EPTOn November 26 2009 06:19 YPang wrote:
i like how the entire post is in caps lol
i like how the entire post is in caps lol
?....
Why no nukes? - Page 4
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
Saturnize
United States2473 Posts
?.... | ||
|
LegendaryDreams
Canada1350 Posts
On November 26 2009 21:50 axel wrote: I remember Boxer doing fast cc ( before rax) on longinus ,into 1 fact then fast nuke. That was quite good strategy because he could destroy totally 2 nexus thanks to some places behind expands that made impossible for any protoss units to shoot down the gost. During the time protoss was busy to not be nuked he was building lots of factories and of course upgrading fastly due to lab investissement. Then turtling to b3/b4 , b4 with 2 gas on longinus. He won quite easily :3-3 ups , vessels..This is viable on maps where u can wall your main with your nat, best exemple is longinus. I could not find the vod but i think it was vs some class b player in proleague. Against Superman[Kal], and BoxeR lost that game. | ||
|
IceCube
Croatia1403 Posts
On November 28 2009 19:50 LegendaryDreams wrote: Against Superman[Kal], and BoxeR lost that game. owned? I just don't think it's doable and useful. Otherwise pros would use it, no? | ||
|
nayumi
Australia6499 Posts
On November 26 2009 20:40 29 fps wrote: damn. still got it wrong. i wrote alt-tab first, then changed it. i need to play more Alt-tab while you're playing is instant win imo. | ||
|
MrHickoryHam54
United States208 Posts
| ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
| ||
|
alphafuzard
United States1610 Posts
On November 29 2009 01:52 StylishVODs wrote: same as queens, it's just too much damn work aren't you the one who came up with the nuke strategy in tvz? i remember watching replays of a sunken busting nuke strategy that was pretty pimp, and i think they were from you... | ||
|
Neivler
Norway911 Posts
| ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
On November 29 2009 03:04 alphafuzard wrote: aren't you the one who came up with the nuke strategy in tvz? i remember watching replays of a sunken busting nuke strategy that was pretty pimp, and i think they were from you... Yeah;) well I got it from Casy first but remodelled it more into a rush... But incorperating it into standard play lategame or whatever would be too much work imo. | ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
 BoxeR. | ||
|
YellowDeath
Ireland53 Posts
| ||
|
mmp
United States2130 Posts
It's a game though, have some fun. Make it as potent as possible though, plan it out, not just a gimmick. Fast nukes in TvZ can demolish a zerg's sunkenline and let marmed storm in to victory. Granted this is very unlikely to succeed (since it is so easy to scout and has a weak follow up), but it's one of the few ways you can actually turn the game by killing a bunch of stationary stuff. Likewise, in TvP you will want to bring along EMP to ensure you 1-hit KO the toss base. I think nukes in TvT are entirely viable if you need to uproot your opponent from a critical turtled position, and normal dropship distractions aren't getting the job done. Granted cattlebruisers would be nice also (you sort of have to choose one or the other). | ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
On November 29 2009 06:51 mmp wrote: Fast nukes in TvZ can demolish a zerg's sunkenline and let marmed storm in to victory. Granted this is very unlikely to succeed (since it is so easy to scout and has a weak follow up), but it's one of the few ways you can actually turn the game by killing a bunch of stationary stuff. Likewise, in TvP you will want to bring along EMP to ensure you 1-hit KO the toss base. Tanks do that too! Except they're faster, cheaper, more mobile, and stronger at it. | ||
|
Vestige
United States303 Posts
 i think that stands for itself though lol | ||
|
Duckvillelol
Australia1256 Posts
As many would know, for example with an early Reaver drop, you want to do enough damage to hurt the economy yes, but you also want to make the investment of the: Reaver/shuttle/scarabs worth it (and some people even take it further sometimes to robo/support bay/reaver/shuttle/scarabs but that's too harsh in my opinion). When you take this into the equation of a nuke, you need to obviously gain the cost of the nuke; 200/200 (and 100 seconds if you want to take time into account). Then you also take in the cost of the ghost + cloak research; 125/175 (total). Basic cost so far: 325/375. Then you need to take into account the possibility that you may need a dropship if the terrain or enemy positioning isn't favourable: another 100/100. Total cost: 425/475. Thus we take it back to cost vs gain, you need to gain 425/475 worth of damage to your opponent. These days given how fast most of the programers are, you generally don't get any of the