|
On June 06 2013 21:58 gingerfluffmuff wrote:
Is this NA masters league? wow...
I dont think that there is a chance that it would work on a T twice / on a T who actively scouts and scans you.
I watched a replay and was dying a little inside.
1. Marauders are awesome against carriers
2. Terrible engagements in chokes with bio
3. no widow mines in engagements
4. no mass expand / using mobility of bio
Widow mines don't tend to be very good against carriers and I'm pretty sure there are mass expand games and drops being used. I could show you a game where a massive amount of widow mines are created in the early game and its pretty bad. Your point number 2 is good, if you always follow the number one rule of going carriers "Stay over none passable terrain" bio will always have Terrible engagements, Thats the point xD. They will never get a good grip if you micro weak carriers back to dead space.
Also the build will work twice, Any build will be weaker the second time its used but you make it sound like Its an easy counter >.> Its not like I'm going DT's where its a big surprise. You can put all your money into vikings and marines and still lose. You act like because a terran did not scan the right location between 8-9 minutes and made a few marauders they are suddenly a bad terran who does not know what they were doing.
|
On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz?
Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still.
Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD
|
On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD
You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight.
also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly.
|
On June 06 2013 22:49 Cress wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 21:58 gingerfluffmuff wrote:
Is this NA masters league? wow...
I dont think that there is a chance that it would work on a T twice / on a T who actively scouts and scans you.
I watched a replay and was dying a little inside.
1. Marauders are awesome against carriers
2. Terrible engagements in chokes with bio
3. no widow mines in engagements
4. no mass expand / using mobility of bio Widow mines don't tend to be very good against carriers and I'm pretty sure there are mass expand games and drops being used. I could show you a game where a massive amount of widow mines are created in the early game and its pretty bad. Your point number 2 is good, if you always follow the number one rule of going carriers "Stay over none passable terrain" bio will always have Terrible engagements, Thats the point xD. They will never get a good grip if you micro weak carriers back to dead space. Also the build will work twice, Any build will be weaker the second time its used but you make it sound like Its an easy counter >.> Its not like I'm going DT's where its a big surprise. You can put all your money into vikings and marines and still lose. You act like because a terran did not scan the right location between 8-9 minutes and made a few marauders they are suddenly a bad terran who does not know what they were doing.
Let me clarify the widow mine usage:
I would use it in the mid-late game to zone out the carriers. Move with bio to a expansion while knowing where the carrier army is, then planting 5 or mines between the armies like before a ledge or something where i know you would abuse the terrain. You have to slow down and kill the mines while i stim my marines and kill structures.
|
On June 06 2013 23:16 gingerfluffmuff wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 22:49 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 21:58 gingerfluffmuff wrote:
Is this NA masters league? wow...
I dont think that there is a chance that it would work on a T twice / on a T who actively scouts and scans you.
I watched a replay and was dying a little inside.
1. Marauders are awesome against carriers
2. Terrible engagements in chokes with bio
3. no widow mines in engagements
4. no mass expand / using mobility of bio Widow mines don't tend to be very good against carriers and I'm pretty sure there are mass expand games and drops being used. I could show you a game where a massive amount of widow mines are created in the early game and its pretty bad. Your point number 2 is good, if you always follow the number one rule of going carriers "Stay over none passable terrain" bio will always have Terrible engagements, Thats the point xD. They will never get a good grip if you micro weak carriers back to dead space. Also the build will work twice, Any build will be weaker the second time its used but you make it sound like Its an easy counter >.> Its not like I'm going DT's where its a big surprise. You can put all your money into vikings and marines and still lose. You act like because a terran did not scan the right location between 8-9 minutes and made a few marauders they are suddenly a bad terran who does not know what they were doing. Let me clarify the widow mine usage: I would use it in the mid-late game to zone out the carriers. Move with bio to a expansion while knowing where the carrier army is, then planting 5 or mines between the armies like before a ledge or something where i know you would abuse the terrain. You have to slow down and kill the mines while i stim my marines and kill structures.
I have no idea bro, I thought you were talking about the usage of like 30 widow mines. I think the carriers in a late game situation could fly over those five widow mines and not care at all xD. The problem with widow mines is if your marines are between the carriers and widow mines, theres a chance the mines could go off on the marines when they lock onto an interceptor. I'm not saying mines are not useful, but I've yet to see them see a bulk of interceptors or deter carriers from walking over them xD
|
On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly.
Well its pretty easy to dodge 1v1 requests when your at work xD. I never dismissed your zerg insight. Insight would be sharing some experiences you've had with carriers in the past. You brought information about how 50 muta's would own X number of carriers in a unit tester.
Saying the strategy only works against bad players is an odd claim. Its almost like you wanna crush this type of build from ever entering the meta and making your life as zerg hell xD. That seems to be the purpose and tone of your 1v1 challenge.
The fact that you say, This build will Never Never!!! Never!! work!! Ever!! and if I beat you in a 1v1 thats proof 100%, Which is surprising considering I open the thread with:
"I might have a decent fun and viable build for reaching mass carriers against terran and zerg. I can't say if its possible or not to make it viable at the highest level of play, but it shows promise and its by far the most fun I've ever had playing this game."
You sir are the enemy of anything fun, as you wish to destroy it before it can ever bloom xD,
|
|
|
On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:
EDIT:
I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D
People need to start using "Bro, do you even ladder?"
|
|
|
On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly. Playing a strategy against someone who knows exactly what you're going to do isn't a fair test of how good that strategy is. Most strategies will have specific weaknesses if someone plays to those weaknesses from the very start of the game, but they won't have those same weaknesses when the opponent has to respond to what is going on (even if they know the correct response). For example, if I know that a Zerg is going to go 2 Base Mutalisk before the game starts then I will crush their face every single time, but if I have to scout and respond then I won't crush their face every single time despite knowing how my build is supposed to react to 2 Base Mutalisk openings. Having to scout and react is really important; if it wasn't then map-hacks wouldn't be such a massive problem. Another reason why it isn't a fair test is because it could just be the case that one player is better than the other, and will win regardless of the strength of a strategy (or at least have an advantage regardless of the strength of a strategy). EDIT: I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D
Yeah the real issue with this is even if he completely stomps Cress, it means nothing. There is nothing to prove they are similar skill and I'm sure if Kaluro is a better player he'll beat him handily, especially when knowing exactly what his opponent's doing. If he plays Cress and gets destroyed, still means nothing. He could just be a terrible player.
|
On June 07 2013 01:32 Venomsflame wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly. Playing a strategy against someone who knows exactly what you're going to do isn't a fair test of how good that strategy is. Most strategies will have specific weaknesses if someone plays to those weaknesses from the very start of the game, but they won't have those same weaknesses when the opponent has to respond to what is going on (even if they know the correct response). For example, if I know that a Zerg is going to go 2 Base Mutalisk before the game starts then I will crush their face every single time, but if I have to scout and respond then I won't crush their face every single time despite knowing how my build is supposed to react to 2 Base Mutalisk openings. Having to scout and react is really important; if it wasn't then map-hacks wouldn't be such a massive problem. Another reason why it isn't a fair test is because it could just be the case that one player is better than the other, and will win regardless of the strength of a strategy (or at least have an advantage regardless of the strength of a strategy). EDIT: I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D Yeah the real issue with this is even if he completely stomps Cress, it means nothing. There is nothing to prove they are similar skill and I'm sure if Kaluro is a better player he'll beat him handily, especially when knowing exactly what his opponent's doing. If he plays Cress and gets destroyed, still means nothing. He could just be a terrible player.
Nope, you missed the point.
On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly. Playing a strategy against someone who knows exactly what you're going to do isn't a fair test of how good that strategy is. Most strategies will have specific weaknesses if someone plays to those weaknesses from the very start of the game, but they won't have those same weaknesses when the opponent has to respond to what is going on (even if they know the correct response). For example, if I know that a Zerg is going to go 2 Base Mutalisk before the game starts then I will crush their face every single time, but if I have to scout and respond then I won't crush their face every single time despite knowing how my build is supposed to react to 2 Base Mutalisk openings. Having to scout and react is really important; if it wasn't then map-hacks wouldn't be such a massive problem. Another reason why it isn't a fair test is because it could just be the case that one player is better than the other, and will win regardless of the strength of a strategy (or at least have an advantage regardless of the strength of a strategy). EDIT: I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D
you missed the point too 
Cress claims that zergs are unable to get a decent mutalisk fleet out, before he gets up to a huge number of carriers, while I claim the opposite.
I don't care whether I face a GM or him, all I want to show is that the numbers I put out are quite realistic, without them being discarded straight away.
Whether someone opens up a stephano max and has 200/200 at his doorstep @ 11 min (You don't need to be able to shoot up, to overrun someone who is going exclusively carriers with no sentries at all), opens up a mutalisk/corruptor combination on 4/5 bases and gets maxed extremely quickly, since there's no gateway pressure, or whatever else, I'm in it for the numbers
It's not about "See, I win, your strategy sucks", It's about showing him that numbers are accurate and that he shouldn't be discarding them so hastily.
What you guys are putting it off as, is that it's for the e-peen, to discard his strategy as a whole. I told him that i can have 50 mutalisks or 30 corrruptors out before he has a critical fleet of carriers, he told me that wasn't true. So instead of going for the infinite yes/no/yes/no/yes/no theory, I invited him to put it to the test.
So instead of putting posts out of context, giving a nasty swing to it and making it sound like I'm an alpha male trying to see who's more alpha, lets keep it real shall we .
And seeing it's purely for the numbers' sake, I find things to be irrelevant whether or not I know what I'm up against.
|
|
|
On June 07 2013 05:38 kaluro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 01:32 Venomsflame wrote:On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly. Playing a strategy against someone who knows exactly what you're going to do isn't a fair test of how good that strategy is. Most strategies will have specific weaknesses if someone plays to those weaknesses from the very start of the game, but they won't have those same weaknesses when the opponent has to respond to what is going on (even if they know the correct response). For example, if I know that a Zerg is going to go 2 Base Mutalisk before the game starts then I will crush their face every single time, but if I have to scout and respond then I won't crush their face every single time despite knowing how my build is supposed to react to 2 Base Mutalisk openings. Having to scout and react is really important; if it wasn't then map-hacks wouldn't be such a massive problem. Another reason why it isn't a fair test is because it could just be the case that one player is better than the other, and will win regardless of the strength of a strategy (or at least have an advantage regardless of the strength of a strategy). EDIT: I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D Yeah the real issue with this is even if he completely stomps Cress, it means nothing. There is nothing to prove they are similar skill and I'm sure if Kaluro is a better player he'll beat him handily, especially when knowing exactly what his opponent's doing. If he plays Cress and gets destroyed, still means nothing. He could just be a terrible player. Nope, you missed the point. Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 00:49 Sated wrote:On June 06 2013 23:13 kaluro wrote:On June 06 2013 22:57 Cress wrote:On June 06 2013 22:16 aldochillbro wrote:
shutup ginger. state uses a carrier build in pvt sometimes and wins like 40-50% of the time at a high gm level in pvt so i'm sure this isn't the worst build ever.
anyway, cress what's your win % pvz? Well on my other accounts I have not used the carrier build 100%. I have a new account that I've only been doing the Carrier build on in PvZ-PvT It's like 80% though, You can still lose to proxy hatchs and six pools all the same xD. My win rate for terran is at 100% still. Once the carriers get the momentum its difficult to stop. It also can be map dependent some maps have more dead space then others, Carriers get raped in open ground. You need space to micro weak carriers back. Always travel along the sides of the map, Even I fail to do this a lot of the time xD You havent replied to my 1on1 request, yet you keep dismissing my zerg insight. also your strategy works because anyone below high master will just blindly metagame and when a new build is introduced they will choke and do badly. Playing a strategy against someone who knows exactly what you're going to do isn't a fair test of how good that strategy is. Most strategies will have specific weaknesses if someone plays to those weaknesses from the very start of the game, but they won't have those same weaknesses when the opponent has to respond to what is going on (even if they know the correct response). For example, if I know that a Zerg is going to go 2 Base Mutalisk before the game starts then I will crush their face every single time, but if I have to scout and respond then I won't crush their face every single time despite knowing how my build is supposed to react to 2 Base Mutalisk openings. Having to scout and react is really important; if it wasn't then map-hacks wouldn't be such a massive problem. Another reason why it isn't a fair test is because it could just be the case that one player is better than the other, and will win regardless of the strength of a strategy (or at least have an advantage regardless of the strength of a strategy). EDIT: I find it funny that this, "Your strategy sucks, play me and I will prove it" kind of thing is actually the Strategy Forum's equivalent to "Bro, do you even lift? I will destroy you IRL" :D you missed the point too Cress claims that zergs are unable to get a decent mutalisk fleet out, before he gets up to a huge number of carriers, while I claim the opposite. I don't care whether I face a GM or him, all I want to show is that the numbers I put out are quite realistic, without them being discarded straight away. Whether someone opens up a stephano max and has 200/200 at his doorstep @ 11 min (You don't need to be able to shoot up, to overrun someone who is going exclusively carriers with no sentries at all), opens up a mutalisk/corruptor combination on 4/5 bases and gets maxed extremely quickly, since there's no gateway pressure, or whatever else, I'm in it for the numbers It's not about "See, I win, your strategy sucks", It's about showing him that numbers are accurate and that he shouldn't be discarding them so hastily. What you guys are putting it off as, is that it's for the e-peen, to discard his strategy as a whole. I told him that i can have 50 mutalisks or 30 corrruptors out before he has a critical fleet of carriers, he told me that wasn't true. So instead of going for the infinite yes/no/yes/no/yes/no theory, I invited him to put it to the test. So instead of putting posts out of context, giving a nasty swing to it and making it sound like I'm an alpha male trying to see who's more alpha, lets keep it real shall we . And seeing it's purely for the numbers' sake, I find things to be irrelevant whether or not I know what I'm up against.
