| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
 Would really like to see them testing a marine&marauder nerf (like -1 damage to first and -10 hp the second), plus some higher tech units buffs like tanks&BCs (the second is already happening in HotS). Just to see how that goes and if it changes the early and late game balance problems. Of course a lot of the balance fixes they did could be reverted with the -1damage for the marine maybe as well. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 29 2012 18:46 mizore wrote: You cite replacing banelings with lurkers, colossus with reaver, and making marines into their bw counterparts as well as citing that heavy tank play in tvt is just like bw and therefor ok, and I'm the one derailing this into an sc2 vs bw topic? Reading comprehension fail. I didn't suggest replacing banelings with lurkers or colossi with reavers. I was explaining how those changes from BW flowed from the SC2 marine. On May 29 2012 18:46 mizore wrote: Besides that, changes like those are too massive to put into a patch, especially with all that's currently invested into sc2's proscene. Maybe down the road in lotv, because right now I can guarantee almost everything you have a problem with is going to make it into hots. I don't disagree that the problems with SC2 require massive fixes, but that doesn't mean they're not worth pointing out to help people understand how game design flow has affected SC2. On May 29 2012 18:46 mizore wrote: At that point you might as well try to make a custom map to propose your changes and generate actual data that you can base these conclusions off of instead of waxing theorycraft on how it would be so much better. But hey, putting on airs like you know better than everybody else is the cool thing to do these days yeah? It's Blizzard's job, not mine, to fix SC2. The issues I'm pointing out with the marine aren't emprical and cannot be tested, but are logically coherent to anyone with an understanding of Starcraft and game design/theory. I'm also not the only one who's aware of the problems with marines, as many people have pointed these issues out since the beta. I'm merely elaborating on how they also result in a ripple effect on the rest of the game. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:14 Dalavita wrote: Making races have core units doesn't mean the game becomes worse. There's a substantial difference between a "core unit" and a unit that dominates every aspect of a race's gameplay. On May 29 2012 19:14 Dalavita wrote: SC2s problems aren't with the marine because the marine makes for good games. Lolwut? How does an overpowered marine make for good games? Do marine/scv all-ins make for good games? Does using mostly one unit in all matchups make for good games? Does forcing nerfs like depot before rax and 45 hp SCVs make for good games? On May 29 2012 19:14 Dalavita wrote: Also not comparing zealots and zerglings to marines is laughable and shows that you have no clue what you're talking about. The conversation you jumped into was about how marines warp the entire Terran race around them. Zealots and zerglings have no such effect on their respective races. The analgous sacred cows for Zerg and Protoss are the Queen (especially Spawn Larvae) and the Colossus, respectively. The fact that you think zealots and zerglings have anything to do with this topic is indicative of how lost you are. | ||
|
Dalavita
Sweden1113 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:27 sunprince wrote: There's a substantial difference between a "core unit" and a unit that dominates every aspect of a race's gameplay. Lolwut? How does an overpowered marine make for good games? Do marine/scv all-ins make for good games? Does using mostly one unit in all matchups make for good games? Wake-up call: your Terran bias is showing. The conversation you jumped into was about how marines warp the entire Terran race around them. Zealots and zerglings have no such effect on their respective races. The analgous sacred cows for Zerg and Protoss are the Queen (especially Spawn Larvae) and the Colossus, respectively. Marine/SCV all-ins at the highest level make for very good games (MVP vs Squirtle). Marine tank in zvt and tvt make for good games. I only care about SC2 being a good game. There is no bias here. And no, sorry. Both zealots and zerglings are used just as extensively as marines are, and got even more value than pure marines in situations where the marine isn't viable. Also, I like how you arbitrarily place game warping units for Z/P as well. Your actually have no idea what you're talking about. | ||
|
sieksdekciw
