[G][D] MC vs Kas 2 base Carrier allin PvT
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
RandomAccount#216215
76 Posts
| ||
craaaaack
479 Posts
| ||
RandomAccount#216215
76 Posts
| ||
yanot
France130 Posts
On August 27 2012 23:11 craaaaack wrote: Assuming this had to be unscouted to be successful: how is it any better than having the exact same amount of gateway units but instead of the carriers you get colossus with range upgrade? I guess: Pros: - Surprise effect - Swarming effect, the interceptors can create more confusion in the battle - Carriers are cost effective against almost everything if upgrades are not too much behind - Unlike Colossi, Carriers are actually able to hit vikings - Carriers can't be hit by marauders - Carriers are also tankier and can take more hits before falling down - Unusual play means terran may overreact and focus too much on anti-air and be slaughtered by the gates units - Faster transition to Mothership, that great unit Cons: - Slow production... it's a big one. - More expensive. - Carriers don't share upgrades with gateway units, unlike Colossi There are probably more cons but can't think of them yet.. | ||
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
On August 27 2012 23:11 craaaaack wrote: Assuming this had to be unscouted to be successful: how is it any better than having the exact same amount of gateway units but instead of the carriers you get colossus with range upgrade? The carriers can come from behind the nat or from the 3rd into the main on CK and harass - forcing the Terran to move forces from the front - allowing the break of the bunkers more easily, and even if the Terran does not take the bait and somehow defends both sides perfectly, the carriers are better at breaking bunkers faster, since their single target damage is so much higher. Just an idea, how about starting out with a couple phoenixes? This would allow scouting the Terran's base and would actually make the Terran not make too many marines, since the normal transition after opening phoenix is the colossus, and so the Terran normally wants to get more marauders in the mix. Also, the phoenixes would help fight the vikings, if the Terran was successful with his scouting, and since carriers are still decent vs vikings, with the help of the phoenixes they would crush the Terran air ships! | ||
MistSC2
Sweden583 Posts
| ||
Jazzman88
Canada2228 Posts
The point is that the Terran WILL see this, because he will either be doing a Banshee/1-1-1 attack or the fast Medivac timing 99x out of 100, and both of those arrive before all of the Carriers are out. Just like if your opponent went for five gates and robo in defense, if you see that much stuff, you back off and take the third. I believe with correct defense and sufficient Vikings, this might actually be easier to hold than a 2-base Colossus play, simply because Colossi deal so much damage to mass bio, whereas the Carriers are single target units. Bunker up, target with Vikings, and I think this can be held. | ||
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
If this becomes a really popular build they might not scrap the carrier. Haha | ||
Fairwell
Austria195 Posts
On August 27 2012 23:22 isrtor2 wrote: Carriers also have great dps as well(im not sure how to compare their dps to colosus dps because although carriers have more dps than colossus, they dont deal splash damage). Why does everyone think that carriers have an insane amount of dps? Their initial burst dmg upon unleashing all the interceptors (with graviton catapult is about 3 times as high as their normal dps, this basically lasts a little bit more than 1sec ingame time according to liquipedia ...). However, after that their dps is around 26.66 vs the 18.18 from the colossus (no upgrades each). However, colossi come way faster, don't lose dps due to not losing interceptors, provide detection etc we all know that. The amount of hp for a single carrier is also lower than of a colossus compared to the cost. But, and having watched WhiteRa doing this exact build (not exactly the same bo, but exactly the same layout, 1gate-fe into 3 gates into 3rd gas with stargate etc) and he used to push out with about 4 carriers with 2 more in production. He killed some terrans with it as no terran will have a decent viking count at the time when the protoss pushes unless he scouts it early enough. There is no reason at all for a terran do blindly get a good number of vikings that early instead of the important medivacs or even a 2nd starport on 2 base. Basically you can compare it with going quick double robotics colossus of 2 base with like 6 range colossi instead of 4 carriers. If the terran doesn't scout it and goes for a standard 10:30-11:00min 2 base medivac timing he will likely get crushed as long as you have some kind of meatshield in front of those colossi. Now that I think about it this could be some really nasty colossus allin. :-) The only advantages I can see for the carriers here is that if the marines kill the interceptors they will tank quite some dmg for their cost and since the protoss stopped probes, is not getting any more upgrades behind it, is not preparing a 3rd base or any transition at all this means that all the money went into that army and together with nice tanking units (zealots + interceptors) allows the protoss to kill the terran. The other big advantage I've seen from WhiteRa doing this is that once terrans scout no 3rd base around 10-11min from the protoss and see that the protoss has units at his natural they usually won't just rush in. Instead they will drop (maybe with some front aggression combined). And those 2 medivacs that are coming into the protoss base just die instantly (intial high burst dmg and the range). And from this point on the protoss keeps pushing and having the bigger army at all times. In frontal engagements I've seen WhiteRA focus fire the medivacs first always so that the terran player loses his big advantage of endurance. | ||
Stunergy
United States41 Posts
edit: I just tried this on the ladder after i practice it, and it was an easy win, he scanned my base twice, and only saw the gates, and the units at my natural. Had no idea what happened to him, when i pylon'd at his main cliff, and use the carriers to warp in the main as the 3 other carrier and gateway units attacked the natural. | ||
Whatson
United States5356 Posts
| ||
![]()
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
I don't recommend this build for normal ladder play, that's all. | ||
ineversmile
United States583 Posts
The first thing to realize is that you're running 2 fully saturated bases and you have all 4 gases by the time you push out, so you should be able to use more than just 6 gateways with that level of income. Usually one fully saturated base can handle 4 gateways with cut probe production and no other units being produced. The reason why 6 gates work here is that your interceptors are being rebuilt, which is a mineral sink. Notice that MC doesn't remake Zealots; he makes stalkers and interceptors and keeps everything ranged for the attack. This means you can forcefield as you would with Stalker/Sentry/Colossus, splitting armies in half and not allowing the bio behind your FFs to have range onto anything (as opposed to Zealots, which they would shoot at right over the FFs). Having more stalkers also means that you have a lot of anti-viking units. If you were to go for this same push with 4 Colossi instead of Carriers, obviously the Colossi are going to be good, but the difference with Carriers is that the Carriers can fight back, and at similar range to Vikings. If you hit and run with Carriers and the Vikings fly over your ground army, you can focus them with stalkers. In a late game situation and your opponent already had 2 Starports and a full count of Medivacs already, Carriers are a lot easier to focus down with Vikings. However, in a 2base all-in at this timing, you're looking at the opponent being forced to cut Medivac production a bit early and not having enough Vikings up to trump the Carriers straight-out. Normally, they can have enough Vikings to deal with Colossi at this timing (well, it's a slightly earlier timing due to Colossi build time and move speed both being faster, but it's still pretty similar for the stage of the midgame), but that's also because Colossi don't shoot back at the Vikings to punish small numbers of them kiting as you move towards the Terran's base. Also, often there are Marauders helping to do damage to the Colossi, and since Carriers don't give a shit about Marauders, they're going to last longer. Between that, their higher HP and base armor, and the support from Stalkers, the Vikings at that stage of the game are not the biggest issue for your Carriers; it's keeping the Marines from shooting directly at the Carriers because you want to be trading Interceptors for