|
On December 10 2019 01:12 Nakajin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 00:57 egrimm wrote:On December 09 2019 22:24 deacon.frost wrote:On December 09 2019 21:43 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 09 2019 07:55 Snakestyle11 wrote:On December 07 2019 20:47 WaesumNinja wrote:
Switch hydra/roach to be hatch/lair instead,respectively, and rebalance the units to accommodate this (weaker hydra, tankier and burstier roach. Maybe 1 supply hydra)
Take away some more range from hydra and slap it back on the lair upgrade, do the same with speed. Remove queen anti-air. Bc doesn't need nerf. How would zerg not lose versus hellion / bcs everygame? + Show Spoiler +
It's not a perfect solution, but at this point I don't think there even is one.
But the way you react to this just shows how much of a role the queen fills currently. Ideally it wouldn't have any attack, much like how orbitals can't attack, but would just act as a support unit to whatever else you have around. At least, I find that a more interesting design than a good-vs-everything mineral unit that runs around on creep. Also since you can't rally them, they're annoying to mass produce to begin with.
Hydra needs to be t1 if you remove the attacks from queen. I think removing queen anti-air is a good start, but my opinion is that it would be more interesting if it didn't have any attacks at all.
Yes, anti-light units would be very powerful after this change, and hydras are far from ideal against bc unless you make hydras cheaper. Making hydra super slow off-creep until research makes them less rushable, but limiting them in this way isn't necessarily the best way, either.
Moving things off from the queen will make zerg a more interesting race, and it'd need to start somewhere. YES! YES! I fully support this. But that's a big redesign and I don't think that Blizzard is capable of doing so in this time with how old the game is. (no offense to Blizzard, I get it, it would require many people and monies) How about we just leave both roaches and hydras on T1? You have both roaches to defend against things like protoss Adept all-ins and you can have hydras to defend against air harass instead of queens. You as a Zerg would need to scout properly and adjust your unit comp. Also if T1 would happen to be to weak in later stages of the game you can have upgrades which could prolong its utility. It still dosen't fix the problem of proxy stargate or starport, or even proxy robo immortal. Aproxy oracle can be into your base way quicker than you can go roaches (or what would be hydra in that case), you would basicly need to cut every single lings to have hydra out the fastest you can or just get the risk of beeing obliterate by air. (Uncontested oracles can kill the hydra den anyway even if you have two spores in each mineral lines. But keeping the idea, how about we gave queen an air attack, but no ground attack? Maybe force zerg to make more units in the early-mid game? You could also make building queens take larva that could fix a few things
You are right about the proxy issue. I wonder if we just tone down queen AA so the proxy would be still reasonably holdable but at the same time mass queen play would be the play.
Maybe nerfs to proxy air plays shouldn't be taken out of the consideration?
|
On December 10 2019 01:50 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 01:12 Nakajin wrote:On December 10 2019 00:57 egrimm wrote:On December 09 2019 22:24 deacon.frost wrote:On December 09 2019 21:43 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 09 2019 07:55 Snakestyle11 wrote:On December 07 2019 20:47 WaesumNinja wrote:
Switch hydra/roach to be hatch/lair instead,respectively, and rebalance the units to accommodate this (weaker hydra, tankier and burstier roach. Maybe 1 supply hydra)
Take away some more range from hydra and slap it back on the lair upgrade, do the same with speed. Remove queen anti-air. Bc doesn't need nerf. How would zerg not lose versus hellion / bcs everygame? + Show Spoiler +
It's not a perfect solution, but at this point I don't think there even is one.
But the way you react to this just shows how much of a role the queen fills currently. Ideally it wouldn't have any attack, much like how orbitals can't attack, but would just act as a support unit to whatever else you have around. At least, I find that a more interesting design than a good-vs-everything mineral unit that runs around on creep. Also since you can't rally them, they're annoying to mass produce to begin with.
Hydra needs to be t1 if you remove the attacks from queen. I think removing queen anti-air is a good start, but my opinion is that it would be more interesting if it didn't have any attacks at all.
