| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
On January 15 2013 19:03 Roe wrote: They gave stargate some obs http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Oracle For 150/150 and 3 supply. And you don't even have to burn a scan/have overseers to snipe it. Oracles are not really a great unit otherwise as they are generally shut down too easy, and only work if you can seriously surprise your opponent. | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
What might happen is that new builds emerge but you can't afford paying 100/100 that early and not making 2 queens and play the same way as before. Besides having no detection is far from game-ending. It can be annoying, delay stuff, make the zerg army marginally stronger but I wonder if the research is worth the cost even in the scenarios people are mentioning. | ||
|
oberhofer
Germany98 Posts
On January 15 2013 07:49 Fenris420 wrote: I am not so sure that I feel like it is necessary. After the queen range buff, many terrans have informed us of the various impracticalities of agression in the matchup and against protoss most zerg can take three bases relatively unhindered. Even the infamous immortal/sentry push comes at a time when you have lair already despite 3 bases. Not that I am against burrow as a tool, I am just wondering whether there is a specific kind of application for it in the early game that Blizzard has in mind that I don't know about. If not, then they are just adding strength to an underused ability in hopes of seeing more use out of it and that might lead to other impracticalities. Then again, if there is a time for testing stuff it is now. This. Depending on the upgrade costs of burrow on hatch tech, it could mean even more powerful roach all-ins and even less possible early game harassment _against_ zerg. To prevent this, the burrow upgrade would have to be very costly. Either way, cheap or costly, this change makes no sense. | ||
|
Rider517
70 Posts
| ||
|
FrozenProbe
Italy276 Posts
| ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Baneling landmines going to be used even more and more, going be a bitch for Terran ^_^ | ||
|
CYFAWS
Sweden275 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 15 2013 20:50 oberhofer wrote: This. Depending on the upgrade costs of burrow on hatch tech, it could mean even more powerful roach all-ins and even less possible early game harassment _against_ zerg. To prevent this, the burrow upgrade would have to be very costly. Either way, cheap or costly, this change makes no sense. No matter what changes they make to Zerg early game, you are going to find people with complaints about "early harassment against Zerg is going to be even harder". People need to understand, if Zerg has a stronger early game, their late game won't NEED to be as overpowered as it currently is at the moment. I've had to say this many times lately - for beta it's more important that fundamental roles are functional because the numbers can be tweaked later. With that said, Burrow might turn out to be a good solution for Zerg early game. Because it's a solution that requires micro to be effective. Which is always welcomed as it adds skill-based elements to gameplay. Plus it's more fun to watch from a viewer perspective as well. Also, keep in mind build orders that support this kind of build are drastically different, basically the difference between no-gas and quick lair. Protoss and Terran will still be able to scout and try to adapt around the different type of pressure, so no reason to be worried about "Early harassment" problems against Zerg. If anything this would discourage quick tech macro games, which is a welcome change imo. Zerg players have been begging for something early game since WoL beta, I wish people wouldn't be complaining so much when they finally are finally doing something. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
Now revert the queen buff so ZvT can be fun again. | ||
|
Badfatpanda
United States9719 Posts
People are saying 100/100 and queen sacrifice is detrimental to zerg but how about burning 2/3 scans you saved up just to deal temporary economic damage to a zerg who can replenish his drone count in less than a minute after you attack, assuming you actually you know..kill drones? This is the queen patch 2.0, this time they just want to make attacking easier and it in turn makes defending harass easier. 3 hatch is still standard against expand builds from a Terran. Burrow at your third while you tech to lair at your main, not cutting a queen and you'll definitely have gas to do so by that point. That way you'll have it damn near completion when hellion pushes come. Offensive? Really? ...it's not like they're making tunneling claws T1. | ||
|
mec
Sweden192 Posts
On January 15 2013 19:44 VieuxSinge wrote: One scan is 270 mineral (5 drones) and you will probably lose your hellions (800 minerals, 16 drones). Great idea! really... I just love this math! At first you say that you lose 270 minirals when you scan (how do you actually lose something you never had?) and then you compare 8 hellions with 16 drones. Not taking into account what you just said, lost mining time on those drones from that point and forward. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 15 2013 21:27 Badfatpanda wrote: It won't be that big offensively early game, but it will really lessen the damage hellion runbys do in the early-midgame. Blizzard is so fucking gungho for giving toss and zerg more detection but ravens still cost 100/200 and come out of a tech-lab starport. People are saying 100/100 and queen sacrifice is detrimental to zerg but how about burning 2/3 scans you saved up just to deal temporary economic damage to a zerg who can replenish his drone count in less than a minute after you attack, assuming you actually you know..kill drones? So... your complaining about not enough detection in your first paragraph, when scans are intended to be early game detection for Terran... and then in your second paragraph complaining about using scans offensively? And dumbing down economic damage of taking out Drones? If a Zerg player invests to try to do damage to the Terran player, shouldn't the Terran player need to invest something in response to that? Also silly to say Zerg can just replenish the drone count in a minute, if they do so they are sacrificing larvae for that from other things, and having decreased income during that time. What about if Zerg does some economic damage to the Terran player and then Terran responds by immediately dropping mules which give more income than the Zerg player would have made during that entire time? The rest of your comment goes beyond straight theory, since you are trying to extrapolate the first 10 minutes of the game without knowing anything about the ideal burrow build orders. If the Zerg player was going 3 hatch macro build Burrow isn't exactly one of the top things the Zerg player would be prioritizing... and the Terrans few scans would basically nullify any advantages Burrow had on defense since they would be working with a limited amount of defenders that would be detected with those few scans. If we're talking theory, Burrow has more usefulness on offense, since you can force a scan and then back off, or more easily block expansion/contain, and repeat until the scans are gone or the Terran player invests more in to detection. You can't do that on defense without letting other economic damage happen, but it actually would theoretically work on offense. If anything this change would bring Zerg on more even terms with Terran since they have widow mines that need to be detected. Also keep in mind if they prioritize burrow the Zerg players own detection would be lacking leaving them vulnerable if they don't plan around that. | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
On January 15 2013 21:27 Badfatpanda wrote: People are saying 100/100 and queen sacrifice is detrimental to zerg but how about burning 2/3 scans you saved up just to deal temporary economic damage to a zerg who can replenish his drone count in less than a minute after you attack, assuming you actually you know..kill drones? ... Well, to answer your question, the cost is much cheaper on the Terran side. If that's the only way you plan on using burrow it's just not worth it. | ||
|
BoxingKangaroo
Japan955 Posts
I think it's a great move, because it gives Zerg one more option at hatch tech without it being a free option. What I mean by that is, sure we get the option to research burrow, but if we do then we either: - Delay tech (lair) - Delay extra Queens (macro, defence) - Delay upgrades I don't really believe any overpowered builds will come out of this, so given the downsides to the research at hatch, there's really no reason to keep it at lair, and frankly it should probably have been this way since day 1. | ||
|
BoxingKangaroo
Japan955 Posts
On January 15 2013 21:27 Badfatpanda wrote: It won't be that big offensively early game, but it will really lessen the damage hellion runbys do in the early-midgame. Blizzard is so fucking gungho for giving toss and zerg more detection but ravens still cost 100/200 and come out of a tech-lab starport. People are saying 100/100 and queen sacrifice is detrimental to zerg but how about burning 2/3 scans you saved up just to deal temporary economic damage to a zerg who can replenish his drone count in less than a minute after you attack, assuming you actually you know..kill drones? This is the queen patch 2.0, this time they just want to make attacking easier and it in turn makes defending harass easier. 3 hatch is still standard against expand builds from a Terran. Burrow at your third while you tech to lair at your main, not cutting a queen and you'll definitely have gas to do so by that point. That way you'll have it damn near completion when hellion pushes come. Offensive? Really? ...it's not like they're making tunneling claws T1. Either way, the Zerg has spent 100 more gas than if this were at lair. That's either a delayed lair/speed or less roaches. In the last case, that means that your hellions still can do damage, even with burrow. | ||
|
VieuxSinge
France231 Posts
On January 15 2013 21:29 mec wrote: I just love this math! At first you say that you lose 270 minirals when you scan (how do you actually lose something you never had?) and then you compare 8 hellions with 16 drones. Not taking into account what you just said, lost mining time on those drones from that point and forward. Was just pointing out that if you have to use a scan early game to kill 8 drones, then it's pointless to harass and risk losing your helions. Scan could have earned you 270 minerals (very needed early game). If you use your scan for something else, you just lose 270 minerals. Period. But i see you are focused on the wrong part of my post, the point I was trying to make waas this one : On January 15 2013 19:44 VieuxSinge wrote: Blizzard wants to put burrow at tier 1 because they want more offensive play from the zerg (which is good) but I'm affraid this change will simply allow zerg to turlte harder (baneling mines / burrow drones if danger) and rush T3 even more faster, and that is not what HotS needs | ||
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
In the early game, are you really going to spend your relatively low resources on Burrow rather than ling speed, +1 attack, or Lair? Or prioritize it over queens? Or drones, or units/buildings for defense, banenest/roach warren, units for an attack, expansions.. The thing about burrow people don't realize is that in most every case, you're not going to be getting it over these other things that are generally more vital and helpful. Yes you should eventually get it cus its useful, but how often is it going to be a core part of your opening, more important than those upgrades I mentioned? You don't exactly have a ton of resources to just spend on whatever you like, especially as lair finishes you'll be needing resources for whichever lair tech, like roach speed, bane speed, spire, infestor pit, etc. I mean its not exactly like people prioritize burrow at lair right now over those other things. I'm saying all this as a response to all the people getting a little carried away with how suddenly detection will become suddenly so necessary early on and such nonsense | ||
