Official Poll #1:Would You Like Reavers in SC2?

[Protogod]

Pretty self-explanatory. Blizzard may be removing reavers from SC2 because they feel that reavers fulfilled the same roles as the colossus. What do you think about the matter?

If this gets reasonable feedback, I am considering making a new poll weekly/biweekly. Results would be posted along with highlights, similarly to sc.org's poll system.

[TitanWing]

I'm unsure on this (not a Protoss player...yet *winks at Proto*), but I think it could work either way.

The Protoss already have a good anti-mass arsenal and a HT drop was as good as a Reav drop, if not better. But there are several things the Reaver can do that th Collossi can't, such as fit in a Phase Prism.

[Faiien]

UGGG YES!!! finally someone sees eye to eye with me. The reaver is completely different then the colossi and they both totally perform a different role. I'd like to think that the reavers are more like cannons and colossi are more like Gigantic skyscraper tall robots with lazers .The reavers could be transported in ships; colossi cannot, reavers do splash damage;colossi just kinda scan the area with their lazers no splash there -_-, theres a famous move for the reavers (reaver drops), theres no moves named after the colossi XD (i know we havnt even got to use it yet but w/e lol iam trying to make a point)

Vote #1 choice!!!ftw

[Protogod]

The reavers could be transported in ships; colossi cannot, reavers do splash damage;colossi just kinda scan the area with their lazers no splash there, theres famous (reaver drops)

Pretty much. reavers strke suddenly and powerfully. Colossi are very slow and calculated, with a continual damage flow instead of sudden damage with a long cooldown.

Both effective in situations, but not entirely interchangeable.

[Faiien]

Dustin Browder had this to say about their decision on dropping the reaver

This decision is not permanent. Nothing is final.

We had a lot of units for the Protoss and we had to make some decisions for Blizzcon about what to keep and what to drop. The Reaver was by far the hardest call.

We are VERY aware of how some players feel about the Reaver. Frankly, we feel pretty passionately about it ourselves. The challenge of making a sequel to StarCraft is enormous. You will see us make (and unmake) a lot of decisions like this as we continue the development process together.

Thanks to everybody who posted their feelings on this issue. I don't know what is going to happen in the future, but your feelings on the Reaver have been heard.

- Dustin

i really hope it comes back

[sdbolts11]

Well, the Reavers are a great unit. I would prefer them over the Colossi. However, the thing is you keep one and drop the other. Having both of them in the game would seem kind of imbalanced :/

[Protogod]

Having both of them in the game would seem kind of imbalanced


elaborate, please. To tech and produce them both would still leave glaring weak spots and cost alot of money.

[Kawagata]

who else can hold off the masses so effeciently? HT run out of nrg too fast.

[TitanWing]

DAs work too.

[BlackDefiler]

Reavers were also the artillery for toss. They had a longer range then defencive buildings. The Colossus clearly does not fulfill this role. I't s a good Zerglingkiller, but when it comes to razing buildings fast it just can't cut it against the Reaver.

[Ktan]

Something that's also quite appealing about the Reaver, I suppose, is the illustrious 'Reaver Drop'. I'm not sure how often it is used, but the rapid and large amount of damage a Reaver can dole out combined with it's ease of transportation make it a good worker hunter.

Unless, of course, the Stalker is supposed to supersede this type of attack, but Stalkers don't seem to have the same appealing punch.

If it's not put directly into the game, I'm sure it's on of the most mapped/modded in units we will see in this game.

[Basan]

I think that Reavers played the artillery role for the 'Tossies - a thing already mentioned here - and also the equivalent of a Tank drop (with some scans). The Colossi seem more fitting to the anti-infantry/cliff harassment role and both don't exactly overlap, especially considering the terrain and consequential gameplay differences between SC-BW and SC2.

And the Stalkers don't replace any of the above simply because, so far, they don't seem to be carrying the same 'surprise punch'.

[Diege]

The Reaver is more of a siege unit. that is true.

