|
In PvT many people opt to go Colossi against Terran, and only teching to HTs todays the late game. I don't see why HTs cannot be integrated into mid game play, replacing Colossus play altogether. Sure, a Protoss will usually have a Robo to begin with, making the teching to Colossi easier, but is it worth it?
Here are my reasons for going HT over Colossus:
- Colossi are hard countered by Vikings, an easy to get staple unit of a Terran force entering the mid game. Oftentimes, a Terran will pre emptively get four to six vikings in preperation for Colossus, which can shut them down without great micro or extremely stalker heavy (which I find too frail, as your army is inneffective against marauders). Having them sit in the sky (or land and be pathetic), therefore not being useful at all, puts the Terran at a disadvantage.
- I also like to get Zealot speed when approaching the mid game, as it is very effective against bio balls. This means that the mandatory Twilight Council is not a nuisance to have to get, but a necessity (IMO) in the first place.
- High Templar ar only hard countered by ghosts. If you are good with micro, you can space your HTs out to prevent the EMPs for dealing too much damage, and even Feedback them before they have to chance to do so. Therefore, I would hesitate to call them a hard counter in the first place, but an important threat you have to keep in mind the whole time you go HT.
- Having HT with Khaldarin Amulet gives you complete map control if you're good at placing pylons. See an overwhelming advancing army? Warp in a couple of nearby HTs, and storm the ball, often making him turn tail to heal. See a drop in a hard to defend expansion, warp in three HTs and storm the small force, and feedback the medivac.
- Sure, storm has a much closer range than range-upgraded colossi, but this doesn't matter as they are much less likely to be sniped, and only have to stay alive long enough to launch a couple of storms to pay for themselves.
- I feel very vulnerable with a colossus-heavy build, as it is very immobile and slow to respond to harass, whereas, as I have stated, a few Khaldarined HTs will deal with most harass perfectly.
FYI, I one gate expand vs T on most maps, and take an early-ish third to fund what is usually a primarily Chargelot-HT force, with the stalkers and sentries I aquired early game for defense.
Your opinion please 
|
A Few early ghosts own early HT plus all the time it takes to tech.. if you miss storms your kinda screwed..
Also... if your opponent has 6 - 7 Vikings by the time you have your 1st collosus.. Warp more units and go friggen kill him
|
The only thing that counters templar is ghosts? Really? Do you not know what a banshee is? Even without cloak u lose.
Also takes about 20 years to get templar up.
The only way templar will be viable is if protoss gets some buffs to deal with AA, cloak, or DT's from archives.
|
Often, you need colossi for a smooth transition into templar tech.
I'm a protoss player that has tried playing around 300 games of terran to understand the game from T's perspective. If you go straight to templar tech, there will be a time where you will be extremely vulnerable (before amulet upgrade and when he uses all his gas for mass medivacs).
Colossi means he needs to spend his gas and starport production on a reasonable amount of vikings, which is less medivacs so he can't go on the offensive too quickly.
While HT are definitely awesome, not going colossi is doing T a big favor. I learned this over a long period of time as my T practice partner would constantly ask me why I would rarely build colossi, as they are a huge pain in for T.
If T knows you're skipping colossi altogether, he can expand more freely as your offensive options are limited by fast HT tech. With mules, it's easy for T to play a straightup macro game vs noncolossi build by dumping all gas on ghosts and medivacs. Mass medivacs are also a pain for HT centered armies since if you haven't actually killed much, you will take terrible, terrible dmg during your WG cooldown.
So, in summary, yes it's viable to choose one of the two paths but try transitioning into HT from colossi. It is a lot more stable and smoother. Better yet, try TvPing and it becomes much clearer from a T's perspective.
Also, on shit positions like close positions on metalopolis, HT tech is too dangerous.
|
As a 2k Diamond toss (500 games played) My favorite and best matchup is PvT. (if you go the chargelot route PvT plays out similar to SC1/BW PvT of throwing zealots(unit trade since protoss recovers faster) at terran to keep them from reaching critical mass as you tech)
Like yourself I always do the kcdc style 1 gate FE, into quick chargelots / then into templars / then throw in colossus late game. (keep on eye on barracks count and make sure your always ahead in warpgates) Certain games / maps i go colossus because of cliffs / like LT or if i feel that it might work better for some reason but 85% of the time i go chargelots. *edit i always get a robo and 1 observer to scout, then i basically never use it again until late game prism drops or adding in immortals if terran incorporates mech units)
I much prefer going chargelots vs colossus because i like the playstyle it encourages. It gives me map control / mobility. I get forge upgrades going without feeling in danger of getting my first 1/2 colossus sniped.
When going colossus I(personally) feel I am too dependent on the colossus so if terran is proactive with scans / vikings they can eat away at them then engage me and i die.
When i go charge lots I am very macro oriented / pump out ALOT of zealots mix in some stalkers/ and sentries. I enjoy the way this game plays out vs going colossus then adding in high templars which sometimes works okay, and sometimes doesnt for myself.
The problem of going chargelots is right around mid game when terran reaches that critical mass of MM zealots /stalker sentry simply cannot handle a large MM ball.
When i go chargelots I lose if the terran conserves their units well, doesnt try dropping, doesnt push out prematurely but wait until he gets a large ball then moves out, just before my templars kick in. You really have to be careful of teching to high templars too fast, then you will lose to terrans 2nd push. And if you tech too slow you wont have templars out when you need them.
With colossus its more of focusing on keeping colossus alive as you push terran back while they get 4-5+ vikings then they will begin to push out. Before terrans pushes back out you need to expand, and get more colossus or tech to templars to mix them in.
Also going the templar route allows for devastating templar drops. Drop them on you can take out the entire mineral line. Forcing terran to get more turrets / keep units back.
As for ghost countering templars, they are more of a soft counter especially once you research the amulet. You are 5 seconds away from templars with storm. You just have to be careful to not be passive and sit their and let the terran / scan/scout then que emp up on your templars as they push. You keep pushing storming, pulling back, drop, push storm pull back.
|
You usually have a robo up anyway for detection against Banshee
Bay (+ range) vs C, T, Storm and Amulet?
Just compare the time and resources.
Also, HTs get screwd by ghosts since EMP out-ranges Storm. Ruins FFs and takes away the shield.
Even if they have vikings u can deal with then using stalkers or getting pheonixes. Which can also lift up siege tanks.
Its simply better. Or at the very least safer.
|
On December 03 2010 09:20 Heen wrote:
I'm a protoss player that has tried playing around 300 games of terran to understand the game from T's perspective. If you go straight to templar tech, there will be a time where you will be extremely vulnerable (before amulet upgrade and when he uses all his gas for mass medivacs).
If you just got HTs out and storm/amulet hasn't finished, you should be feedbacking those medivacs as much as possible.
I definitely prefer HT tech over collosi in PvT. You still need a robo for obs (notice how more PvTs involve P getting tons of obs nowadays) but in terms of damage, HTs are king. Watch any of the Mana games in Dreamhack + Show Spoiler +Yes, he lost, not the point. Naama's contain/slow push strat was too much for him, all of his best plays were aggressive HT pushes.
