|
Day[9] took a lot of heat for saying that Idra was late getting Tier 3 against Cruncher. I thought I’d take a look and explore just how bad (or not) Zerg Tier 3 units are. In this Issue: The Ultralisk.
At first blush, this is the Zerg’s ultimate damage-dealer. Its attacks of 15 (35 vs. armored) each .86 seconds gives it the highest DPS in the Zerg army, regardless of target: 17.4 (40.65 vs. armored). That’s not bad; a stimmed marine does 10.5, a carrier does 26.66 and a Thor, highest against ground in the game, does 46.875. So the Ultralisk is playing with the big-boys here.
But Ultralisks also cost an arm and a leg. What happens if we divide the DPS by cost (taking each gas as being worth 1.66 minerals and each supply costing 12.5 minerals)? Ultralisk DPS per cost is 0.0246 (0.0574 vs. armored). That means that, for the price, an Ultralisk’s DPS is worse than every other Zerg ground unit against light and about the same as a Roach (Roach DPS per cost is 0.0565) against armored. For comparison, a stimmed Marine’s DPS per cost is 0.16728, a Carrier is 0.0283, and a Thor is 0.0662
So the Ultra really isn’t that bad at doing damage, especially against armored. But maybe I’ve been doing this the wrong way. See, all those comparisons are with units that use ranged attacks. What happens when we compare an Ultralisk to other melee units: the Zerglings, Zealots, DTs, and harvesters? Well, we find that, per cost, an Ultralisk against a light unit is WORSE than a harvester (0.0533 vs. 0.02459) and against an armored unit is about half as cost effective as a zealot (0.1066 vs. 0.0574). Melee units need to pack more punch to reward you for the effort of getting them in close. Ultras don’t seem to do that.
“But Ultralisks can absorb damage!” you say. I reply, “There are numbers for that, too.” An Ultralisk has 500 hit points, and we’ll say 3 armor (we all know the upgrade is mandatory). The average attack against armored units does 15.1 damage every 1.16 seconds. The armor value of 3 reduces that to 12.1 damage every 1.16 seconds, which means it takes an average of 41.48 hits to kill an Ultralisk. If we divide that by cost, we get 0.05856.
Just as above, the best comparison is against other melee units. So we find that a Zealot takes 0.095 hits per cost, a zergling takes 0.0822 hits per cost and the permanently cloaked DT comes in at 0.0265 hits per cost. (SCVs take 0.0528 hits per cost)
It looks like, cost for cost, the Ultralisk does less damage and can take less punishment than a Zealot…or even a Zergling! Of course, one Ultralisk only costs 1 larva. The 40+ zerglings that equal it in resource cost are 30 larva.
It’s here that quantitative analysis hits its limit. Siege Tanks and Colossi kill Zerglings and Zealots by the dozen, but I haven’t found a way to reflect that in the unit’s durability stats. And the Ultralisk itself does splash damage to units it attacks. Again, I don’t know how to add that. How many extra units are affected on average? Until I can know that, I can’t really do anything about it.
Also, there is the sheer bulk of the Ultralisk. The fact that it is so large means that it is difficult to bring the full weight of a platoon of Ultralisks to bear against your opponent, while his smaller ranged units employ a very high “DPS density” against you.
TL;DR/Conclusion: Disregarding unit size and attack splash, the Ultralisk is a unit that is clearly inferior to all other melee units in the game. However, factors that are difficult to analyze quantitatively such as the ability to give and receive splash damage, unit size, “DPS density”, and larva cost make it difficult to say authoritatively that the Ultralisk is a worthless unit. It’s not looking good though.
EDIT: Splash damage. I don't know how to do it accurately, but not including it has been undermining basically every point I might wish to make. I have to make several assumptions: each attack hits four units in addition to the target, and each additional unit is the same armor type as the target. So here you go: Ultra DPS per cost including splash is 0.057 (0.134 vs. armored). So, against armored units it finally looks like the Ultra is doing better than Zealots, but it still does worse than Lings (a hilarious 0.22 DPS per cost)
|
wow u must be a math major. But this is good, I am a z player and i am constantly dissapointed in zerg's late game, ultras in particular. u can be 2-3 bases up, make a bunch of ultras that just die to a big mm or toss death ball, and suddenly ur broke and ur ultras are dead. Even if fully upgraded, they are just not cost effective. In BW, if u outmacroed ur opponent to the point of getting 5-3 ultras, u had pretty much won the game. Now making ultras is like getting robbed. cough*BUFF*cough
|
It's some interesting theory crafting but I think the points that you admit you can't factor in are actually super important, perhaps more important than all the math you have done. Take, for example, a typical Terran army of marine/tank/thor/medivac. If one were to attack it while maxed on ling/bling, each tank shot is going to be kill a gazillion blings/lings, the marines can stim and run away until the blings are all dead, etc.
Now imagine attacking into such an army with ultra/bling instead. The bulk of the ultras will greatly reduce the splash damage of the tanks and thors. The ultras will tear through the armored units (tanks/thors) while the blings, which will survive much longer do to the spread of the ultras, might actually hit the marines. The marines can't stop to shoot the ultras because then the blings will catch up. Moreover, b/c ultras and blings have the same movement speed, they are easier to keep together than ling/bling.
This is of course mostly theory crafting about the elements you said were hard to qualify mathematically, but I think it's important not to completely disregard the ultralisk because of your math. In certain unit combinations they can be an extremely powerful addition to one's unit composition. One can't just call them inferior to lings (cough blue flame cough).
|
It's a melee unit which is as much of a runner as a hydralisk. Too easy to kite, too easy to snipe. Roaches are better in every regard.
They should be smaller and faster imo.
Edit: Regarding the OP, you need to factor the supply too. Ultralisks have tons of HP for their supply cost, so theyll be more effective in a 200/200 army than T1/2 units.
|
you need ultra and nydus to make them effective, nydusing bases and taking out production
|
Ultras kill forcefields. That's pretty much the most useful thing a zerg can have if they don't want a pure air army in ZvP.
|
Zerg just need to learn HOW to use them and when to use them. And yeah, nydus play with ultralisks seems like a good way to use them.
|
Even if I don't believe the Ultralisk is a stellar unit, disregarding splash just doesn't make sense. If you can't model one of the variables, you can't call it worthless and keep analyzing the data and hope to get meaningfull results. When would an ultralisk damage only 1 unit in a protoss ball? Almost never I would say. His size and pathfinding definatelly makes his splash worse than equivalents, but it's a vital part of the unit.
His armor is a lot harder to rate than you make it seems like. High armor against marines/carriers? Awesome. Against tanks it's a diferent story. There are tons of units that do less than 15 damage a hit. If you looked at things like that, carriers would seem pretty damn good. Look how much they gain from upgrades. But you if take into account how much armor lowers it's damage, it's another story.
I would actually say the least meaningfull thing about the ultralisk is what you wrote about. If they walked over other units and had a larger splash radius, I doubt anyone would call them weak. Remember when it was "bugged" and almost guaranteed Fruitdealers victory in GSL?
|
Another thing that goes unmentioned in your post: the ultralisk is 1 unit, while 40 zerglings are 40 units. the dps of 40 zerglings goes down as they get attacked and some of the units die, but the DPS of an ultraliisk stays the same until it has lost all of its hp.
|
Has anyone here successfully used the ultra in a close/slightly behind situation? Because I've only ever seen them work out when you're so far ahead it's irrelevant which unit to make. Please post replays, because I'd love to see how it can be useful.
|
tbh, I'd say damage and health per supply would be more useful, as ultras are mostly going to come into play late game when zergs are maxed and money is practically unlimited. Especially when zerg drones really hard, there's not a lot of supply left over, so supply-efficient units are a must.
|
@JDuB: An ultra/bling composition certainly sounds like it would be very effective against all compositions (except air  ). Of course, there's a difference between "very effective" and "optimal", and I haven't seen that play from a lot of pros.
@SKC: Yep, disregarding splash is pretty silly. I really have no idea how to account for it though. What's the average number of units that are going to get hit? If I have that, I'm all over it.
Also, regarding "average damage", I arrived at the number used by taking a cost-weighted average of all units in the game, so Marines do count for more than Siege Tanks. But also don't forget optimization: a player who is microing during the battle is going to try to get Thors to attack the Ultralisks and Marines to attack the zerglings.
@benefluence: But that works both ways: 45 damage 15 hits and the Ultralisk can't do anymore damage. 45 damage 15 hits, optimally distributed, and there's still 25 Zerglings left doing damage.
|
Ultra 1v1 in unit fights is terrible for cost effectiveness. The splash pretty much triples it's dps(due to the fast attack speed) against armoured units. Its very much like zerglings but with a much worst pathing. If you can get a surround with ultras they will become the most cost efficient units you can possibly make. Or if you screw up they will give you a free loss right there. I once a moved into a terran, but thanks to bunkers the path was too small for ultras so my lings and banelings ran in to get killed by tanks. But my ultralisks went the long way around and were attacking his third. It was on scrap btw.
|
@Kovaz:
Damage per supply: Ultra 2.9 (6.77 vs. armored). Ling: 14.36. Hydra: 8
Hits per supply: ultra 6.9, ling 5.14, Roach 5.15
|
I've always viewed ultras as a meat shield that allows your other units to do their job. It also has a very cheap supply cost. Those 40 zerglings may be as cost effective as an ultra, but you could have 3 ultras for the food cost in a 200/200 army. The larva cost is also very important. In fact, I'd agree with the other posters that the mineral/gas cost is probably the least relevant "cost" of the unit.
|
Disregarding attack splash
The ultralisk would be insanely imbalanced in the dps department if it had better or on par DPS with single-target units.
|
@Talack:
Damage per cost of Ultra: 0.024 (0.057 vs. armored), Siege Tank: 0.029 (0.042 vs. armored), Colossus: 0.025, Hellion: 0.025 (0.046 vs. light), Archon: 0.022 (0.031 vs. biological)
It's damage seems right in line with other splash-dealers. Of course, everything else has range (even the Archon!).
|
On April 02 2011 06:53 tGhOeOoDry wrote:
TL;DR/Conclusion: Disregarding unit size and attack splash, the Ultralisk is a unit that is clearly inferior to all other melee units in the game. However, factors that are difficult to analyze quantitatively such as the ability to give and receive splash damage, unit size, “DPS density”, and larva cost make it difficult to say authoritatively that the Ultralisk is a worthless unit. It’s not looking good though.
These factors alone make quantitative analysis worthless. Also note that the armor will rarely be 3; competent zergs will also aim for ultras by upgrading regular carapace alongside. The sheer number of variables that can't be taken into account (all of which add to the ultra's viability save perhaps size) means saying something like "it's not looking good" is foolish.
If we looked at Thors, but removed their splash ability, how would they do against Muta? Not very well. Look at DTs and ignore their cloaking. How do they do? Pretty terribly. HT? They can't even attack! What a ripoff. While I'm not saying that ultras are a good unit (they probably aren't) numbers conclusions aren't authoritative or very useful.
|
Editing OP to include extremely basic splash. I'm assuming hitting 4 extra units for no good reason at all, and that the 4 extra units are all the same armor type as the primary target.
Damage per cost: 0.057 (0.134 vs. armored).
So, against armored opponents it is better than zealots, and against light still far worse. Also, just for fun, you should know a Zergling does 0.229 DPS per cost. Woo!
|
The biggest problem of the ultralisk is the unit size and speed imo. Ultras in BW were awesome cause they were fast, and not too large. I have lost many games were I've had really large number of ultras (10+) to pretty much kiting marauders, and as others have said, you really can't go pure ultra cost-effectively.
|
The reason saying IdrA should of got T3 sooner was sketchy was not because ultra are bad against protoss (they are), but because Cruncher had like 15 void rays.
Void Rays are the ABSOLUTE counter to both zerg T3 units, there is almost no harder counter in the game.
The only units that can fight voids are corruptors and hydra. Hydra die before the colossus do, almost always. Corruptors are not only weak to void rays themselves, but stalkers also do great damage to them.
If you think Muta can fight the deathball, that's a jokie.
|
On April 02 2011 08:39 Mailing wrote:
The only units that can fight voids are corruptors and hydra. Hydra die before the colossus do, almost always. Corruptors are not only weak to void rays themselves, but stalkers also do great damage to them.
That is why you target the colossi with corruptor and the voidrays with hydras.
|
@Mailing: I only included the Day[9] criticisms because that's what got me interested in the analysis. The analysis itself is just about comparing the Ultralisk to other melee units and other Zerg options in the late game. Thanks for complaining about the general balance of the PvZ match-up though.
|
The reason, I feel, that the ultras are not that good is because of tier 2ish unit counters against the ultras i.e Marauders and Immortals. Those two units completely murder ultras.
|
On April 02 2011 08:48 Refreshe wrote:
The reason, I feel, that the ultras are not that good is because of tier 2ish unit counters against the ultras i.e Marauders and Immortals. Those two units completely murder ultras.
