|
Here's the Twitter question in case anyone hasn't seen it yet.
+ Show Spoiler +Q. Do you agree that the Zerg currently suffers from a lack of diverse army composition, and if so what are your plans to fix it?
A. Yes, we are looking at the Zerg diversity issue. We are working to make the Infestor a more core part of more match-ups. We will continue to moniter the use of Banelings, Roaches, Hydras, Zerglings, Mutalisks and Corruptors to make sure the Zerg army remains diverse in each match-up.
Aside from balance problems, I think there may be another reason why Zerg's army isn't quite diverse enough.
Let's look at the number of combat units for each race.
Protoss: 12 + Show Spoiler +Zealot Stalker Sentry High Templar Dark Templar Immortal Colossus Archon Phoenix Void Ray Carrier Mothership
Terran: 12 + Show Spoiler +Marine Marauder Reaper Ghost Hellion Siege Tank Thor Viking Medivac Raven Banshee Battlecruiser
Zerg: 9 + Show Spoiler +Zergling Baneling Roach Hydralisk Infestor Ultralisk Mutalisk Corruptor Brood Lord
Zerg has three fewer fighting units than the other races. It seems like this is at least partially why Zerg seems to not have many options. I'm not saying Zerg's underpowered, although people will no doubt gloss over this post and say that I am, instead I'm saying that Zerg's very constrained strategy-wise. It's not only that they have distinct units that are always a better choice than other units, it's that they simply don't have as many units as the other races. This isn't good for the game from a viewers' perspective either. Hydras are great, but watching them fight is just okay, and will likely get boring after seeing them in pretty much every matchup. At the same time this isn't exactly easy to fix, you can't just throw units at Starcraft II and hope they stick. Personally I think Blizzard's going to need to add at least another unit if they want to improve army diversity.
|
You forgot the queen, that makes it 11
And since an overlord can be used as dropship, dropping creep spell you could count him as 12
Ofcourse that would give the zerg 3 non-combat units, 2 of them wich are basicly upgraded supply depot's so to say, so your point still holds.
And if you add the overseer to zerg, also put the observer with protoss, wich puts them at 13
edit nvm, didn't see the the "combat units" in the post.
But if you don't add the observer to protoss then also don't add the overseer to the zerg, since they both fill the same role basicly, and changeling isn't exactly a combat spell. (so that makes it 12-12-9 actually)
|
Maybe they plan to add 3 new Zerg units in the first expansion and only one to Terran and Protoss?
|
On March 16 2010 06:00 FictionJV wrote: You forgot the queen, that makes it 11
And since an overlord can be used as dropship, dropping creep spell you could count him as 12
Ofcourse that would give the zerg 3 non-combat units, 2 of them wich are basicly upgraded supply depot's so to say, so your point still holds.
And if you add the overseer to zerg, also put the observer with protoss, wich puts them at 13 Queen helps against small rushes, but I think it's obvious why nobody actually uses them with their army past the four minute mark. This is why I didn't count them, they're not really a combat unit, they're the macro mechanic (and some other spells).
Didn't count Overseers because I didn't count Observers. Didn't count Overlords because I didn't count Phase Prisms. None of these units fight.
So yeah, that's why they weren't mentioned.
EDIT: didn't realize I put Overseer in there. Editing the main post.
|
i wouldnt count the queen as a combat unit zergs wont ever use the queens out on the battlefields cause they r slow low hp dmg and their healing spell cost 50 xd
|
then you should edit your post, because the overseer is in your zerg list
It is that that caused my confusion, so with the overseer gone the zerg list goes to 9
|
I think the main problem is that Protoss and Terran have more spell caster units. Protoss have one at tier one and one at tier two, Sentry and High Templar. Terran have one at tier two and tier three, Ghost and Raven.
Zerg technically have two, but the Queen never leaves the base and rarely uses its spells in combat anyway. It's more of a mirror of the other races macro mechanics than it is of their spell casters.
Basically I think the Zerg need another spell caster unit that plays more of a defensive support role.
|
On March 16 2010 06:06 KhaosKreator wrote: I think the main problem is that Protoss and Terran have more spell caster units. Protoss have one at tier one and one at tier two, Sentry and High Templar. Terran have one at tier two and tier three, Ghost and Raven.
Zerg technically have two, but the Queen never leaves the base and rarely uses its spells in combat anyway. It's more of a mirror of the other races macro mechanics than it is of their spell casters.
Basically I think the Zerg need another spell caster unit that plays more of a defensive support role. Starts with a D...
|
its ok dude u can win by just making banelings all game you dont need more units
|
I don't think the problem is the number of units, but the abilities. While other races' units can do cool stuff like blink, cliffjump, transform ground-air, stim, cloak etc., most of zerg's fighting units are just that: fighters. Zerglings, hydras, mutas and ultras can't do anything fancy other than attack.
|
Currently infestors are a defensive spell caster imo because of lack of range and spells they use i wouldn't use them in an offensive setting as they'll just die but wheni can set them up on a cliff or at a choke they can be used.
|
i think its cuz the lurker was removed JUST before the beta, and they didn't really have time to put in a unit that substituted its role. i honestly foresee it being put back in.
|
IMHO 3 is still a big difference weather Zerg lacks cool ablility or not.
Yeah, I know it is redundant, but they should've found a way to at least keep the lurkers..
|
just throwing it out there: it'd be cool to see drones have an ability to morph into a new unit, perhaps a tier 1.5 or 2 ability. Perhaps even an additional building that could come to life when a number of additional drones entered it. This would work beautifully with overlords' creep creation. I don't have a beta, so I'll let experienced players elaborate this idea if they like it.
|
Decreasing range on Parasite also made it so that fungal bloom is basically the only spell you'll use them for. It does no good trying to parasite a collossus when I have to come well within the range of his entire army to hit him. The infestor would work well if it was really rugged, or really long range, or stealthy, or quick, or cheap, but it is none of those. It's not worth losing 1.5 mutalisks or 3 hydralisks for an infester unless you know straight up that your opponent is massing zealots or marines.
With the way that NP works now, it should be permanent, non channeled.
Zerg unit selection is boring in general. You have 4 core units (ling, roach, hydra, muta) all of which just do and take damage. Then a few specialist/"finisher" units (and you generally can't afford to mix them, since they all cost so much for the building and basic upgrades).
|
Canada135 Posts
If this has been answered before I am sorry, but does anyone know why the lurker was removed? I heard it was because "no one was using them" but that does not seem like much of a reason. Anyone have more concrete insight?
|
On March 16 2010 06:23 Razamataz wrote: If this has been answered before I am sorry, but does anyone know why the lurker was removed? I heard it was because "no one was using them" but that does not seem like much of a reason. Anyone have more concrete insight?
That's the reason.
For some reason they made lurkers T3 (but gave them siege tank range) and for some reason were surprised when every one chose Broodlords or ultralisks instead of lurkers. They've talked about "working" on lurkers (and another unit that was removed, but I can't recall what it was) and putting them back into the game once they've been polished a little.
Zerg are really missing out on lurkers, scourge, and defilers though.
|
best option is to town down the hydralisk put in lurkers (tier 3) and introduce maye a light armor tier 2 unit
|
On March 16 2010 06:09 Paperkat wrote: its ok dude u can win by just making banelings all game you dont need more units
And you're in copper division right?
That's what i thought.
|
On March 16 2010 06:40 r4j2ill wrote: best option is to town down the hydralisk put in lurkers (tier 3) and introduce maye a light armor tier 2 unit
Why? T3 lurker was removed because it's useless to get lurkers as an end game "finisher" unit, and what purpose do you imagine for a "light armor tier 2 unit"? Can you explain your reasoning?
|
All of the special abilities that the units have are a wash. Burrow movement is completely useless because detection is so easy to get now. Corruptor corruption web or whatever it is called is kinda useful. But it is hardly going to swing the game in your favor.
I was initially resisting bringing back the lurker but now it looks like they don't intend to bring back anything at all, so hell a lurker is better than nothing.
I believe that a tier 2.75 lurker would be at the very least useful. Yeah sure, there is detection, but if the stats are good enough they could be brought out on the field and massed about the same time banshees with cloak come out. As long as their stats are good enough that they can be used with support, that'll have to do.
|
wasn't this always the case in bw as well?
|
I was thinking and counting this as I went to bed last night and it really struck me as odd.
Diversity wont really spawn from fixing the Infestor I'm afraid.
I really miss lurkers, and I dont wanna turn this thread into "fix the game" thread - because I love it and I think it's great already but I also belive that if they increased the collisionsize abit will make certain things and units more viable and more diverse in general in this game, and maybe it could bring back the Lurker in some way
|
On March 16 2010 06:40 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 06:09 Paperkat wrote: its ok dude u can win by just making banelings all game you dont need more units And you're in copper division right? That's what i thought.
im not and 1 baneling killed 16 marines in a game i played today gg banelings retarded as hell
|
On March 16 2010 06:53 azndsh wrote: wasn't this always the case in bw as well? Yeah, and I guess that's the only reason I can see it as beeing valid designwise, but in BW it worked alot diffrently. Maybe we will see transitions between techs that effect gameplay when things are figured out more, who knows.
|
On March 16 2010 06:12 Scorch wrote: I don't think the problem is the number of units, but the abilities. While other races' units can do cool stuff like blink, cliffjump, transform ground-air, stim, cloak etc., most of zerg's fighting units are just that: fighters. Zerglings, hydras, mutas and ultras can't do anything fancy other than attack.
I actually agree with this post. And even the roach is just an combat unit, until you upgrade its tech and only them it becomes more strategic. So that makes 5 units that only fight and have no good abilities.
Corruptors and broodlords are cool units with useful and interesting abilities, but the corruptor is too situational and the broodlord is a late game unit.
On the other side, I also feel Zerg lack one unit and especially a unit like the lurker or the lurker itself.
|
Hmmm, I do tend to agree a little bit. However as a Zerg player in Sc2 Beta, I like the units I have now. I'm totally fine with the amount of units the Zerg has. I know what each unit's purpose is, what units they counter, and how they should all be utilized.
