|
On July 19 2014 09:26 Varroth wrote:
Did Happy just say that the very top terran players are better than the very top protoss and zergs?
This view that terrans are better than Zergs/Protoss players is just so disgusting.. that top zerg and protoss players somewhat rely on their race while for terrans its pure damn skill. Despicable.
true to an extant
|
On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc.
"gas units" was the key word I believe. Part of the strength of the marine is that it only requires minerals (no gas) but it can trade efficiently vs. gas units and be produced consistently all game long.
|
On July 22 2014 02:40 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:38 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:35 DinoMight wrote:
I think to say that the Marine is perfect and not a source of balance issues at all is really baseless and unjustified.
The reason that Protoss needs units like the Colossus and Templar (w/ Storm) is because without dishing out ridiculous AoE, there is nothing that can handle Stimmed bio + Medivacs. A Medivac heals a Marine faster than a Stalker can kill it 1v1..
It's very very very difficult to design a game in which both Mech and Bio are viable against Z, T, and P. If you recall, Brood War bio was unusable vs. Protoss. You had to mech.
I'm pretty sure you can win without HT and colossi. There are some 2/2 zealot archons that rekt bio like it was nothing. (ofc now there is the WM but without it it's almost impossible to old this compo without a fuckton of bunker and a wall. And guess what ? it's only gateway units. And btw, blink allin is only stalker and deal pretty well against bio for a while. Short of an allin timing that hits before Terran gets critical mass I'm pretty sure this is impossible. Plus when you factor in that Widow Mines exist it's almost impossible. Point is that there is no macro strategy viable for P without Colossi or Storm because of the Marine.
And there is no viable strategy for terran without viking against colo or ghost against HT ? Vikings/medivacs/ghost are latter stage units too. It just happens they don't have AoE attack.
I bet you 10$ that if you use only gateway unit vs rax unit, terran will be rekt in no time.
You are talking like terrans are wining with only 2 units when they use 6. As much as the protoss btw.
|
On July 22 2014 02:23 gneGne wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 00:57 Squat wrote:On July 22 2014 00:41 gneGne wrote:
Yes, maybe. But notice... WITH medivacs. Wouldn't that be a problem with the medivac rather than the marine? Zerglings and Zealots are really strong too when accompanied with other supporting units. Aren't you making an unfair comparison? No, this is not quite correct. Lings and zealots do not gain exponential power when supported by medivacs the way marines do, they just don't have the offensive output or versatility to make use of that healing and mobility like marines do. Just try it, play a 2v2 and support bunch of lings and zealots with medivacs, it's not the same thing. The basic units of zerg and protoss really are nowhere near as strong as the marine, as any pro game will show. Just because marines also require medivacs to operate at full capacity, it does not make them less strong. You can still fight far more gas heavy armies with marines as your main combat unit. We could substitute the medivac with the medic and the same thing would apply. Medivacs are a general support unit that benefit anything they can heal, obviously more powerful units will get more out of the healing. See, choices were made when the basic units were put into the game. They chose to make the basic units really strong from the early to the late game (when accompanied by other units). This was a design choice which you may agree or disagree with, but it was a fundamental choice. You have no idea whether that is the case or not. The only people who would know for sure are those who would seriously attempt to implement a change like this. Simply asserting that such is the case does not make it true. Wait, are you proposing to balance on basis of involving the mixing of units from the three races? I don't think you will get much out of that, at least if you intend to keep three different races. And in my eyes, any pro game, of all the three races, involve using the basic unit, I don't see how this can be denied (just think about zerg remax on lings and zealot harass late late game).
I said no such thing and any honest reading of what I wrote should demonstrate that. It a was a point of comparison to elucidate on the fundamental difference between the dynamics of the marine vs the zealot or the zergling. At no point did I imply that a balance should be predicated on a mix of units from different races.
Of course requiring another unit supporting the marine to be viable in the mid game makes them less strong! Medivacs are exactly those expensive units that require gas you know! Without medivacs marines are nothing in the mid game, I think you underestimate medivacs. Most expensive gas heavy armies have no problem against pure marine/medivac compositions. The only thing you could argue is that splitting marines is too powerful against banelings? MKP should probably win a lot of titles  .
No, marines scale far better with the medivac support than the units of other races, that is a different issue. The original, and only point I ever made, that is being lost in the pointless bantering about semantics, was that marines limit the possibilities of improving other options for terran. Because of their incredible cost-efficiency and overall strength, it means that any significant buff to a supporting unit could break the game, as it opens a massive window of marine plus X timings, before an opponent can realistically have the units needed to fight both the marines and the auxiliary unit.
If we want to make other styles of terran viable, this has to be taken into account.
|
On July 22 2014 02:42 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc. "gas units" was the key word I believe.
Queens and spine cost so much gaz.
and there is no viable marine early pressure in TvP.
|
On July 22 2014 02:43 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:42 DinoMight wrote:On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc. "gas units" was the key word I believe. Queens and spine cost so much gaz. and there is no viable marine early pressure in TvP.
