EPTAs you said in your post, you already know a good counter to banelings: Marauder shield, hellions or *gasp* go mech.
hellion/viking/thor easily beats ling/bane/muta.
Banelings in TvZ (balance change proposition) - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
bendez
Canada283 Posts
As you said in your post, you already know a good counter to banelings: Marauder shield, hellions or *gasp* go mech. hellion/viking/thor easily beats ling/bane/muta. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:04 bendez wrote: So you're saying we should tech all the way up to hive just to counter MMM blob? As you said in your post, you already know a good counter to banelings: Marauder shield, hellions or *gasp* go mech. hellion/viking/thor easily beats ling/bane/muta. Roach/Hydra/Muta/Ling > Hellion/Viking/Thor... Don't call armies that are impossible to get -_- | ||
|
bendez
Canada283 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:07 G.s)NarutO wrote: Roach/Hydra/Muta/Ling > Hellion/Viking/Thor... Don't call armies that are impossible to get -_- then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings. Not even gonna argue anymore. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:10 bendez wrote: then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings. Not even gonna argue anymore. Thats right, I'm not going to argue with someone with 69 posts, who absolutely has no clue about the game OR doesn't back up his arguments / statement as many other players here do. Additionally its wrong that Viking/Thor/Hellion eats up mass ling / baneling / muta. Hellions die so fast due to their slow attack animation and bane / speedlings kill off thors so fast. In the end its probably only vikings left (since Thor's shoot down mutas so fast (vikings alone lose hard to mutas)) and you can't do shit with those vikings if he adds new mutas, since thors are more expensive and build slower than mutas do.. | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:10 bendez wrote: then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings. Not even gonna argue anymore. do you understand how terrible thors are? | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
| ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
I don't think Thors are terrible, they are totally dominating mutas (they deal 64 damage to them in 1 shot!!) and 1 shot hydras with +1. But they have no chance without support, and since they are so expensive, you can't have a good mMm army + thors.. So its not worth getting 2 / 3 factories for Thors, because Zerg will have the whole map with broodlords + support while you can move out with a thor featured army. And yeah, Thors ALONE are terribad. | ||
|
theon.vbn
United States5 Posts
On March 21 2010 03:53 G.s)NarutO wrote: Probably around 70% with my fast expansion and fast 2-2 160/200 push. Around 30% with 1 base-play. But that fast expansion styles only works so well because lots of Zerg send banelings to attack bunkers etc. They manage to break the defence, but lose so many gas while I only lose minerals and just rebuild bunkers. They don't expand while doing so, so I get a massive army advantage later. Against Zergs who stay back, expand and MASS baneling hydra/roach, I lose a lot. I mean you 'can' wait for Ravens and counter all Zerg got, but they are so late (with their upgrades etc..) that its not worth waiting / too risky, because Zerg got the whole map. To be honest this guy really knows what he's talking about, at least from my own playing experiences as a #8~10 platinum Terran which is not top of the line, but definitely better than the majority right now. All his experiences are basically identical to mine. A lot of people see his posts and think it's another "omg banelings are imba" thread, but in fact it isn't. SC1 analogies do not apply to SC2 such as these "dude just bunker rush him" ideas. On March 21 2010 03:29 {88}iNcontroL wrote: increase price of baneling nest/upgrade and move them to lair tech to fully balance them in vs p/t mu's imo Agree. A few of my ideas are to move Baneling Nest to Lair tech, Baneling nest cost from 100/50 to 100/150, increase each Baneling cost from 25/25 to 25/40. Perhaps a combination of parts of the above. The basic idea is this... a Terran shouldn't have to pull off a miracle micro/macro to defeat a Zerg that contains with the army and just expands and A-move into the Terran army with speedlings+banelings+hydras when Terran makes that push. I just find it funny that people are saying how top platinum Terrans don't know what they're talking about when there is really a legitimate issue at hand = = | ||
|
lol_WomensRights
52 Posts
