Older Marine or footman marine?

@ ItzaHexGor
You have a good point there. However, a shield can be dangerous to wear.

When an explosion happens right next to you, you get hit by the shockwave. If you wear a shield, you are much less earodynamic. The shield will push you over and come down on you. This has happened in real life, the riot police actually can get injured by their own shields when faced with explosives. Just look at the bomb squad people. They have no shield with 2 holes with armored arm pieces. They have the fattest, most round armor possible.

I like the shield for the looks and the obvious practicality of recognizing upgraded armor. The pure realism side behind it just bothers me. And when an ultralisk hits you, you better have a pretty fat shield. Just the force of it will make your brain jump around in your head. The cuts are your least worries if you survive the blow...

 

True, Aurora, but how often would the Marines be in a situation where it's detrimental to wear shields in relation to a situation where it's beneficial to wear a shield?

Splitting up the list I made earlier, Marines would only be at risk to such shockwaves when fighting Banelings, Reapers with D8 Charges, Siege Tanks, Thors, Ghosts with Nukes, Nighthawks with Hunter Seeker Missiles, and possibly Archons, or when standing next to buildings that are destroyed, which would seldom be the case for Marines, given their range.

As for the units where Marines would be better off wearing fighting with a shield, there're Zerglings, Roaches, Hydralisks, Lurkers, Infestors, Infested Marines, Ultralisks, Queens, Mutalisks Guardians, Spine Crawlers, Zealots, Stalkers, High Templar, Dark Templar, Nullifiers, Immortals, Colossi, Phoenix, Void Rays, Carriers, Motherships, Photon Cannons, Marines, Hellions, Vikings, Banshees, Battlecruisers and Auto-Turrets.

Now even if the ratio of these units and occurrences to the other units was one to one, which it most definitely isn't, Marines would benefit from wearing shields far more often than not. On top of that, most of the occurrences where the Marine wouldn't be better off are against Terran, which, lorewise, they'd be fighting the least.

On top of that, just because there's a risk associated with shields, it doesn't mean that Marines would be better off without them. For example, yes, if a Siege Tank shell exploded nearby, Marines would be knocked down from the force. However, if not wearing a shield, they're completely vulnerable to any and all bits of steel, carapace, rock, acid, heat, flames and would still be hit by the force of it anyway.

And on top of that, a Marine's powersuit would most likely be more than enough to withstand any such blast. Otherwise Marines would simply be useless against Ultralisks and Siege Tank fire, including friendly fire, as they'd simply be blown off their feet every swipe or shell.

 

*is impressed*

Still, wearing a shield just seems a bit lame. I can't really tell why, it just is to... medieval. Probably because I have played quite a lot of Warcraft 3.

That gave me an idea: those footman needed to be told to raise their shields. Why not do the same? Since marines can be massed faster now, why not add a bit of micro? That will encourage players to still micro with the marines, instead of using them like zerglings with a ranged attack.

So: manual raising of shield. Gives extra armor when raised, but less accuracy. -translates to less dps- When turned of, they have normal armor, but full firepower.
What do you think?

 

No shields. Only cowards hide behind shields.

And I'd associate shields with armor anyway, not hit points.

If the upgrade were a steroid shot or something, that made the marine physically bulkier, then that would be appropriate for the game and appropriate for a hitpoint boost.

 

Hooray for unbiased thread titles!

Shields all the way. If people took the effort of dissociating it from native jungle-living people's bamboo plates (or their medieval variants, for that matter) then the idea would come through as it's planned. Projectiles can be deflected and pressure can be distributed to a larger area. The very concept of a shield fits in with the profile of the marine (being relatively cheap to produce and simple to handle/deploy). If you've got a problem with the shield then you should also question their rifles for not being Goa'uld sticks.

 

People, if you will go to a war against aliens with lasers, horns and other stuff. The last thing you will use will be a SHIELD. Please, the shields was in the medieval age. Try to equip you with a shield and fight with them against lasers, and other stuffs, you will die, because is too heavy and bothers you. No have any sense, and the people is posting likes the shield, i would like ask you a thing: Do you play with the terrans? because the ppl who likes play with the terrans hate this new model of the marines.

PD: Ah! and the pics of the new marine and the footman....men, they are the same but with better graphics and other armor.

 

if a shield is so worthless, why would the marines wear body armor in the first place? Modern riot police use bullet proof shields. So, its logical in the future that humans would have shields that could survive a spike or even a few lazer blasts.

Terran was the first race I became good with, but was never good with being offensive.

 

You make no sense. For one, don't generalise. I happen to be a Terran player and I like the shield. Two, last time I checked marines didn't have lasers... their rifles are not state of the art, nor are the shields. Three, if the shield is heavy, the powersuit is more than capable of handling it.

Question: if you were given the choice of going into battle (for real, fearing your life, etc.) with a shield or without it, what would you choose?

 

It's not that the shield would be to heavy. They have powersuits. Lifting heavy objects is no problem if you have -about- 20 times the strength of a normal human. Or even more, powersuits like that already are in development today. I can post a link later if anyone is interested, but I saw it on Discovery NextWorld. A skinny little fellow lifted 500 pound steel bars without breaking a sweat.

