I did an experiment with vikings versus muta / corruptor. It seems that the viking would counter all zerg air, cost effectively, if it had upgrades. TL;DR on bottom.
I chose clumped muta balls versus clumped viking balls because for small even numbers of vikings vs mutas, mutas get destroyed. The effectiveness of glaive bounces is only apparently in large clumps, hence 24 v 24.
Matchup is 24 clumped vikings vs 24 mutas.
at 0/0 upgrades (for both) result: mutas win by about 5 mutas
at 1/1 upgrades (for both) result: vikings win by about 8 vikings
at 0/1 upgrades (+1 armor) for vikings against 1/0 upgrades (+1 attack for mutas) result: vikings win by about 10 vikings
at 0/1 upgrades (+1 armor) for vikings against 2/0 upgrades (+2 attack for mutas) result: even match, viking wins by about 1 viking (red hp)
at 0/1 upgrades (+1 armor) for vikings against 1/1 upgrades (+2 attack for mutas) result: advantage to vikings, viking wins by about 1 viking (red hp)
at 3/3 upgrades (for both) result: vikings win by about 11 vikings
Versus Corruptor
at 3/3 upgrades, 24 clumped vikings vs 24 corruptors (not using corruption) result: even match
at 3/3 upgrades, 24 clumped vikings vs 24 corruptors (using corruption) result: VIKINGS WIN by about 7 vikings (corruption has a small short cast range, so for the corruptor to move into cast range, it nullifies, and in fact, can make the +20% corruption spell totally not worth casting).
It would appear that since Terran can mule like crazy , vikings, because they cost -25 gas less, would appear to be cost-effective against zerg. Furthermore, vikings can be sent home to be repaired very quickly, where as mutas would need queens to heal them.
So why don't terran just go mass vikings to snipe all the overlords over and over again, it seems zerg would HAVE to make hydras to deal with it. EDIT I realize this sentence was said inproperly. I meant mass vikings against mass mutas, other wise Vikings + tanks mix. TL;DR version
Vikings need only +1 armor upgrade to be cost effective against Zerg Air. Zerg would need at least +2 attack for mutas to be on par, +1 for corruptors. Furthermore, if zerg mutas even get in range of viking ball, they will be forced into engagement, as viking ball of more than 7 will immediately snipe out a muta regardless of upgrades. any zerg players that want to try out against a mass viking strat, feel free to add me (Griffith.583)
EDIT: Chiponyasu was kind enough to provide an awesome replay in GSL3 demonstrating the power of mass vikings (expo into 3 port , 2banshees, mass makings) + mass marines. This was between littleboy vs jookToJung: http://www.gomtv.net/2010gslopens3/vod/1337
I feel like mass vikings would be nice if you could suddenly make them materialize on the field. The problem is getting to that point is rather hard if you tech to a starport quickly and Z comes knocking on your door with ground forces. Even if it is as you say, and you manage to get mass vikings, 3/3 upgrades take a LONG time to research, and from what you've said, unupgraded mutas beat vikings 1:1, so for a heavy part of the game, Z will have an aerial advantage that will be very hard to defend against if you're trying to build that many vikings.
so the problem is the vikings are kind of useless when there's nothing left in the air. i fully agree, vikings, once they hit a nice mass, are kings in the air - people keep saying mutas beat vikings, but with the proper positioning (i.e. spread) and upgrades, can certainly go toe to toe. and reactors make it feasible to get a lot in a short period of time as well.
the problem is you can't really -kill- someone with just vikings. you can piss them off by constantly supply blocking them, but if they see you're doing nothing else, they can make a 'basket' of spores, queens, and maybe hydras to ward off your vikings, and then suddenly they are useless. zerg doesn't have to go air if terran goes air, you know?
On November 17 2010 16:15 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: I feel like mass vikings would be nice if you could suddenly make them materialize on the field. The problem is getting to that point is rather hard if you tech to a starport quickly and Z comes knocking on your door with ground forces. Even if it is as you say, and you manage to get mass vikings, 3/3 upgrades take a LONG time to research, and from what you've said, unupgraded mutas beat vikings 1:1, so for a heavy part of the game, Z will have an aerial advantage that will be very hard to defend against if you're trying to build that many vikings.
Even so, what n3mo said is completely true. There's really no point to the vikings if somehow they do manage to clean up the air. Landed vikings die rather quickly to lings and roaches. And again, the problem is getting that many vikings in the first place without dying.
Low diamond zerg here. I apologize if this topic does not belong in this thread, but I've been facing problems against terrans who make an initial marine push and I can somehow hold it off with lings. Then they go for double starport banshees with cloak and vikings. The presence of 1-2 vikings makes scouting this tech pretty hard even with an overseer. The vikings snipe off overseers and banshees destroy everything in sight. I tried planting sporecrawlers, but banshees with their insane dps can snipe them off while letting vikings absorb the spore hits. I'd really like to know what you guys think about this build and how I can negate it. Hydras, perhaps?
The issue with mass viking and why it blows against zerg is because of the projectile animation. Due to the overkill caused by the projectile delay, fights where vikings should have won by comparing damage, rate of fire, etc will actually be lost because the vikings will kill a mutalisk and X shots will be wasted.
Vikings are also slower, which never helps against mutalisk, and as other have mentioned, tech switches make mass viking that much more useless. At least with my mutalisks I can harass. All mass vikings can do is pray to get a few overlord kills.
rofl rofl, so mutas can take out workers, buildings, harass, annoy the shit outta people and put up a good fight against vikings, but vikings cant do anyof that, their only job is to stop those mutas
Yes, it's true that vikings are cost effective against mutas. It is even more pronouned with the +1 armor upgrades (because the +1 armor negates more than the +1 muta attack).
The issue with vikings vs mutas are as follows: 1. Vikings come out of starports while mutas from larvae. That means the zerg can outproduce you. 2. Vikings can't hit ground.
If they have more mutas than you (esp when you don't have your upgrades yet), how would you snipe overlords?
However, I do believe that vikings are viable once the terran establishes a solid 3rd base with PF/turrets. This allows them to fall back if needed.
Just in case u didnt know, you need a Raven with your vikings to maximize your range. I dunno why since Viking vision range is 10 and shooting is 9, but the extra 1 range that raven has make u shoot at full range.
I am talking about war fog, obviously if u have other units and no war fog you have no need of raven.
Its not why people dont do it, its how you get to that point. 3/3 + mass viking doesn't just happen you have to stockpile viking before it gets to the 3/3 viking point there WILL be muta out any they'll slow you down enough to make your 3/3 viking useless OR if you lack aggression a smart zerg will just take the map.
When I was playing random I had attempted various viking play, the thought was kill his food i'll win, i stop scouting i can just run him over with banshee or something. but before i got to the point where my viking could destroy him via air he had enough queens to hold off viking play and then mutas would pop and kill me off or at least push me back. viking are my favorite unit if you can get this to work please lemme know and include reps but I personally couldn't get it to work.
I just did this same test. The Vikings won with and without upgrades.
I've tried this strategy in game as well. It's tough sense the Zerg can replenish their army with a variety of units... It's important to have a strong defense at home while your Vikings are out and about.
The test vs. Corrupters: the Corrupters won pretty convincingly. Even when using corruption. Go test this urselves lol. The corrupt range is like 1 shorter than the attack range.
Vikings have the ability to Kite both mutas and corrupters for a few shots which could make a huge difference. Add a fully charged raven to the vikings if u want to see true air superiority! jaja=
So how do you get that many vikings without compromising so much? Are you going to put those starports up right away and defend with marines? Or play normally and then gather a critical mass of vikings? 150/75 is quite expensive. Not only that, 24 of them take away 48 supply, and which limits the amount of your overall ground forces significantly. Give us a build order, or a replay showing this in the works.
It looks good on paper but if you can't bring it out in the game, it's useless. Suppose you play normally and you can bring in a critical mass of vikings by late game, what unit composition will you have that can win you the game? Zerg will just over run you with waves of forces. Sniping overlords down in the late game with mass vikings doesn't really help, especially when you can only do it when zerg forces aren't at base to defend their overlords. If you find their forces missing and free overlords to kill, you're already in trouble.
On November 17 2010 16:52 Azzur wrote: Yes, it's true that vikings are cost effective against mutas. It is even more pronouned with the +1 armor upgrades (because the +1 armor negates more than the +1 muta attack).
The issue with vikings vs mutas are as follows: 1. Vikings come out of starports while mutas from larvae. That means the zerg can outproduce you. 2. Vikings can't hit ground.
If they have more mutas than you (esp when you don't have your upgrades yet), how would you snipe overlords?
However, I do believe that vikings are viable once the terran establishes a solid 3rd base with PF/turrets. This allows them to fall back if needed.
