|
On July 27 2011 22:15 Pigzyf5 wrote:
Its a cool idea. I really hope this happens one day in a game i watch. But i dont think im going to incorperat it into my play, seeker missle still costs allot of cash, and its a big risk. If you put it on a unit and move into an army wont the uni die before the missles meet thier target? and if you move a unit into the drone line wont they just run workers away from the unit with out even seeing the missles?
I think it sure would be fun to watch but... yeah..it was just an idea I had and played around with.
Adressing your points:
I depends how big the army is and which unit you use. For example: if you use a medivac over roaches or banelings they surely won't be able to kill it. also if you run in hellions or a marauder (maybe with another one in front). They can reach the army. And if you have a cloaked ghost and they lack detection, they wont see you.
If you move your unit into the drone line, they often won't just "pull out". Even in pro replays that rarely happens. You would have to be very quick. Remember, that the unit isn't attacking the probes. He doesn't get warned if it reaches the dronelines it takes only seconds until the missile hits. After all I think you won't expect this.
|
well seaker missiles are quiet nice, the problem is the range. Against toss or zerg you won't get them off if hts or infestors are out, atleast not from the raven. Another problem is the self detonate if the target dies. Last but not least is the energy investment, often 2 autoturrets do better then the seeker itself.
I simply think they overnerfed the damage, when the seeker was to strong, they should have reduced the energy usage as well. Now its like a easy to dodge storm, that almost costs the double amount of energy and you need to move the unit into anti air range before fireing.
though its always a good idea to get a raven along with vikings. Well main theme is seeker Missile, banshees are actually perfectly at delivering seeker Missiles, since they survive the blow and are cloaked and can fly. It is fun to splatter a zerg baneling blob that way or lings and then go for some infestor sniping. Or fly directly on top of gathered infestors and kill alot of them off.
Its diamond platin playing around though, so my opponents are more busy macroing and not checking their army alot. And cloakd banshees are really evil against a zerg that stopped muta production anyway. So the seeker is just a bonus if you have your raven anyway.
|
On July 27 2011 23:02 FeyFey wrote:
well seaker missiles are quiet nice, the problem is the range. Against toss or zerg you won't get them off if hts or infestors are out, atleast not from the raven. Another problem is the self detonate if the target dies. Last but not least is the energy investment, often 2 autoturrets do better then the seeker itself.
Actually I wouldn't dare to proclaim that the proposed Idea would be efficient. And I very much like to her pros as well as cons. But I wonder a bit about these responses like: Well... the missiles are quite nice, but the range is the problem. Or..they can run their unit back into yours. I mean did you read the post at all? It's about extending the range.
|
On July 27 2011 22:24 Souljah wrote:
If there is any unit that is broken in SC2.. its the Raven. Its slow as shit, does 0 damage, and the seeker missile is a joke. The only thing its good for is PDD.
And even that can be sniped in seconds if the units focus fire it (have to be in range). I mess around with Terran sometimes, and when my mineral line is getting harassed constantly, I use AT to defend while I push out. Not sure how cute that is, might help some people out.
|
PS: I went back and counted. The two attacks on the drone line with this kind of seeker missile play killed 29 drones of him (while the respective 2 suicide units could have been spread out much better)
|
baas... everyone seems to be completely against the idea. everyone knows some reasons why it seems to be bad...
in broodwar vultures were considered bad too. i'm sure people had similar "great arguments" for why vultures sucked. until boxer revolutionized the whole terran race...
people always think they know it all... quite annoying tbh.
i like the idea of getting a raven:
-for killing creep
-detecting burrowed banelings
-PDD
-maybe harass
how many units are THAT useful? considering the raven does so many good things already, it's not a big strech to go for HSM too. it's not that expensive. and it does indeed do huge damage. and zerg armys indeed are clumped most of the time.
idra was convinced that raven would become standard.
i dont know about the long range bombing. might work better than people are suspecting.
i think the raven has a lot of potential. we might see it much more often in the future, including HSM.
|
Idk, Zerg here, so take my comments with a grain of salt, but I think this could be an interesting gimmick, especially in a multi-pronged attack, though I have to question the cost efficiency, and I think every terran should ask, what would be better here, turrets or a seeker missle? Personally, as Zerg, I can handle a few seeker missles and just run away across the map. But when 10 or so turrets are dropped in my mineral lines (or worse, multiple bases, simultaneously), I seriously shit my pants. Perhaps the seeker missle is better vs army than workers, but again, I'm no Terran expert, and maybe in other matchups (TvT and TvP) the seeker can be better, I'm not sure, but I really think a melee heavy army has a much harder time dealing with turrets as well.
