EPTThis thing should have died a long time ago.
[H] TvP - The Immortal Problem. - Page 21
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
This thing should have died a long time ago. | ||
|
Smoyf
United States44 Posts
Oh and Vikings have 9 range! It's tough to counter them as toss since if we blink our stalkers up ahead to take out the vikings all the stalkers get ownt by your ground force. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On April 19 2010 12:42 Smoyf wrote: Immortals don't like thors. And when an immortal doesn't like an armored unit you know what happens to them! That's the point of this thread after all! Oh and Vikings have 9 range! It's tough to counter them as toss since if we blink our stalkers up ahead to take out the vikings all the stalkers get ownt by your ground force. If he's using his robos for coli he won't be immortal heavy most likely. Also I was not at a lack for EMPs that game. Once you have 4-5 ghosts out you have enough EMP to blanket the entire screen. Immortals are not overly powerful in the mid/lategame. It's only the early immortal push that's such a problem. | ||
|
silentguy
99 Posts
| ||
|
Opti
United States155 Posts
So either I screw my economy to defend against you screwing my economy, or you screw my economy anyway. Either way we're screwed, see what I'm getting at? It's been proven mathematically that fast reaper rush is unstoppable when excecuted correctly for totally screwing the P economy. It's also been proven that a correctly executed "all in" 6 marine + SCV rush is nearly unbeatable. Now that aside, most PvT games i find myself really having a hard time succeeding in an immortal push, since i know that i MUST have stalkers out immediately to counter reapers, and then I need to take the time to tech up to immortals, get an observer or 2 out, get more gateways up, and then pump out some zealots for a meat shield. By the time i can attack, the T will have ghosts out which greatly reduces my pushing power, as well as the tactical advantage of a choke point with longer range units and a superior economy due to mules. At this point, the Terran will turtle and i will proceed to keep pumping units, usually with a proxy pylon to keep warping in stuff to continue the push. If things are going well, i expand, keep pushing etc. At this point if the terran is smart he will push me out and can probably win with a solid MMM push. If not, and he lets me contain him, or expands himself, i will have an economic advantage due to having my expo out quicker, and win with a well timed push after i have received the full benefit of my better economy by producing more units. At this point, I will win simply because i have a larger army. It will take some time to let the ghosts blow their energy on me, so that means attacking, backing out, attacking, backing out, get an observer there, kill anyghosts i see as priority, but eventually I will break through and win, only because i contained the terran and had an economic advantage. Now, this can go both ways. I have been contained and the terran was able to expand and get an economic advantage. I have had games where it was literally a stalemate, we would each attack, and our armys would be entirely decimated, and we would have to rebuild a new army. Now aside from the cheeses that Terran is able to pull off (super fast reapers and all in 6 marine scv rush) this is a very balanced matchup. If anything, those 2 cheeses need to be nerfed somehow, otherwise it is a solid matchup. And for a counter to a previous statement: problems with marines are: 1. they lose vs anything out of the warpgate early. zealots beat em straight up,stalkers too. 2. they need shields and stim to be effective.none of the P units "need" em to put up a fight. 3. they build time is downrght retarded (kneejerk "fix" by blizzard cause marine/scv allins were too strong) 4. sentries reduce marines dmg by 1/3. 5. P can just wait till he has storm/collosi and kill 50 marines with aclick or 3 storms. and considering whole factory tech gets countered by immortals there really isnt much left. so T has to go mass marauder which again fight a uphill battle vs standart gate+immortal aclick action 1. Actually for cost, I'm pretty sure marines will kill stalkers without much trouble. 3 marines = 150 minerals vs 125/50 for a stalker, and im pretty sure 3 marines would kill a stalker and only lose 1 maybe 2 of them. As for Zealots, YES, in the open, Zealots DO indeed kick marines asses AS THEY SHOULD considering that marines are the starter unit and can attack both air and ground from range (and they are quite good vs air as well). Now as for Sentries, i dont think they directly kick marines asses so much as they really help out as a support unit, and they should considering that is their role. The Toss teched to them and had to invest a huge amount of gas into them, which implies that they have spent even more minerals on getting that gas harvested etc. It greatly reduces your marines effectiveness. Good. It should. As for DT/HT? Yes DT and HT both can kick ass but both can be quite easily countered with air or emp respectively. 2. This is a very general statement. Do you expect massing marines, which sacrifice some of their ground damage and health for the utility of being able to attack from range and attack air, to be better than a ground unit whos sole purpose is to kill other ground units? Of course not. However for my units to be effective against your army, or to even get to your army, i need to get immortals, stalkers, probably an observer or 2 so that i can even break down your wall. In the meantime you should be teching up to better units, just like I did in order to try to attack you. Spamming 50 marines will surely make you lose yes, just like spamming 25 zealots would. This is just a stupid mentality. 3. Uh, Reactor? 