|
I have been tossing this around to my toss friends and even they aren't 100% sure on this so I put the tag up there open for discussion if this isn't set in stone at all.
So in their basic sense, High Templar and Colossi both sort-of fill the same niche as the big splash, area of effect damage units. They require very different tech paths as well. Any thoughts on what situations call for either one or what builds would transition easier to one or the other would be appreciated
some basic considerations:
1. Feedback: High Templar have Feedback which burns energy and does damage.
2. Energy: High Templar have a limited use for their abilities as they are limited by energy, colossi do not
3. Counters: Colossi have some very hard counters like vikings or corrupters that can be a pain.
4. Robo tech vs Twilight council: In long enough games you usually end up with both, but the one you get first will make a large effect on the unit of choice.
so Protoss players, what circumstances do you use Colossi or High Templar?
|
Beyonder
Netherlands15103 Posts
I generally prefer storm over colossi. Because colossi makes my opponent to go anti air and subsequently hard counter my stuff. My storm however is rarely ever hard counterd: i can still spread my storms versus ghosts, for example. And the ability to warp them in is just so crucial to defending multiple bases. Another reason is that I really, really enjoy speed zealots. They are highly effective, and cheap. And you have the additional possibility of storm harass [well, you need a robo for that, but no full tech at least]. U truly feel that the hightemplar (cq storm) is underappreciated in this game.
The only time I favor colossi might be in PvP, but that's not always the case either. Depends a bit what my opponent goes.
|
Against Zerg I prefer HT build because Robo pushes aren't very effective against them. They rarely mass roaches and even if they did, 4 gate would work better. Also warp in storm after upgrades is a life saver for expos. Even more, I honestly have had great success with archons vs zerg as well.
Against Terran it is tricky, so far I favor HT. I still make robo for counter drops etc, but again I feel like storm has won more fights than colossi in this matchup. I also like them to snipe ravens to prevent pdd. That things just nullifies stalkers completely.
Against Protoss I think colossi are better. There are less Air to Air threats to it in this matchup, and the access to the max range is very strong. They work like siege tanks to force a fight if they do not have colossi. Oddly enough though, I think ht/archons is good versus colossi build.
Overall I favor HT, but colossi are easier to use until you get the hang of it.
|
I hardly ever go strom colossi just seems to work much better for me
|
I play both toss and zerg, and I find storm harder to deal with as zerg unless I have very good positioning before the fight begins. Against collossi, I can usually pick off a couple with corruptors before even engaging with my ground forces, which can ruin the toss player's push.
I don't honestly run into HT tech too often, which might be part of the reason I don't deal with it as well. Definitely seems viable though...
Edit: Wanted to add that I absolutely crush any protoss that go archons. imho, you are much better served only doing that when your HTs are oom. They just don't seem to do enough to justify morphing them before the fight even begins.
|
Sorry, don't mean to sound dickish, but I wrote up basically this exact thread not 2 days ago (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128582). That being said, all of my thoughts can be found in that thread.
However, to sum them up, I find that High Templar tend to take more of a support role, allowing the rest of your forces to become more efficient, while Colossi take the role of the linchpin of your army, to be supported by the rest of your units, and, while Colossi themselves can be quite cost effective, they do not very well serve to support your army (as your army is actually supporting the Colossi). For me, this differentiation makes High Templar more favored in PvT matchups, while Colossi tend to have more use in PvZ.
|
Why not both? Maybe one before the other, but with an extended game and your opponent possibly getting anti-air to handle colossi, throwing a HT or four into your army composition can't hurt.
|
I believe colossi are much more safe because they dont rely on perfect micro. Too many times i have lost a game because i went HTs and my storms failed to kill all I should have killed with em, maybe because they dont do enough damage. (marauders refuse to die to storms XD)
But having both colossi and storm makes your army almost unstoppable. So it might be very good option to consider if the game goes to late game and you are afraid to lose your army if you go on offensive.
What works great in PvZ is going collosi while taking your natural and go HTs while taking your third. If you happen to saturate your third, you'll have a deadly force almost impossible for the zerg to stop, and HTs can help protect your colossi against corrupters with feedback.
|
On June 02 2010 03:46 gdroxor wrote:
Why not both?
The tech to Colossi:
Gateway (150)
Cybernetics Core (150)
Robotic's Facility (200/100)
Robotic's Bay (200/200)
Total: 700/300
The tech to High Templar:
Gateway (150)
Cybernetics Core (150)
Twilight Council (150/100)
Templar Archives (150/200)
Total: 600/300
Combined Total: (subtracting cost of double Core/Gateway): 1000/600
Not to mention the time to build all of that.
Unless you're not planning on making any units until around 10 minutes into the game, I think you'd better pick a tech to start first.
EDIT: Ah, just read your edit.
Yes, in the late-late game, both High Templar and Colossi can be quite an effective composition, as High Templar make other units more cost effective (playing a support role), and Colossi are incredibly cost effective as a focal point of your army. But when you factor in all the tech required (plus the upgrades/research), it's only really viable if you're mining 3 bases. You might be able to pull two-basing this, but only if you're willing to take a fairly high risk and cut quite significantly into your gateway-produced forces.
Again, I have this all written up in the other thread, but I'll briefly explain my build and why I feel it is useful (and relevant to this discussion)>.
A Gateway-produced army (Zealots/Stalkers/Sentries) can be incredibly mobile, versatile, and powerful. When Charge or Blink (or both) is researched, your army becomes even more powerful, and even more mobile. For that reason, I typically choose to go from 3gate+robo (for observers, and immortals are made only as I feel absolutely necessary), and either push, or leave them to defend and safely expand. When on 2 bases, I start producing for 4 gates and get a Twilight Council. By then, I am typically 1-1 on upgrades, and the council lets me start my second attack upgrade. Also by then, I have had a few Observers out doing quite a lot of scouting. It is at this point that I decide which tech path I want to take: High Templar or Colossi.
I have run into the argument that I am vulnerable to certain pushes, since I get my third-tier tech so late, but with Charge and/or Blink and numerous upgrades for my ground units, I feel like I am fairly secure. Additionally, the mobility of a full-gateway army allows me to expand somewhat safely.
The other thing I like about my build is that if, by the time I get a third base, I decide to get both Colossi and High Templar, I am more than equipped to do so. I need only to get one tech building and one upgrade.
|
I prefer Colossi for the sole reason they are just more consistent. Two hits from a colossus does about as much damage as a storm would do(not absolute obviously, but its rare a storm does the full 80). I think a buff to archons would push me to favor templar but right now i believe colossi just have the slight edge.
They are also cheaper to tech to and you get observers.
|
On June 02 2010 03:50 Seltsam wrote:The tech to Colossi: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Robotic's Facility (200/100) Robotic's Bay (200/200) Total: 700/300 The tech to High Templar: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Twilight Council (150/100) Templar Archives (150/200) Total: 600/300 Combined Total: 1300/600 .
Don't have to build two cyber cores. Unless you're going to also build stargates and get double upgrades for air!
|
On June 02 2010 03:53 WhistlingMtn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2010 03:50 Seltsam wrote:On June 02 2010 03:46 gdroxor wrote:
Why not both? The tech to Colossi: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Robotic's Facility (200/100) Robotic's Bay (200/200) Total: 700/300 The tech to High Templar: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Twilight Council (150/100) Templar Archives (150/200) Total: 600/300 Combined Total: 1300/600 . Don't have to build two cyber cores. Unless you're going to also build stargates and get double upgrades for air!
Ah ha!
Good catch!
My apologies; the post has been modified to incorporate the corrections Mr. WhistlingMtn has so kindly provided.
|
Colos better to start then when they get AA go HT's and they will mass a bunch of units that are worthless. then later in game switch back to a few Colos. But colos first into HT's
|
On June 02 2010 03:50 Seltsam wrote:The tech to Colossi: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Robotic's Facility (200/100) Robotic's Bay (200/200) Total: 700/300 The tech to High Templar: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Twilight Council (150/100) Templar Archives (150/200) Total: 600/300 Combined Total: (subtracting cost of double Core/Gateway): 1000/600 Not to mention the time to build all of that. Unless you're not planning on making any units until around 10 minutes into the game, I think you'd better pick a tech to start first. EDIT: Ah, just read your edit. Yes, in the late-late game, both High Templar and Colossi can be quite an effective composition, as High Templar make other units more cost effective (playing a support role), and Colossi are incredibly cost effective as a focal point of your army. But when you factor in all the tech required (plus the upgrades/research), it's only really viable if you're mining 3 bases. You might be able to pull two-basing this, but only if you're willing to take a fairly high risk and cut quite significantly into your gateway-produced forces. Again, I have this all written up in the other thread, but I'll briefly explain my build and why I feel it is useful (and relevant to this discussion)>. A Gateway-produced army (Zealots/Stalkers/Sentries) can be incredibly mobile, versatile, and powerful. When Charge or Blink (or both) is researched, your army becomes even more powerful, and even more mobile. For that reason, I typically choose to go from 3gate+robo (for observers, and immortals are made only as I feel absolutely necessary), and either push, or leave them to defend and safely expand. When on 2 bases, I start producing for 4 gates and get a Twilight Council. By then, I am typically 1-1 on upgrades, and the council lets me start my second attack upgrade. Also by then, I have had a few Observers out doing quite a lot of scouting. It is at this point that I decide which tech path I want to take: High Templar or Colossi. I have run into the argument that I am vulnerable to certain pushes, since I get my third-tier tech so late, but with Charge and/or Blink and numerous upgrades for my ground units, I feel like I am fairly secure. Additionally, the mobility of a full-gateway army allows me to expand somewhat safely. The other thing I like about my build is that if, by the time I get a third base, I decide to get both Colossi and High Templar, I am more than equipped to do so. I need only to get one tech building and one upgrade.
