|
On April 10 2010 04:22 HTX wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
Very good post, Floop, I agree completely. I've seen tons of games where armies have clashed, zerg's opponent barely wins, but then gets crushed literally 30s later by another 40+ roach army.
To those who claim that more larvae doesn't give you resources, I say this: good macro in starcraft involves maximizes two things: the rate at which you acquire resources, and the rate at which you spend those resources to productive ends. Ideally, these should be high, and balanced. The second value is limited by the investment in unit producing structures coupled with player skill.
With spam^H^H^H^Hspawn larvae, zerg is essentially barely has to worry about the second factor. They don't have to invest much resources in unit producing infra, they can "save up" to spike to very high rates of production, and they have very little penalty for not macroing well.
What do I mean by that? Well, obviously the ideal in SC1 is to not queue units, because they you are spending resources before it is absolutely necessary to no productive end. So good macro consisted of queue'ing at the last possible second. Being late meant you were wasting the value of the structure; it is lost permanently. SC2 toss makes this even more severe by disallowing any queueing. This is an explicit and heavy disadvantage, and often you need more warpgates as a consequence. SCBW zerg had some leniency here: their structures didn't "waste" time until three larvae were queued. Still, it was tension-filled.
This tension doesn't exist in SC2, or does so to a laughably low amount. If not the rate of larvae production which destroys this, it is the ability to save ridiculous quantities of larvae.
To those who don't think this has much of an impact, consider PvT in SCBW. Factories with addons are very expensive, and tanks build slowly. Gateways are cheap. Consequently, the protoss has a much easier time rebuilding their army after the 200/200 armies clash, and that matters to the matchup. The whole matchup revolved around the rate of tank production, which often had to be produced over a longer period of time due to constraints on the rate of resource spending (unit producing structure cost + unit build time are the main determiners of this).
This doesn't mean that zerg is imbalanced in SC2. As Floop as pointed out, zerg has been nerfed repeatedly to compensate for this advantage. However, I'm convinced that larvae inject is too powerful, especially the larvae stockpiling. It should be nerfed and coupled with a buff to other zerg units.
|
On April 09 2010 02:33 Jugan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2010 01:57 IcMp wrote:
I'm kind of neutral on this. I mean yes spawn larva seems broken, but on the other hand, zerg really does need this. A good example is Thors 1 shotting hydras. I guess maybe make it so they spawn alittle less larvae? Yeah, let's ignore that the thor is 1) Ridiculously overcosted 2) Has a slow attack speed 3) Cost a million food 4) Takes forever to build If the reason why you're losing ZvT is because of the Thor, you're doing something wrong buddy.
those reasons you listed are far too specific, could you be more vague plz?
+ Show Spoiler +hyperbole is an ineffective way to prove a point.. I know a lot of great terran players who love using thor in TvZ
|
4 larvas for 40 seconds = 1 larva every 10 seconds.
A hatchery produces 1 larva for 15 seconds. But when it has 3 or more larva, it doesn't produce more.
So 1 hatchery+queen produce nearly the same larva count as 2 hatcheries without queen.
Yes, it gives slight boost to the zerg (don't forget, that a zerg loses 2 drones for extractor, instead 1), but protoss has chrono boost (it doesn't cost minerals) and terran - MULE, which gathers at the same speed as 3 SCVs.
|
Spawn larva is not broken at all. Just have a look at what it does. If you assume then 1hatch+1queen = 2 hatches, than it only saves you 150 per queen. On average you save maybe 450 minerals per game on it. That is what it does. Now compare this to terran mule. The OC beats it after the second mule has harvested minerals.
The only other point that might be important is that zerg now can save up a ton of larvae if he is maxed to be able to produce once he loses some stuff. This seems good, but for this little extra, you get something to worry every 40 seconds about and queens to protect etc. Also, the zerg propably the weakest maxed army.
|
reduce max larva to 12 per hatch and make roaches deal +10 to armored units ;P.
|
What about max larva 8 per hatch?
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
If zerg is allowed to drone, they can make more units in a shorter timeframe than either of the other races. Protoss can somewhat compensate because warpgates and chronoboost pump out units very very quickly. Terran is screwed because reactors only work for 4 units.
Therefore, to balance the game, protoss and terran are given the ability to keep zerg down completely: terran has reapers which on some maps actually keep a zerg from expanding ever. Protoss has proxygates which are virtually unstoppable, and chronoboost to get those zealots out ridiculously fast. In addition, terran has viking/banshee play, which if not scouted can end the game very quickly. Protoss has voidrays which do the same thing effectively.
When I beat a zerg, it's because I gain some massive advantage earlygame with harass, outeco, and then push while he's trying to catch up in economy. I have to be winning all game to beat zerg. Completely disagree with your problem here. A trademark of Zerg is being able to produce a lot of units very quickly and be able to switch tech very quickly. With weaker units, you'd expect that Zerg would be able to churn out more units than other races since they need greater numbers to win battles. Furthermore, if you simply let a Zerg drone up then you deserve to lose because they're powering away at the economy without being kept in check.
While I can't talk for TvZ, for PvZ pressure is a vital part of the game - and was a part of the game in SC1 before the forge fast expand. Indeed, all Protoss builds in SC1 (including the FFE) have provisions built in to be able to punish a Zerg for being greedy - in SC1 this was taking more bases than you should be able to take. Indeed, Bisu was able to exploit Savior's 2nd expo timing with his Corsair play and defeat him 3-0 - a perfect example of zergs being too greedy and being punished. Jump back to SC2 and if you're not playing 10pylon10gate you're playing an inferior build (generally) since you need that scouting information and pressure to avoid the Zerg from massing up too big. And no, Protoss don't have proxy gates as a legitimate counter - 10/10 is and it's a fairly even game from there.
-Spawn larva makes for ridiculously easy macro. Zerg players I've talked to agree. Zerg is easy. There's no larva management anymore. Just get your spawn larvas on time and you'll never have an issue. In BW managing larva was huge. Why ruin one of the biggest aspects of skilled zerg play? Disagree. Larvae management is still a large part of the game, just in a different way. It may not be as elaborate as SC1, but then again, many aspects of SC1 are watered down in SC2 and this is just one of them. There are other things for Zerg players to worry about to compensate.
-Lategame zerg is unbeatable. I have never seen a zerg lose lategame. Ever. The only time I was able to beat lategame zerg was as protoss and that involved denying expansions with mass colossi all game and required a mothership to end it, BEFORE mothership nerfs. That's 1 time out of hundreds of games. The reason behind it is this: Lategame is all about smashing armies together nonstop. Whoever can widdle down the opponent faster will win. This can be done through harass or winning repeated battles or out expanding. Zerg does this by rebuilding their army in 1 second. With spawn larva you can simply save up larva (up to 19 per hatch wtf) and then when your army dies you have 80 more roach or 160 more speedling at your disposal. How can anyone expect to win vs that when zerg units already do fine cost for cost. Yes and if a Protoss has 30 Warp gates (equally outrageous as 19 larvae per hatch) then a Protoss can instantly warp in 30 Zealots, or Templar, or whatever and then by the time the Zerg units hatch they can warp in another round of units. I have zero issues with this. Again, I can't speak for TvZ.
In summary, I'm not convinced you've isolated a real problem here and your arguments are pretty flimsy.
|
On April 10 2010 23:55 guitarizt wrote:
What about max larva 8 per hatch?
I was thinking 7 is reasonable, since it forces you to macro between spawn larvas. If spawn larva is nerfed in the number of larva made, just make it 1 spawn larva + 3 as the max. Basically, people should be forced to use their larva.
@plexa: I know that zerg has its identity infused with the larva mechanic. It's a very fine line and the problem is very difficult to actually pinpoint. In addition because of the broken maps and undefendable cheeses zerg is really screwed in terms of actually winning games, so people naturally won't see this as an issue. In BW you didn't necessarily have to constantly pressure all the time. You didn't have to open with a strategy that automatically put zerg on the back foot. Forge FE, 1 rax FE, 1 fact vulture FE - all strategies which proved to be the standard because they provided you a macro advantage. Sure zerg could power drones like crazy too, but each race had timing attacks that were effective. Protoss had 4 gate 2 archon. Terran has 2 rax pressure after expo, which zerg had to respond to with sunkens. Terran then had the 9 minute 3 tank 1 vessel push.
All these strategies relied on one thing - it was okay to let zerg power their economy for a while, as long as you did the same.
What I see in sc2 is that if you simply play economy and maybe do a little harass with hellions or warp prisms or something, you are way behind. The only option vs zerg is to open with cheesy fast pressure, and keep up that pressure the whole game so zerg never gets to make drones. That just doesn't feel like starcraft to me. Something is VERY wrong with the metagame right now, and you can just look around at posts and talk to top players and you'll hear the same thing. Something is wrong.
I believe the problem lies within spawn larva and the game cannot be fixed until spawn larva is fixed. I know it's not the only problem. It may end up making zerg really weak even. However, zerg can be rebalanced around a more reasonable spawn larva, which will lead to a better metagame than "attack zerg all the time or lose."
|
U would have to rebalance the whole game if you do 7 larvas per hatchery. Wont happen so live with it.
|
On April 11 2010 02:56 Floophead_III wrote:I was thinking 7 is reasonable, since it forces you to macro between spawn larvas. If spawn larva is nerfed in the number of larva made, just make it 1 spawn larva + 3 as the max. Basically, people should be forced to use their larva. @plexa: I know that zerg has its identity infused with the larva mechanic. It's a very fine line and the problem is very difficult to actually pinpoint. In addition because of the broken maps and undefendable cheeses zerg is really screwed in terms of actually winning games, so people naturally won't see this as an issue. In BW you didn't necessarily have to constantly pressure all the time. You didn't have to open with a strategy that automatically put zerg on the back foot. Forge FE, 1 rax FE, 1 fact vulture FE - all strategies which proved to be the standard because they provided you a macro advantage. Sure zerg could power drones like crazy too, but each race had timing attacks that were effective. Protoss had 4 gate 2 archon. Terran has 2 rax pressure after expo, which zerg had to respond to with sunkens. Terran then had the 9 minute 3 tank 1 vessel push. All these strategies relied on one thing - it was okay to let zerg power their economy for a while, as long as you did the same. What I see in sc2 is that if you simply play economy and maybe do a little harass with hellions or warp prisms or something, you are way behind. The only option vs zerg is to open with cheesy fast pressure, and keep up that pressure the whole game so zerg never gets to make drones. That just doesn't feel like starcraft to me. Something is VERY wrong with the metagame right now, and you can just look around at posts and talk to top players and you'll hear the same thing. Something is wrong. I believe the problem lies within spawn larva and the game cannot be fixed until spawn larva is fixed. I know it's not the only problem. It may end up making zerg really weak even. However, zerg can be rebalanced around a more reasonable spawn larva, which will lead to a better metagame than "attack zerg all the time or lose."
/agree
|
The initial concept of having this important hero style unit as Queen was probably more balanced if we consider how many larva pop from Spawn Larva. I'm pretty sure we'll at least see the queen go up in cost and stats (to battle ever evolving cheeze). Right now its like 3-6 hatcheries worth of larva production for 150, yey for zerg.
|
On April 11 2010 07:31 Black Octopi wrote:
The initial concept of having this important hero style unit as Queen was probably more balanced if we consider how many larva pop from Spawn Larva. I'm pretty sure we'll at least see the queen go up in cost and stats (to battle ever evolving cheeze). Right now its like 3-6 hatcheries worth of larva production for 150, yey for zerg.
If you're going to look at it that way, it's 2.5 hatcheries. So for 150 minerals, you save 2.5 drones and 750 minerals. If you stay on 2 base the entire game, that's 5 drones and 1500 minerals. Compare this to Terran, who gets ~300 minerals per MULE. Terran only needs to MULE 5-7 times to equalize the macro mechanic benefits in terms of resources. And, this is assuming Zerg never misses a single spawn larva. yey for terran.
...?
|
Yes but the mule still is limited because you only get the benefit of more minerals, which equates to more CCs, supply depots, scvs, marines, hellions, and barracks. That's it. Zerg's extra larva allows them to make more of any unit they want. If terran is making gas heavy units, they could care less about mules. You could argue that means they can expand more with the minerals, but not when they can't hold them.
It's comparing apples to oranges is my point. They work so differently that it's rather meaningless to compare them.
|
I'm gonna point everyone to this replay in hopes to clear this issue up a little.
http://www.sc2win.com/starcraft-2-replays/zvp-pvz/dimaga-vs-hasuobs-2/
The reason I like this one to prove a point is because of the late late game battles they have going on. The only reason DIMAGAs army stood a chance is because he could reinforce it very quickly. Which was needed because the Toss army absolutely stomped DIMAGAs at nearly every conflict.
I honestly believe if larva were capped at a low number, DIMAGA would've lost that match. I mean, he had hasuOBs completely cornered into his base nearly the whole game. AND he had like 75% map control. And losing a match with that much in your favor would be absolutely stupid.
|
On April 11 2010 14:03 Johoseph wrote:I'm gonna point everyone to this replay in hopes to clear this issue up a little. http://www.sc2win.com/starcraft-2-replays/zvp-pvz/dimaga-vs-hasuobs-2/The reason I like this one to prove a point is because of the late late game battles they have going on. The only reason DIMAGAs army stood a chance is because he could reinforce it very quickly. Which was needed because the Toss army absolutely stomped DIMAGAs at nearly every conflict. I honestly believe if larva were capped at a low number, DIMAGA would've lost that match. I mean, he had hasuOBs completely cornered into his base nearly the whole game. AND he had like 75% map control. And losing a match with that much in your favor would be absolutely stupid.
