The roach still sucks

Alright, so even after BR3 with a much much better zerg player, roaches were still incredibly ineffective. What's the deal?
They need a boost somehow. Either an attack bonus (desperately needed) or a speed boost so they can close in faster and make better harrassers (which the regen would be perfect for) or more hp.

at the very least they should be able to burrow while under attack so that you can micro the damaged ones underground (much like the stalkers micro away)

I really think a major speed boost would be good. They could run in, dish some serious damage, retreat, regen, and recycle.

 

It depends which Roach was the most recent version in BR2 or BR3.

BR2 Roach has 100 HP, while BR3 Roach has 90 HP, but both are very similar in build... Roach vs Stalker was never a good counter, but was twice as effective against Zealots due to biological bonus doubling Roaches' attack.

I hope they show us a better incarnation of the Roach, as well as its new slimmed up model =)


-Psi

 

Sure a super fast regen isn't enough for you Zerg is it? I should have expected a topic like this popping up. First off it isn't supposed to be an uber unit that takes out everything ekulio. Second, the Roach did much better than I ever expected it to in the Battle Report as it has a moderate attack. Third, this is a commando unit and as such has 90 health points which is pretty high for a zerg and it regenerates at a ridiculously high level. I mean seriously did you even see that roach go from almost all red to mostly green in 4 second like I did? No? I didn't think so. Take a second look ekulo and you will see they did much better than you thought they did.

EDIT: and it has a biological attack bonus. I didn't even remember that at first.

 

true, but so far it looks like a waste of resources. I'd prefer to jump straight to hydras but they've crippled the hydra by making it an AA unit. Makes no sense to me.

 

The roaches were not even upgraded. when there upgraded there health regen goes up. Atleast know some propare facts before dissing a unit. I think if the zerg player focues more on banelings and roachers at there fullist he would of won easly. even an ultalisk. Whats even more of a slap in the face this guy had like 4 queens at one point and DIDNT DO 1 FREAKIN RAZOR STORM (zerg version of psi storm[it moves])

how often do you build a high templar and never use psi storm. if you do you deserve to loose.

 

mass zerglings wouldve won him the game along with those number of roaches he had...

 

Roaches are awesome. You just need to micro them so that they burrow right before dying, and you pretty much have an immortal ground army until the enemy gets detectors.
How awesome is that?

And even the nerf they got from 100hp to 90hp doesn't seem to be enough imo. Maybe lower the hp to 80 (like sc1 hydras) and also the cost a little bit to make up for that.. because 90hp for a zerg unit seems a little bit too much.

 

Precisely. Roaches aren't weak. They're formidable. They're capable of doing 18 damage against biological targets. They also benefit from the enhanced regeneration upgrade, allowing it to completely recover to full health in 4-5 seconds with great micro such as burrowing. The fact that it is capable of achieving these feats make a roach a powerful unit, even with the health decrease.

 

Ok that's great....but I was under the impression that taking damage interrupts burrowing.

 

roaches alone cant win the game. if you win by massing 1 unit its not fun (but it is possible) they werent upgraded and they were not mixed with his other units effectivly. should of had banelings flank in and blow up or had hydralisk with range upgrade so they can stay out of range and the roaches be shot first. Even more the zerg didnt use his caster abilitys well enough nor did he make enough high tier units.

we saw no ultralisk. No LURKERS? Not a single muta or even a Brood Lord. GG zerg...

 

"Alright, so even after BR3 with a much much better zerg player, roaches were still incredibly ineffective. What's the deal?"

The zerg player made a few mistakes. I'm going to ignore the economy mistakes and just look at unit choices and micro.

1) Roaches make great meatshields against anything that doesn't counter them well. Stalkers are a good counter to roaches, since stalkers have longer range and can focus fire them. Zealots are a poor counter to roaches (no focus fire due to no range), so if your opponent uses lots of zealots, counter with lots of roaches.

2) Roaches have poor offense. They're quite good against organic units, but stalkers (their bane) are mechanical and only take 8 damage a hit from a roach. Between their lower range (making focus fire less effective) and the stalker's blink dancing, roaches just can't handle stalkers.

