|
On September 10 2010 06:55 Apollys wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2010 06:02 Knickknack wrote:
Good job on the build Markwerf
1)Chrono the 2nd stalker is not needed. Chrono just 1st stalker+wg the timing is such that the sentry finishes as wg completes. Boosting wg right away might indicate to T aggression also.
2)2gate likely preferred, 32gate, 33p, 34robo
The fact is that based on the rep you showed you made no real use of the extra production provided by the 3rd gate. In fact one could produce more gateway units off two wg than you did. If the large mineral commitment to constant 3wg production is made then the ob is getting pushed back slightly and more importantly probe cuts. The 3rd gate gives what 2more units by 8min? If 3gate commitment is preferred largely depends on if those extra units are absolutely needed, but from what I have seen that does not seem to be the case. Plus remember that we can use chrono on gates to help production if wanted. I'll test out what you said about chronoing only 1 stalker. But as for your second point, I definitely feel like I need that 3rd gateway, and I feel like I would be really vulnerable to just a straight up push without it. I'll definitely play around with this though. So far I'm feeling really good about this build all in all.
I'll mention why 2gate is preferred since its not easy to understand even if people try to test it out themselves.
First look at optimal timings with Markwerf BO +my optimization:
<8min 1sentry/5zealot/7stalker/ob
+We have ~3chorno normally used on probes after ob we could have used on gates.
Compare to 3gate reps:
1)Markwerf rep: 1sentry/4z/4stalker/ob = 4 less units
2)kcdc 3rax800: ~6stalker/6zealot = 1less, no robo
3)kcdc 3raxmaraurader: 2less, no robo
The difference here is efficiency. Having the build spot on, and keep gates constantly active.
But that is not easy to do, so it is certainly possible that most would be better off going for a more manageable 3gate, though of course I recommend they learn to play better.
The point is that adding a 3rd gate early with a early-robo build at this level of efficiency is hardcore, and only if you need maximum units at ~9min at a large hit to economy. At that point it seems better to simply be doing a different build. At that point the build to consider that would have more units+expo would be 2gate->expo->robo.
|
On September 11 2010 01:33 Knickknack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2010 06:55 Apollys wrote:On September 10 2010 06:02 Knickknack wrote:
Good job on the build Markwerf
1)Chrono the 2nd stalker is not needed. Chrono just 1st stalker+wg the timing is such that the sentry finishes as wg completes. Boosting wg right away might indicate to T aggression also.
2)2gate likely preferred, 32gate, 33p, 34robo
The fact is that based on the rep you showed you made no real use of the extra production provided by the 3rd gate. In fact one could produce more gateway units off two wg than you did. If the large mineral commitment to constant 3wg production is made then the ob is getting pushed back slightly and more importantly probe cuts. The 3rd gate gives what 2more units by 8min? If 3gate commitment is preferred largely depends on if those extra units are absolutely needed, but from what I have seen that does not seem to be the case. Plus remember that we can use chrono on gates to help production if wanted. I'll test out what you said about chronoing only 1 stalker. But as for your second point, I definitely feel like I need that 3rd gateway, and I feel like I would be really vulnerable to just a straight up push without it. I'll definitely play around with this though. So far I'm feeling really good about this build all in all. I'll mention why 2gate is preferred since its not easy to understand even if people try to test it out themselves. First look at optimal timings with Markwerf BO +my optimization: <8min 1sentry/5zealot/7stalker/ob +We have ~3chorno normally used on probes after ob we could have used on gates. Compare to 3gate reps: 1)Markwerf rep: 1sentry/4z/4stalker/ob = 4 less units 2)kcdc 3rax800: ~6stalker/6zealot = 1less, no robo 3)kcdc 3raxmaraurader: 2less, no robo The difference here is efficiency. Having the build spot on, and keep gates constantly active. But that is not easy to do, so it is certainly possible that most would be better off going for a more manageable 3gate, though of course I recommend they learn to play better. The point is that adding a 3rd gate early with a early-robo build at this level of efficiency is hardcore, and only if you need maximum units at ~9min at a large hit to economy. At that point it seems better to simply be doing a different build. At that point the build to consider that would have more units+expo would be 2gate->expo->robo.