Queens and spines don't (typically) walk across the map and kill you (they have on occasion though :p)
Anyway, my point was that you can't say "the marine is perfect." Marines + X is viable in every single matchup and therefore every stat of the Marine has a huge impact on how the game is played. So if there is imbalance in any Terran matchup, the Marine is involved.
Maybe the marine is too strong in the late game vs. Gateway units and therefore it requires Protoss to have incredible AoE to deal with it... So any discussion about Storm or Colossus obviously is also a discussion about the Marine. Maybe Zerg needs banelings because without them Mass Marines beats literally anything Zerg makes. Okay.. then obviously discussions about Fungal's strength or Banelings are also really about the Marine.
|
On July 22 2014 02:10 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:On July 22 2014 00:49 Big J wrote:On July 22 2014 00:32 gneGne wrote:On July 22 2014 00:07 Big J wrote:On July 21 2014 23:55 gneGne wrote:
What is wrong with the marine? [1]It has been balanced in context of the zealot and the zergling. I don't see the problem, please explain further? [2] If you would like a different role for the marine then you basicly need to redo all three races. Basicly the whole game. [1] I think before anybody can answer to you, you have to explain what you mean with this phrase. Because cost for cost and supply for supply, marines beat zealots and zerglings in any mid-high amount. And timingwise, marine+wall completely crushes those units before those high amounts are reached. [2] I don't know why. If you were to change the marine to a unit that e.g. works well against light but not so well against armored, and compensated Terran with slightly better armored counters (e.g. stronger tanks and moving-shot vikings vs air), I don't see why you'd have to redo the other races. Maybe a tiny tweak here or there to prevent early stalker or roach rushes to kill you, but this could surely be done without redoing the other races. (similarily to how you could change FFs or Swarm Hosts without having to change Terran) I am not quite sure where you get (1) from. If you are talking about mid-to-high amounts of marines, you are already talking about mid game where I presume not the marines themselves, but the combination with medivacs are the problem which make marines so cost effective? However, the same can be said here about units in combination with zealots and zerglings. Timingwise I also see no problem, are you really saying that pushes against terran are impossible because of supply/bunker walls? As for (2), if you feel the need to introduce a new way in which the damage of the marine works, you have to do the same for zealots and zerglings against armored units. Or would it be fair that only terran has to build an army that counters either armour or light while zerg and protoss don't have to because their basic unit are one size fits all? It is an interesting option, but it would involve changing all three races like I mentioned. Again, tell me what you meant with (1). If you bring other units in the equation, I don't see what the whole point is to first say "Marines are balanced in the context of Zerglings/Zealots". So, what do you mean with this phrase? In what way are they balanced against Zerglings and Zealots? About (2), just because a unit stat says "+ vs armored/light", doesn't mean the unit is bad against something else (e.g. blink stalkers). Or vis verca. Just for a lot of those units, the "+ vs something" values tend to be mid to high, while something like 5+1vs light on marines would still leave them as a decent all around unit. And you could keep the zealot at 8*2damage vs everything, because it isn't a decent all around unit to begin with (no antiair at all; melee attribute making it weak against bigger ranged balls, etc). In either case, you will want something more against a blink rush. On (1): Let me make it really simple. If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Well, let's take an example, we have the 11/11 build against Z which is built around the effectiveness of the marine, but its not invincible and requires a greedy Z and intensive micro battles to be really successful. Against P the 11/11 build can work but is overall even less effective than against Z. On (2): I am not quite sure where you are getting at, but you claim zealots and zerglings are not good all around units? I have to disagree, they are useful throughout the whole game, especially versus Terran all pro players use them in the late game. Indeed, only terrans basic unit can target air (still air is used a lot vs T), there are main differences in how the 3 races operate, but that is a challenge Blizzard is willing to work with. (1) two words: defender's advantage. And also that marines a ranged and while in the early game zerglings/zealots hold their own or in really tiny amounts can even beat marines, the marine's true power against those units shows in the 10s and higher amounts. That doesnt mean they are bad, imo zerglings are very good (due to their speed). But yes, this fact also helps to prevent early game marine builds from winning easily. (2) There's a difference between an all around unit and a unit being useful. The fact that it is basically impossible to spend your money without building mineral only units once you mix in tech units makes zerglings/zealots useful. The difference is that Zs and Ps build certain units and then also build zerglings/zealots because they have money that cannot be spent differently and the game being balanced around spending your money. While Terrans build marines and then eventually sit on a gasbank because it is better to build mineralonly units than to build more expensive units and fill what's left with marines. It leads to weird scenarios in which a Terran rather builds 2.5marines for 125/0 and stores gas (or doesnt mine at full efficiency to begin with) instead of building one tank for 125/100. Because the one unit is just so much better that you Double the cost doesnt even mean more power.
