|
In terms of openers, unless you're willing to hit a sharp timing there's not a lot you can do except be safe and find the time you can be greedy. 1-1-1 is absolutely the best bet since 1/2 base allins will destroy multi-barracks openers. The safest you can probably pick is just opening hellion-banshee and macroing from there. Banshees will ward off all but the most allin or roach heavy (or nydus) allins at your front door, the hellions should take care of anything ling based. If you happen to sniff out an allin, immediately switch into Reactored Marines, Tanks and Bashees. The combination of which should be able to hold just about everything if you micro properly and catch it early enough.
Banshees might be able to be traded in for Liberators, which are also great defensively if you know where the zerg is going to hit you. A drop (hellions, marines or mines) before going viking or liberator can be fine as well.
For compositions, you're probably just best off going HotS style bio-mine and being aggressive as possible, lots of drops, pokes, clearing creep etc. and doubly so if you can manage to scout them as they're teching to Hive. Liberators can be great harass on certain maps, but for just fighting army and being aggressive you're better off with something more mobile (tanks and medivacs, mines, hellbats and thors). Obviously if you're versus a roach ravager army you want tanks, which produces slower but are just better defensively. Roach-Ravager is also more open to Liberator play, since Tanks and Liberators gel together very well when it comes to locking down an area.
You can't let Ultralisks surprise you or you will just be dead, every time. You're probably dead anyway when it comes to Ultralisks, unless you're the top performing Korean Terran.
On December 06 2015 23:37 Bojas wrote:
If Zergs go ling bling muta, hit a nice timing with liberators to counter the mutas,
Liberators don't have a place against ling bling muta, using single shots against lings and blings is a waste, and unless you're willing to cut on medivacs early and hit with about 6 liberators, which is only good against mutas, you're not doing yourself any favors. Just go thor and either mines or hellbats, since thors and hellbats will tanks a lot of hits, and thors can mines can ward off mutas.
|
|
|
@terran4lyfe
Liberators auto-target banes right? They have an AI that prioritizes expensive units.
Besides that, they are extremely good vs mutas. I don't see why you wouldn't make them and so do GM teammates of mine. Saying that they have no place seems like nonsense to me.
|
On December 07 2015 20:21 Bojas wrote:
@terran4lyfe
Liberators auto-target banes right? They have an AI that prioritizes expensive units.
Besides that, they are extremely good vs mutas. I don't see why you wouldn't make them and so do GM teammates of mine. Saying that they have no place seems like nonsense to me.
I disagree as well. You don't open with libs (except for defense against an all-in) but you transition into them once on 4 or more bases. Not only does it shut down mutas, but it also acts as a soft counter to the ultra transition that should come about at that time. Plus, at this moment of the game, you already have your medivac count up (and you really shouldn't lose them). Just add 1-2 starports, and add liberators to your compositions. I believe MLord did this in at least one of his Nation Wars 3 games, but I don't remember who it was against.
|
I watched Marinelord's games. He just reaper rushed 2 of the zerg games and the other was a hellbat timing with a liberator made afterwards only for harassment.  That's actually a build I used frequently myself and doesn't detract from my previous assertion. Liberator harass is all well and good (and I fully endorse it), but against a core ling baneling muta army, unless you are already a better player, or get an advantage from the early game (do damage or defend an allin or timing), every liberator made would be better served making a siege tank or other factory units.
If a pack of liberators is good enough to snipe every baneling then that zerg lost the game way before the engagement ever started.
Lings and banelings are too many and too fast to rely on a liberator's single targeting system, a tank would suit you better in every way, especially since a liberator's targeting circle is made obvious to your opponent. Against an opponent who can macro as well or better than you, the fights will always go in their favor with a proper army.
SC2 is an extremely dynamic game with people having tendencies that are strong against x or weak against y, so you can probably find some zergs who are bad enough that let their entire natural be covered in liberator circles, only have lings or roaches and queens and just die to liberator. And the lower the league, the more likely that is. But those are edge cases at best.
Also Liberators are not a factor at all against Ultralisk since Ultralisks have the ability to move and once the Zerg player has the income and ability to go Ultra, it's nearly a free win against the Terran no matter what units he has (pro players can usually put a fight though). If you can force Ultralisks to walk or standstill under 6+ liberators, good for you.
