots would be wasted. While the Colossus over AoE over time, the Reaver offers large bursts of AoE akin to the disruptor at the moment. However the Reaver also fulfils a siege role and is useful vs ultralisks when defended properly. Disruptors at this point in the game are either effectively mines (detonate and die) or win-more units, I feel the Reaver offers more rich gameplay for those reasons. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
| ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:24 Musicus wrote: I think Protoss needs a new gateway/early game unit, they have enough splash and late game power. I'm pretty sure Blizzard will deliver, there is more for Protoss in the works than was shown. Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:25 Plexa wrote: Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) Dragoons making a comeback?! | ||
Olli
Austria24417 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:25 Plexa wrote: Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) I really hope they do something with archons. Right now they're a chunky a move unit  | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24201 Posts
| ||
|
MrMotionPicture
United States4327 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:25 Plexa wrote: Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) A new unit would be interesting. Something early on to stop cyclones maybe? Heheh. Kidding of course. I don't think Dark Archon would have much role in sc2. Units don't stack as much as the muta ball in bw. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:25 Plexa wrote: Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) What was the difference between Archon and Dark Archon? Didn't play BW. I think to remember it could cast storm? Edit: Oh no it was Feedback, I knew it was a HT spell  . And Maelstrom and Mind Control, interesting.http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Dark_Archon | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
| ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:35 Musicus wrote: What was the difference between Archon and Dark Archon? Didn't play BW. I think to remember it could cast storm? Unlike SC2, you couldn't merge different templar. x2 Dark Templar = Dark Archon. While HTs combined to give a very powerful attacking unit, two DTs combined to create a spellcaster only unit. The Dark Archon had three abilities; feedback (same as HT feedback in sc2), maelstrom (brief AoE stun on biological units only) and Mind Control (take over a unit permanently, DA loses all shields in the process). While those spells don't need to come back, the concept of an incredibly powerful archon mage (and the possibility of a hybrid archon) was something I've always wanted to see in SC2 | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:38 Plexa wrote: Unlike SC2, you couldn't merge different templar. x2 Dark Templar = Dark Archon. While HTs combined to give a very powerful attacking unit, two DTs combined to create a spellcaster only unit. The Dark Archon had three abilities; feedback (same as HT feedback in sc2), maelstrom (brief AoE stun on biological units only) and Mind Control (take over a unit permanently, DA loses all shields in the process). While those spells don't need to come back, the concept of an incredibly powerful archon mage (and the possibility of a hybrid archon) was something I've always wanted to see in SC2 Wait I've never seen a DT and HT morph before, haha holy shit I didn't know that. The concept of Hts and Dts morphing to different archons is awesome, I'd definitely want to see that  . | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
Admittedly it's the Reaver, which, honestly, I agree with 100%, if it weren't for the fact that we're getting both the new Disruptor and the pick up at range Warp Prism ability, which together seem like they will basically fulfill the same role as Reaver/Shuttle. But I would give up both the Disruptor and Colossus in a heartbeat to have the old Reavers back in action. I just don't think Blizzard is going to cut any pre-existing units at this point. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3376 Posts
Little funny how hard time they have to make up new units, meaning every new unit is just a BW one. The one thing cool about the Reaver though, is that they aren't just another Orb/Spider looking unit. Oracle, Sentry, Mothership Core for orbs and Stalker/Immortal/Colossus for Spider looking. Something a lot more ancient looking would be cool, or more humanoids/energy forms. | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
| ||
|
doihy
668 Posts
| ||
|
FrogsAreDogs
Canada181 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
| ||
|
Thrill
2599 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
| ||
|
Bub
United States3518 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44300 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:17 royalroadweed wrote: The reaver was brought back. Its now called the siege tank. Yup x.x The siege mode drops are quite similar. Also, OP, David Kim said they might introduce a second Protoss unit, which would be nice. | ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:01 FrogsAreDogs wrote: Please dont. Just because something is in BW doesn't mean it has to be in SC2. I think the idea is that the reaver is entertaining to watch rather than just that it was in BW. The thing with all these units is that if they were fun to watch in BW then implementing them might be an attractive option. Brood War itself doesn't have much to do with it, it's just that it's the point of reference given the enormous similarities between the two games. | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
Psychobabas
2531 Posts
As if Protoss hasnt got enough random allins or enough AoE. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:31 Scrubwave wrote: I'm sure this poll will accomplish many a great thing. After all. It's a poll. On the internet! Well, it will. Because majority is against the Reaver... and we won't get it! Huehuehue | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
Arnstein
Norway3381 Posts
| ||
|
wcLLg
United States281 Posts
| ||
|
Zenbrez
Canada5973 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:47 wcLLg wrote: Part of the fun of the Reaver was the spastic tendencies of the Scarab shots lol. I'm all for it. Its slow speed would also prevent it from being a stupid death-bally unity. But then it has to be better than the colossus, because otherwise people will just make colossi instead. It being in the game is one thing, but it has to synergize with everything else. As it is, colossus just 'makes the better army' than what I assume a reaver would. It was amazing in bw because deathball wasn't as much of an issue, simply adding it to sc2 won't make the deathball go away. It would likely either just add to the deathball, or not be made altogether. Its place would probably just be for harass | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10672 Posts
what more can you ask for. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:57 GGzerG wrote: Disruptor = manually controlled scarab..... what more can you ask for. Don't forget the ranged pickup of the Warp Prism. Got a Reaver Shuttle without Reaver haha. | ||
|
TokO
Norway577 Posts
| ||
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:57 GGzerG wrote: Disruptor = manually controlled scarab..... what more can you ask for. I feel like the downside to that is that, the manually controlled scarab is 300 gas and dies probably very quickly right after it does its damage. The issue with this is solved, in skirmishes or drop play with a warp prism. But this is not going to be an option against an army that has air units, and it won't be useful in engagements. As Plexa said, if you defended your Reavers, they could do fairly sustained damage in a fight. But the only defense for the is to pick it up AT the range the moment it explodes. At least with a reaver you had a range of 8, which allowed you to fire a scarab from 8 units away, then pick up and reposition. With the 5 range pick up of a warp prism, in a game with a lot of high range air units, the Disruptor is going to be much more limited in terms of how long it remains viable for, and what its uses will be. I would rather have a reaver which I can have the option of using all game long, than the Disruptor which has a timer on its lifetime and which will effectively become replaced by the collossus - an actual 8 range unit with more sustained DPS vs ground than the disruptor. So in short: Concern - the 5 range pick up of a prism is a poor replacement for the 8 range target acquisition of a reaver. Its not really a scarab, because the effective range is much shorter. If it was a 5 range reaver, how would that feel? | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10672 Posts
It all makes sense to me as well, I hope everything changes before Beta is released, and i'm sure it will. But honestly I wouldn't care like anyone else as long as I get in the beta. I just hope everything is great once the game is released. 300 gas for the disruptor? ...if thats true, it makes no sense lol Obviously want David Kim wants is Protoss players using warp prism / disruptor to in a way replicate shuttle / reaver micro, I think that is the reason the shuttle has the increase range, is so players can unload + start timer + reload / move abot with the warp prism, unload then kill workers, and have some sort of synergy between the two...but will it be possible? Probably not. EDIT : I guess we can just all pray for a 3D BW one day....that is what i'm doing at least.... | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:25 Plexa wrote: Indeed, tweets suggest there is another new unit for Protoss in the works that was not at Blizzcon. (Pls Dark Archon) 2nd this, dark archon hypuuuu | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10672 Posts
