[G] A slightly simpler marine split - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
| ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
| ||
|
Asmodeusz
193 Posts
| ||
|
dynwar7
1983 Posts
all you need to do is a-move? This is awesome, but some ppl say the patrol is better than this, in what ways if I may ask? Just tried this, got to 13. Used patrol got to 17. Can someone explain how patrol move works better than this? Dont the marines essentially do the same thing? run , and when there are blings nearby, shoot? Then shouldnt patrol and a-move be the same? | ||
|
Makura
United States317 Posts
love to see people discovering new ways to play, especially at a manageable level for the masses | ||
|
phaleos
Australia105 Posts
Imagine if zerg has baneling and 15ish mutalisk (which is standard), the marines that are running away will just die | ||
|
Warpath
Canada1242 Posts
It's still a better idea to actually spread the marines in hope of making the banes spend more time traveling from target to target, giving you more of an opportunity to gun them down as opposed to trading. | ||
|
godulous
United States337 Posts
On August 26 2011 14:18 phaleos wrote: This technique is useless compared to the proper marine split because with proper marine split, majority of your marines will be firing, when you do that method, the majority of the marine is running is away and only the group you leave behind is firing. Maybe this will work against zergs at diamond level or below, but otherwise it's pretty much useless. Imagine if zerg has baneling and 15ish mutalisk (which is standard), the marines that are running away will just die The zerg did have about a dozen mutalisks in the video. Either way, I agree it's not much use for masters/GM level play where obviously players have the skill/apm required to execute much more effective and complex micro. This guide is targeted more at lower league play where players may not be able to handle doing higher intensity micro yet. This works significantly better than just blindly a-moving with no goal. (edit: added a clarification to the OP to that effect) Thanks for all the feedback though, glad to know some people found it useful. | ||
|
Teddyjex
Canada35 Posts
In the video provided, baneling numbers were diminished by tank fire/exploding on tanks which helped prevent the mass destruction of the marine force. It does show, however, that a large portion of that force was stopped by the lings attacking as I described above. I feel the risk vs reward of this maneuver may not be worth it. As you have stated though, it may be worth a shot in lower leagues where attacks are less coordinated. | ||
|
tuestresfat
2555 Posts
thanks for sharing! | ||
|
phiinix
United States1169 Posts
| ||
|
dynwar7
1983 Posts
| ||
|
Himself
Ireland14 Posts
really helping me split my marines, instead of my standard splitting into two slighly small groups :D | ||
|
Shadyf0o
63 Posts
| ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
| ||
|
4Servy
Netherlands1542 Posts
problems are flanking lings they will screw you over. | ||
|
Nivoh
Norway259 Posts
| ||
|
Himself
Ireland14 Posts
On August 27 2011 05:59 Nivoh wrote: Isn't it better using patrol rather than attack? if you use patrol, wont your marins end up back towards the banelings if you dont update the waypoint? I think this is better as you can adjust the line your marines are taking as you go. | ||
|
bunnymuncher
Canada112 Posts
| ||
|
SurroundSound
106 Posts
| ||
| ||