|
Related: Part 2: PvZ: Reaver Midgames PvZ: The Main-Line ZvP Reavers Protoss BOs and Strategies: PvZ Land The Many Uses of Reavers
An examination of the early game of PvZ Strategies incorporating Reavers, particularly Corsairs + Reaver to Reaver + Goon.
In a recent thread I started to look at the PvZ strategy of going Corsair + Reaver to Reaver + Goon. As many of you have surely noticed, Reavers are a relatively rare sight in progaming PvZs. While there are definite reasons for this beyond any strategic "fashions", the objective of this thread is to give this strategy the further examination that I feel it deserves.
Why? Protoss are currently considered something of an underdog in the Starcraft scene -- and this is after making a big rise in the last year or two! Many of the top gamers have been reduced to playing crazy "cheese" strategies to catch their opponents off guard and play for a win. Further more, the number of Protoss top gamers is traditionally much fewer than the Terran and Zerg gamers. Even those just-for-fun gamers on a WGT level have noticed the lower number of good Toss players. It should be obvious that the Protoss game is somewhat lost; it needs a rehaul, to find itself again. This strategy has many virtues, a few of which will be listed here and hopefully more to be found shortly as part of this thread.
- Psychological. Although this is only a temporary sort of advantage -- and less applicable at the pro level -- this strategy offers a long-term change of pace. All of the favorite Zerg strategies seem ineffective against Reaver/Goon. Mass hydras don't specifically counter anything; Ultra/Ling, the favorite finishing blow of Zergs these days, is useless. And Lurker containment simply doesn't exist; stubborn Zergs who are stuck on their lurkers will quickly find themselves totally run over.
- Physical. Because of the Reaver element in this strategy, players will find that the game immediately takes on a micro-based tendency. Micro can quickly mean the difference between victory and defeat as the all the play for both players revolves around those Reavers. This may be good or bad depending on your personal style.
- Practical. Those cheese strategies that so many are trying to use these days tend to have the effect of producing a do-or-die game; hardly better than gambling, these strategies are not particularly reliable. Reaver + Goon offers a much more solid game plan that will probably still take the Zerg out of his game.
Why Not? Why is it that we don't see this strategy used at the top level? On a whole, I feel it is largely because the strategy has been overlooked or they just haven't made it this far. There are a few things to worry about, though.
- Tactical problems. This strategy can be tough for a Protoss to pull off and disaster can occur quickly. Losing all your Reavers to just a few scourge is disheartening for anyone. This strategy is not for the faint of heart.
- Physical Considerations. It is possible that in many games the Protoss will end up putting in a lot more effort than the Zerg without being able to clearly see the benefits. The Protoss player cannot afford to be lazy with this strategy.
- Strategic Considerations. There are certain strategic considerations that must be taken into account, most notably dealing with the Zerg Mutalisks and Scourge. It is these considerations that the this thread aims to examine, and that I hope the readers will take the effort to overcome in their games.
Goals I hope for two things to be accomplished by this thread. 1) Evaluation of whether or not this strategy is suitable for a pro level. Obviously, we can't find this out for a surety due to our weaker skill, but we can do our best. 2) Refinement of this strategy to be useful for those who are NOT pro-level.
Down to Business: So, that's the theory. How does it hold up against different situations? The Standard: Mass Hydras. Mass hydras has always been and probably will always be the favorite Zerg strategy, when they feel they can get away with it. However, it is by no means an obvious counter to Reaver + Goon. True, a few Hydras can demolish Reavers, but Reavers never were designed for stand-up fights. They serve two rolls: support and harrassment. This is something that must be tested and experimented with, as there are a lot of variables. For more on mass-hydra , refer to this post. Counters: Because mass-hydra is not itself a direct counter to Reaver-Goon until late in the game, you don't need to change strategies. The counter is to out-micro and out-maneuver them.
The Sharp: Spire Tech. This is definitely dangerous to the Protoss, as both Mutalisk and Scourge can ruin pure Reaver ideas and Dragoons suffer vs. MutaLing. However, this is actually not very good for the Zerg is the Protoss isn't out-microed. First of all, using the Corsairs + Reaver to Reaver + Goon path means that Protoss should not be surprised early on by Spire, and will have time to prepare. Secondly, the timely switch to Templar from Reavers is absolutely required in every situation with this strategy and may provide a respite against Spire Tech. But even before Templar are needed, Protoss can crush Zerg pure-Spire strategies by maintaining Corsair production. The only time pure-Spire might be genuinely worriesome to the Protoss is in near positions like 9 vs 6 on LT, when Zerg can almost simultaneously defend his base while pressuring Protoss.
The Critical: Spire/Hydra This is without a doubt the best strategy for Zerg against Stargate to Reaver in normal situations. The idea is to maximize flexibility by keeping Hydras as a strike force and anti-harrassment while keeping Mutas and Scourge to harrass and hunt shuttles.
Miscellany: What other options are there for the Zerg player? Post your thoughts.
[UPDATE]: Established: Conclusions and Theory These are things that are evident either from practice or simple common-sense, or seem to have been established in the progress of this thread, as well as things that need to be examined in particular. If you disagree, say why and, if possible, post examples. Below they are marked whether they seem to favor [++] the strategy or [--]oppose it.
- [--]Mass Reavers is not an option. Don't even think about it. For a demonstration, check this.
- [--]Spire/Hydra Zerg is the most dangerous for the Protoss.
- [--]Lazy Protoss will die. This is a relatively high-energy strategy.
- [++]Pure Spire is not good. Pure Spire allows Protoss steadily produce Corsairs and Dragoons to go along with his Reavers, usually over powering Zerg once he has 5-6 Corsairs: with Muta/Ling/Scourge the Zerg does not have the power to stop a Reaver push. See this game.
- [++]Hydratech is not convincing as a strategy in the early game and might even be favorable to Protoss, but in the least offers chances to both sides.
- [++]Colonies seem to be required if the Zerg wants to ease the harrassment pressure, as most units may be out-maneuvered or spread too thin. Can Spire-Tech Zerg's safely forego investing in colonies?
