|
I made a topick on blizzard:
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23767560787&sid=5010
But since it seems to me noone comes there, i will also start discussion thread here. Please don't agree with me cause you're terran or disagree cause you're zerg. Just arguments. If such combination helps - then why, e.t.c. Thanks in advance.
If someone is too lazy to open blizzard site - i put my full post in spoilers.
+ Show Spoiler +First of all i want to mention that all said below is spoken about banelings with upgrade on speed.
Every unit in starcraft has it's counter. If we started to talk about TvZ - i will give you TvZ example. Roaches are good against rines. Marauders are good against roaches. Hydra is good against marauders. Rines are good against hydra. When there is a large number of hydra and roach terrans surely need medivacs and upgrades. When there are very many medivacs and M+M, zerg needs infestors, brood lords or ultralisks. Everything depends on your skill, everything is balanced. I can make same cycle on mechanical terran or the terran which starts with air. Doesn't matter a lot. The main idea i wanted to show is that EVERY UNIT HAS IT'S COUNTER.
Now let's talk about speed banelings. The units they counter. The units which counter them. In fact the unit they counter best are rines. The power of rines is in their number, banelings don't care about number of units they strike in. Terran has to use rines in TvZ, because rines are: 1) antiair. 2) the best ground unit against big amount of hydra. 3) cheap and that's why the only way of terran not to get outmassed by zerg. So we need to have rines in our army. Which units can we add to it to deal with banelings? There are 3 variants of such addons. :
1) Marauders as shield. Banelings strike in marauders, they die but rines still alive and kill the rest of army. Why doesn't it work? Zerg never attacks from 1 way. He will attack from several ways with banelings in each army. It's impossible to have marauders everywhere. So your rines will die anyways and marauders won't work as shield. I don't know how you can change marauders so they become good counter to banelings and don't become counters to other units. So no propositions here.
2) Hellions. Hellions are good against lings. Probably they are good against banelings? Yes they are, but only if banelings don't have speed. Why so? Main reason is that in fact hellions are really good only against lings without speed. If lings do have speed it's very hard to kill those masses. So hellions are also bad against speed banelings. If you don't believe me - try to micro 1 baneling with hellion. Is it possible to change hellion in such a way to counter banelings and not to counter units in other matchups? Yes, it's possible, because marauders are highly used in all 3 terran matchups and hellions are used very rarely in tvp and never used in tvt. There are 2 ways to make hellions counter banelings: adding hellions speed upgrade or/and giving them bigger range upgrade. In first way - hellions will manage at least to outrun banelings. In second way - it will be at least possible to strike banelings before they explore in your entire M+M army.
3) Raven's ability of missiles. They make damage to many units so they can kill zerg masses as banelings kill you. You can even say that it's terran's banelings. What is the problem? The problem is that it is very hard to give good amount of ravens with missiles. They "eat" a lot of gaz, gain energy very slow and the shot demands a lot of energy. To start making ravens you will need: 2 starports with addons, fusion core, upgrades on missiles and upgrade on +25 energy. Upgrade on duration of missiles is also highly needed. All that you will need to make from 2 bases and only 4 gazes because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. Otherwise zerg will work from 3-4 bases. I tested 1 expo into slow ravens and can say - when you get 4 ravens with 1 missle each - game is already lost because zerg is too far ahead in economy and limit. So this upgrade CAN be a counter but due to it's expensibility and slowness it's not a counter in any ways. So the question - can we change missiles in such a way - not to touch other matchups, only tvz. Yes we can. In TvT ravens are never used because they eat a lot of gaz and are simply useless. In TvP terran sometimes does 1 raven, but he never does many of them, because he needs gaz on ghosts. Also protoss has amazing possibilty to feedback raven, so they will 100% not change balance in tvp. So how can we change ravens to make them more powerfull against zerg? There is only 1 way - make their building faster and cheaper, especially on gaz. More power or higher speed of misciles won't help - because as i said before - zerg will be way ahead economically and in units before you get at least 4 ravens with upgade.
There is also a possibilty to reduce banelings. But honestly i know nothing about balance in ZvP, so reducing banellings power can probably be an end to zerg in ZvP....
I hope you will read my proposition carefully and of course i am open for discussions.
Eugin "mouz.Strelok" Oparyshev
|
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that.
|
On March 19 2010 02:56 Koffiegast wrote:
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that.
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore.
|
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings.
I dont get why so small number of Terran players use tanks at all, 4-5 tanks placed properly can really bring a hell on zerg's army ( if we are talking about speedling/baneling/hydralisk cluster ), and with proper use of stimpack on marines tanks can sometimes negate banelings completetly.
Using hellions late in game seems like a mistake to me, they feel really terrible in late game against zerg.
because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army.
I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. Also, with tanks behind (2-3 is often enough, 4-5 juts destroys zerg ;p ) rushing in against terran without creep providing additional baneling speed, it's a suicide.
Also, most ( all actually I think? ) maps have islands and closed expand spots, if you can secure a nat expo then just go for walled expansion latera and voila ;o
|
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran.
It is very important to keep game balanced at any point (early-mid-late). I agree banelings own terran in early game, but still terran can do something about it. Late game is like 90% terran win since HSM kills anything I repeat anything in zerg army.
Good suggestion would be nerf baneling and HSM as well.
Don't fight for your race only. If you want this game to be a good at e-sports fight for overall balance. You are a good progamer. Но тянуть одеяло на себя не красиво, умей держать репутацию (sorry for russian).
|
On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 02:56 Koffiegast wrote:
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that. Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore.
I dont, and I think a lot of other zerg players dont as well.
The reason is simple, building enough of mutalisks to use them as your main strike force needs A TON of gas ( 3 bases+ really ) and building banelings isnt cheap in gas well. But let's skip that and say zerg have 3 bases, and goes mass mutalisk/baneling. Banelings are pretty much useless in that case without other meat shield on the ground that could absorb tanks dmg, since they wont even reach the target, especially with new AI of tanks ( no overkills ).
I prefer speedling/baneling with a back-up of hydras with infestors.
Banelings ARE strong if used properly, but hey - you could say it's pretty ridiculous as well that most of terrans play MMM against anything and still manage to win a 45 minute long games with tier1 starting unit.
|
On March 19 2010 03:15 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 02:56 Koffiegast wrote:
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that. Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. I dont, and I think a lot of other zerg players dont as well. The reason is simple, building enough of mutalisks to use them as your main strike force needs A TON of gas ( 3 bases+ really ) and building banelings isnt cheap in gas well. But let's skip that and say zerg have 3 bases, and goes mass mutalisk/baneling. Banelings are pretty much useless in that case without other meat shield on the ground that could absorb tanks dmg, since they wont even reach the target, especially with new AI of tanks ( no overkills ). Banelings ARE strong if used properly, but hey - you could say it's pretty ridiculous as well that most of terrans play MMM against anything and still manage to win a 45 minute long games with tier1 starting unit.
Don't give me that crap, have you watched any replays lately? Every Z player goes Ling/Baneling contain, into 2 expos with Mass Muta/Baneling/Ling push before Terran gets to his late game units. It's nearly unstoppable and almost retarded. If you push out the Z has so many ways to see you coming, and can ambush you from alot of directions in this game (such as the grass points, from Xel Naga towers, burrow, etc.)
Banelings can be used bad, but it's really hard to do so when you have vision of the whole map and map control. The Terran at most is sitting on his natural (best case scenario) and is probably wondering how the hell is he going to push out. Banelings are a BIG reason why this match-up is so stupid at the moment; one good use of Banelings means GG Terran.
|
United States7166 Posts
Yeah, the best would be to replace banelings with lurkers (not at hive but at lair, perhaps tier 2.5 from research @ Hydra den).
It would not only make it more balanced, but much more fun and interesting for both players to use. i believe lurkers need to return to bring back a huge part to the game which is good unit positioning by both players and map control. the micro is much more interesting and fun, and provides a much better dynamic to the game by trying to establish and hold key map positions, and makes terrain more significant. The unit is just what zerg needs to make all 3 of its matchups much more interesting, and would give back zerg the iconic unit that really defines their play in Brood War. People have been complaining, myself included, about the lack of diversity and fun for Zerg in SC2, this is what they've been needing.
For some reason Blizzard seems concerned about making invisible attacking units at Tier 2 tech, well Lurkers cannot move while invisible and so it becomes very difficult to attack with them, plus Detection is considerably easier/faster to get in SC2 than it is in BW, and it wasn't a problem there either.
I know they removed the lurker because it wasn't being used at its previous Hive requirement, well bring it back to Lair, remove or rework Banelings (perhaps the + Show Spoiler [Baneling Bombs idea?] +On March 16 2010 09:27 Ziel wrote:
Baneling Bomb: Costs 25 energy. Requires research first at Infestation Pit and requires Hive to unlock. Allows the Infester to load up to four Banelings inside it. Targets over 8 range at a location and lobs a Baneling to the location, exploding on the spot and dealing +20 additional damage (added onto base damage. Bonus and building damage are discounted) but also does friendly damage. Banelings can't be shot down. I thought it could be novel to have a direct unit-to-unit usage, something like the HT/DT Archon morph, plus it helps to keep Banelings useful late game against heavy hitters.
|
On March 19 2010 03:18 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:15 Defrag wrote:On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 02:56 Koffiegast wrote:
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that. Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. I dont, and I think a lot of other zerg players dont as well. The reason is simple, building enough of mutalisks to use them as your main strike force needs A TON of gas ( 3 bases+ really ) and building banelings isnt cheap in gas well. But let's skip that and say zerg have 3 bases, and goes mass mutalisk/baneling. Banelings are pretty much useless in that case without other meat shield on the ground that could absorb tanks dmg, since they wont even reach the target, especially with new AI of tanks ( no overkills ). Banelings ARE strong if used properly, but hey - you could say it's pretty ridiculous as well that most of terrans play MMM against anything and still manage to win a 45 minute long games with tier1 starting unit. Don't give me that crap, have you watched any replays lately? Every Z player goes Ling/Baneling contain, into 2 expos with Mass Muta/Baneling/Ling push before Terran gets to his late game units. It's nearly unstoppable and almost retarded. If you push out the Z has so many ways to see you coming, and can ambush you from alot of directions in this game (such as the grass points, from Xel Naga towers, burrow, etc.) Banelings can be used bad, but it's really hard to do so when you have vision of the whole map and map control. The Terran at most is sitting on his natural (best case scenario) and is probably wondering how the hell is he going to push out. Banelings are a BIG reason why this match-up is so stupid at the moment; one good use of Banelings means GG Terran.
Do you agree that in TvZ banelings are overpowered in early-mid game and HSM is overpowered in late game? If you don't please explain why. I'm not on T or Z side, just say neutral. I want this game to be perfectly balanced and to become the best e-sports game. To do so every matchup should balanced at any stage of the game.
I think your problem is that you see the game only from terran's point of view (Basically not only you)
Those who are zergs please try to be in terrans place.
|
On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore.
80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+baneling
On March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings.
Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack.
I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again.
The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing.
On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran.
Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced.
|
On March 19 2010 03:29 hellitsaboutme wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:18 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 03:15 Defrag wrote:On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 02:56 Koffiegast wrote:
Tbh replace banelings with lurker, I also dont like them.
Banelings are a one trick pony. Yet I find it funny when T cries when a couple banelings actually manage into his MMM ball which he most likely a-moved. Ive had several occassions were I managed waves of units from 4 sides at the same time, yet the couple tanks and MMM ball survived the slaughter (as there wasnt any actually). I honestly wouldnt see banelings as OP, sure they may be effective against rines when rines stand still or when T doesnt scan/detect and T walks with his army clumped over a burrowed group of banes or when Z simply outmacroed the T and got too many, but afaik they arent a guaranteed win. The other side however about mass banelings is that when they actually kill some rines, they also die. This basically means that both teams are effectively losing army. In the open and such, you can easily micro your army away from the banelings and manage to kill them, heck with a couple tanks chances are you dont even need to do that. Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. I dont, and I think a lot of other zerg players dont as well. The reason is simple, building enough of mutalisks to use them as your main strike force needs A TON of gas ( 3 bases+ really ) and building banelings isnt cheap in gas well. But let's skip that and say zerg have 3 bases, and goes mass mutalisk/baneling. Banelings are pretty much useless in that case without other meat shield on the ground that could absorb tanks dmg, since they wont even reach the target, especially with new AI of tanks ( no overkills ). Banelings ARE strong if used properly, but hey - you could say it's pretty ridiculous as well that most of terrans play MMM against anything and still manage to win a 45 minute long games with tier1 starting unit. Don't give me that crap, have you watched any replays lately? Every Z player goes Ling/Baneling contain, into 2 expos with Mass Muta/Baneling/Ling push before Terran gets to his late game units. It's nearly unstoppable and almost retarded. If you push out the Z has so many ways to see you coming, and can ambush you from alot of directions in this game (such as the grass points, from Xel Naga towers, burrow, etc.) Banelings can be used bad, but it's really hard to do so when you have vision of the whole map and map control. The Terran at most is sitting on his natural (best case scenario) and is probably wondering how the hell is he going to push out. Banelings are a BIG reason why this match-up is so stupid at the moment; one good use of Banelings means GG Terran. Do you agree that in TvZ banelings are overpowered in early-mid game and HSM is overpowered in late game? If you don't please explain why. I'm not on T or Z side, just say neutral. I want this game to be perfectly balanced and to become the best e-sports game. To do so every matchup should balanced at any stage of the game. I think your problem is that you see the game only from terran's point of view (Basically not only you) Those who are zergs please try to be in terrans place.
Here's the thing, Marines are your BEST counter to Mutalisks. This is a universally accepted truth. Vikings blow against Mutas, have 0 armor, and cost too much gas to keep up. Thors are too expensive, slow, etc. Banelings however counter the crap out of them, so what can you do? Sit in your base and turtle. Basically all you can do, is hope you can survive till Ravens, and hope the Zerg didn't take advantage of having control of the whole map.
I agree that TvZ HSM is overpowered if we were talking about even field conditions (such as 3 base T vs 4 base Z). However, that almost NEVER happens in this match-up because of Banelings, which prevent any kind of movement outside of a Terran's natural. Moving out in full force is too big of a risk when he can just instantly kill all your Marines, and clean up Mauraders with Lings.
I may only see the view from a Terran's PoV, but I do agree with Z player's that HSM is POSSIBLY OP if a Terran player managed to A. Prevent Muta harass from being effective, B. Stopped Z from easily taking 3rd expo (which is nearly impossible to do), and C. Forced Z to constantly make units throughout the entire game (almost impossible to do also, since this map pool heavily favors Z except a few like LT, which is a good map).
Zerg players have so many weapons at their disposal to counter early timing attacks of M&M (Baneling/Ling is very deadly, and because you have sight with Overlord and control of Xel Naga towers, you will almost always have position advantage on Terran moving out). Because of this, a Terran player has to either be...
1. God with micro and his macro early on with his timing attack, and hope to end the game right there
2. Turtle in his base, get Ravens, hope Z didn't expo 4+ times on him
3. Wait until he has critical mass of MMM, go out and fight Z before he has Broodlords and other high tech units, and hope the Z player sucks at controlling his army
In nearly every scenario you are in a losing position.
|
On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. 80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+baneling Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack. Show nested quote +because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran. Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced.
It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely.
|
On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. 80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+banelingShow nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack. Show nested quote +because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran. Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced.
This is another combination that is very strong, but I find that Ling/Muta/Baneling is much stronger overall, especially on maps where Terran has a tougher time expanding on (Desert Oasis and Scrapyard for instance).
Either way, any decent Z player will control the map with Banelings early, and obtain his almost virtually free 3rd expo relatively early.
|
Sorry all that I am noob in using quotes. Now I see how my posts are horrible  Will improve next ones
|
I play random plat and I think banelings are very balanced. You need to deal with them using micro, marauders, stim, and helions.
|
On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely.
Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo!
Second thing. I am terran user. Before making solution i have reached top-2 of platinum and 2000+++ points with playing over 600 games. I have no clue what's going on in zvp or pvp matchup. I won't win even 1500 zerg in zvz how the hell i can ask for changing balance? And who the hell are you to tell me what to do and judge about wisdom of my suggestions in such a thone? Make attitude to my words and arguments. Not to myself please!
|
On March 19 2010 04:02 FortuneSyn wrote:
I play random plat and I think banelings are very balanced. You need to deal with them using micro, marauders, stim, and helions.
And if he sees you too Maurader/Helion heavy he either stops making Banelings and goes mass Hydra/Roach (which WILL beat you due to lack of DPS from Marines), or into Mutas and harasses you to death, contains you, then expos all over the map. Baneling affects this match-up far too much, and has too much of a GG factor early on for this match-up to be balanced, just as how HSM can GG an entire army late game, Banelings are essentially the same thing early on.
|
On March 19 2010 03:49 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. 80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+banelingOn March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack. because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran. Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced. This is another combination that is very strong, but I find that Ling/Muta/Baneling is much stronger overall, especially on maps where Terran has a tougher time expanding on (Desert Oasis and Scrapyard for instance). Either way, any decent Z player will control the map with Banelings early, and obtain his almost virtually free 3rd expo relatively early.
I fully agree that Muta+baneling has some advantages. But it also has some disadvantages  It's just way of play, not mandgatory for zerg, right?
|
On March 19 2010 04:08 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:49 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. 80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+banelingOn March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack. because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran. Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced. This is another combination that is very strong, but I find that Ling/Muta/Baneling is much stronger overall, especially on maps where Terran has a tougher time expanding on (Desert Oasis and Scrapyard for instance). Either way, any decent Z player will control the map with Banelings early, and obtain his almost virtually free 3rd expo relatively early. I fully agree that Muta+baneling has some advantages. But it also has some disadvantages It's just way of play, not mandgatory for zerg, right?
Of course Muta/Baneling has disadvantages, such as being gas heavy. However, Z can obtain 3rd expo almost for free on the currently map pool (especially on those 3 maps I listed) due to the Terran being too scared to move out for fear of an ambush or Muta harass.
|
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
This would probably make things fair, but then Zerg players will start crying about how they can't just roll their Banelings into MMM and auto win anymore.
|
Watch one of the last games between Morrow and Dimaga on LT - Morrow picks a small group of marauders stims them and puts them on front. He won the battle impressively.