[Kellanved]

The reaver was great fun because of the popping and fast killing capabilities. It was one of my favourite units.

The colossus also looks great, but for different practical purposes, like shooting from behind the cliff, or being able to quickly dispatch 1 or 2 to take out an expansion aside from the main event (like with reaver pops, but this one done on its own).

They're obviously different because one is faster moving and has a more solid foundation, while one requires pickups but can kill faster. But they're both great units

You have to understand that Blizzard is under pressure to make SC2 such that, in 10 years from now people will look back and say: 'Starcraft 2 was such a great game, and so was Starcraft 1, both in their own respects' as opposed to 'Starcraft 1 was such a great game, and I'm sorta glad they gave it a graphical revamp 10 years later'.

They want each of their new inventions to grow on us until they attain the same classical status as the old units have to us now.

Also it seems to me that the Colossus has siege range.

[Protogod]

DAs work too.
But DA's arent in sc2. ;)

[Ktan]

Maelstrom is back though, isn't it? I'd assume that was what made DA's handy against swarms.

Heh, pick of a swarm with feedback >.>
Or MC them all O.o

[Protogod]

Maelstrom is back though, isn't it? I'd assume that was what made DA's handy against swarms.


I dunno, I only remember feedback being there.

[Kawagata]

they only mentioned FB. Honestly reavers are much too important. Collosus and Sair? Pfft hell no.

[sdbolts11]

Hopefully, at least Maelstrom comes back. Now that the TA I'm guessing will be significantly more used than the DA ever was, people can actually take advantage of Archon abilities without having to build a completely different unit. Maybe the Colossi will be better against Zerg than the Reaver was. Probably not, but in any case, Maelstrom has to stay.

[apostolos]

Both reavs and Colls should stay.Remember that they get easily owned by some flyers(When no anti-air support.)

[sdbolts11]

Simply throw in anti-air units and you're good to go.

NO! Both Reavers and Colossi with all the other monstrosities the Protoss have would make things.... IMBALANCED. Make the Thor as fast as and as little cooldown as a Marine then maybe... But no, one or the other or bust.

[Neo]

First off: I didn't really like the reaver model in sc2... Now granted they could change it, but something felt off about it, you know?

Second I don't know. Its hard to make judgements like this without playing with both units first, you know?

The reaver did annoy me though because of the baby sitting they needed, and the annoying way sometimes the scarabs would go off and get stuck and/or the fact that it cost minerals for each scarab.

However, the colossus doesn't seem to fit the bill imo -- the reavers point was fast and sudden damage, and the col seems to be... I don't know. Slower. Would it not make sense to simply micro your units away from the damn thing, thus preventing any serious losses?

my 2 cents, and i didn't read the whole thread, i sorta skimmed, sorry if what i said was already brought up, but personally... toss seems lacking without a reaver. I mean cmon, reavers!

-Neo

[Faiien]

well the ways they could fix the reavers problems of stuck scarabs and maintenance is to allow the scarabs to be able to move in more directions, up in the air ect. and you could also make the reaver auto create scarabs

[Aqo]

I hated being Reaver-dropped, but I loved the challenge of defending it. Pulling it off myself several times has been pleasantly rewarding. I want Reavers to stay ;_;

[Faiien]

ugg i wish i could pull off reaver drops but i phail most of the time -_- always with the goons/lots combo

[Protogod]

NO! Both Reavers and Colossi with all the other monstrosities the Protoss have would make things.... IMBALANCED. . But no, one or the other or bust.


But do you not see how they fulfill some very different roles? Or how you couldnt make both of them effectively?

[SilverCrusader]

So wtf is a reaver anyway guys?
(sorry, whenever someone gives me the chance to pick a stupid choice i do...)

[Protogod]

So wtf is a reaver anyway guys?
A reaver (http://www.battle.net/scc/protoss/units/reaver.shtml)

[Kawagata]

I didn't like the new model also. It was too slim and small. Reavers should be the size of a truck and with a curve of 80 ARC of so.