4. As I already stated, sentries are a HEAVY investment in gas (and therefore a heavy mineral investment to get that gas) and a utility unit, they SHOULD help counter your marines which are very low tech. Comparing a 50 mineral unit to a 50 mineral 100 gas unit isn't very fair, nor the fact that the toss had to invest 150 minerals into a cybernetics core to even get them. 5. It's called teching. Teched units are vastly superior to lower tech units because they have the added cost and build time of TECHING. Now, if YOU had teched a few ghosts and used some good play by using their EMP, those High Templar are nullified and a waste of money. On the other hand, If the Toss is going for Colossi, why in gods name are you going mass marines? Colossi with extra range requires a very long build time and they are very fragile, especially to things like Vikings, which come standard on your starport and can be pumped out extremely fast with a reactor upgrade. Let's see, you need Barracks, Factory, Starport, Reactor on the Starport to counter Colossi. And these units are viable ground and harass units as well, and also are your primary means of dealing with other capital ships. The protoss needs Gateway, Cybernetics, Robo, and the Robo extension, plus a 300/200 research with a huge research time. So the toss needs 4 buildings which are far more expensive in comparison than yours are, and a heavy research time PLUS the colossi themselves are extremely expensive plus have a long build time, infact they really aren't worth pumping unless you can chrono them. So if you see Colossi, theres your counter, kind of like immortals hard counter your tanks, vikings hard counter colossi, you see the pattern here? Think about units, maybe look at the "units" tab in game and you might see that is good against what and find counters and strats to deal with things that rape your poor versatile tier 0 units. | ||
|
KawaiiRice
United States2914 Posts
On April 19 2010 13:52 Opti wrote: . . . . It's also been proven that a correctly executed "all in" 6 marine + SCV rush is nearly unbeatable. . . . . What are you even talking about lol, why do you think marine/reactor time was upped | ||
|
Frenzied_Tank
Germany100 Posts
- thor will take the splash from tanks due gateways units being close to them - thors don't take many "mass colossus" hits, thors have almost no def them even dying to a couple of units, reparing wont work unless u'd like your worker being destroyed due tank splash - thors are expensive, for the money you could get a couple or more vikings to take the colossus effectivly out and snipe obs thats my opinion | ||
|
Opti
United States155 Posts
| ||
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
On April 19 2010 14:23 Opti wrote: Honesetly i love to see thors in my PvT matches, i just laugh and build a couple of immortals which are lower tier and will annihilate the thors. Ohh, we're comparing units in a vacume again! So immortals dying to marines (lower tier) is a travesty aswell then? | ||
|
SchAmToo
United States1141 Posts
So, tell me what's a solid build for going against toss, because I'm still not seeing one. I've tried 3 rax(3 tech labd) and early harass, but get denied, and can't get ghost AND deal with the insane amount of stalkers. I've tried fast expoing, that was a joke. I'm thinking about trying rax-techlab, to fact-techlab. And getting maruaders/wall for early aggression, and siege tanks plus ghosts/EMP for immortals/colossi. Fitting? Problem is if i i miss EMP i'm done for. | ||
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
On April 19 2010 15:15 Schamus wrote: Yeah, last podcast, didn't Jinro say that thors get outranged by colossi? So, tell me what's a solid build for going against toss, because I'm still not seeing one. I've tried 3 rax(3 tech labd) and early harass, but get denied, and can't get ghost AND deal with the insane amount of stalkers. I've tried fast expoing, that was a joke. I'm thinking about trying rax-techlab, to fact-techlab. And getting maruaders/wall for early aggression, and siege tanks plus ghosts/EMP for immortals/colossi. Fitting? Problem is if i i miss EMP i'm done for. Check the 20-26ish pages in the Terran v Protoss thread, there are strats and replays that have worked for various players within. I've also linked a pack from Strelok who went 4-1 v. WhiteRa which is on page 29 i think. | ||
|
Opti
United States155 Posts
On April 19 2010 15:07 WorkersOfTheWorld wrote: Ohh, we're comparing units in a vacume again! So immortals dying to marines (lower tier) is a travesty aswell then? Immortals hard counter tech armored units and are decent against marauders. To counter marines I would need to add more zealots to my push, or HT, or colossi etc. Marines are a good counter for immortals, and if a terran is pushing for marauders and high armor tanks etc, but sees me going immortals, it would be wise for him to revert to pumping marines. Nothing at all wrong with that, hes just countering the counter, thats how the game is played, whoever does it better will win. Not sure why you are trying to patronize me. And it's *Vacuum* btw. | ||
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
On April 19 2010 15:29 Opti wrote: Immortals hard counter tech armored units and are decent against marauders. To counter marines I would need to add more zealots to my push, or HT, or colossi etc. Marines are a good counter for immortals, and if a terran is pushing for marauders and high armor tanks etc, but sees me going immortals, it would be wise for him to revert to pumping marines. Nothing at all wrong with that, hes just countering the counter, thats how the game is played, whoever does it better will win. Not sure why you are trying to patronize me. And it's *Vacuum* btw. Thank you for the spelling correction. Countering the counter which is then countered. The point is: saying that it's wrong for a unit to be effective against another unit based on tier alone is silly, unless the offending A unit is supposed to fulfill the role of B unit killer. ie. roaches v. zealots. If roaches were easily killed by zealots, there would be something wrong with one of the two, or both. So if the thor was expressedly designed to kill immortals, you'd be right. But that is not the case. | ||
|
Opti
United States155 Posts