Yes, anti-light units would be very powerful after this change, and hydras are far from ideal against bc unless you make hydras cheaper. Making hydra super slow off-creep until research makes them less rushable, but limiting them in this way isn't necessarily the best way, either.
Moving things off from the queen will make zerg a more interesting race, and it'd need to start somewhere. YES! YES! I fully support this. But that's a big redesign and I don't think that Blizzard is capable of doing so in this time with how old the game is. (no offense to Blizzard, I get it, it would require many people and monies) How about we just leave both roaches and hydras on T1? You have both roaches to defend against things like protoss Adept all-ins and you can have hydras to defend against air harass instead of queens. You as a Zerg would need to scout properly and adjust your unit comp. Also if T1 would happen to be to weak in later stages of the game you can have upgrades which could prolong its utility. It still dosen't fix the problem of proxy stargate or starport, or even proxy robo immortal. Aproxy oracle can be into your base way quicker than you can go roaches (or what would be hydra in that case), you would basicly need to cut every single lings to have hydra out the fastest you can or just get the risk of beeing obliterate by air. (Uncontested oracles can kill the hydra den anyway even if you have two spores in each mineral lines. But keeping the idea, how about we gave queen an air attack, but no ground attack? Maybe force zerg to make more units in the early-mid game? You could also make building queens take larva that could fix a few things You are right about the proxy issue. I wonder if we just tone down queen AA so the proxy would be still reasonably holdable but at the same time mass queen play would be the play. Maybe nerfs to proxy air plays shouldn't be taken out of the consideration?
That was my point. By changing something that fundamental you would essentially have to redesign the whole game.
Another place to look is the 3 attack range queens had way back in time, and it kind of worked. Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins.
|
On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 01:50 egrimm wrote:On December 10 2019 01:12 Nakajin wrote:On December 10 2019 00:57 egrimm wrote:On December 09 2019 22:24 deacon.frost wrote:On December 09 2019 21:43 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 09 2019 07:55 Snakestyle11 wrote:On December 07 2019 20:47 WaesumNinja wrote:
Switch hydra/roach to be hatch/lair instead,respectively, and rebalance the units to accommodate this (weaker hydra, tankier and burstier roach. Maybe 1 supply hydra)
Take away some more range from hydra and slap it back on the lair upgrade, do the same with speed. Remove queen anti-air. Bc doesn't need nerf. How would zerg not lose versus hellion / bcs everygame? + Show Spoiler +
It's not a perfect solution, but at this point I don't think there even is one.
But the way you react to this just shows how much of a role the queen fills currently. Ideally it wouldn't have any attack, much like how orbitals can't attack, but would just act as a support unit to whatever else you have around. At least, I find that a more interesting design than a good-vs-everything mineral unit that runs around on creep. Also since you can't rally them, they're annoying to mass produce to begin with.
Hydra needs to be t1 if you remove the attacks from queen. I think removing queen anti-air is a good start, but my opinion is that it would be more interesting if it didn't have any attacks at all.
Yes, anti-light units would be very powerful after this change, and hydras are far from ideal against bc unless you make hydras cheaper. Making hydra super slow off-creep until research makes them less rushable, but limiting them in this way isn't necessarily the best way, either.
Moving things off from the queen will make zerg a more interesting race, and it'd need to start somewhere. YES! YES! I fully support this. But that's a big redesign and I don't think that Blizzard is capable of doing so in this time with how old the game is. (no offense to Blizzard, I get it, it would require many people and monies) How about we just leave both roaches and hydras on T1? You have both roaches to defend against things like protoss Adept all-ins and you can have hydras to defend against air harass instead of queens. You as a Zerg would need to scout properly and adjust your unit comp. Also if T1 would happen to be to weak in later stages of the game you can have upgrades which could prolong its utility. It still dosen't fix the problem of proxy stargate or starport, or even proxy robo immortal. Aproxy oracle can be into your base way quicker than you can go roaches (or what would be hydra in that case), you would basicly need to cut every single lings to have hydra out the fastest you can or just get the risk of beeing obliterate by air. (Uncontested oracles can kill the hydra den anyway even if you have two spores in each mineral lines. But keeping the idea, how about we gave queen an air attack, but no ground attack? Maybe force zerg to make more units in the early-mid game? You could also make building queens take larva that could fix a few things You are right about the proxy issue. I wonder if we just tone down queen AA so the proxy would be still reasonably holdable but at the same time mass queen play would be the play. Maybe nerfs to proxy air plays shouldn't be taken out of the consideration? That was my point. By changing something that fundamental you would essentially have to redesign the whole game. Another place to look is the 3 attack range queens had way back in time, and it kind of worked. Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins.