Also watch CowGoMoo vs KHB on blistering sands - microed helions do the trick.
Tanks can help as well.
Pure MMM die terribly.
|
On March 19 2010 04:05 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely. Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo! Second thing. I am terran user. Before making solution i have reached top-2 of platinum and 2000+++ points with playing over 600 games. I have no clue what's going on in zvp or pvp matchup. I won't win even 1500 zerg in zvz how the hell i can ask for changing balance? And who the hell are you to tell me what to do and judge about wisdom of my suggestions in such a thone? Make attitude to my words and arguments. Not to myself please!
I think you got me wrong. I didn't say anything about your personality. By saying to make suggestion wisely I mean consider all PROS and CONS. I bring my apologizes about тянуть одеяло.
You've played so many games. I don't doubt your skills. Have you reached that stage of game where you had like 6-7 ravens with researched HSM vs platinum zerg? I guess not often, because you never survive to that late, you win or die. What I am trying to say is that if banelings (or mutas whatever) are nerfed then most probably the game will continue to late macro stage where you get a lot of ravens (like tons of vessels before). But zergs won't have decent counter for them, eventhough he will make a lot of Ultras. Ultras will die constantly clashing to your army but not Ravens.
|
On March 19 2010 04:23 hellitsaboutme wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:05 3D.Strelok wrote:On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely. Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo! Second thing. I am terran user. Before making solution i have reached top-2 of platinum and 2000+++ points with playing over 600 games. I have no clue what's going on in zvp or pvp matchup. I won't win even 1500 zerg in zvz how the hell i can ask for changing balance? And who the hell are you to tell me what to do and judge about wisdom of my suggestions in such a thone? Make attitude to my words and arguments. Not to myself please! I think you got me wrong. I didn't say anything about your personality. By saying to make suggestion wisely I mean consider all PROS and CONS. I bring my apologizes about тянуть одеяло. You've played so many games. I don't doubt your skills. Have you reached that stage of game where you had like 6-7 ravens with researched HSM vs platinum zerg? I guess not often, because you never survive to that late, you win or die. What I am trying to say is that if banelings (or mutas whatever) are nerfed then most probably the game will continue to late macro stage where you get a lot of ravens (like tons of vessels before). But zergs won't have decent counter for them, eventhough he will make a lot of Ultras. Ultras will die constantly clashing to your army but not Ravens.
Yes but at that point you have empty mana Ravens and he just simply macros another army in time before your Ravens have mana to HSM again. Either way, Z is still winning this fight.
|
On March 19 2010 04:20 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi. This would probably make things fair, but then Zerg players will start crying about how they can't just roll their Banelings into MMM and auto win anymore.
At least I wouldn't cry. And who cares about some people whining?
Besides, you can't just roll your banes into the enemy anyways. I've seen people form an almost perfect circle of marauders around their marines. What you really want to do is push some holes into the marine defense and "inject" banelings into the MMM ball.
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
I am sorry can you explain a bit more? Do you mean reaver-tank thing when tanks goes away from scarab and takes half of damage?
|
On March 19 2010 04:26 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:23 hellitsaboutme wrote:On March 19 2010 04:05 3D.Strelok wrote:On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely. Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo! Second thing. I am terran user. Before making solution i have reached top-2 of platinum and 2000+++ points with playing over 600 games. I have no clue what's going on in zvp or pvp matchup. I won't win even 1500 zerg in zvz how the hell i can ask for changing balance? And who the hell are you to tell me what to do and judge about wisdom of my suggestions in such a thone? Make attitude to my words and arguments. Not to myself please! I think you got me wrong. I didn't say anything about your personality. By saying to make suggestion wisely I mean consider all PROS and CONS. I bring my apologizes about тянуть одеяло. You've played so many games. I don't doubt your skills. Have you reached that stage of game where you had like 6-7 ravens with researched HSM vs platinum zerg? I guess not often, because you never survive to that late, you win or die. What I am trying to say is that if banelings (or mutas whatever) are nerfed then most probably the game will continue to late macro stage where you get a lot of ravens (like tons of vessels before). But zergs won't have decent counter for them, eventhough he will make a lot of Ultras. Ultras will die constantly clashing to your army but not Ravens. Yes but at that point you have empty mana Ravens and he just simply macros another army in time before your Ravens have mana to HSM again. Either way, Z is still winning this fight.
I doubt zerg will win this. Considering stacking of zerg army 3-4 HSMs will do such amount of damage that time spent for zerg to recover will be enough to restore energy. Remember HSMs are free and units are not.
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
Just some ideas from someone who hasn't played SC2 yet:
What about making the splash radius of banelings that are killed smaller than those that detonate?
If you shot it while it was RIGHT on top of you, it would kill some but not as many, if it was a small distance away, it might kill none whereas before you would still lose some marines.
Alternatively, how about making the ones that explode due to being killed deal less dmg compared to those that explode themselves? Kind of like their explosion wasn't optimized.
|
I'm sorry, I don't know what terran's fixation is about banelings. Literally they work against two terran units. SCVs and marines. That's it. God forbid a higher tech unit that costs *gas* and takes twice as much time to build should defeat a single tier one unit.
Hellions in amounts greater than or equal to 4, roast banelings in droves, and they don't even cost gas. Marauders, which every terran has, completely demolish banelings if they get in the way. Even the ghost is improbably not classified light and would take 9 banelings to kill him. A couple seigemoded tanks will kill 3 or 4 banelings per shot.
Stop building useless medivacs when you see banelings and build some tanks or hellions instead, and watch as banelings cease to be a problem. Or do what you are doing now, but hotkey your marauders into a special hotkey and move them forward when you see banelings.
And as a sidenote, ultras really are useless against terran. They have pathing issues, so ravens can throw down turrets and render them completely useless. Even without that they die in seconds. You could have 10 ultras and a medium size mmm ball, and the ultras would probably mostly die. It is pretty ludicrous. I never thought I would suggest upgrading ultras, but there you are. They need to be way smaller than they are, but with the same stats.
|
On March 19 2010 04:30 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:20 superstartran wrote:On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi. This would probably make things fair, but then Zerg players will start crying about how they can't just roll their Banelings into MMM and auto win anymore. At least I wouldn't cry. And who cares about some people whining? Besides, you can't just roll your banes into the enemy anyways. I've seen people form an almost perfect circle of marauders around their marines. What you really want to do is push some holes into the marine defense and "inject" banelings into the MMM ball.
Ok, I wouldn't say "auto win if you roll them in" but if you use them properly with the amount of map control and vision you have at the beginning of the game, there's no reason why you shouldn't win every fight.
|
im a zerg, i know what you mean. rather than getting all fancy, i think a simple movement speed decrease/radius reduction/gas increase/gas increase on upgrade could solve the problem.
of those i would probably make the radius a bit smaller, and make the upgrade 40 gas from 25 gas.
|
On March 19 2010 04:46 onmach wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't know what terran's fixation is about banelings. Literally they work against two terran units. SCVs and marines. That's it. God forbid a higher tech unit that costs *gas* and takes twice as much time to build should defeat a single tier one unit.
Hellions in amounts greater than or equal to 4, roast banelings in droves, and they don't even cost gas. Marauders, which every terran has, completely demolish banelings if they get in the way. Even the ghost is improbably not classified light and would take 9 banelings to kill him. A couple seigemoded tanks will kill 3 or 4 banelings per shot.
Stop building useless medivacs when you see banelings and build some tanks or hellions instead, and watch as banelings cease to be a problem. Or do what you are doing now, but hotkey your marauders into a special hotkey and move them forward when you see banelings.
And as a sidenote, ultras really are useless against terran. They have pathing issues, so ravens can throw down turrets and render them completely useless. Even without that they die in seconds. You could have 10 ultras and a medium size mmm ball, and the ultras would probably mostly die. It is pretty ludicrous. I never thought I would suggest upgrading ultras, but there you are. They need to be way smaller than they are, but with the same stats.
Helions suck against speed lings, and if your wasting gas on Tanks you have no Medivacs and are totally immobile, which results in him Muta harassing you all day until he has 5+ saturated bases and a 200 supply food army.
Mauraders are decent counters until speed upgrade, and even then a Z player will never straight up engage from the front, he will always attempt a surround.
|
Actually, if you have been keeping up macro wise, a baneling must hit AT LEAST 3 marines to get their money back.
baneling costs 50/25 each, and you need two to kill 3 rines.
If banelings gets absorbed by marauders, then its almost a sure lost on the zerg side. you need more then half a dozen banelings to kill a marauder, and thats like 500 resources to kill 125 (hard counter)
Flanking? you will DEFINITELY have more marauders then the ammount of flank options the zerg has. If the zerg has 3 flank directions and you have 3 marauders, you should still be able to protect your troops. with micro, banelings is NEVER cost effective against MMM, just like how lurkers can eat shyt vs MnM.
As it was said before, there is no such thing as imbalanced, only bad players.
There is no such thing as "banelings overpowered", numerous people can easily micro their way out of banelings with no problem. Just because you are bad at playing the game doesnt mean the unit is imbalanced
The counter to banelings is micro, micro and more micro! (and detection).
If you cant split your rine backwards in a bunch of six into bunches of three, practice, and practice. Please dont just tag something as imbalanced just because you are bad at it.
|
On March 19 2010 04:54 SturmAddict wrote:
Actually, if you have been keeping up macro wise, a baneling must hit AT LEAST 3 marines to get their money back.
baneling costs 50/25 each, and you need two to kill 3 rines.
If banelings gets absorbed by marauders, then its almost a sure lost on the zerg side. you need more then half a dozen banelings to kill a marauder, and thats like 500 resources to kill 125 (hard counter)
Flanking? you will DEFINITELY have more marauders then the ammount of flank options the zerg has. If the zerg has 3 flank directions and you have 3 marauders, you should still be able to protect your troops. with micro, banelings is NEVER cost effective against MMM, just like how lurkers can eat shyt vs MnM.
As it was said before, there is no such thing as imbalanced, only bad players.
There is no such thing as "banelings overpowered", numerous people can easily micro their way out of banelings with no problem. Just because you are bad at playing the game doesnt mean the unit is imbalanced
The counter to banelings is micro, micro and more micro! (and detection).
If you cant split your rine backwards in a bunch of six into bunches of three, practice, and practice. Please dont just tag something as imbalanced just because you are bad at it.
What, l0l. Please. DeMuslim, TeamEG players, etc. are bad Terran players? What about Louder complaining about Z imbalance? You gotta be kidding me right?
There is no cost effective counter to Banelings, the Z can afford to lose resource trades because he has huge resource/macro advantage over a Terran anyways for the entire game, unless the Zerg player was utterly terrible.
|
I agree that Banelings that do not reach their target should not cause any damage. I don't know if this is what happens with the current version (I haven't really checked), but if something like this happens now then it should definately be removed.
I was looking at some ZvT replays and I know this may be completely off topic, but where did the U-238 upgrade go? (+1 range for Marines) It seems that Hydra (range 6 after upgrade) vs Marine (range 5) always gives Hydras a few shots before the Marines can attack in return. And if that wasn't enough, Marines lose an additional 10hp just to stim, and each attack from a Hydralisk is 12 damage. Dunno why they removed this upgrade. 
|
On March 19 2010 04:35 3D.Strelok wrote:
I am sorry can you explain a bit more? Do you mean reaver-tank thing when tanks goes away from scarab and takes half of damage?
I don't really know which part of my post you are referring to, but I assume it is this part:
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
Yes this is similar to scarabs. A scarab starts exploding, but it takes a while until the damage is actually dealt. During that time the tank moves ot of the 100% damage radius and thus takes less damage. That's what I am suggesting, basically. It is similar with mines, which is why you can defuse mines with drops (so you might be able to "defuse" banes with drops if there is no antiair, which would be cool imo).
In particular my suggestion was meant as an optional addition to MorroW's suggestion (only if it wouldn't be balanced enough already). So banelings will behave most similar to mines, less similar to scarabs. Because as far as I know mines can be killed even after they start exploding, and if they are killed they won't deal any damage (DT, press hold just before the mine reaches the DT, something like that). Scarabs can't be killed so all you can do is run from the splash.
The advantage of changing banelings in this way is that it actually makes room for micro. Focus fire, hit and run etc. Autosurround would do worse, so it also forces zergs to micro more.
|
On March 19 2010 05:06 DeA wrote:I agree that Banelings that do not reach their target should not cause any damage. I don't know if this is what happens with the current version (I haven't really checked), but if something like this happens now then it should definately be removed. I was looking at some ZvT replays and I know this may be completely off topic, but where did the U-238 upgrade go? (+1 range for Marines) It seems that Hydra (range 6 after upgrade) vs Marine (range 5) always gives Hydras a few shots before the Marines can attack in return. And if that wasn't enough, Marines lose an additional 10hp just to stim, and each attack from a Hydralisk is 12 damage. Dunno why they removed this upgrade.
The removal of this upgrade perplexed me too. This upgrade was key to fighting off Mutas in SC1, don't see why they don't have it here either.
|
Yeah it would make sense to bring back this upgrade and probably allow other units to benefit from it (hello Reaper?)
|
On March 19 2010 04:54 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:46 onmach wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't know what terran's fixation is about banelings. Literally they work against two terran units. SCVs and marines. That's it. God forbid a higher tech unit that costs *gas* and takes twice as much time to build should defeat a single tier one unit.
Hellions in amounts greater than or equal to 4, roast banelings in droves, and they don't even cost gas. Marauders, which every terran has, completely demolish banelings if they get in the way. Even the ghost is improbably not classified light and would take 9 banelings to kill him. A couple seigemoded tanks will kill 3 or 4 banelings per shot.
Stop building useless medivacs when you see banelings and build some tanks or hellions instead, and watch as banelings cease to be a problem. Or do what you are doing now, but hotkey your marauders into a special hotkey and move them forward when you see banelings.
And as a sidenote, ultras really are useless against terran. They have pathing issues, so ravens can throw down turrets and render them completely useless. Even without that they die in seconds. You could have 10 ultras and a medium size mmm ball, and the ultras would probably mostly die. It is pretty ludicrous. I never thought I would suggest upgrading ultras, but there you are. They need to be way smaller than they are, but with the same stats. Helions suck against speed lings, and if your wasting gas on Tanks you have no Medivacs and are totally immobile, which results in him Muta harassing you all day until he has 5+ saturated bases and a 200 supply food army. Mauraders are decent counters until speed upgrade, and even then a Z player will never straight up engage from the front, he will always attempt a surround.
Helions do not totally suck against speedlings, are you for real?
6+ helions with soso micro toast through lings. I'm up for a discussion here, but after reading your comments it seems like you've already made up your mind and are arguing for the sake of being right.
|
What, l0l. Please. DeMuslim, TeamEG players, etc. are bad Terran players? What about Louder complaining about Z imbalance? You gotta be kidding me right?
Simply means they are not good enough, but i seriously doubt they are whining specifically about banelings.
This is an e-sport game. and its NOT supposed to be "balanced" just by playing it for 1 month.
No, im not saying its not supposed to be balanced because its a beta.
Im saying its not supposed to be balanced by just one month of playing experience. Do you seriously think those players are playing at the pro level? think again.
Terran has tons of Cost effective options vs banelings.
if they run into one or two marines, thats cost effective.
if they run into single bunkers or supply depots, thats cost effective
any defensive positions with a single tank can cost effectively take out banelings
Hellions can take on any ammount of unburrowed banelings
Even if a tank or marauder dont shoot a single shot, they are STILL cost effective just by virtue of tanking all of them
in short, anything in low numbers counters banelings.
Micro and army management counters banelings, the small things like stimming away, and your marauders behind, then leaving some rines behind, and kiting at the same time are all the things that will help to stay alive.
How can you say that there is "no counter" to banelings? that makes no sense at all. Banelings are absurdly expensive, every single banelings could have been another roach into the army.
|
Marines are your hydra counter? Put in 3-4 siege tanks with ur MmM army and its gg for the zerg unless he has Brood Lords. its really that easy. Banelings are zergs ONLY counter to MmM and you suggest we get rid of it. Why does everyone want MmM to kill zerg so easily?
"You mean i have to do some kind of micro with my marine/maurauder/medivac ball?? o no way thats op" like seriously...? MmM+2-3 siege tanks+a raven = win unless ur going against 4-5 brood lords.
Zerg has ONE and only one counter to Marine balls and its a unit that dies as soon as its used, and costs gas. Were already making a gas unit which NEEDS (speed/burrow) 2 upgrades to be useful against your 50 mineral unit.
I have NO idea how anyone claims banelings are OP at all. And lol at "somthing so maurauders counter baneling" because it only takes like 5-6 banelings to kill a single maurauder atm? not to mention maurauders have a slowing attak against a unit that requires being in melee distance. How this doesnt counter already is beyond me..
Not to mention that if maurauders counter banelings anymore than they do, then they hard counter banelings and roaches= we then have no useful t1 unit against Marine balls as zerg.
You have more units and thus more counters to Zerg units. Hellions and siege tanks already counter hydras (and banelings)hard.Siege Tanks and Maurauders counter roaches and banelings hard. Hellions/marines/maurauders all >lings in numbers.
Ur cheapest unit (marines) counters mutas hard.
Zerg has broodlords that are countered by vikings that are countered by corrupters that are countered by marines and battlecruisers.
Lol and the guy who said "speedlings counter hellions" .. ? how? There is this thing called micro... 4 hellions can whipe out 50+zerglings in seconds if you dont just a-move ur hellions into them. Hellions actually counter all of Zerg t1-t2 ground units except roaches that will NEVER catch a hellion/if you are using ur hellions to fight roaches u deserve to lose.
I will say that zerg has advantage on protoss atm tho, we can get a good amount of speedlings be4 u can get colossus (if and only if ur going colossus, if your going immortals u lose instantly) Usually i build a roach warren just to make P go immortals, at which point a massive ball of speedlings wins.
Sorry just my 2 cents and trying to write coherently while being distracted in my philosophy class.
|
On March 19 2010 05:30 mnofstl007 wrote:
Marines are your hydra counter? Put in 3-4 siege tanks with ur MmM army and its gg for the zerg unless he has Brood Lords. its really that easy. Banelings are zergs ONLY counter to MmM and you suggest we get rid of it. Why does everyone want MmM to kill zerg so easily?