|
Tsubbi
Germany7997 Posts
On January 15 2013 23:00 Zelniq wrote: In the early game, are you really going to spend your relatively low resources on Burrow rather than ling speed, +1 attack, or Lair? Or prioritize it over queens? The thing about burrow people don't realize is that in most every case, you're not going to be getting it over these other things that are generally more vital and helpful. Yes you should eventually get it cus its useful, but how often is it going to be a core part of your opening, more important than those upgraded I mentioned? You don't exactly have a ton of resources to just spend on whatever you like, especially as lair finishes you'll be needing resources for whichever lair tech, like roach speed, bane speed, spire, infestor pit, etc. I mean its not exactly like people prioritize burrow at lair right now over those other things. I'm saying all this as a response to all the people getting a little carried away with how suddenly detection will become suddenly so necessary early on and such nonsense. exactly, burrow itself needs to be more useful, it is strictly worse than all alternatives you could spent gas on in the early and midgame, hopefully the'll do something about it | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5226 Posts
On January 15 2013 07:40 baldgye wrote: so... they never want people to put on early aggression? Guess so. This is purely a defensive change. Gateway timings will really suffer since the MSC lost detection. Zerg will be able to burrow Queens and Drones to save them against air attacks. If Blizzard doesn't want early aggression to be viable, then it is time for them to start everyone with 2 bases, 32 workers, and some basic buildings. There is no reason to waste the time of Master League players, because some dumb is cheese is viable in Gold. On January 15 2013 23:00 Zelniq wrote: In the early game, are you really going to spend your relatively low resources on Burrow rather than ling speed, +1 attack, or Lair? Or prioritize it over queens? The thing about burrow people don't realize is that in most every case, you're not going to be getting it over these other things that are generally more vital and helpful. Yes you should eventually get it cus its useful, but how often is it going to be a core part of your opening, more important than those upgrades I mentioned? You don't exactly have a ton of resources to just spend on whatever you like, especially as lair finishes you'll be needing resources for whichever lair tech, like roach speed, bane speed, spire, infestor pit, etc. I mean its not exactly like people prioritize burrow at lair right now over those other things. I'm saying all this as a response to all the people getting a little carried away with how suddenly detection will become suddenly so necessary early on and such nonsense. Except that burrow will become a tool that will straight up stop Gateway timings with burrowed Roaches. So you scout the 7 Gate, and now it doesn't work at all, allowing the Zerg to be more greedy. | ||
|
Novacute
Australia313 Posts
On January 15 2013 23:00 Zelniq wrote: In the early game, are you really going to spend your relatively low resources on Burrow rather than ling speed, +1 attack, or Lair? Or prioritize it over queens? The thing about burrow people don't realize is that in most every case, you're not going to be getting it over these other things that are generally more vital and helpful. Yes you should eventually get it cus its useful, but how often is it going to be a core part of your opening, more important than those upgraded I mentioned? You don't exactly have a ton of resources to just spend on whatever you like, especially as lair finishes you'll be needing resources for whichever lair tech, like roach speed, bane speed, spire, infestor pit, etc. I mean its not exactly like people prioritize burrow at lair right now over those other things. I'm saying all this as a response to all the people getting a little carried away with how suddenly detection will become suddenly so necessary early on and such nonsense. I think David Kim failed to see the reason behind Z's lack of real aggression pre 9 min. As a long time Z player, i wholeheartedly agree with your opinion on this. +1 and Ling speed are far too important in any matchup and should not be forgone in favour of burrow. Burrow only has limited applications and it's resource cost is too high to warrant any real use pre lair. While some 'all ins' may be more effective, the inherent mechanical issues that lies with the Z race itself (needing more hatches/queens/strong eco) to maintain an otherwise swarmy yet not very cost efficient unit is too important which is why they should have looked at other alternatives aside from burrow. The issue at hand is most likely the mechanics of Z which is so pervasive and if Z really wants to be able to commit decent pressure, they need to look at tweaking unit stats or changing certain drone/larvae mechanic. The current meta and Z's weakness on needing to be 1 base ahead is one such reason preventing possible harass options and these 'surface' changes are not enough to create any meaningful change. | ||
| ||
|
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Invitational
OSC
ArT vs MindelVK
MiniZergUA vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
Ultimate Battle
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
TerrOr vs IJ_Terran
rasowy vs Hazorath
BSL
TerrOr vs OyAji
UltrA vs Gosudark
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
.
