archons arnt bad as everyone think. in pvz for example i see toss players making like 20+ templars at times to storm the shit out of me. usually im able to dodge them to the point my entire army doesnt get wiped out but im still barely left with any units after all the storms. in those situations im still able to hold off there army because they rly dont have many units left either usually. so they just retreat till they can gain energy back for storm and regroup.
BUT if they simply merged all those templar into archons they would be able to easily clean me up after those storms. zergs entire army is bio and archons do insane dmg to bio. even zerg buildings are bio. archons work very well in zvp honestly. but luckily no one has caught on to this yet otherwise zvp would get alot harder.
archons also are pretty damn good against ultras. its a simple matter of actually recycling the templars after they exhausted energy on storms instead of rushing to templars and instantly making archons soon as the templars warp in...
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates.
I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast.
A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p
You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs.
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates.
I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast.
A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p
You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs.
ToxNub, In the Nicest possible way; You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Archons would be alot better if Ranged units weren't so good in this game. Zerg gets tons of Hydras PvZ, which are good vs Archons. Terran is still pretty much a nightmare for Archons to. EMP does 100 damage in a single shot to them, plus ALL Terran armies consist of stuff like Marine Marauder Tank, which rapes them.
Zealots can do alright vs ranged stuff because of Charge, but Archon's can't close the distance like that. IMO the best thing to do would be to give Archons some sort of spell. Archons would be great if they could cast Maelstrom, for example lol
Archons are amazing vs zerg, but are more "janitors" than "core units". I call them janitors, because after a large battle againts a roach/hydra mix, the archons clean up any roach or hydra that are left with little hp after the storms. The only time I ever morphed 2 DTs into an archon was when two of my DTs were very low on hp and I actually noticed it, and morphed them to "save" them.
Note: If I want to make archons, Id rather spend the 50 extra gas for 2 HTs and save 200 minerals and use it to warp in 2 zealots. Plus as I mentioned, there are basicly very few instances where it's worth morphing DTs into archons.
they cost 100/300, making them one of the most expensive units in the game, and they take the time of two templars and the archon time to create. Going for archons for the purpose of archons is not viable, but after you finish storming, getting archons out is a great way to clean up.
i was doing a lot of thinking about it and i think archons would actually be useful in a matchup if they were considered massive units. that way in PvP they can be used to bust through forcefields.
This in theory is great! but rarely do we see people tech to both templar types. It isn't practical to develop so much midtier (especially when immortals and colossi are almost a requirement). You'd basically never have enough for both the templar archives and the dark shrine.
On July 18 2010 15:59 Brokengamer wrote: Archons will soon be popular for countering ultralisks. They might be useless now but sit tight and watch as how the metagame shifts.
Yeah I agree to this 100%. This thread is over a month old, the meta game has changed. A large advantage of the Archon is that its only unit type is Psionic, which means they take very little damage from an ultralisk, and they do well against roaches and lings. An archon can tank Ultras REALLY well, and the splash is useful against roach ling.
On July 18 2010 14:52 PhiliBiRD wrote: rofl stomped by EMP?
you realize it takes 4 emps to completely remove an archons shield.
Several people already commented on how it takes 4 EMPs a month ago, and the original discussion on this was about going mass Archons. 4 Emps removes the shield of 1 solo archon, or 6 clumped up archons.
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates.
I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast.
A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p
You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs.
Is that so?
Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps
If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo or a marauder. I think for cost, marauder might come out barely on top assuming splashing 1 unit, but roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4 hits. They also decimate lings, leaving your zealots and stalkers, who do crap damage to lings, more time to focus on roach, and they can attack air, unlike either of the other 2 units. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^
On June 02 2010 05:50 tarsier wrote: they get roflstomped by emp... because emping the same unit 4 times is made of win?
Yes, when that unit has 10 HP after doing so. Wouldn't you?
um no.
waste 4 emps on a single archon? ...really?
His post about EMP leaving Archons with 10 HP is in regards to how come mass Archons versus Terran in BW could work quite well sometimes, but essentially never works in SC2. No one is suggesting you burn all of a Ghosts energy EMPing one Archon. If Terran is facing a Bio/Templar army, and is surprised with Archons in SC2, its as simple as building some Ghosts (which you should already have given how early you can get them in SC2) and spamming EMP, as stated above spamming EMP on an army of Archons will decimate it, and is far from a poor use of EMP.
In BW unless the Terran purposely went for a Sci Lab tech build it would require building that, then the Covert Ops add-on and then getting Ghosts. This is the primary reason that making it look like you're going a Templar army only to get Archons in BW was viable and could work in a number of situations versus Terran.
