EPTI'll help you with Terran - Page 2
| Blogs > Type|NarutO |
|
pRodg
Jordan5 Posts
| ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
| ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:00 Blasterion wrote: I have trouble making my Siege Tank hold ground against Protoss Charges =/ EMP, Hellions I think I've tried them all What's there to just wall down a incoming protoss army? I sometimes come out ahead but the Second wave of warp ins just do me in. I don't play mech against Protoss, nor does anyone I know. Even GoOdy gave up on mech vs Protoss. I'm not saying its not valid, but to most Terrans it seems just like that. So I'd like to help you but I can't. I think tanks are a terrible unit in TvP because they are too weak unsieged and too immobile sieged. You can never force an engagement with tanks in your army, while with bio you can. | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:02 Type|NarutO wrote: I don't play mech against Protoss, nor does anyone I know. Even GoOdy gave up on mech vs Protoss. I'm not saying its not valid, but to most Terrans it seems just like that. So I'd like to help you but I can't. I think tanks are a terrible unit in TvP because they are too weak unsieged and too immobile sieged. You can never force an engagement with tanks in your army, while with bio you can. Then that just means I have to be more courageous than GoOdy, I like it. I think I'll add more thor count to my composition maybe that will help it hold up better against Templar-Zealot-Archon armies. With EMP of course. Maybe some banshees might help. But where can I get all that gas..... | ||
|
Angel_
United States1617 Posts
I've been doing a 1-1-1 variation in every match-up (never all-in, unless I scout that that's just going to be a great idea) to focus on specific things. Basically what I want to know is, in your opinion, at what point should the fact that I'm using a sub-standard build actually force me to use something else, or rather, at what point should I say "Yeah this is good for mechanics and thinking and getting the most out of your units and practicing reacting and positioning and everything else, but it's time to start using different builds"? There, not much rambling. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:12 Angel_ wrote: So, I'm midway through diamond now, and I might ramble to outline this question. I've been doing a 1-1-1 variation in every match-up (never all-in, unless I scout that that's just going to be a great idea) to focus on specific things. Basically what I want to know is, in your opinion, at what point should the fact that I'm using a sub-standard build actually force me to use something else, or rather, at what point should I say "Yeah this is good for mechanics and thinking and getting the most out of your units and practicing reacting and positioning and everything else, but it's time to start using different builds"? There, not much rambling. I think the only disadvantage in playing only one sort of builds is that you will get very predictable. One of the strength of Terran is that they have an insane variety of builds they can use and that actually work. If you are fine with 1-1-1 openings its absolutely valid on every level. It only hurts you as you won't have experience with other builds that are probably called 'better'. If a build is good or not is usually very depending on the map and how its played. 1-1-1 against Terran usually is not a bad choice as its very adaptable and you can take your expansion after as well. Against Protoss I'd say you will put yourself economically behind, but some variations of 1-1-1 that involve an expansion or even double-expansion after that can work and your transition should be the standard game. Against Zerg I don't really like is as much, even though you can do damage it is very rare that such a build deals damage and if you don't get damage off with such a build against Zerg you will put yourself economically behind in such a big way, that you won't come back. Overall I'd still say, try to play as economically as possible and make it your standard, but eventually still play those 1-1-1 variations you like so much from time to time. It makes you less predictable and an overall better player. | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:20 Type|NarutO wrote: I think the only disadvantage in playing only one sort of builds is that you will get very predictable. One of the strength of Terran is that they have an insane variety of builds they can use and that actually work. If you are fine with 1-1-1 openings its absolutely valid on every level. It only hurts you as you won't have experience with other builds that are probably called 'better'. If a build is good or not is usually very depending on the map and how its played. 1-1-1 against Terran usually is not a bad choice as its very adaptable and you can take your expansion after as well. Against Protoss I'd say you will put yourself economically behind, but some variations of 1-1-1 that involve an expansion or even double-expansion after that can work and your transition should be the standard game. Against Zerg I don't really like is as much, even though you can do damage it is very rare that such a build deals damage and if you don't get damage off with such a build against Zerg you will put yourself economically behind in such a big way, that you won't come back. Overall I'd still say, try to play as economically as possible and make it your standard, but eventually still play those 1-1-1 variations you like so much from time to time. It makes you less predictable and an overall better player. What's the likelihood that I will die trying to double expand while I send some cloaked banshees to greet the toss? | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:21 Blasterion wrote: What's the likelihood that I will die trying to double expand while I send some cloaked banshees to greet the toss? As far as I experienced, if the Protoss is going for that standard 1 gate fast expansion, very low. | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On March 21 2012 11:24 Type|NarutO wrote: As far as I experienced, if the Protoss is going for that standard 1 gate fast expansion, very low. I think I must start Banshee attacking protoss more often then. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
 ! | ||
|
GTPGlitch
5061 Posts