It wouldn't really matter if Protoss got a Dark Archon, Reaver, Dragoon, or Corsair, you would probably find some way to make a balance complaint before the beta starts. ^_^ | ||
|
HeavenResign
United States702 Posts
Siege tank + medivac should be awesome to watch. I don't think every aspect of all races needs to translate linearly from bw to sc2. toss definitely needs something though and I think blizz knows that but I really hope they consider removing colossus and re-working it a bit. The warp gate change is a step in the right direction, for now it's a nerf but once everything balances out I bet it'll make for better game play | ||
|
Cele
Germany4016 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:19 Plexa wrote: Would rather have reaver than disruptor. Although if the tank change remains I might just play Terran because medivac+tank plays very similarly to the reaver+prism. Good question. Functionally, it allows Blizzard to retune the Colossus to fulfill a more specific niche rather than multi-purpose destroy everything unit. Reavers in BW weren't ever something that you could mass to ridiculous numbers except in certain circumstances -- slow fire rate and the slow speed of scarabs meant that too many reavers would fire on the same target and a lot of the extra shots would be wasted. While the Colossus over AoE over time, the Reaver offers large bursts of AoE akin to the disruptor at the moment. However the Reaver also fulfils a siege role and is useful vs ultralisks when defended properly. Disruptors at this point in the game are either effectively mines (detonate and die) or win-more units, I feel the Reaver offers more rich gameplay for those reasons. true, but that doesnt imply that the rvr isn't a crucial unit for big fights in broodwar. If you play PvP, often times 2 reavers and a shuttle are a crucial part of your midgame army composition, giving you an edge versus the pure dragoon army. Of course, this is seldom still done in the lategame where storms are easier to utilize. Then again, any good lategame PvZ army usually includes 2 reavers and a speed shuttle in order to fend of the ultraling composition of Zerg. Archons and HT, Zeals as meatshield offer the same concept basically, but the reavers add a lot to it. Further, in the lategame base defense via reavers becomes crucial once crackling swarm comes into play. To summarize: no you don't mass reavers, but of course they are very important to the army composition in various scenarios. Including the reaver in Lotv would be difficult, the main reason it isnt OP in Broodwar is because it's AI is so bugged, so it's effetciveness would need to be smaller in relation, given Blizz won't screw the reaver AI on purpose ^^ | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:28 Zealously wrote: I think the idea is that the reaver is entertaining to watch rather than just that it was in BW. The thing with all these units is that if they were fun to watch in BW then implementing them might be an attractive option. Brood War itself doesn't have much to do with it, it's just that it's the point of reference given the enormous similarities between the two games. The Reaver was popular because of its RNG though, same reason why people love Hearthstone. Creates excitement because the player can't control the hit and miss. They can use it in the right moment though, to create an awesome play. I would say the Widowmine was pretty much a test if they want to bring RNG into Sc2. And the theme of LotV seems to be Voidzones and giving a race its Colossus back >.< . | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:15 hitpoint wrote: Wow, why is anyone voting no on this? The reaver was an amazing unit. Because protoss really doesn't need another destroy everything on the ground unit. Unless they remove colossi then I would support it. If they decided to add it along with colossi/templar, yeah screw that. | ||
|
Masada714
United States89 Posts
| ||
Kipsate
Netherlands45349 Posts
| ||
|
HeavenResign
United States702 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:35 Masada714 wrote: While I understand most peoples concern with the Colossus, if it was removed then what happens to the units made specifically to counter it i.e.(Viking, Corruptor)? Hopefully they'd be changed to become more interesting dynamic units. Corrupters still have a purpose anyway like in pheonix vs muta/corrupter and vikings are used to deal with bl's and toss air which could change in lotv with the new tempest and carrier buffs | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:15 hitpoint wrote: Wow, why is anyone voting no on this? The reaver was an amazing unit. I voted no because protoss doesn't need another powerful splash option. Colossus+storm+disruptor+reaver is overkill. Everything on the ground will die instantly. If colossus or disruptor were removed to put in the reaver, then yes. | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:15 hitpoint wrote: Wow, why is anyone voting no on this? The reaver was an amazing unit. every non-BW player and balance complainer votes no I guess. | ||
|
L3monsta
New Zealand149 Posts
| ||
|
Gary Oak
Canada2381 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:41 Musicus wrote: Christ, this exchange makes me feel old; I'm used to everyone knowing about the BW stuff due to when it came out. I was 9 when SC came out, and 10 when BW hit the shelves, so I very much grew up with that game, among others. It's so bizarre to me that there are a bunch of users who weren't born until after Brood War's release.Wait I've never seen a DT and HT morph before, haha holy shit I didn't know that. The concept of Hts and Dts morphing to different archons is awesome, I'd definitely want to see that . | ||
|
Jaded.
United States125 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:29 FeyFey wrote: The Reaver was popular because of its RNG though, same reason why people love Hearthstone. Creates excitement because the player can't control the hit and miss. They can use it in the right moment though, to create an awesome play. I would say the Widowmine was pretty much a test if they want to bring RNG into Sc2. And the theme of LotV seems to be Voidzones and giving a race its Colossus back >.< . Nah far from true. Reason ppl do found reaver exciting is because when its used to harass, the enemy has a great way to deal with it. There is always uncertainty involved with the reaver, but not from rng but from how the protoss control the reaver and how the enemy control its defence against it. Its probably worth to note here, that its more fun to watch reaverharass vs terran mech than vs zerg. Because usually with zerg - There are alot of hydras everywhere. While vs mech, its more about positioning and tactic. Reaver can be used as a defensive unit vs zerg. Not vs mech(worth to point out i guess) In later stages of the game(big armee vs big armee), zerg has ways to deal with the unit with its core ground units. You dont need a hardcounter unit at all to deal with it. I love the harass with the reaver. I love that reaver can be used as defence on its on or atleast behind a few cannons vs zerg. Some negative parts about the reaver imo is that sometimes, it feels like reaver is the only unit that is microed in fights while the rest is pretty much on autopilot. Might be wrong on this, but i feel its a mandatory lategame unit in pvz in broodwar. Reaver scarab doesnt have any RNG btw, its consistent in the way it works, but i can understand why some ppl believe it is RNG. Before i want the reaver in Lotv i actually want to see this new robo unit in play alot more. The Disruptor. Maybe tweak it, try and make it more interesting? But i rly like the concept atm. Maybe reaver would be more fun. If reaver is introduced in Lotv - I hope colossus gets a completely different role and tweaked tremendously or just removed from the game. Also hope they focus on to do not make it super strong in deathball. Something that might be worth mentioning - There are no scourges in Lotv(atm atleast), this might mean its possible to move out with warpprism+2reavers and a few zealot/archon etc vs zerg. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44300 Posts
On November 10 2014 08:58 FeyFey wrote: Don't forget the ranged pickup of the Warp Prism. Got a Reaver Shuttle without Reaver haha. Most expensive scarab ever x.x | ||
|
mishimaBeef
Canada2259 Posts
| ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On November 10 2014 10:55 mishimaBeef wrote: The new self destruct unit seems like a reaver whose scarab you control. How high are you? And why was not this prefaced by a lengthy "maaaaaaaaaan" Maaaaan it's like a reaver who's actually a scarab shot by nothing and it explodes man! Anyhow, the reason why I think the reaver is not likely to happen in SC2 is that it seems to me like what made the BW reaver balanced is the scarab duds which over the years saved millions of drones/probes/scvs. The dumb AI was part of what made SCBW so good. Now with smart AI, the scarab wouldn't glitch on anything, so you can't have it doing 125 dmg or whatever it was... unless you made the reaver difficult to use on purpose, and I have no idea how that would be done if it's even possible. | ||
