Marine strength tests. Are they really OP?

General Discussion
Post Limit:
1 2 3 16 Next
Highly Rated
NOW THAT I'VE ASCENDED TO PLATINUM I REALIZE SOME OF THESE TESTS ARE RIDICULOUS WHILE SOME ARE STILL VALID. PLEASE DON'T RAGE IF THIS IS DUG UP OR SOMETHING. I DID THIS WHEN I WAS DUMB AND NOOBY.

EVERYTHING BELOW WAS DONE WHEN I WAS SILVER AND ALL TEXT HAS REMAINED UNTOUCHED FOR HILARITY'S SAKE.

Update 2.1: I've tested even more, and they have been added to the bottom. Valryn has also done legitimate testing, his original post can be found on page 8. It will also be copy/pasted below some of my tests.
Update 2.0: I've copy and pasted the results that I had shown on the other one. Instead of making new threads, just keep up with the most recent tests on this thread. New tests coming soon. They will be posted below the others.

-For the most part marines are the only unit used. Please keep that in mind before saying "Zomg, that's unrealistic, it's never just marines." My goal is to compare pure marine effectiveness against other units pure effectiveness.

Another thing, call this QQ if you want, but it really isn't I don't claim a nerf is necessary I'm simply stating the facts. I was always on the side of marines being fine because a well place storm will take them. You draw your own conclusions and if you want to make crazy accusations like 1 zealot> 4 marines... wow... (the guy who claims that is diamond. so it has to be true!)

Now because of some of what people have been saying already let me explain a few things.

-No Micro was involved unless specified

-positioning was left up to the AI, they were left in clumps by me. (Exception where units were left in the back, not fighting)

-Zerg fights were off creep

-UPGRADES USED WERE LISTED, IF NONE WERE LISTED THEN NONE WERE USED.

Recently I've been seeing a lot of people QQing about marines and how OP they are. I was one of the ones who defended them saying they can be defeated and when people said it was possible but only with intense microing and crazy expensive counters.

Finally someone told me to prove it using actual tests. I did. The map I used was superferrets "unit test arena". The area used was completely open perfect for letting zerglings/ zealots get a nice surround on the marines.

Everything found in this has been tested multiple times, and since my internet is sketchy, I can't play online games so I play AI a lot. With my free time I ran these tests today and last night collecting notes and data.

So without further ado, my results:

Marines (50) vs. Zealots (25) results= marines win
Losses
Marines=30
Zealots=25
This was expected, but such an unbalanced trade off was unexpected. THIS IS WITHOUT MEDIVACS.

Marines (50) vs. Chargelots (25) results= marines win
Losses
Marines=37
Zealots=25

No medivacs.

Stimmed-Marines (50) vs Chargelots (25) results= marines
Losses
Marines=26
Zealots=25

For an upgrade that costs double (charge) it is so incredibly ineffective when compared to the half-cost stim-pack. Simply amazing that this result is achieved even thought the damage they take is supposed to "balance" the increased speed. Again, no medivacs.

Stim-and-run Marines (50) vs chargelots (20)+HT with storm= Protoss
Losses
Marines=50
zealots=19
HT=survived

This was simply incredible. Even though I'm one person I stimmed the marines then charged with zealots laying down a storm in the direct center of the mass. I ran out of the storm and after that tried to kite with the marines, because there really is no micro to be done with chargelots. This one really blew my mind. Simple stim and run can save literally your entire army from storm related death. No medivacs

zerglings(100) vs marines (50)= marines
Losses
zerglings=100
marines= 16

This one was shocking to me. I could not even take it seriously, I know lings are weak but that is ridiculous, they even had a completely even and near perfect surround. No medivacs used

Speedlings (100) vs marines (50)=marines
Losses
Marines=26
Speedlings=100

Still astounding, Zerglings had the 100/100 upgrade and marines were un-stimmed. Still the marines completely owned the lings. No medivacs

Hydralisks (15) vs Marines (45)= marines
Marines=17
Hydras= 15

This was awful. The marines didn't even arc and some weren't even firing. The cost of a hydra 100/50 and the marine cost 50 mins is so off balance. I even gave it at a ratio of 3 to 1 even though technically vespene is about 3 times harder to collect than mins so... This one is just bad. No medivacs

Ultralisks (4) vs. Marines (28)= ultralisks
Losses
Marine=28
Ultralisk=3

I did focus fire the marines on this one admittedly, as any decent terran would. However, I made zero effort to minimize the damage done by ultralisk splash. If I had the marines would have won easily. Thats bad considering the splash damage done is supposed to be a soft counter to marines. No medivacs.

Rolling Blings (32) vs. Marines (55)=Blings
Losses
Marines=55
Blings=28

It's true, marines do counter banelings at a certain point. No medivacs.

Chargelots (15) Siege range colossi (2) vs marines (60)=marines
Marine loss=41
All !!@@ing dead.

This made me want to cry. No medivacs. Colossi were attacking the entire time, and were not derping. Nor were the lots, however some derpage of marines occurred. BUT THEY'RE !!@@ING MARINES! THEY CAN'T DIE!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Results

Marines with simple micro will beat the high templar. Other than that as long as the other army doesn't micro it seems like they need no micro to beat what's supposed to counter them, (Colossi, Ultra, Blings) at least as far as cost efficiency goes. When the zerg won with ultra's and Banelings it's good to remember, they cost way more to produce that win than those marines did to lose.

Conclusion

I had to swallow defeat. I was wrong, it seems marines, at least on levels where intense micro is unable, are unbeatable unless you completely out micro your terran foe and can waste a ton of resources on mass sentry, HT, or mass Blings.

As far as my tests, they will continue as long as my internet is derpy, I hate lagging out of matches. So if you have any suggestions that you would like me to test against marines tell me.

-If I do not list an upgrade, it was not used. Simple

-Unless I say so, Micro is non-existent.

-All of this play was done in the open, with marines in a wad.

-I'm aware critical mass range will beat melee that's common sense. However, other than terran, what race can mass range units?

-Zerg play was not on creep unless I specify.

-Lastly, I forgot a post with roaches vs Marines+marauders, check it out.

Now for what my posts will look like. WITH LABELS. Adding labels in the last post sucked but this time I have even more data for those who are data oriented.

Example

Stalkers (12) (1,500/600) vs. Marines (40) (2,000)= Marines
^unit ^number of unit ^min ^gas ^# unit ^mins ^winner
Stalkers X amount (mins lost/ gas lost
Marines Y amount ( mins lost/gas lost
Losses^

Now for the results you're used to. This time I'm going to try to not sound biased and do this as if it were my chem lab reports....

Stalkers (12) (1,500/600) vs. Marines (40) (2,000)= Marines
Stalkers (12) (1,500/600)
Marines (13) (650)

I was fairly surprised, Stalkers do well against early marine pushes the problem is like everyone else said, Marines are DPS machines and for the cost, they far out-do their protoss basic range counter

Roaches (18) (1,350/450) vs. Marines (35) (1,750)= roaches
Marines (35) (1,750)
Roaches (11) (825/275)

Looking back on this test the roaches had the number, armor, and cost advantage. But like marines, most zerg can pop this number out just as rapidly as 35 marines. At the end roaches were pretty damaged. In case people skipped my beginning, THERE WERE NO UPGRADES LIKE SPEED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FOR THE ROACH.

Siege Colossi (5) (1,500/1,000) vs Marines (60) (3,000)= colossi
Colossi (3) (900/600)
Marines (60) (3,000)

It's nice to see a counter do it's job. Realistically though there would have been zealots soaking up a bit of damage, and marines would surely be focus firing, but I think those 2 variables can more or less cancel each other out.

Same as above, but marines have both combat shields and stim= Marines
Marines (37) (1,850)
Colossi (5) (1,500/1,000)

Shows the true nature of late game fights, if someone really did manage to get 60 marines they'd already have these upgrades for sure. They would also have upgrades just like the colossi would. Marines simply upgrade better than colossi.

