[Q] Terran counter to immortals? - Page 2
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
TDC
United States197 Posts
| ||
Randomaccount#77123
United States5003 Posts
| ||
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On June 17 2010 00:48 Krowser wrote: Just to repeat what everyone said. EMP. It removes 100 shield, Immortals have 100 shield. So it turns off their Hardened shields in 1 hit. After that, it's just a big stalker that can't shoot in the air. It couldnt be further from a stalker. Immortals are costly, super slow, super high DPS, low range units that counter specific units. Stalkers shoot everything, are pretty mobile, have bad DPS, good range, average cost, and are most used when an OK vs everything unit is needed. | ||
Zarahtra
Iceland4053 Posts
On June 16 2010 23:43 baytripper wrote: eh, if there are already ghosts and large marine numbers out, your immortal was a big fat waste of money and keeping him alive another 60 seconds isn't going to help you much if anything keeping the zealots alive would be my priority, two zealots can kill more marines than an immortal. yeah, they benefit slightly less from having shields, but they're still the better unit in that situation. that's true that force field does let you retreat in a few situations where you'd normally be dead, but it's not something you can rely on, especially in the stage of the game where you would actually have immortals v terran. That is assuming heavy marine number. Rarely do I see a T go with like 4 to 1 marine vs marauder, since there are 3 builds that will rape it, chargelots+ff/GS, HTs and collossi. Assuming 4 to 1 split immo can ofcourse be quite effective too, since a good terran will try to put his marauders in the front, where the immo can deal nasty dmg given the time. Anyway I'd say it's norm closer to 1 to 1, so keeping the immo up I'd still say is better than 1-2 zealots and/or 100 sentry energy. The zealots are a lot easier to replace, your robo(s) would by then prob be in full production of collossi anyway, so you'd be unlikely replacing the immo. But yer since this is all hypothetical... yer... The only reason you couldn't rely on FF is if you'd get all your sentries all EMPed. If you don't bunch them together it'd be pretty unlikely to happen I'd say. But sorry for the OT :/ | ||
Darkren
Canada1841 Posts
On June 16 2010 20:34 Zarahtra wrote: Well I mean there's no ultimate solution, all have some weaknesses. Even EMP, if you do it before the immos get in range, the P can just back his units off and wait until the shields have regened. Marines are quite good vs immos, marauders hold their own but zealot+immo will help the immo out loads to make the AI kill the zealots first while with +1 dmg upgrade and stim, immos 2 shot marauders. TL:DR if the P is immo heavy, be marine heavy or make sure to have enough EMP to go around. It's funny how u make a Tl;DR for 4 lines of text are people really that lazy? | ||
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
| ||
baytripper
United States170 Posts
On June 17 2010 02:46 Zarahtra wrote: That is assuming heavy marine number. Rarely do I see a T go with like 4 to 1 marine vs marauder, since there are 3 builds that will rape it, chargelots+ff/GS, HTs and collossi. Assuming 4 to 1 split immo can ofcourse be quite effective too, since a good terran will try to put his marauders in the front, where the immo can deal nasty dmg given the time. well you must play some awful terrans then, that's pretty much the money ratio right there any safe TvP build has its own way to punish all of those builds, and the more marines you can get away with, the more damage you're doing, everything else you build is just centered around keeping them alive. | ||
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
Even pure marauder is cost effective vs immortals. (Marauders have higher dps per cost). When you add marines and EMP immortals are a joke. | ||
raph
United States204 Posts
| ||
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
| ||
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