Oh, by the way, this is all in the assumption the Terran player is going bio. Against mech that's completely different, but you wouldn't see ling baneling muta vs that anyway.
|
What do you guys think about the opening MarineLord versus Zerg in the Nations Was 3 ? For those who don't know what I'm talking about, he used a 1 base, 3 barrack mass reaper opening. He often times straight up won from there as it's an obviously very aggressive strat. However, when he couldn't kill the zerg quickly enough, his money piled up and he transitionned out from this by building 2 additionnal CC's while keeping up pressure with his reapers, killing queens and lings continuously - this ensured a manageable (low) number of speedlings. Then he added a techlab, got stim, and started a factory. He defended any kind of roach counter with reapers, marines and bunkers.
My question is do you think this is a "legit" strat, or do you think it's a gimmick that'll get figured out eventually by zerg players ? Kinda similar to going gasless 2 racks (proxy or not) in HotS into 3 CC, "hiding" your greed behind an insanely aggressive opening. My initial thoughts was that such a cheesy strat could only be a gimmick and will get figured out quickly by Z's. But seeing how MLord kept doing it over and over, it made me wonder if this build isn't more solid than it actually looks. Thoughts ?
|
On December 08 2015 00:52 terran4lyfe wrote:I watched Marinelord's games. He just reaper rushed 2 of the zerg games and the other was a hellbat timing with a liberator made afterwards only for harassment. That's actually a build I used frequently myself and doesn't detract from my previous assertion. Liberator harass is all well and good (and I fully endorse it), but against a core ling baneling muta army, unless you are already a better player, or get an advantage from the early game (do damage or defend an allin or timing), every liberator made would be better served making a siege tank or other factory units. If a pack of liberators is good enough to snipe every baneling then that zerg lost the game way before the engagement ever started. Lings and banelings are too many and too fast to rely on a liberator's single targeting system, a tank would suit you better in every way, especially since a liberator's targeting circle is made obvious to your opponent. Against an opponent who can macro as well or better than you, the fights will always go in their favor with a proper army. SC2 is an extremely dynamic game with people having tendencies that are strong against x or weak against y, so you can probably find some zergs who are bad enough that let their entire natural be covered in liberator circles, only have lings or roaches and queens and just die to liberator. And the lower the league, the more likely that is. But those are edge cases at best. Also Liberators are not a factor at all against Ultralisk since Ultralisks have the ability to move and once the Zerg player has the income and ability to go Ultra, it's nearly a free win against the Terran no matter what units he has (pro players can usually put a fight though). If you can force Ultralisks to walk or standstill under 6+ liberators, good for you. Oh, by the way, this is all in the assumption the Terran player is going bio. Against mech that's completely different, but you wouldn't see ling baneling muta vs that anyway.
Interesting post, but I don't agree with everything you say. Althought I'll admit that I haven't played enough games to make my personnal opinion (nor am I good enough for my opinion to be relevant), however I still see points that would favor liberators over tanks. But I'm very open to be proven wrong since those points are mostly theorycrafting anyway.
- Tanks need APM to focus fire banelings. In an engagement vsZ, you're generally busy splitting your MM, and having spare APM to focus fire bane groups seems pretty much outside of a lot of people's ability, except for top koreans. I suppose it is possible since we have seen top koreans focus fire with their mines in 4M engagements (Jjakji is the most notable), but compared to Liberators who autoattack banes, it still makes terrans life easier, and more time to spend on the splits => better splits => better trades.
- Liberators outside of siege mode have a value: they can allow you to chase/zone out mutas. Tanks are purely deadweight. Also, now you have a counter to mutas that can fly as well, so it makes chasing after mutas in your base easier (don't have to load a medivac and boost it from your 3rd to your main for example).
- Tanks do splash damage on your own units, libs don't ! (OK, I'm really nitpicking here :p)
- There are ways to force an engagement into liberator circles. You're kind of black/white here when you say that since ultras can move, they should never be shot by liberators. Reality is a more gray area: if you put pressure on a 5th base for example, you can set up the libs, spread out/pre-split and attack his base with only some MM so he has to attack into you !
However, be it tanks or liberators, we can at least all agree that both are garbage if BL come out :D
|
On December 08 2015 01:06 LoneYoShi wrote:
What do you guys think about the opening MarineLord versus Zerg in the Nations Was 3 ? For those who don't know what I'm talking about, he used a 1 base, 3 barrack mass reaper opening. He often times straight up won from there as it's an obviously very aggressive strat. However, when he couldn't kill the zerg quickly enough, his money piled up and he transitionned out from this by building 2 additionnal CC's while keeping up pressure with his reapers, killing queens and lings continuously - this ensured a manageable (low) number of speedlings. Then he added a techlab, got stim, and started a factory. He defended any kind of roach counter with reapers, marines and bunkers.
