|
On February 27 2010 05:00 SubtleArt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 04:21 FortuneSyn wrote:On February 27 2010 04:01 SubtleArt wrote:On February 27 2010 02:53 FortuneSyn wrote:On February 27 2010 01:50 SubtleArt wrote:On February 27 2010 01:21 Feefee wrote:On February 27 2010 01:04 SubtleArt wrote:On February 27 2010 00:52 Feefee wrote:On February 27 2010 00:38 Haemonculus wrote:
Haha, actually I find that banelings are more than happy to explode themselves all on the same target. It takes a bit of micro for them to be effective. Aka, in ZvZ mass fights, target them on the hydras! They do pitiful damage to roaches, but eat hydras alive. Wow, is it really that bad? I just watched tons of vids of the likes of David Kim running baneling floods in and simply running over everything without all the banelings insta-evaporating. Maybe it just feels like banelings overkill less because units clump up so insanely well and so even if a few too many banelings die it doesn't matter? Hmm.... I really needs me a beta =( Btw for the scourge all exploding on 1 target thing: Spread the scourge and use right click to move them. When they are right beside (and kinda overlaping) the clump of air units u want to scourge you press a-move and they all acquire different targets. Pretty basic micro tip. Again, shows that you barely play BW. Refer to my first response lol What does scourge micro have to do with the question of if banelings overkill a target? I'm aware that you can micro scourge to lessen the blow of bad AI, I'm asking if banelings have similarly bad AI. And I've certainly played and watched enough BW to be able to voice my opinion on if zerg "feels disappointing now". They do not in my eyes. The point im making is if u dont know something as basic as that you obviously don't play sc enough to have an appreciation for it. Yes 3v5 comp stomps and watching some pro games are fun but not enough for you to claim you adequately know the game. Hence, you think that any time we request something to be made similar to SC1 we're blind fanboys. Again, go read my post on page 1 Seriously, what the fuck are you talking about? Please quote the part in which he shows that he doesn't know something as basic as scourge micro. The part where he says scourge suck because they all blow up on 1 target while banelings (or w/e those exploding units are called) do not. That part doesn't fucking exist. You've made me read through that god damn line of quotes 4 times already. Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 00:34 Feefee wrote:
Honestly? That OP post almost makes me angry =P. You thought the scourge was one of the most interesting units in SC1? I suppose I'll leave you to that opinion.. Banelings are like mass scourge on the ground that do splash damage and don't all explode into the same target. Infinitely better and infinitely more fun to watch. Plus you can burrow them and explode them like you would a stop lurker trap if you really miss lurkers.
Changelings are a blast to watch every time. I recommend wr3k's stream, he uses them so often^^. Roaches can move while burrowed, Nydus worms are scary as hell. All in all I think sc2 zerg have really captured the feel of "overrun the guy with a swarm of units, and be sneaky and mean while doing it". They're anything but bland, you're just being one of those people who cries himself to sleep for hours when they change a tiny minute detail from sc1... well you get what I mean^^. Happy? The fact that you even bothered that much is funny
I'm happy. Next time quote what you're talking about. Go laugh.
|
I
Need
Swarm.
I do really like banelings and the faster speed on creep combined with ovies dropping it make for some interesting stuff. As does nydus xD.
Less important is that i hate the sound a zerglings attack sounds. I dont really know why. Its like a mushy sound that doesnt remind me of the attack speed and power they had in broodwar. Say im not accepting but i want my bw zerglings back.
|
One of the things that really impressed me about the zerg was the queen, but agree it lacks some of its pizazz.
|
I do find the new zerg rather still very straight forward but i would like it to be changed to what ionno. I stopped playing zerg when i hit plat now i'm back down to gold lulz playing as terran working out builds like i did for zerg working my way to getting random.
|
Disagree completely with OP and don't think he put much effort/thought into his griping.
Zerg are super fun to play right now. Queen, roaches, banelings are all great additions.
|
Dominican Republic463 Posts
you're also forgetting a few things
1. Still in beta, yatta yatta yatta.
2. SC2 Will have 2 confirmed expansions, remember BW is a finished game with one expansion.(The lurker you mentioned was not in the original game). By the time we play and play, new units come out with new expansions in 2-3 years, it willbe polished enough. I assure you that.
|
Scourge was an awful unit. It was a can't-do-much-with-it-but-won't-let-you-do-much-with-your-fliers-either unit. This game should be about possibilities not about denying them.
|
Let's take a moment to think about why Zerg seems so boring. People seem to pin it on the roach and infestor at the moment, because one is easy to mass and the other has abilities with very limited use.
