|
On July 26 2010 04:00 Kahmunrah_ wrote:
pretty useful information here.. any testing done on carriers?
Apparantly its bugged =/
Although Carriers are fairly micro dependent against most GROUND anti-air. Unlike short-range battlecruisers, they should never be fighting things like Hydras or Stalkers in straight-up battles. 8 range ftw. Is it true that interceptor's stay out up to 9 range if you move them back, but require 8 to launch? Been meaning to confirm that somewhere for a while.
Carriers versus vikings, void rays, and corrupters would be interesting since thats the type of battle where carriers will be forced to fight straight up.
Even moreso, I want speed upgraded Void Rays against vikings, with and without being charged first. I strongly suspected speed upgraded vrays would wtfpwn vikings.
Edit: Didn't see this post.
On July 26 2010 01:11 Pertinacious wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:08 Ndugu wrote:Very good thread. Would love to see more! Do speed upgraded void rays pwn vikings for cost?  Been wondering this for a while. I tested this awhile back and the answer I got was no. Void Rays are very expensive, especially in gas. Equal cost Vikings seems to beat them unless the VRs already have a full charge (I didn't test w/Fazing).
Hm, I wonder how they would do with full-charge into a+move, or with fazing.
I really want a late game carrier build to be viable against Terran, but Vikings are just so good. Would love to be able to surprise counter-them with speedrays. 
Also been trying to figure out exactly how much carriers get per air weapons upgrade. Intercepts hit twice, so is it 5+1x2 times 8? Or do they only gain +1 per upgrade, despite 2 attacks, like phoenixes (I believe).
|
corrupters beat carriers (given both are focus fireing, as non focus fire they corrupters target the intercepters and lose badly), with about a 2 corrupters (300/200) to 1 carrier (350/250). Its not as bad as I thought. With corruption micro before you attack used you can save maybe a single corrutper vr 5 carriers, (so its 9 corrupters vr 5 carriers rather then 10:5). Carriers also tend to do a litle better with small numbers (like BCs because they stay at full firepower the whole time). I personaly thought that corrupters would rape carriers, given that they get a huge bonus vr massive. But carriers do a lot of damage. I picked corrupters because with proper micro carries beat anything on the ground (as they can move while they attack and abuse cliffs). My guess is with proper micro you might even be able to come out even with corrupters as carriers (and corrupters are the best thing zerg has against carriers).
Still I would love to see a game that starts out going voidray vr zerg, and then transitions into carriers. Well microed carrires can kill a lot of hydra.
|
Note on marines vs ultras: Although they are bad because ultras have 3 armour, they aren't that bad for a pure tanking role. If they are in front with a reasonable spread they can take a decent amount of ultra damage while marauder/thor/tank do most of the damage. Ultras kill marauders as fast as marines.
|
Downside of the mutas thors is you can't test for SCV's repairing them and marines mixed in. That's what the REAL situation of muta vs thor is, you never just see 4 mutas fighting one thor with no support units aside from drops.
|
Carriers kill vikings per cost. I Think BCs will kill carriers though, With a EMP though, I think vikings can kill carriers.
Edit: Actauly its almost even if you include the price of a ghost, up to about 8 carriers.
|
great finds, alot of useful information here. cheers!
|
On July 26 2010 04:31 obsid wrote:
corrupters beat carriers (given both are focus fireing, as non focus fire they corrupters target the intercepters and lose badly), with about a 2 corrupters (300/200) to 1 carrier (350/250). Its not as bad as I thought. With corruption micro before you attack used you can save maybe a single corrutper vr 5 carriers, (so its 9 corrupters vr 5 carriers rather then 10:5). Carriers also tend to do a litle better with small numbers (like BCs because they stay at full firepower the whole time). I personaly thought that corrupters would rape carriers, given that they get a huge bonus vr massive. But carriers do a lot of damage. I picked corrupters because with proper micro carries beat anything on the ground (as they can move while they attack and abuse cliffs). My guess is with proper micro you might even be able to come out even with corrupters as carriers (and corrupters are the best thing zerg has against carriers).
Still I would love to see a game that starts out going voidray vr zerg, and then transitions into carriers. Well microed carrires can kill a lot of hydra.
If it's lategame and you can afford high temps it's easy to pick off corrupters as well considering you can feedback them and also have blink stalkers.
|
If your facing thors+scvs, add about 1 extra muta per 3 scvs, and target the scvs first. SCVS repair at an insane rate, and there is no way your going to out damage what they repair. Also note that thors have a higher attack priority then repairing SCVs so if you a+move into thors+scvs, mutas get killed totlay and compleatly with no loss on the terran side. (PS. I think they should change the attack priority of repairing scvs to be equal to attacking scvs which is the same as all other units). Use the delete and insert keys to look "around" the thor and focus fire down the scvs on the other side. Also note when you start targeting the scvs first, the scvs will come to repair the ones you target making it easier to kill them all.
|
On July 26 2010 04:50 obsid wrote:
Carriers kill vikings per cost. I Think BCs will kill carriers though, With a EMP though, I think vikings can kill carriers.
