EPTAnother is the ability for banelings to burrow and still explode underground. By lowering the cost/research time you can have banelings burrowed before any early/mid push effectivly stopping any terran in their tracks and that early on you cant really expect them to scansweep every choke or commonly traveled over ground can you =/.
[D] The cost of Burrow - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Izslove
Australia69 Posts
Another is the ability for banelings to burrow and still explode underground. By lowering the cost/research time you can have banelings burrowed before any early/mid push effectivly stopping any terran in their tracks and that early on you cant really expect them to scansweep every choke or commonly traveled over ground can you =/. | ||
|
KrUtiAL
United States41 Posts
you can still burrow b-lings and use them as mines you can burrow your workers when being harrassed you can burrow your units to flank an incoming push burrow still works it just takes good micro to use effectively | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
For one thing, I don't think the roach should be invisible when burrowed. Enhanced regeneration and obstacle passing are enough. To my mind, the ideal roach comes with burrow, and has an overpowered attack which it briefly loses whenever it gets hit by a projectile or melee attack, making it more of a tank than an all-around fighting unit. You have to keep shooting them to stop them from returning fire, but they're tough to kill and their fragile zergling/hydra comrades are doing lots of damage over time themselves while you're busy shooting roaches. Then again, I'd also like to see zerglings swarming around between ultralisks' legs and being shielded by the ultralisk as if they were in a dark swarm, brood lords getting attacked by their own broodlings and slowly losing health any time they have no targets to fire on, overlords pulling themselves down to the ground to spread creep instead of opening a portal into the Elemental Plane of Goo to fuel their infinite slime waterfalls, phoenixes getting back their area attack as a fleet beacon tech and severely pwning any flying unit except carriers and battlecruisers, and stalkers blasting about four times as much damage on their first shot in an engagement than on their subsequent shots. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 25 2010 18:49 Thamoo wrote: I agree. And if I'm wrong and burrow is indeed used in high level games then I rest my case. But if its not currently being used (and I think thats currently the case) theres nothing wrong with buffing it slightly to encourage it. Except that we have no reason to buff it or encourage except as some kind of experiement, or to put it in laymen terms "just cuz lol" On April 25 2010 18:49 Thamoo wrote: Your thor argument is flawed, as reducing the burrow's cost to 50/50 is reasonable, reducing thor to 75/25 isn't. That's what I'm getting at. Reasonable and unreasonable are subjective. To me, there's nothing reasonable about an upgrade that confers a huge tactical advantage to most of the units of a race costing next to nothing. To you, having Thors cheaper than marauders is unreasonable. Are you getting my point? On April 25 2010 18:49 Thamoo wrote: And again the whole point is encouraging people to try stuff with it. Because right now almost nobody uses it and thats a shame for such a well designed and flavorful ability. According to your million replays watched? Or what? It doesn't matter if burrow is used in games or not. It remains part of the racial identity. Nobody used burrow outside of lurkers in high level Brood War either, yet burrow remained part of Zerg's identity and kept it's flavor. Nobody used scouts in high level games, but the idea of powerful air units remained part of the Protoss racial flavor. On April 25 2010 19:24 MoNoNauT wrote: It wasn't broken before, and they fucked with it anyways. Roaches were broken, and they responded in the wrong way. Arguable. On April 25 2010 19:24 MoNoNauT wrote: As I said, this isn't that much of an issue now that roaches are so significantly weaker, and the 100 seconds delays it also. The only thing you have to do to defend it is add one missile turret to your choke wall. And if you drop them behind the choke wall? If you break down the backdoor (Desert Oasis)? Snipe the one turret with 4-5 mutas or something? How many turrets do we need to build to keep what amounts to cheap spamable Dark Templar out of our base? Yes, it does. On April 25 2010 19:52 MoNoNauT wrote: Think of a burrowed baneling as a really shitty spider mine. After you research spider mines for 100/100, it only costs 75 minerals for 3 of them PLUS a fast scout/harassment unit. Banelings cost 50/25 each, and once you blow up a terran army the first time, they'll scan everywhere they go before they get a raven... it's a one-time gimmicky trick, and 100/100 is definitely too much to pay for it. Obviously they aren't going to be Brood War status spider mines. That shit was ridiculous, and I say this from the perspective of a Terran player. Also, scanning everywhere and going raven is EXPENSIVE. every scan is 240-270 potential minerals, and the terran isn't going to leave his base until he gets a raven, you're basicly free to double, even triple expand. On April 25 2010 19:52 MoNoNauT wrote: Even compared to lurkers, the units they were supposed to replace, banelings are pretty terrible. First of all, the suicide-attack makes it an extremely short-term investment, and even if a lurker is detected, it can still attack. If the baneling gets detected, that's 50/25 that the Terran is essentially stealing from you. Where did you get the idea that banelings are supposed to replace lurkers? | ||
|
TheTuna
United States286 Posts
I suppose since Warp Gates are 50/50 though (right?) and that's a REALLY game-changing upgrade, Burrow might warrant some looking at. | ||
|
shindigs
United States4795 Posts
On April 26 2010 03:44 TheTuna wrote: I don't believe that 100/100 is an unreasonable cost for this upgrade, seeing as how it affects so many Zerg units. In the grand scheme of things it's really not that much money for an ability you get a remarkable amount of utility. I suppose since Warp Gates are 50/50 though (right?) and that's a REALLY game-changing upgrade, Burrow might warrant some looking at. I think that's the argument at this point. If Protoss has a unit-wide utility upgrade for 50/50, why can't Zerg get that ability back? Warp Gate tech makes switching up unit composition much much faster for Protoss. Another thing I may try is just to incorporate burrow into my games, despite of 100/100. Since it's 100/00 I might just have to make the most of each burrowed unit. If it stays at 100/100, would be nice to see a time decrease for the upgrade as an incentive to use it? | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 26 2010 03:46 shindigs wrote: I think that's the argument at this point. If Protoss has a unit-wide utility upgrade for 50/50, why can't Zerg get that ability back? Because the races are different. The Protoss and Terran get cliff walking/jumping/blinking abilties, why can't the Zerg get one? Because the races are different. The Protoss and Terran have seperate building queues for workers and combat units, why can't the Zerg? Because the races are different. On April 26 2010 03:46 shindigs wrote: Warp Gate tech makes switching up unit composition much much faster for Protoss. Said the Zerg player. -.-" On April 26 2010 03:46 shindigs wrote: Another thing I may try is just to incorporate burrow into my games, despite of 100/100. Since it's 100/00 I might just have to make the most of each burrowed unit. If it stays at 100/100, would be nice to see a time decrease for the upgrade as an incentive to use it? What are you, a Republican? Why do you need an incentive to use it? If you like it, use it. If you don't, leave it alone. | ||
|
shindigs
United States4795 Posts
On April 26 2010 03:53 ComradeDover wrote: Because the races are different. The Protoss and Terran get cliff walking/jumping/blinking abilties, why can't the Zerg get one? Because the races are different. The Protoss and Terran have seperate building queues for workers and combat units, why can't the Zerg? Because the races are different. Said the Zerg player. -.-" What are you, a Republican? Why do you need an incentive to use it? If you like it, use it. If you don't, leave it alone. I just feel like for an ability upgrade that defines the Zerg race, not a lot of people feel the need to upgrade it and incorporate it into play. I'm aware that not all three races should have their own colossus or their own viking, but the issue I see is that the ability that makes Zerg so unique faces the problem that it had in the original BW - it just isn't worth getting in every single game. This is a shame since, as I stated earlier, burrows is one of those abilities that should define Zerg and its playstyle. Something needs to drive players to utilize it more, and the current state that it's in is not providing incentive (THERE'S THAT WORD AGAIN) for players to use it. | ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
On April 26 2010 03:46 shindigs wrote: I think that's the argument at this point. If Protoss has a unit-wide utility upgrade for 50/50, why can't Zerg get that ability back? Warp Gate tech makes switching up unit composition much much faster for Protoss. Another thing I may try is just to incorporate burrow into my games, despite of 100/100. Since it's 100/00 I might just have to make the most of each burrowed unit. If it stays at 100/100, would be nice to see a time decrease for the upgrade as an incentive to use it? Well, Warp gate is quite a "OP" Ability, since theres never any reason you would use gateways | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 26 2010 04:03 shindigs wrote: I just feel like for an ability upgrade that defines the Zerg race, not a lot of people feel the need to upgrade it and incorporate it into play. I'm aware that not all three races should have their own colossus or their own viking, but the issue I see is that the ability that makes Zerg so unique faces the problem that it had in the original BW - it just isn't worth getting in every single game. This is a shame since, as I stated earlier, burrows is one of those abilities that should define Zerg and its playstyle. Something needs to drive players to utilize it more, and the current state that it's in is not providing incentive (THERE'S THAT WORD AGAIN) for players to use it. What I'm getting from your reply is "I don't see Zergs using burrow (even though there have been plenty of cited examples of burrow use in this thread already), and this upsets me for some reason that I don't bother explaining, so I'm suggesting a tax cut on burrow." Is that about right? | ||
|
wintergt
Belgium1335 Posts
| ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
| ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 26 2010 04:45 SichuanPanda wrote: I think burrow should be a Hatchery level tech, and remain at 100/100. Having to wait for a Lair to get burrow can really hold you back in some of the strategic options available. I see nothing wrong with being able to micro your Roaches with burrow before they have the ability to move underground. Also being able to burrow your Queen early would really help stop quick Zeal rushes aimed at taking out your Queen and effectively shutting down any chance of macro. Baneling minefields would come way too early in the game, then. I see nothing wrong with limiting strategic options initially and unlocking them as a zerg player tiers up. | ||
|
shindigs
United States4795 Posts
On April 26 2010 04:31 ComradeDover wrote: What I'm getting from your reply is "I don't see Zergs using burrow (even though there have been plenty of cited examples of burrow use in this thread already), and this upsets me for some reason that I don't bother explaining, so I'm suggesting a tax cut on burrow." Is that about right? It "upsets" me because I see burrow as a really race defining ability for Zerg but it's getting the same treatment as it did in BW where it was ignored for most of the time. The situation was that burrows wasn't necessary in play for a lot of standard builds. You could go an entire game without having to research burrow and definitely do fine. Yes, there were games where you saw top level players researching burrow for zergling scouting or burrowing drones, but that wasn't part of what people would consider part of the "standard play." Another big critique of Zerg is that it's just so bland to play. So why not throw in burrow into more everyday play? The problem is that it requires Lair tech AND 100/100, and 100/100 can definitely be minerals/gas well spent in another muta or hydra. Protoss and Terran mechanics have evolved for SC2 and Zerg is constantly criticized as being the most bland. Lowering burrow cost would help remedy this situation by at least letting players feel less of a burden of incorporating burrow into their play and allows for a variety of more strategies to be deployed. | ||
|
skippy2591
United States46 Posts
On April 26 2010 04:56 skippy2591 wrote: well, i'm not in the beta at all, but i have spent some time watching casted matches on tl. well, as everyone knows, its not uncommon in z v p to see centuries (or what ever they are called) pretty much split a massive z army in half w/ force fields, and then procede to kill the closest half while the other half retreats. This got me wondering on why is it not common place (for at least the games i've seen played) to see z just burrow their units untill the force fields ware of?? of course the toss can't see burrowed units untill they have obs, and surly burrowing could keep your units alive in most early mid game toss pushes. so what do you guyz think? is burrowing vs forcefields viable? or is it just a bad idea/ impratical??? comment on the other post as well plz http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=121582 much appreciated | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 26 2010 05:03 shindigs wrote: It "upsets" me because I see burrow as a really race defining ability for Zerg but it's getting the same treatment as it did in BW where it was ignored for most of the time. People love BW. They say it's the perfect RTS. If it's like that in BW, it can't be wrong. On April 26 2010 05:03 shindigs wrote: The situation was that burrows wasn't necessary in play for a lot of standard builds. You could go an entire game without having to research burrow and definitely do fine. Yes, there were games where you saw top level players researching burrow for zergling scouting or burrowing drones, but that wasn't part of what people would consider part of the "standard play." How is this a problem? On April 26 2010 05:03 shindigs wrote: Another big critique of Zerg is that it's just so bland to play. So why not throw in burrow into more everyday play? The problem is that it requires Lair tech AND 100/100, and 100/100 can definitely be minerals/gas well spent in another muta or hydra. If you're given the choice between an upgrade for your 24+ roaches or building one muta, and you choose building one muta, you've made the wrong choice. On April 26 2010 05:03 shindigs wrote: Protoss and Terran mechanics have evolved for SC2 and Zerg is constantly criticized as being the most bland. Lowering burrow cost would help remedy this situation by at least letting players feel less of a burden of incorporating burrow into their play and allows for a variety of more strategies to be deployed. It isn't a burden now. 100/100 is dirt cheap. 100/100 is less than what Terrans would pay for one siege tank, never mind the siege mode upgrade or the cost of getting your mech infrastructure up. If zerg players choose not to get burrow (And make no mistake, they ARE making a choice), they have nobody to blame but themselves. | ||
|
skippy2591
United States46 Posts
burrow is a choice, its cheep, and is the lack of one unit really more of a drawback then the lack of an upgrade that you'll have for the rest of the game? surly one unit can make the diffrence, but one unit can die, and upgrades arn't always just a one time thing, especially not burrow; late game ambushes can be deadly (imo)... just depends on how u use it though. | ||
|
HubertFelix
France631 Posts
If there was larger macro maps we could try cute ambushes or use burrow to defend against harassment (drones). But the current small maps promote A)"1base timed push" or B)"1 expand + camp" In case A) the game is decided in ~10 minutes. You use your gas for tier 2 buildings and units like hydra, muta or infestor to counter those timed attacks. In case B) this is useless. The problem is the maps. | ||
|
ComradeDover
Bulgaria758 Posts
On April 26 2010 05:26 HubertFelix wrote: With current maps, I only see burrow used for roach regeneration, mostly in ZvZ. If there was larger macro maps we could try cute ambushes or use burrow to defend against harassment (drones). But the current small maps promote A)"1base timed push" or B)"1 expand + camp" In case A) the game is decided in ~10 minutes. You use your gas for tier 2 buildings and units like hydra, muta or infestor to counter those timed attacks. In case B) this is useless. The problem is the maps. What about LT? -.-" | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
| ||
| ||