Marines, not Carriers for Marines. Something else to think about is that you can shoot down Medivacs with Carriers in engagements, making stim actually cost something. This is a pretty big deal. The more Medivacs you kill while you force more Viking production, the weaker the Bio army is and consequently the stronger all of your ground units are. My next point is that people don't think a lot about the Inteceptors themselves. They actually have 80 total HP because they're 40 HP+40 Shields, so they have more HP than Marines and they each do fairly similar DPS 1-0 marines (their main nemesis during the timing window in which engagements should start). According to Liquipedia, Marines do 10.5+1.7 DPS while stimmed (1.7 accounting for +1 weapons)=12.2 DPS. Interceptors do 5 DPSx2 shots=10 DPS. Considering that Marines have lower HP (45 when stimmed plus Medivac healing shouldn't equal an average of 80 HP for 1 minute engagements with only 4-6 medivacs), you're going to trade minerals pretty well with the Terran. Marines cost double what interceptors cost, so if your carriers stay alive and keep producing (think of them like a mobile Barracks), you're going to replenish your units at a favorable rate to the Terran's production. Interceptors produce in 8 seconds. You can figure 2 of them are the same cost as a marine and produce in 16 seconds from a carrier. A reactored barracks produces 2 marines in 25 seconds, which adjusts to 1 marine per 12.5 seconds. The marines produce slightly faster than pairs of interceptors, however the interceptors also show up right at the battlefield inside carriers, just like warp gate units. And this brings me to my next point: that Carriers and warp gates work very well together. Why? Because they both allow reinforcements to show up right there on the battlefield. If you think of your army as Interceptors, Stalkers, and Sentries, it's a lot more synergistic than thinking about Carriers with gateway units. We know carriers are slow and take a long time to rebuild, but if you think of them more like flying production buildings, that completely changes the equation. And this is what's so exciting about this build, to me. There is reason behind the function of carriers in this composition: they produce mineral units right there on the battlefield. No, they don't shoot AoE, but that's not the point of them. You wouldn't expect a Barracks to shoot AoE, either, right? How about a flying barracks that follows your army around while remaking units to a specific cap? That's the carrier. | ||
Havik_
United States5585 Posts
| ||
EngrishTeacher
Canada1109 Posts
We rematched, and this time I went for a 2-rax marauder opening with 3 marauders and 1 marine at his ramp @ 5:30, with 2 reinforcing marauders. He FF'ed 1 marauder but I picked off the stalker, and with 4 marauders + 1 marine I did way too much economic damage scoring the free zealot/sentry kill, a second sentry kill, and 4-5 probes while getting my expansion up. Overall, good build, but against marauder heavy (2 tech-labs) 2 rax the terran should come out ahead, especially when the 2nd rax is hidden or proxied somewhere so not enough chrono was spent on WG research. | ||
ineversmile
United States583 Posts
On August 28 2012 15:49 EngrishTeacher wrote: I just faced against this in UMS against a GM smurf who executed the push and it hit at exactly 12:10. I scanned after my medivac push at around 11:30 and saw a ton of gateways and some gateways units, so I naturally thought it was going to be a 2-base heavily upgraded 6 or 7 gate into expansion. Then when the carriers came... even though I made mostly marines for the gateway units and my 3rd was up, I had NO chance. The DPS of the carriers backed up by FFs and zealot meat shields just tore through my bio like a joke. We rematched, and this time I went for a 2-rax marauder opening with 3 marauders and 1 marine at his ramp @ 5:30, with 2 reinforcing marauders. He FF'ed 1 marauder but I picked off the stalker, and with 4 marauders + 1 marine I did way too much economic damage scoring the free zealot/sentry kill, a second sentry kill, and 4-5 probes while getting my expansion up. Overall, good build, but against marauder heavy (2 tech-labs) 2 rax the terran should come out ahead, especially when the 2nd rax is hidden or proxied somewhere so not enough chrono was spent on WG research. Right, but the point of the build isn't executing a 1-gate Expand, the point is after you execute that you go on to a 2-base all-in. If you see gas, you don't play the same way. That would be like FFE against a 6pool and going on to 2-base immortal all-in exactly the same way, which sometimes happens but not if the game doesn't normalize with simply delayed timings. | ||
ImmortalTofu
United States1254 Posts
On August 28 2012 13:46 ineversmile wrote: There are some more fine details to this attack. The first thing to realize is that you're running 2 fully saturated bases and you have all 4 gases by the time you push out, so you should be able to use more than just 6 gateways with that level of income. Usually one fully saturated base can handle 4 gateways with cut probe production and no other units being produced. The reason why 6 gates work here is that your interceptors are being rebuilt, which is a mineral sink. Notice that MC doesn't remake Zealots; he makes stalkers and interceptors and keeps everything ranged for the attack. This means you can forcefield as you would with Stalker/Sentry/Colossus, splitting armies in half and not allowing the bio behind your FFs to have range onto anything (as opposed to Zealots, which they would shoot at right over the FFs). Having more stalkers also means that you have a lot of anti-viking units. If you were to go for this same push with 4 Colossi instead of Carriers, obviously the Colossi are going to be good, but the difference with Carriers is that the Carriers can fight back, and at similar range to Vikings. If you hit and run with Carriers and the Vikings fly over your ground army, you can focus them with stalkers. In a late game situation and your opponent already had 2 Starports and a full count of Medivacs already, Carriers are a lot easier to focus down with Vikings. However, in a 2base all-in at this timing, you're looking at the opponent being forced to cut Medivac production a bit early and not having enough Vikings up to trump the Carriers straight-out. Normally, they can have enough Vikings to deal with Colossi at this timing (well, it's a slightly earlier timing due to Colossi build time and move speed both being faster, but it's still pretty similar for the stage of the midgame), but that's also because Colossi don't shoot back at the Vikings to punish small numbers of them kiting as you move towards the Terran's base. Also, often there are Marauders helping to do damage to the Colossi, and since Carriers don't give a shit about Marauders, they're going to last longer. Between that, their higher HP and base armor, and the support from Stalkers, the Vikings at that stage of the game are not the biggest issue for your Carriers; it's keeping the Marines from shooting directly at the Carriers because you want to be trading Interceptors for Marines, not Carriers for Marines. Something else to think about is that you can shoot down Medivacs with Carriers in engagements, making stim actually cost something. This is a pretty big deal. The more Medivacs you kill while you force more Viking production, the weaker the Bio army is and consequently the stronger all of your ground units are. My next point is that people don't think a lot about the Inteceptors themselves. They actually have 80 total HP because they're 40 HP+40 Shields, so they have more HP than Marines and they each do fairly similar DPS 1-0 marines (their main nemesis during the timing window in which engagements should start). According to Liquipedia, Marines do 10.5+1.7 DPS while stimmed (1.7 accounting for +1 weapons)=12.2 DPS. Interceptors do 5 DPSx2 shots=10 DPS. Considering that Marines have lower HP (45 when stimmed plus Medivac healing shouldn't equal an average of 80 HP for 1 minute engagements with only 4-6 medivacs), you're going to trade minerals pretty well with the Terran. Marines cost double what interceptors cost, so if your carriers stay alive and keep producing (think of them like a mobile Barracks), you're going to replenish your units at a favorable rate to the Terran's production. Interceptors produce in 8 seconds. You can figure 2 of them are the same cost as a marine and produce in 16 seconds from a carrier. A reactored barracks produces 2 marines in 25 seconds, which adjusts to 1 marine per 12.5 seconds. The marines produce slightly faster than pairs of interceptors, however the interceptors also show up right at the battlefield inside carriers, just like warp gate units. And this brings me to my next point: that Carriers and warp gates work very well together. Why? Because they both allow reinforcements to show up right there on the battlefield. If you think of your army as Interceptors, Stalkers, and Sentries, it's a lot more synergistic than thinking about Carriers with gateway units. We know carriers are slow and take a long time to rebuild, but if you think of them more like flying production buildings, that completely changes the equation. And this is what's so exciting about this build, to me. There is reason behind the function of carriers in this composition: they produce mineral units right there on the battlefield. No, they don't shoot AoE, but that's not the point of them. You wouldn't expect a Barracks to shoot AoE, either, right? How about a flying barracks that follows your army around while remaking units to a specific cap? That's the carrier. Very well reasoned, and a very nice post. However I'd still like to know your opinion on the viability of the strategy should you get scouted early. With all of these nice benefits, is it just a really good cheese? Or is it a viable timing push? | ||
