EPT[Q] Why Stasis instead of Dweb PvT? - Page 5
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
axel
France385 Posts
| ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
| ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
| ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On January 06 2009 11:22 Jonoman92 wrote: Positives of Dweb: -Corsairs are faster and cheaper than arbiters. -2 corsairs cost much less gas than one arbiter (albeit more minerals) so gas can be spent on additional templars/upgrades Faster to build, yes: they build 4x faster. Cheaper to build, no. Gas cost is essentially irrelevant in PvT: the limiting factor is minerals, because your ground army will be very mineral-heavy. Since Dweb has a smaller AOE than Stasis, and costs more energy, let's say you need 2 sairs for every arbiter to get the same effect. Then the Dweb strat will cost you 3 times more minerals. Not to mention the fact that Fleet Beacon + Dweb upgrade = 500 minerals, whereas Arbiter Tribunal + Stasis upgrade = 350 minerals. -Corsairs build very quickly and once the ability is researched it is easy to have a few with enough energy to cast some dwebs This is really their only merit: you get access to Dweb faster than Stasis. -While tanks are covered not only can they not attack but they are still vulnerable as well. On January 07 2009 00:07 GrandInquisitor wrote: * Units under dweb can be attacked This is a bad thing. It means your units will be wasting time attacking enemies that are harmless: they should be attacking the enemies that are currently firing back, instead. -Easy transition to carriers if desirable. This is mostly-useless because depending on the terrain, one will go either carriers or arbs. So if you replace arbs with sairs, then you would never want to go carriers on a map where you are going sairs, anyway. Furthermore, if you have to choose between sairs and arbs to augment your carriers, the obvious choice is arbs because they cost so much less minerals, even with the added cost of the Arbiter Tribunal (200 mins). On January 06 2009 13:31 epic-zerglings wrote: - dweb only lasts around 20 seconds, but pwns turrets as well as tanks Dweb on turrets is useless compared to arbs. First of all, when it comes to big drops, turrets seldom stop an arbiter from flying in and recalling. But more importantly, the # of units you can recall with an arbiter would require many shuttles, and shuttles are very mineral-heavy. As for storm drops, or any situation where Dweb on turrets would be useful, you can just use Hallucination instead. In fact, Halu is much better because multiple turrets will each need a separate Dweb, and when you do cast Dweb you make it obvious that you're about to do a drop/recall. - corsairs are cheap, fast, and can shoot down dropships(only if you have a lot, which i don't think is a good idea) I'll argue that arbs are about equally useful against drops: 1. sairs chase and shoot down dropships ~= arbs stasis them to be shot down later 2. sairs dweb dropped tanks ~= arbs stasis dropped tanks On January 07 2009 00:07 GrandInquisitor wrote: * The counter isn't as simple as focus fired goliaths. Increased number of corsairs + faster movement speed means it's harder for goliaths to pick them off quickly * Corsairs are sometimes easier to control, since they won't run off and attack turrets on their own Actually, countering arbs is harder. Building arbs forces the terran to build vessels (= fewer tanks) and gols (= fewer tank/vult, and gols suck hard compared to tanks and vults). Building sairs doesn't really force the terran to do anything, since they can't directly attack the terran army and don't do anything else except Dweb sieged tanks. Sairs also have less health than arbs (even though they take less damage), which negates the advantage of being able to run away faster. They do run away on their own when attacked, but this has the downside of making it harder to dweb stuff, since some of your sairs will have run away. This leads into your point about control. If the terran does build vessels and gols vs sairs, then the sairs will have a tendency to chase after the vessels, flying deep into the terran army where they die easily. In addition, sairs + Dweb require more apm than arbs + Stasis. Thus sairs are overall harder to control. Lastly, someone mentioned that sairs can shoot down vessels, but arbs are arguably better vs vessels than sairs. It takes time to kill a vessel with sairs, and the terran can just move the vessel back and crush the sairs with turrets/gols. Stasising a vessel (or even a group of them) is a lot easier. The only drawbacks are the energy cost (though you might get part of his army as well), and the fact that you can't stop the vessels if your arbs all get EMP'd beforehand. In conclusion, there really isn't a single advantage to going sairs over arbs, except for the fact that you can get dwebs earlier than stasis (and the fun aspect, of course  ). Add this to the myriad advantages to going arbs over sairs, and it's obvious why sairs + Dweb is almost always less useful than arbs + Stasis. | ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9101 Posts
Thanks for the replies though. I do think that generally Arbiters are more useful and easier to use but i'll test out trying to use some sairs this weekend when I have time and see how badly I get owned, just for fun. I also disagree with the people who say it's blatantly obvious that one is better than the other. The main argument I do agree with is that teching arbiters is gas heavy, and gas is generally not the limiting resource in PvT, and that going dweb it uses up minerals you need for building up your army. | ||
|
Dalroti
Canada70 Posts