Yes, Vikings can hit ground, just not effectively as they die quite fast to zerg ground units. Use viking range to snipe mutas, and if mutas tried to close on vikings, run to the MMM and fight them on top of your marines. I've owned 9 mutas with 3 un-upgraded vikings this way. Of course, my opponent was kinda noob and was angry at me earlier for sniping his overlords and drones... ~XD~
If I played a terran who got vikings, I would just take map control with my mutas since they are way faster than vikings, while putting my overlords over my queens supported by hydras and transition to a hydra heavy army. Even if the terran killed all my mutas with his vikings, I would just roll his viking army with the hydra army later, there's no way a terran can transition as fast as a zerg. What a terran could do is use his vikings completely defensively, camping them over towers at their bases. That would stop my muta harass, which is annoying since mutas are expensive, but that would just give even more map control so the end result would probably be the same.
On November 17 2010 17:47 friscosav wrote: interesting. did you focus fire with either of them?
No I didn't focus -
But to those who said transition to hydras, keep in mind that terran doens't have to go pure vikings, it could be 50/50 tank viking, and hydras just suck in general against terran, IIRC.
If the other guy wants to make mutas, he can make 20 mutas is a small period of time, whereas you would need a LOT of time to make it unless you have a shiton of starports, but them the guy just need to make any ground unit and roflstomp you.
It's cool you can mass vikings but.....then the zerg quickly tech switches to roach/hydra and your vikings are useless after the overlords scurry back home. Meanwhile you've spent a ton of resources into your starports and all those vikings.
On November 17 2010 17:47 friscosav wrote: interesting. did you focus fire with either of them?
No I didn't focus -
But to those who said transition to hydras, keep in mind that terran doesn't have to go pure vikings, it could be 50/50 tank viking, and hydras just suck in general against terran, IIRC.
the problem with this, is how fast a Z can get out 20 mutas vs 20 vikings off 1 starport.
If you go 2 starport then that is -1 factory... 3 starport = -2 factory.
A viking takes 42 seconds to produce. You can produce 2 vikings out of a reactor starport. Will take 4minutes 20 seconds to get 20 vikings out of 1 starport.
2 reactor starports = 2:10
Mutalisks take 33 seconds to build, and 6 can be made at the same time.
Meaning what 1 hatch can do in production in 1:33 it takes ~4 reactor starports...
That Z will be on two base, so takes 1:01 to make 20 mutas (if they had 2000/2000)... this means you would need 8 reactor starports to make 20 vikings in the same amount of time.
- - - - -
I know this is a stupid comparison... but lets just look at this for a second.
Say you scout the spire, and its half done, the zerg will be able to make 8 mutas when the spire pops, you start making vikings out of your reactor starport as soon as you can the spire (say your reactor just finishes)
Spire = 100s Muta = 33s
Spire is half done = 50s
So in 1:23 you have to make 8 vikings... unfortunately you can only get out 4 vikings in that time.
So its 4 vikings vs 8 mutas and who wins that one?
- - - - - -
Think of late game, say you have 20 vikings, that's 40 supply. Me as Z has just lost all my mutas to your vikings.
So then I make Roach hydra and the T macroes up...
Now when you fight say both players have 60 food in workers.
T comes to fight with 100 food (-60 in workers -40 in vikings) vs 140food worth of hydra/roach.
With an army 40% smaller, the likely hood of the T winning is very very small.
Then, with you 100 food army, even if you are holding, as the Z losses units it replaces say 24 food (3 base) with lings.
The loss of that 40 food will mean a HUGE difference in winning vs losing a battle.
- - - - -
There is a reason 1 - 4 vikings is great vs Z (kill overloards, help control the muta population, scout for tanks) but over all, not something you mass simply because a tech switch will kill you.
Instead, just mass marines they murder mutas and are great vs everything Z can make... banes suck but micro + maruders + tanks makes banes somewhat less scary.
This is a great thread OP. I've never actually thought about rushing 3/3 vikings and getting 3 bases with marine tank and a pf. I've just given up on dropping zergs before this because I just assumed that mutas would wreck any small groups of marines and would totally be cost effective against any vikings. It looks like it's worth a shot to play the 3base turtle&drop game. It'd also be the frigging hard counter to baneling bombs. I guess TL can be useful from time to time.
This would look something like an sc1 marine/dropship/valkyrie build.
I've considered these kinds of things as well. Things to consider:
1. Adding a raven (or more) for PDD spam, does pretty good against mutas and GREAT against corruptors.
2. Spreading vikings vs mutalisks to prevent bounce damage. Vikings have such high range that the spreading shouldn't hurt their dps much (if at all).
Edit: 3. Infestors can really put a damper in all this. Huge AoE plus infested Terrans. Losing a ball of Vikings is a good way to INSTANTLY lose the game due to how expensive they are.
If you can suprise them then go for it. If they spot it it only takes 40 seconds to build a hydra den and 33 seconds to build 20 hydras that will own your 24 vikings.
If you decide to mass up 24 Vikings, Zerg won. Mutas are a harass unit to force your opponent to react, which you've just done, convincingly. You could build 10 turrets in your base to shut down Mutas as well, but that's pretty widely acknowledged as a bad strategy, because there's no transition, no pressure, no capability to counter, no anything. Vikings aren't much better. All Zerg needs is a Baneling Nest (which they may have anyway) and about 30 seconds, and you're Baneling busted, trying to defend with mass Vikings.
On November 18 2010 04:38 SCdinner wrote: If you can suprise them then go for it. If they spot it it only takes 40 seconds to build a hydra den and 33 seconds to build 20 hydras that will own your 24 vikings.
Actually I beg to differ. If I'm playing against a Zerg who is so bad that he saves up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas to make 20 hydras at once, chances are I've already won
I think the OP is discussing how vikings can in theory, dominate the air. He's not trying to say Zerg has no counter to vikings (LOL). And seriously, do you honestly think the counter is to save up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas and then make 20 hydras all at once? Somehow this doesn't sound wise.
Mass 3/3 vikings? How in the world are you going to get mass 3/3 vikings without dying? Is the zerg just sitting back and letting you take 2 free expos at the beginning?
And comparing equal number of vikings and muta is silly. If you didn't make more than a couple of marines, no factory units, build 2 starports as soon as factor completes, pre-build both reactors, then maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to match his muta numbers with vikings. But skipping everything and going straight for mass viking is complete suicide.
On November 18 2010 04:45 BlasiuS wrote: You have some pretty outlandish scenarios there.
Mass 3/3 vikings? How in the world are you going to get mass 3/3 vikings without dying? Is the zerg just sitting back and letting you take 2 free expos at the beginning?
And comparing equal number of vikings and muta is silly. If you didn't make more than a couple of marines, no factory units, build 2 starports as soon as factor completes, pre-build both reactors, then maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to match his muta numbers with vikings. But skipping everything and going straight for mass viking is complete suicide.
I don't think he ever said or implied that massing up vikings from the start is a good idea. Where are you getting these ideas from?
And of course the scenarios are outlandish because nobody upgrades air anyway, despite it actually being not that expensive to do. The OP was just trying to open our eyes to an outcome that we might not have expected.
Personally, I'd be far more interested to see how 1/1 Vikings fare against Mutalisks than 3/3 Vikings. Even 2/2 would be infinitely more practical. Vikings are definitely relevant in late-game TvZ when/if Broodlords are out.
Edit: I just wanted to add that it's really NOT SILLY AT ALL to compare pure Viking against pure Mutalisk. Why? Because they're both air units, so it's possible for them to battle where ground units aren't around. Furthermore, Mutalisks are faster, so it's possible for the Zerg to force a confrontation if you're out in the open, and if you run away you'll just take damage while dealing none, maybe even losing some precious Vikings. So yeah. Not silly.
On November 18 2010 04:45 BlasiuS wrote: You have some pretty outlandish scenarios there.
Mass 3/3 vikings? How in the world are you going to get mass 3/3 vikings without dying? Is the zerg just sitting back and letting you take 2 free expos at the beginning?
And comparing equal number of vikings and muta is silly. If you didn't make more than a couple of marines, no factory units, build 2 starports as soon as factor completes, pre-build both reactors, then maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to match his muta numbers with vikings. But skipping everything and going straight for mass viking is complete suicide.
I don't think he ever said or implied that massing up vikings from the start is a good idea. Where are you getting these ideas from?
you serious?
read the OP:
On November 17 2010 16:10 Griffith` wrote: Matchup is 24 clumped vikings vs 24 mutas.
