EPTOn March 15 2013 16:55 shindigs wrote:
Smartly placed widow mines basically make ling runby's obsolete mid to late game. Totally re-evaluating how I'm playing Zerg because of it, but it would be great if they could reduce splash.
Same thing with mutalisks - two volleys wreck a pack of mutas. I don't think thors even do that much damage.
Show nested quote +
On March 15 2013 16:51 ALPINA wrote:
I am not saying it should be useless, just not THAT cost efficient. If you run 20 zerglings through the widow mine, they all gonna die. I don't think that is how it's supposed to be.
There are different levels of "cost efficiency". If you siege an army with tanks/marines and put several mines in front, they are so incredibly cost efficient and impossible to deal with.
On March 15 2013 16:35 DemigodcelpH wrote:
The major drawback of the Widow Mine is that it's a non-fighter unit that is stationary, therefore it has to be "cost effective" or it would not be worth it. The Widow Mine being cost effective is the equivalent of a full-time fighting unit being even, because you're paying the hidden tax of 2 supply per mine being taken away from army potential when the shot is down along with the requirement of being immobile while firing.
This is why, to the untrained thinker, you might see a Window Mine kill two stalkers and conclude that it was "cost effective", but the threshold of efficiency for a unit with situational fighting opportunities but a constant supply cost is higher than simply surpassing resource cost on paper.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
Consider thinking more critically when you make comments about unit balance.
On March 15 2013 16:24 ALPINA wrote:
Zerg is reactive race yes, but widow mines are not the units to which you can react. They are universally good vs. everything, and you don't have real counter to them. Not to mention probably most cost efficient unit in the game as it stands now.
On March 15 2013 13:37 avilo wrote:
If widow mine is "too powerful" i'm assuming that he understand the current blinding cloud radius is "too powerful" as well correct?
Tested it in the unit tester today after some "strange" games, 4 vipers using 6 blinding clouds shut down roughly15+ siege tanks that were pre-spread in a 99% optimal fashion.
Something is wrong here.
A balance designer cannot only look at one race...the widow mine is one of the few balancing factors right now against the insane blinding cloud radius vs mech.
We all can only assume that if they are "looking at the widow mine" then they will not let their own bias disallow them from also "looking at the blinding cloud radius" as well...correct?
We would hope so.
Ultras also currently seem to be "overperforming."
In the original post of this thread, why is there no mention/analysis of any Zerg units "being too powerful" whatsoever? I am confused. Should there not be "looking at" all 3 of the races? It seems one has been mysteriously left out of the equation here.
Hmm.
Just food for thought. Right now in the community, the largest majority of whining is coming from prominent Zerg streamers. It is not unjustified, but I am going to point out here that what these Zerg players are complaining about is not an actual balance issue with the game, but a learning curve related to a new game in relation to Zerg being the most reactive race.
When Zerg players right now are complaining about being underpowered, they are not understanding the game and the basis of their own complaint - what they are really complaining about is that at the start of this new game it is difficult to read and react to the new variety of things that Protoss and Terran can do to them due to the differences in worker production and the larva mechanic.
This is a learning curve issue - NOT A BALANCE ISSUE. Get it straight everyone in this thread and community. We do not want a repeat of wings where one race is overbuffed.
Zerg is the most reactive race. Everyone knows this. If you do not know the perfect amount of drones to make, or what you can get away with you will die to new things. This is the root of what Zerg players REALLY MEAN when they complain that they are currently "underpowered." The truth is they are not.
As the game is more figured out, and Zergs realize what to do with their larva better vs certain openings and situations...Zerg is just as powerful as the other two races.
I write this because right now it's a "Zerg QQ fest" and the developers seem to be being influenced by it quite a bit to the point, i'll say it again, they completely leave out any criticism balance wise of the viper in the OP of this post or anything of Zerg's possibly being "too strong."
