|
On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky .
And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals.
BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2.
Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc.
I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta.
I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up.
|
On May 28 2012 04:22 KawaiiRice wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 01:06 StarBrift wrote:On May 28 2012 00:57 SKYFISH_ wrote:
then you have successfully baited me, i congratulate you.
because it is only at the highest level where you see marines countering banelings successfully, and only by a handful of terrans, which means you're contradicting yourself in your original post, i.e. intentional logical fallacy
well done
No i've met plenty of players in masters that can micro marines perfectly. They just aren't that good at macro and multitasking which is why foreigner pro terrans are much better than them. Foreigner pros could all have perfect micro they just dont feel the need to spend time on it since they have much other actual hard work to go through to have a chance at the top levels. It's fun to watch Marineking micro sure. But you shouldn't be impressed by something that anyone can emulate with a few days work. You should be impressed about the fact that all his barracks are making units and he's expanding / dropping at the same time as he is doing that micro. Oh and I didn't bait you in any way. You are just a very presumptious person. I wish I could micro marines perfectly why cant I be as good as those masters players
Haha well said :D
|
What...? Is there really a debate going on here about whether or not MKP's micro (or anyone's for that matter) is stellar or not?
On May 28 2012 01:06 StarBrift wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:57 SKYFISH_ wrote:
then you have successfully baited me, i congratulate you.
because it is only at the highest level where you see marines countering banelings successfully, and only by a handful of terrans, which means you're contradicting yourself in your original post, i.e. intentional logical fallacy
well done
No i've met plenty of players in masters that can micro marines perfectly. They just aren't that good at macro and multitasking which is why foreigner pro terrans are much better than them. Foreigner pros could all have perfect micro they just dont feel the need to spend time on it since they have much other actual hard work to go through to have a chance at the top levels. It's fun to watch Marineking micro sure. But you shouldn't be impressed by something that anyone can emulate with a few days work. You should be impressed about the fact that all his barracks are making units and he's expanding / dropping at the same time as he is doing that micro. Oh and I didn't bait you in any way. You are just a very presumptious person.
By stating that they micro marines "perfectly", I think you mean perhaps there are players out there who's micro is adequate enough to counter YOUR imperfect use of banelings, not that their marine performance is significantly better, let alone "perfect".
Yes, we should be impressed by the fact that he has very strong mechanics (micro, macro, multitasking, etc), but your claims that his micro aspect is nothing extraordinary is absurd. I don't mean to call you out or flame you or anything, but I'm pretty sure you or any other run-of-the-mill masters player couldnt match MKP's micro (while he is multitasking) even if you spent all your time and energy into practicing your micro.
|
On May 28 2012 01:06 StarBrift wrote:
Foreigner pros could all have perfect micro they just dont feel the need to spend time on it since they have much other actual hard work to go through to have a chance at the top levels.
It's fun to watch Marineking micro sure. But you shouldn't be impressed by something that anyone can emulate with a few days work.
:D
U serious ?
|
On May 28 2012 05:22 zezamer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 01:06 StarBrift wrote:
Foreigner pros could all have perfect micro they just dont feel the need to spend time on it since they have much other actual hard work to go through to have a chance at the top levels.
It's fun to watch Marineking micro sure. But you shouldn't be impressed by something that anyone can emulate with a few days work. :D U serious ?
Im thinking we all just got rick (t)roll'd by that guy
|
On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up.
Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup.
If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary:
Depot before barracks.
Bunker build time increase.
SCV life decrease.
Medivac speed decrease.
Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase.
|
Marines stopped being 'OP' the moment people realized they couldn't sit at 0/0 vs 3/3 marines. Pretty silly to talk about them.
|
That video wasn't really helpful for me..does anyone know another preview vid?
|
On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase.
They would also die after stimming to:
1 Baneling
1 Fungal
1 Tank volley (hello tank viking~)
2 Blue Flame Hellion shots (and 2 without stimming prepatch :D)
1 Colossus attack
Not that I'm entirely against the idea but you'd have to severely change other aspects of the race to even make it work because marines wouldn't be worth much of anything if they only had their bw 40hp and couldn't stutterstep. Oh, and they'd also start at range 4.
|
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO.
|
On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO.
That makes no sense. The only reason why TvP mech aint viable, is because Immortals/zealots is just pur counter. Once battlehelions arrive it will clear up.
|
blizzard zvt has gone completely broken do something please
|
On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO.
speak for you, tvt played with tank viking, for me is far more entertaining than stupid bio-boring shit
On May 29 2012 16:03 mizore wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase. They would also die after stimming to: 1 Baneling 1 Fungal 1 Tank volley (hello tank viking~) 2 Blue Flame Hellion shots (and 2 without stimming prepatch :D) 1 Colossus attack Not that I'm entirely against the idea but you'd have to severely change other aspects of the race to even make it work because marines wouldn't be worth much of anything if they only had their bw 40hp and couldn't stutterstep. Oh, and they'd also start at range 4.
the marine buff, come from a decision to make the dropship an healing unit, all the problem come from there, if there were medic in sc2, all this bullshit marine problems would not exist.
the medivac is the real guilty
|
On May 29 2012 16:43 BoB_KiLLeR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO. That makes no sense. The only reason why TvP mech aint viable, is because Immortals/zealots is just pur counter. Once battlehelions arrive it will clear up.
Well I was talking about the current SC2 so it makes complete sense if you think about it.
Let's hope HoTs shakes things up and makes it interesting. It isn't looking that bright for now.
|
On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO.
Whos arguing that TvT shouldn't be that way? Unless you're projecting.
|
On May 29 2012 17:41 Tyrant0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO. Whos arguing that TvT shouldn't be that way? Unless you're projecting.
I actually liked BW TvT more so I wouldn't care at all. But we have seen many complains about that in the past in other threads and one just a pair of pages before in this one:
On May 28 2012 01:00 s3rp wrote:
I hope not if the solution is buffing the tank because that would make TvT once a again a giant pain in the ass. Its annoying as is right now once one or both side have 10+ tanks but if they makee tanks as strong as they had been in beta and the beginning of the game TvT will once against be tank/viking only and suck as hell.
I can understand the love for bio-mech versatility in the matchup tho.
|
On May 29 2012 16:43 BoB_KiLLeR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO. That makes no sense. The only reason why TvP mech aint viable, is because Immortals/zealots is just pur counter. Once battlehelions arrive it will clear up.
Sadly it's not the only reason. Add feedback + lack of zone defense for tanks against blink stalkers and chargelots + the fact that mules favor a high mineral/low gas army. Even if all these parameters were changed, P would tech to get a mothership for the vortex, and why not recall in order to abuse mech's poor mobility.
|
On May 29 2012 13:08 oxxo wrote:
Marines stopped being 'OP' the moment people realized they couldn't sit at 0/0 vs 3/3 marines. Pretty silly to talk about them.
Bullshit. Marines are still the backbone of every Terran matchup because so much of SC2 Terran's power is invested into a single unit and other Terran assets are underpowered to compensate.
On May 29 2012 16:03 mizore wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase. They would also die after stimming to: 1 Baneling 1 Fungal 1 Tank volley (hello tank viking~) 2 Blue Flame Hellion shots (and 2 without stimming prepatch :D) 1 Colossus attack Not that I'm entirely against the idea but you'd have to severely change other aspects of the race to even make it work because marines wouldn't be worth much of anything if they only had their bw 40hp and couldn't stutterstep. Oh, and they'd also start at range 4.
Most of those other things were designed with OP marines in mind, and wouldn't have to exist in their current forms were it not due to marines. A lot of the game's design decisions were drastically distorted by the need to deal with the marine:
Banelings wouldn't have been needed in the game; lurkers would have been included instead.
Fungals should counter marines and destroy them in any real situation even if one-shotting weren't an issue.
Tanks countering marines is not a problem. See BW.
Blue flame hellions aren't all that effective against spread marines.
Colossi are stupid units that wouldn't have been needed if not for the marine; we would've had reavers instead.
On top of that, those are marine counters, and stims are supposed to be a real cost. What exactly are you expecting, when Zerglings, Zealots, and Hydras die to those same units just as easily? It's not like you don't have other units to protect marines; pure marines shouldn't be a viable composition.
On May 29 2012 17:08 Garmer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 16:35 Salteador Neo wrote:
All terrans want mech to be viable against protoss but don't want TvT to be the Tank-viking boring-as-hell stalemate it was before.
Well you can't have one without the other IMO. speak for you, tvt played with tank viking, for me is far more entertaining than stupid bio-boring shit Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 16:03 mizore wrote:On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase. They would also die after stimming to: 1 Baneling 1 Fungal 1 Tank volley (hello tank viking~) 2 Blue Flame Hellion shots (and 2 without stimming prepatch :D) 1 Colossus attack Not that I'm entirely against the idea but you'd have to severely change other aspects of the race to even make it work because marines wouldn't be worth much of anything if they only had their bw 40hp and couldn't stutterstep. Oh, and they'd also start at range 4. the marine buff, come from a decision to make the dropship an healing unit, all the problem come from there, if there were medic in sc2, all this bullshit marine problems would not exist. the medivac is the real guilty
False. Marines distort the game long before medivacs enter play. There's a reason why SCV life was nerfed, depot was made a requirement for rax, bunker build times were increased, etc.
|
On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase.
