|
On August 05 2010 06:12 superbabosheki wrote: SC2 AI would make scourge ridiculously overpowered, and completely negate mutas in ZvZ. Assuming they cost 25/75 and spawn two at a time. Just like tanks right?
|
People are soo defensive.
Seeing as the unit I miss most is either the scourge or the lurker I endorse this. I mean, the Zerg having a swarm type feel to them again? Surely not.
|
On August 05 2010 06:19 Zanez.smarty wrote: I don't think the issue is whether the Scourge would be OP. My problem with the scourge is that it is YET ANOTHER unit from SC1 added to SC2. More and more people are wanting to turn the game into SC1 with better graphics. We need NEW units. If you want to play around with Scourge, go nuts. Play SC1. Or even better, remake SC1 in the map editor. I would love to play that every now and then.
Also, Scourge steps on the toes of the Corruptor. I understand no one likes the Corruptor, but rather than bringing back an old unit to do it's job, why don't we come up with some solution to make the Corruptor a viable interesting unit again.
Absolutely agree,hell as far as sc1 remake,maps,tilesets,units and heroes are all there.Someone should really remake it,heck one of these days i might just do it myself.
As far as scourge,corruptors do the exact same thing.Especially with their spell,so there is no point of scourge in multi-player.Still looking at a combined zerg army of everything + lurkers and scourge sure looks bad ass.Cant wait for HOTS
|
You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units.
|
i think zerg could should really get scourge back. They created so much excitement in SC1. And this is coming from a Protoss player. Give zerg their scourge back!
|
Why don't we find a way to make corrupters strong enough to hold up instead of redoing sc1? What if the corrupter's attacks slow the movement speed and damage of a target(stacking with every attack), so that they can slow down the damage of other air since they can't match the scourges killing power?
|
On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units.
Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors.
Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated. So would the inclusion of scourge be strong enough to keep Zerg balanced in the face of other changes to the other races?
|
On August 05 2010 06:45 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units. Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors. Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated.
Well here's a common situation. I'm using marine/tank/medivac/hellion in midgame push vs Z. He attacks my push in motion with some combo of ling/bling/roach/muta. There's a ledge nearby. I quickly pick up as much of my force as I can and drop it on the ledge, using whatever spare marines I can to kill mutas. I might lose 1 dropship before it fully unloads, but I get most of my units to safety and manage to do a bunch of damage to the zerg force. If there's scourge, I would've lost everything attempting that.
|
On August 05 2010 06:48 Floophead_III wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:45 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units. Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors. Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated. Well here's a common situation. I'm using marine/tank/medivac/hellion in midgame push vs Z. He attacks my push in motion with some combo of ling/bling/roach/muta. There's a ledge nearby. I quickly pick up as much of my force as I can and drop it on the ledge, using whatever spare marines I can to kill mutas. I might lose 1 dropship before it fully unloads, but I get most of my units to safety and manage to do a bunch of damage to the zerg force. If there's scourge, I would've lost everything attempting that.
'common'? If the ledge is more than a small distance away you'll lose a large amount of your force, and that's provided the ramp up the legde (if there is one) isn't nearby. It seems like a very specific situation that it'd come in handy. Again I know there are situations where they're useful, it's just not as often as BW because you wouldn't be able to use scourge to counter phoenixes or vikings well and corruptors melt carriers and BCs.
|
On August 05 2010 06:52 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:48 Floophead_III wrote:On August 05 2010 06:45 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units. Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors. Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated. Well here's a common situation. I'm using marine/tank/medivac/hellion in midgame push vs Z. He attacks my push in motion with some combo of ling/bling/roach/muta. There's a ledge nearby. I quickly pick up as much of my force as I can and drop it on the ledge, using whatever spare marines I can to kill mutas. I might lose 1 dropship before it fully unloads, but I get most of my units to safety and manage to do a bunch of damage to the zerg force. If there's scourge, I would've lost everything attempting that. 'common'? If the ledge is more than a small distance away you'll lose a large amount of your force, and that's provided the ramp up the legde (if there is one) isn't nearby. It seems like a very specific situation that it'd come in handy. Again I know there are situations where they're useful, it's just not as often as BW because you wouldn't be able to use scourge to counter phoenixes or vikings well and corruptors melt carriers and BCs.
I do that pretty much every game there's isolated ledges. Kulas and LT are prime examples. Man, if you aren't seeing that type of play, you need to play some more abusive terrans LOL.
|
On August 05 2010 06:13 synapse wrote: I'm guessing scourge now have smart-targetting? They take out quite a few vikings / medivacs even with no micro and a shitload of units attacking them.