As I said in my post you just quoted, comparing equal numbers is silly. X vikings v X mutas is not realistic in any way. The only way to match muta production is to skip everything and go straight for mass viking. Read my post again if you missed that part. So yes, saying you'll have as many vikings as he has muta DOES IMPLY that you are massing vikings from the start.
On November 18 2010 04:49 ltortoise wrote: Edit: I just wanted to add that it's really NOT SILLY AT ALL to compare pure Viking against pure Mutalisk. Why? Because they're both air units, so it's possible for them to battle where ground units aren't around. Furthermore, Mutalisks are faster, so it's possible for the Zerg to force a confrontation if you're out in the open, and if you run away you'll just take damage while dealing none, maybe even losing some precious Vikings. So yeah. Not silly.
Again, I didn't say comparing only muta v viking was unrealistic. I said comparing equal numbers of muta v viking was unrealistic. Pretty key difference there.
It's a unit test. Comparing units does not imply or even remotely indicate or suggest that you should start massing up 24 vikings (or any number) right from the start. Why would it?
If I did a unit test of unsieged tanks vs stalkers, does that mean I should just start massing unsieged tanks while skipping everything else? Get real.
Comparing equal numbers of Viking and Muta is pretty close to realistic as a late game scenario since the gas cost is pretty close. The burst production of Zerg evens out with every other race over the course of the game. In the end, everybody needs resources to make units and that's the ultimate limiting factor in production.
In the late game, Broodlords are one of the two big threats, and vikings are critical in that battle. I'm absolutely interested in how upgraded Vikings can do against Mutalisks specifically because of this.
Thank you OP for your research! Looking forward to more, including 1/1 and 2/2, and maybe even some viking spreading micro if you can. I might do some testing myself.
On November 17 2010 16:52 Azzur wrote: Yes, it's true that vikings are cost effective against mutas. It is even more pronouned with the +1 armor upgrades (because the +1 armor negates more than the +1 muta attack).
The issue with vikings vs mutas are as follows: 1. Vikings come out of starports while mutas from larvae. That means the zerg can outproduce you. 2. Vikings can't hit ground.
If they have more mutas than you (esp when you don't have your upgrades yet), how would you snipe overlords?
However, I do believe that vikings are viable once the terran establishes a solid 3rd base with PF/turrets. This allows them to fall back if needed.
I should point out that, its not so much the +1 armor that makes the difference, rather vikings effectively get +2 attack per attack upgrade, where as mutas only get +1. The +1 armor on vikings even out with the mutas +1 attack. I will do more testing on 1/1 and 2/2 .
Also I'm doing mass/clump tests because 0/0 vikings actually beat 0/0 mutas for small numbers (I think for numbers <10). Mutas only tend to overwhelm mass, unupgraded vikings.
in practice mass viking beats mass muta because the vikings can sit on top of turrets and protect the abse from range 9. Throw in a thor and it's even more brutal.
But realistically if i start seeing mass viking i'll go get infestors. Just like i do vs mass muta or mass phoenix or mass void ray. Fungal growth dominates air.
Armorys are also cheaper than spires so you can get air upgrades quicker, if you wanted to.
On November 18 2010 04:38 SCdinner wrote: If you can suprise them then go for it. If they spot it it only takes 40 seconds to build a hydra den and 33 seconds to build 20 hydras that will own your 24 vikings.
Actually I beg to differ. If I'm playing against a Zerg who is so bad that he saves up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas to make 20 hydras at once, chances are I've already won
I think the OP is discussing how vikings can in theory, dominate the air. He's not trying to say Zerg has no counter to vikings (LOL). And seriously, do you honestly think the counter is to save up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas and then make 20 hydras all at once? Somehow this doesn't sound wise.
It takes 40 seconds to build, thats enough time to save up around that much. If you have 3600 minerals and 1800 gas for you're vikings that will be owned by 2000 minerals and 1000 gas of hydras you have the unwise strat.
I was saying it will be countered quickly if spotted and would only work well if you can keep it a secret.
I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but perhaps mix in tank. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
On November 18 2010 04:38 SCdinner wrote: If you can suprise them then go for it. If they spot it it only takes 40 seconds to build a hydra den and 33 seconds to build 20 hydras that will own your 24 vikings.
Actually I beg to differ. If I'm playing against a Zerg who is so bad that he saves up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas to make 20 hydras at once, chances are I've already won
I think the OP is discussing how vikings can in theory, dominate the air. He's not trying to say Zerg has no counter to vikings (LOL). And seriously, do you honestly think the counter is to save up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas and then make 20 hydras all at once? Somehow this doesn't sound wise.
It takes 40 seconds to build, thats enough time to save up around that much. If you have 3600 minerals and 1800 gas for you're vikings that will be owned by 2000 minerals and 1000 gas of hydras you have the unwise strat.
I was saying it will be countered quickly if spotted and would only work well if you can keep it a secret.
This is silly. What are you going to do before those hydras pop? Cry? Make nothing? Why couldn't I just land my Vikings and kill your whole base while you are just lazily saving up for Hydralisks? How about I just go kill ALL your Overlords so you can't make ANY Hydralisks?
But really, nobody claimed that you can win a game by making nothing but Vikings.
For instance, I'm mostly interested in this thread because Vikings become very important in the late game, and I want to know when I can be at an advantage facing whatever amount of Mutas he makes.
PS. If my opponent is making hydras, I feel like I already have an advantage anyway since you can't even attack with them really. It would take them about five years just to get to my base.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
On November 18 2010 04:38 SCdinner wrote: If you can suprise them then go for it. If they spot it it only takes 40 seconds to build a hydra den and 33 seconds to build 20 hydras that will own your 24 vikings.
Actually I beg to differ. If I'm playing against a Zerg who is so bad that he saves up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas to make 20 hydras at once, chances are I've already won
I think the OP is discussing how vikings can in theory, dominate the air. He's not trying to say Zerg has no counter to vikings (LOL). And seriously, do you honestly think the counter is to save up 2000 minerals and 1000 gas and then make 20 hydras all at once? Somehow this doesn't sound wise.
It takes 40 seconds to build, thats enough time to save up around that much. If you have 3600 minerals and 1800 gas for you're vikings that will be owned by 2000 minerals and 1000 gas of hydras you have the unwise strat.
I was saying it will be countered quickly if spotted and would only work well if you can keep it a secret.
This is silly. What are you going to do before those hydras pop? Cry? Make nothing? Why couldn't I just land my Vikings and kill your whole base while you are just lazily saving up for Hydralisks? How about I just go kill ALL your Overlords so you can't make ANY Hydralisks?
But really, nobody claimed that you can win a game by making nothing but Vikings.
For instance, I'm mostly interested in this thread because Vikings become very important in the late game, and I want to know when I can be at an advantage facing whatever amount of Mutas he makes.
PS. If my opponent is making hydras, I feel like I already have an advantage anyway since you can't even attack with them really. It would take them about five years just to get to my base.
Did you read my last sentance? That point was is it will work if you can do it in secret. Your describing what will happen if they never do scout it which I said will work. Once he finds out you have 73 seconds window to use them. Also if you do land your vikings to take out the oppenents base the oppenent can attack with zerglings, roaches and whatever anti ground they have avaible. Vikings GtG abilities are sub par at best.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
for everyone saying a zerg player can get 20 mutas out in one time...do all zerg players always have 2000minerals and 2000 gas laying around at all times? and vikings do a decent amount of dps while landed so you cant just leave them flying over your base without pulling ground forces to defend your drones/hatcheries/tech buildings.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
You can't rely on Thors for anti-air in the late game because of Broodlords (I've already mentioned this several times and you seem to ignore it). Vikings are mandatory unless you just want to gamble on the Zerg never bothering with Broods.
Most Zergs I've played who go Broodlord in response to mech tend to make only exactly as many corruptors as they intend to make into Broodlords, or maybe just a few more, relying on mutalisks and infestors instead for anti-air.
On November 18 2010 05:45 kawilson wrote: for everyone saying a zerg player can get 20 mutas out in one time...do all zerg players always have 2000minerals and 2000 gas laying around at all times? and vikings do a decent amount of dps while landed so you cant just leave them flying over your base without pulling ground forces to defend your drones/hatcheries/tech buildings.
I think the assumption is that if you have 3600 minerals and 1800 gas spent on vikings that the zerg will have around the same amont of reasorces saved up themselves. Unless they're spending it on an army in which case they should be attacking and causing you to have to build units to defend and not be able to build up so many vikings in secret or have to use the vikings at which point they'll have to react.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
The main crux of thors is that it is horribly immobile, and gets easily magic boxed by mutas. Where as a critical mass of vikings will give you some form of map control (sniping overlords everywhere) to effectively make the zerg blind. As long as viking upgrades are greater than zero and ON PAR with that of mutas, vikings will dominate air.
so the problem is the vikings are kind of useless when there's nothing left in the air.
