EPTPvZ: Reavers + Sair | Goon - Page 4
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
| ||
|
ShadowMaster
United States238 Posts
Yes, close positions make it much more difficult. Although they would probably turn to the advantage of the Protoss if the Zerg were to go pure Hydra, allowing the Protoss to use his faster drop ability, most smart Zergs will go Spire and suddenly the advantage turns around. While it might still be too early to say that Reaver drops should not be tried at all in close positions, Protoss definitely need to figure out a way to deal with the difficulties of Spire harrassment when there is no time to build up Corsairs and no room to maneuver Shuttles. An interesting option from close positions might be Zealot + Reaver, which is an interesting twist on the Reaver theme and must be handled very carefully by both players. It has a lot of naunces and should not be tried "cold", as notable players have lost very quickly because they didn't grasp some of the necessary elements. If there is interest I could elaborate on it in another thread. Otherwise, Protoss might just consider trying a different strategy from the close positions  | ||
|
wakiki
United States65 Posts
Just today(before I had read this thread), I was experimenting with Reavers vs. Zerg. In the first game, I was using Reavers versus a person who was using the Hydra + Lurk strategy. Of course, it worked very well, and I believe that under "The many uses of Reavers" you should put in there that they are good for breaking containment. (The guy was trying to contain me with Lurkers and Hydras) What eventually happened was, we stalemated(due to the fact that he was a much better player, and my macro was suffering from the Reaver micro), and we both got run over by another player who had taken most of the map(it was FFA). I used it in another game, and got run over by mass Mutalisks(I hadn't gotten Corsairs up yet). I have difficulty steadily building and, more importantly, teching to Corsairs and Reavers, while steadily building Dragoons and having three Zealots to defend my choke. So, which is better to get first? Reavers or Corsairs? Reavers first would be better for ground based armies, but without High Templar or Corsairs, I get run over by large numbers of Mutas. Corsairs first might be a little more conservative, but then getting Reavers late means they are better defended against drops, and putting up the tech and money for Corsairs is a pretty harsh waste of money, if they get Hydras instead of Mutas. Also, isn't static defense not very helpful in general vs. Reavers and Corsairs? researching Dweb is a no-brainer, I think, and even without it, Reavers can outrange the static defense anyway. Another point: if you are really good at microing, you could try using High Templars also. High Templars + Reavers + Goons + Sairs. Or, you could just use the HT's for defense. I like to leave 2 of them in each base. I assume that the reason you arent using them is because of gas problems, but I think it might be worth it to have two HT's, instead of six goons(and you would have some minerals and supply left over). Of course, the obvious disadvantages of this are that you would have to go up three tech trees at once. Why not just scrap the Corsairs? Oh right, scouting and manueverability. Perhaps you could consider just being a damage powerhouse, and knock on their front door with Reavers, Goons, and High Templar. See, my Psi storm micro is what saves me whenever I fight Zerg, and giving up HT's would make me nervous. Another consideration for late game: The counters to Reavers seem to be Mutalisks, and well-managed Hydras. So, consider Maelstrom. It would freeze the Hydras in place, and often Mutas will stack on top of each other, allowing you to garner many in one Maelstrom. Now then, Dark Archons are fairly impractical due to the cost of the research, the ridiculous cost of the DA's themselves, and the cost of the micromanagement. (Micromanagement is a real resource - some people have larger amounts of this resource than other people) Would I recommend getting DA's? Well, no, but I just thought I would put this idea forward, and if someone thinks that they can Maelstrom, Dweb, and micro Reavers at the same time, they can test it out. Besides, even if you don't win, you get to be kickass After all, who uses Maelstrom?Overall, the my feelings on this strategy are that I like the manueverability aspect, especially for FFA games, but the lack or lateness of High Templars and the sheer firepower they provide worries me. Of course, the idea is to avoid direct confrontation, and harrass them until you can afford direct confrontation. This reminds me of a game where I massed scouts on Flooded Plains - and won. No air units, big or small, can stand up to 4 control groups of scouts, and I just ran away from any ground units that I saw, going mineral spot to mineral spot, killing workers. This is how this strat works (although its more practical/cost effective, of course ;p). | ||
|
T1_iloveSinky
China43 Posts
| ||
|
kCiNNiCk
United Kingdom313 Posts
| ||
|
TheRioN_CoL
Colombia21 Posts
| ||
|
ShadowMaster
United States238 Posts