You still get wrecked with proper ghost use. Most players on the ladder aren't good enough to do that though.
|
Medivacs will outnumber your HTs. Usually you make HTs before storm research so they gather 75 energy by the time storm upgrade finishes. feedback is a waste compared to storm's ability to survive delay the attack.
These choices are dependent on style of both players, maps, and positions. Using HT tech just because it's easier and T can't handle it is not good reason to use it.
The way I see it. Colossi are better for 2 bases since you have much less ground to cover and you want HT upgrades in progress or almost done by the time you take your 3rd.
|
Lots of people go HT first instead of colossus in PvT, I personally never get colossus until 4 bases unless the terran has already rushed for ghosts blind.
If you're planning on playing this style though, you have to realize that storm will not be ready for most terrans' first pushes. You need to defend with zealots (hopefully with charge) and good force fields. It takes some practice, but once you can comfortably defend against early bio pushes without having to rely on colossi it opens up the midgame a lot.
|
That's a lot of assumptions though. None of which are necessarily always true.
- HTs aren't any easier to use then collosi. Quite the opposite IMO.
- A two-base HT army can be significantly larger/techier because HTs cost far less then collosi, especially in terns of minerals (making it easier to spam zealots and/or take a third). HT army vs collo army would have significant differences in the number of lower tier units.
- If the attack comes before storm is done, you can feedback a bunch of times and then make archons. Really, what else would you do there?
The only problem I have with HTs is how hard they're shut down by ghosts. For the average ladder player, encountering blind vikings is far more common then blind ghosts. To be honest, I think that's a mistake, but I'll capitalize on it for all it's worth.
|
Colossus is there to keep the army from being kited, you will not be able to do this with psi storm, you will run out of energy.
|
I think a little TOO much pessimism.. Chargelots can help defend those slightly early-mid game pushes, slightly b4 you finish getting storm and a decent amount of hts.. They're pretty underused, mainly just because the twilight council is not contributing to colossus tech. My only problem is that marauders in general don't get damaged enough for hts to be viable. Not a neccesarily bad idea, but I feel a lot of people think "waste" when forced to get observer (spotting a 1/1/1 build for instance), to make sure banshees won't own your ass.
---
Also it forces the terran to micro a shit load more. Unless you're facing some dude with 150 apm, when you get 3 spread storms on his army, moving them around is a serious problem, and well if they don't move, insta lose? Still, marauders + kiting is still a bit problematic, kind of need to get sentries, which eats away at gas, never good when ur massing hts.
|
What do you mean if they don't move? When have I ever seen a marauder marine ball stop moving? If a storm comes down he just doesn't attack move at my units until it runs out; they're always running away! Unless the psi storm lagged out his computer so his move command was laggy or something.
|
I feel like colossus is the easier / faster / safer tech path for the early to mid game. You can get immortals if he is marauder heavy and then you can scout with obs which works well against banshees and polt pushes.
However, most games that begin to transition into the late mid game I throw down twilight council for either charge or if he is really medivac heavy I will get blink to take them out and from there you can easily tech into HT. The combo is basically unstoppable and can actually be gotten relatively quickly as you push terran back and attain a 3rd base with colossus as he scrambles to get a ton of vikings which will basically be useless as you are tech switching to temp.
|
as a protoss player primarily, I have found that colossi are just annoying to have. I just straight up don't make them, the only time I might even consider it is if zerg has gotten way to scary and I just need the anti hydra aspect and storms would be too far away.
My suggestion would to be keep finding ways to play without the colossus and you will become a stronger player.
Too many times have I seen a toss lose cause their gateway army gets melted and they're left with 4-6 naked colossi that just fail at life. We must not let this continue!
I am NerVFourOTwo, and I hate colossi.
|
On December 03 2010 10:24 N3rV[Green] wrote:
as a protoss player primarily, I have found that colossi are just annoying to have. I just straight up don't make them, the only time I might even consider it is if zerg has gotten way to scary and I just need the anti hydra aspect and storms would be too far away.
My suggestion would to be keep finding ways to play without the colossus and you will become a stronger player.
Too many times have I seen a toss lose cause their gateway army gets melted and they're left with 4-6 naked colossi that just fail at life. We must not let this continue!
I am NerVFourOTwo, and I hate colossi.
The same thing would happen if your ground army dies and you are left with 4-6 naked HT
|
Your logic is somewhat faulty, because vikings are not a staple unit of the terran force UNLESS you get colossi. Colossi do great damage and you force them to go vikings. This makes switching to templar tech easier because they will have a bunch of useless vikings. If you don't go colossi, any decent terran would omit vikings and just get medivacs.
|
After you get your third you'll have the econ to pump both (more collosi than HT) Force the Terran to make Vikings and then if there is a battle that doesn't end the game, warp in a Stalker/HT/Chargelot army as he will almost always overreact and get too many vikings expecting you to re-macro more Collosi which will make his ground army very weak
|
On December 03 2010 09:13 blitzkrieger wrote:
The only thing that counters templar is ghosts? Really? Do you not know what a banshee is? Even without cloak u lose.
Also takes about 20 years to get templar up.
The only way templar will be viable is if protoss gets some buffs to deal with AA, cloak, or DT's from archives.
Do you know what Feedback is?
|
On December 03 2010 10:29 Reborn58 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 10:24 N3rV[Green] wrote:
as a protoss player primarily, I have found that colossi are just annoying to have. I just straight up don't make them, the only time I might even consider it is if zerg has gotten way to scary and I just need the anti hydra aspect and storms would be too far away.
My suggestion would to be keep finding ways to play without the colossus and you will become a stronger player.
Too many times have I seen a toss lose cause their gateway army gets melted and they're left with 4-6 naked colossi that just fail at life. We must not let this continue!
I am NerVFourOTwo, and I hate colossi. The same thing would happen if your ground army dies and you are left with 4-6 naked HT
No, believe me, you will not. Having 6 templars call dawn the thunder is scary. Especially considering how fast you can reinforce if you've gone templar route (the joy of warping in 10 templars...).
|
You don't go straight to HT because it takes longer then collosus and most get charge along the way and then you get owned by the polt timing attack.
|
On December 03 2010 10:38 sqrt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 10:29 Reborn58 wrote:On December 03 2010 10:24 N3rV[Green] wrote:
as a protoss player primarily, I have found that colossi are just annoying to have. I just straight up don't make them, the only time I might even consider it is if zerg has gotten way to scary and I just need the anti hydra aspect and storms would be too far away.
My suggestion would to be keep finding ways to play without the colossus and you will become a stronger player.
Too many times have I seen a toss lose cause their gateway army gets melted and they're left with 4-6 naked colossi that just fail at life. We must not let this continue!
I am NerVFourOTwo, and I hate colossi. The same thing would happen if your ground army dies and you are left with 4-6 naked HT No, believe me, you will not. Having 6 templars call dawn the thunder is scary. Especially considering how fast you can reinforce if you've gone templar route (the joy of warping in 10 templars...).