"You mean i have to do some kind of micro with my marine/maurauder/medivac ball?? o no way thats op" like seriously...? MmM+2-3 siege tanks+a raven = win unless ur going against 4-5 brood lords.
Zerg has ONE and only one counter to Marine balls and its a unit that dies as soon as its used, and costs gas. Were already making a gas unit which NEEDS (speed/burrow) 2 upgrades to be useful against your 50 mineral unit.
I have NO idea how anyone claims banelings are OP at all. And lol at "somthing so maurauders counter baneling" because it only takes like 5-6 banelings to kill a single maurauder atm? not to mention maurauders have a slowing attak against a unit that requires being in melee distance. How this doesnt counter already is beyond me..
Not to mention that if maurauders counter banelings anymore than they do, then they hard counter banelings and roaches= we then have no useful t1 unit against Marine balls as zerg.
You have more units and thus more counters to Zerg units. Hellions and siege tanks already counter hydras (and banelings)hard.Siege Tanks and Maurauders counter roaches and banelings hard. Hellions/marines/maurauders all >lings in numbers.
Ur cheapest unit (marines) counters mutas hard.
Zerg has broodlords that are countered by vikings that are countered by corrupters that are countered by marines and battlecruisers.
Lol and the guy who said "speedlings counter hellions" .. ? how? There is this thing called micro... 4 hellions can whipe out 50+zerglings in seconds if you dont just a-move ur hellions into them. Hellions actually counter all of Zerg t1-t2 ground units except roaches that will NEVER catch a hellion/if you are using ur hellions to fight roaches u deserve to lose.
I will say that zerg has advantage on protoss atm tho, we can get a good amount of speedlings be4 u can get colossus (if and only if ur going colossus, if your going immortals u lose instantly) Usually i build a roach warren just to make P go immortals, at which point a massive ball of speedlings wins.
Sorry just my 2 cents and trying to write coherently while being distracted in my philosophy class.
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 19 2010 05:30 mnofstl007 wrote:
Marines are your hydra counter? Put in 3-4 siege tanks with ur MmM army and its gg for the zerg unless he has Brood Lords. its really that easy. Banelings are zergs ONLY counter to MmM and you suggest we get rid of it. Why does everyone want MmM to kill zerg so easily?
"You mean i have to do some kind of micro with my marine/maurauder/medivac ball?? o no way thats op" like seriously...? MmM+2-3 siege tanks+a raven = win unless ur going against 4-5 brood lords.
Zerg has ONE and only one counter to Marine balls and its a unit that dies as soon as its used, and costs gas. Were already making a gas unit which NEEDS (speed/burrow) 2 upgrades to be useful against your 50 mineral unit.
I have NO idea how anyone claims banelings are OP at all. And lol at "somthing so maurauders counter baneling" because it only takes like 5-6 banelings to kill a single maurauder atm? not to mention maurauders have a slowing attak against a unit that requires being in melee distance. How this doesnt counter already is beyond me..
Not to mention that if maurauders counter banelings anymore than they do, then they hard counter banelings and roaches= we then have no useful t1 unit against Marine balls as zerg.
You have more units and thus more counters to Zerg units. Hellions and siege tanks already counter hydras (and banelings)hard.Siege Tanks and Maurauders counter roaches and banelings hard. Hellions/marines/maurauders all >lings in numbers.
Ur cheapest unit (marines) counters mutas hard.
Zerg has broodlords that are countered by vikings that are countered by corrupters that are countered by marines and battlecruisers.
Lol and the guy who said "speedlings counter hellions" .. ? how? There is this thing called micro... 4 hellions can whipe out 50+zerglings in seconds if you dont just a-move ur hellions into them. Hellions actually counter all of Zerg t1-t2 ground units except roaches that will NEVER catch a hellion/if you are using ur hellions to fight roaches u deserve to lose.
I will say that zerg has advantage on protoss atm tho, we can get a good amount of speedlings be4 u can get colossus (if and only if ur going colossus, if your going immortals u lose instantly) Usually i build a roach warren just to make P go immortals, at which point a massive ball of speedlings wins.
Sorry just my 2 cents and trying to write coherently while being distracted in my philosophy class.
You don't need burrow at all. 2-3 siege tanks can be easily be ignored if you got mass spling/bling. Hellions are less useful in large battles because you can't micro with them and even if you do you will just move behind your MMM force and thus open the way for the lings.
4 hellions with micro don't wipe out 50+ lings if the lings are microed too.
|
you can't count scenarios where its one unit against another one unit to see whether it counters. scenarios are different with higher number of units. 4 hellions are only worth 16 lings...how about 13 hellions vs 52 lings, that seems to be fine and if you micro correctly should be no problem.
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
That would be terrible and make the unit useless for any top-ladder players.
All it would required is to split army for two binds, move with one, attack with second, then move second and attack with first. Even if banelings get to your army, they would blow up in space where terran is no longer standing.
|
On March 19 2010 04:23 hellitsaboutme wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 04:05 3D.Strelok wrote:On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely. Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo! Second thing. I am terran user. Before making solution i have reached top-2 of platinum and 2000+++ points with playing over 600 games. I have no clue what's going on in zvp or pvp matchup. I won't win even 1500 zerg in zvz how the hell i can ask for changing balance? And who the hell are you to tell me what to do and judge about wisdom of my suggestions in such a thone? Make attitude to my words and arguments. Not to myself please! I think you got me wrong. I didn't say anything about your personality. By saying to make suggestion wisely I mean consider all PROS and CONS. I bring my apologizes about тянуть одеяло. You've played so many games. I don't doubt your skills. Have you reached that stage of game where you had like 6-7 ravens with researched HSM vs platinum zerg? I guess not often, because you never survive to that late, you win or die. What I am trying to say is that if banelings (or mutas whatever) are nerfed then most probably the game will continue to late macro stage where you get a lot of ravens (like tons of vessels before). But zergs won't have decent counter for them, eventhough he will make a lot of Ultras. Ultras will die constantly clashing to your army but not Ravens.
And tell me, have you ever seen a zerg win in 10 minutes against Terran?
This is a VERY specific match up, Zerg cant rush terran due to walling-in and Terran gets problem attacking as well, since upgraded banelings on creep are impossible to get away from.
This is a macro war, and late game is what matters here. Majority of games I've seen from Zotac cups are almost always 20 minutes plus, while I saw some ZvP and Zvz under 8 minutes.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I have around 30% of my games as random, around 20% as Terran and 50% as Zerg. Almost 500 played.
|
zerg has nothing to counter mnm ball except banelings, if u nerf banelings theres no way to play tvz,
mutas are horrible right now u cant even micro them, with timed engering bay, u can get 3 turrets easy, and mnm just counters muta, banelings are needed like lurkers to defeat marines, if ur whining about how zerg can attack from all sides, then dont put your self in that situation, dont blame a unit's "imba" for your terrible skills.
|
On March 19 2010 06:01 frankcrest wrote:
zerg has nothing to counter mnm ball except banelings, if u nerf banelings theres no way to play tvz,
mutas are horrible right now u cant even micro them, with timed engering bay, u can get 3 turrets easy, and mnm just counters muta, banelings are needed like lurkers to defeat marines, if ur whining about how zerg can attack from all sides, then dont put your self in that situation, dont blame a unit's "imba" for your terrible skills.
So you need a unit that keeps me inside my base the entire time to win the game. Yup, totally fair.
You guys are calling for nerfs on HSM when we can't even get there in time because Baneling/Roach ambushes keep you contained for too long. If a Terran steps outside of his base, 100% of the time he will get ambushed from 2 sides, because he will not have vision of the whole map like the Z player will.
Your argument is for us to "play better"? Ok fine then. My argument to Zerg players when facing HSM is to "play better" then.
|
I don't know why Zerg players are complaining about HSM. I am a Zerg player and I think if they nerf HSM it would probably be the dumbest thing ever...
|
On March 19 2010 05:58 Defrag wrote:
That would be terrible and make the unit useless for any top-ladder players.
All it would required is to split army for two binds, move with one, attack with second, then move second and attack with first. Even if banelings get to your army, they would blow up in space where terran is no longer standing.
You know that there are those things called Speedlings that easily get to the rear of your army and block your retreat path? And other units like Hydralisks that are free to shoot at your retreating marines? And Infestors that fungal growth your MMM ball making it impossible to move at all?
Sure if you go all baneling you might lose all the time. But wouldn't that be expected?
On March 19 2010 06:01 frankcrest wrote:
zerg has nothing to counter mnm ball except banelings, if u nerf banelings theres no way to play tvz,
mutas are horrible right now u cant even micro them, with timed engering bay, u can get 3 turrets easy, and mnm just counters muta, banelings are needed like lurkers to defeat marines, if ur whining about how zerg can attack from all sides, then dont put your self in that situation, dont blame a unit's "imba" for your terrible skills.
Sure banelings are needed to counter marines. But the question is: Do they counter them too effectively? By the way, I am playing zerg @ platinum.
|
On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues.
If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win?
And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back?
|
Bring a number of SCVs and run them into the Banelings. I've found it works well a lot of the time (i'm at platinum level).
One might argue that their mineral mining capacity will be wasted, but my retort would be that you would have 2 scenarios:
1) Early game - Pulling out SCVs right before reaching mineral saturation will be bad for mid game economy? I would guess so,but I value them higher at this point the game since they act as baneling fodder.
2) Mid/End game - Pulling them out would not have any significant economic impact (as much) since your main CC would have been saturated by now. Take the time to make a few SCVs to take the hits.
It may not be the best strat but it works for me. Z would have to micro them around SCVs to not waste them.
Here's an example:
http://www.mediafire.com/?0dzqwhzyhjy
|
On March 19 2010 06:18 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 05:58 Defrag wrote:
That would be terrible and make the unit useless for any top-ladder players.
All it would required is to split army for two binds, move with one, attack with second, then move second and attack with first. Even if banelings get to your army, they would blow up in space where terran is no longer standing. You know that there are those things called Speedlings that easily get to the rear of your army and block your retreat path? And other units like Hydralisks that are free to shoot at your retreating marines? And Infestors that fungal growth your MMM ball making it impossible to move at all? Sure if you go all baneling you might lose all the time. But wouldn't that be expected? Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:01 frankcrest wrote:
zerg has nothing to counter mnm ball except banelings, if u nerf banelings theres no way to play tvz,
mutas are horrible right now u cant even micro them, with timed engering bay, u can get 3 turrets easy, and mnm just counters muta, banelings are needed like lurkers to defeat marines, if ur whining about how zerg can attack from all sides, then dont put your self in that situation, dont blame a unit's "imba" for your terrible skills. Sure banelings are needed to counter marines. But the question is: Do they counter them too effectively? By the way, I am playing zerg @ platinum.
Using a Infestor so tier 1 unit can be effective sounds like one of the most stupid ideas that could be implemented into game. Thats like putting a 'ammo carrier' on Terran's Factory so marines can reload after 20s of shooting ;o
Speedlings against a late-game MMM? Good luck with that, before you get to the rear and block, a 2 or 3 upgraded dmg MMM will rip you to shreds ( not mentioning about marauders slow, which stops from surrunding ).
Hydralisks are 2 slow, not even comparing to stimpacked units.
The thing is, beta is one big copy-strat fest, once people see replays from Zotac or something familiar - everyone plays MMM, or fast helion rushes.
I just played with against z Terran ( as Zerg ) that destroyed me completetly, two games in a row, and I lost against 3-4 terrans in last 2 weeks, being top20 in plat. He's just playing something original, and hard to adapt against, but well... people mass bio, attack-move and wonder why mass baneling rapes them ;o
|
Those of you suggesting hellions are missing quite an important point, hellions costs high minerals as well as marines. Basically you can't spend all your minerals on hellions AND marines, but you need both, one to defend against muta, and the other against baneling. Another problem is that if your pumping out hellions you must have at least 2 facts and so the muta harass is just going to roll you over because you don't have enough barracks pumping marines, and if you don't have enough hellions the banelings are going to roll you over. If they want to make 2 viable builds, mech and bio, they need to make thors better vs air and marines better vs banelings, if they don't want two builds then they need to make either marines a lot better vs mutas or hellions a lot better vs banelings if you have to have a mix. Although i do understand the argument that a lot of terrans a attack move with their ball and don't really micro much so maybe it's just a question of micro, maybe not.
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
haha i wouldnt miss a single thread in sc2 with "baneling" in it
hell im even singing songs for myself in the shower of how imbalanced they r
"Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW."
yes thats EXACTLY what i want them to change, love when ppl understand :D
gonna keep readin this lovely thread now
|
On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Using a Infestor so tier 1 unit can be effective sounds like one of the most stupid ideas that could be implemented into game. Thats like putting a 'ammo carrier' on Terran's Factory so marines can reload after 20s of shooting ;o
Wow, this really hurts. I'm sorry, but a lot of units in SCBW and SC2 become much more useful if combined with other units or supplemened by upgrades that don't have to be and often are not of the same tech level.
Prime example: MMMR
On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Speedlings against a late-game MMM? Good luck with that, before you get to the rear and block, a 2 or 3 upgraded dmg MMM will rip you to shreds ( not mentioning about marauders slow, which stops from surrunding ).
Yep, speedlings against late game MMM. You know that for every +dmg on the marines the lings should have a +armor? Lings deal significant damage and you have tons of minerals that you can't spend on anything but lings. "getting to the rear" isn't done by running straight at the MMM ball and then around it. You can easily chose a safe path and come from the back with half your army.
On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Hydralisks are 2 slow, not even comparing to stimpacked units.
They are fast enough. Especially on creep.
On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
The thing is, beta is one big copy-strat fest, once people see replays from Zotac or something familiar - everyone plays MMM, or fast helion rushes.
I just played with against z Terran ( as Zerg ) that destroyed me completetly, two games in a row, and I lost against 3-4 terrans in last 2 weeks, being top20 in plat. He's just playing something original, and hard to adapt against, but well... people mass bio, attack-move and wonder why mass baneling rapes them ;o
So, what did he do? Chances are that this build is not capable of finishing the game reliably and then we are back to the MMM ball again.
|
Banelings dealing damage when they're killed is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't even care about any associated game balance, they shouldn't deal damage when they die.
|
France231 Posts
On March 19 2010 06:37 mnofstl007 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues. If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win? And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back?
From my experience, speedling are faster than hellion. I spend my days microing hellion tvz as it is currently my standart bo and it's REALLY easy for zerg to exchange hellions with speedlings.
I'm not a total newb as i'm top 5 platinum, so my micro isn't bad.
And btw, no zerg will go straight to muta, they will make just enough roach for your hellion to not do anything, so your argument " but if muta you kill drone lolzor " isn't really valid.
And marines won't hard counter mutas, he'll just avoid them and harasse you.
|
On March 19 2010 07:23 crate wrote:
Banelings dealing damage when they're killed is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't even care about any associated game balance, they shouldn't deal damage when they die.
Well it does makes sense since they're a big fat ball of acid so however they pop, stuff nearby is going to get burned. Perhaps they could make it so the bonus damage to light units isn't applied when they are shot as opposed to detonated though, so killing them in time would drop their damage from 35 to 15 on marines who are probably their number 1 target.
|
I agree that banelings shouldn't deal damage from being killed, I see that as more of a glitch than a feature considering nothing in the starcraft universe (spider mines/infested kerrigans) behaves that way. Yeah, I know SC2 is a whole new game etc, etc, but I believe there must have been a thought behind the way spider mines/infested kerrigans work and I can't see that having changed.
|
my ZvT sux so hard it's unspeakable
some of my opponents told me that banelings should work, but they dont, if the T's army is big enough. That marauder-marine-medivac (maybe a copule of tanks) flood seems to have no counter on the world, i've been trying everything, but everything fails. They obliterate the banelings befor thye could do the dmg, on lower levels baneling-traps worked, but on higher levels nobody falls for that anymore :s
|
On March 19 2010 07:34 Ninja4ever. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:37 mnofstl007 wrote:On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues. If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win? And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back? From my experience, speedling are faster than hellion. I spend my days microing hellion tvz as it is currently my standart bo and it's REALLY easy for zerg to exchange hellions with speedlings. I'm not a total newb as i'm top 5 platinum, so my micro isn't bad. And btw, no zerg will go straight to muta, they will make just enough roach for your hellion to not do anything, so your argument " but if muta you kill drone lolzor " isn't really valid. And marines won't hard counter mutas, he'll just avoid them and harasse you.
Actually the real problem is if you open hellion/marine roaches will just demolish you. You also use up all your minerals so your only options vs roach would be ravens with HSM and by the time you get that zerg can expo the map, and because HSM costs so much you can't use it in one battle and have it ready for the next. I'd like to see an upgrade for total raven energy so you can save up for 2 hsms =/
I'm really at a loss with TvZ.
|
On March 19 2010 07:39 Bane_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 07:23 crate wrote:
Banelings dealing damage when they're killed is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't even care about any associated game balance, they shouldn't deal damage when they die. Well it does makes sense since they're a big fat ball of acid so however they pop, stuff nearby is going to get burned. Perhaps they could make it so the bonus damage to light units isn't applied when they are shot as opposed to detonated though, so killing them in time would drop their damage from 35 to 15 on marines who are probably their number 1 target.
By that logic, should tanks blowing up also make splash damage when they die? no... you can't look at it that way.
|
On March 19 2010 07:22 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Using a Infestor so tier 1 unit can be effective sounds like one of the most stupid ideas that could be implemented into game. Thats like putting a 'ammo carrier' on Terran's Factory so marines can reload after 20s of shooting ;o
Wow, this really hurts. I'm sorry, but a lot of units in SCBW and SC2 become much more useful if combined with other units or supplemened by upgrades that don't have to be and often are not of the same tech level. Prime example: MMMR Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Speedlings against a late-game MMM? Good luck with that, before you get to the rear and block, a 2 or 3 upgraded dmg MMM will rip you to shreds ( not mentioning about marauders slow, which stops from surrunding ).