Fairwell
Austria195 Posts
On August 28 2012 13:46 ineversmile wrote: My next point is that people don't think a lot about the Inteceptors themselves. They actually have 80 total HP because they're 40 HP+40 Shields, so they have more HP than Marines and they each do fairly similar DPS 1-0 marines (their main nemesis during the timing window in which engagements should start). According to Liquipedia, Marines do 10.5+1.7 DPS while stimmed (1.7 accounting for +1 weapons)=12.2 DPS. Interceptors do 5 DPSx2 shots=10 DPS. Considering that Marines have lower HP (45 when stimmed plus Medivac healing shouldn't equal an average of 80 HP for 1 minute engagements with only 4-6 medivacs), you're going to trade minerals pretty well with the Terran. Marines cost double what interceptors cost, so if your carriers stay alive and keep producing (think of them like a mobile Barracks), you're going to replenish your units at a favorable rate to the Terran's production. Interceptors produce in 8 seconds. You can figure 2 of them are the same cost as a marine and produce in 16 seconds from a carrier. A reactored barracks produces 2 marines in 25 seconds, which adjusts to 1 marine per 12.5 seconds. The marines produce slightly faster than pairs of interceptors, however the interceptors also show up right at the battlefield inside carriers, just like warp gate units. You are bringing up very good points. However, you missed something very important in the quoted paragraph above. Each interceptor does 5x2 dmg each attack every 3.0sec ingame time. So the dps of each interceptor is 10 : 3 = 3.33dps not 10dps. This is a huge difference. However, the initial dmg (burst dmg, little bit over 1sec) this dps is about 3 times as high (a bit less but nearly). The reason is that the interceptors are release in much shorter time intervals when the carrier starts to attack a target instead of having a single interceptor attacking once each 3.0sec meaning that on average every 3 (attack rate) : 8 (number of interceptors) = 0.375sec 2x5dmg is dealt. However, until every interceptor is released they release way faster than that. This is why I have stated in my post that the intial burst dmg is about 3 times as high and crazy good (like to snipe an incoming drop etc) but the overal dps of carriers is not that great compared to their cost. The tanking ability of the interceptors remain though. | ||
![]()
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On August 28 2012 15:49 EngrishTeacher wrote: I just faced against this in UMS against a GM smurf who executed the push and it hit at exactly 12:10. I scanned after my medivac push at around 11:30 and saw a ton of gateways and some gateways units, so I naturally thought it was going to be a 2-base heavily upgraded 6 or 7 gate into expansion. Then when the carriers came... even though I made mostly marines for the gateway units and my 3rd was up, I had NO chance. The DPS of the carriers backed up by FFs and zealot meat shields just tore through my bio like a joke. Again, I think this strategy is not a "solid strategy" as you sink all of your early gas into stargates and the fleet beacon, all of your minerals into probes, and try to deflect early pressure with a limited number of gateway units until all 6 gateways get up (10:00). If ANY early pressure comes, protoss is dead. Protoss CANNOT scout (hallucination or pheonix delays the carrier push), protoss CANNOT deflect banshees if they do come out, protoss CANNOT stop a heavy 3 rax push after expand, etc. The timing between 7:30 and 12:00 is a HUGE window to do damage. That being said, when MC did it, it was a GREAT strategy because he knew Kas wouldn't commit to an early attack or do banshee shenanigans. But in any other situation, it would have been a colossal error. Against Mvp or SuperNova, MC would have likely just outright died. That being said, I know we want to make carriers viable, but the problem is that they're just too impossible to get safely in this matchup at that time. This is a silly thread, it's like analyzing Huk's Mothership Rush. It doesn't work in the real world, it only works if MC is playing mindgames and being a total baller. | ||
Adonminus
Israel543 Posts
Since this is a discussion, here's some of my thoughts: -Discussion of getting air weapons MC doesn't get +1 weapon, the advantages of this is being able to get some additional gateway units like a zealot and a sentry, or get faster the 3 additional gates. This also allows you to delay the 3th and 4th gas for 10-20 seconds. On the other hand getting +1 weapon or even eventually +2 allows carriers to really serve their purpose of DPS dealers in the fight if the terran has gone for fast upgrades. Usually he'll have +1 armor done, or he went for fast double upgrades then even +2 armor. +2 armor on marines is really deadly if you have +0 carriers and I think just spending the extra 100/100 on air weapons doesn't really hurt you and is a cost effective investment. -Discussion of build weaknesses The scout after gateway, the late nexus at 30 supply, and getting zealot-stalker-sentry early game make this build really secure. You can always transition into something more safe if you scout a gas opening, (if you don't like standard, you can do those phoenix openers that counter stuff like 111). Then it's safe from any early push the terran can execute from a 1 rax FE since you get 3 gateways and lots of sentries. It is important to have a unit at his watchtower to see if he pushes and be ready to forcefield. The only danger are those 10-11 min medievac pushes, not because you can't stop them but because they are so strong that it forces you to reveal the carriers in order to defend. However that doesn't hard counter it, even if you reveal your carriers, if you push fast enough you can still go and kill him, especially after killing his push. The other major weakness of the build is scan. If he scans you at 8 min, and sees double stargate carrier. He has at least 4 minutes to prepare marines and vikings. Marines and vikings together really hard hard hard counter this (remember in standard you don't go pure marines with vikings, since you go marauder heavy vs colossi so they can't instantly burn them and marauders can also snipe colossi). This means pure marine viking is non standard and will never happen unless he does a lucky scan to see it. This means the core key to winning with this build is not getting your stargate scanned. This explains why you build it in the corner of your base. -Discussion of how many carriers you need The power of carriers increase as their number grows. However if you want a large number of carriers, you'll also have to delay your extra 3 gates (4th, 5th and 6th gate). The advantages of more carriers are obvious however it can get worst if you get scouted meaning more time for him to prepare. The solution to this is to attack with 4 carriers if you get scouted, or wait for like 6 carriers if you go unscouted and terran is unprepared. | ||
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