The only addition I'd like to see is a caster unit to replace the defiler, and possibly a siege unit like the lurker.
|
On March 16 2010 06:58 Paperkat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 06:40 SLush wrote:On March 16 2010 06:09 Paperkat wrote: its ok dude u can win by just making banelings all game you dont need more units And you're in copper division right? That's what i thought. banelings retarded as hell
I agree with this, even if I don't lose to them I just don't like them or the concept.
|
United States7166 Posts
yeah when you compare the races..
zealots have Charge, stalkers Blink, sentries have Force Field which is the coolest ability ever, along with Guardian Shield and Hallucination, templars have feedback/psi storm/form archon, phoenixes have graviton beams, void rays a cool mechanic, warp-in, immortals have hardened shield, colossuses walk up and down cliffs are are super awesome, dark templars are permanently invisible ninjas, mothership has cloak mass recall and nether void or whatever
marines have stim, marauders have stim and slow units with their shots, reapers jump up and down cliffs and have cool weapons and mechanics, ghosts can EMP / Snipe / Calldown Nuke / Cloak, hellions are super speedy vultures with flamethrowers, siege tanks have siege mode, Thors have special cannon abilities and are badass, vikings transform, banshees cloak, medivacs Heal, Ravens have 3 totally sweet abilities (turret/defense drone/HSM), and finally Battlecruisers are sweet and have yamato
all zerg ground can Burrow, but this is pretty boring. zerglings have nothing, banelings explode which is cool but not nearly as fun as Lurkers are for both players in the game, roaches regen when burrowed which is just ok, hydras have nothing, mutalisks have nothing and cant be microed like in BW, Queens can spread more creep and heal stuff, boring, corruptors can disable buildings for a short time (pretty boring as it only applies to buildings, not nearly as cool as Graviton Beam), infestors spawn useless infested terrans, neural parasite is cool, fungal growth is decent (roaches/infestors can move while Burrowed, mildly interesting), Broodlord spawn broodlings on attack which is..ok, ultralisks have no special abilities but are badass.
zerg also lacks a single unit that can attack while invisible, now that Lurker was strangely removed. I don't know why blizzard is so against these units, but at least other races have DTs, mothership cloak all units/buildings, banshees, and ghosts.
so yeah zerg is really lacking in terms of abilities and also unit diversity and unit numbers. yes it's probably because zerg, unlike terran/protoss, lack any sort of technology, but cant they have cool biological/evolved abilities? pretty lacking right now
|
Banelings are about as expensive as roaches and can only explode once and have 30 hp :/ If you die to mass baneling, either you did something totally wrong, or the zerg player caught you nicely off guard (or was able to contain you fairly well).
There really isn't much option imo. Although it feels we have some options (hydra+roach, roach+ling, ling+muta, massmuta, muta+roach, hydra+ling and banelings/infestors for good measure with ultras and broodlords to finish it off), I still think its somewhat limited as pretty much every unit is 'get them pretty close to enemy'. Of course I have to elaborate this thought: lurkers were a more unique playstyle, defilers made it fairly possible to get up closer. Atm its nothing but "get a mass army and get them to attack the enemy' and not so much 'quick harass with a unit' (dark templar/ghost) or 'have to be stationary to deal some nice dmg' (siege tanks). Of course this is the zergs playstyle, but the lack of lurker/defiler makes it even more straightforward.
|
mutas have splash damage, i might add
|
On March 16 2010 06:02 Deviation wrote: Maybe they plan to add 3 new Zerg units in the first expansion and only one to Terran and Protoss?
I see what you did there In all seriousness, though, while that sort of promise doesn't make me feel better for now, you know that with all the depth the game already has (and what we see in beta doesn't include a great many things in the campaign seen at Blizzcon) I can't help but be excited to see what is to come in expansions, after this game sells 5 or 10 million copies on day 1. :>
Technically Zerg ha(s|d) some combat units the OP didn't mention. The Infested Terran (lulz, BLIZZARD IF YOU ARE READING please get rid of this ability, it makes no sense, and even though its situational usefulness as an anti-air option is reasonable, I'd much much rather the Infestor squirted out something other than an infested marine power suit hatched from an egg!), the Lurker (R.I.P), and the Broodling (spawned from destroyed buildings and Moustache Lords).
I see very very little spire usage nowadays, which is sad because Corrupters are really good if you take the time to fag up buildings continually with their spell. Muta+Corrupter with the Barracks all fagged up for several minutes while you whittle down his M&M until he has no more defenders and your mutas keep coming... Can you picture it? Vikings are a highly-microable anti-air counter though, with 9 ranged, and Corrupters aren't that great against them due to their shorter range and slower flight speed, but they also tend to stack up when being microed and so massed mutas beats Vikings cost for cost with the splash...
If Zerg was to gain a new unit I would put in something AA at tier 1, perhaps another sidegrade to the Zergling which can fire mini-hydra spines. The Hydraling :>
|
I hope they nerf down to hydras to tier 1 again and bring back those lurkers.. as it was before.. :D
|
On March 16 2010 08:10 Gedrah wrote: ...
If Zerg was to gain a new unit I would put in something AA at tier 1, perhaps another sidegrade to the Zergling which can fire mini-hydra spines. The Hydraling :> OR, maybe the solution is to add another unit called the superdrone. its special ability is "be 2 drones." it could cost about 2x a normal drone.
|
On March 16 2010 08:18 OneBk wrote: I hope they nerf down to hydras to tier 1 again and bring back those lurkers.. as it was before.. :D
Putting hydras in tier 1 would be a buff, not a nerf. Also lurkers was removed because no one ever used them.
|
Well the obvious point is that Roaches, Hydras, Zerglings, and Mutas are the answer to everything we're seeing in metagame ATM. What else do you need?
|
On March 16 2010 08:30 baller wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 08:10 Gedrah wrote: ...
If Zerg was to gain a new unit I would put in something AA at tier 1, perhaps another sidegrade to the Zergling which can fire mini-hydra spines. The Hydraling :> OR, maybe the solution is to add another unit called the superdrone. its special ability is "be 2 drones." it could cost about 2x a normal drone.
that would be pretty op, i think it would get nerfed so it would cost 2 larvae as well
In serious though, i think zerg are lacking units. Yer were pretty good if we mass up the same units themselves, but its definatley a lot less fun.
Also someone mentioned corrupters being useless. I think muta/corrupter is an awesome combo, if you get air advantage early a corrupter can secure that air advantage for most of the game. Also if they haven't put cannon/turrets up yet you can just spam the currupters spell on any they try to build, in which time all of their workers are taken care of.
|
I don't know about you guys. I've been playing only zerg; I've logged nearly 100 games. I love it. Their concept isn't to have "cool" abilities; they're the ZERG SWARM. They swarm their enemies with unrelenting and overwhelming numbers, infest enemy units and burst out of the very ground.
I just love it when I'm tightening the noose on my opponent and then finish him off with a massive onslaught of units to his front main, two nydus worms in his base, and 5 hatcheries fully injected with larvea with rallied lings.
|
for unknowen reason bliz removed, the most fun stuff from bw, stacking muta micro agains marines, was so much fun ... if they just let the stucking with an overlord, it would be so much more fun to play zerg
they want make infestor usefull, but are nerfing it ... mindcontroll with range of 7??????? wtf you can controll from that range? a mariner zealot? ...
|
What about a unit that can only live on creep (e.g. loses health quickly when not on creep) and basically can function as a sort of miniwall/grabber/pusher (i.e. stops them from moving thru, hold units in their place or pushes them to a certain direction). Their hitpoints being about 120, they move with the speed of an infestor, deal very low dmg (say 5-7) at a normal atttack rate (or leave dmg out), are a melee unit, have biological armor with 0 armor and count as a light unit (e.g. that hellion can deal fairly nice dmg to it). Cost 100 minerals. Tier2 tech and becomes available when you get lair and have a pool out.
The idea is that you can basically "catch infiltrators" in your base and move them towards your army.
A slightly different idea: a unit that is a eater. A fairly slow unit with a decent amount of hp that literally eats units. As an attack, this unit is able to spawn "grabbers" that can catch a unit when its low hp and bring it to the eater which will devour it. The grabbers will spawn similarly to the broodlings that a broodlord spawns, will last only for a short while, have 50 hp and move as fast as a roach or hydra. Once a unit is grabbed it will basically be immune to attacks or healing (which forces the AI, or the player to attack at a different unit). But, a grabber that caught a unit can be killed and when it dies the unit, that was caught, will return to the battlefield, with the hp it had when it was caught.
|
On March 16 2010 09:47 Koffiegast wrote: What about a unit that can only live on creep (e.g. loses health quickly when not on creep) and basically can function as a sort of miniwall/grabber/pusher (i.e. stops them from moving thru, hold units in their place or pushes them to a certain direction). Their hitpoints being about 120, they move with the speed of an infestor, deal very low dmg (say 5-7) at a normal atttack rate (or leave dmg out), are a melee unit, have biological armor with 0 armor and count as a light unit (e.g. that hellion can deal fairly nice dmg to it). Cost 100 minerals. Tier2 tech and becomes available when you get lair and have a pool out.
The idea is that you can basically "catch infiltrators" in your base and move them towards your army.
A slightly different idea: a unit that is a eater. A fairly slow unit with a decent amount of hp that literally eats units. As an attack, this unit is able to spawn "grabbers" that can catch a unit when its low hp and bring it to the eater which will devour it. The grabbers will spawn similarly to the broodlings that a broodlord spawns, will last only for a short while, have 50 hp and move as fast as a roach or hydra. Once a unit is grabbed it will basically be immune to attacks or healing (which forces the AI, or the player to attack at a different unit). But, a grabber that caught a unit can be killed and when it dies the unit, that was caught, will return to the battlefield, with the hp it had when it was caught.