A short delay between scourge explosion and damage dealt would negate that I think
|
Scourge autocloning is pretty dumb. On the other hand, I LOVE the model. It's so faithful to the original And yeah, Zerg needs a cost effective way to stop drops.
|
United States47024 Posts
This is cool! They even made the explosions green!
|
On August 05 2010 06:54 Floophead_III wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:52 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:48 Floophead_III wrote:On August 05 2010 06:45 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units. Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors. Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated. Well here's a common situation. I'm using marine/tank/medivac/hellion in midgame push vs Z. He attacks my push in motion with some combo of ling/bling/roach/muta. There's a ledge nearby. I quickly pick up as much of my force as I can and drop it on the ledge, using whatever spare marines I can to kill mutas. I might lose 1 dropship before it fully unloads, but I get most of my units to safety and manage to do a bunch of damage to the zerg force. If there's scourge, I would've lost everything attempting that. 'common'? If the ledge is more than a small distance away you'll lose a large amount of your force, and that's provided the ramp up the legde (if there is one) isn't nearby. It seems like a very specific situation that it'd come in handy. Again I know there are situations where they're useful, it's just not as often as BW because you wouldn't be able to use scourge to counter phoenixes or vikings well and corruptors melt carriers and BCs. I do that pretty much every game there's isolated ledges. Kulas and LT are prime examples. Man, if you aren't seeing that type of play, you need to play some more abusive terrans LOL.
I see people abuse ledges all the time, but never in a situation where I a) have mutas b) don't have enough mutas to quickly kill medivacs c) lack infestors d) am up against a terran with a strong tank force that prevents me from being able to pick off units in some other fashion and e) don't have drops for my banelings by this point which would counteract the medivac lift anyways.
It's a lot of situations that all have to come together for your scenario to happen in a way that causes heavy losses for the zerg that can't have been avoided.
And you're still like ignoring 1/2 of my point which is that I agree that scourge could be useful in some situations but it's undeniable that they're less useful as other than drops the only air unit that might be more efficiently killed by scourge is void rays which aren't frequently used ZvP past an early void ray rush for a reason.
Well they'd melt colossi which are already killed by corruptors, but all that does is upset a matchup that's arguably well balanced.
|
On August 05 2010 06:57 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2010 06:54 Floophead_III wrote:On August 05 2010 06:52 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:48 Floophead_III wrote:On August 05 2010 06:45 Logo wrote:On August 05 2010 06:35 Floophead_III wrote: You guys don't understand.
Scourge fill a very important role. They are high dps AtA units. Corruptors are AWFUL at stopping drops, taking out key targets, and removing support in big fights. Mutas are good at some things, but they're very expensive and weak in small numbers.
Examples: Protoss opens proxy voidrays and you went spire thinking he was going robo since he had low gate count. You have 2 queens and a spire almost done when 2 voidrays suddenly appear in your main. Your first queen dies before your 2nd reaches it and the voidrays are about to charge and your spire pops. You make 6 mutas really quickly, but by that time your spire is dead, the voidrays are charged, and another is in your base. Your 6 mutas cannot deal with the charged rays and you lose. Scourge would've instantly killed the rays and brought you back into the game.
Terran is dropping everywhere with a force of marine/tank. You have banelings, lings, and mutas. Your mutas miss a drop heading to your 3rd and your lings/blings are sitting in the middle of the map. 12 marines 2 medivacs and a tank are sitting behind the 3rd's minline. You lose your mutas trying to engage directly, and when the slower blings arrive, T just picks up and runs away. Scourge would've dealt with this much better, either by intercepting the drops by patrolling, or by killing the runaway force.
