|
On March 17 2010 01:31 Zoler wrote:
No unit should be used as "harass only". Look at SCBW, there is no unit that is only used for harass. The closest to that would probably be the DT, but it does have a few other uses as well. All units must be strong in battle in some way or they won't be used at all (reapers).
Wraiths? I mean they can peck away at tanks or lings but they're never going to be useful in a straight up fight. They lose straight up against literally everything that can hit them I think.
|
I still think that a great unit mechanic for zerg would be to scrap the stupid regen of the roach (or reserve it for another, better-balanced unit, and replace it with a passive ability that lets it drop creep wherever it attacks. Yes, that's right.
If it attacks a marine, it will create a little puddle of creep in front of the marine. Continuous attacks would only make that creep radius bigger. If you have 15 roaches, you could make a large creep patch very quickly. Simply plop down a creep tumor and voila, instant territory gain.
Roach/Ling: Greases the ground so your lings can close with the enemy faster (works like charge basically). Also makes chasing the enemy easier (like marauder slow, only in reverse).
Roach/Baneling: makes the KABOOM moment come 30% faster :D
They could even experiment with making the creep do a slowing effect so that this would work like ensnare (and give marauders another ability)
Zerg seem so boring, but it isnt like there are NO cool options for them. Blizzard is either retarded and hasnt thought of them, or hasnt managed/bothered to try them out for gameplay viability.
And taking out legit units like the lurker is a terrible idea IMO. One of the only truly interesting zerg units was taken out (for whatever reason)? Nonsense!
|
On March 17 2010 01:41 crate wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 01:31 Zoler wrote:
No unit should be used as "harass only". Look at SCBW, there is no unit that is only used for harass. The closest to that would probably be the DT, but it does have a few other uses as well. All units must be strong in battle in some way or they won't be used at all (reapers). Wraiths? I mean they can peck away at tanks or lings but they're never going to be useful in a straight up fight. They lose straight up against literally everything that can hit them I think.
They are essential vs guardians, they fight well vs BC and carriers, wraith/tank in TvT.
They are not harass only, tho probably closest to that after the DT.
|
New zerg unit, Zerg King: mate with Queen to spawn Overmind end-game unit GG.
|
Move hydra back to t1 with noticably reduced attack speed, increase cost of hydra spines while adding the lost attackspeed of hydras to this upgrade + keep in lair tech, re add lurker to lair.
|
On March 17 2010 02:47 bmml wrote:
Move hydra back to t1 with noticably reduced attack speed, increase cost of hydra spines while adding the lost attackspeed of hydras to this upgrade + keep in lair tech, re add lurker to lair.
and free nukes for terran can be fired from command center at any location on the map, got any more brilliant ideas?
|
Lurkers T2, roach T2, Hydra T1, with T2 upgrades
Lurkers get siege range upg at hive like before
Give zerglings a lair upg for +3 damage vs armoured
with lurkers in the game, fungal growth will be incredibly useful and will need no changes
Give infestors an upg to allow them to move while NP is channeled, letting them move around the map with a unit on a leash (unable to burrow or use any other abilities though)
Give infested terrans the devourer's ability, where every time they hit, they increase the damage taken by the target by 1, so infested terrans arn't there for damage, but to assist other units in doing damage.
edit:
with all this there will need to be statistical nerfs to other units, but I think this will cause the desired effect on making zerg interesting.
|
and you all didnt believe me 2 weeks ago
|
zerg units are overall too strong by themselves making there be less incentive to mix your army. Roaches are very good for their cost. Most units that counter other units only come out slightly ahead in cost, whereas, roaches come out a bit further than say the difference between using marines vs zealots and marauders vs zealots... 2 marine and 1 marauder are only like 8 damage apart so even though marauders don't "counter" zealots, they are by no means bad against them at least pre shield upgrade. Z's go roaches vs me pretty much every game so i assume that's the basis for the op... roach is to integral probably.
|
On March 16 2010 19:28 G3nXsiS wrote:
Hmm I really think that zerg is a one unit race solely because I think their units are overpowered. The roaches, hydras and mutas are so strong that they are able to single-handedly decimate the terrans and tosses and thats the huge issue with zerg. The reason why terrans and tosses have to get such a diverse army is because of this.
uhhhhhhhhh, WHAT?
I'm not sure if you are aware of this but SC2 has a rock/paper/scissors concept and if zerg ONLY makes one unit....toss or terran ONLY have to make one unit as well to COUNTER them.
Example:
Zerg only gets Roaches, Terran gets Marauders.