- [++]Sauron Style Zerg (no colonies all game) without much Spire Tech is extremely risky for the Zerg player as he is especially vulnerable to harrassment.
- [++]The Zerg must be unusually conservative.Zerg trying to go mass expansions will have a hard time, as this strategy affords the Protoss a MUCH greater than usual degree of maneuverability.
[Update]Resources:
See what Beast says about this strategy in this post.
What Protoss need to worry about: how to counter Reaver Sair to Goon.
NonY's post on the different nature of this type of game.
What not to do with Reavers.
So, post your thoughts and practice here. I will update with links to informative replays, posts, and articles when possible.
|
All of the favorite Zerg strategies are ineffective against Reaver/Goon. Mass hydras don't counter anything; Ultra/Ling, the favorite finishing blow of Zergs these days, is useless. And Lurker containment simply doesn't exist; stubborn Zergs who are stuck on their lurkers will quickly find themselves totally run over.
- hydras rape it. ultraling rapes it. it does beat lurkers though. 1 for 3; you should play baseball. psst mutaling rapes it too.
Because of the Reaver element in this strategy, players will find that the game immediately takes on a micro-based tendency. Micro can quickly mean the difference between victory and defeat as the all the play for both players revolves around those Reavers. This may be good or bad depending on your personal style.
- blah blah blah
Those cheese strategies that so many are trying to use these days tend to have the effect of producing a do-or-die game; hardly better than gambling, these strategies are not particularly reliable. Reaver + Goon offers a much more solid game plan that will probably still take the Zerg out of his game.
- no
GOOD EFFORT OK I LIKE HOW YOUR POST LOOKS
|
The ONLY thing reaver sair goon is good against is a 1 base zerg. thats it
|
Fisheye is pretty good with goon reaver vs zerg
|
Well, he did structure the post beautifully as a zerg player i hate playing against reavers, but they arent hard to counter, and if the protoss' multitasking isn't very good, it is an automatic gg
[edit]:missed a "u"
|
First off, thanks for the quick replies. The interest is great.
"Only good vs. one-base Zergs" and "Mass Hydras rapes it" are just what I want to hear -- but a little more elaboration please Replays that demonstrate these statements, or further explanation.
Man, for all I said in the thread header, there sure is a lot I didn't say...
|
Reaver goon sair is simply DOMINATED by hydra muta. Mass muta also dominates it. 3 hatch hydra/ling counters it well, but toss needs to expo relatively fast and turtle+mass afterwards.
If the zerg goes 1 base OR expands really late to a non gas expo, the strat can work. But if zerg has 2 gases then toss shouldnt be able to win.
|
Corsair/reaver to reaver/goon is only good for early game. I'm gonna have to disagree with BigBalls and say that it's a valid strategy against zergs who take their naturals on lost temple. However, you have to put the zerg on the defensive from the start with corsair harrass, to reaver drop harrass.. and finally you'll have the opportunity to make the only attack that can win the game- setting up the goons and reavers properly right outside of the natural so that the zerg is pinned in. If you fuck up the handling of the game, then you're going to miss the opportunity to make that attack, and you'll have to use the goons/reavers on defense to take your nat and switch to high temps.
The other situation is where the Protoss early expands, and the zerg counters by expanding twice. The toss can go corsair/reavers safely with the economy of two bases, and then use the mobility of a corsair/reaver army to pick off the spread-out zerg. These games are pretty risky, although I've seen a lot of Korean Protoss do this.
Casper is pretty much right if you think of going goon/reaver/corsair for the entire game under any circumstances. However, in a lot of cases, you can finish a game before the zerg "goes" anything.. and if you don't finish it, you come out with an advantage + the technology of robotics/stargate. Then you switch to templar tech accordingly.
If you think of just having 1 shuttle w/reavers and 1 or 2 scouting corsairs, then well controlled reavers/corsairs have very effective places against any zerg strategy
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
16927 Posts
I always thought with good enough micro Mutalisk/Few Scourge would counter Corsairs easily...
Shadow Master, you have brilliant formatting. Consider a job designing web pages ^_^'
|
Yes, spire tech is definitely the critical line: it is what will decide whether this strategy is worthwhile or not. I think the question of whether the Corsairs can be countered or not is a little off-the-mark, though. There what will you counter? They aren't designed to cripple the Zerg or even to do much damage. Here are a few of their uses that I'll copy from another post:
The Power of Corsairs 1) Emergency damage soaks when things started getting hot for a Reaver Drop: the corsairs would intercept the incoming hydralisks and distract them, giving the Shuttle time to get away.
2) Constant full-map scouting. There were no secrets for the Protoss -- and every experienced Toss player knows how much this means in a PvZ game.
3) As annoying as can be for the Zerg. I mean, really, how would you feel if someone was constantly poking you in the eye? Distracting, no?
True, having anti-Corsair hunts will alter this -- but not eliminate it. Good micro should be able to preserve the Corsairs.
|
is awesome32251 Posts
The strat is very map dependant. I think of reaver as an option only when i had an early advantage/preassure in the game. Maybe its my reaver skills but i feel less protected with reaver than with temps. Plus while microing reaver and shuttle reaver auto target and hydra not a zone as storm does....so if he sends in a cuople o flings the reaver will hit them 1st and they hydras will get free shots. Same if he sends an hyrda forward and splash doesnt work for you.
but yeah, its hell of a help to take down the sunken line in fornt of a zerg expansion.
|
you die to muta/hydra, by the time you have enough sairs he has the map and the game is over
|
16927 Posts
On October 24 2004 18:35 ShadowMaster wrote: Yes, spire tech is definitely the critical line: it is what will decide whether this strategy is worthwhile or not. I think the question of whether the Corsairs can be countered or not is a little off-the-mark, though. There what will you counter? They aren't designed to cripple the Zerg or even to do much damage. Here are a few of their uses that I'll copy from another post:
The Power of Corsairs 1) Emergency damage soaks when things started getting hot for a Reaver Drop: the corsairs would intercept the incoming hydralisks and distract them, giving the Shuttle time to get away.
2) Constant full-map scouting. There were no secrets for the Protoss -- and every experienced Toss player knows how much this means in a PvZ game.
3) As annoying as can be for the Zerg. I mean, really, how would you feel if someone was constantly poking you in the eye? Distracting, no?
True, having anti-Corsair hunts will alter this -- but not eliminate it. Good micro should be able to preserve the Corsairs.
1) Expensive units whore only function is to soak damage and easily countered? If I had a few Scourge laying around, I'd target a Shuttle over Corsairs, regardless of whether I think there are units in them or not.
2) Agreed, though what are you going to do, patrol them over the map?
3) I never really found Corsairs to be that annoying... I just set a Spore Colony over each expansion, and I find that Protoss players never really bother to ever research Disruption Web... I don't know, maybe it's the newbie level I'm playing at -_-p
|
This_is_not_a_smurf, in the example I was referring to with the original notes, it was all about two corsairs -- the only two that were made in the game. As far as Protoss units go, I don't think Corsairs are generally considered overly expensive; sure, the 150 gas Stargate + 100 gas Corsair could be usefully spent elsewhere, but countless Korean gosus seem to think that the Corsair is worth it, even just as a scout. I think that that one extra Corsair might be worth it for how much more dangerous it makes your overlord-hunting/harrassment expeditions. Yes, shuttles are definitely higher priority targets than Corsairs. But if you check the replay I was referring to, you'll see what I mean. Again, Spiretech is a whole different game, but against Hydras, there are several AI abuse type things you can pull that give you that extra second you might need. Just an idea, though. You've seen the way Yellow and other Zergs like to send out ovies all over the map as soon as they have the speed upgrade, surrounding the enemy base and so scanning for any shuttles or probes leaving. With just two Corsairs, this is suddenly much more difficult for the Zerg. It's like an anti-hack The topic of whether the Corsair is worth it early game is definitely debatable, but by that very fact I think their value is apparent.
|
isn't reaver too slow,and goons are slow too, what if they go for early muta rush? no ht or archon?and do u go for reaver first? or not,and isn't reaver damages ur own units too? then speed lings will own
|
As has been mentioned, Spire is definitely the most dangerous way Zerg can go. That's one reason you go Corsair + Reaver first: not because the Corsairs would counter the Muts, which they wouldn't, but so you can see it coming and prepare. To see exactly what I'm talking about, check here under Nucleus Strategies and follow the links. And no, Reavers do not splash your own units.
|
you need 2 gas, you need to fast expand then go reaver / sair
|
if the zerg is going muta you should give up on attacking and just expo
|
|
Holy damn, I think ShadowMaster deserves some credits for posts and answers like this. If you like his ideas or not, at least these are the most thorough examinations in the whole strategy sections!
Good job and thanx!
|
If u have corsairs quite early u can slow down zerg greatly, since he must cut down on drone production and must go eigher spores or den. I personally think that if u decide for spores, you waste 125(50 for drone) for evolution chamber, if u build 2 spores another 175*2=350 minerals. Otherwise u force zerg into using hydras early, being low on economy. Now u can try to use revear, i often see it with like 1:1 zeal,goon ,1 shuttle with revears, producing only goons from this moment. Since perfect timing and micro is needed not many players use it. Fisheye uses it on LT along with dropping 2 goons on expand cliff first, this way zerg must invest to another 1-2 sunken colonies to protect the cliff and withdraw drones till it's safe. Therefore on LT this strategy is quite safer i think.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 24 2004 17:41 BigBalls wrote: The ONLY thing reaver sair goon is good against is a 1 base zerg. thats it *1 gas zerg. But even then it's not that great, I like how kingdom zealot/reavers vs 1 gas zerg
|
even mass lings > goon rvr :D
|
Sweden33719 Posts
No.
Because even if you somehow beat the attack your drones will all be dead ;o
|
the real power of reaver/sair is on islands. for a few reasons. first, you dont have to worry about hydra/ling/lurker whatever rush, it will come by air and by then you should at LEAST have cannons. When going sair/reaver, what money does that leave you with if a zerg says "fuck you 3hatch hydra " before your reaver comes out?
anyway, thats early game. secondly, on islands you NEED sairs v. zerg to keep them in check, the versatility of lords, and speed of muta/scourge will beat the crap out of you if you dont have sairs covering your shuttles. also, on islands zerg will have trouble massing ground units to combat you if you employ guerilla tactics. You have 1-2 hatches on a small island? well that wont be enough to get enough hydra to stop 3-4 reavers(microed) supported by sair and later dweb.
Then think about costs, on island pvz you need sairs, you also need shuttles (and maybe obs.). Unlike the other 2 races these are on different tech trees. So you are wasting alot of money to cover 1. the ground and 2. the air. You cant venture up the templar tree so soon to deal with zerg with storms, without 2-3 gas nodes. it just wont work. So, you need something that is dangerous, splashing, and cheaper than zealot/templar to throw at the zerg. ur answer is reavers.
That is why reaver/sair is so great. And i think on land maps reaver/goon is like terran metal v. zerg, can be good, DOES have the element of surprise, but ultimately there is only so much you can do with it, you dont have the versatility and power of templar/lot/goon, just like in tvz you dont have the microable, versatile and incredibly damaging M&M force.
My 2cents.
|
The involvement of reavers in PvZ is not simply just that, it requires the toss to be offensive early game with fast zeas to 3 gate zea/goons onto robo forcing z 2 sunken up and make lings 2 slow down on drone. Many of reps PvZ from T.3)Jeju involved early pressure toss then 4 gate + reaver 1 attack GG
|
On October 25 2004 03:41 LastWish wrote: If u have corsairs quite early u can slow down zerg greatly, since he must cut down on drone production and must go eigher spores or den. I personally think that if u decide for spores, you waste 125(50 for drone) for evolution chamber, if u build 2 spores another 175*2=350 minerals. Otherwise u force zerg into using hydras early, being low on economy. Now u can try to use revear, i often see it with like 1:1 zeal,goon ,1 shuttle with revears, producing only goons from this moment. Since perfect timing and micro is needed not many players use it. Fisheye uses it on LT along with dropping 2 goons on expand cliff first, this way zerg must invest to another 1-2 sunken colonies to protect the cliff and withdraw drones till it's safe. Therefore on LT this strategy is quite safer i think.