I'm sure there's many other reasons scourge would be excellent units. Those situations are not realistic. Most players, even on seeing a low # of gateways, would go hydra den first. There's no need for a spire that early. If your opponent pops out 1-2 colossi with low gateways they're vulnerable to lings and until upgraded and in larger numbers hydras can stand up. So you'd go hydra den then spire (or just hydra den on seeing the VRs). In the second example you're engaging your mutas before the banelings get there which is a silly thing to do. If both forces engage at the same time he either has to pick up and risk getting the medivac killed or stay on ground and risk the banelings blowing everything up. Plus you can setup your OLs better to spot the drop and you have better overall vision than BW because of creep tumors. Anyways there's no doubt that the scourge would be useful, it's just that the # of situations they'd be useful is less than the # of situations in BW. Many people feel that getting a unit that covers more of the Zerg's gaps would be a better choice or that Scourge would be disruptive to some of what we have now. Personally I'm not anti-scourge, I just don't know how well they'd fit. Keep in mind that the inclusion of scourge would also likely mean something for the other races, it's not clear that Zerg is so bad to warrant an additional unit without the other races being compensated. Well here's a common situation. I'm using marine/tank/medivac/hellion in midgame push vs Z. He attacks my push in motion with some combo of ling/bling/roach/muta. There's a ledge nearby. I quickly pick up as much of my force as I can and drop it on the ledge, using whatever spare marines I can to kill mutas. I might lose 1 dropship before it fully unloads, but I get most of my units to safety and manage to do a bunch of damage to the zerg force. If there's scourge, I would've lost everything attempting that. 'common'? If the ledge is more than a small distance away you'll lose a large amount of your force, and that's provided the ramp up the legde (if there is one) isn't nearby. It seems like a very specific situation that it'd come in handy. Again I know there are situations where they're useful, it's just not as often as BW because you wouldn't be able to use scourge to counter phoenixes or vikings well and corruptors melt carriers and BCs. I do that pretty much every game there's isolated ledges. Kulas and LT are prime examples. Man, if you aren't seeing that type of play, you need to play some more abusive terrans LOL. I see people abuse ledges all the time, but never in a situation where I a) have mutas b) don't have enough mutas to quickly kill medivacs c) lack infestors d) am up against a terran with a strong tank force that prevents me from being able to pick off units in some other fashion and e) don't have drops for my banelings by this point which would counteract the medivac lift anyways. It's a lot of situations that all have to come together for your scenario to happen in a way that causes heavy losses for the zerg that can't have been avoided. And you're still like ignoring 1/2 of my point which is that I agree that scourge could be useful in some situations but it's undeniable that they're less useful as other than drops the only air unit that might be more efficiently killed by scourge is void rays which aren't frequently used ZvP past an early void ray rush for a reason. It's kind of ridiculous to force the Zerg to tech to a decent number mutalisks just because the Terran is getting medivacs though. Scourge can also be used on colossi data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt=""
EDIT: I'll elaborate. You see a Terran getting medivacs and threatening drops. You get a spire and 8 mutalisks (1000/1000) to negate the drops. He gets 1-2 thors to complement his ground army (300/200-600/400). His army is now much more complete than yours, and he didn't have to sacrifice anything while teching to medivacs or thors. In the end, you're spending an assload of money to nullify a threat that doesn't cost anything for the Terran. It would be nice if Zerg had a cost-effective way to deal with medivacs, such as scourge.
EDIT 2: Now that I think about it, I'd gladly trade corruptors for scourge lol (and banelings for lurkers while we're at it, though I really like banelings as well).
|
On August 05 2010 06:56 Saracen wrote:Scourge autocloning is pretty dumb. On the other hand, I LOVE the model. It's so faithful to the original data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt="" And yeah, Zerg needs a cost effective way to stop drops.
Well, my thinking is that autocloning might be necessary after all now that I think about it. It's much easier to control a large force in SC2. The reason scourge were often so effective in BW was because you'd clone them in advance and it took a lot of attention and very quick reflexes to say, move and stim 2 groups of marines and move 6 vessels out of the way. Now that you can easily control a larger force scourge will be much easier to dodge and pick off. The autocloning might help make up for the fact that it's very likely most of the scourge will die trying to get the targets anyways.
|
Neat. I'd have them replace corruptors and have mutas morph into broodlords. I'd also have them to do bonus damage vs armored so zerg can have an easier time dominating air v terran.
|
What is autocloning? I'm very confused about what you guys are talking about.
|
nownow people, i hear and understand that you guys don't want zerg to be pretty much the same as BW zerg and stuff.
BUT. if you've ever played BW, just a tiny bit or played it seriously, you'd know that BW zerg is WAAAAAAAAAAAY better than the current SC2 zerg, and a lot more fun also.
of course i don't want zerg to be exactly like SC1, but close to it. queens are alright, it's annoying to inject but it does it's job properly and works. i DO want hydras in T1 and pretty much the same as SC1 (i.e we get our speed upgrade back.) and that's now cause i want it to be BW, i just want a proper freaking T1 unit that can be used to defend early air (SERIOUSLY, last 5 protoss games have ALL been fast void rays and me doing nothing else but trying to get lair up as fast as possible to get my hydras up and going, and even though i push back their void rays i STILL can't put the same pressure on the protoss that he just put on me, why? cause my hydras are so godfuckingly slow)
there's many parts of SC1 zerg that just works. i don't want it all to be moved to SC2, just the parts that DOES work. (T1 hydra, POSSIBLY lurker but not really since i can manage anyways, scourge cause corruptors are useless waste of money once they've done what they were created for)
so stop whining that we want SC1 into SC2, we just want a balanced zerg race without problems that we have now. and since blizzard isn't giving us new units or fixing the current units to fix those problems, we'll just continue suggesting adding a bit from SC1 just cause it WORKS.
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 05 2010 07:10 Whole wrote: What is autocloning? I'm very confused about what you guys are talking about. In SC1, scourges would overkill, so you had to manually split (cloning) scourges on to separate targets. In SC2, scourges are incapable of overkill, so a-moving them into a bunch of air units achieves the same effect, hence "autocloning".
|
|
|
|