EPT[SC2] Zerg & Larvae Injection - Page 7
| Forum Index > News |
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36392 Posts
i was just larvae inject, 25 seconds later use my extra 4 larvae and inject again, repeat all game. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On September 03 2009 12:59 Archerofaiur wrote: Why? The new macro mechanics are analogous to SC1's manual worker mining. Its something you want to do all game to increase your army size. If you tried playing SC1 without making any more workers I think youd have a tough time winning aswell. Making workers all game doesn't favor one race. Terran and Protoss can't 1-hatch queen, and their macro mechanics aren't nearly as strong as larva injection. A more appropriate analogy would be how in the early builds of SC, all zerg buildings made larva for their respective unit types (e.g. you made zerglings with spawning pool larva, drones with hatchery larva, etc.) | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
| ||
|
MaTaAeRuKaNa
United States95 Posts
| ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36392 Posts
(Yes I understand all the mechanics have alternate abilities, like the Queen can heal some bio structure or something but 99% of the time we didn't use it) | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36392 Posts
On September 03 2009 13:43 MaTaAeRuKaNa wrote: so to sum it all up, z imba. right? We think its far too easy to macro with 1-hatch and its much harder to play PvZ and TvZ. This doesn't mean its imba, just that at low levels its hard to play against Z. Just like in regular BW, rushes seem overpowered because noobs don't know how to properly micro to defend them. Of course we are better than average noobs, but I haven't eliminated the possibility that we were simply missing something about PvZ and TvZ. We did try a lot of things, and we played 50+ games. | ||
|
tedster
984 Posts
On September 03 2009 13:39 Kennigit wrote: yeah yeah, just keep it civil lol - these things always get out of control. I try hard to make good posts but one day i'll surely blow it and flame out | ||
|
genryou
Malaysia390 Posts
Another idea could be that the injected larvae can only make drones so its is more for econ macro than unit macro (like the other two macro mechanics). I think this is the only solution, though doing so will just make Z back to the title "Weakest" | ||
|
tedster
984 Posts
On September 03 2009 13:43 Hot_Bid wrote: That's a good idea, because one of the main reasons larvae inject is so imbalanced is because its a macro mechanic that can be used to make fighting units not just workers. P and T mechanics are limited to only getting you minerals. (Yes I understand all the mechanics have alternate abilities, like the Queen can heal some bio structure or something but 99% of the time we didn't use it) Unfortunately this doesn't really work because you can just use all the normal larvae for units and the rest for drones. This would actually make your gameplay even MORE linear because all regular larvae = units, all injected = drone. Obviously you can't instantly make 14 zerglings from one hatch but with even a slight planning ahead you still have: -way too easy drone saturation -econ that is super resistant to harass (back to full drone count in 25 secs after dropship lol) -tons of spare larvae for army -tons of spare drones to mine/build extra hatches which still give you access to tons of fighting units While you'd be unable to whip out 20 hydras 5 mins into the game, you'd still be consistently outproducing once you got past the early game. Sauron zerg is really cool but probably shouldn't be the goal every single game. On top of that, the whole "rebuild after worker harass for free" might actually be even worse. Seriously, think of how goofy responding to a siege drop by injecting 8 drones for 50 mana would be. | ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36392 Posts
On September 03 2009 13:49 tedster wrote: Unfortunately this doesn't really work because you can just use all the normal larvae for units and the rest for drones. This would actually make your gameplay even MORE linear because all regular larvae = units, all injected = drone. Obviously you can't instantly make 14 zerglings from one hatch but with even a slight planning ahead you still have: -way too easy drone saturation -econ that is super resistant to harass (back to full drone count in 25 secs after dropship lol) -tons of spare larvae for army -tons of spare drones to mine/build extra hatches which still give you access to tons of fighting units While you'd be unable to whip out 20 hydras 5 mins into the game, you'd still be consistently outproducing once you got past the early game. Sauron zerg is really cool but probably shouldn't be the goal every single game. On top of that, the whole "rebuild after worker harass for free" might actually be even worse. Seriously, think of how goofy responding to a siege drop by injecting 8 drones for 50 mana would be. how can you possibly arrive at a conclusion about a theoretical balance change on an issue that there isn't even a consensus yet about. we're like 3 levels of theorycraft removed and you're talking about it like its fact. i mean, this is like saying oh hey if we create a race of super goats that solve the world's hunger problem because they can produce some type of special goat cheese, should we feed them regular grass or nutrient enhanced hay? and then you come in and say "well nutrient enhanced hay won't work because X. like X was super obvious, hello!? | ||