The second idea is totally kodo beasts from WC3.
|
theres also broodling.. TECHNICALLY
|
muta. they need to make muta viable in more situation then just swarming tosses.
|
I wouldn't mind seeing scourge, lurkers, and defilers make a come back...
|
On March 16 2010 06:07 McCain wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 06:06 KhaosKreator wrote: I think the main problem is that Protoss and Terran have more spell caster units. Protoss have one at tier one and one at tier two, Sentry and High Templar. Terran have one at tier two and tier three, Ghost and Raven.
Zerg technically have two, but the Queen never leaves the base and rarely uses its spells in combat anyway. It's more of a mirror of the other races macro mechanics than it is of their spell casters.
Basically I think the Zerg need another spell caster unit that plays more of a defensive support role. Starts with a D...
D.. d...de..de.....
|
yea there are two really boring things about sc2
a) Mech isnt really strong for Terran, thors are useless atm
and even worse
b) zerg is a superboring race compared to t/p. i mean... z has only one real casterunit and even this unit got boring spells, comon "Neural parasite" u can control another unit.. wow! very creative... infested terran is just crap.
put back the fucking lurker and give zerg another caster or completely change the infester thx =]
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think the Thor is good TvZ
But I agree the Infestor is a really poor replacement for the defiler. Even if all they did was remove the stupid infested terran spell, it'd be a huge step in the right direction.
|
i want plaguu back
|
well maybe u can sometimgs build thors against zerg if u mech but its not as strong as bio imo.
they have to change the thor =[ he sucks in tvt and in tvp hes freaking useless its not even funny. first step should be to resize him a bit (make him smaller) and increase maybe his abilityrange, so he can handle colossi, on the other hand... his ability is very boring anyway imo =(.
Dont get me wrong, sc2 is a very good game but sometimes i think it lacks creativity, there could be so much "cooler" abilitys :/
|
Terran have 2 front line units only : ( rest are more support wtb 1 more
|
On March 16 2010 10:04 synapse wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 06:07 McCain wrote:On March 16 2010 06:06 KhaosKreator wrote: I think the main problem is that Protoss and Terran have more spell caster units. Protoss have one at tier one and one at tier two, Sentry and High Templar. Terran have one at tier two and tier three, Ghost and Raven.
Zerg technically have two, but the Queen never leaves the base and rarely uses its spells in combat anyway. It's more of a mirror of the other races macro mechanics than it is of their spell casters.
Basically I think the Zerg need another spell caster unit that plays more of a defensive support role. Starts with a D... D.. d...de..de.....
Devourer? Totally
|
On March 16 2010 10:31 dogabutila wrote:i want plaguu back
Plagues would be so less impressive in SC2 simply because of unit clumping. Every single plague would hit the entire army. Hard to make that exciting...
|
On March 16 2010 10:56 HuskyTheHusky wrote:Plagues would be so less impressive in SC2 simply because of unit clumping. Every single plague would hit the entire army. Hard to make that exciting...
They kept storm and just tweaked it a little bit. Why not just make the plague radius a little smaller?
Same concept.
Edit: and another thought, is it just me or is storm so much more boring than it was in BW? Maybe you're right.
|
Zerg honestly need a distinct unit with a real neat ability. I mean, Terran have Raven with their questionably balanced hunter seeker and ghost with emp which rapes P, Protoss have stom. Zerg have the infestor who's mind control ability has very limited uses. They honestly need to bring in a caster, im wishing defilers were still in the game.
|
wow, I didn't realize that. Good stuff. I wonder if they will add the 'uberlisk' that was in thier world editor video /drools
(I know that they won't but man that would be cool)
|
On March 16 2010 05:55 McCain wrote:
Q. Do you agree that the Zerg currently suffers from a lack of diverse army composition, and if so what are your plans to fix it?
A. Yes, we are looking at the Zerg diversity issue. We are working to make the Infestor a more core part of more match-ups. We will continue to moniter the use of Banelings, Roaches, Hydras, Zerglings, Mutalisks and Corruptors to make sure the Zerg army remains diverse in each match-up.
Yes because lowering the cast range + hp of the infestor and nerfing fungal growth will make it used MORE often. Perma mind control whoopdie fuckn doo, that would be nice if you could actually even get to cast it without the infestor popping before its rediculously slow (and now short) tongue hook gets there.
Genius blizzard, genius.
IMO dustin was not the go-to guy to head this project.
|
SC1 /SC2
Terran (11) /(12) Marine /Marine NOTHING /Reaper(new harasser-can't take dmg; can deal) Firebat /Marauder(new replacement doesn't play like old) Medic /Medivac Ghost /Ghost Vulture /Hellion Goliath /Thor(gta) Siege Tank /Siege Tank Valkyrie /Viking(ata) Wraith /Banshee(cloaked ground harasser) Science Vessel /Raven Battlecruiser /Battlecruiser
Protoss (11) /(12) Zealot /Zealot NOTHING /Stalker (new harasser-can't take dmg; weak atk) Dragoon /Immortal(new replacement doesn't play like old) Dark Templar /Dark Templar High Templar /High Templar Archon /Archon Dark Archon /Sentry(spell caster) Reaver /Colossus(area damage dealer) Corsair /Phoenix(light air attacker) Scout /Voidray(captial ship attacker) Carrier /Carrier Arbitor /Mothership
Zerg (10) /(10) Zergling /Zergling NOTHING /Roach(burrowed movement harasser+) Hydralisk /Hydralisk(new replacement doesn't play like old) Lurker /Baneling(area damage dealer) Mutalisk /Mutalisk Devourer /Corruptor(kind of replaced scourge too) Guardian /Broodlord Scourge Queen /Queen(new replacement doesn't play like old) Defiler /Infestor Ultralisk /Ultralisk
Terran and Protoss always had one more unit. T, P, and Z all got a new harasser with their own ways of escape (cliff hopping, blinking, burrowed movement) Now Z is down another unit making them 2 less than T and P because corruptor replaced 2 anti-air units. This is fine and does not contribute to a stale ground army at all. It is just that people like to mass one unit and not diversify. Instead of making just roach or just baneling why not make both? because it costs 2 tech buildings? That's kind of silly considering T and P build multiple of the same building just to produce units.
Bonus New Harasser Critique Reaper(50/50) can't take damage, but can deal damage*no fix*. Stalker(125/50) can take much damage, but can't deal damage but can attack air*suggest cost 100/50 and boost attack*. (Reaper/Roach cannot attack air) You are paying 50 more minerals than a reaper for more life and ability to attack air. Roach(75/25) can take damage and can deal damage*suggest cost 75/50*. You are paying 25 more minerals for more life.
edit: but everyone just mass roaches really...they are too good to be used as only harasser right now but make them cost more gas and we'll see if they are still massed. also but everyone just never makes stalkers...they are too not good to be used as a harasser right now but make them cheaper and do more damage and we'll see if they are still not used.
|
On March 16 2010 16:55 zomgzergrush wrote: IMO dustin was not the go-to guy to head this project.
lol you cant really blame everything on him though!
Would have been cool if they used the entirety of Starcraft 1 as a jumpoff template though.. I think most people woulda been happy with a few new units and some tweaks while keeping the core the same : \
|
thats why zerg is easier to play cause they got less units.
|
I just want (weaker) Hydras back on T1...
Why?
1 Having to basically *rush* Hydras or Mutas just in case your enemy is getting 2-3 Airunits is not fun.. In most games this is no problem anyway, you want one of these Units out anyway because Zerglings aren't what they once were and Roachs get fucked over by their counters like it's nobodies business...
2. On T1 the unit is totally BORING. It gets, theoretically, more fun/interesting once you reach T2 and get it's upgrades... Which only cost 450/450, take forever to get and are not very strong because everyone has detection at that time anyway and burrowed Units can't burrow uphill or under buildings...)...
3. To me it feels like a (against Zerg +1) Zealot with a little range. It destroys Marines, Zerglings and (rl) Zealots. Just like Zealots in SC/BW did and it begins to lose against Marines when they they get some Support (Marauders in SC2, Firebats/Medics in SC1).
The Roach is just a retarded unit whichs main purpose is to quickly kill players that have no Idea how to deal with it... And for ZvZ.
Btw: When it comes to Toss... Remake the whole Robotics tree... If you go for a game with hard counters then it is probably a rather stupid idea to have 2 hard counters + your best harassment options + your transport/moveable Warpgate beacon + your best scout + your only moveable stealth detection in one Techtree featuring a grand total of 2 buildings and 3 upgrades (of which 2 are of very questionable use/need)... Really, if there would be some sort of Anti-Air in this tree, or Stalkers were stronger against air, you wouldn't need anything else ever. Oh, and Protoss is actually fun to play... Way more fun than Zerg for sure...
|
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.
That being said, zergs have lots of options and strategies but they they lack diversity in their army. Alot of time you only see 2-3 units at a time in the zerg army. And its the same units in all matchups just different timings and numbers. People are not gonna mix in different units if the units they have are so strong already right?
|
As far as I know they want to add new units with the 2 expansions. If they already care about diverese armies they won't have a place to fit new units in without basically having 2 units for one purpose. Which is BAD.
|
On March 16 2010 17:05 ffswowsucks wrote: thats why zerg is easier to play cause they got less units.
So then by this logic zerg would become harder to play if they added scourges, lurkers and defilers?
|
I think the fact that zerg has the least amount of units that have dmg that counters an armor type is what's making them so easy to play and feeling like they have less units. Hydras do flat damage and so do roaches. Neither get a bonus towards any armor type. So zerg doesn't even feel like it has an empty spot for another ground unit right now. Right now they have no unit that hard counters armored units. Not like they need it since they can just spam their flat damage hydras and roaches to counter mostly anything. Only thing zerg players needs to worry about is what the opponent is getting to counter them.
|
this is a problem because most people in europe at least seem to agree that z is the strongest race, and if blizzard adds another unit or tier 3 spell caster then zerg will only get stronger ;( hmm
|
Zerg armies in SC2 are too slow
Think roaches and hydras off creep. Does that really feel like the zerg we loved ín bw?
|
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.
That being said, zergs have lots of options and strategies but they they lack diversity in their army. Alot of time you only see 2-3 units at a time in the zerg army. And its the same units in all matchups just different timings and numbers. People are not gonna mix in different units if the units they have are so strong already right?
You are right, but for the wrong reason. The reason is "you shouldnt make anything else, as it will be obliterated within a sec" and going "muta+hydra" is just not possible unless you got like 4 bases. Thats exactly why people dont make more than 2 and sometimes 3 different units as Zerg.
|
If infestors become fun and there are more interesting openings for zerg it'll be much more fun, atm its like theres very few options and the few options there are are very similar. A new unit or 2 would be very nice.
I think speedlings should be able to be morphed into scourge like units that fly and can hit air and massive units only.
Then I'm not fussed about lurkers coming back or not but some more spells in the mix would be nice, kind of like how templars are an optional route and not vital if you go with other units.
I think the most obvious thing I could hope for is infested dark templar :D Maybe instead of just attacking it poisons or lowers armour or something plague like.
Guardian shield is kinda like swarm so a new swarm would bring a bit to much sameyness between bringing back swarm for zerg. Maybe just straight forwards plague but nerfed a bit maybe only does 50% dmg or less or is channeled or something.
Whatever happens I hope it happens in beta and not delayed till the expansion which would be typical blizzard
|
On March 16 2010 20:02 FortuneSyn wrote: Zerg armies in SC2 are too slow
Think roaches and hydras off creep. Does that really feel like the zerg we loved ín bw?
That's why you use generate creep and creep tumor, Sir. Covering the whole map in creep is a core element of SC2 zerg play. In turn, good p/t players will try to get rid of creep (though it's very expensive for terran until a raven is out).
Creep in SC2 imo has some parallels to minefields in SCBW.
|
On March 16 2010 19:36 spinesheath wrote: As far as I know they want to add new units with the 2 expansions. If they already care about diverese armies they won't have a place to fit new units in without basically having 2 units for one purpose. Which is BAD.
There are already a lot of units which are multi use they just suck at one particular type of situation each though i.e. reapers are good for ambush, harass and killing immortals etc but they aren't good enough to replace a maruader or marine as a bulk of your army in most cases though they can make do to a certain degree.
|
Zerg needs scourge and lurkers back, they were such useful units. It might get imbalanced if they both get added in but they could just nerf mutalisks as an exchange.
|
On March 16 2010 23:30 KinosJourney2 wrote: Zerg needs scourge and lurkers back, they were such useful units. It might get imbalanced if they both get added in but they could just nerf mutalisks as an exchange.
We definately could lose some more AA lol... not We need to get t2 to get hydras or mutas (or corruptors, but whos making these as their first unit when they get lair) that can attack air. T got units that can attack air at t1 and P at t1.5 if I'm correct (cybernetics core)
|
On March 16 2010 23:30 KinosJourney2 wrote: Zerg needs scourge and lurkers back, they were such useful units. It might get imbalanced if they both get added in but they could just nerf mutalisks as an exchange.
What is it that you people don't understand, lurkers is not in this game because they were not useful at all
|
On March 16 2010 23:19 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 20:02 FortuneSyn wrote: Zerg armies in SC2 are too slow
Think roaches and hydras off creep. Does that really feel like the zerg we loved ín bw? That's why you use generate creep and creep tumor, Sir. Covering the whole map in creep is a core element of SC2 zerg play. In turn, good p/t players will try to get rid of creep (though it's very expensive for terran until a raven is out). Creep in SC2 imo has some parallels to minefields in SCBW.
Exactly. Therefore, zerg has changed from "being anywhere at any time ultraling hydralinglurk flanks" to "Wait till I creep highway to your base so my units can be slightly faster than yours". It almost feels like a tank push.
The ONLY unit combination that has the same feeling as BW in terms of maneuverability and flanking (even outside creep) are ling/banelings.
Solution: Roaches should already come with the speed upgrade. Increase hydra speed.
|
On March 17 2010 00:02 Zoler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 23:30 KinosJourney2 wrote: Zerg needs scourge and lurkers back, they were such useful units. It might get imbalanced if they both get added in but they could just nerf mutalisks as an exchange. What is it that you people don't understand, lurkers is not in this game because they were not useful at all
Only because Roaches are way too good. I'll take Lurkers over broken Roaches any day.
|
You want diversity I win most of my games as zerg though 14 gas speed mass lings all mu except zvz where i have to play roach to win like half the time
|
We certainly need lurkers!
|
On March 17 2010 00:02 Zoler wrote: What is it that you people don't understand, lurkers is not in this game because they were not useful at all
This is only true because of the place lurkers were holding in the tech tree. I don't feel that lurkers fit as a T3 siege unit, which is the role it was playing. Personally I like the idea of lurkers coming back at T2 and perhaps having bonus dmg to armored.
This would definitely require tweaks to the current unit base, however I do feel it would go a long ways toward creating the diversity we want for zerg.
Edit: As a side note the bonus to armored would differentiate the role between the lurker and the baneling.
|
they should put hydras back to where they were in bw so that lurkers will have use again. I can totally see how no one would use them at T3. Roaches should be harrass units, moving while burrowed. Make roaches much weaker and bring their regeneration back.
|
On March 17 2010 01:19 pzea469 wrote: they should put hydras back to where they were in bw so that lurkers will have use again. I can totally see how no one would use them at T3. Roaches should be harrass units, moving while burrowed. Make roaches much weaker and bring their regeneration back.
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).
|
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.
|
If Queen isn't really fun for you guys, demand to Blizzard that the Heal ability should have GLOBAL cast range.
|
If infestor had dark swarm instead of infested terran, we would see:
1. More infestors being made 2. More non-roach/hydra builds (and hopefully a comeback of ultra/ling) 3. ZvZ would have a twist in that if 1 player simply stayed roach/hydra all game, the other could get infestors and swarm.
I would love to see all 2 of those changes.
Infestor should have: 1. Fungal whatever its called 2. Dark swarm 3. Consume (based on some formula of unit HP)
|
Technically the zerg only has 8 combat units because the ultralisk is just there to look cool, it doesn't actually do anything but die if you make it. >.>;
|
is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit'
|
On April 01 2010 11:19 lolaloc wrote: If Queen isn't really fun for you guys, demand to Blizzard that the Heal ability should have GLOBAL cast range.
Hah I posted that idea on this forum once. I even said that any units on creep should be healed with global range, so that it can't be used offensively. But for some reason, some biased TL mod thought it was overpowered and closed it right away.
|
On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit'
No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree.
|
On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree.
ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8
|
On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8
Queens cant move fast enough to keep up with any other z unit
|
On April 01 2010 11:38 zomgzergrush wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8 Queens cant move fast enough to keep up with any other z unit
same with thors for the terran
|
On April 01 2010 11:27 Synwave wrote: Technically the zerg only has 8 combat units because the ultralisk is just there to look cool, it doesn't actually do anything but die if you make it. >.>;
Ultras were never supposed to fight alone. Just like lone colossi die easily as well. Use them with a fat wad of speedlings and they are pretty good.
|
Broodlings, Infested Terrans and Queens. There are your missing 3. Add another unit to Z now and we have a lot of balance work ahead of us.
|
On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8
Queen is a defensive unit for macro purposes. It it not a combat unit you silly child.
|
On April 01 2010 11:49 OminouS wrote: Broodlings, Infested Terrans and Queens. There are your missing 3. Add another unit to Z now and we have a lot of balance work ahead of us. Oh I wasn't aware that a missileturret/hatchery was a combat unit, or that a unit that is completely useless for fighting counted either.
(if we're counting infested terrans, why wouldnt we count auto turret and seeker missile? hell might as well throw MULE in there if we're counting queen too)
|
On April 01 2010 11:51 bendez wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8 Queen is a defensive unit for macro purposes. It it not a combat unit you silly child.
the queen is a unit that can heal in combat, do moderate dps to both air and ground at range, has a decent amount of hp, and isn't light or armored so it doesn't take extra damage from any attacks, just the base damage. i don't see how it can't be considered a combat unit.
|
|
On April 01 2010 11:27 Savio wrote: If infestor had dark swarm instead of infested terran, we would see:
1. More infestors being made 2. More non-roach/hydra builds (and hopefully a comeback of ultra/ling) 3. ZvZ would have a twist in that if 1 player simply stayed roach/hydra all game, the other could get infestors and swarm.
I would love to see all 2 of those changes.
Infestor should have: 1. Fungal whatever its called 2. Dark swarm 3. Consume (based on some formula of unit HP)
What about TvZ? With fungal growth and dark swarm, it's auto-win for zerg
|
I don't think this'll directly address the supposed lack of Zerg combat viable units, but I think an interesting idea would be to remove the requirement of targeting a Hatch/Lair/Hive with Spawn Larva. So when Spawn Larva is used, the Queen will give birth to four larva after 5 seconds and the Queen has to be standing still and can't be doing anything else during that time. It'd have to be adjusted appropriately, like increasing the energy cost to 50 and giving it a cooldown of 50 seconds, or some combination of changes. Larva will still die if they don't have any creep to move on.
What this'll do is turn the Queen into a limited mobile Hatch. She can stay inside a base and spawn larva all day and it'd be mostly the same as how it is now. But this could work well with Creep Tumors since the generated creep will let her move better across the map and the creep will keep the larva alive while they're away from a Hatch. She will also be able to work well with Overlords for proxy; have the Overlord carry the Queen to some remote place, spit out creep, drop a creep tumor and spawn larva.
This change would make the Queen more reliable for being at the front line, but it remains different from the Protoss Warp-In mechanic in several ways, including: 1. Units are not immediately deployed and still must be grown like normal Zerg units. 2. Queens can reinforce the front line or flank with any Zerg unit, not just those from Gateways 3. Creep is visible to the player, but psi auras are not.
|
Why would I expose my macro unit to the front lines? It isn't as if reinforcing takes terribly long. Not to mention any slightly faster reinforce that could change a battle would be decided by the enemy just shooting the queen in the head first.