It's TvZ, There's always stuff in the air (ovies) and taking air control in tvz cuts down on zergs map vision, while also forcing zerg to pull their ovies in for fear of losing them. What's also not noted is that throwing in 2-4 ravens to a viking ball will greatly increase their usefulness against mutas with either HSM or PDD the effectiveness of mutas is significantly reduced, not to mention a 'magic box' of viks vs muta balls. with 3x the range of mutas terrans should be keeping them at range with a thor.
I have to agree that this probably isn't a viable opening strategy, but potentially abusable with the right map and a good transition. If you go MMM or Marine/Tank against a Zerg opponent (very strong early-game play), you'll likely have a reacor'd Starport anyway. If the Zerg opponent tries to counter with Infestors (VERY hard counter to both MMM and Marine/Tank if micro'd properly), then they're not spending gas on Mutas. Since he has fewer Mutas (if any at all), then you can relatively safely come in with Vikings to snipe some OLs and supply block the Zerg. At the very least, that will slow down their rebuild/counter by a larva cycle.
Also, say you're on a specific map like Lost Temple. If you push in and do some damage, but can't match up against the remnants of a Zerg ground army, you can use your Medivacs to pick up some tanks and lock-down their natural from high ground. Without any gas coming from their natural, they won't have many mutas and you can cover it with Vikings, and even use said vikings to join in on the lockdown when there aren't any OLs/Mutas around to spot the high ground. Going Vikings instead of Turrets will also allow you to defend this lockdown against Broodlords.
That said, there aren't going to be many opportunities like this on a map like, say, Metalopolis.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
You can't rely on Thors for anti-air in the late game because of Broodlords (I've already mentioned this several times and you seem to ignore it). Vikings are mandatory unless you just want to gamble on the Zerg never bothering with Broods.
Most Zergs I've played who go Broodlord in response to mech tend to make only exactly as many corruptors as they intend to make into Broodlords, or maybe just a few more, relying on mutalisks and infestors instead for anti-air.
So you want to skip thors so you'll be more prepaired for broodlords? Then its more of a if he scouts you're not going thors then he has time (I belive you calculated 80 years) to get hydras over to your base with a large hydra/roach/infestor army at you're base instead of going brood. But then you have a chance to scout that and build more tanks. I imagine the zerg might have sucess with going ultras instead so a tank switch won't work as well but by this point in the game its basically a big macro fest and going one or two tech isn't viable anymore
On November 18 2010 06:00 ensis wrote: did you know that a viking almost wins vs a stalker? sorry, for offtopic, just wanted to state how awesome vikings are.
Viking doesn't beat stalker but can abuse mobility until stalkers have blink.
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
You can't rely on Thors for anti-air in the late game because of Broodlords (I've already mentioned this several times and you seem to ignore it). Vikings are mandatory unless you just want to gamble on the Zerg never bothering with Broods.
Most Zergs I've played who go Broodlord in response to mech tend to make only exactly as many corruptors as they intend to make into Broodlords, or maybe just a few more, relying on mutalisks and infestors instead for anti-air.
So you want to skip thors so you'll be more prepaired for broodlords? Then its more of a if he scouts you're not going thors then he has time (I belive you calculated 80 years) to get hydras over to your base with a large hydra/roach/infestor army at you're base instead of going brood. But then you have a chance to scout that and build more tanks. I imagine the zerg might have sucess with going ultras instead so a tank switch won't work as well but by this point in the game its basically a big macro fest and going one or two tech isn't viable anymore
This is just theory-crafting nonsense!
I never said ANYTHING about "skipping thors" I said you cannot rely on Thors SPECIFICALLY for anti-air in the late game... Which is true! You can't! Broodlords will rape an army that doesn't have Vikings.
Thus, in a situation where I NEED TO HAVE VIKINGS OUT, I like to know how many I need to hold the air, and what kind of upgrades can help me with that... That's all...
On November 18 2010 05:30 Griffith` wrote: I never said that terrans should go PURE vikings, but rather mix in 50/50 tank/viking. Tanks should completely destroy hydra/infestors, the two "counters" to this.
This strat seems to work better for TvT. The tanks don't counter mass speedlings well enough. Against 264 zerglings 24 tanks don't stand a chance. Then the hydras can come in and mop up the vikings easy.
Shrug. Then add some pre-igniter hellions which only cost minerals...
All this theory-crafting is silly to me.
OP posts an interesting result that I wasn't aware of (namely that vikings can actually beat mutalisks in mass), and everybody just seems to want to flame him for it.
I'll take the info. Thanks, OP!
That would solve zerglings but the extra minerals needed might prevent the ability to build mass vikings. This would be a variation of the mech push but instead of thors you'd be using vikings for the anti air. I don't think this variation whould be as good because you'd have to upgrade both mech and air.
He did a service with his calculations and I and most people I think are not saying its useless. We're just trying to find the bounds of its uses, its not flames, just discussion.
You can't rely on Thors for anti-air in the late game because of Broodlords (I've already mentioned this several times and you seem to ignore it). Vikings are mandatory unless you just want to gamble on the Zerg never bothering with Broods.
Most Zergs I've played who go Broodlord in response to mech tend to make only exactly as many corruptors as they intend to make into Broodlords, or maybe just a few more, relying on mutalisks and infestors instead for anti-air.
So you want to skip thors so you'll be more prepaired for broodlords? Then its more of a if he scouts you're not going thors then he has time (I belive you calculated 80 years) to get hydras over to your base with a large hydra/roach/infestor army at you're base instead of going brood. But then you have a chance to scout that and build more tanks. I imagine the zerg might have sucess with going ultras instead so a tank switch won't work as well but by this point in the game its basically a big macro fest and going one or two tech isn't viable anymore
This is just theory-crafting nonsense!
I never said ANYTHING about "skipping thors" I said you cannot rely on Thors SPECIFICALLY for anti-air in the late game... Which is true! You can't! Broodlords will rape an army that doesn't have Vikings.
Thus, in a situation where I NEED TO HAVE VIKINGS OUT, I like to know how many I need to hold the air, and what kind of upgrades can help me with that... That's all...
I don't think its fair to call it nonsence. I've shown your posts respect by reading them and discussing them it would be nice if you did the same. If you think something I wrote is speficially wrong call me on it but don't call it all nonsence. Its not completely theorycrafting because I've seen a lot of mass viking back in the beta when they were stronger and cheeper and the things I discussed still worked then when vikings were more powerful. My comments are based on the games that I played. Yes in = numbers vikings can destroy air. Its just rare that you get as many vikings as there is muta ouside of 3v3s and 4v4s.
On November 17 2010 16:29 Saechiis wrote: Zerg can switch to hydra pretty easily on a 2base muta set-up. Air control also doesn't protect you from a bling bust.
Viking Hellion might be viable on a map like Scrap Station, getting the Air Attack upgrades and transitioning into Battlecruisers on 3 bases.
On November 18 2010 05:45 kawilson wrote: for everyone saying a zerg player can get 20 mutas out in one time...do all zerg players always have 2000minerals and 2000 gas laying around at all times? and vikings do a decent amount of dps while landed so you cant just leave them flying over your base without pulling ground forces to defend your drones/hatcheries/tech buildings.
You don't need to build 20 mutas at once. I'm fine with the 6-10 that can realistically happen the moment the Spire pops. How many Vikings are you going to have at that time? Remember, Vikings are your anti-air solution here. I'm guessing not enough. If you do, that's fine with me: Mutas are more mobile than Vikings. I can disengage, regroup with another round of Mutas, and try again. Also, don't try to take another base: Mutas will be able to get in and do some damage before you can get all your Vikings there. You can split your Vikings over your bases, but now 24 Mutas can engage your 12 Vikings, kill a few, and retreat before your other 12 have a chance to get there. Rinse and repeat.
This is to say nothing of the actual recommendation: Viking/Tank as a counter to mass Muta. You can't push with that - Zerg counterattacks and you're screwed, not to mention that if at any point Zerg can trade his Mutas for your Vikings, he can rebuild faster and take free tanks, and then the air units don't even matter.
Honestly, this is the problem with the whole "what unit counter X" mentality that Day9 is always talking about: the best counter to a bunch of stuff is even more stuff, which is exactly what Zerg is going to get while you're figuring out how to get 24 Vikings. It doesn't matter what happens at 24 3/3 Vikings against 24 3/3 Mutalisks if that's not a realistic game scenario.