Roaches (18) (1,350/450)vs. Marine (20) (1,000)+ marauder (5) (500,125)=Terran
Roaches (18) (1,350/450)
Marines (18) (900)
Marauder (2) (200/50)

Most bio-balls will have marauders which changed the outcome greatly. It's important to remember, that there was no micro. It's likely that Marauders would have been focused down.

As a test for a suggestion

Speedlings on creep (100) (3,000) vs. Marines (50) (3,000)=Speedlings
Lings (85) (2,125)
Marines (50) (3,000)

Shows the complete advantages granted by creep. THE MARINES HAD NO UPGRADES.
Still, very unexpected, the zerglings were just able to complete their surround so much faster and fill the gaps left by the dead at an amazing rate. This result prompts further investigation of the whole ON creep vs. Off creep dilemma.

In my standard format here are the results of those tests where someone said marines would lose in every situation and more. TKiBalgore said this.

1 ling > 1 marine
1 zealot > 4 marines

(Also, if you want to compare micro... 1 stalker > infinity marines)


He's diamond, so he has to be telling the truth right?

zealot (1) (100) vs. Marines (4) (200) = Marines
zealot loss-1
Marine loss-1

Total lie, you know better, you're diamond.

Zealot (1) vs Marines (2)= Zealot

True, but no micro was used at all.

Zealot (1) vs Marines no stim, no C-shields, but with basic micro (2)= Marines
Zealot-1
Marine loss-1

With micro even a small amount of marines of equal cost easily beat zealots.

Stalker (1) vs Marines (4)= Marines
Marines loss-1

Surprising isn't it??

Stalker w/ micro (1) vs Marines w/ micro (4)= Marines
Marine loss-2

Stalker (1) (125/50) vs Marines (2) (100) = Stalker

A little better I guess

1 Speedling on Creep vs Marine=marine

wow good call, even in best scenario for the zergling the marine still wins
Again you lied. I'm beginning to see a pattern.

Zerglings (2) vs. 1 marine= Zergling
1 zergling lost.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mutilisks (9) (900/900) vs Marines (25) (1,250) =Marines
Mutilisks (9) (900/900)
Marines (3) (150)

I thought with splash it would go slightly better.

Broodlords (3) (900/750) vs Marines (25) (1,250) =Marines
Broodlords (3) (900/750)
Marines (6) (300)

I did have to focus fire on the marines.

Thor (3) (900/600) vs Marine (25) (1,250)= Thor
Thor (2) (600/400)
Marines (25) (1,250)

Terran counter to marines still works cost for cost.

Archon (3) (300/900) vs Marines (20) (1,000)=Marine
Archon (3) (300/900)
Marine (15) (750)

You are better off running those HT's away to recharge. Or even if he has detection on every single inch of the map, DT's are probably still better.

Zergling (36) (900)+ Roaches (9) (675/225)+ Hydralisks (9) (900/450)+ Mutilisks (9) (900/900) total= (3,375/1,575) vs Marines (80) (4,000)= Marines
Zerg=they died.
Marines (35) (1,750)

Before this test I legitimately thought the marines would be slaughtered, and that this would be a good time to see the effectiveness of Stim Pack with such a huge force. Sadly for my tests the results of this made me not want to continue, despite roaches and mutis being somewhat decent I expected a win from Zerg or a slim margin win.

Speedlings (on Creep) w/ adrenal gland+full armor+full melee damage (100) (2,500) vs. Marines with C-shield and Stimpack and full upgrades in armor and damage. (100) (2,500)=Marines
Speedlings= (100) (2,500)
Marines= (18) (900)

I'm not sure exactly what this shows. I put in a lot of variables from one of my previous tests where the speedlings on creep beat the marines of equal value. They both had their two natural upgrades (Stim, C-shield, Adrenal Gland, Metabolic Boost) with full upgrades on damage and armor. I want to test some more like this to determine the effectiveness of upgrades on marines. If I had to say based on these results, the marine upgrades extremely efficiently compared to zerg's basic unit.

P.S. Not one single medivac ever entered the battlefield.