Here's the problem with ultras. Their intention is to be used when you're on enough bases that you can support going 200/200 with t3.
If T/P didn't have any cheap massable specialist unit to fight the ultras, they'd just get stomped at that point.
The only thing they need to fix with Ultras is their pathing. Anything else would more than likely turn them into a deathball unit.
|
On April 02 2011 08:39 Mailing wrote:
The reason saying IdrA should of got T3 sooner was sketchy was not because ultra are bad against protoss (they are), but because Cruncher had like 15 void rays.
Void Rays are the ABSOLUTE counter to both zerg T3 units, there is almost no harder counter in the game.
The only units that can fight voids are corruptors and hydra. Hydra die before the colossus do, almost always. Corruptors are not only weak to void rays themselves, but stalkers also do great damage to them.
If you think Muta can fight the deathball, that's a jokie.
Agreed. Void rays would just own any tier 3 unit idra could have gotten out.
|
Ultras ar every usefull, I'm using them and consider ultimate anti turtle unit in TvZ. They work wonders with killing Terran turtled bases. Usually when i can quite save get ultras, I have won game. ANd averagely, human and his dog has 3 legs. U can't take average of everything, and count it as a practical argument;)
|
ANd averagely, human and his dog has 3 legs.
Fixing that to: "On average, a man and his dog has 3 legs." Fantastic saying haha, I've never heard it before.
|
“But Ultralisks can absorb damage!” you say. I reply, “There are numbers for that, too.” An Ultralisk has 500 hit points, and we’ll say 3 armor (we all know the upgrade is mandatory). The average attack against armored units does 15.1 damage every 1.16 seconds. The armor value of 3 reduces that to 12.1 damage every 1.16 seconds, which means it takes an average of 41.48 hits to kill an Ultralisk. If we divide that by cost, we get 0.05856.
I don't think it's that simple. You can't say because an ultralisk has three armor that damage over time is simply decreased by 3. For instance, if an ultra has three armor and a marine does six damage, every shot will be mitigated by 3 damage, and the damage over time is HALVED, not decreased by three. (6 damage/shot * five shots/sec = 30 damage/sec, 3 damage/shot * five shots = 15 damage/sec. Notice, 15 (not 27) is half of 30.)
This leads us to the conclusion that ultralisks vs marines have a cost effective hp/cost ratio of around 0.1, higher than any of the other units that you calculated.
To have a completely valid comparison between tanky units, you must now take the armor capabilities of all the tank units you are comparing vs all the different units because the armor of your tank decreases the damage over time by a FRACTION, not an additive value.
By all means, you can average the cost effectiveness of one unit against all of the other units in the game and then compare once more. Since ultras, I believe, have the highest armor in the game, they will not nearly be as horrible as you might think.
On a side note: Yes, ultras are too damn expensive.
edit: Damage over time further decreases with +3 carapace alongside. Marines will end up doing 1 damage, nearly 1/6 the damage over time as before.
|
@QtreadzSD: The average attack in SC2 does 15.1 damage against armor. This average is weighted by cost such that about three marines are counted for every marauder etc. Sure, an ultra's armor cuts marine damage in half, but it only reduces a Marauder hit by 15% and an Immortal hit by 6%. On average, an ultra's armor reduces the damage from an attack by 20% (15.1-12.1). Of course, keep in mind what Crescend1 said about averages.
|
every ground unit in the zerg army except for roaches and ultras is *incredibly* vulnerable to splash damage: lings of all sorts, obviously...but infestors die near-instantly to tanks, and hydras melt in seconds. roaches are somewhat better against small amounts of splash, or against storm...but a critical mass of colossi or heavy terran mech, or a few fungals, will annihilate them.
against armies with lots of splash damage--meaning almost any late-tier protoss or terran army, or any zerg army with lots of infestors--the vast majority of the zerg ground army becomes *incredibly* inefficient. Like, 6+ Colossi can kill an *infinite* number of t1 and t2 zergs.
The entire Zerg philosophy is the idea that, even if you can't outright kill your opponent or trade armies with the first exchange, you can do some damage with the first wave, then remax immediately and hit them with another, until they've been whittled down and destroyed.
When all your units melt from a ball of Colossi, this isn't possible.
Ultras, with high armor, high hp, regeneration, immunity to FG snare effects, and huge size...are literally the *only* Zerg ground unit that doesn't just vaporize once the aoe splash damage comes out.
But, as you say, they're woefully inefficient in terms of dps for cost. This means that, ideally, Ultras would be used to tank AOE damage, allowing the other zerg units to get into position and deal damage.
What throws a wrench in this is that Void Rays are so fucking good against massive armored (and everything Zerg has except hydras and corruptors, the former of whom melt to colossi and the latter is woefully one-dimensional)...hence, the effectiveness of the Colossi/Void Ray deathball.
But that doesn't mean Ultras don't have a role. They do. Its just that right now, for Toss at least, the unit whose role is "kill shit like Ultras" is one that Zerg are really, really bad at dealing with.
If Hydras or Corruptors were better, Ultras would shine.
|
Your math is good, but you have to think of the ultralisk in specific situations and matchups. For example, ZvP. The Ultralisk is THE ONLY UNIT that destroys forcefields. Without Ultralisks, Zerg would constantly be at the disadvantage. Also, most people do not create ultralisks as a late game unit. Ultralisks are mainly used as decoration, feeling better about your win. Most people create Brood Lords late game, which block pathing and deal a ton of damage.