Zerg only gets Mutas, Toss gets phoenix's
|
On March 17 2010 02:56 Shiladie wrote:
Lurkers T2, roach T2, Hydra T1, with T2 upgrades
Lurkers get siege range upg at hive like before
i totaly aggre with that.. i think that would make the banglings more optional in ZvZ..
|
There is no diversity issues. The number of units have always been this way. Zerg always had less units. Zerg units have always been too strong for their costs even in SC1. The difference in SC2 is the macro mechanic behind the scenes. It has essentially changed the game in the way zerg played making zerg much more stronger than what it was.
Think about this: In SC1 Z always had significantly less workers than T or P. Generally T/P has 2+ times min patches while Z has 1.5 or less times min patches (especially low econ zergs) Macro zerg has really been a fairly "new" trend in terms of 10 years. With this in mind, zerg units were cheaper than TorP units because that relatively low cost hurts or is felt by a zerg just as the much as a relatively higher cost is felt by a TorP. Producing a group of hydras that cost 75/25 felt like it took a lot of resources because zerg's resources comes in slowly. Now in SC2, producing 12 roaches of the same cost is nothing because zerg has just as much or MORE workers as the game progresses as TorP.
If Zerg had the same # of workers in sc1, zerg would also be extremely powerful. It is not that units in this game is that more powerful relative to sc1. In terms of strength a 75/25 hydra 80hp 10dmg is more cost efficient than a 100/50 hydra 90hp 12dmg. But the ability for zerg to create a high number of hydras in sc2 is easier than creating a high number of hydras in sc1. sc1 requires 7 minutes of macro on 3 bases before 5 hatch hydras start to pump. sc2 requires 2bases and2queens.
There should really be an analysis on how much a larvae is worth and what the queen's spawn 4 larvae ability is actually giving zerg. If a mule is worth 270minerals in 90 seconds, a single queen's vomit is worth more than that. The queen can vomit more often twice as often as one can mule.
|
Zerg always had less units, but at least in BW, they worked differently.
Now it's just 1a2a3a
Also KneeOfJustice: You play competitive Smash back in the day?
|
On March 17 2010 07:37 Odds wrote:
Zerg always had less units, but at least in BW, they worked differently.
Now it's just 1a2a3a
Also KneeOfJustice: You play competitive Smash back in the day?
you forget unlimited unit select, it's actually just 1a and go back to macro more
|
This may be something we will need to wait for an expansion for.
|
On March 17 2010 09:34 Smurfz wrote:
This may be something we will need to wait for an expansion for.
Sometimes I think that blizzard is purposely holding off some units (such as lurker), so that they can just add it in the expansion.
|
On March 30 2010 06:24 bendez wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 09:34 Smurfz wrote:
This may be something we will need to wait for an expansion for. Sometimes I think that blizzard is purposely holding off some units (such as lurker), so that they can just add it in the expansion.
They held off the lurker because they believe that there is sufficient splash within the baneling, infestor and ultra. They also believe that the burrow mechanic is being adequately handled by the roach and infestor with abilities like move while burrowed and burrow regen. It has nothing to do with expansions. Blizzard does not deliberetly hold off units for expansions. It's the other way around. When they are making expansions they decide what they can add to a race.
|
On March 30 2010 06:49 DeCoup wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2010 06:24 bendez wrote:On March 17 2010 09:34 Smurfz wrote:
This may be something we will need to wait for an expansion for. Sometimes I think that blizzard is purposely holding off some units (such as lurker), so that they can just add it in the expansion. They held off the lurker because they believe that there is sufficient splash within the baneling, infestor and ultra. They also believe that the burrow mechanic is being adequately handled by the roach and infestor with abilities like move while burrowed and burrow regen. It has nothing to do with expansions. Blizzard does not deliberetly hold off units for expansions. It's the other way around. When they are making expansions they decide what they can add to a race.
I know I should get my references together, but my memory is quite strong on remembering an article outlining that the broodwar units were already developed along with the original starcraft development effort, but simply released later as an expansion. It makes a lot of sense economy wise, as you can put the same directors/developers/graphics artists/voice artists to good use in a somewhat larger time period.
But starcraft II is developed somewhat differently, at least from what has been told. It is mentioned that the single player campaign mechanics are to be a focus of differentiating between the original release and expansions. It is also mentioned that this difference brings a substantial extra development effort, much more so than the development of a couple of extra units. Almost on a rant here but to cut it short, there's plenty of room for unit developing for the expansions.
|
I can see a use for a anti-armored unit just because it would make the mirror much more interesting. If it would be caster like that would be great as those units just increase the micro potential and the fun of the game.
For me the most fun units are the sentry, the ghost, the raven and the high templar. Zerg just has the infestor. Perhaps the queen was intended to be this support unit but the only relevant combat ability is the healing which is only useful on ultralisks.
Maybe a caster unit that would have a AoE spell against armored, it wouldn't affect TvZ and PvZ too much as they don't tend to have clogged armored units but would be very neat against roaches.
|
Bump this because it is a great read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