This isn't true. Well, the first part isn't. Equal cost is 3 Vikings per Carrier. With no micro accept attacking the Carrier directly the Vikings win. With micro the Vikings win and also take no damage. Vikings are basically a hard counter to Carriers. If you ever mass them the Vikings win so easily that it's stupid. In a 4v12 for instance either 1, or no Vikings are lost. The first Carrier dies before launching any Interceptors, the second dies when Interceptors begin to launch, the third dies about halfway through the launching process and then the fourth will either barely kill 1 Viking, or will die before it has a chance. If you micro the focused Viking away as soon as it gets hit the first time then you'll always walk away with all Vikings in tact. Viking v. Carrier is a hard counter.
BCs also wreck Carriers 1v1 and are equal roughly cost (400/300 vs 450/250). A Carrier actually takes something stupid like 50 seconds to kill a BC when both are fully upgraded. It's not remotely fair. The BC attacks until the shields are down (~4 seconds) and then hits Yamato and the Carrier dies instantly. Even without Yamato they kill Carriers with around 250 health left. Void Rays struggle against them as well actually. Especially with decent micro on Yamato (it instantly kills a VR from full health).
This is exactly why Carrier vs Terran doesn't work. If you just a-move then Carrier vs Viking/BC is a fairly even exchange, but only because of the AI problems. As soon as you target fire Carriers are just weak slow moving targets. Not as bad as a Mothership, but still pretty bad.
|
very good read! I will be keeping this in mind for my unit composition. The thor vs muta surprised me.
|
Thanks for the Ultra updates. Two points:
1) While ghosts don't stand a chance with their normal attack, if they have full energy, snipe is good enough to defeat them - you should try this out.
2) You mentioned "- In a real game, your tanks should be behind other units or on cliffs." But keep in mind, "in a real game" (assuming the zerg player isn't a complete noob), the zerg will have overlord drop by time they have ultralisks. Dropping them makings them even more effective before, and no cliff can save them.
And for those thinking that the Terran could just have enough antiair to prevent drops - if that is the case, you can just walk in the base because they don't have enough ground power. (This excludes battlecruiser, but that's easily countered by much less corruptors or infestors, leaving you room to have dominance otherwise.)
|
*sigh* More bad information in the first post as well, this time in regard to Ultras vs Marauder/Marine. Ultras do not move faster than Stimmed Marines and Marauders. They actually move quite a bit slower. They only outrun them on creep. Just tested to confirm because it sounded off. 2 Marauders beats 1 Ultra. Depending on how crazy with micro you want to get so does 4 Marines. I'd dismiss Marines as any type of counter though due to the work involved.
|
On July 26 2010 05:41 harky wrote:
*sigh* More bad information in the first post as well, this time in regard to Ultras vs Marauder/Marine. Ultras do not move faster than Stimmed Marines and Marauders. They actually move quite a bit slower. They only outrun them on creep. Just tested to confirm because it sounded off. 2 Marauders beats 1 Ultra. Depending on how crazy with micro you want to get so does 4 Marines. I'd dismiss Marines as any type of counter though due to the work involved.
Maybe he meant including the attack time - not just running?
|
On July 26 2010 05:19 harky wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 04:50 obsid wrote:
Carriers kill vikings per cost. I Think BCs will kill carriers though, With a EMP though, I think vikings can kill carriers. This isn't true. Well, the first part isn't. Equal cost is 3 Vikings per Carrier. With no micro accept attacking the Carrier directly the Vikings win. With micro the Vikings win and also take no damage. Vikings are basically a hard counter to Carriers. If you ever mass them the Vikings win so easily that it's stupid. In a 4v12 for instance either 1, or no Vikings are lost. The first Carrier dies before launching any Interceptors, the second dies when Interceptors begin to launch, the third dies about halfway through the launching process and then the fourth will either barely kill 1 Viking, or will die before it has a chance. If you micro the focused Viking away as soon as it gets hit the first time then you'll always walk away with all Vikings in tact. Viking v. Carrier is a hard counter. BCs also wreck Carriers 1v1 and are equal roughly cost (400/300 vs 450/250). A Carrier actually takes something stupid like 50 seconds to kill a BC when both are fully upgraded. It's not remotely fair. The BC attacks until the shields are down (~4 seconds) and then hits Yamato and the Carrier dies instantly. Even without Yamato they kill Carriers with around 250 health left. Void Rays struggle against them as well actually. Especially with decent micro on Yamato (it instantly kills a VR from full health). This is exactly why Carrier vs Terran doesn't work. If you just a-move then Carrier vs Viking/BC is a fairly even exchange, but only because of the AI problems. As soon as you target fire Carriers are just weak slow moving targets. Not as bad as a Mothership, but still pretty bad.
You have no idea what you're talking about, even remotely in the Carrier vs Viking analogy. Carriers are very decent vs Vikings. First of all, in a 1v1 (1 viking vs 1 carrier) a viking gets 2 shots off, MAYBE 3 max, vs a carrier. You're also more likely to have Protoss air ups than have invested in Viking air ups. Carriers can kill a viking, retreat, and get back up to 100% health from their shields, while a Viking can NOT retreat from a carrier once under fire. You are absolutely spewing massive amounts of ignorance in this topic when it's obvious you have no personal experience using them.
Am I saying 4 carriers will win? No, I'm not. But if 4 carriers will "barely kill a viking, if even," then you're just shitting around random facts to people and causing ignorance on this forum.
|
Sorry, I wasnt counting the mineral cost of the intercepters, yea after that I think 3 to 1 is the right ratio for even. Still its hard to say because carriers are a lot more gas heavy, while vikings are a lot more mineral heavy, so it depends on how much you value gas at a given point in the game. But I still think carriers are even in that fight at a 3 viking:1 carrier ratio.
Although I am assumming the faster intercepter upgrade. Its practicly required if your going carriers in anyway. Without that upgrade vikings rock carriers before they even get a chance. With no other upgrades for eather side, vikings beat carriers in a 1:3 ratio (its about 1:2.8 before carriers win). With full upgrades (for both sides) however carriers beat vikings in a 1:3 ratio, although lose in just about anything above a 1:3 ratio.
1 Carrier 0/0/0 beats 3 vikings 0/0/0), although its very close (carrier usualy has low red hp in the end).
2 vr 6, the 6 vikings win usualy (2 vr 5 and carriers win), unless both are moving twords each other to start (the lower air distance really helps carriers out a lot in this fight). Still this is very very even almost and it can go eather way
3 vr 9 vikings usualy win, but its very close (like down to 1 vikings in low hp). 3 v 8 and carriers win totaly.
So yea vikings win at exactly 1:3 ratio if everyone is unupgraded, but at a 1:2.8 ratio or so I think carriers win with the faster intercepter upgrades.
In a maxed upgrade fight (where everyone has every upgrades) carriers win at 1:3 ratio, but lose to anything above that.
|
|
|
On July 26 2010 06:12 Barrin wrote:
While it is good to see how they fair in straight up fights, these units do not cost the same, and therefore these results are extremely flawed. Do not take them at face value.
Indeed... you also have to consider other things such as Carriers being effective vs ground armies will vikings are not, thus too many vikings and you'll steamroll their ground army with yours, etc. Vikings are much more fragile, if you get into a quick skirmish and decide to retreat, carrier shield can regen while Vikings, although being allowed to be repaired, typically die before they get the opportunity to simply because a single volley from a carrier takes out most of a vikings HP.
|
On July 26 2010 04:34 Slayer91 wrote:
Note on marines vs ultras: Although they are bad because ultras have 3 armour, they aren't that bad for a pure tanking role. If they are in front with a reasonable spread they can take a decent amount of ultra damage while marauder/thor/tank do most of the damage. Ultras kill marauders as fast as marines.
Thats not true, marines go down way faster than marauders due to size and splash damage. Marines are small and so ultras can tear through 5 or 6 at a time. Marauders and larger and so ultras only tear through 2 or 3 at a time.
|
On July 26 2010 01:53 Trion wrote:Show nested quote +Ultra vs SCV, Reaper, Ghost, Hellion, Viking: Are you kidding?
- No testing was done.
I would think reapers ghosts and vikings would do great vs ulta with micro. Reapers should kite ultas easily. Vikings could do land lift micro and not get hit. As for ghosts, I'm not sure how many snipes are needed, but it should be fairly close cost for cost with ghost who are spread out and use snipe. Edit: I would think even hellions could do well with micro.
Wow man, your example is perfectly analagous to those martial arts dojos that teach you some extremely bullshit techniques and convince you it will work in a real fight...
Go ahead and try using reapers and vikings to counter ultras in a real game and see what happens. Ill give you a hint, same thing that happens to the nerd practicing kung fu when he gets into a street fight, you'll get beat down badly.
|
interesting stuff. Thanks for testing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