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
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. | ||
|
Lumi
United States1612 Posts
| ||
|
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
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. | ||
|
Morbidius
Brazil3449 Posts
| ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
| ||
|
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
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 | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
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. | ||
|
ETisME
12387 Posts
| ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19234 Posts
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. | ||
|
SemperSC
Canada117 Posts
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. | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On November 10 2014 11:11 Falling wrote: 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. | ||
|
ne4aJIb
Russian Federation3209 Posts
| ||
|
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
-.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 | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12172 Posts
| ||
|
Kuchikikun
Italy560 Posts
| ||
|
ilikeredheads
Canada1995 Posts
| ||
|
KDot2
United States1213 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 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. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
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. | ||
|
Xinzoe
Korea (South)2373 Posts
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 | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
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. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
On November 10 2014 14:07 Gamegene wrote: 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. | ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
Remove the Disruptor, include the reaver and there will still probably be one other unit for protoss in the expansion. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
Blizzard needs to grow some balls and cut units out. There's already a lot of units that overlap too much and are only Deathball filler, and we don't need more of those in LoTV. Marine/Maruder, Roach/Hydra, Ranged tossball filler (Stalker/Collosus/Immortal). Since they're willing to flip the economy game upside down, I hope they continue that spirit with the units in SC2. Cut out the boring shitty units like the Marauder, Collosus, Immortal, Roach, Raven, Hellbat, Hydralisk, Corrupter, Archon whatever, even just one or two from each race and give the possible new LoTV units more room to breathe. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
It's always amazing to see how Riot and Valve constantly updates all of the elements of LoL and DoTA respectively. Blizzard seems more inclined now to catch up with these companies given their new titles, so I hope they realize they also have the power to break the mold completely with SC2. They're already doing it with the economy, why stop there? | ||
|
GolemMadness
Canada11044 Posts
| ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
I realize theirs a ton of carry over units between SC2 and BW but we don't need to bring them all over. Besides. The reaver doesn't fulfill a vacant role in the Protoss army. | ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
On November 10 2014 14:42 Orcasgt24 wrote: Its nice to feel nostalgic but must we turn SC2 in BW2? I realize theirs a ton of carry over units between SC2 and BW but we don't need to bring them all over. Besides. The reaver doesn't fulfill a vacant role in the Protoss army. No but the role SHOULD be vacant. The Colossus is the worst-designed trash in SC2. See it's not about nostalgia, it's about good unit design that leads to fun interactions in terms of more micro on both sides. The Reaver fulfills that. | ||
|
Zerg.Zilla
Hungary5029 Posts
On November 10 2014 14:59 SmileZerg wrote: No but the role SHOULD be vacant. The Colossus is the worst-designed trash in SC2. See it's not about nostalgia, it's about good unit design that leads to fun interactions in terms of more micro on both sides. The Reaver fulfills that. I agree 100%...Protoss with Colossus and Reaver would be to much,so take out that boring ass trash unit called le'Colossus and bring back the Reaver and everything is right in the world. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
| ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On November 10 2014 14:59 SmileZerg wrote: No but the role SHOULD be vacant. The Colossus is the worst-designed trash in SC2. See it's not about nostalgia, it's about good unit design that leads to fun interactions in terms of more micro on both sides. The Reaver fulfills that. There would be no micro with reavers. You would auto-cast create Scarab and because of the smart targeting AI Reavers would always do the maximum damage by not targeting the same unit or any unit that would die to the splash, just like siege tanks. You wouldn't be target firing them, you opponents can't do anything to dodge and with the way bases get saturated in SC2 a single Reaver in a Warp Prism would be able to instantly end the game in 2 shots. You could easily kill a whole mineral mining base with 2 shots. The Reaver doesn't work in this game. Leave it out | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
| ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
On November 10 2014 15:25 Orcasgt24 wrote: There would be no micro with reavers. You would auto-cast create Scarab and because of the smart targeting AI Reavers would always do the maximum damage by not targeting the same unit or any unit that would die to the splash, just like siege tanks. You wouldn't be target firing them, you opponents can't do anything to dodge and with the way bases get saturated in SC2 a single Reaver in a Warp Prism would be able to instantly end the game in 2 shots. You could easily kill a whole mineral mining base with 2 shots. The Reaver doesn't work in this game. Leave it out There is no smart targeting, it doesn't actually work that way. The only reason Siege Tanks don't overkill is because there is an unnoticeable thousandth of a second delay staggering between each of them firing, so that the shots don't go off until damage from the previous one has already been calculated by the engine. Blizzard didn't put this in to make the units more effective, they did it for performance reasons, it just happened to have that terrible side effect. Since Reavers fire actual slow-moving projectiles, they will have no such mechanic and overkill all the time. And considering their slow firing speed, you better be target firing them or you are an idiot. And opponents can indeed dodge, I'm not sure why you think a game with blink, forcefields, and cliff-jumping etc. will make it harder for players to avoid getting hit by scarabs. Oh, and even if none of these things were the case, they'd STILL be a better unit for the game than the goddamn Colossus. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
If the best you can say about an idea is that you associate it with positive memories in another game, then I don't think it is OP-material, sorry. I mean, he didn't even say "BW is the best game ever, thus sc2 should mimic bw in every possible way to become a better game". While I have no idea how the reaver would do in sc2, I am easily voting no due to the lacking OP. | ||
|
Quixotic_tv
Germany130 Posts
I would propose one iconic BW unit per race. Zerg: Lurker, I think most ppl agree there. Toss: Reaver; but maybe there are units that are even more iconic than the reaver? Terran: Science Vessel maybe? Well, that's just my opinion. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
| ||
|
SmileZerg
United States543 Posts
On November 10 2014 16:00 Immhey wrote: I don't think it has to be the reaver. What protoss need is just a well designed AoE robo unit. It can be whatever. The reaver was just one of that kind of unit in BW so people go the easy way to just bring the reaver back. Well if an iconic, beloved and well-designed AoE robo unit already exists, why make a different one just for the sake of change? The Colossus had its time, it's been tested, it's a proven failure. Cut the motherfucker and bring back the Reaver. At first I was thinking "this new Disruptor looks interesting, let's see that take a shot", but honestly the removing the Colossus part is better for the game, so imo it's just collateral damage to get that piece of crap out of the way. Then with the siege AoE robo unit missing, obv bring in the Reaver. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
On November 10 2014 16:09 SmileZerg wrote: Well if an iconic, beloved and well-designed AoE robo unit already exists, why make a different one just for the sake of change? The Colossus had its time, it's been tested, it's a proven failure. Cut the motherfucker and bring back the Reaver. At first I was thinking "this new Disruptor looks interesting, let's see that take a shot", but honestly the removing the Colossus part is better for the game, so imo it's just collateral damage to get that piece of crap out of the way. Then with the siege AoE robo unit missing, obv bring in the Reaver. Well, it would be better if we could get something that is a well designed AoE robo unit designed specifically for SC2. I don't think taking the Reaver straight into SC2 would work as well as some people think. For example, Corsair and Pheonix, I think both are well designed unti but Pheonix also blend into SC2 really well thus better unti for SC2. May sound a bit too good to be true but well, we have to strive for the best. | ||
|
DSR
Czech Republic5 Posts
So you wanna reaver to play with mouse only or? | ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
Think about reaver Vs bio in BW. Didn't happen often, but when it did, it's pretty reminiscent of Marines Vs banelings. Splitting your units to minimize damage. On top of that, there's the focus fire aspect where you want to target down the relatively squishy reaver. On top of that, there's the pickups with the warp prism and targeting one or the other. Stalker micro would be similar to the dragoon/reaver fights except with an extra bonus of blink micro. Imagine defending a base against Zerg with cannons, 2 sentries and a reaver. Position based play anyone? I just think that the reaver/warp prism dynamic is so much more interesting than a colossus. It combines the reaver's slow speed with a pickup micro dynamic. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
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). | ||
|
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
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On November 11 2014 00:54 BaronVonOwn wrote: The disruptor is basically a scarab you can micro. It's just as good but takes more skill. I'd be happy either way. Now that the disruptor is planned I'd say the Brood War unit protoss needs the most is the dragoon. It has much better combat stats than the stalker. It's possible that the immortal with its new shield can fill this role though. 200 hp shield gives the immortal a 67% increase in health, for 500 hp total. That's battlecruiser/carrier levels of hp. Shield only lasts 3-4 seconds. Dragoon was mainly able to survive because it can kite in BW. The marauder's concussive shell basically shuts any of that down. Blizzard, please remove concussive shell. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10332 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:00 purakushi wrote: Shield only lasts 3-4 seconds. Dragoon was mainly able to survive because it can kite in BW. The marauder's concussive shell basically shuts any of that down. Blizzard, please remove concussive shell. But now we have slightly weaker but more mobile stalkers with blink which allows interesting tvp fights and chases and pvz attacks. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:00 purakushi wrote: Shield only lasts 3-4 seconds. Dragoon was mainly able to survive, because it can kite bio in BW. The marauder's concussive shell basically shuts any of that down. Blizzard, please remove concussive shell. Maybe have it so consussive shelld only effect biological units. Sentries could instead of that "reduce dmg" spell get another spell which removes the root from fungal and slow from marauders. Aoe spell, removes the debuff and makes the effected units immune. Would be fun with a dragoon-type-of unit for protoss. Hopefully immortal can maybe take its role. But that means the immortal needs to be redesigned. What if the ability on immortal removes debuffs and makes the unit immune? Idk. There is potential here atleast. | ||
|
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19234 Posts
| ||
|
Topdoller
United Kingdom3860 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:06 Foxxan wrote: Maybe have it so consussive shelld only effect biological units. Ya, I have also thought of this. I would be satisfied with this change. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
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. I am still confused on what role the Collosus and the Disruptor should have? They are both tier 3, and both AOE, and thus both of them seem to overlap quite heavily. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
| ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:25 Hider wrote: I am still confused on what role the Collosus and the Disruptor should have? They are both tier 3, and both AOE, and thus both of them seem to overlap quite heavily. Disruptor should do more damage but you'd have to micro and possibly use a warp prism to rescue. So Colossus can do (slightly less than it does now) damage from afar, while disruptor is more like a manual scarab. | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:25 Hider wrote: I am still confused on what role the Collosus and the Disruptor should have? They are both tier 3, and both AOE, and thus both of them seem to overlap quite heavily. The disruptor gives protoss burst AOE damage, something which protoss does not have but the other races do (baneling, widow mine, siege tank). Hopefully it will allow protoss matchups to function more like ZvT with lots of battles rather than turtle-till-deathball. The colossus is more of a DPS unit, unlike the disruptor it has to be protected to do its damage which is a different playstyle. Not saying this playstyle ought to be removed from the game but I find it less fun. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:25 Hider wrote: I am still confused on what role the Collosus and the Disruptor should have? They are both tier 3, and both AOE, and thus both of them seem to overlap quite heavily. Disruptor could work like a semi-widowmine for protoss. Mass blink stalkers + a few disruptors makes protoss able to be offensive? The disruptor can be used to zone units, make units run and lose dps that way. Great synergy with forcefields and to some degree speed prism. Probably possible to harass with this unit abit like the reaver from broodwar. Not sure it hits air? Obviously would still be rly hard. Hope to see more styles such as zealot/archon + disruptor. Hope archons get better vs air so protoss doesnt have to make phoenixes vs zerg. | ||
|
Swift118
United Kingdom335 Posts
Just wondering who in the ActiBlizz sc2 team actually thought that unit and warp gate was a good idea for sc2.. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
| ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
How about exchanging the colossus for a unit that cannot walk over other units, cannot be targeted by air, and removing guardian shield (giving toss something else)? Well, protoss units won't be able to walk easily on the map, guess what? That is the intention, unit positioning becomes key, separate groups for the protoss arsenal, each doing its job in the right place, is the beauty of protoss micro ^^ edit, Immhey: My guess is that they underestimated the power that the SC2 engine and unit/building selection had over reducing micro potential. Lore wise, multiple unit types hanging around together in a deathball that doesn't work well separated is very protoss-like, same goes for warp-gate. | ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
I think with what they're bringing to T and Z, what protoss will really need is a solid early game unit, plain damage, nothing fancy. Either something that provides a very early harassing/delaying option, or is more meaty and useful for defense without reliance on FFs. Gateway preferred, so it doesn't force you down a tech path. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:25 Hider wrote: I am still confused on what role the Collosus and the Disruptor should have? They are both tier 3, and both AOE, and thus both of them seem to overlap quite heavily. I think the Disruptor should be a micro-intensive AoE unit that has the potential to do a lot of damage (so I think it could use a reduced cost/increased damage), while the Colossus should be reworked to lose its air weakness, lose a lot of range, and make it slighlty faster so it can be micro'ed in battle, and lose some of its damage output. Basically Disruptor = more risk, more reward, and Colossus = less risk (easier to 1a around), less reward | ||
|
Moonsalt
267 Posts
As for the reaver, they already gave the protoss the warp prism range pick-up thingy to help harass and the reaver will never be like in Brood War. NO UNIT WILL BE! | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
On November 11 2014 02:34 Moonsalt wrote: The Lurker will be literally useless. It's cost to get, the fact that you can move a marine so easily around it's spikes and all spells that can deal with them...... it is there just as an icon in my opinion. As for the reaver, they already gave the protoss the warp prism range pick-up thingy to help harass and the reaver will never be like in Brood War. NO UNIT WILL BE! 200 HP = 3 storms. And I think they'd be even more damaging than in BW because clumping. Hell, maybe it's meant to counter the deathball, especially if it gets hold position back. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Default 6range. 9range with an upgrade. So its a really powerful unit atm. | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
| ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