On another note, the Ultralisk is actually very good at absorbing damage. The only downside is that in order to absorb the damage, you have to have max armor upgrades.
|
On April 02 2011 09:20 QtreadzSD wrote:Show nested quote +“But Ultralisks can absorb damage!” you say. I reply, “There are numbers for that, too.” An Ultralisk has 500 hit points, and we’ll say 3 armor (we all know the upgrade is mandatory). The average attack against armored units does 15.1 damage every 1.16 seconds. The armor value of 3 reduces that to 12.1 damage every 1.16 seconds, which means it takes an average of 41.48 hits to kill an Ultralisk. If we divide that by cost, we get 0.05856. I don't think it's that simple. You can't say because an ultralisk has three armor that damage over time is simply decreased by 3. For instance, if an ultra has three armor and a marine does six damage, every shot will be mitigated by 3 damage, and the damage over time is HALVED, not decreased by three. (6 damage/shot * five shots/sec = 30 damage/sec, 3 damage/shot * five shots = 15 damage/sec. Notice, 15 (not 27) is half of 30.) This leads us to the conclusion that ultralisks vs marines have a cost effective hp/cost ratio of around 0.1, higher than any of the other units that you calculated. To have a completely valid comparison between tanky units, you must now take the armor capabilities of all the tank units you are comparing vs all the different units because the armor of your tank decreases the damage over time by a FRACTION, not an additive value. By all means, you can average the cost effectiveness of one unit against all of the other units in the game and then compare once more. Since ultras, I believe, have the highest armor in the game, they will not nearly be as horrible as you might think. On a side note: Yes, ultras are too damn expensive. edit: Damage over time further decreases with +3 carapace alongside. Marines will end up doing 1 damage, nearly 1/6 the damage over time as before.
I was just about to point the same mistake... but still i think the analysis is pretty accurate.
I think the thing that was pointed out in both the article and the reviews about ultra's size is remarkably true. they are TOO bulky, so their splash (which is supposed to stack tremendowsly) can't be effective enough due to their size and speed, practically this guys need to be in low numbers and in large (not to say HUGE) areas so that they -mixed with other army types- can really realease full damage, so splash is not THAT of a critical factor (at least in real fights), tanks and collosus for example, get an splash that is almost 100% effective regardless of the terrain and more importantly location (a collosus or a tank does not "runs around" the army trying to find a spot from which they can attack and they really DON'T care for fights in chokes).
So yeah, the thing about their size-movespeed must be dealt (i say it as a protoss) for ultras to really hit the arena... Or at least they should be made more REAL cost effective.
|
You can't make a mathematical argument to conclusively say the ultralisk is a horrible unit. It is supposed to be used in synergy with other zerg ground units. Just like a ball of stalkers isn't great, and a ball of colossus isn't great, if you combine them together, their effectiveness is far more than the sum of their parts. 4 ultras combined with a huge swarm of zerglings and banelings with infester support is capable of tearing through any protoss ground composition you could think of. Ultras tank the splash damage and break forcefields, allowing lings and banelings to get a surround and deal massive dps rather than get melted instantly. Fungal growth is icing on the cake.
edit: IMO the only weakness of the ultra is its bad path finding. This can be mitigated by carefully selecting where you fight your battles, and putting effort into setting up good flanking positions such that your other units will not obstruct the ultralisk.
|
You can't make a mathematical argument to conclusively say the ultralisk is a horrible unit. It is supposed to be used in synergy with other zerg ground units. Just like a ball of stalkers isn't great, and a ball of colossus isn't great, if you combine them together, their effectiveness is far more than the sum of their parts. 4 ultras combined with a huge swarm of zerglings and banelings with infester support is capable of tearing through any protoss ground composition you could think of. Ultras tank the splash damage and break forcefields, allowing lings and banelings to get a surround and deal massive dps rather than get melted instantly. Fungal growth is icing on the cake.
This would be what would happen, if Void Rays weren't the ultimate anti-Ultra tool, or if Zerg had a good way to deal with Void Rays.
Unfortunately, they kinda don't. So yes, against gateway+Colossus, Ultras are the magic ingredient. Which is why every Toss transitions out of that to Colossus+Void Ray before Ultras can make an impact.
|
For the people making posts about ultra speed, remember that off-creep an ultra has the same speed as a stalker - it's not particularly slow.
The other point to remember is that converting supply into an arbitrary mineral cost does not make for a good analysis. The two should be treated separately.
|
The other point to remember is that converting supply into an arbitrary mineral cost does not make for a good analysis. The two should be treated separately.
Very true. The later the game gets, the more important supply cost becomes, and the less important mineral cost becomes.
|
As with what came up in another of the threads that tried to analyze units by numbers, the concept of "DPS Density" is important, and why the Ultralisk is so weak.
The basic answer to the problem is not a per-unit comparison but a Marginal-unit comparison. It's not a question of 1 Marine vs 1 Ultralisk, it's a question of 20 Marines vs 4 Ultralisks. If you add a 5th Ultralisk, does the situation turn in your favor? What about a 6th?
The problem with UItralisks is the maximum useful is 4 on almost all maps. 6 Going into a fight is probably the most you want to have on the field at any 1 time. Unless you're pulling a last-second Ultras switch, which means you're going to be just plowing them right into the opponent. Most of the rest of the units in the game don't have anywhere close to the limitations to the utility of their numbers. Ranged-DPS numbers don't stop having good Marginal utility until the "ball" can't shoot all the way across itself.
Once the spacing issue can be quantified, then we'll be able to really compare them.
|
There is unquestionably a mineral cost to supply: 8 supply costs 100 minerals. That isn't the only cost to supply, but it is a cost. I do agree that in the lategame the supply cost is more important than resource cost, and I included that information as well.
|
On April 02 2011 11:00 Taf the Ghost wrote:
As with what came up in another of the threads that tried to analyze units by numbers, the concept of "DPS Density" is important, and why the Ultralisk is so weak.
The basic answer to the problem is not a per-unit comparison but a Marginal-unit comparison. It's not a question of 1 Marine vs 1 Ultralisk, it's a question of 20 Marines vs 4 Ultralisks. If you add a 5th Ultralisk, does the situation turn in your favor? What about a 6th?
The problem with UItralisks is the maximum useful is 4 on almost all maps. 6 Going into a fight is probably the most you want to have on the field at any 1 time. Unless you're pulling a last-second Ultras switch, which means you're going to be just plowing them right into the opponent. Most of the rest of the units in the game don't have anywhere close to the limitations to the utility of their numbers. Ranged-DPS numbers don't stop having good Marginal utility until the "ball" can't shoot all the way across itself.
Once the spacing issue can be quantified, then we'll be able to really compare them.
This would be true, if the point of Ultras was high dps.
Its not. The Zerg army already has some of the highest-dps for cost, and dps-density, units in the game. In particular, Lings dps for cost is *insane*, and Hydra dps density is very,, very good (which is why Hydras melt Stalkers despite, on paper, seeming to be about even with them).
The point of Ultras is to tank damage, particularly splash damage, so those high-dps, lower tier units can get a flank, close the distance and start dealing heavy damage.
This is also why Ultras are so damn big, so that they absorb a lot of splash.
Making them smaller might marginally improve their dps, but it still wouldn't make their dps for cost *or* density nearly as good as that of Lings or Hydras. In other words, unless you outright buff their damage, teching to Ultras for higher dps will never ever make sense.
The *only* point of the Ultra is to tank damage, and for that they need to be big.
The problem, at least in ZvP, is that Ultras really, really suck against Voids. Like, it is unbelievable how worthless they quickly become if Voids are on the field and free to focus them down. And Zerg...kinda suck at dealing with Voids.
If Hydras or Corruptors were better against Void Rays, Ultras would start to shine, because if Voids can't focus them then Toss doesn't have much that can quickly kill an Ultralisk. Meaning Ultras can do the job they were designed for, tanking lots of damage. Which means lings and hydras can actually get into range and flank the deathball without being vaporized.
|
Protoss can generate much fear with mass colossi and mass void. Terran has thors and tanks which really make you choose your attack timing careful, if you do attack. Usually as a zerg, they wait for P or T to move against them (unless you're July). The ultra just does not generate fear. mass ultra can easily be stopped by marauders and many other units. The only time ultras shine is when you are ahead. In which case they are more of a show off unit. You have a huge income after crushing their army and an expo or two so you pump out ultras to finish the job. most of the time they are never the deciding factor in victory. there is a ladder replay casted by artosis of IdrA v MVP in which IdrA uses ultras to win the game along with infestors. However, there are not many pro replays in which ultras are used so effectively.
|
On April 02 2011 11:21 tGhOeOoDry wrote:
There is unquestionably a mineral cost to supply: 8 supply costs 100 minerals. That isn't the only cost to supply, but it is a cost. I do agree that in the lategame the supply cost is more important than resource cost, and I included that information as well.
The problem with that is that supply can be reused, so assigning this value to it only makes sense in the very early game. Trying to equate supply to minerals in an overall analysis of unit effectiveness is incorrect - as I pointed out earlier.
|
Another thing you might want to calculate is DPS/Tankiness per supply since it's not too rare for a late game zerg to be worrying more about supply than money.
|
I just kind of wish ultras at least had a purpose when they come out. I mean broodlords are so beastly it is a shame that ultras just don't even seem to be workable.
|
On April 02 2011 12:53 SlipperySnake wrote:
I just kind of wish ultras at least had a purpose when they come out. I mean broodlords are so beastly it is a shame that ultras just don't even seem to be workable.
As has been said, but ignored so many times in this thread already, the purpose of the ultra is to tank damage. It is fricken huge, has high hp, and has high armor when upgraded. All splash damage attacks landing on the ultra will not damage adjacent units, because the physical size of the ultra is so big. Many splash damage attacks are required to hit the ultra before you finally bring it down, unlike zerglings or banelings, which die to 2 hits of any splash-dealing unit. Yes, the 6 supply equivalent of zerglings has a combined higher HP than a single ultralisk, BUT individual zerglings are extremely easy to kill, thus their DPS decreases linearly as each zergling dies. Additionally, a splash damage attack landing on this group of zerglings will damage all nearby zerglings instantly. 3 splash shots from a colo, tank, or hellion can easily wipe out 12 zerglings, but that will not even take off 50% of an ultralisks HP. Tier 1 units such as the marine and zealot do very little damage against the ultralisk due to its armor. The only true weakness of the ultralisk is voidrays in pvz. Any other situation, if you mix them into your army correctly and use them to TANK hits so that your more fragile units can close in and actually do damage, you'll see massive success.
Yes, it is 'depressing' to watch 10 ultras get kited to death by 10 stim marauders, but this is not what ultras are for. Throw 4 ultras and 60 lings instead and 10 (or 30) marauders will get shredded.
|
On April 02 2011 06:53 tGhOeOoDry wrote:
But Ultralisks also cost an arm and a leg. What happens if we divide the DPS by cost (taking each gas as being worth 1.66 minerals and each supply costing 12.5 minerals)?
Why do you think that has any significance? Ultralisks do "area damage", so you have to figure this HIGHLY SITUATIONAL fact into the damage as well. That is wayyyyyyyyy too many assumptions to make any calculations more than just "gee I am good at math".
On April 02 2011 06:53 tGhOeOoDry wrote:
So the Ultra really isn’t that bad at doing damage, especially against armored. But maybe I’ve been doing this the wrong way.
Yes. You can never ever analyze units mathematically to compare them. There are just too many non-numerical factors (the opponent isnt a static set of numbers and if Marines Stim to run away any damage of the Ultralisk is moot).
So I would suggest not thinking about this game in mathematical terms. It doesnt help.
|
Zergs are assumed to outmine protoss and terran in almost all high-level long games, so I think it's pretty reasonable for them to be less cost effective on the dollar. The ability to shut down forcefields also makes your other ground units actually good late game.
But you're right, these things are kind of a joke as protoss. You build a 2nd robo or a 2nd stargate and can pretty easily deal with them. I think them doing more damage and expanding splash radius so they can actually do something before they're evaporated by voidrays or immortals.
|
On April 02 2011 11:24 Disarm22 wrote:
Protoss can generate much fear with mass colossi and mass void. Terran has thors and tanks which really make you choose your attack timing careful, if you do attack. Usually as a zerg, they wait for P or T to move against them (unless you're July). The ultra just does not generate fear. .
Banelings are the most frightening unit in the game against terran and zerg. I know that doesn't help with protoss though =P.
Terran's t3 isn't that amazing either tbh. Especially battle cruisers which don't receive any upgrades that are useful to any unit comp outside tvt.
At least your t3 gets full upgrades from the unit you generally mass all game (zerglings).
|
On strengthening the argument (or undermining it if it doesn't work out) a bit: Well, it'd be hard to get statistics on "average splash targets by an Ultralisk attack" or the such... But perhaps try finding how much splash you'd need to break even. In other words, calculate the number of splash targets an ultralisk would need on every hit to make the ultra worth it, when going up against armored/unarmored, to match the effectiveness of the other units (Zerglings, etc.).