LastWish, that is exactly what I'm talking about Hydratech is no simple matter vs. Reavers and can easily blow up in the Zerg's face; it's really tough for even good players to keep up with Corsairs and Reavers in the early game using only hydras, and going colonies, while probably necessary, is a considerable investment that further justifies the strategy for the Protoss.
SpuniasauR, You are right, but I think that everyone will agree that generally Protoss are much easier to play on island maps than on land maps; thus we are examining this strategy on whether it is viable on a land type map. It's those early attacks that we are examining -- is Protoss okay?
|
I've just updated the main post with what we seem to have established so far, and in italics, what we need to investigate next. I'll put it here, too, for good measure.
- --Spiretech Zerg is the most dangerous for the Protoss. How should the Protoss deal with a Spireing Zerg?
- ++Hydratech is not convincing as a strategy in the early game and might even be favorable to Protoss, but in the least offers chances to both sides.
- ++Colonies seem to be required if the Zerg wants to ease the harrassment pressure, as most units may be out-maneuvered or spread too thin. Can Spire-Tech Zerg's safely forego investing in colonies?
- ++Sauron Style Zerg (no colonies all game) without much Spire Tech is extremely risky for the Zerg player as he is especially vulnerable to harrassment.
- ++The Zerg must be unusually conservative.Zerg trying to go mass expansions will have a hard time, as this strategy affords the Protoss a MUCH greater than usual degree of maneuverability.
|
I feel like your analysis is naturally leading into an invalid direction. Allow me to explain...
Many of PvZ problems stem from the fact that Zerg is fast and versatile, and can switch units, strategy, and style very quickly. The Protoss is often left guessing what units to build and what strategy to apply to a particular game. For example, if a Protoss rushes with zealots, but can't win the game instantly, then the Zerg can effectively get lurkers, mutas, upgraded hydras, lings, or a combo of these without the Protoss knowing exactly what the Zerg is doing. So the Protoss has to prepare for all of it, generally getting storm and cannons, then reacting more specifically once the Zerg is found out.
What is the solution to this? The Protoss can make moves to force the Zerg into doing something. Corsair/goon/reaver forces a reaction out of a Zerg, which you can see in real-time. You can see what units are hatching out of the eggs, what buildings are being built, and how his current army is being allocated. Thus, in a general sense, you can counter his strategy instantly, rather than as a reaction, and see the game several moves ahead.
By playing this way, you never expect one particular move to win the game. Instead, you just expect for your moves to put you a step ahead. It could be that you win on your first advantageous move, and it could be that it takes 40 minutes. To me, this is the "correct" way to play PvZ, given all the nuances and unique qualities of the matchup.
So, if I were to go corsair -> goon/reaver, it would be so that I can possibly kill a few overlords, harrass with reaver drop, safely establish my natural, and see what my opponent is doing the entire time. In this way, I'm controlling the flow of the game. I can decide if it's a good idea to try for a "finishing blow" by actually taking my utility army of corsair/goon/reaver, and turning it into a real attacking army. Otherwise, the utility army makes a great defensive army, and allows for me to get a real attacking army (templars) while maintaining that utility.
|
I believe NonY's most important points are (correct me if I am mistaken, please):
(1) In a PvZ, if Protoss goes Corsair, they know what the Zerg is doing and can react. Protoss doesn't have to build against multiple things or guess, but will have a correct, but debatably weaker (due to building the Corsair) reaction.
(2) In a PvZ, if Protoss does not Corsair, the Zerg can keep them blind until they make their first real move (Lurker, Muta, Hydra, etc.); Protoss has to build to be safe from it all or guess.
(3) ShadowMaster's excellent work is not consistent with the above two points (I have not personally checked -- this is soley from NonY's above post.
|
On October 25 2004 10:56 NonY wrote: I feel like your analysis is naturally leading into an invalid direction. Allow me to explain...
Many of PvZ problems stem from the fact that Zerg is fast and versatile, and can switch units, strategy, and style very quickly. The Protoss is often left guessing what units to build and what strategy to apply to a particular game. For example, if a Protoss rushes with zealots, but can't win the game instantly, then the Zerg can effectively get lurkers, mutas, upgraded hydras, lings, or a combo of these without the Protoss knowing exactly what the Zerg is doing. So the Protoss has to prepare for all of it, generally getting storm and cannons, then reacting more specifically once the Zerg is found out.
What is the solution to this? The Protoss can make moves to force the Zerg into doing something. Corsair/goon/reaver forces a reaction out of a Zerg, which you can see in real-time. You can see what units are hatching out of the eggs, what buildings are being built, and how his current army is being allocated. Thus, in a general sense, you can counter his strategy instantly, rather than as a reaction, and see the game several moves ahead.
By playing this way, you never expect one particular move to win the game. Instead, you just expect for your moves to put you a step ahead. It could be that you win on your first advantageous move, and it could be that it takes 40 minutes. To me, this is the "correct" way to play PvZ, given all the nuances and unique qualities of the matchup.
So, if I were to go corsair -> goon/reaver, it would be so that I can possibly kill a few overlords, harrass with reaver drop, safely establish my natural, and see what my opponent is doing the entire time. In this way, I'm controlling the flow of the game. I can decide if it's a good idea to try for a "finishing blow" by actually taking my utility army of corsair/goon/reaver, and turning it into a real attacking army. Otherwise, the utility army makes a great defensive army, and allows for me to get a real attacking army (templars) while maintaining that utility.
Excellent post. You are elaborating on what I called the Physical and Psychological aspects of the strategy, as mentioned in the original post. Physically the whole game takes a different flavor than old conventional PvZ games -- as you mention in your third and fifth paragraphs. This physical change will naturally put many Zerg players into a psychological rut; as you said, suddenly it is THEY who are forced to react.