On March 21 2010 03:33 Lz wrote: i have not had a problem vs. bainlings.. there a strong unit.. but make them any weaker and they would be useless IMO.. no offence but i watch ur stream alot and never seen u facing zerg as strong as DIMAGA or other tops europe Z's, in 99% of games ur hellion rush succeds and u kill alot of drones, then you usually are able to make marauder block and kill small armies of benelings + lings but this wont work vs properly played zerg. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:18 beetlelisk wrote: What about my questions from the previous page? Hellions are just the counter in theory, speedlings charge so fast, that the hellions they before the masses of lings / banelings die. If you have a good number of hellions as support they definately help you out here and there but nothing major. Even with the attack upgrade of them engaging hydras from the right angle, the hellions will most likely not even reach the hydras as they die so fast (hydras usually blocked from lings or roaches)... Hellions are only good in theory, but actually not a viable hard counter to Zergs mixed force. | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:25 G.s)NarutO wrote: Hellions are just the counter in theory, speedlings charge so fast, that the hellions they before the masses of lings / banelings die. If you have a good number of hellions as support they definately help you out here and there but nothing major. Even with the attack upgrade of them engaging hydras from the right angle, the hellions will most likely not even reach the hydras as they die so fast (hydras usually blocked from lings or roaches)... Hellions are only good in theory, but actually not a viable hard counter to Zergs mixed force. I'm asking just to be sure: even when you spread them and don't hit and run with all of them at once? Even when you try to use Medivacs to evacuate them or other forces close enough for them to come and help? I don't know how viable fast Fac with Reactor is but when you wrote something about Overlords spawning creep it made me think there has to be aggressive opening giving map control? How Reapers cope so far? Nitro upgrade makes them like twice as fast? | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2010 04:46 beetlelisk wrote: I'm asking just to be sure: even when you spread them and don't hit and run with all of them at once? Even when you try to use Medivacs to evacuate them or other forces close enough for them to come and help? I don't know how viable fast Fac with Reactor is but when you wrote something about Overlords spawning creep it made me think there has to be aggressive opening giving map control? How Reapers cope so far? Nitro upgrade makes them like twice as fast? Reapers (even with speed) are countered by speedlings (they are faster even on non-creep). Hellion openings can work, but usually a Zerg with a brain will have roaches up in time (hellions are faster, but lots of Zergs are good with blocking). Medivacs are stupid, so if you try to evacuate hellions, they die in medivacs to hydras. Marauder/Hellion is a good early game combo that can shred a lot of Zergs units, but the transition into the midgame is hard if Zerg survives the initial attacks. | ||
|
beetlelisk
Poland2276 Posts
| ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
| ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
i dont think banelings cost too much, i just think zerg tech tree in general is too cheap and banelings exploding when dying is ridiculous :p | ||
|
Dacendoran
United States825 Posts
| ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
On March 21 2010 06:04 Dacendoran wrote: Honestly if you watch the Esl cup.... banelings seem fine use marauders up front, keep your marine groups in a few groups find out what group they're following and kite it takes control yes... But it works wonders honestly instead of crying about balance just play the game as is. and then the day comes when zergs figure out that have to flank and/or target fire the marines with baneling | ||
|
Dacendoran
United States825 Posts
On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote: and then the day comes when zergs figure out that have to flank and/or target fire the marines with baneling Then you're going to have to work on your positioning so you don't get flanked, and move and shoot with your marines while the banelings die for nothing becaus ethey can't reach your marine control group. you should pay a heavy price for being pincered in any battle, you have to use your marauders as a meat shield if you do get surrounded or your marines get eaten alive. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On March 21 2010 06:22 Dacendoran wrote: Then you're going to have to work on your positioning so you don't get flanked, and move and shoot with your marines while the banelings die for nothing becaus ethey can't reach your marine control group. you should pay a heavy price for being pincered in any battle, you have to use your marauders as a meat shield if you do get surrounded or your marines get eaten alive. *facepalm* seriously why is random people with 50 posts arguing against good players | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On March 21 2010 05:58 MorroW wrote: u cant change a unit cost to anthing but 25 0 50 or 75 tho naruto. 40 breaks the laws of physics and makes the blizzard server implode 3 times uppsidedown i dont think banelings cost too much, i just think zerg tech tree in general is too cheap and banelings exploding when dying is ridiculous :p I never said I want to change the costs. | ||
| ||
