|
Judging from these forums, watching streams and my own experience with the beta I think it's safe to say that Zerg is the most powerful race at the moment. A lot of different theories are out there but I haven't seen what I'm about to present discussed very much.
Basically nearly every Zerg combat unit deals normal damage, no bonus vs a specific armor type. While some might say that bonus damage is good, it really seems like a broken system when Zerg seem to be exempt from it. A Protoss won't go colossus against my tanks, just as I wouldn't use tanks against mass speedlots. Why? Because his colossus won't get his damage bonus against my tanks, just like my tanks won't get a bonus from shooting zealots. So what is established here is a typical hard-counter system. If I see you go for mass colossus I will respond with tanks, and you will then respond with zealots, and so on.
So what does this have to do with Zerg? Well since pretty much all the Zerg units don't have a bonus, it also means they don't have a penalty. No matter what unit composition I try to use, hydralisks will always deal 12 damage a hit against it. Roaches will do 16, broodlords 25, etc. Basically this lets the Zerg still have a pretty good chance at winning any fight against any unit composition with any standard composition they choose to use.
Now I fully understand that the beta has been out for only around 3 weeks and it's hard to concretely say something is overpowered since no one has tried all the options yet. Even if I'm wrong and Zerg aren't overpowered, this is at the very least inconsistent. Terran and Protoss are play one game with both armor types that take different amounts of damage and attack types that deal different amounts of damage. The Zerg are in their own world where they take different amounts of damage but always deal full damage. Opinions?
Just a little tangent.... Why the hell do hydras outrange marines? Where is my marine range upgrade? Why do aliens that use spines shoot farther than some futuristic assault rifle? Why to big bulky guys with grenade launchers shoot farther than some futuristic assault rifle? Why are my marines constantly getting caught up behind marauders running into each other and not shooting because the AI can't get them in range? Combo +1 range with the combat shield upgrade, up the cost by 100/100 and call it something like "Advanced Standard Issue Equipment", this is retarded.
|
I agree that the hard-counter system is very unsavory and almost forces certain tech paths in many match-ups, limiting creativity of builds.
Why are my marines constantly getting caught up behind marauders running into each other and not shooting because the AI can't get them in range?
Stop A-moving. Micro your army.
|
On March 09 2010 16:39 sleeepy wrote:
Basically nearly every Zerg combat unit deals normal damage, no bonus vs a specific armor type. While some might say that bonus damage is good, it really seems like a broken system when Zerg seem to be exempt from it. A Protoss won't go colossus against my tanks, just as I wouldn't use tanks against mass speedlots. Why? Because his colossus won't get his damage bonus against my tanks, just like my tanks won't get a bonus from shooting zealots. So what is established here is a typical hard-counter system. If I see you go for mass colossus I will respond with tanks, and you will then respond with zealots, and so on.
I find this hilarious since neither the tank nor the colossus got any bonus damage against targets... (I hope you don't use unsieged tanks)
Contrary to what people on this forum seems to believe special damage types are no more present in starcraft 2 than in starcraft 1 and neither do they have stronger numbers now than in starcraft 1. Zerg had mainly normal damage units in both games, terran had mainly special damage units in both games, protoss was in between in both games.
Look, how many normal damage type units did terran have in sc1? They had the marine, half of goliath and wraith and they had the battlecruiser. ~3 units, they have more normal damage units now. How many special damage type units did zerg have? They had the sunken colony and the hydralisk, also very similarly how they are now but they gained a few with special damage.
I don't understand why people whine so much about this... (Not that that whining have much to do with your post, I am just pointing it out that it was like this in sc1 too)
|
On March 09 2010 16:53 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 16:39 sleeepy wrote:
Basically nearly every Zerg combat unit deals normal damage, no bonus vs a specific armor type. While some might say that bonus damage is good, it really seems like a broken system when Zerg seem to be exempt from it. A Protoss won't go colossus against my tanks, just as I wouldn't use tanks against mass speedlots. Why? Because his colossus won't get his damage bonus against my tanks, just like my tanks won't get a bonus from shooting zealots. So what is established here is a typical hard-counter system. If I see you go for mass colossus I will respond with tanks, and you will then respond with zealots, and so on. I find this hilarious since neither the tank nor the colossus got any bonus damage against targets... (I hope you don't use unsieged tanks) Contrary to what people on this forum seems to believe special damage types are no more present in starcraft 2 than in starcraft 1 and neither do they have stronger numbers now than in starcraft 1. Zerg had mainly normal damage units in both games, terran had mainly special damage units in both games, protoss was in between in both games.
