|
I created this post on the B.net forums and would like to know what people at TL are thinking about zerg and the free unit trend they seem to be on.
+ Show Spoiler +This is something that has been on my mind for a while, and after playing with/against the swarm host for a while, I feel like this needs to be said. I know it is probably too late in the beta to change anything, and I know Blizzard seems to think the swarm host is very "zergy" and generally a good design that they wouldn't want to overhaul. However, I'm here to tell you why it isn't very "zergy" (in my eyes) and why I think this unit will be problematic in the future. I'm a master level player in WoL and HotS, if that is relevant. This will be kind of long.
Zerg already has free units
First, and most obviously, zerg already has the most (and by most, I mean all) the "free units" in the game, namely broodlings (from broodlords primarily) and infested terrans (from infestors). I guess you could maybe count autoturrets as free units, but really it's just getting academic. The point is, zerg has a lot of free units, and we've seen how problematic infested terrans have become (and why they had to be nerfed). Going above the 200 supply cap is a big part of the problem, but ultimately having to trade real units, or at least energy, for free units sort of feels wrong, particularly when you are playing against it. My feeling when going against the swarm host is that killing locusts does absolutely nothing (which it really doesn't). At least before when you held off pressure from zerg you felt like you were at least accomplishing something because you know the zerg had to sacrifice something in order to pressure you. That feeling of "yeah, I held" is now gone, because you know you didn't really accomplish anything, and it will be coming back in like 30 seconds.
As an aside to this, why do protoss still have to pay for interceptors when zerg has all these free units? That sort of leads to my next point.
Free units really aren't "zergy"
I know some of the staff at Blizzard (particularly DB) think free units feel "zergy." I'm here to tell you why it really isn't. Since Brood War, zerg has been, generally speaking, the most cost inefficient race. They had to be, because they had the most streamlined (cheapest) production, the fastest way to reproduce units, and usually the most bases. They won by have bigger economies and more production to make up for having reduced unit cost inefficiency. Units that produce free units completely breaks that paradigm. Units that create free units actually have the ability to become the most cost efficient units in the game, by virtue that they kill a lot of stuff without dying (duh). This is, in part, why broodlord/infestor is so good, and also so boring to watch (it isn't really zerg). It can be incredibly cost efficient because it has two free unit producing units.
It is ok for zerg to have a few cost efficient units, however you now have 3 free unit producers. All on one race. That race also happens to have the cheapest base/infrastructure and the ability to reproduce the fastest. I'm starting to wonder what zerg's real weakness is here, if they have the most cost effective units in the game as well.
It over-incentivises splash damage
The last big problem with all these free units is that it makes splash damage even more appealing (necessary) than it already is. Currently, as protoss, there is only one real way to deal with a significant amount of swarm hosts: colossus. If you catch the problem early enough, you might be able to handle it with air, but after a point, the pressure on your ground base/army will be too much and air is actually the worst to handle it. High templar simply aren't much of a solution; the locusts come faster than they can recharge energy for psi storm. Colossi are really the only answer to this problem. As if you weren't already seeing colossi enough in pvz, prepare to see it more, because not only is it the only answer to swarm hosts, it is the best thing to deal with hydras as well. I honestly think most of the hate this unit garners is really because you see it in almost every game involving protoss, because it is so necessary.
So that wraps up why I think this trend in free units is bad. It creates boring gameplay, breaks the zerg paradigm of cost-inefficientness, and makes splash damage even more appealing than it already is. I know this probably won't change anything in HotS, but at least least I'm trying to do my part as a beta tester.
Link to original thread
I'm personally not too happy about having to constantly deal with waves of free units, and I explain why in the post. Do zerg players like all these free units? How does terran deal with it (siege tanks)? I'm concerned what this might mean for the game in the long term.
|
They're not technically free.
Their cost is the cost of the unit spawning them, and their price goes down the more waves that are produced. Honestly, 200/100 for 2 temporary units is absolutely horrible. But the longer the swarm hosts are alive, the more they're worth it.