On August 28 2012 13:46 ineversmile wrote: There are some more fine details to this attack. The first thing to realize is that you're running 2 fully saturated bases and you have all 4 gases by the time you push out, so you should be able to use more than just 6 gateways with that level of income. Usually one fully saturated base can handle 4 gateways with cut probe production and no other units being produced. The reason why 6 gates work here is that your interceptors are being rebuilt, which is a mineral sink. Notice that MC doesn't remake Zealots; he makes stalkers and interceptors and keeps everything ranged for the attack. This means you can forcefield as you would with Stalker/Sentry/Colossus, splitting armies in half and not allowing the bio behind your FFs to have range onto anything (as opposed to Zealots, which they would shoot at right over the FFs). Having more stalkers also means that you have a lot of anti-viking units. If you were to go for this same push with 4 Colossi instead of Carriers, obviously the Colossi are going to be good, but the difference with Carriers is that the Carriers can fight back, and at similar range to Vikings. If you hit and run with Carriers and the Vikings fly over your ground army, you can focus them with stalkers. In a late game situation and your opponent already had 2 Starports and a full count of Medivacs already, Carriers are a lot easier to focus down with Vikings. However, in a 2base all-in at this timing, you're looking at the opponent being forced to cut Medivac production a bit early and not having enough Vikings up to trump the Carriers straight-out. Normally, they can have enough Vikings to deal with Colossi at this timing (well, it's a slightly earlier timing due to Colossi build time and move speed both being faster, but it's still pretty similar for the stage of the midgame), but that's also because Colossi don't shoot back at the Vikings to punish small numbers of them kiting as you move towards the Terran's base. Also, often there are Marauders helping to do damage to the Colossi, and since Carriers don't give a shit about Marauders, they're going to last longer. Between that, their higher HP and base armor, and the support from Stalkers, the Vikings at that stage of the game are not the biggest issue for your Carriers; it's keeping the Marines from shooting directly at the Carriers because you want to be trading Interceptors for Marines, not Carriers for Marines. Something else to think about is that you can shoot down Medivacs with Carriers in engagements, making stim actually cost something. This is a pretty big deal. The more Medivacs you kill while you force more Viking production, the weaker the Bio army is and consequently the stronger all of your ground units are. My next point is that people don't think a lot about the Inteceptors themselves. They actually have 80 total HP because they're 40 HP+40 Shields, so they have more HP than Marines and they each do fairly similar DPS 1-0 marines (their main nemesis during the timing window in which engagements should start). According to Liquipedia, Marines do 10.5+1.7 DPS while stimmed (1.7 accounting for +1 weapons)=12.2 DPS. Interceptors do 5 DPSx2 shots=10 DPS. Considering that Marines have lower HP (45 when stimmed plus Medivac healing shouldn't equal an average of 80 HP for 1 minute engagements with only 4-6 medivacs), you're going to trade minerals pretty well with the Terran. Marines cost double what interceptors cost, so if your carriers stay alive and keep producing (think of them like a mobile Barracks), you're going to replenish your units at a favorable rate to the Terran's production. Interceptors produce in 8 seconds. You can figure 2 of them are the same cost as a marine and produce in 16 seconds from a carrier. A reactored barracks produces 2 marines in 25 seconds, which adjusts to 1 marine per 12.5 seconds. The marines produce slightly faster than pairs of interceptors, however the interceptors also show up right at the battlefield inside carriers, just like warp gate units. And this brings me to my next point: that Carriers and warp gates work very well together. Why? Because they both allow reinforcements to show up right there on the battlefield. If you think of your army as Interceptors, Stalkers, and Sentries, it's a lot more synergistic than thinking about Carriers with gateway units. We know carriers are slow and take a long time to rebuild, but if you think of them more like flying production buildings, that completely changes the equation. And this is what's so exciting about this build, to me. There is reason behind the function of carriers in this composition: they produce mineral units right there on the battlefield. No, they don't shoot AoE, but that's not the point of them. You wouldn't expect a Barracks to shoot AoE, either, right? How about a flying barracks that follows your army around while remaking units to a specific cap? That's the carrier. Your comment inspired me to try air Protoss with carriers as mineral sink, but I do think that Blizzard should reduce the build time, would make the unit much more viable ![]() | ||
Adonminus
Israel543 Posts
On August 28 2012 13:46 ineversmile wrote: Notice that MC doesn't remake Zealots; he makes stalkers and interceptors and keeps everything ranged for the attack. This means you can forcefield as you would with Stalker/Sentry/Colossus, splitting armies in half and not allowing the bio behind your FFs to have range onto anything (as opposed to Zealots, which they would shoot at right over the FFs). Having more stalkers also means that you have a lot of anti-viking units. If you were to go for this same push with 4 Colossi instead of Carriers, obviously the Colossi are going to be good, but the difference with Carriers is that the Carriers can fight back, and at similar range to Vikings. If you hit and run with Carriers and the Vikings fly over your ground army, you can focus them with stalkers. I totally agree on this. If some people haven't realized this yet, stalkers are actually quite good against marines. Let's discuss this a little bit. Let's remember those not upgraded marine (no stim / combat shield) pushes. What did you build against them? Yes, stalkers. Marines have quite low dps and stalkers can kite them. The stalker loses the kiting advantage to marines, and their dps becomes ineffective when medievacs come out and they also get murdered by marauders. But... he doesn't build marauders against carriers. I need to do some explanations now for you to fully understand how stalkers function in this build. Ok, so you have carriers against marine viking situation, let's see how carriers fight them and how can stalkers help them do it. Let me discuss some situations: 1) Carriers vs Pure Marines with Medievacs Very cost ineffective engagement for the carriers. They can get sniped, or just have all their interceptors die. Only way they could possibly win is if marines try to snipe the carriers and then using micro and terrain abuse (just like with broodlords) you pull them back to high ground / impassable terrain and marines can't kill them. Now imagine you have those stalker sentry force. You can do the following: a) Do not let the marines come and snipe the carriers by positioning the stalkers under the carriers. This results in only interceptors and stalkers taking damage, while the priority for the terran is to kill carriers. Basicly he's targeting useless units either too cheap (interceptors) either too tanky (stalkers) and he hasn't marauders to kill those stalkers. b) Guardian shield makes interceptors and stalker die even harder so remember to always guardian shield. Also split his marine army, this makes the carriers and stalkers safer and marines can only shoot interceptors like that. 2) Carriers vs Vikings The usual misunderstanding is that people say that vikings counter carriers. However if we investigate further, we understand the largest advantage of vikings is their range of 9 (that's how they can kite stuff like void rays or battlecruisers until they die and really hard counter them), however against carriers they do not have this advantage. The carrier's dps is so strong that they simply melt before dealing enough damage. You need a really high viking count to be effective, not 6, like 12-16 vikings. You can't achieve this amount of vikings unless you get a lucky scan and see it at 8 min. This is why I recommend always a more marine heavy response against this. Anyway, I almost forgot I was talking about stalkers here. So stalkers as it already been said can help you even against this large viking count by sniping them. | ||
Treehead
999 Posts
One question, though. I feel like I ask this often of MC's builds - why is this structured as an allin? Can't you build up to 55 probes, and plant a third once your push has started moving across the map (maybe cutting a gateway and a couple units)? From 55 probes during the timing push, you're in quick striking distance of 65 workers on 3 bases, which is a fine setup for a lategame economy. You might not need this economy - but assuming a well-played Terran can defend this push (which we probably should, since PvT Carrier pushes are still in their infancy). Is the margin of victory on this push so slim that we cannot remove a couple units from it and hedge our bets? It'd be one thing if more workers limited Carrier production - but gas and production time are really the only factors in how fast you can build up carriers. Also, if you somehow find your carriers interceptor-less, if you have a lategame infrastructure prepared - you can always pull back, remake interceptors, and then repush immediately. I feel like the window of time where you'd have less units for building from 45 to 55 or 60 probes is relatively small, yes? | ||
