EPTLink0 - I'm not convinced this build is dead, maybe mass speedlings does well against it, but then they are using all their money to make speedlings and they are not teching/droning up and although I have lost against mass speedlings (once and I didnt macro well) I believe if I pumped out a few banshees instead of my early raven, it would have gone differently, did you try that? Also, not everyone is playing at the 2400 level, in fact I would say basically nobody on this thread except you is playing at that level, so its hardly "dead" as it works well up to the 2000 level that I'm at.
[G]TvZ Marine/Raven - Page 21
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
statikg
Canada930 Posts
Link0 - I'm not convinced this build is dead, maybe mass speedlings does well against it, but then they are using all their money to make speedlings and they are not teching/droning up and although I have lost against mass speedlings (once and I didnt macro well) I believe if I pumped out a few banshees instead of my early raven, it would have gone differently, did you try that? Also, not everyone is playing at the 2400 level, in fact I would say basically nobody on this thread except you is playing at that level, so its hardly "dead" as it works well up to the 2000 level that I'm at. | ||
|
cilinder007
Slovenia7251 Posts
On November 05 2010 06:18 statikg wrote: Heres a replay of me beating infestors/blings at 2000 diamond if anyone is interested. This is the first replay I have uploaded so let me know if it doesn't work please. http://topreplays.com/Replays/Details/3053/Lostcause_vs_Kahboom why the BM ? and the zerg realy wasnt 2000 diamond level, his macro was realy off | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
If zerg went something like pure muta/ling without lurkers(banelings in SCII), what was Terran's response? It was like Marine/Firebat/Medic or something. Why not get hellions with blue flame? you have a reactor barracks that you can swap to the factory the instant blue flame is done. That factory then becomes a 400 min/minute mineral sink that basically instantly utilizes most of the money from your second base(no 1000 mineral bubble before ports come online due to needing to get barracks up to spend money). So you can get 5 rax marine production, reactor blue hellions, and then cloaked banshee/raven. If people thought Thor/Hellion was ridiculous, I think this would be even worse. Zerg would probably just get banelings/infestors but then you can just get more marines and air. 5Rax Marine/4port cloaked banshee or 2port BC is something I have not yet had the pleasure to mess with. | ||
|
HypnoticPoo
Singapore291 Posts
On November 06 2010 00:43 Antisocialmunky wrote: Been thinking about this amongst other things. If zerg went something like pure muta/ling without lurkers(banelings in SCII), what was Terran's response? It was like Marine/Firebat/Medic or something. Why not get hellions with blue flame? you have a reactor barracks that you can swap to the factory the instant blue flame is done. That factory then becomes a 400 min/minute mineral sink that basically instantly utilizes most of the money from your second base(no 1000 mineral bubble before ports come online due to needing to get barracks up to spend money). So you can get 5 rax marine production, reactor blue hellions, and then cloaked banshee/raven. If people thought Thor/Hellion was ridiculous, I think this would be even worse. Zerg would probably just get banelings/infestors but then you can just get more marines and air. 5Rax Marine/4port cloaked banshee or 2port BC is something I have not yet had the pleasure to mess with. You just might have a good point there. Been having lots of trouble doing marine raven against people who just go pure speedlings and mutas. I'll try that and post some results. The only problem i see would be scouting for it as he might just go roach heavy. Mutaling really establishes alot of map control for the Zerg. | ||
|
MegaTerran
214 Posts
marines kill everything exept banelings, when hellions with good micro can kill banelings good enough i think so u can just place more and more expoes even without gas and getting more and more hellions and marines. hellions can be good support vs roaches when their aoe attack is used good enough. | ||
|
DirtMerchant
United States14 Posts
Theory: A full marine drop early is very deadly if targetting drones and can force mutas(earlier imo) since you can scoop before blings/slings hit. A banshee or double banshee can snipe queens, severely limiting larva production. A marauder/rine drop might be more efficient against queens but the banshees allow for transition to raven if needed. Teching cloak forces spores/seers. That much more units not on the field. Has anyone tried bunker hopping with this? Ravens out front to PDD/turret wall mutas from sniping scvs, marines to fend off lings. | ||
|
Raiznhell
Canada786 Posts
I'd really liek to see more pros incorperate ravens into their play it really does strengthen the amry overall by a significant amoutn at least at diamond level. maybe at pro level it isn't worth it? I've seen Flintzenith so mass raven but his way of doing it seems more like a gimmick than a full fluid standard type strategy although what makes a standard strategy standard... all the current pro standards are rather weak atm. | ||
|
Senorcuidado
United States700 Posts
The micro would be insane, though! Splitting marines away fom banelings while trying to kite with hellions, I can't wait for such epic virtuosity to be displayed. There are so many options for transitions, you can decide to spend your gas on whatever you want, it seems too hasty to say the build isn't viable. We saw in staticg's replay that one banshee can be a beast, and a few medivacs can help 10 marines kill a lot of lings. What amazing marine control, fungal looked almost useless. And the ravens and autoturrets weren't even upgraded. That Zerg stuck to mostly lings and infestors with a few banelings, and the Terran was damn late on his third. He also could have defended it a little better, but Zerg did a good job of abusing the mobility of his lings. I think they both played very well and had some room to improve, and that game is a great example of how to play the build. I hope it gets included in the OP. edit: I love the banter at the end of that game Zerg: but I raped you! Terran: I know! That's how this build works! Zerg: but I RAPED you! (paraphrased, of course) | ||
|
pwadoc
271 Posts
On November 05 2010 21:36 Antisocialmunky wrote: @ Unit tester guy. I don't think that zerglings are very efficient against marines, it depends on positioning and number of units. Marines scale linearly while melee scale less than linearly. Test it yourself. Given an equal mineral value of marines and lings, even with combat shields and stim, the lings win until the marines hit 3/3. Micro will of course come into play, but that's a matter of player skill. All else being equal, lings are cost effective against marines. Also, for those suggesting unit replacements to counter mass lings, once the zerg has made you shift your unit composition, they have sent you off-build. That is an advantage that can be exploited. Zerg are much more efficient in a tech switch than terran. If you produce hellions, the zerg will pop out a few roaches, and roaches are very very coast effective against hellions. [edit] The point here is not for the zerg to vary their unit composition, but rather to make their army more cost effective. The reason this build works is because it forces the zerg to spend gas on blings and infestors. I'm saying that the zerg can spend a lot less on blings and infestors if they have mineral parity with marines. If you have 16 marines, and a zerg comes at you 16 lings and two blings, that's pretty easy to outmicro. If the zerg comes at you with 32 lings and blings, you're suddenly put in the position of trying to both outmicro blings, and outmicro a ling blob that can take your marines. Even if the zerg loses, more lings are on the way, and the gas cost of the loss is very low. That means a lot of extra gas available for fighting off banshees, hellions, or any other cute variation that the terran tries. | ||
|
gerSelect
Germany3 Posts
http://screplays.com/replays/gerselected/12851 | ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
On November 06 2010 06:14 gerSelect wrote: I love this build, but I cant seem to make it work. How do you guys deal with early roach pressure or mass lings/blings off 2 bases? I thought that with all those raxes it would be great vs early pressure but its hard to keep trading armies if he seems to win more cost efficiently. Early roach pressure can be defended with a (repaired) bunker. "mass lings/blings" should never appear. The key point to this strategy is constant aggression, keeping the zerg busy, trading armies if neccessary and in your favor (you shouldn't suicide them). If there are too many blings on the field for your current army setup and your micro doesn't allow pro marine spreading á la FoxeR, then bolster it up with some support units (hellions, marauders) and harass with Ravens in the meantime. | ||
|
dahorns
21 Posts
On November 06 2010 00:43 Antisocialmunky wrote: Been thinking about this amongst other things. If zerg went something like pure muta/ling without lurkers(banelings in SCII), what was Terran's response? It was like Marine/Firebat/Medic or something. Why not get hellions with blue flame? you have a reactor barracks that you can swap to the factory the instant blue flame is done. That factory then becomes a 400 min/minute mineral sink that basically instantly utilizes most of the money from your second base(no 1000 mineral bubble before ports come online due to needing to get barracks up to spend money). So you can get 5 rax marine production, reactor blue hellions, and then cloaked banshee/raven. According to this site, unit production, your best combo on 2 base play looks to be 6 Rax, 1 Fact /w reactor (and the two starports). You'd have a small mineral surplus and a larger gas surplus for upgrades. Unit testing seems to indicate that the relative unit mix would be effective. 20 rines with combat shield and stim lose straight up to 40 lings with speed and gland, but there are only about 6 lings left (no micro). Results are worse on creep. However the addition of blue flame hellions, even without micro, completely turns the battle. 12 rines and 4 hellions will destroy 40 lings. 8-12 of the rines survive and 1 or 2 hellions. Even with only 2 hellions in a group of 12 marines, an equal number of lings are destroyed with about half of the terran force remaining. As the numbers scale up, combat favors the Terrans. Test it yourself. Given an equal mineral value of marines and lings, even with combat shields and stim, the lings win until the marines hit 3/3. Micro will of course come into play, but that's a matter of player skill. All else being equal, lings are cost effective against marines. At marine numbers below 20, equal resources of speedlings with gland have a significant advantage against marines with stim and combat shield both on and off creep (with no micro). Once marines get in numbers above 40 they trash lings regardless of creep. Of course this changes if the rines are forced to spread to combat blings. | ||
|
Moja
United States313 Posts