This post also doesn't address unit diversity at all. It just talks about moving a queen to the front lines. THE QUEEN IS ZERGS MACRO! Jeebus I wish people without a beta key would stfu in these threads.
|
On April 01 2010 12:17 Synwave wrote: Why would I expose my macro unit to the front lines? It isn't as if reinforcing takes terribly long. Not to mention any slightly faster reinforce that could change a battle would be decided by the enemy just shooting the queen in the head first.
This post also doesn't address unit diversity at all. It just talks about moving a queen to the front lines. THE QUEEN IS ZERGS MACRO! Jeebus I wish people without a beta key would stfu in these threads.
damn calm down man it's just some well-thought out unit ideas in perhaps not the best thread but still acceptable. jesus wtf
|
On April 01 2010 12:17 Synwave wrote: Why would I expose my macro unit to the front lines? It isn't as if reinforcing takes terribly long. Not to mention any slightly faster reinforce that could change a battle would be decided by the enemy just shooting the queen in the head first.
This post also doesn't address unit diversity at all. It just talks about moving a queen to the front lines. THE QUEEN IS ZERGS MACRO! Jeebus I wish people without a beta key would stfu in these threads.
Nerdrage is the cause of global warming Hey! The polar bears are going extinct because of you
In any case, it was just an idea to make Queens more than a macro unit. It is more likely that Blizzard will make amendments to whatever is present in beta compared to adding new abilities or units, so I'm seeing if it is possible to make certain units more interesting. You seem to be okay with how Queens work at the moment; would that be correct?
|
You don't really need to make new units for Z. The first step towards promoting diversity is balancing the zerg units that are already there.
First, I would really love to see Zerglings get bonus damage against Armored. (I know this sounds like blasphemy but I feel it is needed for them in SC2) Banelings are fine IMO. Roach need an armor nerf... I really feel they are the main culprit here, if Roaches are less tanky overall it would promote more flanking instead of A-moving which would also promote Infestors. I have no problems with Hydras. A T3 offensive spell for the overseer would be great... not necessarily dark swarm but something that would promote ultra/ling usage. Ultras need to be smaller. Slight BroodLord nerf cause theyre simply op.
Objective of these changes is to promote the use of melee zerg units and spell casters
|
I'll post what I posted in b-net. I think its pretty good.
Its pretty clear that the problem is zerg tier2.
Zerg needs a unit in tier2 that gives them another option to mass.
Protoss have three divergent tech options, while terran have simply more units to add on as the game progresses. Zerg has literally 4 units to choose from+banelings, which are only used with lings anyway, Roach/hydra, roach/muta, lingbling/hydra, lingbling/muta. I suspect that was the intended theme of the zerg, large masses of a couple unit times. Thats fine, the army is suppose to consist of few unit types, but that obviously doesn't mean the race shouldn't have a variety of units to pick from when making that army.
Zerg literally only have Hydra and Mutas. Mutas are problematic in their on right.
It isn't that Mutas are weak, but they've become a much more niche role. Hydralisks are unique as the only non t2 unit usable as a "Basic unit", yet are still relatively gas intensive. This presents a greater confliction with mutas, no with a niche unit as well (LurksvMutas), but with Basic unit Versus Mutas, or General versus Niche, in which cases the Mutas status as more of a niche unit is highlighted due to this confliction. Gas is simultaneously more sparse, yet less demanded of early game, yet remains just as valuable mid/late.
In the end, Z is basically forced to go Hydra in T2, unless theirs a "Niche" for the newly niche Mutalisks.
I suspect blizzard doesn't want to add a new T2 unit because they want to leave room for expansions.
Not out of greed to get you to buy the expansion lol, (and I'm a pretty cynical guy, but this isn't the reason here)
Rather they just want a stable, simplistic base in which they can expand on later. I'm sure this kind of basic, engaging and oddly symmetrical design is very appealing for them. They probably just don't LIKE the notion of having to draw from the expansion pool of "niche units and additions" , designed to expand a fully independently functioning game to create said independently functioning game.
In which case an Infestor buff is exactly, spot on, whats needed. Not just a statistics buff, but a reworking.
A armor debuff onto fungal will let zergling both remain useful all game, as well as make it viable to skill Hydras/roaches altogether for rushed infestors. This needs to be supplemented by a powerful infested terrans spell in order to make massed infestors appealing, preferably as a learned upgrade for them, and to supplant the absolute 100% need zerg have for hydras
|
On April 01 2010 11:43 karebear wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:38 zomgzergrush wrote:On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8 Queens cant move fast enough to keep up with any other z unit same with thors for the terran Queens don't have cannons that one shot kills units. Zerg units also move much faster than a queen compared to the difference in speed between a thor and the rest of the T army. Finally, I'm like 90% sure that a thor is faster than a queen off creep.
On April 01 2010 11:54 karebear wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 11:51 bendez wrote:On April 01 2010 11:37 karebear wrote:On April 01 2010 11:35 Synwave wrote:On April 01 2010 11:28 karebear wrote: is the medivac exactly a 'combat unit'?
it's more of a support than anything. that's like calling dropships in sc1 a 'combat unit' No its like calling the medic in sc1 a combat unit, which it is. Healing an army on the move increases its combat efficacy by a massive degree. ok well then the queen should be a combat unit too. so the ratio is 11:11 not 11:11:8 Queen is a defensive unit for macro purposes. It it not a combat unit you silly child. the queen is a unit that can heal in combat, do moderate dps to both air and ground at range, has a decent amount of hp, and isn't light or armored so it doesn't take extra damage from any attacks, just the base damage. i don't see how it can't be considered a combat unit. Queens can only heal ONE unit/structure for 50 energy, not 25 like spawn larvae. ONE. ONE zerg unit isn't terribly game changing.
They also cost 150 minerals for only slightly more damage than a ling.
Honestly, I like it how people who don't play the race think they've figured out so much more than us. Should really phrase these statements as:
"why DON'T Z's do xyz?"
followed by "well, good terran sir, thats because of abc" or maybe even possibly "haven't thought of that, we will see if it is viable"
instead of all the "you guys are playing the race wrong even though I don't play it at all" bullshit.
On April 01 2010 13:34 heyitsme wrote: You don't really need to make new units for Z. The first step towards promoting diversity is balancing the zerg units that are already there.
First, I would really love to see Zerglings get bonus damage against Armored. (I know this sounds like blasphemy but I feel it is needed for them in SC2) Banelings are fine IMO.
Roach need an armor nerf... I really feel they are the main culprit here, if Roaches are less tanky overall it would promote more flanking instead of A-moving which would also promote Infestors. I have no problems with Hydras. A T3 offensive spell for the overseer would be great... not necessarily dark swarm but something that would promote ultra/ling usage. Ultras need to be smaller. Slight BroodLord nerf cause theyre simply op.
Objective of these changes is to promote the use of melee zerg units and spell casters +1.... cept roaches do NOT need an armor nerf. The current nerfs have already made zvz even more retarded and effectively removed any useful "crackling" type upgrade from T3.
|
On April 01 2010 13:34 heyitsme wrote: You don't really need to make new units for Z. The first step towards promoting diversity is balancing the zerg units that are already there.
First, I would really love to see Zerglings get bonus damage against Armored. (I know this sounds like blasphemy but I feel it is needed for them in SC2) Banelings are fine IMO. Roach need an armor nerf... I really feel they are the main culprit here, if Roaches are less tanky overall it would promote more flanking instead of A-moving which would also promote Infestors. I have no problems with Hydras. A T3 offensive spell for the overseer would be great... not necessarily dark swarm but something that would promote ultra/ling usage. Ultras need to be smaller. Slight BroodLord nerf cause theyre simply op.
Objective of these changes is to promote the use of melee zerg units and spell casters
These are all great ideas.
But I've seen so many great ideas for a lot of things, and then when the patches come it's always the most boring things they choose to do. The races will never change, there won't be any new units or even abilities/upgrades.
Just take the brood lord for example. I've seen a lot of suggestions, including an energy bar for the broodlings. What does blizzard do? Nerf the damage... I saw a lot of suggestions to fix the warpgate, but what does Blizzard do? Nerf the research time. I've never seen any creative change to anything but I've read a lot of great suggestions. The overseer change is brilliant, the zergling upgrade is brilliant, but they will NEVER be implemented.
Zerg is doomed.
|
On April 01 2010 12:17 Synwave wrote: Why would I expose my macro unit to the front lines? It isn't as if reinforcing takes terribly long. Not to mention any slightly faster reinforce that could change a battle would be decided by the enemy just shooting the queen in the head first.
This post also doesn't address unit diversity at all. It just talks about moving a queen to the front lines. THE QUEEN IS ZERGS MACRO! Jeebus I wish people without a beta key would stfu in these threads.
+1.
|
Jesus, god forbid one should make more than a Queen per nest. Unthinkable really.
|
I would definitely like to see another unit in there... They got rid of the lurker right before Beta was released. but I think we'll just have to wait til the expansions.
|
So why again did they remove the lurker? Can't they just adjust it and place it in T2, that'll help unit diversity a bit.
|
idk, i usually use more type of units in ZvT and ZvP than my opponents do. Like hydra-ling-baneling-corruptor-broodlord maybe even roaches against P (or mutas ofc but then i use less of the others) and ling-baneling-roach-muta against T, and sometimes throwing in other units liek broodlords and infestors
The problem is with ZvZ. Either one million roaches or one trillion speedlings
Although i wouldnt mind a low tier caster unit, with a spell like buffing other units to have extra dmg against armored
Anyone else thinking about this?
|
On March 16 2010 06:04 McCain wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2010 06:00 FictionJV wrote: You forgot the queen, that makes it 11
And since an overlord can be used as dropship, dropping creep spell you could count him as 12
Ofcourse that would give the zerg 3 non-combat units, 2 of them wich are basicly upgraded supply depot's so to say, so your point still holds.
And if you add the overseer to zerg, also put the observer with protoss, wich puts them at 13 Queen helps against small rushes, but I think it's obvious why nobody actually uses them with their army past the four minute mark. This is why I didn't count them, You see lots of people using Mothership in their army?
|
Terran puts down barracks+factory, now has access to 5 units without tech labs. Zerg puts 2 buildings down, that cost drones, can now build 2 units.
Would a cool solution be adding banelings to spawning pool along with their tech ( remove baneling nest ), and do something similar with a lair building? Or perhaps give access to a unit when you upgrade to Lair . ( Maybe give infestor access w/ lair and move tech to evo chamber?, and change hive upgrade path into nydus network ).
Would require adjusting building times/costs/etc but it could be funky.
|
A simple unit that has bonus vs armored would be nice. I mean, both terran and toss got so many units with bonus this and that, while Z is pretty much forced to just spam one unit as pretty much none of them have a +bonus. Its just en masse roach & hydra to get units of both armored and light units so you aren't completely obliterated by a single unit.
Change Ultra also, I dont think anyone makes them and Hive tech isn't really persuasive, you get it for broodlord, t3 upgrades and.. thats it. The upgrades for lings is poor, the one for roaches is really nerfed and ultras are getting owned by t1 units of T and are easily kited and making more of them doesnt make sense as they will block each others ass on top of that the lings themselves aren't that great once ppl get to t2/t3.
|
On April 01 2010 22:04 Luckbox wrote: Terran puts down barracks+factory, now has access to 5 units without tech labs. Zerg puts 2 buildings down, that cost drones, can now build 2 units.
Without tech labs? Marine, helion and?
Also I could say: zerg puts down ultralisk cavern and can make gazilion ultras instantly, just needs larvae and money, while terran with one port could make only one BC at a time no matter how much money he has. The races just work differently, that's a good thing.
|
Ultras are not as bad as they seem. I've been using them of late. If you wait until 20 minutes into the game when there are 20 tanks, 15 immortals and 75 marauders and 5 collossi all with full upgrades on the field before you get your first unupgraded ultras, yeah they're gonna die pretty fast.
But if you try to get them out a bit earlier, ultras have a lot of hp, so they don't die very easily. You can usually pull them out of combat and take them back to your nat, where your queens will have a bit of extra energy since you don't need to spawn as many larvae.
As for queens. I really wish they'd just take out the creep restriction. Not only does it not make sense, it cripples the unit. I can't think of any queen rush that would have any real chance of success whatsoever in trying to get past a wall. The queen simply is not better than the zerglings you'll get out early, and it is crucial to spawn larvae early to get your economy going, so using your queen offensively is risky at best. They should just remove this restriction, and then people might use queens more often in their pushes.
|
I actually still don't get why people don't use queens as offensive healers. Queen's healing is actually more powerfull than medivac in some cases. Just take a look
Cost: Queens is cheaper (no gas and not even larvae!), supply is the same Healing potential: at full energy, medivac will heal 600 HP (3HP per 1 energy, max is 200). Queen could heal 500 HP (125 HP per 50 energy, max is 200) Mobility: Medivac is much more mobile, but Queen's healing has a substantialy bigger range, so you could easily heal your front troops from behind.
The Queen's healing is much much better for high HP units, because she cast the spell (and therefore heal 125 HP) almost instantly. Medivac is better suited for healing low HP units, but it's slow as fuck. 2 Marines will easily shoot a third to death despite being healed.
So...why not accompany your late game army of ultras/broodlords with couple of queens? It's not like these units are lighting fast.
I know the main problem is probably the 50 energy to 125 HP ratio. You usually don't have 50/100/150/200 energy so some of the energy is innevitably wasted because you ended with like 39 energy and can't cast anything.
I would propose to reduce the cost to 25 energy and the healed ammount to 60 HP. Then you can cast the spell more often and more effectively use your energy.
+ Show Spoiler +Please, no more that retarded "but...but I need my queens to spawn larvae!" argument. You could make how may queens you want.
|
It is because they are too slow, that's the only reason. Imagine if a dropship was as slow as a queen and was a ground unit. No one would use it.
I think it is a relic from when the queen started the game without requiring being built at a hatchery. It is an obsolete restriction that should be removed.
|
On April 02 2010 00:27 onmach wrote: It is because they are too slow, that's the only reason. Imagine if a dropship was as slow as a queen and was a ground unit. No one would use it.
I think it is a relic from when the queen started the game without requiring being built at a hatchery. It is an obsolete restriction that should be removed.
I think quicker queens led to some early game problems, maybe because of that the are so slow? What about speed upgrade at lair then?
I'd love to see queens used more and with bigger diversity. They are often just a spawn-larvae button now :/
|
If you're fighting on creep, then it's not as much of an issue. If you're using a nydus worm, it's also less of an issue. I think eventually we will be seeing queens used offensively, especially with ultras.
|
On April 02 2010 00:12 adelarge wrote:I actually still don't get why people don't use queens as offensive healers. Queen's healing is actually more powerfull than medivac in some cases. Just take a look Cost: Queens is cheaper (no gas and not even larvae!), supply is the same Healing potential: at full energy, medivac will heal 600 HP (3HP per 1 energy, max is 200). Queen could heal 500 HP (125 HP per 50 energy, max is 200) Mobility: Medivac is much more mobile, but Queen's healing has a substantialy bigger range, so you could easily heal your front troops from behind. The Queen's healing is much much better for high HP units, because she cast the spell (and therefore heal 125 HP) almost instantly. Medivac is better suited for healing low HP units, but it's slow as fuck. 2 Marines will easily shoot a third to death despite being healed. So...why not accompany your late game army of ultras/broodlords with couple of queens? It's not like these units are lighting fast. I know the main problem is probably the 50 energy to 125 HP ratio. You usually don't have 50/100/150/200 energy so some of the energy is innevitably wasted because you ended with like 39 energy and can't cast anything. I would propose to reduce the cost to 25 energy and the healed ammount to 60 HP. Then you can cast the spell more often and more effectively use your energy. + Show Spoiler +Please, no more that retarded "but...but I need my queens to spawn larvae!" argument. You could make how may queens you want.
Queens aren't meant to be an offensive unit , anyone who argues against this is just dumb and unless some ultra gosu of Jaedong/Flash level in SC1 starts using them as offensive units effectively in SC2 i will stay by this statement . The heal ability is used only in critical situation to save a hatchery sunken or an other building or queen . I can't imagine someone using queens on the offensive , because they are slow as hell and easy to kill and even if you have the whole map covert in creep or have a nudis network set up by that time the timing window when the queen could have possibly be of any help would be long gone .
The fact is zerg needs an other spellcaster and/or a tactical unit like the lurker badly . Zerg doesn't have a diversety of units which meens zerg doesn't have a diversity of strategy which meens playing zerg ISN'T AS FUN OR INTERESTING TO PLAY AS THE OTHER RACES WHICH IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM RIGHT NOW , AND NOT THE BALANCE OF THE GAME .
And arguments like zerg doesn't need knew units they are doing just fine without them are fucking stupid as well . Zerg has lesser units then the other races right now . If you take away for example the DT or the Banshee Protoss and Terran could very well do fine without them , but that is not the point . Just having them there as on option is 31231231 better then not having them at all .
You can't even compare the infestor/corruptor spells with the combined spells of ghost/raven and sentry/HT/mothership .
|
There is minimal infestor use...
I think they should just buff infestors first... then worry about unit diversity. If they start putting in units that do as much as the infestor, it won't make much of a difference.
|
Zerg needs another utility/spell caster unit AND a defensive unit (lurker)
|
About the Infestor: Fungal is an ok spell, but the other two spells are ridiculous. I mean, Dark Archon had a permanent, long-range mind control in bw and no one ever used it. In this game, it's not permanent, it has a short range, and it's telegraphed which unit is doing the mind controlling. Also, they first had it limited to BIONIC units. That's mind-boggingly stupid. Then all this talk about making it a core part of the gameplay, and a few days later they nerf it. Stuff like that is why I have no hope left for Zerg and why I'm attempting to switch to Terran despite their being kinda broken as well.
|
SC1: terran has 12 units toss has 13 zerg 10
|
I don't know if its really been suggested but I think this might be an interesting way to put lurkers back into the game.
In broodwar lurkers gave zerg a very tactical T2 unit that allowed for many many options when fighting terran, and protoss. It opened the door for solid containment strategies, harassment options with drop or run bys to areas of the opponents base with out detection. However, the lurker was removed from SC2 due to it "not being used" in internal testing, which personally I feel was due to it's placement at T3.
My suggestion is as follows. Put the lurker back in as a T2.5 unit, but instead of upgrading from the hydralisk make it upgrade from the roach, after researching lurker aspect at the roach warren after the lair completes. As for dmg from the lurker I think having 8x3 + 6 vs armored would be a good starting point as it would allow them to 2 shot marines (as per BW) and 3 shot Marauders, it would also mean that the +1 armor upgrade for terran infantry would make them 3 shot marines and 4 shot marauders. This would definitely allow for much more tactical play from zergs than we are currently seeing. It would also open up many more strategies in which roaches are not playing such a dominant role as they are being morphed to lurkers.
edit: I also think that this would flesh out T2 enough to allow the infestor to be moved to T3 or to at least have some T3 upgrades to make it a more viable late game caster. Obviously I'm not saying bring back dark swarm but maybe removing infested terran and replacing it with a T3 upgradeable spell would help add even more diversity to the zerg as a whole.
I posted this on the beta suggestion forums as well.
|
why do zerg need the same number of combat units as the other races? if protoss wants to switch from ground to air is has to mass up stargates. if zerg wants to they only need to build 1 building.
|
On April 02 2010 05:18 Postaljester wrote: why do zerg need the same number of combat units as the other races? if protoss wants to switch from ground to air is has to mass up stargates. if zerg wants to they only need to build 1 building.
I don't think any one is saying they need the same number of combat units. People are mostly saying that they lack diversity and that the easiest way to introduce more diversity into the zerg race as a whole, at this point, is going to be adding in just one more combat unit.