You kinda have an idea of this with the edit section of the OP, but it'd be more clear to solve for the actual number - then we can judge for ourselves whether it's reasonable to expect an ultralisk to hit groups of (say) 5.2 marines at a time in the heat of battle.
edit:
On April 02 2011 11:38 Jumbled wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 11:21 tGhOeOoDry wrote:
There is unquestionably a mineral cost to supply: 8 supply costs 100 minerals. That isn't the only cost to supply, but it is a cost. I do agree that in the lategame the supply cost is more important than resource cost, and I included that information as well. The problem with that is that supply can be reused, so assigning this value to it only makes sense in the very early game. Trying to equate supply to minerals in an overall analysis of unit effectiveness is incorrect - as I pointed out earlier.
I'm not too sure about this. Obviously, if you think you're about to lose (or win) and you have an excess of overlords, the cost of supply doesn't matter. But if the game has any chance of progressing (which is usually the case), supply is probably going to be a limiting resource, and (pardon the pun) that supply will eventually be in demand. Even if it doesn't cost minerals to replace the supply yet, it does prevent you from getting other units with that supply, and, assuming you're not capped, the new replacement supply will eventually cost you 12.5 minerals each once you have to start making overlords again. And in the late game, nearing the 200-supply cap, that supply may well be even more valuable than 12.5 minerals each due to its scarcity.
|
[B]
They should be smaller and faster imo.
.
Ultras are just about as fast as zerglings, how fast do you want them to be???
|
On April 02 2011 13:30 tubey wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 11:24 Disarm22 wrote:
Protoss can generate much fear with mass colossi and mass void. Terran has thors and tanks which really make you choose your attack timing careful, if you do attack. Usually as a zerg, they wait for P or T to move against them (unless you're July). The ultra just does not generate fear. . Banelings are the most frightening unit in the game against terran and zerg. I know that doesn't help with protoss though =P. Terran's t3 isn't that amazing either tbh. Especially battle cruisers which don't receive any upgrades that are useful to any unit comp outside tvt. At least your t3 gets full upgrades from the unit you generally mass all game (zerglings).
There is a current shift in the metagame changing this. tQaquanda first brought ling bling ultra queen into thorough examination. I currently do not have a solution against 200/200 ling bling ultra infestor if I am going regular deathball. The key is only two 5-armor ultras to squash FFs, then 80 blings rolling into your army and killing them since they have +3 melee by that time. Add in infestors so you can't blink, and queens to transfuse ultras and you have by far the scariest ground army in the game of starcraft. I dont have a way to deal with this currently and would love to hear thoughts. I just wanted to point out how very useful a select few ultralisks are in a zerg late game composition against P providing they survive the midgame.
|
Ultras and Hydras both need a buff its ridiculous. Hydras move too slow off creep and Ultras are completely unreliable due to size and inability to walk over units
|
You really would rather have workers than ultras to fight with?? I question the OP's game knowledge or he must be a troll. 1 unit with 100 hp that deal 10 damage is better than 2 units with 50 hp that deal 5 damage because the sturdier unit LASTS LONGER. The sturdier unit kills one unit, then kills other because once the first unit dies, half the damage is being dealt. Ultra not only deliver sock DPS, but they survive a long time! I think all your post proves is that thors are OP  but seriously, ultras are UU.
|
So according to your math. Collosus are terrible, and thors are worse than zealots, and queens are 3x better than collosus.
I don't see any merit in theory crafting when said theory crafting is proven to not predict the results of various units in actual situations.
Ultras are good. in practice. not in every situation, and not with negative upgrades, but they have their role. some units are bad when they are out of their element, such as thors (vs mass ling players), collosus (vs sky terrans), vikings (vs gateway compositions), immortals (vs mass marine), hellion (vs blink stalker).
|
I think why people don't like ultras in comparison to the other higher tech units is that:
A. They are terrible against voidrays
and B. They are a mele unit. They do splash damage, but if the opposing army is in a ball and against a wall, the surface area is going to be decreased and ultras will have less to attack and the pathing isn't that good either. The terran and protoss splash damage units are ranged and thus can be protected and survive longer to do more damage.
|
On April 02 2011 14:46 j0k3r wrote:
There is a current shift in the metagame changing this. tQaquanda first brought ling bling ultra queen into thorough examination. I currently do not have a solution against 200/200 ling bling ultra infestor if I am going regular deathball. The key is only two 5-armor ultras to squash FFs, then 80 blings rolling into your army and killing them since they have +3 melee by that time. Add in infestors so you can't blink, and queens to transfuse ultras and you have by far the scariest ground army in the game of starcraft. I dont have a way to deal with this currently and would love to hear thoughts. I just wanted to point out how very useful a select few ultralisks are in a zerg late game composition against P providing they survive the midgame.
I find that when I roll with ling / bling / ultra / infestor, 5 and 6 gate pressure off of the standard 3-gate sentry tends to do terrible terrible damage to me when I'm getting my third up. Granted, that's not the way to deal with the late-game composition. But it's very possible to tell when the zerg is going for this composition and set up the rush accordingly. Early blink research (before infestors are out) can also only help.
I do love using the composition in the late-game, though. Not only is it powerful, it's mobile and swarm-y. It feels like how zerg is meant to be played. I've had a lot of difficulty getting to that point lately.
|
The only reason ultralisks were viable in brood war was because of dark swarm. Terran's infantry has received a boost to both mobility and damage, and dark swarm was taken away from zerg. Same applies to protoss. Dragoons raaaaaaped ultralisks cost for cost, but dark swarm tipped that scale way, way back in to the ultralisk's favor.
In SC2, marauders, tanks, and marines all do a pretty good job on their own taking care of ultras, and do an even better job when they're mixed together. The same applies to protoss. Protoss may have lost the reaver, which were very strong vs ultralisks, but they still have immortals, dark templars, archons, colossus, void rays, and to a lesser extent: stalkers (made slightly more viable with blink micro).
Ultralisks never were a real tank-y unit. They were just big and had a decent number of hitpoints, but you obviously couldn't mass them in the same way you could hydras or zerglings because of their food cost. It was their combination with dark swarm that made them a huge threat because it then took a very long time to kill them, or you had to use specialized units which you may not have amassed enough of, and their damage was really good.
|
On April 02 2011 15:02 Node wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 14:46 j0k3r wrote:
There is a current shift in the metagame changing this. tQaquanda first brought ling bling ultra queen into thorough examination. I currently do not have a solution against 200/200 ling bling ultra infestor if I am going regular deathball. The key is only two 5-armor ultras to squash FFs, then 80 blings rolling into your army and killing them since they have +3 melee by that time. Add in infestors so you can't blink, and queens to transfuse ultras and you have by far the scariest ground army in the game of starcraft. I dont have a way to deal with this currently and would love to hear thoughts. I just wanted to point out how very useful a select few ultralisks are in a zerg late game composition against P providing they survive the midgame. I find that when I roll with ling / bling / ultra / infestor, 5 and 6 gate pressure off of the standard 3-gate sentry tends to do terrible terrible damage to me when I'm getting my third up. Granted, that's not the way to deal with the late-game composition. But it's very possible to tell when the zerg is going for this composition and set up the rush accordingly. Early blink research (before infestors are out) can also only help. I do love using the composition in the late-game, though. Not only is it powerful, it's mobile and swarm-y. It feels like how zerg is meant to be played. I've had a lot of difficulty getting to that point lately.
I'll agree with you there, it's very very hard at the moment for zergs to hold fast 5-6 WG pushes as well as delayed +1 or blink pushes off of 5-6 gates. Almost impossible without going burrow roach. As a toss player, if I scout super fast evo or end up seeing a bling nest my response is to just WG rush since I don't have the proper answer to play against the late game ling bling ultra. I think zergs need to experiment with gas timings in order to facilitate baneling drop play instead. I dont know if it's even feasible against an 8:30-10:00 variety of WG rushes. The matter is, I can so easily FF my entire army inside of a circle to take little or no damage from blings. If I take the fight to your base and end up FF my army, your banes will have a no trouble decimating my force. Another answer is to backstab - perhaps if you've scouted a 5-6 gate moving out across the map, go on the offensive with bling drops at both bases to force me back and buy time for key infestor tech. Once infestors are out it becomes much easier to deal with toss armies in the midgame. Tech to ultra thereafter.
|
Excellent write up. I infer from your data that Ultras serve a niche purpose in the Zerg Army. They are to balance econ with larva availability.
Let us outline the following common scenario:
You are engaging an opponent in the late game on 4 base (5 hatch) with a 200/200 army. You have 71 larva saved. You have 3500/2200 in the bank. You anticipate needing 1 or more re-maxes in order to win the game.
You attack.
There is no way you are going to spend your money to zero if you use all your larva on lings. Conversely, you will not spend your larva to zero if you spend all your money on ultras.
Considering this knowledge, and managing larva as the fourth resource, we can conclude that (barring other, unmentioned variables), the best way to remax is to make enough ultras to bring yourself down to a reasonable amount of money, then continue remaxing with more money effecient units after the larva efficiency issue has been addressed.
For example, making 4 Ultras, then 16 roaches, 9 hydras, 8 corruptors and the rest lings.
But it is the absurdly ineffecient cost of the ultra that allows them to spend your money while not using much larva, bringing your resources into balance with your larva number.
|
Its quite impossible to mathematically compare units against each other.
You have to compare races, while taking into account maps, player skill, timings and other such variables.
Saying the Ultralisk is bad for its DPS, thats just irrelevant, because its meant to be used in conjunction with other units (infestor) and its not really meant to be a make 10+ then win game unit composition.
Also comparing tiers of races against each other, such as colossus against ultralisk/brood lord is quite ludicrous etc etc. There's no point attempting to mathematically analyse balance, unit efficiency and such.
|
The ultralisk armor upgrade is only +2 armor, not +3.
You should also mention that it takes about 60 seconds for an ultralisk to hatch, leaving you totally undefended for a full minute.
But I thought it's common knowledge that Zerg T3 is the worst in the game.
|
On April 02 2011 16:34 Crushgroove wrote:
the best way to remax is to make enough ultras to bring yourself down to a reasonable amount of money, then continue remaxing with more money effecient units after the larva efficiency issue has been addressed.
From my experience, when I remax with ultras, suddenly my opponent gets a chance to come back in the game. No math needed. They also take 5 years to build.
|
Ultras seem as hard to properly micro as BW Dragoons, but that's probably just due to the AI having trouble with the big size. Still it's hard for me to get more than 1-2 at a time to attack, and I've noticed pros have trouble with this as well (Destiny vs BRAT_OK in the justin.tv invitational)
|
I thought the ultralisk was a terrible unit previously due to it seemingly only having the ability to die miserably, cost a crap load and deal very little damage given it was a melee unit prior to reading this and what everyone has contributed. But I can see now how the ultra is meant to be used, a tank to help the rest of your army get in position and deal damage without immediately getting splattered by the splash damage of the enemy's units. In that regard the ultralisks size makes sense (thankyou wise posters who posted that). I do wish though the ultralisk could have something similar to the collosi's movement where it can step over friendly units just to stop the awful scenes ultras getting stuck behind friendly units and then just milling about frantically.
|
Worst thing about ultras is that they take forever to kill a single zealot - 10 attacks to kill a zealot that's super crazy.
|
On April 02 2011 17:02 Alpina wrote:
Worst thing about ultras is that they take forever to kill a single zealot - 10 attacks to kill a zealot that's super crazy.
nah the worst thing about ultras is the build time. if they made in 40 seconds or 45 seconds they would be pretty damn good at timed switched, they are just a tad slow to be fearsome. now theyy are just a snowball unit similar to tanks.
|
Lol i feel bad for the OP has to respond to all these haters... i appreciate the math support for the conclusion that ultras definitely need a buff... (toss player)
|
This kind of math is a poor way to compare units. I can probably beat up 5 children at once even though combined they are stronger than me. But what does that mean when one punch or slap KOs them? Same applies to ultra. It's staying power is it's asset while other units die off to him.
Ultra's weakness is speed and size. I can't think of a reason to build them instead of broodlords unless playing protoss. But don't feel bad we have worthless carriers.
|
Carriers are bad because they take forever to make, not because they suck
|
Interesting read, though is seriously think the only thing wrong with the ultralisk is its size it just too fat.
Other than that its about as good as a melee unit gets in this game, I mean there's only so much they can do, its a really limited unit.
Needs more darkswarm.
|
|
|
You can't judge units by simplifying so much. It just doesn't work. No, 300/200/6 is just not the same as something that costs pure minerals. Many of the times in lategame you'll have higher gas than minerals. So it's still worth it to get the ultras in comparison to zerglings. All tier 3 units are "cost ineffective" when looked at this way. It's the way the game is supposed to be.
You are ignoring important statistics like splash damage (which is kind of signficant, even if the splash was nerfed as hard as it was). You are also ignoring speed, which for zerg is super important. No other unit is as fast as the Ultralisk in comparison to its power.
|
On April 02 2011 16:06 VorcePA wrote:
The only reason ultralisks were viable in brood war was because of dark swarm. Terran's infantry has received a boost to both mobility and damage, and dark swarm was taken away from zerg. Same applies to protoss. Dragoons raaaaaaped ultralisks cost for cost, but dark swarm tipped that scale way, way back in to the ultralisk's favor.
In SC2, marauders, tanks, and marines all do a pretty good job on their own taking care of ultras, and do an even better job when they're mixed together. The same applies to protoss. Protoss may have lost the reaver, which were very strong vs ultralisks, but they still have immortals, dark templars, archons, colossus, void rays, and to a lesser extent: stalkers (made slightly more viable with blink micro).
Ultralisks never were a real tank-y unit. They were just big and had a decent number of hitpoints, but you obviously couldn't mass them in the same way you could hydras or zerglings because of their food cost. It was their combination with dark swarm that made them a huge threat because it then took a very long time to kill them, or you had to use specialized units which you may not have amassed enough of, and their damage was really good.
I would say the role of Ultralisk in BW is way different to SC2 and that's not because of Dark Swarm. In BW Zerglings/Cracklings were actually really potent dpsers and ultras were there to tank for these sick damage dealers. In SC2 lings really aren't heavy damage dealers so a tanky unit for them would be very silly. Thus the ultralisk has shifted to a dpsers but a big fat semi slow melee unit is exactly the best kind of unit for dps purposes. So it's a bit of an iffy unit.
|
I would say the role of Ultralisk in BW is way different to SC2 and that's not because of Dark Swarm. In BW Zerglings/Cracklings were actually really potent dpsers and ultras were there to tank for these sick damage dealers. In SC2 lings really aren't heavy damage dealers so a tanky unit for them would be very silly. Thus the ultralisk has shifted to a dpsers but a big fat semi slow melee unit is exactly the best kind of unit for dps purposes. So it's a bit of an iffy unit.
Ling dps for cost is still easily the best in the game.
The only difference is, now units naturally clump, which means fewer lings can attack at any one time.
Still, Ultra splash might help counteract that by forcing people to spread. Its just that the "kill Ultra" specialized units are so damned good.
|
It’s here that quantitative analysis hits its limit. Siege Tanks and Colossi kill Zerglings and Zealots by the dozen, but I haven’t found a way to reflect that in the unit’s durability stats. And the Ultralisk itself does splash damage to units it attacks. Again, I don’t know how to add that. How many extra units are affected on average? Until I can know that, I can’t really do anything about it.
The proper way to do this sort of analysis is probably some sort of "time-to-die" measurement using a standardized level of DPS. That would probably better reflect how durable Ultralisks are.
|
Ah, theorycrafting. The most worthless form of internet banter when considering balance.
Ultras aren't "undermade" because they're bad, it's because the metagame hasn't been figured out enough for zerg to need, or even effectively, transition and techswitch, which was their greatest asset in BW. It'll happen. Start talking about strategies for transitioning into ultras in a way where your opponent won't be ready for it.
|
Most useless post ever. Your conclusions ignore the two most important things about the ultralisks: its large size and splash damage; therefore your entire post is pointless.
Splash damage and larger size (sort of defense vs splash) add value to a unit. That's why marines are so good according to your model (because their small size reduce their value).
This post is about as meaningful as just comparing unit's hp to one another.
|
I have a theory about the role of Ultralisks. At this stage in the game zerg is having a massive problem with the Protoss deathball. Zealots/Stalkers/Collosi are just murdering zerg all over the place, and yet zerg insist on staying away from the ultralisk like it's the plague. We see pros going broodlords, and then getting blink stalkered and gg'd immediately.
Typically the current zerg makeup against the Protoss deathball is Zergling/muta or Roach/Hydralisk, and the zerg gets rolled.
The future of ZvP is Infestors/Banelings/zerglings/Ultralisks. Just get a splash of banelings and that will annihilate zealots, four infestors will pin down blink stalkers, and ultralisks will rip into the stalkers and colossi while zerglings just dps the hell out of everything.
|
On April 30 2011 23:50 JonoLith wrote:
I have a theory about the role of Ultralisks. At this stage in the game zerg is having a massive problem with the Protoss deathball. Zealots/Stalkers/Collosi are just murdering zerg all over the place, and yet zerg insist on staying away from the ultralisk like it's the plague. We see pros going broodlords, and then getting blink stalkered and gg'd immediately.
Typically the current zerg makeup against the Protoss deathball is Zergling/muta or Roach/Hydralisk, and the zerg gets rolled.
The future of ZvP is Infestors/Banelings/zerglings/Ultralisks. Just get a splash of banelings and that will annihilate zealots, four infestors will pin down blink stalkers, and ultralisks will rip into the stalkers and colossi while zerglings just dps the hell out of everything.
Ultras does not work at ZvP, unless you already won a battle. Reasons:
1. You need very good upgrades on them. And usually zerg upgrade path is missile/armor upgrades.
2. They take forever to build, thus you can't really reinforce with them, unless you already won first battle, but if that happens you pretty much won no matter what you reinforce with. Imagine attacking with fresh 50 roaches you just made or 8 ultras who will take twice as long to hatch, which means toss army going to be much stronger.
3. Protoss has very simple way of dealing with ultras: just zealots and immortals are perfect against ultras, and those units are easily available in their tech already.
4. Voids do bonus damage to ultras.
5. And the last reason is that half of your ultras are already dead before they reach toss deathball.
|
Ultras can be bad alone but you have to consider their synergy with other units. I'm having a lot of success vs bio armies in ZvT with an ultra / infestor / zergling lategame. Infestors are infestors, and with fungal you can prevent the ultras from being kited, allowing them to do their splash damage against infantry. Like you said, its hard to calculate the fact that collosus and tanks kill like 12 lings a volley, which is why I like ultras. It's something that lets me actualyl do damage without literally my entire army evaporating before 3 rounds are fired.
In ZvP though, I'd say ultras are completely useless unless the toss goes stalker collosus and you can somehow tech to ultras, spawn a bunch, and kill his army before he makes zealots and immortals.
|
You forgot to say that the pathing is horrible and its almost impossible to make the ultras attack instead of just dancing around like its a disco.
EDIT: And also they take around 43 eternities to hatch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