On November 03 2004 23:32 wakiki wrote: Heh, a quick fact that I would like to mention is that in Free For Alls, manueverabiltyis supremely important. You often need to defend multiple places far away in rapid succession. I am a Protoss player, and have considered using only Zealots + Scouts + Corsairs + Reavers and Templars in Shuttles as my main army, but I haven't really gotten around to it. Another issue with FFA is that your "projected force" is more important than your current force - that is to say, in FFA, your opponents might have a much bigger military, but you might have three expansions. In a 1v1, you would be run over, but in a FFA, he will likely be distracted, or not kill you off completely, so you will have time to rebuild. Using the superior manueverability of Shuttles + Corsairs(with Disruption Web) could keep their Projected Force low, by harrassing opponents' workers, and keep them from attacking you, since they have to defend themselves everywhere. Of course, I'm sure that most of you do not play FFA, and that this thread is dealing with solo play, so I apologize if this was just an utter waste of a paragraph for of you ;p Just today(before I had read this thread), I was experimenting with Reavers vs. Zerg. In the first game, I was using Reavers versus a person who was using the Hydra + Lurk strategy. Of course, it worked very well, and I believe that under "The many uses of Reavers" you should put in there that they are good for breaking containment. (The guy was trying to contain me with Lurkers and Hydras) What eventually happened was, we stalemated(due to the fact that he was a much better player, and my macro was suffering from the Reaver micro), and we both got run over by another player who had taken most of the map(it was FFA). I used it in another game, and got run over by mass Mutalisks(I hadn't gotten Corsairs up yet). I have difficulty steadily building and, more importantly, teching to Corsairs and Reavers, while steadily building Dragoons and having three Zealots to defend my choke. So, which is better to get first? Reavers or Corsairs? Reavers first would be better for ground based armies, but without High Templar or Corsairs, I get run over by large numbers of Mutas. Corsairs first might be a little more conservative, but then getting Reavers late means they are better defended against drops, and putting up the tech and money for Corsairs is a pretty harsh waste of money, if they get Hydras instead of Mutas. Also, isn't static defense not very helpful in general vs. Reavers and Corsairs? researching Dweb is a no-brainer, I think, and even without it, Reavers can outrange the static defense anyway. Another point: if you are really good at microing, you could try using High Templars also. High Templars + Reavers + Goons + Sairs. Or, you could just use the HT's for defense. I like to leave 2 of them in each base. I assume that the reason you arent using them is because of gas problems, but I think it might be worth it to have two HT's, instead of six goons(and you would have some minerals and supply left over). Of course, the obvious disadvantages of this are that you would have to go up three tech trees at once. Why not just scrap the Corsairs? Oh right, scouting and manueverability. Perhaps you could consider just being a damage powerhouse, and knock on their front door with Reavers, Goons, and High Templar. See, my Psi storm micro is what saves me whenever I fight Zerg, and giving up HT's would make me nervous. Another consideration for late game: The counters to Reavers seem to be Mutalisks, and well-managed Hydras. So, consider Maelstrom. It would freeze the Hydras in place, and often Mutas will stack on top of each other, allowing you to garner many in one Maelstrom. Now then, Dark Archons are fairly impractical due to the cost of the research, the ridiculous cost of the DA's themselves, and the cost of the micromanagement. (Micromanagement is a real resource - some people have larger amounts of this resource than other people) Would I recommend getting DA's? Well, no, but I just thought I would put this idea forward, and if someone thinks that they can Maelstrom, Dweb, and micro Reavers at the same time, they can test it out. Besides, even if you don't win, you get to be kickass After all, who uses Maelstrom?Overall, the my feelings on this strategy are that I like the manueverability aspect, especially for FFA games, but the lack or lateness of High Templars and the sheer firepower they provide worries me. Of course, the idea is to avoid direct confrontation, and harrass them until you can afford direct confrontation. This reminds me of a game where I massed scouts on Flooded Plains - and won. No air units, big or small, can stand up to 4 control groups of scouts, and I just ran away from any ground units that I saw, going mineral spot to mineral spot, killing workers. This is how this strat works (although its more practical/cost effective, of course ;p). Yes, Reavers + Corsairs are a decent strategy in FFA, getting 6+ Reavers and 12+ Corsairs with D-Web as you main killing force, since it arrives faster than the normal BC/Carrier masses. The maneuverability aspect is also useful for covering bases. However, you need to be very careful about the harrassment thing. Sure, you might kill dozens