My question is do you think this is a "legit" strat, or do you think it's a gimmick that'll get figured out eventually by zerg players ? Kinda similar to going gasless 2 racks (proxy or not) in HotS into 3 CC, "hiding" your greed behind an insanely aggressive opening. My initial thoughts was that such a cheesy strat could only be a gimmick and will get figured out quickly by Z's. But seeing how MLord kept doing it over and over, it made me wonder if this build isn't more solid than it actually looks. Thoughts ?
I am only a lowly Diamond League player in the Asia/KR region, so take my opinion lightly.
With constant Reaper production, Overlord scouting for the Zerg is free, so he will know instantly when Terran transitions; with such a cheap Baneling nest, combined with the fact that most Zs often get Zergling speed very quickly, Zerg can quickly build more Zerglings than Terran reapers can handle, and then build 7-8 Banelings the instant he knows Terrain is teching or building CCs, bust down the wall, and kill Terran.
Besides, Zerg need only build 1 Spine Crawler in each base and a complementary pack of lings to ward off Reapers while building(Reapers are awful against buildings), then do the above, and then Terrain is toast.
|
Liberator and bio army is actually way more apm and actively detracts from splitting your units. Since you can't tell your liberators to all focus an area in one button and have to manually set the circles down individually, every quarter second and click spent on laying those down are APM not using the army that matters. If the zerg starts the fight before you're ready you'll panic to try and set down the circles while the lings and banelings wrap around your army (not to mention the liberators will take 2 seconds before they even fire) and take a bad trade. OR you'll focus on splitting and completely ignore the liberators making them a nonfactor.
If you have 5 tanks sieged up and attached to your medivacs, no matter what happens, whether you decide to fight or the zerg starts the engagement, the command to drop all the tanks is 3 clicks (or a button press and 2 clicks) and they will immediately attack whatever is in range and you're free to split your units.
The splash damage of hitting a clump of banelings is way more valuable and reliable than relying on liberators, the splash damage on your own units is nearly negligible if you have medivacs. Not to mention one tank shot on a clump of banelings can easily be a tide turner for a fight and maybe snowball into a win.
For mutas, liberators can good early game since it's splash damage on a flying unit that you can make 2 at a time. In a mid game scenario, Thors will aggro the mutas from a much longer range, also mines and Thors have a much much higher chance of grabbing kills on mutas while liberators will only get kills if a bad zerg purposefully chooses to fight liberators when they don't have to.
And there's no such thing as a dead weight tank unless you forget to pick it up with a medivac.
Zerg late game is bullshit though, no matter the option they choose.
|
On December 08 2015 01:22 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 00:52 terran4lyfe wrote:I watched Marinelord's games. He just reaper rushed 2 of the zerg games and the other was a hellbat timing with a liberator made afterwards only for harassment. That's actually a build I used frequently myself and doesn't detract from my previous assertion. Liberator harass is all well and good (and I fully endorse it), but against a core ling baneling muta army, unless you are already a better player, or get an advantage from the early game (do damage or defend an allin or timing), every liberator made would be better served making a siege tank or other factory units. If a pack of liberators is good enough to snipe every baneling then that zerg lost the game way before the engagement ever started. Lings and banelings are too many and too fast to rely on a liberator's single targeting system, a tank would suit you better in every way, especially since a liberator's targeting circle is made obvious to your opponent. Against an opponent who can macro as well or better than you, the fights will always go in their favor with a proper army. SC2 is an extremely dynamic game with people having tendencies that are strong against x or weak against y, so you can probably find some zergs who are bad enough that let their entire natural be covered in liberator circles, only have lings or roaches and queens and just die to liberator. And the lower the league, the more likely that is. But those are edge cases at best. Also Liberators are not a factor at all against Ultralisk since Ultralisks have the ability to move and once the Zerg player has the income and ability to go Ultra, it's nearly a free win against the Terran no matter what units he has (pro players can usually put a fight though). If you can force Ultralisks to walk or standstill under 6+ liberators, good for you. Oh, by the way, this is all in the assumption