My suggestion: Build hydralisks. Hydras don't hard counter stalkers, but they're not pushovers against them either. The stalkers would only have one advantage at that point: Blink.

3) In order to counter units that counter roaches (eg stalkers) you need to burrow. Sometimes the zerg player used burrow effectively, sometimes (like that disastrous retreat) they did not.

 

Guys keep in mind that the Battle Report is orchestrated. The units they build and the combinations were planned before recording, so that we could see all of these new units and how they were intended to be used (like the forcefield mechanic).
So if getting hydras was not a part of the script, he would simply not get them. Same goes with the Toss. Or why do you think that in all Terran matchups they never get Crucio tanks? That's because they'd rather show you a new unit and a new mechanic, instead of a known unit.
I would assume that next Battle Report will be TvZ showcasing a mid-late game with crucio tanks, thors, vikings; and mutalisks, infestors, and brood guardians.

 

I totally agree. I always thought that the battle reports might be staged. Well maybe not move for move at each time. Buy like maelstrom said, they only allow certain units to be used. That's why we don't even get into the late or middle game. Ok I guess that they've been heading into the mid game at the end, but not long enough to see other units.

 

I admit that "sucks" was a bit harsh. However, I understand the roach, I understand that the player could have microd them better, I know that they get a regen upgrade (really makes no difference if you die in one volley) so stick to your own philosophy and don't diss me until you know some proper facts about me, ok?

 

I would hope you know that the BR are staged. Just so you know facts about you will do the raoch little good. That match could of been won if they had armor upgrades (atleast 2) and there health regen even if they were poorly microed. if you didnt see the remaining health of those stalkers they would of went down at some point. The ones in the back had a nice 10% life or so. So factor in a few more seconds of living in and propare microing and it would of been a whole different story.

Last. your thred about Roaches which is your started topic should be based on roach facts... not your facts. Plz lets keep it at that and not about personal differences. I'm behind a computer screen we dont know each other, we only see given starcraft facts and debate about them.

 

Moving on! The Roach is awesome the way it is. I think Roaches should just be the way they are hell, they may need a nerf of health once more down to 80 as that regen is still pretty nasty with 90 hp. Also I think they are designed to die in one volley because that is their counter (focus-fire) and its supposed to be that way.

 

I do agree that somehow the game was planned, for 1 fact the zerg player is a korean, and koreans generally play better than that, I know cause I always watch koreans playing SC on tv...

FYI : The "Emperor" has returned playing SC1 again, I saw him battling with the aces match, It was against a very much younger oponent, 18yrs, against 30yrs old, anyway the match ended in 2 quick vitories...

Im looking forward how good will they play once SC2 comes out and becomes a legit e-sport.

 

"Emperor" who's that? I already may know I prbably just forgot. Also It wasn't a staged game, Blizzard said so. However the commentary was done afterward. They get replays of ever match these guys have, wither it is to test balancing or just for fun and they choose the best games showing the things the like and they do commentary, wrap it up with some special openings and closing and add Battle Report at the top of it and there you go.

 

Way back when SC2 was just announced the stalkers was doing the draggons same dmg (20) and the roach was announced a melee unit if you all can remeber back that far. Back then the match was prononunced a FAIL on the zergs behalf even though its a very close match. 1 vs 1 a roach can win past the number of 5 or 6 it starts leaning in the stalkers favor. Now fast forward to current day the stalker is doing 10 dmg + bounce vs armored so its still basicly hitting hard vs the roach and the roach is now short ranged but still loosing to the stalker in Large numbers if not micoed currectly.

This match was doomed to fail under those circumstances. The roach is only a good counter vs 1 protoss unit and thats the zealot. A roach is a terran counter not a protoss but you'll still needed to build them to survive for a while if you wanna win.

 

This is when I stopped reading. The battles are staged; mistakes are made intentionally as the devs see fit to showcase different aspects of the game. For example, the Roaches in this Battle Report didn't have their regen upgrade, meaning their regen was 15 hp/sec for the entire game. Not only that, but Yeon-Ho Lee was horrible at microing his Roaches - there were a dozen times where he should have burrowed his Roaches, but didn't. The important thing is not to take these Battle Reports at face value, otherwise one will confuse lack of player skill for an underpowered unit.