He's complaining about Zerg not the other races. But I see your point. Maybe he should be comparing the Immortal to every armored unit in existence.
On a completely unrelated note, I've seen Hellions with the Infernal Igniter upgrade trash Zealots. Just place them in front of the tanks and use the tanks to take care of the Colossi.
|
Its because zerg is based on swarm-plays and units are spent fast.
|
Contrary to what people on this forum seems to believe special damage types are no more present in starcraft 2 than in starcraft 1 and neither do they have stronger numbers now than in starcraft 1. Zerg had mainly normal damage units in both games, terran had mainly special damage units in both games, protoss was in between in both games.
This isn't technically true, there was nothing in Sc1 as drastic as say, the immortal's bonus to armored.
Still, OP, seriously, when you start off with an example thats blatantly incorrect, it makes me question how thoroughly you have actually investigated this issue.
EDIT: I stand corrected on the first point, but it certainly SEEMS more drastic, maybe it has to do with the great amount of damage being dealt.
|
On March 09 2010 17:34 sob3k wrote:
This isn't technically true, there was nothing in Sc1 as drastic as say, the immortal's bonus to armored.
Concussive damage is 4x as effective against small units as against large units. Immortals are only 2.5x as effective against armored compared to other stuff.
|
I hope everybody realises zerg is #1 race atm lol.
So many options who are all good and do ok vs "its counter strats". IMO.
|
Isn't the armor and size for sc1 different then sc2
in sc1
small units took extra dmg from concussive
large units took extra dmg from explosive
small units took reduced dmg from explosive
large units took reduced from concussive
and everyone took everything from normal
in sc2 i think it's just armor types and certain units do + dmg over their normal dmg ionno i things haven't been to clear
i'm just thinking that the dmg reduction works diff although it may be the same haven't put too much thought into it.
|
On March 09 2010 17:40 _EmIL_ wrote:
I hope everybody realises zerg is #1 race atm lol.
So many options who are all good and do ok vs "its counter strats". IMO.
must be why there are so many protoss people in rank 1 in their divisions with high win raitos
|
On March 09 2010 16:39 sleeepy wrote:
So what does this have to do with Zerg? Well since pretty much all the Zerg units don't have a bonus, it also means they don't have a penalty. No matter what unit composition I try to use, hydralisks will always deal 12 damage a hit against it. Roaches will do 16, broodlords 25, etc. Basically this lets the Zerg still have a pretty good chance at winning any fight against any unit composition with any standard composition they choose to use.
This is also not true, while they may not DEAL any bonus damage, the types of bonus damage they can RECEIVE imposes a counter system in the same way. Roaches deal 16 dmg vs everything, but they will get destroyed by marauders and immortals due to their armored status, hydras deal 12 regular damage to everything, but an upgraded pack of hellions will torch them in one shot.
The bonus damage is only PART of a counter system that takes into account unit size, speed, range, and armor type. Just because many zerg units don't deal bonus damage does not mean they "have a pretty good chance of winning any fight against any unit composition."
Zerg may be overpowered due to a combination of factors, but your argument is half-baked and flat out not true.
|
Let us look at SC1:
ling - normal dmg
hydra - explosive
muta - normal + bounce
ultra - normal
lurker - normal + splash
drone - normal
guardian - normal
scourge - normal
wow SC1 zerg so fucking imbalanced
(uncommonly used)
broodling - normal
infested terran - explosive + splash
devourer - explosive
|
SC2 =/= SC1
there's some big differences in the damage output of units, because SC2 is a new game.
Comparing roaches to hydralisks or zerglings or whatever from SC1 is retarded.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke
|
On March 09 2010 18:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke
one funny thing is, hydra does alot better than stalker against banshees, and stalker is even meant to counter it
personally i find ultralisks and hydralisks just slightly too good. mass hydra was good in pvz even tho they made half dmg vs zea. now they do 12 dmg and full dmg so i can only imagine how much harder it must be
roaches r supposed to do better against marine medivac but im starting to think masshydra is better than massroach just because of the range and fast attack speed
id like if hydra got +dmg vs armored like in sc1 or that roach got +dmg vs bio or small. it feels like its hard to split them apart when it comes to counterplaying
|
On March 09 2010 16:39 sleeepy wrote:
Judging from these forums, watching streams and my own experience with the beta I think it's safe to say that Zerg is the most powerful race at the moment. A lot of different theories are out there but I haven't seen what I'm about to present discussed very much.
Basically nearly every Zerg combat unit deals normal damage, no bonus vs a specific armor type. While some might say that bonus damage is good, it really seems like a broken system when Zerg seem to be exempt from it. A Protoss won't go colossus against my tanks, just as I wouldn't use tanks against mass speedlots. Why? Because his colossus won't get his damage bonus against my tanks, just like my tanks won't get a bonus from shooting zealots. So what is established here is a typical hard-counter system. If I see you go for mass colossus I will respond with tanks, and you will then respond with zealots, and so on.
So what does this have to do with Zerg?
Answer: Zerg is the hardest race to play
|
On March 09 2010 18:30 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 18:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke one funny thing is, hydra does alot better than stalker against banshees, and stalker is even meant to counter it personally i find ultralisks and hydralisks just slightly too good. mass hydra was good in pvz even tho they made half dmg vs zea. now they do 12 dmg and full dmg so i can only imagine how much harder it must be roaches r supposed to do better against marine medivac but im starting to think masshydra is better than massroach just because of the range and fast attack speed id like if hydra got +dmg vs armored like in sc1 or that roach got +dmg vs bio or small. it feels like its hard to split them apart when it comes to counterplaying
except hydralisk now move slower perma and zealots not only attack better but have a charge ability which just to love to surround slow units.
i'm still fuzzy on how +dmg differs from dmg bonus and dmg reduction as far as i know there is no dmg reduction besides against the - dmg from your armor which is fundamentally diff from bw.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
On March 09 2010 18:30 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 18:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke one funny thing is, hydra does alot better than stalker against banshees, and stalker is even meant to counter it
Imagine if wraiths would have owned goons...
I don't think I've got to say much more about this, right? :[
MIGHT be funny to you as Terran heh, for me as P its more like plain sad tho. ^_-
|
On March 09 2010 17:55 Fontong wrote:
Let us look at SC1:
ling - normal dmg
hydra - explosive
muta - normal + bounce
ultra - normal
lurker - normal + splash
drone - normal
guardian - normal
scourge - normal
wow SC1 zerg so fucking imbalanced
(uncommonly used)
broodling - normal
infested terran - explosive + splash
devourer - explosive
ling - damage 5 (iirc)
hydra - damage 10, with penalty for small units
muta - damage 9 & second tier unit
ultra - relatively low damage, 3rd tier unit
lurker - 2nd tier, high damage BUT You can't A-move a bunch of them(!)
drone - no comment
guardian - 3rd tier, perfectly acceptable as it has many flaws
scourge - many flaws
Compare that to:
Roach - 1.5 tier, FUCKING 16 DAMAGE (i hope op is not wrong), perfect for A-move
Hydra - 2nd tier, 12 damage, perfect for A-move
That's what sucks... or we need to find the flip side of the story.
|
On March 09 2010 18:30 MorroW wrote:
personally i find ultralisks and hydralisks just slightly too good.
No one goes Ultras.
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
Yea, sure fyyer.
There's no games that exceed the 10 minute mark EVER.
Some people really deserve to be banned for being stupid.
|
On March 09 2010 18:56 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Yea, sure fyyer.
There's no games that exceed the 10 minute mark EVER.
Some people really deserve to be banned for being stupid.
Ultras are terrible and clumsy in SC2, with alot of collision detection issues. Waste of resources when they could just be used on useful things, like Muta for example. This isn't SC1.
|
On March 09 2010 18:48 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Imagine if wraiths would have owned goons...
I don't think I've got to say much more about this, right? :[
MIGHT be funny to you as Terran heh, for me as P its more like plain sad tho. ^_-
I don't disagree that stalkers are really terrible against banshee... (one banshee > one stalker), however I wouldn't compare banshee with wraith from SC. The main reason is because wraiths were meant for anti-air and weak ground attack (somewhat strong for harass due to movespeed) while banshee has no air to air attack, and a strong ground attack.
|
On March 09 2010 18:43 Virtue wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 18:30 MorroW wrote:On March 09 2010 18:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke one funny thing is, hydra does alot better than stalker against banshees, and stalker is even meant to counter it personally i find ultralisks and hydralisks just slightly too good. mass hydra was good in pvz even tho they made half dmg vs zea. now they do 12 dmg and full dmg so i can only imagine how much harder it must be roaches r supposed to do better against marine medivac but im starting to think masshydra is better than massroach just because of the range and fast attack speed id like if hydra got +dmg vs armored like in sc1 or that roach got +dmg vs bio or small. it feels like its hard to split them apart when it comes to counterplaying except hydralisk now move slower perma and zealots not only attack better but have a charge ability which just to love to surround slow units. i'm still fuzzy on how +dmg differs from dmg bonus and dmg reduction as far as i know there is no dmg reduction besides against the - dmg from your armor which is fundamentally diff from bw.
What? Just becase the multiplication is now changed to almost analogous addition doesn't make it fundamentally different.
It's actually very similar and BW values can be easily transformed into SC2 values. For example: goons deal 10 + 10 against large(armored) and shields, vultures deal 5 + 15 against small(light) and shields. There aren't any units with bonus against shields in SC2, but they could add them if they wanted.
The difference is that armor is more effective when the enemy does not deal it's bonus damage against you. For example: marauders deal 10 + 10 vs armored(equivalent to goon attack), but against a light unit with 2 armor they would deal 10 - 2 = 8 damage, while goons would deal (20 - 2) * 50% = 9 damage.
|
Add defiler to zerg again and i am happy ^^
|
I'll blog about Zerg and especially TvZ later the day, cause I'm at work right now. It will be a lot of hate in it but one thing thats definately wrong is that ultras are actually 'really good' against marine/marauder. Ultras alone will get destroyed if you micro your marine/marauder/medivacs back and forth. Ultras get slowed so much by marauders and take so much damage its ridiculous. You should better spend money on Broodlords.
On the other hand, if the ultras reach the marines (for example use infestors ability to make marines and ANY other stuff not moveable) and run ultras into it OR banelings. It rapes.
|
On March 09 2010 19:17 trypt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 18:48 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Imagine if wraiths would have owned goons...
I don't think I've got to say much more about this, right? :[
MIGHT be funny to you as Terran heh, for me as P its more like plain sad tho. ^_- I don't disagree that stalkers are really terrible against banshee... (one banshee > one stalker), however I wouldn't compare banshee with wraith from SC. The main reason is because wraiths were meant for anti-air and weak ground attack (somewhat strong for harass due to movespeed) while banshee has no air to air attack, and a strong ground attack.
Actually 1 Banshee > 2 Stalkers in 1v2. Banshee dies when last stalker dies.
|
Roach - 90 hp, 10 damage, 1 armor, 2 food, change move-while-burrowed to attack-while-burrowed for 200/200, no hp regen upgrade, replace with range upgrade to 6 when burrowed for 200/200.
Basically make Roach into mini-Lurker.
Problem solved.
|
On March 09 2010 20:25 LunarC wrote:
Roach - 90 hp, 10 damage, 1 armor, 2 food, change move-while-burrowed to attack-while-burrowed for 200/200, no hp regen upgrade, replace with range upgrade to 6 when burrowed for 200/200.
Basically make Roach into mini-Lurker.
Problem solved.
wow, thats the biggest nerf i've seen, i play protoss, and if blizzard nerf'd zerg like that i would just plain lol, do you realise how unviable that would make early roach play?
|
If the Roach did 10 damage + 5 vs biological, and the Hydra was 9 + 3 vs armored, would that make things better?
|
i do kind of agree with the op though, it owuld be nice to see roaches with slightly less normal damage and more bonus vs light or heavy, to make them slightly less versatile against all early game units, i mean, its not like the zerg doesnt have lings aswell to hold against w/e else
but even then you have to take other balances into acount, i mean, how would a zerg hold a helion puch if roaches did + damage to light, and how would zerg hold off rines if roaches did + damage to armoured?
|
zerg is not the best race, it's the easiest to play.