the Terran player is going bio. Against mech that's completely different, but you wouldn't see ling baneling muta vs that anyway. Interesting post, but I don't agree with everything you say. Althought I'll admit that I haven't played enough games to make my personnal opinion (nor am I good enough for my opinion to be relevant), however I still see points that would favor liberators over tanks. But I'm very open to be proven wrong since those points are mostly theorycrafting anyway. - Tanks need APM to focus fire banelings. In an engagement vsZ, you're generally busy splitting your MM, and having spare APM to focus fire bane groups seems pretty much outside of a lot of people's ability, except for top koreans. I suppose it is possible since we have seen top koreans focus fire with their mines in 4M engagements (Jjakji is the most notable), but compared to Liberators who autoattack banes, it still makes terrans life easier, and more time to spend on the splits => better splits => better trades. - Liberators outside of siege mode have a value: they can allow you to chase/zone out mutas. Tanks are purely deadweight. Also, now you have a counter to mutas that can fly as well, so it makes chasing after mutas in your base easier (don't have to load a medivac and boost it from your 3rd to your main for example). - Tanks do splash damage on your own units, libs don't ! (OK, I'm really nitpicking here :p) - There are ways to force an engagement into liberator circles. You're kind of black/white here when you say that since ultras can move, they should never be shot by liberators. Reality is a more gray area: if you put pressure on a 5th base for example, you can set up the libs, spread out/pre-split and attack his base with only some MM so he has to attack into you ! However, be it tanks or liberators, we can at least all agree that both are garbage if BL come out :D
Focusing banes with tanks is extremely easy, and I'd expect diamond players to be able to do it while splitting.
When I mass liberator vs zerg, I often lose the ground fight but they can't really stop the liberators. Every zerg goes roach ravager anyway because liberators MASSACRE mutalisks and the pressure is super easy to execute.
edit: liberators are also easier to micro than tanks to that poster who said they're hard to set up. You can select every liberator and E+Click 20 times in 20 different spots and a different liberator will go to each spot.
|
Are tanks actually viable, and better than mines? 1-3 defensive tanks in the early game seem good, but any more than that seems far too difficult to micro against ravagers, and mines are better vs. ling/bling anyway.
More generally, can we talk about the way tech is flowing in your TvZ and TvP games? In TvZ I'm getting defensive tanks into 8 rax + mines, and then I usually add a second starport after my fourth base, and a ghost academy whenever he builds a hive. This has been working quite well for me and I haven't seen anything to indicate that I should change this. In TvP I am doing much the same as well, with basically the same flow of buildings, but I cease mine production earlier. What are your tech transitions and how are they working out? When are you getting liberators/ghosts/mines/tanks etc.? Is anyone bothering to build any other support units at any point?
|
In TvZ I'm having huge success against masters/gm on NA ladder who go mass roach ravager by having ~10 tanks and medivacs. With good pickup micro and having the bio make a wall between roaches and the tanks it works fairly well. Even viper blinding cloud is bad against the pickup mechanic. If david kim is reading this I want him to still know that the mechanic is dumb and should be removed.
The problem with going for a lot of tanks and medivacs is the ultralisk tech switch because everything sucks against ultralisks.
|
If the zerg goes ling bling muta, you can just go bio widow mine with a transition ready for hive tech wheter it be 3 factory or 3-4 starports. Its not like bios vs the muta ling bling is any worse or anything. You simply cannot parade push marines and mines all day because zerg can get to hive a lot faster and ravagers are pretty good.
For the record liberators are used to zone areas as you push making it daunting for the zerg to flank you which is what they want to do with this kind of composition. Ultimately they need to be protected like tanks or mines. Liberators replace thors as the anti muta cloud for bio players a few liberators flying around will make any zerg think twice about flying into your units. Much like a thor did but liberators are faster.
Tanks just arent a good option vs Zerg who go pure ling bane muta. Even with all the zoning tools of terran mutas can easily pick off tanks and pull you apart. Not only that but they arent actually that good at killing zerg unless you have critical mass which you dont want to have for bio. There are better ways to spend resources on since any good zerg doesnt clump all their banes to get one shotted by tanks.
