| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
NoodleFish
South Africa198 Posts
I'm a 400-500 silver Protoss player atm, and I was messing around last night on the unit testing map. I was mainly testing against Terran and Protoss, but one thing I noticed is that weapons upgrades weren't as effective as armour upgrades for many of my battles. I was using just "attack move" but even with some micro from both sides I still find that armour upgrades are better. Can some more experienced players shed some light on this? | ||
|
Girr
United States24 Posts
I go armor vs Terran because it immensely increases the amount of hits units can take from annoying marines... which are pretty core for everything. I go Mothership in PvP and make tons of carriers for giggles, so my gas is usually there or in air upgrades. | ||
|
tigerflux
United States20 Posts
And during a fourgate if I were to plop down a forge I wonder if it would be better to get the wep or armor upgrade pvp. | ||
|
Zill
United States34 Posts
Against enemies that attack fast and do a small amount of damage per attack, get armor upgrade. Against enemies that attack slow and do a lot of damage per attack, get attack upgrade. This is just a general "rule", there are always exceptions to be made. The poster above points out one such scenario. If we break it down even further, you could say that armor upgrades give you more "bang for your buck" in the early game being that most units in the early game fall into the quick attack/small damage category. I think this is a question many players have, and I think the answer most come up with is to start performing upgrades when you can afford to do both at once. | ||
|
FinestHour
United States18466 Posts
+1 weapons lets your Immortals 2 shot Stimmed Marauders instead of 3 shot. +1 armor, with Guardian shield, makes your army a hell of a lot stronger against Marines. Pick which ever one you like better and spend that 100/100! | ||
|
Azn_Christian
United States153 Posts
| ||
|
RiceMuncher
Australia138 Posts
Only get armour if your enemy is spamming weak low dps units (e.g Zergling) AND your ahead in tech/gas. | ||
|
Hurkyl
304 Posts
A Marine, for example, does 5 damage per hit against a unit with 1 armor. A +1 attack upgrade for the Marine increases that damage to 6. A +1 armor upgrade for the opponent decreases it to 4. A Zealot, OTOH, does 7 damage per hit on the same target. +1 attack for it and +1 armor for the opponent have less of an effect. Then, look at the HP of units. A Zealot does 16 damage (8 damage per hit, and 2 hits per round) when it attacks a Marine. With combat shield, the Marine has 55 HP. The Marine marine dies in 4 rounds. Now, a Zealot with +1 attack does 18 damage per round. But it still takes 4 rounds to kill a Marine. So, in a battle of Marines (with combat shield) vs Zealots, +1 attack for the Zealots does absolutely nothing. Against a Zergling, it's a different story; +1 attack for the Zealot means they kill Zerglings in 2 rounds instead of 3, so upgrading weapons is a huge advantage, even though one would otherwise think armor is more important. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
In general the weapon upgrade is considered much better against zerg and protoss where armor is slightly better then weapons against terran. Against zerg you are often using pure sentry, stalker, colossus, immortal. All of these benefit marginally from armor upgrades but get a reasonable benefit from attack. Also zerg is mostly using roach, hydra against this against which armor isn't too good. With a zealot based composition armor gets better but attack also gets tons better because attack upgrades are fantastic for zealots against lings. Being 1 ahead is super and against roaches/hydra's attack upgrades are much better then armor for zealots too. Generally against zerg i'd go 2-0 or even 3-0 before i'd get 1 armor upgrade. PvP you don't want to get upgrades at all actually, the game finishes before that happens 99% of the time anyways. When you do get so far attack is once again much better then armor. PvT armor is actually good, because zealots are your core unit and they benefit more from armor then attack. The difference isn't huge though as stalkers and colossi still benefit more from attack then from armor so usually i just go: 0-1, 1-1, 1-2, 2-2, 3-2. By the time you get to 2-2 I generally have some archons as well which offcourse benefit way more from attack then armor so i switch my priority at that point. | ||
|
ToF.CheckMate
Canada16 Posts
Ps- would you like to add me? I'm a 1200 Silver Protoss player, and would love to get some good practice in with someone around my level! ^.^ Feel free to add me, if you're on the NA servers! CheckMate #882 | ||
|
backtoback
Canada1276 Posts
On December 02 2010 17:24 Markwerf wrote: You might want to specify more what kind of unit compositions you were using. In general the weapon upgrade is considered much better against zerg and protoss where armor is slightly better then weapons against terran. Against zerg you are often using pure sentry, stalker, colossus, immortal. All of these benefit marginally from armor upgrades but get a reasonable benefit from attack. Also zerg is mostly using roach, hydra against this against which armor isn't too good. With a zealot based composition armor gets better but attack also gets tons better because attack upgrades are fantastic for zealots against lings. Being 1 ahead is super and against roaches/hydra's attack upgrades are much better then armor for zealots too. Generally against zerg i'd go 2-0 or even 3-0 before i'd get 1 armor upgrade. PvP you don't want to get upgrades at all actually, the game finishes before that happens 99% of the time anyways. When you do get so far attack is once again much better then armor. PvT armor is actually good, because zealots are your core unit and they benefit more from armor then attack. The difference isn't huge though as stalkers and colossi still benefit more from attack then from armor so usually i just go: 0-1, 1-1, 1-2, 2-2, 3-2. By the time you get to 2-2 I generally have some archons as well which offcourse benefit way more from attack then armor so i switch my priority at that point. i disagree with the PvP part. Most of the time, it turns out to be a Phoenix/Collosus fight and it REALLY favors on posistioning But.. if both are posistioned right, attack really matters because of the collosus | ||