On April 19 2010 15:34 WorkersOfTheWorld wrote: Thank you for the spelling correction. Countering the counter which is then countered. The point is: saying that it's wrong for a unit to be effective against another unit based on tier alone is silly, unless the offending A unit is supposed to fulfill the role of B unit killer. ie. roaches v. zealots. If roaches were easily killed by zealots, there would be something wrong with one of the two, or both. So if the thor was expressedly designed to kill immortals, you'd be right. But that is not the case. I'm not really seeing what you're driving at here. I never said it was wrong for one unit to be effective against another unit based on tier alone. There is much more that goes into it, however in general higher tiered units tend to be more cost effective simply because they required a higher time and economy investment. Actually I have no idea what you're saying I'm saying. Are you saying that I'm saying that Thors are underpowered or overpowered, or immortals are over or underpowered, or only against eachother, or that I am saying that tier should be the only deciding factor in unit vs unit? I'm just confused as to your point. The only thing i said about thors was that they die easily to immortals, and they should because they are the epitome of a heavy armored ground unit which is expressly what immortals are made to counter, regardless of tier. Just like Immortals die easily to pin prick enemies like marines, lings, zealots etc. I just don't really see what the role is for Thors, and I think they need to be adjusted and given a more defined role, other than "big clunky machine does good damage dies to immortals". | ||
|
WorkersOfTheWorld
United States619 Posts
On April 19 2010 15:45 Opti wrote: I'm not really seeing what you're driving at here. I never said it was wrong for one unit to be effective against another unit based on tier alone. There is much more that goes into it, however in general higher tiered units tend to be more cost effective simply because they required a higher time and economy investment. Actually I have no idea what you're saying I'm saying. Are you saying that I'm saying that Thors are underpowered or overpowered, or immortals are over or underpowered, or only against eachother, or that I am saying that tier should be the only deciding factor in unit vs unit? I'm just confused as to your point. The only thing i said about thors was that they die easily to immortals, and they should because they are the epitome of a heavy armored ground unit which is expressly what immortals are made to counter, regardless of tier. Just like Immortals die easily to pin prick enemies like marines, lings, zealots etc. I just don't really see what the role is for Thors, and I think they need to be adjusted and given a more defined role, other than "big clunky machine does good damage dies to immortals". I think you're saying what i though you were saying that i'm saying. Either way. I agree immortals counter thors. Not sure that i agree thors need a more defined role, but that goes beyond the scope of my orignial argument. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
Wretched
Australia121 Posts
this is because units with with small quick attacks that should theoretically counter immortals, are made redundant by use of guardian shield and forcefield. nerfing sentrys will make marines more cost effective, causing the protooss player to tech to aoe, and in turn the terran player will also tech to counter whatever protoss plans. and balance to the universe shall be restored. Unless they want to rename the game to: Starcraft II: The Immortal Push i have to put up with it as zerg as well. | ||
|
link0
United States1071 Posts
On April 19 2010 17:18 Wretched wrote: the immortal problem is actually a sentry problem. this is because units with with small quick attacks that should theoretically counter immortals, are made redundant by use of guardian shield and forcefield. nerfing sentrys will make marines more cost effective, causing the protooss player to tech to aoe, and in turn the terran player will also tech to counter whatever protoss plans. and balance to the universe shall be restored. Unless they want to rename the game to: Starcraft II: The Immortal Push i have to put up with it as zerg as well. +1 It's the sentries that are the crux of the problem. Immortals are fine besides the insane build speed. | ||
|
lolreaper
301 Posts
| ||
|
Feefee
Canada556 Posts
On April 19 2010 17:18 Wretched wrote: the immortal problem is actually a sentry problem. this is because units with with small quick attacks that should theoretically counter immortals, are made redundant by use of guardian shield and forcefield. nerfing sentrys will make marines more cost effective, causing the protooss player to tech to aoe, and in turn the terran player will also tech to counter whatever protoss plans. and balance to the universe shall be restored. Unless they want to rename the game to: Starcraft II: The Immortal Push i have to put up with it as zerg as well. Or you could.. micro? =P Honestly... the best nerf you can give a sentry is to targetfire it down. These aren't thors we're talking about, they melt like butter if you'd bother to actually control your units. And forcefield is useless unless you have 4-5 of them, at which point there better be a ghost on the field. Unless of course you park your units on top of a ramp while leaving your expo unprotected, in which case my advice would be.. don't do that. I mean, what kind of immortal pushes do these people do against you? do they have like 10 sentries or something? What exactly prevents you from engaging the toss army mid-way to burn some of their forcefields down? Heck you could sack half your army to kill every sentry he has and laugh as his remaining force melts to your reinforcements. I honestly don't find force field trouble at all in TvP. There's so many ways to deal with it. I WOULD find forcefield troublesome though if I never bothered to scout and if some giant toss ball showed up at my naturals' choke unannounced, but then I would blame myself, not the sentries | ||
| ||
