• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 05:31
CEST 11:31
KST 18:31
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall9HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles0[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China5Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL63Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?13FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event22
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles Program: SC2 / XSplit / OBS Scene Switcher The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?
Tourneys
RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament WardiTV Mondays Korean Starcraft League Week 77
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
SC uni coach streams logging into betting site Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL BW General Discussion Practice Partners (Official)
Tourneys
[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational The Casual Games of the Week Thread [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2024! Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 709 users

[D] PvP - Why Immortals & not Colossus?

Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy
Post a Reply
Normal
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
February 23 2010 15:01 GMT
#1
Almost every PvP game I play, I have my opponent going zealots, some stalkers and transitioning into immortals. I don't understand this strategy at all. Stalkers are weak to zealots, zealots are even with other zealots, (obviously) and immortals, unless I am missing something, are only useful against armored units.

I can understand why you would want a few stalkers, as they do additional damage to armored targets, so they might be useful for taking out flying warp prisms and aren't half-bad against tech units, but why the immortal? I've beaten every player who has done this versus me, but considering it's a strategy that every one seems to be doing, I'd like it explained to me.

My standard build is to get my gateways and warp gates ASAP and then tech robotics for an observer and colossus. Zealots seem like the best unit by far in this matchup, as with charge they are good versus almost everything except colossus, so that's why I am confused at people making immortals, maybe it's to counter other plays who make zealot/colossus?
RandomAccount#49059
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States2140 Posts
February 23 2010 15:23 GMT
#2
--- Nuked ---
abyss
Profile Joined September 2009
Czech Republic139 Posts
February 23 2010 15:31 GMT
#3
no, these people are just dumb and dont understand what is good.
Stupid is who stupid does
djWHEAT
Profile Blog Joined October 2005
United States925 Posts
February 23 2010 15:35 GMT
#4
I've had luck using Immortals to get through Terran ramp blocking. But I guess the argument could be made that Colossus do the same thing via cliff climb.
OneMoreGame.tv // Weapon Of Choice // Kings Of Tin // Inside The Game // Live On Three
Amber[LighT]
Profile Blog Joined June 2005
United States5078 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 15:47:10
February 23 2010 15:43 GMT
#5
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.
"We have unfinished business, I and he."
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 16:05:54
February 23 2010 16:04 GMT
#6
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.


I understand what you are saying, but are you conceding that in an open area, or an area in which the opponent can be flanked, that mass zealots with colossus are better? If that point is conceded, that you have to weigh what is considered easier to do: flank with zealots, or only fight in areas with tight chokes/make tight chokes yourself.

I'm not trying to advocate that mass/zealot and colossus is the best combination throughout the entire game, as late game it would be silly to have only a massive pile of zealots, but I don't see how mid-game you're going to stop an opponent with twelve to fourteen chargelots, when you have six zealots, four stalkers and an immortal for example. Can you post a replay where you play someone who went for chargelots, foregoing any immortals or stalkers? I would post my own replays, but I haven't lost versus an opponent who makes these units.

EDIT: Furthermore, if I am going to engage and you throw up barriers, why do I not simply retreat? From what I envision, I see myself being able to easily get out of nasty situations like the one I stated, whereas if I happen to catch you in an open area you're toast.
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
February 23 2010 16:08 GMT
#7
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals
You're pretty when I'm drunk.
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 16:09:58
February 23 2010 16:09 GMT
#8
also, stalkers are worthless i have no idea why you would make any more than a handful of them in any matchup
You're pretty when I'm drunk.
Haemonculus
Profile Blog Joined November 2004
United States6980 Posts
February 23 2010 16:11 GMT
#9
Well I think you need to be getting a mix of all of those units. Colossi do crazy damage to just about everything on the ground. They are your best bet against zealots and actually clean up stalkers with ease as well.

Immortals with just a little bit of focus fire are going to blow up your colossi almost instantly. They also make a mess of stalkers, but are weak against zealots. In my opinion it's a bit of a complicated RPS type system. React to what your opponent is doing. If he is massing immortals and little else, get fewer colossi and focus on more zealots. If he's got loads of stalkers and zealots, get a mix of zealot and colossi. If he's got loads of colossi, add your own immortals and focus fire.
I admire your commitment to being *very* oily
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
February 23 2010 16:13 GMT
#10
On February 24 2010 01:11 Haemonculus wrote:
Well I think you need to be getting a mix of all of those units. Colossi do crazy damage to just about everything on the ground. They are your best bet against zealots and actually clean up stalkers with ease as well.

Immortals with just a little bit of focus fire are going to blow up your colossi almost instantly. They also make a mess of stalkers, but are weak against zealots. In my opinion it's a bit of a complicated RPS type system. React to what your opponent is doing. If he is massing immortals and little else, get fewer colossi and focus on more zealots. If he's got loads of stalkers and zealots, get a mix of zealot and colossi. If he's got loads of colossi, add your own immortals and focus fire.

you're a smart girl.

You're pretty when I'm drunk.
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
February 23 2010 16:42 GMT
#11
On February 24 2010 01:11 Haemonculus wrote:
Well I think you need to be getting a mix of all of those units. Colossi do crazy damage to just about everything on the ground. They are your best bet against zealots and actually clean up stalkers with ease as well.

Immortals with just a little bit of focus fire are going to blow up your colossi almost instantly. They also make a mess of stalkers, but are weak against zealots. In my opinion it's a bit of a complicated RPS type system. React to what your opponent is doing. If he is massing immortals and little else, get fewer colossi and focus on more zealots. If he's got loads of stalkers and zealots, get a mix of zealot and colossi. If he's got loads of colossi, add your own immortals and focus fire.