Vikings with Marine support makes for some very dead mutas. You guys gotta remember that making Vikings to counter Muta harass is very viable. And when the Viking ball outpowers the muta ball, Terran can transition into Banshees and Ravens (possibly BCs). I'm not saying only make Vikings and win Foxer style (although that can work). I'm saying that making Vikings is a legitimate strategy versus Mutalisk harassment. Its not an all-in because you can transition out of it. Whether it be an expansion or a different unit composition, it doesn't matter because Vikings are good for the entire game. So long as Zerg has Overlords, Vikings have a use.
Now that I'm thinking about it, Couldn't Reactored Vikings transition well into Mass Marine Battlecruiser? You already have the Starport and the Barracks and during the time you could make Reactors with the Factory in preparation for it.
On November 18 2010 06:20 Dominator1370 wrote: Honestly, this is the problem with the whole "what unit counter X" mentality that Day9 is always talking about: the best counter to a bunch of stuff is even more stuff, which is exactly what Zerg is going to get while you're figuring out how to get 24 Vikings. It doesn't matter what happens at 24 3/3 Vikings against 24 3/3 Mutalisks if that's not a realistic game scenario.
good post.
zerg doesn't really want to build 24 mutas anyway, especially against terran. they just want to build about 10 or so to help them harass and transition to tier3.
I guess terran could go ahead and build 10-15 vikings and get +1 armor +1 weapons but as a zerg player i'd be okay with that. I'd probably make a few extra queens in response, and make sure my overlords were either out on the fringes or clustered in my base with 5 queens under them. Late game zerg usually has a lot of extra minerals.
If it's just a question of what unit do I mass in a 4v4 then yeah get vikings and MMM.
From my point of view, vikings are not cost effective against muta.
I don't compare the cost of vikings with the cost of muta. I compare the cost of vikings with the cost of anything else in the terran army that can shoot air.
So if we look only at cost effectiveness, vikings might be the worst choice.
The real question is probably why do you want to make vikings to begin with ? And once you have found an answer to this, you should ask yourself if it is worth it in comparaison with the advantages of the other anti-air solution terrans have.
It drives me insane to see so many people who think that zerg can build/rebuild faster. Does zerg get some magical influx of minerals and gas that I never knew about? Does zerg always have a 2:1 advantage in bases?
Granted zerg can build any one specific unit in great numbers better than the other races. But does that make the supporting tanks/marines/ravens/marauders/whatever useless? No.
Granted zerg can build any one specific unit in great numbers better than the other races. But does that make the supporting tanks/marines/ravens/marauders/whatever useless? No.
If vikings need the support of other units, they loose the advantage of the mobility... And it becomes really hard to find a reason to make more than a couple viking... until broodlords come into play
On November 18 2010 07:01 Keilah wrote: It drives me insane to see so many people who think that zerg can build/rebuild faster. Does zerg get some magical influx of minerals and gas that I never knew about? Does zerg always have a 2:1 advantage in bases?
Granted zerg can build any one specific unit in great numbers better than the other races. But does that make the supporting tanks/marines/ravens/marauders/whatever useless? No.
Zerg doesn't get magic minerals and units. But they can save up money and larva and then build an entire army at once to counter their oppenents. No other race can do that reasonably. Sure they could build 30 gateways, 20 stargates and 15 robotics facilities or 30 barrack, 20 factories and 15 starports and then build their counter army within 45 seconds like zerg can but that is just unpractical.
On November 18 2010 07:00 Elean wrote: The real question is probably why do you want to make vikings to begin with ?
Honestly, to supply block the living daylights out of the Zerg. If you manage to supply block the Zerg just once, the Vikings have pretty much already paid for themselves. If you can do it continuously or a few times in a row, it's HUUUUUGE damage. Huge. It might even require additional hatcheries and/or queens just to spend their mineral/gas pileup from the supply blocking.
Also, air dominance allows for the possibility of Battlecruisers which are a good all-around unit.
On November 18 2010 07:19 Keilah wrote: "But they can save up money and larva "
I think you mean, 'the Terran player might fuck up and allow the zerg to get away with saving up money and larva"
If a terran does a good job of harrassing/putting on pressure then it is very hard for a zerg to save up to do it. All because its stoppable doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The point they're trying to make is if you're building up a certian unit instead of putting on pressure its easier for zergs to come up with a bunch of counter units quickly than it is for protoss or terran.
I havn't played in a while, but I remember losing a bunch of mutalisks to upgraded vikings + battlecruiser with repair.
If a terran was going for BC and they were going to get ship upgrades, it would allow them to also add in vikings to counter muta, but that is more of a very wierd and lategame thing, and still very vulnerable to hydra + infestor. How often do we see ship upgrades or BC in TvZ (besides the rare few times with a BC timing attack)
On November 17 2010 16:52 Azzur wrote: Yes, it's true that vikings are cost effective against mutas. It is even more pronouned with the +1 armor upgrades (because the +1 armor negates more than the +1 muta attack).
The issue with vikings vs mutas are as follows: 1. Vikings come out of starports while mutas from larvae. That means the zerg can outproduce you. 2. Vikings can't hit ground.
If they have more mutas than you (esp when you don't have your upgrades yet), how would you snipe overlords?
However, I do believe that vikings are viable once the terran establishes a solid 3rd base with PF/turrets. This allows them to fall back if needed.
I should point out that, its not so much the +1 armor that makes the difference, rather vikings effectively get +2 attack per attack upgrade, where as mutas only get +1. The +1 armor on vikings even out with the mutas +1 attack. I will do more testing on 1/1 and 2/2 .
Also I'm doing mass/clump tests because 0/0 vikings actually beat 0/0 mutas for small numbers (I think for numbers <10). Mutas only tend to overwhelm mass, unupgraded vikings.
I'd like to point out that this isn't correct, as a viking's +1 is also reduced twice by the muta's armour (Assuming equally distributed upgrades, of course). However, the +1 armour for the vikings reduces the net damage from mutas by 3 (Bounce damage being 9/3/1). The armours don't all scale this well because of interesting bounce damage scaling, but I'll post up some numbers a bit later.
I would be interested to see how 3/3 vikings would do against most zerg units, and HOW badly they would lose. They would probably lose, but i'm curious as to how bad. think they might be better on ground than most people think.
What makes mass vikings seem effective is that once you have 7+ (or 6 if at least +1/+0), they will one-shot one of the mutas before the mutas even get a chance to attack. Thus 7 vs 7 becomes 7 vs 6 before the vikings even start to take damage.
Like the thor, they have a slow attack speed though, so a few accompanying marines do wonders, especially since they will reduce the hits to kill by unupgraded vikings (6 viking hits, 1 marine hit = dead muta).
Landed vikings are pretty good at tanking baneling hits in a pinch, more so if you land them in front of your bioball. Their model is slightly bigger than a marauder, and they can eat 1-2 more banelings, since they didn't lose 20 hp to stim. Also, I don't think any units are allowed under the vikings once they've begun their landing animation (screws baneling pathing).
Whenever I've been in a air race with terran and they go viking, I always end up engaging with bigger numbers. Unless the terran is devoting a huge chunk of production to vikings, (in which case even a small force of roaches and lings is deadly), the zerg is always going to be able to field more mutas faster than the terran can build vikings. Even when I lose air battles against vikings, I just show up a minute later with 12 more mutas.
I think this thread is definitely something to think about.
Vikings -can- land, and I think a lot of people forget that, if you open reactor starport on Scrap Station for instance you can get your vikings out before he gets his mutalisks. Move down, land, kill some drones and maybe a queen, take off and kill some overlords.
Vikings also do 10+4 armored, not a whole lot of a bonus, but it hits twice. Will always get a shot off before the Mutalisks can get their shot off and if the Mutalisks retreat they also get a free shot.
Maybe I'm just wanting to try and experiment with air more lately, but I've been using a lot of Phoenixes and its been working out quite well. Maybe next time I roll terran I'll try for mass vikings.
IDK about mass vikings, since that would take a toll on the terrans ground force, but even if the zerg gives up air control, just a small group of vikings can be fucking annoying due to overlords and flying.
Try making a few and force the zerg to micro queens/make spore crawlers possibly.
And maybe a banshee or two with the vikings=deadly?
Lol... I like the test by the OP, but realistically vikings are outmatched by mutalisks in terms of speed. They deny overlord vision, but that can be done by a MMM force.
Zerg air (mass muta) will lose to an equal supply of either protoss or terran air. This should be pretty well known. The difference is that terran or protoss have to invest a huge amount of resources into starports/stargates to get mass air. Zerg only need to build one 200/200 spire. If you don't mass starports, you will be completely outmatched. 20 mutalisks will beat 10 vikings.
Even if their mutas get killed by your mass vikings, Zerg can rapidly tech switch back to ground units. A terran who goes mass starport won't have enough rax/factories.