You wouldn't have the econ to have that many temps and call in another 4-6 temps and another army at that point in the game. If you can then you might as well have temps and colo up.
You're better off having both in the late game and the fact is that if you go temp first you are vulnerable to a lot of things you aren't vulnerable to if you go colo tech first. And you don't really gain anything by going temp first except charge, which isn't that useful because you won't have that many zealots yet if you are fast teching to get to temps so you don't get overrun by the MMM ball.
Plus, as an earlier poster said, you don't see as many medivacs if you go colo because they are forced to make vikings instead.
|
Against any really good terran players who does a timing with stim bio+medivac. Any none-colo mid game means that you basically give up your second base. I tried the 1 gate into expo into 3-4 gate(by cutting probes ) build. It works until the terran scouts it and just do a 3 rax 1 base stim all-in because charge lots isn't good enough against a big bioball. By going colossus, against any terran build, even 3 rax, I can get my second base when my colossus is about half finish. Im a macro oriented player so I perfer a faster/safer expo. Temp onlys also just fold to 1/1/1 banshee.
|
I'm a HUGE HT>Colo fan, but the fact is that mass-warpgate play works best when you have a good economy working, whereas colossus can be used effectively off 1 or 2 bases.
I used to do a lot of 1 gate FE builds, but with the emergence of the 2 thor push, this is becoming a huge issue.
|
my point is that storm is truly powerful when you have a strong economy going to assist the storm damage. Getting relatively fast HTs while securing a 3rd might work but just know that having your HT out of mana and ~20 near death mauraders kiting your zealot-centered army is not fun...
|
I use colossus as a means to transition to templar sometimes. Good terrans usually dont die outright to colossus, and for me to overcommit to a push and lose them means i lose. Colossus you have to keep each and every one alive. If at any point you lose too many you die.
With templars the mechanics are alot more forgiving. Since templars arent 300min200 gas investments that take a long time to make.
If my templars get sniped / emped, just retreat while i warp in more. Since my army is more based around zealots/stalkers losing some HT's arent an instant GG. In fact i can sacrifice templars to kill workers, or feed back and its okay.
Also late game you will have a few expos, 2 cannons and 2 templars can stall long enough for your army to arrive, or for some units to warp in before they wipe your probes / nexus. In fact with a few cannons and templars terrans dont even try to kill expos because they will likely lose their MM force.
vs terran I rarely have a "killing" push. Every fight i storm, as they dance around and kite zealots. When most of my zealots die, i retreat while warping in more zealots /templars to replace whatever died, push again.
Terran will storm dance / kite, as i feedback and unit trade zealots.
This continues constantly once i get templars, just keep nibbling at terran so they dont reach a 200 ball, and keeps them busy defending so you dont have to worry about drops as much.
** the only problem with storm is mastering the transition into it. As long as you get to templar tech you are now ahead of terran and your tech advantage lets you skirmish more effectively. Until templar tech terran is more cost effective vs your zealot ball and you have to rely on sheer numbers to hold them off until templar tech.
|
On December 03 2010 10:58 Reborn58 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 10:38 sqrt wrote:On December 03 2010 10:29 Reborn58 wrote:On December 03 2010 10:24 N3rV[Green] wrote:
as a protoss player primarily, I have found that colossi are just annoying to have. I just straight up don't make them, the only time I might even consider it is if zerg has gotten way to scary and I just need the anti hydra aspect and storms would be too far away.
My suggestion would to be keep finding ways to play without the colossus and you will become a stronger player.
Too many times have I seen a toss lose cause their gateway army gets melted and they're left with 4-6 naked colossi that just fail at life. We must not let this continue!
I am NerVFourOTwo, and I hate colossi. The same thing would happen if your ground army dies and you are left with 4-6 naked HT No, believe me, you will not. Having 6 templars call dawn the thunder is scary. Especially considering how fast you can reinforce if you've gone templar route (the joy of warping in 10 templars...). You wouldn't have the econ to have that many temps and call in another 4-6 temps and another army at that point in the game. If you can then you might as well have temps and colo up. You're better off having both in the late game and the fact is that if you go temp first you are vulnerable to a lot of things you aren't vulnerable to if you go colo tech first. And you don't really gain anything by going temp first except charge, which isn't that useful because you won't have that many zealots yet if you are fast teching to get to temps so you don't get overrun by the MMM ball. Plus, as an earlier poster said, you don't see as many medivacs if you go colo because they are forced to make vikings instead.
What? Not have many zealots yet? What are you doing with your minerals?
Council + charge + archives is 450 minerals and you have nothing other then pylon/worker production to do until the archives finishes. Make some zealots and cut back on your stalkers, unless you scouted banshee, it's very straightforward. Get +1 ground armor too, with guardian shields, marine damage gets hosed.
The timing attack window difference between HT/collo only exists if you sit on 2 gate/robo forever.
|
I dont know if you could templar tech efficiently on 1 base since it takes quite a bit to get to, esp since you need a robo JUST in case of cloak banshee, and to scout overall. Say you skip the robo, and terran doesnt go cloak banshee(auto loss if he does) Your on 1 base using FF until templar come out. By that time terran will be one 2 bases pumping out like made and likely able to overcome your forces in sheer numbers even with storm because you wont have much steam to follow up since your on 1 base.
I think you need to do 1 gate FE, to safely have the economic advantage / translating to macro advantage to hold terrans pushes back with pure gateway units while you templar tech.
I suppose you could 1 base templar, then late expand while you templar drop to even the econ situation... But coming from behind is harder than start ahead by FE yourself.
|
On December 03 2010 09:26 s4m222 wrote:
Like yourself I always do the kcdc style 1 gate FE, into quick chargelots / then into templars / then throw in colossus late game. (keep on eye on barracks count and make sure your always ahead in warpgates) Certain games / maps i go colossus because of cliffs / like LT or if i feel that it might work better for some reason but 85% of the time i go chargelots. *edit i always get a robo and 1 observer to scout, then i basically never use it again until late game prism drops or adding in immortals if terran incorporates mech units)
Replays of you defending vs MM ball without collosi and teching straight for storm, where T makes ghosts after seeing templar tech plox.
I used to always storm rush off 2 bases, but I found that holding a straight up marine marauder ball that would always hit before I could get storms, HT and Charge (Which are basically the 3 things you need) is completely brutal to hold off as even if your gateway army value is higher than his barracks army value he will be able to completely crush you. Also, some terrans realize that they have a tier 1.5 unit that counters every protoss in the game
|
On December 03 2010 09:07 FenneK wrote:
- Colossi are hard countered by Vikings
God i hate when people claim something "hard" counters another thing... It's ALL about your micro.
But on to the topic on hand, templar vs colossi is generally going to be the choice you'll make to deal with terran bio. Do you melt it with colossi or storm the shit out of it with templars? I don't think the question should boil down to high templar vs. colossi, but rather robo vs. templar tech.
Robo is probably going to be your "safe" play, as it provides ways to combat a lot of one base plays that terran can throw at you (those mostly being ovserver to watch for cloaked banshee, and immortals to beat thors).
On the other hand, twilight council opening gives you access to charge, blink, and high templar and DT tech. If you choose this path you will probably get wrecked by most terran timing pushes (whether its the thor+scv repair, cloaked banshee, or marine raven push)
Getting to the actual units mentioned, the high templar is such gas intensive 3:1 gas to mineral ratio, that it's extremely difficult to use midgame, where gateway unit count is directly related to how long you survive. The key to getting to these units is staying alive until then. There is a reason templar are primarily used lategame, they require lots of gas, and this is best used when you have bases mined out of minerals, but you are still getting gas.
Just think, the earlier you have templar, the less useful they are. You can get all the research done, and warp in a few on two base, then you're good for a few storms. But after that, you have to morph archons, or wait a LONG time for more energy to storm again. Late game with long battles is where any unit with energy shines, as they replenish and you use it again and again. (you may argue that this is a reason to get them out earlier, but think you will have much less gateway units to support them, and once your stalker/zealot count is dead you can kiss your templars goodbye)
|
@Geovu here are some - i always go FE into chargelots / then depending on how hard or not terran is pressure ill tech to templars quickly or a little slower.
These replays are from 1200-1900ish. (bought sc2 at release date, played for 1 month hit 1200, went on a trip for near 2 months, got back less then a month ago and up around 2000.)
Delta Quad - FE vs early Marauder pressure Terrible map to FE, but this was earlier one when i just started adopting the build so i did it anyways.
Early Harass works extremely well If my early harass ever works well - the entire game is a coast usually
FE vs marine heavy pressure not sure if i won or lost this one.
FE vs Marauder heavy Composition I love it when terran goes marauder heavy. vs 50/50 marine maruader mix because marines melt zealots much better than marauders
Heres one where i get absolutely rolled. I scouted him staying on 1 base and alot of rax, but i didnt macro hard enough and was behind in army when he came out. When i scouted him on 1 base with alot of barracks i should have added more gateways and chronoed warpgates instead of continuing tech and build of 3 or was it 4 gates. -- But thanks to my improper response i absolutely got rolled.
**PS is there a better site for replays sc2replayed seems a bit slow...
|
HTs give you more flexibility and allow you to take a third quicker imo, colossi are a liability unless you're attacking with them I feel since like all robo units they're really slow. FE into chargelot/HT then tech back into colossi or carriers is incredibly strong.
|
On December 03 2010 13:42 NeoSlicerZ wrote:
HTs give you more flexibility and allow you to take a third quicker imo, colossi are a liability unless you're attacking with them I feel since like all robo units they're really slow. FE into chargelot/HT then tech back into colossi or carriers is incredibly strong.
So you would basically skip detection and pray that he doesn't go banshee or ghost?
Doesn't seem like a great build to me...
|
On December 03 2010 13:57 Reborn58 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 13:42 NeoSlicerZ wrote:
HTs give you more flexibility and allow you to take a third quicker imo, colossi are a liability unless you're attacking with them I feel since like all robo units they're really slow. FE into chargelot/HT then tech back into colossi or carriers is incredibly strong. So you would basically skip detection and pray that he doesn't go banshee or ghost? Doesn't seem like a great build to me...
When you do this particular FE(kcdc) you take a robo before going chargelots... or at least i do by default(for 1 observer to scout and against banshee). Then i basically never use robo again until late game, unless terran incorporates mech (minus the occasional observer)
You have the econ to make a robo and still tech into twilight fairly quickly/smoothly.
Robo is part of the 1 gate FE opener(made popular by kcdc the OP).
1 gate
expand
add gateways and robo
---> go whatever tech route you choose from here.
|
I think in a long game you'll probably take advatage of going both.
I usually open colossus since i need my robo for detection anyway, I will build up my number to 4-5 with range, then i usually add templars as i take my 3rd.
Of course colossus as HT can be easily hard countered. But that's not so easy to counter both efficiently at the same time micro wise, and emp that goes off on the HT don't remove the shields of your zealots. Plus i've found HT extremely useful to stop drops, and harass.
So, definately both, but open with colossus, they're more reliable early game, and their tech tree is critical early game anyway.
|
Robo is much more convenient/quicker/cheaper/safer as a path to take. You need the robo facility for the observer both to scout and detect, that leads immediately into a robo bay, and then you can pump colossi. If you choose to go templar you will have these problems.
1. It is the most gas heavy of all of the protoss tech paths. 100g council, 200g archives, 200g for charge which you will need to hold off till templar arrive, 200g for storm, 150 for amultet, and then 150 per templar.
2. Engaging a bio ball with just templar is not as good as you might think. Much like a terran with stim concussive marauders trying to kite chargelots, it works, but not completely. Good terrans can stim and dodge most of your storm damage. Then your chargelots will pursue them through the storm and get hit themselves. Also against a marauder heavy build, storm has less effect. Marauders will stim retreat and a couple of medivacs will outlast your templar.
3. There is a huge timing attack window that you open for your opponent by trying to go templar first. Because of all the previously mentioned upgrades plus waiting for energy plus having a decent amount of templar, you have a small contingency of forces until the templar arrive.
4.Once you run out of energy, you are a fish out of water. And your opponent will roll over you. colossi never stop being a threat, but some kiting and an emp will neutralize templar. Also, due to the nature of the units and of storm, you cannot chase a player down with templar like you can with colossi.
On December 03 2010 10:38 sqrt wrote:
No, believe me, you will not. Having 6 templars call dawn the thunder is scary. Especially considering how fast you can reinforce if you've gone templar route (the joy of warping in 10 templars...).
Yes this is true, but you wont have 1500g lying around unless its very late in the game in which case you could use any tier 3 untis to beat MM.
|
If the only question was 'colo or ht', ht are probably stronger overall. What ht let protoss do is remacro instantly (in a very zerg fashion, really), by making nearly your entire army out of warpgates. This means if you lose your army, you can slam out another one rather than having to slowly push out colossi from your few robos. This also gives protoss huge mobility and expo defense purely because you can put templar where you need them, as well as being more forgiving if you come out behind in a battle. When Protoss gets amulet and at least 3 bases, they're not losing unless they make a giant error in almost all cases/are significantly behind.
The problem with this is getting storm is a pretty big timing window, which we saw exploited in GSL. You're relying on gateway units + immortals to sit in your base and defend, which can let Terran take map control, expand, or simply try to break you when he has emp or medivacs. Because you're going robo anyways for obs Colossi prevent those kinds of situations - but are more 'counterable' in the later PvT game.
I prefer ht, but on SEA you can get away with anything.
|
Well, I see a lot of HT fans here.
PvT is my best MU but I dare say that I litteraly hate HT in that MU, even though they are really cool and I loved them in BW.
What I do is a 1gate expand followed by a solid tech to colossi with a lot of gateways. From that point, if the terran was aggressive and failed even a little, I can push and take the game. If he didn't, pushing can be quite difficult at an equivalent skill level.
From there on, T should pump vikings like crazy. Keep in mind it is difficult for him to see exactly your army composition, so he doesn't know what you're doing exactly and how much vikings to throw in.