Remember, having more gateways gives you more production capacity should you need it. If you have 3 gates, you can spend all your chrono on gates and cut probes and wind up with a ton of units should you need to defend against an all-in. I don't doubt that you were able to get more early units out of 2 gates than we got out of 3 in those replays, but if you compare what's possible to produce in either scenario, I'm sure you'll find you can mount a bigger defense earlier with the extra gateway. Most of the time you'll want to skimp on production a bit to get a better economy, but I prefer to have the extra gateway there so that I know I can make it to the mid-game no matter what T does.
|
@ knickknack
I appreciate the input. I'm not so sure 3 gate + robo is too much though, there are a lot of different factors at stake as well.
The replay I provided was just to show the build order up till the point you get the nexus and your gates basically, I didn't macro the gates to 100% efficiency from that point and definately had a lot less units then possible. In the replay I had a attempt at hellion harass and the (expected) scouting of a starport with banshee's though which makes total efficiency on your gates a moot point. Against banshee harass all you need to do is protect both your mineral lines and pump probes non-stop and you got a huge lead if you get templar in time afterwards.
The 3 gates are in my build to help deal with possible ground pressure which you can never be sure of if it's coming or not before you get in a obs. Hellion + marauder pushes for example are not unheard of so you need to have a flexible build.
If you are indeed pushed you can cut probes a bit AND you won't have to make as many pylons (your losing units) which means you sustain more gateways then. I haven't done the numbers but from experience 3 gateways + 1 robo seems appropiate for me in those situations, factoring in the fact you won''t ever have 100% efficiency on your warp gates, which I've never even seen a pro get close to. Just take the fact that many pro's like a 3 gate + robo build in PvP on 1 base just because running 2 warpgates 100% efficient is very hard since you can't quee units.
I will try to see if 2 warpgates + 1 robo (constantly CB'ed) is sufficient though.
With the upcoming patch 3 warpgates is most likely the number you need though and also your probe count will increase quite fast to the point where you need 3 anyway, yet you might be right that a delayed 3rd is better.
Your other point about 'wasting' a CB on my gateway because I have to wait at warpgate seems absolutely correct though and I will probably change this. I make my builds based on just testing timings instead of calculating them but you seem to be right.
(one CB takes 10 secs off building time)
2 stalkers + 1 sentry = 3 * 42 = 126 seconds. With 1 CB's this becomes 116 seconds.
warpgate tech = 140 secs. With 2 CB's this becomes 120 secs.
It makes sense to either use 1 CB on gateway and 2 on warpgate tech OR 2 CB's on gateway and 3 on warpgate tech. Because the latter uses too few CB's on the nexus i'll probably change the BO to use my first 4 CB's on the nexus allowing me to sqeeze in another probe in the build (going to 34/34).
*for those that prefer a zealot over the sentry 1 CB on the gateway and 3 on warpgate will fit best this will let you have 112 secs of unit making with 110 secs of warpgate research in the next patch.
@ kcdc
I think the faster robo is preferred in all scenario's over just more gateways.
A immortal/stalker mix is just much better then pure stalkers as your ranged backup past the early game. Immortals are a bit slower and have 1 less range but are much more durable and just do a shitload more damage to marauders which are always present basically (if they aren't pure zealots will win).
Sure stalkers help more against kiting but this build is not really vulnerable to early kiting but rather to early stim attacks. When stim is used but medivacs arent available yet they can't kite you forever anyway so you rather have immortals which are just way better in straight up battles.
Warpgates might have a advantage of providing you a unit straight away while the robo needs time but the robo is much more efficient with chronoboost which makes up for that imo.
More importantly though I prefer the faster robo because it also means faster other techs. You are basically forced to get robo before council because of the banshee treat so the faster you get obs the faster you know you can get charge. Just gateways is easier for keeping of direct pressure at your nexus but you will have a very hard time with it against MM pushes with stim that come like 3 minutes after the nexus completed because you will be late with charge.
Next patch will make the robo even more efficient compared to warpgates so I'm fairly sure this is the right thing to do soon.
|
On September 11 2010 03:34 Markwerf wrote:
@ kcdc
I think the faster robo is preferred in all scenario's over just more gateways.
A immortal/stalker mix is just much better then pure stalkers as your ranged backup past the early game. Immortals are a bit slower and have 1 less range but are much more durable and just do a shitload more damage to marauders which are always present basically (if they aren't pure zealots will win).
Sure stalkers help more against kiting but this build is not really vulnerable to early kiting but rather to early stim attacks. When stim is used but medivacs arent available yet they can't kite you forever anyway so you rather have immortals which are just way better in straight up battles.
Warpgates might have a advantage of providing you a unit straight away while the robo needs time but the robo is much more efficient with chronoboost which makes up for that imo.