What I like about transitioning from one to both is how well the tech trees compliment each other. There are very few games where I don't get Charge and at least a couple observers and/or an early-ish Immortal, so I always end up one building away from getting either, anyway. But my playstyle is similar, I end up teching just slightly later than usual as well.
|
On June 02 2010 04:06 gdroxor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2010 03:50 Seltsam wrote:On June 02 2010 03:46 gdroxor wrote:
Why not both? The tech to Colossi: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Robotic's Facility (200/100) Robotic's Bay (200/200) Total: 700/300 The tech to High Templar: Gateway (150) Cybernetics Core (150) Twilight Council (150/100) Templar Archives (150/200) Total: 600/300 Combined Total: (subtracting cost of double Core/Gateway): 1000/600 Not to mention the time to build all of that. Unless you're not planning on making any units until around 10 minutes into the game, I think you'd better pick a tech to start first. EDIT: Ah, just read your edit. Yes, in the late-late game, both High Templar and Colossi can be quite an effective composition, as High Templar make other units more cost effective (playing a support role), and Colossi are incredibly cost effective as a focal point of your army. But when you factor in all the tech required (plus the upgrades/research), it's only really viable if you're mining 3 bases. You might be able to pull two-basing this, but only if you're willing to take a fairly high risk and cut quite significantly into your gateway-produced forces. Again, I have this all written up in the other thread, but I'll briefly explain my build and why I feel it is useful (and relevant to this discussion)>. A Gateway-produced army (Zealots/Stalkers/Sentries) can be incredibly mobile, versatile, and powerful. When Charge or Blink (or both) is researched, your army becomes even more powerful, and even more mobile. For that reason, I typically choose to go from 3gate+robo (for observers, and immortals are made only as I feel absolutely necessary), and either push, or leave them to defend and safely expand. When on 2 bases, I start producing for 4 gates and get a Twilight Council. By then, I am typically 1-1 on upgrades, and the council lets me start my second attack upgrade. Also by then, I have had a few Observers out doing quite a lot of scouting. It is at this point that I decide which tech path I want to take: High Templar or Colossi. I have run into the argument that I am vulnerable to certain pushes, since I get my third-tier tech so late, but with Charge and/or Blink and numerous upgrades for my ground units, I feel like I am fairly secure. Additionally, the mobility of a full-gateway army allows me to expand somewhat safely. The other thing I like about my build is that if, by the time I get a third base, I decide to get both Colossi and High Templar, I am more than equipped to do so. I need only to get one tech building and one upgrade. What I like about transitioning from one to both is how well the tech trees compliment each other. There are very few games where I don't get Charge and at least a couple observers and/or an early-ish Immortal, so I always end up one building away from getting either, anyway. But my playstyle is similar, I end up teching just slightly later than usual as well.
Yes. Clearly we are in total agreement!
As long as you're comfortable working with just tier 1/1.5 units for a slightly extended period (and if you play Protoss, I feel like you should definitely be comfortable doing that), then the slightly later tech offers no actual disadvantage.
And I also tend to favor Charge (and the second level of upgrades), particularly in macro games. Even in games that focus heavily on harassment, I really like having Blink. So I completely agree that they complement each other nicely.
|
It really depends on what you're trying to do with the rest of your build. IMO, the biggest consideration in collosi vs HT is how soon you need observers.
In PvP, it's generally best to go for collosi. Storm isn't as effective against high-HP P units, storm hits your zealots, and you need robo fairly early or you'll risk losing to mid-game DT's.
In PvT, it really depends how you get there. I often like to open with void rays which forces marines and vikings, and slows ghost tech. Against this composition, HT are an obvious choice. If you prefer to open with an immortal push or like to make a lot of sentries (prime ghost-bait), collosi might be a better choice.
In PvZ, they're both good options. I usually open with a lot of zealots for early pressure, so I tend to open robo so I can deal with a roach push and so I don't have to worry about storming my zealots. If you're worried about mutas, HT might be a better choice. Storms hit air, but more importantly, HT tech opens up blink which is critical against mutas.
|
ht AND dts require more skill to beat, cauz muta sniping isnt that easy as colossi targetting with corrupter, and also keeping overseer alive is harder for Z, trust me :D
|
On June 02 2010 04:52 graphene wrote:
ht AND dts require more skill to beat, cauz muta sniping isnt that easy as colossi targetting with corrupter, and also keeping overseer alive is harder for Z, trust me :D
also takes more skill for the toss to pull off well
|
Well, as a diamond player i've never used HT ever. Always collossi. Archive tech is useless. I've never seen a player get HT vs me either. I'm also pretty high % and rank every patch so bash if you want, i just think that HT are utterly useless.
|
On June 02 2010 05:24 AddictedDwarf wrote:
Well, as a diamond player i've never used HT ever. Always collossi. Archive tech is useless. I've never seen a player get HT vs me either. I'm also pretty high % and rank every patch so bash if you want, i just think that HT are utterly useless.
Well between all matchups, using templar PvP is far less effective given Protoss units' much higher base health. Also robotics builds are just way too popular right now and people are sticking to what works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
