[A] Starbow - Page 133

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 15:54 GMT

#2641

On October 27 2012 15:45 SmileZerg wrote:

My argument isn't just that Inject is bad cost-investment wise, but that it is fundamentally redundant, regardless of costs. It doesn't accomplish anything you can't also do with macro Hatches. Chrono Boost is never redundant. Yes you can use it on production facilities early to avoid having to make additional ones, however, it can also speed along research and provide an aid in defense with Cannons. But most importantly, it can not be used before investing in producing the units you actually want.

For example, as Protoss, you decide to make X Zealots and Y Stalkers out of your N Gateways. Chrono can be used to speed along the return on this investment, after the fact. It cannot be used to increase value N before you start a production cycle.

As Zerg, with Inject, you are not speeding along or increasing a return on any investment. You are just adding more possible slots with which to invest in at a future point. But why have that be a possibility, if making more production facilities (in this case hatcheries), already does that? Why have the redundancy of two game mechanics with no substantial differentiation do the same thing? The cost-effectiveness is not the issue. We can change the values, but we will still end up with either:
A) Macro hatches are better, so Queens are largely unnecessary, or B) Queens using Inject are better, so macro hatches are largely unnecessary.

Mathematically the whole thing is just a mess, and in my opinion we are far better off scrapping it and starting anew. I think we can find better ways to make Zerg macro work, and we don't need to cling to an old mechanic just because it was already established in SC2.

I do agree that, until we come up with a replacement, we need to leave Inject purely as the APM dump. But we should all be working towards brainstorming said replacement.

And mule is fundamentally redundant compared to macro CC's. How is chrono never redundant if by definition it also gives the same returns as building a macro Nexus or another production facility? That is the same exact thing as inject, with he difference being it can also further along upgrades and speed up cannon defense. The queen also has diverse set of abilities because it has more spells than simply chrono, it can also aid in defense with transfuse and with the new spell aid in building time.
Why is it so important that chrono can't be used before investing in the production que, and how does that translate to inject being bad that way? There is no real argument for that.
Hatches will raise the cap of larva, and queens are used to reach that cap, its not cut and dry both are used for max larva production.

If queens are more powerful than macro hatches, macro hatches are still required because you can't inject twice on the same hatcheries. To get to your full potential production over time, you need more hatches for more inject targets.

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 16:04 GMT

#2642

As for inject lacking any decision making, compare it to chrono and lets try to apply that to zerg.

Zerg obviously has one serious decision he has to make, and that iss make more units, and occasionally creep spread.

But the outcome of that decision is the core of how zerg plays, do I drone up, or do I make more fighting units with these new larva?

Its hard to make a competing decision against the very essence of what zerg is, especially without making it seem gimmicky and drastically changing how the entire zerg race plays.

Still looking forward to all the wild ideas to see if there are a few gems in the rough.

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 16:18 GMT

#2643

Personally I'd be all for changing the queens role and giving the actual hatcherie the inject so we can look forward to more moments like this

Traceback

United States469 Posts

October 27 2012 16:48 GMT

#2644

On October 27 2012 14:37 Traceback wrote:
1. Transfusion: To make transfusion more useful why don't you make it a small AOE ability that heals all damaged units in a certain radius with an energy cost proportional the to amount of health healed. This will make transfuse a more useful ability while keeping it balanced. Maybe like a 4:1 health to energy ratio. Just an idea.

What do you guys think of this idea for making transfusion more versatile?

