|
Hey guys. I used the search function and basically read every battlecruiser thread there was. There hasn't been a good battlecruiser discussion in over 3 months now it seems.
I'm not too high level of a player and don't consider myself to be all that skilled, but I have been watching pro level Starcraft for 2-3 hours a day every day for a year now. I know the trends, I know what to look for in a good player, and I follow mostly every pro player on the scene riight now. But there have been a few complex discussions between myself and my other Starcraft loving friends recently and I'd like to get to the bottom of at least one of them, because I don't feel like my answers have been sufficient in this case.
My question is ultimately about Battlecruisers and why they are *almost* never used in the late-game, even by a terran mech. Keep in mind I am talking about fully top tier level players. You don't see MVP, MMA, Bomber, MarineKing, etc... use Battlecruisers - almost never. Thors, yes. Other mech units, yes. But battlecruisers? It's almost like a spark of life into each game whenever a fusion core actually starts getting built.
The DPS on Battlecruisers is top 3 in the game, and that's without Yamato cannon. The price is also one of the highest in the game too, though. That's usually my reason to friends about why they are never used. Starcraft is more of a game of speed than a game of theoretical might. Just because they are the highest DPS unit, doesn't make them anywhere near *worth it* to build for top tier players.
Especially since they are so slow and are countered by many units in all 3 races inventories. The slow speed is one of the top reasons I've heard from others on why the Code S players don't use them; too much potential kiting, especially in matchups like Viking vc BS (with V's having 1.5x the range of their opponent).
Am I correct in these reasons on why they simply aren't *that* good, or is there more that I'm not really seeing, being a lowbie? I can use BC's all day in the lower leagues and win, obviously, but when watching master and grandmasters streams, it's almost a joke or an accident when you see that fusion core pop up.
Thanks in advance for the thoughts!
Psilo
|
They are used in TvT. God knows why, since Vikings hard counter them and each terran is already massing vikings.
In TvZ, if you go BC, you die to corruptor.
In TvP, they go blink stalkers or void rays.
And above all else, they are expensive, hard to tech to and they have to pay for themselves.
You need like 4+ bases to get them anyway, and terrans cant get to 4+ bases since they dont know how to macro.
|
Usually it's:
-Never reached that point.
-Never needed it.
-Too expensive.
|
O_O MVP used Battlecruisers to great effect in TvT when he went mech, particularly against MarineKing in GSL January and the Super Tournament.
Other than that I have nothing else to say, I don't use battlecruisers much.
EDIT: Also not sure if trolling.
|
On January 31 2012 11:05 Raithed wrote:
Usually it's:
-Never reached that point.
-Never needed it.
-Too expensive.
Yeah, makes sense. "Never needed it" is a good one.
I'm still wondering about the too expensive thing though. Do you think theyre too expensive because they are LITERALLY not worth it, or because you can build 2-3 units of OTHER types with the same price you can build a battlecruiser?
(the latter is the reasoning I usually use)
|
You're correct in many points, that battlecruisers are slow to move, slow to build, and countered easily. HOWEVER, there are several examples of high level TvT where siege tank lines force a stalemate, and one player gets some battlecruisers to break the lines. In this sense, battlecruisers serve a similar role to broodlords in ZvT: They force the siege tanks to back up to a defensive line, force vikings, etc.
Obviously, though, if you have few or no vikings, battlecruisers will die WAY too fast.
|
On January 31 2012 11:07 Psilo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2012 11:05 Raithed wrote:
Usually it's:
-Never reached that point.
-Never needed it.
-Too expensive. Yeah, makes sense. "Never needed it" is a good one. I'm still wondering about the too expensive thing though. Do you think theyre too expensive because they are LITERALLY not worth it, or because you can build 2-3 units of OTHER types with the same price you can build a battlecruiser? (the latter is the reasoning I usually use)
Well, terrans would prefer having 3 tanks over a battle cruiser. It's just efficiency, thats all.
|
On January 31 2012 11:06 JagerGard wrote:
O_O MVP used Battlecruisers to great effect in TvT when he went mech, particularly against MarineKing in GSL January and the Super Tournament.