240 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:27 sunprince wrote: There's a substantial difference between a "core unit" and a unit that dominates every aspect of a race's gameplay. Ye, I agree. Zealots and zerglings are units that dominate every aspect of toss and zerg respectively so I believe they should both be nerfed and stalkers and hydra buffed respectively so zerg and toss have more variety. I suggest -30 health on zealot and -4 dmg and +1 dmg on stalker. For zerg, I suggest -20 health on ling and +10% movement speed on hydra on creep. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
| ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:33 Dalavita wrote: Marine/SCV all-ins at the highest level make for very good games (MVP vs Squirtle). Marine tank in zvt and tvt make for good games. Limiting viable compositions to those involving the marine does not make for good games. On May 29 2012 19:33 Dalavita wrote: Both zealots and zerglings are used just as extensively as marines are, No. Zealots and zerglings are support units at best, whereas the vast majority of Terran compositions are designed around protecting and supporting the marine. On May 29 2012 19:33 Dalavita wrote: and got even more value than pure marines in situations where the marine isn't viable. Lmao. Pure marines have more utility than pure zealots or pure zerlings in the vast majority of the situations; the fact that marines don't dominate every situation is not proof that they are comparable. On May 29 2012 19:33 Dalavita wrote: Also, I like how you arbitrarily place game warping units for Z/P as well. The entirety of the SC2 Zerg race was designed around the Spawn Larvae mechanic, and the colossi are the only unit where the mirror match counter is to make more of the same unit. I've explained in others posts in the last couple pages why these warp the game. | ||
|
sieksdekciw
240 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:40 Salteador Neo wrote: Nah lings and zealots are almost never the core of the army. Zerglings sometimes, depending on the build (mass lings with infestors, or early game strats). Marines are the core unit of the terran army 90% of the games ez. It is known. You are right, sir, Zealot HT rarely has zealots as the core unit, unlike marine marauder medivac ghost where the only units present are marines. Also, "ling bling muta" and "ling bling infestor" rarely have any zerglings in them so we can safely say that zerglings are not a core zerg unit. In "ling bane" wars in zvz we rarely see presence of zerglings as well. But in TvT mech! vs mech! the core unit of terran: the marine, is largely dominating the matchup. Tanks are used to support the main damage dealer: the marine, thors and hellions are to provide meat shield to this very powerful unit which is totally core, unlike Zealots and Zerglings, in every T matchup. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On May 29 2012 20:03 sieksdekciw wrote: You are right, sir, Zealot HT rarely has zealots as the core unit, unlike marine marauder medivac ghost where the only units present are marines. Also, "ling bling muta" and "ling bling infestor" rarely have any zerglings in them so we can safely say that zerglings are not a core zerg unit. In "ling bane" wars in zvz we rarely see presence of zerglings as well. But in TvT mech! vs mech! the core unit of terran: the marine, is largely dominating the matchup. Tanks are used to support the main damage dealer: the marine, thors and hellions are to provide meat shield to this very powerful unit which is totally core, unlike Zealots and Zerglings, in every T matchup. Zealots are mostly represented in that one build that makes a lot of archons and HTs because they are only mineral and decent tanks. They tank damage while archon/Ht deal damage. It's only one build btw. Same with lings. You need them to make banelings that deal the damage, together with fungal. Lings just clean up the wastes of the opponent army/take damage so the other units don't die too fast. Marines are the DPS while the other units (medivac, tanks, ghost) are the support. Core unit. You probably already know this, but eh. Edit: Regarding TvT, most GSL games are also marine/tank vs marine/tank nowadays. Last pure mech build I saw on it got stomped by marine/tank of course. Marines are just faster, most effective, mobile and win base races. | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On May 29 2012 19:27 sunprince wrote: There's a substantial difference between a "core unit" and a unit that dominates every aspect of a race's gameplay. Lolwut? How does an overpowered marine make for good games? Do marine/scv all-ins make for good games? Does using mostly one unit in all matchups make for good games? Does forcing nerfs like depot before rax and 45 hp SCVs make for good games? The conversation you jumped into was about how marines warp the entire Terran race around them. Zealots and zerglings have no such effect on their respective races. The