Yes, mass vikings with upgrades will own any air units in the game. No, that doesn't make them an excellent counter to mass muta.
There's also a common mis-perception (due to massed Unit Tester battles) that upgraded mutas suck against other upgraded units. This is true in a fair fight, as Muta bounce damage gets completely negated by Armor upgrades. However, the optimal use for mutas is to snipe vulnerable targets (buildings, workers, small groups of units) and avoid fair fights. This actually makes Mutas dramatically stronger as they gain weapons upgrades (particularly when sniping buildings).
Vikings are nice, but there are better ways to counter Mutas (=Marines with Stime and some Medivacs). Tho i liked the Vikingplay in beta.
I didnt read all, so maybe it was asked already: The question is, how good do Vikings do with only one defense upgrade versus Mutas with no upgrade. Cuz thats realisticly what might happen, and armorupgrade >>> attack, cuz Mutas deal damage to 3 Vikings which each shot, which means that each armor upgrade saves you 3 dmg per Mutavolley.
For late game my unit composition is essentially BC, Vikings, Tanks, and so far, IF i can reach late game, I haven't met a Z composition that can stop it
On November 18 2010 07:00 Elean wrote: From my point of view, vikings are not cost effective against muta.
I don't compare the cost of vikings with the cost of muta. I compare the cost of vikings with the cost of anything else in the terran army that can shoot air.
So if we look only at cost effectiveness, vikings might be the worst choice.
The real question is probably why do you want to make vikings to begin with ? And once you have found an answer to this, you should ask yourself if it is worth it in comparaison with the advantages of the other anti-air solution terrans have.
Vikings are mobile, and can chase mutas who are sniping buildings. Marines are good for damage against mutas, but not as mobile.
Vikings can be used to scout, snipe overlords due to their comparative mobility. So yeah, there are plenty of reasons to build vikings. But I build only 6 vikings as standard, as the marginal utility decreases as you increase their numbers.
bumping, added more upgrade combinations per request, notably, +1 armor on viking will last you TWO muta upgrades (1/1 or 2/0), upgrading armor on muta is pretty useless against vikings.
Also for Z players who say they can just "dodge" the vikings, Vikings have Range 9. IF you even come within vision of a viking clump > 7 , you will lose at least 1 muta. IE. If you don't engage, you lose one muta, if you do engage, you can only do so if you have more mutas/better upgrades.
Hello, I actually use this strat all the time. Throw in a couple of ravens and you can do alot more damage. A couple of pdds and the Vikings just tear thru them. If you have extra energy on ravens after pdd a turret adds alot of dps. I actually love seeing Zerg go muta because raven and king abdolutly dominate it
I saw a pro game on scrap station not too long ago where one guy whent mass vikings. He layed down 3 starports and pumped them out quickly to supply block and land at expso. I'll try to dredge up the game. He eventually won but it got close as the zerg ground forces started to take their toll.
Grounded Vikings lose to pretty much every Zerg ground unit (not banelings), cost-for-cost, but the margin is generally small. They have the range of a Hydra, and nearly the same DPS, with 50% more durability, at 50% higher cost (and they don't need a range upgrade). Paired with Stimmed Marine + Medivac, they should be fine, provided you're getting usage out of air mode.
If you're not using both modes, Vikings are underwhelming against anything but slow, armored air units/colossi.
Did you guys see the GSL 3 game where the Terran goes 4 cloaked Banshee into mass Viking vs Zerg? Pretty sick build that rolled over the Zerg. While you can TheoryCraft why this is not a good build, it can work in practice, even at the pro level.
Okay, maybe someone in the five pages before me told you this.... but if I see you massing viking, I'm just going to make a ling/roach/infestor army and kill you, and there isn't much you can do about it. In order to make these vikings, you have to transition to them, and the moment I see multiple starports with no labs, I'm just going to make more ground units. You can hunt my overlords until the cows come home, but vikings suck vs. anything on the ground, and I'll just wipe out your base.
Maybe I'm missing some information? I really think mass viking play is a horrible idea at any level vs. zerg. It's annoying, but that's about it. Vikings beat Mutas, that's nice.... if I don't make mutas/corrupters, then what?
And if you're making vikings in response to muta/corrupter, that means I already have the air superiority advantage, so I either have to let you make them, or you build up an army that defends it.
That defending army (marines) would be sufficient to counter the air. Just attack the zerg and win with your ball of units.
if there's no muta in the air, what's gonna stop the vikings from killing every single overlord the zerg has/creates and supply blocking them permanently
I think perhaps Vikings and Tanks would be a very powerful composition for lategame, but I don't really understand how you can make enough of either fast enough to dominate air or land. Fungal can really punish mass air all too easily.
I recently lost to mass Viking on Scrap, but the Vikings didn't really play that huge of a part once I got Infestors. I still teched to Broodlords, perhaps foolishly, but they worked well and I only really lost to a pretty massive army control fail. I think against Ultras mass Viking would not stand a great chance, and I think I could have just outright killed him with Roach/Infestor at many points too.
The OP has given me great comfort to know I would probably only need to pile up at least 12 vikings in the mid-game and more in the late game to keep buildup my siege tanks/thors safely for the inevitable doom march.
Have you guys ever tried a fast banshe and viking build?? I have done it a few times and it had worked really really well every time. 2 port both with tech labs fast and pump banshes first then after about 3 banshes making 3 or so vikings and with your banshes kill queens drones and any tech going on. With your few vikings scour the map for overlords. this has worked aslong as while doing this building a wall of three racks at your ramp and being really really good with your repairs if they have a ground army. so you will have like some rines at your front to ward them away and if they try to bust they have three fucking racks to take down.
I partly believe this worked cause they think to themselves "what kinda noob builds 3 racks for a wall in? This must be a new player that used to play fastest in starcraftbw. WTF banshes? VIKINGS? ATTACK!!! DAMN IT HE HAS A MARINE!!! and all his scvs waiting at the ramp to repair... sometimes this game makes me want to pour cereal on my head in disbelief"
On November 18 2010 07:00 Elean wrote: From my point of view, vikings are not cost effective against muta.
I don't compare the cost of vikings with the cost of muta. I compare the cost of vikings with the cost of anything else in the terran army that can shoot air.
So if we look only at cost effectiveness, vikings might be the worst choice.
The real question is probably why do you want to make vikings to begin with ? And once you have found an answer to this, you should ask yourself if it is worth it in comparaison with the advantages of the other anti-air solution terrans have.
Vikings are mobile, and can chase mutas who are sniping buildings. Marines are good for damage against mutas, but not as mobile.
Vikings can be used to scout, snipe overlords due to their comparative mobility. So yeah, there are plenty of reasons to build vikings. But I build only 6 vikings as standard, as the marginal utility decreases as you increase their numbers.
Vikings aren't very good at chasing mutas, maybe deter them for a time, but 9 times out of 10, if you chase a pack of mutas with vikings, you'll get ruined when the 5+ more mutas join them from the hatchery.
The problem with this is application in my opinion. The difference is that Mutas are faster, can attack ground units all the time and more effectively and the fact is that you can make more then 2 Mutas at once because of Larvae(Taking Starport Reactor in consideration). If you invested that heavily into Vikings it really leaves you open to all sorts of other shit as opposed to a Zerg player just consequently getting Mutas anyway as apart of their build. I can't really see how going Mass Viking is a viable strategy. Besides, it's really not THAT easy to supply block Zerg players unless for some reason they keep all the Overlords in their base which is just bad play. The second someone sees 24 Vikings floating around the map looking for Overlords and they have Mutas, they're going to attack your Harvesters and by the time you get to your base to defend it or attack their's the Mutas are just going to run back. You then have grounded Vikings getting hit and by the time they can actually take to the air to attack Mutas you've probably already lost a few.
On November 19 2010 03:54 Griffith` wrote: For late game my unit composition is essentially BC, Vikings, Tanks, and so far, IF i can reach late game, I haven't met a Z composition that can stop it
I don't know if it's just me but I don't think I've ever actually allowed a Terran player to actually be able to Tech to Battlecruisers. You'd literally have to put not pressure on a Terran player in order for them to be successfully able to Tech to Battlecruisers. I'm sure there are plenty of pro games out there where people have but the only one I can think of off the top of my head is when it was TLO vs Dimaga and Dimaga just countered almost all of the above units you're referring to with Hyrdas.
I dont get why everybody is whining about this thread. The info is relevant for the TvZ matchup as Mech requires vikings to counter BL lategame and you should always OL harass. Nobody said anything about a mass viking build, unit numbers just tend to escalate late game...