Critical fleet of carriers? that's not what the builds about. Its about harassment with small forces of carriers in the early game to delay ideal composition from getting out and winning the game doing a fun as hell strategy.
The fact that you say theres no gateway pressure is lulz ish, how do you know theres no gateway pressure with that version when its a gateway expand >.> oh, you read the build order and every detail, its not a fair test.
You could open triple hatch before pool and not be able to punish it greatly with just a zealot and stalker, Inless you switched into a 4 gate off of two base, Protoss is a "Surprise race" Its not terran or zerg. There's reason protoss tend to do better in bo1-bo3's instead of bo5-bo07.
|
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
Maybe Terran was just clueless as to how to deal with this.
|
On June 07 2013 09:13 dUTtrOACh wrote:"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Maybe Terran was just clueless as to how to deal with this.
No, They are not clueless, they know to make marines/vikings take alot of bases and drop alot. Theres no hard counter per say, It really comes down to position and micro of the carriers, Its down to the protoss to make a mistake with the carriers The terran will have many chances to kill them and he only has to get it "right" once, Never the less Its still alot of fun to do. That was the point behind sharing the build
|
Cress, could you watch this replay for me? I'm in Diamond. PvZ. He denied first oracle with 2 queens. Then went fast hydra and denied the 3-4 carrier harass. Then just massed corrupter/hydra and steam rolled me. Please watch and tell me what I should have done differently. Thanks.
http://drop.sc/340766
|
I used to build carriers in PvP at the end of WoL and I had a pretty good winrate with it in masters, but other protoss have gotten a lot better at dealing with stargate, so it might not be viable anymore. It was stargate/2gate/robo on 1base and then add fleet beacon and add carriers once natural gets saturated -> push with zealot/immortal/carrier while they're still on stalkers. It might still work because people still like their stalkers, but charglot/archon should deal with it. Carriers were more like the retard magnet of that build while immortals did the damage.
I really want to make carriers work PvT, so I'll try that some.
|
On June 07 2013 16:59 RaptorPete wrote:Cress, could you watch this replay for me? I'm in Diamond. PvZ. He denied first oracle with 2 queens. Then went fast hydra and denied the 3-4 carrier harass. Then just massed corrupter/hydra and steam rolled me. Please watch and tell me what I should have done differently. Thanks. http://drop.sc/340766
Yeah I took a look at the replay, Your probe saturation is poor, You wanna have 3 workers on each gas and 16 on minerals and have both carriers started at 8:00-8:10. You also waited too long to take your second gas. You should work on refining your build, Once its crisp, work on your Micro and movement of your carriers around the map, this is quite hard to master, I still fuck it up myself. I'll move my carriers through bad area's of the map and get punished for it, Always have an area around the terrain to retreat too, and you'll do alright, But first you need probes and pylons my friend. I'll pluck some replays for you.
I got a new account this week. Just for Carriers in PvT and PvZ, Its unfortunately ladder locked in diamond, its still masters games though
This zerg was quite embarrassed losing to carriers: http://drop.sc/340775.
Always stay around the edges of the map and unpassble terrain, and snipe bases and force bad engagements from the zerg, if your opponent, Zerg or terran. Gets their desired composition, you will die. Need to prevent this and keep their economy low
|
On June 07 2013 21:41 Cress wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 16:59 RaptorPete wrote:Cress, could you watch this replay for me? I'm in Diamond. PvZ. He denied first oracle with 2 queens. Then went fast hydra and denied the 3-4 carrier harass. Then just massed corrupter/hydra and steam rolled me. Please watch and tell me what I should have done differently. Thanks. http://drop.sc/340766 Yeah I took a look at the replay, Your probe saturation is poor, You wanna have 3 workers on each gas and 16 on minerals and have both carriers started at 8:00-8:10. You also waited too long to take your second gas. You should work on refining your build, Once its crisp, work on your Micro and movement of your carriers around the map, this is quite hard to master, I still fuck it up myself. I'll move my carriers through bad area's of the map and get punished for it, Always have an area around the terrain to retreat too, and you'll do alright, But first you need probes and pylons my friend. I'll pluck some replays for you. I got a new account this week. Just for Carriers in PvT and PvZ, Its unfortunately ladder locked in diamond, its still masters games though This zerg was quite embarrassed losing to carriers: http://drop.sc/340775. Always stay around the edges of the map and unpassble terrain, and snipe bases and force bad engagements from the zerg, if your opponent, Zerg or terran. Gets their desired composition, you will die. Need to prevent this and keep their economy low
Thanks for the advice. I do have another question for you though. Assuming I had a good economy but was still for some reason unable to harass, can you comment on his amount of Hydra/Corrupter? I guess my concern is, if I were to have max carrier/void versus his max hydra/corrupter, does the carrier/void win?
|
On June 08 2013 06:16 RaptorPete wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2013 21:41 Cress wrote:On June 07 2013 16:59 RaptorPete wrote:Cress, could you watch this replay for me? I'm in Diamond. PvZ. He denied first oracle with 2 queens. Then went fast hydra and denied the 3-4 carrier harass. Then just massed corrupter/hydra and steam rolled me. Please watch and tell me what I should have done differently. Thanks. http://drop.sc/340766 Yeah I took a look at the replay, Your probe saturation is poor, You wanna have 3 workers on each gas and 16 on minerals and have both carriers started at 8:00-8:10. You also waited too long to take your second gas. You should work on refining your build, Once its crisp, work on your Micro and movement of your carriers around the map, this is quite hard to master, I still fuck it up myself. I'll move my carriers through bad area's of the map and get punished for it, Always have an area around the terrain to retreat too, and you'll do alright, But first you need probes and pylons my friend. I'll pluck some replays for you. I got a new account this week. Just for Carriers in PvT and PvZ, Its unfortunately ladder locked in diamond, its still masters games though This zerg was quite embarrassed losing to carriers: http://drop.sc/340775. Always stay around the edges of the map and unpassble terrain, and snipe bases and force bad engagements from the zerg, if your opponent, Zerg or terran. Gets their desired composition, you will die. Need to prevent this and keep their economy low Thanks for the advice. I do have another question for you though. Assuming I had a good economy but was still for some reason unable to harass, can you comment on his amount of Hydra/Corrupter? I guess my concern is, if I were to have max carrier/void versus his max hydra/corrupter, does the carrier/void win?
There's just not a whole lot to say about the game, the build was done incorrect  . You wanna build that forge after the carriers are started. Your carriers were 2 full minutes late and you stopped making carriers after. You should have had 4-5 carriers when you had 2. Focus on refinement of the build order.
After you have the refinement and macro down then focus on positioning. I added an Rules Of Engagement section to the OP that makes mention of your overall game plan when moving around the map.
Also to anwser your question about hydra/corrupter Its not really possible to go for both of these. If they do go for this composition then its up to you to make the "right" amount of void rays and carriers. Plus hydra's can't fly last I checked, so make use of dead space against them. Force a fight at a base over dead space or bad terrain you could call it. Muta/Corruptor is also the same way you need the correct amount of voids and carriers. The carriers will deal with the muta's well and the voids will rape the corruptors. Its always possible to get the amount wrong on either the zergs side or protoss's though.
Playing the build a lot is how your gain this experience. Even I'm not good at scout and doing this build well. My micro/positioning is not ideal half the time either. But I make mental notes each time and learn.
Nobody does anything like this, Its a bit uncharted territory.Yes I know carriers have been used a lot in the past, That's with gate way support however. Those Rules of engagement don't really apply to the gateway/carrier style.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