Yep, speedlings against late game MMM. You know that for every +dmg on the marines the lings should have a +armor? Lings deal significant damage and you have tons of minerals that you can't spend on anything but lings. "getting to the rear" isn't done by running straight at the MMM ball and then around it. You can easily chose a safe path and come from the back with half your army. Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
Hydralisks are 2 slow, not even comparing to stimpacked units.
They are fast enough. Especially on creep. Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:54 Defrag wrote:
The thing is, beta is one big copy-strat fest, once people see replays from Zotac or something familiar - everyone plays MMM, or fast helion rushes.
I just played with against z Terran ( as Zerg ) that destroyed me completetly, two games in a row, and I lost against 3-4 terrans in last 2 weeks, being top20 in plat. He's just playing something original, and hard to adapt against, but well... people mass bio, attack-move and wonder why mass baneling rapes them ;o So, what did he do? Chances are that this build is not capable of finishing the game reliably and then we are back to the MMM ball again.
Dude, you are giving a specific situations where your theory looks fine, other then that - not.
Two units combined being more useful - completly fine with me, as its now with infestor baneling. But reading with comprehention please - I meant that slow banelings that need time to explode ( especially when standing in place to blow up ) would be USELESS without infestors, and thats not 'making unit work better' but 'work at all'.
Example about hydralisks, yes, they are fast on creep, but take that siutation and put your theory about speedlings there, their surround: its not going to happen - if you are on creep ( so hydras got speed ) it means you are getting attacked, and before you 'choose another path' with speedlings, your whole army plus half base will be already destroyed.
Last point, he did fast hellions variation with air harras, but I didint see it in that form yet, and his playstyle was terribly annoying. Probably best terran I've played against so far.
Banelings ARE very good, but are you surprised they are overused? Not like 90% of terrans play MMM and thats it. It's same way it was with roaches against protoss, million whines about how overpowered roach rush is, people learned a fast immortal push and destroy it, so a lot of players switched to speedlings. Same is going to happen here, as soon as terran's mech get buffed and some people drop playing MMM every game, banelings are going to be used less frequently. But by that time, someone will probably find an effective way to deal with them.
|
I would say I'm winning 2 out of 3 of my ZvTs at 1250 Plat without using banelings (or burrow) at all, but maybe the terran I'm playing just suck. I think ZvT can be done without banelings.. but after reading this thread I think I need to try them out more ^^
|
The problem isn't banelings. The problem is Terran players are so reliant on using tier 1 units to win games. Blizzard already stated they are looking into Terran's mech. Once those changes go in the banelings won't be such a hard counter to terran because you won't be massing MMM to win every game.
|
On March 19 2010 07:56 Defrag wrote:
Dude, you are giving a specific situations where your theory looks fine, other then that - not.
Two units combined being more useful - completly fine with me, as its now with infestor baneling. But reading with comprehention please - I meant that slow banelings that need time to explode ( especially when standing in place to blow up ) would be USELESS without infestors, and thats not 'making unit work better' but 'work at all'.
Example about hydralisks, yes, they are fast on creep, but take that siutation and put your theory about speedlings there, their surround: its not going to happen - if you are on creep ( so hydras got speed ) it means you are getting attacked, and before you 'choose another path' with speedlings, your whole army plus half base will be already destroyed.
Last point, he did fast hellions variation with air harras, but I didint see it in that form yet, and his playstyle was terribly annoying. Probably best terran I've played against so far.
Banelings ARE very good, but are you surprised they are overused? Not like 90% of terrans play MMM and thats it. It's same way it was with roaches against protoss, million whines about how overpowered roach rush is, people learned a fast immortal push and destroy it, so a lot of players switched to speedlings. Same is going to happen here, as soon as terran's mech get buffed and some people drop playing MMM every game, banelings are going to be used less frequently. But by that time, someone will probably find an effective way to deal with them.
Banelings won't be useless that way. You are exaggerating this horribly. The delay between starting to explode and dealing damage can be tweaked. It's not like I said "make it 10 seconds". It could be just enough to get a few marines out of the splash radius, but not all. And spling/bling is easily strong enough to get banelings into positions where you CAN'T evade easily anymore.
Good zergs cover the whole map in creep. Maps are currently very small in SC2. Good zergs don't attack into the base of a terran unless they have a huge advantage. So it is very likely that most important battles happen (partly) on creep.
I know from my own experience that speedling surrounds are extremely easy to pull off, especially if you got the map covered in creep and thus have insanely fast zerglings and a ton of scouting information. A terran army isn't nearly fast enough to destroy destroy anything before my surround is set up.
Air is a very common followup to hellions actually. But you can deal with the hellions just fine and still get your hydras up in time. It's not like that terran build is completely useless, but it surely doesn't outright win the game. It's very similar to vult -> wraith builds in tvz. Tons of harrass but in the end the terran is not as far ahead as it seems during the harrass.
In the end such a build is either all-in or only tries to get enough damage done to be able to expand and switch to MMM.
|
On March 19 2010 07:51 HyDRa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 07:39 Bane_ wrote:On March 19 2010 07:23 crate wrote:
Banelings dealing damage when they're killed is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't even care about any associated game balance, they shouldn't deal damage when they die. Well it does makes sense since they're a big fat ball of acid so however they pop, stuff nearby is going to get burned. Perhaps they could make it so the bonus damage to light units isn't applied when they are shot as opposed to detonated though, so killing them in time would drop their damage from 35 to 15 on marines who are probably their number 1 target. By that logic, should tanks blowing up also make splash damage when they die? no... you can't look at it that way.
What a fine idea, maybe they should do so?
|
As a ~1500 platinum Terran, I am also having trouble dealing with early speedling+baneling contain into losing the entire map. I have died so many times to zergs simply pinning me back to 1base (best case scenario 2) with speedlings and banelings, then roflstomp me with anything because there is no way to keep up production with zerg taking up the entire map.
Most people that are talking cost-effectiveness and late game don't seem to realize that the game never gets to late game because Terran can't expand, and because zerg has more bases he can afford to be less cost effective... it's the same idea as 1 million dollars to Bill Gates.
I might just rush banshees or do a 4hellion rush and pray for the best. I don't know how else to safely expand and it is very frustrating.
|
Sooooo are you proposing a nerf for banelings or a buff for some terran units? In my opinion to counter the banelings right now the best way, is to decrease their AoE but then again zerg can get so many of them its hard.
Now,banelings are a great unit and I really don't wanna see them nerfed and be relegated to only killing buildings but with the muta combination its almost impossible to stop the muta-baneling-zergling strat into broodlords.
Right now my proposition is to buff the helion. Their attack rate needs to be much much faster considering they need to be stationery to fire.
|
On March 19 2010 18:53 G3nXsiS wrote:
Right now my proposition is to buff the helion. Their attack rate needs to be much much faster considering they need to be stationery to fire.
As I understand that it is an incorrect statement. Helions animation is long, you can animation cancel it and still get damage done. If you don't understand what I mean play some DotA with a ranged unit chasing another hero, you do not wait until the attack hits, only until it is launched.
|
On March 19 2010 19:16 Sosseres wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 18:53 G3nXsiS wrote:
Right now my proposition is to buff the helion. Their attack rate needs to be much much faster considering they need to be stationery to fire. As I understand that it is an incorrect statement. Helions animation is long, you can animation cancel it and still get damage done. If you don't understand what I mean play some DotA with a ranged unit chasing another hero, you do not wait until the attack hits, only until it is launched.
Ah! that is something I didn't think about considering I don't really use helions much. Perhaps decreasing their animation time would go hand in hand with increasing the attack speed as its pretty hard to micro the helions during the battle. But yeah I totally get what you mean.
|
On March 19 2010 07:34 Ninja4ever. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:37 mnofstl007 wrote:On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues. If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win? And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back? From my experience, speedling are faster than hellion. I spend my days microing hellion tvz as it is currently my standart bo and it's REALLY easy for zerg to exchange hellions with speedlings. I'm not a total newb as i'm top 5 platinum, so my micro isn't bad. And btw, no zerg will go straight to muta, they will make just enough roach for your hellion to not do anything, so your argument " but if muta you kill drone lolzor " isn't really valid. And marines won't hard counter mutas, he'll just avoid them and harasse you.
Lings aren't really good against large # of hellions . 8 Hellions can kill a shit ton of lings with the upgrade for light damage and micro even 4 or 6 hellions are hard to stop with lings even with speed upgrade .
|
here is the deal - former top sc1 players get raped by Dimaga over and over again. Since they cant accept someone is just plain better than them, they call imbalance. Good lord ive had more than my fair share of formerly good sc1 players crying about imbalance like a lil baby after they lost to me just because im not a known sc1 player and they feel they have to beat me or else it must be imbalance. (Not saying that about strelok though, he is as mannered as the other ukranians).
|
On March 19 2010 19:16 Sosseres wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 18:53 G3nXsiS wrote:
Right now my proposition is to buff the helion. Their attack rate needs to be much much faster considering they need to be stationery to fire. As I understand that it is an incorrect statement. Helions animation is long, you can animation cancel it and still get damage done. If you don't understand what I mean play some DotA with a ranged unit chasing another hero, you do not wait until the attack hits, only until it is launched.
DotA players giving advice, what has the world come to
|
On March 19 2010 21:39 diehilde wrote:
here is the deal - former top sc1 players get raped by Dimaga over and over again. Since they cant accept someone is just plain better than them, they call imbalance. Good lord ive had more than my fair share of formerly good sc1 players crying about imbalance like a lil baby after they lost to me just because im not a known sc1 player and they feel they have to beat me or else it must be imbalance. (Not saying that about strelok though, he is as mannered as the other ukranians).
It's kinda strange that every zerg player is better than every terran player though. Obviously DIMAGA is a skilled player but at this point its pretty much Z>T
|
On March 19 2010 07:39 Bane_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 07:23 crate wrote:
Banelings dealing damage when they're killed is ridiculous. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't even care about any associated game balance, they shouldn't deal damage when they die. Well it does makes sense since they're a big fat ball of acid so however they pop, stuff nearby is going to get burned. Perhaps they could make it so the bonus damage to light units isn't applied when they are shot as opposed to detonated though, so killing them in time would drop their damage from 35 to 15 on marines who are probably their number 1 target.
when baneling kills themself they stretch all their muscles pushing the acid from all sides until the acid tube cant take it and then it explodes
but when the baneling dies and u shoot hole in the acid tank it wont fly everywhere, its just gonna leak down in the ground
it makes no sense at all that it deals dmg upon death
|
On March 19 2010 21:39 diehilde wrote:
here is the deal - former top sc1 players get raped by Dimaga over and over again. Since they cant accept someone is just plain better than them, they call imbalance. Good lord ive had more than my fair share of formerly good sc1 players crying about imbalance like a lil baby after they lost to me just because im not a known sc1 player and they feel they have to beat me or else it must be imbalance. (Not saying that about strelok though, he is as mannered as the other ukranians).
Uh, what? DeMuslim is a former SC1 player? A bunch of Terran and Toss players both say Zerg has significant advantages over both races. They have macro advantages AND hardcounters in this game. In SC1, Zerg at best had "soft" counters and big macro advantages, so it was actually feasible to win with 2 bases vs a 3 base Z in SC1. Hell, you could even do 3 base vs 5 base Z and end up winning in SC1 as either Terran or Toss.
If you watch every TvZ replay, the Terran is in best case scenario pinned to his expansion for most of the game. It is virtually impossible for him to obain a 2nd expansion against any decent Z player, because Z has Baneling/Speedling/Muta combo to keep him inside his base with contain, or Roach/Hydra/Baneling ambushes to threaten the T player (can't win without tanks and infantry upgrades, both which take heavy amounts of gas).
Also on top of this, the current map pool really sucks towards Terran. Desert Oasis, Blistering Sands, and Scrap Yard all HEAVILY favor Z. In fact, almost none of these maps favor a Terran player at the moment (except maybe Kulas Ravine where you might be able to get away with an early 3rd expansion, basically the only map Terran could feasibly get his 2nd expo on).
And it sure as hell isn't because we haven't tried everything. I've watched Terran players do things ranging from FEing, to Mech, to mass early Helions into Air, some tried to fast siege with mass Marines early, etc. and the majority of them have lost. I've tried 1 rax FE, single base 3 rax all in, tried to do mid game timing attacks after establishing expo, etc. and it's simply ridiculous how the second I walk outside my base, I can lose over half of my army in a second (yet Zerg players in the HSM thread are complaining about a skill I should realistically never get to).
|
On March 19 2010 20:53 raga4ka wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 07:34 Ninja4ever. wrote:On March 19 2010 06:37 mnofstl007 wrote:On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues. If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win? And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back? From my experience, speedling are faster than hellion. I spend my days microing hellion tvz as it is currently my standart bo and it's REALLY easy for zerg to exchange hellions with speedlings. I'm not a total newb as i'm top 5 platinum, so my micro isn't bad. And btw, no zerg will go straight to muta, they will make just enough roach for your hellion to not do anything, so your argument " but if muta you kill drone lolzor " isn't really valid. And marines won't hard counter mutas, he'll just avoid them and harasse you. Lings aren't really good against large # of hellions . 8 Hellions can kill a shit ton of lings with the upgrade for light damage and micro even 4 or 6 hellions are hard to stop with lings even with speed upgrade .
Mass speed lings vs 4 Helions = win for Z.
|
An easy fix would be making thors do short range splash damage instead of burst damage to a single target or giving thor a base armor of 2 or 3. Currently thors are complete garbage against mutas contrary to what you might think from reading the tooltip. Thors are good at tanking banelings but are fairly terrible at complimenting the rest of T's arsenal.
Another idea is perhaps a speed upgrade or armor upgrade for hellions.
The real issue has been stated several times in this thread although people seem to be going on about "oh yeah dont expect it to be balanced" and "blah blah autowin."
And that issue is with out ample drone harass early, the zerg gains a substantial economic lead which can be used to contain the terran (with baneling ball) in order to further the economic advantage and ultimately out produce him with any number of options.
So as a recap. Currently terran needs early drone harass, ie hellion/banshee rush.
If this fails, the game is all but over against a skilled zerg.
The issue isnt whether the baneling/ling ball is cost effective at the time of purchase, but rather that the initial investment made by the zerg contains the terran in that if the terran pushes out, he is very likely to autolose and if he doesnt push out, the zerg takes a quick 3rd and outproduces the terran.
btw: does anyone know how to beat muta/baneling/ling/ultra? it seems impossible to beat as terran.
|
Think there is a simple solution to this problem: Just as siege tanks do friendly fire damage, make banelings do ff damage when they explode.
This will force the zerg player micro a lot more and not just roll over the marines with one big bunch of banelings.
I (plat) was just on a 13 win streak game as terran and lost game 14 to a zerg.
I have been micro my marines a lot, spreading them out and sacrificing 1 or 2 to blow up the banelings. This game the zerg just made a few too many banelings and it was impossible to manage it.
I think my suggestion of friendly fire explosion would make it require equal micro for the both the zerg and terran in the mm vs ling/baneling fight.
|
On March 20 2010 00:37 NOTIP wrote:
Think there is a simple solution to this problem: Just as siege tanks do friendly fire damage, make banelings do ff damage when they explode.
This will force the zerg player micro a lot more and not just roll over the marines with one big bunch of banelings.
I (plat) was just on a 13 win streak game as terran and lost game 14 to a zerg.
I have been micro my marines a lot, spreading them out and sacrificing 1 or 2 to blow up the banelings. This game the zerg just made a few too many banelings and it was impossible to manage it.
I think my suggestion of friendly fire explosion would make it require equal micro for the both the zerg and terran in the mm vs ling/baneling fight.
If two banelings dies it would trigger a chain reaction killing the whole zerg army lol!
|
I'm not sure after reading the OP - have you tried using Hellions with their upgrade, both on their own and with the rest of your units?
edit:
If you don't believe me - try to micro 1 baneling with hellion.
Hellions do splash right? Why do you give an example of 1 against 1?
Also don't you need Medivacs anyways? Can some of them be used to rescue your Hellions when they get surrounded?
|
On March 19 2010 22:42 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 20:53 raga4ka wrote:On March 19 2010 07:34 Ninja4ever. wrote:On March 19 2010 06:37 mnofstl007 wrote:On March 19 2010 05:40 superstartran wrote:
You're dumb. Speedlings can surround 4 Helions so fast it's not even funny. Sure, if you invested 2k minerals + gas into the attack upgrade, yeah Helions rape Lings. But if you put that many resources into Helions, he's gonna scout it and go into Mutas and rofl all over you.
how? How do you let a slower unit get a surround on you? Even if they manage to kill 4 hellions with attack upgrade (curious how this is 2000 minerals btw care to share your math?) You have doneit at the cost of a LOT of your lings which NEED the 100/100 upgrade to even stand a chance of killing a hellion. Lings without the 100/100 are free food to even a single hellion unless you dont know how to micro a hellion. If a zerg chases a running hellion, it stops and shoots a line of fire straight through all of your lings. Repeat. How can hellions lose to lings? Only way is if a better play is playing Z and the T player isnt micro'ing, but analyzing a scenario in which one is obviously better is useless for balance issues. If he goes mass muta what is keeping ur hellions from killing all of his workers? Also- build marines? they cost 50 minerals and counter Muta's hard. U have a barracks, at least one. If you know "he is going spire" and didnt stop producing hellions an change into a something that can kill muta's...why should u win? And to the person who said u cant micro hellions in a battle... why? And if he is using banelings why would u want ur hellions in the back? From my experience, speedling are faster than hellion. I spend my days microing hellion tvz as it is currently my standart bo and it's REALLY easy for zerg to exchange hellions with speedlings. I'm not a total newb as i'm top 5 platinum, so my micro isn't bad. And btw, no zerg will go straight to muta, they will make just enough roach for your hellion to not do anything, so your argument " but if muta you kill drone lolzor " isn't really valid. And marines won't hard counter mutas, he'll just avoid them and harasse you. Lings aren't really good against large # of hellions . 8 Hellions can kill a shit ton of lings with the upgrade for light damage and micro even 4 or 6 hellions are hard to stop with lings even with speed upgrade . Mass speed lings vs 4 Helions = win for Z.
when you say things like this, it makes people ignore you
|
On March 20 2010 03:19 beetlelisk wrote:I'm not sure after reading the OP - have you tried using Hellions with their upgrade, both on their own and with the rest of your units? edit: Hellions do splash right? Why do you give an example of 1 against 1? Also don't you need Medivacs anyways? Can some of them be used to rescue your Hellions when they get surrounded?
hellions are useless vs so many speed ling
|
On March 20 2010 04:40 Tarson wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 03:19 beetlelisk wrote:I'm not sure after reading the OP - have you tried using Hellions with their upgrade, both on their own and with the rest of your units? edit: If you don't believe me - try to micro 1 baneling with hellion. Hellions do splash right? Why do you give an example of 1 against 1? Also don't you need Medivacs anyways? Can some of them be used to rescue your Hellions when they get surrounded? hellions are useless vs so many speed ling
It's hard to imagine 24 splash damage to be useless you know :/ correct me if I'm wrong but that's Hellion attack versus light targets after it's upgrade at Tech Lab?
edit: nvm uploading a screenshot, I don't see anything changing that in the patch notes
|
It surely gives a lot of advantage to zerg in early game but if banellings do no dmg when they die, it will be a big disadvantage for zerg. Banellings are weak in late games as rines gets extra health and the attack upgrade for mm makes alot of difference. personally tvz is my strongest. Also about position it's same as starcraft 1 it depends on how you position and how you attack while your opponent is not prepared. Scout with scv and fight in a good position. don't forget the tanks in tvz(really rapes hydra )
|
On March 19 2010 06:59 UdderChaos wrote:
Those of you suggesting hellions are missing quite an important point, hellions costs high minerals as well as marines
lol?
|
@ Tarson and Strelok: you know about this upgrade and you have tried using Hellions after researching it right?
