|
Everyone loves to say that Zerg is underpowered these days. A quick browse through Liquipedia leads me to blame Zerglings. They attack too slow.
BW Liquipedia states that the Marine attack cooldown is 15 (7.5 stimmed).
Zergling attack speed is 8. 6 with the Hive upgrade.
Zealots have a cooldown of 22.
So baseline numbers show that Zerglings/Marine is roughly a 2:1 ratio. Zergling/Zealot is around a 3-1 ratio. Marine/Zealot is a roughly 3:2 ratio at base.
Looking at SC2, attack cooldowns are all fancy to multiple decimal points.
SC2 Zergling is .696 and .587 with Hive upgrade.
SC2 Marine is .8608 and .57387 stimmed.
SC2 Zealot is at 1.2
Marine/Zealot ratio seems to be around the same. Zerglings are just under getting 2 attacks per Zealot attack instead of just under 3 (and people have noticed that it takes 4 lings per Zealot instead of about 3). Versus Marines where it's supposed to be about 2 for every 1 Marine shot it's closer to being 1 for 1 than it is 2 for 1 and stimmed Marines actually attack faster than cracklings! Whereas in BW it was at 6 vs 7.5, which is a 4:5 ratio.
As a side note it seems that stim actually got nerfed slightly in the attack speed buff it gives to Marines, but that's another discussion altogether for various reasons.
This inhibits Zerglings in all sorts of other ways (6 pool dying to probes attack moving, anyone?) as the game goes on (defending harass, etc.) since Zerglings are supposed to be a bread and butter unit. Zerg seem to have the hardest trouble with early game antics. Once it gets past that into a macro game it's a lot more stable (late game ZvT mech whining aside). Fixing Zerglings seems to be the best solution. Are other tweaks needed? Of course, the game just came out. All races need tweaks but it is amazingly well-balanced for a launch state.
Now sure, SC2 is a different game than BW with different units to make up each race's army, but I can't think of a decent reason why it's like this as it effects the early game so much unless A: Liquipedia is wrong (doubtful) or B: some Blizzard dev accidentally changed it/missed it while tweaking various numbers.
I tried to keep that as fact-based as possible. If I missed something or am completely off feel free to correct me.
For ease of reference for the lazy people:
BW
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zealot
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zergling
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Marine
SC2
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Zealot
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Zergling
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Marine
|
lings definitely suck in sc2 compared to bw. in bw they were staple unit from beginning to end, in sc2 they arnt even worth the larva mid-late game.
i blame the sc2 affect of damage overwhelming and lack of any consideration of that for zerglings. marines get combat shields, but lings get shit all. Plus the tight balls these days make zerglings useless.
|
On August 21 2010 00:27 Vortok wrote:
(6 pool dying to probes attack moving, anyone?)
I'm pretty sure that's by design, since otherwise there's no way to respond to a 6 pool on a small map.
That said, a balance change to zergling attack that didn't undo that but made the cost a little heavier for the defender might have other positive effects.
|
I agree. Zerglings are way worse in SC2 which is one of the reasons Z is very vulnerable in the early game, and has mobility/harrass problems in the end-game
|
On August 21 2010 00:34 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2010 00:27 Vortok wrote:
(6 pool dying to probes attack moving, anyone?) I'm pretty sure that's by design, since otherwise there's no way to respond to a 6 pool on a small map. That said, a balance change to zergling attack that didn't undo that but made the cost a little heavier for the defender might have other positive effects.
Earlier scout,or preparing Yourself for the worst.
Right now massing lings in any occasion is just like wasting larva/mineral sink.
Maybe if Adrenal Glands were cheaper/earlier in tech that would make zerglings a bit more viable mid..
