|
Everyone is familiar with the 4.0 redesign of Protoss, most notably the removal of the Mothership Core. Of course, there were many other changes (Shield Battery, Recall, Stalker buff, etc) but the largest aspect of 4.0 for Protoss was the MSC being removed, and the subsequent redesign of Protoss around its absence. And I think I speak for most people when I say that, on the whole, the state of Protoss post-4.0 has been far and away superior to Protoss pre-4.0. Obviously there were some balance issues that needed to be worked out, but at this point I think it’s safe to say that removing the MSC was a resoundingly successful redesign.
Recently, there has been some design-related attention towards Zerg (specifically from uthermal), most of which can be distilled down to the Queen and its many, many roles. Creep-spreading, hatch-injecting, early-defense anti-air with transfusions, you name it and the Queen does it. They’re massed in the early game for defending harass. They’re massed in the lategame for transfuse. They’re massed because they’re quite frankly great units and too many Queens is a rare problem indeed.
The flip side to this is of course that Queens are absolutely essential to keeping Zerg in the game. Without good creep spread, defending is impossible. Without injections, there are no larvae. Without beefy tanks, hellions and adepts run wild. Without AA, drops pull the Zerg apart. Without transfusions, critical units die in seconds. Without Queens, Zerg is quite simply hopeless.
So. Can’t live with them, can’t live without them. What’s to do?
At this juncture, it’s very important to note that Queens are NOT a balance problem. Much like Protoss can and was balanced quite well around the MSC, Zerg can and is balanced quite well around the Queen. That being said, simply because something is not a balance problem does not mean it cannot be improved design-wise.
With 4.0, the current balance team has shown that it is capable of redesigning major aspects of the Protoss race in a competent fashion. What say you about letting them try with Zerg?
|
|
|
I've always found inject larva to be a profoundly unfun part of Zerg, and I never entirely got over how much more fun the game was to play during that LotV beta patch when transfuse was automated.
The problem is that it's a necessary APM handicap on Zerg players, due to their simplified (otherwise) macro. I would absolutely love for Queens to be redesigned and for injection to be removed. However, it must sadly be admitted that something else would need to rise in order to take injection's place, unless major changes were made elsewhere to Zerg.
|
(Accidental double post, please delete)
|
It would be nice.
Redesigning the queen is probably a harder task than redesigning the mothership core though. The MC's role was essentially to allow Protoss to survive early on with some utility in the midgame. The queen does all that (and is one of the only forms of defensive advantage in early ZvZ), and so much more.
|
A Queen redesign could be nice, but part of the problem that you guys already mentioned is that the Queen does so much (which I guess is a reason for the re-work) that if you took out some of it's options, then presumably you'd have to give some more power/tools to other units/buildings.
While I think that could be possible, I don't think it would be very easy to do.
|
If the sky is the limit, I would love this paired with a total overhaul of Zerg's AA. To start I'd like them to strip the queen of any early AA abilities and just switch the hydra with the roach on the tech tree with rebalanced stats respectively.
Additionally, queen AA is now a cheap hive upgrade and hives can produce multiple queens at once. This way they still have their lategame utility as an inexpensive support/AA unit.
|
Disclaimer: I am evil.
Some QoL "improvement" (like the high templars) along with emphasis on base mobile defense instead of very long range.
Do you hate when your queen is not close enough to the hatchery and can't inject? Or kited by that carrier that is flying away? I present the Queen-ken.
Increase the larva inject range to 3, and reduce anti air attack range to 7 reduce transfusion cast range to 5. Queens health is reduced to 125. Increase off-creep movement speed to 2.63 (This is the same speed as upgraded Overlord, faster than Brood lord and can kite Carriers off creep.) Increase on-creep speed to 3.9375. (This is the same speed as Hydralisk.).
Queen will now gain a new passive ability:
Symbiosis:
Queen will received increased regeneration speed to 1.4 Hit Point per second while in 3 range of a hatchery.
What if I need to keep queens in place? Queen will now gain a new ability:
Make Nest:
Grants the Queen 25% wider vision, and increase its ground attack range to 6 and anti-air attack range to 8, but removes its ability to move. This ability is instant cast but have a 1 second cool down. The nest will spread creep for a range of 6 until the queen is killed or stop making nest. This ability can be canceled after activation. This ability can be cast while burrowed.
Enjoy send your queens to middle of nowhere. (Or proxy hatch and make a queen next to it.)
|
On July 18 2018 09:14 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
To start I'd like them to strip the queen of any early AA abilities and just switch the hydra with the roach on the tech tree with rebalanced stats respectively.
Queue every single ZvP and ZvT ending to Oracles and Banshees. And when Zergs figure out how to rush to hydra tech fast enough to not instantly die to air harass, then Terrans and Protoss just go for fast ground pushes because being forced into those quick hydras would be extremely brittle and you'd have to cut so many drones and other stuff in order to get them out in time for Banshees and especially Oracles.
Which is a pretty good representation of the criticality of Queens as they are in the current version of the game. Change one fairly small piece of them (small considering their many, many roles) and Zergs would basically never win a game. Again, in the game as it currently is.
|
I don't like it that playing Zerg requires building a lot of queens. Massing queens should not be a thing, Zerg needs buffs elsewhere to make it less dependent on the queens.
Design-wise it would be somewhat cooler if you could build only one queen per base. It could then be made more tanky to help defend early rushes with just 1-2 queens + zerglings.
To compensate creep spreading, Zerg could get a new building like Creep Colony, which would allow to drop a creep tumor every 30 seconds or so. That would make it possible to respread creep without having tons of queens.
|
I think there should be a limit to the number of queens per hatchery (of course still allowing you to remake them if they die). I guess 2 per hatch would be a good limit?
I don't think it would overly nerf zerg, it would just disrupt zerg's ability to make queens literally nonstop from the start of the game. They'd need to wait for their new hatcheries to come in.
|
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad.
While they are doing that, I'd like to see them also get rid of Terran and Protoss macro mechanics. Even without them, the skill ceiling of SC2 will still be well above what humans are capable of and there is no reason to artificially raise the skill floor in a competitive game.
On July 18 2018 10:00 travis wrote:
I think there should be a limit to the number of queens per hatchery (of course still allowing you to remake them if they die). I guess 2 per hatch would be a good limit?
I don't think it would overly nerf zerg, it would just disrupt zerg's ability to make queens literally nonstop from the start of the game. They'd need to wait for their new hatcheries to come in.
Do Zerg players ever really go over 2 queens per hatchery? Snute's 9-10 queens come to mind, but isn't he usually on 4-5 bases by that point? Maybe he'd be down to 8 queens with 4 hatcheries which is still kind of insane.
|
On July 18 2018 10:19 Boggyb wrote:
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad.
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Do you mean within Zerg specifically, not the game as a whole? There's no economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic within Terran and Protoss other than putting resources into one means less to put into the other, and at 200 supply you have to choose how much of each to have. And both of those things apply just as much to queens.
Also the overlord is another unit that ignores any trade off between economy and attacking units, as it does neither.
|
On July 18 2018 10:19 Boggyb wrote:
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad.
While they are doing that, I'd like to see them also get rid of Terran and Protoss macro mechanics. Even without them, the skill ceiling of SC2 will still be well above what humans are capable of and there is no reason to artificially raise the skill floor in a competitive game.
They tried this in the LotV beta and the game was considerably worse because if it. It only lasted a short time before they realized it wasn't working.
|
On July 18 2018 09:14 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:
If the sky is the limit, I would love this paired with a total overhaul of Zerg's AA. To start I'd like them to strip the queen of any early AA abilities and just switch the hydra with the roach on the tech tree with rebalanced stats respectively.
So, where would Ravagers go?
Take away the Queen's AA, move Hydra to Hatchery tier, move Roach... somewhere, change Spore Crawlers. Would Spire units need to be changed as well? Should Lairs gain AA defenses when upgraded? Or would Infestors (Infested Terrans and Fungal Growth) need to be tweaked?
|
Thats funny..I might be bias, but i think queens are one of the best designed unit in the game. They have a clear defensive role, and while massing them will make you stronger defensively and give you a better set up for the long macro game ( creep spread, injects, etc). By massing queens, the zerg becomes stronger defensively but weaker offensively. Also, they have some good decision making involved on how you spend the energy, and they reward faster and more skilled players by allowing faster and better creep spread and transfuses.
As far as i know, there isnt any unit in the game that is made unviable because of the existence of the queen.
Meanwhile, you have units like thors and pheonix that completely invalidates mutalisks, no amount of micro can save that.
Mutalisks are a badly designed unit currently in my opinion. Its the regeneration that is too strong, and it makes super hard counters like thors and shoot while moving phoenixes; with range upgrade even, almost mandatory.
I feel like mutalisks should lose a lot of their regen, but gain 1 extra armor possibly or a bit more life to compensate. After that, you could actually nerf thors and pheonixes, so the interactions between those units are less 1 sided.
I mean i guess Queens could use a small combat nerf, but it would require, like said above, a swap of the hydra and roaches accessiblity and stats/price. I would love a 1 supply cheaper and weaker hydra. And a 2 supply stronger but more expensive roach.
|
On July 18 2018 10:55 Torrefy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 10:19 Boggyb wrote:
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad. I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Do you mean within Zerg specifically, not the game as a whole? There's no economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic within Terran and Protoss other than putting resources into one means less to put into the other, and at 200 supply you have to choose how much of each to have. And both of those things apply just as much to queens. Also the overlord is another unit that ignores any trade off between economy and attacking units, as it does neither.
Having to choose between one or the other is what I mean. Queens are both until you reach the point where you're no longer going to be making drones which if you're not NoRegreT is mid to late game.
On July 18 2018 11:09 esReveR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 10:19 Boggyb wrote:
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad.
While they are doing that, I'd like to see them also get rid of Terran and Protoss macro mechanics. Even without them, the skill ceiling of SC2 will still be well above what humans are capable of and there is no reason to artificially raise the skill floor in a competitive game. They tried this in the LotV beta and the game was considerably worse because if it. It only lasted a short time before they realized it wasn't working.
The fact that they only tested it for a short time is why it never worked. That's the kind of change that requires months of testing.
|
On July 18 2018 10:00 travis wrote:
I think there should be a limit to the number of queens per hatchery (of course still allowing you to remake them if they die). I guess 2 per hatch would be a good limit?
I don't think it would overly nerf zerg, it would just disrupt zerg's ability to make queens literally nonstop from the start of the game. They'd need to wait for their new hatcheries to come in.
This is extremely bad design for new and lower skill level players as it is another, very non-optional thing to keep in mind all the time on top of everything else, and would be an extreme disadvantage for anyone playing Zerg compared to Protoss or Terran as Zerg as a whole would require players to have that limitation in mind part, if not most, of the time and Protoss and Terran would not, I assume, also gain a new disadvantage.
It could work, but it would more than likely complicate Zerg too much for the majority of Zerg players. Sure, the limitation could mostly be ignored depending on how balance goes, or if players stick to build orders which have the limitation in mind for them, but it's "one more thing" to keep track of that brings its own balance and design complications with it.
|
On July 18 2018 11:28 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 11:09 esReveR wrote:On July 18 2018 10:19 Boggyb wrote:
I'm 100% in favor of a queen redesign as they are the one unit in the game that ignores the economy and attacking unit trade off dynamic and anything that is that extreme of an outlier is probably bad.
While they are doing that, I'd like to see them also get rid of Terran and Protoss macro mechanics. Even without them, the skill ceiling of SC2 will still be well above what humans are capable of and there is no reason to artificially raise the skill floor in a competitive game. They tried this in the LotV beta and the game was considerably worse because if it. It only lasted a short time before they realized it wasn't working. The fact that they only tested it for a short time is why it never worked. That's the kind of change that requires months of testing.
No matter how much testing they do for however long, gameplay suffered and players hated it. That's why it didn't work.
|
It's a tough call. I might be in the minority but I tend to think the queen is a bit too strong balance-wise, but actually makes a lot of sense design wise.
Zerg can just die to so many things and the queen adds a stability to the race that I think is really important. Yes, early game defence is way too centralised on the queen, but I think that is balanced somewhat by the fact that queens have very little offensive potential. I imagine any design change to zerg would very likely have too strong offensive/cheese potential, coupled with the larva mechanic would make things really bad IMO.
The lack of offensive anti-air in the early game for Zerg IMO is actually super important to allow any sort of macro game in ZvP. Almost every other build in PvZ has fallen out of favour because it's so hard to consistently take a third base against Zerg without a SG. People talk about stuff like tier 1 hydras etc, I think it's a dumb idea that would take so many other changes to have it work at all; larva is just too strong in sc2 for zerg to have actual well rounded units in early game.
I don't actually mind the queen dynamic in ZvT, and again I think it's important that it fixes a lot of defensive holes for Zerg without being able to be used offensive (except for Nydus/Proxy, and I do think Nydus should be looked at a bit for this reason). I just feel like it's too good, Zerg masses queens to stay alive but even if the Terran never attacks, they aren't behind. It seems like making a lot of queens is ideal in every scenario (mass queens does allow Terran to get into the late game to some extent, but Terran late-game isn't good enough for this to be an actual good tradeoff).
I'd prefer things more in line with:
Limit maximum energy on Queens so they don't store many transfuses as the game goes on
General nerfs to the strength of the Queen
Terran late game buffs (I think this is really important because the reason queens are so good rn is that terrans want to end the game as early as possible and queens become so useful and relevant against this style)
If someone comes up with some genius design change, I'd be happy to change my mind but it seems like a really difficult thing to do. I'd personally just be really happy to see what Queens would be like if their energy capacity was severely limited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