In my mind, this really just reinforces what I've been saying. Zerg don't need a low Spawn Larvae cap because the way it is now is essential to us being competitive. What they really need are more microable units so we can use that instead of spamming out units and winning with macro. There simple are not very many microable units at all for Zerg. Hydras may be the worst because they are such a pathetic shell when it comes to control... sure, they have decent stats, but they are so absurdly slow off creep that it's sad.
|
On April 11 2010 07:45 Saracen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2010 07:31 Black Octopi wrote:
The initial concept of having this important hero style unit as Queen was probably more balanced if we consider how many larva pop from Spawn Larva. I'm pretty sure we'll at least see the queen go up in cost and stats (to battle ever evolving cheeze). Right now its like 3-6 hatcheries worth of larva production for 150, yey for zerg.
If you're going to look at it that way, it's 2.5 hatcheries. So for 150 minerals, you save 2.5 drones and 750 minerals. If you stay on 2 base the entire game, that's 5 drones and 1500 minerals. Compare this to Terran, who gets ~300 minerals per MULE. Terran only needs to MULE 5-7 times to equalize the macro mechanic benefits in terms of resources. And, this is assuming Zerg never misses a single spawn larva. yey for terran. ...?
I'd like to see your queens producing like 2.5 hatcheries. It's actually more like 1.3. So every queen saves you a drone and ~180 minerals.
Comparing the macro mechanics, I would say spawn larvae is by far the weakest.
I mean, look at chrono boost. You can use it for everything. It speeds up the build time of key units, gets you a faster economy production or lets you get your upgrades really fast. Especially early game profits a lot from it because of all the funny stuff like early agression you can do with it.
For the terran it is the same with all the early game stuff. You can cut workers and build an early barracks and still get economically ahead by getting the OC instantly. Also it is sooo easy to use unlike chronoboost.
And what does zerg get? A boost on the third resouce. I dont think zerg would be much worse if you start building hatcheries instead of queens again. Yeah, it is okay to crap out drones like crazy, but remember BW ZvP. Pumping drones from three bases and 5 hatches didn't seem to be any different.
|
so much blabla, from player who lacks any skill
larva injection, have nothing imba in it, ZERG IS THE RACE WHO EXPANDS FASTER AND BUILD FASTER THE MASS
it was in bw that way and it is in sc2 that way and it will stay that way
when i read bullshit like "he build in 1min 50units", good newb learn how to play, my opponents never build somany unit in 1min, why? because i play the game and dont sit afk in my base 20min and think one attack gg
comeon dont waste your time with useless post, go and play once you reach 1500+ in platin, then you have a little understanding of the game and can start talk about balances
but even at this point some poeple oppinion is nothing worth (morrow best example, crys about every crap like TvZ is so fucking imba (then one day later demuslim wins zotac, right a Terran who raped dimaga in final))
instead of crying about not imbalanced stuff, just use your brain while gaming
from my experiance lucifron is the best player (lost 0-3 to him in ladder, and nobody else who i didnt beat atleast once when played) and he is not zerg player
and if zerg is so fucking imba with its larva injection, then why i have 80% winrating in pvz?
i am 1670protoss in platin
now waiting for some bronze player to reply ^__^
|
well the sad part is that exactly that @Art_of_Kill forces terran to be the offender against zerg and toss while they always just have to defend.
because once u strike 200 psi and both have many expoes, zerg can remkae 50 roaches in 30 seconnds and toss can warpin units in 5 second while terran must build their units
in sc1 terran 200 psi was stronger than toss 200 psi but toss rebuilt faster, so after a battle toss had to rebuild and then wipe out terran
but in sc2 terran 200 psi is weaker and they rebuild alot slower in comparison to production facilities costs
thats why i hope they do something about this because in theory zerg and toss never has to attack the terran because they know they have an easy ride later game. so they can put larva max to half and that wouldnt change alot except for later game where u actually stop make units as z
its very shallow match up if u know lategame terran always lose. maybe u can balance it and say ok terran have to attack and that is balanced, sure but its not so interesting if we always see terran be the attacker. all races should be able to camp, timing attack and be somewhat equal in the late game, but its not like that at all with sc2
|
terran has plenty of lategame advantage's other races don't have that weighs up against this 'faster rebuilding' advantage of toss & zerg.
T can float over mined out bases for free new expansion's. T has a lot of economy in orbital commands freeing up space for army. T can mine out particular bases much faster then Z or P because of Mules, lategame quite an advantage if you manage to secure one (gold) expansion and can instantly mass Mule on it.
Overall the orbital command stays much more usefull then spawn larvae and chrono boost lategame which compensates more then enough for the slower rebuild time of terran.
Terran 200 psi is still the strongest because of the OC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
