|
On April 05 2010 02:37 Louder wrote:Marauders are fine. They don't do much to non-armored units, for their cost, and are absolutely butt raped by immortals. How they do against gateway units is not relevant because the counter to them is in the robotics, and with chrono you can build 2 immortals in the time 1 barracks makes 1 marauder. Also once you have charge I can't outmicro shit with marauders  And you greatly overhype medivacs - they run out of energy ridiculously fast, and recharge painfully slowly.
You honestly dont see the problem with marauders countering every single toss unit?? Have you ever been on the opposing end of a tvp?
|
On April 05 2010 04:14 -orb- wrote:
I don't think you understand chrono boost correctly. Stalker is 42 without chrono, 30 with. Immortal is 40 without, 28 with. It's not 50% reduced build time, it's 50% increased building speed, AKA 25% reduced build time.
I even tested this in a custom game. The build time for stalkers was 42 seconds and 30 with chrono (no idea why there's the 2 second discrepancy). The build time for immortals was 40 seconds and 28 with chrono.
Please fix this in the OP, you're making it seem like protoss could get out a stalker in a reasonable about of time in comparison to the marauder.
By my calculations a unit that takes 42 seconds to build, at 1.5x build speed would take 28 seconds and a 40 second unit takes 26 1/3 seconds. Where does the discrepancy come from?
Edit: What a hot thread, seems I was beat to the punch.
|
On April 05 2010 04:30 bt-scubasteve wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 04:14 -orb- wrote:
I don't think you understand chrono boost correctly. Stalker is 42 without chrono, 30 with. Immortal is 40 without, 28 with. It's not 50% reduced build time, it's 50% increased building speed, AKA 25% reduced build time.
I even tested this in a custom game. The build time for stalkers was 42 seconds and 30 with chrono (no idea why there's the 2 second discrepancy). The build time for immortals was 40 seconds and 28 with chrono.
Please fix this in the OP, you're making it seem like protoss could get out a stalker in a reasonable about of time in comparison to the marauder. By my calculations a unit that takes 42 seconds to build, at 1.5x build speed would take 28 seconds and a 40 second unit takes 26 1/3 seconds. Where does the discrepancy come from?
The discrepancy is in the spoiled part of the OP that claims with chrono boost, stalker is 21 seconds and immortal is 20.
|
A friend of mine and I (both being high Gold players) were talking about the kind of counter square that went on in SC1 where you had Dragoons beating Vultures beating Zealots beating Siege Tanks (with speed) beating Dragoons, and then it really ended up depending on micro/composition as to who wins battles. The reason I say this is because at the moment, there are many of these complex relationships that I think get us away from "hard counters" like EMP vs. Psi Storm vs. Feedback. The Marauder to me just doesn't seem to fit into any of these relationships that I see. It's just so all-purpose.
The ideal solution I think is to adjust it in a way so that it synergizes well with another terran unit that makes you want to have both in your army but massing them ends up being detrimental; like how the Protoss army mostly consists of Gateway units supported by Robotic Facility units. Colossus and Immortals are very powerful as support but if you just straight mass them without support they get destroyed quite easily. Perhaps upping the cost and actually making it more powerful could be a solution. Just some musings, any thoughts?
|
On April 05 2010 03:09 humblegar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2010 19:34 Spaylz wrote:
...
Just add a 10 second cooldown to the slow. Blink isn't an initial skill, neither is Charge or Storm. Pretty much every spell any Protoss unit may have (aside from Sentries - THANK GOD) has to be researched. What do Terrans have to research exactly ? Slow is given, so is Snipe, EMP, Medivacs' healing ability, the only thing I can think of that needs researching is Cloak..
...
Although you said spell, slow is just another ability, let me list "free" protoss abilities for you. Protoss abilities that do not need research:Immortal - hardened shield Dark templar - permanent cloak + archon warp Sentry - force field + guardian shield Warp Prism - phasing mode Colossus - cliff walk Phoenic - graviton beam High templar - feedback + archon warp Void Ray - prismatic beams Mothership - cloaking field + vortex + mass recall Observer - permanent cloak + detector But those are hardly worth mentioning are they? I personally think Blizzard went a bit too far with abilities and will pay the price during balancing. With the marauder nerf that just has to come some day, terran will probably have to get other boosts to stand half a chance versus protoss (as mentioned by better posters/players than me :p). And why do people that don't have have a key post balance proposals (or in this forum at all)? Oh well.