[sdbolts11]

But do you not see how they fulfill some very different roles? Or how you couldnt make both of them effectively?
Of course the fulfill different roles. But it's the fact of imbalance. Both are pretty good units, although cost a hell of a lot. It would be nice to have both, would make gameplay much more interesting. But it all comes down to balance :(.

[TitanWing]

How are they imba? If some dumbass masses Collossi and Reavers, just go air on his ass. gg.

[Faiien]

lol
y would you mass colossi and reavs in the first place it would be hella expensive XD
you could probably build 2 armies vs the reavs vs colossi massing

back to the topic at hand
@sdbolts
elaborate wth do you mean it would be imba? it takes alot of resources to get to the reavs and or the colossi, so plz tell us how?

[vIsitor]

A Colossus is infinitely more useful than the Reaver was against infantry, certainly, but it simply doesn't have the building-leveling firepower that a Reaver possesses. Not to mention that Reavers can fit in transports, and Colossi can not (a definite problem on island maps).

How are the Protoss going to assault a fortified base without a proper siege unit? Even with combined arms, they will have a difficult go of it from the ground, and the skies do not look particularly friendly even with the glut of capital ships the Protoss have at their disposal.

Either the Reaver needs to be re-admitted, or a new Protoss siege unit needs to be designed. And the Colossus, for all its usefulness and novelty, is not it.

[BlackDefiler]

The Colossus and Reaver could be both in IMO if they put them as far away on the tech tree as possible. But if I had to choose even as the Colossus is very, very cool, the Reaver just beats it both in damage and effectiveness.

[SilverCrusader]

you see, the thing about reavers is that they weren't originally designed to be fighting, so they were effective in battle, but more or else old machinery fitted for a different purpose. The collosi on the other hand is the first fully AI unit that is meant to be on the front lines fighting.
They are making units that aren't just good for gameplay, but also fit along with the story. Why shouldn't the protoss have adapted and made a robot that is meant to battle? The main problem with reavers is that unlike siegetanks, they cannot fire over things, the collosi solves this problem by being able to walk over whatever is in the way and firing. They would be also excellent guards for your base because if anyone drops you the collosi can step over your own units and quickly dispose of the intruders w/o pathfinding, whereas the reaver would have to circumnavigate through your entire base to do so, as well as cause collatoral damage to the rest of your nearby units.

[BlackDefiler]

The Reaver doesn't damage allies.
And now the Protoss won't have a siege unit. Although the superior damage of their other troops might make up for this IDK.

[Faiien]

The main problem with reavers is that unlike siegetanks, they cannot fire over things, the collosi solves this problem by being able to walk over whatever is in the way and firing. They would be also excellent guards for your base because if anyone drops you the collosi can step over your own units and quickly dispose of the intruders w/o pathfinding, whereas the reaver would have to circumnavigate through your entire base to do so, as well as cause collatoral damage to the rest of your nearby units.


and btw colossi cant step over buildings so they are still a hassle to move with their size if you accidentally build them in a little space you'll find yourself destroying buildings to get out. and with the reaver, yes it was hard to maneuver it through your own units, but thats what shuttles are for
with colossi you cant carry them in a shuttle so you have to run away at 3 miles an hour while your getting pounded -_-
reavers>colossi in a way
and in a picture we saw that the devs had made it so that the scarabs could lop up in the air, this would solve many problems with the reav's scarab

[Protogod]

lol
y would you mass colossi and reavs in the first place it would be hella expensive
you could probably build 2 armies vs the reavs vs colossi massing

@sdbolts
elaborate wth do you mean it would be imba? it takes alot of resources to get to the reavs and or the colossi, so plz tell us how?

How are they imba? If some dumbass masses Collossi and Reavers, just go air on his ass. gg.

Sdbolts's argument has been gged, imo.

[TitanWing]

Some people are saying that the Protoss won't have a siege unit without the Reaver.

It looks to me like the Collussus has a fairly long reaching thermal lance...about the range of the (now shortened) SC2 tank.

[Faiien]

well hopefully, imo the protoss must have a unit that has increased range to take care of pesky base defenses such as cannons and such

btw another difference between reavers and colossus is that reavers dont take damage from turrets :P

[Kellanved]

Hey... zerg never had a very convenient way to get rid of base defense! Guardians were absolute top of the tech tree, and sometimes not worth getting when you need your gas in order to counter the enemy's army. Lings/hydra swarms were usually the best way (or ling/ultras with dark swarm, but again... top of the tree and not a hot choice vs protoss/zerg army).

Let's hope they get one.

[Faiien]

well the zerg could always overwhelm the enemy in numbers and its kapisce
with protoss and terran we always had to take our time
specially with terran, tank pushes
with protoss reavs or overwhelm
but i think zs shouldnt be able to get a ranged unit thats at the bottom of the tech tree.
its one of the things that set them apart fromt he other 2 races

[Protogod]

well the zerg could always overwhelm the enemy in numbers

Exactly. Lings owned cannons pretty fast once they closed range with them.

Not to mention- protoss are supposed to be the ones with heavy hitting powers. They're the classic "beat the shit out of you with 1 unit" archetype. Zerg were never meant to have specifically designed fortification killers.

[TitanWing]

Nor should they, we want to keep the races distinct. Give them all ground artillery units and where does the uniqueness start to go? Down the drain, that's where.

[apostolos]

Nor should they, we want to keep the races distinct. Give them all ground artillery units and where does the uniqueness start to go? Down the drain, that's where.indeed.

[SilverCrusader]

I agree with titan. You guys are sticking to the old SC way too much, you think that you have to to stick to old stratergies to win, when blizz is trying to make a new StarCraft all you guys are asking for is SC in 3D, "Give us back the reaver", "change the siege tank back."

[MajorSonnwaitts]

I like the reavers. I always use them (well, not always), so I think that both the colossi and the Reaver should be there.
The colossi could be a base protector or anti-infantry unit, but, as all the guys said, they don't have enough force to be the base of our assault, but the reavers, with the phase prism, could be a great drop, like always they were.

And I agree with proto and TitanWing. Protoss are the big strong and expensive force, while the Zerg's strategy is based in big armies of little and cheap creatures. If Blizz make a siege unit as the Reavers or the (now ugly) tank to the Zerg, there will be no difference between a race and the other. It's like to give an uberstrong flying zerg like the BCs or the carriers. What would be the difference?
(The guardians don't count. They need mutas or devourers for anti-air, meanwhile the BCs and carriers can self-defend themselves)

[Faiien]

ok...yes blizz is trying to improve on sc2 but that doesnt necessarily mean that they have to remove important units to do it. the reaver has always been an important arsenal in the protoss army. from raping lings, rines to destryoing entire bases.

i know blizz is tring to diversify the 3 races but imo its ok if there are one or two units that have counterparts in other races.

all in all my opinion still stands strong reavers stay
we like options even if the reaver isnt used TONS it still doesnt hurt to know that if the time comes to use them we have them

[nkoplm]

and plus, reavers just make such a cool sound 'jweeb'. keep them.

[Protogod]

and plus, reavers just make such a cool sound 'jweeb'. keep them.
Hello, and welcome to WB. Please stop spamming.

[Faiien]

well atm it seems that logic has won again
with a majority vote most of us think the reavs should stay its been a fun thread
props to proto ^^

[Protogod]

Yeah, at 31 Votes I think this thread has reached maximum capacity (given that 20 of those votes were clearly for reeavers, while 8 of the others were indecisive)

[SilverCrusader]

ok, have fun with your SC in 3D, just because they take away reavers the entire protoss section is totally unbalanced!

[Protogod]

ok, have fun with your SC in 3D, just because they take away reavers the entire protoss section is totally unbalanced!

You lost the vote. Whine elsewhere.

/thread. New poll forthcoming (when I get highlights from this thread.)