EPTCorrect me if I'm wrong here, but isn't it more like
3hatch before pool = 14 CC > 12hatch=1rax FE >12pool >overpool = 2rax CC >9pool > BBS >5pool
economically speaking.
Simple Questions, Simple Answers - Page 3
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
Armathai
1023 Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't it more like 3hatch before pool = 14 CC > 12hatch=1rax FE >12pool >overpool = 2rax CC >9pool > BBS >5pool economically speaking. | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
Hidden_MotiveS
Canada2562 Posts
On May 09 2011 22:09 Frigo wrote: 60 drones on 3 bases? That's 17 drones on minerals for each base, meaning 4 or perhaps 3 hatcheries per base, or 10 to 17 overall (5 to 3 drones on minerals per hatch). That drone count is more appropriate for 4 bases, with 2 hatcheries at each base, increased to 3 hatcheries if the money allows it. And a 4 base zerg with 60 drones and time to power up completely OWNS a 2-base terran, no matter how many SCVs he has. A more realistic comparison would be 42 drones (3*[11+3]) vs somewhere between 42 and 60 SCVs (2*[9*2..3+3]). Of course the question itself is silly, you can't make a straight comparison due to several factors, including the different mechanics of the races, different unit costs, different unit mixes, time available to power up, timing windows, etc. Yeah, that part is wrong. Sorry, I meant to say 48 workers for both. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
On May 10 2011 03:15 Armathai wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't it more like 3hatch before pool = 14 CC > 12hatch=1rax FE >12pool >overpool = 2rax CC >9pool > BBS >5pool economically speaking. This is better but there are too many variations to compile a simple ranking out of. | ||
|
Release
United States4397 Posts
Do clumped lurkers under swarm take damage? | ||
|
Hidden_MotiveS
Canada2562 Posts
On May 10 2011 08:57 Release wrote: I've seen that a single lurker takes absolutely no damage under a swarm, but Do clumped lurkers under swarm take damage? Lurkers under swarm, even clumped, take no damage from sieged tanks. If you irradiate a single lurker in a clump, only that irradiated lurker will take damage. Dark swarm prevents direct damage from ranged attacks on units. Burrow prevents indirect splash damage. | ||
|
Magus
Canada450 Posts
| ||
|
Release
United States4397 Posts
Can clumped lurkers be damaged under swarm from sieged siege tanks? yes or no | ||
|
hauton
Hong Kong743 Posts
Dark Swarm Under Dark Swarm, the projectile is shifted to the side. Therefore, the point of impact is also shifted to the side. Since the point of impact is shifted to the side, units under Dark Swarm are only affected by the splash damage of those units with radial splash. In addition, if a unit is on top of the shifted point of impact, it takes full damage from the attack. Burrowed units do not take damage from radial splash under Dark Swarm. There are a few exceptions to this effect, and they are the: Reaver, Infested Terran, Firebat, and Spider Mine. In the case of these units, they don't have a projectile attack sprite, so their attacks are not shifted at all. The two airborne radial splash damage dealers both do not attack ground, thus they never come into conflict with Dark Swarm. So I think this is conclusively saying that Siege Tanks do not do any damage to Lurkers. They are a ranged damage whose radial splash does not fall within the list of these exceptions. | ||
|
Rustymike
Finland327 Posts
Has anyone besides me tried this in ZvT? After the standard 3hatchmuta opening into lurkerling, where you inch by inch move back slowly, take one or two of your lurkers and put them on hold position behind Terrans possible 2nd expansion mineral lines (since he is only on two bases at this point). After the game moves towards late game and he has saturated the expansion, remove the hold command. It's like an invisible drop. I've tried it against two terrans and they didn't know what hit them. I think I've never seen in any provods either the Terran scanning their possible expansions before taking them (well only if there is a ling blocking them burrowed). | ||
|
Magus
Canada450 Posts
On May 10 2011 11:34 hauton wrote: Edit: from Liquipedia So I think this is conclusively saying that Siege Tanks do not do any damage to Lurkers. They are a ranged damage whose radial splash does not fall within the list of these exceptions. You forgot the part I bolded in there, which means lurkers in front of the targeted lurker can be killed if the tank shot is on top of them. | ||
|
Release
United States4397 Posts
On May 10 2011 13:22 Magus wrote: You forgot the part I bolded in there, which means lurkers in front of the targeted lurker can be killed if the tank shot is on top of them. Thinking about the discussion, the dark swarm works by moving the projectile 1 unit grid from the target, therefore nullifying any direct damage, and the burrow ignores splash damage. However, the projectile, now one unit grid away from the original target, will "directly" attack the spot, damaging, killing, even burrowed units. I think this is the most logical explanation. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
On May 09 2011 06:42 Murderotica wrote: I saw that the SC2 forum has created something good Pah, elitists! | ||
|
koreasilver
9109 Posts
| ||
|
[Cute]Pjnkje
Vietnam50 Posts
...and the burrow ignores splash damage Many say that splash damage cant hurt burrowed units, but I often see an Archon attack a zealot to kill the burrowed Lurker, so ...? | ||
|
Percutio
United States1672 Posts
| ||
|
fazek42
Hungary441 Posts
| ||
|
buhhy
United States1113 Posts
| ||
|
Magus
Canada450 Posts
On May 16 2011 03:48 buhhy wrote: Guys, I have tested. Tanks can indeed kill lurkers under swarm. Will post screenies later. We already tested and answered this. Twice. Does no one read page 2?  | ||
|
buhhy
United States1113 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/4553/49777286.png) ![[image loading]](http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/4163/34487871.png) ![[image loading]](http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/1411/56451320.png) ![[image loading]](http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/1015/44362714.png) ![[image loading]](http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/7566/44576899.png) Cool, no? | ||
| ||