Terran is the best race and its the hardest to play.
|
On March 09 2010 21:22 DaEm0niCuS wrote:
zerg is not the best race, it's the easiest to play.
Terran is the best race and its the hardest to play.
Now there's a random troll statement 
I'll bite though, do you mean at beginner level? Because I thought the consensus was (used to be) that Zerg is quite difficult for beginners because of the more complex economy of drones compared to scv/probes.
|
On March 09 2010 21:40 NeoLearner wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 21:22 DaEm0niCuS wrote:
zerg is not the best race, it's the easiest to play.
Terran is the best race and its the hardest to play. Now there's a random troll statement I'll bite though, do you mean at beginner level? Because I thought the consensus was (used to be) that Zerg is quite difficult for beginners because of the more complex economy of drones compared to scv/probes.
with the abundance of larva you can keep producing 1 and 1 drone while still building an army and keep your money below 100. you also have the option to build 10 drones at once if you can get away with it.
|
i dont see a problem in having no hard counter system as T/P have.
basicly zerg playstyle is so much different because you have to build everything from larves, which would put zerg at a major disadvantage did they have similiar hardcounter mechanism as T and P.
to put that into a simple example:
if you build one type of units and your enemy scouts it, he will obvious try to get a counter for that. only thing P and T do now is start production at a different building (bio - > tech ie.) while as Zerg you have to wait for your larves to spawn again.
taking that into account i cant understand any point saying Zerg untis need more hard counter mechanism. this would simply take aways all the flexibility of a zergs playstlye and army.
i may be wrong but in my opinion zerg would stand no chance with hardcounter mechanism + everything build from larves.
Zira
|
On March 09 2010 21:46 McCrank wrote:
with the abundance of larva you can keep producing 1 and 1 drone while still building an army and keep your money below 100. you also have the option to build 10 drones at once if you can get away with it.
And then get rolled for not having any units able to attack. I thought the problem wasn't so much not having enough drones, but more knowing when to make them. I know Zerg can power drones even better in SC2 (because of spawn larva as you said), but you have to know when to power and when to make units, while Protoss can keep building probes together with zealots..
A simplified view, of course.
|
I highly agree, zerg is very overpowered. As protoss, if I dont EXPECT or SCOUT muta and they go muta and im not prepared for it... It's pretty much GG. also The roaches deal too much damage and so do hydras.. I believe they should nerf the hydra and roaches and buff the zerglings a little bit honestly, kuz they pop when u step on them.
|
On March 09 2010 21:52 TheComeback wrote:
I highly agree, zerg is very overpowered. As protoss, if I dont EXPECT or SCOUT muta and they go muta and im not prepared for it... It's pretty much GG. also The roaches deal too much damage and so do hydras.. I believe they should nerf the hydra and roaches and buff the zerglings a little bit honestly, kuz they pop when u step on them.
Nerf Zergling speed so you can actually scout Zerg would be a BIG deal already.
|
On March 09 2010 21:52 TheComeback wrote:
As protoss, if I dont EXPECT or SCOUT muta and they go muta and im not prepared for it... It's pretty much GG.
Wow.. thats exactly like in that game starcraft 1. :o
|
When I had just started I deffinetely felt this way: that zerg is imba but after 400+ games I really just don't think it's the case. I feel it is the natural first impression but that's because of the narrow view that a first impression provides. Yes if you don't keep scouting the zerg to know what they can do, like mutas; then if he does something you are totaly unprepared for you get screwed... is this new? for everything zerg can do there are counters. Though in my opinion it might be prudent to raise the cost of hatcheries as they now more then ever are all powerfull structures for zerg players.
Zerg buildings are very expensive - spawning pool 200 + drone which is 100 more then the other races and it goes on.
I also don't like that toss are the only race that can't build their military structure before their supply due to the power requirement issue. I would like to see nexus become a power source.though to be clear I don't feel it should provide any additional supply.
|
On March 09 2010 22:15 jabberwokie wrote:
When I had just started I deffinetely felt this way: that zerg is imba but after 400+ games I really just don't think it's the case. I feel it is the natural first impression but that's because of the narrow view that a first impression provides. Yes if you don't keep scouting the zerg to know what they can do, like mutas; then if he does something you are totaly unprepared for you get screwed... is this new? for everything zerg can do there are counters. Though in my opinion it might be prudent to raise the cost of hatcheries as they now more then ever are all powerfull structures for zerg players.