The tests below were all done by Valryn. His post starts on page 8 and his posts are set up much like mine.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll be helping with some tests. For the record, we are both using the same map/techniques.
There will be no micro unless specified.
No meds unless specified.
No upgrades unless specified.

The next ten tests were centered around smaller fights when marines weren't in a ball, but a line. Therefore taking away any advantage they would have against melee units/ranged units lower than the range of marines (6)

First test:
5 - Stalkers(625 mins/250 vesp) VS 10 - Marines (500)
Win = Stalkers
Losses:
4 - Stalkers (500 mins/200 vesp)
10 - Marines(500)
Note that the last stalker had 2 hp left. Just barely held this one out. I thought stalkers were supposed to be the "all-purpose" unit for the toss, as the terran has the marine, and zerg has the hydralisk. I'm not QQ'ing, but i believe the stalker is a bit underpowered. Just a bit, but they just not be roflstomped by marines. One less stalker, and they'd have 500 mins for both armies.. Yet the losses "probably" would've been something like this:
4 - stalker (500/200)
7 - Marines (350)
^^^ An estimate! ^^^

Second test:
1 - Colossi (300 mins/200 vesp) VS 10 - Marine (500 mins)
Winner: Marines
Losses:
1 - Colossi (300/200)
7 - Marine (350)
Last 3 marines were moderately injured. Fight began with the colossi looking good, but the marines apparently pulled something out of their butt.

Third test:
1 - Carrier (350/250) VS 10 - Marine
Winner: Marines
Losses:
1 - Carrier (350/250) (4-interceptors only)
2 - Marines (350)
Marines were obviously focus fired.
I was planning on the marines winning, but not with such a low amount of losses...

Fourth test:
1 - Carrier (350/250) + (100 mins [4-interceptors]) VS 10 - Marine (500)
Winner: Marines
Losses:
1 - Carrier (350/250)+(100)=(450/250)
6 - Marines(300)
After viewing the last test, this was more along the lines of what i expected. Nuff said.

Fifth test:
5 - Zealot (500) VS 10 - Marine (500)
Winner: Zealot
Losses:
3 - Zealot (300)
10 - Marine (500)
Note that the two remaining zealots had extremely low health left, very close fight. With any micro on the marines, the winner of the battle would've changed to the Marines.

Sixth test:
5 - Zealot (500) VS 10 - Marine (500) + (150/150) <-- Combat Shields
Winner: Marine
Losses:
5 - Zealot (500)
7 - Marine (350)+(150/150) = (500/150)
Hmpfff.. With a quick upgrade the marines drastically change the results from the Fifth test.

Seventh test: Didn't turn out the way i planned
1 - Hellion (100 mins) VS 2 - Marine (100)+(150/150) <--Combat Shields
Winner: Marines!
Losses:
1 - Hellion (100)
0 - Marines (0)+(150/150)=(150/150)
I guess there isn't much to say.

Eighth test:
2 - Colossi (600/400)+(200/200)<--E.T.L. VS 20 - Marine (1000)
Winner: Colossi
Losses:
0 - Colossi (very low health)
20 - Marines (1000)
Obviously if any micro was applied the marines would've won with a handful of troops left.

Ninth test:
2 - Colossi (600/400)+(200/200) VS 2 - Marine (1000)+(150/150)+(100/100)<-Combat/Stim
Winner: Colossi
Losses:
1 - Colossi (300/200)+(200/200)=(500/400)
20 - Marine (1000)+(150/150)+(100/100)=(1250/250)
Once again, no micro was used whatsoever except for activating stimpack. I don't think that counts as micro though..

Tenth Test:
2 - Void ray (500/300) VS 10 - Marine (500)+(150/150)<-Combat Shields
Winner: Marines (not surprising)
Losses:
2 - Void (500/300)
2 - Marine (100)+(150/150)=(250/150)
I can't say i was expecting that little amount of losses of marines, especially with no micro involved. I'm aware that voids are countered by marines, but i wanted to show just how ineffective they are against marines for the cost.

More to come. Suggestions/Comment/Feedback is appreciated!
ahahahah niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
I like it because it is not QQing.

Speaking of QQ.... TSUNAMI OF TERRAN TEARS INCOMING!!!
I take it this is without the combat shields?
Good, now try this test with Speedlings ON CREEP vs Marines

marines will prolly win but will prolly win with a smaller margin
01/31/2011 3:40 PMPosted by Who
Good, now try this test with Speedlings ON CREEP vs Marines

marines will prolly win but will prolly win with a smaller margin


They wont attack any faster, just get the surround slightly faster.

Once there are more than a handful of Marines, Zerglings are no longer useful against them.
The thing to keep in mind is scaling. In small numbers, marines aren't that great. In large numbers however, range is everything. I would assume (though only against armored), marauders do even better since they have more range.

The higher the range, the more units you can stack in a ball and still hurt everything. The more units that can attack at range, the more casualties the opposing army takes before it even gets to you. Case in point: roaches. When they got changed from 3 range to 4 range, it was HUGE, because when in a choke, more roaches could hit. Now marines are much smaller, and have one more range. They scale way, way better than roaches will.

This isn't unknown to Blizzard: early on, everyone was complaining about marauders, not marines. In some interviews (I wish i had a link? Was it Blizzcon?), they explained that in their internal tests, they played with taking out stim from marauders, but it made them worthless. However, marines were super powerful.

The catch however, is Terran design: Terran can tech to everything they have in 8-9 minutes flush. Their scalability via range is the only thing that lets them compete in the end game (since there's nothing left to tech to)....but at the same time, it is stupid strong. So sure, it needs fixing, but how do you fix it?

Until someone figures it out, I'll cry everytime I lose a ball of banelings to marines just because I DARED engage off creep....
Very good intention. I think we need more of these statistic on the forum. However, I afraid I have to disagree with your testing method. In most of your tests, you always pitch critical mass marine (45+) against other unit. This number is unrealistic in a real Platinum+ game. Try cut down the number by half and you will see how the marine starts to lose its effectiveness. Personally, I have never have more than 30 marines in my army at any given time.

If you are over committed to marine, you are almost guaranteed to lose in high level play. A prime example of this is the recent game of Loner vs Moonglade on HD Starcraft channel. I am not trying to disprove your hypothesis since I am speaking from personal experience but I am merely making a suggestion for better testing methods.
01/31/2011 3:03 PMPosted by ProbableLoss
Chargelots (15) Siege range colossi (2) vs marines (60)=marines
Marine loss=41
All !!@@ing dead.


This one is scary. I thought colossi were supposed to do heavy damage to clumped up small units (like the marine).

01/31/2011 3:50 PMPosted by DKNY
In most of your tests, you always pitch critical mass marine (45+) against other unit. This number is unrealistic in a real Platinum+ game.

Actually, 45 marines is not very unrealistic. I've seen it happen many times in replays, some even with pro players.
you should have tested with not ''rolling banelings'' first i think there would had be like 1 marine loses with unupgraded banelings

I would REALLY like that burrow could be more used to ''unball'' terran bioball.
I've recently come to the conclusion that marines are not OP. They are just so small that more can attack at the same time because theyre closer to the target.
01/31/2011 3:37 PMPosted by bombrider
I take it this is without the combat shields?


Yes sir, all upgrades used are listed, if none are, that means no upgrades performed.
blah blah blah marines beat zealots and zerglings in equal costs when theres a ton of marines (duh? do you understand how ranged units get better in higher numbers?)

01/31/2011 3:03 PMPosted by ProbableLoss
Hydralisks (15) vs Marines (45)= marines
Marines=17
Hydras= 15

This was awful. The marines didn't even arc and some weren't even firing. The cost of a hydra 100/50 and the marine cost 50 mins is so off balance. I even gave it at a ratio of 3 to 1 even though technically vespene is about 3 times harder to collect than mins so... This one is just bad. No medivacs


hydralisks are bad when stuff shoots at them...moving on

01/31/2011 3:03 PMPosted by ProbableLoss
Chargelots (15) Siege range colossi (2) vs marines (60)=marines
Marine loss=41
All !!@@ing dead.