I'm confused by your first statement, though. " I feel like your analysis is naturally leading into an invalid direction. Allow me to explain...". What analysis are you referring to? Your post seems to support the strategy.
|
I will reiterate, to use this strategy, the Protoss cannot be lazy and must micro and harrass like mad. Here is a perfect example of what not to do.
Game Analysis: Didi8 vs. Rabbit, Lost Temple 9 vs. 3, 1.09. Category: The Trouble with Reavers (What Not To Do) Replay: In the pack here.
Of Particular Interest:
- Didi8 remembered to leave a Reaver at his entrance while he sent another 2 Reavers on a raid, not neglecting his defense and buying time if he should need to bring the others back.
- Didi8 Reaver micro was absolutely awful, as he just let them sit vs. the Hydras when his natural was first attacked. Reavers MUST be microed.
- Didi8 did not micro.
- Didi8 did not counter.
- Didi8 did a wonderful job of showing what NOT TO DO with Reavers.
Report: A highly suspect build order (available here), made possible by the conservative game Zerg chose. Protoss chooses a strange mass-Reaver strategy, having 6 Reavers and only 2 Goons, 2 Zealots by the time he expands at 10:00. Notice that Zerg went late lair and Protoss knew it. Zerg attacked with mass hydras and focused on the Reavers, and Didi8 let them die without trying to save them. Zerg switches to mass Mutes and Protoss is helpless, having gone total Reavers. Conclusion: Mass Reavers sucks. Although this is low-quality play from the Protoss, this shows the sort of thing that users of this strategy must take efforts to avoid.
|
I think I kind of misread when I disagreed in my first line. I do have some further elaboration to make, but I'll do that after I finish my homework :O
|
Game Analysis: ArtToss vs. JulyZerg (Gurince), LT 9 vs 6. Category: Countering Sair/Reaver to Goon/Reaver (Spire) Replay: ArtToss vs JulyZerg
Strategic Notes:
- As has been mentioned, this strategy is best at more distant starting spots. The close position made things harder for the Protoss.
- The Protoss efforts to deny the Zerg expansion would actually have been counter-productive in different starting positions. In positions where the Protoss has more room to move (if the Toss was in any other position). Giving the Zerg more space actually increases the effectiveness of the Reavers, as you have more potential targets. However, in these close starting positions, it wouldn't have helped much.
- Notice how effectively the Zerg was able to counter the Reaver/Goon with his Muta/Scourge/Ling. This is what Zerg should try to do vs. this strategy.
In Conclusion: JulyZerg met it with the timing and reflexes of a pro (hmm... wonder why?) and dealt it a real blow. It would appear that Corsair + Reaver to Reaver + Goon is very high-risk at such close positions, as Spire tech will blow the Zerg away. Notice, however, that if the Zerg had not gone spire but had tried to stick with Hydras, the close positions would instead have favored Protoss because he could drop faster while the Hydras would not get to his base any faster.
A beautifully accurate play by JulyZerg, showing why he is one of the best.
|
16927 Posts
On October 24 2004 22:10 ShadowMaster wrote: This_is_not_a_smurf, in the example I was referring to with the original notes, it was all about two corsairs -- the only two that were made in the game. As far as Protoss units go, I don't think Corsairs are generally considered overly expensive; sure, the 150 gas Stargate + 100 gas Corsair could be usefully spent elsewhere, but countless Korean gosus seem to think that the Corsair is worth it, even just as a scout. I think that that one extra Corsair might be worth it for how much more dangerous it makes your overlord-hunting/harrassment expeditions. Yes, shuttles are definitely higher priority targets than Corsairs. But if you check the replay I was referring to, you'll see what I mean. Again, Spiretech is a whole different game, but against Hydras, there are several AI abuse type things you can pull that give you that extra second you might need. Just an idea, though. You've seen the way Yellow and other Zergs like to send out ovies all over the map as soon as they have the speed upgrade, surrounding the enemy base and so scanning for any shuttles or probes leaving. With just two Corsairs, this is suddenly much more difficult for the Zerg. It's like an anti-hack The topic of whether the Corsair is worth it early game is definitely debatable, but by that very fact I think their value is apparent.
Oh sorry, I didn't check the replay :D
|
[EDIT] -- I am moving this post to a new thread. Let's keep this thread as an analysis of the early-game Reaver strategies, which, if moderately successful, will lead to the midgame strategies discussed in the next thread.
|
Shadow I sware you must be a teacher or something, and if you aren't you better look into it. You could teach a complete newb about the basics of BW, and different strategy ideas, with your detailed outlined posts. I am very very impressed !
|
i think i would rather make zealots than goons speedy zealots. It would probably be great on a map where there is a freebee expand like biofrost. You could just turtle up and go out with reavers and millions of zealots. and if u have an citadel its not so bad to do tech switch. A siar would do great to socut also.
|
On October 26 2004 15:27 S(O)ME(O)NE wrote: i think i would rather make zealots than goons speedy zealots. It would probably be great on a map where there is a freebee expand like biofrost. You could just turtle up and go out with reavers and millions of zealots. and if u have an citadel its not so bad to do tech switch. A siar would do great to socut also.
I'm afraid I don't quite see your idea. With Zealots you are completely asking for Mutalisk, which is already the best Zerg option, and Zealots don't complement Reavers very well for main attack forces. Maybe you are talking about switching techs, like we've mentioned, to Zealots + Templar. That is definitely one of the main features of this strategy, and even of the whole game of Starcraft: knowing when to change strategies.
|
I would like to highlight a point made in a post by Hatamaki: Reavers are NOT front-line troops. They cannot be the spine of your army and attempts to make them so against even mediocre opposition will fail. In head-on fights the Reavers will suffer; 3 hydras can beat them, or even 6 Zerglings. It's true that intensive micro can win small battles for you, but this is only applicable in small battles and there are a lot of counter-micro tactics the Zerg can use.
Mass Reavers Mass Reavers: it's a classic. It has been tried countless times both the the explorers of early Starcraft theory and newbies. And it sucks. The primitive logic goes something like this: "If one Reaver is good, and two Reavers is twice as good, how about 6 Reavers? or 8?" The truth is, after 4 Reavers, extra Reavers add almost nothing. In fact, even 4 Reavers is usually not much better in a fight than 3; it's more like a precaution when one of the Reavers is destroyed, or so that you can leave 2 at home while 2 harrass.