Issue with nerfing the Queen GtG range is that I have a very specific build that's basically combining 2 rax reaper (non proxy) FE with Innovation's Reaper Hellion expand, that weird Reaper Hellbat KR GM allin and does stuff after, like BCs or w/e you want, really. It's a very tight build order and is already difficult to hold, even when a baddie like myself executes it imperfectly. If you nerf Queen GtG range, I can almost guarantee that some pro would pick up the build and use it to insane effect since the only real hold is 3 base constant queen production+safety spines as you ball up enough Roaches to out muscle Reaper Hellion and then Reaper Hellbat shortly after.
I think what makes Queens so capable of making Zerg eco cheese so safe is that how they're so tanky. Reduce their armor by 1 or their health by 20-30 and maybe, just maybe Zerg players will stop taking their 3rd at 1:30. We might actually see a fast nat and a roach warren before the 3rd if queens can't hold all early game aggression.
|
On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins.
Only biased terrans feel this way, it was an okay buff at the time. Zerg had to mass drones just to keep up, and hellions/reapers would make it to the base before zerg would have enough lings, or roaches. Making lings severely puts you behind since they get outtraded, you don't have speed... of course, I'm sure terrans had a great time kiting everything and picking off free drones, but for zerg that was a total chore.
Then people forgot that BL/infestor rose to prominence because zerg didn't have any other aggressive options that didn't get shut down hard, but that's a different discussion.
Since lotv we start with a ton of workers, giving us way more options than before. I believe that was the biggest change paving the way towards toning down the queen.
|
On December 10 2019 17:15 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins. Only biased terrans feel this way, it was an okay buff at the time. Zerg had to mass drones just to keep up, and hellions/reapers would make it to the base before zerg would have enough lings, or roaches. Making lings severely puts you behind since they get outtraded, you don't have speed... of course, I'm sure terrans had a great time kiting everything and picking off free drones, but for zerg that was a total chore. Then people forgot that BL/infestor rose to prominence because zerg didn't have any other aggressive options that didn't get shut down hard, but that's a different discussion. Since lotv we start with a ton of workers, giving us way more options than before. I believe that was the biggest change paving the way towards toning down the queen.
No, BL Infestor rose because it was an OP comp that was too easy to get to, and even mediocre zergs (real patch zergs) became tournament winners. There were other options, but they did not need them. In the end, people massed 20+ infestors.