On November 11 2014 03:00 BaronVonOwn wrote: I suppose they could balance the reaver by lowering the scarab speed to something like 3-4 and putting it on a timer, so it's possible to run away from it like in Brood War. That seems to be the idea with the disruptor. I think there is some concern the reaver might be too OP in SC2 what with the balling AI. On the other hand Terran got a mostly intact siege tank and also has the widow mine, so I don't see why protoss can't have the reaver. Imagine banelings. Do you counter them by shooting them with marines? No, you minimize damage by spreading your units out. Same idea. Spread out, and focus fire the reaver in between shots. | ||
|
murphs
Ireland417 Posts
| ||
|
scrubbEN
12 Posts
| ||
|
G5
United States2898 Posts
| ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2641 Posts
On November 11 2014 03:13 neobowman wrote: Imagine banelings. Do you counter them by shooting them with marines? No, you minimize damage by spreading your units out. Same idea. Spread out, and focus fire the reaver in between shots. Actually yes you do, a lot of the banelings die to WM and marine fire before reaching the target, also stimmed bio can run away from banelings and split without being pre-spread when out of creep, hell if you are good enough even in creep. I agree with him, you shold be able to somewhat out run scarabs, if they ever implement the reaver at least. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:43 BaronVonOwn wrote: The disruptor gives protoss burst AOE damage, something which protoss does not have but the other races do (baneling, widow mine, siege tank). Hopefully it will allow protoss matchups to function more like ZvT with lots of battles rather than turtle-till-deathball. The colossus is more of a DPS unit, unlike the disruptor it has to be protected to do its damage which is a different playstyle. Not saying this playstyle ought to be removed from the game but I find it less fun. Isn't that kinda what the High Templar is supposed to do? AoE damage (and at range no less.) | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
On November 11 2014 01:45 Foxxan wrote: Disruptor could work like a semi-widowmine for protoss. Mass blink stalkers + a few disruptors makes protoss able to be offensive? The disruptor can be used to zone units, make units run and lose dps that way. Great synergy with forcefields and to some degree speed prism. Probably possible to harass with this unit abit like the reaver from broodwar. Not sure it hits air? Obviously would still be rly hard. Hope to see more styles such as zealot/archon + disruptor. Hope archons get better vs air so protoss doesnt have to make phoenixes vs zerg. One Reddit-poster argued that the disruptor didn't benefit from scale as much as the Collosus does. But I am still not sure they really offer that different playstyle? Like in which situations would you prefer Collosus and in which sitautions would you get Disruptors? Is it just when you want to play aggressive with a low army value you get the distuptor and when you want to turtle you get the Collosus? Isn't that kinda what the High Templar is supposed to do? AoE damage (and at range no less.) Yeh, I am also a bit worried about this. Sure you may control the units differently, but will it allow for different types of gameplay (?), and the micro-response from terran also seems to be the same as vs Psy Storm. Regardless, Blizzard seemed to do a poor job of outlining their vision for the new units. I also still believe a redesign of the Collosus + more mobility to the Immortal is much more important. | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
| ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On November 11 2014 03:41 Falling wrote: Isn't that kinda what the High Templar is supposed to do? AoE damage (and at range no less.) It does do AOE, but it's damage-over-time (4 seconds) as opposed to burst. The reaver just goes KAPOW and there's blood everywhere. This makes the HT more akin to the colossus in that they both need time to get their damage in, as opposed to front-loaded damage which instantly removes a lot of enemy army value and dps from the board. That being said I love the high templar and all the other BW protoss units that made it to SC2, they are the only reasons I still enjoy watching/playing protoss occasionally. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On November 11 2014 04:20 BaronVonOwn wrote: It does do AOE, but it's damage-over-time (4 seconds) as opposed to burst. The reaver just goes KAPOW and there's blood everywhere. This makes the HT more akin to the colossus in that they both need time to get their damage in, as opposed to front-loaded damage which instantly takes a lot of enemy army value and dps off the board. This is what makes Collosus HT so potent in TvP. The damage between storm and the thermal lance stacks on top and creates this exact effect. | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
| ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On November 11 2014 04:24 Gamegene wrote: This is what makes Collosus HT so potent in TvP. The damage between storm and the thermal lance stacks on top and creates this exact effect. Sure, but that's only a viable comp in the late game. You need to go down 2 long/expensive tech trees to get there. Meanwhile Zerg just builds a tier 1 baneling nest and terran builds a factory. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
Just watched exhibition match pre show. Dayvie said it himself that Collosus is being redesigned and he seems like he understand why the collossi suck too. That's a really good news. :D I thought he just said he wanted to make it less neccesary for protoss and therefore reduced its range to 8 and added in the Disruptor? Could you link me to the time-period where he directly implies that they are still working on it? | ||
|
TurboMaN
Germany925 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On November 11 2014 04:24 Gamegene wrote: This is what makes Collosus HT so potent in TvP. The damage between storm and the thermal lance stacks on top and creates this exact effect. Not sure this is the reason? Terran need ghost and viking. Both are required, without both terran stand no chance. Without correct amount, terran stand no chance. Like in which situations would you prefer Collosus and in which sitautions would you get Disruptors? Is it just when you want to play aggressive with a low army value you get the distuptor and when you want to turtle you get the Collosus? I would prefer disruptors when they are a realtively small number. I mean, just having 1 or 2 can work with any armee size it feels like. Offense for sure, probably defence also. While having 1 or 2 colossus for protoss means the gateway armee needs to be really big. 1colossus as defence feels kinda bad while 1 disruptor as defence feels alot better. It also opens up to go more heavy none-stalker play since u dont need to attack air as you do with the colossus(mass stalkers). EDIT: Something i didnt think about. With this disruptor, it might be possible to use it in flanking. Zerg is the only race i feel that can flank with their siege unit. This unit might not be a siege unit tho but still, its very powerful and i have actually never seen any unit this powerful able to flank before. | ||
|
Immhey
Thailand19 Posts
On November 11 2014 05:02 Hider wrote: I thought he just said he wanted to make it less neccesary for protoss and therefore reduced its range to 8 and added in the Disruptor? Could you link me to the time-period where he directly implies that they are still working on it? In the video I watched,he didn't said anything about reducing its range. He just said that the unit is too all around and he wants to reduce its role to be more situational. That sounds like a redesign to me. At 9:40 | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
His explanation of the disruptor was just well phrased. | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
On November 11 2014 05:15 Immhey wrote: In the video I watched,he didn't said anything about reducing its range. He just said that the unit is too all around and he wants to reduce its role to be more situational. That sounds like a redesign to me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONH0XwzYq9U At 9:40 He says that they put in the Disruptor becasue they wanted to make the Collosus less all-round. The collosus has been nerfed (8 range - he doesn't say it in the video though) and thus this could open up for more usage of the Disruptor. Moreover, he used the term "we wanted", thus indicating that he believe they already have changed the role of the Collosus. I am pretty sure that if they were working on a larger design or would do that in the future, then he would phrase it more like "we are working on changing the collosus". So my interpretation from watching this video is that they are not planning any further redesigns of the Collosus. I would also argue that if he really wanted to redesign it, then he would talk about how the current Collosus lacked micro opportunities and not talk about unit roles. | ||
|
lastride
2390 Posts
On November 11 2014 03:23 murphs wrote: Remove Colossus and add Reaver. One could only dream! but its pretty obvious bliz wants to eliminate the randomness which somehow made bw the game it was. Scarabs,mines,lurkers etc Those things worked in perceft harmony in bw,probably a fluke tho | ||
|
Knee_of_Justice
United States388 Posts
They could take a leaf out of the reaver's book here by slowing down the Colossus' attack speed while increasing its damage output. They would provide a visual marker on the ground or unit where its next line attack will be unleashed (perhaps with some distinctive noise or visual cue as well). After an appropriate amount of time (not too long that it will be useless, but long enough that a skillful opponent could react), the colossus would swipe that area with its laser, dealing huge splash damage. If they start with that redesign premise, the reaver does not need to come back. I'm curious about how the Disruptor will work in practice. Blizz obviously has a fine line to walk here but I think it has some real potential. Overall, Im kind of disappointed at how uncreative their design team is: they tend to use similar balance resources when balancing a unit. For example, the reaver was unique because its absurdly powerful attack was mitigated on a number of fronts, including a resource cost and build time. Why does every unit get a timed ability now? What if the disruptor could drain a group of units, or a buildings' shields for its power but could use its ability more frequently? Finally, as people have said, I'm not sure how this unit will end up competing with the colossus as a tier 3 anti ground splash damage unit. If it were slightly cheaper and maybe a bit less powerful, it could perhaps fulfill a role between the two units. Maybe 50-100 damage to start with (with maybe a late game upgrade to give it +20-50 more, like the reaver had)? | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9376 Posts
They could take a leaf out of the reaver's book here by slowing down the Colossus' attack speed while increasing its damage output. The Reaver worked because it had synergy with the Warp Prism/Shuttle. Collosus could indeed have more synergy if it had a higher burst-damage and perhaps could one-short workers, but it would also need to get rid of it being targetable by AA units. If terran is getting Vikings everytime he sees Collosus, then Warp Prism + Collosus is never gonna work. | ||
|
ionONE
Germany605 Posts
1. I'd like to see a Reaver with a baneling esque attack animation/ texture sc2 cannon - scarab has a timer of 3 sec, if it doesn't hit the target it will explode (area damage) - upgrade: faster attack, longer range, more damage - both players can see the possible scarab hit (seeker missile) Preventing damage is similar to marine/baneling - seeker missile micro spread army - move targeted unit towards scarab, medivac load in + you can target fire scarab manually, (scarab has health) ?! If have no experience with the sc2 editor legacy looks uninspired/random reaver micro in action: | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
Fuck, even as a Zerg, I'd rather the reaver than the colossus (that's how unselfish I am). | ||
|
Kranyum
77 Posts
| ||
|
Kranyum
77 Posts
On November 11 2014 06:27 Knee_of_Justice wrote: I'm no fan of the colossus, but there are a few things they can do to redesign it according to their new philosophy of increasing micro (on both sides). They could take a leaf out of the reaver's book here by slowing down the Colossus' attack speed while increasing its damage output. They would provide a visual marker on the ground or unit where its next line attack will be unleashed (perhaps with some distinctive noise or visual cue as well). After an appropriate amount of time (not too long that it will be useless, but long enough that a skillful opponent could react), the colossus would swipe that area with its laser, dealing huge splash damage. If they start with that redesign premise, the reaver does not need to come back. collosi are clucky, they always were. they've never been used to do anything else than 1a. reavers were skill intensive, promoted micro, supported drop play from protoss and could have been totally devastating damage if the enemy would not micro against them. Think about a Terran drop in the current game. Leave 1 reaver near the nexus and watch 2 full medivacs full of units evaporate. Collosus' weakness to air attacks is an extremely poor gimmick imo | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On November 10 2014 07:32 MrMotionPicture wrote: A new unit would be interesting. Something early on to stop cyclones maybe? Heheh. Kidding of course. I don't think Dark Archon would have much role in sc2. Units don't stack as much as the muta ball in bw. You are wrong, DA would have way more utility in sc2 than they ever had in sc1! maelstroming marine marauder + amove collossi: ez win! | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
TurboMaN
Germany925 Posts
| ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
On December 24 2014 08:18 TurboMaN wrote: And the spider mines instead of HotS mines Yeah, and load them on hellions. One hellion carries one spider mine, haha. | ||
|
Lunareste
United States3596 Posts
| ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3376 Posts
Where the Reaver relies solely on the Prism. The Disruptor is the best of both worlds. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2641 Posts
On December 24 2014 08:34 Lunareste wrote: Bring back the Vulture pls I'd rather have the goliath, right now mech AA is too dependant on starport units (vikings and ravens) an the thor is a very clunky unit, goliaths would make mech less dependant on starpot tech and could even allow to have separate ground and air upgrades. | ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
I don't agree with adding the reaver. It seems like the disruptor is a unit that allows and requires more control which is more exciting than the "kind of" random scarab shots. Really the only downside of the disruptor is what Jinro and others mentioned: It would probably be very hard to keep the disruptor alive after a good shot. I feel like they will have to play around with the invulnerability mechanic to make it worth alot of gas (currently 300 i think). But I can also imagine that good disruptor control would also protect them. Like if you use like 3 disruptors in a quick succession you cover fire the vulnerable disruptors by aiming the next one at the correct spot. The disruptor design would be a cool addition that would have even a higher skillceiling to control than the reaver. | ||
|
coolman123123
146 Posts
On December 24 2014 08:34 Lunareste wrote: Bring back the Vulture pls I wish they would just make Hellions control like Vultures. I don't like Spider Mines at all but Vultures are fun. | ||
|
Kranyum
77 Posts
On December 24 2014 08:47 Lexender wrote: I'd rather have the goliath, right now mech AA is too dependant on starport units (vikings and ravens) an the thor is a very clunky unit, goliaths would make mech less dependant on starpot tech and could even allow to have separate ground and air upgrades. Yea lol, I even forgot about the Thor. Such a crap unit. Seems like most LotV units were questionable at best | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
|
_TMT_
Vietnam114 Posts
On December 24 2014 15:21 TedCruz2016 wrote: I read a lot of complaints about colossus, P's reliance on it and how it acts as a dumb A-move unit. Seriously, P will go HT+Archon instead if ghost's EMP were replaced with a long-range Lockdown. It's one of the coolest abilities in SC1 and I really miss it. But it will disable Tempests, Carriers and Collosii.. | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:23 GGzerG wrote: It wouldn't really matter if Protoss got a Dark Archon, Reaver, Dragoon, or Corsair, you would probably find some way to make a balance complaint before the beta starts. ^_^ Excellent, thank you for contributing! | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
On December 24 2014 16:48 _TMT_ wrote: But it will disable Tempests, Carriers and Collosii.. T doesn't need Lockdown to deal with Tempests and Carriers. Vikings and marines are cheap and competent. Colossus is the only threat, not because of its splash damage, but it forces T to pop vikings that are completely useless against any other deathball units. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10672 Posts
On December 24 2014 17:10 TedCruz2016 wrote: T doesn't need Lockdown to deal with Tempests and Carriers. Vikings and marines are cheap and competent. Colossus is the only threat, not because of its splash damage, but it forces T to pop vikings that are completely useless against any other deathball units. That is a pretty simplistic way of thinking lol | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
Reebuuuh!!! | ||
|
lpunatic
235 Posts
| ||
|
phyren
United States1067 Posts
Protoss would be well served with some unit that both encouraged early game fights and discouraged death balls, ideally a unit that could potentially harass but was somewhat useful in a straight up fight. Units with high skill caps are also just generally a good idea. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10672 Posts
On December 24 2014 17:59 phyren wrote: The thing about the reaver is that is served a gameplay function somewhat similar to the terran widow mine. When dropped, it served as a strong harrassment option, but it was also very good defensively vs a variety of aggressive timings or all ins. At the same time, it had a great sense of diminishing returns, so you'd rarely get more than a few reavers throughout the game. This encourage some early game action as getting a reaver before or after expansion was both very safe and easily transitioned to aggression, and it also encourage splitting up your army since you didn't want to just mass reavers but also wanted to use the ones you'd made while transitioning. Protoss would be well served with some unit that both encouraged early game fights and discouraged death balls, ideally a unit that could potentially harass but was somewhat useful in a straight up fight. Units with high skill caps are also just generally a good idea. That is a good but, with that aside there are things such as Reaver / Corsair in BW, if that is what we are talking here. :-P | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:15 hitpoint wrote: Wow, why is anyone voting no on this? The reaver was an amazing unit. Because that is not the only consideration one has to take. But instead of discussing gameplay considerations (role overlap, options to defend against, ...) I don't understand why so many guys want old units back instead of seeing new units added to the roster. Why "give me what I already know" instead of "let me experience something new"? On November 10 2014 16:00 Quixotic_tv wrote: They showed that they don't invest too much time to create new content for zerg. Instead they took a unit which already existed (howver unused) since WoL. They created just one new unit and recycled another one.Although I like SC2 even better than I liked SC1 and BW (kill the heretic!), I guess more BW units would be funny. They already made a point when they introduced the lurker. I would propose one iconic BW unit per race. Is that really what we should expect from the final expansion? | ||
|
Lunareste
United States3596 Posts
On December 24 2014 18:42 [F_]aths wrote: Because that is not the only consideration one has to take. But instead of discussing gameplay considerations (role overlap, options to defend against, ...) I don't understand why so many guys want old units back instead of seeing new units added to the roster. Why "give me what I already know" instead of "let me experience something new"? because when they make "something new" they make shit like the Colossus? Hellbat? Swarm host? | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On December 24 2014 18:43 Lunareste wrote: because when they make "something new" they make shit like the Colossus? Hellbat? Swarm host? Are you actually looking for a discussion, or do you just bash SC2 units to try to look like a hipster? | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
| ||
|
ZombieFrog
United States87 Posts
| ||
|
Lunareste
United States3596 Posts
On December 24 2014 18:46 [F_]aths wrote: Are you actually looking for a discussion, or do you just bash SC2 units to try to look like a hipster? 2 out of those 3 units are easily the most hated by the community and for good reason. The other is an amalgamation designed to fit a niche that could be solved for better gameplay by splitting the Hellion into Firebats and Vultures once more. I generally don't bash SC2 because I love the game, but there are several design problems with both the Colossus and Swarm Host which would warrant their removal from the game if the Blizzard designers weren't so fucking cock-sure with their own creations. Certainly the community at large has been calling for their removal almost from their inception. | ||
|
TiberiusAk
United States122 Posts
On November 10 2014 09:06 ZeromuS wrote: I feel like the downside to that is that, the manually controlled scarab is 300 gas and dies probably very quickly right after it does its damage. This weakness could just be addressed through tweaking numbers; buffing the hp/shields, or by extending the invulnerability window to last for a time after the explosion has gone off. With the right numbers, the unit doesn't have to just be an expensive baneling in the hands of a skilled player. (But it probably should be in the hands of an unskilled player.) To me, the Disruptor is more interesting than the Reaver because the Disruptor appears to have a higher skill ceiling. From what I'm reading in this thread, Reaver micro consists of 1) targeting a unit in the back (because it splashes backwards), 2) building scarabs, and 3) microing the shuttle for taking optimal pot shots. 1) With the Disruptor, you still need to steer it toward the right place in the "clump" (which may be in motion, or some of which may be lifted, split, or blink away after your initial click). I also disagree that "any middle will do"--you'll always prefer to hit more units, the squishier units, and/or specific tech units depending on the situation. 2) You don't need to hit the build scarab button, but you do need to time the actual detonation, which is way more interesting (including to viewers). Also, after you've hit detonate, you have the additional choice of backing off for a better attempt based on how your opponent reacts. Maybe all you need is to pull off a couple of feints to keep your opponent's army split or retreating while you flank, finish a warp-in, get energy for storm, get a kill on a nexus etc. Scarabs are simply fire and forget--beyond targeting, no unique APM or decisions can change the outcome once they're released. 3) The difficulty of warp prism micro can be tweaked with the aforementioned Disruptor numbers as well as the warp prism's pickup range, acceleration and so forth, so this seems like a tie. The siege tank/zealot bait move might be valid too, depending on the numbers chosen and if you can activate detonate while you're inside a prism--but with dropship micro being a thing Terran now also has the option to time their firings to some extent. Also, being able to deploy at range gives you a new choice of exactly where to deploy, but picking up is slightly easier. So overall, assuming the numbers can be calibrated to give the desired timings, the only real downside I see to the Disruptor vs the Reaver is the Disruptor takes more APM and more decisions on the user's side. (While the opponent loses the option to block with units after detonation is triggered, they gain the option to set up a kill on the Disruptor or Prism while they're vulnerable.) Since there is generally more APM available in SC2 than BW, I think that's only a plus. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
The distruptor plays enough like the reaver anyways, you drop it from warprism, do AOE damage, pick it up while it's vulnerable.. Will it? I suspect they won't play that similar simply because one is a ranged unit and the other is not. If Disruptors wind up being used in conjunction with the warpprism, they'll likely be more like a bomb whereas reaver micro was used as long range artillery to snipe targets and run. To me, the new tank pick-up is more akin to reaver play, except that you don't get the cool directional splash that requires more thought on where you target. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44300 Posts
On December 25 2014 03:17 Falling wrote: Will it? I suspect they won't play that similar simply because one is a ranged unit and the other is not. If Disruptors wind up being used in conjunction with the warpprism, they'll likely be more like a bomb whereas reaver micro was used as long range artillery to snipe targets and run. To me, the new tank pick-up is more akin to reaver play, except that you don't get the cool directional splash that requires more thought on where you target. I see the Disruptor more like an individual scarab than a Reaver. I loved the Reaver back in BW, but I'd much prefer a new, earlier tech (tier-1.5?) gateway unit. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
But I already got everything I needed with WoL for Protoss, I would love if they would revert the Voidray again to its more powerful form. But thats why I love Protoss so much, they have a really good synergy between units so they need each other to work at all. And while it would need insane micro to handle everything, you can do alot of things before the engagement. I would really hate if they would add stand alone units, thats more a Zerg and Terran thing. | ||
|
Trozz
Canada3454 Posts
I want them in the campaign. Robotics imba. | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
| ||
|
NotSorry
United States6722 Posts
| ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On December 25 2014 07:36 NotSorry wrote: toss needs a solid microable unit Fixed. Only half joking. | ||
|
_TMT_
Vietnam114 Posts
| ||
|
14681
United Kingdom27 Posts
Just admit it. The clue is in the name. LotV. Legacy of the Void. LEGACY of the Void. Time to bring back the best BW units. | ||
|
Highways
Australia6103 Posts
But removing colossus would be waaay better | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
We are getting the disruptor, which is a much microable and dangerous scarab. Just balance the unit cost/resistance and it's all done, very micro friendly. We dont really need the Reaver back in multiplayer. It would possibly be the same as a Siege tank or overlap with Storm, given the AoE damage values in SC2. I'm optimistic and I hope they find a new spot for the colossus, as a mobile siege unit. More speed and DPS/ range, and it can be a very effective microable siege unit abusing terrain (something that Disruptors can't do). Just add an inactive mode ability which turns it into some kind of ground rock (resistant) or shield battery mechanic. It would still have some use, supportive and microable, useful to attack, very limited use when switched into off, suddenly turning air counters (Corruptor, Viking) wasted supply, forcing their ground attack. But I'm just waiting to see them in the campaign ^^ | ||