zatic
Zurich15365 Posts
Btw Hydra were tier2 in that build and you would overrun your opponent with roach/ling. Everyone who suggests to put hydra back on tier2 completely misses the point why the queen is so strong. Article about the Cologne build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=96528 On September 03 2009 08:06 Hot_Bid wrote: It seemed near impossible to hit his muta flock, and Zatic is no Jaedong. SC2 Jaedong imho. | ||
|
tedster
984 Posts
On September 03 2009 13:55 Hot_Bid wrote: how can you possibly arrive at a conclusion about a theoretical balance change on an issue that there isn't even a consensus yet about. we're like 3 levels of theorycraft removed and you're talking about it like its fact. i mean, this is like saying oh hey if we create a race of super goats that solve the world's hunger problem because they can produce some type of special goat cheese, should we feed them regular grass or nutrient enhanced hay? and then you come in and say "well nutrient enhanced hay won't work because X. like X was super obvious, hello!? I know it's just theorycrafting, and I'm not really talking about the balance implications so much as whether it makes the game more or less linear. I strongly believe that any balance issues will be addressed over time and jumping on them now doesn't accomplish much at all. I'm more interested in how "open" the game is and how viable different options are. Looking at mechanics like the T and P macro abilities, for example, you still gain a great deal from killing a worker. P in particular, they lose both the mine time and the "cracked out" mine time, so there's a proportionate loss in resources that even effects the macro mechanic. T can "recoup" some of the losses by skimping on scans, etc. and use a MULE to help make up for lost workers, but they still are behind in the overall worker framework and have to rebuild them, one at a time, and suffer proportionate loss in economy as time passes. Z, on the other hand, could (under the proposed injection policy) rapidly throw up 4-8 drones without slowing down unit production... which somewhat makes the "drones vs. army, especially when being harassed" decision-making process a lot less dynamic, in addition to making the decision to drop/harass the drones a lot less appealing. Will it still be viable? No way to tell, but I'm always going to be a little concerned about something that could possibly hard-counter an interesting and dynamic strategy (dropping to harass workers) when you're going to be making that potential counter every single game. If you look at the last few posts I've made, most of my concern is over keeping the game from becoming too linear. I come from a War3 background first and SC second, and so I'm really used to seeing decisions that seem neat, are fun to play with, but ultimately sidestep the decision-making process because they are automatic decisions. I just don't want to see the same things happen in SC2 where possible. also def. nutrient-enhanced grass, goats can totally eat anything | ||
|
Ozenlord
United States7 Posts
Surprised and relieved, this made my day. Im glad that Zurg isn't as bad as Blizzard said they were but I'm sure they will find a way to balance it out in the end. Live for the Swarm. | ||
|
icystorage
Jollibee19350 Posts
| ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
Much of the conversation so far focused on the larve, but you touch on another element as well: scouting. In BW scouting and reacting to the other player is key (ex: hiding a 2nd scouting probe somewhere as P, scanners for T, etc.). It seems queens make it virtually impossible to scout vs. a z in SC2? And yeah, nutrient enhanced grass, obviously. | ||
|
Pufftrees
2449 Posts
When I first arrived I was under the stigma from the developer and community chat that Zerg was the weakest and least developed race. I wanted to play them while they were weak so when they get buffed I would be ahead of curve. Early the first day, basically any time I went 2 -Hatch relatively early against a smart opponent, I would only win by really outplaying them (nydus worms ftw), but it was an uphill battle. I then focused on the queen mechanic for one hatch play... and oh man just as this article described.. it is NASTY. It all clicked at this point, the power of keeping opponent in dark and then just rolling them over. Key words for this are flexibility and destruction. Great article again. | ||
|
omninmo
2349 Posts
| ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36392 Posts
On September 03 2009 14:15 omninmo wrote: no screen shots? I have a bunch but all you can see is larvae everywhere. | ||
|
tedster
984 Posts
On September 03 2009 14:23 Hot_Bid wrote: I have a bunch but all you can see is larvae everywhere. Hahaha awesome, I totally want to see these, it's funnier this way | ||
| ||