I hate Blizzard's new philosophy that Terran should have a core set of units that dominate their gameplay. Namely, marines with marauders sprinkled in. I honestly associate mech and factory units with terran, moreso than a swarm of marines cutting their way through practically every unit that is not tier 3 splash. Bio is much more interesting when it is the "alternative" composition, like mech/air is right now. As the staple, all it looks like is "herr time to macro 5 aaaaaaaaaaaa army is now complete. 1 T A click and click "Score Screen". Of course, it is not that simple, and no race is 1A easy like anyone thinks they are, but the way the design for SC2 is going, it sure seems like it.
|
On May 29 2012 17:54 Kid-Fox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 12:54 sunprince wrote:On May 28 2012 05:15 Mjolnir wrote:On May 28 2012 00:22 s3rp wrote:On May 27 2012 23:54 Mjolnir wrote:
The problem is the marine.
They're too strong - period. I play Terran and Zerg and I utterly hate how Terran plays in SC2 (compared to BW) simply because bio is so freaking strong - in every match up.. Not only do marines have more life now, they can get a shield to increase that life further - two factors that make them so powerful early/early mid. They have phenomenal dps per cost, and they can go toe-to-toe with pretty much anything given the right micro and spacing.
Yes, anything. There are games where pros split and micro against infestor bane (marine counters) to make the engagement cost effective.
That's absurd. It's a spammable tier 1 unit that is extremely effective throughout the entire game. I know the counter argument here is that zealots or zerglings are also effective late game (drops, warp ins, run bys); but I'd respond to that by saying neither of those units is as effective as late game marines, nor do you find builds where the only unit used to carry the game from early, mid, to late is one of those units.
Example, the ling/infestor builds that Terrans struggle with is a build that's meant to get enough time and save gas to get BLs. Compare that to virtually any non-mech Terran build where marines are the core of the army from start to finish.
Again, I play T and Z. While each race has strengths, Terran marines are so strong it actually makes playing the race feel shitty and one-dimensional. I would argue that so many of Terran's nerfs could have been avoided if marines were only slightly weaker. This would have made (at the very least) Terran a far more dynamic and interesting race to play.
Of course, this is all my opinion and I'm sure the flames will start rolling in. My post isn't meant to incite argument - I enjoy playing all races and I'm not qqing about marines from the standpoint of a Zerg or Protoss. To be quite honest, I am disappointed with how Terran, my favourite race, plays out because marines are so incredibly strong.
Which they also have to be because any non-Marine is not strong enough to be the core unit. Tanks are not nearly as good as in BW ( not even close ) unless you get 10+ of them and 1-2 hit an entire army. And even that doesn't work against Protoss because Protoss units close the distance too fast to sieged tanks . Anything else isn't even fit to be a core unit. Helions suck against anything that isn't light , Thors are way too slow and clunky . And that's part of my gripe with SC2 Terran. Those units were nerfed because they were perceived to be too strong. I believe that they weren't - the marines "supporting" them were. There's a reason Terran doesn't have any other "core unit" option - they're all crap when compared to what you get from a marine for 50 minerals. BW Terran was fantastic. They had many versatile builds, none of which revolved entirely around a single unit - certainly not like Terran plays in SC2. Again, I'm not trying to incite an argument. I just think marines are so strong and the cause for a lot of the problems in SC2. They should have been balanced long ago - it's possible that if they were Terrans wouldn't have had a nerf to their rax first builds, rax build times, bunker rushes, tank damage, etc. etc. I really believe an argument can be made that more balanced marines would have prevented many of the nerfs Terrans have faced since beta. I say this as a T and Z player. I would prefer Terran was more rounded and didn't rely on marines/bio for every match up. Completely agreed. Blizzard's unwillingness to touch the sacred cow that is the marine is responsible for it's distortion of every Terran matchup. If the SC2 marine was replaced by the BW marine, then all of the following patch changes would have been unnecessary: Depot before barracks. Bunker build time increase. SCV life decrease. Medivac speed decrease. Nexus/Depot/Hatch/Lair/Pool/Spire/Cavern life increase. I hate Blizzard's new philosophy that Terran should have a core set of units that dominate their gameplay. Namely, marines with marauders sprinkled in. I honestly associate mech and factory units with terran, moreso than a swarm of marines cutting their way through practically every unit that is not tier 3 splash. Bio is much more interesting when it is the "alternative" composition, like mech/air is right now. As the staple, all it looks like is "herr time to macro 5 aaaaaaaaaaaa army is now complete. 1 T A click and click "Score Screen". Of course, it is not that simple, and no race is 1A easy like anyone thinks they are, but the way the design for SC2 is going, it sure seems like it.
It's not just Terran either. All of the races have been greatly distorted by a single overly dominant unit that completely force game design around them:
Terrans have the marine.
Zerg have the queen (particularly Spawn Larvae's implications for a ridiculously exponential economy).
Protoss have colossi (the fact that the PvP counter to colossi is more colossi should've been a blatant red flag).
The end result is that styles of play are horribly limited around those units. Marines end up being the key unit in every Terran matchup, Zerg must play a heavy macro swarm style (goodbye low econ/supply builds of BW), and Protoss must build Colossi-centric deathballs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
