          
Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Updated
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web Client | | New to Team Liquid? Register here! | | | | |
|
 Purind Canada. October 27 2006 14:10. Posts 2822 | Profile Blog |
Hey, in recent Rock games, I've noticed he makes heavy use of reavers. Not only does he harrass like hell with his first reaver (standard), but he persists in his reaver tactics. This season, I recall.... I believe 3 PvT's where he persistently goes reaver. One of them was on Arkanoid, so that's pretty understandable, but I believe 2 of them were on Tau Cross, really standard maps that I wouldn't imagine reavers to be particularly good on.
Anyway, I was wondering how good of a strategy you feel this is (to keep going reavers even after your initial harrass), particularly on land maps. Obviously, it's good enough for a progamer to use in a huge game, but can you consistently win with it? Is it a one shot thing?
+ Show Spoiler +
As I recall, Rock got totally bashed vs. Light when he used this. However, he was behind from the very beginning (failed proxies) and he was STILL able to hold his own with very good reaver defense. So that game maybe was not a good indication of the full potential of the strat
In the recent game vs. Goodfriend, he won, though he was not as persistent with reaver (he still built a second reaver even after losing his shuttle), and it is very VERY clear that he won as a result of his decisions with his zealots and carriers, NOT because of his reavers.
Neither game indicates clearly the effectiveness of his strat. But do you like it? (Rock likes it obviously) Under which situations is it good?
Edit: TY I put spoilers instead of spoilerLast edit: 2006-10-27 14:13:40 |
| |
|
 fonger New Zealand. October 27 2006 14:12. Posts 1152 | Profile Blog | |
|
|
 skyglow1 New Zealand. October 27 2006 14:30. Posts 3923 | Profile Blog |
| Well if you feel your reaver micro is solid and you're confident with it, then its a good idea. Also you have to have decent multitask so that you slow down T's economy and macro by harassing scvs/units/buildings in general while building up probes/expansions/gates/units yourself. Furthermore, if you go reaver tech as your opening build, it makes sense to utilize the money you spent on your robotics support bay (is that what its called?) by building more than 1 reaver. Reaver can also help you if you need to stop an earlier push, and keeps the terran in check and generally scared. He'll have to spend money or time on defense while you happily macro away. You also get alot of scouting done if you keep your shuttle alive. Last edit: 2006-10-27 14:43:30 |
|
|
 X [jOyO] United States. October 27 2006 14:59. Posts 920 | Profile |
reavers piss me off when used really well. fo example if the toss reaver drops and gets a few scvs then just fucks around in my base i am forced to either make more turrets than i want to or pull back my rush and first few tanks to defend. if you do have the macro capabilities then it is a good idea. reavers also destroy joyo and FE strats imo.
im talking joyo into FE or 1fact tank/vult/rine into FE, NOT 1fact sieged tank FELast edit: 2006-10-27 14:59:52 |
| | You must notta heard me PARTNA! |
|
|
 gg_hertzz October 27 2006 15:26. Posts 2087 | Profile Blog |
| Reavers and DTs can give you a great head start when used well in the first 10 minutes. |
|
|
| Purind Canada. October 27 2006 15:52. Posts 2822 | Profile Blog |
On October 27 2006 14:30 skyglow1 wrote:
Well if you feel your reaver micro is solid and you're confident with it, then its a good idea. Also you have to have decent multitask so that you slow down T's economy and macro by harassing scvs/units/buildings in general while building up probes/expansions/gates/units yourself. Furthermore, if you go reaver tech as your opening build, it makes sense to utilize the money you spent on your robotics support bay (is that what its called?) by building more than 1 reaver. Reaver can also help you if you need to stop an earlier push, and keeps the terran in check and generally scared. He'll have to spend money or time on defense while you happily macro away. You also get alot of scouting done if you keep your shuttle alive.
Well, the drawback being if you don't do a great amount of damage with your reaver, he'll attack move and you'll have no way of defending (OK, maybe you'll defend, but you'll be in a very bad position)
The way I saw it (the way Rock used the strat), he tried to play it like how a zerg uses mutas, keep the T in his base and worried, making it safe to tech
+ Show Spoiler +
Though he did not successfully do so (making it safe to tech) in any of his games
|
| |
|
| DJEtterStyle United States. October 27 2006 15:58. Posts 2605 | Profile Blog |
Reaver is one of the safest all-around PvT builds on any map, and it's--bar none--the best build on maps with cliffs above their naturals or mains (LT, Jungle Story, Tau Cross, Legacy of Char). The key to continued reaver harrass is to not do it blindly. If you scout opportunities with observers and saved your opening shuttle but lost the reaver, by all means, make another reaver or two and continue to harrass. But to just blindly make additional reavers in the hopes that you'll find an opening isn't a great idea; reavers cost 325/100 after you add in the inital five scarabs. That's two zealots and a dragoon--not an investment to jump into unless you're certain that you'll do damage.
A great example of what well-scouted reaver harrass can accomplish can be seen in the recent match between Bisu and Yooi on Arcadia (I'm not sure what league). |
| | Sometimes I have unique thoughts. |
|
|
| skyglow1 New Zealand. October 27 2006 16:02. Posts 3923 | Profile Blog |
On October 27 2006 15:52 Purind wrote:
Show nested quote +On October 27 2006 14:30 skyglow1 wrote:
Well if you feel your reaver micro is solid and you're confident with it, then its a good idea. Also you have to have decent multitask so that you slow down T's economy and macro by harassing scvs/units/buildings in general while building up probes/expansions/gates/units yourself. Furthermore, if you go reaver tech as your opening build, it makes sense to utilize the money you spent on your robotics support bay (is that what its called?) by building more than 1 reaver. Reaver can also help you if you need to stop an earlier push, and keeps the terran in check and generally scared. He'll have to spend money or time on defense while you happily macro away. You also get alot of scouting done if you keep your shuttle alive.
Well, the drawback being if you don't do a great amount of damage with your reaver, he'll attack move and you'll have no way of defending (OK, maybe you'll defend, but you'll be in a very bad position) The way I saw it (the way Rock used the strat), he tried to play it like how a zerg uses mutas, keep the T in his base and worried, making it safe to tech + Show Spoiler +
Though he did not successfully do so (making it safe to tech) in any of his games
Well thats why you gotta be confident in your shuttle/reaver micro and be able to exploit holes in the defense whenever possible. If he makes so much defense that you can't do much, then the money put into your reaver is worth it. |
|
|
 Knickknack United States. October 27 2006 17:14. Posts 1073 | Profile |
A great example of what well-scouted reaver harrass can accomplish can be seen in the recent match between Bisu and Yooi on Arcadia (I'm not sure what league).
http://www.crunchyroll.com/showmedia?id=3450
Reavers seem to me one of those highly situation and chance based things. It comes down to if t prepared well enough for reavers. If T is not then going reaver is great. But, if they are prepared well vs reaver, then you can gain an advantage by simply not going reaver, and going for the earlier expo, etc. Toss typically decides to do reaver before he knows if the ts build will be sufficiently anti-reaver.
Reactionary reaver is safer overall i suppose, but who's to say they wont prepare well enough in the extra time they were given.
It seems there are some clear situations where going reaver can cause early loss. Some midas vs p on paranoid comes to mind. take 12/3 on lt, p goes reaver t goes for hard ground. P typically wont have the units to withstand the attack. Another game iloveoov vs p on enterthedragon, he saw robo before goon and assumed reaver, so he went to attack with the first few units knowing that would at least buy him some time while the p delt with his attack.
Meh, maybe someone can explain reaver use better. I see persistent reavers pretty much the same, cost/benefit analysis if its worth it. Sometimes is sometimes isn't.
|
| | | www.ArtofProtoss.vze.com | |
|
|
 ManaBlue Canada. October 27 2006 21:58. Posts 10420 | Profile Blog |
Rock has had good opportunities to do it though Sushi.
+ Show Spoiler +
In the GF game you referenced, he was playing against a CC first Terran. So a harass build is suitable. In the Shine game, he was playing a super aggressive strategy with proxies into reaver into fast carriers. I've never really noticed Rock reavering all that much, except recently. And some of those games I'd say it was a reaction to his opponent, like the GF one. If I had to pick a signature for Rock, I'd say his 3 gate pressure builds with kamikazi zealots to kill mines vs a midas style fast expo terran is it. But that's just me.  |
| | TL VOD legends: Live2Win, hasuprotoss, Cadical, rinizim, Mani, thedeadhaji, Kennigit, SonuvBob, yakii, fw, pheer, CDRdude, pholon, Uraeus, zatic, baezzi. The contributors make this site what it is. *Props to FakeSteve for respecting the guitar gods* |
|
|
| Purind Canada. October 27 2006 22:19. Posts 2822 | Profile Blog |
That makes sense, but his reaver didn't do much in either game
+ Show Spoiler +
In the GF game, it made sense to go reaver. But even after his first drop was done (he lost a reaver AND shuttle), he went ahead and got ANOTHER reaver AND shuttle. Most people would view that as a waste, and in that situation it definitely was.
In his game vs. Light, again, reaver made sense, though it totally failed as Light was totally prepared for it. Despite that, his reaver defense seemed to do more than it should have
I guess the main problem is, Rock used some interesting strategy, and because of how ugly the games turned out, we never got to see it's true potential.Last edit: 2006-10-27 22:20:22 |
| |
|
 BboyRain Korea (South). October 27 2006 22:25. Posts 85 | Profile |
| reavers are best choice if u can use them like intotherainbow |
| | Seong C. Kim ... aka. nada_sk / yellos |
|
|
 Mr_Pink United States. October 28 2006 07:34. Posts 338 | Profile |
I always use reavers they are extreamly effective vs T.  Altough it's hard to keep your macro up from the other units.  |
| |
|
 EvilTeletubby Baltimore, USA. October 28 2006 08:37. Posts 13164 | Profile Blog |
| I've never been a fan of persistent Reavers, and I have actually noticed it a lot from Rock and iirc Bisu did it a couple times too. It just seems like it has diminishing returns... IMO the point of a reaver build is to catch the T off guard and net some SCV kills/harass in general, and to put the T on a bit of a defensive... but the thing is, once the T knows you're doing that, they've already thrown up their turrets and laid mines/maybe sieged a tank or two, so those little gaps/opportunies close up pretty quick. Granted, once T thinks a reaver threat is over, they may, you know, take their tanks out of their main, but they're still a bit more alert/on edge for it to happen again, and it's just very rare I see reavers doing worthwhile damage after one or two have drops have already been made. Last edit: 2006-10-28 08:37:43 |
| | http://carbonleaf.yuku.com/topic/408/t/So-I-proposed-at-a-Carbon-Leaf-concert.html |
|
|
 ShabZzoY! Great Britain. October 28 2006 08:48. Posts 760 | Profile |
| I feel its best to simply keep the first reaver alive and continuously look for safe openings to cause damage and generally distract the terran |
|
|
| Purind Canada. October 28 2006 14:50. Posts 2822 | Profile Blog |
From what I could tell, Rock was defending well with reavers, and was able to prolong games that seemed long lost.
So, to use reavers like that along with your regular army (breaking pushes and such), I always thought it was either bad or really really impossible to control. Rock doesn't seem to think so.
are reavers good to go along with your regular army (or atleast to use in defense)? Are zealot/goon/storm better 95% of the time? |
| |
|
 GeneralCash Croatia. October 29 2006 01:17. Posts 318 | Profile |
defending with reavers is just so ez, since there are no turrets. they are great followups to fe build to defend vs jojo or fd attacks since they rape vultures (and coupled with shuttles, they also rape tanks without turrets). personaly, i like to drop dt after a reaver drop. this way i keep harassing, but also get most of my tech tree done.
being persistent with reavers is not a good idea unless you have 250 (spamless) apm and can macro/expand/defend eficiently, while keeping your reaver harassing. |
|
|
| DaZe Sweden. October 29 2006 03:16. Posts 2043 | Profile |
| reavers are kinda bad to drop vs terran army's. Not in beginning when so few units but when terran goes out with 120+ or so, its useless to drop reaver, it will get killed before any shots ... |
|
|
 NeO)PhOeNiX Canada. October 29 2006 08:38. Posts 245 | Profile Blog |
doing persistant reaver antics is good because usually terran players will lower their defences thinking that they wont be expecting another reaver drop, and the BAM! 12 scvs gone  But don't forget to build units/stay on top of your pylon production/scout while you're dropping... |
| |
|
 SuperJongMan Jamaica. October 29 2006 12:32. Posts 10230 | Profile |
On October 29 2006 01:17 GeneralCash wrote:
being persistent with reavers is not a good idea unless you have 250 (spamless) apm and can macro/expand/defend eficiently, while keeping your reaver harassing.
lol.. right. 250 APM. Yup. That's the APM quota for using reavers... persistantly... |
| | POWER OVERWHELMING ! ! ! KRUU~ KRUU~ |
|
|
| | 1 2 Next All |
|
|
|
 |
|
      
|