But I love crackling+hydra vs P. Hydras counter Warpgate units pretty well,while cracklings do massive amount and dps and are really mobile,though why would I favour them over Muta/Infestor?
|
zerglings are my favorite unit from a non-gameplay point of view. watching mass speedlings run around is just so much fun. too bad they are a pretty bad unit.
|
ya lings are a little worse then bw in terms of what you can do with them but i dont think they will be getting a buff any time soon, zerg right now needs some more diversity instead of everyone just going mass ling/roach or ling/muta or hydra/roach or w/e it is zerg players do, just theres no real unit combos like toss where you have zealots, stalkers, the little orb things, colosi etc..
|
lings were nerfed to make up for the pathing changes. The whole auto surround thing benefits lings much more then almost any other unit. I have the feeling that if lings had the same attack speed ratio as BW they would be OP. I haven't tested it, and even if I did test it I don't feel that I'm qualified to make a decision on balance. In any case, I just remember reading something to this effect a while ago.
|
- More unit counter them ( Helions, Reaper, Colossi, Tanks, even Thor when u can't have a surround )
- They are worse stats wise than in BW
So it's pretty obviouis that they aren't really worth it anymore.
|
United States22883 Posts
On August 21 2010 00:40 NukeTheBunnys wrote:
lings were nerfed to make up for the pathing changes. The whole auto surround thing benefits lings much more then almost any other unit. I have the feeling that if lings had the same attack speed ratio as BW they would be OP. I haven't tested it, and even if I did test it I don't feel that I'm qualified to make a decision on balance. In any case, I just remember reading something to this effect a while ago.
I think this is a really good point.
Still, it seems like lings are too weak at killing buildings, now that they all come with armor, and that's not really affected by the AI change at all.
|
I've been saying this since early beta when I did the same calculations after wondering why its so hard to defend zealot rushes with lings. Apparently the rationalization is that the AI helps lings more than it does zealots or marines, which honestly is a load of shit, because if you don't micro your lings you suck. Whats also sad is that a +1 melee upgrade actually increases zergling dps by almost as much as adrenal glands, so the upgrade isn't really worth it if you don't have +1 melee already.
|
On August 21 2010 00:40 NukeTheBunnys wrote:
lings were nerfed to make up for the pathing changes. The whole auto surround thing benefits lings much more then almost any other unit. I have the feeling that if lings had the same attack speed ratio as BW they would be OP. I haven't tested it, and even if I did test it I don't feel that I'm qualified to make a decision on balance. In any case, I just remember reading something to this effect a while ago.
autosurround is nice and all in the early game, but once the enemy gets a decent number of units autosurround is useless. and since most people attack with a decent number of units, and rarely will lings surround that ball, zerglings arnt useful in real games.
sure autosurround helps lings, but clumping of units does not. cancels eachother out.
I think a ling buff would do wonders. early zeal rushes or reapers/hellions harass would be a tad more reasonable to defend against with lings, rather than forcing spince crawlers and roaches every damn time.
|
I don't think that lings are all that bad. It is just that you can't get enough of them to really do the damage you need outside of very early game.
I think they are better than people give them credit for though. They get a ton of extra benefit from upgrades. They are a lot faster than they ever were in brood war, and that gives you some options you never used to have.
It is just that in order for roaches to have a place in the game, some other unit has to lose utility to compensate, and zerglings were that unit.
|
On August 21 2010 00:40 NukeTheBunnys wrote:
lings were nerfed to make up for the pathing changes. The whole auto surround thing benefits lings much more then almost any other unit. I have the feeling that if lings had the same attack speed ratio as BW they would be OP. I haven't tested it, and even if I did test it I don't feel that I'm qualified to make a decision on balance. In any case, I just remember reading something to this effect a while ago.
It really doesn't benefit when 20 lings go towards ONE point against a zealot wall.
I agree the zergling is a mess. If they get a proper surround (must move and take damage THEN attack) then zerglings are a bit more lethal, but when you put 24 zerglings against 5 zealots and lose it's a bit disheartening to say the least (600 minerals vs. 500 minerals).
I feel like Zerglings would be better if their size was actually what it was. As of now it looks like they are about the same size as a zealot (with regards to going through walls). Zerglings can't swarm when only 5 can surround a zealot or when only one can get up against a zealot in a wall.
That and marines got this attack bonus that completely tears apart zerglings. I can understand that marines should be stronger against lings since banelings are the proper counter, but the marine ball is stronger than the zergling surround.
|
Lings are also more vulnerable to other AI changes like better worker pathing (probes dont bumble around retardedly when being attacked by 6pool lings, and instead actually cluster together to fend it off) and the "ball AI" that forms all ranged armies into perfect spheres of death. In that situation, "auto surround" doesnt really benefit them hardly at all since the attacking area on the ball is so small. But i imagine that early game they would be incredibly potent with any sort of buff. I agree that cracklings should be more effective cause in BW, as a toss player, i was scared shitless of my expos being sniped by crack. Now i just dont care.
A possible solution would be to make terran armies move at different speeds (make marauders slower than marines) which would open up moments when zergling flanks would be extremely effective against bio, cutting off the two halves and increasing the attackable area of the bioball. The bioball wouldnt just be able to stim around at will because the player would have to manage 2 units of different speeds.
|
Especially with Forcefield, Blizzard was pretty harsh on Zerglings 
|
On August 21 2010 00:40 NukeTheBunnys wrote:
lings were nerfed to make up for the pathing changes. The whole auto surround thing benefits lings much more then almost any other unit. I have the feeling that if lings had the same attack speed ratio as BW they would be OP. I haven't tested it, and even if I did test it I don't feel that I'm qualified to make a decision on balance. In any case, I just remember reading something to this effect a while ago.
Mmmhmm, their attack speed would probably make them hugely imba in the earlier stages of the game.
Regardless, this does not change the fact that they scale horribly compared to any other tier 1 unit.
They actually do very well from early, but in late game they're utterly useless (actually detrimental when paired with ultralisks).
And don't say its cause 'they're a tier 1 unit'. They have a tier 3 upgrade which does absolutely nothing for the 200 mineral 200 gas cost. Zealot's charge adds a huge oomph to their effectiveness (200min/200gas), Marines also have the stim + combat shields (200min/200gas). It's painfully obvious that the other two tier 1 units benefit more from their 200/200 upgrade than the zergling does. (Actually the zergling has a total of 300/300 of unit specific upgrades)
They used to be so effective in destroying buildings, but you never end wanting to use them other than for a mineral sink in the later stages.
Anyways, I wouldn't to go so far as calling them the 'problem'. They're definitely not even close to the sole reason of why zerg is 'underpowered'. Early game issues is where it's at (zerg has a couple of end-game solutions, though most professional games rarely transition to a proper end-game, as a result we can rarely see the balance issues there). Buffing zerglings base attack speed would probably just make them really unfair in rushes.
|
If they are so bad why do people still insist on getting the speed upgrade? I am not very good, but can't you just go early lair and tech straight for hydras/mutas and rely on more roaches in the early game?
You could go early lair -> roach speed -> hydras for example.
Hydra/Roach is a very viable comp.
|
On August 21 2010 01:02 grudgeStar wrote:
If they are so bad why do people still insist on getting the speed upgrade? I am not very good, but can't you just go early lair and tech straight for hydras/mutas and rely on more roaches in the early game?
You could go early lair -> roach speed -> hydras for example.
Hydra/Roach is a very viable comp.
Most people don't like going roaches early because they quite costly and you can't be really aggressive with them pre-speed upgrade where as speedlings give you some potential for early map control. Many people do go roaches though.
|
i personally think the usefulness of Zerg unit compared to their cost/availabilty is:
Baneling
Muta
Speedling
infestor
ultralisk
BroodLord
Corruptor
Roach
Hydra
Zerglings are crap, but they are useful to run around, cut reinforcements, draw dmg from mutas or blings, control the map. They are fast and cheap and weak. As long as there s 2 + and only 1 -, i love the unit. Take the hdyra: Slow, costly, and weak health-strong dmg. 2.5 -, 0.5 +
I m not saying everybody should look at the units as i do, as it's the truth, it's just how i feel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