Yes, I agree that immortals beat Colossi, but partly of what I am asking is why are people going zealot/stalker/immortals. Zealot/Colossus or Zealot/Immortal seem like the only two combinations that seem worthwhile.
Chairman Ray
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
United States11903 Posts
February 23 2010 16:52 GMT
#12
Early game, you want 1-2 immortals instead of colossi. Mid game, you want to switch to colossi.

When both players have very few units, if your opponent is going stalkers while you are going zealots (without charge), your opponent will just outmicro you. At this stage, stalkers are bit better than zealots, so you want to get immortals. If your opponent goes mass zealots, you can micro your immortal against them and do quite a bit. Colossi aren't worth it at this point because with such few units, you won't get much splash damage. Furthermore, their immortals will crush your colossi.

Mid game, you want to switch to colossi. Both player will have a lot of zealots, usually not a lot of stalkers, and either colossi or immortals. When zealots engage, they will be in a line. This way, colossi completely demolish them because they attack many at a time. Your opponent needs to use immortals to counter your colossi but he can't do that because thanks to a colossus' range, an immortal has to walk past the line of zealots in order to fire on your colossi. So during the fight, your colossi will be ripping their zealots apart while their immortals will be doing crappy damage against your zealots. You will destroy their army much faster, and then you zealots can clean up their immortals with ease.

Therefore early game, it is best to go stalkers/immortals, and mid game switch to zealot/colossi. Always have support units like sentries or temps of course.
IdrA
Profile Blog Joined July 2004
United States11541 Posts
February 23 2010 16:58 GMT
#13
On February 24 2010 01:42 Salv wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 01:11 Haemonculus wrote:
Well I think you need to be getting a mix of all of those units. Colossi do crazy damage to just about everything on the ground. They are your best bet against zealots and actually clean up stalkers with ease as well.

Immortals with just a little bit of focus fire are going to blow up your colossi almost instantly. They also make a mess of stalkers, but are weak against zealots. In my opinion it's a bit of a complicated RPS type system. React to what your opponent is doing. If he is massing immortals and little else, get fewer colossi and focus on more zealots. If he's got loads of stalkers and zealots, get a mix of zealot and colossi. If he's got loads of colossi, add your own immortals and focus fire.


Yes, I agree that immortals beat Colossi, but partly of what I am asking is why are people going zealot/stalker/immortals. Zealot/Colossus or Zealot/Immortal seem like the only two combinations that seem worthwhile.

well zealots rape immortals and collosus rape zealots so the reasoning behind those is focus on immortals to overpower his collosus but have a couple of your own to protect yourself from zealots. but really pure zealot collosus seems to be the strongest mix and most immortal builds are specific timing builds designed to punish people rushing straight for collosus'.
http://www.splitreason.com/product/1152 release the gracken tshirt now available
Haemonculus
Profile Blog Joined November 2004
United States6980 Posts
February 23 2010 17:48 GMT
#14
It's certainly not easy. In large PvP battles it can be difficult to see what's going on. I've entered into a few battles thinking everything was going awesome and then realize a few seconds too late that my entire army just got murdered horribly.

When there are several colossi on each side, entire blobs of units can just melt instantly and it's so hard to know who's units are dying.
I admire your commitment to being *very* oily
AeTheReal
Profile Joined June 2009
United States108 Posts
February 23 2010 18:08 GMT
#15
This may be somewhat of a tangent, but wouldn't a Protoss player going stargate basically counter one that's going for robotics units? Mass Zealots + Void Ray/Carriers should be superior to Zealots + Immortal/Colossus assuming you don't just blindly charge into the Colossus. And, if the other Protoss player mass Stalkers to counter your air, the Zealot should be able to tear them up.

Also, I think Zealot/Colossus is superior to Zealot/Immortal for the most part, especially after their range upgrade. The player going Colossus should be able to afford more zealots (assuming both are spending all their gas on their gas units) and should be able to block Immortals from getting into position to fire on the Colossi. Meanwhile, your Colossi can easily wipe out the enemy zealots from range and leave the other player with only Immortals vs your Zealot/Colossus army. Of course, positioning can affect the outcome quite a bit here.
Plexa
Profile Blog Joined October 2005
Aotearoa39261 Posts
February 23 2010 18:12 GMT
#16
In my experiences Void Rays get destroyed by Stalkers. If you're going robo you typically get an obs out first and you'll see he's going voids and just start slapping down a few stalkers. Void's are a pretty big investment so it shouldn't be long until you're able to over power them.
Administrator~ Spirit will set you free ~
AeTheReal
Profile Joined June 2009
United States108 Posts
February 23 2010 18:27 GMT
#17
Are Carriers any good then? From looking at the stats, they're cheaper (due to having 4 free interceptors) and possibly having higher dps compared to SC1 since each interceptors do 5x2 instead of 6 when they shoot. There's probably a big timing window of vulnerability since they take so long to build but it shouldn't be too bad once you get a couple of them out. Or... do they just get completely destroyed by Stalkers too?
caution.slip
Profile Blog Joined June 2007
United States775 Posts
February 23 2010 18:32 GMT
#18
stalker > void ray > immortal > collosus > zealot > stalker

sort of...
Live, laugh, love
starcraft911
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Korea (South)1263 Posts
February 23 2010 18:36 GMT
#19
immortal > stalker
collossus > zealot (sorta)

collossus is also vulnerable to pheonix attacks. If they make immortal vs pure zealots they are making a bad move because they are terrible vs zealots for their cost. If they are vs a mix of zealot/stalker i can see it. my 2c
Konni
Profile Blog Joined February 2003
Germany3044 Posts
February 23 2010 18:45 GMT
#20
zeal immo < zeal colossus (in my experience) because the range and aoe damage of the colossus
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
February 23 2010 19:27 GMT
#21
On February 24 2010 03:12 Plexa wrote:
In my experiences Void Rays get destroyed by Stalkers. If you're going robo you typically get an obs out first and you'll see he's going voids and just start slapping down a few stalkers. Void's are a pretty big investment so it shouldn't be long until you're able to over power them.