workers, and, if possible you get most of a resource center. And then that whole equation comes down to the risk element the others had spoken about... Does the ghost survive long enough? I think if you looked at it statistically at an end-game scenario, where both sides have taken up most of the map (assuming a 4 player map) and there is a lot of micro/macro to focus on - the ghost has a 50-75% chance of getting the nuke out (numbers up for grabs guys I'm just taking a swing in the dark) - but to me... the 50% chance is still kinda ugly, given what you have to pay for, for what you gain. This, to me, is why they aren't used that often. I would love to see them used more, but as Boxer has said, I do think they need to be worked into a build somehow. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
On November 29 2009 17:09 Duckvillelol wrote: When it all comes down to it, just about any tactical/strategic decision is made based on the simple equation of cost vs gain. As many would know, for example with an early Reaver drop, you want to do enough damage to hurt the economy yes, but you also want to make the investment of the: Reaver/shuttle/scarabs worth it (and some people even take it further sometimes to robo/support bay/reaver/shuttle/scarabs but that's too harsh in my opinion). When you take this into the equation of a nuke, you need to obviously gain the cost of the nuke; 200/200 (and 100 seconds if you want to take time into account). Then you also take in the cost of the ghost + cloak research; 125/175 (total). Basic cost so far: 325/375. Then you need to take into account the possibility that you may need a dropship if the terrain or enemy positioning isn't favourable: another 100/100. Total cost: 425/475. Thus we take it back to cost vs gain, you need to gain 425/475 worth of damage to your opponent. These days given how fast most of the programers are, you generally don't get any of the workers, and, if possible you get most of a resource center. And then that whole equation comes down to the risk element the others had spoken about... Does the ghost survive long enough? I think if you looked at it statistically at an end-game scenario, where both sides have taken up most of the map (assuming a 4 player map) and there is a lot of micro/macro to focus on - the ghost has a 50-75% chance of getting the nuke out (numbers up for grabs guys I'm just taking a swing in the dark) - but to me... the 50% chance is still kinda ugly, given what you have to pay for, for what you gain. This, to me, is why they aren't used that often. I would love to see them used more, but as Boxer has said, I do think they need to be worked into a build somehow. Not everything is simply dollars and cents... even if it costs more to do something, it can be worth it if it does more than just mineral damage. For example if you kill tech with it, it could perhaps be worth it since the zerg can't make any ultras or defilers until he gets another one up and maybe you use that opportunity to push in and win. You can argue that there are other ways to kill tech but I'm jsut giving an example of how you can do less than 425/475 worth of damage and have it still be worth it. Against protoss, instantly killing a base with emp+nuke could possibly be worth it, if your opponent was already at a disadvantage... In any case, I dislike how people tend to just think that they need to get what they spent out of something, instead of thinking about what other types of damage it does. When | ||
|
UntitledQ
Germany99 Posts
Also note that the actual cost of nukes is closer to 225/275 + 200/200 * number of nukes used throughout the game. And last, the attention to the game you steal your opponent for a few seconds may not be expressible in numbers but definitely plays to your advantage if you just coordinate the timing of your nuke with a push or a drop. | ||
|
Schezar
United Kingdom16 Posts
| ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5282 Posts
It's a perfectly reasonable late game tactic in my opinion. It consumes a huge amount of your opponents attention, and by doing that, gives you an advantage in the battles you'll be fighting on the other side of the map. Nobody want's to lose an expo full of drones/probes. (even if the hatch/nex survives) So, when you launch a nuke, you can bet your ass that your opponent is gonna switch his attention to the nuke until he finds the dot. A good way to abuse nukes would be to even nuke empty space, and keep doing the standard things while the opponent panicks. Do it 2 times, then 3rd time nuke him for real. Combining the nuke with a drop, like fantasy showed, is a combination that can't NOT do serious damage. In short, nuke sucks as a pillar of your strategy. But it's an awesome "multitasking overloader". | ||
|
poutipou
Canada30 Posts
| ||
| ||