I then go phoenixes and then carriers with multiple expos (I keep passive and colossi are amazing at defense).
I don't go HT anymore, except in late late game. Why ? Many reasons:
Teching to HT even on 2/3 bases make you drop in food by around 10 against a decent T
Attacking with HTs is a nightmare. They're slow as hell. If youre sentrys are killed for whatever reasons you're army can be kited to death and the templars will be 100 miles behind.
I hate losing a game that I was REALLY leading. That happens a lot when you go templars. 20 more food, 2 expo more up ? Loose 90 food to a well placed EMP while the T loses only 10. No, it is not imba, etc. But it can happen more often than you think.
Overall, HTs are not a bad choice of course, they are really good. But I don't like the "pray that he won't success with EMPs or die" thing that can make you loose even if the T was really behind. That is a matter of taste I guess, but here was my thinking.
GL in PvT !
|
i use ht much more than colosi because of the whole viking issue because i love doing ht drops at mineral lines you get like 10+ free kills if they dont pay close attention and i love archons anyways so i can use them too after i storm. its a win win for me just space your temps b/c if they get a good emp off your done.
|
Do both tech. I usually used to lose against a Terran. They would get an MMM ball and then rush at me when I had 2 base. (This is off a Fast Expand).
And then I started getting 2 robos pumping out collosus and I still lost. Then I switched. Now, what I do is 1 robo pumping out collosus, and then transition into templar tech. The collosus reduces the timing window of overpowered terranness of the MMM ball (which kills toss balls unless you have sentry usage which EVEN then doesn't work since you need *good* sentry usage and 60 marines still kills like 60 zealots). =P
However, once you have onee collosi or two collosi, terran must get air of they risk forcefield + splash rapage. And then, you can transition into templar tech and make it really safe.
|
One of the best feutures of Ht's is just that they come from gateways (instant warp-in). Seems like peopel are forgetting how usefull this is! First of all you can easily reinforce (spelling?) your army, storm and then create archons but this isn't the big thing.
The big thing is preventing drops, storm armies and scv lines. I saw minigun play vs this terran, he sees 4 dropships full with marauder comming towards his base, warps in 4 ht's and kills them all with feedback really amazing. In lategame you have pylons allover the place, sees the terran army, warps in 2 ht's and gets 2 perfect storms of and even manages to escape due to highground.
|
i love hts against t, but this usually does require a couple of bases or more while you can get a collosus out before expanding to a second base. like a 3gate robo build.
|
What you're posing - going HTs before Colossi - has been experimented with quite often before.
Early in my days of playing SC2 I tried going 3 Gate into expand and HTs. I'd get a couple HTs out before Storm purely for the feedback against Medivacs. Once Storm hit I was golden, and I would grab a ton of Gateways and would hold very well, ESPECIALLY against Terran MMM balls.
The thing is though that Colossi can do good damage far earlier than one can get HTs with Storm. Sure taking out Terran healing early is good, but wiping out the units is even better. This is also only countered by very mech-heavy builds or Banshee shenanigans, which the former is pretty rare and the latter happens early enough that one can transition out into Blink Stalkers.
If I'm not already outright winning against Terran bio by the mid-game, yes, I will get HTs on my third base. Having such a diverse army makes the Protoss virtually unstoppable at that point, and I can exercise a pretty dominant contain until the Terran quits.
So what to do about Vikings? Simple - make them useless. As soon as I see more than a couple of them I give Terran the air and start my HT tech. My Robo with either become passive or make Immortal/Observers while I add more Gateways. IF the Terran is smart enough he'll harass with his Vikings, but his wasting so much resources on them means I'll win the ground war, and with HTs this is a guarantee.
So tl;dr go Colossi first and play it by ear.
|
If he's going vikings thats good. More vikings=less medivacs and I feel like like medivacs are a bigger problem than marauders
|
You spend a lot to get really fast high templar. If you opt to get them faster and skip robo, you're choosing to lose if Terran just goes cloaked banshees. If Terran opens with ghost play, you're hard countered early game.
Colossi and high templar are both expensive and far up the tech tree. But colossi have much more reliable and sustainable damage before Terran can one shot them with vikings. At that point, switching to high templar is both logical and absolutely powerful, because by late game you can pump so many high templar that ghosts are only a hard counter with perfect micro, EMPing every single templar.
|
I think everyone agrees having warp-in storm is better against Terran than just collosus. The reason you don't see people teching straight to templar is they are vulnerable to a timing attack.
If your opponent knows you are skipping collosus and reacts appropriately he can do a timing attack that you can not hold. Really, you can't hold it. All he has to do is attack with medivacs/ghosts/bio at the timing when you are either researching storm or have just finished storm but don't have amulet. If he hits before storm finishes you die. If he hits after it finishes but before amulet and he hits any kind of decent emp you die.
The safest way to play PvT is to expand, get collosus + charge on two base, then take a third as soon as you safely can and add templar. If you get your third up and have amulet done + collosus you basically can't lose at this point.
I have won tons of games against Terrans without going Colossus. I like skipping them better too but I have found that against better Terrans you can't get away with it. If they scout and react with that timing you just kind of die.
If your opponent is too bad to make ghosts you can easily get away with immortal + chargelot into HT on 2 base. I used to love this build. Its just way too weak against good terrans that know timings and use ghosts well.
|
-The answer is you need both late game.
-OP seems to focus on why people tend to go colossi first rather than HT first. This is because the standard build is 1/2/3 gate into robo and in this scenario you must get colossi first vs bio because you simply will not have templar/storm up in time to deal with a push where they have bio upgrades + medivacs.
-Obviously the reason people open robo is that it gives scouting (observer), a mid-game unit to defend bio pushes (immortal), and eventually access to an AOE unit (colossi). On particular maps (like Scrap Station) I like to open stargate which also allows me to scout with a phoenix or defend pushes with a Void Ray, but doesn't give me access to AOE. In this scenario it is easier to transition into templar since you don't need the early AOE unit to survive the bio push. Chargelot + sentry + phx + VR does very well vs bio. The problem with stargate openers is that there is a window of weakness where you start to get your air force up, which is why it is most useful on particular maps.
-The counters are actually somewhat irrelevant in choosing which to go first. It has a lot more to do with your actual build. Of course if your opponent already has the appropriate counters out on the field before you even have to make your decision that has an effect, but that is rarely the case that people make counters for something that you don't have yet.
|
On December 04 2010 02:37 Skyro wrote:
-The answer is you need both late game.
It seems many korean protoss would disagree with you, shoring up their Colossi's weakness to air units with phoenixes. Last I recall, phoenixes are cost effective against vikings, and chargelot/Colossi or chargelot/sentry/colossi is solid against any terran land army. Tanks are the biggest problem on the ground (which happen to be the only target a phoenix can lift where the phoenix is displacing more of the opponent's during a fight than his cost).
Of course, this comp is a bit weird - and at least a few NA professional protoss players that have been asked their opinions on this comp openly criticize it, but I think the "need" for both HTs and Colossi lategame is a bit overstated.
|
I think it's pretty situational and even comes down to preference. If you are close spawns and already have a robo down, it might be safer to throw down a robo bay and get some collosi. But if you have some space (and therefore medivac drops are a relatively larger threat) it might be worth it to use your robotics facility strictly for observers and some buffering immortals while you sprint for templar tech.
Whenever I go for collosi vs terran, I feel like I cannot do two things at once because your collosi have to be babysitted by your gateway units to stay alive and your gateway units have to be with your collosi to not get stimmed and rolled over. templar tech gives you more flexibility, as you can warp in your aoe damage where you see fit (once amulet is done), as well as parry drops with feedback, given you have sufficient spotting with pylons and observers.
I think collosi is therefore more suited for 2baseplay (if a third is hard to take or you're gunning for a timing) where you can easily bounce back and forth between main and nat to handle drops. On the other hand, templar tech enables you to play more of a management style on 3-5 bases.. until the terran wises up and bolstors his mmm with thors/tanks, then it is wise to grab some voids or even carriers.
|
The problem with HT replacing colossi is this:
- HT are too gas heavy early on, you need some stalkers, sentries and some upgrades like zealot charge, +1 armor etc which conflict with getting HT.
- HT tech is slower and more costly compared to colossus tech. Note that a robo is virtually a neccesity against terran because of the cloaked banshee threat and certain playstyles you want immortals against (such as a thor rush or mech favored terran). HT needs council and templar archives AND storm tech before they really have a good effect, colossi only need the robo bay and a colossus to be effective, you can postpone range even if neccesary. The fact that colossus tech is more gradually and relatively cheaper (if you include a robo anyway) then ht makes them a better first tech target.
- Colossi are just too good early on. First of all you NEED some stalkers anyway to prevent your zealots from piling up and to prevent harass and low numbers of vikings don't do that great against colossi anyways. It's quite easy to shield abuse with colossi for example if they just have 2 or 4 vikings. Forcing them into vikings also delays other gas intensive stuff like ghosts or infantry upgrades as well which is a good thing as well. Building colossi is also great to simply use the robo, immortals are cumbersome lategame anyway because they are too slow and too shortranged to do well in big fights if you are using zealots and stalkers too.
HT are good lategame when you have the council anyway for zealot legs and you're income starts to get more gas which always happens lategame. Lategame your first base is depleted from minerals but still getting gas, the neccesary upgrades (zealot legs, warpgate etc.) are already done and your production includes no sentries anymore which all let you pile up gas later on. THat gas pileup is the reason to go HT later imo. (some koreans prefer the colossus + phoenix strat but that is imo map dependant and generally inferior to colossi + ht though).
|
Canada13389 Posts
Teching to HTs IMO is less all in than teching to collossus on 2 base. This being said I still like to get a robo bay but I focus on observers and a couple of immortals. This works best after a KCDC FE since it allows you to have enough economy early enough to support the tech switch from robo to HT.
Templar tech is a lot more reliable than Collosus IMO. This being said getting collossus can be good but HTs are scary Collossus are not. Vikings own collossus while the ground army is busy.
|
Another thing I'll add to the discussion is that when you go for templar tech, your entire army comes out of warpgates. With robo tech, you can warp in support but your aoe damage comes from robotics facilities, which might be on the other side of the map. I can't count how many times vikings have sniped my colossi as they were walking to reinforce my army. Mid-late game, with 10-12 warpgates and pylons in key locations, you can warp in entire forces that are ready to engage the terran's ball at any time.
Also, warping in templar with amulet to proxy pylons or warp prisms to naked terran expansions (such as hidden/isolated pf's) and throwing down a couple of storms is absolutely amazing. Try doing this on xel'naga by putting a pylon on the high ground above the terran's expo (not the gold one but the one farther away from you) and throwing 2 storms right in the worker line can bolster a lead or put you ahead in a management game.
|
Lots of complains people have with colossi just seem to be an issue with poor play imo.
Sure vikings may counter colossi but with proper stalker micro focussing the vikings it actually becomes really hard for them. Forcing the terran into vikings is often only a good thing, the unit is really poor on the ground, gives a nice target for your stalkers and makes it more difficult for the terran to balance their army. Have too many vikings and they simply lose to the ground, have too few and the colossi can dominate.
Colossi not warping in like templar do is in many ways actually an advantage as you don;t need as many warpgates. Colossi build from the otherwise fairly idle robo, sure you can make immortals but they are hardly an upgrade over stalkers and don't actually replace stalkers in their role as they don't function well as a anti-harass unit. Immortals are also rather slow, whereas a chargelot + stalker army is quite fast (and colossi can at least cut corners to keep up with the rest).
Templar may be the better lategame tech, but colossi are just too good early on to skip imo. They have a safer and faster tech, give a good use to the robo facility and force T into making vikings which don't mesh well with their infantry upgrades. Usually I just keep making colossi from 1 robo non-stop the entire game, early on they are fantastic when viking numbers are low and basically secure my 3rd. Lategame they are still good as they benefit from upgrades while vikings don't, for example it's not uncommon to be having 2-2 colossi vs 0-0 vikings lategame.
|
On December 04 2010 02:55 Treehead wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 02:37 Skyro wrote:
-The answer is you need both late game.
It seems many korean protoss would disagree with you, shoring up their Colossi's weakness to air units with phoenixes. Last I recall, phoenixes are cost effective against vikings, and chargelot/Colossi or chargelot/sentry/colossi is solid against any terran land army. Tanks are the biggest problem on the ground (which happen to be the only target a phoenix can lift where the phoenix is displacing more of the opponent's during a fight than his cost). Of course, this comp is a bit weird - and at least a few NA professional protoss players that have been asked their opinions on this comp openly criticize it, but I think the "need" for both HTs and Colossi lategame is a bit overstated.
Phoenixes do not really "solve" the problem of vikings due to viking range regardless of how cost-effective they are (actually they are roughly cost equivalent, it depends on how big of an army we're talking about since in small numbers phoenixes win out). Once vikings hit a critical mass where they kill a colossi in 1 or 2 volleys it is nearly impossible to keep your colossi from being picked off and whittled down slowly.
Certainly, if vikings numbers are fairly low in number where they don't pose a great threat of picking off your colossi, or if tanks are in play, phoenix are great. But once they reach a critical mass storm punishes vikings most effectively. You really want to steer away from making mass phoenix as well and use them more as support. HTs also provide balance and forces Terran to get ghosts and provide numerous other benefits like the ability to warp-in.
|
I personally prefer HT to collossi.
First, I tend to get collossi in PvT because a good T is simply going to timing push before I actually have storm and amulet researched. Before amulet researches, I am relying on having HT already on the field sitting around doing nothing other than using feedback on medivacs or ghosts (and thus not having energy for storm). More often than not if I try to go storm really fast, I die before I can make use of it. If I can't even make use of it, I may as well have spent all of that time and resources simply going collossi.
So, this makes collossi a bit of a clutch, in my opinion.
