Why are queens not used more often for defense?

mothergoose729

United States666 Posts

January 02 2011 12:02 GMT

If I sound like I am theory crafting a little bit please excuse me, but I am wondering why so many players favor spine crawlers and zerglings as their early defense, and maybe a macro zerg who wants to spread a lot of creep might get a third queen for air defense and tumors. Why do most players stop there? One really underutilized ability of the queen is transfuse which is like medivac heal on steriiods. One queen costs as much minerals as a drone morphed into a spine crawler, takes only 2 food, can attack air, can spread creap, its more mobile, and can heal building and other units. Also, and perhaps more importantly, queens are the only zerg unit which costs no larva. Why don't more higher level players make constant queens for the first 10 or so minutes of play? Wouldn't this allow for faster expanding, better defense and be economical? The only con I can see is that they are terrible offensive units, but many zergs marco hard until the the final push anyway. Would even 20 food worth of queens really take that much away from a max zerg army anyway?

Thoughts?

Saechiis

Netherlands4989 Posts

January 02 2011 12:12 GMT

They are pretty bad against marines, zerglings and zealots which is the primary stuff you want to fend off early game. And while they are pretty resilient to stuff like hellions and reapers, their ground damage isn't high enough to kill them before taking drone losses.

A third queen has become more or less common practice to fend off air and spread creep since that queen prevents an insta-loss against mass banshee/ void ray. More queens would only really be useful against more air. Also keep in mind that queens take up food and hatch production time.

Alphasquad

Austria505 Posts

January 02 2011 12:18 GMT

zerglings cost only 50 minerals while you have to save 150 for a queen which is pretty bad in early stages where your purpose is to drone up; it also takes quite long to build a queen

spine crawlers cost as much as a queen but are way stronger (hp, damage, range); for the healing ability your extra queens have to be built very early and you have to save its energy instead of getting creep

20 food is huge in mid and late game so if you made so much queens you would have to use them in the offense as well; their best use is still for anti-air purposes

mothergoose729

United States666 Posts

January 02 2011 12:22 GMT

They tank pretty well though don't they? Have any two queens in one place and you can pull off at least two tranfuses. Also, one queen has about the same dps as one zergling with 5 times the health. It delays layer and hatchtery upgrades, but it doesn't really delay larva production, unless I am mistaken. If you FE you can always just not build queens on the hatch you are researching with. I think in a zvp match up especially, some transfuse micro on a couple of roaches could perhaps be really effective. You can also transfuse on structures, so a combination of lings, roaches, spine crawlers, and queens could potentially be very potent.

BuuGhost

Netherlands340 Posts

January 02 2011 12:25 GMT

i think the main reason why queens are so little used in defense is because their melee damage is VERY weak, And you DONT want it to tank. Since a queen dies very easily to a medium push. And it takes long to rebuild and is quite expensive.

As Alpha squad said spine crawlers are less expensive and do way better in defense.
Not sure about the build time but should be the same.

Orome

Switzerland11984 Posts

January 02 2011 12:26 GMT

Constant queens for the first 10 minutes is definitely overkill, but I do believe more than 3 queens can be a good choice in several situations and I think it's entirely possible we'll see that more in future.

Your comparison to spine crawlers defense isn't really relevant though, as good Zergs rarely rely on spine crawlers for early-game defense anyway.

wherebugsgo

Japan10647 Posts

January 02 2011 12:32 GMT

Four Zerglings kill a queen. One zealot will kill a queen. Any number of marines can kill a queen.

Queens are bad early game defense. When in numbers they're decent AA, and in ZvZ they have lots of potential because of transfuse and their sheer HP, but otherwise, for their mineral cost, they're very inefficient. One spine crawler defends better than two queens, while 4-6 Zerglings can defend, scout, attack, and make banelings.