Zerg buildings are very expensive - spawning pool 200 + drone which is 100 more then the other races and it goes on.
I also don't like that toss are the only race that can't build their military structure before their supply due to the power requirement issue. I would like to see nexus become a power source.though to be clear I don't feel it should provide any additional supply.
Well I'm almost 200 games in #3 (tied for #2 currently in gold) and I feel like they are a little bit power overwhelming still... nerd just a tiny bit pleaseee
butttt as to the nexus supplying psi... sounds cool!
|
I'm not quite sure if they should decrease the damage of roaches. To my impression they are very strong against Protoss and nerf them would give Zerg propably a huge disadvantage against Terran.
IMHO they should decrease the speed of roaches so they are not faster than a zealot and no longer abled to do hit and run against almost any tech 1 unit. That would compensate their strength regarding their hilarious low cost.
|
On March 09 2010 16:39 sleeepy wrote:
Why the hell do hydras outrange marines? Where is my marine range upgrade? Why do aliens that use spines shoot farther than some futuristic assault rifle? Why to big bulky guys with grenade launchers shoot farther than some futuristic assault rifle? Why are my marines constantly getting caught up behind marauders running into each other and not shooting because the AI can't get them in range? Why wouldn't it?
|
This whole zerg is overpowered thing is getting old. If they are overpowered, I'm certainly not feeling it. I'm assuming it is coming from the protoss players of which there are double the number of zerg, and so they are skewing the results. I'd like to see a poll that says I am ZTP and I think ZTP is overpowered, with 9 options, so that we could get some real results.
|
On March 09 2010 21:52 TheComeback wrote:
I highly agree, zerg is very overpowered. As protoss, if I dont EXPECT or SCOUT muta and they go muta and im not prepared for it... It's pretty much GG. also The roaches deal too much damage and so do hydras.. I believe they should nerf the hydra and roaches and buff the zerglings a little bit honestly, kuz they pop when u step on them.
Observers don't require a special building, and zerg don't get stealth detection for free in SC 2 (Olords have to be morphed).
You can scout for mutas, or anything else, and if not doing so means auto losing, then why not do it?
|
On March 09 2010 18:30 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 18:07 iNfeRnaL wrote:
Nice example fontong.
I really think its too early to tell, the only thing I personally hate is how much more competent Hydralisks are vs Air than any other unit in the game seems to be -_-;;
Yes I know a single archon is prolly better than a single hydra, but it costs a shit fucking load of money and 4 supply and the range of it is more like a stupid joke kekeke one funny thing is, hydra does alot better than stalker against banshees, and stalker is even meant to counter it personally i find ultralisks and hydralisks just slightly too good. mass hydra was good in pvz even tho they made half dmg vs zea. now they do 12 dmg and full dmg so i can only imagine how much harder it must be roaches r supposed to do better against marine medivac but im starting to think masshydra is better than massroach just because of the range and fast attack speed id like if hydra got +dmg vs armored like in sc1 or that roach got +dmg vs bio or small. it feels like its hard to split them apart when it comes to counterplaying
why ultralisks? Honestly I find them a lil underwhelming, against 5-10 tanks mixed in the mmm ball broodlord seems to be way better than ultralisks. Especially because you have like 10+ dropships hovering over ur army anytime anyways, so if u are about to get raped by ultras, load up and fly elsewhere. Even with speed upgrade, ultras arent as mobile as in sc1 anymore.
|
I agree with the hydralisk point, but I think this is an attempt by blizzard to make air units more friendly, I learned quickly stalkers <<<<<<<<<<< air units. Hydras >>>>>> air units.
|
One small but notable difference between the bonus damage system and the SC1 damage reduction system is the way shields take damage. In SC, shields take full damage from all attacks, while in SC2, shields take the same damage that HP would take. In other words, if you attack a Zealot with a Hellion, the bonus damage is applied to shields and to HP, but if you attack a Stalker with a Hellion, only the base damage is applied to both. The analogous situation for SC would be if the Hellion dealt its bonus damage to the Stalker's shields but not its HP
|
On March 10 2010 00:56 onmach wrote:
This whole zerg is overpowered thing is getting old. If they are overpowered, I'm certainly not feeling it. I'm assuming it is coming from the protoss players of which there are double the number of zerg, and so they are skewing the results. I'd like to see a poll that says I am ZTP and I think ZTP is overpowered, with 9 options, so that we could get some real results.
