Patch 1.4.0

[Aldrius]

But fair enough forcefields and colossus can be devastating to your army, sometimes a bit to devastating. It's exactly the same if you play terran, it's like you don't really want to get those vikings because they are bad vs ground but you sort of have to.

Thing about Viking vs. Corruptor I think is that you don't need a lot of vikings to deal with what they have to deal with. They have long range, and deal tons of burst damage to armored targets. And they're fairly quick.

Corruptors on the other hand are very slow, and very short-range. So you need more of them because they're stalker-fodder. Vikings don't have to worry about stalkers because they're safely behind your army. And they can move away if need be. Corruptors aren't so lucky, but in compensation Corruptors have bulk. (They have one or two armor and I think... 75 more HP?) But they also cost a little more. So they're much more vulnerable and less likely to get the job done that you want them to, so you need more of them I think.

The corruptors main problem is that it's slow. Time and again, Brood War and Liberty have proven there is little to no place for slow air units. It defeats the entire point of being an air unit. Having a unit that can bypass terrain obstacles if they can barely move is hideously pointless. And for an air-to-air unit, which needs to hunt down it's enemies... even more so.

So the high-cost, and the lack of use even as an Air to Air unit just makes the corruptor incredibly worthless except for transforming them into Brood Lords. (Which is really the ONLY reason you ever see them, short of countering colossi). And Blizzard seems to want to chalk this up to Corruptors being boring because they're reactive units. But that's really not the case. Scourge in SC1 were reactive units, you only got them to deal with corsairs, science vessels and shuttles. They countered three units, they had no way of countering ground forces or affecting them in any way and yet they were way more exciting and interesting than corrupters are.

Because they were cheap, and they were fast, they did a role and they did it WELL. Corruptors are just too large an investment for what they are. I think if they traded some of that durability for a cost reduction (and then increased the cost of the Brood Lord to compensate), they'd seem a lot more desirable and useful.

[Twilice]

Lol^

Corruptors are faster then vikings.

[Aldrius]

Lol^

Corruptors are faster then vikings.

Are they?

Well, still. 3-5 range makes a big difference, and it's a pretty negligible speed difference.

[RamiZ]

Are they?

Well, still. 3-5 range makes a big difference, and it's a pretty negligible speed difference.

Speed difference isn't negligible at all, but Corruptors just can't do hit and run or kite targets like Vikings, so they will always take a load of damage if they get into the fight.

But that's really not the case. Scourge in SC1 were reactive units, you only got them to deal with corsairs, science vessels and shuttles. They countered three units, they had no way of countering ground forces or affecting them in any way and yet they were way more exciting and interesting than corrupters are.

The good comparison is Corruptor and Devourer, and you barely saw Devourers in game. The Scourges countered all of the air units, not just those that you've listed. That is why you didn't see much of an Air play vs. Zerg, Scourges were just too good for their cost, even though they were a little bit hard to control because of their AI(Only AI that is more retarded than Scourge's was the AI of the Reaver's Scarab).

[Twilice]

The range difference is 3, which is quite a lot considering colossus range is also +3 of that of corruptors.

Corruptor dps = 12,72 (using corruption)
Viking dps = 14

Vikings are also a little bit cheaper, so yes. They are better at killing colossus then corruptors are. Corruptors do though have 200 hp and 2 armor while vikings got 125 hp and 0 armor. But as well all know that armor difference makes the most vs marines and not vs stalkers.

Overall I think vikings are better vs colossus.

[Aldrius]

Speed difference isn't negligible at all, but Corruptors just can't do hit and run or kite targets like Vikings, so they will always take a load of damage if they get into the fight.

It's a difference of .2. That's next to nothing.

The good comparison is Corruptor and Devourer, and you barely saw Devourers in game. The Scourges countered all of the air units, not just those that you've listed. That is why you didn't see much of an Air play vs. Zerg, Scourges were just too good for their cost, even though they were a little bit hard to control because of their AI(Only AI that is more retarded than Scourge's was the AI of the Reaver's Scarab).

My point was that a unit's not bad or unexciting just because it's an ATA unit.

The range difference is 3, which is quite a lot considering colossus range is also +3 of that of corruptors.

Corruptor dps = 12,72 (using corruption)
Viking dps = 14

Vikings are also a little bit cheaper, so yes. They are better at killing colossus then corruptors are. Corruptors do though have 200 hp and 2 armor while vikings got 125 hp and 0 armor. But as well all know that armor difference makes the most vs marines and not vs stalkers.

Overall I think vikings are better vs colossus.

Also a Starport is cheaper and builds faster than a Spire does. You're also going to get more use out of Medevacs in TvP than you will mutalisks in ZvP. Though that's debatable I suppose.

[DesertRose]

Didn't know if someone already mentioned it but there was a ninja change to transports:

I made several tests and found the difference between 1.3 and PTR 1.4:
In both versions you cannot drop units if your opponent's units are closely hugging each other; however in 1.3 it's possible to drop units in an area where they can't fit in if you give the Drop command early enough so your first unit can drop regularly, all other units in the transporter then are dropped no matter if there's actually room for that unit or not. For example I was able to drop an Immortal between Zealots where even a Zergling wouldn't have fit in; if you could load up more than one Ultralisk in a transporter I'm sure you could even drop an Ultralisk ANYWHERE you want.

A video that shows the effects of this change very clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMVTjsLN42M (Thanks to tpyo for the video)

[Twilice]

Looks more like a bugfix to me.

Also since when do starports build faster then hatcheries? Must have meant something else.

[RamiZ]

Looks more like a bugfix to me.

Also since when do starports build faster then hatcheries? Must have meant something else.

Yes, but it is also a huge nerf to Baneling bombs. They really contradict themselves, I mean, the more units are clumped up, the harder is to kill them with AoE, I mean really? It is supposed to support micro and spreading, not kill it...

[DesertRose]

Yes, but it is also a huge nerf to Baneling bombs. They really contradict themselves, I mean, the more units are clumped up, the harder is to kill them with AoE, I mean really? It is supposed to support micro and spreading, not kill it...

In 1.3 units are also dropped to the edge of an unit ball, only when the unit ball is so big that no unit could be dropped under normal conditions they are dropped directly into the unit ball; that's no longer happens in PTR 1.4.
If you clump up ~70 Zealots/Marines or ~45 Stalkers/Marauders in a circular unit ball the ball would be big enough to make a difference; if the numbers are smaller or the ball is not clumped up circularly there's no difference between 1.3 and PTR 1.4, in both versions the units, e.g. Banelings, will be dropped at the edge of the ball.

Or, to say it in different words:
The change will have next to no effect on actual gameplay, the only exception is when a Protoss player tightly traps his units inside Force Fields.