There is a slight difference between cliffwalk and Blink or Storm. Colossi can cliffwalk but they need the range upgrade to be used to their fullest potential. If Feedback wasn't an initial skill there would be no way to counter EMP. If Phasing Mode had to be researched, you would have to make Zerg research the puking creep abitily the Overlords have and do the same for the Medivacs' heal (which I know I mentioned, but it's a bit different). Protoss have to build an extra building (which has no upgrade for them whatsoever - hello?) just to make Dark Templars, so it's just common sense they have initial cloaking. Phoenixes are worthless, if you make Gravitation Beam an upgrade you might aswell remove the unit from the game. The same goes for Void Ray, would defeat the whole point of the unit. And as for the Mothership... Well, it takes two buildings, 400/400, a two minutes building time, moves damn slowly and takes like 8 food, so it better have all those three spells available right away.
You also still have to take the cost of all that into the balance. Immortals - again - are very expensive and are meant to counter mechanical units with their shields and you would want to make that an upgrade ? Wouldn't be possible to win a single game going Robo. Naming abilities like cliffwalking or hardened shield really has nothing to do with naming powers or spells like Storm and EMP.
Although, it would only be logical that if the Marauders' slow gets some kind of nerf, Immortals would get nerfed too. I suggested a cooldown on the Slow, maybe something similar could be applied to Immortals. Can't think of anything right now tho.
|
I see asian terrans generally play differently than mass euro marauders.
I think the euros have creampuff brains.
Oooo. Burn.
|
On April 05 2010 04:32 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 04:30 bt-scubasteve wrote:On April 05 2010 04:14 -orb- wrote:
I don't think you understand chrono boost correctly. Stalker is 42 without chrono, 30 with. Immortal is 40 without, 28 with. It's not 50% reduced build time, it's 50% increased building speed, AKA 25% reduced build time.
I even tested this in a custom game. The build time for stalkers was 42 seconds and 30 with chrono (no idea why there's the 2 second discrepancy). The build time for immortals was 40 seconds and 28 with chrono.
Please fix this in the OP, you're making it seem like protoss could get out a stalker in a reasonable about of time in comparison to the marauder. By my calculations a unit that takes 42 seconds to build, at 1.5x build speed would take 28 seconds and a 40 second unit takes 26 1/3 seconds. Where does the discrepancy come from? The discrepancy is in the spoiled part of the OP that claims with chrono boost, stalker is 21 seconds and immortal is 20.
Don't think this is off topic. So I will rant.
Hmm, I think the OP is wrong in the spoiler part as pointed out by orb. It's not 50% less build time, it's 50% faster build time. They are different. so if one stalker builds in 42 seconds then you get 1/42, and if you have 50% FASTER build time then it's 1.5/42 (that is you can build 1.5 stalkers in the same amount of time. So using my 8th grade ratio knowledge, 1.5/42 = 1/x . Seems like it's 28 seconds. I'm asking why -orb- said 30 seconds and math tells 30.
Anyway, not a big deal. As long as everyone realizes it's 28(30) seconds, not 21 seconds.
I don't play toss so I had to research, here, hxxp://www.sc2armory.com/game/protoss/buildings/nexus
PS, didn't realize the OP was saying rauders were imba until re-reading the spoiled stuff. Also didn't realize it wasn't in strategy forums. *bonk*
|
I suggested a cooldown on the Slow, maybe something similar could be applied to Immortals. Can't think of anything right now tho.
I won't comment on this idea as a solution for the marauder spam, but I actually think that a cooldown on the immortals shield ability could balance the game in regard of the Siege tank vs. immortal imbalance.
This isn't realistic numbers, I just want to give some random numbers here to explain my idea. If, let's say, the Immortal could resist 3 shot, and then had to wait, let's say, 10 secs., before being able to resist again.
This would really improve time micro required for both parties. Terran would have to be very keen on the placement of his tanks, so as soon a immortal gets into range there will always be more than 3 tanks shooting at it etc.. And as the protoss player you really have to keep moving you immortals in and out of siege tank range, and all that moving units with shield ready in the front etc..
Again this is just random numbers, and this mechanic would of course require some more changes to work (the range of the two units for example I would guess) But I think it could solve both imbalance and lack of micro issues.
|
I think we should just make the SC2 pro mod a reality.