The stalker definitely does NOT destroy the void rays. One void ray will beat two stalkers in a straight up battle, and the mobility of them is unparalleled. Stalkers are the key to beating them, but if you use void rays correctly you can do a lot of damage. I play a guy who went stargate instead of robotics and citadel and he was doing a fair bit of damage. Every time I moved out he would come in with void rays, and considering that you need six or seven stalkers to effectively fight three void rays, you need to split up your army too much to be able to simple counter-attack.
Amber[LighT]
Profile Blog Joined June 2005
United States5078 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 19:39:58
February 23 2010 19:38 GMT
#22
On February 24 2010 01:04 Salv wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.


I understand what you are saying, but are you conceding that in an open area, or an area in which the opponent can be flanked, that mass zealots with colossus are better? If that point is conceded, that you have to weigh what is considered easier to do: flank with zealots, or only fight in areas with tight chokes/make tight chokes yourself.

I'm not trying to advocate that mass/zealot and colossus is the best combination throughout the entire game, as late game it would be silly to have only a massive pile of zealots, but I don't see how mid-game you're going to stop an opponent with twelve to fourteen chargelots, when you have six zealots, four stalkers and an immortal for example. Can you post a replay where you play someone who went for chargelots, foregoing any immortals or stalkers? I would post my own replays, but I haven't lost versus an opponent who makes these units.

EDIT: Furthermore, if I am going to engage and you throw up barriers, why do I not simply retreat? From what I envision, I see myself being able to easily get out of nasty situations like the one I stated, whereas if I happen to catch you in an open area you're toast.



im not talking about just throwing up force field when you see him coming. There is a tiny timing window where you can make force fields to split the enemy's army. Your goal is to get about 1/2 the zealots on one side of the block and the rest + colossus on the other end. Even on an open field this is a viable tactic to manipulate the playing field. You have to be stupid to engage a protoss ball of zealots and colossus in an open field with an army that requires a tight choke without even thinking you can change the field in your favor.

On February 24 2010 04:27 Salv wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 03:12 Plexa wrote:
In my experiences Void Rays get destroyed by Stalkers. If you're going robo you typically get an obs out first and you'll see he's going voids and just start slapping down a few stalkers. Void's are a pretty big investment so it shouldn't be long until you're able to over power them.


The stalker definitely does NOT destroy the void rays. One void ray will beat two stalkers in a straight up battle, and the mobility of them is unparalleled. Stalkers are the key to beating them, but if you use void rays correctly you can do a lot of damage. I play a guy who went stargate instead of robotics and citadel and he was doing a fair bit of damage. Every time I moved out he would come in with void rays, and considering that you need six or seven stalkers to effectively fight three void rays, you need to split up your army too much to be able to simple counter-attack.



Not true at all. 2 stalkers is enough for 1 void ray.
"We have unfinished business, I and he."
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15661 Posts
February 23 2010 19:51 GMT
#23
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Not true at all. 2 stalkers is enough for 1 void ray.


Well, to be fair, it depends. Is this 2 stalkers walking to the middle of the map while a void ray does the same? Or is this a battle that already began, where a void way is already doing its max damage trying to kill 2 stalkers? Different circumstances will have different results.
Amber[LighT]
Profile Blog Joined June 2005
United States5078 Posts
February 23 2010 19:54 GMT
#24
On February 24 2010 04:51 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Not true at all. 2 stalkers is enough for 1 void ray.


Well, to be fair, it depends. Is this 2 stalkers walking to the middle of the map while a void ray does the same? Or is this a battle that already began, where a void way is already doing its max damage trying to kill 2 stalkers? Different circumstances will have different results.


Once stalker 1 is defeated the void ray needs to begin again from its base damage to take out stalker 2. And you can micro two stalkers to disrupt the void ray's attack.
"We have unfinished business, I and he."
richter
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
United States39 Posts
February 23 2010 20:07 GMT
#25
On February 24 2010 04:54 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 04:51 Mohdoo wrote:
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Not true at all. 2 stalkers is enough for 1 void ray.


Well, to be fair, it depends. Is this 2 stalkers walking to the middle of the map while a void ray does the same? Or is this a battle that already began, where a void way is already doing its max damage trying to kill 2 stalkers? Different circumstances will have different results.


Once stalker 1 is defeated the void ray needs to begin again from its base damage to take out stalker 2. And you can micro two stalkers to disrupt the void ray's attack.


In my experience this isn't true. It takes a 2-3 seconds for the void ray to lose its charge. During that time, it can attack any other target to keep up its charge; just one "tick" of damage from the beam is enough to prevent the charge decay for another 2-3 seconds.

I think terrain is going to decide the effectiveness of void rays vs stalkers. Void rays outrange stalkers slightly (7 vs 6) but a mass of stalkers with blink can pounce on the void rays and kill at least a few before they retreat. The void ray speed upgrade may help; upgraded, I think void rays are a bit faster than stalkers.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15661 Posts
February 23 2010 20:07 GMT
#26
On February 24 2010 04:54 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 04:51 Mohdoo wrote:
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Not true at all. 2 stalkers is enough for 1 void ray.


Well, to be fair, it depends. Is this 2 stalkers walking to the middle of the map while a void ray does the same? Or is this a battle that already began, where a void way is already doing its max damage trying to kill 2 stalkers? Different circumstances will have different results.


Once stalker 1 is defeated the void ray needs to begin again from its base damage to take out stalker 2. And you can micro two stalkers to disrupt the void ray's attack.