This.
|
On March 09 2010 22:09 zee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 21:52 TheComeback wrote:
As protoss, if I dont EXPECT or SCOUT muta and they go muta and im not prepared for it... It's pretty much GG. Wow.. thats exactly like in that game starcraft 1. :o
Protoss players always been the smartest.
|
On March 09 2010 16:53 Klockan3 wrote:
Look, how many normal damage type units did terran have in sc1? They had the marine, half of goliath and wraith and they had the battlecruiser. ~3 units, they have more normal damage units now. How many special damage type units did zerg have? They had the sunken colony and the hydralisk, also very similarly how they are now but they gained a few with special damage. This is very true, but just for the sake of complete clarity there's a few other things you need to consider. Zerglings had such an outrageously high attack rate that armor points mattered more against them than anything else. Mutalisks' glaive accomplished the same thing. On top of this, because Zerglings are so cheap an equivalent cost of lings to other units covers a huge surface area, so AOE attacks were more powerful against them. Conversely, Ultralisks had such an extreme amount of armor that anything with low damage and a high rate of fire would perform poorly against them (marines and zealots being the prime examples as far as all practical situations go). There's more to it than just the armor classification that influences what makes a hard counter. Unit size, armor value, speed, and range all play huge factors too.
If you look at the units purely on paper, Siege tanks strictly hard counter ultralisks, and Zealots strictly hard counter siege tanks. Spider mines and Dark Swarm significantly complicate this. From what I've seen so far, I think one of the things that Starcraft 2 is lacking is abilities that complicate the hard counter wheels we've grown so accustomed to ignoring.
|
On March 09 2010 21:51 NeoLearner wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 21:46 McCrank wrote:
with the abundance of larva you can keep producing 1 and 1 drone while still building an army and keep your money below 100. you also have the option to build 10 drones at once if you can get away with it.
And then get rolled for not having any units able to attack. I thought the problem wasn't so much not having enough drones, but more knowing when to make them. I know Zerg can power drones even better in SC2 (because of spawn larva as you said), but you have to know when to power and when to make units, while Protoss can keep building probes together with zealots.. A simplified view, of course.
And this drone unit timing is a hard aspect of the game how? the hardest part of zerg is bw was micro and cheese countering. In sc2 there is no micro and very little cheese to worry about and its all fairly easy to stop. You mess up 1 attack in bw and it often costs you the game.
In bw you could die to quick mnm attack, bunker rush, proxy gate, proxy rax, 9-10 gate, 2 port wraiths, mnm ferrying, cliff tanking, vults up ramp, quick tank mnm rush, sairs do damage etc.
In sc2 there is less to worry about, you can have the same exp count and win and micro is very minimal.
|
On March 10 2010 14:38 DaEm0niCuS wrote:
And this drone unit timing is a hard aspect of the game how? the hardest part of zerg is bw was micro and cheese countering. In sc2 there is no micro and very little cheese to worry about and its all fairly easy to stop. You mess up 1 attack in bw and it often costs you the game.
In bw you could die to quick mnm attack, bunker rush, proxy gate, proxy rax, 9-10 gate, 2 port wraiths, mnm ferrying, cliff tanking, vults up ramp, quick tank mnm rush, sairs do damage etc.
In sc2 there is less to worry about, you can have the same exp count and win and micro is very minimal.
Obviously it is not a problem for advanced players, more a bonus even. Zerg can power superlinear. For beginners this is hard to understand. With Terran/protoss it is almost always a good idea to keep producing SCVs, with Zerg you have to do it in batches. I'm not saying it's wickedly difficult, just that it is harder to understand and master for beginners.
Define cheese? Because I don't see why all the things you say kill you in BW, could not kill you now.
Maybe it doesn't happen so much because now everybody plays SC1's 12 pool instead of 12 hatch? Because that's not an argument.
Same exp count is true. But isn't it a good thing? Was it fair that Zerg forces had to be spread over 4 bases to be able to fight a 2 base opponent?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