Adonminus
Israel543 Posts
On August 28 2012 23:36 Treehead wrote: I'm willing to try this out - I've been wanting to try stargate in PvT for a while now and this probably has promise. One question, though. I feel like I ask this often of MC's builds - why is this structured as an allin? Can't you build up to 55 probes, and plant a third once your push has started moving across the map (maybe cutting a gateway and a couple units)? From 55 probes during the timing push, you're in quick striking distance of 65 workers on 3 bases, which is a fine setup for a lategame economy. You might not need this economy - but assuming a well-played Terran can defend this push (which we probably should, since PvT Carrier pushes are still in their infancy). Is the margin of victory on this push so slim that we cannot remove a couple units from it and hedge our bets? It'd be one thing if more workers limited Carrier production - but gas and production time are really the only factors in how fast you can build up carriers. Also, if you somehow find your carriers interceptor-less, if you have a lategame infrastructure prepared - you can always pull back, remake interceptors, and then repush immediately. I feel like the window of time where you'd have less units for building from 45 to 55 or 60 probes is relatively small, yes? This is all in because it has no transition. The only good transition are high templars but they're too gas heavy and too slow to tech making it impossible to get it in time. You have to kill him before he can hard counter your carriers. | ||
ineversmile
United States583 Posts
On August 28 2012 21:22 Adonminus wrote: Thanks for the guide Tor, I've always been liking carriers in any match. MC is a true president of protoss that showed us how imba carriers are. You didn't have to put my name near MC's, I'm too modest for that. I just gave you a replay and some tips for the guide. Since this is a discussion, here's some of my thoughts: -Discussion of getting air weapons MC doesn't get +1 weapon, the advantages of this is being able to get some additional gateway units like a zealot and a sentry, or get faster the 3 additional gates. This also allows you to delay the 3th and 4th gas for 10-20 seconds. On the other hand getting +1 weapon or even eventually +2 allows carriers to really serve their purpose of DPS dealers in the fight if the terran has gone for fast upgrades. Usually he'll have +1 armor done, or he went for fast double upgrades then even +2 armor. +2 armor on marines is really deadly if you have +0 carriers and I think just spending the extra 100/100 on air weapons doesn't really hurt you and is a cost effective investment. I think that MC's build was pretty darn good, considering how radical a build it is to use an obscure unit on a 2-base economy and hit a sharp timing to kill a Terran with penty of Bio, a handful of medivacs, +1, and stim. However, it probably can be improved. +1 air weapons costs 100/100 and can probably be researched about halfway through the first pair of carriers' build times, making the push have exponentially higher DPS for trading units. It's totally worth it, and the gas probably lines up if we take a deeper look at the build order and figure things out. I agree that you definitely need some units out so you don't die to a premature bio timing or take too much damage from an off-timed poke, but that's the balance of a build order. -Discussion of build weaknesses The scout after gateway, the late nexus at 30 supply, and getting zealot-stalker-sentry early game make this build really secure. You can always transition into something more safe if you scout a gas opening, (if you don't like standard, you can do those phoenix openers that counter stuff like 111). Then it's safe from any early push the terran can execute from a 1 rax FE since you get 3 gateways and lots of sentries. It is important to have a unit at his watchtower to see if he pushes and be ready to forcefield. The only danger are those 10-11 min medievac pushes, not because you can't stop them but because they are so strong that it forces you to reveal the carriers in order to defend. However that doesn't hard counter it, even if you reveal your carriers, if you push fast enough you can still go and kill him, especially after killing his push. I think that if he drops your main with the standard 10-11 minute medivac timing, and you wreck his army and kill a couple medivacs with that awesome carrier range, it doesn't even matter that your hand is revealed. You can honestly probably just either go across the map and kill him (because he has so few medivacs and has to completely switch over to vikings), or you can take a third and invest in a bit more tech and a forge or two, if you think he'll have too high of a viking count. An all-in is an all-in until you're somehow ahead...and then what is it? How many 6pools and 4gates lead into standard games? A lot. So while this build does basically put you all-in if your opponent takes a third and goes defensive, if he attacks you with that bio army, you can probably just take a third and even a fourth and probe up again while you go into AoE tech or you make ranged Phoenixes to support your Carriers against inevitable Viking massing. The other major weakness of the build is scan. If he scans you at 8 min, and sees double stargate carrier. He has at least 4 minutes to prepare marines and vikings. Marines and vikings together really hard hard hard counter this (remember in standard you don't go pure marines with vikings, since you go marauder heavy vs colossi so they can't instantly burn them and marauders can also snipe colossi). This means pure marine viking is non standard and will never happen unless he does a lucky scan to see it. This means the core key to winning with this build is not getting your stargate scanned. This explains why you build it in the corner of your base. I've played some whacky games, but I'm nowhere near experienced enough with this branch of the 2-base carrier PvT play yet to understand who is in what position when he scans at 8 minues, sees the double stargate carrier, and reacts with marine viking. I would have to see some example games of it and probably crunch a few numbers to figure out the timings. How many vikings does he have if he makes 2 at a time? 3? 4? At which point does his second starport kick in, and did he fly his factory home to make another reactor while he keeps all his raxes pumping marines? It seems complicated. God forbid your opponent's solution is to see 2 stargates and make cloakshees because he figures you're cutting the robo for the fastest carriers in the universe. -Discussion of how many carriers you need The power of carriers increase as their number grows. However if you want a large number of carriers, you'll also have to delay your extra 3 gates (4th, 5th and 6th gate). The advantages of more carriers are obvious however it can get worst if you get scouted meaning more time for him to prepare. The solution to this is to attack with 4 carriers if you get scouted, or wait for like 6 carriers if you go unscouted and terran is unprepared. I think that 4 is the magic number for the all-in against standard terran play involving 10-11 minute medivacs/stim/+1 and then a third and second EBay upon scouting your lack of a third. I want to see +1 air weapons in that timing, as well, but other than that I think MC's build is about right for producing a fatal timing with the 4 carriers. If you wait too long, there will be pre-emptive Vikings because he's going to find out you're 0-0 in ground upgrades and assume you're not in twilight tech. This question is more philosophical to me, because if you don't need exactly 4 for the all-in timing, what kind of build are you actually doing? Right now, this is just a 2-base all-in. However, a lot of 2-base all-ins are great because they could be an all-in, or they could be heavy pressure into a delayed third, or it could be fake pressure into a regular/early-timed third. We've seen a slighly rough, yet functional 2-base Carrier opening, now. It's entirely possible we can refine this and just make it a 2Stargate Carrier into third build. What's missing from this build? Well, the natural expansion might be faster, but that's semantics because MC is often known for expanding after Stalker to be safe (hence the variants of the MC expand in PvT). The point is to get on 2 bases and take gases at the right time to fund a Stargate and then Beacon+Stargate 60 seconds later, then start 2 carriers off of 500 gas another 60 seconds later. That means your build basically just needs gases 3+4 to be done as you start your second stargate, since in 60 seconds you'll produce a little over 500 gas to start the carriers. Obviously the minerals should line up, as well, but you could feasibly use less gateways and take a third, or cut a warp-in and build a third if you feel safe based on scouting. Or, you could build one boosted phoenix and send that out to scout, then decide on your expansion timing and further commitments to tech. Or you build a robo and delay the second stargate, or something else to be less in the dark. Because, honestly, if this 2-base all-in sticks around and doesn't prove to just be a fluke, it's going to prove that you can achieve some map control with 2Stargate Carrier and allow a third base transition. And I highly doubt that it sucks (though maybe it does...but I'm not going to be concerned with that thought process). I mean, sure...he could figure out you have 4-6 carriers and then mass vikings and marines. Doesn't that mean that you now know exactly what composition he's building? It's only a matter of being one step ahead and planning a way to beat that army composition with a planned transition and the right army positioning for the situation at hand? | ||
Treehead
999 Posts
On August 28 2012 23:44 Adonminus wrote: This is all in because it has no transition. The only good transition are high templars but they're too gas heavy and too slow to tech making it impossible to get it in time. You have to kill him before he can hard counter your carriers. I've read a lot of your guides, and you're really good at setting up timing pushes, so I trust that this one is no different. However, have you tried out possible transitions? What about adding range 6 phoenixes? They trade pretty well with Vikings, outrange marines and make drops difficult. What about a Mothership to vortex the vikings or marines (I'd imagine they tend to be split apart)? What about abandoning Carriers and moving towards Phoenix Colossus (if you can't scout gasless expand, so that you have the robo already)? I'm 100% theorycrafting here, so I'm probably wrong, but it seems like somewhere in there, there's probably a way to delay a high viking count long enough to get something new up and running before his forces can bowl you over. I mean 12 Vikings (your lower limit on when they start to "counter") take 3:12 to build (4:36 for 16 vikings) from a reactored starport, and assuming you can take his small number of vikings during the push, you should have at least a few minutes to come up with something new, right? | ||
Adonminus
Israel543 Posts
On August 29 2012 00:24 Treehead wrote: I've read a lot of your guides, and you're really good at setting up timing pushes, so I trust that this one is no different. However, have you tried out possible transitions? What about adding range 6 phoenixes? They trade pretty well with Vikings, outrange marines and make drops difficult. What about a Mothership to vortex the vikings or marines (I'd imagine they tend to be split apart)? What about abandoning Carriers and moving towards Phoenix Colossus (if you can't scout gasless expand, so that you have the robo already)? I'm 100% theorycrafting here, so I'm probably wrong, but it seems like somewhere in there, there's probably a way to delay a high viking count long enough to get something new up and running before his forces can bowl you over. I mean 12 Vikings (your lower limit on when they start to "counter") take 3:12 to build (4:36 for 16 vikings) from a reactored starport, and assuming you can take his small number of vikings during the push, you should have at least a few minutes to come up with something new, right? The problem aren't the vikings but the high marine count. | ||
Startyr
Scotland188 Posts
Just thinking mass marines shouldn't be much of a problem. Terran cant get many marauder/medivac and pure marines without medivacs is beaten by plain stalker/sentry. So could just get a large gateway army with upgrades and expand while heading for templar tech? Colossus does not sound like a great idea as they are already getting vikings for the carriers. | ||
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
| ||
tehemperorer
United States2183 Posts
| ||
Crow!
United States150 Posts
I feel these specific replays fail to show whether using Carriers was a good idea. Each time, Terran was simply caught trying to attack when his army was like 70% as large as the Protoss army was. Were those Carriers replaced with Colossi or Blink Stalkers or whatever, the games would have been just as onesided. The Carriers do seem better than Stalkers at fending off drops, but that's not saying much. I personally use Phoenixes to help deal with drops, and while they're less effective at clearing the drop out once it's landed, Phoenixes are even more effective at stopping it preemptively or hunting it down afterward. Oh, and they get made faster. And they don't come with a 450/350 price tag just for the right to make them. Make Phoenixes, guys, they're really good. On the plus side, the Carriers are easier to hide than the Colossi are. A good Terran should realize that something is up, but since Carriers can fly off into the corner and stack on top of each other / on the telltale buildings themselves, unless the Terran happens to scan the Stargates they'll be in the dark. That's worth something. As for what Terran should be doing about this, my experience using Carriers says to just keep your bio on the ground, make purely marines, and watch for the addition of Colossus. (HTs don't make sense here, as storms kill your inteceptors). Prepare to mass up vikings should this happen (3 Starports is not excessive). Don't start massing up Vikings unless there are Colossi coming; the 150 minerals is better spent on 3 marines. Carrier + Colossus does not do well against well microed Marine + Viking. The Carriers have to stay in front of the Colossi or else they get sniped, and if the carriers engage the Vikings, marines behind the carriers can shoot the interceptors, whereas the Colossi can be kited by the Terran ball while still attacking the Carriers. Zealots will be poorly upgraded and so won't be that big a deal. However, Carrier + Colossus will positively smash pure MMM. Above all, keep your infantry upgrades going continuously. Fights involving Carriers hinge more on upgrades than any other unit in the game. | ||
phantastron
Canada21 Posts
| ||
tehemperorer
United States2183 Posts
http://drop.sc/244260 | ||
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
On August 28 2012 10:31 Stunergy wrote: What about doing the proxy stargates on the harder to hide maps? edit: I just tried this on the ladder after i practice it, and it was an easy win, he scanned my base twice, and only saw the gates, and the units at my natural. Had no idea what happened to him, when i pylon'd at his main cliff, and use the carriers to warp in the main as the 3 other carrier and gateway units attacked the natural. Maybe just proxy the Beacon? It is an expensive proxy regardless, just figure 300 300 is better to lose than what would amount to a huge amount of your ability to produce units. | ||
tehemperorer
United States2183 Posts
On August 29 2012 03:46 ThomasjServo wrote: Maybe just proxy the Beacon? It is an expensive proxy regardless, just figure 300 300 is better to lose than what would amount to a huge amount of your ability to produce units. If you go super all in, proxy them. If Terran pushes you before you have any carriers out though, you lose. | ||
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
| ||
uh-oh
Hong Kong135 Posts
not sure if many people know this but I just found a little micro trick while using carriers: normally when your carrier is moving and shooting, after it's target dies the interceptors go home and the carrier is now essentially a giant slow moving space ship that cannot attack without having to stop and release interceptors, which is obviously not good as units can catch up with the carrier and take it out while the interceptors are released one by one. Even with graviton catapult it still takes a bit of time. There is a way to prevent the interceptors from entering the carrier hanger when a target dies and maintaining its speed at the same time: right when the target dies and as the interceptors are flying back to the carrier you a-move the carrier or right click the enemy unit you want to kill next then immediately issues a move cmd afterwards. This way the interceptors that are flying back to the carrier will immediately fly towards the target and engage, the carrier will decelerate a slight bit when you are issuing the attack cmd but if you issue the move cmd fast enough after that the carrier won't lose much speed. This doesn't work for any interceptors that have gone back into the carrier hanger, those in the hanger will stay there until you override the carrier's move cmd with a stop/attack cmd, at which point they will be released. Obviously this takes quite a lot of apm, but I can imagine this boosting the effectiveness of carrier by quite a lot, especially in this all in build where every unit counts. I hope some more dedicated users with better technical skills that I do will write a more thorough guide on this. | ||
