EPTTvP Marauder Cheese - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
discordfighting
United States39 Posts
| ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
If they nerf maurds they need to only nerf them so they are affected early game. I think if the slow ability just required a research at the tech lab and costs 100/100 or 75/75 (either be cheep, take a long time, or a compromise) that should stop the early maurd push from being too powerful since zealots would actually be useful vs them. | ||
|
hellitsaboutme
Singapore118 Posts
Maradeurs>Immortals. Terran gets four maradeurs to the cost of one Immortal. If there is EMP then Maradeurs>>>>>>Immortal. | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
Reducing Marauder damage vs Light units a little would be a great solution, I think. Make it so, if they want to spam that one unit, they have to kite Zealots across the entire map while Stalkers/Sentries/Immortals plod along at a snail's pace taking the odd pot-shot, making them a horrible, horrible choice. Right now they just kill them too damn quick, particularly when Stims enters the field, never giving the Protoss' ranged units a chance to cause any casualties. Once that happens, Terrans will depend on Marines more, to take on those Zealots and won't have as many Marauders to decimate the remainder of the Protoss' army once the Zealots are dead. When all Zealots are dead and he has nothing but Immortals, Stalkers and Sentries versus a bunch of Marauders left...good luck. Cut down the number of Marauders, up the number of Marines they need to pull off this tactic (which is what they SHOULD be doing anyway) and things get more sensible. I'd really like to see them do something with the Reaper, too. So we can see some more interesting T1/1.5 battles between all 3 options of each race. Not just 1 from Zerg, 1 from Terran and 3 from Protoss. | ||
|
Deleted User 31060
3788 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:44 Slick348 wrote: One of the things I'm talking about, come up with things to back up your statement and not just say stupid and pointless things like "sound's like you need an ice pack", grow up... Sometimes there has to be some changes if things are clearly unbalanced. If there's a counter it must be a hella hard to counter it with the terran barely even trying, things like someone trying extremely hard comparing for someone doing something extremely easy counts in the balance section as well just in case you didn't know. This is a strategy forum. Despite all your complaining, you fail to offer any ideas or strategy to try to combat the marauders. They may be strong, but so are zealots in SC1. Are Zealots strong? Sure. We see them in every matchup. But they're not considered 'overpowered' because people have come up with ideas to combat them. As for the Marauder deal, how about trying early harass builds? Air units? Colossi? Until Blizzard patches the game, there's nothing you can do but brainstorm ideas that might work. On April 02 2010 10:52 discordfighting wrote: I love how almost every single topic since the beta opened has been about "unit a hard counters unit b and is hard countered by unit c." I wish Day9 were here to drop the knowledge. Me too. What a god among mortals. | ||
|
Tor
Canada231 Posts
| ||
|
Whiplash
United States2928 Posts
| ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:52 discordfighting wrote: I love how almost every single topic since the beta opened has been about "unit a hard counters unit b and is hard countered by unit c." I wish Day9 were here to drop the knowledge. The problem is not hard counters related. The problem is that there's no better option than mass maras, no better option than making roaches, and no better option than making immortals, even vs their supposed hard counters. What we're looking for is a way to make marauders not the most overwhelmingly best choice, a choice so strong you can make them vs ANY protoss army and still be ok, even zealot/templar. It takes a lot of time to finally crumble to a protoss who makes the perfect army to fight you. Right now the marauder is totally the dragoon of sc2. It's stupid strong vs everything, BUT it's far better because you have stim and medivac healing, and slowing attack. If the dragoon was so strong you couldn't not make them in BW, marauders are so strong you can't even think about making anything else. That's the problem. | ||
|
discordfighting
United States39 Posts
On April 02 2010 11:03 Floophead_III wrote: The problem is not hard counters related. The problem is that there's no better option than mass maras, no better option than making roaches, and no better option than making immortals, even vs their supposed hard counters. What we're looking for is a way to make marauders not the most overwhelmingly best choice, a choice so strong you can make them vs ANY protoss army and still be ok, even zealot/templar. It takes a lot of time to finally crumble to a protoss who makes the perfect army to fight you. Right now the marauder is totally the dragoon of sc2. It's stupid strong vs everything, BUT it's far better because you have stim and medivac healing, and slowing attack. If the dragoon was so strong you couldn't not make them in BW, marauders are so strong you can't even think about making anything else. That's the problem. Oh no, I wasn't suggesting the root of the problem was hard counter related, but more that much on the conversation on this thread (and the strategy forums in general) is broken down to "hardcounter" this and "oh em eph gee imba" that. | ||
|
L0thar
987 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:22 Slick348 wrote: I don't have a beta key, although I've had experience in SC1 and a lot of balancing experience in many other games. But from what i've seen, Terran has been winning all TVP and I'm talking about pro matches, not just your casual SC2 players. The reason for terran probably losing to protoss players is probably because there's way more protoss players than terran and well the terran either slipped up very bad/trying something new or there were no good Terran players at the time lol. Could you possibly be even more arrogant? You have zero experience with actually playing SC2, yet you easily discredit recent results from PlayXP (where participate very good players) basically just by "The terrans there were bad lolz". You ask other people for proofs of their claims, yet your only arguments are "I have seen some stuff". Seriously what the fuck? I won't even comment about marauders (im)balance, because I know there are many more competent people than me, but I have to say something. | ||
|
sikatrix
Canada172 Posts
| ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
On April 02 2010 11:36 sikatrix wrote: do we whine about the immortal slow in here too? or where. I also believe 90% of the toss saying marauders are op have never built a sentry. The Immortal what? | ||
|
Trowabarton756
United States870 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:23 nujgnoy wrote: Also, the difference 1~2 colossi and immortals make is so much greater than the difference 1~2 tanks/medivacs/vikings make. Colossus hard counters bio with proper micro and immortals provide a timing attack opportunity for FEing terrans because it melts everything armored like the bunker. Sieged tanks can't be microed and without the ramp advantage they're not that difficult to kill. Vikings exist only to take down colossi, and they take heavy fire from stalkers. This is what I've experienced in plat TvP since the beta. But for all I know I might be wrong. I'll actually try mid/lategame focusing on mass marauder myself and see how it fares up in platinum TvP. Right now I highly doubt that this would favor the terran vs a standard though. ...right cause the vikings range is only 9(default value) and stalkers are range 6, you're just doing it wrong. | ||
|
hellitsaboutme
Singapore118 Posts
It's too obvious that massed maradeurs make games monotonous and boring, which is not what Blizzard wants. | ||
|
RatherGood
Canada147 Posts
| ||
|
RatherGood
Canada147 Posts
On April 02 2010 12:05 hellitsaboutme wrote: I'm sure maradeurs will be nerfed and some other thing will be buffed in coming patches. It's too obvious that massed maradeurs make games monotonous and boring, which is not what Blizzard wants. I agree, it is boring. The game needs diversity. I can't see them nerfing Marauders though because they already did a substantial nerf to Marines. Marauder are the only solid unit you can really mass early on. | ||
|
KungKras
Sweden484 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:32 Sunyveil wrote: need an ice pack? You sound really butthurt. People really need to stop complaining and start coming up with ideas of how to play the system, not on how to redesign it. Becasue that's what beta testing is all about. Learning to play the system... | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
A good player will not let his marauders take a single dam hit in early game PvT. | ||
|
nujgnoy
United States204 Posts
On April 02 2010 11:55 Trowabarton756 wrote: ...right cause the vikings range is only 9(default value) and stalkers are range 6, you're just doing it wrong. In a p unit formation, colossi are in the back or in the middle. Zealots and stalkers are in the front. You simply have to back off your colos, and if the vikings follow the colossi, stalkers between the two units can attack them. By "you're just doing it wrong" logic, once sieged tanks come out, every P and Z would have to go air because sieged tanks outrange all ground units. | ||
|
Reuental
United States457 Posts
On April 02 2010 10:52 discordfighting wrote: I love how almost every single topic since the beta opened has been about "unit a hard counters unit b and is hard countered by unit c." I wish Day9 were here to drop the knowledge. This times infinity. I think that the phrase 'hard counter' should be temporarily banned on teamliquid until people stop using it excessively and using it too describe any situation that a unit beats another unit. I know what I just said is impossible but it really is ridiculous. I am now going to describe Starcraft 1s unit interactions with the current lingo that is used in the SC2 beta forums. Defiler hard counters bio. Tanks hard counter Hydralisks. Goliaths hard counter Mutalisks. Vessals hard counter Defilers. Zealots hard counter tanks. Goons hard counter Vultures. Archons hard counter mutalisks. Lurkers hard counter Zealots. What I just said sounds totally ridiculous right? I think we seriously need to correct how we describe things here because certain phrases such as 'hard counter' over simplify things WAY too much and in the end it will be harder to really discuss strategy if we use phrases that are so black and white. I'll probably get flamed for this but whatever. | ||
| ||