1-I've noticed a pattern in most of my games, where when I take control of the center of the map (mainly antiga and entombed), it becomes a lot easier for my opponents to be aggressive since I become focused on keeping 'map control' (also happens in reverse sometimes). Do you think control of the center is really all that critical in TvT, or is it better to be constantly aggressive and forcing a reaction from your opponent? 2-How many mech units does it take to make it cost-ineffective to uproot the group? I like splintering mech into groups of 3-4 tanks and some hellions (sometimes with viking support) to pull enemy forces back and forth. Unfortunately, some of the mech groups don't seem to be especially cost-effective (lacking critical mass, one might say). I know that mech is meant to play ballish, but what would be the best way to play in a split manner? Thanks muchly ^____________^ | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 13:17 Active.815 wrote: Hey Naruto, this I've got a few TvT questions~ 1-I've noticed a pattern in most of my games, where when I take control of the center of the map (mainly antiga and entombed), it becomes a lot easier for my opponents to be aggressive since I become focused on keeping 'map control' (also happens in reverse sometimes). Do you think control of the center is really all that critical in TvT, or is it better to be constantly aggressive and forcing a reaction from your opponent? 2-How many mech units does it take to make it cost-ineffective to uproot the group? I like splintering mech into groups of 3-4 tanks and some hellions (sometimes with viking support) to pull enemy forces back and forth. Unfortunately, some of the mech groups don't seem to be especially cost-effective (lacking critical mass, one might say). I know that mech is meant to play ballish, but what would be the best way to play in a split manner? Thanks muchly ^____________^ 1) For entombed valley I really don't think the center control is AS important, but it helps. If you move your army there and do nothing with it, obviously that doesn't help you all that much. You can move it there, if he sees it you can leave one marine at the tower and move your army. You don't need to babysit the tower with all of your army. Sensor towers are very important in TvT, also if you keep the towers with your army, don't shy away from building a few more turrets than needed to be secured. There are maps where its more important to keep center control, Antiga is a good example. If you ever have control of the center getting a 4th base is so much harder or actually doing anything is insanely hard. You don't need to sit there sieged, sit there unsieged, if he attacks you you will know early enough to siege up and you can move your army in position into 4 different directions, he cannout outmove you. Add sensor towers / turrets to that and you are basically unattackable, even more frustrating against a mech - terran. 2) I am not much of a mech player, but I'd suggest to not be offensive with small groups of mech. If you want to attack, attack with a big army and leave a few spread out units (tanks) back home to defend in key locations, but don't attack with small groups of tanks/marines if you know the Terran has an army that is actually a threat to you. If a mech player donates small amounts of units, its always a huge victory for the bio player. | ||
|
Sergio1992
Italy522 Posts
1- do you think that mech is viable in higher leagues(masters, gm) against zerg? 2- what do you mean by "crisp mechanics" in tvp? I read somewhere one of your post when you said that the terran who doesn't have crisp mechanics will die. What do you mean? Good micro? | ||
|
Recognizable
Netherlands1552 Posts
| ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 19:25 Sergio1992 wrote: Hi, 1- do you think that mech is viable in higher leagues(masters, gm) against zerg? 2- what do you mean by "crisp mechanics" in tvp? I read somewhere one of your post when you said that the terran who doesn't have crisp mechanics will die. What do you mean? Good micro? 1 - Yes. Absolutely viable, if not even better than bio in some situations and maps. 2 - You need absolute spot on unit control and macro behind it. If you can kill an entire army in a good trade, but you didn't macro behind it, you will probably die. If you macro well, but lose all your units without gaining anything out of it, you will die as well. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2012 21:26 Recognizable wrote: Could you walk me through your TvP gameplan and build ^^? I am usually going for a gasless fast expansion. While I do so, I do scout what Protoss is doing. Usually on my level they are going for a 1 gas 1 gate fast expansion build and I will play a completely standard game. I will add two barracks and after that I'll add two gases and tech to medivacs. You can usually move out with your first two medivacs if he's going robo or a non-agressive gateway (double-forge) style. While you do so, you can add two more barracks and after that a 3rd base. While all this happens you need to do something , apply pressure, drop but don't overcommit. By now you should know if he's going colossi or double-forge style or some sort of mix. Usually they'll open with colossi, so I get another starport for viking production, otherwise I'll add a second ebay and a ghost academy. TvP is a lot about what style the Protoss is using and who well you adjust or when to adjust. If you can read timings or their game plan, you can adjust properly. Since Protoss can switch tech easily when on multiple bases, you are best off to either macro well and head for a good army composition like a lot of ghosts early, or try to pull him out of position and have good drops. | ||
|
Sergio1992
Italy522 Posts
On March 22 2012 07:02 Type|NarutO wrote: 1 - Yes. Absolutely viable, if not even better than bio in some situations and maps. 2 - You need absolute spot on unit control and macro behind it. If you can kill an entire army in a good trade, but you didn't macro behind it, you will probably die. If you macro well, but lose all your units without gaining anything out of it, you will die as well. Thanks. Question: if you go marine\tank in tvz, how do you open? when do you know you can push out? Sometimes I feel like if I push out I will be overwhelmed by lings\baneling  . Do you go 3 oc and then destroy the zerg with sheer macro? thanks for help | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 22 2012 07:23 Sergio1992 wrote: Thanks. Question: if you go marine\tank in tvz, how do you open? when do you know you can push out? Sometimes I feel like if I push out I will be overwhelmed by lings\baneling . Do you go 3 oc and then destroy the zerg with sheer macro? thanks for help I use a reactor hellion opening, going for 6 hellions and I will transition into a push that comes around 10:30 with medivacs, marines and the hellions I hopefully kept alive to either deny the 3rd base or even kill it. At least I will head out for a trade and force him to not saturate his bases any further, but build units. Against infestor/ling I will keep being a bit more defensive than I am against muta/bane/ling but you will have to read the game well. If he goes for mass units and minimum saturation, stay back and be defensive and continue to expand, because 200/200 muta/ling/bane becomes way less effective ones you get higher tank and upgrade count. | ||
|
Sergio1992
Italy522 Posts
| ||
| ||