I think it's an interesting dynamic, and I have no problem with it being in sc2.
Mid master zerg opinion. Take that as you will.
|
The problem is range. Zerg units are mainly melee based. In ZvP, roaches are for survival only if you are taking it to late game. Plus zerg range units dont scale well unlike stalkers or marines. If you don't want broodlords or swarm hosts, then buff accordingly. What else can you expect with units that have to be at range 0 to attack. There has to be some way to attack without losing most of your units before they engage.
|
On the topic of "zergy" I feel that broodlings and locusts are okay and that Infested Terrans, in fact, are the "non-zergy" feeling units. It just doesnt make sense to me... should be locusts or some other ranged creature and not infested Terrans, that seems a little gimmicky. Aside from the aesthetics, at this moment, I feel locusts are tolerable. I'm curious to see how the community feels when more people migrate to the beta/release. (I'm referring to beyond the initial "I dont know how to deal with this unit - zomg it rapes face")
|
Zerg should be more tier 1 orriented, higher tiers for supporting them, hydras, zerglings and so on should be the units you build the most. Right now its not a swarm feeling about it.
|
I completely agree with the OP. The free units never felt zergy to me. I've purposely avoided using Infestors and Broodlords for 3 years because I don't like the unit design. In the last year as all other options were nerfed I fell to platinum because I didn't play the standard.
My macro isn't that great. It used to win/lose me games. If I was good macro I could totally outmass. If I was bad macro... that was why I lost. In HotS I can use swarm hosts... have the worst macro ever... apply pressure... expand... and as long as my SH ball hasn't been dealt with (while dealing terrible free damage) I often bank upto 10k mins because I HAVE NO NEED TO MAKE A NEW ARMY!!!
Personally I find this laughable. It means when my opponent finally kills my SH I can remax on BL! It is a silly dynamic and I really think it was the wrong direction for Zerg. It doesn't feel zergy to me.
What's better? Hard to say... but I think swarmy is the way I see Zerg (DB thinks that too) but that is a swarm of units you produced through the unique zerg production mechanic and superior macro... not a tech advantage you got by racing to infestor pit (we need less racing for infestor pit right?). Good post OP. I hope you make waves.
|
Our 'free units' is (partially) our AOE. (In addition to, of course, banelings and fungal).
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
I'm just going to respond to the points I feel I can actually argue. It's kind of pointless to argue with how someone feels about things, so I'm not going to get into that. I'll just say that I think the Swarm Host is a very zergy interpretation of a Siege Unit, and I think a Lair Tech Siege Unit was a good addition to Zerg.
For your point about 'The feeling of "Yeah I held".'. In short, I think you are just having that feeling when you shouldn't. You wouldn't expect to have that feeling while a Tempest is shooting at you from far away, even if you were repairing your units from the damage. You should feel under pressure, because you are under siege. Until you actually break that siege, you shouldn't be having that feeling of "Yeah I held". Because you haven't. Swarm Hosts do have the interesting dynamic of allowing you to hold without even breaking the siege in some way, but simply by accruing enough long range Splash (basically just with Siege Tanks, and to a much lesser extent Colossus). That's when you should have the feeling of "Yeah, I held". Siege Units by their very nature should make this feeling harder to get then simple Ling or Roach pressure, otherwise it wouldn't be a very good Siege Unit now would it?
On the topic of cost-efficiency: You can say the same thing about Air units if the opponent has no anti-air, Cloaked units if the opponent has no detection, or Siege Units if the opponent can't close the distance (because of Terrain, Force Fields, or whatever). They have the potential to be really cost-efficient if they are engaged poorly, or not countered properly.
I would concede that, Fungal in combination with these high range units (it really doesn't have anything to do with the "free units", except for that they all offer a high potential range with their movement), does achieve some stupid cost-efficiency, and all that has to happen is getting "caught" in the fungal once. But this would be true if it were Siege Tanks + Infestors, or Tempests + Infestors. It's really just the nature of Fungal and High Range that makes this the case. This I do find can make for some really poor gameplay sometimes. Things are roughly even, player get's caught in a fungal for a second, and loses thousands of resources for nothing. Very hard to recover from that kind of a trade.
There are more counters to Swarm Hosts than Splash. Gaining Air dominance or abusing mobility is a perfectly effective counter, just as well as Splash.
As far as it making Colossus to common/necessary in the match-up. That's a problem with the Colossus, not the Swarm Host. You can go air and beat Swarm Hosts, you can go Templar and beat them (you just have to beat them all at once), and you can just abuse mobility and beat them. If you don't like using Colossus go for a different strategy that can deal with Swarm Host in another way, because they do exist. If you are turtling, and the Zerg player get's into perfect position with his Swarm Hosts, and you don't have air dominance, yeah, you will probably need to make Colossus. Just like a Terran will probably need to make Siege Tanks.
|
On January 28 2013 04:33 algorithm0r wrote:
I completely agree with the OP. The free units never felt zergy to me. I've purposely avoided using Infestors and Broodlords for 3 years because I don't like the unit design. In the last year as all other options were nerfed I fell to platinum because I didn't play the standard.
My macro isn't that great. It used to win/lose me games. If I was good macro I could totally outmass. If I was bad macro... that was why I lost. In HotS I can use swarm hosts... have the worst macro ever... apply pressure... expand... and as long as my SH ball hasn't been dealt with (while dealing terrible free damage) I often bank upto 10k mins because I HAVE NO NEED TO MAKE A NEW ARMY!!!
Personally I find this laughable. It means when my opponent finally kills my SH I can remax on BL! It is a silly dynamic and I really think it was the wrong direction for Zerg. It doesn't feel zergy to me.
What's better? Hard to say... but I think swarmy is the way I see Zerg (DB thinks that too) but that is a swarm of units you produced through the unique zerg production mechanic and superior macro... not a tech advantage you got by racing to infestor pit (we need less racing for infestor pit right?). Good post OP. I hope you make waves.
zerg in bw was swarmy and you sorta "rushed" for defilers the same way. Tech advantage doesn't really matter because of how different each race utilizes their tier 3 units.
|
On January 28 2013 04:13 phrenzy wrote:
The problem is range. Zerg units are mainly melee based. In ZvP, roaches are for survival only if you are taking it to late game. Plus zerg range units dont scale well unlike stalkers or marines. If you don't want broodlords or swarm hosts, then buff accordingly. What else can you expect with units that have to be at range 0 to attack. There has to be some way to attack without losing most of your units before they engage.
Broodwar Zerg was all about losing 1/3 of your army before they even landed the first hit. Would be happy if we return to those times. But the game is probably to balanced for this. So you kill the first Zerg units when they are already biting at you. But in exchange they don't rip through you if they do get you.
It is basically the same thing. But it is easier for the non Zerg to handle the Zerg surround, while it is also easier for the Zerg to not mess up horribly and lose everything.
As for free units, Terran has them as well, Protoss too. I think they aren't to bad for gameplay, they actually create quiet a bit of pressure. And I love my patent mule drop behind the Zerg army to trigger Broodlord fail shots, that might even block the infestors from retreating.
Or the 4 probe hallucination to shut down a widow mine field. Of course it is hard to balance them especially if players use them as if they were free, not bothering to optimize them. Still waiting for some pro to waste his apm in a stalemate. That will start to create 3 waves of Broodlings via tumors and send them into the opponents army. Range 30 Broodlords are fun! (especially is you are at 220 supply)
But I think free units shouldn't be able to fight against non free units on their own. They should support Zerg. Broodlings work fine, they melt away withoutout support. But Locust are small roaches, just like Infested Terrans were small hydras.
|
On January 28 2013 04:07 InfCereal wrote:
They're not technically free.
Their cost is the cost of the unit spawning them, and their price goes down the more waves that are produced. Honestly, 200/100 for 2 temporary units is absolutely horrible. But the longer the swarm hosts are alive, the more they're worth it.
I think it's an interesting dynamic, and I have no problem with it being in sc2.
This is the response b.net posters are making (silver and gold). Take that for what you will.
"Free" may not be the exact term for these units, but everyone knows what I mean. You are just arguing semantics. The issues I raised are still the same, regardless of what you want to call them.
The problem is the threshold for them becoming very cost effective is very low (I'd say roughly two waves of locusts, depending on the situation). That is incredibly cost effective for any race, particularly zerg. That is the real issue.
|
On January 28 2013 04:45 ZjiublingZ wrote:
I'm just going to respond to the points I feel I can actually argue. It's kind of pointless to argue with how someone feels about things, so I'm not going to get into that. I'll just say that I think the Swarm Host is a very zergy interpretation of a Siege Unit, and I think a Lair Tech Siege Unit was a good addition to Zerg.
For your point about 'The feeling of "Yeah I held".'. In short, I think you are just having that feeling when you shouldn't. You wouldn't expect to have that feeling while a Tempest is shooting at you from far away, even if you were repairing your units from the damage. You should feel under pressure, because you are under siege. Until you actually break that siege, you shouldn't be having that feeling of "Yeah I held". Because you haven't. Swarm Hosts do have the interesting dynamic of allowing you to hold without even breaking the siege in some way, but simply by accruing enough long range Splash (basically just with Siege Tanks, and to a much lesser extent Colossus). That's when you should have the feeling of "Yeah, I held". Siege Units by their very nature should make this feeling harder to get then simple Ling or Roach pressure, otherwise it wouldn't be a very good Siege Unit now would it?
On the topic of cost-efficiency: You can say the same thing about Air units if the opponent has no anti-air, Cloaked units if the opponent has no detection, or Siege Units if the opponent can't close the distance (because of Terrain, Force Fields, or whatever). They have the potential to be really cost-efficient if they are engaged poorly, or not countered properly.
I would concede that, Fungal in combination with these high range units (it really doesn't have anything to do with the "free units", except for that they all offer a high potential range with their movement), does achieve some stupid cost-efficiency, and all that has to happen is getting "caught" in the fungal once. But this would be true if it were Siege Tanks + Infestors, or Tempests + Infestors. It's really just the nature of Fungal and High Range that makes this the case. This I do find can make for some really poor gameplay sometimes. Things are roughly even, player get's caught in a fungal for a second, and loses thousands of resources for nothing. Very hard to recover from that kind of a trade.
There are more counters to Swarm Hosts than Splash. Gaining Air dominance or abusing mobility is a perfectly effective counter, just as well as Splash.
As far as it making Colossus to common/necessary in the match-up. That's a problem with the Colossus, not the Swarm Host. You can go air and beat Swarm Hosts, you can go Templar and beat them (you just have to beat them all at once), and you can just abuse mobility and beat them. If you don't like using Colossus go for a different strategy that can deal with Swarm Host in another way, because they do exist. If you are turtling, and the Zerg player get's into perfect position with his Swarm Hosts, and you don't have air dominance, yeah, you will probably need to make Colossus. Just like a Terran will probably need to make Siege Tanks.
First, air isn't an answer to swarm hosts. It just isn't. When HotS first came out and zerg were doing 2 base swarm host rushes with nothing else, yeah air was a good answer. Now they have learned how to better use them(support them), and air is probably the worst thing you can do. The metagame has evolved, and that is good.
The problem is, there is only currently one real answer: colossus. Maybe some genius pros will find other ways of dealing with them, but that isn't clear yet, and it may not happen at all. I think the last thing this game needs is more reasons to make deathballs, and that is exactly what this unit forces protoss to do: build a deathball and overcome the locusts, kill the swarm hosts, and push to the zerg base. All this is a result of having a unit that is very cost effective against anything not-colossus.
|
On January 28 2013 04:07 InfCereal wrote:
They're not technically free.
