EPTIt's called a Seeker Missile. There's no Hunter in it.
Hunter Seekers are from Terminator.
Seeker Missiles are from SC2.
Hunter Seeker Missiles are from nowhere, since they don't exist.
A look at the Raven's role in TvZ - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
It's called a Seeker Missile. There's no Hunter in it. Hunter Seekers are from Terminator. Seeker Missiles are from SC2. Hunter Seeker Missiles are from nowhere, since they don't exist. | ||
|
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
| ||
|
heishe
Germany2284 Posts
| ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
On October 21 2010 22:57 kojinshugi wrote: Stop calling it HSM. It's called a Seeker Missile. There's no Hunter in it. Hunter Seekers are from Terminator. Seeker Missiles are from SC2. Hunter Seeker Missiles are from nowhere, since they don't exist. it was called hunter seeker missiles at one point in time. + it sounds cooler. so get over it. | ||
|
Trentelshark
Canada385 Posts
I opt for cutting out a few medivacs, and also, if I choose to go Banshee harassment, keep the investment here to 1 Banshee without cloak, because no cloak means HSM is basically a small additional investment and tbh HSM will be more useful in general than a cloaked Banshee which is more a unit I have at a period of time and not much beyond that. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
I don't see what's wrong with it. You can dump all your gas into them and kill all the zerg's gas units. Once you get a critical mass, they just start mass HSM or paving hte map with auto turrets. | ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
PS: remember that HSM does friendly fire and the banelings don't (why not?) Hunter Seeker Missiles are from nowhere, since they don't exist. They were called HSM in alpha/early beta, and it kinda stuck, if i called it SM, noone would understand what it was. deal with it ASM: I see no replays of said marine raven strategy | ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
On October 21 2010 17:21 OPSavioR wrote: you should watch poltprime play from GSL 1 and check out his TvP build. Ah, thanks. Way to be relevant on a TvZ thread. I've seen quite a few mass Raven games, and apart from one in which Idra Fungal Growths the hell out of them, I've never seen the Ravens lose. | ||
|
JinjoBust
Korea (North)130 Posts
| ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
| ||
|
AyJay
1515 Posts
On October 21 2010 17:01 Nazza wrote: Seeker Missile - "Let's make an ability that people can RUN AWAY FROM!" Banelings - "Let's make unit that people can RUN AWAY FROM!" Nothing wrong with it. | ||
Kinky
United States4126 Posts
On October 21 2010 17:31 grinTOR wrote: That's the whole point of the Seeker missile...set it on the pack of mutas that are magic boxing your thors and they have to run away most of the time, or get utterly destroyed. It's strength is in the ability to make them run away. Although I do agree that the energy cost should be lessened by 25 or so. Except most of the times, the magic boxed mutas will be on top of your army. It'd probably hurt your bio more than the mutas because of how tightly they group up. | ||
|
XerrolAvengerII
United States510 Posts
On October 21 2010 17:58 Cyber_Cheese wrote: if anything, the ravens turret is OP, based on the infested terran You mean the fact that infested terrans deal the same damage and that they cost half as much right (and unlike the auto turret, they get damage upgrades)? Forget that auto turrets have a long lifespan, zerglings and banelings would have a long lifespan too, if they didn't get killed. On October 22 2010 00:36 AyJay wrote: Banelings - "Let's make unit that people can RUN AWAY FROM!" Nothing wrong with it. Except the fact that banelings move faster than most things, and seeker missiles move slow or equal to most things, which means they miss. The only time I ever saw a baneling miss, was when its controller misclicked and the baneling went passed the ramp, instead of up it. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On October 22 2010 00:57 XerrolAvengerII wrote: You mean the fact that infested terrans deal the same damage and that they cost half as much right (and unlike the auto turret, they get damage upgrades)? Forget that auto turrets have a long lifespan, zerglings and banelings would have a long lifespan too, if they didn't get killed. The thing is once you get enough ravens(4-5). You can create a large fields of them that Z has to run through and eventually kill. | ||
|
VorcePA
United States1102 Posts
| ||
|
XerrolAvengerII
United States510 Posts
On October 22 2010 01:00 Antisocialmunky wrote: The thing is once you get enough ravens(4-5). You can create a large fields of them that Z has to run through and eventually kill. Large fields? Really? has this actually happened to you?... no wait... you actually let a Terran do this to you and you didn't punish them? If a terran player has spent 1000 gas on Ravens b4 20 minutes, you should be able to punish him really hard, because that means, that he didn't spend that gas on A) tanks, B) thors, C) medivacs... and that is a GOOD THING FOR YOU>>> If your opponent is making a cutsie army of ravens with a bunch of 2 minute auto turrets on one spot on the map... how about you just go somewhere else? Its kinda like bunkers or siege tanks... you shouldnt attack straight into it, except that unlike the siege tanks, the auto turrets go away by them selves. | ||
|
dudeman001
United States2412 Posts
On October 22 2010 00:36 AyJay wrote: Banelings - "Let's make unit that people can RUN AWAY FROM!" Nothing wrong with it. ? Then why not include every melee unit? HSM (I'm keeping the H) is so far up the tech tree, makes Terran choose between throwing down a PDD or a missile, and costs so much for it's terrible effectiveness. If I'm spending 100/200 on a Raven then 150/150 on the ability, I want that money to actually guarantee me something more than making my opponent run (a unit) away. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On October 22 2010 01:08 XerrolAvengerII wrote: Large fields? Really? has this actually happened to you?... no wait... you actually let a Terran do this to you and you didn't punish them? If a terran player has spent 1000 gas on Ravens b4 20 minutes, you should be able to punish him really hard, because that means, that he didn't spend that gas on A) tanks, B) thors, C) medivacs... and that is a GOOD THING FOR YOU>>> If your opponent is making a cutsie army of ravens with a bunch of 2 minute auto turrets on one spot on the map... how about you just go somewhere else? Its kinda like bunkers or siege tanks... you shouldnt attack straight into it, except that unlike the siege tanks, the auto turrets go away by them selves. 2 Base Raven, 2 Ports and everything else into marines. I kill creep tumors to make coutnering and taking a third harder. Then I trade armies of marines for all your units that take gas and eventually just crawl turrets all the way to your natural and start dropping HSM. ITs basically the SC2 version of SK Terran. Its not really cutesee when you have 8 rax producing marines with stim, combat shield, and a massive cloud of ravens spamming auto turrets up to your nat and walling your ramp with turrets and then crawlling into your base. Plus I can get medivacs to drop. | ||
|
Panoptic
United Kingdom515 Posts
| ||
|
baph
Poland30 Posts
On October 22 2010 01:10 dudeman001 wrote: ? Then why not include every melee unit? HSM (I'm keeping the H) is so far up the tech tree, makes Terran choose between throwing down a PDD or a missile, and costs so much for it's terrible effectiveness. If I'm spending 100/200 on a Raven then 150/150 on the ability, I want that money to actually guarantee me something more than making my opponent run (a unit) away. thats a valid point. Also HSM costs quite a bit of energy, so once you shot, say 2 of them, you have to either wait or have more ravens which means more gas spent. | ||
| ||