More importantly though I prefer the faster robo because it also means faster other techs. You are basically forced to get robo before council because of the banshee treat so the faster you get obs the faster you know you can get charge. Just gateways is easier for keeping of direct pressure at your nexus but you will have a very hard time with it against MM pushes with stim that come like 3 minutes after the nexus completed because you will be late with charge.
Next patch will make the robo even more efficient compared to warpgates so I'm fairly sure this is the right thing to do soon.
Personally, I think Sentries > Immortals against Marauders. You can have 2 Zealots and 1 Sentry for each Immortal. Forcefield, Guardian Shield, and being light armored are huge. I actually find Immortals to be pretty underwhelming. Sure they end up being cost-effective, but they never seem to be as good as laying down some really good Forcefields.
Robo is actually worse than Gateway against Banshees in my opinion. If you are cutting Stalkers and pushing out more Immortals, then you end up being more vulnerable to non-Cloaked Banshees because they'll have more, sooner, and those Immortals can't shoot up.
If you go heavier Stalker, it would force (kinda, Banshees are still really good against Stalkers), them to go get Cloak which is about the same time/cost as getting an Observer except you'll have more Stalkers (or Sentries) rather than having Immortals. It's better to address the immediate threat of Banshees, then the later threat of Cloaked Banshees.
|
On September 11 2010 03:34 Markwerf wrote:
@ kcdc
I think the faster robo is preferred in all scenario's over just more gateways.
A immortal/stalker mix is just much better then pure stalkers as your ranged backup past the early game. Immortals are a bit slower and have 1 less range but are much more durable and just do a shitload more damage to marauders which are always present basically (if they aren't pure zealots will win).
Sure stalkers help more against kiting but this build is not really vulnerable to early kiting but rather to early stim attacks. When stim is used but medivacs arent available yet they can't kite you forever anyway so you rather have immortals which are just way better in straight up battles.
Warpgates might have a advantage of providing you a unit straight away while the robo needs time but the robo is much more efficient with chronoboost which makes up for that imo.
More importantly though I prefer the faster robo because it also means faster other techs. You are basically forced to get robo before council because of the banshee treat so the faster you get obs the faster you know you can get charge. Just gateways is easier for keeping of direct pressure at your nexus but you will have a very hard time with it against MM pushes with stim that come like 3 minutes after the nexus completed because you will be late with charge.
Next patch will make the robo even more efficient compared to warpgates so I'm fairly sure this is the right thing to do soon.
It's up to you how you want to play it, but just note that you've listed building 2 gateways and a robo all at 33 food. That's 500 minerals and 100 gas of building while cutting probes. You can afford to be a little greedier with worker production and still survive anything Terran can throw at you. I don't see a good reason to cut probes to get the robo up that early. In that that timing window, you're not going to do anything with 3 gates and a robo that you couldn't do with just 3 gates, so you might as well squeeze out an extra couple probes and not fall behind a FE T.
|
On September 11 2010 03:34 Markwerf wrote:
Next patch will make the robo even more efficient compared to warpgates so I'm fairly sure this is the right thing to do soon.
As I understand it, the next patch is only nerfing zealot warp cooldown time. Each gateway unit has its own cooldown time, so stalkers and such will not be affected.
|
Well I've changed to 2 gateway 1 robo now which seems to work fine. Knickknack was right that the 3rd gate was redundancy. Mismacro on the gates can be corrected by chronoboost to catch up actually.
|
I hardly even see terrans getting cloak anymore...I like the 4 gate variation (suggested as a response to an early timing push) because you just get so many units out. Why not just spend 100/100 and research hallucination for scouting and only drop the robo if needed? I much prefer phoenix for scouting and the hallucination gives you free information all from buildings you already have. Since you opted to go for a macro game I dont see why theres such a rush for a robo that you might not even need. In YABOT I can hit 104-110 food at the 10 minute mark with 4 gateways and. This is a healthy mix of zealots/sentries and stalkers and protection at every timing window. You dont get your detection by default, but with hallucination you can see if you need it. I think additional gateways are so important if your goal is a strong economy. What is to stop the terran from just taking his expansion while you're worried about his timing push? If he tries to expand you can absolutely crush him with gateway units if you have four warpgates. If he tries to push you will crush anything up to that point aside from cloaked banshees (which you will be able to scout). I personally throw down a forge either way the moment I feel my expansion is up and running because I want the upgrades. He WONT kill you and you're well on your way to templar tech or whatever else you choose (really should probably be templar).
