|
And then I guess the balanced side of the question would be...
Should an Overlord have Vision if it is not Visible?
The overlord gives supply but comes from larva
The queen takes supply but does not come from larva
Complete opposites apparently intended to work together in harmony to complete the zerg philosophy.
For a zerg player, they should always be able to put themselves in a position to the enemy where they can say "i can drop my upgraded queens on your base at any time"
But maybe the idea doesn't get quite fulfilled unless contaminates are used....
I iust don't know if queen dropping has really turned out to to be the staple of zerg that it was suppose to be...
Any thoughts? any pro players doing this?
Does the concept of overlord queen drops on death balls work now that infestors can cast fungal from under ground?
|
there is a considerable difference between having information, and having information without your opponent knowing about it.
there is a reason why obs are more expensive and slowmoving then overseers.
|
Are these kind of threads some kind of meme I dont get?
|
On September 10 2016 07:56 Clonester wrote:
Are these kind of threads some kind of meme I dont get?
|
It's not about the information for me, as you can see that I was willing to sacrifice the ability to see, or down to 1 vision value. What ever the classification is for the state of "blind"
But, I am only concerned about the lack of creep cooperation with the overlord because the overlord is an "air" unit.
But insanely enough, the unit drops creep itself.
I feel like one either ends up asking why the overlord does not get the speed buff considering that relationship....
Or why it doesn't get a more positional utility value for setting up queen gank raids at particular positions.(the overlord needs that sufficient utility value for occupying larva)
I guess that is what burrow is for but do people use that tactic much?
|
I had to re-read your post many times to understand what you're saying/asking... wait I still don't know what you're saying. But at least I understood your title.
No, why should an overlord cloak when it's not moving?
|
it seems like there is no point to what i'm talking about since queens can burrow...
I guess the only possibility for significance would be to have the overlord be invisible and lose its vision while moving and then get its vision and visibility back when still.
|
Cloaked overlords for Harambe.
|
That's just what this game needs. More invisible units!
|
Canada8991 Posts
On September 10 2016 08:01 phodacbiet wrote:
I had to re-read your post many times to understand what you're saying/asking... wait I still don't know what you're saying. But at least I understood your title.
No, why should an overlord cloak when it's not moving?
Because it is a troll, it is like his 5th topic like that in 2 days.
|
On September 10 2016 07:56 Clonester wrote:
Are these kind of threads some kind of meme I dont get?
|
I suppose my deepest question is...
Was zerg suppose to have a consideration of "functional alterations" in a balanced sense with the invisible visionless overlord as explained prior, combined with the zergling concept "Zergling Many 1" to represent the swarm as the zergling wouId be able to leap at the target, sacrificing its remaining life pool as single target damage down to 1 life(not finishing an enemy off to waste life) in order to represent that it is the prerequisite to the baneling and has the aim/role of being used as micro against gas units? If the baneling is a sacrificial gas unit to be used on mineral units, then what about the consideration of zergling functionality with the aim as a mineral unit meant to be sacrificed on gas units? But also in consideration of the death ball, the overlord moving in for a tactical positional drop of the queen while those zerglings come in.
Or...
Was zerg suppose to be more as it is now... with upgraded queens and drops all the same but with minimal infestor casting fungal to hold the death ball while the queens move in to be dropped by the overlord as it is now followed up by the zerglings as they are now?
There is a classic wisdom used in starcraft back to broodwar
It goes "do not make units unless you are going to use them"
It is difficult to guarantee the value and use of zerg warriors unless there is a sacrificial element (it's hard to conceptualize because you can't see every unit having a unique sacrificial element)
But it would almost seem in the overlords case, that it would be a matter of attaining the right degree of utility element for occupying a larva, in order to some how guarantee the use of a utility unit like the overlord, or the sacrificial sense, warrior made.
|
On September 10 2016 07:42 AtlasMeCHa wrote:
Complete opposites apparently intended to work together in harmony
Pretty sure I got that in a fortune cookie before.
|
On September 10 2016 13:54 Erik.TheRed wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2016 07:42 AtlasMeCHa wrote:
Complete opposites apparently intended to work together in harmony
Pretty sure I got that in a fortune cookie before.
must've been a large fortune cookie
|
The hope is that these considerations point us to a complete revolution about the way that we think about the game but maybe zerg in particular.
The idea would be expressed in question form as follows...
"In what diversity of ways can the roster of zerg units make a sacrifice with a particular parameter for a gain in another parameter so that it may help to ensure that a unit made is a unit used which hopefully represent what the unit concept is about"
An example might come down to building damage as follows
The opponent to the zerg player may force zerg to make warriors and then run back home. Now it shouldn't be the case that the warriors are able to surround and trap to guarantee kills every time... but a unit like the baneling that was made as a reaction may be chasing the enemy back and explode on a production building like a barrack or gateway.
The question here would be...
Should the barrack produce X% less fast based on its missing life pool?
Or for the gateway, would the effect be doubled once shields are gone?
Of course the same would apply to a hatchery producing larva....
But isn't this concept particularly meaningful to zerg for the better ensurance of "a warrior or utility unit made is a warrior/utility unit used"?
.................................................................................
Protoss players may then complain about how terran and zerg can restore the life of their buildings. But this only reminds me of the utility replacement building to the Shield Batter that would "spirit link" (wc3 term) or "unify" (diablo 3 term) the shields of the units or buildings in the AoE
The thematic schematic was as follows btw
Bunker: Positional Ability Utility (can salvage as ability)
Swarm Wreather: Mobile Quantity Utility (if looses life releases broodlings)(made by combining the overlord and spine or queen)
Unique Pylon: Semi, Mobile Quality Utility (uniting shield pooI)
inspired by the trichotomy of Quantity, Quality and Ability
|
this thread is amazing.
The more you read it, the less you understand..
|
|
|
Dude, I'm pretty sure if you had a big fat and juicy overlord hovering in the sky over your head you'd fucking notice it, even if it's not moving. Not to mention you probably smell that thing from miles away.
|
this guy has been trolling the sc2bnet forums for years with these threads. i really hope you dont let him do the same here.
|
Are you high when you're making these treads op?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