I think the source of zerg "boringness" lies so much deeper than that.
Before anything else, it's beta and people may not have found an optimal unit mix that works well. Hence, people simply tend to mass units, tech up, and mass other units. However, pinning this tendency to simply mass units on the fact that it's beta means that we are overlooking the possibility that perhaps massing the right units actually is the optimal way to play Starcraft 2.
To a certain extent this is true for Starcraft 1 as well, but there is a fundamental difference in how this massing of units is complemented with high-risk high-damage units. Starcraft 2 instead features a much more simplistic form of counters in the form of bonus damage than Starcraft 1 did. Take the lurker for example. Its strength was "hard counter"-like but there were severe limitations on how it attacked. Why did lurkers in Starcraft 1 become a popular unit? This is because it was very effective against the massed unit style of m&m and dealt with zealots very well. Why was it such an exciting unit? The lurker was unable to easily get into position to deal large amounts of damage because of its low hp and inability to attack while above ground. This created a need for Zerglings to act as a shield while lurkers moved into place.
It wasn't the thrill of watching swarms of units smash into the opposition that made Zerg exciting. It was the very sharp tension caused by the possibility of dealing large amounts of damage combined with the possibility of losing too many expensive units that made battles exciting. It was the significance of the micro that made this battle exciting. This is why scourge were exciting, this is why mutalisk clumps were exciting, and this is why defilers were exciting. They generated tension.
So why is the roach not exciting? The roach is not exciting for three interdependent reasons:
1. It's very durable.
2. It's very cheap.
3. It deals a decent amount of damage.
By themselves, each of the above three features would make good single units. The problem is that all three of these characteristics are present in the same unit. Durability and low cost makes it low-risk. Decent amounts of damage makes it useful on its own with little need for supporting units. It simply takes too much of a middle ground to make it exciting in any way. If they had only 80 hitpoints but moved faster without the need for an upgrade, they would become much more exciting to watch as strategic burrowing and unburrowing takes place and Zerglings rush in from the sides as Roaches would be decimated without Ling support.
Banelings are not very exciting either for similar reasons. It is cheap and it deals only a decent amount of damage. The point is to generate tension with this kind of unit, meaning that this unit should possess the potential to be devastating while being difficult to use.
A. Higher gas cost would make it a greater economic investment.
B. Friendly splash damage would make it a greater micro investment.
C. Lower hitpoints + friendly splash would make it only useful as support.
D. Higher damage will give greater returns and combined with the above, create greater tension.
This is what I think of these Zerg units, though I believe the Ultralisk and Immortal suffer from being too strong in relatively small numbers to be "tanks" and the Collossus is too unwieldy to micro. It's similar to the shuttle/reaver in terms of resource and time cost, but in terms of micro cost it's barely there. Again, there is not much tension. A shuttle could barely escape in the red with the reaver, but if a Collossus is caught alone, it stands no chance. Maybe Blizzard intends on balancing units to cause evenly distributed groups of staple and counter units to create exciting but even battles, and that micro will be useful no matter what and so does not need to be a very major factor. On the contrary, exciting battles are the result of tension caused by the fact that a single slip in unit control on either side could result in massive losses.
|
|
|
On February 27 2010 05:47 LunarC wrote:
Banelings are not very exciting either for similar reasons. It is cheap and it deals only a decent amount of damage. The point is to generate tension with this kind of unit, meaning that this unit should possess the potential to be devastating while being difficult to use.
A. Higher gas cost would make it a greater economic investment.
B. Friendly splash damage would make it a greater micro investment.
C. Lower hitpoints + friendly splash would make it only useful as support.
D. Higher damage will give greater returns and combined with the above, create greater tension.
This is what I think of these Zerg units, though I believe the Ultralisk and Immortal suffer from being too strong in relatively small numbers to be "tanks" and the Collossus is too unwieldy to micro. It's similar to the shuttle/reaver in terms of resource and time cost, but in terms of micro cost it's barely there. Again, there is not much tension. A shuttle could barely escape in the red with the reaver, but if a Collossus is caught alone, it stands no chance. Maybe Blizzard thinks that balancing units to cause evenly distributed groups of staple and counter units will result in exciting but even battles, and that micro will be useful no matter what and so does not need to be encouraged directly. On the contrary, exciting battles are the result of tension caused by the fact that a single slip in unit control on either side could result in massive losses.
I agree. Zerg scarabs would make for some exciting moments.