TLDR: why does everyone feel like robo is 100% required vs. terran without even scouting? Gateway units are normally alot better at fighting terran comps than robo. Even a gateway/stargate mix would be ideal... so why are you forcing yourself into an inefficient playstyle? Slower teching to collossuss? Aka... asking to be countered.
|
On September 11 2010 05:15 Jayrod wrote:
TLDR: why does everyone feel like robo is 100% required vs. terran without even scouting? Gateway units are normally alot better at fighting terran comps than robo. Even a gateway/stargate mix would be ideal... so why are you forcing yourself into an inefficient playstyle? Slower teching to collossuss? Aka... asking to be countered.
People like not auto-losing to cloak, as well as being able to see exactly what the terran player is doing. Cloak isn't happening to me every other game like it did back in beta, but I would probably lose 20% of my games if I made several phoenix/void ray before getting the robo up.
|
3 gate robo is the safest opener. 4 gates is good if you're sure it's a bio allin. 2 gate robo could be good if you expect early cloak shee to get out those extra obs early so you can be aggressive earlier.
I find to be really aggressive in midgame 4 gate robo works nicely.
Basically the only thing that's going to differ is the number of gates you have when you decide to start thinking about grabbing citadel. The later it is the weaker you will be vs bioballs, but that's made up for by just having more stuff. What's best? Who knows at this point?
|
Imo robo is also better against pure bio play, immortals > stalkers just when armies are bigger then 20 pop. Early on micro ability of stalkers is huge but later on the power of immortals is just better.
Also by going just gates you delay your tech too much imo, the terran can just wait for stim and then push, no matter if you are up 10 pop you cant beat a stimmed marine/marauder army without some tech if it hits critical mass...
Only problem with robo is that unlike a warpgate it takes longer for your first unit to arrive, which can be critical against some timings but the weakness of the build imo lies when a terran finishes stim not before that.
Most troublesome builds to stop in my opinion are:
- no gas marine all in
you cant stop this if you expo'd only answer is not expoing and forcefielding the ramp. Fortunately this play is quite easy to scout if you get your probe in in time. (and it's really rare)
- 3 rax stim push with 1 rax tech lab 2 normal rax. Stim and concussive ASAP.
this build tends to get stim at a time where you don't have charge yet and if the terran is good, brings some scv's it just obliterates mass gateway play imo.
|
On September 11 2010 05:15 Jayrod wrote:
I hardly even see terrans getting cloak anymore...I like the 4 gate variation (suggested as a response to an early timing push) because you just get so many units out. Why not just spend 100/100 and research hallucination for scouting and only drop the robo if needed? I much prefer phoenix for scouting and the hallucination gives you free information all from buildings you already have. Since you opted to go for a macro game I dont see why theres such a rush for a robo that you might not even need. In YABOT I can hit 104-110 food at the 10 minute mark with 4 gateways and. This is a healthy mix of zealots/sentries and stalkers and protection at every timing window. You dont get your detection by default, but with hallucination you can see if you need it. I think additional gateways are so important if your goal is a strong economy. What is to stop the terran from just taking his expansion while you're worried about his timing push? If he tries to expand you can absolutely crush him with gateway units if you have four warpgates. If he tries to push you will crush anything up to that point aside from cloaked banshees (which you will be able to scout). I personally throw down a forge either way the moment I feel my expansion is up and running because I want the upgrades. He WONT kill you and you're well on your way to templar tech or whatever else you choose (really should probably be templar).
TLDR: why does everyone feel like robo is 100% required vs. terran without even scouting? Gateway units are normally alot better at fighting terran comps than robo. Even a gateway/stargate mix would be ideal... so why are you forcing yourself into an inefficient playstyle? Slower teching to collossuss? Aka... asking to be countered.
You're right--since you want a forge (or 2) anyway, you could get away with skipping the robo, researching hallucination, and building a cannon at each base if you scout a starport w/ a tech lab. The problems are that hallucination is kind of expensive, it's not as good for scouting, you need sentries w/ 100 energy each time you want to check up on your opponent, you're going to need observers anyway if you ever want to push against cloaked banshees, and it doesn't open up immortals. All-in-all, researching hallucination might be a little better against straight bio, but I think it's probably significantly worse against banshees and mech. Do what you like tho. Going expansion into 4-gate and quick forge will give you a hell of a timing push that you won't get with 3-gate robo. I'm finding that Terrans are starting to go for more FE's against this build, so variations where you skip the robo for extra aggression will be good to have in your back pocket.
|
Imo robo is also better against pure bio play, immortals > stalkers just when armies are bigger then 20 pop. Early on micro ability of stalkers is huge but later on the power of immortals is just better.
Also by going just gates you delay your tech too much imo, the terran can just wait for stim and then push, no matter if you are up 10 pop you cant beat a stimmed marine/marauder army without some tech if it hits critical mass...
Only problem with robo is that unlike a warpgate it takes longer for your first unit to arrive, which can be critical against some timings but the weakness of the build imo lies when a terran finishes stim not before that.
Most troublesome builds to stop in my opinion are:
- no gas marine all in
you cant stop this if you expo'd only answer is not expoing and forcefielding the ramp. Fortunately this play is quite easy to scout if you get your probe in in time. (and it's really rare)
- 3 rax stim push with 1 rax tech lab 2 normal rax. Stim and concussive ASAP.
this build tends to get stim at a time where you don't have charge yet and if the terran is good, brings some scv's it just obliterates mass gateway play imo.
|
On September 11 2010 06:03 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2010 05:15 Jayrod wrote:
I hardly even see terrans getting cloak anymore...I like the 4 gate variation (suggested as a response to an early timing push) because you just get so many units out. Why not just spend 100/100 and research hallucination for scouting and only drop the robo if needed? I much prefer phoenix for scouting and the hallucination gives you free information all from buildings you already have. Since you opted to go for a macro game I dont see why theres such a rush for a robo that you might not even need. In YABOT I can hit 104-110 food at the 10 minute mark with 4 gateways and. This is a healthy mix of zealots/sentries and stalkers and protection at every timing window. You dont get your detection by default, but with hallucination you can see if you need it. I think additional gateways are so important if your goal is a strong economy. What is to stop the terran from just taking his expansion while you're worried about his timing push? If he tries to expand you can absolutely crush him with gateway units if you have four warpgates. If he tries to push you will crush anything up to that point aside from cloaked banshees (which you will be able to scout). I personally throw down a forge either way the moment I feel my expansion is up and running because I want the upgrades. He WONT kill you and you're well on your way to templar tech or whatever else you choose (really should probably be templar).
TLDR: why does everyone feel like robo is 100% required vs. terran without even scouting? Gateway units are normally alot better at fighting terran comps than robo. Even a gateway/stargate mix would be ideal... so why are you forcing yourself into an inefficient playstyle? Slower teching to collossuss? Aka... asking to be countered. You're right--since you want a forge (or 2) anyway, you could get away with skipping the robo, researching hallucination, and building a cannon at each base if you scout a starport w/ a tech lab. The problems are that hallucination is kind of expensive, it's not as good for scouting, you need sentries w/ 100 energy each time you want to check up on your opponent, you're going to need observers anyway if you ever want to push against cloaked banshees, and it doesn't open up immortals. All-in-all, researching hallucination might be a little better against straight bio, but I think it's probably significantly worse against banshees and mech. Do what you like tho. Going expansion into 4-gate and quick forge will give you a hell of a timing push that you won't get with 3-gate robo. I'm finding that Terrans are starting to go for more FE's against this build, so variations where you skip the robo for extra aggression will be good to have in your back pocket.
Yeah, upgrades are huge, huge, huge. Marines and Marauders (against non-armored units) have their strength greatly decreased by armor upgrades. It's totally worth slowing down production for strong units. Forge + Armor is only 250/100 which is just Zealot and a Sentry which is nothing compared to how good the Armor upgrade is.
However, I do think that Robotics Facility > Stargate in this match-up, at least out of two bases. Warp Prism is the best means of containment and harass that you'll have (unless if it's a good map for Blink Stalkers).
Hallucination is alright. I mostly think of it as a way to force scans and detections, which is makes it fairly cost efficient really. You probably break close to even on 1 Scan. The biggest issue is just that I start phasing out my Sentry usage at this point.
|
i don't like robo for anything but observers and eventual colossi maybe. one immortal is 250/100, which is enough for either 2 zealots and a sentry, 2 stalkers, or w/e. immortals are slow, countered by EMP, and don't shoot up. people seem to be stuck in the 1 base mode, where they tech to storm or colossi asap and use their tech advantage as the strength of their army. compare this to day9's protoss FE style where he just gets as many gateway units as possible, with almost no tech. you don't need storm to beat 3 rax or a stim timing push, you just need a lot of shit (units). if you get charge along the way (and usually even if you dont), storm will come out way too late to stop the pushes you guys are talking about. i find that either getting 5-6 gateways up, or going for quick colossi is the best way to deal with a terran who wants to go bio.
also, just in case any of you aren't doing this, i almost always have good results pushing out with my first zealot and stalker. not only do you get a glimpse of their current composition (look for a maurader, conc shell if you're late, or any buildings in construction). sometimes you can take out marines or a supply depot using your stalker. i sometimes send my second stalker to their base as well, which is a little risky vs reaper but usually if they haven't gotten there yet they're not going to.
what i find the most troubling when using this build is drop + banshee play. for that i usually try to get blink stalkers, but i really should be making better use of cannons, spotting pylons, and more obs.
also, a technique everyone should be making use of: warp prism harass! a warp prism is pretty cheap, and can be REALLY effective. just as the risk of terran drops prevent you from moving out, and can do bad economic harassment, parking a warp prism at the edge of their base and warping in zealots or some zealots + stalker can have devastating results on a terran unable to split his attention. in many games i've done this while the terran engaged my army, and by the time the engagement is over i've done so much economic damage some of them just GG right there. even if you dont get much done, you can keep a terran on his toes, force him to get base defense, or pull back on an attack that might've given you trouble. with this build, unless the Terran also fast expands, any delay is advantageous for you.
if they DO fast expand, and aren't the brightest of players, you can sometimes get them to pull their army back into their main. if you have your army situated outside of their expansion and can get them to do this, forcefielding their ramp can give you enough time to take out their expansion while they're stuck in their base.
|
I guess where we differ is that I dont think immortals are really that good against terran. When i get immortals against terran its because I want to push and they take tank shots but tbh I think attrition is the way to go. Maybe ive been lucky but I dont see many banshee and Id say more than half the time I do they dont bother with cloak and just use the banshee as a high dps unit. The popular build seems to be marine/banshee with a raven with the people I play with.
I dunno maybe im just looking for excuses to get hallucination more often. Hallucinate makes 2 stalkers per summon and the illusions remove PDD charges as fast as normal units... just some food for thought.
|
On September 11 2010 09:24 Jayrod wrote:
I guess where we differ is that I dont think immortals are really that good against terran. When i get immortals against terran its because I want to push and they take tank shots but tbh I think attrition is the way to go. Maybe ive been lucky but I dont see many banshee and Id say more than half the time I do they dont bother with cloak and just use the banshee as a high dps unit. The popular build seems to be marine/banshee with a raven with the people I play with.
I dunno maybe im just looking for excuses to get hallucination more often. Hallucinate makes 2 stalkers per summon and the illusions remove PDD charges as fast as normal units... just some food for thought.
Huh. I didn't realize that. That's pretty decent actually if they force you to fight under a PDD. Of course with the Raven they'll know that it's not a real unit, but at least it'll help get rid of the PDD.
|
On September 11 2010 08:51 fallore wrote:
i don't like robo for anything but observers and eventual colossi maybe. one immortal is 250/100, which is enough for either 2 zealots and a sentry, 2 stalkers, or w/e. immortals are slow, countered by EMP, and don't shoot up.
I've been playing around with using immortals more, and I've noticed that immortals aren't really that bad against a terran using EMP - compared to 2 stalkers, after the EMP the stalkers have 80 health each, 160 total, versus 200 health on the immortal. Losing hardened shield hurts, but I think an EMP on stalkers or sentries or HT hurts a lot more. In fact, once you tech up, mixing HT with Immortals means the terran needs a lot more EMPs to hit all the units he wants to hit with the EMP.
The not shooting up is a problem, though.
|
Immortals are freaking awesome. Their higher hp makes them more microable, shield regen + hardened shields makes them last forever, 50 damage +5 per grade to armored makes them completely annihilate anything armored in seconds, they're only 4 food for an absolutely insane unit, and they're very massable with 250/100 cost.
Yes, pure immortal has issues vs bio. However, marines are well dealt with by having just a couple sentries with guardian shield, and then later, storm. Marauders do well in an open confrontation but if there's zealots in there immortals can unleash their ridiculous damage while zealots absorb the hits.
Immortals also transition wonderfully vs mech armies, so as the game progresses you'll be glad you made immortals and have robos to make more.
As for EMP, it only puts terran on an even footing at best. If you have HT with feedback it's unlikely they'll get to use any, and lord knows they need to in order to live.
|
Thanks for the reps, I cant wait to try this. 1 base robo was starting to get pretty boring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
