Immortal's shield triggered by......?

[LordPerenolde II]

Hi guys. I was thinking about opening a thread which may contain a list of the units that trigger the immortal's shield with their attacks. First of all is the Siege Tank as far as i know. Then......?

 

[Statharas]

Every unit that does more than 10 damage to it -.^? After it's shield is dead, puff. No more damage reduction.

 

[Dr Super Good]

The shield is basically there to cause damage wasteage. Damage wastage is horribale cause it makes a strong unit behave like a weak unit.

Example, a thor sufferes from horriable damage wastage (60 or something) when attacking an immortal. Other immortals will waste a lot of damage on each other as well. Marines on the other hand have no damage wastage at all (although the shield armor does reduce their damage substantially).

Thus immortalls are weakest against units with low damage per hit units, and strongest against high damage per hit units.

An exception I hear is where maurders can counter immortals when stimmed despite damage wastage due to high attack rate.

 

[PurplePoot]

Marauders don't counter Immortals. Keep in mind that in addition to their Hardened Shield (every attack deals min(damage,10) instead of just damage) they do +30 damage vs armoured. In fact, except against very high-damage units like Thors and Siege Tanks (both of which do 40 less damage to Immortals) the Immortal really shouldn't be tanking, just dealing damage from the back.

 

[LordPerenolde II]

Then? Every unit that deal more than 10 damage triggers the shield??

 

[Dr Super Good]

Acording to purple, every unit triggers the shield. Just on marines it is a damage increase while on thors it is a major damage wastage.

 

[PurplePoot]

No, that isn't a damage increase. Marines do 6 damage: min(6,10) is 6. Thors do 30*2 damage: min(30,10)*2 is 10*2 = 20 damage as opposed to 60. Siege tanks do 50 damage: min(50,10) is 10 damage as opposed to 50, and so on.

Note that this is after shield armour, so if immortals have 3 shield upgrades a tank would do min(50-3,10) = 10 damage (no less!) compared to an immortal with 0 shield armour.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Oh you provided it as a formula. It is dangerous to mix words and formulas as I tried to read it as english lol.

 

[Rispetto]

So in essence.. still use high damage units, seeing as how the higher the damage they cause the more damage will actually reach the immortal? (not speaking of anything like a marine, under 10 damage).

Or.. what's the best counter? I'm thinking 1 immortal vs 1 ______.

I like Battlecraft, kay? xP

 

[Mechanical Man]

What about if the Immortal has 1 point of shield, how is damage then dealt? Since the shield regenerates constantly, it is often it has at least 1 point.

 

[PurplePoot]

Shields don't regenerate constantly. They regenerate quickly but only when out of combat. I don't know how Hardened Shields works for less than 10 shields, though.

As for Immortals, the best answer is units with high DPS but low damage per attack, and/or light units. The former because they will still maximize their damage against the Immortal, and the latter because they won't take +30 from it. Obviously the Battlecruiser is the ultimate unit to beat them, and Yamato Cannon even ignores the special Hardened Shield reduction so it leaves them at 0 shields 50 life.

 

[Rispetto]

Zerglings counter immortals as well, more so than marines I would think. The simple fact that lings are produced in 2s allows them to maximize effective time DPSing the target, seeing as how one can die and the other can still DPS. The HP of a marine and ling are not too far off.

 

[PurplePoot]

I could equally say that it's a disadvantage since their DPS is cut in half rather rapidly.

 

[Rispetto]

I could equally say that it's a disadvantage since their DPS is cut in half rather rapidly.

2 lings vs 1 marine, who wins?
Nuff said. Pros outnumber cons of having lings.

 

[PurplePoot]

60 adrenalings vs 30 stimmed/shielded marines, who wins?

That aside, you cannot compare their performance against each other to their performance against other units.

 

[LordPerenolde II]

I still don't get it. maybe i don't know about these acronyms like DPS(HP is ok) or whatever.

 

[PurplePoot]

DPS is damage per second.

 

[mrzwach]

2 lings vs 1 marine, who wins?
Nuff said. Pros outnumber cons of having lings.

You do know that the effectiveness of marines increases as you add more marines much faster than the effectiveness of zlings? :\

 

[Devious_Machine]

2 lings vs 1 marine i believe the lings win (depends on who gets the first strike, meaning does the marine shoot at them b4 they get in range or do the lings get the jump on him) but the situation of 60 lings vs 30 stimmed marines, the marines would win hands down due to their ranges attacks.

 

[TKF]

I think the immortals sucks now as they only have 100 shield points and how often do we see tank vs immortal situations alone, there is always other units messing up the situation make makes the immortal suckage in combat.

I had much greater expectations after watching the blizzard movie, in multiplayer it's a different story, they get ripped off like nothing and that hard shields is a joke. It would have been better if they had less hp and more shield points so this could have been a little more useful.

 

[PurplePoot]

Hardened shields aren't why immortals are awesome vs tanks and such. It's their +30 damage.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Half of immortals awesomeness is their hardened shield, wasting over 60 damage from thors is pretty major and no other unit can do that. Even siegetanks get huge damage wastage against immortals.
The other half is their insane anti armored damage. Although their fire rate is low, they still have pretty good DPS against armored (void rays will still deal more against armored when fully charged).

This is why they are pretty much the ultimate anti land armored unit.

Like mentioned, their shield capacity is rather low for their price (so is their durability). Thus against units that deal around 10 damage (so wastage is 0) they are extreemly poor. Additionally against non armored units their DPS is pretty low for their price. Air to land also thrashes them for the logical reason of no AA attack.

They are very good against ultralisks, thors (lots of wasted damage and deal a lot of damage). They are weak against zealots, zerglings and marine units (no bonous damage, nearly no wasted damage).

 

[PurplePoot]

They reduce thor damage by 40 (and ignore all damage upgrades from it), not "over 60".

 

[Statharas]

When an immortal is at less than 10 shields, lets say.. 5, the damage dealt is 5+(Original Damage*0.5). I think so at least.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Ok, the exact shield specs are as follows.

The hardened shield behaviour reduces all non spell damage that is atleast 10 damage to 10 damage .
The harden shield behaviour only works while the unit's shield is greater than or equal to 1.

Combining these in reality means that shots that kill the immortal shield will deal atmost 10 damage and as such the maximum damage an immortal can take to life when having its shield broken by a non spell damage source is 9 damage (cause it must have atleast 1 shield which will reduce damage by 1).
If an immortal has 1 shield, and takes 1337 non spell damage, it will lose 9 life. If it had 2 shield it would have lost only 8 life.
If an immortal has 0 shield and takes 1337 non spell damage or it takes 1337 spell damage at full shield/health, it will die.

PurplePoot, I am sorry for the incorrect value but I was using the campaign attack for the thor which is 45 base hitting twice (atleast in the quick test I ran). Infact in that case it is atleast 70 damage wasted (more with upgrades) which is more than the value I orignally gave. As you pointed out the skirmish version of the thor has only 30 damage an attack so immortals will waste only 40 damage (30 less than the immortals in the campaign did).