EPTOr overhaul the stats/ability's in the roach to make it more interesting.
As I see T&P are tired of playing against it, Z is tired of playing with the current roaches, so I really hope they change them
SC2 Zerg a dissapointment? - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Icx
Belgium853 Posts
Or overhaul the stats/ability's in the roach to make it more interesting. As I see T&P are tired of playing against it, Z is tired of playing with the current roaches, so I really hope they change them | ||
|
Ronald_McD
Canada807 Posts
Most people are confusing this with "Zerg suck" No, Zerg are capable of spanking bitches up n down the aisle, but they don't really have that many cool new features. Blizzard just gave all of the cool ideas to Protoss. | ||
|
omninmo
2349 Posts
| ||
|
Dr.Frost
United States389 Posts
| ||
|
SevenSpirits
United States12 Posts
BW had Terran: - Siege tanks - Spider mines Protoss: - Psi Storm - To a lesser extent, Reavers move very slowly, and Templar and Carriers move fairly slowly. Zerg: - Lurkers - Dark Swarm SC2 by contrast has Terran: - Siege tanks - Autoturret and point defense drone via the Raven Protoss: - Psi Storm - Force Field - To a lesser extent, the Mothership and some other units move slowly Zerg: ... That's basically the problem, isn't it? | ||
|
HowitZer
United States1610 Posts
And what makes SC so fun is that you can win or lose a battle outright in devastating fashion based not on static things like hp and speed but on your own hands. SC1 is a cut-throat game with an infinite amount of edges to exploit. We need a game that's just ruthless to the player. Allow a player to rape your whole base with a group of mutas if they are good enough with them. C'mon Blizzard, don't be afraid. | ||
|
father_mitch
United States48 Posts
OP hit a lot of the problem on the nose. And ok, sure, it's about nostalgia, but not for the same units or same exact game. Something about the races should be consistent: their feel. | ||
|
Cowazon
Canada58 Posts
On February 27 2010 13:03 HowitZer wrote: a unit's effectiveness should be proportional to the amount of effort the player puts into it. Could not agree more. Right now Zerg just feels too much like you're only encouraged to scout often, tech appropriately, macro hard, and a-move your army. Zerglings auto-surround and are pretty weak against early game units anyways (rather, roaches are infinitely better so making lings makes very little sense). Roaches are painfully slow until you get the speed upgrade (lair) so you don't really need to micro them hard. Mutalisks don't stack, so all you need to control them for is for hit and runs to harass workers and sniping key units in big fights (colossus). Hydralisks are slow so there's very little micro for them as well. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
On February 27 2010 13:03 HowitZer wrote: a unit's effectiveness should be proportional to the amount of effort the player puts into it. wooooow - 100% agree man! but exactly this isn't the case in sc2 and it's is biggest letdown for me... | ||
|
hacpee
United States752 Posts
No overlord does not have automatic detection now. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
Take Terran for example: Lot's of new Units that are Interesting, versatile and they grow stronger the more time you invest on microing them (again, the GREAT Quote mentioned above: a unit's effectiveness should be proportional to the amount of effort the player puts into it.) Also, it's important to note, that the time spent on a Unit to utilize it to the maximum should be almost infinite and that it should be proportional, which means; if I micro this Unit 50% of the time during 1 minute, they should do more or less halve DMG than when I Micro them 100% of the time during 1 Minute. So it should be possible to spend as much time as you want on a Unit and be able to use that time and skill properly. This Fact makes all the different playstyles in SC1 possible! Of course, you will never be able to win just by microing one Unit-Group, but it should be possible to win with different micro to macro ratios. This is totally true for some of the Units in SC2: - Reaper (if you harrass with them they require a lot of Multitasking if you wanna keep up with macro and microing your main-army etc.) If you watch them closely, you'll do much DMG, you won't loose many Reapers because you can Retreat quickly etc. but you may neglect Macro a bit. - Hellion (Fast Unit without much Health but does nice AoE DMG - ->Very Microintensiv). If you try to hit the maximum Amount of Units with the Flamethrower, you have to have very good Positioning with Hellions, you also have to watch that they don't die, you can scout around the Map with them and maybe miss sth if you don't watch but Macro etc. Again: They're much better if you watch/micro them closely, but naturally, you