 

Its just so very unoriginal. It seems like Blizzard just agreed upon the first thing that came to mind, a shield. We should instead get something that both looks good and makes sense- and a shield does not. If you have decent power armor, you wouldn't use a shield (and you wouldn't need one) since your mobility lacks anyway.

 

@ Aurora. You do realise that would still require shields, and would make it even more 'medieval' that it already supposedly is, don't you? Also, it makes Marines much less useless for late game, as they'd still die just as easily, unless they've got their shields raised the entire time, which wouldn't actually give a health boost, just an armour boost. It'd equate to Marines only having their shields 'turned off' in Bunkers.

@ jasmine. Health is largely based on armour anyway. Just look at stuff like the Marine and Marauder. They're still the same people, it's just that the Marauder has more protecting it. Same goes for vehicles and ships as well. The more metal they have protecting themselves, the more health they have. You've still gotta account for balancing, etc, but it still holds.

As for steroids, firstly, logically, it wouldn't work, as steroids do not work that quickly, and because muscle mass doesn't equate to health. Also, there be little to no change to the visual unit, which seems to be prominent for obvious reasons in StarCraft2.

@ Darknight. Why is it that you wouldn't want a shield? If you were fighting this stuff, you'd want as much protection as possible. A shield is just that. More protection. As for being medieval, they're still used today, so I don't know what you're smoking there. Weight does not matter, as their power suits are mechanised and self-powered. Saying a shield is too heavy is like saying that the Marine's body armour is too heavy.

And yes, I do play Terran. You're jsut generalising for your own interests with what you said about people who play as Terran hating the shields.

 

Since when do units in real time strategy games have to make sense under scrutiny? I don't see anybody whining about how ridiculous the Vicking would be in a realistic situation.

Or that marines can have more armor than just about any other unit in the game, including battlecruisers, as long as the marines are fully upgraded and the other units are not.

Or that if I research cloaking technology, suddenly my banshee out in the field, even if he's in the middle of combat, can somehow have the new technology magically installed so he can cloak and be saved.

Or that many explosive attacks don't actually do splash damage, even against tightly packed zerglings.

Or that one zergling somehow has the firepower to destroy an entire base in only a few minutes (as long as it's not defended).

 

You're right. We should actually aim for the game to make no sense at all. I hereby start a petition to include backwards, pink hopping Thors in StarCraft2.

Seriously though, there's nothing wrong with discussing the realism of a human team in a any game genre. Yes, there will always be things that don't really make sense, like what you've mentioned above, but each and every one of those things you listed are for gameplay purposes, save maybe the one about explosive attacks. The Marine's shield, though partially based on gameplay as well, is predominantly based on aesthetics, which is what people don't like about it. However, regardless of whether people like it or not, it can still make sense for it to be in the game, which is what is being discussed right now.

 

The question should be: is there no better alternative?

 

I'm just saying I don't look at a marine with a shield and instantly loose willing suspension of disbelief unless someone starts scrutinizing it in detail in a forum thread about it. And that there are plenty of units and mechanics in the game that can't hold up to the same scrutiny, but I don't mind because we suspend our disbelief to a certain extent for the sake of just having fun and having mechanics (like being able to see an obvious change to identify the upgrade) that make things more convenient.

P.S. I think they look just fine anyways.

P.P.S. And I actually do get a little annoyed when I see vickings, so I can see where you're coming from, but I still think they're fine. I miss goliaths though!

 

What upgrades are realistic though? Suddenly everyone out in the field has +2 damage or +2 armor. They don't even go back to the barracks to change their gear... it just magically improves.

 

Oh please, does nobody knows this? :S
The battles only last for a few minutes in the game, but days or even weeks pass in the story. The "magical" upgrades are done in the barracks and such in the lore, would you really WANT to see that happen in real time? The same goes for 1 zergling taking down a base. It actually goes on for hours.

 

Um I didn't know that. In fact I actually doubt that. Do you mean to say all the movements, attacks, builds are only symbolic, and represent a multiple of actual game time? No... just no. Please Marines don't wait minutes between two pulls of the trigger. Or do they?

 

I'm arguing the case for steroids being feasible by comparing the upgrade to how the other established upgrades are implemented. They are "magical" because the unit can be in the midst of combat when an upgrade is completed. The units don't need to change their gear. Their gear improves in their hands.

In the context accelerated time, I feel it is reasonable for such futuristic designer drugs to work in a similar magical way. I feel that marine muscle mass is closer to hitpoints than armor because these are biological units. Body armor reduces damage to that biology, but the more biology there is, the more damage it can take, the less fragile the biology is, so the more hitpoints there should be.

War machines on the other hand are disabled when the machinery is damaged. So hitpoints will come from the materials there, not particularly from the biology of the internal controller.

Classing material as hitpoints vs armor is all the do with how much of the unit is defensive plating and how much of the unit is fragile inner workings. Shields are clearly defensive plating, therefore should be armor. Steroids make the inner workings more hardy, so they can take more damage before failing, therefore boost hitpoints.

 

shield sucks for the marine !

Just see the cinematics, the logos, the wallpapers and you will never see any marine with shield. Excpet in screen shots but that does not count here.
When i see a marine ... he has no shield. Ok now it is an upgrade. BTW ..... no !