Other than that I have nothing else to say, I don't use battlecruisers much.
EDIT: Also not sure if trolling.
Im not trolling. I watched all 152 matches in recent GSL up'and'downs and Code S ro.32 this month, and in only 2 games out of the 152, a fusion core was built. And one of those 2 was the hilarious accident that (Gumiho i think?) did, when he was meaning to build a factory in that spot. The recent terran GSL play is the reason for this thread.
On January 31 2012 11:08 spacebob42 wrote:
You're correct in many points, that battlecruisers are slow to move, slow to build, and countered easily. HOWEVER, there are several examples of high level TvT where siege tank lines force a stalemate, and one player gets some battlecruisers to break the lines. In this sense, battlecruisers serve a similar role to broodlords in ZvT: They force the siege tanks to back up to a defensive line, force vikings, etc.
Obviously, though, if you have few or no vikings, battlecruisers will die WAY too fast.
good stuff, thanks, makes a lot of sense
|
On January 31 2012 11:08 Psilo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2012 11:06 JagerGard wrote:
O_O MVP used Battlecruisers to great effect in TvT when he went mech, particularly against MarineKing in GSL January and the Super Tournament.
Other than that I have nothing else to say, I don't use battlecruisers much.
EDIT: Also not sure if trolling. Im not trolling. I watched all 152 matches in recent GSL up'and'downs and Code S ro.32 this month, and in only 2 games out of the 152, a fusion core was built. And one of those 2 was the hilarious accident that (Gumiho i think?) did, when he was meaning to build a factory in that spot. The recent terran GSL play is the reason for this thread.
They were built for awhile following the speed upgrade as they helped break siege lines, but then people realized that Ravens and Vikings were probably more practical since the game would switch to a full out air war by that time.
They are also better vs Thors (a natural counter to mass Vikings/Ravens) than Viking or Ravens so they do serve some purpose in late game TvT compositions.
|
Aside from the obvious, I feel TvT shows why BC's are so rarely used. During the period when almost every top Terran was meching you had stalemate games where neither player could attack the other. This allowed an air transition to happen - enough time to set up Starports with Tech Labs, get air upgrades, get Ravens, blahblahblah. Air transitions that actually make BC's useful are really hard to set up, and throwing in a couple BC's into a standard composition doesn't really work - if you're going to sacrifice mobility for your army, you'd better make that army damn strong.
So really, the fundamental issue with BC's is that they're not effective enough to make up for the huge investment cost. If you can spend enough money to switch into BC's safely against anything but a meching Terran, you can just go fucking kill your opponent.
|
There could be a point where the metagame shifts and most TvT ends up in BC stalemates. BW TvT had quite a few BCs a few years ago.
|
On January 31 2012 11:11 FuzzyJAM wrote:
So really, the fundamental issue with BC's is that they're not effective enough to make up for the huge investment cost. If you can spend enough money to switch into BC's safely against anything but a meching Terran, you can just go fucking kill your opponent.
This makes tons of sense to me, especially in the "theoretically" termed debate that I always get into.
With this logic, would you then say that this exact idea is the reason that the TOP tier players can rarely make them work?
Is because those top tier'ers don't *allow* their opponent to construct such a reasonably well crafted army with a perfect amount of BC's thrown in?
I mean, that is a fundamental difference between the medium-to-high level ranking players (plat + diamond, and such), and the true Grandmasters of the game, right?
|
I'd assume unless in TvT, they're simply too slow to be in the right place at the right time to invest so much supply/resources in one unit
|
they're too easily countered by P/Z to be used in the respective matchups. In TvT they can be a major trump card with solid upgrades and a good economy (which is fairly often, due to the stalemate type nature of TvT, getting lots of bases isn't too challenging).
|
TvZ and TvP they get hard countered easily.
In TvT battlecruisers have received tremendous use as a unit composition switch. If the opponent has invested too much into marauder/tank or just flat out mech and you have procured a viking lead, a BC switch will often kill him.
|
I experimented some with battlecruiser a while ago in TvZ/TvP. They can be good in all matchups but especially in TvP they are really hard to transition in.