The only thing which could keep the zergs in check was the protoss 2bade immo sentry pushes, so the WCS was won by masters of that. Terrans were pretty much gone. The recent bl/Infestor scare was nothing in comparison. Check this tournament:
 2012 Battle.net World Championship
|
On December 10 2019 17:48 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 17:15 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins. Only biased terrans feel this way, it was an okay buff at the time. Zerg had to mass drones just to keep up, and hellions/reapers would make it to the base before zerg would have enough lings, or roaches. Making lings severely puts you behind since they get outtraded, you don't have speed... of course, I'm sure terrans had a great time kiting everything and picking off free drones, but for zerg that was a total chore. Then people forgot that BL/infestor rose to prominence because zerg didn't have any other aggressive options that didn't get shut down hard, but that's a different discussion. Since lotv we start with a ton of workers, giving us way more options than before. I believe that was the biggest change paving the way towards toning down the queen. No, BL Infestor rose because it was an OP comp that was too easy to get to, and even mediocre zergs (real patch zergs) became tournament winners. There were other options, but they did not need them. In the end, people massed 20+ infestors. The only thing which could keep the zergs in check was the protoss 2bade immo sentry pushes, so the WCS was won by masters of that. Terrans were pretty much gone. The recent bl/Infestor scare was nothing in comparison. Check this tournament: https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/2012_Battle.net_World_Championship
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome
|
On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 17:48 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 17:15 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins. Only biased terrans feel this way, it was an okay buff at the time. Zerg had to mass drones just to keep up, and hellions/reapers would make it to the base before zerg would have enough lings, or roaches. Making lings severely puts you behind since they get outtraded, you don't have speed... of course, I'm sure terrans had a great time kiting everything and picking off free drones, but for zerg that was a total chore. Then people forgot that BL/infestor rose to prominence because zerg didn't have any other aggressive options that didn't get shut down hard, but that's a different discussion. Since lotv we start with a ton of workers, giving us way more options than before. I believe that was the biggest change paving the way towards toning down the queen. No, BL Infestor rose because it was an OP comp that was too easy to get to, and even mediocre zergs (real patch zergs) became tournament winners. There were other options, but they did not need them. In the end, people massed 20+ infestors. The only thing which could keep the zergs in check was the protoss 2bade immo sentry pushes, so the WCS was won by masters of that. Terrans were pretty much gone. The recent bl/Infestor scare was nothing in comparison. Check this tournament: https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/2012_Battle.net_World_Championship Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome
Before the range buff or after?
There was little point of playing anything but bl/Infestor turtle. The WCS 1 fiasco should be more than enough to prove my point.
To complain that the Zergs were "forced" to play that way does not fly imo. It warped the whole metagame around itself, so it does not even matter if Zergs were able to win in other ways or not, also because the Terrans expected drones+hiverush so anything else was considered a curve ball.
|
On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after?
During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it.
Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 10 2019 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after? During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it. Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time.
What replays are we talking about? You can't launch the old replays from the game and you can search youtube yourself to have any luck with finding such. But then you're searching pro games where pro players are using the best strategy to win. Which was BL/infestor. Surprise.
Pro means professional in case you've forgotten.
Just felt it had to be mentioned.
|
Northern Ireland25054 Posts
On December 10 2019 17:48 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 17:15 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 04:28 Slydie wrote:Changing the attack to 5 to help defend helions was probably the worst balance decision ever, as it essentially removed Terran from the first WCS season which was to be filled with BL/Infestor and immortal/sentry all ins. Only biased terrans feel this way, it was an okay buff at the time. Zerg had to mass drones just to keep up, and hellions/reapers would make it to the base before zerg would have enough lings, or roaches. Making lings severely puts you behind since they get outtraded, you don't have speed... of course, I'm sure terrans had a great time kiting everything and picking off free drones, but for zerg that was a total chore. Then people forgot that BL/infestor rose to prominence because zerg didn't have any other aggressive options that didn't get shut down hard, but that's a different discussion. Since lotv we start with a ton of workers, giving us way more options than before. I believe that was the biggest change paving the way towards toning down the queen. No, BL Infestor rose because it was an OP comp that was too easy to get to, and even mediocre zergs (real patch zergs) became tournament winners. There were other options, but they did not need them. In the end, people massed 20+ infestors. The only thing which could keep the zergs in check was the protoss 2bade immo sentry pushes, so the WCS was won by masters of that. Terrans were pretty much gone. The recent bl/Infestor scare was nothing in comparison. Check this tournament: https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/2012_Battle.net_World_Championship
Ah good times. Not for the PvZ fest but it was one of Idra’s last good runs.
|
On December 10 2019 20:35 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after? During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it. Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time. What replays are we talking about? You can't launch the old replays from the game and you can search youtube yourself to have any luck with finding such. But then you're searching pro games where pro players are using the best strategy to win. Which was BL/infestor. Surprise. Pro means professional in case you've forgotten. Just felt it had to be mentioned.
