|
On April 02 2010 12:29 nujgnoy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 11:55 Trowabarton756 wrote: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. 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.
Cannot vikings flank? The are flying units.
3 Vikings slighly more expensive than one colossus. If you lose one or two viking while attackin a colossus that's worth it. Believe me.
Remember stalkers still have to fight maradeurs.
With a decent micro it's pretty easy to take out colossus. Top players are not buildin colossus anymore coz vikings easily counter them.
you're just doing it wrong - that was true
|
On April 02 2010 11:29 adelarge wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 10:22 Slick348 wrote:On April 02 2010 10:13 ploy wrote:
It's surprising to me how many people are willing to jump on the OP bandwagon even though, unless I'm mistaken, the last PlayXP tournament had many terran losing to protoss players (and no terran players in the final 4 I believe?)
There must be a way to hold them off other than complaining about them. 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.
Wow lol, do you actually think that people can't see that their imbalanced by watching multiple videos? You'll mostly know more about the game from watching videos than playing the game. I catch on games fast trust me, this goes with any kind of game. This is why i say i have a lot of experience in balance and i'm usually right. That's why i want people to send me games where protoss win so i could be proved wrong. And i talk about this a lot because when a lot of people talk they look into changing things. So don't start "seriously what the F***" before seeing someones point of view. Now could someone send me a link where PROTOSS WINS
|
On April 02 2010 13:33 Slick348 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 11:29 adelarge wrote:On April 02 2010 10:22 Slick348 wrote:On April 02 2010 10:13 ploy wrote:
It's surprising to me how many people are willing to jump on the OP bandwagon even though, unless I'm mistaken, the last PlayXP tournament had many terran losing to protoss players (and no terran players in the final 4 I believe?)
There must be a way to hold them off other than complaining about them. 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. Wow lol, do you actually think that people can't see that their imbalanced by watching multiple videos? You'll mostly know more about the game from watching videos than playing the game. I catch on games fast trust me, this goes with any kind of game. This is why i say i have a lot of experience in balance and i'm usually right. That's why i want people to send me games where protoss win so i could be proved wrong. And i talk about this a lot because when a lot of people talk they look into changing things. So don't start "seriously what the F***" before seeing someones point of view. Now could someone send me a link where PROTOSS WINS
You are still missing the point. Random guy without beta with couple of post coming into SC2 strategy forum claiming marauders are imbalaced and asking other people to prove him wrong...it doesn't work that way. It should be *you* who support your statements with hard fact first and then we can talk.
If some platinum protoss switches to terran, beat the hell out of other platinum protosses with the imbalanced marauder spam (because it's so easy, right?), come here and post the replays, I will be among the first who would say "Oh crap, Blizzard needs to look at it asap!"
And yes, there may be some people who could find imbalanced stuff just by analyzing videos. But for every one of them there is like 999 whiners who believe they are also the chosen ones but in reality know nothing. You've never said anything which would send you in the first group. Why should people even waste their time sending you replays?
You have to learn that you must usually prove your worth before people start to take you seriously.
|
The thread was originally about a particular Terran build order. Not so much the giant ball of marauders itself.
Yes, late game a well mixed protoss army can defeat a large blob of marauders. What the OP was about, (and this is something i've been seriously struggling with myself), is the 10-rax rallied straight to your base marauder build.
The first marauder shows up as your cyber core is finishing. With micro, a marauder defeats one zealot without taking a hit. One on one, a marauder defeats a stalker. The mix of units needed to beat off the super early marauder push is very hard to get quickly. Myself, Storr, and Orb just did some practice games in trying to hold this off, and yes, sometimes the protoss was able to fend it off. That is, with two gateways in their own base they were able to defeat 1 rax attack from across the map. That's seriously messed up.
After 4 or 5 minutes of intense micro battles, the terran has to retreat. The end result though is that the Terran has been building 100/25 units off of one barracks, while the toss has been making a mix of 100/0, 125/50, and 50/100 units off of two gates. Once this early game dance is over, the Terran usually has an expansion up, 4-5 more barracks starting to build, and is ready to start the midgame. The protoss on the other hand is still exhausted thinking, "holy shit I just barely held that off".
