I have this game that I lost. I am kinda ahead during the early game, but then when our army battle, I lose more units.
He uses more immortals than colossi. I wonder if immortals are better for PvP than colossi?
I tested 1 immortal vs 1 colossus using a unit tester map, and the immortal won.
I also tested 10 immortals vs 10 colossi, and the immortals won.
In the replay, I think I lose a lot more units because of his immortals.
If immortals are better for PvP than colossi, why do a lot of players use colossi than immortals?

replay:
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replay-videos/17607

Espion9

Canada25 Posts

January 31 2012 04:32 GMT

I think immortals are better when the collossus count is low but as you reach critical mass they become better especially since immortals can't break forcefields they can get zoned out of the battle. Immortals would also be better in an open ground battle while collossus will be better fighting at the ramp from what i've seen.

bg451

United States40 Posts

January 31 2012 04:39 GMT

From personal experience, choosing immortals over colossus depends on two main things. The first is unit composition. I find that immortals are great versus a heavy stalker army. Were if there are more zealots, then colossus is what i would favor. Second would be map choice. As stated by espion9, immortals are better in maps that have more open ground. I know this is generic but this should help. Just try to get as much scouting as you can and then make your choice.

ctypewriter

63 Posts

January 31 2012 04:41 GMT

Anothing thing to keep in mind is that generally there are zealots mixed into armys at almost all times in PvP, reducing immortals dps substantially. This effectively makes them worthless with no collosi backup. A good mix of both of them is pretty terrifying though.

Whatson

United States5356 Posts

January 31 2012 04:51 GMT

For what it's worth, gateway-immortal-archon actually straight-up beats gateway-collosi, so twilight robo is actually my preferred midgame composition. I can't watch the replay since I'm at work

so I'll just give you some tips. Collosi in PvP are only better against Immortals if 1. you have a critical number of them 2. you have a LOT more zealots than they do. Immortal/Archon composition's drawback is that it has very limited range, so you want a big meat shield of zealots so that your collosi can attack them from range. Of course, if you have like 20 collosi (lol..), it won't really matter how much stuff they have.
Also, definitely pick your fights. Like Espion9 and bg451 said, always fight at ramps with your collosi, where you can micro up and down the cliffs. I would definitely recommend getting a 3rd robo, instead of normally 2 for collosi, just for immortal production if you see your opponent mixing in immortals.

ksoewondo

12 Posts

January 31 2012 04:55 GMT

Thanks for the great replies guys.
So I should have mixed more zealots in?
He goes blink stalkers + immortals, and I should have went zealots + sentries + colossi?
I mean, my force fields would not affect his blink stalkers right?

monk

United States8476 Posts

January 31 2012 05:02 GMT

On January 31 2012 13:51 Whatson wrote:
For what it's worth, gateway-immortal-archon actually straight-up beats gateway-collosi, so twilight robo is actually my preferred midgame composition. I can't watch the replay since I'm at work

This isn't really true at all. Colossi based armies generally > gateway immortal archon.

Whatson

United States5356 Posts

January 31 2012 05:04 GMT

On January 31 2012 13:55 ksoewondo wrote:
Thanks for the great replies guys.
So I should have mixed more zealots in?
He goes blink stalkers + immortals, and I should have went zealots + sentries + colossi?
I mean, my force fields would not affect his blink stalkers right?

Sentries are, IMO, more for forcefielding and zoning out his immortals. When I reach a scenario like that, I have all my zealots and sentries on 1 hotkey, and I ff the ramp/choke, and just hold position with my zealots and sentries while using my collosi to kill the immortals from range. If my opponent tries to blink past the forcefields onto my Collosi, he runs the risk of being swarmed by zealots.

Whatson

United States5356 Posts

January 31 2012 05:06 GMT

On January 31 2012 14:02 NrGmonk wrote:

Show nested quote +

This isn't really true at all. Colossi based armies generally > gateway immortal archon.

In my games, if the collosi numbers aren't at critical mass (5+) and its around even supply and even upgrades, I can beat my collosi opponent with immortal archon as long as I focus fire and have my archons in front to soak up damage. It normally turns into a stalker/few Collosi vs stalker immortal skeleton battle. Of course once it reaches critical mass nothing works like a collosi deathball

Of course you could be right, I'm barely in masters lol...

ckunkel1

United States181 Posts

January 31 2012 05:09 GMT

#10

I would tend to say that colossi are better as the game progresses just because of their range. In the early game it is probably much better to start of with immortals because the armies are mostly stalkers. However, as the game gets longer the unit mix tends to vary and colossi are just so easy to have at the back of the army dealing immense amounts of damage. It all depend on what unit composition your opponent is going though. The best composition might be just a mix of both.

fighter2_40

United States420 Posts

January 31 2012 05:30 GMT

#11

immortals are good against colossus if u can get in range to shoot the colossus. Generally immortals are shooting the stalkers/zealots and colossus kill stalker zealot faster than immortals.

DaemonX

545 Posts

January 31 2012 07:35 GMT

#12

The reason is what protoss have figured out the last season or two - having both is best.

You need at least some colossi or forcefields would be massive game changers. But quite apart from that, colossi splash damage is incomparable to anything else in the game except massed siege tanks. Your simulation does not take into account the sheer amount of damage being dealt when the colossi is facing a BALL rather than a thin line of (heavy shielded) units. In ball vs ball, each swipe of a colossus' lasers is doing hundreds of damage.

If the game was a weird 1 unit type on 1 unit type arena, then yeah immortals would win every time

That said, inclusion of immortals is fantastic, as they help degrade the high-value targets of the opponent at a similar rate to the light units. Immortals, especially since the range buff, can be used to target down opposing colossi, or just drop a tonne of pain on the opposing stalker count.

IMO you're silly to leave immortals out, but that doesn't mean they replace colossi.

Stropheum

United States1124 Posts

January 31 2012 08:07 GMT

#13

In an actual army composition, not just pure immortal vs pure colossi, the colossi deal more damage once the numbers get to 4+, maybe even sooner. The reason for this is that zealots, sentries, and stalkers all clump up really close, and one swipe from a colossus will deal more dps than an immortal blast, not to mention the overlapping fire from multiple colossi can one-shot multiple enemy units, drastically increasing the damage disparity with each volley, allowing your army to stay consistently larger than your opponent's.

That's pretty much all I have to say about that.

Sylailene

91 Posts

January 31 2012 14:25 GMT

#14

I love gateway archon immortal vs Colo builds, you just have to keep attacking to keep numbers low, Colo wise

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh