Would it improve the zerg gameplay if the Queen's ability to Spawn larva had to be cast on a Unit instead of the hatchery? The ability could work on either friendly or enemy biological units. It would take a few seconds before the multiple larvas hatched inside the unit and made it explode, meaning that a group of enemy units could destroy their ally before the larva hatched.

This would add decision to the process of spawning larva and also add some complexity to the zerg build; do I want to spawn larva or save my units for now? I'm not considering balance in this, I figure it can be adjusted later.

Well, just a thought out there.

JohannesH

Finland1364 Posts

December 10 2009 05:38 GMT

#42

Small question, is it possible to change the keybind layout?

Liquid`Jinro

Sweden33723 Posts

December 10 2009 10:08 GMT

#43

They said that would be something they'd add later (after launch), but this was before they delayed the game so it might be in now.

Sandrosuperstar

Sweden525 Posts

December 10 2009 17:27 GMT

#44

I hope they get the same sprad system for sc2 where u can pre-lineup ur units^^ it was relly annoying paying without it. Gost replays is an awsum idea and so is the kill 1 unit 4 4 larvae(lol)
I really like how they continue to change the teams to make them more different like with the toss teleport macro, cant wait for the new macromechanic :D

GW.Methos

United States249 Posts

December 10 2009 20:54 GMT

#45

On December 04 2009 07:22 JohannesH wrote:
What do you mean by formations?

unit formations such as in other rts games like EE, AoE, and C&C i think.

jalstar

United States8198 Posts

December 11 2009 00:36 GMT

#46

On December 11 2009 05:54 GW.Methos wrote:

Show nested quote +

unit formations such as in other rts games like EE, AoE, and C&C i think.

bad idea, EE and AoE have them for historical accuracy, but the top BW players are good enough to micro their own "formations" and it should be even easier in SC2

beetlelisk

Poland2276 Posts

December 11 2009 15:04 GMT

#47

What if one of new, easy to learn, difficult to master skills would be to make unit formations and prevent them from clumping by using magic boxes?

Another thing I was thinking about is what will be possible to break in SC2 (MBS etc, at least Scarab pathing, multiple unit selection...?) to make UMS as similar to BW as possible...
I remember blue post that said it won't be easy but will be possible to "turn off" MBS.
What if BW leagues don't die and keep on living (as SC2 UMS) with new SC2 ones?

Kleander

United States334 Posts

December 11 2009 15:53 GMT

#48

have they released an actual reason for why beta has been delayed? i heard it was because b.net 2.0 wasnt ready, and if so have they told anyone when it will be ready (beta specifically)?

beetlelisk

Poland2276 Posts

December 11 2009 17:09 GMT

#49

On December 12 2009 00:53 Kleander wrote:
have they released an actual reason for why beta has been delayed? i heard it was because b.net 2.0 wasnt ready, and if so have they told anyone when it will be ready (beta specifically)?

Official reason was BN2.0 but no word on when beta starts yet
From recent TL interview
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=107013

TL: I have to ask quickly about the beta – there had been hints that it would be coming in the first few months of 2010. What types of numbers would we be looking at for the first wave? And is there any sort of format for how new players will be added later on (bulk waves, trickle in etc)?

DB: I don't think I have the answer to that question, it would be a better question for Chris Sigaty as he usually keeps that stuff. I also know that those numbers will change over time and we will decide as the beta goes forward how many people to invite based on how well we are doing with our server load, player activity etc. It will be a little bit organic – there isn't sort of a secret document somewhere that I can read to you and say “Oh there's the whole plan!”. We're going to play it a little bit by ear as we go.

beetlelisk

Poland2276 Posts

December 14 2009 21:33 GMT

#50

New Blues - Avarius & Zhydaris
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=21724987619&sid=3000
I have to say Brood Lord in his avatar looks very good, even though I didn't like Swarm Guardian look being scrapped.

There are few new blue posts
http://sc2pod.com/trackers/blue/starcraft-2/

edit Immortals die to nukes

A good amount of zerg units are affected by the immortal's Hardened Shell. They are particularly effective against roaches, ultralisks, and spine crawlers. Also, Psionic Storm and Nuclear Strike do not appear to be affected by the Hardened Shell as the immortal I just nuked disintegrated gloriously.

WhiteKnight

New Zealand134 Posts

December 17 2009 05:01 GMT

#51

How do I start my own Topics?

I have something to share. Two new never before seen Zerg Concepts.

Well here they are.

What do you guys think?

http://s838.photobucket.com/albums/zz305/whiteknight021/?action=view&current=zerg2.jpg&newest=1

http://s838.photobucket.com/albums/zz305/whiteknight021/?action=view&current=Zerg1.jpg

Would of made my own topic, however I realise I have only been here for 2 days, not 3. If someone could turn this into a discussion topic for me giving credit, I would be grateful. Thanks.

Liquid`Jinro

Sweden33723 Posts

December 17 2009 20:19 GMT

#52

Where are they from? I don't remember what the length of time is before you can create new topics but shouldn't be more than a few days.

Psyonic_Reaver

United States4343 Posts

December 17 2009 22:43 GMT

#53

They are from the Blizzard calender. The first picture looks like the lurker. The second... Maybe that's what the infestor used to look like?

n00bonicPlague

United States197 Posts

December 22 2009 23:06 GMT

#54

Can someone point me to one or a few solid articles/threads that really nail TL's general position on macro as a whole? Essentially, I want to know what you guys feel the "macro problem" is and why you think that.

Grumbels

Netherlands7032 Posts

December 24 2009 23:58 GMT

#55

I was wondering about the Thor.. I thought one of the earlier ideas behind it was that it could function as a heavy siege unit to lead during base attacks? Considering that currently it's so much like a Marauder with an air attack, except stronger, I didn't see what was special about the Thor, and how they could balance it so it's not dominant yet does have a unique role in the terran arsenal, not just as generic T3 unit to base your army around.

I remembered a unit from a game I played when I was younger, Earth 2140, which was called the TIGER Hellmaker. I thought of it since it physically resembles the Thor a lot, but more importantly, I figured its attack might as well be a good idea for the Thor. It fires two slowly moving napalm grenades that impact the ground a second or two later, only to explode in fire. Standing around for the explosion deals damage and standing in the fire as well(which lasts 4-5 seconds).

I really feel like such an attack could be useful for an army leading unit, especially in not terribly mobile situations such as base assaults, in which case it works well on a siege unit. This is because leading with a Thor armed with these weapons forces your opponent to move away, or fight, so if you can force a fight it becomes more destructive.

Besides this, it's also a fun attack to play with. Faster enemy units can try to avoid the attack in smaller numbers, even it requires heavy attention, and there's also a benefit for individually macroing your Thors to attack different targets so avoiding it is more difficult. A minor benefit is that it's somewhat intricate, yet not an ability. (which is a concern, I believe)

Vortok

United States830 Posts

December 27 2009 21:21 GMT

#56

Regarding Terran Macro tension - aka Mule vs. Scan. Given that mules and scans are done from the same building, forcing a Terran to scan means one less mule (not sure if they're the same cost or not). Given that mules are estimated to gather a few hundred minerals each (foggy memory, at best - not sure what the exact number was last time someone was able to check) forcing a Terran to scan, even if you don't do much, could theoretically set them economically back. If this is actually true, it would strengthen obvious stuff like DT harass/Lurkers, as well as something simple like burrowing a single ling at an expansion site (a la vulture mines of old), Roaches, etc. Sniping an observer without tower detection (aka, Obs suicide)/a mobile detector of your own becomes more costly as well.

Last I knew mules could be called down anywhere in the player's sight range, not just at the CC calling it down. Of course all of this is subject to tons of change/balance/etc. If they can be called down anywhere, then scanning would still effectively cost minerals even late into the game. If there's a range limitation then you'd eventually have CCs that don't need to call mules and have the spare energy to scan, at which point it's less of an issue.

Hammurabi_br

Brazil5 Posts

December 30 2009 12:55 GMT

#57

What changed since Blizzcon? The G-star building is the same that they used in Blizzcon?

Darcey

Sweden35 Posts

January 02 2010 19:49 GMT

#58

Am I the only one who woke up in the New Year, browsed ones regular sites. Eventually popped up into this one and thought.

"So... 2009 is over. There would be no beta in -09'. So it can start any moment now..."

Dav_

Hungary236 Posts

January 02 2010 19:51 GMT

#59

On December 30 2009 21:55 Hammurabi_br wrote:
The G-star building is the same that they used in Blizzcon?

yes. what we saw is 5 months old now

keV.

United States3214 Posts

January 02 2010 21:54 GMT

#60

They are coming up on their next claimed deadline, that being jan/feb. I'm thinking Q4 2010