The Void Ray's attack remains after killing a unit if I recall correctly. The time it spends not attacking decreases the potency of the attack at the same rate that continuing to attack increases it. So its stronger in long fights and weaker in short fights.
jabberwokie
Profile Joined September 2009
Canada142 Posts
February 23 2010 20:44 GMT
#27
Disclaimer: I do not have a beta key but have played at blizzcon 2009

Watched a great game between Louder and Idra which illustrated this well. I feel that at volume the zealot / collosi mix become more vulnerable and less effective. The collosi do an absolute ton against zealots especialy when grouped both zealots and collosi, but with the collosus requireing the robotics bay after the robotics facility lower unit count with a voidray, immortal mix (which I believe can be timed properly) will be more effective. The voidrays and imortals can mince the heavy targets while contributing to light but they will be much less suceptable to aoe anti light units (colosus). Not to mention the wider optinos available to the player with the stargate, they can either specialize for colosi if there is an over abundance of light units, make pheonix even head for carrier tech to counter more light ground forces. with a more diverse unit mix (especialy if there are range differences or ground /air elements) incoming damage can be minimized through less natural grouping and or micro. The collosus cost is not justified unless you are massing light units that will fight in a clumped fashion. If you have such units send in waves.
InToTheWannaB
Profile Joined September 2002
United States4770 Posts
February 23 2010 21:08 GMT
#28
Has anyone tryed a zealot archon mix in PvP? Seems like you can burn up zealots as fast with archon as u can with collssi and they are cheaper.
When the spirit is not altogether slain, great loss teaches men and women to desire greatly, both for themselves and for others.
Whiplash
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
United States2928 Posts
February 23 2010 21:34 GMT
#29
I always go zeal/immortal/collossus. I haven't lost many PvP's unless I make a stupid mistake or if I lose to early proxy pylon 3 gate. Or disconnects lol (my nemesis).

I consider it a free win when my opponent goes templar tech or gets lots of stalkers.
Cinematographer / Steadicam Operator. Former Starcraft commentator/player
zeppelin
Profile Joined December 2007
United States565 Posts
February 23 2010 21:41 GMT
#30
On February 24 2010 06:08 InToTheWannaB wrote:
Has anyone tryed a zealot archon mix in PvP? Seems like you can burn up zealots as fast with archon as u can with collssi and they are cheaper.


I had a successful game mixing in two archons against a player who was going very heavy on zeals, their DPS against zealots is insane.

In general people are using immortals because, as people said, they're good against both stalkers and colossi and don't hurt you if your opponent also goes immortals. I have seen players with good sentry micro keep immortals away from their colossi while they safely pummel zealots, so it's not a hard counter, but in general the whole idea behind making immortals is that it scares your opponent into a predicable response (zealots).
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
February 23 2010 21:45 GMT
#31
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 01:04 Salv wrote:
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.


I understand what you are saying, but are you conceding that in an open area, or an area in which the opponent can be flanked, that mass zealots with colossus are better? If that point is conceded, that you have to weigh what is considered easier to do: flank with zealots, or only fight in areas with tight chokes/make tight chokes yourself.

I'm not trying to advocate that mass/zealot and colossus is the best combination throughout the entire game, as late game it would be silly to have only a massive pile of zealots, but I don't see how mid-game you're going to stop an opponent with twelve to fourteen chargelots, when you have six zealots, four stalkers and an immortal for example. Can you post a replay where you play someone who went for chargelots, foregoing any immortals or stalkers? I would post my own replays, but I haven't lost versus an opponent who makes these units.

EDIT: Furthermore, if I am going to engage and you throw up barriers, why do I not simply retreat? From what I envision, I see myself being able to easily get out of nasty situations like the one I stated, whereas if I happen to catch you in an open area you're toast.



im not talking about just throwing up force field when you see him coming. There is a tiny timing window where you can make force fields to split the enemy's army. Your goal is to get about 1/2 the zealots on one side of the block and the rest + colossus on the other end. Even on an open field this is a viable tactic to manipulate the playing field. You have to be stupid to engage a protoss ball of zealots and colossus in an open field with an army that requires a tight choke without even thinking you can change the field in your favor.


OK, but then my point remains but altered to this:

What is considered easier to do, flank with zealots or essentially split an opponent army in half?
renixian
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
United States50 Posts
February 23 2010 21:47 GMT
#32
You also have to take into account that zealot immo will have an earlier and much stronger push then a zealot colossus just because of the tech and build time of the colossus. Overall I believe it depends on the skill level of each player, you can pull off zealot immo against players of a lesser caliber then you, but colossus is overall an amazing unit in this matchup with proper micro as well as positioning (basically ideally fighting near any cliffs, which shouldn't be too hard if it's him pushing you or visa-verse). If you want I can dig up a replay of Pillars beating me with Colossus Zealot vs my Zealot Immortal. Was an okay game!
Amber[LighT]
Profile Blog Joined June 2005
United States5078 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 22:17:25
February 23 2010 22:16 GMT
#33
On February 24 2010 06:45 Salv wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
On February 24 2010 01:04 Salv wrote:
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.


I understand what you are saying, but are you conceding that in an open area, or an area in which the opponent can be flanked, that mass zealots with colossus are better? If that point is conceded, that you have to weigh what is considered easier to do: flank with zealots, or only fight in areas with tight chokes/make tight chokes yourself.

I'm not trying to advocate that mass/zealot and colossus is the best combination throughout the entire game, as late game it would be silly to have only a massive pile of zealots, but I don't see how mid-game you're going to stop an opponent with twelve to fourteen chargelots, when you have six zealots, four stalkers and an immortal for example. Can you post a replay where you play someone who went for chargelots, foregoing any immortals or stalkers? I would post my own replays, but I haven't lost versus an opponent who makes these units.

