EPTOn February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
Divided my post into two arguments for ease of response:
Divided my post into two arguments for ease of response:
Thanks man.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
Banelings are a necessary component of the ZvT and ZvZ matchups
The issue is relatively simple: If you remove Banelings, large, early bio pushes in ZvT become insanely strong. Honestly, I'm not sure how one would even hold a fast bio push (hitting at ~6:00) sans banes. Unless you go for hyper fast upgrades and throw down a ton of spines, which Zerg can't honestly afford to do that early on without getting horribly behind, I actually don't think it's possible.
Terran can just produce units constantly, mass up a bio ball and a-move into the Zerg's base. Is that honestly a better outcome?
Banelings are a necessary component of the ZvT and ZvZ matchups
The issue is relatively simple: If you remove Banelings, large, early bio pushes in ZvT become insanely strong. Honestly, I'm not sure how one would even hold a fast bio push (hitting at ~6:00) sans banes. Unless you go for hyper fast upgrades and throw down a ton of spines, which Zerg can't honestly afford to do that early on without getting horribly behind, I actually don't think it's possible.
Terran can just produce units constantly, mass up a bio ball and a-move into the Zerg's base. Is that honestly a better outcome?
This sort of response seems to be the biggest one I've noticed, but seems to ignore a big part of my OP. If I were saying "Hey guys, let's take WoL and make it WoL, but without banelings", then yeah, I'd completely agree with you. That would be absurd, and early bio pushes from Terran would be too hard to hold.
However, my OP revolves heavily around the idea that Blizzard is making design changes in the two upcoming expansion packs, HotS and LotV. Blizzard has already stated their intentions to remove some units and replace them with something better. My blog revolves around making the case why the baneling should also be considered for replacement.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
You keep throwing out all of these rebuttals claiming that "that's a weak counter-argument", but most of your responses are(and in fact, your core argument is) about how we need to get rid of the Baneling because it's imba/boring. If you're going to make either claim (imba and/or boring) you do kind of need to provide a reasonable alternative so that the game doesn't become imba/boring against the Zerg's favour.
So what unit do you propose is introduced to replace the Baneling in order to make ZvT something more interesting than "Oh. He's sending bio at me before I could conceivably have Infestors or any unit that could reasonably deal with it at this point in time. GG"?
You keep throwing out all of these rebuttals claiming that "that's a weak counter-argument", but most of your responses are(and in fact, your core argument is) about how we need to get rid of the Baneling because it's imba/boring. If you're going to make either claim (imba and/or boring) you do kind of need to provide a reasonable alternative so that the game doesn't become imba/boring against the Zerg's favour.
So what unit do you propose is introduced to replace the Baneling in order to make ZvT something more interesting than "Oh. He's sending bio at me before I could conceivably have Infestors or any unit that could reasonably deal with it at this point in time. GG"?
My reasonable alternative involved providing Zerg with a good positional unit that can fill the role the baneling currently does, as well as the role gap left behind from the removal of the lurker -- zoning out areas of the map. Perhaps my blog wasn't clear enough that I was expecting the zoning unit to replace the baneling?
If you're asking for a specific unit design (like attack type, appearance, abilities, stats, etc.), I'll admit I don't have "the" answer.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
What unit do you propose is introduced to replace the Baneling in order to make ZvZ something more interesting than "Oh. Oh man guys. Zerglings. Zerglings are fighting! Lot's of them! Man those Zerglings are fighting."? As much as I hate actually taking part in ling/bling wars, I much prefer it to the world where ZvZ is 6 minutes of Zerglings fighting while both players try to get upgrades to turn the battle in their favor. You can't, in all honesty, tell me that ling/bling is to be lost for this.
What unit do you propose is introduced to replace the Baneling in order to make ZvZ something more interesting than "Oh. Oh man guys. Zerglings. Zerglings are fighting! Lot's of them! Man those Zerglings are fighting."? As much as I hate actually taking part in ling/bling wars, I much prefer it to the world where ZvZ is 6 minutes of Zerglings fighting while both players try to get upgrades to turn the battle in their favor. You can't, in all honesty, tell me that ling/bling is to be lost for this.
Wouldn't a good zoning unit that's effective against bio timings also be effective against zerglings?
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
And how will this supposed unit alter the ZvP match-up? Remember, it'll have to be a tier 1.5 unit like the Baneling, but it can't be the Baneling because the Baneling is imbalanced and leads to stagnant games.
And how will this supposed unit alter the ZvP match-up? Remember, it'll have to be a tier 1.5 unit like the Baneling, but it can't be the Baneling because the Baneling is imbalanced and leads to stagnant games.
Lots of things will be affecting all the match ups in Heart of the Swarm. I can't say how a zoning unit would affect ZvP in an environment where we don't know what ZvP will look like, though you can still take away the same basic concepts: it should provide Zerg with early defence and good map zoning.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
In the OP you talk about revamping the swarm host into a fitting zoning unit; that won't really cut it. Swarm host is Lair tech level, and AFAIK it requires burrow. Not exactly a great solution to the ZvT/ZvZ issues above.
In the OP you talk about revamping the swarm host into a fitting zoning unit; that won't really cut it. Swarm host is Lair tech level, and AFAIK it requires burrow. Not exactly a great solution to the ZvT/ZvZ issues above.
And how is adjusting those issues off-limits to the swarm host? When I say revamp the swarm host, I mean turn it into a useful unit, as opposed to creating this useful unit I'm imagining alongside the swarm host.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
This is the difficulty involved in arguing "Banelings need to be removed/replaced". You need something that can perform the exact same job, at the exact same time, for roughly the same cost, without breaking any of the match-ups.
This is the difficulty involved in arguing "Banelings need to be removed/replaced". You need something that can perform the exact same job, at the exact same time, for roughly the same cost, without breaking any of the match-ups.
I think that's rather rigid thinking. I can guarantee that units like the viper and oracle will break the match ups in certain ways when Heart of the Swarm is first released; if you don't think there will be balance patching after the upcoming design changes, you have another thing coming. My argument is that, with these things getting broken and tweaked anyway, why not deal with the baneling while we're at it?
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
I realize you've already touched on this topic extensively in your earlier responses, but you don't seem to have any interest in explaining what Banelings should be replaced with. Without that, I really can't justify agreeing with you on any of your points, because I just don't see how you can fill the Baneling's role in a way that doesn't break other match ups.
I realize you've already touched on this topic extensively in your earlier responses, but you don't seem to have any interest in explaining what Banelings should be replaced with. Without that, I really can't justify agreeing with you on any of your points, because I just don't see how you can fill the Baneling's role in a way that doesn't break other match ups.
It's not that I don't have interest, but rather I don't have delusions of grandeur in assuming I have "the solution", so to speak. Zerg's lack of a zoning unit is both extensively voiced by many professional Zerg players, and is being addressed (in a way) by Blizzard in Heart of the Swarm via the Swarm Host, so that's a straight admission that there's a clear design gap there. I just don't think the Swarm Host will actually fill the role, for the reasons I state in my OP.
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
Positional units don't fit with the Zerg playstyle
Zerg is all about fast, cheap, throwaway units. Zerglings are the very definition of "what a Zerg unit should be". Super fast, great for in-your-face aggression and great for defense if need be. Roaches, commonly touted as the Zerg "tank", are pretty damn squishy compared to other "tanky" units, but the key is they can be (and nearly always are) massed to draw fire for higher damage, but lower health Zerg units. Sure, Roaches have their regen upgrade, but that really doesn't see enough use to really call Roaches a hard-to-kill unit. They're a disposable damage soaking line.
Banelings, by their very nature (morphing from the quintessential Zerg unit, the Zergling) are very much a "Zerg" unit. Fast, disposable, and easily mass produced.
Positional units, in any form, are counter to these core Zerg "philosophies" if you will. Positional units aren't disposable; they're expensive, slow, and they really aren't supposed to move all that much, except to change where they're going to stand still and defend. They require teching and time and resources, none of which meshes well with the other Zerg units.
To be clear; you can have slower, more expensive, and less disposable units in the Zerg arsenal. That's kind of self evident just by looking at Hydras, Infestors, and Brood-lords. These are units that are balanced out for their slowness or generally non-disposable nature by being really fucking strong, and in general, you don't see these units until late in the game, when Zerg's overall focus shifts from the early game concerns (taking lot's of bases and abusing the mobile units available to an early game Zerg to prevent the player's opponent from taking bases) into the late game concern of "how do I kill this deathball?".
You're more or less asking for something that is completely counter to the Zerg's ideal approach to the early and mid game scenarios. Zerg shouldn't be turtling or trying to defend positions. That's the Terran philosophy. Zerg wants to be aggressive; positional units on face value are not conducive to this play style.