I don't mind marauders that much later in the game. It's the super fast 1 or 2rax pushes that crush me consistently. And many of the times that I do hold those rushes off it's because my opponent does not have great micro, and my zealots killed marauders.
|
On April 02 2010 08:53 Slick348 wrote:
Mauraders counter
Zealots(even if they have charge)
I loled hard... Be serious if you have zealots with charge and can't kill marauders you get getting out resources + macroed. A marauder needs to hit a single zealot 15 freakin times.
|
Maradeur > Zealot
> Stalker
> Sentry
> Roach
> Zergling (Yes yes stimmed maradeurs kill speedlings)
which means maradeurs beat all basic tier 1 units or any combination cost to cost.
That is pretty clear it's overpowered in it's tech depth.
If there is any balance, then it is stupid balance. Why protoss has to fight terran tier1 units with high tech units (Immortals/HT)?
For people who say charged zealots counter maradeur: Do you even know how expensive and time consuming to get that upgrade? You cannot keep up with terran's mass maradeurs, any slight delay in army production is autolose.
|
You guys are spending more effort arguing with slick than simply directing him to a replay where maruaders gets destroyed by protoss. How about just pointing some out?
I'm terran myself and even I have to admit that the unit pretty cheesy.
|
i don't see sentries and zealots happening in that time frame - those replays are indeed disturbing.
and i dont want choke cannon to become obligatory right off the bat either -.-
|
TvP is a nightmare, honestly. From my experience in the last few days, the only games that go beyond early-mid game are ones where some sort of early rush or push has failed. The chance that both players will play even remotely "standard" is nil. Things were bad with the SCV/Marine rush, but now that it's been completely overnerfed, things are even more messed up.
Terrans are using this Marauder strategy and owning any hints of early tech Protoss has. Protoss respond by just going proxy 2gate, which is a pain in the ass to deal with considering SCV numbers and hp, and Marine build time.
If for some reason neither of those happen (or in some cases even if), it's normally early banshees or one of the quick immortal pushes that are so damn effective.
I'd love to see some action taken vs this specifically that doesn't have any serious impact on other parts of the game, but I just don't see it happening. PvT is pretty far protoss favored in the lategame, and a straight up nerf to Marauders isn't going to make things any easier. At least not while terran mech is so laughably countered in the matchup.
|
On April 02 2010 12:48 Crabman123 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
It seems to me that most units could outmicro their hardcounter in SC1 (you could unsiege a tank and kite the zealots chasing you, or you could spread out your mutalisks to kill an archon).
However, most hardcounters in SC2 are nearly impossible to outmicro in my experience, but I could be wrong on that. For example, Immortals versus pure Siege tanks on low ground will always win. I guess stimmed marines can outmicro banelings, but it's still not as common.
|
On April 02 2010 14:33 Haemonculus wrote:
The thread was originally about a particular Terran build order. Not so much the giant ball of marauders itself.
Yes, late game a well mixed protoss army can defeat a large blob of marauders. What the OP was about, (and this is something i've been seriously struggling with myself), is the 10-rax rallied straight to your base marauder build.
The first marauder shows up as your cyber core is finishing. With micro, a marauder defeats one zealot without taking a hit. One on one, a marauder defeats a stalker. The mix of units needed to beat off the super early marauder push is very hard to get quickly. Myself, Storr, and Orb just did some practice games in trying to hold this off, and yes, sometimes the protoss was able to fend it off. That is, with two gateways in their own base they were able to defeat 1 rax attack from across the map. That's seriously messed up.
After 4 or 5 minutes of intense micro battles, the terran has to retreat. The end result though is that the Terran has been building 100/25 units off of one barracks, while the toss has been making a mix of 100/0, 125/50, and 50/100 units off of two gates. Once this early game dance is over, the Terran usually has an expansion up, 4-5 more barracks starting to build, and is ready to start the midgame. The protoss on the other hand is still exhausted thinking, "holy shit I just barely held that off".