So I think we can agree on (1) that marines are not imbalanced in the early game. With (2) I think you exaggerate Terrans building of a gasbank when we are talking about mid game Terran. However, I agree there is a problem in the late game, where Terran has already spent everything there is to get for the bio composition that uses gas, but this is not a problem with the marine, but rather the apparent ineffectiveness of the late game units? For a time ghosts were skipped altogether vs P, because terrans thought they wouldn't really give any advantage. Nowadays ghosts are used and with the need for vikings we rarely see gas banks, unless, as is for all the races, there is a stale period in the game with two maxed out armies and a lot of bases mining.
|
On July 22 2014 02:51 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:43 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:42 DinoMight wrote:On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc. "gas units" was the key word I believe. Queens and spine cost so much gaz. and there is no viable marine early pressure in TvP. Queens and spines don't (typically) walk across the map and kill you (they have on occasion though :p) Anyway, my point was that you can't say "the marine is perfect." Marines + X is viable in every single matchup and therefore every stat of the Marine has a huge impact on how the game is played. So if there is imbalance in any Terran matchup, the Marine is involved. Maybe the marine is too strong in the late game vs. Gateway units and therefore it requires Protoss to have incredible AoE to deal with it... So any discussion about Storm or Colossus obviously is also a discussion about the Marine.
You know, the zealot is used in every single match up. The zergling too. It's a core and basic unit.
Since currently, say Z>T. Do we need to nerf the zergling because it scall to much with the baneling ? I mean, if prevent the terran from splitting correcly without taking huge additional hit and allowing mutas to take on in the fight.
I mean, you zergling is still used in the very late game is this MU. Should we nerf it ?
And about TvP, if the marine is so strong in lategame vs gateway unit, but so weak against AoE protoss, why don't we nerf AoE a little so that it even things out ?
You know, sc2 is an asymetrical game. If you wanted everything to value the exact same everytime, there wouls be only a single race.
It happens that terran as the strongest t1 unit (I disagree, it just has a great synergy with later tech).
But in counterpart, we don't have huge reproduction capacity like P and Z, we don't have sick AoE like Storm or colossi, or even fungal.
It would be stupid to nerf a unit because it looks like it's very useful for a race. If you want to give more possibillity to the terran, just buff other units.
And anyway, you CAN'T nerf the marine without breaking every single match up in sc2. (yeah yeah, nerfing the marine would have an impact on pvz too).
|
On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc.
I agree. gneGne was trying to argue that marines alone can't be better than zealots or zerglings alone, or else Terran would just make marines and auto-win... and I (and others) responded with how Protoss defends *not* by just making zealots, but by making others units and structures... *that's* why Terrans can't just make marines and win. We don't actually see only zealots vs. only marines, which is why his comparison was silly.
|
On July 22 2014 02:43 Squat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:23 gneGne wrote:On July 22 2014 00:57 Squat wrote:On July 22 2014 00:41 gneGne wrote:
Yes, maybe. But notice... WITH medivacs. Wouldn't that be a problem with the medivac rather than the marine? Zerglings and Zealots are really strong too when accompanied with other supporting units. Aren't you making an unfair comparison? No, this is not quite correct. Lings and zealots do not gain exponential power when supported by medivacs the way marines do, they just don't have the offensive output or versatility to make use of that healing and mobility like marines do. Just try it, play a 2v2 and support bunch of lings and zealots with medivacs, it's not the same thing. The basic units of zerg and protoss really are nowhere near as strong as the marine, as any pro game will show. Just because marines also require medivacs to operate at full capacity, it does not make them less strong. You can still fight far more gas heavy armies with marines as your main combat unit. We could substitute the medivac with the medic and the same thing would apply. Medivacs are a general support unit that benefit anything they can heal, obviously more powerful units will get more out of the healing. See, choices were made when the basic units were put into the game. They chose to make the basic units really strong from the early to the late game (when accompanied by other units). This was a design choice which you may agree or disagree with, but it was a fundamental choice. You have no idea whether that is the case or not. The only people who would know for sure are those who would seriously attempt to implement a change like this. Simply asserting that such is the case does not make it true. Wait, are you proposing to balance on basis of involving the mixing of units from the three races? I don't think you will get much out of that, at least if you intend to keep three different races. And in my eyes, any pro game, of all the three races, involve using the basic unit, I don't see how this can be denied (just think about zerg remax on lings and zealot harass late late game). I said no such thing and any honest reading of what I wrote should demonstrate that. It a was a point of comparison to elucidate on the fundamental difference between the dynamics of the marine vs the zealot or the zergling. At no point did I imply that a balance should be predicated on a mix of units from different races. Show nested quote +Of course requiring another unit supporting the marine to be viable in the mid game makes them less strong! Medivacs are exactly those expensive units that require gas you know! Without medivacs marines are nothing in the mid game, I think you underestimate medivacs. Most expensive gas heavy armies have no problem against pure marine/medivac compositions. The only thing you could argue is that splitting marines is too powerful against banelings? MKP should probably win a lot of titles . No, marines scale far better with the medivac support than the units of other races, that is a different issue. The original, and only point I ever made, that is being lost in the pointless bantering about semantics, was that marines limit the possibilities of improving other options for terran. Because of their incredible cost-efficiency and overall strength, it means that any significant buff to a supporting unit could break the game, as it opens a massive window of marine plus X timings, before an opponent can realistically have the units needed to fight both the marines and the auxiliary unit. If we want to make other styles of terran viable, this has to be taken into account.