As per my last post, I think that that would open up a lot of options for blizzard to diversify the zerg race on the whole and make it more interesting for everyone to play and play against.
|
The key to army diversity isn't more units, it's modifying the existing units to handle much differently from each other and assume different roles. I feel that there's just too much overlap between units and too little diversity of use. Because Zerg is supposed to be the race that is most able to mass up units, there should be a few "core" units that are easily massable and a few "support" units that are used mainly for holding position, casting abilities, or defending expansions. I think the diversity problem arises because Zerg is given too many units that are made to mass and not enough units that are usually fewer in number due to supply cost/tech cost/resource cost but play crucial supporting roles. This also comes from the fact that units are made to be effective enough on their own.
|
On April 02 2010 05:52 LunarC wrote: The key to army diversity isn't more units, it's modifying the existing units to handle much differently from each other and assume different roles. I feel that there's just too much overlap between units and too little diversity of use. Because Zerg is supposed to be the race that is most able to mass up units, there should be a few "core" units that are easily massable and a few "support" units that are used mainly for holding position, casting abilities, or defending expansions. I think the diversity problem arises because Zerg is given too many units that are made to mass and not enough units that are usually fewer in number due to supply cost/tech cost/resource cost but play crucial supporting roles. This also comes from the fact that units are made to be effective enough on their own.
LunarC,
I pretty much agree with everything you said here. However, I feel that you can't really give each unit completely different roles if you don't have a large enough unit base. I mean you can very well introduce diversity by modifying existing units and re-defining their roles. However, this becomes much easier to do with a larger unit base.
The Zerg at the moment have 2 - 3 less combat units than the other races. By adding one unit that offers many tactical options, such as the lurker, you open up a lot of doors for the rest of the units to become more specialized. Personally I don't feel that you can diversify the units Zerg has enough to make the difference we would like to see as a whole, because doing so with so few units would narrow the options the Zerg have in any given situation.
To me it just seems because of the limited unit count Zerg has, not adding a unit while specializing each of the Zerg units, that are currently in the game, would lead to more hard counters when that is definitely not what the community on the whole has shown that they want to have happen.
|
Blizzard has already said that the Lurker isn't in place because the Baneling overlaps this role.
Hard counters are specific numerical advantages given to a unit, such as the Roach with high hitpoints, attack, and 2 armor. What I mean when I talk about different roles is modifying existing units to have multiple situational uses. For example, in Starcraft 1 the Lurker was used to hold position either outside of the opponent's base, or was used defensively to hold expansions. The Baneling is the best example of a unit that has diverse use, in this case.
Right now I think that many of the new units, such as the Roach and the Corruptor, have the potential to really diversify the Zerg race. Each has a special ability, but neither really encourage diverse use of the unit. Perhaps if Blizzard can modify numbers and give them abilities that make them work very differently from other units rather than abilities that encourage cute tactics like sneaking into bases or corrupting buildings, it would make the Zerg race feel more diverse.
Example: For Roach, replace Tunneling Claws with Calcification, allowing a Roach to temporarily morph into an immobile Chrysalis with 200 hitpoints and 4 armor. Takes 3 seconds to morph in and out and retains identical percentage damage. A Chrysalis can be burrowed, but a Roach cannot be Calcified when burrowed. Attack priority on a Chrysalis is lowest, as workers should be -,-
The Infestor could also stand to have more interesting abilities. It's just that the abilities don't have enough of an impact. Actually, I'd advocate buffing every single ability in the game.
|
On April 02 2010 02:16 Jyxz wrote: SC1: terran has 12 units toss has 13 zerg 10 Even so, zerg in sc1 was much more diverse than it is in sc2. Each matchup had different unit compositions, and even if you used the same composition how you used each unit changed. Mutas are a great example of this, as their role changes drastically from mid game ZvT to ZvP.
|
On April 02 2010 10:05 LunarC wrote: Blizzard has already said that the Lurker isn't in place because the Baneling overlaps this role.
Do you have a link to where Blizzard said this?
As far as I know the only Blizz said about removing the Lurker was that it was due to it being under used.
On April 02 2010 10:05 LunarC wrote: Hard counters are specific numerical advantages given to a unit, such as the Roach with high hitpoints, attack, and 2 armor.
Yes, I would agree. Hard counters are numerical advantages given to certain units when facing off against other units to such an extent that unless the unit being counters has vastly superior numbers the hard counter is always going to win, ala roach vs immortal.
On April 02 2010 10:05 LunarC wrote: What I mean when I talk about different roles is modifying existing units to have multiple situational uses. For example, in Starcraft 1 the Lurker was used to hold position either outside of the opponent's base, or was used defensively to hold expansions. The Baneling is the best example of a unit that has diverse use, in this case.
See I don't know if the current Zerg units have the ability to be modified to an extent to allow for the flexibility and tactical diversity that units like the Lurker and even the BW Mutalisk had. Don't get me wrong I have faith that Blizzard will get things worked out as they have proven to be very responsive to the community through out the beta thus far. I just really feel that the small number of units compared to Protoss and Terran is limiting what Blizzard is currently able to do with the Zerg.
On April 02 2010 10:05 LunarC wrote: Right now I think that many of the new units, such as the Roach and the Corruptor, have the potential to really diversify the Zerg race. Each has a special ability, but neither really encourage diverse use of the unit. Perhaps if Blizzard can modify numbers and give them abilities that make them work very differently from other units rather than abilities that encourage cute tactics like sneaking into bases or corrupting buildings, it would make the Zerg race feel more diverse.
I agree that adding new abilities to current units could definitely help diversity. I also feel that adding in a new unit or the lurker back to T2 as a morphed unit from the roach would be a good start. Like I said before I just don't feel Zerg has enough units to truly have each unit be specialized with out causing them to become hard counters in a lot of situation.
|
On April 02 2010 10:47 reallogic wrote: See I don't know if the current Zerg units have the ability to be modified to an extent to allow for the flexibility and tactical diversity that units like the Lurker and even the BW Mutalisk had. Don't get me wrong I have faith that Blizzard will get things worked out as they have proven to be very responsive to the community through out the beta thus far. I just really feel that the small number of units compared to Protoss and Terran is limiting what Blizzard is currently able to do with the Zerg.
To be totally honest, this is the kind of problem that I would prefer to see solved in an expansion. After all, Lurkers weren't in SC1; they were in SC1's expansion. And didn't the Zerg have the same problems in SC1 compared to BW? A bunch of A-move units, right? Zerglings, Hydralisks, Mutalisks. Queens were useless, so Zerg play centered around surviving Tier 2 to get to Tier 3.
The Infestor should get some improvements. A simple buff to Infested Terrans would be a strong start; make them more dangerous. And allowing Neural Parasite to work at longer ranges would also help. But it's current suite of spells is reasonably functional.
Even so, I think that the Zerg are a fairly full race at present. They cover all the bases and all of their units seem legitimately useful, if somewhat circumstantial for some (though Corruptors really need a damage buff).
I think that the key to dealing with the problem is seeing how Zerg play evolves as players learn how to play Zerg. And beta, unless it's a good year or so long, is probably not long enough to see that. To know what you need to add to the Zerg to make them better, you need to see how the Zerg are currently being used. You need to make sure that the core Zerg units are doing their jobs. Then, you can branch out into more "gimmicky" units, for want of a better term.
In short, I would rather that they make the Zerg solid for SC2's release, and then use the expansions to give them more flavor.
|
On April 02 2010 11:04 NicolBolas wrote: To be totally honest, this is the kind of problem that I would prefer to see solved in an expansion. After all, Lurkers weren't in SC1; they were in SC1's expansion. And didn't the Zerg have the same problems in SC1 compared to BW? A bunch of A-move units, right? Zerglings, Hydralisks, Mutalisks. Queens were useless, so Zerg play centered around surviving Tier 2 to get to Tier 3.
Honestly though this is a serious problem that can be solved now and should be before release. Saying that it can be solved in an expansion is a very true statement. However, why would you make all the Zerg players wait a year or more before their race is as diverse and fun to play as Protoss and Terran?
|
On April 02 2010 10:47 reallogic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 10:05 LunarC wrote: Blizzard has already said that the Lurker isn't in place because the Baneling overlaps this role.
Do you have a link to where Blizzard said this? As far as I know the only Blizz said about removing the Lurker was that it was due to it being under used.
The 9th post: http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23766988609&sid=3000
Text: + Show Spoiler +The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
RTS Community Team Blizzard Europe
I agree with the devs except for the fact that Lurkers were placed in a position on the tech-tree that allowed Zerg to smoothly transition into other units rather than having to devote an entire building to it, and that while Lurkers are fairly long-lived and effective in relatively small numbers for offensive and defensive purposes, Banelings demand constant production, using up precious larvae and resources. The main difference between Lurkers and Banelings is that Banelings require much more commitment and are more difficult to transition out of.
The Ultralisk is placed at a very high position in the tech tree and requires many bases to produce in effective numbers. This defeats the purpose of the Lurker which was used either to secure Zerg bases or to restrict the opponent's movements until higher tech units could be produced.
Ideally, I want to see the Roach modified to fit the previous role of the Lurker: Restricting army movement and protecting expansions. The Calcification ability I proposed does exactly this.
|
I think the problem with them saying that baneling fills that role already is that it shouldn't be looked at that way. For example, looking at the protoss tech tree we can say that collosus and templar serve the same role: killing masses of light/small units. However, both of them are produced and are products of diverging tech trees, that of templar and that of the robo-bay, and they function with different mechnics/skills.