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 16:51 GMT

#2645

+ Show Spoiler +

On October 27 2012 10:52 Kabel wrote:
>>> My view on Zerg <<<

First of all, I feel ashamed when I watch Zerg games because its so broken T_T
(Yes I got home and tuned in to the stream. The first thing I saw was the broken Z games on NA with unlimited Zerg bases at 15 min..... This will be a long post but it contains beautiful pictures so don´t worry )

I, and many other players, earlier felt that Zerg was not challenging or fun to play in Starbow. (It still is not) There is not so much to do, compared to P and T. There are two areas I want to fix with the Zerg race. I will start with the minor problem:

[image loading]

The core units of Terran and Protoss are highly rewarded by control. They have an" A-move mode" that makes them decent. But if you micro them - stutter step, blink, focus fire, stim pack, place spider mines etc, they get even better.
Zerg core units reaches their maximum state of efficency by simply existing. (And its very easy to make them exist... But I will come to that later)

So thats why I have been working on increasing the need of Zerg micro - Z must flank, Z must manually surround with Zerglings, the creep regeneration bonus encourages Zerg to micro units out of combat to regain health... There are lot of stuff to do in this area and I have some more improvements coming. (More about that in later posts)

In BW the unit selection limit of 12 units added the need of army control for Z. A huge Z army could not A-move in a blink of an eye... It required work to just order the huge army to attack!

But this is a minor issue compared to the real problem:

[image loading]

The core aspect of the Zerg race is to make decisions on what to do with the larvas - army or workers. Imagine if Zerg had unlimited acess to larvas. There would be no decision. If Z had only 1 larva every minute it would be a very important decision. A high spawn rate on the larvas nullifies the importance of making good larva decisions since you can choose both!

A possible simple solution to a complex problem: Reduce the spawn time of larva. It will make the decisions more important between economy and army. Sure, Zerg can still get 5 early bases if they want. But it will require lots of larvas to saturate the bases and actually gain any value from them... And if they do, they have no units to defend... At this state of balance, Zerg can expand like crazy, saturate the bases AND build armies. This is because they have enough larvas to do everything. .. . . .. .. The downside might be that it will make Zerg a bit more "boring" since you have less to do... (But I think there are ways to overcome that problem)

Why am I bothering so much with the macro mechanics of Queens?!

I can panic balance the state of the game. (And maybe I must do it!) But I want to balance the game on good macro mechanics. Otherwise I fear that the fundamentals of Zerg will never be fixed.

[image loading]

First of all, it has some unique features.

- Its the only ability in the game that "permanetly" makes a building better - it can add more maximum larvas to a hatchery.
- It "speeds" up the rate at which units can be produced. Hence it speeds up the number of decisions Z can make. But if that rate is too high the importance of deciding how to use each larva gets weaker...

No matter what kind of artificial respiration I give to Inject it will never add anything more versatile to Zerg macro by itself.
Why?
Because it only has 1 target ------> the hatchery.
The only decision Inject offers is the option to get more decisions from the hatchery... O_o

>>>>>>> Remember those pretty pictures? <<<<<<<<

+ Show Spoiler +

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I can only change WHEN its most optimal to use Inject - if you have a low or high amount of larvas at the hatchery, if the hatchery is already doing something else etc. It will always be a spell whos only purpose is to click on the hatchery, just to give a skill limit in Zerg macro. (Since there is unlimited selection of buildings. Hence, everyone can macro like a pro in terms of mechanics without Inject)

A thought experiment: Imagine if all Protoss units (even workers) was built from the gateway. You would only have to chrono boost the gateway. But since Chrono boost effects researches too, it would still be a versatile ability with some decision in it. What if the Chrono boost would not even affect upgrades and only the gateway? There you have Inject in a nutshell...

Imagine if each unit-type-building for Zerg had its own stack of larvas. Hydra Den could store larvas. Spawning pool could spawn larvas etc.. Each building could only build its own kind of units. The Queen can choose what building to inject. It would be so versatile and useful!

But that is not the reality. Starcraft do not work in that way.

So... There are two ways to go with the Queen.

1) Redesign it completely. Make Queens unable to manipulate larvas at all. But this would require a lot of work and good ideas.

2) Make the best out of the worst. Inject can be one part of the Queen arsenal. If so, it should compete with other important spells in the Queen energy pool.

Look at this picture of the SC2 Queen and all its possible interactions:

[image loading]

Ps. There are obviously lots of targets to Transfuse. But its expensive and can "overheal" the early units, especially in Starbow. Zerg defence is so strong anways without Transfuse. If Transfuse was crucial for survival, Zerg would have to be careful to keep energy on the Queens...

Compare it to the current version of the Starbow queen:

[image loading]

Its not perfect yet. (Obviously) I see flaws in it. (80 second Inject...)

The Queen shall be a unit that is VERY IMPORTANT for base management.

- Inject must be important. (But not as important as in SC2 for lots of reasons... )
- Transfuse must play a crucial role in base defence. (Just as chrono boost on cannons)
- Speed up buildings (or something else) must compete with Inject about the energy.
- Creep spread must require more participation from Queen.

All of this creates a Queen which has a conflict in how to use the energy. And I consider to do some adjustments to further enchance those aspects..

What needs to be decided?

- Exactly how Inject should work and what impact it should have on macro.
- Some form of seperate ability that competes with Inject and lets the Queen manipulate something else in the Zerg macro/base management.

What makes Zerg able to explode like they do? What values can be manipulated to balance it?

Larva Spawn time?
Drone Build time?
More need for Inject?
Cost for hatcheries?

The first thing I consider to do is to increase the spawn time of larvas by a couple of seconds. (I will look at numbers)
I will also increase all bases to 4 mineral patches with 1500 and 4 minerals patches with 1000. This will help P and T get longer value from their bases why at the same time benefit from more bases.

Thanks for reading ^^

@Kabel
Concerning balance:

On October 25 2012 18:31 hipo wrote:
Concerning Zerg economy and balance:
A lot of Protoss (especially on NA) seem to struggle against Zerg and are complaining about their strong economy. Yesterday, as I was waiting for peoples to play Starbow, I did play a few BW’s games with a friend and asked him to go for the 4 hatch build showed by Decemberscalm. I also watched a few BW VOD in which Zerg are using a similar strategy and I tried to make a quick comparison with the replays provided by NA’s players. It might surprise you, but Zerg economy in Starbow isn’t stronger than in BW. It might be true that this build is easy to execute, but from my stand point, as long as you scout it (because others strat like 3hatch hydra or 3hatch muta doesn't requiere the same answer) it’s far from being unbeatable and you don’t have to go for 2gate pressure into Reaver to beat it. For example, Danko tried this build yesterday against me and I beat him after a FFE opening with a fast +1 speedlot timing with 6gate (it hit before the 9 minutes marks when Zerg don’t have a critical mass of hydra yet). Since he was on 4bases, he wasn’t able to defend all of them at the same time (hard to micro hydra at 3 places at once) and I did a good amount of damage as I was securing my 3rd and teching to Templars and Storm. Others opening might work too since I remember a few game of Bisu in which he used a Stargate or Templars opening against a 4hatch build.

By the way, if you look at Decemberscalm cast, you will notice that Zerg isn’t really ahead of Protoss in harvesters count. Zerg have more income because he have more base but if Protoss can secure a third (with canon + Storm or Reavers), he will almost match Zerg in income (and Protoss don’t need to be ahead in income to beat Zergs). In this game, the Protoss wasn’t able to do it (because he played very badly) but I don’t think it is impossible to take a third around the 8 minutes mark if your canons are ready in time and if you have Reaver or Storm available to defend against the first hydra bust. At this point, you want to scout what is Zerg follow up (usually lurkers or muta) and react accordingly (robot tech vs lurker and canon + archon + storm vs muta).

FYI, Danko stopped playing this macro heavy style against me because every time he does, my +1 speedlot timing kill him.

Concerning Queens:

On October 26 2012 21:05 hipo wrote:
Some idea for a complete revamp of the Queen:
Combine Queen (not used) and Overseer (used but boring) to create a more interesting unit.
Let’s call it the Overseer too because I don’t have a better idea.

Overseer only requires pool and is morphed from an Overlord for 50/50 in 20 seconds
Same stat as current Overseer but slightly slower

Overseer start with 3 spells:
- Spam Creep Tumor - 25 energies (same as the current one with faster spread but slower replication)
- Spam Larva – 50 energy (increase spam larva rate of an hatch by 25% during 60 sec)
- Reveal – 50 energies (reveal cloaked unit around the Overseer for 20 seconds)

At Lair, Overseer gets a new passive ability:
- Creep Bleeding (same as creep generation for Overlord but work even when the Overseer is moving)

At Hive, Overseer gets a new ability:
- Nydus Spam – 125 energies (create a Nydus Worms under the Overseer, built time 5 sec)

Overseer also gain benefit from Overlord’s upgrad: Pneumatized Carapace and Ventral Sacs

Explanations:
At hatch tech, Overseer isn’t really needed but you can still make them to scout, to start spreading creep, to increase your production or even to bank some energy for more reveal usage when needed. Later, you need it because it’s your only mobile detection. At this point, you can’t spam creep tumor or larva without taking the risk of being low on energy to use Reveal (a bit like an Orbital with call-down SCV / scan). You have to take care of them constantly because otherwise, they might be sniped allowing cloaked unit like DT to do a lot of damage. It also became a nice addition to your army to provide detection and creep even when you are moving. At hive tech, it greatly increases Zerg army mobility and harassment possibility.

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 17:37 GMT

#2646

@hip REPLAYS PLEASE!

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 17:49 GMT

#2647

On October 28 2012 02:37 decemberscalm wrote:
@hip REPLAYS PLEASE!

+1 speedlot timing vs 4hatch hydra:
http://drop.sc/268310

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 18:04 GMT

#2648

On October 28 2012 02:49 hipo wrote:

Show nested quote +

+1 speedlot timing vs 4hatch hydra:
http://drop.sc/268310

That was awful. Gonna be honest here. Z got supply blocked for a good 50 seconds at one point, and another supply block soon after.

He didn't actually respond to the zealots at all, instead opting for a riskier early spire with no actual units to defend vs zealots when he plainly had the money the entire time to do so.

At roughly 7:09 he pulled drones off for some ungodly reason when he had 6 lings in production, 4 larva ready (no queens at all >.<). The zealots ideally want to kill the drones, why on earth are you giving them for free when the spine can slow down the zealots and easily give enough time to zergling up and crush any zealot aggression and buy time for lurker tech.

And then the transition to hydra came out after zerg spotted twilight council which means charge which hard counters hydras.

This was just terrible reaction to +1 zealots.

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 18:25 GMT

#2649

On October 28 2012 03:04 decemberscalm wrote:

Show nested quote +

Gonna be honest, all the game I saw from NA's players were awful too.
In fact, everyone is awful at Starbow ^^...

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 18:41 GMT

#2650

On October 28 2012 03:25 hipo wrote:

Show nested quote +

Gonna be honest, all the game I saw from NA's players were awful too.
In fact, everyone is awful at Starbow

Doesn't really refute the fact the Z in that game just gave the game away to P :/.

I promise you +1 zealots attack timings were tried, extremely similar to the one in the replay. It can still easily be managed by a Z who knows what to do.

scen

Wales61 Posts

October 27 2012 19:00 GMT

#2651

still way to hard to select the reaver, the whole back half of it cant be selected.

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 19:05 GMT

#2652

On October 28 2012 03:41 decemberscalm wrote:

Show nested quote +

Like Protoss gave away every PvZ I have watched so far...

Obviously, it can be easily stopped (like any timing). But it isn't an all-in, the purpose of this attack is to force units instead of drone and to stop Zerg from expanding like crazy. Stopping this attack doesn't mean that Zerg will win the game because it does allow Protoss to take a 3rd with Templars tech ready and without being heavily behind in eco.

Anyway, I don't really care since we are talking about nerfing Zerg... it will not hurt me xD

purakushi

United States3301 Posts

October 27 2012 19:17 GMT

#2653

On October 28 2012 04:00 scen wrote:
still way to hard to select the reaver, the whole back half of it cant be selected.

Deleted User 97295

1137 Posts

October 27 2012 19:53 GMT

#2654

--- Nuked ---

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 20:18 GMT

#2655

On October 28 2012 04:05 hipo wrote:

Show nested quote +

The problem here is that Zerg's on NA have plenty of lings to shut down zealot aggression AND mass expansions at the same time.
Z can also go pool first forcing a wall off on the FE and still have two hatch down in quick order.

I can get some games with a +1 timing zealot aggression and show how much stuff Zerg has at that point if he's playing macro.

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 21:15 GMT

#2656

Yea, I saw in one of the game you casted that you were making a lot of ling in the early game to shut down early Zealot pressure (at that time, I though it was in reaction to 2gate pressure). It can be very effective if Protoss actually try to pressure before getting +1 and speed but otherwise, those ling are a bit useless since you can't do anything with them. Don't forget that every 2 ling is one less drone for Zerg... It delay your economic explosion and as a result, you have to delay hydra (like you did in the game I watched). In this case, Protoss can push a bit later (to get a bigger Zealot count before moving out) and even 40 ling will not do anything against them because of the upgrade difference.

Pool first is one of the favorite opening of Danko so I'm a bit used to it and I don't understand how it force a wall of. With forge at 13 and canon right after Nexus, I'm usually fine against 9pool.

decemberscalm

United States1353 Posts

October 27 2012 21:41 GMT

#2657

On October 28 2012 06:15 hipo wrote:
Yea, I saw in one of the game you casted that you were making a lot of ling in the early game to shut down early Zealot pressure (at that time, I though it was in reaction to 2gate pressure). It can be very effective if Protoss actually try to pressure before getting +1 and speed but otherwise, those ling are a bit useless since you can't do anything with them. Don't forget that every 2 ling is one less drone for Zerg... It delay your economic explosion and as a result, you have to delay hydra (like you did in the game I watched). In this case, Protoss can push a bit later (to get a bigger Zealot count before moving out) and even 40 ling will not do anything against them because of the upgrade difference.

Pool first is one of the favorite opening of Danko so I'm a bit used to it and I don't understand how it force a wall of. With forge at 13 and canon right after Nexus, I'm usually fine against 9pool.

Delay the push and see what happens as Toss

Z's eco will still be going up regardless of whether he gets the lings or not.

That is our main concern with Z right now, its supposed to be a balancing act on a knifes edge between units and drones, but it simply isn't right now.

For all of our masters players, the person playing as Z will win the match nearly 100% of the time, the only losses are Z doing something really stupid. Our less skilled Zergs have a much better chance vs high caliber players.

We've played a ton of PvZ, its not a friendly match right now.

Freeze967

United States230 Posts

October 27 2012 21:49 GMT

#2658

The point is, because of how the bases work now is that you don't need a lot of drones at expansions to maximize income. For max income you want 8 drones mining minerals per base. 11 counting gas. This means a zerg needs extremely few drones, and even if you snipe one base they will just transfer to another base, without losing huge amount of income. Like a zerg on 4 bases, will only want around 32 drones mining minerals, plus like 4-5 mining gas as otherwise it is way to much gas for them. So a total of about 36 drones. This is nothing.

hipo

France482 Posts

October 27 2012 22:45 GMT

#2659

On October 28 2012 06:49 Freeze967 wrote:
The point is, because of how the bases work now is that you don't need a lot of drones at expansions to maximize income. For max income you want 8 drones mining minerals per base. 11 counting gas. This means a zerg needs extremely few drones, and even if you snipe one base they will just transfer to another base, without losing huge amount of income. Like a zerg on 4 bases, will only want around 32 drones mining minerals, plus like 4-5 mining gas as otherwise it is way to much gas for them. So a total of about 36 drones. This is nothing.

Does 32 workers on 4 base actually mines more minerals than 32 workers on 2 base ???

Roblin

Sweden948 Posts

October 27 2012 23:28 GMT

#2660

On October 28 2012 07:45 hipo wrote:

Show nested quote +

Does 32 workers on 4 base actually mines more minerals than 32 workers on 2 base ???

it does, the difference is quite noticeable, though I do not have any concrete numbers on it right now.

kabel should be able to satisfy your curiosity adequately.

Prev 1 131 132 133 134 135 537 Next

Please or register to reply.

[A] Starbow - Page 133

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming