Reavers with Immortals and Stalkers=Ground combo

[eq]

[/eq]

look i dont wana bash you or anything but in the post i quoted before you said "they are similar.... one has to go" and now you say its a completely different unit.

i was responding to the first post, so - if they are similar they should be equally useful, and reaver is a much better unit (now of course, things may change later on) due to stronger attack. so far in Battle reports i havent seen a single good use of colossus, okay it doesn't need a shuttle but so what if it cant harass well... id rather have a shuttle + a good harass unit (and that is what reaver is and colossus is supposed to be)

 

Thats just currently bro, later, who knows.

 

well to me, both the colossus and the reaver has pros and cons.
Colossus:
- mobile
- higher hp
- can be upgraded to have larger range than reaver
- extremely vulnerable
- less damage per hit (dunno about dps but probably less dps as well)

Reaver:

-Huge damage at a time
-starts off with nice range
- Not-so-mobile
-Less hp

I don't see why blizzard couldnt just put in colossus and the reaver. Give it to the player to decide which one he/she wants. or spend more resources on both.

 

1) Everybody this is Starcraft II not Brood War. You can't really legitimately compare the Reaver to the Colossus or say that it is better. They have similar roles, but that's it. Plus, Blizzard can change numbers at will to balance things out, so DON'T WORRY!

2) The Reaver is in Starcraft II - just the campaign editor. But I would guess that like the Wraith and Goliath in Wings of Liberty, we will see it in the single-player Protoss campaign.

3) Blizzard probably has a very good reason for not including both the Colossus and the Reaver in the multi-player Protoss build. But even so, they can't just give every cool unit from the original game to the Starcraft II version of each race. Otherwise the game would take so long to balance it would never come out.

 

what is it with this forum i cant quote anything without getting excessive quote message... in any case as to the guy above (ninerman13): i dont think people care much about units that are only in campaigns and/or editor, if you cant use it in MP its pretty much like it isnt in the game at all...

as for what 1n5an1ty said, there i completely agree, why not have both, they arent so similar that one should replace other IMO

 

CROrens - it's against forum posting/quoting rules to either quote the guy who posted immediately before you or overquote (meaning your analysis or new text amounts to less than the actual quote), so I'm guessing that's the problem. In other words, if you quote two lines of text, you have to post at least three lines of text or it is an overquote. Quoting is fine here as long as you adhere to those two items.

As to the topic, you and 1n5an1ty are missing my earlier point #3 - Blizzard can't just put every unit in Starcraft II to make people happy. It'd delay the game, make it harder to balance, and take away from Blizzard's desired new mechanics. Besides, you could probably find a number of fans for each old unit that want to see a return in Starcraft II. It's just too much, and Blizzard has to draw the line somewhere.

EDIT - I noticed some other places in the forum where you overquote a little you may want to fix those posts before the mods jump on ya.

 

I find myself posting this kind of thing a lot, but at least now I have some official backing. A recently Q&A confirmed that the Colossus is just as effective at worker raids as the Reaver.

Don't make judgments on what the unit can or cannot do based on the battle reports. Unit use in any individual match is not necessarily representative of unit use overall. We see a single failed raid, and suddenly the unit is a piece of junk? It just doesn't work like that.

The guys at sc2.net.pl made the same mistake, trying to pass one video off as "many battle videos." If you only have one example to point at, or a bunch of examples that are obviously skewed, you can't begin to hope your conclusion will be correct.

(Also: I don't think the mods are that strict about overquoting. I myself use more abstract terms to judge where someone is quoting too much, basically, if stuff is quoted and the poster doesn't address it, I'll trim the quote. If it is overquoted and the accompanying text doesn't need the quote, I'll delete the quote. If it is overquoted, but conveys a succinct message that relates to the entire quoted text, I'll leave it be. If you're getting your quotes deleted, it's likely because they weren't needed to make your messages make sense.)

 

It seems the removal of the reaver will hinder the use of the "shuttle" mechanic of the phase prism. The primary use of the shuttle from SC was the add mobility to the slow reaver. Without it, the combat uses of the "shuttle" seem limited, seeing as how the collosus is much more mobile than the reaver and it doesn't even fit.

Also, the reaver was also affective in taking out groups of even more "heavy" units, such as terran siege tanks. The collosus doesn't seem like it will fit that roll very well, only in taking out small units.

Anyways, the colossus looks like a cool substiute for the reaver. Its a big innovation and functions a lot differently. The whole cliff mechanic makes it seem like it will open up a whole bunch of new strategies and roles for it to play.

However, bringing them both in would seem kind of redundant, as they both have very similar functions.

 

The removal of the Reaver shouldn't hinder the "shuttle" mechanic of the Phase Prism. You still need a Phase Prism to get any ground unit across a gap (even the Colossus - it can only traverse up single-level cliffs) and make a drop. Plus, I think the "shuttle" mechanic is enhanced by the addition of warp-in.

Plus, the primary purpose of the Shuttle in the original Starcraft was not simply to add mobility to the slow Reaver - it was to add mobility to all Protoss ground units! The Reaver was just one ground unit that benefitted more than the others.