Having SC1 in a 3D engine is pretty cool already.
I mean as long as the story is completely different and the graphics are updated, people who haven't thought too much about SC1 would not complain that SC2 is the exact same game.
I also think blizzard should just concede to KESPA and give all rights of SC2 to them.
We can bring over the hotshot players of SC1 into a pretty straightforward transition into SC2. Games will be casted in high definition with the cool observer/replay abilities.
We can go back to status quo and everyone will be happy.
|
I think that shifting more of their damage to the bonus versus the correct type and providing a very short cooldown (.3? seconds) before they can shoot after turning more than 90~ degrees would be pretty good.
|
Here's a list of problems with the TvP matchup right now:
a) the Marine + SCV rush vs. Marines being underused
b) the Marauder rape vs. Immortal Rape
c) EMP vs. Storm
The way I see it, the best way to address the rush imbalance is very easy: Move sentries to Gateway level tech and change their cost from 50/100 to 75/75. This means that the scv rush is far easier to block with sentries that can forcefield/guardian shield their way to victory. Then, you can undo the Reactor nerf and SCV HP nerf (at least somewhat). This then will go into the next point, where:
Marauders rape everything except Immortals, and Immortals are hard counters to virtually every single Terran mech unit ever.
Let's pretend that Immortals are the Protoss equivalent of Ultralisks for a second. They destroy the marine-medic formations that tend to decimate zerg in the middle-game. They also don't die and eat everything. What were the weaknesses of Ultralisks, though? They were very susceptible to spells and heavy fire (which is negated because of the shields) and they did fairly low damage. 20 + 30 Damage for an Immortal against armored is ridiculous. I suggest lowering the bonus damage from 30 to 10 and in response buff the HP (not shields) of the Immortal. Either that, or change Immortals to just 30 damage against all types. Their shield makes them a hard counter to tanks, and they still can help against roaches.
As for marauders: I was never a huge fan of Marauders purely because they could do everything the marine could, but better. Especially with the reactor nerf it's far better to simply just make marauders than marines. To counter this, I suggest turning the marauder into a slightly different type of unit-rather than shoot slowing missiles, they should take the "fragmentation grenades" of the Vulture a step further-their shots do additional damage over time, so they would shoot 10 + x armored + 1dps for two seconds. The point of the extra damage isn't necessarily to do more damage, but rather to deter enemy regeneration like roaches.
I also suggest supplementing the "additional supply" with an "emergency drop" of 3 marines for 50 energy. Why would u get this instead of the mule? 3 marines is 150 minerals vs 280 for the mule, but you can have that anywhere that you have vision. It's essentially a trade off between having your cake and eating it too, as well as providing another mechanism for producing more marines. This serves to increase reduce the need to simply mass as many marauders as possible because flexibility of one's forces is also necessary, rather than most games ending after a big fight in the middle. Drop pods of marines landing to harass mineral lines, reinforcements landing in to turn the tide, it's all very terranesque -_-
I also suggest changing the Hellion's attack to be more continuous like that of the Void Ray (only without the damage increase). This serves to make them more useful against things like Immortals as they now do their full 18 damage to the shields rather than 10.
I got side tracked, but the whole spell casting thing: spells are nice but it's so easy to evaporate one's army with just one or two spells. Especially because units clump together. A way to fix this might be to introduce a little bit more of a delay in the casting animation as it is too hard to see where caster units are. If you delay the onset of storm and EMP by a little bit the overall effect of each spell will be less and therefore spells won't be as necessarily based on spells. This also encourages more use of forcefield to seal units into areas to storm, as well as increases the utility of tanks as the long range of tanks means that splitting your army into many small groups just results in them getting picked off by tanks one at a time.
~end rant
|
There is a lot of hyperbole in this thread about the effectiveness of Marauders. Marauders only beat units they deal bonus damage to dollar for dollar. Marauders lose to Hydras, Zealots and Zerglings (with speed), and Marines. They beat Roaches, Immortals (with EMP), and Stalkers.
|
On April 05 2010 05:16 yomi wrote:
There is a lot of hyperbole in this thread about the effectiveness of Marauders. Marauders only beat units they deal bonus damage to dollar for dollar. Marauders lose to Hydras, Zealots and Zerglings (with speed), and Marines. They beat Roaches, Immortals (with EMP), and Stalkers.