I am sorry I misunderstood on the first point, because you were talking about 2v2s where medivacs were paired with zealots and lings, I thought you were trying to show that those combinations were less effective, hence basing balance on the mixing of units.
How can you compare that other units scale less than the marine with the medivac? And why does the marine limit the other options for terran? Why does mech exist in TvT and TvZ? Im just not sure what you are getting at anymore. Who said anything about buffing supporting units that would benefit bio compositions? Why can't a unit be buffed in order so that it only encourages mech play without encouraging bio play? This could be the role for the Raven I reckon.
|
rax with reactor (200/50/115): builds marines
The other races have far more flexible production. They can afford to switch the core of the army, because their production mechanic allows it. A terran going bio+x can adjust the rine to rauder ratio while adding other support units. That'S the way the game works. Terran infrastructure is very VERY inflexible. I actually blame the reactor.
|
On July 22 2014 03:17 submarine wrote:
rax with reactor (200/50/115): builds marines
The other races have far more flexible production. They can afford to switch the core of the army, because their production mechanic allows it. A terran going bio+x can adjust the rine to rauder ratio while adding other support units. That'S the way the game works. Terran infrastructure is very VERY inflexible. I actually blame the reactor.
To be fair, the barracks and the factory and the starport can all lift and switch add-ons at any time, so I don't think the Terran infrastructure is particularly inflexible. I think the Terran lacks versatility in regards to successful unit compositions because of game balance, but I don't think Terran would have a huge problem merely creating other units simply because reactor cores exist as an option.
|
On July 22 2014 03:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc. I agree. gneGne was trying to argue that marines alone can't be better than zealots or zerglings alone, or else Terran would just make marines and auto-win... and I (and others) responded with how Protoss defends *not* by just making zealots, but by making others units and structures... *that's* why Terrans can't just make marines and win. We don't actually see only zealots vs. only marines, which is why his comparison was silly.
Perhaps this is fair. I agree that balance is not as easy as focusing on one unit, even in the early early game there are synergies between scv's/bunkers/marines, just as for protoss there is probes/zealot/msc, and zerg drone/ling/queen. But that is why I think it is not useful to blame solely the marine for imbalance in the first place. Either way early game Terran pressure is holdable.
|
On July 22 2014 02:43 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:40 DinoMight wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:35 DinoMight wrote:
I think to say that the Marine is perfect and not a source of balance issues at all is really baseless and unjustified.
The reason that Protoss needs units like the Colossus and Templar (w/ Storm) is because without dishing out ridiculous AoE, there is nothing that can handle Stimmed bio + Medivacs. A Medivac heals a Marine faster than a Stalker can kill it 1v1..
It's very very very difficult to design a game in which both Mech and Bio are viable against Z, T, and P. If you recall, Brood War bio was unusable vs. Protoss. You had to mech.
I'm pretty sure you can win without HT and colossi. There are some 2/2 zealot archons that rekt bio like it was nothing. (ofc now there is the WM but without it it's almost impossible to old this compo without a fuckton of bunker and a wall. And guess what ? it's only gateway units. And btw, blink allin is only stalker and deal pretty well against bio for a while. Short of an allin timing that hits before Terran gets critical mass I'm pretty sure this is impossible. Plus when you factor in that Widow Mines exist it's almost impossible. Point is that there is no macro strategy viable for P without Colossi or Storm because of the Marine. And there is no viable strategy for terran without viking against colo or ghost against HT ? Vikings/medivacs/ghost are latter stage units too. It just happens they don't have AoE attack. I bet you 10$ that if you use only gateway unit vs rax unit, terran will be rekt in no time. You are talking like terrans are wining with only 2 units when they use 6. As much as the protoss btw.
What kind of starcraft are u watching? Assuming even upgrades and stim finished, Bio > Gateway always when in high numbers. Blink stalkers are gateway only but they are only effective in a certain timing window which is pre medivac + stim. Once they are out the cost efficiency of blink stalkers is severly reduced. And nobody does Chargelot Archon anymore with the WM buff, even parting goes colossus now.
On July 22 2014 02:40 WhaleOFaTale wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 09:26 Varroth wrote:
Did Happy just say that the very top terran players are better than the very top protoss and zergs?
This view that terrans are better than Zergs/Protoss players is just so disgusting.. that top zerg and protoss players somewhat rely on their race while for terrans its pure damn skill. Despicable. true to an extant
I agree even as a protoss player. To be the best Terran is more mechanically challenging than being the best protoss or zerg but that is a problem in design, not that the race is OP
|
On July 22 2014 03:25 gneGne wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 03:09 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 02:40 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:
If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Which is exactly why Protoss needs to make sentries or stalkers (or nexus cannon) to help defend against marines/ any early pressure. The fact that marines are ranged units and can micro around zealots is exactly why zealots can't beat marines by themselves. As for zerglings... well, they need zergling speed or to be on creep to get a surround, and they defend early all-ins with queens and spines too. So Protoss and Zerg hold early pressure *not* because a bunch of zealots or zerglings can beat a bunch of marines in a straight up fight between pros, but because they also use gas units or defensive structures to help supplement their tier one units. and terran use bunkers? This is a stupid reasoning. A bunker rush against a pool first is almost autolose and it's only zerg. Terran does not just win with marines. They use scv to tank, build bunkers, buy time, etc. I agree. gneGne was trying to argue that marines alone can't be better than zealots or zerglings alone, or else Terran would just make marines and auto-win... and I (and others) responded with how Protoss defends *not* by just making zealots, but by making others units and structures... *that's* why Terrans can't just make marines and win. We don't actually see only zealots vs. only marines, which is why his comparison was silly. Perhaps this is fair. I agree that balance is not as easy as focusing on one unit, even in the early early game there are synergies between scv's/bunkers/marines, just as for protoss there is probes/zealot/msc, and zerg drone/ling/queen. But that is why I think it is not useful to blame solely the marine for imbalance in the first place. Either way early game Terran pressure is holdable.
Yeah I don't think you can solely blame the marine for imbalance either, and I may have missed it, but I don't think anyone was saying that the marine is 100% of the reasons why imbalances exist in SC2.
|
On July 22 2014 02:53 gneGne wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:10 Big J wrote:On July 22 2014 01:43 gneGne wrote:On July 22 2014 00:49 Big J wrote:On July 22 2014 00:32 gneGne wrote:On July 22 2014 00:07 Big J wrote:On July 21 2014 23:55 gneGne wrote:
What is wrong with the marine? [1]It has been balanced in context of the zealot and the zergling. I don't see the problem, please explain further? [2] If you would like a different role for the marine then you basicly need to redo all three races. Basicly the whole game. [1] I think before anybody can answer to you, you have to explain what you mean with this phrase. Because cost for cost and supply for supply, marines beat zealots and zerglings in any mid-high amount. And timingwise, marine+wall completely crushes those units before those high amounts are reached. [2] I don't know why. If you were to change the marine to a unit that e.g. works well against light but not so well against armored, and compensated Terran with slightly better armored counters (e.g. stronger tanks and moving-shot vikings vs air), I don't see why you'd have to redo the other races. Maybe a tiny tweak here or there to prevent early stalker or roach rushes to kill you, but this could surely be done without redoing the other races. (similarily to how you could change FFs or Swarm Hosts without having to change Terran) I am not quite sure where you get (1) from. If you are talking about mid-to-high amounts of marines, you are already talking about mid game where I presume not the marines themselves, but the combination with medivacs are the problem which make marines so cost effective? However, the same can be said here about units in combination with zealots and zerglings. Timingwise I also see no problem, are you really saying that pushes against terran are impossible because of supply/bunker walls? As for (2), if you feel the need to introduce a new way in which the damage of the marine works, you have to do the same for zealots and zerglings against armored units. Or would it be fair that only terran has to build an army that counters either armour or light while zerg and protoss don't have to because their basic unit are one size fits all? It is an interesting option, but it would involve changing all three races like I mentioned. Again, tell me what you meant with (1). If you bring other units in the equation, I don't see what the whole point is to first say "Marines are balanced in the context of Zerglings/Zealots". So, what do you mean with this phrase? In what way are they balanced against Zerglings and Zealots? About (2), just because a unit stat says "+ vs armored/light", doesn't mean the unit is bad against something else (e.g. blink stalkers). Or vis verca. Just for a lot of those units, the "+ vs something" values tend to be mid to high, while something like 5+1vs light on marines would still leave them as a decent all around unit. And you could keep the zealot at 8*2damage vs everything, because it isn't a decent all around unit to begin with (no antiair at all; melee attribute making it weak against bigger ranged balls, etc). In either case, you will want something more against a blink rush. On (1): Let me make it really simple. If the marine would be way more powerful than zerglings or zealots, we would see a lot of Terrans just win a lot in the early game because the few units available for P and Z (zealot and zergling) would get demolished. Well, let's take an example, we have the 11/11 build against Z which is built around the effectiveness of the marine, but its not invincible and requires a greedy Z and intensive micro battles to be really successful. Against P the 11/11 build can work but is overall even less effective than against Z. On (2): I am not quite sure where you are getting at, but you claim zealots and zerglings are not good all around units? I have to disagree, they are useful throughout the whole game, especially versus Terran all pro players use them in the late game. Indeed, only terrans basic unit can target air (still air is used a lot vs T), there are main differences in how the 3 races operate, but that is a challenge Blizzard is willing to work with. (1) two words: defender's advantage. And also that marines a ranged and while in the early game zerglings/zealots hold their own or in really tiny amounts can even beat marines, the marine's true power against those units shows in the 10s and higher amounts. That doesnt mean they are bad, imo zerglings are very good (due to their speed). But yes, this fact also helps to prevent early game marine builds from winning easily. (2) There's a difference between an all around unit and a unit being useful. The fact that it is basically impossible to spend your money without building mineral only units once you mix in tech units makes zerglings/zealots useful. The difference is that Zs and Ps build certain units and then also build zerglings/zealots because they have money that cannot be spent differently and the game being balanced around spending your money. While Terrans build marines and then eventually sit on a gasbank because it is better to build mineralonly units than to build more expensive units and fill what's left with marines. It leads to weird scenarios in which a Terran rather builds 2.5marines for 125/0 and stores gas (or doesnt mine at full efficiency to begin with) instead of building one tank for 125/100. Because the one unit is just so much better that you Double the cost doesnt even mean more power. So I think we can agree on (1) that marines are not imbalanced in the early game. With (2) I think you exaggerate Terrans building of a gasbank when we are talking about mid game Terran. However, I agree there is a problem in the late game, where Terran has already spent everything there is to get for the bio composition that uses gas, but this is not a problem with the marine, but rather the apparent ineffectiveness of the late game units? For a time ghosts were skipped altogether vs P, because terrans thought they wouldn't really give any advantage. Nowadays ghosts are used and with the need for vikings we rarely see gas banks, unless, as is for all the races, there is a stale period in the game with two maxed out armies and a lot of bases mining.
To be clear: Im far from saying that marines are imbalanced. The thing is, they are extremely limiting on what the opponent can do and they are so strong that most other Terran units are balanced to only fill support roles for them. Else it would become very hard to counter a Terran army if you'd still be required to react as hard to the marines as peope are forced to right now, but also had to take find a way to counter another very strong unit differently.
The part about lategame is partly true and leads back to exactly what I said in the sentence before. You dont make the other units as much because they are balanced down.
@Faust: the other races mine more gas to begin with and spend it all through the game on units while for terran it is mainly medivacs and ugrades especially in TvZ. Once you are out of upgrades, the gasbank starts building. And yes, the lategame units are either weak or at least hard to transition into with bio. It would be pretty criminally good if you could play your biopushes in which only one player can actually lose straight up and that isnt you because you are in his face and not vis-verca, but also get to freely tech into a ravenfleet that you could instause to strengthen your attack further and have a lategame with it. That just doesnt add up, an aggressive playstyle must backfire if you dont do damage and asking to safely do damage while not fully commiting (because you also build a strong lategame) is not possible because then players will just fully commit and win straight up.
And yes, of course the marine is a superfun unit. Guess what the most fun unit to play with in the history of starcraft was... the WoL Infestor - then they rightfully nerfed it, and not everything else to "keep the infestor fun". Guess what the most fun Zerg unit currently is: Supermutas. Strong (aggressive) units are superfun to play with. Blink allins are superfun to execute. That doesnt justify that they limit your opponents fun because he has to go "that one" techpath everygame.
|
On July 22 2014 03:29 Xinzoe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:43 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:40 DinoMight wrote:On July 22 2014 02:38 Faust852 wrote:On July 22 2014 02:35 DinoMight wrote:
I think to say that the Marine is perfect and not a source of balance issues at all is really baseless and unjustified.
The reason that Protoss needs units like the Colossus and Templar (w/ Storm) is because without dishing out ridiculous AoE, there is nothing that can handle Stimmed bio + Medivacs. A Medivac heals a Marine faster than a Stalker can kill it 1v1..
It's very very very difficult to design a game in which both Mech and Bio are viable against Z, T, and P. If you recall, Brood War bio was unusable vs. Protoss. You had to mech.
I'm pretty sure you can win without HT and colossi. There are some 2/2 zealot archons that rekt bio like it was nothing. (ofc now there is the WM but without it it's almost impossible to old this compo without a fuckton of bunker and a wall. And guess what ? it's only gateway units. And btw, blink allin is only stalker and deal pretty well against bio for a while. Short of an allin timing that hits before Terran gets critical mass I'm pretty sure this is impossible. Plus when you factor in that Widow Mines exist it's almost impossible. Point is that there is no macro strategy viable for P without Colossi or Storm because of the Marine. And there is no viable strategy for terran without viking against colo or ghost against HT ? Vikings/medivacs/ghost are latter stage units too. It just happens they don't have AoE attack. I bet you 10$ that if you use only gateway unit vs rax unit, terran will be rekt in no time. You are talking like terrans are wining with only 2 units when they use 6. As much as the protoss btw. What kind of starcraft are u watching? Assuming even upgrades and stim finished, Bio > Gateway always when in high numbers. Blink stalkers are gateway only but they are only effective in a certain timing window which is pre medivac + stim. Once they are out the cost efficiency of blink stalkers is severly reduced. And nobody does Chargelot Archon anymore with the WM buff, even parting goes colossus now. Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 02:40 WhaleOFaTale wrote:On July 19 2014 09:26 Varroth wrote:
Did Happy just say that the very top terran players are better than the very top protoss and zergs?
This view that terrans are better than Zergs/Protoss players is just so disgusting.. that top zerg and protoss players somewhat rely on their race while for terrans its pure damn skill. Despicable. true to an extant I agree even as a protoss player. To be the best Terran is more mechanically challenging than being the best protoss or zerg but that is a problem in design, not that the race is OP
I'm not the one utilizing stupid scenarii with gateball < bio. This doesn't make any sens. This never happens. Noone plays "just bio" without medivacs, or viking and ghost in late game. People say that bio rekt get ball, but this is fondamentally stupid to think like that since terran won't play with just bio. This is normal that terran beat only zealot and stalkers when they have medivacs to support them right ? Then it's normal for terran to lose to colossi when they don't have vikings, etc. That's how the game work and taking a single unrealistic scenario to prove that bio > gate units is stupid as hell.
|
@Faust: the other races mine more gas to begin with and spend it all through the game on units while for terran it is mainly medivacs and ugrades especially in TvZ. Once you are out of upgrades, the gasbank starts building. And yes, the lategame units are either weak or at least hard to transition into with bio. It would be pretty criminally good if you could play your biopushes in which only one player can actually lose straight up and that isnt you because you are in his face and not vis-verca, but also get to freely tech into a ravenfleet that you could instause to strengthen your attack further and have a lategame with it. That just doesnt add up, an aggressive playstyle must backfire if you dont do damage and asking to safely do damage while not fully commiting (because you also build a strong lategame) is not possible because then players will just fully commit and win straight up.
And yes, of course the marine is a superfun unit. Guess what the most fun unit to play with in the history of starcraft was... the WoL Infestor - then they rightfully nerfed it, and not everything else to "keep the infestor fun". Guess what the most fun Zerg unit currently is: Supermutas. Strong (aggressive) units are superfun to play with. Blink allins are superfun to execute. That doesnt justify that they limit your opponents fun because he has to go "that one" techpath everygame.
Are you really saying that infestor was considered fun ? Even pros agreed that it was a stupid imbalanced unit. It was so stupid that even without much micro it was imbalanced.
I don't see the correlation between imbalanced and fun. I don't remember a single game where a zerg won in BL infest era that was considered "good". But after that, you can check what is considered the best game in the history of sc2, and you will realize that the marine is a big part of it.
An unit doesn't need to be imbalance to be fun. Pheonix are fun. Marines are funs. Even zergling in the hands of Life are ultra fun. Mutalisk was fun in WoL because it was a risk/reward unit with very huge micro potential. The HotS mutalisk is no fun because there is absolutly no risk using them agressively.
|
On July 22 2014 04:34 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +@Faust: the other races mine more gas to begin with and spend it all through the game on units while for terran it is mainly medivacs and ugrades especially in TvZ. Once you are out of upgrades, the gasbank starts building. And yes, the lategame units are either weak or at least hard to transition into with bio. It would be pretty criminally good if you could play your biopushes in which only one player can actually lose straight up and that isnt you because you are in his face and not vis-verca, but also get to freely tech into a ravenfleet that you could instause to strengthen your attack further and have a lategame with it. That just doesnt add up, an aggressive playstyle must backfire if you dont do damage and asking to safely do damage while not fully commiting (because you also build a strong lategame) is not possible because then players will just fully commit and win straight up.
And yes, of course the marine is a superfun unit. Guess what the most fun unit to play with in the history of starcraft was... the WoL Infestor - then they rightfully nerfed it, and not everything else to "keep the infestor fun". Guess what the most fun Zerg unit currently is: Supermutas. Strong (aggressive) units are superfun to play with. Blink allins are superfun to execute. That doesnt justify that they limit your opponents fun because he has to go "that one" techpath everygame. Are you really saying that infestor was considered fun ? Even pros agreed that it was a stupid imbalanced unit. It was so stupid that even without much micro it was imbalanced. I don't see the correlation between imbalanced and fun. I don't remember a single game where a zerg won in BL infest era that was considered "good". But after that, you can check what is considered the best game in the history of sc2, and you will realize that the marine is a big part of it. An unit doesn't need to be imbalance to be fun. Pheonix are fun. Marines are funs. Even zergling in the hands of Life are ultra fun. Mutalisk was fun in WoL because it was a risk/reward unit with very huge micro potential. The HotS mutalisk is no fun because there is absolutly no risk using them agressively.