In TvP you need to be at a point where you are maxed, already 3/0 airgrade and have around 2k/2k ressources left with still good income ( atleast 3~basish minining/gasharvesting). That alone make BC only viable on big maps(taldarim) or splittmapscnerios with keymappositions where your opponent Protoss cant Engage. First i think its recommended when it goes to lategame transitions in Tvp that you go 3Ghostacademys nuke, after this BCs areviable if you make the right switch if the scenario is right.
So once you hit 3/0 you can start grading airplatin on your armory and switch to BCs.
I would only cosider it strong if you match all or most of the stated above in one match and also able to sacrifice SCVs and go mass orbital like its used in TvT, while holding keypoint @ Shakuras for example with maybe 1-2planetarys so you can be sure WHILE you sacrifice some of your supply in marinedropps/scvs that you dont die within your battlecruiser switch.
Theyre not any unit that u build and remax, if you go Battlecruiser in TvP its a completly Killmove/allin. If they all die ur mostlikely dead i guess.
I would really try to get mass orbital/Ghostwithcloak/BC 3/3 and try to use scanns to snipe observers, cloak ghost emp everything and kill with mass bc/ghost/bio maybe. Also this mass orbital/Only mule except for gases doesnt only leave u alot of supply for an almost 200/200 Pure army, it also gives u the ability to dropp mass mules to repair battlecruiser infight.
So yes on a very highlevel to match all those things at once where ur BC switch works vs another toptier player is pretty rar but it can be totally worth it. But i would never try to force me in my mindset to play BC in TvP it wont end good  .
|
Marine tank is so prevalent now in TvT after the BFG nerf anyway, you don't get as many stalemates anymore, it's much more back and forth. There isn't much time to safely mass up BCs. MVP made BCs in one of his games against MMA in Blizzcup, didn't go too well for him.
|
1v1: Agreed with most of what's said above.
Actually BC's are pretty good ULTRA LATE GAME against Zerg, Corruptors aren't that good, provided you have Vikings and a Raven (pdd ftw!) and you can Yamato the first couple. However you can't neglect a solid ground force. Which is why most games don't go there.
Most of the reasons given above are correct though, they are a late game "broodlord" basically. Their anti-air defences are far more formidable but you need critical mass of them.
Versus toss BC's actually hold up very well until the high templar show up, or you can EMP your bc's... but really you're better off making more bio instead of BC's. Since if you've EMP'd your BC's you cant yamato their VR's which will cut them up.
|
On January 31 2012 11:05 Lebzetu wrote:
They are used in TvT. God knows why, since Vikings hard counter them and each terran is already massing vikings.
In TvZ, if you go BC, you die to corruptor.
In TvP, they go blink stalkers or void rays.
And above all else, they are expensive, hard to tech to and they have to pay for themselves.
You need like 4+ bases to get them anyway, and terrans cant get to 4+ bases since they dont know how to macro.
Yes but if you have air superiority you can keep your battlecrusiers safe as long as you micro properly.
The reason why they're not used is because it takes a lot of time and money to tech to battlecruisers, so if you do manage to tech to BCs vs P and Z, its likely that you would have won faster if you'd just produced more of the standard unit composition.
The reason it works in TvT is because in TvT, even if you're ahead it is often difficult to actually kill your opponent, which leads to stalemates where one player can come back. A sky terran army can break your opponents siege lines and allow you to finish the game. Personally I think that unless your opponent also has a large (but still smaller because its a waste of time making either banshees or BCs if you don't have more vikings) viking fleet, banshees are superior to BC when you have air superiority, because they have higher dps per supply cost (I think BCs do higher dps with enough of an upgrade advantage), are faster and have cloak which means they can be used in a lot more ways than BCs.
If your opponent also has a large viking fleet banshees are probably worse because your opponent will find it easy to defend them when they're away from your own viking fleet and they are slightly worse than BCs for actually breaking siege lines.
|
I believe oGsTOP vs IMMVP in gsl September finals had bc.
Also believe EmpireHappy vs FnaticToD at dreamhack winter had bcs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
