EPTIt would be nice if marines started with 40 hit points and only got 55 after Combat Shields, but w/e.
The Problem with Marines - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Severedevil
United States4830 Posts
It would be nice if marines started with 40 hit points and only got 55 after Combat Shields, but w/e. | ||
|
eth3n
718 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:26 Santi wrote: are you serious? can we stop the "THE PROBLEM WITH" Threads. Is so annoying You know how easy it is for a zerg to mass lings or for a protoss to mass zealots? lol? | ||
|
SonicBoom
United States20 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:11 imBLIND wrote: It's too damn good in the early game and it's not nearly good enough in the late game. If marines (and scvs) are too strong against zerg early game, the way to fix that is to buff spine crawlers somehow (cheaper and decrease build time imo). Marines are great for harassment late game. They're mainly vulnerable to splash damage, as they should be. The marine doesn't need to be stronger  | ||
|
Grack
51 Posts
| ||
|
eoLithic
Norway221 Posts
I would reduce the cooldown of creep spread, reduce the build-time for queens as well as reduce the research time for zergling speed. | ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:28 Consolidate wrote: Increase unit size. This is interesting. less clumpage and more surface area would drastically effect marines. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:32 SonicBoom wrote: If marines (and scvs) are too strong against zerg early game, the way to fix that is to buff spine crawlers somehow (cheaper and decrease build time imo). Marines are great for harassment late game. They're mainly vulnerable to splash damage, as they should be. The marine doesn't need to be stronger Not really, spines are already insanely good vs marines. Spines aren't the issue. Unless you're suggesting a build time decrease. Which I'd be open to. Anything else is just a nogo. On December 07 2010 17:35 Fa1nT wrote: This is interesting. less clumpage and more surface area would drastically effect marines. Same concept as the difference between how hydras and stalkers end up fighting, I'd imagine. There was some youtube video that shows one hydra vs one stalker (hydra doesn't have range, stalker doesn't have blink) and the two are A moved towards each other, they actually kill each other on the same volley. Of course, hydras will prob have range before stalkers have blink, but the point is that mass hydra > mass stalker nonetheless because of unit size. At the same time, it'd make banelings also a slightly worse counter to marines, which I'm actually all for. I would like to see this. Have it so marines to clump as tight EVER SO SLIGHTLY. On December 07 2010 17:36 bokeevboke wrote: Marines are ok (maybe quite too strong in some situations). But if you think they are OP then try microing them against banelings or storm. However some interesting facts: BW Marine 40HP 6 damage - SC2 Marine 45 HP 6 damage. BW Zealot 160HP 16 damage - SC2 Zealot 150 HP 2x8 damage (which is bad against armor upgrades) Zergling unchanged. No you can see why zealots suck against marines. Zealots were 2x8 dmg in bw too fyi. | ||
|
nka203
United States102 Posts
siege tanks and positioning? didn't blizzard nerf tanks just to avoid that "static defense" you're talking about? so 2 terrans don't sit for hours waiting for another to attack first? | ||
|
bokeevboke
Singapore1674 Posts
However some interesting facts: BW Marine 40HP 6 damage - SC2 Marine 45 HP 6 damage. BW Zealot 160HP 16 damage - SC2 Zealot 150 HP 2x8 damage (which is bad against armor upgrades) Zergling unchanged. Now you can see why zealots suck against marines. | ||
|
sixghost
United States2096 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:36 FabledIntegral wrote: Not really, spines are already insanely good vs marines. Spines aren't the issue. Unless you're suggesting a build time decrease. Which I'd be open to. Anything else is just a nogo. I really disagree with this. If spines were stronger against marines I don't think zergs would be having these problems with T. | ||
|
iopq
United States835 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:36 bokeevboke wrote: Marines are ok (maybe quite too strong in some situations). But if you think they are OP then try microing them against banelings or storm. However some interesting facts: BW Marine 40HP 6 damage - SC2 Marine 45 HP 6 damage. BW Zealot 160HP 16 damage - SC2 Zealot 150 HP 2x8 damage (which is bad against armor upgrades) Zergling unchanged. No you can see why zealots suck against marines. afaik zealots did 2x8 in BW as well which is why zerg keeping up with armor upgrades could still let zerglings survive two shots from zealots | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