I didnt say a unit must be imbalanced to be fun. I said a strong unit is naturally fun. Reverse side of the implication.
And yes, Infestors were considered superfun... go back to destiny and stephano times with them. Noone ever said it wasnt fun to play with them. What wasnt fun was seeing Terrans drop like flies to those units. Just like it wasnt fun to see Protoss die to 1-1-1s over and over again, though playing the 1-1-1 yourself was pretty entertaining.
And no, risk/reward doesnt make a unit more or less fun to play with. It makes it more fun to play against it. Flying around with 30mutas and blowing up your shit is however huge fun to me, just not for you.
Edit: and there were tons of fun games involving broodord infestor. People just hate and hated on it because the game got stale and it wasnt fair and the winner too predictable which sometimes killed the tension. Similarily to how people got disgusted when all the Zergs were dropping to 4M and how DRGs win in a long TvZ series in 3macro games against Innovation was almost considered a miracle.
|
United States7483 Posts
On July 22 2014 04:46 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2014 04:34 Faust852 wrote:@Faust: the other races mine more gas to begin with and spend it all through the game on units while for terran it is mainly medivacs and ugrades especially in TvZ. Once you are out of upgrades, the gasbank starts building. And yes, the lategame units are either weak or at least hard to transition into with bio. It would be pretty criminally good if you could play your biopushes in which only one player can actually lose straight up and that isnt you because you are in his face and not vis-verca, but also get to freely tech into a ravenfleet that you could instause to strengthen your attack further and have a lategame with it. That just doesnt add up, an aggressive playstyle must backfire if you dont do damage and asking to safely do damage while not fully commiting (because you also build a strong lategame) is not possible because then players will just fully commit and win straight up.
And yes, of course the marine is a superfun unit. Guess what the most fun unit to play with in the history of starcraft was... the WoL Infestor - then they rightfully nerfed it, and not everything else to "keep the infestor fun". Guess what the most fun Zerg unit currently is: Supermutas. Strong (aggressive) units are superfun to play with. Blink allins are superfun to execute. That doesnt justify that they limit your opponents fun because he has to go "that one" techpath everygame. Are you really saying that infestor was considered fun ? Even pros agreed that it was a stupid imbalanced unit. It was so stupid that even without much micro it was imbalanced. I don't see the correlation between imbalanced and fun. I don't remember a single game where a zerg won in BL infest era that was considered "good". But after that, you can check what is considered the best game in the history of sc2, and you will realize that the marine is a big part of it. An unit doesn't need to be imbalance to be fun. Pheonix are fun. Marines are funs. Even zergling in the hands of Life are ultra fun. Mutalisk was fun in WoL because it was a risk/reward unit with very huge micro potential. The HotS mutalisk is no fun because there is absolutly no risk using them agressively. I didnt say a unit must be imbalanced to be fun. I said a strong unit is naturally fun. Reverse side of the implication. And yes, Infestors were considered superfun... go back to destiny and stephano times with them. Noone ever said it wasnt fun to play with them. What wasnt fun was seeing Terrans drop like flies to those units. Just like it wasnt fun to see Protoss die to 1-1-1s over and over again, though playing the 1-1-1 yourself was pretty entertaining. And no, risk/reward doesnt make a unit more or less fun to play with. It makes it more fun to play against it. Flying around with 30mutas and blowing up your shit is however huge fun to me, just not for you. Edit: and there were tons of fun games involving broodord infestor. People just hate and hated on it because the game got stale and it wasnt fair and the winner too predictable which sometimes killed the tension. Similarily to how people got disgusted when all the Zergs were dropping to 4M and how DRGs win in a long TvZ series in 3macro games against Innovation was almost considered a miracle.
TvZ was okay to watch vs. broodlord infestor at first, although it was frustrating to play for a lot of terrans. PvZ against broodlord infestor was never fun to watch or play at all. Terrans at least had some decent harass options at the time. Protoss had literally no options for harass once the spines and spores were up, had no way of getting a good engagement other than hoping for a good vortex, and once players figured out how to neural the mothership or spread their broodlords, had very little hope of even getting that.
TvZ got bad reasonably quickly too. Broodlord infestor was a composition that had no real weakness if controlled properly, was too outright powerful, and could be obtained far too quickly. It's no surprise every game was an all-in from toss or terran against zerg and zerg either holding it and then winning or being a little too greedy.
And yes, it sucked for terran to play against broodlord infestor, but it was even worse for protoss. Terran at least had the potential to maybe win the engagement with insanely good ghost control and viking control due to the range of those units (yes it was insanely hard, but players like Gumiho and MMA occasionally managed it), Protoss literally had no option other than 'hope the vortex hits'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
