EPTWhat's the counter when they use infestors with this?
The LotV Terran Help Me Thread - Page 48
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Damien
Brazil131 Posts
What's the counter when they use infestors with this? | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
On July 18 2016 19:37 Damien wrote: What's the counter to corruptor/ultralisk? What's the counter when they use infestors with this? Bio/tanks/liberators and a few vikings to bait the aggro from corruptors. Ultras will die on the liberators, split & use tanks to kill infestors, and vikings will chip away at the corruptors until marines shoot them down at the end of the engagement. If there an insane number of corruptors you can also go for few ravens to PDD and protect your liberators while they kill the ultras. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
On July 18 2016 19:37 Damien wrote: What's the counter to corruptor/ultralisk? What's the counter when they use infestors with this? If you go Mech Thor/Liberators. All the Thors should be in High Impact payload mode (they should basically always be in this mode as soon as Zerg reaches hive). You should have more Thors than Liberators, the Liberators are only there to support the Thors at killing ground units faster. Infestors are no real problem if you use ground heavy mech, ie Thor/Liberator works fine against Infestors on their own. If he used Vipers you must snipe or emp the Vipers with ghost before the battle starts or you will most likely lose. | ||
|
AleXusher
280 Posts
http://ggtracker.com/matches/6733985 | ||
|
Elentos
55585 Posts
Also some micro mistakes. You clicked your marines on the prism and lost them all, there was no way you'd ever kill it. You let your medivac die, the only way of protecting your tank from the stalkers. And your mine shot at a single stalker on the low ground instead of the clump of stalkers on the high ground. | ||
|
Damien
Brazil131 Posts
On July 18 2016 23:12 JackONeill wrote: Bio/tanks/liberators and a few vikings to bait the aggro from corruptors. Ultras will die on the liberators, split & use tanks to kill infestors, and vikings will chip away at the corruptors until marines shoot them down at the end of the engagement. If there an insane number of corruptors you can also go for few ravens to PDD and protect your liberators while they kill the ultras. On July 19 2016 04:52 MockHamill wrote: If you go Mech Thor/Liberators. All the Thors should be in High Impact payload mode (they should basically always be in this mode as soon as Zerg reaches hive). You should have more Thors than Liberators, the Liberators are only there to support the Thors at killing ground units faster. Infestors are no real problem if you use ground heavy mech, ie Thor/Liberator works fine against Infestors on their own. If he used Vipers you must snipe or emp the Vipers with ghost before the battle starts or you will most likely lose. Ty guys for the feedback! I will upload replay Can you guys watch my replays on TvZ and help me with some tips to improve? http://ggtracker.com/matches/6734117 http://ggtracker.com/matches/6734118 | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On July 18 2016 23:12 JackONeill wrote: Bio/tanks/liberators and a few vikings to bait the aggro from corruptors. Ultras will die on the liberators, split & use tanks to kill infestors, and vikings will chip away at the corruptors until marines shoot them down at the end of the engagement. If there an insane number of corruptors you can also go for few ravens to PDD and protect your liberators while they kill the ultras. There is also a unit called ghost that is kinda strong... | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
On July 20 2016 12:04 Gwavajuice wrote: There is also a unit called ghost that is kinda strong... Yeah right if you wanna gamble your whole fight on very punishing positionning that doesn't work against any decent zerg that knows how to take a fight with a flank, sure ghosts are nice | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On July 20 2016 16:41 JackONeill wrote: Yeah right if you wanna gamble your whole fight on very punishing positionning that doesn't work against any decent zerg that knows how to take a fight with a flank, sure ghosts are nice I'd love to have a more ellaborate reasonning for this, with possibly soem pro replay because it doesn't makes sense with both what I experience on my own ladder and what I see from pros. Check Taeja vs soO and Ragnarok in code S, Marinelord vs Snute and stephano in DH valencia and even against Nerchio in the finals, because even if looses the games he counters ultra pretty decently. Last time I checked all of them were decent Zergs... | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
Considering how he brainfucked snute it's not a good exemple. Also, to see taeja do some ghosts isn't a surprise. Whenever a new strategy is used it always takes time before it's figured out In the current general meta they're not used for a reason, it's not because you have few isolated cases where they're used that the reason why they're not used in 90% of TvZs is any less wrong | ||
|
Damien
Brazil131 Posts
On July 20 2016 19:54 Gwavajuice wrote: I'd love to have a more ellaborate reasonning for this, with possibly soem pro replay because it doesn't makes sense with both what I experience on my own ladder and what I see from pros. Check Taeja vs soO and Ragnarok in code S, Marinelord vs Snute and stephano in DH valencia and even against Nerchio in the finals, because even if looses the games he counters ultra pretty decently. Last time I checked all of them were decent Zergs... I couldn't find taeja games, but I am watching marinelord matches. Ty for that. | ||
|
Pokebunny
United States10654 Posts
On July 20 2016 16:41 JackONeill wrote: Yeah right if you wanna gamble your whole fight on very punishing positionning that doesn't work against any decent zerg that knows how to take a fight with a flank, sure ghosts are nice ghosts are the way that good terrans deal with lategame zerg. you can just play bio/liberator if you are constantly aggressive with drops/harass and whittle down his economy, but in max engagements you will never win straight up without ghosts unless your opponent controls horribly | ||
|
AleXusher
280 Posts
| ||
|
ArtyK
France3144 Posts
It seems more of a liability in case of proxy stargates with void rays killing your reactor off and possibly forcing a lift off. I see pros doing that even when going 1 rax expand with the CC on the low ground, it makes no sense to me. Wouldn't it be better to always just wall with depots there in this specific matchup? | ||
|
Elentos
55585 Posts
On July 22 2016 06:04 ArtyK wrote: What makes terrans decide if they want to put their first rax in the main wall in TvP? It seems more of a liability in case of proxy stargates with void rays killing your reactor off and possibly forcing a lift off. I see pros doing that even when going 1 rax expand with the CC on the low ground, it makes no sense to me. Wouldn't it be better to always just wall with depots there in this specific matchup? Well if you do a regular 1-rax expand you don't make your 3rd depot in time to keep out the first adept scout on 2-player maps, so that's already pretty bad. Plus if you get hit with an all-in or even just a pylon rush, the 3rd depot in the wall isn't much better than an add-on. Could even be significantly worse depending on the situation. | ||
|
ArtyK
France3144 Posts
On July 22 2016 06:26 Elentos wrote: Well if you do a regular 1-rax expand you don't make your 3rd depot in time to keep out the first adept scout on 2-player maps, so that's already pretty bad. Plus if you get hit with an all-in or even just a pylon rush, the 3rd depot in the wall isn't much better than an add-on. Could even be significantly worse depending on the situation. Fair enough, if i suspect an allin i put a bunker where the 3rd depot would be though | ||
|
Elentos
55585 Posts
On July 22 2016 06:36 ArtyK wrote: Fair enough, if i suspect an allin i put a bunker where the 3rd depot would be though Yeah that's a thing you could do. I remember TY against Billowy, TY floated his rax from the wall further in to make the add-on and made a bunker in the wall because he was expecting heavy blink pressure (on Dusk Towers). | ||
|
scoo2r
Canada91 Posts
What makes terrans decide if they want to put their first rax in the main wall in TvP? In previous versions of the game it was more common to see no wall off in TvP, the buildings would put near the CC just to be more efficient/easier to defend, the change towards more walling off seemed to happen with the adept and shade ability, you saw more and more terrans walling off to stop it from getting in the main. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8252 Posts
On July 15 2016 18:44 LoneYoShi wrote: I think the answer to such a build should not be to stay at home and macro up, but to try and contain him as much as possible. He'll need lots of gas for his ravens, so if you can manage to delay his 3rd and not allow a 4th, even if you trade badly you should be able to win it... How are you supposed to contain him? It just happened to me again. He has Tanks, Turrets, Planetaries, the indestructible defense. http://ggtracker.com/matches/6738144 | ||
|
Bojas
Netherlands2397 Posts
On July 23 2016 13:48 geokilla wrote: How are you supposed to contain him? It just happened to me again. He has Tanks, Turrets, Planetaries, the indestructible defense. http://ggtracker.com/matches/6738144 Just opened the replay, will give some pointers as I go. - holy crap that terran's opener is weird, my head hurts. It's complicated, auto-loses to lots of things and doesn't even make his economy better than normal - Try to expand a lot quicker, you take your natural at 4:51 which is needlessly late, you went for a gas first opening which is smart on that map, but in general there's quite some inefficiency that could be resolved in your opener. - General rule of thumb: if the Terran makes turrets around his base like this guy did, he can hardly cover all sides, so check every single side, if you find an opening and get into his mineral line you can do a lot of damage - You committed super hard on the banshees, and they were arguably not cost efficient (the turrets are useful later) - The whole transition to a 2 base infrastructure setup wasn't efficient, using your starport to make a tech lab to get combat shields means your starport isn't building anything, whereas your opponent's starport is, your opponent didn't use his much, but in a general game you should be behind in medivacs/vikings which isn't a good place to be. For example, your reactored starport was ready at 6:46, which is like 3 minutes later than it should be. - You move out at 6:11, which is the right thing to do, but without viking/medivac support it's hard to get anything done, look at your unit count and imagine 1-2 vikings and imagine your timing hitting 2-3 minutes earlier, which is entirely doable. It would've been a win for you. - Your attack wasn't cost efficient which puts you further behind - Since you weren't producing workers often and your expansions were later you're now 13 workers behind (7:58) - 8:22 you lose a double drop and kill absolutely nothing TL;DR - Economy was neglected in favor of attacking -> attacks were the opposite of cost efficient - Transitions can be smoother so you don't put yourself behind versus more optimal openers - General macro, production of scvs and upgrades for example (you were just 1-0 at 8:23) Some tips on how to be more cost efficient on a tactical level: - From the banshee you would know his turret structure, if you know of a weak spot you can attempt to doom-drop that spot, potentially while a second group attacks the front - Getting a viking advantage enables you to push a lot easier - If there's no way to push, expand. You'll have another attempt to find a hole in your opponent's defense whenever he takes a new base It's very hard to find a hole and sometimes you think you've found one, go for it and end up losing your units for free. Happens to me all the time. Just make sure to expand more than the meching player so you've got some leeway. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but 90% of the time when people ask for strategic advice they don't post a replay, I'm very happy that you did. Because usually, there's tactical and most of all, economic mistakes that resulted in the loss. Too often people talk about strategy in this thread neglecting the underlying issues that caused the loss. | ||
| ||