Otherwise... oh my god there is no micro in this game -____-
On March 20 2010 05:34 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 06:59 UdderChaos wrote:
Those of you suggesting hellions are missing quite an important point, hellions costs high minerals as well as marines lol?
ROFL hahahahaha
|
I think some cost or build time should be increased. Because after one battle zerg recovers really fast.
Banelings still can be killed by anything: hellion, tanks, maradeurs.
The problem is that zerg gets them very quickly and controls map right away.
Don't nerf it to be useless, nerf it to be hard to get.
|
|
|
I think they should change banelings to not do all of its damage instantly. Make it do its damage over time so that yes they will still kill everything they do now but it still lets the hit units survive a little longer. Kinda like plague but from rolling balls from hell.
|
On March 19 2010 21:39 diehilde wrote:
here is the deal - former top sc1 players get raped by Dimaga over and over again. Since they cant accept someone is just plain better than them, they call imbalance. Good lord ive had more than my fair share of formerly good sc1 players crying about imbalance like a lil baby after they lost to me just because im not a known sc1 player and they feel they have to beat me or else it must be imbalance. (Not saying that about strelok though, he is as mannered as the other ukranians).
Since your post also refers a bit to me; Its ridiculous that Zerg players think they are plainly playing better than any other player. Its just not true; right now Zerg is overpowered and if you play your race right, you shouldn't lose! If you could accept it, I wouldn't even mind losing, but you guys are like : "Hey, learn to play your race; you can easily beat Zerg" when you never tried to play TvZ vs someone who can actually abuse the imbalance yourself.
Edit; I've tried marauder circles around my army; hellions, Tanks, Medivacs with Scvs and scans to spot baneling and drop scvs in the middle to make some of them explode and it works if Zerg isn't aware, but if the Zerg is really good, he'll research burrow and burrow his banelings all over the map and you have to wait for a Raven, gives him chance to
1) expand more than you can
2) mass more since Ravens are expensive
|
I find top terran players quite unmanner compared to other races:
Idra, Morrow, Fenix.
They often do not admit that they played worse than opponents when they lose. (But sometimes they do it for fun)
Maybe thats why a lot of terrans cry about imbalance. no offense
|
right now Zerg is overpowered and if you play your race right, you shouldn't lose!
Do you play your race right? Do you use all upgrades (like the 1 for Hellions) necessary?
Do you use Medivacs in other ways than just a flying Medics?
Hey it's ok to ignore an upgrade that takes what, 160 seconds and 150 minerals and gas for few games but 600 ?????
I'm still waiting for insight from someone who has used upgraded, 24 splash damage dealing Hellions.
|
I'm still waiting for insight from someone who has used upgraded, 24 splash damage dealing Hellions
Do you play your race right? Do you use all upgrades (like the 1 for Hellions) necessary?
do you know what you are talking about?
banelings are not light armor.
|
On March 20 2010 07:09 Stimmmed wrote: Show nested quote +I'm still waiting for insight from someone who has used upgraded, 24 splash damage dealing Hellions
Do you play your race right? Do you use all upgrades (like the 1 for Hellions) necessary?
do you know what you are talking about? banelings are not light armor.
Banelings are light;
Modifiers: Light - Biological
|
On March 20 2010 07:09 Stimmmed wrote: Show nested quote +I'm still waiting for insight from someone who has used upgraded, 24 splash damage dealing Hellions
Do you play your race right? Do you use all upgrades (like the 1 for Hellions) necessary?
do you know what you are talking about? banelings are not light armor.
They are light. Dunno how you could even think they weren't.
|
On March 20 2010 07:09 Stimmmed wrote: Show nested quote +I'm still waiting for insight from someone who has used upgraded, 24 splash damage dealing Hellions
Do you play your race right? Do you use all upgrades (like the 1 for Hellions) necessary?
do you know what you are talking about? banelings are not light armor.
For the love of god I hope you don't have a beta key.
FYI you need to be funny to troll and not get banned for it in the end. Or maybe you are pbu?
|
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras.
|
On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras.
I agree, and not even that works if the zerg does it right.
TvZ = impossible if it's just not something we're not getting :/
|
On March 20 2010 07:53 Zoler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras. I agree, and not even that works if the zerg does it right. TvZ = impossible if it's just not something we're not getting :/
Its as any Terran player stated by now, there are counters to everything that Zerg can throw at you, but they are either too expensive , or too late in tech or just too hard to pull off.
|
On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras.
Listen to this guy. His series vs Dimaga on ESL shows the best play against banelings I have seen so far. Not by using gay countering units but by having the better micro.
|
On March 20 2010 22:34 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras. Listen to this guy. His series vs Dimaga on ESL shows the best play against banelings I have seen so far. Not by using gay countering units but by having the better micro.
I have pretty good control over my units with using marauders as shields, but if your opponent abuses Zerg he'll have creep all over the map when your push with massive amounts of marauder/marine/medivacs hit and he can engage from a lot of angles. Also 'speed banelings' on creep are insane, if you mix a few lings in them and add mutas, Terran is totally fucked. A game or more exactly a certain match up shouldn't be about someone being able to somehow pull a miracle in micro to give him a chance in winning.
It should be possible to win without the perfect control / split.
|
On March 20 2010 05:34 beetlelisk wrote:@ Tarson and Strelok: you know about this upgrade and you have tried using Hellions after researching it right? Otherwise... oh my god there is no micro in this game -____- Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 05:34 dogabutila wrote:On March 19 2010 06:59 UdderChaos wrote:
Those of you suggesting hellions are missing quite an important point, hellions costs high minerals as well as marines lol? ROFL hahahahaha
Try using Hellions and Patrol Micro. Hellion attack animation is ridiculously long and speed lings are ridiculously fast. Unless you reach a critical number of Hellions they get owned by mass speedlings. Once the lings reach the Hellions they die so fast, and only hit one ling at a time. Failsauce. I hope Blizzard will fix Hellion animation, as that is what is really holding that unit back ;/
|
On March 20 2010 22:34 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras. Listen to this guy. His series vs Dimaga on ESL shows the best play against banelings I have seen so far. Not by using gay countering units but by having the better micro.
thanks ! :D
|
On March 20 2010 22:40 G.s)NarutO wrote:
I have pretty good control over my units with using marauders as shields, but if your opponent abuses Zerg he'll have creep all over the map when your push with massive amounts of marauder/marine/medivacs hit and he can engage from a lot of angles. Also 'speed banelings' on creep are insane, if you mix a few lings in them and add mutas, Terran is totally fucked. A game or more exactly a certain match up shouldn't be about someone being able to somehow pull a miracle in micro to give him a chance in winning.
It should be possible to win without the perfect control / split.
So, if he abuses zerg, why dont you just abuse terran? Terran has dropships by default and zerg is pretty spreadout if he has 3 or 4 bases. Just one idea, terran has a lot of possibilities.
Terran never was an easy race to play. You have the strongest army in the game, but also the most demanding one to use, just like in Broodwar. As a solid terran player you rarely use to worse players, but also rarely win against better. Deal with it or switch races.
|
by having better micro isnt a counter
if u wanna balance this game u wanna count both races having just as good micro, not that terran has to micro better than zerg lol
in sc1 it was insanely hard for both t and z to micro
|
I don't get that whole DMG vs certain Unit-types anyways - it's so unnecessary or just way too strong.
Small Units like Zerglings/Marines get owned by AoE of maybe Hellions, Banelings or Collossi anyways, so why the extra damage on top of that? -,,-°
This hard-counter-system is so annoying and forces you into playing certain Units, instead of being creative...
I would understand maybe a little bonus-dmg from certain Units against Buildings or Bigger Units, but in a very moderate way. But AoE Dmg that does more Dmg to small/light Units, who get more hits from one shot anyways (just because more of them are in the AoE) - that's just stupid.
|
On March 20 2010 23:06 MorroW wrote:
by having better micro isnt a counter
if u wanna balance this game u wanna count both races having just as good micro, not that terran has to micro better than zerg lol
in sc1 it was insanely hard for both t and z to micro
Starcraft is known and loved for the different ways the races work. Consequently different tasks and abilities are required to play different races. For example, you cannot say protoss is too easy because they don't have to ballance unit and worker production like zerg has to, etc..
|
On March 20 2010 23:26 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2010 23:06 MorroW wrote:
by having better micro isnt a counter
if u wanna balance this game u wanna count both races having just as good micro, not that terran has to micro better than zerg lol
in sc1 it was insanely hard for both t and z to micro Starcraft is known and loved for the different ways the races work. Consequently different tasks and abilities are required to play different races. For example, you cannot say protoss is too easy because they don't have to ballance unit and worker production like zerg has to, etc..
Maybe you should try Terran before talking big. MorroW, me, DeMusliM, LucifroNNN and every other Terran agrees that its insanely difficult (NOT IMPOSSIBLE) to win vs an abusive Zerg. You tell me to abuse my race and point out that I should use medivacs. You know what? - I did. The Zerg army is so mobile and medivacs are slow; speedlings will be ready for defence in no time.
I tried to use a medivac with 4 marauders to snipe the queen and head back to my base, but its just not worth the effort. Please put more thought into something before judging other players abilities.
|
Sorry, if it sounded like I judged other players, but to me, terran is a special race. I am used to thinking of terran playes as those with balls. Maybe you are right and all races should have equal requirement in terms of skill, but then again, this would mess with the basic idea of the terran army being a glass cannon.
And by the way, yes, I tried terran and yes I sucked horribly, but this is just another point why I respect good terran players so much.
|
I don't mind if playing Terran is hard and I don't mind if my army is actually a glass cannon, but right now you can't gain advantage by abusing the map for example. Good Terran players always had to move their army and gain a positional advantage, at least in TvP. In TvZ it was a huge gain if you move around, because Zerg couldn't know where you attack.
In Starcraft 2 you can barely scout without wasting your energy (MULE) but I agree that sometimes information are worth more than minerals. You also can't move out and gain map control, since you are in the defending spot against a Zerg with speedlings/banelings. If the Zerg abuses his abilities (i.e burrow for burrowed banelings) you can't even move out without wasting scans/having a raven.
Things I'd like to see:
- 30% speed advantage for Zerg on Creep should decrease to 20%
- Lings should be slower / as fast as probe/scv so you can actually scout (they can be faster on creep)
- Speedlings should be slightly decreased in speed, but still be faster than scv/probe/hellion
- Banelings shouldn't deal damage when they get killed
Thats all I'd change for now and see how TvZ develops.
|
demuslim is doing well vs banelings. blocking and tanking the damage with the marauder, while drawing back the marines a little bit.
|
On March 21 2010 00:07 zul wrote:
demuslim is doing well vs banelings. blocking and tanking the damage with the marauder, while drawing back the marines a little bit.
1) He doesn't use Ravens , so burrowed Banelings would destroy him
2) Mass Baneling are totally different from 10-12 Banelings mixed in an army
3) Muta/Baneling is insane-_-
I respect GladHeAteHer and admit that he's really good, but we all agree that banes are too strong 
|
i think they should change so t/p get slower by 5% on creep and z faster by 5% instead of giving z +30% speed, its absolutely ridiculous, why in gods name would u move faster on ur creep?
thats like saying a polar bear moves faster on snow than grass, no he doesnt xd
but i think naturo makes many good points, in sc1 u could kinda move around on the map with both races while in sc2 its either full mapcontrol or 0 mapcontrol
|
Make the baneling 20 life and cost 25 more gas.
|
also on a sidenote lings shouldnt be able to kill scouting scv's probes without the speed upgrade.
also hatchery build time should be increased by 5-10 seconds... i m reffering to dimaga vs morrow? or someone game on Metalopolis where he takes rich minerals and with drone micro and lings timing is safe from 11rax ... thats just ridic. There have been other instances of this aswell.
|
i do use ravens, but the gas cost is very heavy. My plot last game was to keep the game at below 100 supply armies, so he couldn't really flank me, keeping his bases to a minimum and keeping his hydras at a low count.
While yes banelings are hard to deal with, i still think that hydras are ridiculously strong :S
Things i've mentioned before - i'd like to see banelings doing FF damage to none baneling units(so the banelings themselves don't hurt each other - similar to alien acidblood!), so you can't run them in with zerglings - but you have to run them in from a different angle, or burrow suprise - so there's some thought behind using them - but i'd also like to see maybe a range upgrade for marines, now i know that maybe a suprise but - marines/medivacs/marauders actually lose in a straight up fight vs pure hydra, which is kinda sad, but it's mainly down to the fact you have 2 rows of hydras shooting vs 1 row of marines (the range is too short for anything else).
Those are probaly the 2 things that i'd like to see most in tvz - or a range decrease on hydras - and the upgrade making them equal to rines.
|
I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing.
Now go watch Dimaga's zerg style get completely raped by Lucifronnnn. Why should 1 Terran build(MMM) beat everything zerg can do? MMM was to counter roach/hydra so zerg switched to ling/banes to counter MMM, well to counter that all Terran has to do is go hellion + vikings or banshees.
You're not trying to help the game you're trying to simplify it to one Terran strat > anything a zerg can do to counter it and that's just lame.
|
On March 21 2010 01:08 Irrelevant wrote:Show nested quote +because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. Now go watch Dimaga's zerg style get completely raped by Lucifronnnn. Why should 1 Terran build(MMM) beat everything zerg can do? MMM was to counter roach/hydra so zerg switched to ling/banes to counter MMM, well to counter that all Terran has to do is go hellion + vikings or banshees. You're not trying to help the game you're trying to simplify it to one Terran strat > anything a zerg can do to counter it and that's just lame.
Thats simply not true. Viking / Tank / Hellion is not viable against Zerg, since Baneling/Hydra/Roach or Air will eat you alive. Vikings even if you get more than mutas lose to hard to mutas.. its not even funny.
|
Did you even go watch the series? He was completely helpless against it.
|
hellions are probably very good against banelings, just by looking at the numbers: baneling has 30hp and does 15 damage(to hellions) and hellion has 90hp and does 16 damage(to banelings) :}.
P.s. Baneling costs 50/25 and Hellion costs 100.
|
On March 21 2010 01:27 Irrelevant wrote:
Did you even go watch the series? He was completely helpless against it.
I don't need to watch DIMAGA getting stomped by LucifroNNN on KR because he didn't destroy the rocks. Also one game isn't really going to proof the experience of thousands of games wrong.
The point is: LucifroNNN won't win 3 games in a row with this stuff, while Zerg could and can.
On March 21 2010 01:31 ProoM wrote:
hellions are probably very good against banelings, just by looking at the numbers: baneling has 30hp and does 15 damage(to hellions) and hellion has 90hp and does 16 damage(to banelings) :}.
The slow attack animation of the hellion make it only good in theory and HUGE numbers, but speedlings / banelings charge at the hellion so fast, it just gets shredded.
|
you obviously didn't look carefully at how many mistakes he made against it.
I'll go into detail on kulas -
1. the amount of drones he kept making and losing on this cliff expo was staggering, if he wanted to make that many drones and mine with them, he could of just mined from his main, he lost atleast 1k+ minerals by doing this.
2. he could of attacked the rocks and got up the cliff - limiting the use of vikings to stop him from mining at his expo.
3. Hellions are not a viable counter - they are further countered by the main problem being hydras/lings/banelings. - Sure they are a nice harrass tool if the zerg isn't prepared, but that's just abit sloppy.
Lucifron used 2 strategies on game 2/3 because he knew EXACTLY how dimaga was gonna play - fe, lings/baneling contain. - Now that doesn't mean this viking/hellion is gonna work every single game does it? No.
The thing you have to realise is, Dimaga is a really great zerg right now, but he made a few errors that i'm sure he won't make again in a hurry. These suprise strategies sure inflicted major damage, but it was mainly down to the fact dimaga didn't handle it properly.
|
On March 21 2010 01:34 DeMusliM wrote:
Lucifron used 2 strategies on game 2/3 because he knew EXACTLY how dimaga was gonna play - fe, lings/baneling contain. - Now that doesn't mean this viking/hellion is gonna work every single game does it? No.
My point exactly, he switched up his play to confuse the zerg, instead of sitting here bitching that MMM loses to ling/bane, he went out and did a build to counter them and did a great job at it.
It shouldn't work every game, that's the point, nothing should work every game, the fact that there is at least 2 viable counters to that build shows this game is on the right path.
|
No it isn't your point exactly, the point is the zerg messed up - thus the terran came out the victor.
The fact the zerg had to mess up, and make large mistakes in order for the "counter" to work, just shows how wrong you actually are.
|
On March 21 2010 01:48 DeMusliM wrote:
No it isn't your point exactly, the point is the zerg messed up - thus the terran came out the victor.
The fact the zerg had to mess up, and make large mistakes in order for the "counter" to work, just shows how wrong you actually are.
and how exactly do u know that it wouldnt work had dimaga played well.
Hell, Luci woulda won game one had he had decent macro.
The fact that the harrass was so succesfull in game #1 even tho Luci was stockpiling the minerals all game long clearly shows that banelings need to be buffed.
See, this train of thought works both ways.
|
On March 21 2010 02:02 Sfydjklm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 01:48 DeMusliM wrote:
No it isn't your point exactly, the point is the zerg messed up - thus the terran came out the victor.
The fact the zerg had to mess up, and make large mistakes in order for the "counter" to work, just shows how wrong you actually are. and how exactly do u know that it wouldnt work had dimaga played well. Hell, Luci woulda won game one had he had decent macro. The fact that the harrass was so succesfull in game #1 even tho Luci was stockpiling the minerals all game long clearly shows that banelings need to be buffed. See, this train of thought works both ways.
Banelings need to be BUFFED
Someone please hold me back or I'm going to Belarus today.
|
all im saying stop fucking with the balance. stop jumping the gun.
demuslim surely must remember the days of night elf AoW's.
Now that was bad. This, this is nothing.
Sure if dimaga kept on freerolling everything there would be a cause for alarm.
But right now there is a sign that banelings and zerg arent all you thought they were. So back off. Balance is a fragile thing.
|
On March 21 2010 02:13 Sfydjklm wrote:
all im saying stop fucking with the balance. stop jumping the gun.
demuslim surely must remember the days of night elf AoW's.
Now that was bad. This, this is nothing.
Sure if dimaga kept on freerolling everything there would be a cause for alarm.
But right now there is a sign that banelings and zerg arent all you thought they were. So back off. Balance is a fragile thing.
Do you own a BETA key? I think I'm pretty good in TvZ (really good in TvZ in Broodwar) and my micro and macro are also really good; but against Zerg you just feel like you give up either mapcontrol or take huge risks pressuring Zerg.
You need to pressure Zerg to make him spend his larva-injection on units rather than drones, but the lack of scouting which is due to the speed of zerglings won't allow you to safely pressure him without getting punished. You can counter 1 mix of Zerg units pretty well, while they can totally change their complete army composition and still own. Zerg doesn't have units that deal extra damage to light/armored (besides banelings) so they can go all combinations of units they want to and would still end up with a nearly equal damage output.
When I change my unit composition to lots of marauders, he'll add more hydras. If I add more Marines, he'll add more banelings or roaches..
Zerg right now is overpowered and there's no way to talk away their advantage. Terran can win, thats correct, but Terran needs to pull off a miracle in scouting, micro and macro to keep up with an equal skilled Zerg which may not be the fact in an competetive RTS.
|
T>>>Z IMO. I don't know of any top zergs who can compete with competent Ts. You guys are just playing wrong I think.
|
On March 21 2010 02:51 Maynard wrote:
T>>>Z IMO. I don't know of any top zergs who can compete with competent Ts. You guys are just playing wrong I think.
Every Terran is playing wrong, .... right.
|
Every advantage in this Matchup is definiately T's. Zerg has map control for maybe the first 6 mins, but after that Marine and Mauruaders are out- our only counter to this being Broodlords. We can survive w. roaches/hydras/banelings but none of these are a hard counter to a competent T. (any T dieing to Banelings is terribad, unless they are speedupgraded AND on creep)
By the way hellions counter hydras/lings/banelings. To the person who said it up there. If YOURS dont, its cause your bad. Hellions actually do a crapload of damage against hydras, and cost less. Hellions do light damage = more damage against hydras. Dont just A-move ur hellions, and U would see yours killing hydras too.
|
On March 21 2010 02:52 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 02:51 Maynard wrote:
T>>>Z IMO. I don't know of any top zergs who can compete with competent Ts. You guys are just playing wrong I think. Every Terran is playing wrong, .... right.
No. You guys are. Every game I see or am involved in, if the T plays correctly, the Z gets rolled amazingly hard. I'm not talking gold level players I'm talking #1 ladder Zs.
Zerg cannot expand without having a considerable force. Fast expansions are not plausible. Zerg cannot deal with the Marine/Marauder swarm until T3.
The only way Z wins is if the T wants to have fun with hellions, tanks, dropships, reapers, etc.
|
On March 21 2010 02:25 G.s)NarutO wrote:
You need to pressure Zerg to make him spend his larva-injection on units rather than drones, but the lack of scouting which is due to the speed of zerglings won't allow you to safely pressure him without getting punished. You can counter 1 mix of Zerg units pretty well, while they can totally change their complete army composition and still own. Zerg doesn't have units that deal extra damage to light/armored (besides banelings) so they can go all combinations of units they want to and would still end up with a nearly equal damage output.
When I change my unit composition to lots of marauders, he'll add more hydras. If I add more Marines, he'll add more banelings or roaches..
Zerg right now is overpowered and there's no way to talk away their advantage. Terran can win, thats correct, but Terran needs to pull off a miracle in scouting, micro and macro to keep up with an equal skilled Zerg which may not be the fact in an competetive RTS.
Don't talk like zerg has a million of working unit mixes. You allways have the hydralisks as the backbone of your army and then you need something to deal with marines, either banelings or roaches. Thats it. You either go baneling/ling or roach/ling in the early game and add hydras in the midgame. Mutalisks still suck as a fighting unit because they have negative DPS.
Terran on the other hand has plenty of openings. You can go for early banshee harass, 2 port vikings on certain maps, early clifftanks, helion harass and what not.
If you have narrowed your focus down to just marines and marauders, this is not the fault of the game.
|
I'm Platinum, #2 in my division with 1 Protoss being in front (not too far) and 10 Zergs follow. You think thats because EVERY Terran is playing wrong style? I'm seriously getting mad at the statements you make, because its just not true.
First of all a fast expansion is very viable, even hatch first even though thats not worth it. The Terran can't punish 2 hatchery with 2 queens and massling/baneling early, because for that you would need stimpack. (Stimpack = 140 seconds) also you need combat shields for marines to make them survive 'banelings' a bit better. Zerg can also research burrow to set baneling traps and Terran can't do anything about it, since you would have to scan and you don't have enough scans to scan the whole way.
(Assuming you talk about a 3 rax push, because the situation you describe can't be from a fast expanding Terran).
The Zerg can also get Lair + Hydras up by the time your 3 rax timing push hits, so just a weak Zerg would die to that. I'm not really sure what Terrans you watched and what Zergs you have in mind, but you are plain wrong and even the top Zergs agree. Its not just Terrans crying.
On March 21 2010 03:00 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 02:25 G.s)NarutO wrote:
You need to pressure Zerg to make him spend his larva-injection on units rather than drones, but the lack of scouting which is due to the speed of zerglings won't allow you to safely pressure him without getting punished. You can counter 1 mix of Zerg units pretty well, while they can totally change their complete army composition and still own. Zerg doesn't have units that deal extra damage to light/armored (besides banelings) so they can go all combinations of units they want to and would still end up with a nearly equal damage output.
When I change my unit composition to lots of marauders, he'll add more hydras. If I add more Marines, he'll add more banelings or roaches..
Zerg right now is overpowered and there's no way to talk away their advantage. Terran can win, thats correct, but Terran needs to pull off a miracle in scouting, micro and macro to keep up with an equal skilled Zerg which may not be the fact in an competetive RTS. Don't talk like zerg has a million of working unit mixes. You allways have the hydralisks as the backbone of your army and then you need something to deal with marines, either banelings or roaches. Thats it. You either go baneling/ling or roach/ling in the early game and add hydras in the midgame. Mutalisks still suck as a fighting unit because they have negative DPS. Terran on the other hand has plenty of openings. You can go for early banshee harass, 2 port vikings on certain maps, early clifftanks, helion harass and what not. If you have narrowed your focus down to just marines and marauders, this is not the fault of the game.
2 port banshee is not really viable because: Zerg gets hydras up in time, he can even get mutas up in time if he wants to. All tech variations pretty much die to massling/baneling breaks. Hellions die due to their slow attack animation to speedlings / roaches.
Pure muta or muta/ling suck; muta / baneling/ling which you can easily play on the other hand don't suck at all. It rapes. I don't know what your understanding of the game is or what your skilllevel and macro/micro abilities are, but if you have enough banes (speed+on creep if possible(defensive position)) you can easily shred a huge marine/marauder army.
I agree that Roach/Hydra alone is not too strong and I'm pretty aware that Zerg has a hard time beating Marine/Marauder/Medivac with just Hydra/Roach. If you add banelings (12+++) Terran on the other hand is pretty much done, you can micro as much as you want because AS ALREADY MENTIONED banelings DEAL DAMAGE EVEN WHEN YOU KILL THEM before they hit.
|
On March 21 2010 03:03 G.s)NarutO wrote:
I'm Platinum, #2 in my division with 1 Protoss being in front (not too far) and 10 Zergs follow. You think thats because EVERY Terran is playing wrong style? I'm seriously getting mad at the statements you make, because its just not true.
First of all a fast expansion is very viable, even hatch first even though thats not worth it. The Terran can't punish 2 hatchery with 2 queens and massling/baneling early, because for that you would need stimpack. (Stimpack = 140 seconds) also you need combat shields for marines to make them survive 'banelings' a bit better. Zerg can also research burrow to set baneling traps and Terran can't do anything about it, since you would have to scan and you don't have enough scans to scan the whole way.
(Assuming you talk about a 3 rax push, because the situation you describe can't be from a fast expanding Terran).
The Zerg can also get Lair + Hydras up by the time your 3 rax timing push hits, so just a weak Zerg would die to that. I'm not really sure what Terrans you watched and what Zergs you have in mind, but you are plain wrong and even the top Zergs agree. Its not just Terrans crying.
Scout. See hatchery at expansion. Make a bunker out of hatchery site range. Send all your early marines and 5 SCVS. I dont see that hatch ever standing. You're talking about all tech counters and I'm talkin about some brute force SCV/Marines.
Sure if you take the SCV/Marine rush out of your arsenal because its cheesy it makes things different.
|
Iraq1230 Posts
|
On March 21 2010 03:06 Maynard wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 03:03 G.s)NarutO wrote:
I'm Platinum, #2 in my division with 1 Protoss being in front (not too far) and 10 Zergs follow. You think thats because EVERY Terran is playing wrong style? I'm seriously getting mad at the statements you make, because its just not true.
First of all a fast expansion is very viable, even hatch first even though thats not worth it. The Terran can't punish 2 hatchery with 2 queens and massling/baneling early, because for that you would need stimpack. (Stimpack = 140 seconds) also you need combat shields for marines to make them survive 'banelings' a bit better. Zerg can also research burrow to set baneling traps and Terran can't do anything about it, since you would have to scan and you don't have enough scans to scan the whole way.
(Assuming you talk about a 3 rax push, because the situation you describe can't be from a fast expanding Terran).
The Zerg can also get Lair + Hydras up by the time your 3 rax timing push hits, so just a weak Zerg would die to that. I'm not really sure what Terrans you watched and what Zergs you have in mind, but you are plain wrong and even the top Zergs agree. Its not just Terrans crying. Scout. See hatchery at expansion. Make a bunker out of hatchery site range. Send all your early marines and 5 SCVS. I dont see that hatch ever standing. You're talking about all tech counters and I'm talkin about some brute force SCV/Marines. Sure if you take the SCV/Marine rush out of your arsenal because its cheesy it makes things different.
Check MorroW vs DIMAGA, as long as you don't touch Zergs economy / the queen he can also lose his expansions and he can still fight back easily, because YOU lose a lot more mining time in the process of rushing. Also a good Zerg will notice if your scv moves out of range and builds a bunker.
|
Where can I see this "Morrow v. Dimaga"
|
Anyway I think if Ts are letting you FE as Z they just simply dont want to do an overpowered cheese rush on you and want to have fun instead.
|
On March 21 2010 03:14 Maynard wrote:
Anyway I think if Ts are letting you FE as Z they just simply dont want to do an overpowered cheese rush on you and want to have fun instead.
I tried:
2 Rax no OC, Marine/SCV Rush
2 Rax OC, Marine/SCV Rush
2 Rax, Gas, no OC, Reactor Rush
none of those builds work against a good zerg.
Also, 2nd Zotac Cup I think.
|
On March 21 2010 03:14 Maynard wrote:
Anyway I think if Ts are letting you FE as Z they just simply dont want to do an overpowered cheese rush on you and want to have fun instead.
If it always works then it's not really cheese.
|
why dont u all just wait for someone to come out with a counter? it applies the same logic to how protosses in scbw were raping hard last year until someone created the 3 hatch spire 5 hatch hydra to counter them.
it should work out naturally i guess. rmb folks u guys are pkaying the BETA not the real game yet. if banelings were overpowered then blizzard will nerf it
|
On March 21 2010 03:22 streamofhonour wrote:
why dont u all just wait for someone to come out with a counter? it applies the same logic to how protosses in scbw were raping hard last year until someone created the 3 hatch spire 5 hatch hydra to counter them.
it should work out naturally i guess. rmb folks u guys are pkaying the BETA not the real game yet. if banelings were overpowered then blizzard will nerf it
If no one complains and states how it is, Blizzard won't change anything. Blizzard keeps an eye on discussion where people bring arguments and don't just flame.
|
12/13 rax 15 OC 16/20 depot seems to work pretty well TvP i havent tried it extensively in TvZ but it seems like it would be pretty useful. move out with 6 rines and rally your rax to their base to apply pressure. when the mule kicks in you should have enough to add about 3 more rax or a cc (while constantly pumping marines) which is nice because you should know by then if you want to continue pressure or back off and expo. i'm not sure when i got gas with the build i think it was either after you spend the MULE money you have yo get two geysers right away (might not need this TvZ).
so what you get with the build is nice early pressure with the option to 3 rax and continue pressure or safe expo. choosing either just means the other comes after getting dual gas (might not need TvZ) because on the second mule you get enough minerals to do it again. it's also nice because you force larva usage and / or roach tech.
you control the aggression, you control the flow, you control the game awwwww yeeaaahhhhh
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
increase price of baneling nest/upgrade and move them to lair tech to fully balance them in vs p/t mu's imo
|
You can put early agression on Zerg, but there's a high chance of:
1) lings raping you, since spinecrawlers / lings / queen rape marines
2) roaches raping you since you don't have marauders
I always fast expand with a bunker, into 3 rax (2 tech, 1 reactor) adding more rax when MULE's kick in and medivac's. Its as macro-heavy and adaptive as it gets.
|
Just saw the Dimaga v. Morrow replay. The T had the game won. All he had to do was run his marines above the minerals, block the opening w/ SCVS. GG. Instead he fought in the open and barely lost the battle. I closed replay after that.
A match where someone messed up doesn't really prove anything balancewise.
|
On March 21 2010 03:31 Maynard wrote:
Just saw the Dimaga v. Morrow replay. The T had the game won. All he had to do was run his marines above the minerals, block the opening w/ SCVS. GG. Instead he fought in the open and barely lost the battle. I closed replay after that.
A match where someone messed up doesn't really prove anything balancewise.
DIMAGA messed up vs LucifroNNN on KR, yet its always put as example that Zerg isn't overpowered.
|
i have not had a problem vs. bainlings.. there a strong unit.. but make them any weaker and they would be useless IMO..
|
On March 21 2010 03:33 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 03:31 Maynard wrote:
Just saw the Dimaga v. Morrow replay. The T had the game won. All he had to do was run his marines above the minerals, block the opening w/ SCVS. GG. Instead he fought in the open and barely lost the battle. I closed replay after that.
A match where someone messed up doesn't really prove anything balancewise. DIMAGA messed up vs LucifroNNN on KR, yet its always put as example that Zerg isn't overpowered.
I have no idea who these dudes or replays are but you referenced me to that replay as a showing that Z>T. All I saw was a successful cheese rush butchered. T goes back to main and just pumps econ/military =win. T blocks choke for a few minutes then runs before speed kicks in = win. T puts marines above mineral spot and blocks openings from Z = win. T waits a bit then fights queen/lings/drones in open = loss.
If anything this should show you that Z is absolutely unable to expand early.
Also I don't think that T had to sacrifice early economy as he did. He could have achieved the same making more scvs, having 1 fewer marine, but having a bunker put up at Z natural.
But I think I will agree with you that once the power of T to stop early expansions is removed, that Z will be stronger.
|
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..
If you throw in that you don't have any problems against banelings, please explain the circumstances, since without reasoning, there's no way anyone could judge about the situation you were in / you faced.
What did you play, what did he play, how did you manage to fight them off etc. I don't have problems with armies where a few banelings are mixed in, but if he has massive amounts, its hell.
|
On March 20 2010 07:51 DeMusliM wrote:
problem with hellions vs banelings, due to their fairly short range (or by short, i mean long annimation time) by the time the shots been fired the baneling was around close, thus meaning your helions take a huge hit.
Only thing i've found affective so far is good marauder/rine micro vs a flock of banelings/lings - everything else is just not cost effective or good vs other units such as roachs or hydras.
This sort of calmed me down, I'm sorry if I've hurt anyone's feelings here.
I'm still curious though - what openings do you guys use?
Do you tend to get Medivacs ASAP?
Have you tried adding another Factory before Starport /// switching addons of the 1 you have for a good mix of Hellions (not a pure Hellion force though!) but keeping in mind to start Hellion's upgrade fairly early?
Does it matter if you use A-move or Patrol at all?
How do you micro your Hellions? Have you tried to use it in a different way than microing Vultures?
What DeMusliM wrote made me remember BW Lurker Defense UMS where keeping Lurkers spread in a line was always better than having them burrowed all in one place - maybe Hellions should approach lings in similar way?
Not all of them would start shooting at the same time but risk of not utilizing splash to the full extent should be lower; another thing is some Hellions would be shooting while those in the front retreat a bit, until they all don't form a line anymore.
I have yet to try this against bot as I just now got a launcher allowing me to pick races...
Since there is no Medium armor and Hydras are Light, Hellions should be of any use against them - not alone but not worthless at the same time?
When you do try to use Hellions do you try not to send them too far away from your other units (MMM)? Do you try to load your Hellions and Marines into Medivacs during battles?
|
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
I agree with this. Makes them come out later but doesn't weaken them as a unit either.
|
On March 21 2010 01:34 DeMusliM wrote:
you obviously didn't look carefully at how many mistakes he made against it.
I'll go into detail on kulas -
1. the amount of drones he kept making and losing on this cliff expo was staggering, if he wanted to make that many drones and mine with them, he could of just mined from his main, he lost atleast 1k+ minerals by doing this.
2. he could of attacked the rocks and got up the cliff - limiting the use of vikings to stop him from mining at his expo.
3. Hellions are not a viable counter - they are further countered by the main problem being hydras/lings/banelings. - Sure they are a nice harrass tool if the zerg isn't prepared, but that's just abit sloppy.
Lucifron used 2 strategies on game 2/3 because he knew EXACTLY how dimaga was gonna play - fe, lings/baneling contain. - Now that doesn't mean this viking/hellion is gonna work every single game does it? No.
The thing you have to realise is, Dimaga is a really great zerg right now, but he made a few errors that i'm sure he won't make again in a hurry. These suprise strategies sure inflicted major damage, but it was mainly down to the fact dimaga didn't handle it properly.
I'm probably a lot weaker then you guys i'm only 10th in gold division , but really a mass of hellions is the counter to the units mentioned above . 10 -12 hellions or even more mixed in with your MMM army would be a wise investement vs anything thats light armored they aren't even that bad vs roaches . You can do animation cancel with hellions , they of course have to stop for like half or less of a second , but they are curtainly the best counter against mass lings/banelings and even hidras . The only issue is that you need to transition smoothly from MMM to hellions or vice versa depening on your opening build and also keep a balanced composition between them .
|
On March 21 2010 03:30 G.s)NarutO wrote:
You can put early agression on Zerg, but there's a high chance of:
1) lings raping you, since spinecrawlers / lings / queen rape marines
2) roaches raping you since you don't have marauders
I always fast expand with a bunker, into 3 rax (2 tech, 1 reactor) adding more rax when MULE's kick in and medivac's. Its as macro-heavy and adaptive as it gets.
the thing about that is you let the zerg power drones for a good portion of the game while you FE. then you have to spend a MULE to scan because you gave up map control in order to scout. the way you describe it it doesn't seem too much different from a 2 rax opening except your cc is earlier but you give up the ability to apply and continue early pressure.
i also dislike using reactors and just add as many barracks as you need because mid game you'll be getting 2 ebays for upgrades / marauders / tanks / medivacs. the faster you can get those the better and you're not really losing anything by spending more minerals.
|
banelings need to be strong and i dont see them being overpowered. how u want to defend a terran bio army without them? if u tech roaches, terrans just make more marauders and kills zerg in the first push. i see many good terran winning vs banelings, tho maybe it is possible that your playstyle needs some adjustment.
a question to all those who think banelings are to strong. whats your winrate vs zerg?
|
On March 21 2010 03:50 zul wrote:
banelings need to be strong and i dont see them being overpowered. how u want to defend a terran bio army without them? if u tech roaches, terrans just make more marauders and kills zerg in the first push. i see many good terran winning vs banelings, tho maybe it is possible that your playstyle needs some adjustment.
a question to all those who think banelings are to strong. whats your winrate vs zerg?
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.
|
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.
|
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 -_-
|
On March 21 2010 04:07 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +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 -_-
then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings.
Not even gonna argue anymore.
|
On March 21 2010 04:10 bendez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 04:07 G.s)NarutO wrote: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 -_- 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..
|
On March 21 2010 04:10 bendez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 04:07 G.s)NarutO wrote: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 -_- then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings. Not even gonna argue anymore.
do you understand how terrible thors are?
|
What about my questions from the previous page?
|
On March 21 2010 04:13 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 04:10 bendez wrote:On March 21 2010 04:07 G.s)NarutO wrote: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 -_- then keep making those MMM army and get countered by banelings. Not even gonna argue anymore. do you understand how terrible thors are?
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.
|
On March 21 2010 03:53 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 03:50 zul wrote:
banelings need to be strong and i dont see them being overpowered. how u want to defend a terran bio army without them? if u tech roaches, terrans just make more marauders and kills zerg in the first push. i see many good terran winning vs banelings, tho maybe it is possible that your playstyle needs some adjustment.
a question to all those who think banelings are to strong. whats your winrate vs zerg? 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 = =
|
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.
|
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.
|
On March 21 2010 04:25 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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?
|
On March 21 2010 04:46 beetlelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 04:25 G.s)NarutO wrote: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. 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.
|
Well thank you for your answers and good luck in beta...
|
I believe the bigger issue is this 30% on creep buff, just seems crazy when you add +speed upgrades and the fact that good zergs will literally cover the map in creep so it's nearly constant. Would much rather see this as something like -10% movement speed to T or P units, but 30 is just way too much, and it's not just for attack but allowing them to cross the map at such speeds as well.
|
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
|
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 the baneliong ball while your other half of the mnm ball completely kills all of the banelings takes control yes... But it works wonders honestly instead of crying about balance just play the game as is.
|
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
|
On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +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
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.
|
On March 21 2010 06:22 Dacendoran wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote: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 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
|
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.
|
imo Dimaga lost in ESL becasue he always uses those bos that are very vulnerable to harrass and not even that much better economically. You don't have to get such a huge economical advantage to be able to play spling/bling (if the terran goes bio). He also messed up quite a bit.
Also those ESL games don't really tell anything about baneling balance. Even if terrans were doing better with hellion/viking/banshee builds that wouldn't be desirable. Only having a single tech option to deal with zerg is bad. And if that option is highly risky then that's even worse.
I definitely wouldn't increase baneling cost (that just doesn't fit for a .5 supply unit). There are other ways to fix them.
Putting them higher up the tech tree imo wouldn't help much. I never feel like I have to get them as early as I could. I don't even think it would allow terran to pressure the zerg well because you don't want to waste a scan that early and a decent number of speedlings seems to kill any early pressure even without banes.
Imo the best idea so far is to make banes deal no damage when killed. They still will be hard to deal with and if the terran isn't playing well they will definitely rape just as badly, but it should open enough opportunities to counter them with proper micro.
It also isn't an uninteresting change like (time/resource) cost, damage or speed nerfs.
|
Yo, not related to thread, but I wanted to ask OP something, Strelok did you ever play lineage 2? Because I used to play with a guy who was from russia and his name was 3DArcher, and strelok = archer/shooter or w/e
|
On March 21 2010 06:38 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +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.
oh yes ur right, sorry. it was someone else
but its pretty hard to avoid a flank in sc2 because units are very small while terrain is about same size
also zerg puts creep all over the map so they get +30% move speed (i think it is) and that basically allows them to roam around however they want, its like like the terrain ball can hug the edge of the cliff while we move because then we have no chance of escaping reinforcing or microing
the only way i can play straight up tvz is to make a fakemove on the map so he move to middle to preapre for a flank then i enter my 6 medievacs and attack his main base meanwhile i have about 15 supply depots blocking my natural lol
|
On March 19 2010 04:05 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:48 hellitsaboutme wrote: It's just a matter of seconds for stimmed Maradeurs and Tanks to kill Ultralisks. (Ultras dont kill ravens, you can turtle and move around with Ravens only. No more scorges)
Then make proposition where you consider pros and cons of all races not only yours. I am totally ok with making suggestions and propositions, if it's done wisely. Oh really? Tanks shot ultralisks 1 time. Ultralisk come into rines and marauders. Tanks shot all your army with next shot theirself. To kill 1 ultralisk you need to make 10 tanks shot. It's not first starcraft yo!
This. Tanks in siege mode are a totally different unit from SC1:
- They deal lower damage against armored/large units (60, down from 70 in SC1)
- They deal much higher damage against light/small units (60, up from 35 in SC1)
- They have a greater AoE splash radius
- They're more expensive
Now, look at the consolidated effect of the changes:
Against armored/large targets, tanks are worse due to being more expensive, and worse still due to dealing less damage per attack; against light/small targets, tanks are slightly worse due to higher cost, hugely better due to dealing 70%+ more damage per shot, and better yet when shooting at tightly-packed groups of units thanks to their new and improved AoE splash radius (which is very significant because light/small targets clump up a lot more than armored/large units do).
Tanks seem to be more effective at vaporizing swarms of lings / banelings than they are at melting big, armored units such as thors or ultralisks.
Marauders/Thors ripping up Ultras, I can buy. Tanks? Not so much.
|
Tanks are trash vs zerg imo, atleast against top tier zergs I have not been able to use them cause you simply miss anykind of mobility to attack or control the map. On a map like blistering sand tanks can be good but on maps with alot of eco they are trash.
|
my solution is very simple, just get tanks ... thats all.
siegetanks just eat zerg groundunits alive.
and they do so, because they have an intelligent aiming system now.
(you can set the target of them aswell).
even if something comes closer, its not even nearfull hp, and will be done by the mmm with ease.
so in my opinion, just get more rines, a bit less marauder and add tanks.
with one expansion you can afford to have like 1 factory, 4 baracks (2 tech / 2 reactor)
|
making 4-5 tanks to cover your base while you run around killing stuff with your ball is nice though.
|
From the zerg perspective, the MM ball is very dangerous and if we fail with even one baneling attempt that can be gg right there. The new improved marines + no muta stacking means they absolutely eat mutas for lunch. So basically our whole survival depends on that good baneling hit.
Tanks work ok even when not in siege mode. Just stimpack and run back through them. I mean, really you don't even care if you lose every single unit you own except the marines, cause they are all you need to own all of my lings and mutas. Banelings do almost zero damage to anything in your army other than marines or hellions.
Also, I'm not so sure about the lurker solution working in SC2. It works well in SC1 because all they had to counter it until tanks was marines, but in this one they have marauders. Just think of what dragoons did to lurkers in SC1 and that's basically what marauders would do to them this time. So in order for them to work there would have to be some sort of major change to them (like huge bonus damage to armored or something crazy).
|
On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:
Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced.
Totally agree with most of your points, and to people saying x is fighting for y race - well, someones going to balance it, and who better than the ones who actually attempt to master the races?
On topic: Banelings seem pretty damn strong, even against zealots they're really efficient, not quite sure what the solution would be, but if it was up to me Zerg would need some serious restructuring and move away from the current design with large units it has at the moment.
And to the people saying X tier 2 unit counters banelings - that's not really helping if you're losing map-control early on because of it.
(*cough cough* roaches PvZ)
|
On March 21 2010 08:36 MaD.pYrO wrote:
And to the people saying X tier 2 unit counters banelings - that's not really helping if you're losing map-control early on because of it.
(*cough cough* roaches PvZ)
This is pretty irrelevant for toss though seeing how fast they can fly up any one of their tech trees. Toss t2 comes out by the time you've got like 5 or 6 t1.5 units, and toss t3 units can be out by the time anyone else gets t2. The kicker is this isn't even in some sort of all in tech rush as toss can still make a respectable ground force while flying up a tech tree. If a zerg rushes straight to muta, 4-6 muta is all he will own by the time you show up with your immortal push.
As for banelings, they are pretty suck without speed which is a t2 upgrade. That being said, it isn't hard to contain a terran with just speedlings. The terrans that really get me are the ones that are good with the hellion into banshee harass while they expand, then build like 5 barracks and make huge bio balls.
|
drops help alot if u cant get mapcontroll. and when u get into a fight with banelings, stim - run - shot - run - shot. as long as no investors are out, terrans are superfine and zerg cant afford to go early investors, since they need a big army to get map controll.
|
On March 21 2010 09:21 zul wrote:
drops help alot if u cant get mapcontroll. and when u get into a fight with banelings, stim - run - shot - run - shot. as long as no investors are out, terrans are superfine and zerg cant afford to go early investors, since they need a big army to get map controll.
Have you ever fought banelings on creep, with and without speed upgrade? What about speedlings? Speedlings will surround you in a split second, and then banelings come in to mop up.
|
Guys. you need to realise that tanks can be in UNSIEGE after the first shot.
there is no way ultralisks can beat a large defensive MMM tank position, because tanks can choose for higher dps by unsieging (focused damage).
Also, there is no reason to fight banelings on creep. The only reason the map is filled with creep is the terran gave up map control, which shoudnt happen with 5 rax pumping stuff, OR vikings, OR medivacs.
Another thing is, Although banelings are good for map control and defence generally with burrow, Once terran has medivacs out, they can just drop any base with 2 dozen rines behind mineral lines, and without a strong hydra roach force, this is impossible to take down.
This T doom drop is especially strong versus baneling-muta, cuz the minerals are just so good at protecting the drop.
There is no such thing as banelings being inbalanced. Every single terran unit counters banelings with the proper setup, there is no reason to fight the zerg in a disadvantageous position (like, waltzing on their cliffs)
|
On March 19 2010 04:14 spinesheath wrote:
I hope that MorroW will check this thread out, he has a suggestion about banelings that I find pretty reasonable and worth trying:
Banelings currently deal damage when they are KILLED, even if they didn't launch their attack. This makes it impossible to counter them well with any ground unit.
So his suggestion is to make them NOT dal damage when killed. Just like Infested Terrans in BW.
Imo this would help a lot because stimmed marines will be able to take out quite a few banes before they actually get hurt. Add awesome focus fire and you can hold off a lot of banes.
A further modification could be to lengthen the attack animation. A baneling would get close to a marine and take some time before it actually deals damage. If it gets killed during that time it deals no damage.
I don't think these changes would hurt zvp a lot. I almost never use banelings zvp. They are just more expensive 1-shot targets for collossi.
I did not know they dealt dmg when they were killed. No wonder my marines keep melting after i focus fired the banelings...
|
so the point is, just make banelings dont do damage when they die.
|
i dont know if this is feasible, but anyone try dropship micro vs banelings? since medivacs kinda serve as dropships and can pick up units, wouldnt it be a good idea to use your 4-5 medivacs to pick up 32-40 marines after you see the banelings like just before they reach you, so that they get wasted on your marauders and you can drop them back down right afterwards to clean up his army?
|
Let's say, for arguments sake, that the banelings are overpowered. As a zerg player what, then, is my counter to an m&m ball? If I know you're going to go with an m&m&m push, and my banelings are nerfed, what am I supposed to do? How should I punish such predictable play?
FWIW I'll attempt to answer the question reversed (but I'm a very middling player): I lose games if my banelings explode on marauders, or if I take b/lings anywhere near a sieged tank or terran wall-in, or if I screw up my timings and the banelings attack too soon or too late relative to the rest of my army. Also: has anyone who can play tried reapers against speedlings/banelings?
|
On March 21 2010 10:12 SturmAddict wrote:
Guys. you need to realise that tanks can be in UNSIEGE after the first shot.
there is no way ultralisks can beat a large defensive MMM tank position, because tanks can choose for higher dps by unsieging (focused damage).
Also, there is no reason to fight banelings on creep. The only reason the map is filled with creep is the terran gave up map control, which shoudnt happen with 5 rax pumping stuff, OR vikings, OR medivacs.
Another thing is, Although banelings are good for map control and defence generally with burrow, Once terran has medivacs out, they can just drop any base with 2 dozen rines behind mineral lines, and without a strong hydra roach force, this is impossible to take down.
This T doom drop is especially strong versus baneling-muta, cuz the minerals are just so good at protecting the drop.
There is no such thing as banelings being inbalanced. Every single terran unit counters banelings with the proper setup, there is no reason to fight the zerg in a disadvantageous position (like, waltzing on their cliffs)
yea lolz. Use up all that extra APM u have to kill creep tumors/naga tower control unit.(witha banshee for example)
But hey it took terrans like 20 watchable dimaga zvt game to realize his build is super vulnerable to banshee/helion.
It took dimaga 1 series vs Luci to come up with a rush that got him to a Zotac cup finals.
|
I'm top 3 platinum division Zerg and I think ZvT is the most balanced and difficult for both sides at the moment. (similar to zvt in sc1). I've lost way more to T than any other race at the moment.
(For reference I usually pool - fast expo - ling speed to lair bane/hydra/ling/infestor. T usually goes mmm/tank eventually raven.. and a few times 1-2 ghosts for emp on my defilers.)
|
On March 19 2010 03:46 superstartran wrote:
Here's the thing, Marines are your BEST counter to Mutalisks. This is a universally accepted truth. Vikings blow against Mutas, have 0 armor, and cost too much gas to keep up. Thors are too expensive, slow, etc. Banelings however counter the crap out of them, so what can you do? Sit in your base and turtle. Basically all you can do, is hope you can survive till Ravens, and hope the Zerg didn't take advantage of having control of the whole map.
I lead with marauders, and try to have about an even mix of marines and marauders. You don't need as many marines to kill lings when the marauders can take some of the hits for you, roaches die fast with such a high mix of marauders, and you can push on even a well defended expo well before mutas are available to punish your light use of marines.
|
I'm a terran player and i've gotta say is banelings force terran to play creatively. Zerg really have no good answer to bio without them and yes it bothers me when I screw up and lose all my marines to a good baneling hit but I can usually recover from it because it costs zerg alot and they have a hard time following up the hit if you have good macro and your army wasn't 100% marines. In SC2 if you get flanked you're probably going to lose the fight anyways. You can stim your army and run away from banelings while throwing out a few suicide marauders. You can make a ridiculous wall out of 3 thors to block banelings. Mid game you typically have the advantage when engaging in fights because scan gives such a big vision advantage allowing you to out micro zerg. You can harass his front bane/lings with hellions, you can randomly kill 15 burrowed banelings before he can even react, you can simply use medivacs to raid expansions and out macro him even if he gets good baneling hits, you can lose an entire army of marines to banelings but comeback because your ravens HSM made his banelings look dumb. Or you can get outplayed and your opponent effectively uses banelings to kill your marines. Banelings have a role to play and zerg need them. Any nerf would seriously jeopardize their viability. Seriously it is very hard for zerg to get cost effective baneling hits. Sure a bad baneling hit can lose them a game, a good hit can win them the game, but in my experience most of the time they go nearly one to one in cost and allowing a game that terran would otherwise run over and win to go on to a deeper long term game.
|
On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +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
So it becomes a matter of positioning and micro, which is what people want right.
|
I have been playing both zerg and terran alot and there has been a few games where I actually one shotted the terran army with burrowed baneling-traps at unexpected places. Therefore I am very careful when I play bio vs zerg, I dont think they are op but they are not fun at all(replace with lurker imo)
|
Since it doesn't hurt to ask:
Have you people actually tried Vikings after the patch? 9 range and 20 damage?