|
On December 08 2015 13:27 Thaniri wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 01:22 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 08 2015 00:52 terran4lyfe wrote:I watched Marinelord's games. He just reaper rushed 2 of the zerg games and the other was a hellbat timing with a liberator made afterwards only for harassment. That's actually a build I used frequently myself and doesn't detract from my previous assertion. Liberator harass is all well and good (and I fully endorse it), but against a core ling baneling muta army, unless you are already a better player, or get an advantage from the early game (do damage or defend an allin or timing), every liberator made would be better served making a siege tank or other factory units. If a pack of liberators is good enough to snipe every baneling then that zerg lost the game way before the engagement ever started. Lings and banelings are too many and too fast to rely on a liberator's single targeting system, a tank would suit you better in every way, especially since a liberator's targeting circle is made obvious to your opponent. Against an opponent who can macro as well or better than you, the fights will always go in their favor with a proper army. SC2 is an extremely dynamic game with people having tendencies that are strong against x or weak against y, so you can probably find some zergs who are bad enough that let their entire natural be covered in liberator circles, only have lings or roaches and queens and just die to liberator. And the lower the league, the more likely that is. But those are edge cases at best. Also Liberators are not a factor at all against Ultralisk since Ultralisks have the ability to move and once the Zerg player has the income and ability to go Ultra, it's nearly a free win against the Terran no matter what units he has (pro players can usually put a fight though). If you can force Ultralisks to walk or standstill under 6+ liberators, good for you. Oh, by the way, this is all in the assumption the Terran player is going bio. Against mech that's completely different, but you wouldn't see ling baneling muta vs that anyway. Interesting post, but I don't agree with everything you say. Althought I'll admit that I haven't played enough games to make my personnal opinion (nor am I good enough for my opinion to be relevant), however I still see points that would favor liberators over tanks. But I'm very open to be proven wrong since those points are mostly theorycrafting anyway. - Tanks need APM to focus fire banelings. In an engagement vsZ, you're generally busy splitting your MM, and having spare APM to focus fire bane groups seems pretty much outside of a lot of people's ability, except for top koreans. I suppose it is possible since we have seen top koreans focus fire with their mines in 4M engagements (Jjakji is the most notable), but compared to Liberators who autoattack banes, it still makes terrans life easier, and more time to spend on the splits => better splits => better trades. - Liberators outside of siege mode have a value: they can allow you to chase/zone out mutas. Tanks are purely deadweight. Also, now you have a counter to mutas that can fly as well, so it makes chasing after mutas in your base easier (don't have to load a medivac and boost it from your 3rd to your main for example). - Tanks do splash damage on your own units, libs don't ! (OK, I'm really nitpicking here :p) - There are ways to force an engagement into liberator circles. You're kind of black/white here when you say that since ultras can move, they should never be shot by liberators. Reality is a more gray area: if you put pressure on a 5th base for example, you can set up the libs, spread out/pre-split and attack his base with only some MM so he has to attack into you ! However, be it tanks or liberators, we can at least all agree that both are garbage if BL come out :D Focusing banes with tanks is extremely easy, and I'd expect diamond players to be able to do it while splitting.When I mass liberator vs zerg, I often lose the ground fight but they can't really stop the liberators. Every zerg goes roach ravager anyway because liberators MASSACRE mutalisks and the pressure is super easy to execute. edit: liberators are also easier to micro than tanks to that poster who said they're hard to set up. You can select every liberator and E+Click 20 times in 20 different spots and a different liberator will go to each spot.
For the record, as a diamond terran on EU, I don't even manage to split my bio properly half of the time...
|
You should use patrol for splitting. That's what I do when I need it (otherwise I still can't do it properly -_-).
|
vs zerg i go for a 2 base 3 techlab-rax (stim+ concussive shells),1 reactor-factory(+armory), 1 starport, Marauder, Hellbat, Liberator Push. i usually destroy their roach revanger with this timing, also zergling compositions. and with the liberators im pretty safe against mutas also.
so far none of my zerg opponents held it.
|
Canada8157 Posts
On December 08 2015 20:06 KOtical wrote:
vs zerg i go for a 2 base 3 techlab-rax (stim+ concussive shells),1 reactor-factory(+armory), 1 starport, Marauder, Hellbat, Liberator Push. i usually destroy their roach revanger with this timing, also zergling compositions. and with the liberators im pretty safe against mutas also.
so far none of my zerg opponents held it.