Thanx for the upgrade statistics OP. I'll go bio&air armor first vs Z at all times now.
i think vikings are pretty awesome in every match up if you know when and where to land and when to fly, kind of doing the marines job with more hp but no stim. The problem are the upgrades though. If you want to play mech you want upgrades, but vikings also need air upgrades which is kinda sucky.
But they are a good way of taking map control for the terran. Since vikings can take air domination if you don't lose them early when they are weak in numbers.
Tryed for some time to make a mech play with vikings against zerg, when they went muta baneling, But got outmacroed sadly, because low numbers of vikings are no problem for mutas, and i was afraid of moving out. They are perfect though to fend of muta harassment if you have a few thors and towers.
But anti armor ground to ground units are pure evil against them.
On November 23 2010 20:57 Cibron wrote: I dont get why everybody is whining about this thread. The info is relevant for the TvZ matchup as Mech requires vikings to counter BL lategame and you should always OL harass. Nobody said anything about a mass viking build, unit numbers just tend to escalate late game...
Thanx for the upgrade statistics OP. I'll go bio&air armor first vs Z at all times now.
Should read the Thread Title and the OP (as well as watch replays if you care to do so). This is a discussion on the utility/viability of mass viking play in TvZ.
On November 17 2010 16:15 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: and from what you've said, unupgraded mutas beat vikings 1:1, so for a heavy part of the game, Z will have an aerial advantage that will be very hard to defend against if you're trying to build that many vikings.
Actually, mutas only beat vikings 1v1 with no upgrades if both armies have a lot (24) of them. As he stated above. 4 unupgraded mutas will not beat 4 unupgraded vikings.
On November 23 2010 21:34 SovSov wrote: ...but then the Zerg transitions into a huge ground army and rapes you?
add a few cloack banshees and wall your natural tight. whenever he tryes to break you, you kill the overseers with your vikings asap and let the banshees finish their job while you go hunt overlords again.
to counter this build Z has to play very agressively off of 2 bases. probably bane/roach/ling or something or get hydras asap. but either way: droning is forbidden.
Played an awesome TvZ recently where this scenario happened. He went mutas and since I scouted him I went for vikings (smart or not, just felt like it). I won the air battle against the mutas and forced him to make hydras. I stopped production of vikings by this point however and brought a raven out. Once I had air dominance I started going around the map with vikings and raven and taking out creep tumors.
In the mean time I had an additional expo up and starting going back to MMM. The reason for the creep tumor removal was that I went for hunter seekers. He ventured out with his hydras (He was pretty good so had a nice group of them by the time he started pushing out) and since hydras move so slow out of creep guess what happened to them when 2-3 hunter seekers hit them (Boom Baby).
On November 24 2010 02:22 Ohitefin wrote: Played an awesome TvZ recently where this scenario happened. He went mutas and since I scouted him I went for vikings (smart or not, just felt like it). I won the air battle against the mutas and forced him to make hydras. I stopped production of vikings by this point however and brought a raven out. Once I had air dominance I started going around the map with vikings and raven and taking out creep tumors.
In the mean time I had an additional expo up and starting going back to MMM. The reason for the creep tumor removal was that I went for hunter seekers. He ventured out with his hydras (He was pretty good so had a nice group of them by the time he started pushing out) and since hydras move so slow out of creep guess what happened to them when 2-3 hunter seekers hit them (Boom Baby).
After that my MMM cleaned up.
I think herein lies the golden nuggets of this discussion thread.
Force zerg to make certain units, and destroy the creep that's slowly covering the map. While it's much easier to spread creep than it is destroy creep tumors, it's similarly much more difficult to re-start the spread of creep tumors once the highway is in pieces. By that time in the game there is so much to do that most players (myself included) won't be bothered with starting it up again.
And you're absolutely right... this makes hydras completely useless. Any hydra aggression off-creep should be (rightly) considered an all-in attack, because there is no retreat.
checkout Nestea in 1st r64 match of gsl3....terran played well got vikings to counter muta/broodlords but nestea ofc already knew this would happen and just tech switched to ultra in 1 production cycle with the armor upgrade already complete. It totally showed how getting too many of a specific counter-unit is only going to get you killed vs zerg
On November 24 2010 10:37 xseverityx wrote: checkout Nestea in 1st r64 match of gsl3....terran played well got vikings to counter muta/broodlords but nestea ofc already knew this would happen and just tech switched to ultra in 1 production cycle with the armor upgrade already complete. It totally showed how getting too many of a specific counter-unit is only going to get you killed vs zerg
If Jys had gotten the planetary fortress wall up in the center, that game would've gone a lot differently imo.
There was all of one mention of this, and no discussion, but a Terran player actually did go mass vikings in the GSL, to amazing effect.
Wow the timing on the mass air was definitely impressive, but I can't help but think that only worked out because of the surprise element and that could be reacted to more efficiently, the 3 rax wall that wasn't doing anything....thats a lot of resources invested early on that weren't doing anything. seems kind of flimsy TBH...nonetheless very impressive how he pulled it off.
There was all of one mention of this, and no discussion, but a Terran player actually did go mass vikings in the GSL, to amazing effect.
Holy crap, I guess you need 3 starports to maintain the viking production. The 3rax wall was actually crucial to prevent baneling/roach busts. Though as artosis pointed out, Infestors would have destroyed this build. (In fact infestors seem to destroy ANY terran build). Thanks for the stream Chiponyasu, I've modified my OP and given you credit for it.
ok, have a blast countering my mutalisks. i'll just throw down a hydra den and take advantage of your complete lack of ground army.
also, you have to ask yourself not only if viking are cost effective against mutas in and of themselves, but also if they are the most cost effective solution to mutas terran has.
On November 24 2010 13:02 universalwill wrote: ok, have a blast countering my mutalisks. i'll just throw down a hydra den and take advantage of your complete lack of ground army.
also, you have to ask yourself not only if viking are cost effective against mutas in and of themselves, but also if they are the most cost effective solution to mutas terran has.
I think its pretty much accepted that hydras are considered crap in ZvT. Even mass marines will counter hydras. Vikings can also be used to snipe overlords into oblivion.
On November 24 2010 10:37 xseverityx wrote: checkout Nestea in 1st r64 match of gsl3....terran played well got vikings to counter muta/broodlords but nestea ofc already knew this would happen and just tech switched to ultra in 1 production cycle with the armor upgrade already complete. It totally showed how getting too many of a specific counter-unit is only going to get you killed vs zerg
If Jys had gotten the planetary fortress wall up in the center, that game would've gone a lot differently imo.
PFs are awful against Ultralisks and even if they weren't Jys' army was so badly steamrolled in the last fight that a PF would not have helped.
On November 24 2010 13:02 universalwill wrote: ok, have a blast countering my mutalisks. i'll just throw down a hydra den and take advantage of your complete lack of ground army.
also, you have to ask yourself not only if viking are cost effective against mutas in and of themselves, but also if they are the most cost effective solution to mutas terran has.
I think its pretty much accepted that hydras are considered crap in ZvT. Even mass marines will counter hydras. Vikings can also be used to snipe overlords into oblivion.
Not if your opponent is massing air (re: hydras being crap).
If it's like 4 vikings vs 4 mutas and you get flying, first strike, you should run for 1.50 seconds and then shoot again ( 2.00 "Normal" = 1.50 in "Faster" or IRL seconds ) multi-hit and lower cooldown might give them the win in bigger mass, but the upgrades might negate some of it if you have more slightly more vikings to start than mutalisks, you should be able to get a lot of free hits before they get in range to attack you takes 5 viking hits to do 140 damage on an unarmored mutalisk +1/+1 vs +1/+1 has the same effect as the above You should win due to the flying, first strike 4 Vikings should fire at the Mutalisk A on their first attack 3 Vikings should fire at Mutalisk B on their second attack, leave 1 Viking to attack Mutalisk A ( This would allow you to get no shots wasted on over kill on the first Mutalisk )
Vikings cost less gas, more minerals, but terrans get 4.5±0.50 temporary scvs that last for 67.5±0.50 every time they get 50 energy if they decide to use the spell could mix in with mass marines and occasionally hunt overlords
Vikings are not terrible on the ground once you clear out the mutalisks. If zerg is making a bunch of mutas they will not suddenly have a huge ground army (unless he is way ahead and at that point the game is already over). Correct me if this is wrong...but a viking is pretty even against a hydralisk on the ground. The only problem is that they are much less cost effective.
TLO has done mass viking+hellion, it actually worked pretty well. The zerg did beat it, but with some trouble.
The problem with vikings is the time it takes to lift off. A good zerg player will get hydra/muta combined with a ground unit and exploit the timing. Additionally, vikings are not cost effective against ground. So- it could work in a situation like muta/ling if you micro right.