Randomaccount#128098

United States411 Posts

January 02 2011 12:34 GMT

--- Nuked ---

Vaethin

Germany44 Posts

January 02 2011 12:37 GMT

Queens are not reactionary. You have to get them ahead, have to exspect an enemy push. Sure they can be used to defend against some things ... but if your enemy doesnt attack and macros up instead you will be behind(er).

mothergoose729

United States666 Posts

January 02 2011 12:38 GMT

#10

Perhaps a more specific example: in steps or war it is very common for protoss and terran to do 4 warp gate/3 racks style pushes. Both of these hit between 8-11 minutes, which is about the time a macro zerg going 14 pool 15 hatch will have just saturated their main and expo and be thinking about where they want to go with their layer tech. Their is a ramp that leads into both the natural and the expo that is not far from the natural mineral line. A little creep spread, a handful of lings, a couple of spine crawlers, and a few queens could block of that ramp pretty well. Tranfuse on the spine crawlers while lings block and surround and you could hold a lot. If they go banshees or void rays its still possible to defend. When you pull ahead in macro the destructible rocks can come down for a third and a gold is not far for a 4th. You already have the queens to start larva injecting right away. Creep spread is really effective in that map if you can make it into the mid and late game. Its a cutsey defense, but in this example their is a specific timing and usage for the queens, with a reasonable transition afterwards.

I am going to start testing this.

Gigaudas

Sweden1213 Posts

January 02 2011 12:48 GMT

#11

Spine Crawlers are A LOT stronger and while Queens are more dynamic they still hinder your immediate offensive, signaling to the opponent that he can macro and be safe.

Oleksandr

United States227 Posts

January 02 2011 12:52 GMT

#12

Maybe if Queens were 100 minerals, I would use them for deference. As it is, they are insanely expensive.

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

January 02 2011 13:25 GMT

#13

On January 02 2011 21:32 wherebugsgo wrote:
Four Zerglings kill a queen. One zealot will kill a queen. Any number of marines can kill a queen.

Queens are bad early game defense. When in numbers they're decent AA, and in ZvZ they have lots of potential because of transfuse and their sheer HP, but otherwise, for their mineral cost, they're very inefficient. One spine crawler defends better than two queens, while 4-6 Zerglings can defend, scout, attack, and make banelings.

I think your entire post is wrong, and I'd like to explain why:

1) Two queens with 1 transfuse (your extra queen) and zero micro about breaks even with 6 zerglings, comes out slightly ahead of two zealots (for cost) and way ahead of three marines. If you can fend off this with your extra queen, that queen has already broken even with you, since you have to buy the other one for your hatch anyway.

2) They aren't decent AA, they're amazing AA. Consider the cost: 2 food, 150 minerals and ZERO larva. Now, 2 queens with transfuse can kill at least two banshees or two void rays, and if you have more energy, they could kill more.

3) You don't give any credence to the other abilities of the queen, while praising the other abilities of zerglings. One queen costs you zero larva, while a spine crawler costs you a drone/larva, and 6 zerglings cost you three larva. They can transfuse and spread creep, adding value to your actual army, and if you have roaches, transfuse is an incredible defensive ally.

If you want to maximize your defense against ground units, getting 5 queens is almost certainly going to be inferior to 3-4 spines and a handful of zerglings. But to get added defense throughout the game in addition to shutting down AA, and providing added HP for your roaches/hydras/mutas is a pretty wonderful advantage.

You're being extremely closed-minded to cherry-pick a small scenario (super early small-force aggression) to tell him that in general, the idea is bad.

The point here is that the OP isn't just referring to early game. He's speaking in general. Getting several queens is a valid strategy and has been used effectively at high level play throughout the age of this game. I'm no pro, but I do it in some situations and I've found it to be very effective more often than not.

Second to probably the marine, I'd argue that the queen is the most efficient unit in the game.

Slayer91

Ireland23335 Posts

January 02 2011 13:30 GMT

#14

Comparing them to lings, zealots and marines is comparing them to the best, most cost efficient units in the game. They're insanely good AA its just they aren't that mobile so you can't use them enough in offense to jusitify building too many in defense.

However, they are still not very effective ground to ground units unless you count each one having a few tranfuses and even then its micro intensive and relies them being on the back and not attacking.

Good for AA, won't see too much use for other purposes except as AA+ support.

Ryukku

Singapore545 Posts

January 02 2011 13:40 GMT

#15

i play zerg and the reason for this is because firstly in the early stages of the game u cant get enough queens to defend the early pushes that most pple do. that 2 rax marine bunker push that most terrans do happen just as your queen is about half way done. and with that queen.. your creep spread isnt even enough for the queen to be mobile enough to defend and marines do fairly well against queens. 2nd, its too easy to kite a queen because in the early game.. your creep spread is horrible. 3rd, even if u do manage to hold off the early game with just queens... you cant gain map control like u do if u defended with lings for example. the queens would be limited by the creep.

i wont deny that they are good defense even in the mid game especially against hellions and banshee, voids and mutas. but its just not viable in the early game. this is entirely in my opinion of course...