On November 06 2010 00:43 Antisocialmunky wrote: Been thinking about this amongst other things. If zerg went something like pure muta/ling without lurkers(banelings in SCII), what was Terran's response? It was like Marine/Firebat/Medic or something. Why not get hellions with blue flame? you have a reactor barracks that you can swap to the factory the instant blue flame is done. That factory then becomes a 400 min/minute mineral sink that basically instantly utilizes most of the money from your second base(no 1000 mineral bubble before ports come online due to needing to get barracks up to spend money). So you can get 5 rax marine production, reactor blue hellions, and then cloaked banshee/raven. If people thought Thor/Hellion was ridiculous, I think this would be even worse. Zerg would probably just get banelings/infestors but then you can just get more marines and air. 5Rax Marine/4port cloaked banshee or 2port BC is something I have not yet had the pleasure to mess with. This is where this strategy is going imo. I've been working with just the core of the strat (pure mass upgraded marines with mass expand), and I've found infestors give the most trouble. I tried ghosts as a counter unit but was unimpressed, so I'm testing banshees now (I hate tanks). I think adding blue-flame hellions is a very good idea. They work great with your army unless he's very roach heavy, and they can be used as a harass force at his 3rd while you pressure with your army at his main. I'd use BCs if they didn't take hours to build and weren't awful... :| Working out the timing of the transitions is very difficult though. | ||
|
Senorcuidado
United States700 Posts
| ||
|
jHERO
China167 Posts
On November 05 2010 20:12 k4ne wrote: tanks kill your own units if there is a lot of lings on the field (you will need so much upgrades to be able to kill lings in 1 shot with tank's nerf). Why do people want TANKS ?!! They are only good to defend your position (you don't wanna lose your 3rd PF on a 20+ blings rush) but not to attack with mass marines... Raven can harass, survive, protect your marine ball with a line of turrets, PDD, HSM infestors, deny creep tumors, etc... But sure, late game when you have like 12+ raven you can go for something else, but having a critical mass of raven is a priority. In fact, tanks cost MORE because they die. no you are wrong... tanks with 1 upgrade can 1 shot lings with +3 armor | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On November 06 2010 06:25 Shockk wrote: Early roach pressure can be defended with a (repaired) bunker. "mass lings/blings" should never appear. The key point to this strategy is constant aggression, keeping the zerg busy, trading armies if neccessary and in your favor (you shouldn't suicide them). If there are too many blings on the field for your current army setup and your micro doesn't allow pro marine spreading á la FoxeR, then bolster it up with some support units (hellions, marauders) and harass with Ravens in the meantime. You can do mass ling/bling in the 2 base econ bling bust. I think you would be fine if you scouted right (mass lings and no third) and get tanks ASAP or float your raxes to your choke. I fear the fast infestor more TBH. | ||
|
pwadoc
271 Posts
On November 06 2010 06:48 dahorns wrote: Unit testing seems to indicate that the relative unit mix would be effective. 20 rines with combat shield and stim lose straight up to 40 lings with speed and gland, but there are only about 6 lings left (no micro). Results are worse on creep. However the addition of blue flame hellions, even without micro, completely turns the battle. 12 rines and 4 hellions will destroy 40 lings. 8-12 of the rines survive and 1 or 2 hellions. Even with only 2 hellions in a group of 12 marines, an equal number of lings are destroyed with about half of the terran force remaining. As the numbers scale up, combat favors the Terrans. Yes, if you add in other unit types, the equation changes. I'm saying that lings are cost effective against marines. If the terran player adds in hellions, then the zerg is obviously going to vary their composition as well. I'd image that adding in a few roaches to a group of lings would largely offset hellions. Also, 2 or 3 banelings mixed in with the lings will also have a significant effect on the battle. At marine numbers below 20, equal resources of speedlings with gland have a significant advantage against marines with stim and combat shield both on and off creep (with no micro). Once marines get in numbers above 40 they trash lings regardless of creep. Of course this changes if the rines are forced to spread to combat blings. I tested this with 60 marines and 120 lings, off creep, with 2/2 upgrades, combat shield, stim and ling speed, no micro. The lings win. Once the marines get to 3/3 they win, though it's pretty much even once the zerg has adrenal glands. Again, even the addition of two banelings completely shifts the balance. Even the the marines manage to snipe the banelings, the lings are getting free hits during that time. As long as the zerg can maintain ling parity with marines, the advantage of this build is negated. It does not force the zerg to heavily invest in gas counters, and as a result does not force the zerg to get a fast third for gas income. the zerg can also replenish ling numbers much faster than the terran, even off 6-rax. | ||
|
Fruscainte
4596 Posts
Hellions completely turn the tide of battles with Lings. Extremely cost effective at that, 3 hellions will just roast huge lines of Zerglings instantly. | ||
|
OutlaW-
Czech Republic5053 Posts
| ||
|
pwadoc
271 Posts
On November 06 2010 09:39 Fruscainte wrote: Are you even reading the thread pwadoc? Hellions completely turn the tide of battles with Lings. Extremely cost effective at that, 3 hellions will just roast huge lines of Zerglings instantly. I've replied to this repeatedly. We're talking about the cost effectiveness of marines vs. lings. If I mix in a few banelings with my lings, marines are suddenly not at all cost effective against lings. If you mix hellions in with your marines, lings are not at all cost effective. If I mix roaches, ling and blings against marines and hellions, the marines and hellions will get roasted. We're not talking about any of that though. The point is that as long as the zerg maintains ling parity with the terran, the advantage of this build is negated. Of course both players are going to supplement their armies with units that counter marines and lings. | ||
| ||