I don't mind marauders that much later in the game. It's the super fast 1 or 2rax pushes that crush me consistently. And many of the times that I do hold those rushes off it's because my opponent does not have great micro, and my zealots killed marauders.
THANK YOU for that post^^. I had the pleasure of trying to deal with that "rally your first marauder into the P base" deal too and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what to do against it. Glad to see that better players than me are equally lost.
And he's right, marauders overpowered or not aside, this thread is about a particular opening terran can do against toss. My best attempt at holding it off so far has been sacking my first zealot and praying for a sentry. Since one marauder kills a zealot reasonably slowly, as long as you're not fighting in your base you can hopefully get a forcefield up to keep maraudery out for long enough to get the aforementioned unit mix.
|
On April 02 2010 15:35 Feefee wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 14:33 Haemonculus wrote:
The thread was originally about a particular Terran build order. Not so much the giant ball of marauders itself.
Yes, late game a well mixed protoss army can defeat a large blob of marauders. What the OP was about, (and this is something i've been seriously struggling with myself), is the 10-rax rallied straight to your base marauder build.
The first marauder shows up as your cyber core is finishing. With micro, a marauder defeats one zealot without taking a hit. One on one, a marauder defeats a stalker. The mix of units needed to beat off the super early marauder push is very hard to get quickly. Myself, Storr, and Orb just did some practice games in trying to hold this off, and yes, sometimes the protoss was able to fend it off. That is, with two gateways in their own base they were able to defeat 1 rax attack from across the map. That's seriously messed up.
After 4 or 5 minutes of intense micro battles, the terran has to retreat. The end result though is that the Terran has been building 100/25 units off of one barracks, while the toss has been making a mix of 100/0, 125/50, and 50/100 units off of two gates. Once this early game dance is over, the Terran usually has an expansion up, 4-5 more barracks starting to build, and is ready to start the midgame. The protoss on the other hand is still exhausted thinking, "holy shit I just barely held that off".
I don't mind marauders that much later in the game. It's the super fast 1 or 2rax pushes that crush me consistently. And many of the times that I do hold those rushes off it's because my opponent does not have great micro, and my zealots killed marauders. THANK YOU for that post^^. I had the pleasure of trying to deal with that "rally your first marauder into the P base" deal too and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what to do against it. Glad to see that better players than me are equally lost. And he's right, marauders overpowered or not aside, this thread is about a particular opening terran can do against toss. My best attempt at holding it off so far has been sacking my first zealot and praying for a sentry. Since one marauder kills a zealot reasonably slowly, as long as you're not fighting in your base you can hopefully get a forcefield up to keep maraudery out for long enough to get the aforementioned unit mix.
This is definitely a very effective rush versus Protoss. I believe that the fix for Marauder should be to nerf (but not remove) the slowing effect. Firebats had splash damage, and without something for the Marauders T early game would be dominated by Zerg as has been discussed already. Currently the slow is roughly 1.3 seconds, I think a simple 50% reduction would properly balance the Marauder. They would still fair well versus Roaches, and with Evac and Marine support Hydras, however, at the same time the slow would be short enough that even with micro a Zealot can still get a hit in on the Marauder as it runs away - this would give Protoss at least an option to counter the fast-rax Marauder rush. Any thoughts?
|
how will Terran counter proxy gates + photons if they nerf again the T1?
|
i agree marauder is too strong, however, just nerfing the marauder will have large implications to tvt and tvz. A delicate touch is needed here. i'd like to see marines and reactors changed back to their old build times. 45 hp scvs are more than enough to stop the cheese, I don't see the point in making early marines such a terrible strategy. if building marines early on was actually a viable strategy, then a nerf to marauders would not be so crippling to terran.
|
currently marines build longer than chronoboosted immortal and reactor builds the same time like 2nd barraks.
nerfing marauders will be like last nail in the coffin for terran lol, this race has no decent unit left ...
ps. i would rather see delaying them by increasing back price of techlab than nerfing them -.-
|
On April 02 2010 08:53 Slick348 wrote:
There's honestly no reason for Mauraders to have the ability to slow down enemy units when there
1. Ranged units
2. Powerful units
3. Stimmed units (and can be healed by Medics)
4. Overpowered units
They honestly need to take that ability off, they gave it to them for no reason at all. Roaches atleast have to attack supper close but mauraders destroy roaches since their armored plus they slow down enemy units, it's ridiculous.
