|
On December 08 2010 02:28 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2010 02:26 ltortoise wrote:On December 08 2010 02:25 travis wrote:
people have said it before but my only problem with marines is their attack animation. their attack animation literally takes no time at all which allows for the possibility of INSANE MICRO, something that no other unit in the game have. all other units in the game have cooldowns on their attack animations so u can't fucking stutter step them with instant attacks over and over. give marines a delay in their attack animation but keep their damage the same. this will make marines harder to micro, and it will especially help with the ridiculous cheese rushes we see of marine + scv. If anything I'd prefer other units in the game had their attack animation cooldowns removed (or shortened) rather than one added to marines. Nerfing micro seems horrible to me. that's not nerfing micro, that's making it more difficult every unit in sc:bw had cooldowns on their animations. they simply made it WAY EASIER with the marine in sc2. it takes more skill to micro other units. the reason ranged units shouldn't be thaaat easy to micro is that it gives ridiculous advantages vs melee units, and it just so happens that T starts with ranged units but P and Z start with melee units.
It's still nerfing micro because you're reducing what is possible. What else could that be but a nerf to micro?
I don't think it takes any more skill to micro units with a cooldown, you just learn the cooldown and continue as normal. Marines still have a (small) cooldown, and you still have to learn it, and if you do it less than optimally your marines will do less than optimal dps.
|
There is no "terran" playstyle right now; it's just a terran playing like a zerg or a terran playing like a protoss. The old terran style revolved around positioning and static defense; unless people start leapfrogging PF's, bunkers, turrets, and sensor towers, there is no such thing as positional play in SC2. Too many things like cost and strong, mobile units makes leapfrogging tanks look retarded.
I do not agree with this at all. bunker marine all ins? banshee play? tank+vikings? tank contain? bioball? out of all races terrans are best at turtling on ramp +scv repair and they can contain the best.
I agree with nerfing rines to make rine allins less effective, but I do not agree that t1 units should be buffed to engage t3 toss units like collosi. collosi are supposed to be a direct counter to rines and you want to make it more balanced? comeon now.
Edit: seems like you want to be able to use rines for everything. there is a reason why other units are in game for terrans.
|
Mech is incredible garbage.
Seige tanks are terrible units other than taking out banelings.
At 50 damage they are ineffective at taking out stalkers/immortals/colossi even with EMP support.
Hellions are terrible units as well. Only decent against zealots, things turn out even worse when charge is out.
Thors do nothing, even with 250mm, colossi have too much mobility and kiting ability to fall into 6 range of 250mm.
Again zealots just destroy tanks and thors in general regardless of the support. All the while being blasted with psi storm, colossi and god knows what else.
Even with banshee mech, you'd still get feedbacked and stormed on for free, you'll have to land incredible EMP shots to prevent a lot of that damage if the protoss just happens to not have observers. But don't worry, they'll just make archons and warp in a few more HT with amulet, or shove all of them into a warp prism to prevent further EMP damage.
|
On December 07 2010 17:11 imBLIND wrote:
All the Terran match-ups are botched because of this one unit. Every damn TvZ -- mass marine. Almost every TvT -- mass marine. TvP -- kinda have to mass marines. It's too damn good in the early game and it's not nearly good enough in the late game.
So how good are marines supposed to be, ideally, in the late game? You state that T falls apart in the late game due to the prevalence of counters against marines (despite the fact that all of these counters are themselves also easily countered by other T units), how would you change that without simultaneously making marines, and thus T early game, overpowered?
|
Mech is incredible garbage.
Seige tanks are terrible units other than taking out banelings.
At 50 damage they are ineffective at taking out stalkers/immortals/colossi even with EMP support.
you do realize tanks need position to be effective. it is most effective when stalkers/immortals are approaching the tanks while taking hits, not when sieges are in range against them n taking shot for shot. tanks are good
|
i'd like to vote for range upgrade for marines. upgrade = current, non upgraded -1. (just like bw)
since day one i was hoping they would keep the idea of mech vs protoss , bio vs zerg (occasional vice versa) but marauder changed all taht. marauder is the one at fault here 
|
I came to many of the same conclusions as the OP when I was trying to experiment with mech and bio/mech builds. It is impossible to have a viable unit composition without marines, because they are the backbone of Terran's anti-air, but marines are too fragile to survive end-game battles.
At the blizzcon balance panel, the devs mentioned that stimmed-marines were too cost effective in the early-mid game. I think a slight marine nerf would be warrented, but Terran definitely needs more options to be able to compete in the late game. Ideas ive thought about include buffing viking ground mode, to allow terran's to mass more vikings for AA, without getting punished as much in their ground army or making thors more reliable by increasing the rate of fire, removing the splash, and tweaking the armor bonus.
To clarify, I don't think Terran is imbalanced. But I do think that terran players are in an awkward position where they need to win during the mid-game, because they have no good late game follow ups. In state of the game, inControl said himself, that once a protoss player reaches templar tech with storm+khaydarin amulet the protoss has already won. This is because, marines, the backbone of the Terran army, become obsolete once storm becomes that accessible. Marines either need a late-game buff, to keep them viable in every state of the game, or Terran players need a better transition after marines become useless.
