🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.games.starcraft
Article #292120

Re: Battlecruiser vs. Carrier

#292120
From: Luc The Perverse
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 06:32
33 lines
2556 bytes
"Jon" <dini...@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1179453466.827935.227160@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> It would be easy to setup a test.
>> So someone less lazy than me go do it
> Thanks guys.
> That's pretty much what I thought the result would be.
> Unfortunately, the only time we tested BC vs. Car was a direct
> assault, during which the BC would obviously win.
> My friend is not available to test his hit-and-run theory. If he does
> in fact have such awesome control.

Unless you guys are playing BGH!!nr20mins - it shouldn't be "just carriers 
on BCs".  There should be some support units, Ghosts, High Templars, Science 
Vessel - maybe a shield battery etc.

Usually if I am making a carrier fleet - I will have one or two shield 
batteries to run back to for recharging purposes.  (Of course I usually lose 
too - so what do I know.)

I made a test map once where you have a number of rounds in which you are 
greatly outnumbered for firepower, but you had a series of caster units that 
you could use to defend and attack with.  (A sort of 1 player micro practice 
map.)

I practiced things like lockdown - but some of the most amazing results came 
from doing weird stuff, like putting a defensive matrix on a pair of 
firebats - stim packing them and then having them take hits while marines 
pwned lings.

--
LTP

:) 
Technical Details
Message-ID: <sttvh4-b8g.ln1@loki.cmears.id.au>
Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!newsfeeder.syd.optusnet.com.au!news.optusnet.com.au!newsfeed.pacific.net.au!token.pipenetworks.com!218.100.2.59.MISMATCH!not-for-mail
References: <1179387227.008384.71360@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <f2h88r$7c4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <5p6uh4-ebd.ln1@loki.cmears.id.au> <1179453466.827935.227160@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!newsfeeder.syd.optusnet.com.au!news.optusnet.com.au!newsfeed.pacific.net.au!token.pipenetworks.com!218.100.2.59.MISMATCH!not-for-mail
From: "Luc The Perverse" <sll_noSpamli...@cc.usu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.games.starcraft
References: <1179387227.008384.71360@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>   <f2h88r$7c4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>   <5p6uh4-ebd.ln1@loki.cmears.id.au> <1179453466.827935.227160@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Battlecruiser vs. Carrier
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 23:32:44 -0700
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
Message-ID: <sttvh4-b8g.ln1@loki.cmears.id.au>
Lines: 35
NNTP-Posting-Host: 121.44.254.79
X-Trace: 1179472082 un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au 4610 121.44.254.79:41019
X-Complaints-To: Abuse, including message IDs to ab...@pipenetworks.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit