|
I'm talking about the defesive way they are played these days.
I mean are they supposed to be like that?
I've never really played SC1 or BW online, so I don't know if it was the same case in these games but I think the way Zerg is played doesn't really fit the race.
Isn't Zerg supposed to be the race that constantly pressures and attacks the enemy instead of constantly fending stuff off?
And don't get me wrong, this is not a complaint about balance in any way, I'd just like to hear what you guys think about it.
Were the Zerg designed to be defensive or is that just a consequence of the current meta-game?
|
They're designed to macro up, and rape mid-late game with overwhelming force, massive economy, and infinite reinforcements.
|
Due to the current meta-game and map size I think zerg is being played the right way.
|
Its a consequence of how well both protoss and terran can turtle on the current set of maps. Its virtually impossible for zerg to do any major attacks that cannot be just blocked by a wall/ramp/forcefield making it tough for zerg to put any major pressure on the opponent. Therefore instead of taking a risk and attacking a choke, its better for zerg to macro up and defend, letting the game go into the later stages.
|
Zerg are ment to slowly consume the map, and eventually overwhelm with pure numbers, and i think it fits there lore perfectly.
And yes they were designed this way, just look at there creep mechanic, and the way they are encouraged to expand (only 300 for hatch, and you need them for unit production)
|
Much of the races offensive capabilities were clipped in SC2 if you're doing a direct comparision to SCBW. Zerglings took a nerf, Hydralisk are beyond terrible as offensive units and since SC2 is more counter-focused than SC1 was Zerg has to play responsive or they'll be left with a ton of units that will simply instantly evaporate.
In short, no.
|
Kyrix had a good amount of success with playing Zerg aggressively. NesTea plays PvZ really aggressively as well, and he has had a ton of success with that.
Like others have noted, Zerg has the fastest growing economy. It makes sense to use that.
|
I think many Zerg players would like to play aggressively, but that there is a problem. Protoss and Terran, accompanied by a selection of maps featuring ramp choke points, have an incredibly easy and strong way of walling off their base and not having to worry about early aggression much.
1 hold position Zealot can hold off 6 Zerglings.
1 Sentry can delay any push by lots of crucial time.
Marines standing safely behind buildings can shoot freely at the short range tier 1 Zerg units.
I believe it is simply a combination of Zerg having very short range tier 1 and the maps all having easy to fortify choke points. Notice how ZvZ is mainly Ling/Bling rushes? It's because Zerg can't wall everything off and have ranged units sitting behind 1000 hp buildings. Baneling Busts and 7RR are hardly viable against P or T due to their ease in predictability/scouting and counters.
If Zerg had either:
1. A cliff walking early game unit
2. A longer ranged tier 1 unit (ex. Hydra)
3. Maps with no ridiculous ramp choke points
Then they could maybe harass instead of always being the one harassed.
|
@the oldy:
think about the cost of an Exp:
Terra cost 400 gives aditional 11 Supply thats under 300
Zerg cost 300 + drone = 350 + 2 supply
Protoss 400 Cost 10 Supply thats also just 300 +the cost of a pylon
so its the zerg exp is the expensiv one
|
Zerg units are obviously less cost effective than a majority of Terran and Protoss units, but I feel one of their main strength is supposed to be their mobility. Fast units like Mutas and Lings, along with stuff like Overlord Doom drops and Nydus Worms mean they can anywhere they want in theory. The problem is that many current maps don't cater to this kind of play until very very late game. If a Terran or Protoss is two basing, there will only a couple spots he'll need to check if he hears a Nydus go up on map and his army can easily shift between his bases if drops come in.
Compare this to SC:BW where 3 bases (which is considered entering well into late game) was mid game, and it was the norm for each player to have 4 to even 6 expansions spread across huge expansive maps, I have a feeling that Zerg in larger macro maps will become much more aggressive at denying expansions with good mobility play.
We very well might see this in action in the new GSL maps. Zerg will have to worry less about dying to early pressure, and as a result will macro up much harder and force their opponents to expand more as well. Larger maps mean it will be much harder for the Terran/Toss deathball to effectively control the safety of multiple expansions, and quick surgical strikes with nydus worms and overlords might become very very effective.
|
There's still a lot of Zergs out there that are really aggressive and have that kind of play style.. I don't think you have to strictly be macro Zerg, but I do think it's the strongest style out there right now.
|
On January 12 2011 00:13 Tumor wrote:
@the oldy:
think about the cost of an Exp:
Terra cost 400 gives aditional 11 Supply thats under 300
Zerg cost 300 + drone = 350 + 2 supply
Protoss 400 Cost 10 Supply thats also just 300 +the cost of a pylon
so its the zerg exp is the expensiv one
I, as a zerg player, don't think this is a fair way to put it. The hatch also generates creep and serves a unit producing structure.
|
On January 12 2011 00:13 Sajuuk7 wrote:
I think many Zerg players would like to play aggressively, but that there is a problem. Protoss and Terran, accompanied by a selection of maps featuring ramp choke points, have an incredibly easy and strong way of walling off their base and not having to worry about early aggression much.
1 hold position Zealot can hold off 6 Zerglings.
1 Sentry can delay any push by lots of crucial time.
Marines standing safely behind buildings can shoot freely at the short range tier 1 Zerg units.
I believe it is simply a combination of Zerg having very short range tier 1 and the maps all having easy to fortify choke points. Notice how ZvZ is mainly Ling/Bling rushes? It's because Zerg can't wall everything off and have ranged units sitting behind 1000 hp buildings. Baneling Busts and 7RR are hardly viable against P or T due to their ease in predictability/scouting and counters.
