How come pro Terrans almost never build bunkers? I see them take hits from ling runbys so frequently, and every time I’m thinking, even a single bunker with a single marine in it can go a long way in protecting your expos from a runby. They can also be used to create chokepoints with bigger structures (compared to 2x2 depots). It also buys time for scvs to run away. I don’t think it’s an economic issue, especially when they are floating resources.
1 Like
When you play a race, you figure out why they don’t do what they do. Building a bunker and placing it a sim city location at a 3rd or 4th with marines isn’t always a first priority on top of everything else.
It’s like asking why don’t zerg players always have bangleing traps set around the map, or why protoss players don’t always have stasis traps.
2 Likes
No a similar question would be why don’t Zergs or Protosses use more static defense to defend their outer bases. The answer for Zerg at least is that it’s a supply investment, and it’s not always best to mass static defense, especially when you can speedrun across the map with lings and whatnot. For Protoss, well, they do. They also use stasis traps when they can, but just like the raven, the oracle tends to fall off later in the game.
1 Like
in general the two times you want to build a bunker is either during a roach all in in the early game or at an exposed orbital such as the third base(thats where i put a bunker every game)
i like to put it between the base and one of the gas geysers so the zerglings have less surface area.
if you have yet to master the art of the stim f2 A-move thn you can always just leave units behind.
I guess it’s just an attention thing, a bunker can be destroyed by banes, then you have to rebuild, refill…doing that every time.I agree it can stop runbys, but Z can make some banes and deny the bunker with ease.
What I don’t know why T don’t do, is building bunkers when they are defending a position, many times we see T with minerals defending between the first three bases and being overrun by the enemy and they have no bunkers, why not building 4-5 bunkers when the danger is obvious?.Same when sieging a position, bring 3-4 workers along the army, build bunkers, enjoy the contain and repair mech units with those 3-4 workers.
1 Like
I guess for the same reason that Pro-Protoss suck in designing and building proper static-defense in mid-late game. And no, randomly throwing 2-3 cannons is not Static-Defense.
I guess it is due to an inflated sense of security in the ability to counter the enemy which time and time again causes 5-times more damage in resources (probe and structires lost) and attention (aborting attacks in order to deal with the risks at home)…
Stasis never recovered after the stupid and unfair nerff (stasis on timer).
you have no idea what you are talking about no offense.
They view them as a waste of money. And time.
1 Like
The human stupidity never ceases to impress me. It always can be reduced in the ratio: Resources&Attention spent/Damage to the attacking enemy&Resources and structures saved.
Those last months some Pro-Protossers have shown what a strong SD can do and how it support the deathball for the late-game PvZ.
As about terrans…forget them. It’s a good thing that they are stupid enough to not protect their bases so our WP can wreck them with impunity…
LOL. they save 200-300 in some Bunkers + WM and…suffer 2000-3000 damage from our glorious Zealots.
1 Like
Istead of saying that, how about saying why I was wrong (in case you have some counterpoint and are not trolling)?
ok a bunker has 400 hp banelings deal 80 damage vs structures, 400 / 80 = 5 banelings to kill a bunker PLUS zerglings to do the runby so while you are being hammered by a 300 apm terran do you really want to risk a counter attack?
the only time this move would make sense is if zerg is very far ahead or if it is late game. a bunker WORKS against zergling runbys very well and has won me many games.
Yes, Z pros do it all the time, go with speedlings, attack if there is no bunker, if there is bunker, retreat, make banes and attack again, attacking while being hammered is a way to minimize pressure and make the T look away, if you can do it is better than just reinforcing your defense. Not every player plays with f2, so runbys during important moments can be done, specially because if a T has 300 apm the zerg plays with 600.
1 Like
you are basically trying to argue to me that a bunker isnt worth it in blocking speedling counter attacks yes?
i mean hey if you dont want to build a bunker its cool you can lse 20 scvs to 10 zerglings
on ladder i NEVER take damage to zergling runbys although im sure it can happen but i always deflect them.
No, I think is a good investment, but what I was saying is that maybe other players do not build them because they think that map awareness is enough to stop any agression, being more active instead of more passive and maybe they find a hassle rebuilding and refilling the bunker every time because sometimes when the bunker is destroyed, is not replaced and the base becomes a weak point that is constantly harassed, I’m not inside the mind of a pro player, but there must be some reason behind it, if there is no reason for it, it means they are not good or really careless.
The first 32 marines are dedicated to pressure.
1 Like
There is no rule against making bunkers in the late game
It takes 5 banes to take down a bunker (6 or 8 depending on number of marines in your bunker). The difference is they won’t enter your mineral line right away. The middleground is making supply depots, but even though they give supply, banelings can break down three of them at least. With a bunker, you may lose 0-1 depots if it’s part of a wall. I’ve seen many times where people just leave their mineral lines wide open and then a few banelings roll in when the Terran’s attention is elsewhere. It makes no sense, especially at the pro level. I want to see if anyone in here (or a pro) can convince me it’s not intentional gamethrow or no one in the pro scene has a big enough brain to make bunkers in the late game.
If anything else, building bunkers creates chokepoints and makes it harder for ling/bane to get right into your bio. I understand that a Zerg army is fast and you have to make decisions on the fly (fast paced game and all), but if you KNOW they want to hunt that expansion down, why not make a few bunkers? Sure, if you’re a split god, you can probably make things work, but bunkers absorb 5 banelings on top of giving a buffer for bio to gun down ling/bane. The investment and tradeout is extremely good (as static defense should always trade well).
I have always thought this, but to be fair, it doesn’t work vs Zerg due to creep. I do think you have better chances splitting off creep than making static defense along a line outside of the creep, so I’m with them in that decision. Against Protoss, they do it in allins. I think the reason why they don’t it against Protoss is because of disruptors. Other than that, I don’t see a reason why Terrans don’t build bunkers in the late game offensively. You create chokepoints on the fly so zealots aren’t as likely to shred your bio. They are also much more resistant to storm (the spell that bio players dread so much) and any other splash damage really. It’s a great question for great discussions, but I’m mostly looking for an answer to TvZ and defensive bunkers.
I think when it’s split map, they don’t do a great job of making walls. However, when it’s for the sake of defending their third or fourth (maybe fifth), they do an excellent job of making walls.
I’m talking about TvZ though (Protoss nowhere to be found in this matchup I promise). But I get what you mean. The Terran always tries to get counter damage done with drops, and sometimes they do. They can even snipe a base, but the Zerg has a ton of eco and creep spread at this stage in the game, and they can afford to lose a base if it means wiping your mineral line.
RIP stasis. One of many countless nerfs…
I guess they do. It’s not like they needed that third or fourth base mineral line anyway.
They have some really nice and creative builds. Someone in the pro scene or behind the scene is clearly doing some theory crafting to improve their openers. What I’m wondering is how, among all the pros, has no one decided to make bunkers in the late game? I’ve seen extremely rare instances of bunkers used, but honestly, it goes such a long way. I’m hoping someone can convince me, otherwise, I’m going to assume no pro Terran is smart enough to make that small investment that goes a long way…
This is true. Definitely when you are on 3-4 bases, you don’t really want to make more than one bunker to hold attacks because you are the one attacking, so you need all the fighting units you can get. I guess I forgot to mention it, but I’m mostly talking about the late game, especially in split map situations. Once you have 5 or more bases, a bunker investment goes such a long way, but no pros do it consistently. It BAFFLES me. You have to know as a Terran, that the top level Zergs are going to try to throw in a ling runby at every possible opportunity. And as a pro, you easily have 400+ APM. My APM is 180-210 usually, and I don’t take my advice a majority of the time (but sometimes I do). They are capable of multitask on a completely different level. They should be able to afford the attention and resources to increase their chances of keeping a fifth/sixth base rather than give it up to a ling runby for LITERALLY free, especially when it’s a vulnerable orbital command center floated from the main.
1 Like
The worst wall is that built by Cannons and SB, not only is expensive but also sucks due to banes.
Real defensive Protoss (KingCobra) integrate into walls GW that close the path for Zealots, Zerglings and Banes while Cannons and SB do their work protected.
The Pros might have 400 or even 4000APM but they face other Pros with 400APM. So, not wasting 50 APM due to proper built SD would make them have a 50-APM advantage versus their similarily skilled opponents.
The short answer is that they are expensive. Terran needs resources for other thigs during that time in the game. It is a economy issue. Protoss can throw a ton a shield batteries down and its meh. They more than pay for themselves early on at least. Zerg can build some static D as well and it will pay for itself. Terran throwing bunker down that Z and P can avoid makes it usless in most scenarios. Torrets are also to expensive for terran to throw down. early on.
If only the eonomy was fixed for terran to be on par with the other races.
Turrets are one of the best late game mineral dumps you can invest in. You can go mass planetary and spam turrets everywhere. With SCV’s set to auto-repair. Very powerful.
1 Like
That’s a load of c.rap. Turret has double the DPS of a Cannon and costs half as much (not calculating the Pylon needed to power it). Bunkers are cheap and salvageable.
As about avoiding, use your head and place where they can not be avoided or avoided with heavy costs.
It’s precisely this mentality that makes terrans play with 500MMR disadvantage in mid-late game both in TvP and TvZ.
Why bother with SD? Better whine here in the forum of how a Zergling runby or a WP wrecked your bases.
How typical terran…
1 Like