Marauders lose to Zealots ? THAT'S NEW !
|
On April 05 2010 05:04 Caller wrote:
20 + 30 Damage for an Immortal against armored is ridiculous. I suggest lowering the bonus damage from 30 to 10 and in response buff the HP (not shields) of the Immortal. Either that, or change Immortals to just 30 damage against all types. You do know that Marauders does almost double the damage of Immortals costs per cost, right? If you think Immortal damage is ridiculous, then what of the Marauder (which also features a slow, can be healed, stimmed and not EMPed)?
Why do you think everyone things the Marauder is too strong to begin with?
|
On April 05 2010 05:16 yomi wrote:
There is a lot of hyperbole in this thread about the effectiveness of Marauders. Marauders only beat units they deal bonus damage to dollar for dollar. Marauders lose to Hydras, Zealots and Zerglings (with speed), and Marines. They beat Roaches, Immortals (with EMP), and Stalkers.
Marauders lose to zealots? Are you serious?
|
^ with sentry support yeah, but you gotta get there early
|
On April 05 2010 05:27 Paladia wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 05:04 Caller wrote:
20 + 30 Damage for an Immortal against armored is ridiculous. I suggest lowering the bonus damage from 30 to 10 and in response buff the HP (not shields) of the Immortal. Either that, or change Immortals to just 30 damage against all types. You do know that Marauders does almost double the damage of Immortals costs per cost, right? If you think Immortal damage is ridiculous, then what of the Marauder (which also features a slow, can be healed, stimmed and not EMPed)? Why do you think everyone things the Marauder is too strong to begin with?
If you actually read what I said, it's not that the Marauder is too strong per se: it's that it's
a: a boring unit
b: the core of the army
c: you have no choice but to make this unit in two matchups, otherwise it's essentially an autolose.
And I already put ways to prevent marauders from getting too ridiculous. If you read my post instead of picking a tiny part of it and accusing me of being ignorant, then you would see that I'm supporting lots of ways to prevent marauders from being 100% necessary to this matchup.
|
On April 04 2010 22:59 mTwLive wrote:
I've deep respect of the creator of this topic, but its plain wrong that Marauders are imbalanced in any aspect. First of all you got to micro your marauders, then they 'counter' a zealot in 1v1. And they will counter a stalker in 1v1 without micro.
But have you ever thought about not being stupid and probably building 1 zealot and a stalker? The Zealot tanks the damage and the stalker is faster than a marauder and will kill it. Even works 1Zealot/1Stalker vs 2 Marauder if the Terran isn't paying attention for a second.
On April 04 2010 21:55 Senx wrote:
Why don't Protosses get Legspeed on zealots or blink on stalkers to counter mauraders?
stimmed marauders are faster than stalkers >.> they will kite away and your stalkers wont be able to keep all, all your zlots die then marauders just sit and rape your stalkers
and how the fuck does blink help at all vs marauders? blink into the marauder blob so your stalkers get raped? blink away from a unit that has equal range to you?
On April 05 2010 05:16 yomi wrote:
There is a lot of hyperbole in this thread about the effectiveness of Marauders. Marauders only beat units they deal bonus damage to dollar for dollar. Marauders lose to Hydras, Zealots and Zerglings (with speed), and Marines. They beat Roaches, Immortals (with EMP), and Stalkers.
not really... kited marauders can easily destroy zlots with charge without taking much damage
while speedlots can surround maruaders and actually work, you almost never see charge zlots able to pull that off, so they just get kited and slowed and focused until they die.12 chargelots vs 12 stimmed marauders you'd be lucky to kill 2 marauders while losing all your lots. (200/50 vs 1200) pretty cost-effective if you ask me
|
On April 05 2010 05:22 Spaylz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 05:16 yomi wrote:
There is a lot of hyperbole in this thread about the effectiveness of Marauders. Marauders only beat units they deal bonus damage to dollar for dollar. Marauders lose to Hydras, Zealots and Zerglings (with speed), and Marines. They beat Roaches, Immortals (with EMP), and Stalkers. Marauders lose to Zealots ? THAT'S NEW !
Without micro its true but with micro zealots get owned thats why i say make zealots and zerglings immune to slow ! think this is like the 40 th ive said it lol
|
getting rid of stim will already make a lot of difference. Stim is just too much in combination with what else it can get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