There's no reason lurkers and banelings can't over-lap slightly so long as they are products of diverging tech trees, I mean this happens already with say roaches and hydras to an extent. 'Course I kinda doubt they'll even try to make this kind of change until the next expansion, with the game in this state they can observe the meta-game evolve before deciding on what to add to either spice up, or balance the game further.
|
maybe it's just me but i don't feel zerg really benefits from varying units. 90% of the time you can get away with building absolutely nothing but drones, zerglings, and mutalisks, or drones, hydras, and roaches. adding some mutas or zerglings to a hydraroach army really doesn't have any impact the way adding some tanks or thors or medivacs would to a terran army.
|
Exactly. That's why opposing races should have stronger counters to massed units (Tanks, HSM, Storm) and Zerg units should be modified ability and stat-wise to promote diversity of use. I think all races could benefit from nerfed "easily massable" units and buffed support/special use units. Banelings classify too much as an "easily massable" unit to compare to the Lurker, and Marauders and Roaches are way too beefy to be made "easily massable", yet they are both easily massable.
|
For example, looking at the protoss tech tree we can say that collosus and templar serve the same role: killing masses of light/small units. However, both of them are produced and are products of diverging tech trees, that of templar and that of the robo-bay, and they function with different mechnics/skills.
True. But this is as much a function of race differences.
Protoss will have a lot of Gateways/WarpGates. Every Robo Facility they make is one (or more) fewer Gateways. And because their tech tree diverges, if you get down to the support Bay, you have gotten no closer to High Templar. Likeways, if you have a Templar Archives, you are no closer than you were before to Colossi.
Zerg do not work like that. They cannot work like that. Their tech tree does not branch. Each building allows the production of one unit, two in a few rare cases. Upgraded units require researching something, morphing a building, or making a new building outright. Upgrading units is the closest thing the Zerg have to a branching tech tree. And even that is fairly minimal, compared to Protoss having divergent tech choices.
Protoss need some overlap between the three trees. Similarly, Terrans need some degree of coverage of the basics from each of the three production buildings; this allows them to pick a building and mass them up, using only a few supporting units from the other buildings.
The Zerg have no such need because their tech tree and production mechanics are fundamentally different. Centralized production means that there is no need to pick what production building to use beforehand; you make your choices when you produce the unit. Because of this, each Zerg unit needs to have a specific function, a single purpose that no other unit steps on or messes with.
Remember, for any given tech level, the Zerg are almost always one building away from being able to mass produce that unit (resource limitations apply, of course).
Now, you could restructure the Zerg tech tree. But if you haven't noticed, the basic structure of the tech trees is something that Blizzard has tried very hard to leave unchanged. So they're almost certainly not going to suddenly break the Zerg tree into some Protoss like fork. It also isn't useful towards the Zerg's nature; it doesn't synergize well with centralized production and so forth.
|
Quite interesting thread! I posted something similar amongst my first thoughts on the beta on the official forums a while a go.
Either way, I'm currently playing platinum 1on1 and I've got quite some plat 2on2 experience as well and I must say that even though I love Zerg, they are by far the least interesting/fun race to play right now. They lack diversity and interesting skills for their units.
I really have to agree with the people who suggested to tone down hydras, put them in T1 and give us Lurkers back for T2! It's really not that strange that they where hardly used before, seeing as they were T3! We need an offensive spell caster in the lines of the defiler, would be sorta cool to be able to evolve an Infestor into something else T3 which has an offensive set of spells. Although, already by bringing lurkers back I could already see fungal growth becoming a lot cooler for obvious reasons!
Last but not least I just had to mention the fact that Ultralisks feel quite week/squishy for their cost which is sort of a disappointment..
|
How about,
hydra to t1 with small dmg nerf roach to t3 with some tank capacities (better regen/armor) ultralisk to t2 with some hp/armor nerf and dmg adjusted for t2.
Just a random thought i had 5 secs ago.
|
On April 02 2010 10:21 0mgVitaminE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2010 02:16 Jyxz wrote: SC1: terran has 12 units toss has 13 zerg 10 Even so, zerg in sc1 was much more diverse than it is in sc2. Each matchup had different unit compositions, and even if you used the same composition how you used each unit changed. Mutas are a great example of this, as their role changes drastically from mid game ZvT to ZvP.
10 years of trying shit out and making strats will do that.
|
Sorry to necro the thread but a thought just crossed my mind. Even though zerg is about numbers (which I only agree halfway with. They are only about numbers when it comes to production, but their units are just as expensive as terran units in general)
The diversity of the zerg isn't necessarily because of a lack of spellcasters but because they have no TACTICAL units that can do serious damage in small groups of like 2.
Consider 2 reapers, 2 banshees, 2 hellions, 2 vikings or 2 ghosts. These are units with some serious harass/tactical potential.
Zerg does not have any unit that compares to that kind of destruction in small numbers. Banelings are suicidal so they obviously don't work.
|
On May 02 2010 06:13 Vexx wrote: Sorry to necro the thread but a thought just crossed my mind. Even though zerg is about numbers (which I only agree halfway with. They are only about numbers when it comes to production, but their units are just as expensive as terran units in general)
The diversity of the zerg isn't necessarily because of a lack of spellcasters but because they have no TACTICAL units that can do serious damage in small groups of like 2.
Consider 2 reapers, 2 banshees, 2 hellions, 2 vikings or 2 ghosts. These are units with some serious harass/tactical potential.
Zerg does not have any unit that compares to that kind of destruction in small numbers. Banelings are suicidal so they obviously don't work. That's where the Lurker used to come in.
|
Dustin obviously wasn't aware the number of units the zerg had. Thanks for reminding him.
This is kind of a dumb OP imo. Dustin starts out by outlining that the reason why zerg are not diverse is because 3 units in the zerg arsenal aren't really being used.
This is a valid statement.
The logical solution to this problem is to balance them, not to make 3 more useless units.
Problem : Zerg are only using Zerglings, Banelings, Roaches, Mutalisks, Hydralisks, and Brood Lords, causing a loss of army diversity.
Which of these solutions sounds better
Solution a : Rebalance the remaining zerg units, Corruptors, Infestors, and Ultralisks, to see more regular use.
Solution b : Add in 3 more units with no clear precedent completely imbalancing the game a month before release on the hope that people will actually use them.
Lets give the zerg more units if once the units that already have are all frequently used, there is still a problem.
|
sorry i couldn't read all 9+ pages of this
But i think for blizzard's side, not having a lot of units for any of the races would be in their best interest
As we all know, SC2 will be released in 3 separate times; one for each campaign. Within each release, Blizzard could use the creation of new units or abilities as marketing tactics to draw people in to purchase the game.
Some people do not care for the campaign so they are satisfied with just online play. However, if they release expansions with new units like they did with BW, people would flock the stores for it.
The counter argument to this would be that blizzard could just release new units via web updates and sell the campaign as a separate entity; however, if you were blizzard, what would make you more money: Selling Campaign + expansion in disc form or selling them separately each at their respective prices?
I do agree that Zerg lack unit diversity, which is mainly why I use them because it is easy to understand unit match-ups and army compositions. I can see how this would get "boring" in terms of gameplay
however, we must remember that as a result of our experiences with SC1, we can't be expecting SC2 to succeed the success that was found in SC1.
This is a new game and we should have new hopes for it instead of dwelling into SC1 for answers/solutions
|
I have faith that Blizz will probably destroy some of the most boring/op strats over-time like they did in the transition of SC into BW. So personally I'm just hoping Roaches get Scout treatment.
|
you should have the warp prism for protoss and the overlord for zerg since terran have the medivac.
|
Blizzard's random removal of the Lurker just before Beta along with their insistence that Zerg should have less combat units than the other races will continue to astound us all. Lurkers quite simply would solve the problem Zerg is having with diversity, adding ANY new unit to the Zerg army is the only way to accomplish this. Even if the standard Zerg army consisted of every combat units, including Queens, it still wouldn't have the potential diversity of Terran or Protoss.
|
On May 02 2010 09:20 SichuanPanda wrote: Blizzard's random removal of the Lurker just before Beta along with their insistence that Zerg should have less combat units than the other races will continue to astound us all. Lurkers quite simply would solve the problem Zerg is having with diversity, adding ANY new unit to the Zerg army is the only way to accomplish this. Even if the standard Zerg army consisted of every combat units, including Queens, it still wouldn't have the potential diversity of Terran or Protoss.
Or when they give overseer some more abilities. I dont really see people using many corruptors, simply cuz they attack air only, unless they get an ability that can ground units as well (not talking about corruption of course). The infestor is a bit 'doubtful', sure they can do something nice, but I think its rather poor that the key to success with this unit is to use your opponents units :| . On top of that it has to be quite close in combat and is easily sniped.
|
Don't forget the Zerg have mobile defense buildings. They can wall or semi-wall, can be healed by the Queen, have good range and damage against most weak units. The Zerg can expand and saturate an expansion faster than any other army. We also have Nydus networks which have a whole range of uses (remote mining high yields for example). Also the Zerg probably should have less combat-units since they can switch up so fast. Zerg has more effective diversity than any other race. If I have early warning of my opponents tech I can tailor-make an army instantly. I also have fewer rally points to deal with.
I don't think Zerg need new combat units, they should just re-evaluate the lesser used ones. They could maybe buff spine/spore crawlers by giving them extra armor when burrowed but letting them attack when unburrowed. Any buff to mechanics or tactical choices aside from adding units is probably the best thing.
Personally I'm fine with the Queen mechanics as well. They could maybe buff the heal ability so it costs less.
Also I disagree with people who say Zerg have scouting problems. Not only do we have overlords, overseers, and changelings, but we can just send out burrowed roaches or fast lings to all the expansions or watchtowers. I can't tell you how many games I've won because of 2 to 6 Zerglings that I bought early and just left all around the map.
|
Part of the problem, IMO, is that zerg don't use burrow tactically enough, setting up ambushes and the like (though maybe that's not efficient enough, I don't know) and part of it is the pure effectiveness of the units that ARE so commonly used, I mean hydralisks rape almost everything and have few vulnerabilities.
Partially, though, the greater part I think, IS the ability diversity of the other two races vs. zerg. Maybe doing stuff like giving the corrupter a unique ability that affects ground (like an attack speed slow, say, small AOE though, so you'd need lots to have an effect) that thus give them synergy with other units that attack ground. And one I've always thought should exist is that units that can move burrowed should be tunneling, and thus able to "cliff-jump".
There's my $.02, not that I expect anyone cares.
|
|
|
|