of workers all around, but the truth is that it probably isn't worth it. Harrassment is usually one thing you do not want to do in FFA: it simply calls to much attention to you. You often want to wait until you have a "killing blow" rather than make everyone mad at you; 3 vs 1 = gg  As far as Reavers vs. containment, I didn't bother specifying because we already mentioned that Lurks vs. Reaver/Goon builds is practically suicide. As for Disruption Web, there are a lot of considerations. Firstly, it is completely out of the question in the early game. Even after you have your first expansion, it is only possible if you have an "excuse" to get the number of Corsairs you need to make it useful. In other words, he needs to be massing with Spiretech. If this is not the situation, you will be run over by Hydras before you get a pay-off on the expensive investment. Static defense is effective against Reavers, but only in a minimal amount. Zerg must not over-invest. This is because it is an on-the-edge resource battle. Getting a Fleet Beacon and Disruption Web is very expensive, not to mention the number of Corsairs you need to make it feasible. This makes it possible only in certain situations. If you see the Zerg going mass sunks at all of his bases, this means that he is spending enough money that you can counter with Disruption web. The correct Zerg plan, though, is to only put one or two Sunks at each mineral line. As you have noticed, Sunks do not stop Reavers -- but they aren't supposed to. The Zerg should be using the Sunks only to buy time until his Hydralisks or, preferably, Muta/Scourge arrive to take care of the threat. Of course, massing sunks is an almost complete waste of money against Reaver strategies. I like your ideas and think that Protoss definitely need to learn to use as many of the units at their disposal as possible; again, the biggest problem is just the resources and research/build time. Of course, FFAs are a whole different game and you can do a lot of things that would normally be suicide. This thread is aimed at 1:1 games, though. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17257 Posts
The only solution now is making some spores in main and all expos but this is countered by web, anyway zerg gets slowed down BIGTIME leaving toss with plenty options to take him out (even with zeals). That's how I see it and if I find any reps about that (seen few myself) I'm gonna post it here. | ||
|
recluse
60 Posts
| ||
|
Splinter
United States188 Posts
Mass muta with +carapace upgrades and scourge if needed simply rapes sair reaver. Once the zerg gets greater spire, the toss stands no chance (Devs with carapace upgrades basically nullifies sairs). It only really can work well if you surprise the zerg, but a toss really isn't going to be able to surprise a decent zerg all that well. Once the zerg finds out what you are up to, they will be able to expo/power hard while going straight to mutas. The toss might be able to destroy a base every once in awhile, but if the zerg is expanding well and pulling drones away when the drop is coming, losing a base shouldn't be much of a problem. This is especially true because sair/reaver is even more gas heavy than muta/scourge, so having a ton of bases really isn't needed, as the toss probably will only have 2. Having lots of bases in this case is basically just to make sure losing one won't stop your ability to produce enough to stop the sair/reaver. | ||
|
TheRioN_CoL
Colombia21 Posts
 So muta is hard in ZvP, u can use mutas in short games but in large games u need hydras, dance and ultras ^^ | ||
|
Jansports
United States80 Posts
Second I would like to point out that Recently I have only played rec. Games and not against the best competition out there unfortunately. When I scout and find a Z player usually I think Temps or Reavs? No matter what Im going to be harassing with Sairs. Usually starts with OL hunting forcing him into spores or Hydras rather then powering for now. This is a very good thing often a Z wont bother with Muta since he knows you have Sairs out and about the map. He Might still go spire tech but against constant Sairs this is almost pointless.(And about carpace counter with Weapon ups, Generally I Get Ups instead of a few early goons) So my base has just some Zeals and here and there cannons (3-4 usually by the time I'm two gate Sairs) Now with his production either down or slowed Depending on how the harassment went and how he reacted I normally decide between two or three choices (Sometimes others but rarely) Choice A: He attempts to counter Sairs with Hydras; perhaps building more non-peons as he would have liked around then, spending money on them instead of an expo or another hat? If there are substancial levels of Hydras Strait to High Temps I go. It Just makes sense, they build hydras I respond with Storm technology perhaps even a shuttle, and hope my speedy Zeals + Temp can deal with Hydras en mass. Here I Generally Begin to ignore Sairs as I doubt they would want Hydra / Muta when they know Im pumping sairs from 1-2 Gates Choice B: Using less Hydras but more Spores to provide a haven for OLs. Well Here I have to keep at lest one Stargate on Sairs as he Might Muta ling or Muta ling lurk Here I dont normally use Reaver / goon but instead Speedy Weapon Zeals. Constant Sairs from 1-2 and lots of, well Zeals with speed / weapon ups and 1 maybe 2 reavs. Fast Muta < Sair. In equal-ish numbers the 'better' splash range of sairs and immense differance in attack speed(Damage per second) leaves Sairs on the up. Scourge are problematic however and if its Ling / scourge / muta its not so good news. From the Games I've played (Sorry no reps I dont normally save any I will next time I play PbZ and anything intresting happens) Speedy Zeals with 2 hit kills(1-2 weapon ups, enough to beat any Z carpace ups or be even after 2[go +2 ups]) Backed up by a single maybe a pair of reavers. As long as the Z wants their lings to attack the Zlots 4-8 will go down per reaver shot in addition to what ever is being eaten but the Zeals themselves. This with Zeal run tactics lure Lings into reaver shots + cannons give the P enough time to also climb up to having a signifigant force of Stormers(high temps) allowing a nicely balanced attack or defnce force.(Just add goons as needed for Hydra / Lurk) This is how I feel after browsing the thread and thinking back on my PvZ games Almost every game I lose I regret not getting Sairs first. So I'd say get Sairs first then play according to their response. | ||
|
Sosha
United States749 Posts
ArtToSs = JulyZerg, from POS Season 5 WGT. Gurince = T.3)Prince. I believe he was 50% Zerg and 50% Protoss. This being because another team mate, T.3)SohA, played on the same account, during the same season. SohA, being a Protoss player, went on to the WSL under FavoriteDream and beat some mighty skilled Zergs. He actually used Rvr / Goon builds ^ ^ As for ur dossier: It's quite nice! Very organized, collected and expressed. You have a Terran icon on the forums, and you still post much for Protoss? ^ ^ That is rare. You were correct when you said that this is troubled times for the Protoss race. I'm glad to see others strategically thinking more, in-depth, about Protoss. Rvr / goon is a pretty hard build / tactic to pull off, though. I've lost the battle from Muta/Ling mostly. I think Muta / ling is the hardest unit combination to go up against, if you think about it. Zergs, w/ two-gasses and numerous hatchs. They're able to produce many Mutalisks and dozens of lings. I know harassment is needed w/ the Rvr build, but it's also hard to do so, knowing that the rvr's may not escape. During main battles: Mutas swarm in, giving the dragoons more then they can handle, often targetting the rvr's or the shuttle. Then the lings come too. Rvr's can kill lings by the hand fulls but, it is hard to target a good ling in a group while being hammered down on from above ( by muta ). The lings, of course, make short work of the goons as the muta's aid the slaughter of the robotic units after laying waste to the heavily armored, slow moving reavers. GLGL | ||
|
ShadowMaster
United States238 Posts
On November 08 2004 01:02 Sosha wrote: ShadowMaster, correction on ur aka's: ArtToSs = JulyZerg, from POS Season 5 WGT. Gurince = T.3)Prince. I believe he was 50% Zerg and 50% Protoss. This being because another team mate, T.3)SohA, played on the same account, during the same season. SohA, being a Protoss player, went on to the WSL under FavoriteDream and beat some mighty skilled Zergs. He actually used Rvr / Goon builds ^ ^ As for ur dossier: It's quite nice! Very organized, collected and expressed. You have a Terran icon on the forums, and you still post much for Protoss? ^ ^ That is rare. You were correct when you said that this is troubled times for the Protoss race. I'm glad to see others strategically thinking more, in-depth, about Protoss. Rvr / goon is a pretty hard build / tactic to pull off, though. I've lost the battle from Muta/Ling mostly. I think Muta / ling is the hardest unit combination to go up against, if you think about it. Zergs, w/ two-gasses and numerous hatchs. They're able to produce many Mutalisks and dozens of lings. I know harassment is needed w/ the Rvr build, but it's also hard to do so, knowing that the rvr's may not escape. During main battles: Mutas swarm in, giving the dragoons more then they can handle, often targetting the rvr's or the shuttle. Then the lings come too. Rvr's can kill lings by the hand fulls but, it is hard to target a good ling in a group while being hammered down on from above ( by muta ). The lings, of course, make short work of the goons as the muta's aid the slaughter of the robotic units after laying waste to the heavily armored, slow moving reavers. GLGL Thanks a bunch for correcting those AKAs for me. Yes, Reaver/Goon is very skill intensive. However, MutaLing probably isn't the Zerg's best choice, assuming you went with a fast Stargate before the Reaver. If you scout a Spire without any Hydras, just start cranking Corsairs nonstop from that one Stargate while also maintaining a decent Dragoon production pace. Once you have six or so, you should be able to move out to either expand or attack. This is demonstrated in the Froz game mentioned above; unless you have unluckily drawn very close positions, there shouldn't be any unusual difficulties against this Zerg choice. | ||
|
Ceril
Sweden1343 Posts
| ||
| ||