Partially the "blandness" people are talking about is the lack of offensive spellcasting currently, but we'll see how the new patch affects that.
|
On February 27 2010 05:54 LuDwig- wrote:
another sc1 nostalgic 3d
Before dismissing me as a Starcraft 1 nostalgic, read into my post a bit. I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 should be like a 3D Starcraft: Brood War. I'm simply using units in Brood War as examples of units that made battles more exciting. I don't know about you, but I like to watch exciting battles.
|
I agree with the OP. Zerg seem powerful enough and at least as fun as the original, but compared to the other races SC2 doesn't bring us as many many cool new toys. I'd like to get some units like the colossus, void ray, thor, or banshee, that have a totally different feel from anything we had in SC1.
|
I've said it in every other thread, might as well add it to this one. I HATE THE ROACH! 
other than that, Zerg is pretty nice... if it were up to me, make the hydra T1.5 again, and remove the roach (maybe give some of the roach abilities to the hydra, that'd be interesting) and then you have this wide window at Tier 2 (where hydra currently is) to get really creative and bring something new to the table for zerg.
We don't need a Hydralisk with down syndrome wearing a suit of armor, just so we can have the not retarded hydra at tier 2
|
On February 27 2010 01:32 HowardRoark wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 01:02 Piousflea wrote:
I hate how terrans now have Dark Swarm (point defense drone) and zergs don't. Even toss get their anti-ranged defense with sentry shield. Yes, this ability was a trademark for Zerg. I feel if something ought to stay with Zerg, it would be their anti-range support spell and their melee over-running. Show nested quote +On February 27 2010 01:13 CharlieMurphy wrote:
i always disliked roaches ever since I heard the name, it didn't sound zerglike at all.
If I had my way, i'd scrap their attack and change it to some kind of 10 second cooldown ability like charge for zeals, where they could shoot a line/wave of damage that does small splash. (similar to lurkers). Also roach is stupid name and thing in real life, would be better if they were called locust or something that can actually damage shit. then you could call the attack locust swarm or whatever.
That is a good idea. If the Roach stay in the game, it needs something more than being just a ground only Hydra-clone. Especially since anti-ranged defence is given to T and P, and the Lurker "cloaked" splash is gone.
i mean especially since most people once they hit lair will be getting speed/burrow moving and attack then burrow anyways. the cooldown single powerful shot would work better.
and you can still do things like lurker ambush where you wait till the last second unburrow and BAM then reburrow and move away
|
On February 27 2010 05:47 LunarC wrote:
Let's take a moment to think about why Zerg seems so boring. People seem to pin it on the roach and infestor at the moment, because one is easy to mass and the other has abilities with very limited use.
I think the source of zerg "boringness" lies so much deeper than that.
Before anything else, it's beta and people may not have found an optimal unit mix that works well. Hence, people simply tend to mass units, tech up, and mass other units. However, pinning this tendency to simply mass units on the fact that it's beta means that we are overlooking the possibility that perhaps massing the right units actually is the optimal way to play Starcraft 2.
To a certain extent this is true for Starcraft 1 as well, but there is a fundamental difference in how this massing of units is complemented with high-risk high-damage units. Starcraft 2 instead features a much more simplistic form of counters in the form of bonus damage than Starcraft 1 did. Take the lurker for example. Its strength was "hard counter"-like but there were severe limitations on how it attacked. Why did lurkers in Starcraft 1 become a popular unit? This is because it was very effective against the massed unit style of m&m and dealt with zealots very well. Why was it such an exciting unit? The lurker was unable to easily get into position to deal large amounts of damage because of its low hp and inability to attack while above ground. This created a need for Zerglings to act as a shield while lurkers moved into place.
It wasn't the thrill of watching swarms of units smash into the opposition that made Zerg exciting. It was the very sharp tension caused by the possibility of dealing large amounts of damage combined with the possibility of losing too many expensive units that made battles exciting. It was the significance of the micro that made this battle exciting. This is why scourge were exciting, this is why mutalisk clumps were exciting, and this is why defilers were exciting. They generated tension.
So why is the roach not exciting? The roach is not exciting for three interdependent reasons:
1. It's very durable.
2. It's very cheap.
3. It deals a decent amount of damage.
By themselves, each of the above three features would make good single units. The problem is that all three of these characteristics are present in the same unit. Durability and low cost makes it low-risk. Decent amounts of damage makes it useful on its own with little need for supporting units. It simply takes too much of a middle ground to make it exciting in any way. If they had only 80 hitpoints but moved faster without the need for an upgrade, they would become much more exciting to watch as strategic burrowing and unburrowing takes place and Zerglings rush in from the sides as Roaches would be decimated without Ling support.
Banelings are not very exciting either for similar reasons. It is cheap and it deals only a decent amount of damage. The point is to generate tension with this kind of unit, meaning that this unit should possess the potential to be devastating while being difficult to use.
A. Higher gas cost would make it a greater economic investment.
B. Friendly splash damage would make it a greater micro investment.
C. Lower hitpoints + friendly splash would make it only useful as support.
D. Higher damage will give greater returns and combined with the above, create greater tension.
This is what I think of these Zerg units, though I believe the Ultralisk and Immortal suffer from being too strong in relatively small numbers to be "tanks" and the Collossus is too unwieldy to micro. It's similar to the shuttle/reaver in terms of resource and time cost, but in terms of micro cost it's barely there. Again, there is not much tension. A shuttle could barely escape in the red with the reaver, but if a Collossus is caught alone, it stands no chance. Maybe Blizzard intends on balancing units to cause evenly distributed groups of staple and counter units to create exciting but even battles, and that micro will be useful no matter what and so does not need to be a very major factor. On the contrary, exciting battles are the result of tension caused by the fact that a single slip in unit control on either side could result in massive losses.
I really like this analysis of it. I, personally, also hate the Roach. Unfortunately, it has pretty much become the staple of the Zerg army. But its slow movement rate and durability makes it very Protoss-like, which isn't what Zerg is supposed to be about.
Zerg is supposed to be a fast, expendable, swarming type of force. The suggestion you made to reduce the Roach's HP and make them move faster is a really great suggestion. I think doing that, by itself, will improve the SC2Beta so much. I just really hate things that feel like WC3 Grunts =[
|
I waited 7 years for WC3 and got really dissapointed when it was released, even though I tried to enjoy it. However, being a WC2 addict I tried out SC1 and took it too my heart. I wonder how much Bill Roper contributed to the greatness of SC1 and WC2, having in mind he is not at Blizzard for either WC3 and SC2...
If I were Blizzard I would scrap the Roach, and try to look at new ways to improve Zerg with the same quality as they improved Protoss. Perhaps moving the Hydra back to tier 1.5, or find ways to evolve the Hydra at Tier 2, or have the Zerglings evolvabe an additional time at Tier 2, with perhaps Baneling that can grow wings. That would be cool.
I was also thinking that IF they move Hydra to Tier 1 and scrap Roach, they could turn the Infestor into a Reaver like unit with support abilities and attack abilities, or something. Since I do believe there is potential in Infestor, contrary to the Roach. I always liked the meleeish Zergs, and Roach just doesn't cut it.
Another VERY cool idea with the Infestor would be if, when the Infestor first meet an enemy unit in a match (marine or zealot), it can try to devouver it, and if it succeeds with capturing it and sucking it in, the Infestor can start making foul copies of it in her big back and then start "puking" up these bastardized versions of the marine and zealot and use them as a Tier 2 unit. Almost like a portable unit factory, but that perhaps only can create them on creep or something. That would work much cooler than the way the Blizzard handles Infested terrans now. I imagine real interesting matchups where a Terran does his best to avoid getting a marine sucked in by an Infestor so that the Zerg will never be able to reach this Tier 2 Infested unit stage. On the other hand the Zerg player will try to get as close as possible with an Infestor (and sacrificing loads of Lings) to capture a marine or zeal so he can start producing foul copies. The Terran will do his best to die the normal way to avoid giving the Zerg his advantage. Pretty cool idea IMHO! That would be really Zergish, and would send thrills down the spines in the marine mess halls. "Guys, Jeremy got sucked in last battle, even though he tried to commit suicide before it happened, and today I'm afraid we will meet him on the battlefield, spraying green glob from his badly copied rifle...  "
|
I'm thoroughly enjoying zerg at the moment =]
|
United States7166 Posts
they need to change it to like 20 dmg +15 vs light, not 15 dmg +20 vs light..or evne more extreme. really too many units in this game are hard counters for X unit but suck too badly vs Y
|
How about:
Hydra - Tier 1.5
Roach - Tier 2
It would probably make ZvZ less boring with all those Roach wars going on... Ling/Hydra/Bane early game would be kinda cool and more micro-intensive to play
|
I agree, new zerg sucks. Old zerg was about lurkers and scourges. Roaches are as boring as Godfather 3, and banelings suck mid game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