That said I do not believe the Archon should be as under-valued in PvP or PvZ battles, as it is still a good unit versus those races.
You know that SC1 ghosts didn't have EMP, right? And archons were terrible in PvT in BW. Under all possible sircumstances.
You know under all circumstances i really cant agree with that statement.
I think archons are absolutely great in SC2, granted my templar die most of the time before i can warp them in, but when i do they provide pretty decent DPS, since they get the +25(i think?) damage against bio which is what most terrans army consists of
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates.
I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast.
A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p
You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs.
Is that so?
Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps
If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo and marauder. Roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^
just a heads up here but dps got nothing to do with anything of what counters what. its 100 times more complicated than that afaik archons splash is 1 radius and that isnt gonna reach another roach from a roach, not sure tho archons r horrible and have so little use in the game. they say they wanna only use necessary units for sc2 and not lurker but still they keep archon which literally noone who is top tier makes unless they get out or energy and wants something juicy and temporary remove archon or buff it is my vote, would be totally badass if they moved feedback from ht to archon for a starter so this ht isnt some kind of mighty master with no counter
On July 18 2010 16:27 SoMuchBetter wrote: id personally rather keep my dt and empty templars rather than waste them by turning them into a completely useless unit
yes thats pretty much how most ppl would say too. making archon its kinda like EMPing and go out of energy and say, alright lets run to the frontline and tank my marines because this ghost is useless now
On June 02 2010 10:37 indczn wrote: Ill fess up, I use archons just about every pvt and pvz. They are really good bridge while researching storm/energy upgrade. Zealot/Archon/sentry holds off most annoying terran bio attacks, is a good followup after 10gate pressure on a zerg xp. Archons are definitely useful, tanky, do good damage to bio, and are available before storm, and open up the templar tech tree, which in other threads, people are conflicted on which is better. Being cheap on minerals allows for more XP, more zealots, more warpgates.
I think archon/zealot is the hardest counter to the roach in the game. It is stupid how effective archon + zealot is at killing roaches. They are also THE best damage absorber in the game if you are able to micro them since they can regenerate their entire enormous health pool, and they are quite fast.
A raiding party with a couple of archons that never overcommits is a very strong force. But it's cool, none of you have to use them, I'll make it my signature build :p
You obviously have no idea what yo'ure talking about if you think archon/zealot is a harder counter to roaches than Immortals or stimmed marauders with medivacs.
Is that so?
Immortal does 50 damage per 1.45 sec = 34.5 dps Marauder stimmed does 20 damage per 1.5 sec (x2 stimmed) = 26.66 dps Archon does 35 dmg per 1.75 sec (splash) = 20 dps
If the archon splash hits even 1 other roach, you deal more DPS than an immo or a marauder. I think for cost, marauder might come out barely on top assuming splashing 1 unit, but roaches in clumps easily can result in 3-4 hits. They also decimate lings, leaving your zealots and stalkers, who do crap damage to lings, more time to focus on roach, and they can attack air, unlike either of the other 2 units. I guess you guys just know everything tho, so you should probably ignore my comment. ^^
Doesn't matter if they splash, archon range isn't anywhere near that of a Marauder, and the DPS is much less than an Immortal. Roaches are a direct COUNTER to zealots, especially since they can just burrow and run feature to regen HP after battle. Archon splash is virtually negligible when it comes to Roaches, no you don't deal more DPS. Marauders also have slow.
Your entire comments concerning lings and air are incredibly stupid because you were talking about the "hardest counter to roaches." You're wrong, clearly, and yes, I'm nearly positive I know much more than you.
On July 18 2010 15:59 Brokengamer wrote: Archons will soon be popular for countering ultralisks. They might be useless now but sit tight and watch as how the metagame shifts.
Also: those who have been saying that ultralisks are still useless must have been living under a rock
again that goes back to the original statement that archons are just a way to convert your spent temps into something that's immediately useful rather than a direct counter.
On June 02 2010 05:44 TheAngelofDeath wrote: So, after running numerous tests on the unit tester with the Archon. It pretty much dismantles anything in large quantities. + Show Spoiler +
The exception being the carrier, and broodlords. The topic is short, but I haven't seen a dedicated topic about the Archon so....why all the hatred towards this unit? What is it that makes the Archon so terrible?? I've used it in real game and it holds up just fine, so why is it that it's never used much at all?
Thank you, I'm glad there's a topic for that. In late game turtling toss with enough cannons and max out archon ball is quite hard to stop. He'll just walk around the mighty archon ball to each enemy base one by one and destroy them. As zerg you could waste a couple of full waves to this walking wall, or lose your bases before catching them (carriers and BLs are slow).
EPT
