EPT[G] Protoss Shield Upgrade Defense - Page 3
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
| ||
|
MilesTegM
22 Posts
On April 07 2011 07:23 Jonas  wrote:Pretty much this. Unless your units are constantly losing their shields and then regenerating them then it will always be better to research regular unit armor. This was my point, only with different emphasis. It takes micro skill to engage with your units, do damage, then back off without taking any hull damage. Most people don't even bother. 1A syndrome will benefit more from armor upgrades than shields, but a good player who puts effort into keeping units alive will get more benefit over the long term from shield upgrades. Pretty much every protoss unit except the zealot has enough shields to benefit more from the shield upgrade if they are kept alive for more than 2 engagements. Phoenix and Blink Stalker just happen to be the fastest units, so they are the easiest to keep alive from one fight to the next. Other units are slower, so it is harder for them to disengage from a fight and survive. (in other words, it takes more skill to keep slower units alive) Shield Upgrades reward good micro and tactics/strategies that keep units alive. | ||
|
indigoawareness
Slovakia273 Posts
However and important point is is many units HAVE LESS SHIELDS THEN LIFE. | ||
|
regulator_mk
United States127 Posts
On April 07 2011 08:45 indigoawareness wrote: Your section on usefulness makes no sense. Increasing percent damage reduction means nothings. A probe with +1 armor is shot by a marine, the armor absorbs 4 total damage. With +1 shield, same thing, 4 damage absorbed. In fact it is my opinion that it is better to get +1 shield before +3 armor percisely because adding 1 to armor and 1 to shield do the exact same in terms of damage reduction, but you will save 75/75. However and important point is is many units HAVE LESS SHIELDS THEN LIFE. Not quite. While percent reduction per se doesn't matter, it does in some sense. Specifically: An upgrade reduces by 1 damage per hit. If you already have some armor, you take more hits, so you get more reduction. For example, a stalker starts with 1 armor and 0 shield armor, so it takes a ling 80/5=16 hits to remove the shield and 80/4=20 hits to remove the hp. So the armor upgrade will give a greater benefit in terms of the number of hits to kill the unit from full life. | ||
|
nodule
Canada931 Posts
Similarly, going from +2 to +3 armor is going to be way more beneficial than getting +1 shield. Another way to think about it is as follows: even for units that have equal health/shields (e.g., stalker), the 1 natural armor means that they effectively have more health than shields, which make armor ups more effective. | ||
|
FinestHour
United States18466 Posts
| ||
|
TheHumanSensation
Canada1210 Posts
Muta attack deals 9/3/1, with +3 attack it becomes 12/4/1. The first point of armour on any unit will reduce the net damage dealt by 3, whereas the next two points (three at max attack upgrade) only reduce net damage dealt by 2, and all points of armour past that only reduce net damage by 1. Unless you plan to keep a sentry for guardian shield around everything at all times, I think getting the first shield upgrade is the strongest possible upgrade to get as long as the zerg gets at least one muta. Helps that shields applies to everything to help out with the whole 'net damage' thing, too. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Shield upgrades are basicly way better then armour upgrades if hp and armour for both would be the same even if shields would not regenerate The reason for this is that you will only profit from the armour upgrade once your shield is down (in situations where you fight till death) wich does not happen in every engagement while you will always profit from the shield upgrade There are some twists like emp ,immortal shield, the base armour nearly all protos units have wich makes an extra armour upgrade often more efficient then a shield upgrade and the difference in healthpoints between shields and armour Still am realy suprised that all thoose twists make the armour upgrade "better" (since i realy never see or hear about a pro researching shields first) Personally i think shield armour is extremely underrated though am only gold lvl player maybe there are more reasons why people dont research it, am still puzzled with it | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
Shield upgrades also make archons freaking awesome at tanking damage, and of course it's good when you're going air+ground units together. I tend to get shield upgrades in PvZ. | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
1 marine shooting an immortal w/ +1armor upgrade + guardian shield takes 1:30 gametime to kill the immo 1 marine shooting an immortal w/ +2 armor upgrade + guardian shield takes 3:30 gametime to kill the immo. Protoss shields are always at 0 base for this reason because you want to hit 5 total armor with guardian shield ASAP against terran in this bio-based metagame. Now whether or not getting 1 shields before your + 2 attack is better in PvT isn't entirely clear and it really kind of depends on the nature of the game. If you will be using blink stalkers to poke, then the 1 shields seems to be worth it... if you are deathballing it up with colossus instead you might want the +2 attack. Ill be doing a 2-1-1 upgrade scheme into 3-1-3 over the next couple weeks to compare and contrast. Vs. Zerg I can only see shields as useful if you are using air. or mass blink stalker. Immortals dont benefit the same way from it in this matchup. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
 If Toss starts doing this EMP is really gonna be a must in TvP when using Marine Tank Against Immortals. | ||
| ||