On June 17 2010 06:40 Wr3k wrote: EMP with MM. Even pure marauder is cost effective vs immortals. (Marauders have higher dps per cost). When you add marines and EMP immortals are a joke. Well, Marines have higher DPS per cost, even against an armoured target, in a vacuum. They're just squishier and get penalized by armour rating more heavily. Two Marines = 6 / 0.8608 * 2 = 13.94 vs All One Marauder = 20 / 1.5 = 13.33 vs Armoured, 10 / 1.15 = 6.67 vs Light Against a target with 1 armour (most Protoss stuff, but only when Shields are down) Two Marines = 5 / 0.8608 * 2 = 11.6 vs All One Marauder = 19 / 1.5 = 12.67 vs Armoured, 9 / 1.5 = 6 vs Light Baffles me to this day why some Terrans still favour pure Marauder armies. Get Marines for the damage and the AA capability. Get Marauders to help them kite units, or get some free kills if they try to escape. | ||
Cloak
United States816 Posts
| ||
Leeoku
1617 Posts
| ||
peckham33
United States267 Posts
On June 17 2010 10:50 Leeoku wrote: u need emp since the immortal ability only works if they have shields not quite need but you whould be stupid to try it without unless nesasary (if it dose, you might want to gg right then and there). | ||
SilverforceX
Australia267 Posts
On June 17 2010 10:48 Cloak wrote: Marauders in decent number beat Immortals. Marines definitely beat Immortals. EMP definitely beats Immortals. Tanks in decent numbers beat Immortals. What do Immortals counter again? Oh yea, Supply Depots. I always thought immortals are pretty lackluster, but couldn't quite put my finger on why. The stats look good; high hp, high dmg, ok range, ok speed. But they just don't perform well vs most armies. The more i think about it, i think its due to their range 5. They tend to be at the frontlines, and their hardened shields isn't effective since most ground armies from terran consists on marines/marauders, zerg has lings/hydras, protoss has zealot/stalkers.. its only marginally effective vs marauders (but they have stim and offset it quite well). So in most encounters, the immortal dies extremely fast (it's basically ~2 zealots worth of hp) and become a waste of resources. It usually gets off 1 or 2 shots as it moves into range, then dies. But recently ive had more success with using chargelots + immortals. The clots are faster and end up being the tank as they get into melee range, immortals survive and dish out crazy dmg, ending fights with a lot of kills. Kinda weird that they perform a lot better when in a support role, which isn't putting their hardened shields to use. | ||
Crixus
Canada110 Posts
i.e. if you look at the immortal, it will show you a picture of a marine under what immortals are bad against (you'll also a picture of a marauder, under what immortals are good against) this is a really silly thread! :S | ||
SilverforceX
Australia267 Posts
| ||
Whole
United States6046 Posts
| ||
D3lta
United States93 Posts
If the toss is going heavy chargelots, it might be better to transition to air if you have the breathing room to do so. Otherwise your stuck microing marines + vikings vs colossi. Not the worst or best situation to be in IMO. | ||
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
On June 17 2010 14:47 SilverforceX wrote: I always thought immortals are pretty lackluster, but couldn't quite put my finger on why. The stats look good; high hp, high dmg, ok range, ok speed. But they just don't perform well vs most armies. The more i think about it, i think its due to their range 5. They tend to be at the frontlines, and their hardened shields isn't effective since most ground armies from terran consists on marines/marauders, zerg has lings/hydras, protoss has zealot/stalkers.. its only marginally effective vs marauders (but they have stim and offset it quite well). So in most encounters, the immortal dies extremely fast (it's basically ~2 zealots worth of hp) and become a waste of resources. It usually gets off 1 or 2 shots as it moves into range, then dies. But recently ive had more success with using chargelots + immortals. The clots are faster and end up being the tank as they get into melee range, immortals survive and dish out crazy dmg, ending fights with a lot of kills. Kinda weird that they perform a lot better when in a support role, which isn't putting their hardened shields to use. I agree with your post. I have the exact same feeling and experience with immortals. their strength lies in dealing damage and not tanking. as soon as your opponent has some other units than highdamage-armored then hardened shields become useless. not to mention EMP. but the marauder>immortal statement is completely false. It might be right early-midgame when foodcost isnt as important and if you can outproduce the protoss. but in term of costeffectiveness immortals are ahead. an MMM ball or ghost support is a different story. but the marauder itself cant do shit against immortals. | ||
| ||