Of course, they'd be very old. YouTube "reps" or recorded pro games are acceptable.
|
Northern Ireland25054 Posts
On December 10 2019 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after? During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it. Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time.
It wasn’t the only way, far from it. We saw it a lot but it was far from every game.
The Queen range change just made it much easier to be greedy and skimp units, which smoothness the transition to hive and Broods.
I’m reminded of the Mothership core. Protoss needed something defensively when speedivacs were introduced, but that wasn’t it. The one click defence was immensely frustrating to play against for opponents for being well, one click defence.
For Protoss players whose previous strength was specifically good defensive positioning in PvT (by far my best matchup for all of SC2), it was frustrating because something that gave me an edge over comparable Protoss players and what I felt was my particular style was no longer a useful thing because now a Protoss whose army movement and scouting was terrible was on a level playing field.
When it was removed I think everybody felt that it was for the better. The people who said at the time that Protoss couldn’t defend certain pushes without it have been proven wrong and more skill and good decision making is now more important again for Protoss players.
So making such changes can work, to me it feels building Queens is too much of a no-brainer, you need some anyway and they’re good against way too much. If that was retooled slightly without breaking Zerg I think it’d be a good change.
|
On December 10 2019 21:33 Wombat_NI wrote:
So making such changes can work, to me it feels building Queens is too much of a no-brainer, you need some anyway and they’re good against way too much. If that was retooled slightly without breaking Zerg I think it’d be a good change.
Yeah, the comentators even joke about it when casting, that there is no such thing like too many queens..
Maybe increasing their supply cost by 1 would do the trick? it would require Z to build more Overlords early on when going mass queen and would make the maxed out army smaller, if Z had to many queens.
If that would be to much of a nerv, a Hatchery could give one extra supply, that for the 1st queen per hatch nothing would change at all and all further ones are more expensive.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 10 2019 21:33 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after? During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it. Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time. + Show Spoiler +It wasn’t the only way, far from it. We saw it a lot but it was far from every game.
The Queen range change just made it much easier to be greedy and skimp units, which smoothness the transition to hive and Broods.
I’m reminded of the Mothership core. Protoss needed something defensively when speedivacs were introduced, but that wasn’t it. The one click defence was immensely frustrating to play against for opponents for being well, one click defence.
For Protoss players whose previous strength was specifically good defensive positioning in PvT (by far my best matchup for all of SC2), it was frustrating because something that gave me an edge over comparable Protoss players and what I felt was my particular style was no longer a useful thing because now a Protoss whose army movement and scouting was terrible was on a level playing field.
When it was removed I think everybody felt that it was for the better. The people who said at the time that Protoss couldn’t defend certain pushes without it have been proven wrong and more skill and good decision making is now more important again for Protoss players. So making such changes can work, to me it feels building Queens is too much of a no-brainer, you need some anyway and they’re good against way too much. If that was retooled slightly without breaking Zerg I think it’d be a good change.
The issue is that queen role is
* macro booster
* early game anti-air defense
* early game anti-ground defense
* healer
* creep spread
* larvae saving unit
Queen has way too many roles and on top of that she doesn't cost any larvae nor gas(I get this one). I don't get how people were annoyed by the MSC and yet they tolerate this horrible unit. Either they need to create another unit to overtake some roles of the queen(e.g. the fighting roles and Queen having pathetic fighting value - see sentry) or they need to redesign the Zerg.
Even a fighting and macro queens both created via the hatch would be a big nerf when you have to decide if you want to be safe or macro(meaning the fighting queen cannot inject).
|
Wouldve been fun if queens instead had a low-cost spell that'd buff/stim/whatever a drone, making it pretty savage but unable to mine a while
|
Northern Ireland25054 Posts
On December 10 2019 22:42 WaesumNinja wrote:
Wouldve been fun if queens instead had a low-cost spell that'd buff/stim/whatever a drone, making it pretty savage but unable to mine a while
I rather like this idea myself.
|
On December 10 2019 21:59 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2019 21:33 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 10 2019 20:03 WaesumNinja wrote:On December 10 2019 18:55 Slydie wrote:On December 10 2019 18:19 WaesumNinja wrote:
Name a couple of Z comps that didn't just get demolished at the time. Replays would be welcome Before the range buff or after? During the infestor/bl period and most importantly the period leading up to it. Sure it "flies" to make that claim. How does it not matter if it was the only way to win? Show some replays of non-broken but winning zerg comps from the time. + Show Spoiler +It wasn’t the only way, far from it. We saw it a lot but it was far from every game.