|
gh0st
United States98 Posts
On December 25 2014 08:52 14681 wrote: Reaver would be so epic, and just perfect - given what they are looking for. Its role, micro potential, everything. Just admit it. The clue is in the name. LotV. Legacy of the Void. LEGACY of the Void. Time to bring back the best BW units. Nice point. If this is Starcraft's _final_ chapter, it ought to feature a few of the beloved units that helped popularize the franchise. When TV shows end (e.g., Seinfeld), they often bring back characters for one last hurrah as everybody rides off into the sunset... I don't know what percentage of SC2's current player base played BW, but it would make sense, from a storytelling POV, to bookend the series with a shoutout to the game's roots. Maybe they plan to do this just for the single-player campaign, but if you ever needed an "excuse" to repackage old ideas (that worked, and worked well!), this is it. | ||
|
ETisME
12387 Posts
Disruptor is best used with warp prism and requires the warp prism to get close to drop the disruptor to get close but close enough to be picked up again. But it can also perform as an individual first line unit in the high supply move out because of its Invulnerability during the charge up phrase. I personally am liking the unit a lot. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
In SC2, it'd be like a mix of swarmhost and colossus, it just doesn't work when all units are so clumped and the scarabs don't bug out and do no damage. Not that it's a bad thing, but the pathing works differently, and other units are more exciting in SC2. | ||
|
stapla05
Australia67 Posts
| ||
|
SoulmaN__
Germany80 Posts
| ||
|
TT1
Canada10009 Posts
edit: but the only thing that i really want is a new unit that we can add into our main comp.. we've playing with the same comp since WoL, gets kinda boring after a while . im tired of getting these flimsy un-massable units like the oracle and psi-disruptor. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
the original strategy in sc:bw was, 1gate -> 2 gate robo with robotics, shuttle, reaver(s), dragoon range + observer -> take nexus and threaten harass or a straight up bust with dragoons if too much damage was taken for the terran. it was an extremely easy build-order, but required a lot of elegance if you wanted to get the damage done (read: you were expected to deal damage, or lose to a strong economically-based timing push). it was also hard to shut down even if you knew it was coming because it was all up to the positioning and timing of your tanks, turrets, vulture mines, and how abusable map architecture was. fast forward to today, i feel the reaver would be too weak of a unit even if the unit were given straight and narrow scarab AI and that is because: bio works in starcraft 2 because the dps and unit spread caused by the smarter AI allows you to edge over today's gateway units, even as they're mobile and protoss is given more options to control the board (fast detection, mothership core with energy, sentries). bio is not as strong in late game compositions, but mech is out of the question because of how maneuverable the protoss army is, or how quickly and risk-free harass can be deployed (proxy warp-ins, warp prisms). for the price of a reaver, you're forced to deal damage all game long until you make up the opportunity cost of having one. --except defending against warp prism harass is easy by today's standards. units are much more responsive and take up much less space. workers react much more quickly, and you're forced to pick up and try again when shields are good again. Stim and having antiair defense that is not a turret is common in the matchup now. ---------------- seriously, i am just venting because they should just get a new all-purpose unit to replace the stalker. they need to get rid of that thing already and i feel it's more of an issue than what should be the next new unit.. it's not even just the blink ability. like i'd be happy to watch somebody 2--3 gate dragoon somebody to death, because you know that takes extreme amounts of control and posturing to pull off. but all you need with a stalker is highground vision, and a spot to blink up to. then from there you have a swiss army unit that can delay, outrun, outposition and out-harass and defend until you're safe enough back home to transition strongly (if deemed a requirement). it is also an uninspiring unit when used in PvZ all-ins because the entire composition consists of just blink-stalkers off of two bases after your first sentries die. pros use this strategy often, because it works in catching people off-guard or being difficult to defend against. it is a cheese/all-in based off of an early-mid-lategame unit that is required in all three matchups to a heavy degree. i do not think the unit is fun to watch, but i'll use them as a protoss player because i feel it's easy to get the kind of game i want through this unit. i'm happy the protoss race has mobility (pre-arbiters) and early transitions options in starcraft 2, currently. i'm not happy it takes a huge risk with your practice time to be able to even think of switching up your regular composition in vs. X matchups. mass gate stalker-sentry with upgrades is -the- strategy for koreans to get a game over and done with against your lesser-skilled player, and it makes for an uninteresting (yet solid) method of killing someone before the game can really take off the ground. i believe this isn't unit synergy--it's just unit abuse because of a lack of better option for winning a game as cleanly or as concisely. this goes for the collosus as well, because it is almost always the follow-up unit should the game require you to transition at any point. so while i agree that the reaver would be a good addition, i have pretty good feeling that the unit as it was is not going to cut it with the way starcraft 2 plays and how quickly you can lose units due to all the easing of mechanics on the player (as well as the increased pace of the game, compared to before). on the other hand, it could also be way too strong in certain early-game strategies. | ||
|
Muffloe
Sweden6061 Posts
| ||
|
NeThZOR
South Africa7387 Posts
| ||
|
algue
France1436 Posts
On December 25 2014 08:54 Highways wrote: Reaver would be nice. But removing colossus would be waaay better I think adding the reaver and removing the colossus would go hand in hand. I don't like the idea of bringing all the BroodWar unit back but it seems that blizzard is unable to come up with new and interesting designs so the reaver and the lurker are a lesser evil. On December 27 2014 22:28 NeThZOR wrote: To echo what others are saying: the reaver is a BW unit and would not really fit into the current state of things. Everything can fit into the game if Blizzard wants it. The only way it wouldn't fit is if Blizzard wants to bring it back without changing anything to the game. But for every new unit Blizzard brought into the game they made some changes to give them a real place. I don't see why the reaver would be any different. | ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1612 Posts
On December 27 2014 22:28 NeThZOR wrote: To echo what others are saying: the reaver is a BW unit and would not really fit into the current state of things. Of course it won't be BW Reaver with its game engine bugging attack. But adjusting it to SC2 could be cool. It's so slow, so you cant add them to deathball, you should always micro them with warp prism. Also you can choose target to make maximum splash damage. More micro, less death ball -> better game | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On December 24 2014 19:05 Lunareste wrote: 2 out of those 3 units are easily the most hated by the community and for good reason. The other is an amalgamation designed to fit a niche that could be solved for better gameplay by splitting the Hellion into Firebats and Vultures once more. I generally don't bash SC2 because I love the game, but there are several design problems with both the Colossus and Swarm Host which would warrant their removal from the game if the Blizzard designers weren't so fucking cock-sure with their own creations. Certainly the community at large has been calling for their removal almost from their inception. Nothing that you say is wrong. That does not mean the argument is valid. If Blizzard had asked the community, SC2 would be largely BW with better graphics and some minor handling improvements. Regarding the reaver, I also miss him. I remember the tension if the reaver would be killed or loaded into the shuttle in time. If the scarab would hit or miss. If I would have been asked, I would have wanted the reaver back in SC2. And the zerg scourges. Try to see it from the developer perspective: An SC1 remake would have been loved by the guys who already like BW, but hardly attracted any new crowd. SC2 had to be different. Some things which are iconic from the previous game had to be cut only to allow having the room for new iconic things. The reaver still can be used. We still have SC1. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Esports World Cup
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
CranKy Ducklings
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
CSO Cup
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