EDIT: Furthermore, if I am going to engage and you throw up barriers, why do I not simply retreat? From what I envision, I see myself being able to easily get out of nasty situations like the one I stated, whereas if I happen to catch you in an open area you're toast.



im not talking about just throwing up force field when you see him coming. There is a tiny timing window where you can make force fields to split the enemy's army. Your goal is to get about 1/2 the zealots on one side of the block and the rest + colossus on the other end. Even on an open field this is a viable tactic to manipulate the playing field. You have to be stupid to engage a protoss ball of zealots and colossus in an open field with an army that requires a tight choke without even thinking you can change the field in your favor.


OK, but then my point remains but altered to this:

What is considered easier to do, flank with zealots or essentially split an opponent army in half?



Who cares if it's easier? That doesn't make your attack any more effective. And you're limiting yourself to one counter, while my proposed army combination requires you to move from a fixed build of one unit type
"We have unfinished business, I and he."
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 22:23:49
February 23 2010 22:22 GMT
#34
On February 24 2010 07:16 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 06:45 Salv wrote:
On February 24 2010 04:38 Amber[LighT] wrote:
On February 24 2010 01:04 Salv wrote:
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
Immortals are beast units that cut through zealot numbers. You want a healthy mix as well. Think about it from a SC1 perspective.

In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons

The same thing applies to this game, in fact even more. An army that consists of 20 zealots will not be nearly as effective as an army with 10 zealots, 8 stalkers and 1-2 immortals. Then mix in a sentry and you can make choke points thus making the all-zealot army less effective. Even a 20 zealot army with 1 colossus vs. a mix of zealots, stalkers, and immortals will not be effective. Immortals are the direct counter to the colossus (without teching stargate or templar archives).

Based upon the number of PvP games I've played I'm liking the 10:8:3:1 ratio of zealots:stalkers:sentry:immortals. The sentry is a good support unit to keep the colossus attack damage minimal. Also you can substitute immortals for colossi if you're willing to tech higher, don't forget you can make an immortal right when the robo is finished, you don't need a support bay.


I understand what you are saying, but are you conceding that in an open area, or an area in which the opponent can be flanked, that mass zealots with colossus are better? If that point is conceded, that you have to weigh what is considered easier to do: flank with zealots, or only fight in areas with tight chokes/make tight chokes yourself.

I'm not trying to advocate that mass/zealot and colossus is the best combination throughout the entire game, as late game it would be silly to have only a massive pile of zealots, but I don't see how mid-game you're going to stop an opponent with twelve to fourteen chargelots, when you have six zealots, four stalkers and an immortal for example. Can you post a replay where you play someone who went for chargelots, foregoing any immortals or stalkers? I would post my own replays, but I haven't lost versus an opponent who makes these units.

EDIT: Furthermore, if I am going to engage and you throw up barriers, why do I not simply retreat? From what I envision, I see myself being able to easily get out of nasty situations like the one I stated, whereas if I happen to catch you in an open area you're toast.



im not talking about just throwing up force field when you see him coming. There is a tiny timing window where you can make force fields to split the enemy's army. Your goal is to get about 1/2 the zealots on one side of the block and the rest + colossus on the other end. Even on an open field this is a viable tactic to manipulate the playing field. You have to be stupid to engage a protoss ball of zealots and colossus in an open field with an army that requires a tight choke without even thinking you can change the field in your favor.


OK, but then my point remains but altered to this:

What is considered easier to do, flank with zealots or essentially split an opponent army in half?



Who cares if it's easier? That doesn't make your attack effective in any way.


If two players have to execute a particular strategy (in this case flanking vs cutting off an army) in order to have the advantage during a battle, then the person who has an easier time executing their strategy will most likely win. If I am making many zealots with charge, which will win in an open area or where I can surround you, and you're making more units with range that while weaker, are better when few zealots can attack, then I think I will have an easier time winning. I think it's harder for you to lure me into an area where you can cut my army in half, and then actually do it; then it is for me to flank.

You said that you would have to be stupid to attack or put yourself in a position where you would wind up battling in open area, whereas I can make the exact same argument that it would be stupid to engage in an area where you can potentially cut my army in half.

On February 24 2010 07:16 Amber[LighT] wrote:


And you're limiting yourself to one counter, while my proposed army combination requires you to move from a fixed build of one unit type


I don't understand what you mean here.
GoodNewsJim
Profile Joined February 2010
United States122 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-23 22:35:46
February 23 2010 22:33 GMT
#35
Immortals cost 250/100 w 100 shield and 200 health. 20 damage +30 armored Range 5
Stalkers cost 125/50 with 80 shield and 80 health. 8 damage + 6 armored Range 6

I haven't tested their ground speed, but with these statistics, immortal makes sense vs other stalkers. Health wise, an immortal is 2x a stalker. And an immortal costs 2x a stalker.
The big thing to notice is: Immortals deal 50 damage a pop to other stalkers while stalkers deal 10 damage to the immortal is a big swing. 5:1 ratio

Even vs Zealots:
Stalkers deal 7 damage to Zealot's health with shield down.
Immortals deal 19 damage to Zealot's health with shield down.