analgous sacred cows for Zerg and Protoss are the Queen (especially Spawn Larvae) and the Colossus, respectively. The fact that you think zealots and zerglings have anything to do with this topic is indicative of how lost you are. " The whole Terran Race is designed to have core units and support units around them. Terran has the most expensive inflexible production and upgrade structure. If a Terran commits to bio he has to play bio. Bio Units need to be as strong as they are to make bionic play possible and to defend at the early state. You could for example easily buff mech play in TvP without destroying the balance of the whole match up, as long as the buff effects the game only after the terran has really committed to mech. And TvP is really the only match up where the Terran has to play bio centric. In TvT and TvZ Mech and Bio centric play is possible. IMHO the only reason why Terran has to play marine heavy bio in TvP right now is the Chargelot. Marines are simply the only unit that can deal with chargelots in a timely manner. And i don`t get why sunprince is talking about fixing SC2. SC2 is fine. The balance is very close. And thats a lot if you think about how very different the Races are designed. Sure i would also like to see some currently underused units made useful, but the core of the game is fine. Just because SC2 is different from SCBW does not mean its worse. | ||
|
MateShade
Australia736 Posts
| ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On May 29 2012 20:19 Salteador Neo wrote: Zealots are mostly represented in that one build that makes a lot of archons and HTs because they are only mineral and decent tanks. They tank damage while archon/Ht deal damage. It's only one build btw. Same with lings. You need them to make banelings that deal the damage, together with fungal. Lings just clean up the wastes of the opponent army/take damage so the other units don't die too fast. Marines are the DPS while the other units (medivac, tanks, ghost) are the support. Core unit. You probably already know this, but eh. Edit: Regarding TvT, most GSL games are also marine/tank vs marine/tank nowadays. Last pure mech build I saw on it got stomped by marine/tank of course. Marines are just faster, most effective, mobile and win base races. Whenever i see MC play PvZ he basically builds a lot of blinkstalkers and support units. Some collossi and immortals for burstdamage until they are gone+ zealots as meatshield and sentries for FFs. Every army has different units that all preform a specific task. Terran is the race that cant switch that core in a timely manner because of the production and upgrade structure. If a Terran commits to a lot of reactored rax he is very likely to build marines all game long. | ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
Sincerely, sunprince | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44909 Posts
On May 29 2012 20:54 MateShade wrote: Why is this thread still going... Because we want to hit 100 pages so badly, and the game clearly isn't balanced because this one time I lost to something I totally shouldn't have because I swear I played perfectly in my diamond league game and my opponent was a scrub because he was bad and I didn't like his ID and he told me to step on a lego faggot so I swear marines/ zerglings/ zealots are imba. That's why. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
You could maybe make an argument for Zerglings being somewhat equivalent to the Marine, and I sort of agree, because they have a use in every Zerg composition and are a worthwhile investment. Zealots, though, are something you need to put money into for them to be good, and in reality nobody actually wants to have 30 Zealots unless they can't afford 15 Zealots + 15 Stalkers in PvT, which is superior. Not that I think the Marine needs a nerf, but it does make it difficult to buff any other Terran units when one needs to consider them in conjunction with the Marine. | ||
|
TeeTS
Germany2762 Posts
 + Show Spoiler + marine vs zealot/stalker under guardian shield... 2dmg, YEAH! | ||
|
sieksdekciw
240 Posts
On May 29 2012 20:58 submarine wrote: If a Terran commits to a lot of reactored rax he is very likely to build marines all game long. You don't say! I woud imagine a terran committing to a lot of refactored rax would have plenty of battlecruisers and ravens. Seriously though, your argument with mc having a lot of blink stalkers is like me having an argument with TLO's mass banshee vs P. | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
| ||
|
dde
Canada796 Posts
| ||
|
.Carnage
United States99 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
CranKy Ducklings
Safe House 2
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Safe House 2
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
|
|
|
EPT