Wow, this is interesting. I always thought mutas > vikings, assuming equal upgrades, numbers, etc. However, I do think it is still worth noting that zerg has the ability to out produce the viking count should they choose to devote their larvae in this fashion.
However, a great post! Until now, as a Zerg, I thought if I saw 3-4 vikings, 3-4 mutas would be just fine, but apparently I should start considering out numbering... However, not sure if this was mentioned, but I'm curious how a mostly muta count with a few corrupters for casting and whatever firepower they can provide between casts, how that might fare vs the vikings...
A terran tried this against me once and I just tech switched to hydras. I ended up losing almost all of my overlords but then I got pissed and just rolled him over with my mass hydra ball. He spent too much micro on the vikings and therefore didn't expand, or have much of a ground force at all. He obviously didn't do this build as well as he could, but if you would like to try this build against me, then add me. My TL name is my name and code.
I think that this would work against mutas, but the problem is that a hydra den takes no time to make and are even cheaper than the mutas so It isn't that hard to just tech switch. Also, the vikings are a HUGE investment. You have to get the factory, a starport, and possibly a reactor on the starport to make double vikings. That is a lot of mins and gas just to get the vikings, so if it doesn't work, then you are in a huge hole for using all of your resources just to snipe a few overlords or mutas, when the zerg can tech switch to hydras in an instant.
i honestly think being slightly defensive and getting techlabs on the starports and pumping battlecruisers would be a better use of your air attack/armor upgrades and starports
BC's decimate mutalisks
corrupters dont even counter battlecruisers _that_ well and if you force your opponent to get corrupters over muta then he cant harass you as well with the muta
BC's otherwise would force your enemy to go hydralisks, which are the worst unit a zerg can get vs terran
BC's take 90 seconds to build from a techlab starport and they are so beefy and can be micro'ed back and repaired by 1-2 SCV's pretty quickly
imo battlecruisers are the key to lategame TvZ
EDIT: dont even upgrade yamato cannon until you have 4+ battlecruisers which can now use energy on it. dont upgrade behemoth reactors its not worth it when bc's start with some energy anyway and if you wait a while you can use yamato
problem with late-game BCs/viking/banshee is that hydras are still very cost-efficient against all terran air, and essentially forces some form of ground.
regardless, I employ vikings in TvZ in late-games where I force zerg to transition to muta/blords, pre-emptively get +1 air armor, and just smile
I as a terran player experimented with this a few months ago and the problem is not that you are unable to get the tech going or that the upgrades take a long time the problem is that vikings take so much longer to replenish after the initial battle. Even if you win a 20v20 battle vs mutas the zerg player can rebuild those mutas in one build cycle where it takes a terran player 5 build cycles even with 2 reactored starports. The only way that I was able to make mass viking work was to throw in a thorship or 2 with my viking army and drop them wherever the fight takes place. Even if you can make all that work you have invested a ton of resources and micro into gaining air control and a good zerg usually just mass expands and tech switches to ling/bling in my experience. Take this with a grain of salt as I am only a ~2200 terran player and maybe someone with better control/macro would be able to pull this off more effectively.
Ive never seen vikings work against mutas. I simply always have more and focus firing i think is a huge factor with mutas. Even if u get more vikings than i can handle with mutas queens and hydras just make them drop like flies. I dont understand why a terran would mass something as expensive as vikings simply to counter mutas when they have better and more versatile units at their disposal.
I have actually been working on a viking marine build for a while now and I have been able to get quite a few wins with it. Also people don't realize that landed vikings aren't actually that bad, in an equal food battle landed vikings can beat hydras, and possibly roaches not quite sure about that one. Anyways here is a replay of me doing this build TvZ viking-jungle basin given im still in plat and so was my opponent so I'm not sure if diamond zergs will be able to handle it better than the zerg in the replay. Also if you try this build you can't sacrifice any vikings early game or you will most likely lose, and if at any point your viking count drops to low the zerg will probably just kill you
On November 17 2010 16:15 Xxazn4lyfe51xX wrote: I feel like mass vikings would be nice if you could suddenly make them materialize on the field. The problem is getting to that point is rather hard if you tech to a starport quickly and Z comes knocking on your door with ground forces. Even if it is as you say, and you manage to get mass vikings, 3/3 upgrades take a LONG time to research, and from what you've said, unupgraded mutas beat vikings 1:1, so for a heavy part of the game, Z will have an aerial advantage that will be very hard to defend against if you're trying to build that many vikings.
From my 20v20 A-move tests, the Vikings win.
The issue with your a-move test is that you won't get an on par of 20 vs 20.
A zerg player makes 9 mutas when they first get their spire AND start +1 attack at the same time. A terran player is not able to do this. Simply put, to get the mass it takes a long time, meanwhile the zerg player pops 12 hydras at once and kills all your vikings giving his mutas free reign again. Also mutas can dance around with their greater movespeed.
On January 02 2011 14:44 Anomaly_ wrote: I have actually been working on a viking marine build for a while now and I have been able to get quite a few wins with it. Also people don't realize that landed vikings aren't actually that bad, in an equal food battle landed vikings can beat hydras, and possibly roaches not quite sure about that one. Anyways here is a replay of me doing this build TvZ viking-jungle basin given im still in plat and so was my opponent so I'm not sure if diamond zergs will be able to handle it better than the zerg in the replay. Also if you try this build you can't sacrifice any vikings early game or you will most likely lose, and if at any point your viking count drops to low the zerg will probably just kill you
Equal food doesn't mean equal cost or equal production time. Hydra's cost 100M 50G, Roaches 75M 50G while Vikings cost 150M 75G. More importantly though, they both build significantly faster, 33 and 27 seconds vs 42 seconds ... and that's on top of Zergs ability to produce faster.
Stupid thing with Vikings is that they aren't useful for anything besides air dominance, you are already fighting uphill to beat mutalisks and even if you do manage to gain air control you're stuck with floating Vikings which will get decimated for cost by anything Zerg has on the ground.
For mass air to work as a terran your vikings MUST apply some harass/pressure after killing his muta. You would probably need a few banshee to get in the needed damage to key units.
The thing is if you over-commit to vikings you're behind unless you deal some serious damage, in the same way you can't over-commit to phoenix play as toss.
IMO a terran with air control is useless without banshees included. But I believe if used correctly it could work.
this experiment is fucking retarded. they dont cost the same and there would never be a situation where a terran could produce more or even as many viking as a zerg could make mutas.
People are forgetting that they are going air. Mix in some ravens for point defense done. If you use tanks and bunkers to secure 2-3 bases while you build up your air forces. Since you get vikings you make fewer turrets and a couple sensor towers to prevent early muta harass from raping you.
The goal is to force an engagement between the vikings and mutas in such a way that you can get some clutch pdd's. It would be s sweet to pull off a timing with vikings ravens with pdd and a ton of banshees. This would exploit the fact that pdd prevents every form of zerg aa. Hydra, corruptor, spore crawler, muta and queen.
On December 11 2010 17:03 nalgene wrote: If it's like 4 vikings vs 4 mutas and you get flying, first strike, you should run for 1.50 seconds and then shoot again ( 2.00 "Normal" = 1.50 in "Faster" or IRL seconds ) multi-hit and lower cooldown might give them the win in bigger mass, but the upgrades might negate some of it if you have more slightly more vikings to start than mutalisks, you should be able to get a lot of free hits before they get in range to attack you takes 5 viking hits to do 140 damage on an unarmored mutalisk +1/+1 vs +1/+1 has the same effect as the above You should win due to the flying, first strike 4 Vikings should fire at the Mutalisk A on their first attack 3 Vikings should fire at Mutalisk B on their second attack, leave 1 Viking to attack Mutalisk A ( This would allow you to get no shots wasted on over kill on the first Mutalisk )
Vikings cost less gas, more minerals, but terrans get 4.5±0.50 temporary scvs that last for 67.5±0.50 every time they get 50 energy if they decide to use the spell could mix in with mass marines and occasionally hunt overlords
On January 28 2011 15:55 charlie420247 wrote: this experiment is fucking retarded. they dont cost the same and there would never be a situation where a terran could produce more or even as many viking as a zerg could make mutas.
If you dislike the topic why did you bump it after 4 weeks of silence? Were you reading thousands of posts of the last months and when you read this one it made you so enraged that you had to voice your disaproval?
On January 28 2011 15:55 charlie420247 wrote: this experiment is fucking retarded. they dont cost the same and there would never be a situation where a terran could produce more or even as many viking as a zerg could make mutas.
If you dislike the topic why did you bump it after 4 weeks of silence? Were you reading thousands of posts of the last months and when you read this one it made you so enraged that you had to voice your disaproval?
Because this post was mentioned on another post as an argument to validate an opinion.
EPT