That is almost a 3:1 efficiency on a unit that has a 2:1 cost ratio

Depending on your build, you may get an immortal out before your robobay is finished depending on how many obs you make. I'd prefer an immortal to a stalker, but not by much.
God is real. Jesus is LORD
Salv
Profile Blog Joined December 2007
Canada3083 Posts
February 24 2010 00:09 GMT
#36
On February 24 2010 07:33 GoodNewsJim wrote:
Immortals cost 250/100 w 100 shield and 200 health. 20 damage +30 armored Range 5
Stalkers cost 125/50 with 80 shield and 80 health. 8 damage + 6 armored Range 6

I haven't tested their ground speed, but with these statistics, immortal makes sense vs other stalkers. Health wise, an immortal is 2x a stalker. And an immortal costs 2x a stalker.
The big thing to notice is: Immortals deal 50 damage a pop to other stalkers while stalkers deal 10 damage to the immortal is a big swing. 5:1 ratio

Even vs Zealots:
Stalkers deal 7 damage to Zealot's health with shield down.
Immortals deal 19 damage to Zealot's health with shield down.

That is almost a 3:1 efficiency on a unit that has a 2:1 cost ratio

Depending on your build, you may get an immortal out before your robobay is finished depending on how many obs you make. I'd prefer an immortal to a stalker, but not by much.


Some variable that you may have missed is build time and the fact that stalkers can be warped in anywhere on the map if there is power, whereas an immortal cannot.
TrueRedemption
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States313 Posts
February 24 2010 01:19 GMT
#37
One thing I haven't heard mention in this breakdown is the differences in range, but it seems like a critical issue in the Imm vs Col comparison. The immortal's 6 range vs the Colossus's 7 doesn't mean much if the two were to meet 1v1 in an open field, however thats not going to happen. Theorycraft with me for a minute:

Lets say the Blue player is going to try Zeal+Col, and the Red player is going to try for the strong Zeal+Stalk+Imm push. Blue would use strictly Zealots to defend till Col are out because saves gas for teching, and Zealots are the majority of the goal unit mix. Red would start with a Zeal or two, start making Stalkers, and then having noticed Blue only making zeal would continue with stalkers while getting Imms. Stalkers can out preform zeals thanks to their range/speed/ease of focusing down a target; Immortals can help take incoming damage while also adding a considerable amount of damage output, greatly developing the overall power behind the push. Blue in the meantime has made a solid number of zealots understanding the vulnerability until Colossi are out. In order to overcome the unit type advantage Red has, Blue could research charge as soon as possible, delaying the 1st Col a little bit, but since Zeal army needs no gas its hardly a delay at all. Charge partially negates the range/speed advantage of stalkers and imms. None of the damage bonuses apply, so in Theory when Red pushes with his army, Blue should have a fighting chance if the zealot count provides roughly the same damage output / health as Red's army. The outcome will depend a little on micro as always, but the majority of Red's tactical advantage is nulled.
So continuing on as if Blue had defended without excess zealots, the Colossus tech should be finished and production started. Red likely continues with Stalker/Imm since these units do counter the Col. If both armies died in the push then Red would have to stick to this unit mix because they need to defend themselves there is not time to branch to a new tech. They could try zealots or sentries but these would fare worse against Zeal+Col. If Red retreated and did not push then they could start a new tech, however they still need to bolster defenses to deal with Blue's incoming push. Here, finally, is where the range issue comes into play. With charge, Blue's zealots engage at a similar range as the colossi, creating a melee wall (aka meat shield) protecting the colossi. The stalkers and immortals cannot easily move past the zealots to attack the colossi, so they are forced to attack the zealots. The Immortals negate the majority of Colossus damage, however hiding the stalkers behind the immortals leaves the immortals taking most of the zealot damage so they will fall quickly. Most likely an actual battle wouldn't have colossi perfectly outranging Red's army, more likely a couple of units could attack them but not enough to focus down quickly in general good positioning, but if Red told the whole army to attack the colossi too many units would be scrambling around out of range taking damage. This huge advantage requires good positioning however, if the stalk/imm flank or utilize LOS to engage at close range, the Colossi will be lost in an instant. Similar to Blue's use of charge however, Red can research Blink for the stalkers, allowing them to bypass the zealot wall and knock out the Colossi. One detail is the Colossi can increase their range even further with an upgrade, but it would not greatly affect the balance of these two armies, still protected by charge but vulnerable to blink.
This is as far as these two unit combinations go, given a chance to shift tech Red would do very well with air units, like blink they can easily attack the colossi and cannot be damaged by Blue's army, but making the tech shift would leave a timing window. In response Blue could add stalkers or tech to archons or air units of their own. There are far too many possibilities to consider things any further though.
Obviously these timings are very flexible, just as all timings are. If Red builds more stalkers, delaying imms, then Blue may have a colossus out by the time the push happens, but less stalkers then Blue needs fewer zealots. If either side is too greedy in teching and scouted by their opponent, harassment should slow the tech down to keep them at a relative pace.

There is no perfect strategy, Immortal and Colossus both work, its a matter of supporting them correctly and making the right choices getting there. Strategies themselves don't win the game, they force your opponent to respond correctly; various sized mistakes give you a relatively sized advantage, but to keep it you can't make any mistakes of your own. With enough practice Red will learn exactly the timing required to hit as hard as possible prior to the Colossus finishing. Likewise Blue will improve at using the perfect number of zealots in early game. It is this back and forth, balanced gameplay that make RTS oh so incredible.
Writer
radiumz0rz
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
United States253 Posts
February 24 2010 01:57 GMT
#38
On February 24 2010 01:08 CrownRoyal wrote:
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals


Correct. All the fire power shut down collosi
Berkeley '10
Ahzz
Profile Joined May 2007
Finland780 Posts
February 24 2010 09:16 GMT
#39
On February 24 2010 10:57 radiumz0rz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 01:08 CrownRoyal wrote:
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals


Correct. All the fire power shut down collosi

except for the fact that colossus can go up cliffs, they have longer range, and immortals are super vulnerable to zealots. They can only work as a surprise or a counter to his first attack maybe, after that I wouldnt keep making immortals. Even though they deal good damage to colossus, even two will still take a moment to kill a colossus. Add up that there's a zealot wall, colossus have longer range etc and your immortals are actually not that good later on.
I tried it out, and it works good in theory until you try it out yourself, or maybe just for the first attack.
Hidden_MotiveS
Profile Blog Joined February 2010
Canada2562 Posts
February 24 2010 09:20 GMT
#40
Maybe people are trying out high tier units as they become available because it's such a new game.
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
February 24 2010 10:11 GMT
#41
On February 24 2010 18:16 Ahzz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 10:57 radiumz0rz wrote:
On February 24 2010 01:08 CrownRoyal wrote:
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals


Correct. All the fire power shut down collosi

except for the fact that colossus can go up cliffs, they have longer range, and immortals are super vulnerable to zealots. They can only work as a surprise or a counter to his first attack maybe, after that I wouldnt keep making immortals. Even though they deal good damage to colossus, even two will still take a moment to kill a colossus. Add up that there's a zealot wall, colossus have longer range etc and your immortals are actually not that good later on.
I tried it out, and it works good in theory until you try it out yourself, or maybe just for the first attack.

do you know how fast a pvp battle ends?

there isn't time to micro your collosus perfectly away from my immortals
You're pretty when I'm drunk.
Unlisked
Profile Joined February 2010
India28 Posts
February 24 2010 11:42 GMT
#42
I think HDstarcraft's beta g7 video gives all the answers to this one.
"BOOM BABY"-Marauder
Ahzz
Profile Joined May 2007
Finland780 Posts
February 24 2010 17:34 GMT
#43
On February 24 2010 19:11 CrownRoyal wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 18:16 Ahzz wrote:
On February 24 2010 10:57 radiumz0rz wrote:
On February 24 2010 01:08 CrownRoyal wrote:
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals


Correct. All the fire power shut down collosi

except for the fact that colossus can go up cliffs, they have longer range, and immortals are super vulnerable to zealots. They can only work as a surprise or a counter to his first attack maybe, after that I wouldnt keep making immortals. Even though they deal good damage to colossus, even two will still take a moment to kill a colossus. Add up that there's a zealot wall, colossus have longer range etc and your immortals are actually not that good later on.
I tried it out, and it works good in theory until you try it out yourself, or maybe just for the first attack.

do you know how fast a pvp battle ends?

there isn't time to micro your collosus perfectly away from my immortals

what are you talking about? you have no idea what you're rambling about.
You have zealots running in front, and colossus behind. you also have obs to see your surroundings better. Whats there to micro about a-moving and then microing 1 colossus. immortals have clearly less range. what I said to begin with was that it could work if you surprise them or maybe for first attack when numbers are low/he might not expect it, but after that it just wont unless he's bad or smthing.
Darkn3ss
Profile Joined November 2009
United States717 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-24 18:13:58
February 24 2010 18:12 GMT
#44
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons


22 goons! ^^
ezpz

12 goons, 8 SPEEDlots and 2 HT's is a different story xD

Very situational tho...

On Topic:
People go immortals because Colossus costs 50 more minerals, 100 more gas and requires a Robotics/Support Bay (whatever it's called) which is 200/200... oO

Immortals come str8 out of robotics afaik... basically for the price, tech price, buid/tech time of a colossus you get about 3 immortals...

Engaging your enemy's force of zlots stalkers or pure zlots with equal number of zlots + 2-3 immortals will make A BIG difference... zlots take 20 dmg from immortal... stalkers (possibly) 50... not 100% but even 20 is enough...

I watched miker last night (some old WC3 pro pwn some old German WC3 pro) and they both went immortals... I can link the video, if you'd like (it's in Russian tho...)
Dont quote me boy, cuz I aint saying shhh...
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
February 24 2010 18:20 GMT
#45
On February 25 2010 02:34 Ahzz wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 19:11 CrownRoyal wrote:
On February 24 2010 18:16 Ahzz wrote:
On February 24 2010 10:57 radiumz0rz wrote:
On February 24 2010 01:08 CrownRoyal wrote:
the only reason to get immortals is because your opponent is going collosus

target fire the collosus with the immortals


Correct. All the fire power shut down collosi

except for the fact that colossus can go up cliffs, they have longer range, and immortals are super vulnerable to zealots. They can only work as a surprise or a counter to his first attack maybe, after that I wouldnt keep making immortals. Even though they deal good damage to colossus, even two will still take a moment to kill a colossus. Add up that there's a zealot wall, colossus have longer range etc and your immortals are actually not that good later on.
I tried it out, and it works good in theory until you try it out yourself, or maybe just for the first attack.

do you know how fast a pvp battle ends?

there isn't time to micro your collosus perfectly away from my immortals

what are you talking about? you have no idea what you're rambling about.
You have zealots running in front, and colossus behind. you also have obs to see your surroundings better. Whats there to micro about a-moving and then microing 1 colossus. immortals have clearly less range. what I said to begin with was that it could work if you surprise them or maybe for first attack when numbers are low/he might not expect it, but after that it just wont unless he's bad or smthing.

i have beat every good protoss player pvp

what have you done? don't question me
You're pretty when I'm drunk.
BluzMan
Profile Blog Joined April 2006
Russian Federation4235 Posts
February 24 2010 18:20 GMT
#46
Should be soluble just with theorycrafting.