As an ideal example of this is the game Smuft - Tsunami, LT 9 vs 12, 1.09. Smuft favors Reavers instead of Dragoons or Zealots and Tsunami thrashes him off of just one base with Hydras. The Point: Reavers don't win in stand-up fights. They require micro and support.
Besides; check out the damage Reach did with just a single Reaver.
|
On October 25 2004 14:35 ShadowMaster wrote: [...] Game Analysis: ArtToss vs. JulyZerg (Gurince), LT 9 vs 6. [...]
Isn't JulyZerg ArtToss? He played WSL with that nick right?
And is the game Smuft - Tsunami, LT 9 vs 12, 1.09 aviable some where?
|
I have the game Smuft - Tsunami but I am having real difficulties uploading it for some reason. It was played in January of 2002 and I haven't found it anywhere else.
I knew one of the players was JulyZerg and figured it was... well... the Zerg. In anycase Zerg played well.
|
Bah, I remember so many times great zerg players have lost vs this.Yellow vs Nal_Ra on Gaema.I was playing some pgtour these days with random and found out it was pretty hard for me to win zvp vs a good reaver user ,while the opposite almost always ended as an easy win.You just gotta be very agressive and adaptive the whole time.I dont see the point of going sair at all if you see him making 3 hatch.Youll have 2zeals and a reaver drop early enough to get his spire if he hasnt made hidras.The problem for the zerg is to balance between making enough hidralisks and getting the spire in time(not to get killed by the first 5-6 protoss units + the reaver) with some gas left.Mass hidras is NOT a counter.It should die horribly (yellow vs nal_ra..)Directly mutalisk is not a counter ,either.A cute move that some guy did vs me was making his spire in the edge of his base and placing 1 sunken so that I couldnt target it without fist killing the sunken, but I killed it anyway. You dont go for reaver drop vs a 2 hatch lair ,though.. I think ppl underestimate thouse builds ,because they require incredibly skilled scouting,timing and adapting to pull off. I tried pulling off several times this build - 7p/7gate/13p ,if i see hatch before pool i can do massive damage with the first 2-3 zeals and see what hes playing for for a long time microing the zeals around in his base and can choose what to tech for - robotics for sure if hes 3 hatching.If hes going for 2 hatch lair ,making army usually works better,cause he cant have enough units to stop you and must turtle.Doesnt matter if its 2nd gate + citadel or 3 gates goons or smth.You just gotta pressure. If he has went pool before hatch, a late 2nd gate zeals may be better than teching as well,to force him use his (not so many) larvas to make lings instead of drones.On far positions I would still go for gas ,though.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 27 2004 10:53 Falc wrote: Show nested quote +On October 25 2004 14:35 ShadowMaster wrote: [...] Game Analysis: ArtToss vs. JulyZerg (Gurince), LT 9 vs 6. [...]
Isn't JulyZerg ArtToss? He played WSL with that nick right? And is the game Smuft - Tsunami, LT 9 vs 12, 1.09 aviable some where? Gurince.. Isn't that someone from T.3) -.-?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Btw with 80 supply reavers I beat 80 supply ultra ling (on a mess around test map).
Was great fun but reavers really are retarded when 20 of them are firing :[!
Lost like half ;o
|
i remember i once lost my shuttle but got the reaver out clean about halfway on the ground path to some z's base so i made 6 cannons at home and escorted it with about a gazillion goons on it's walk towards the thin red line suffice to say mr muta got raped
|
On October 27 2004 15:32 Beast_Bg wrote: Bah, I remember so many times great zerg players have lost vs this.Yellow vs Nal_Ra on Gaema.I was playing some pgtour these days with random and found out it was pretty hard for me to win zvp vs a good reaver user ,while the opposite almost always ended as an easy win.You just gotta be very agressive and adaptive the whole time.I dont see the point of going sair at all if you see him making 3 hatch.Youll have 2zeals and a reaver drop early enough to get his spire if he hasnt made hidras.The problem for the zerg is to balance between making enough hidralisks and getting the spire in time(not to get killed by the first 5-6 protoss units + the reaver) with some gas left.Mass hidras is NOT a counter.It should die horribly (yellow vs nal_ra..)Directly mutalisk is not a counter ,either.A cute move that some guy did vs me was making his spire in the edge of his base and placing 1 sunken so that I couldnt target it without fist killing the sunken, but I killed it anyway. You dont go for reaver drop vs a 2 hatch lair ,though.. I think ppl underestimate thouse builds ,because they require incredibly skilled scouting,timing and adapting to pull off. I tried pulling off several times this build - 7p/7gate/13p ,if i see hatch before pool i can do massive damage with the first 2-3 zeals and see what hes playing for for a long time microing the zeals around in his base and can choose what to tech for - robotics for sure if hes 3 hatching.If hes going for 2 hatch lair ,making army usually works better,cause he cant have enough units to stop you and must turtle.Doesnt matter if its 2nd gate + citadel or 3 gates goons or smth.You just gotta pressure. If he has went pool before hatch, a late 2nd gate zeals may be better than teching as well,to force him use his (not so many) larvas to make lings instead of drones.On far positions I would still go for gas ,though.
Thanks for an excellent constructive post. So, it sounds like you usually Zeal rush into your Reavers or Stargate, using the Zealot rush as a sort of aggressive recon? If you happen to have any replays of yours demonstrating this, it would be great.
