EPT[I] Valkyrie Use, TvZ. - Page 8
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
tKd_
United States2916 Posts
| ||
SilverskY
Korea (South)3086 Posts
| ||
|
Elite]v[arine
United States264 Posts
On October 06 2008 03:48 Empyrean wrote: The first game was some kind of weirdass ten minute short game that didn't get up to Valkyrie tech. The second game wasn't what the topic creator was talking about. Oh wow Boxer made Valkyries! That's about all it has to do with the original poster's strategy of 2port Valk into Tanks with various mm scattered about. not to mention he won both games i can see why nintu is so mad.... ppl throwing out random words without thinking. haha... and here im talking about ppl throwing out random bullshit and i didn't even give you the right vods... http://www.gomtv.net/classics2/vod/304 http://www.gomtv.net/classics2/vod/305 lol... he wins these games. | ||
Empyrean
16950 Posts
| ||
|
d(O.o)a
Canada5066 Posts
*Knock knock* Trick or treat - hydralisk valk AAAAAHH VALKS RUNNNNNN MASS BUILD OVERLORDS! ALL OF OUR MINERALS! - Zergling Nigga it's me - Hydralisk Valk TAKE OFF TEH COSTUMEZ I DUN BELIEVE YOU! - Ultralisk what the fuck man settle down it's halloween remember? - hydralisk valk Valkyrie preparedx12 - medic valk What the hell was that? - mutalisk eaueaueau - mutalisks dieing what the fuck man?! - hydralisk valk build some fucking hydras to kill these nigs - kerrigan We can't they killed all of our overlords - drone WHAT THE FUCK?! - Zerg race Do you understand now? | ||
|
KwarK
United States41931 Posts
On October 06 2008 02:10 Nintu wrote: When you get enough valks with +1, they absolutely DESTROY scourge. Scourge work amazingly when there is 3 or 4 valks, but once you get like 8, I've seen it tried many times and almost everytime, my valks came out unscathed. My point is that you need 8 or so for a critical mass and valks are so expensive that 8 isn't viable for that kind of role. Inefficient mineral cost for the use. This was my point. You're agreeing with me. | ||
|
meathook
1289 Posts
I tried this build and it sort of worked for me, at least on D level... I tried it twice; once I got killed by 2 hatch lurker cheese, but it was mostly due to sloppiness on my part (forgot to put rines in my bunkers at the natural, heh) and the other time I killed the guy as he was going 2hatch muta (what is it with these God damned 2hatch builds ???). Anyway, if I knew my BOs better, I guess I would have less trouble. On October 06 2008 08:30 d(O.o)a wrote: Nintu; he tried to tell everybody valks can be viable they laughed in his face. But know because Valks are really just hydralisks in halloween costumes why? because overlords are fucking scared of them so on halloween they go to the hive cluster and are like: *Knock knock* Trick or treat - hydralisk valk AAAAAHH VALKS RUNNNNNN MASS BUILD OVERLORDS! ALL OF OUR MINERALS! - Zergling Nigga it's me - Hydralisk Valk TAKE OFF TEH COSTUMEZ I DUN BELIEVE YOU! - Ultralisk what the fuck man settle down it's halloween remember? - hydralisk valk Valkyrie preparedx12 - medic valk What the hell was that? - mutalisk eaueaueau - mutalisks dieing what the fuck man?! - hydralisk valk build some fucking hydras to kill these nigs - kerrigan We can't they killed all of our overlords - drone WHAT THE FUCK?! - Zerg race Do you understand now? Hahaha! That is brilliant! Where is the movie adaptation? Russel Crowe would be perfect as the Hydralisk Valk, Mel Gibson could direct. Edit: Added topical response. | ||
|
404.Nintu
Canada1723 Posts
On October 06 2008 08:57 Kwark wrote: My point is that you need 8 or so for a critical mass and valks are so expensive that 8 isn't viable for that kind of role. Inefficient mineral cost for the use. This was my point. You're agreeing with me. Their expense is made up for by their synergy with other Terran units. Sure, you can compare them cost effectively with Corsairs, but corsairs don't have groups of MnM for scourge, or mass tanks for hydras. The comparison between PvZ and TvZ is sort've lost because they're just too different. I got 8 or so valkyries in a real game in game 2 of the vid and it worked just as I described. Critical mass. +1. Unstoppable by any sort of realistic means on the zerg part. | ||
|
Insane Lane
United States397 Posts
| ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
Actually... I was inspired to mess with Valks too, after seeing Perfective's replays (some time last year, maybe 2 years ago?). Definitely loads of fun.... I will never forget this one screen shot though.. ![[image loading]](http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/1174/beautifulmomentjx9.jpg) | ||
|
Viledica
Canada361 Posts
The video was excellent, I'll be sure to recommend it. | ||
|
SWPIGWANG
Canada482 Posts
Sair Reaver is much, much more mobile than terran metal. Reavers kill hydra well enough and Corsairs can kill scourge by itself so the entire air stack can roam the air and kill expansions left and right while killing any stray overlords without being limited by where seige tanks or marines can travel. Sairs scale better with tech as Dweb totally bones hydra. Additional tech into D.Archons or Carriers work well with Sairs to counter a teching Zerg. The lowered vulnerability to plague is also very important, as is reaver/storm's much superior ability in breaking lurk/swarm contain. ------------- On the execution side, Valk-MnM-Tank might be a little easier as it doesn't demand reaver shuttle micro that is easy to botch. When the execution requirement is met and the protoss player no longer needlessly lose shuttles and reavers, Sair Reaver's greater scalability IMO makes stronger.... | ||
|
diehilde
Germany1596 Posts
On October 06 2008 10:26 Nintu wrote: Their expense is made up for by their synergy with other Terran units. Sure, you can compare them cost effectively with Corsairs, but corsairs don't have groups of MnM for scourge, or mass tanks for hydras. The comparison between PvZ and TvZ is sort've lost because they're just too different. I got 8 or so valkyries in a real game in game 2 of the vid and it worked just as I described. Critical mass. +1. Unstoppable by any sort of realistic means on the zerg part. holy crap ur reluctant to any sort of criticism. first i come along and tell u its a cute build but wont work consistently against good players, then kwark (B player) comes along and tells u valks are not cost efficient and still u refuse to believe. Do you really need Idra and Inc coming along telling u its a cute build but unfortunately valks still aren't cost efficient and thus this build will never be more than a cute "1-time" build against good opponents? Why dont u go and try make a build focussing on scouts for P or a build focussing on queens for Z? Then when people tell u its cute but worse than all standard (and even almost all not so standard) builds for the respective matchups, u can go on and refuse to accept the most basic principles of starcraft, like cost efficiency. | ||
|
stenole
Norway868 Posts
When you play zerg against a normal FE terran, you will first of all be focusing on getting up a 3rd gas expo. When a player is not going for a classic FE into marines and medics, he will not be able to mount any pressure on that third base. It also means that there will be very little pressure on the main and natural. So you get the third base for free and you don't have to invest in sunkens. The lair can also be delayed for additional economy. My opinion is that opening with valks is a cheese build, because it relies on having hidden buildings and the opponent is playing it out as if it was a "normal" game (or inability to revert to a "normal" game when it's time). I do however think that late game valks would be an interesting experiment because at that time, the zerg seldomly runs around with upgraded hydras. | ||
|
404.Nintu
Canada1723 Posts
On October 06 2008 19:27 damenmofa wrote: holy crap ur reluctant to any sort of criticism. first i come along and tell u its a cute build but wont work consistently against good players, then kwark (B player) comes along and tells u valks are not cost efficient and still u refuse to believe. Do you really need Idra and Inc coming along telling u its a cute build but unfortunately valks still aren't cost efficient and thus this build will never be more than a cute "1-time" build against good opponents? Why dont u go and try make a build focussing on scouts for P or a build focussing on queens for Z? Then when people tell u its cute but worse than all standard (and even almost all not so standard) builds for the respective matchups, u can go on and refuse to accept the most basic principles of starcraft, like cost efficiency. Let me help you out here. On October 06 2008 14:27 SWPIGWANG wrote: It is best to compare this build to FE into sair-reaver, as their concept is the same. I would consider sair reaver the stronger build. The two main issue this this: Sair Reaver is much, much more mobile than terran metal. Reavers kill hydra well enough and Corsairs can kill scourge by itself so the entire air stack can roam the air and kill expansions left and right while killing any stray overlords without being limited by where seige tanks or marines can travel. Sairs scale better with tech as Dweb totally bones hydra. Additional tech into D.Archons or Carriers work well with Sairs to counter a teching Zerg. The lowered vulnerability to plague is also very important, as is reaver/storm's much superior ability in breaking lurk/swarm contain. ------------- On the execution side, Valk-MnM-Tank might be a little easier as it doesn't demand reaver shuttle micro that is easy to botch. When the execution requirement is met and the protoss player no longer needlessly lose shuttles and reavers, Sair Reaver's greater scalability IMO makes stronger.... Good post. On October 05 2008 00:37 damenmofa wrote: sorry but no, this is crap against a zerg who knows what hes doing. Like others said, hyd/lurk rape the shit out of you, especially when coupled with drops. U say siege tanks rape hyd/lurk, but I say u can NOT have more than 4-5 Siege Tanks and a group of m&m when u go 2 port valks at the time the zerg hits you with like 2 grps of hydras and 5-10 lurks. If he uses drop, things even get more messy for u as u have to turtle like shit while the zerg can keep the pressure up and expo like hell. Damn, even humiliation tactics like throwing in queens with broodling for the tanks work against someone investing that much eco in valks so early on. Shitty post. I'm not reluctant to criticism. I'm reluctant to take shitty, opinionated posts as anything more than ignorant bias. Nobody is a larger critic to my own builds than myself, and I have already discussed all the shortcomings that I have discovered so far. This was simply a forum for ideas and applications, which you have contributed NOTHING. Your posts are useless. You bring nothing. It's blind flames like this that really discourage people from standing up and developing new ideas or strategies. When Boxer decided to produce the unit, he obviously saw that the unit could complete a task that no other unit could have done as efficiently or effectively. Whether it worked or not, in the intended plan or not, progamer level thinking decided that producing the unit was worth it. This thread was designed to find all the scenarios where that decision can find a place. If people have things to contribute, let it continue. If there is nothing else, let it die. =) | ||
|
diehilde
Germany1596 Posts
Corsairs - Pros in comparison to valks Cheaper than Valks Faster than Valks More readily available and cheaper prerequisites(gate->core->stargate) compared to (rax->fax->starport and armory->control tower) More useful interaction with other units in the mu (with DTs since they are cloaked and cors kill ovis, with shuttle/reaver play since u can upgrade ur shuttle to speed shuttle to make it a great harassment strategy which has a lot of mobility. U cant upgrade ur Dropships to Speed Dropships, making harassment strategies for terran far less efficient) Higher damage output due to less cooldown. Also I never flamed, I just told u I dont think its a good strat which obviously u took offense on by telling me u think I have no idea what Im talking about and u should better not listen to my comments. I consider this much more insulting than just directly telling u ur strat is bad. Also u dare to qualify posts by ur own merit, why cant I do the same with strats? To put it in ur own words I would say 1 rax fe -> SK Terran - Good Strat. 1 rax fe -> Dual Port Valks - Shitty strat. | ||
|
diehilde
Germany1596 Posts
| ||
|
Murlox
France1699 Posts
There is no such rule that one should always fucking do the same BO, because all the programmers do it. Only questions i see in the OP is : Is this BO viable ? And how can I improve it ? | ||
|
JMave
Singapore1802 Posts
Unlike corsair reaver, terran is really vulnerable at the start of the game unlike how protoss can cover themselves with proper cannon placement, negating most forms of an early rush. Therefore, the costs of corsairs can be compensated with a fast expansion, something terran can never do against a zerg. If you'd argue about bunker placement for early defense, it also doesn't make up for the early vulnerabilities that terran has due to what is needed for bunkers(150 minerals and 200 minerals for 4 rines). Its this early lack in defense that is probably the main barrier to this build because a second base is key before you can build up valk numbers together with MnM support as you guys have mentioned. I brought much thought to this over the past 2 days or so and I think maybe the aim of a valk build cannot be played like how corsairs are being used in play now due to the limits in economy as I had mentioned earlier. Perhaps a valk build can be good somewhere aroud mid-game when zerg starts getting his third and then you'll start valk production since by that time, he should be moving up his tech tree. Since zerg is heavy gas then, the idea of picking off overlords is critical such that he'd have to divert his attention to defending his ovies and building more hydras to fend off the harrass. Still, I question this build heavily since the way Nintu has showed us reflects alot of similarity to corsair reaver when both builds should be played differently. Just what I think. | ||
|
axel
France385 Posts
I'm curently working on a "semi-valk" build vs the standart 3 hat muta build. The idea is to completly deny muta harras : 1) u save money because u wont waste a lot of minerals in a lot of turets and loose marines vs a GOOD muta harras. 2) U can push the zerg very early , considering his muta harrass wont work and slow u down ( most important point in my opinion). I just standart fe, bunk and gas at the same time as soon as i have 2 marines. I build factory asap while pumping constantly marines from 1 rax. I do academy when begin straport/armory and second rax. At this point u should have like 2 valkyries pumped from ONE starport (not 2 like the op does) when first mutas pops out , ( i usually did 4). The weak points are : u can lose pretty badly to massive gling all in ( a bunker and late academy is sometimes not enough ) I dont know how good it is vs 2 hat mutas . I guess i wont have time to pump enough valkyries turets before mutas comes. My "build" was about a fast vessel + irradiate = same build but u pump a vessel + irradiate asap ( u need your second gas early on here) Till now it worked pretty good when i was not all in cheesed. As i said before i dont know how viable is this build vs 2 hat mutas ( maybe i need more and earlier turets ?) | ||
| ||