Positional units don't fit with the Zerg playstyle
Zerg is all about fast, cheap, throwaway units. Zerglings are the very definition of "what a Zerg unit should be". Super fast, great for in-your-face aggression and great for defense if need be. Roaches, commonly touted as the Zerg "tank", are pretty damn squishy compared to other "tanky" units, but the key is they can be (and nearly always are) massed to draw fire for higher damage, but lower health Zerg units. Sure, Roaches have their regen upgrade, but that really doesn't see enough use to really call Roaches a hard-to-kill unit. They're a disposable damage soaking line.
Banelings, by their very nature (morphing from the quintessential Zerg unit, the Zergling) are very much a "Zerg" unit. Fast, disposable, and easily mass produced.
Positional units, in any form, are counter to these core Zerg "philosophies" if you will. Positional units aren't disposable; they're expensive, slow, and they really aren't supposed to move all that much, except to change where they're going to stand still and defend. They require teching and time and resources, none of which meshes well with the other Zerg units.
To be clear; you can have slower, more expensive, and less disposable units in the Zerg arsenal. That's kind of self evident just by looking at Hydras, Infestors, and Brood-lords. These are units that are balanced out for their slowness or generally non-disposable nature by being really fucking strong, and in general, you don't see these units until late in the game, when Zerg's overall focus shifts from the early game concerns (taking lot's of bases and abusing the mobile units available to an early game Zerg to prevent the player's opponent from taking bases) into the late game concern of "how do I kill this deathball?".
You're more or less asking for something that is completely counter to the Zerg's ideal approach to the early and mid game scenarios. Zerg shouldn't be turtling or trying to defend positions. That's the Terran philosophy. Zerg wants to be aggressive; positional units on face value are not conducive to this play style.
I disagree with this for a few reasons.
1. While Zerg has always been the "scary, aggressive race", they still had a positional unit in the lurker in Brood War
2. Swarm Host is coming in Heart of the Swarm, so even if nothing is said, Zerg's still getting their positional unit (albeit a rather poor one, in my opinion)
3. There's nothing stopping anyone from using a zoning unit to zone out an offensive position
Lurker pushes are a common thing in Brood War. The thing about a zoning unit is that it's not just about being defensive; it's about holding a position. I'd compare the concept more closely with a siege tank; it can be both defensive and offensive at any given notice, but is made useful by planting itself down somewhere and saying "this is my territory".
On February 29 2012 22:30 Kasha_Not_Kesha wrote:
Edit:
See, the role of Banelings in defending Zerg in the early game is more or less to defend against early pushes with a lot of bio units (or Zerglings). After that, the Banelings are there to give the Zerg some kind of edge to allow for aggression. If I send a mass of lings to attack a Terran player's third, they'll get torn apart by nothing but Marines. At this point, Terran controls the map, simply because he has Marines. The Zerg no longer has any fast units to take advantage of the slowness of Mech, because all of the units that *could* do this (Speedling/Mutalisk) are very much countered by stimmed Marines with some Medevacs.
The idea that Zerg needs to "hold territory" in what is implied to be a defensive manner is beyond false. Zerg as a race "holds territory" by containing the player's opponent with heavy aggression. We don't defend by setting up a perimeter and holding the line, we defend by killing drops, having map awareness, and exploiting the speed of our units to force a base race or to force our opponent to pull back his forces to defend against our attack. "Holding territory" is a core component of Terran play in SC II, but it's not even close to a style that most competent Zergs would be willing to adopt.
Edit:
See, the role of Banelings in defending Zerg in the early game is more or less to defend against early pushes with a lot of bio units (or Zerglings). After that, the Banelings are there to give the Zerg some kind of edge to allow for aggression. If I send a mass of lings to attack a Terran player's third, they'll get torn apart by nothing but Marines. At this point, Terran controls the map, simply because he has Marines. The Zerg no longer has any fast units to take advantage of the slowness of Mech, because all of the units that *could* do this (Speedling/Mutalisk) are very much countered by stimmed Marines with some Medevacs.
The idea that Zerg needs to "hold territory" in what is implied to be a defensive manner is beyond false. Zerg as a race "holds territory" by containing the player's opponent with heavy aggression. We don't defend by setting up a perimeter and holding the line, we defend by killing drops, having map awareness, and exploiting the speed of our units to force a base race or to force our opponent to pull back his forces to defend against our attack. "Holding territory" is a core component of Terran play in SC II, but it's not even close to a style that most competent Zergs would be willing to adopt.
Like I mentioned above, there's no implication that a zoning unit is just a defensive unit. However, I disagree with your assessment that a Zerg's need to hold territory is false. Right now it's done by pro Zergs by making a tonne of spine crawlers, either to defend bases or hold an open area. It's a messy solution, however, and one borne from the fact that Zerg doesn't have any effective unit to hold ground like that.