I think it's better to have HT once amulet is finished, as I can reinforce my bread and butter army (zealots, sentries, and stalkers) along with my major tech path (storm) without having to wait on a production queue the way every unit produced from anything other than a robo is.
|
On December 04 2010 05:00 Skyro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 02:55 Treehead wrote:On December 04 2010 02:37 Skyro wrote:
-The answer is you need both late game.
It seems many korean protoss would disagree with you, shoring up their Colossi's weakness to air units with phoenixes. Last I recall, phoenixes are cost effective against vikings, and chargelot/Colossi or chargelot/sentry/colossi is solid against any terran land army. Tanks are the biggest problem on the ground (which happen to be the only target a phoenix can lift where the phoenix is displacing more of the opponent's during a fight than his cost). Of course, this comp is a bit weird - and at least a few NA professional protoss players that have been asked their opinions on this comp openly criticize it, but I think the "need" for both HTs and Colossi lategame is a bit overstated. Phoenixes do not really "solve" the problem of vikings due to viking range regardless of how cost-effective they are (actually they are roughly cost equivalent, it depends on how big of an army we're talking about since in small numbers phoenixes win out). Once vikings hit a critical mass where they kill a colossi in 1 or 2 volleys it is nearly impossible to keep your colossi from being picked off and whittled down slowly. Certainly, if vikings numbers are fairly low in number where they don't pose a great threat of picking off your colossi, or if tanks are in play, phoenix are great. But once they reach a critical mass storm punishes vikings most effectively. You really want to steer away from making mass phoenix as well and use them more as support. HTs also provide balance and forces Terran to get ghosts and provide numerous other benefits like the ability to warp-in.
I'd like to respond to your latest post, but first, I'd like to point out that you said "you need both lategame" whereas many pro late games either go one or the other, and make do with the units they have and solid micro to shore up any weaknesses their less diverse comp might have. Regardless of theorycrafting argument either of us can make, it seems that this statement is not consistent with pro play currently.
I am not a pro, but I believe they play it this way for two reasons:
1. Theorycrafting tends to lead one to create a very, very diverse army - which should be capable of dealing with everything, but in practice ends up getting stomped by mass anything. Example: you scout a tech lab on each structure, and make a couple phoenixes to deal with banshees, a couple immortals to deal with thors some zealots and stalkers for core units, colossi to deal with marines, etc. You see his army of mass _____ (fill this blank with any unit you'd want to mass) and just a couple techy support units, and you say "I have a counter for all of that!". Your one unit of "counter" is dead before you're done saying that. Now, you're in trouble.
Remember that supply is a resource, too, and that every supply that you don't use building a unit that is reasonably strong all around (aka not colossi and HTs) will be regrettable if your opponent didn't build as many of X unit as you thought he would (or built none at all).
2. In the strat I mentioned specifically, Phoenixes AND Colossi puts a lot of pressure on your opponents vikings. If they focus on the phoenixes and have large numbers, they can win the air battle, but in doing so they delay the death of your colossi, which just ream any bio army, until they can do their job. If they focus on killing the colossi, they must let your phoenixes get in range and begin firing for free (unless you only have one colossi). If you've been attempting to keep up in the air game, you should now win the air - though you probably will lose the ground battle if you didn't engage very advantageously. But here's the thing, if you win the air battle, you can kill anything leftover (assuming nearly all marines evaporated at the sight of colossi) by pulling them into the air. If they won the air battle (and you presumably win the land battle handily), their vikings must come down to hit your zealots, which is also in your favor. The wildcard here (again) is ghosts - but then we're talking about an MMG army with mass vikings, one of those sides of his army is going to be weak - that's a lot of tech.
And anyway, I really don't need to defend the build's viability, as I can let people like tester and sangho show the build's viability for me. Tester's phoenixes nixxed Nada's vikings in reasonably large numbers with good micro. I can't micro them like tester did, but that's good enough for me.
|
- Colossi are hard countered by Vikings, an easy to get staple unit of a Terran force entering the mid game. Oftentimes, a Terran will pre emptively get four to six vikings in preperation for Colossus, which can shut them down without great micro or extremely stalker heavy (which I find too frail, as your army is inneffective against marauders). Having them sit in the sky (or land and be pathetic), therefore not being useful at all, puts the Terran at a disadvantage.
Lol stopped reading here. Collosus aren't hard countered by vikings by any means. Going collosus means the terran has to go vikings. Wich means no medivacs and less bio ground army. Also collosus are amazing, when you get like 4 of them they just kill all the marines in one sweep(main dps of terran bio ball)
|
On December 04 2010 07:17 Endorsed wrote:Show nested quote +- Colossi are hard countered by Vikings, an easy to get staple unit of a Terran force entering the mid game. Oftentimes, a Terran will pre emptively get four to six vikings in preperation for Colossus, which can shut them down without great micro or extremely stalker heavy (which I find too frail, as your army is inneffective against marauders). Having them sit in the sky (or land and be pathetic), therefore not being useful at all, puts the Terran at a disadvantage. Lol stopped reading here. Collosus aren't hard countered by vikings by any means. Going collosus means the terran has to go vikings. Wich means no medivacs and less bio ground army. Also collosus are amazing, when you get like 4 of them they just kill all the marines in one sweep(main dps of terran bio ball)
This is true but if your comparing colossi to HT this is hedged by the fact that HTs can make medivacs essentially useless via feedback.
|
when i go HT 1st, i often get powned by emp... 2 early ghosts can ruin your game if the terran scans your archive 
|
On December 04 2010 06:45 Treehead wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 05:00 Skyro wrote:On December 04 2010 02:55 Treehead wrote:On December 04 2010 02:37 Skyro wrote:
-The answer is you need both late game.