TL;DR: Marines are very powerful early to mid game (perhaps to powerful), but become marginalized during the end game. Terran needs a late game buff by either buffing the marine late game, or by giving Terran more late game options that don't use the marine.
|
On December 08 2010 03:09 viraltouch wrote:Show nested quote +Mech is incredible garbage.
Seige tanks are terrible units other than taking out banelings.
At 50 damage they are ineffective at taking out stalkers/immortals/colossi even with EMP support. you do realize tanks need position to be effective. it is most effective when stalkers/immortals are approaching the tanks while taking hits, not when sieges are in range against them n taking shot for shot. tanks are good
Tanks and hellions do fine in pure ground battles. The problem with mech is that it doesn't have any real anti-air. Thors are not sufficient by themselves, especially against armored targets, and vikings are too weak on the ground for a terran to be able to mass them.
The only option left is marines, but marines become completely useless once storm and/or mass colossi come out.
Mech does have other issues, such as lack of mobility and map presence, but that is a different discussion.
Oops, sorry for double post. I meant to edit my original.
|
The OP makes a Good point.
Marines are a Double Edged Sword that make up the Critical mass of the Terran army. Strong Early game , absolutely pulverized by T3 units in the late game.
Against Zerg , The Main Reason why marine has take such an essential role is due to good Anti Air from Terran.Thors were good till Magic Box wasnt Discovered and Vikings are average against a Muta Army.
Against Protoss , Marines are Essential to countering Zealots as they Chew away the marauders which Counter Everything Else the Protoss Ground forces have(as seen today by the Jinro match)
|
I really dont get it. Terran playstyle involves having marines usually...... and you dont want that......
I do.
|
On December 08 2010 03:24 jinorazi wrote:i'd like to vote for range upgrade for marines. upgrade = current, non upgraded -1. (just like bw) since day one i was hoping they would keep the idea of mech vs protoss , bio vs zerg (occasional vice versa) but marauder changed all taht. marauder is the one at fault here
I think that the Immortal did much more damage to TvP mech than the Marauder ever will (also, lack of spider mines).
|
I think they should revert tank damage to what it was.
The game has progressed to where players realize there is more to do than simple 1-A into front of a players base.
As of right now, if you get like 20 tanks and siege, or position your tanks spread far apart, players just a-move zerglings into them, and rape.
That would never have happened in Brood War. In Brood War, if tanks were there, that meant it was their area. You would never even think about going.
Only problem is this would bring back Tank-Viking TvT. But thats what I think would solve the problem.
|
|
|
On December 08 2010 04:27 Msrobinson wrote:
I think they should revert tank damage to what it was.
The game has progressed to where players realize there is more to do than simple 1-A into front of a players base.
As of right now, if you get like 20 tanks and siege, or position your tanks spread far apart, players just a-move zerglings into them, and rape.
That would never have happened in Brood War. In Brood War, if tanks were there, that meant it was their area. You would never even think about going.
Only problem is this would bring back Tank-Viking TvT. But thats what I think would solve the problem.
I'm not entirely sure about that, but I've been thinking into the same direction lately. I'm not even a Terran player but stronger tanks could encourage a more macro heavy, expanding and defensive gameplay by Terran.
Could be good suggestion for the PTR, I guess.
|
If they ever nerf Marines in some other way, they should increase the size of the standard Marine to that of the merc Marines in the single-player campaign. This would decrease the effectiveness of all AOE against them without decreasing their damage density too much
|
nerf marines buff tanks for all i care, would like to play longer games but having the most immobile army in the game lose to some way more mobile ground mixes straight up is less than fun.
|
Using siege tanks in siege mode over open ground Gee, I wonder why they're not effective. Use cliffs! There's plenty of opportunities to place siege tanks in an advantageous position, so DO IT. If you don't have the terrain, keep them in tank mode. They deal more direct damage, can kite a bit, and move to a better position.
Nerfing marines: nope. Marines are fine. Players have trouble fighting LOTS of marines. Why? Because of MULEs. One Mule = 5 marines.
Why does terran mech suck? Because MULEs give you a terrible mineral/gas ratio that favors- you guessed it- marines. And marauders.
|
I think something like making HSM 100 energy and 9 range would do it. It's a nice spell as it is, but it's a costly upgraded spell, on the most gas-intensive caster unit in the game, it costs the most energy of any spell in the game, and has an obvious weakness in that it can be outrun by most units (and it highlights which unit needs to be split off from the pack). It's just not devastating enough for its cost.
|
Maybe combat shield is imba?
|
Marines get slaughtered by bling/infestor from Zerg. They get slaughtered by HT or Colossus or guardian shield from Protoss. Marines get slaughtered by tanks lines and BCs from Terran.
Marines aren't unstoppable. If your opponent uses two storms he can kill 1000 minerals worth of marines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
