EPTSarcasm aside, what Zerg really needs is one good unit that doesn't die easily and doesn't use a ton of larvae (like how the Lurker was). Then larvae spawn can be tweaked for balance.
[D] Zerg and Spawn Larva - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
Sarcasm aside, what Zerg really needs is one good unit that doesn't die easily and doesn't use a ton of larvae (like how the Lurker was). Then larvae spawn can be tweaked for balance. | ||
|
Lordpen
Sweden21 Posts
On April 10 2010 00:53 LunarC wrote: Next Zerg player that complains about not having enough larvae has to start making more than two hatcheries and two queens. I'm sincerely curious. Is making hatcheries in the main and natural (heaven forbid) viable? Or is it just the ravings of a madman hellbent on shoving old strategies into a new game? Sarcasm aside, what Zerg really needs is one good unit that doesn't die easily and doesn't use a ton of larvae (like how the Lurker was). Then larvae spawn can be tweaked for balance. I find that if i go for any sort of army with alot of zerglings I have to get third hatch or my minerals will just keep going up, up and up. I even saw a replay from that korean touranment going on right now where zerg did something like 14 hatch (in main), spawning pool, hatch (at expo). Then went for a zergling/muta mix against a protoss. | ||
|
BeJe77
United States377 Posts
You also have to figure out that the ZERG units are weak compared to Protoss/Terran units. In a for instance 100v100 or whatever equal fight there is, zerg will always lose, why? because their units are weak. They depend on mass production and constant reinforcements to win not unit strength. Thats how it's always been. If a Zerg player is out doing you in macro, he has no units because he spent everything on drones. If a Zerg player keeps expanding, ask yourself, what are you doing??? Why are you letting him expand? I think its just that too many terrible players here are complaining because they don't know how to play or counter.... Patch after patch zerg are getting harder and harder to play to win, even before it was difficult if your opponent actually knew how to fight. BTW am always hovering between 1-15 in Plat 1v1 division as Zerg. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8117 Posts
they just have like a 5x bigger army than me at any point. maybe I just suck way too much at macro(i dont think this is the case), but I think it's just impossible to go toe to toe with zerg in a macro game as toss. | ||
|
Koffiegast
Netherlands346 Posts
On April 10 2010 01:53 Ideas wrote: ever since the storm nerf I've never beat a zerg if I didnt kill him after 10 minutes. they just have like a 5x bigger army than me at any point. maybe I just suck way too much at macro(i dont think this is the case), but I think it's just impossible to go toe to toe with zerg in a macro game as toss. Timed pushes. Push earlier than 10 minutes. Attack. Prevent Z from getting 10 bases. As it is now, Z can have an army twice as big, but P can manage to kill it all with well placed forcefields and a couple immortals or colossus. | ||
|
Ideas
United States8117 Posts
On April 10 2010 02:00 Koffiegast wrote: Timed pushes. Push earlier than 10 minutes. Attack. Prevent Z from getting 10 bases. As it is now, Z can have an army twice as big, but P can manage to kill it all with well placed forcefields and a couple immortals or colossus. yea that's the problem. I HAVE to do serious damage to him in the early game or else I can't kill him (and I mean SERIOUS damage). The matchup shouldnt be completely about whether or not I can kill the Zerg in my 1st attack (as it wasnt in BW). Another thing about the larva issue is how now harassment almost means nothing (or at least is significantly less important than it was in any MU in BW). In BW if you do a storm or reaver drop and kill 12 drones, that's fucking huge. That's like 1/3 or 1/4 of the Zerg's entire economy destroyed and that means to rebuild the 12 drones, that's 12 larva he cant spend on hydras or whatever. Now I can do colossi/warpprism harass and kill 10+ drones but it doesnt even matter, Zerg has so much larva that he can still keep army production going. Couple this with the fact that Zerg now make 2 times more drones than they did in BW and harassment just isnt cost effective (or maybe I just suck too much at it, and Im sure I could do it a lot better, but I dont think nearly all of the story). | ||
|
Johoseph
United States49 Posts
But think about it this way. A hatch naturally produces larva up to 3. If you're stockpiling them up to high numbers, you're hatchery isn't producing ANY more larva, only your queen. So you ARE losing production by stockpiling, so I think its a LOT less macro friendly then you all seem to think. Just did a small test. Had 2 hatches, both being larva'd ASAP. Did 3 spawn larva cycles. ProduceD lings from first constantly with every larva out. Let the 2nd stockpile over all 3 cycles then pumped them out when 3rd larva cycle popped. The stockpiled hatch made 32 lings. The hatch that had constant production on it made 48 lings. Thats a pretty big difference. The stockpiling may be noob friendly, but you're not exactly on your way to Korea by doing it. You're losing production, a lot of production. | ||
|
keV.
United States3214 Posts
I agree, after playing some 1v1 obs game with a zerg friend of mine who is raging about how the first half of a Zv anything involves getting your drones attacked constantly. Defending cheese isn't fun, but as it stands it is also the only way to keep zergs economy and production under control. Cap spawn larva and give zerg better anti-cheese early on. Zerg win ratios are relatively balanced, but its in a way that does NOT make for the kind of competitive RTS we like to see here. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
As we've seen with the recent patch that nerfed Hydras and Roaches, Zerg cannot win very easily in a straight-up battle, but they can surely win because of the better economy. In SC1, Zerg could spawn many Units in a very short time because they built every Unit from Larva. This also meant, that Zerg had to choose to either produce Drones or attacking Units, resulting in a constant dicision whether to invest in the lategame through better economy or invest into other Units to either defeat the opponent or defend against an Incoming attack. In SC2, Zerg can easily produce lots of Drones and Attacking-Units at the same time, making it much easier for the Zerg to stay alive while pumping out drones to have a very strong economy. Through the recent patch, Zerg had to start setting Priorities, because 1 Larva spent on a Hydra and Roach wasn't as good as before anymore. Spawn Larva is not broken because you can stock up Larva, but because the Units produced compared to the Larva spent are too good, resulting in zerg having good Eco and a lot of strong Units without having to neglect one for the other. by nerfing a few Units, you really also balance spawn larva and Zerg will have to learn when they can heavily pump Drones and when they need Units and Static defense to survive a push, because as of yet, Zerg has still by far the best Macro and just because their Units aren't as strong when the same Foodcount of Z-Units fight against other Units, Zerg is still a very powerful race when you play it correctly, which is very economy-oriented and with knowing when to pump drones and expand and when to pump Units to defend against timing-pushes. You see it when watching Korean ex-SC1-Pros or other very good players: They have a few Minutes of time and they'll macro like hell but they know when they have to cut drone-production to pump out Units. IMHO Zerg is the best Race in SC2 in solid macro-games by far and as soon as ppl start playing Zerg right and start to figure out how to defend against the timing-pushes, which is basically the only way for Protoss to win against Zerg and a very important tool for Terran as well, Zerg will be even stronger, just because of their ridiculously strong macro-abilities. | ||
|
LimeNade
United States2125 Posts
| ||
|
Johoseph
United States49 Posts
On April 10 2010 03:26 Limenade wrote: I have to disagree with you saying that late game zerg always win. That is so inaccurate, as a top 10 plat player, zergs game comes from early to mid game. We get destroyed toe to toe with protoss or terran because pound for pound terran/protoss units are stronger then zerg units ESPECIALLY after this latest patch. Agreed. Just watched Idra vs. Lzgamer. Was a looong game. near 200/200 armies for both. Lategame, having 2 more bases than the terran, idra still couldn't beat an army of just MMM rolling around. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
On April 10 2010 03:26 Limenade wrote: I have to disagree with you saying that late game zerg always win. That is so inaccurate, as a top 10 plat player, zergs game comes from early to mid game. We get destroyed toe to toe with protoss or terran because pound for pound terran/protoss units are stronger then zerg units ESPECIALLY after this latest patch. That's exactly in line with what I've written above. You have to stop to think that Zerg has to win in straight-up Battles and abuse the fact that they can harrass and counterattack extremely well, while being able to take and defend expansions and pump workers better than any other race. Some of the things I've rarely seen a Zerg do because they are used to having very strong Units and winning in decisive battles: - Nydus-Worm defense in Lategame and Harrass/Counterattacks in the lategame. (punishes pushes by the opponent and keeps him in his base while Z can expand) - Overlord-Drops (basically the same as above. Why win toe-to-toe when you can kick Unit-production and win by slowly killing the enemy Units off) - Speedling Counterattacks (again, you don't need to absolutely defend a push or win a battle, just counterattack and force the opponent to retreat. Just a few speedlings will do the trick) - containments with burrowed Units. (Many Armies win by shooting some of the Zerg-Units before they reach their target or by hindering them to reach the target with force-fields - when you can burrow and attack right when the enemy is above you, he has a huge disadvantage against zerglings, banelings etc. so he's forced to stay in his base or use up scans, while you can slowly retreat and secure another expansion). - Contain with Broodlords (self-explanatory) Zerg has just much more options to harrass, counterattack and defend multiple expansion, they are also much faster than the other races, so why should they also win toe-to-toe? And by writing that Zerg has an advantage in the Lategame I mostly mean Economy-wise, not that their Army's are better. I do think that Zerg Army can have problems against other Armies, but you have to realize that that's not the way Zerg should be played to fully optimize their effectivity. @Johoseph: Maxed out Terran is still a very strong Army and Z can't really win toe-to-toe, but Idra could've played more creatively and harrass better. besides, Z can reinforce much faster when their Army has been killed. But we've also seen it in the first Game of DIMAGA vs HasuObs on LT on the Germany VS. Ukraine Showmatch - DIMAGA nearly lost in the end, besides being ahead in bases, but he contained the Protoss and kept reinforcing extremely fast and won the game, even though he let HasuObs expand to both Islands without doing anything about it, which he could've easily done by dropping/Nydus-Worms. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On April 10 2010 03:26 Limenade wrote: I have to disagree with you saying that late game zerg always win. That is so inaccurate, as a top 10 plat player, zergs game comes from early to mid game. We get destroyed toe to toe with protoss or terran because pound for pound terran/protoss units are stronger then zerg units ESPECIALLY after this latest patch. Zerg players literally roll around with a ball of hydra/roach/ling and expect to win fights with absolutely nothing more than attackmove right now. The full power of zerg is definitely underused, primarily because until this patch zerg COULD attackmove to victory. I'm hoping to see zerg strategy eventually evolve into just that - strategy. Maybe in the next few rounds of tournaments we'll get another innovative strategy that shows up. Baneling bust is hardly a viable standard strategy, and that's the last big thing to come out of zerg =/ | ||
|
HTX
Germany265 Posts
On April 10 2010 01:23 BeJe77 wrote: You all do realize that the larva are about the only way to keep up with the other races, especially when you put in chrono boost/mule's.... You also have to figure out that the ZERG units are weak compared to Protoss/Terran units. In a for instance 100v100 or whatever equal fight there is, zerg will always lose, why? because their units are weak. They depend on mass production and constant reinforcements to win not unit strength. Thats how it's always been. If a Zerg player is out doing you in macro, he has no units because he spent everything on drones. If a Zerg player keeps expanding, ask yourself, what are you doing??? Why are you letting him expand? I think its just that too many terrible players here are complaining because they don't know how to play or counter.... Patch after patch zerg are getting harder and harder to play to win, even before it was difficult if your opponent actually knew how to fight. BTW am always hovering between 1-15 in Plat 1v1 division as Zerg. Thats all clear and fine so far. Compared to mule and chrono the larva inject is the zerg macro way to keep up. Think what most people dont like is the stockpiling abillity whats get you further away than just keeping up(lategame situations). Think about lategame where you dont need to spend your money on hatches for more larva but you can spend your money all at once on units. | ||
|
fspikec
United States30 Posts
| ||
|
ZypherIM
United States4 Posts
Changing queens to be 1 larva per 20 seconds reduces production from 5 hatches to 3.5 hatches. Building another hatch and queen is 500 minerals, which would give you 5.25 hatches of production. Zerg players aren't stockpiling past 3+spawn larva amount, because waiting 40 seconds without producing anything is silly. You are going to either spend on drones, on an expo, or on army. Zerg doesn't traipse around with 200/200 food building up larva. This means changing the max larva down to 3+spawn larva amount isn't going to change anything. Are you saying that in the early game a window of 100 seconds to build the 3rd hatch and 500 extra minerals spent on it is going to fix all of Zerg's problems? That is somehow going to make late game Zerg macro more, larva heavy armies not viable, and add the need to choose between econ and army production? Weakening queens too much will just shift Zerg play to ignore the queen, build more hatches, and not have to use the macro ability at all. Requiring 1 extra hatchery and queen is not going to make the current playstyle change, it is just going to give an extra 100 seconds of time and 500 minerals before it kicks in. | ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
uh, maybe also PRIMARILY coz you need more money to fund a bigger army? Especially gas? Among other factors? You completely forget to mention that 2 fully saturated bases in sc2 is equivalent to the mineral income of a 1 base T How bout lets start playing other races first before talking..... All of your posts screams that you haven't even touched zerg and don't understand anything beyond "the queen makes moar larvae" i.e. Zerg is the only one who's macro mechanic gets penalized if you miss the timing of the cast. If you forget to mule, you can spam a bunch of em later. If you forget to chronoboost, you can just spread it across other stuff later. If you forget to inject larvae quickly over time and your queen generates 25 extra energy, you just lost 4 larvae. You can't spam inject into one hatchery and if you had to build another hatch to accommodate for your slowness, that's just plain sloppy. That's like being P or Z and saying "terran has too much money. Nerf mules." Or T or Z saying "P's chronoboost gives them insane upgrades and mothership. Nerf mothership and chronoboost" The more you press at the matter with the points you have made so far, the more you're losing credibility. Everything you are posting just screams that you have no understanding how the race works. Anyone who has a remote idea what they're talking about knows most your points are complete bull. | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On April 10 2010 04:43 ZypherIM wrote: Your premise is essentially flawed. The queen is worth 1 larva per 10 seconds. A hatchery produces a larva 1 per 15 seconds. 2 hatch 2 queen is the same production as 5 hatches. If 2 hatch 2 queen gives you infinite larva, any nerf to queens just requires you to build 5 hatches. This is a mineral difference of 750. Changing queens to be 1 larva per 20 seconds reduces production from 5 hatches to 3.5 hatches. Building another hatch and queen is 500 minerals, which would give you 5.25 hatches of production. Zerg players aren't stockpiling past 3+spawn larva amount, because waiting 40 seconds without producing anything is silly. You are going to either spend on drones, on an expo, or on army. Zerg doesn't traipse around with 200/200 food building up larva. This means changing the max larva down to 3+spawn larva amount isn't going to change anything. Are you saying that in the early game a window of 100 seconds to build the 3rd hatch and 500 extra minerals spent on it is going to fix all of Zerg's problems? That is somehow going to make late game Zerg macro more, larva heavy armies not viable, and add the need to choose between econ and army production? Weakening queens too much will just shift Zerg play to ignore the queen, build more hatches, and not have to use the macro ability at all. Requiring 1 extra hatchery and queen is not going to make the current playstyle change, it is just going to give an extra 100 seconds of time and 500 minerals before it kicks in. Therefore, zerg will be unable to produce larva heavy armies in the earlygame as easily, which is makes them consider how to spend larva again. Larva stockpiling also makes it very difficult to see/scout changing army compositions, because they can do it instantly. In BW on 5 hatch you could produce up to 15 units instantly, which, although considerable looks pale in comparsion to what 3 base zerg can do in sc2. With 2 queenloads (which is not unrealistic) of larva, you can produce 30 units instantly. 60 lings as soon as you see them move out with an army that doesn't fare well vs ling. 30 roaches vs a zealot heavy army. 60 banelings vs bio. That's ridiculous. The thing is, zerg doesn't even need to spend ANY money to expand his production past queens. Every single hatchery is an expansion, and CHEAPER than a CC or nexus. Macro-wise, zerg is completely broken right now. HOWEVER, zerg still loses quite a bit, mostly because they don't have good army diversity, good defense vs harass, and good tech choices in the midgame. Blizzard keeps nerfing zerg units to keep them from winning macro fights, but that's not going to do any good. All it does is make them weaker early and pretty soon at this rate zerg won't even be viable because they won't even make it past 10 minutes. Zerg needs fixing. They need more viable midgame tech and lategame tech. Infestors really need to not be armored too. It makes them die to everything. I'm writing this while talking in vent to whiplash and tiki and we're all just facepalming at the balance changes that blizz is doing with zerg. T and P are looking better and better, zerg is such a mess =/ | ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
On April 10 2010 05:21 Floophead_III wrote: The thing is, zerg doesn't even need to spend ANY money to expand his production past queens. Every single hatchery is an expansion, and CHEAPER than a CC or nexus. Macro-wise, zerg is completely broken right now. First off, that statement is the most wrong thing in this post. Zerg needs MORE money to expand PRODUCTION past queens. You are mistaking over and over and over again that more larvae AUTOMATICALLY = more production. More larvae is only PART of more production, but to get more production, you need MORE RESOURCES. Everything you are saying just shows that you haven't touched zerg at all. Ever. You are forgetting very basic concepts: -Hatcheries arent CC's or Nexii. CC's can turn into fortresses and orbital commands. Nexii can chronoboost. -Which brings me to: T and P both have their own macro mechanics too -Stockpiling larvae is INEFFICIENT and BAD MACRO -Larvae require resources to spend. -I don't get what the hell "larvae heavy" and "larvae intensive" mean. All zerg units are spawned from larvae. -Resources -Resources -Resources | ||
|
Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo
Germany2959 Posts
I bet OP is simply, and I mean that's really all, a little whiner. You lost some games? What are you doing? Right, created topic after topic about nerfing Zerg. But don't bring any valid argument, that may justify your opinion... and you don't want that. It was said so often... and you never replied to someone who said: -protoss and terran have their own macro mechanics -you need to make Drones and your army out of larvae -you cannot build without resources And whenever you came to a situation of having 19 stacked larvae you're doing s.th. terrible, terrible wrong. I by the way think that Protoss' Warp Gate ability is at least on par with having a lot of larvae. And last but not least. SHOW US A REPLAY OF YOURS AND TELL US YOUR LEAGUE! | ||
| ||