If Zerg had either:
1. A cliff walking early game unit
2. A longer ranged tier 1 unit (ex. Hydra)
3. Maps with no ridiculous ramp choke points
Then they could maybe harass instead of always being the one harassed.
I'm sorry but zerg has no reason to complain about the choke points. There are plenty of ways to harass as zerg. Learn to micro and actually use your units effectively. Use drops. Prevent expansions (zerglings or mutalisks are perfect for this), and spread creep. If you spread creep, harass will not be a problem. Not to mention zerg's constant unit reinforcement. Protoss can barely harass zerg at all. They can't even harass Terran. Protoss have powerful units, yes, but the only unit that is good for harass is a blink stalker. I really do not see why you complain about this.
|
I've never really thought of zerg as the race that's supposed to be constantly pressuring and losing units to turtling players.
Instead, they're more like a growing infestation which will eventually overrun the entire map and inevitably, the opponent unable to prevent this. Like any disease or infection, until it has replicated enough, it is more likely to be wiped out. I guess it's subject to interpretation, but I see zerg as the race most forced to defend within the limitations of the creep, vs attacking the opponent's home turf and throwing away the economic advantage by losing all their units in the blink of an eye.
Everything is situational, though. If your protoss is opponent goes forge FE and you're on pool first with gas, then, yea... perhaps you want to make something happen.
|
On January 12 2011 00:26 dUTtrOACh wrote:
I've never really thought of zerg as the race that's supposed to be constantly pressuring and losing units to turtling players.
Instead, they're more like a growing infestation which will eventually overrun the entire map and inevitably, the opponent unable to prevent this. Like any disease or infection, until it has replicated enough, it is more likely to be wiped out. I guess it's subject to interpretation, but I see zerg as the race most forced to defend within the limitations of the creep, vs attacking the opponent's home turf and throwing away the economic advantage by losing all their units in the blink of an eye.
Everything is situational, though. If your protoss is opponent goes forge FE and you're on pool first with gas, then, yea... perhaps you want to make something happen.
This.
|
@Grapefruit:
yes thats true, its a producing structure, but he was just thinking about the cost. for the use as a single expansion for Money its more expensive. the rising in production is another big thing. but u need a queen and inject larva to get the full range of advantage of an expansion. or another hatch. Just a hatch with a larva every 17 sec is often not enouth.
|
it's just hard to make it happen now...
in bw you can micro muta to actually kill marines, try to be aggressive (in a "i'm gonna kill you" way, not in a "i'm gonna harass you" way) with mutas in sc2 you find yourself losing right away.
Same with the creeps. The creeps is a great new addition but it really prevents mobility of zerg. Think of creep as a LIMITATION rather than an advantage. Suppose blizzard never implemented creep, or only implemented creep to have units increased regeneration, then hydra would HAVE to move faster and baneling would HAVE to be able to chase down marines with rolling upgrade. Then zerg will be able to be offensive. But alas no.
|
With the map pool the way it is right now i think that zerg is being played the right way. A larger map pool (SHAKURAS IS BACK) would benefit different parts of the zerg race. A longer rush distance will do wonders for zerg in every aspect of play... First off a longer rush distance means more time to prepare for rushes, thus the zerg can be more economy focused. A longer rush distance also means that high speed units like the muta and speedlings for counterattacks will me more effective and will allow more time to get those units back if they are needed to defend. last off as maps grow in size, so do epansion distances. The farther expansions are from eachother and the main the better for zerg. Blizzard has to be careful because they way the nydas is right now it will become borderline overpowered if it takes more that 20 ingame seconds to get from base to base.
How i see it all in all right now, Zerg is played correctly but they sit around too much. They are supposed to be economy focused but the zerg is always waiting for that push to come, theres so many other options that just sitting around with your army. In defence of all zergs playing the "current" style it does take so much concentration just macroing well so harass and small attacks are very difficult to pull off. As skill increases across the board zerg will use their rediclous macro skills that they have obtained in conjunction with drops and the nydas worm that they will become unstoppable and will feel like terran with their constant harass back in the beta.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On January 12 2011 00:04 Tenks wrote:
Much of the races offensive capabilities were clipped in SC2 if you're doing a direct comparision to SCBW. Zerglings took a nerf, Hydralisk are beyond terrible as offensive units and since SC2 is more counter-focused than SC1 was Zerg has to play responsive or they'll be left with a ton of units that will simply instantly evaporate.
In short, no.
I agree with this, on top of this the ''Zerg'' way of swarming units took a hit in supply aswell
Roaches are 2 supply, and so are hydra's (1 supply in BW) so mass production of units is limited by this factor(aswell as queens). Zerg armies are less massive.
However, to win yes zergs are being played the correct way, you still outmacro your opponent most of the times.
|
On January 12 2011 00:18 Grapefruit wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2011 00:13 Tumor wrote:
@the oldy:
think about the cost of an Exp:
Terra cost 400 gives aditional 11 Supply thats under 300
Zerg cost 300 + drone = 350 + 2 supply
Protoss 400 Cost 10 Supply thats also just 300 +the cost of a pylon
so its the zerg exp is the expensiv one I, as a zerg player, don't think this is a fair way to put it. The hatch also generates creep and serves a unit producing structure.
But you can also say a CC provides extra production for scv's, can turn into an indestrutable PF or a cash cow orbital with free supply and vision. The Nexus provides an extra crono for double prob production and faster research. So the creep and the 7 larva a minute with a queen is still meh in terms of what terran can make of his.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