The Queen range change just made it much easier to be greedy and skimp units, which smoothness the transition to hive and Broods.
I’m reminded of the Mothership core. Protoss needed something defensively when speedivacs were introduced, but that wasn’t it. The one click defence was immensely frustrating to play against for opponents for being well, one click defence.
For Protoss players whose previous strength was specifically good defensive positioning in PvT (by far my best matchup for all of SC2), it was frustrating because something that gave me an edge over comparable Protoss players and what I felt was my particular style was no longer a useful thing because now a Protoss whose army movement and scouting was terrible was on a level playing field.
When it was removed I think everybody felt that it was for the better. The people who said at the time that Protoss couldn’t defend certain pushes without it have been proven wrong and more skill and good decision making is now more important again for Protoss players. So making such changes can work, to me it feels building Queens is too much of a no-brainer, you need some anyway and they’re good against way too much. If that was retooled slightly without breaking Zerg I think it’d be a good change. The issue is that queen role is * macro booster * early game anti-air defense * early game anti-ground defense * healer * creep spread * larvae saving unit Queen has way too many roles and on top of that she doesn't cost any larvae nor gas(I get this one). I don't get how people were annoyed by the MSC and yet they tolerate this horrible unit. Either they need to create another unit to overtake some roles of the queen(e.g. the fighting roles and Queen having pathetic fighting value - see sentry) or they need to redesign the Zerg. Even a fighting and macro queens both created via the hatch would be a big nerf when you have to decide if you want to be safe or macro(meaning the fighting queen cannot inject).
* macro booster - well this is the main purpose of existence of this unit and if proven too strong comparably to chrono/mules could be adjusted. However I feel it is ok right now.
* early game anti-air defense - I find this the most problematic one. There is no alternative for Zerg right now. Even in midgame the AA queens provide is detrimental. That's why the proposal to move hydras to T1 would help but still could be not enough vs proxy air.
* early game anti-ground defense - I don't find it as that big of an issue but slight nerf to queens tankiness might open early game a bit - like reducing base armor from 1 to 0. This potentially could be addressed with slight buffs to early game units of Zerg.
* healer - after the nerf, transfusion feels ok imho although still late game big units tend to rely on this utility a bit too much.
* creep spread - this is also problematic. You need queens for early game creep spread but it scales just way to good in later game. Maybe withdraw the change where having more tumors at once speeds the creep spread?
* larvae saving unit - I'm fine with that also.
Overall I'd like queen to be more of macro booster and support unit and move the rest of its' utilities to other part of Zerg arsenal
|
How about limiting the number of queens to one per hatchery? That would sort of chain the queen to the bases and thereby limit its role in fights and out on the map. This would also give a much needed nerf to creep spreading.
The queen would then be limited to a defensive macro unit and using it otherwise would and should be a big gamble.
Of course, other things would need rebalancing then, including compensating partly regarding creep.
|
On December 11 2019 22:05 sneakyfox wrote:
How about limiting the number of queens to one per hatchery?
Don't like the idea of arbitrarily limiting units, it's a limitation they should remove from the mothership too. Would rather they made queens 200m or something.
|
I think the game is fucked up since that stupid hydra patch that now resists siege lines.
Hydra/lurker should always be countered by siege tanks but now it's fucking impossible because the hydra is too tanky.
Just remove 5 hp out of it would fix a lot of balance issues in the midgame.
I don't know why they just buffed the lurker, I mean zerg ground units were not the problem AA was. So explain to me how buffing the lurker changes anything to AA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