FeyFey

Germany10114 Posts

January 02 2011 13:57 GMT

#16

queens are really used often as defense in most games. Blocking ramps, healing spines, shooing air units away etc. The combination of queens and spines is probably the most effectiv defense ingame, especially becaues its semi movable.
But the queen is a caster unit with base support spells mostly, so she will lose cost wise against battle units, especially since she spawns with only 25 energie and would need 50 for her first usefull battle skill. And because she is bound by creep units that outrange her can simply kite queens.

nanoscorp

United States1237 Posts

January 02 2011 14:00 GMT

#17

If you're macroing hard, 2 queens cost enough minerals to put down another hatchery. Would you rather be on 2 hatches with 5 queens, or 3 hatches with 3? I like queens, especially when they kill voidrays or banshees for me, but getting that 3rd hatch is proving to be a better investment. Later on though, having an extra queen or two to bank energy for transfuse is a good way to maximize gas: healing a red-health muta back up to full is almost like buying extra mutas for 150 minerals.

FenneK

France1231 Posts

January 02 2011 14:03 GMT

#18

Against P especially, extra Queens are just going to pop without contributing too much (you can use your default ones to transfuse). If you really need defence, a well-placed Spine Crawler will do wonders.

Antisocialmunky

United States5912 Posts

January 02 2011 14:10 GMT

#19

Queens are okay, they are actually pretty good in large number vs a smaller army due to their range and transfuse.

Slightly OT: Has anyone done the Mass Queen BroodLord strategy of late? You know, mass queen to take care of Anti-Air and broodlords to kill everything on the ground and protect the queens?

wherebugsgo

Japan10647 Posts

January 02 2011 14:35 GMT

#20

On January 02 2011 22:25 mlbrandow wrote:

Show nested quote +

No.

1.) You don't get 2 queens with transfuse until you've made 4 queens. By that point, we're not in the early game, but you've spent early game minerals when Zerg is clamoring for them early, the third queen is generally used for creep spread (delaying transfuse) and getting the fourth queen is a 40 second investment that does nothing in about 95% of games. In fact, it's detrimental to get a fourth queen precisely because it's 150 minerals that's almost never going to do a thing. By the time you have two queens with transfuse, as you say, you've dumped 300 minerals that have sat and done nothing for however long it took for them to get 50 energy each. That's a free expansion for your opponent. You basically HAVE to transfuse something to have them pay for themselves, and at that stage of the game the best you'll get is one or two free muta heals (if that)

2.) Queens being "amazing" AA is honestly bullshit and I don't know why this misconception has been so widespread, for so long. A queen's attack is pathetic, and the only reason I consider it decent is because it's long-ranged enough to deter something from truly sticking around. Losing one of the two standard queens is a crippling blow, and banshee harass/Phoenix/void ray harass does this quite often. One banshee kills a queen straight up. Then it can go back home (or cloak). 2 banshees will kill 3 queens! Usually when banshees come you don't have 2 queens with transfuse. You have two queens with <25 energy and one with 50 energy, and usually only two are together. The banshees catch the queen with 50 energy and bam no transfuse possible. Watch Foxer vs Kyrix on scrap station. There's some proper banshee micro for you, and it highlights how overrated queen AA is. If the opponent somehow has more than one queen with transfuse, then you can always force a transfuse and go backto repair. By the time you come back, he'll have +1 queen at most but you'll have another banshee, and no transfuses!

3.) What "other" abilities of a fourth queen? There are none! Making two queens is standard, and they're larva injecting machines. The third is usually made in the midgame against Terran or otherwise skipped in ZvT and usually ZvP. It's used against stargate in ZvP but it's usually better to go spores, and the third queen is necessary backup for if one of the larva injectors gets gravitonned, not for AA. Queens are absolute shit vs both phoenixes and voidrays.

We ARE talking about getting an early third queen for defense instead of lings or a spine crawler, right? Cause an early third queen has no "other" abilities other than a creep tumor. And yet, it's still worse than both other options BY FAR.

And please, the larva garbage... At that stage in the game, you're not saturated enough to use all your larvae nor do you have minerals to spare on purely defensive units like queens. I'd love for you to point out a pro who routinely gets more than 3 queens for defense as opposed to just making units or spines. I haven't seen a fourth queen in months, precisely because it's a waste of 150 minerals that could go to a hatchery or something more versatile.

1 2 3 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Why are queens not used more often for defense?

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming