Phi vs Sicarius
A 1v1 ranked game on Sentry Point (3 player)
Final result, Victory for me at 27 minutes.
The game was plagued with a fairly high but consistent lag, so it seemed to take much longer than it did, giving me a constant feeling of being "behind", in the sense that my economy and tech didn't feel as advanced as they should be for any given moment.
General Strategy
I opted for a ground-centric approach. I also determined right from the start that I wanted to take the 3rd starting point if I could. Initially I conceived of it as a resource base, however it became the linchpin of my final assault late game.
Sicarius had a more balanced approach, with both ground and air, and managed to maintain an economy that matched mine despite the lack of the 3rd starting place. Most interestingly this seemed to be achieved by the production of a small number of t1 mass fabs as a substitute for the extraction points he couldn't reach. Since I never upgraded most of mine past t1 it worked fine.
My tactics
My primary failure was my very light-handed approach to anti-air. I came too close several times to having insufficient AA to deal with what was eventually a t2 gunship threat, although never in large numbers.
I did have particular success in my use of terrain however, with a significant part of the game spent south of my base in a forward position that had a number of compelling qualities.
The first, and major one was that it was the main choke between the two bases. While there was a possibility of a strike via the western entrance forces could be easily diverted.
Other benefits were that it was in easy range for solid T1 radar coverage, the civilian outpost provided additional fire over part of the access way, and a unique twist in the terrain meant that I could place artillery units "below" the hill, allowing them to fire without receiving fire.
My dual-sided approach paid off, with both bases finally acting in concert to deliver a pincer on his only base. Sicarius showed a limited ability to identify weak points and continued to hammer on my strongest fortification for the majority of the game.
Sicarius
Of interest was his build order (1-2-1 Land which I haven't seen before), and his light but appropriate use of mass fabs to keep his economy even (or in some cases, ahead).
His most significant practical issue was that he failed to deploy any kind of radar. While his visual intel was superior to mine, the lack of radar put his units at a serious firing disadvantage and often caused him to make poor judgements about my range.
At a more strategic level, he simply failed to adapt to the position I created. The forward position was not close enough to provide a significant threat (with the exception of artillery), and my (numerous) weak points went utterly unexploited until late in the game, at which point it was too late.
He also had a tendency to send him small, unformed batches of units (possibly through a lack of familiarity with the formation commands) where a larger, more disciplined force with radar might have been sufficient to push me off my "hill".
Overall
The game was remarkably fast paced for all the lag, constant attacks meant that construction at the "front" was slow and units needed replacement regularly. The need to keep Sicarius focused on the front position and the imaginary "threat" it represented meant I had to push forces forward several times into uncomfortable positions to force him to react.
Watching the replay, it was clear from reasonably early on that I was going to win, but it certainly didn't feel like it until near the end.
Replay
Final result, Victory for me at 27 minutes.
The game was plagued with a fairly high but consistent lag, so it seemed to take much longer than it did, giving me a constant feeling of being "behind", in the sense that my economy and tech didn't feel as advanced as they should be for any given moment.
General Strategy
I opted for a ground-centric approach. I also determined right from the start that I wanted to take the 3rd starting point if I could. Initially I conceived of it as a resource base, however it became the linchpin of my final assault late game.
Sicarius had a more balanced approach, with both ground and air, and managed to maintain an economy that matched mine despite the lack of the 3rd starting place. Most interestingly this seemed to be achieved by the production of a small number of t1 mass fabs as a substitute for the extraction points he couldn't reach. Since I never upgraded most of mine past t1 it worked fine.
My tactics
My primary failure was my very light-handed approach to anti-air. I came too close several times to having insufficient AA to deal with what was eventually a t2 gunship threat, although never in large numbers.
I did have particular success in my use of terrain however, with a significant part of the game spent south of my base in a forward position that had a number of compelling qualities.
The first, and major one was that it was the main choke between the two bases. While there was a possibility of a strike via the western entrance forces could be easily diverted.
Other benefits were that it was in easy range for solid T1 radar coverage, the civilian outpost provided additional fire over part of the access way, and a unique twist in the terrain meant that I could place artillery units "below" the hill, allowing them to fire without receiving fire.
My dual-sided approach paid off, with both bases finally acting in concert to deliver a pincer on his only base. Sicarius showed a limited ability to identify weak points and continued to hammer on my strongest fortification for the majority of the game.
Sicarius
Of interest was his build order (1-2-1 Land which I haven't seen before), and his light but appropriate use of mass fabs to keep his economy even (or in some cases, ahead).
His most significant practical issue was that he failed to deploy any kind of radar. While his visual intel was superior to mine, the lack of radar put his units at a serious firing disadvantage and often caused him to make poor judgements about my range.
At a more strategic level, he simply failed to adapt to the position I created. The forward position was not close enough to provide a significant threat (with the exception of artillery), and my (numerous) weak points went utterly unexploited until late in the game, at which point it was too late.
He also had a tendency to send him small, unformed batches of units (possibly through a lack of familiarity with the formation commands) where a larger, more disciplined force with radar might have been sufficient to push me off my "hill".
Overall
The game was remarkably fast paced for all the lag, constant attacks meant that construction at the "front" was slow and units needed replacement regularly. The need to keep Sicarius focused on the front position and the imaginary "threat" it represented meant I had to push forces forward several times into uncomfortable positions to force him to react.
Watching the replay, it was clear from reasonably early on that I was going to win, but it certainly didn't feel like it until near the end.
Replay
Labels: supcom
posted by PhiRatE at
11:39 PM
<< Home