They outrange even Corruptors and do twice as much damage as Corruptors do back to them o.0
Maybe they can be a good follow up after Hellion Marauder?
|
On March 22 2010 16:10 wintergt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote: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 So it becomes a matter of positioning and micro, which is what people want right.
no what im saying is if both are 0 micro z win
and if both r 100% micro z win
on top of it terrans micro is 10 times harder, good luck targeting 15 banelings while 20 lings r ripping u apart
On March 22 2010 21:05 beetlelisk wrote:
Since it doesn't hurt to ask:
Have you people actually tried Vikings after the patch? 9 range and 20 damage?
They outrange even Corruptors and do twice as much damage as Corruptors do back to them o.0
Maybe they can be a good follow up after Hellion Marauder?
maruder hellion > ling baneling
but hydra and infestors > maruder hellion quite badly
and to be honest with u, once z get 3base with a golden base and start pure hydra infester then there is no counter in the game against it
it simply just takes so much for a t to move out that z always gets 3base so damn fast and the economy just runs him over. hellion doesnt counter hydra at all when infesters r in the game
so many plays ive seen zerg sits on like 800 min the midgame while terran is down at 0 all the time and z still comes on top of the battle every time. and im talking about the top gamers replays t.t
why hasnt blizzard made a new patch yet
|
what about, increasing the splash damage and damage to light units, but decreasing damage to buildings ;P?
On March 22 2010 21:07 MorroW wrote:
and to be honest with u, once z get 3base with a golden base and start pure hydra infester then there is no counter in the game against it
A: Select Raven
B: Launch HSM
C: Repeat
D: Profit!
|
once Z goes mass hydra/infestor, tanks are your friend morrow (or HSM as well but it's such a high tech)
|
I think we have to look at the whole picture.
What we want is an exicting and balanced matchup. Banelings are actually quite an exicitng unit. The first Reaver-style moment in SC2 came yesterday when Dimaga barelled banelings up into the terran base and they split up heading for the SCV line and then BOOM as about 8 scvs died instantly.
That's exactly what we want to see in SC2, it was exciting.
If ZvT is indeed imbalanced at the moment (which having played Z and T extensively I think it might be), I'd rather other changes are made.
|
On March 22 2010 21:20 PredY wrote:once Z goes mass hydra/infestor, tanks are your friend morrow (or HSM as well but it's such a high tech)
yes it all sounds good in theory
in theory it sounds like there is a counter for everything
but the harsh truth is no, hydra + infestor rolls over tanks along with anything because he sits at twice ur econ all the game
ive never seen a single game where a top player like demuslim or so won a tvz without abusing cliffs or the zerg being overall stupid in unit choices. ive never seen a straight forward tvz where terran just simply wins the battle and comes on top, never
|
hm i think it's the same with tanks like in sc1. you need shitloads of them and then they melt everything - target fire hydras, ofc when you are too behind you will prolly lose but...they are the best thing vs hydras i think. also i believe former wc3 player won't go this strat because they are not used to it yet, but i believe someone like you morrow (or any other good sc1 terran) could do that - but i agree zerg can macro so heavily he will easily overmacro terran. drops are necessery then.
edit. also getting tank upgrades is easy now since you need armory anyways
|
Yeah, do you target fire at all?
I've checked few things yesterday and I've learned that salvaging Bunkers always gives back 100 minerals - regardless of how badly damaged they are! Containing zerg should be that much easier?
edit: except you probably want to place them behind you forces as something to retreat to when you hit & run as opposed to placing them in front and letting Roaches focus fire them
edit2: also by the time zerg has Worms you may have any flying units to scout tech and retreat in time to avoid surround?
|
On March 21 2010 06:31 Zoler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2010 06:22 Dacendoran wrote:On March 21 2010 06:06 MorroW wrote: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 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
I didn't know that the number of posts makes u good or bad. Thanks for the tips ! i must be the worst player here i guess.
|
Banelings vs terran is free win, simple as that
|
On March 25 2010 06:48 Kare wrote:
Banelings vs terran is free win, simple as that
Lol. play as zerg for a bit. You'll be surprised how hard it is to get your money's worth out of those little mongrels.
If terran is the underdog here (and there isn't consensus), then buff something other than bioball.
If terran goes bioball every single game, I should be able to punish them for being so predictable, and banelings are that punishment. Bioballs are big groups of cheap/weak units. The natural counter is aoe. For zerg aoe means banelings, fungal growth, and ultralisks. These three things *should* pwn a bioball.
Furthermore, you can't roach against marauders, so if banelings do get nerfed so as not to beat the bioball, the only t1 options zerg has left for m&m is zerglings or fast-lair. Is that really the game you want to play?
Buff terran mech, and aim for new-terran-strat > banelings > bioball > roaches > new-terran-strat. Tweak tanks or ghosts or hellions (or even banshees, ravens or vikings) to be more effective against banelings, but leave marines, marauders and banelings the hell alone.
Maybe hellions vs banelings needs to be less extreme somehow.
"Nerf banelings" = bioball every match, and bioball is dull dull dull.
|
An interesting note is that in the BW forum thread about which styles are most fun to watch, SK Terran was on most lists as #1. Someone commented 'but it's played all the time'. I guess that goes to show you how fun terran bio play really is. I don't think most people would agree with you that 'bioball is dull', nor would they agree with the reasoning that banelings shouldn't be nerfed because 'dull' bio will be the prevalent style of play.
Deep six was all over that thread as well, unsurprisingly.
|
Who are top zergs on the US Server?
I consider my TvZ to be better than my TvP and I'm #1 ranked in my plat division so I'd like to play these gosu zergs so I can see what all the noob zergs I'm playing are doing wrong. Banelings can be annoying when they just liquifey you're whole mm army in early or early/mid-game but the people I've been playing haven't been using them as a staple in their mid-late game armies so I haven't really played against what Strelok is describing.
|
On March 25 2010 09:32 QibingZero wrote:
An interesting note is that in the BW forum thread about which styles are most fun to watch, SK Terran was on most lists as #1. Someone commented 'but it's played all the time'. I guess that goes to show you how fun terran bio play really is. I don't think most people would agree with you that 'bioball is dull', nor would they agree with the reasoning that banelings shouldn't be nerfed because 'dull' bio will be the prevalent style of play.
Deep six was all over that thread as well, unsurprisingly.
I'm not saying that bio "will be" the prevalent style of play, I'm say that it is the prevalent style of play right now, and if banelings counter that style of play so hard that terran needs help there are 2 options:
1) nerf banelings -> it remains prevalent.
2) establish a counter to banelings from some other style of play -> terrans have more options.
I like bio - it's fast, it's dynamic, you can get some very entertaining marauder micro, especially with stim.
But every game? Surely no-one is seriously arguing they'd like to see terran play the same strat every game against zerg? Most games, CowGoMoo just flys his factories around like expensive overlords. I really didn't think I would be in the minority thinking that that's wrong.
Anyway, the main point I wanted to make is: Even if banelings were overpowered, nerfing them is not automatically the right solution.
|
Of course it doesn't work, you don't eat soup with chopsticks do you? You all need to learn to read unit stats rather then just ASSUME everything.
Marine Marauder get owened by Hydralisk/Benalings/Roaches? Gosh, god forbid the unit meant to counter Light/Bio/T1 actually does its job. You are all assuming we live in SC:BW land where you are just suppose to stomp on zerg with marines and medics, even though everything in the Zerg arsenal is saying "GO DIE!" to that. You are also assuming Viking is anti-everything-air when its actually anti-armored air (do Mutalisk look armored to everyone here?). But wait assumptions get better...
The Thor is probably the strongest anti-air unit vs Light (ie. Mutalisk, Banshee, Pheonix). They two shot them unless zerg gets ridiculous amounts of armor before you get any Attack upgrades. But lets all just ingnore that and think like this: "Thor is big and looks like a goliath, so obviously Thor's anti-air who does bonus damage vs light must be only useful against Battlecruisers and Carriers, right?" Sarcasm aside, they are probably the worst targets for the Thor in the entire game!
Another assumtion is that just because you can't mass a full control of them (such as you can with marines) they are suddenly completly useless to your army composition, or even better one: "you need a lot of them to make a difference". Thor 1-shots Hydraliscs and you just need +1 Attack to undermine anything the zerg has in upgrades. Doesn't sound impressive? thats equivalent to 15 marines focusing fire. Try thinking what only shooting twice compared to 15 times means when you add armor/attack upgrades in the mix. Thor also has 400hp. That means it takes 29 benalings to take it down (at +0 upgrade difference). Just get 2 or 3 and put them in front of your army as a wall and you already scew up zerglings, benalings and pretty much everything melee; I don't think I even need to mention how Ultralisk would have a hard time getting though as well.
But hey going (anti-light) mech against zerg (who's almost entirely light T1/T2) is just crazy talk!
On the topic of zergling/benalings, you also have Reapers who two shot Zerglings and Benalings almost always; zerg needs to keep Attack/Armor difference at +2 in his favor to just get it down to 3-shots to kill. Buut NOO! lets use Marines who's Attack upgrades make almost zero difference. At +0 Marines take 5 hits to kill benaling. Get this, you need +2 Attack/Defense difference in your favor you have gain 4 hits to kill with marines (+3 is still 4). If we take armor advantage for Zerg, at +1 more armor then your attack it takes 6 hits, at +2 it takes 8 hits and at +3 it takes hole 10! Lets also pretend we can only put marines into bunkers to defend against a benaling rush. Translation: marines kill benalings slow in anything but huge numbers, 2-3 benalings do massive damage the larger the blob is, so its basically lose-lose situation if you get a lot of marines or few marines.
I also love the: Reaper are weaker then Marines. Even though Reapers have 50hp compared to normal Marines which have 45hp and also do close to 3 times the damage against light that marines do (at +0 upgrades). But what does that matter, we all saw countless times how the 1 or 2 Reapers sent to harass were dieing to Marine, Marauders; if 1 Reaper can't take out a entire control of units that's just fail right! /sarcasm end
As for tanks. Lets just say they are so situational you should treat them with the same caution as with planing to use a nuke in SC:BW.
ps. don't assume zerg has free detection like in SC:BW. Nukes, cloak etc are all viable.
|
Going alot of tanks is really hard, mutas will rape it
|
On March 19 2010 03:38 3D.Strelok wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:10 superstartran wrote:
Don't make me laugh, who the hell goes Banelings and doesn't go Mutas. Once you kill off the majority of Marines with your Ling/Banelings you swoop in with your Mutas and go LOL all over the Terran army who has no anti-air anymore. 80% of top-zergs in european platinum league don't do muta + banelings prefering doing hydra+roach+baneling Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:
Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. Tanks are very slow, you can defend with them but never attack. Show nested quote +because zerg won't give you 3-d base with his banelings and army. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. The problem is not in defending. Problem is in attacking. Watch Dimaga vs Morrow game from Zotac. Morrow went mass tanking and 3-d base. Dimaga just switched to ultralisks. Morrow could do nothing. Show nested quote +On March 19 2010 03:14 hellitsaboutme wrote:
HSM (Raven's missle) destroys any zerg army, regardless what zerg builds. There is no EMP and feedback. Why don't you mention that? So basically, if banelings are nerfed that would mean you will survive until Ravens which is auto win for terran. Ultralisk don't give a shit about HSM. And i don't fight for my race. This is BETA version and i make a proposition to make it better balanced.
Do you have link to that game? It's not up on day's stream. At least not in specific segments.
|
I think that thinking in terms of bio OR mech and nothing in between is a misconception.
|
On March 25 2010 09:20 MeditationError wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2010 06:48 Kare wrote:
Banelings vs terran is free win, simple as that Lol. play as zerg for a bit. You'll be surprised how hard it is to get your money's worth out of those little mongrels. If terran is the underdog here (and there isn't consensus), then buff something other than bioball. If terran goes bioball every single game, I should be able to punish them for being so predictable, and banelings are that punishment. Bioballs are big groups of cheap/weak units. The natural counter is aoe. For zerg aoe means banelings, fungal growth, and ultralisks. These three things *should* pwn a bioball. Furthermore, you can't roach against marauders, so if banelings do get nerfed so as not to beat the bioball, the only t1 options zerg has left for m&m is zerglings or fast-lair. Is that really the game you want to play? Buff terran mech, and aim for new-terran-strat > banelings > bioball > roaches > new-terran-strat. Tweak tanks or ghosts or hellions (or even banshees, ravens or vikings) to be more effective against banelings, but leave marines, marauders and banelings the hell alone. Maybe hellions vs banelings needs to be less extreme somehow. "Nerf banelings" = bioball every match, and bioball is dull dull dull.
^ This.
|
Baneling's buffed. That's the change.
|
On March 26 2010 12:36 Mente wrote:
Baneling's buffed. That's the change.
Indeed, you only need 7 banelings now to kill a marauder now instead of 9.
175 gas for a few 25 gas units is still a terrible trade for the zerg if you can get banelings onto your marauders.
|
On March 26 2010 15:25 MeditationError wrote:Indeed, you only need 7 banelings now to kill a marauder now instead of 9. 175 gas for a few 25 gas units is still a terrible trade for the zerg if you can get banelings onto your marauders.
Are u kidding me...A good zerg will never let his baneling goes into Marauders.
A good zerg will have two option:
1. Use Baneling to scare the Marine away and rape Marauder with Hydra
2. Wait and engage the Terran army, one second of not focusing on your army and Terran players will see his army vaporate into the air...
|
On March 19 2010 03:11 Defrag wrote:Tanks counter them pretty well, at least by players that bother to target and attack moving banelings. I dont get why so small number of Terran players use tanks at all, 4-5 tanks placed properly can really bring a hell on zerg's army ( if we are talking about speedling/baneling/hydralisk cluster ), and with proper use of stimpack on marines tanks can sometimes negate banelings completetly. Using hellions late in game seems like a mistake to me, they feel really terrible in late game against zerg. I dont agree, I've played with players that can secure as many bases as avarage zerg player. Bunkers are not expensive, they eat dmg pretty well, and if they are no longer needed - you can sell them again. Also, with tanks behind (2-3 is often enough, 4-5 juts destroys zerg ;p ) rushing in against terran without creep providing additional baneling speed, it's a suicide. Also, most ( all actually I think? ) maps have islands and closed expand spots, if you can secure a nat expo then just go for walled expansion latera and voila ;o
Because tank tech is slow, and you will be overrun be speedlings if you don't mass up to stop the baneling + speedling cheese. Tanks later in the game may be viable, but it makes you very immoble and you have to be extremely careful about moving out. Not only that, but you have to keep making more units to keep speedlings from overrunning you. Just so you can watch them explode to banelings again.
|
Well, at least they increased main baneling damage in the latest patch, so they are more useful now :}.
|
As if to suggest they were less useful before? I think the change was completely unnecessary. It just opened another window for zvz play.
|
I dont think that Lurkers need to be brought back because if you think about it, Spine crawlers "are" lurkers lol. Defenceless while not burrow, has a long range etc.
Also i agree that Banelings are very imba seeing as that zerg can go ling/bane/muta and basically win the game vs terran. Lings soak up damage from tanks/marines and surround the thor while the banelings roll in very quickly and destroy all of the marines that were essentially used to counter the ling/muta. Then basically the mutalisks and leftover lings mop up the thors/tanks. You cannot get air aa against Zerg because zergs air is stronger than anything the terran could muster up and marines/thor is the only mobile aa that t has. ling/bane/muta takes advantage of that and gives the zerg most of the time an auto win. without marines the thors get surrounded and taken out with the magic-box mutalisks.
|
im pretty sure you just bumped a 6mo thread
|
So confusing... why did you bump this old thread? I was about to rage about how strelok should know better...
|
This thread is old. Banelings aren't "very imba". They're one of the very few cost efficient units which Zerg has.
|
Funny look back on when zerg used to actually be good.
|
|
|
2 posts, and you appear to already be failing at being a quality poster on TL, a bit of an accomplishment there...
When it even gives a dialog box of "Are you sure you want to post in this thread, it is old" and you ignore it, I don't know how much more we can do for you...
edit: maybe I'm on crack for remembering that dialog, I don't want to try and bump a necro to find out.
User was warned for this post
|
hydras used to be good against marauders? damn
|
|
|
On September 25 2010 06:29 NoXious90 wrote:
hydras used to be good against marauders? damn
Hydras are pretty even with marauders actually. Hydra is a DPS powerhouse but they die too easily to rest of terrans army so it's not worth it.
|
Yes this guy is a genious let us get rid of the only counter to a terran army composition, Its not fair that a T player has to lose an occasional game is it, nope, how is that balanced giving zerg a unit to counter marines, you have units to counter blings, tanks are unreal, thors soak up so much dmg as well as fucking up the mutas, with a stellar ground attack as well, go mech with your bio you will fucking rape the shit out of ling bling muta, just move rines back when blings come in very easy micro, some of the easiest in the game and your seige tanks will rip the shit outta banes before they get any dmg off then ur left with ridiculously weak fightinng units to deal with like lings and mutas. But your completely right why should terran have to run away from banes not fair its too imba IMO to have to micro as terran
|
On March 19 2010 02:46 Strelok wrote:
adding hellions speed upgrade or/and giving them bigger range upgrade.
I wasn't around during the beta so I don't really know how hellions were, but as a zerg player, reading this gave me visions of horror. It kinda sounds like that ''bigdaddy'' car from the original Age of Empires.
|
-Roaches are mentioned as a counter to marines. That is not true
(unless it's burrow micro without detection, which is not realistic)
-Hydralisks are mentioned as a counter to marauders. That is also not true, assuming the marauders have medivacs and stimpak.
-Hellions are mentioned to suck against speed zlings and speed blings. This is also not true
Thors, vikings, and to a lesser extent (especially since 1.1) siege tanks also work vs banelings, since not only can they help kill banes, but they can soak up a lot of baneling hits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i805.photobucket.com/albums/yy338/beetlelisk/hellionafterupgrade.png)