Oh, and congratulations on your WCG success!
|
This is a really GOOD post z(-_-)s
|
1 reaver is plenty if you micro it right
|
On October 28 2004 04:59 Casper... wrote: 1 reaver is plenty if you micro it right
Reach definitely demonstrated this
Also, later on in the game (and often even early game), double Reaver drops are devastating and can do much more than just eliminating the drones at an expansion. With attack forces I think 2 Reavers is optimal for most damage and least overkill, while the main purpose of a third Reaver is to reduce the effects of anti-Reaver micro (ie -- assassinating a Reaver). Four Reavers are fairly common in many Reaver midgames and are the "pure" investment into a Reaver strategy. This is good because you'll have the full power of two Reavers, in two places! (I hope I didn't lose anyone with this complex mathematical reasoning). However, note that usually four Reavers TOGETHER in a combat zone do noticeably no more than two Reavers, unless the Protoss is putting an exhaustive effort into microing each one, and has them spread well.
|
The Many Uses of Reavers Reavers can serve many purposes in a PvZ outside of the first initial drop (attempt). Although one of the most difficult units to use effectively, when the Protoss is up to the task the Reaver offers a host of tactical and strategic resources.
Reaver Harrassment
This is the first thing, and often the last thing, most players think of when they see Reavers. Usually the first motion made with Reavers in a game, it has the capability to immediately shut down the Zerg economy. However, it doesn't have to be limited to early-game mineral drops and Reavers used to their full harrassment capacity can wreak havoc in a number of ways. Drone drops are available throughout the game should the Zerg began to get lax in his defence, and once two Reavers are acquired it will take Zerg much more than a few sunken colonies to even pause the Protoss. These are especially effective against those Zerg who try to mass expand, as every new base offers the Protoss a new target. Strategically, just the possibility of drone drops gives the Protoss an unusual maneuverability that Zerg will probably try to counter with Mutalisk and Scourge. Surgical Strikes in the early game can be particularly effective, as mentioned by Beast: with a Reaver and two Zealots or, even better, a pair of Reavers, Protoss can destroy early Spires in construction before the Zerg can get an airforce in operation.
Reaver Support
With speedy shuttles (and sometimes even the slow brand) Reavers can quickly be brought to any battlefront, immediately providing a massive force in the Protoss's favor. In this capacity they are perhaps the fastest anti-ground unit in the game and are useful for anti-harrassment from ground threats.
Reaver Defense
One of the most vital performances of the Reaver in the early game of Reaver/Goon and Reaver/Corsair strategies is that of key defender. Crucial to securing the first expansion, a well-controlled Reaver means the difference between victory and immediate loss.
The Reaver Push
Finally, the aspect of the Reaver that can prove most dangerous to the Zerg: the Reaver Push. If the Zerg leaves the Protoss to his own methods too long, he will quickly find himself dealing with a very serious threat. Using the Reaver's superior range the Protoss will launch an attack on the front door of the Zerg position. The high damage of the Reavers causes the push to progress more quickly than most Tank pushes while the nearby Shuttle provides vastly superior maneuverability. Supported by Corsairs, Dragoons, and occasionally even Zealots, the possibility of this advance keeps Zerg in check and can severely punish them if they get too greedy or too hasty.
|
On October 27 2004 10:18 ShadowMaster wrote: I would like to highlight a point made in a post by Hatamaki: Reavers are NOT front-line troops. They cannot be the spine of your army and attempts to make them so against even mediocre opposition will fail. In head-on fights the Reavers will suffer; 3 hydras can beat them, or even 6 Zerglings. It's true that intensive micro can win small battles for you, but this is only applicable in small battles and there are a lot of counter-micro tactics the Zerg can use. Mass ReaversMass Reavers: it's a classic. It has been tried countless times both the the explorers of early Starcraft theory and newbies. And it sucks. The primitive logic goes something like this: "If one Reaver is good, and two Reavers is twice as good, how about 6 Reavers? or 8?" The truth is, after 4 Reavers, extra Reavers add almost nothing. In fact, even 4 Reavers is usually not much better in a fight than 3; it's more like a precaution when one of the Reavers is destroyed, or so that you can leave 2 at home while 2 harrass. As an ideal example of this is the game Smuft - Tsunami, LT 9 vs 12, 1.09. Smuft favors Reavers instead of Dragoons or Zealots and Tsunami thrashes him off of just one base with Hydras. The Point: Reavers don't win in stand-up fights. They require micro and support. Besides; check out the damage Reach did with just a single Reaver.
I updated the post with a link to the Smuft - Tsunami replay.
|
Game Analysis: Froz(Hero[s.R]) vs Veg (Dante1), LT 12 vs 6, 2003. Category: Countering Pure Spire Replay: Hero[s.R] vs Dante1 Froz opens with a 1-gate tech to Stargate while Veg goes 9-pool speedlings to 1-base Mutas and 3rd hatch exp. Froz opens with a Scout instead of Sair and finds the Spire. He plays carefully, immediately making a Forge and cannons before making a Reaver. He maintains Corsair production all the while and puts down a second gateway, pumping Dragoons. Once the Reaver finishes he doesn't bother trying any harrassment; he immediately pushes on the entrance at the Zerg natural. Zerg had a few hydras and moves in with his Muta/Ling force but the mutas and Scourge only succeed in destroying a Corsair and the shuttle. By the time Veg manages to take out the Reaver, all of his Zerglings and sunks are gone and it's Hydra vs. Dragoon and scout. Froz's reinforcements arrive and seal the deal.
Constant Corsairs > Pure Spire.
Nazgul, Rekrul, Liquid`Drone and a posse of others were observing this game. I wonder if they remember it EDIT: Got the upload working.
|
Great job, guys. I think this has been a very successful thread. It has become clear that Hydra/Muta is without a doubt the Zerg's best counter to Reaver strategies. Pure Muta should usually get crushed by the constant production of 1-Stargate Corsairs with Dragoons, and pure Hydra in the early game usually gives Protoss superior maneuverability and no out-of-the-ordinary threats, as long as he remembers to switch to Templar tech before the Hydras grow too much, or when the Zerg starts the Muts.
So, as the concluding factor on whether Corsair to Reaver is a sound strategy suitable to be a mainstay in the Protoss repertoire, let's examine the Hydra/Spire buildup. Please post replays and experience for both sides of the matchup, and thanks for those good posts we have already seen on this subject.
|
There was some great Vod featuring Nal_ra vs some z at Enter the dragon ,where Nal_ra went for robo before fighting unit, then attacked with 2z+g and forced the z to cancel his spire and when he finally had it ,Ra had the island + 6-7 sairs off 2 stargates and it was obviously over.
Of course it is a sound strategy.It requires a lot of practice to perfect ,though and you cant just start the game ,knowing what youre going to do ,no matter what happens..Its a very adaptive strategy and thus - pretty hard to pull off.And I'd say that robo first may be better stargate vs most of the z builds.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
First, ShadowMaster, I must congratulate you on the success of this thread and its consistency. Second, I must say that I am not a Protoss player, but after much evaluation of replays and reading of this thread, I thought I would give the Sair + Reaver strategy a try. After four games of putting it to use, I ended with 2-2. Emphasizing much of the conclusions we have already came to, I feel I must add my two cents:
- [++] Sair + Reaver is especially effective against Zerg who go Lurker/Ling or Hydra, and at the far positions. In one game I played, where I was 12:00 and my Zerg enemy 6:00, I was able to effectively kill 5 Overlords with only two Sairs, severely halting his unit production and hurting his economy. He had taken his natural, and taking advantage of my harassment early-on, I had two Zealots and a Reaver in a Shuttle back home. (I must note that in order for this strategy to be as effective as it was for me, the player must be very skilled in multi-tasking and again, as already stated, laziness is not an option). In an "unsuccessful" raid on his natural (where Corsairs provided distraction), I lost a zelaot and he managed to get his Drones out of harm's way. However, in smart thinking I quickly did a roud-about, knowing he would brings his Drones vainly back, dropped again and my Reaver managed to attain 23 kills! Though I left two Zealots and a Corsair less, my Reaver was unscathed. By the time I returned back home I had expanded and had a small army of Zealots, Goon, and some ob, plus another Reaver. My enemy then chose to expand again at his mineral-only, which he protected with some Lurker/Ling/Hydra. Seeing that he was over-extending his units, and because manueverability with my Reavers was so easy now, I attacked his mineral-only with my rag-tag army and simultaneously dropped my two Reavers at his natural, bringing that Reaver's kill count to 30+!. He did not have enough units to protect both positions, and I was rewarded with a flat "GG." Overall, I was overjoyed at the success of the strategy and saw how it is by far easily superior to Zerg choosing Lurker/Ling or Hydra as their modus operandi.
- [--] Mutalisk Rush and close positions is especially dangerous to Corsair + Reaver. In the second game I played, where I was 12:00 and my Zerg enemy 3:00, my Corsairs were useless as harassment against him. He had a colony at his main, around which his Overlords were safely shepherded, and he quickly dispatched of my Sairs with some scourge, which were quickly followed by a group of Mutalisks who made quick mince-meat of my main. Of course, I made some mistakes, mistakes that I am sure ShadowMaster covered -- such as being too hatsy and not setting up cannons effectively. However, the close positions, the Zerg's choice of Spiretech, and his overall smart gameplay, took the day. I did not attempt this strategy on any other maps. [Note: In both of the games I lost, the Zerg went Spire tech and was able to dispatch my Sair easily with scourge -- furthermore, each one was at close positions: 12/3, 9/6.]
Although I am not a Protoss user, and probably less-skilled than many players here (my APM ranges between 115-130; I see that sadly, many people think this a barometer of "skill" so I use it now, albeit hesitantly), I feel that I had both success and failure with the Sair + Reaver strategy and I almost immediately saw its advantages and disadvantages in real-time.
|
On October 29 2004 18:46 ShadowMaster wrote: Game Analysis: Froz(Hero[s.R]) vs Veg (Dante1), LT 12 vs 6, 2003. Category: Countering Pure Spire Replay: Hero[s.R] vs Dante1Froz opens with a 1-gate tech to Stargate while Veg goes 9-pool speedlings to 1-base Mutas and 3rd hatch exp. Froz opens with a Scout instead of Sair and finds the Spire. He plays carefully, immediately making a Forge and cannons before making a Reaver. He maintains Corsair production all the while and puts down a second gateway, pumping Dragoons. Once the Reaver finishes he doesn't bother trying any harrassment; he immediately pushes on the entrance at the Zerg natural. Zerg had a few hydras and moves in with his Muta/Ling force but the mutas and Scourge only succeed in destroying a Corsair and the shuttle. By the time Veg manages to take out the Reaver, all of his Zerglings and sunks are gone and it's Hydra vs. Dragoon and scout. Froz's reinforcements arrive and seal the deal. Constant Corsairs > Pure Spire.Nazgul, Rekrul, Liquid`Drone and a posse of others were observing this game. I wonder if they remember it EDIT: Got the upload working. Rofl this is the game i tried to embarrass veg by beating him without my keyboard He's gotten a lot better since then though =[
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
Personally, I like opening with zeal/reaver (after a sair to scout for spire -- I like Beast's advice about watching his # of hatches, though) on maps like Nostalgia where you have a mineral only nat. I do this because reavers (esp. with shuttles) have a much higher min:gas consumption ratio than HTs. I haven't really "put it to the test" yet (read: I have no idea if it's really a good idea or not), but I thought I'd bring it up since everyone seems to be talking about LT and other maps with a gas nat, with relatively little attention being given to mineral-only nat maps.
|
Thanks RayzorBlade for a constructive and very well-written post. Interestingly, in almost all the games I looked at that ended favorably for the Protoss, the positions were 12 vs 6 on LT. In fact, in the vast majority of the games, Zerg was at 6:00 regardless of where Protoss was. Interesting coincidence.
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
|
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).
|
reavers are better i think, 100 attack dmg
|
Great post, thanks for all the strats and counters.
|
mmmm, Mass hydra is rlz in zvp, u just need learn to dance
|
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.
|
Have any of you here thought about how this strat owns? Early sairs hunting for ol's can be a real pain in the ass - how do you want to do anything with zerg if you're constantly in the red? 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.
|
nice thread .. great job guys ...
|
(note: didn't read anything but the first post)
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.
|
a good P player know that storms+archons>corsairs
So muta is hard in ZvP, u can use mutas in short games but in large games u need hydras, dance and ultras ^^
|
First I'd like to mention this is my first post here and that I dont actually exist I am in fact some random.
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
I realy got to try this out...
|
|
|
|