It seems many korean protoss would disagree with you, shoring up their Colossi's weakness to air units with phoenixes. Last I recall, phoenixes are cost effective against vikings, and chargelot/Colossi or chargelot/sentry/colossi is solid against any terran land army. Tanks are the biggest problem on the ground (which happen to be the only target a phoenix can lift where the phoenix is displacing more of the opponent's during a fight than his cost). Of course, this comp is a bit weird - and at least a few NA professional protoss players that have been asked their opinions on this comp openly criticize it, but I think the "need" for both HTs and Colossi lategame is a bit overstated. Phoenixes do not really "solve" the problem of vikings due to viking range regardless of how cost-effective they are (actually they are roughly cost equivalent, it depends on how big of an army we're talking about since in small numbers phoenixes win out). Once vikings hit a critical mass where they kill a colossi in 1 or 2 volleys it is nearly impossible to keep your colossi from being picked off and whittled down slowly. Certainly, if vikings numbers are fairly low in number where they don't pose a great threat of picking off your colossi, or if tanks are in play, phoenix are great. But once they reach a critical mass storm punishes vikings most effectively. You really want to steer away from making mass phoenix as well and use them more as support. HTs also provide balance and forces Terran to get ghosts and provide numerous other benefits like the ability to warp-in. I'd like to respond to your latest post, but first, I'd like to point out that you said "you need both lategame" whereas many pro late games either go one or the other, and make do with the units they have and solid micro to shore up any weaknesses their less diverse comp might have. Regardless of theorycrafting argument either of us can make, it seems that this statement is not consistent with pro play currently. I am not a pro, but I believe they play it this way for two reasons: 1. Theorycrafting tends to lead one to create a very, very diverse army - which should be capable of dealing with everything, but in practice ends up getting stomped by mass anything. Example: you scout a tech lab on each structure, and make a couple phoenixes to deal with banshees, a couple immortals to deal with thors some zealots and stalkers for core units, colossi to deal with marines, etc. You see his army of mass _____ (fill this blank with any unit you'd want to mass) and just a couple techy support units, and you say "I have a counter for all of that!". Your one unit of "counter" is dead before you're done saying that. Now, you're in trouble. Remember that supply is a resource, too, and that every supply that you don't use building a unit that is reasonably strong all around (aka not colossi and HTs) will be regrettable if your opponent didn't build as many of X unit as you thought he would (or built none at all). 2. In the strat I mentioned specifically, Phoenixes AND Colossi puts a lot of pressure on your opponents vikings. If they focus on the phoenixes and have large numbers, they can win the air battle, but in doing so they delay the death of your colossi, which just ream any bio army, until they can do their job. If they focus on killing the colossi, they must let your phoenixes get in range and begin firing for free (unless you only have one colossi). If you've been attempting to keep up in the air game, you should now win the air - though you probably will lose the ground battle if you didn't engage very advantageously. But here's the thing, if you win the air battle, you can kill anything leftover (assuming nearly all marines evaporated at the sight of colossi) by pulling them into the air. If they won the air battle (and you presumably win the land battle handily), their vikings must come down to hit your zealots, which is also in your favor. The wildcard here (again) is ghosts - but then we're talking about an MMG army with mass vikings, one of those sides of his army is going to be weak - that's a lot of tech. And anyway, I really don't need to defend the build's viability, as I can let people like tester and sangho show the build's viability for me. Tester's phoenixes nixxed Nada's vikings in reasonably large numbers with good micro. I can't micro them like tester did, but that's good enough for me.
I say "need" as in if you can get them, it's almost worth it to get them. A lot of games either don't reach the late late game (max armies) or, especially at the pro level, are so razor tight that you don't have an option to tech to them.
I do watch my fair share of replays, but I hardly believe that the majority of korean protoss players transitions into phoenix after colossi when given the option to tech.
1) Your first point does not reflect the dynamic of the protoss deathball. Late game if there is ever a point where your AoE units are killed/disabled you will get rolled over. Obviously colossi are more prone to this than HT since you can warp-in fresh HT quickly.
And sure you can think of supply as a resource. But the difference with supply is that there is a cap, so late game (e.g. supply capped army) you want to make as efficient use of your supply as possible, and I don't think you will find any "korean pro" who would opt for pure colossi over an equal supply mix of colossi and HT, generally speaking.
2) This still doesn't address how you phoenix help stop a critical mass of vikings. I think certainly if you can force an engagement by pushing his base or whatever there is more merit to it. The issue then is getting to that point.
|
Vikings are poor on the ground... when'd that happen? 7 range, 12 dps and they can fly? I ALWAYS love battles that end with me having vikings left, I drop em on the ground and their DPS combined with marine medic ghost is insane.
I personally always want to see HTs. I HATE collsai. I panic and play bad against em. HTs make me get ghosts, which somehow makes me micro much harder and I like that a lot.
Just played a game where toss went collsai -> HT on his 3rd and I countered with marine ghost medic viking.
~2400 terran
|
I too like to 1gate expand and go templars. To make up for the lack of detection, I almost immediately build a forge after my council or vice-versa and throw a cannon or two at each mineral line just in case. If i get attacked by banshees, then I build a robo for the mobile detection. This way I can avoid building a robo as much as possible since most terrans i face go for MMM balls 
|
You don't go one over the other...you end up with both. Then you're invincible vs T late game. Unless they manage 3/3 BCS.
|
well if you are going colossi i suggest having templar tech also available with zealot legs
When terran makes a lot of vikings, colossi is pretty much useless unless you can micro them pretty damn good
|
Canada13389 Posts
Templar buy you time to safely get a bunch of collossus without having to worry about having too few units. You can tech and defend and poke expos really well with a templar gateway army
|
- High Templar ar only hard countered by ghosts. If you are good with micro, you can space your HTs out to prevent the EMPs for dealing too much damage, and even Feedback them before they have to chance to do so. Therefore, I would hesitate to call them a hard counter in the first place, but an important threat you have to keep in mind the whole time you go HT.
Collosus might go down in less then 30 seconds but HT become useless to cloaked Ghosts in .5 seconds. With HT you have to have EXTREME map awareness there is no room for error. You say with some micro you can spare HT but even pro's let their HT get EMP'd with collosus you dont need to be perfect just moving your collosus around your stalkers will keep them alive. for a time. So many games i have lost with HT because i was not paying attention to Terran army and my 4-5 HT where zapped of energy. Personally i like to transition from Collosus to HT then mix them together that to me is the idea army.
|
I'd rather have the Templar, but I'd also rather not die to cloaked banshee and know what they're building. Adding colossi is a building and an upgrade away, while Templar are 2 buildings and at least 2 upgrades away.
Once I can afford both, I tend to try to transition out of colossi.
|
as T its much harder to fight vs immortal, collossi and then ht
|
On December 03 2010 09:13 blitzkrieger wrote:
The only thing that counters templar is ghosts? Really? Do you not know what a banshee is? Even without cloak u lose.
Also takes about 20 years to get templar up.
The only way templar will be viable is if protoss gets some buffs to deal with AA, cloak, or DT's from archives.
The question is if collosi is better than HT and i really can't see how collosi would be a better option vs banshee. It can't shoot air and u will probably have less gateways early so u will have less units out when he pushes with banshees...
|
Colossus first. They are just too powerful. Only go templar when you know he'll be able to get a critical viking mass out. They don't call it the protoss death ball for nothing. HTs are a very viable transition you should tech to once you see vikings, but often a game won't get that far just because you have a critical colossus mass already.
|
Colossi first is MUCH better. Colossi stop kiting, colossi are a safer tech, colossi are less gas heavy (which is good at first because you need upgrades) and colossi mix well with stalkers which you want to make anyway early on. FInally colossi also do really well against low number of vikings if you can simply micro your stalkers well, forcing a 2nd starport occasionally is even more juicy.
Templar are simply impossible on 1 base and only good later on as a tech switch imo, they are simply too slow for the early battle's imo.
|
i would say first collosi, then you force him into vikings ,so he cant produce that many medivacs,and then switch into ht's
|
mix of them is ridiculously strong
|
On December 03 2010 10:35 Bleak wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 09:13 blitzkrieger wrote:
The only thing that counters templar is ghosts? Really? Do you not know what a banshee is? Even without cloak u lose.
Also takes about 20 years to get templar up.
The only way templar will be viable is if protoss gets some buffs to deal with AA, cloak, or DT's from archives. Do you know what Feedback is?
Lol i was gonna say the same thing.
|
Both? I think most of the time storm is harder to deal with, but having a few collossi makes for a more potent army overall. No reason they can't work together in late-game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