Got any replays of this?
|
On December 08 2015 20:28 Jer99 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 20:06 KOtical wrote:
vs zerg i go for a 2 base 3 techlab-rax (stim+ concussive shells),1 reactor-factory(+armory), 1 starport, Marauder, Hellbat, Liberator Push. i usually destroy their roach revanger with this timing, also zergling compositions. and with the liberators im pretty safe against mutas also.
so far none of my zerg opponents held it. Got any replays of this?
ya sure but not right now coz im at work. havent played that much though and still have some problems with the new mechanics and hotkeys. so my build could be better if practiced well. lost some games vs zerg to bane bust all ins though, but i think you could switch up the build pretty good if you scout properly (didnt scout at all in those games)
|
Since my last post I have been having a lot of success with mech. Even against masters on KR, I have been fairing well. I open with an old school cloak banshee/hellion push but with the extra income from LOTV mechanics I also drop an armory and morph hellbats. It's pretty strong and I transition into an avilo *shudder* type turtle play. However I try and be much more aggressive early on. I've only lost to Brood Lord/Air transitions thus far.
|
On December 08 2015 17:07 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2015 13:27 Thaniri wrote:On December 08 2015 01:22 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 08 2015 00:52 terran4lyfe wrote:I watched Marinelord's games. He just reaper rushed 2 of the zerg games and the other was a hellbat timing with a liberator made afterwards only for harassment. That's actually a build I used frequently myself and doesn't detract from my previous assertion. Liberator harass is all well and good (and I fully endorse it), but against a core ling baneling muta army, unless you are already a better player, or get an advantage from the early game (do damage or defend an allin or timing), every liberator made would be better served making a siege tank or other factory units. If a pack of liberators is good enough to snipe every baneling then that zerg lost the game way before the engagement ever started. Lings and banelings are too many and too fast to rely on a liberator's single targeting system, a tank would suit you better in every way, especially since a liberator's targeting circle is made obvious to your opponent. Against an opponent who can macro as well or better than you, the fights will always go in their favor with a proper army. SC2 is an extremely dynamic game with people having tendencies that are strong against x or weak against y, so you can probably find some zergs who are bad enough that let their entire natural be covered in liberator circles, only have lings or roaches and queens and just die to liberator. And the lower the league, the more likely that is. But those are edge cases at best. Also Liberators are not a factor at all against Ultralisk since Ultralisks have the ability to move and once the Zerg player has the income and ability to go Ultra, it's nearly a free win against the Terran no matter what units he has (pro players can usually put a fight though). If you can force Ultralisks to walk or standstill under 6+ liberators, good for you. Oh, by the way, this is all in the assumption the Terran player is going bio. Against mech that's completely different, but you wouldn't see ling baneling muta vs that anyway. Interesting post, but I don't agree with everything you say. Althought I'll admit that I haven't played enough games to make my personnal opinion (nor am I good enough for my opinion to be relevant), however I still see points that would favor liberators over tanks. But I'm very open to be proven wrong since those points are mostly theorycrafting anyway. - Tanks need APM to focus fire banelings. In an engagement vsZ, you're generally busy splitting your MM, and having spare APM to focus fire bane groups seems pretty much outside of a lot of people's ability, except for top koreans. I suppose it is possible since we have seen top koreans focus fire with their mines in 4M engagements (Jjakji is the most notable), but compared to Liberators who autoattack banes, it still makes terrans life easier, and more time to spend on the splits => better splits => better trades. - Liberators outside of siege mode have a value: they can allow you to chase/zone out mutas. Tanks are purely deadweight. Also, now you have a counter to mutas that can fly as well, so it makes chasing after mutas in your base easier (don't have to load a medivac and boost it from your 3rd to your main for example). - Tanks do splash damage on your own units, libs don't ! (OK, I'm really nitpicking here :p) - There are ways to force an engagement into liberator circles. You're kind of black/white here when you say that since ultras can move, they should never be shot by liberators. Reality is a more gray area: if you put pressure on a 5th base for example, you can set up the libs, spread out/pre-split and attack his base with only some MM so he has to attack into you ! However, be it tanks or liberators, we can at least all agree that both are garbage if BL come out :D Focusing banes with tanks is extremely easy, and I'd expect diamond players to be able to do it while splitting.When I mass liberator vs zerg, I often lose the ground fight but they can't really stop the liberators. Every zerg goes roach ravager anyway because liberators MASSACRE mutalisks and the pressure is super easy to execute. edit: liberators are also easier to micro than tanks to that poster who said they're hard to set up. You can select every liberator and E+Click 20 times in 20 different spots and a different liberator will go to each spot. For the record, as a diamond terran on EU, I don't even manage to split my bio properly half of the time...
Practice on Griffiths arcade map Marine Split Challenge. Marine splitting is the hard part, not using your tanks.
1) pay attention to their army position
2) when they go in to attack run your bio back
3) press your tank hotkey and shift click a few baneling clumps
4) start splitting bio/macroing
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