This seems kind of like the fungal growth versus infested terran argument for worker harrass, where infested terrans can do structural damage and prevent mining for longer, en masse, but the instant effect of a couple of FG's can kill all workers, though if the opponent saw the infestors coming, IT's may be a better choice, other than of course, calling it all off, should you choose to do so.
I just think the slow moving seeker missle, whether manually guided or AI guided, is still just a slow moving seeker missle. The only real advantage is perhaps getting to have your raven a little farther from the action, but I bet you're better off with turrets.
However, one thing is certain about the seeker missle: If your units are targetted, run in the opposite direction, or face big losses. Personally, I think the best use would be to set up a tank perimeter concave, and use 3 or more missles from behind the opponents (coming at them from different angles) line to force them to run forward into your seigetank line. Regardless though, interesting use, and maybe it has its place, who knows... Though I'd compare this to longdistance mining via nydus canal, where you have to manually load and unload drones for each mineral trip, which is rarely seen in competitive play...
Although, Multiple seeker missles versus the mineral line from different directions, that may be interesting, as you run away from one, you're running towards another... Regardless, vs muta ling bling, there is the possibility of burrowed blings, and a raven detector is worth the cost for that reason alone, I bet it's much more cost-efficient than leap-frog scanning.
Though if Blizz felt like a balance patch, as Zerg, I'd be happy for a nerfed turret in exchange for faster seeker missles.
|
nice ideas duncanldaho.. i never followed broodwar, but i heard boxer's ideas were pretty daring and genius at the same time. sounds like your idea  ...
but all the nay-sayers are way too lazy to integrate HSM into a solid fight plan like that...
they are even too lazy to consider the idea... or the possibility... damn that's so annoying. most people i try to discuss strategy with are like that...
btw, another thing.. how often do people scan just to kill creep? 2 times? more? 2 times is the cost of a raven ALREADY. plus it has so many more uses...
if the zerg tries to engage the terran army and you fire a HSM... what is he gonna do? run away and eat extra tank shots? engage and take the HSM damage? sounds kinda strong to me.
|
I personally think ravens should just have like heat seeking mines...that float. So you could use a raven to lay them around your base kinda like spidermines. It would help out Ts a bunch against heavy muta play instead of relying on turrets that just get 1 shotted by 25+ +2 mutas.
|
On July 27 2011 23:25 beg wrote:nice ideas duncanldaho.. i never followed broodwar, but i heard boxer's ideas were pretty daring and genius at the same time. sounds like your idea ... but all the nay-sayers are way too lazy to integrate HSM into a solid fight plan like that... they are even to lazy to consider the idea... or the possibility... damn that's so annoying. most people i try to discuss strategy with are like that...
Hehe, ty. Yeah, there's always the mob of "lol that's a crap idea, and I'm not going to back up my opinion with anything more than laughing at you and saying it's stupid" crowd of assholes. But yeah, it is a risky idea, but I don't think that means seeker missles are useless. I mean, If I were to make a thread about using mass banelings to counter mass mauraders, people would likely laugh at me, and proceed to claim that banelings are useless. People just don't know how to think creatively/out-of-the-box.
|
Interesting, i did not know you could target your own units with the seeker missile.
|
This has been discussed before, where the ideal unit is a speed reaper that jumps up the cliff into your opponents mineral line. Even if the reaper dies, the HSM will still detonate where the unit died.
HSM imo is just not worth the energy of the Raven. Throwing down turrets or PDD is soooo much more annoying to your opponent than a slow projectile that can easily be dodged (or they can just split their units). The only time I remember HSM being very viable was in beta when Thor's didn't have splash and there was a bug where HSM did 175% of the listed damage and had longer cast range.
I'm not saying HSM is useless, there's just better options.
|
On July 27 2011 23:34 DuncanIdaho wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 23:25 beg wrote:nice ideas duncanldaho.. i never followed broodwar, but i heard boxer's ideas were pretty daring and genius at the same time. sounds like your idea ... but all the nay-sayers are way too lazy to integrate HSM into a solid fight plan like that... they are even to lazy to consider the idea... or the possibility... damn that's so annoying. most people i try to discuss strategy with are like that... Hehe, ty. Yeah, there's always the mob of "lol that's a crap idea, and I'm not going to back up my opinion with anything more than laughing at you and saying it's stupid" crowd of assholes. But yeah, it is a risky idea, but I don't think that means seeker missles are useless. I mean, If I were to make a thread about using mass banelings to counter mass mauraders, people would likely laugh at me, and proceed to claim that banelings are useless. People just don't know how to think creatively/out-of-the-box.