 

In most Protoss V Protoss or Protoss V Zerg games the only reason for a tech to inculde the robotics facility was to get both the Shuttle out with a robotics support bay for Reavers. No other protoss unit had as much military benefit from a Shuttle as the Reaver did. Zealots "bombs" and High Templar drops were popular but ussually when a protoss techs into robotics facility its not just for that they would get a support bay.

The wording of what I said may be a little odd, but when I say "hinder" I don't mean hinder as in actually make the mechanic worse, but make it less viable/popular. Of course this is what i'm saying perhaps SC2 will do something else.

 

Perhaps, but the phase prism can still transport 2 colossi, and it has the awesome warp gate synergy. But yes, I don't see it transporting as many units anymore.

No it wasn't. Siege tanks do enough damage that a small group can insta-kill a reaver, and their sight range was greater than the reaver's attack range. The reaver drops and instantly dies, or slowly approaches and is destroyed before it can fire a single shot. Reavers also couldn't instantly kill goliaths (even with the damage upgrade, if the goliath is at full health it'll survive the hit (at 1-4 hp, depending on goliath armor upgrades). Given the large size of, well, large units, they would be too spread out to strike them efficiently.

Heck, reavers weren't that great at killing sunken colonies and photon cannons, due to a bug that often caused the reaver to approach to within the turret's range before it fired (especially from south/below).

That's what the colossus is designed to do. It's not a complete reaver replacement; it replaces part of the role of the reaver, and adds its own unique abilities to the mix as well. They probably overlap too much to both be in the game, though.

 

The reaver was good against killing large mech units such as the siege tank. Its also very popular and ussually seen a lot in many games. They were most effective as a supplement with your army, and dropped with the shuttle where it is safe or will take minor damage, and picked up before it is targeted.

 

The collosus is good against small units, but the thing you have to realize is by the time you get a group of collossus i could potentially have air or a strong ground force to counter your attempts. At the end of the day it all boils down to who has the Superior Micro/ Macro Skills.

Im not even a protoss player and i have no complaints about the collosuses power.

 

then dont fight them with marines hit them with siege tanks from far away it wont stand a chance or hit it with banshees once again it wont stand a chance

 

well you don't to fight it with marines. so it would be like saying. lets take the unit that is the counter for the units they have.

 

Sorry for the necro post but:

"No it wasn't. Siege tanks do enough damage that a small group can insta-kill a reaver, and their sight range was greater than the reaver's attack range. The reaver drops and instantly dies, or slowly approaches and is destroyed before it can fire a single shot. Reavers also couldn't instantly kill goliaths (even with the damage upgrade, if the goliath is at full health it'll survive the hit (at 1-4 hp, depending on goliath armor upgrades). Given the large size of, well, large units, they would be too spread out to strike them efficiently."

Check out this video (there are better but youtube starcraft seach sucks )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cB-6MrsDsQ

some highlights that owns your reasoning:

1. Earlygame: 2 zealots + a reaver in a shuttle. You drop the zealots first, so they take the ST damage.
2. Midgame when Terran pushes without Goliaths: Reaver drops right down in the Siege Tanks.
3. Again, When Terran Pushes you go for the harass.
4. A player like Bisu goes Reaver's minimum 50% of all his games against Terran.

Not that I fear that Protoss will need this in sc2.

 

re

Colosus with Reavers would be a deadly combo against ground forces. Say 3 Colosus and 2-3 Reavers. Say bye bye to your Zerg rush.

But at the same time the Colosus seem weak to me. The one video I saw of them, a few hits was all they took before dying.

 

I seriously hope the reavers return. why the freak would the toss discontinue such a kewl product? =[ anyways, there isnt any lore back up >=O

 

Protoss were nerfed because Blizz wanted to favor the Terrans. That's the only logic I have been able to come up with so far.

The way I see it, Terran infantry is simply more vulnerable to Reaver than Colossus. So they removed the Reaver. LOL.

 

That's not true. In terms of general statistics, the Protoss are still formidable in exception for the Colossus which was somewhat lacking in damage from what i've seen in Battle Report 1. Again, let's not forget Protoss shields now regenate significantly faster than before, this encourages a more tactical approach to enhance unit perservation. The latest Stalker Build saw it's HP increase to 180 including shields, making it the most resilient tier 1.5 Unit in the game. Also, Protoss is much more mobile that it was before, as demonstrated by the ability to warp any units in the area of a pylon. This drastically reduce travel time for all protoss ground forces and if used correctly, can easily overwhelm any race and negates the need for 'shuttle tactics'.

The Colossus has also been revamped in the latest development, dealing up to 46 NORMAL damage in total (if i recall accurately) to a single target. This is by far the strongest normal ground unit in terms of damage output aside from the siege tank. It can also easily traverse high grounds, ideal for cliff side battles, and it can be upgraded to have siege range of 9 vs initial 5.

Also, it's also interesting to note that the Terran player in battle report 1 and 2 had access to 'sub cheats' such as unlimited energy usage on the Terran Raven in Battle Report 2. The number of hunter seeker missiles used was alot more than what a player would normally see in a multiplayer battle. One other reason for yourt distorted perspective of Terrans could pontentially stem from the poor Zerg/Protoss response in the late tier game as they've repeatedly fail to keep up in mineral production and unit count.