won't be able to do other stuff, because your preoccupied with Microing the Hellions. - Marauder: You can try to slow as many Targets as possible, Target only Melee, keep retreating and Focusing when necessary etc. You can invest so much time to make better use of the Marauders, but still they aren't just worthless if you don't Micro them as hard but concentrate on macroing or doing other stuff. Now tell me to what extent that is possible with some of the new Units, like Colossus, Immortal, Thor etc. Those ARE new Units, but not interesting and fun to play just because they're new. Also, some old Units like Mutas aren't as fun as in SC1, because Microing is limited by the new Engine. Another thing is, that some old Units aren't as Micro-intensive, because of new features being implemented in SC2, for example every caster just because of intelligent casting. In SC1, if you had High Templars and wanted to use them in a fight, you had to or in better words you could invest more time to use them than in SC2, but I woudln't say (from what I've heard and read) that High Templars are weaker in SC2 and noone would say they're weak in SC1! It's just that in SC1, the amount of time needed for one good Storm is higher than in SC2. This leads to different Playstyles in SC1, because you constantly are basically neglecting HUGE parts of the Game. Now its totally up to the player on what he's concentrating, in SC2, Micro and Macro is definitely necessary and if you're good at it, you'll have an advantage, but to what extent compared to SC1? With Macroing being maybe less of a problem because more Macro-oriented strategies will evolve over time and the Macro-possibilities are quite good, it's all about the Unit-Quality and the fact, that you can do less with good Micro and total focus on controlling the Unit right, than in SC1. | ||
|
tlwilim
Hong Kong24 Posts
| ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
On February 27 2010 19:26 tlwilim wrote: I do think zerg is now the weakest ... Which is totally untrue AND totally not the point of this Discussion.... To be frank, the first sentence of this topic is: "This post is not about balance or about the hard counter nature of SC2 (which I am not sure I like at all), but about the units of Zerg." so; well done... -.-° | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
| ||
|
QuothTheRaven
United States5524 Posts
| ||
|
Shiladie
Canada1631 Posts
I'm actually at the point now where ZvZs arn't fun, at all. As in I'd rather be doing something else because playing the game isn't in the slightest bit enjoyable, even if I win over and over. I've attempted over and over to find a different meta-game that works, to no avail, you go mass roach with a few hydras behind depending on the size of the chokes on the map, with an overseer following you around, just to ensure nobody tries to do any micro or anything, because we can't have that! | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
On February 27 2010 21:43 ComradeDover wrote: This thread is pretty useless. "Zerg is boring" or "Zerg is bland" are some pretty unquantifiable statements. Are they? Aren't they? Who's to say? I'm sorry you feel that way, but Blizzard can't please everybody, nor should they try to. It's a new game, and you'll adapt in time. umm, the point of the entire thread IS to quantify what exactly about zerg is causing this problem. The OP posted his opinion, many people agreed, now we are trying to nail down what we believe should be changed. your post on the other hand... | ||
|
ZCfos~DangerBoy
57 Posts
The current Zerg is in my opinion really interesting with the improved usage of nydus canals and creep. Furthermore, the infestor can be used quite effective and is a good addition to the zerg arsenal with the fungal growth ability. Its just a shame, that the infestor cant use its abilities from underground. The Roach is just a unit, which has to be build almost all the time. Feels a bit forced :/ Nice descrition of the Terran triple B's though: Bigger, bulkier, better for every tier. :D I agree with you on that one. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On February 27 2010 22:01 sob3k wrote: umm, the point of the entire thread IS to quantify what exactly about zerg is causing this problem. The OP posted his opinion, many people agreed, now we are trying to nail down what we believe should be changed. your post on the other hand... Exactly. The OP posted his opinion, some agree, and some don't. The game can't be all things to all people. I, for one, happen to love the Zerg, and I love the endless tactical micro possibilities the infestor opens up, yet some seem to hate this. It seems to me that people are just looking for something to bitch about. Perhaps those looking for flaws in the game should look inward for a minute? | ||
|
grax
United States41 Posts
| ||
| ||