Oh yeah, remember when everyone said banelings are useless against Protoss as Stalkers and Colossi are armored units and there won't be a lot of Zealots? Now banelings are common in ZvP and can crush a whole army.
|
On July 27 2011 23:17 beg wrote:
baas... everyone seems to be completely against the idea. everyone knows some reasons why it seems to be bad...
Yes, it seems most do so. But I'm also not "insisting" it is a viable strategy. I just defend it against arguments that acutally have nothing do do with the point I made. Like "the range is too short". Or I like to argue that there are also pros to some cons like the heavy costs.
|
Personally I'd just make a banshee instead of shooting a hunter seeker missile at several of my own reapers.
|
Basically, Blizz needs to do something to make HSM useable. Ravens are awesome as it is, but not always cost efficient. I think there are ways to increase the utility of the Raven w/o unbalancing the game (more than it already is depending on your pov).
|
On July 27 2011 23:40 CryMore wrote:
This has been discussed before, where the ideal unit is a speed reaper that jumps up the cliff into your opponents mineral line. Even if the reaper dies, the HSM will still detonate where the unit died.
HSM imo is just not worth the energy of the Raven. Throwing down turrets or PDD is soooo much more annoying to your opponent than a slow projectile that can easily be dodged (or they can just split their units). The only time I remember HSM being very viable was in beta when Thor's didn't have splash and there was a bug where HSM did 175% of the listed damage and had longer cast range.
I'm not saying HSM is useless, there's just better options.
Oh ok, I didn't know that :-). I think there are pros and cos to the speed reaper use, because with speed...if you don't stop and wait for the missile beforehand there is more time for the opponent to react and pull of drones.
Yes maybe turrets would do the better job but I think that the argument of dodging there is much more viable. To dogde such a HSM attack is in my eyes much harder than to pull workers away once turrets get layed down. And then the turrets can be killed rather quickly without doing real damage...and you will have spent a lot of energy too. So... is it really better? I think the counter arguments against a use of seeker missiles on drones should apply to the auto turret use as well. Or am I missing something completely?
|
On July 27 2011 22:36 mutantmagnet wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2011 22:15 Zarahtra wrote:
I've known about this for quite some time, but it is imo at best a big gimmick, with high risk high reward.
I think atm the main issue with the raven is exactly that, it's a risky unit to mass/upgrade. Has someone already tried SKT style yet. Hunter seeker is no where near as effective as irradiate but that negative is offset by point defense being vastly better than dmatrix for the situations you want to use either.
Aye, there have been a lot of attempts to force the raven to work. The SKT style was probably the most successful, but it didn't rely so much on HSM as it did on auto turret and hitting before hydras/big number of roaches.
|
I actually saw something like this used last week, in Craftcup I think. It was Satini vs Syz (TvZ), I was trying to find a replay but can't seem to find it.
It wasn't directed at the mineral lines, but used directly in battles.
From what I can remember Satini used at least twice, once with the HSM following a stimmed marine and another one with the HSM following a cloacked banshee straight into Syz army. In both situations the damage dealt was quite considerable.
I don't really see a strategy revolving around this, but it can definitely be useful in some situations.
P.S.: If someone could find the replay of the game I mentioned, I think some people could see how this can be doable and useful.
|
On July 28 2011 00:31 Calad0 wrote:
I actually saw something like this used last week, in Craftcup I think. It was Satini vs Syz (TvZ), I was trying to find a replay but can't seem to find it.
It wasn't directed at the mineral lines, but used directly in battles.
From what I can remember Satini used at least twice, once with the HSM following a stimmed marine and another one with the HSM following a cloacked banshee straight into Syz army. In both situations the damage dealt was quite considerable.
I don't really see a strategy revolving around this, but it can definitely be useful in some situations.
P.S.: If someone could find the replay of the game I mentioned, I think some people could see how this can be doable and useful.
I would love to see that replay too!!!! I just tought it wasn't been used yet because I newer saw it before :-).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