1. It lasts longer than Dweb 2. Arbitors can still cloak 3. Arbitors can attack ground units, sairs can't 4. Fleet beacon costs more than an Arbitor Tribunal 5. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On January 08 2009 07:09 Jonoman92 wrote: I also disagree with the people who say it's blatantly obvious that one is better than the other. Well I think I did a pretty convincing job of showing that there is NO advantage of going dweb over stasis, except that dweb comes earlier. And with all the advantages stasis has over dweb, it is indeed blatantly obvious that stasis is better. (Unless you have some pro gosu timed build where you NEED dweb earlier than stasis.) Alternatively, you could just form your opinion without any regard for logic or reason. Or maybe I'm just not good enough for you to believe my arguments? "He's not Chill or JF: he doesn't know what he's talking about." But if that's the case, why bother starting a discussion in the first place? You should just say, "I want someone who's B+++ to tell me why stasis is better than dweb." | ||
|
Salv
Canada3083 Posts
Also, if the situation arises that you can get enough corsairs together, I think it becomes an advantage that you can still attack the units underneath. Bill, you wrote that it was a disadvantage because your units will spend time attacking units that are no threat to you, which is true, but I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that there are times a Terran's army isn't spread out enough (usually when you catch them off-guard with a flank and they siege immediately), and then four or five disruption webs can cover 80-90% of their army. I think that arbiters are easier to use in general and are overall the better unit to get. Yet I think if you were to play and find out a good timing and became skilled at using corsair, you could use them to great effect. For me, it's something that I can't really explain well in words, but I just have a feeling that it has more merit then your giving it. | ||
|
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
I know I've been tricked in to seeing a fleet beacon, and next to it a blinking stargate thinking "Ah. Carriers. I wonder where the other stargates are." Only to have 5 corsairs backed by a large protoss force completely annihilate me because instead of vultures and tanks I had goliaths and tanks. Goliath/Tank < Zealot/Goon/Reaver/Corsair, or simply Zealot/Goon/Corsair. Do I think it's a viable strat always? No. Simply because a terran player can build 3-5 goliaths and 1-2 vessels with emp, and the better micro wins. The same could be said about arbiters, but they're tougher and still provide cloak when out of energy. But it's certainly a good way to throw off your opponent every now and again. The way you throw off your opponent is they have way too many goliaths and no vessels, and you overrun their army with ground forces. | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
| ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9101 Posts
On January 08 2009 17:06 Bill307 wrote: Well I think I did a pretty convincing job of showing that there is NO advantage of going dweb over stasis, except that dweb comes earlier. And with all the advantages stasis has over dweb, it is indeed blatantly obvious that stasis is better. (Unless you have some pro gosu timed build where you NEED dweb earlier than stasis.) Alternatively, you could just form your opinion without any regard for logic or reason. Or maybe I'm just not good enough for you to believe my arguments? "He's not Chill or JF: he doesn't know what he's talking about." But if that's the case, why bother starting a discussion in the first place? You should just say, "I want someone who's B+++ to tell me why stasis is better than dweb." Sorry I must've come off arrogant I guess? I do agree with you that in general play Arbiters are almost always the better choice largely due to the fact that teching arbiters does not cost nearly as many minerals as going d-web does, and it provides cloaking and recall as well. From the start I never really thought d-web was going to be the "better" option (because hey, then all the pro-gamers would be using it all the time already) I just wanted to figure out the reasons why it was that Arbiters are so overwhelmingly the norm. Thanks for your post though, it captured all the main arguments and I agree with what you said. I was just a bit irritated at the people saying it's obvious that one is better than the other because in my mind it wasn't THAT one sided, at least not upon my first looking at it. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
I got raped TvP last week late game when he went carriers. I naturally went mass gols off 8-9 facts that i already had but he would just fly around everywhere killing my bases abusing the cliffs (Lost Temple) and when I get to my base to save it he already target fired my CC and I couldn't keep up in minerals. So after his 3rd time of doing that I went to counter his main but he had 4-5 sairs sitting there with like a dozen cannons and when i started to kill all his cannons he just dwebed me like fucking 10 times until his carriers arrived. I needlessly threw away like 30 gols and 10 tanks doing that and he just rolled me over after. No fucking joke, that was insane. Idk about ground army + sairs though PvT but carriers with sairs rape monkey balls if you use them effectively... | ||
|
dyos
United States108 Posts
| ||
|
FoBuLouS
United States570 Posts
| ||
|
JFKWT
Singapore1442 Posts
You can stasis vessels. You can't Dweb vessels though. Arb: -Provides cloak -Stasis reduces T army -Recall -Mineral friendly -Game Changing unit Imho the T can kill the corsair faster/ignore the corsair as it doenst pose as high threat level as an arb. | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
| ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
I thought I had a couple of replays of me doing D-Web before (obv amateur games) but I just searched through every PvT and I couldn't find any sairs in them. I've tried to do it a few times recently, but I reserve it for late-game and by then I've secured the win. D-Web is really effective when you use it a lot. Sadly that's time consuming and requires you to wait for the right energy to use it. It would be cool to see a build that utilizes something different in PvT, it's getting a bit redundant doing the same thing every PvT... | ||
|
knightpraetor
United States180 Posts
| ||
| ||