This made me want to cry. No medivacs. Colossi were attacking the entire time, and were not derping. Nor were the lots, however some derpage of marines occurred. BUT THEY'RE !!@@ING MARINES! THEY CAN'T DIE!


You expect to walk 17 units into 60 units and come out ahead? Really?

01/31/2011 3:03 PMPosted by ProbableLoss
Ultralisks (4) vs. Marines (28)= ultralisks
Losses
Marine=28
Ultralisk=3

I did focus fire the marines on this one admittedly, as any decent terran would. However, I made zero effort to minimize the damage done by ultralisk splash. If I had the marines would have won easily. Thats bad considering the splash damage done is supposed to be a soft counter to marines. No medivacs.


I don't actually care about this one, since 4 melee units vs 28 ranged units is dumb for a race that always has some other stuff to throw at the enemy

01/31/2011 3:03 PMPosted by ProbableLoss
Rolling Blings (32) vs. Marines (55)=Blings
Losses
Marines=55
Blings=28

It's true, marines do counter banelings at a certain point. No medivacs.


the marines lost with (I assume) stim and combat shields and micro, and probably off creep, and you say that marines counter what they lost to? I mean everybody knows that banelings don't really do a great job of killing marines, but if this is how you gathered data, I would be suspicious of all of your results and conclusions.
Some of your conclusions don't really follow the results. Like for example if you read the conclusion on the rines vs chargelots + HT it sounds like the marines won the battle, when in reality they all died, with a zealot and a HT left standing.

Another thing. Some of your battles aren't realistic. For example the Chargelots (15) Siege range colossi (2) vs marines (60)=marines. Im not saying that the costs aren't similar, only that I question the amount of time it would take to get to 60 marines vs the time to get 15 zealots and 2 colossi.

Also a lot of your matchups aren't fought in the idea manner for the non-marine units. Marines are designed to be great all around, the backbone of every terran army in any situation. Other races don't use units in this manner. For example you have marines vs lings and marines vs banelings as two different matchups. Lings are great against marines in small groups because, while you said you were able to get a nice surround, getting a surround is impossible when large numbers of units get into a ball. Lings need to get good surrounds on units specifically, not just balls of units. Banelings work in the opposite way. You don't want them getting good surrounds on individual units otherwise they all blow up and just take out one or two marines. This is why the units work well together. Lings draw fire from banelings, banelings blow up on a ball of marines which allows lings to get a great surround on the individual rines left.
01/31/2011 3:50 PMPosted by DKNY
In most of your tests, you always pitch critical mass marine (45+) against other unit. This number is unrealistic in a real Platinum+ game.


clearly you dont know marinekingprime
sooo... i suppose you completely ignored the fact that range units get more effective with higher numbers, while melee units get less effective with higher numbers.
Hey, thanks for real actually feedback, like I said more is to come, and I'm doing more tonight, but you can probably imagine writing down all these numbers and costs and resources lost on both sides is difficult. Once I've worked over the marine enough I may start with random engagements. But I really hope to do some of the test you are suggesting.



Chargelots (15) Siege range colossi (2) vs marines (60)=marines
Marine loss=41
All !!@@ing dead.


This one is scary. I thought colossi were supposed to do heavy damage to clumped up small units (like the marine).

In most of your tests, you always pitch critical mass marine (45+) against other unit. This number is unrealistic in a real Platinum+ game.

Actually, 45 marines is not very unrealistic. I've seen it happen many times in replays, some even with pro players.


I liked this comment because it is basically exactly what happens. As soon as you get 5+ marines they are a counter to other "core units" like the zergling and zealot. However I am only in silver but I see pro replays where 40+ marines are engaging. I do however have yet to see someone use 2-3 marines to extreme effect. The problem is not early game, it's late game.

01/31/2011 4:16 PMPosted by DoomKirby
sooo... i suppose you completely ignored the fact that range units get more effective with higher numbers, while melee units get less effective with higher numbers.


i think you missed the part with the hydralisks, and if he threw any other ranged units in the marines would still win with similar cost for cost

Join the Conversation