In some early-mid stage of the game, you'd want to have a mix of stalkers and zealots just because a mix of melee and range is almost always more effective than pure range. This happens due to space constraint - if you have 20 zealots, chances are high that at least for half the battle half of them won't be attacking, even if ranged units are remarkably weaker, they are still good to mix in because they will be attacking. You cannot skip straight to high tech because it's expensive. And colossi seem rather weak vs stalkers - they can be sniped and don't tank very well despite their huge size. To gain a quick upper hand, you need something more versatile and that something is Immortal - not entirely ineffective vs zeals, ranged, good in large fights due to no projectile (instant hit - no wasted shots) and completely devastating to both stalkers and colossi. Should be it =)
You want 20 good men, but you need a bad pussy.
BluzMan
Profile Blog Joined April 2006
Russian Federation4235 Posts
February 24 2010 18:22 GMT
#47
On February 25 2010 03:12 Darkn3ss wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons


22 goons! ^^
ezpz

12 goons, 8 SPEEDlots and 2 HT's is a different story xD

Very situational tho...

On Topic:
People go immortals because Colossus costs 50 more minerals, 100 more gas and requires a Robotics/Support Bay (whatever it's called) which is 200/200... oO

Immortals come str8 out of robotics afaik... basically for the price, tech price, buid/tech time of a colossus you get about 3 immortals...

Engaging your enemy's force of zlots stalkers or pure zlots with equal number of zlots + 2-3 immortals will make A BIG difference... zlots take 20 dmg from immortal... stalkers (possibly) 50... not 100% but even 20 is enough...

I watched miker last night (some old WC3 pro pwn some old German WC3 pro) and they both went immortals... I can link the video, if you'd like (it's in Russian tho...)


Sorry sir, but you don't know StarCraft. They are good even without speed unless the whole map is a giant emty field.
You want 20 good men, but you need a bad pussy.
CrownRoyal
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Vatican City State1872 Posts
February 24 2010 18:22 GMT
#48
i'll even tell you why you're wrong, if your collosi are moving backwards while mine are attacking your zealots die and mine dont.
You're pretty when I'm drunk.
Darkn3ss
Profile Joined November 2009
United States717 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-02-24 19:03:53
February 24 2010 18:39 GMT
#49
On February 25 2010 03:22 BluzMan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 25 2010 03:12 Darkn3ss wrote:
On February 24 2010 00:43 Amber[LighT] wrote:
In PvP midgame whats better?

12 dragoons, 8 zealots, and 2 high templar
22 dragoons


22 goons! ^^
ezpz

12 goons, 8 SPEEDlots and 2 HT's is a different story xD

Very situational tho...

On Topic:
People go immortals because Colossus costs 50 more minerals, 100 more gas and requires a Robotics/Support Bay (whatever it's called) which is 200/200... oO

Immortals come str8 out of robotics afaik... basically for the price, tech price, buid/tech time of a colossus you get about 3 immortals...

Engaging your enemy's force of zlots stalkers or pure zlots with equal number of zlots + 2-3 immortals will make A BIG difference... zlots take 20 dmg from immortal... stalkers (possibly) 50... not 100% but even 20 is enough...

I watched miker last night (some old WC3 pro pwn some old German WC3 pro) and they both went immortals... I can link the video, if you'd like (it's in Russian tho...)


Sorry sir, but you don't know StarCraft. They are good even without speed unless the whole map is a giant emty field.


I bolded the important part of my statement... and uhmmm name a map where you don't have a big enough space to micro 22 goons vs 8 slow zlots, 12 goons and 2 hts... (And you will be right. On other maps, it's situational, wouldn't you agree?)

HT's will never get to storm anything cuz they'll be way behind the main army... slow zlots will take more damage than they deal bcuz the goon heavy army will just keep backing up/shooting so the 12 goons won't get to fire much either bcuz they'll be trailing behind the zlots.

If they're too close to zlots the goon heavy army can focus fire goons b4 zlots get a chance to attack... oO

OR it could be totally the other way around... depends on how well/bad people micro...

If you're talking about 1a2a into 1a2a3t, then yeah, latter should be in advantage... but plz give it a lil thought and weigh out all of the possibilities before you jump into conclusions, sir.

Edit: Also why do almost all PvP's start with 1 zlot then goon goon goon goon (goon range) then either reaver/DT but most of the army is goons HT's until someone gets leg speed... then they start adding more zlots which causes opponent to get archons...

End result (Units meant to attack...) Speedlots > Goons, Archons > Speedlots, Goons > Archons, HT's > Everything, Reavers > Everything, Goons > Reavers/Shuttles, Everything > HT's...

Main units composition Goons > Zlots > Archons / HT's > Reavers (DT's...) > Observers/Shuttles

Tovarisch...
Dont quote me boy, cuz I aint saying shhh...
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 30m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Creator 1
StarCraft: Brood War
Hyuk 1065
Soma 273
sSak 106
Sharp 73
Aegong 32
sorry 32
Mind 26
yabsab 19
zelot 18
Free 17
[ Show more ]
Bale 7
IntoTheRainbow 5
ivOry 2
Dota 2
XaKoH 563
XcaliburYe399
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss691
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King241
Other Games
ceh9740
Stewie2K532
Happy427
Pyrionflax215
crisheroes194
SortOf148
rGuardiaN52
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick28450
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH382
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2265
League of Legends
• HappyZerGling100
Upcoming Events
Wardi Open
1h 30m
Replay Cast
14h 30m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d
WardiTV European League
1d 6h
MaNa vs sebesdes
Mixu vs Fjant
ByuN vs HeRoMaRinE
ShoWTimE vs goblin
Gerald vs Babymarine
Krystianer vs YoungYakov
PiGosaur Monday
1d 14h
The PondCast
2 days
WardiTV European League
2 days
Jumy vs NightPhoenix
Percival vs Nicoract
ArT vs HiGhDrA
MaxPax vs Harstem
Scarlett vs Shameless
SKillous vs uThermal
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
RSL Revival
3 days
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Classic vs Cure
FEL
4 days
RSL Revival
5 days
FEL
5 days
FEL
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
FEL
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL Season 20
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.