Their cost is the cost of the unit spawning them, and their price goes down the more waves that are produced. Honestly, 200/100 for 2 temporary units is absolutely horrible. But the longer the swarm hosts are alive, the more they're worth it.
I think it's an interesting dynamic, and I have no problem with it being in sc2.
This. Of all the "free" units in SC2, locusts are the "least free".
Locusts are to swarm hosts what Particle disruptors are for Stalkers.
Yes, Locusts are units and particle disruptors are weapons, yet you get neither of them for "free" as you can only buy them together with their carrier. Also they can both do "infinite" damage over time, when you don't destroy the swarm host/stalker.
In the end it comes down to locusts "kind of" costing 100/50/1.5 and being "kind of" invincible as trade off for the massive costs.
On January 28 2013 05:27 HardlyNever wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2013 04:07 InfCereal wrote:
They're not technically free.
Their cost is the cost of the unit spawning them, and their price goes down the more waves that are produced. Honestly, 200/100 for 2 temporary units is absolutely horrible. But the longer the swarm hosts are alive, the more they're worth it.
I think it's an interesting dynamic, and I have no problem with it being in sc2. This is the response b.net posters are making (silver and gold). Take that for what you will. "Free" may not be the exact term for these units, but everyone knows what I mean. You are just arguing semantics. The issues I raised are still the same, regardless of what you want to call them. The problem is the threshold for them becoming very cost effective is very low (I'd say roughly two waves of locusts, depending on the situation). That is incredibly cost effective for any race, particularly zerg. That is the real issue.
2waves of locusts being costeffective is a problem? That's 50seconds of sieging with a swarm host.
You know what happens if a siege tank or a clossus sieges you for 50seconds?
Also, if anything, people are complaining that Swarm Hosts are NOT costeffective enough and they only become useful when you mass them for a very long time.
Also, I don't understand this part
That is incredibly cost effective for any race, particularly zerg.
This isn't Broodwar. Zerg needs to be just as costeffective as all the other races in SC2. There is basically no income advantage that zerg gets from taking the whole map against 3-4 bases.
|
One thing free units do achieve is getting around the problem of Zerg units being less supply-efficient in a game where 3-base saturation is optimal. Any race can saturate 3 bases, and nobody wants to saturate 4, so once you get to 3 bases the 'get a base ahead and swarm with superior economy' mantra fails. Free units (from infestors, broodlords or now swarm hosts) is a way to simulate being ahead in economy - just like free Terran workers (MULEs) is a way for them to pretend the supply cap is higher, both of which serve (in principle) to balance the concentrated might of a maxed Protoss force.
|
|
|
On January 28 2013 05:44 Umpteen wrote:
One thing free units do achieve is getting around the problem of Zerg units being less supply-efficient in a game where 3-base saturation is optimal. Any race can saturate 3 bases, and nobody wants to saturate 4, so once you get to 3 bases the 'get a base ahead and swarm with superior economy' mantra fails. Free units (from infestors, broodlords or now swarm hosts) is a way to simulate being ahead in economy - just like free Terran workers (MULEs) is a way for them to pretend the supply cap is higher, both of which serve (in principle) to balance the concentrated might of a maxed Protoss force.
I like that analysis, free units do allow to push the supply cap, it fits zerg to be that swarmy.
|
Very well put OP, not much more to really say. Bravo. Finally someone realized that these "units that spawn free units" are actually the polar opposite of "zerg-like", because they are by far the most fucking cost-efficient units in the game. It's not "zerg-like" or "swarmy", it's simply a cheap device to create the illusion of being "zergy", I guess because the developers are too lazy to design the race properly the way it was in BW with lings, hydras, etc., so they just make really good cost efficient units and designed their attack to look like units instead of bullets or lasers or whatever and called it a day. Disappointing.
