EPTWould be a LOT better instead of going for all the pages searching for the infos
Busting myths with UnitTester - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Yokoblue
Canada594 Posts
Would be a LOT better instead of going for all the pages searching for the infos | ||
|
Moja
United States313 Posts
 How about banelings vs marines? | ||
|
obsid
United States389 Posts
"My best against 5 Thors was 16 Mutas (I had one surviving Muta with 26 hp)." I think he meant 4 thors (given he was going 1, then 2, then 3, ... .then 5?). With 4 thors he is correct. Best i could do with 5 thors is about 19 muta. One key thing is not just muta spread, but making sure your muta are actualy ON TOP of the thors, the reason is the AI targets the "closest" unit, which if your on top of the thors means each thor is targeting a diffrent muta, spreading out thier damage and making it easier for you. The micro is actualy very easy, and even a noob could do it if they knew how. The hard part is timing it so the marines are away (or scaring them away with some banelings first). I would still stay thor hard counters muta though, as your spending about 2x the cost in gas to kill the thors. For the same amount of resources thors own muta, no matter how much you micro. And we havent even included any scvs repairing the thor or actual focus fire by the thors.... As for upgrades for anyone that cares, it seems to me (from my trials), that the 1armor upgrade is critical for the thor in thor vr muta fight, and is offset by the +1 attack by muta, and if the muta have 2 more defense then the thor has attack, it takes 4 hits rather then 3, which is also critical. 3 2/2 mutas can take an unupgraded thor (3 1 attack/2 defense muta can take a thor with run away then come back micro). I think the key here is not to overestimate how strong thors are when they are alone. With stemed marines, those muta are toast. | ||
|
NATO
United States459 Posts
| ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
The other issue is that some of the "counters" are more effective in real situation, when they are part of the usual army composition. Eg: 1 Ultra vs 1 Thor with 250mm cannons, the Ultra survives with 1HP, but in the real combat both die. Hence the unstoppable Thor is stopped, hence - counter. Often counter means "to get about even", rather than "to get advantage". Counter is not even intended to mean that one unit is strong enough to beat the other, it means that this unit is close to the most cost-effective choice for that race; i.e. if you tried countering with other units instead, probably won't get significantly better edge. And micro matters a lot. Sometimes a half army with micro can beat a full unmicroed army. | ||
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
it's a question of range really. that is why a mech ball with thors will beat ultras handily. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
400/400 barely winning against 300/200 sounds like "died horriblyy" to me. | ||
|
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On July 25 2010 08:06 NerO wrote: I will bet anyone here how ever much u want that i can kill ur 4 queens w/ my 3 voidrays... on creep without speed i doubt it | ||
|
Coolzx
United States138 Posts
On July 25 2010 12:51 ogalthine wrote: wank wank wank wank wank wank These results really start to make me shudder as far as Terran air goes. Vikings can be used for neat vision and range tricks, but they don't seem good for much besides killing other vikings. And things that don't shoot back. Viking are also good at killing corruptor also fyi. Just micro..... the dang thing has 9 range. They can also land and attack ground unit. | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
Comparing them in a one to one ratio is like comparing a marine to an immortal and concluding that marines do not counter immortals, which is obviously flawed. Vikings are cheaper, so they should be compared in a proper ratio. Same case with corruptors. Comparing just one BC to several Hydralisks is flawed, since the BC has 100% of it's dps during the whole battle, unlike the Hydras. You should compare multiple BCs vs Hydras. Doing the same test with Carrier vs Viking would conclude that Carriers win, which is actually only true in a 1v3 scenario and the Vikings win in any practical fight. | ||
|
obsid
United States389 Posts
Well I know stem marauder can kill ultra. They can actualy kill them effectivly even with only half the gas cost. Also ghost can kill ultra even if the ultra has detection, mineral for mineral, gas for gas, if they are fully charged (have full mana), just by sniping the ultra. Tanks, hellions and marines get owned by ultra clearly. Other then those what does ultra really own on terran? | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
Terran needs to get battlecruisers lategame vs zerg and hope he doesnt have enough infestors to mind control them all. | ||
|
Pandoma
United States19 Posts
On July 25 2010 15:13 Jermstuddog wrote: While its a good thread, I have to call bullshit on your mutas vs thors. 400/400 barely winning against 300/200 sounds like "died horriblyy" to me. 300/300 for 300/200 is not dying horribly, but that 100 gas may make a difference. | ||
|
1egend
United Kingdom13 Posts
| ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
The problem with corruptors in general is that they cannot attack ground, and vikings can (as well as phoenix, somewhat). Yes brood lords are powerful, but if zerg looses his anti-air defence OR his anti-ground defence, the other half of his army becomes useless. I guess considering the cost-effectiveness of queens that queens might help that situation, but it's hard to do, and still debatable at max supply. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
Many angles are not taken into account though. Phoenix vs. Viking is one scenario I would point out may not accurately represent game conditions. Ok, a phoenix can beat a viking, but I'm not convinced of the wisdom of amassing 12 phoenices to counter his 12 vikings. True, neither are great main army units, but you can expect the terran to have plenty of marines and possibly thors to rip apart the phoenix while the viking only has to deal with whatever stalkers the toss has. Anyway good job. | ||
|
MiniTsunami
United States274 Posts
On July 25 2010 08:06 NerO wrote: I will bet anyone here how ever much u want that i can kill ur 4 queens w/ my 3 voidrays... lol i'll take that bet and LOL at you the whole time. | ||
|
harky
98 Posts
To clarify: 300/200 vs 400/400, 600/400 vs 700/700, 900/600 vs 1000/1000 and 1500/1000 vs 1600/1600. I assume that's also micros the Mutas with no micro on the Thors, which should be moved slightly between shots to force Mutas to collapse. Even if that's assumed it means you're being forced to use a more expensive force to beat a less expensive force. And even then that's still not upgraded. 2/0 vs */0 increases Thor's use against Mutas by 50% believe it or not. At +3 weapons the armor upgrade on the Mutas no longer matters in the equation as they still get 2 shot at +3 armor. Sorry, but being forced to micro against someone not using any micro and still having to use a higher cost force doesn't bust the myth, it confirms it. If they only 'myth' is that micro doesn't increase your Mutas survivability then the myth is hogwash anyway. However you confirmed what you described. Mutas still die horribly when micros against a group of Thors that is auto-targeting. Check your results at 3/3 vs 3/3. Hell, make it 3/0 vs 3/3 and see how it goes. I've tested this as well and it isn't pretty. More like 1:6 and 2:11. | ||
|
oo_xerox
United States852 Posts
| ||
|
mOnion
United States5657 Posts
great job OP, ty | ||
| ||