Sorry for the long post. Just had to clarify because Zerg right now is in fact no where near underpowered, and Zerg players do not seem to understand that they are not complaining about balance, but about Zerg being the most reactive race and in fact as the game is figured out more they will be perfectly fine, and more.
If widow mine is "too powerful" i'm assuming that he understand the current blinding cloud radius is "too powerful" as well correct?
Tested it in the unit tester today after some "strange" games, 4 vipers using 6 blinding clouds shut down roughly15+ siege tanks that were pre-spread in a 99% optimal fashion.
Something is wrong here.
A balance designer cannot only look at one race...the widow mine is one of the few balancing factors right now against the insane blinding cloud radius vs mech.
We all can only assume that if they are "looking at the widow mine" then they will not let their own bias disallow them from also "looking at the blinding cloud radius" as well...correct?
We would hope so.
Ultras also currently seem to be "overperforming."
In the original post of this thread, why is there no mention/analysis of any Zerg units "being too powerful" whatsoever? I am confused. Should there not be "looking at" all 3 of the races? It seems one has been mysteriously left out of the equation here.
Hmm.
Just food for thought. Right now in the community, the largest majority of whining is coming from prominent Zerg streamers. It is not unjustified, but I am going to point out here that what these Zerg players are complaining about is not an actual balance issue with the game, but a learning curve related to a new game in relation to Zerg being the most reactive race.
When Zerg players right now are complaining about being underpowered, they are not understanding the game and the basis of their own complaint - what they are really complaining about is that at the start of this new game it is difficult to read and react to the new variety of things that Protoss and Terran can do to them due to the differences in worker production and the larva mechanic.
This is a learning curve issue - NOT A BALANCE ISSUE. Get it straight everyone in this thread and community. We do not want a repeat of wings where one race is overbuffed.
Zerg is the most reactive race. Everyone knows this. If you do not know the perfect amount of drones to make, or what you can get away with you will die to new things. This is the root of what Zerg players REALLY MEAN when they complain that they are currently "underpowered." The truth is they are not.
As the game is more figured out, and Zergs realize what to do with their larva better vs certain openings and situations...Zerg is just as powerful as the other two races.
I write this because right now it's a "Zerg QQ fest" and the developers seem to be being influenced by it quite a bit to the point, i'll say it again, they completely leave out any criticism balance wise of the viper in the OP of this post or anything of Zerg's possibly being "too strong."
Sorry for the long post. Just had to clarify because Zerg right now is in fact no where near underpowered, and Zerg players do not seem to understand that they are not complaining about balance, but about Zerg being the most reactive race and in fact as the game is figured out more they will be perfectly fine, and more.
Zerg is reactive race yes, but widow mines are not the units to which you can react. They are universally good vs. everything, and you don't have real counter to them. Not to mention probably most cost efficient unit in the game as it stands now.
The major drawback of the Widow Mine is that it's a non-fighter unit that is stationary, therefore it has to be "cost effective" or it would not be worth it. The Widow Mine being cost effective is the equivalent of a full-time fighting unit being even, because you're paying the hidden tax of 2 supply per mine being taken away from army potential when the shot is down along with the requirement of being immobile while firing.
This is why, to the untrained thinker, you might see a Window Mine kill two stalkers and conclude that it was "cost effective", but the threshold of efficiency for a unit with situational fighting opportunities but a constant supply cost is higher than simply surpassing resource cost on paper.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
Consider thinking more critically when you make comments about unit balance.
I am not saying it should be useless, just not THAT cost efficient. If you run 20 zerglings through the widow mine, they all gonna die. I don't think that is how it's supposed to be.
There are different levels of "cost efficiency". If you siege an army with tanks/marines and put several mines in front, they are so incredibly cost efficient and impossible to deal with.
Smartly placed widow mines basically make ling runby's obsolete mid to late game. Totally re-evaluating how I'm playing Zerg because of it, but it would be great if they could reduce splash.
Same thing with mutalisks - two volleys wreck a pack of mutas. I don't think thors even do that much damage.
that's what overlord is good for.