I really liked the point about Interceptors, too. Carriers are far shittier of units, both for cost AND for unit cap, than Broodlords, Swarm Hosts, and even Battlecruisers, all of which are comparable in some way to the Carrier, yet the poor Carrier, the worst of the bunch, requires you to not only pay an insanely high up-front cost AND an absurd build-time for a subpar-bordering-on-useless unit, but to actually pay minerals to build and replace the interceptors to add insult to injury. Really, Blizzard? Either give locusts + broodlings a small mineral cost, or remove the mineral cost of interceptors. You can't fucking have it both ways.
|
On January 28 2013 05:44 Umpteen wrote:
One thing free units do achieve is getting around the problem of Zerg units being less supply-efficient in a game where 3-base saturation is optimal. Any race can saturate 3 bases, and nobody wants to saturate 4, so once you get to 3 bases the 'get a base ahead and swarm with superior economy' mantra fails. Free units (from infestors, broodlords or now swarm hosts) is a way to simulate being ahead in economy - just like free Terran workers (MULEs) is a way for them to pretend the supply cap is higher, both of which serve (in principle) to balance the concentrated might of a maxed Protoss force.
Infestor/BL is perhaps the most supply efficient army in the game, so no. Same thing with Speedlings.
|
The whole POINT of Zerg is being supply-inefficient; that's why their units are cheap, they can take the whole map and cover it in spine crawlers, cover the map in creep so they have a virtual maphack, and remax an entire army regardless of what it's made up of in a single production cycle. So what the hell are you talking about, Umpteen? If Zerg gets units that "compensate for being supply-inefficient", then fine, but take away the ability to instantly remax with whatever units you want from the same type of building.
|
About swarm host i have to disagree with the op.
Zerg race needed a siege unit before broodlord. Everyone can testify that, even after terrible losses, both protoss and terran could retreat behind their wall and use/abuse their defensive zoning units in order to avoid gettin steamrolled.
I'm thinking about tanks/sentries/colo/templar....
All those units made that zerg couldnt/could barely break in Toss/terran base after suffering terrible losses, even if they won the battle decisively, which sounds wrong.
In that extend, addind a siege unit to zerg race, before broodlord (which were the ultimate siege unit (fly + long range + free units)) is a good thing for the game, making it more dynamic and more interesting overall.
It also do allow zerg to put earlier pressure on their opponent rather than turtling on their 3/4 bases and get BL/infestor like they used to.
Locust have a fairly low range, which allow the defender to get some defensive shot before being underfire. I guess it's harder for protoss to hold since they havent medivacs/repair to heal their units up.
That doesnt necessarily means the unit is bad designed, or op or anything....
The only problem i see with this unit is that it can (as TLO shows/abuse :p) burrow --> send locust --> unburrow immediatly and move.
In that extend, it make the units having his "siege attack" on the way, while still moving, thus not having the uncapacity as a tank for instance. For a tank, either you're using the siege, and you trade the mobility for a powerful siege shot (or lurker in BW) or you're in regular mode which is.... what it is...
So maybe the unit should have some couldown on burrow/unburrow to force smart usage (like the tank need 2 second to siege and 2 second to unsiege and you cannot stop the current transformation). right now it feel like
burrow, shoot 30 locust, unburrow right away and go far enough to not get punished afterward.
This come from a terran player that has played against swarmhost. I dont necessarily think the unit is achieved yet and may need some twist, but the idea is not a bad design and fulfill a most needed place in the Z arsenal, leading to some innovations and fun play.
(You can also remember that the unit isnt given, it's actually a pretty expensive one. it's not like zerg can make 30 of them in a row.... it's rather like a mechin terran or an immortal protoss, adding those strong units time after time.)
It's also a weak unit in some extend
rather slow
pretty big and clunky
cannot shot air
tend to be stacked (in their current usage)
Try to drop zealot and then warp in with warp prism
Try to burrow widow mine in the middle of a swarmhost stack.
(i tried the last one, make a lot of good result).
Think it's a bit too early to call that unit imbalanced or bad designed, it hasnt got enough use yet.
Tempest sounds pretty decent at dealing with it too... (and dealing with anything really..)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