They did. Which si why they sucked vs 5 armored ultras. | ||
|
imBLIND
United States2626 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:17 SuperBigFoot wrote: Banelings work really well against mass marines. You should try them. Micro works really well against banelings. You should try it. On December 07 2010 17:19 Durn wrote: This. I think Blizzard needs to look at the core of the game first which is the maps. Think about when a commentator begins the game. They don't straight up say "well marines counter zerglings pretty well so it'll be gg eventually." Most (decent) ones begin with analyzing positions on the map and there are few circumstances where Zerg is truly safe from the power of the marine. However IN THOSE FEW SITUATIONS, the marine's effectiveness is nothing due to Zerg's abiliity to defend so well. Thusly, the problem is not necesarily the unit, but rather the situations the unit is in. The map pool does have an impact on the effectiveness of the marine, but that's dependent, not independent of the balance between units. You can't go around changing dependent variables like the map pool and expect to standardize all the maps. We need to change the source of the problem before we start touching the maps, because I don't want to play on the same maps just to have a balanced game. God damn. Lemme clear stuff up. 1. I play Terran 2. Fact: Marines are too strong in the early game and not strong enough in the late game due to higher tech units 3. Another fact: You absolutely need marines in any Terran matchup or else you're gonna die to hordes of T1 units or air units, both of which are extremely common. 4. To avoid dealing with the late game problem of "I need marines, but they die too easily," players are overproducing them, scv+marine rush in the early game, or trying to find an alternative which doesn't always work. 5. I'm not whining, I'm not proposing radical balance changes; I'm just fucking talking about the marine. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:37 sixghost wrote: I really disagree with this. If spines were stronger against marines I don't think zergs would be having these problems with T. How would you suggest that we make spines even STRONGER than they are when they already hard counter marines? They two-shot marines, while reducing marine attack from 6 to 4, aka 33%. At the same time they outrange marines so marines can't even poke in. What do you possibly suggest? Things are different once stim comes out (and does combat shields make a dif?) but that's not the issue I believe concerning the all-ins. Unles you're talking about midgame, which if so I apologize I misinterpreted, since mass marine midgame is also incredibly predominant. PS. To OP's response above, I think templar taking out marines how they do is utterly retarded. People complain about how gas heavy templar is, which is irrelevant when they are pretty much only pumping out templar/zealots. When you have 6 gas, making a decent number of templar is no problem when the rest of your army is chargelots! I feel like carpet storming just ruins the game in some parts, and I thought that when I was Z as well. No skill required there really. Think storm majorly needs to be altered. EDIT: No idea how it'd be altered though to keep a balanced perspective and keep it strong  . | ||
|
Adeeler
United Kingdom764 Posts
- Salvage Spines like those dirty Terrans(Except Jinro <3) - Structure spawned creep damaged enemy workers over time (4-5dps) - Blizzard realise zerg has fundamental problems at several points in the game. | ||
|
ddrddrddrddr
1344 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6591 Posts
I said and/OR for the haters and trolls ^^. lol | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On December 07 2010 17:45 ddrddrddrddr wrote: How about allowing hatchery to spread creep before it's finished building? I don't see how that would be abused. It was abused in beta by make hatch --> cancel --> build spines in enemy base. | ||
|
positron.
634 Posts
| ||
|
nalgene
Canada2153 Posts
to trade for gas units he'll eventually just make the zerg lose through insufficient gas units later into the game when they lose hydras/banelings/mutas/roaches/ why they took away this useful unit in favour of a unit that seems good in turtle situations... they already nerfed stim from 100% to 50% when they made sc2...? and went from 0.625 and 0.3125 to 0.86 and 0.57 but they did so by adding 15 more hp to them Marines can hit air/ground/moves quite fast and only cost minerals where as tanks/thors/banshees/vikings/ravens/bcs all move kind of slow and cost a lot of gas | ||
| ||