Mauraders counter
Zealots(even if they have charge)
Stalkers
Archons
Colossus
Not too sure about Sentries but people always mix up Mauraders with Marines so destroys them either way
HighTemps move slow enough already, one shot from Maurader and their already dead even if you have units to try to back up your high temps. High Temps is practically a waste to build since they're useless with EMP(overpowered cast) hitting them.
Protoss needs something that can do splash damage to take out large armies. All they have is the colossus which can easily be countered because there's so many ways since they can be attacked by air and ground units. Where's the reaver? Archon's splash damage?(which I'd rather have splash damage than a bonus increase). They nerfed Protoss so much it's ridiculous. I want somebody to show me a PVT match where Protoss wins because every time i see a PVT my bets are always on Terran. Remember PROS
P.S. Be free to disagree with me because i have many more things to say about terran being overpowered. And please back your statements up
I agree with some of the points that you make. The only thing that needs to be nerfed with marauder is the concussive grenade or whatever its called. They already do 20 dmg to most units they dont need to slow them down also. I fail to see why a stalker costs more than this unit. Because it can blink? So what? I mean its a cool ability and it has its uses but concussive grenade is passive and is way more useful than blink. Perhaps its because Stalkers do air dmg? That's the only reason I can think of.
|
On April 02 2010 17:00 lol_WomensRights wrote:
currently marines build longer than chronoboosted immortal and reactor builds the same time like 2nd barraks.
nerfing marauders will be like last nail in the coffin for terran lol, this race has no decent unit left ...
ps. i would rather see delaying them by increasing back price of techlab than nerfing them -.-
What you say about the marine's build time is true however, immortals cost over five times as much as marines and you can only build 1 per robo bay.
|
I'm willing to bet most of the people in here that are complaining about terran, or specifically marauders being overpowered, A) Aren't platinum level players B) Haven't played terran enough to know it's weaknesses and C) play shitty builds repeatedly expecting blizzard to fix the shittiness of their build for them.
1 gate core is fucking bad, I don't care how many times you see people do it on youtube, 1 gate is going to lose to 3 rax every god damned time.
My challenge to you fucking idiots, get to platinum first so this test actually matters, then play terran for 200 games without building a single marauder. Just fucking try it, be sure to let me know when you revolutionize every matchup because as it stands, they're terran's lynchpin muscle unit. Marines are awful against storm, collosi and roaches(roaches have 2 armor un-upgraded meaning marines have 1/3rd their HP and 1/4th their damage). So we can't use marines, we can't use hellions because they're fucking awful against anything that isn't like(ie everything that matters), thors are completely useless because of the immortal shield functionality, siege tanks die too quickly and easily to be cost efficient, vikings are complete shit when they're not in fighter mode, so what does that leave us. Am I only allowed to mass ghosts and battlecruisers just because some fucking idiot kid can't realize that it's not intelligent to do a fucking greedy tech build every game?
There should be a new rule that anything C or below on Iccup, or plat and below on SC2 can't make balance change posts.
|
Platinum is not that hard to achieve.
Do you have a solution for protoss; what would you suggest them do then? Or do you just want them to suck it up for Terran's sake?
|
This thread has turned into stupid..
Way to many people here are pretty much going into unit specific counters and completely ignore the fact that a army consists of more than 1 unit after a while.
Is the marauder slow broken vs early game toss? I dont know, I can only see it work on some maps tbh and even then a competent toss who scouts early should be able to stop it without unreasonable losses.
It could be a BO win, but doesnt that exist in all matchups in BW aswell?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