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
On December 02 2010 17:19 Zill wrote: This is how I look at it: Against enemies that attack fast and do a small amount of damage per attack, get armor upgrade. Against enemies that attack slow and do a lot of damage per attack, get attack upgrade. This is just a general "rule", there are always exceptions to be made. The poster above points out one such scenario. If we break it down even further, you could say that armor upgrades give you more "bang for your buck" in the early game being that most units in the early game fall into the quick attack/small damage category. I think this is a question many players have, and I think the answer most come up with is to start performing upgrades when you can afford to do both at once. This is an exceptionally helpful general rule to apply in games. I tend to just double evo and get +1/+1 going at the same time, but whenever I am forced to choose, I almost always pick +1 attack for no real reason. Thanks again for sharing. | ||
|
nalgene
Canada2153 Posts
In the rare instance you happened to have 3attack on zealots vs 0 armor rines, you only need 2.5 ( 3 hits ) on rines same with 3 attack vs 1 armor rines and 2 attack/ 0 armor rines On December 02 2010 17:19 FinestHour wrote: There is a very good reason for either one to be valid. +1 weapons lets your Immortals 2 shot Stimmed Marauders instead of 3 shot. +1 armor, with Guardian shield, makes your army a hell of a lot stronger against Marines. Pick which ever one you like better and spend that 100/100! btw, don't immortals only do 20+2 vs rines and not 50? as in 20+ 2 Light / 50+ 5 Mech(roaches) some units might get healed by severals medivacs, so getting ups would help in those fights somewhat making what would be a 3-4 hits become like 5-6hits to kill | ||
|
hangarninetysix
263 Posts
| ||
|
ZapRoffo
United States5544 Posts
As protoss actually I almost always favor attack, because armor only applies to some fraction of your units attacks taken rather than all because of shields. Same for shield upgrade which is also expensive. Whereas attack is cheap and a great value. Units that you fight against where armor actually is good value would be marines and mutas basically. Air armor/possibly shields is something I get first if I'm going for a big phoenix vs. muta thing. Sort of zealots but chances are by the time you are getting an attack upgrade you will be shooting zealots with colossi and attack is way better for that too. Or kiting them with stalkers. Once again, attack is better for that. | ||
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
On December 02 2010 17:50 hangarninetysix wrote: Weapon is best against zerglings, armor is better against marines and marauders, usually. Weapon makes immortals kill marauders alot faster. I think the mighty Thor may disagree! hits to die vs. lings +0 = 80 +1 = 100 +2 = 134 +3 = 200 | ||
|
Finky27
Algeria45 Posts
| ||
|
s4m222
United States272 Posts
PvT get armor first. It makes your zealots/stalkers better meat shields. Into mid/late game its your colossus or templars that do the real damage so you want your ground army to just soak up marine marauder shots. Do you know how many shots it takes a marine or marauder to kill a zealot with +1 armor and guardian shield popped.... i dont but its a CRAP TON. Meaning yes they can kite but they would have to kite so long to kill your zealots. Meaning either A. They will stop kiting and die B. kite so much they fall behind on macro C. Their apm is high so they kite and macro... <--- *shrugs Either way it buys time to warp in more units etc In fact i go armor upgrades, then shield on 2nd forge, and my armor will be + 3 when shields are +1 or 2 - then i go to +attack then when as resources permit/start to float(supply cap) air weapons incase i need to or decide to transition to/mix in voids. Remember to chrono your upgrades. As protoss you can get ahead on upgrades quickly with chronoboost - or if you started upgrading late you can catch up. Also try to time your attacks right as an upgrade finishes - you will have a window of advantage while your ahead in upgrades. Instead of just clicking upgrade, then basically ignoring it. PvZ its generally accepted to get weapons first PvP usually weapons first as well. | ||
|
UncleOwnage
Denmark36 Posts
I'll jump in and give my answer as well though; Armor vs Terran (increases your gateway units survivability vs bio immensely) Weapons vs Zerg (makes your zealots so much more cost-effective vs zerglings, and carries over to your colossi when he goes roach hydra) Both vs protoss (you just need to be ahead of him, and in general it's more situational, if you have immortals vs blink stalkers for example, you might wanna go with weapons first) this is mostly for ground units, which is probably what you're asking about. Air units usually just need damage in every matchup (if you ever upgrade them) | ||
|
Lobotomist
United States1541 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
RSL Revival
Cure vs Rogue
Maru vs TBD
MaxPax vs TBD
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