ineversmile
United States583 Posts
On September 01 2012 04:20 uh-oh wrote: [I hesitate to create a guide on this cuz I don't have any replays yet, for some reasons my replays on the unit tester map are gone.] not sure if many people know this but I just found a little micro trick while using carriers: normally when your carrier is moving and shooting, after it's target dies the interceptors go home and the carrier is now essentially a giant slow moving space ship that cannot attack without having to stop and release interceptors, which is obviously not good as units can catch up with the carrier and take it out while the interceptors are released one by one. Even with graviton catapult it still takes a bit of time. There is a way to prevent the interceptors from entering the carrier hanger when a target dies and maintaining its speed at the same time: right when the target dies and as the interceptors are flying back to the carrier you a-move the carrier or right click the enemy unit you want to kill next then immediately issues a move cmd afterwards. This way the interceptors that are flying back to the carrier will immediately fly towards the target and engage, the carrier will decelerate a slight bit when you are issuing the attack cmd but if you issue the move cmd fast enough after that the carrier won't lose much speed. This doesn't work for any interceptors that have gone back into the carrier hanger, those in the hanger will stay there until you override the carrier's move cmd with a stop/attack cmd, at which point they will be released. Obviously this takes quite a lot of apm, but I can imagine this boosting the effectiveness of carrier by quite a lot, especially in this all in build where every unit counts. I hope some more dedicated users with better technical skills that I do will write a more thorough guide on this. Does this mean you can spam a-click on the ground near the fight to keep attack-moving, to increase the damage output of a fair-sized group of carriers? | ||
uh-oh
Hong Kong135 Posts
On September 01 2012 05:43 ineversmile wrote: Does this mean you can spam a-click on the ground near the fight to keep attack-moving, to increase the damage output of a fair-sized group of carriers? The more attack moves you make the more the carriers decelerate. The damage output will still be the same because interceptors always have to complete their flight path before firing. What you are proposing will probably make the carriers to move at a slower speed but never have their interceptors return to the hanger. If you don't want to slow your carrier down too much you should only issue the a-move cmd when the interceptors are flying home. Another thing is every time time when you attack move the carrier retargets, so if the carrier picks a different target when the first target is damaged but not dead, it will not decrease enemy fire power, which basically decreases the efficiency of the carrier. EDIT: It's a-move cmd while interceptors are returning+move cmd immediately after that, not just spam a-move. | ||
Whatson
United States5356 Posts
On August 28 2012 11:03 SC2John wrote: I just think this is really based off of "omg, I hope he doesn't see me". MC was allowed to do this because he was up 1 game and playing in a Bo5. This is essentially the same as a DT rush, where, if you fail to do damage, suddenly there's no good transition and you have no observers on the map and it just feels really shaky. I don't recommend this build for normal ladder play, that's all. LOL whats the point of ladder if not to have fun? SC2 is a GAME, its meant for ENTERTAINMENT, and this strat is funny and interesting | ||
Asmodeusx
286 Posts
Kas went for ghosts, some vikings, some upgrades and 3rd base and moved out with part of his army vs a 2 base all in. He would lose to any 2 base all in at that point. 3) How to best counter this as terran? MMM - a.k.a make more marines. | ||
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
I've been harping for years on the need for carrier escort and its synergy with sentry. | ||
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
| ||
ImmortalTofu
United States1254 Posts
| ||
Skwid1g
United States953 Posts
On September 01 2012 15:40 Whatson wrote: LOL whats the point of ladder if not to have fun? SC2 is a GAME, its meant for ENTERTAINMENT, and this strat is funny and interesting 1) That's not what this forum is for. 2) Fun is subjective. 3) He's pointing out the fact that he doesn't believe it's a solid build and that it's easy to hold when the opponent knows what's coming. Cool build regardless, have yet to run into it/see it, but carriers are much stronger than people seem to realize. | ||
Crow!
United States150 Posts
I still feel like Phoenixes accomplish so much more than what the Carriers do, and for a much smaller initial investment. | ||
ImmortalTofu
United States1254 Posts
On September 02 2012 22:35 Crow! wrote: I don't like the idea of proxying the stargates. One of the big advantages of hiding Carriers is that you get to crush drops if any arrive at your base at a normal time - kill an unsuspecting dropship or two or three right before your timing attack and you've basically won the game. Proxying the Stargates means all that money just doesn't help you at all when the Terran tries to pick you apart with standard pressure. I still feel like Phoenixes accomplish so much more than what the Carriers do, and for a much smaller initial investment. Do phoenixes tank hard, add alot of dps to your army, and basically act as a floating barracks that allows your push to maintain momentum after the attack initially starts? | ||
![]()
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On September 03 2012 13:37 ImmortalTofu wrote: Do phoenixes tank hard, add alot of dps to your army, and basically act as a floating barracks that allows your push to maintain momentum after the attack initially starts? For the sake of getting stargate play off the ground, yes pheonixes are much better and do the same job as the initial 2 carriers. Which, IN MY OPINION, is the most important part of stargate play. Again, this strategy works well as a "Oh, gee, I hope the terran doesn't attack any earlier than 10:30 cause I'd be screwed if he did! And I CERTAINLY hope he didn't go cloaked banshees!" strategy. However, if you do manage to get away with the initial 2 carriers, this strategy snowballs out of control really fast and there's seriously not a lot of hope for terran players unless they happened to go 2 reactor/1 techlab then followed up with fast 4th and 5th barracks with reactors. Which...let's face it, is unrealistic. Carriers are great, especially getting them this early, but it's a huge risk that plays on the metagame and the hope that terran doesn't scout it and react. | ||
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
Yes, 6 carriers would not snuff a bioball as quickly as 6 colossi, but then, 8-12 Vikings will make short work of those same colossi whereas, those carriers well micro'ed with stalker support will make short work of Vikings if overextended. No sense in phoniexes if T is going bio, as the eBay would already be up by then. | ||
![]()
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On September 03 2012 20:28 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: What risk when there's two carriers guarding the base while the zealot/stalker/sentry army holds the mid-ground? Yes, 6 carriers would not snuff a bioball as quickly as 6 colossi, but then, 8-12 Vikings will make short work of those same colossi whereas, those carriers well micro'ed with stalker support will make short work of Vikings if overextended. No sense in phoniexes if T is going bio, as the eBay would already be up by then. I'm talking about the risk of like 2 minutes before carriers start popping out. During that time, protoss is on 3 gateways with no detection. Any type of heavy aggression will shred the protoss up at that time. If you want an example, it would be EXACTLY the build that Kas did with fast CS/stim on 3 barracks, delayed medivacs. He just didn't attack because he didn't scout the stargates. | ||
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On September 03 2012 23:42 SC2John wrote: I'm talking about the risk of like 2 minutes before carriers start popping out. During that time, protoss is on 3 gateways with no detection. Any type of heavy aggression will shred the protoss up at that time. If you want an example, it would be EXACTLY the build that Kas did with fast CS/stim on 3 barracks, delayed medivacs. He just didn't attack because he didn't scout the stargates. Don't you think then that two phoneixes showing up at a T's door step is huge red flag that there won't be a 4g/gateway timing push coming any time soon? Either way there isn't enough data to indicate phoneixes are needed. Rather the build is perfect for punishing passive T play. | ||
![]()
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On September 04 2012 10:10 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Don't you think then that two phoneixes showing up at a T's door step is huge red flag that there won't be a 4g/gateway timing push coming any time soon? Either way there isn't enough data to indicate phoneixes are needed. Rather the build is perfect for punishing passive T play. 1) I actually never mentioned phoenixes at all in my post. If you're talking about opening phoenixes into carriers, of course that's ridiculous. Phoenixes are far too expensive to transition into that kind of play without upgrades. I agree that phoenixes are not needed in this strategy, and in fact would make this strategy infinitely worse as the strength of opening carriers is that you get them ridiculously fast and how once they're out they can't be stopped. 2) However, if you want an example of phoenix versus carrier openings, I'll point out that phoenix openings use only 1 stargate and take less time. Because you have a freer allocation of resources and time, you can easily get blink, +1, and start colossus tech before the standard 10:00 timing. In addition, phoenix counters 1-1-1 openings behind 1rax expo. You also have extra gateways up sooner to deal with early aggression in many cases (because you're not dumping all your minerals into carriers). This makes phoenix play perfectly safe, and, most importantly, without that GIGANTIC HOLE in defense. That being said, phoenix are FAR MORE viable than carriers. 3) This is passive P play too. If terran at any point decides to step into action, they can punish THIS risk fairly well. And it's not like terran is incapable of attacking, it's rather that it generally doesn't make sense to attack into a protoss with stim and no medivacs. But if there's a hole in defense like the fact that there are no units at the front and attacking incurs an instawin, there's no reason for terran to not just rally and go. Again, I think this is a super clever, brilliant strategy coming from MC, but it really should NOT be used in anything else but BoX tournaments. It has a gaping hole that allows terran a full 4 minutes of opportunity to win, which is just...bad. You can't justify strategies on the probability that your opponent will fail in scouting, execution, or decision making. | ||
Channel Pressure
United States62 Posts
On August 28 2012 13:46 ineversmile wrote: There are some more fine details to this attack. The first thing to realize is that you're running 2 fully saturated bases and you have all 4 gases by the time you push out, so you should be able to use more than just 6 gateways with that level of income. Usually one fully saturated base can handle 4 gateways with cut probe production and no other units being produced. The reason why 6 gates work here is that your interceptors are being rebuilt, which is a mineral sink. Notice that MC doesn't remake Zealots; he makes stalkers and interceptors and keeps everything ranged for the attack. This means you can forcefield as you would with Stalker/Sentry/Colossus, splitting armies in half and not allowing the bio behind your FFs to have range onto anything (as opposed to Zealots, which they would shoot at right over the FFs). Having more stalkers also means that you have a lot of anti-viking units. If you were to go for this same push with 4 Colossi instead of Carriers, obviously the Colossi are going to be good, but the difference with Carriers is that the Carriers can fight back, and at similar range to Vikings. If you hit and run with Carriers and the Vikings fly over your ground army, you can focus them with stalkers. In a late game situation and your opponent already had 2 Starports and a full count of Medivacs already, Carriers are a lot easier to focus down with Vikings. However, in a 2base all-in at this timing, you're looking at the opponent being forced to cut Medivac production a bit early and not having enough Vikings up to trump the Carriers straight-out. Normally, they can have enough Vikings to deal with Colossi at this timing (well, it's a slightly earlier timing due to Colossi build time and move speed both being faster, but it's still pretty similar for the stage of the midgame), but that's also because Colossi don't shoot back at the Vikings to punish small numbers of them kiting as you move towards the Terran's base. Also, often there are Marauders helping to do damage to the Colossi, and since Carriers don't give a shit about Marauders, they're going to last longer. Between that, their higher HP and base armor, and the support from Stalkers, the Vikings at that stage of the game are not the biggest issue for your Carriers; it's keeping the Marines from shooting directly at the Carriers because you want to be trading Interceptors for Marines, not Carriers for Marines. Something else to think about is that you can shoot down Medivacs with Carriers in engagements, making stim actually cost something. This is a pretty big deal. The more Medivacs you kill while you force more Viking production, the weaker the Bio army is and consequently the stronger all of your ground units are. My next point is that people don't think a lot about the Inteceptors themselves. They actually have 80 total HP because they're 40 HP+40 Shields, so they have more HP than Marines and they each do fairly similar DPS 1-0 marines (their main nemesis during the timing window in which engagements should start). According to Liquipedia, Marines do 10.5+1.7 DPS while stimmed (1.7 accounting for +1 weapons)=12.2 DPS. Interceptors do 5 DPSx2 shots=10 DPS. Considering that Marines have lower HP (45 when stimmed plus Medivac healing shouldn't equal an average of 80 HP for 1 minute engagements with only 4-6 medivacs), you're going to trade minerals pretty well with the Terran. Marines cost double what interceptors cost, so if your carriers stay alive and keep producing (think of them like a mobile Barracks), you're going to replenish your units at a favorable rate to the Terran's production. Interceptors produce in 8 seconds. You can figure 2 of them are the same cost as a marine and produce in 16 seconds from a carrier. A reactored barracks produces 2 marines in 25 seconds, which adjusts to 1 marine per 12.5 seconds. The marines produce slightly faster than pairs of interceptors, however the interceptors also show up right at the battlefield inside carriers, just like warp gate units. And this brings me to my next point: that Carriers and warp gates work very well together. Why? Because they both allow reinforcements to show up right there on the battlefield. If you think of your army as Interceptors, Stalkers, and Sentries, it's a lot more synergistic than thinking about Carriers with gateway units. We know carriers are slow and take a long time to rebuild, but if you think of them more like flying production buildings, that completely changes the equation. And this is what's so exciting about this build, to me. There is reason behind the function of carriers in this composition: they produce mineral units right there on the battlefield. No, they don't shoot AoE, but that's not the point of them. You wouldn't expect a Barracks to shoot AoE, either, right? How about a flying barracks that follows your army around while remaking units to a specific cap? That's the carrier. This is, such a great post. This is basically the philosophy behind thsi playstyle. If this is viable (and it seems like it is), there are indeed reasons why you would opt for this over a colossus build. Point of fact, colossus behave completely differently than carriers (obviously). Great stuff! | ||
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
Granted this is the first time (in a long time) the Carrier has seen competitive play in a serious (pro) competition, could there be more in store? | ||
Generalul
Romania114 Posts
As a way to counter this in a TvP i believe all kinds of early agression are fatal. Also sneaking a helion in could scout it, or at least make the terran believe something is cooking, if he sees only 3 gates. Granted, he will probably suspect a hidden shrine somewhere, but he can multiple scan or float a building in. Also a 2 tank marine push will kill the protoss on the spot, at 7-8 minutes, not to mention a cloack banshee followed by a 1-1-1 Puma style... I think this is a great thing to have in your arsenal against opponents you know or in a competition, but on the ladder it could backfire a lot more than it will bring benefits. ![]() | ||
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
| ||
| ||