| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Majick
398 Posts
On November 28 2019 03:37 BaneRiders wrote: So we are stuck with these ramps then, until they find a solution? Like patch 4.11.1?  They are currently testing whether island maps could be a thing. Who knows, might even stay like that. | ||
|
Snakestyle11
76 Posts
On November 28 2019 03:03 Big-t wrote: This. I hate watching mass queens and I think it is the real reason zerg was / is so strong. One queen per hatch could solve this. Maybe buff the queen a bit, but I think it is not Ok that Zergs just mass queens the whole time. But yeah, anti air range feals to be too much. I mean they keep adding units and strategies that forces zerg to mass more queens. In todays game, if you dont mass queen you die against half the meta builds out there. | ||
|
Majick
398 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:02 Snakestyle11 wrote: I mean they keep adding units and strategies that forces zerg to mass more queens. In todays game, if you dont mass queen you die against half the meta builds out there. That's exactly what I was talking about when complaining about queens. As a Zerg I hate that I have to build them. It feels so lame but still you have no choice for the reasons you mentioned. It's the same with massing spellcasters in the late game. Zerg race design was butchered because Blizz added units to other races that were unbeatable without bullshit like mass queens or infestors. | ||
|
Big-t
Austria1310 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:02 Snakestyle11 wrote: I mean they keep adding units and strategies that forces zerg to mass more queens. First it was lib and tankivac added to the already present hellion/banshee play, but now theres super tanky shoot while moving battle cruisers teleporting anywhere in any of your base instantly without vision before the 6minute mark. In low numbers hydras get completely destroyed by BC+hellions and you cannot get enough spire unit in time. So then, zerg needs 1 queen per hatch to keep inject, and a pack of 4-6+ queens to defend all those air harass but really, you want more queens so you have room for error and dont autodie to 2 bcs. Im all for nerfing queens, but for the love of god, give us earlier AA unit(ravager should attack air, at 100/100 3 supply its not much to ask). Alternatively, send BCs back where they belong, as a late game main army unit, not a freaking early game harass tool... Tankivacs were stupid, but current harass bc builds might be even more stupid, design wise. Sorry for the rant, but it gets triggering to see ppl complain about mass queen yet on the ladder, almost every game i play against a terran they open up with a BC... Zergs didnt always mass queens, but its kind of hard to defend air harass with lings and roaches. It takes a lot of ling and roaches to kill a battle cruiser. And if you dont have enough AA to kill it fast enough, they kill all your drones while moving/kiting your queen back and teleport home before dying. You NEED mass queens, and its not something you can mass up reactively after scouting BCs... I promise you if the meta was always straight up bio openings and mass gateway units openings from protoss, zerg would almost never mass queen. It would be 1 per hatch, and 2-3 for creep spread/ AA. Queens are not really good against ground. You can nerf queens, and zerg will still mass them because its all they have to defend early game stuff from protoss and terran. Also agree on this, espacialy the ealierer need AA. I feel like the patch did not dealt with the problematic units. It tried to buff underused units tough... | ||
|
Obamarauder
270 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:02 Snakestyle11 wrote: I mean they keep adding units and strategies that forces zerg to mass more queens. In todays game, if you dont mass queen you die against half the meta builds out there. Nerf queen and just remove BC teleport completely. its such a dumb gimmick and takes away any strategic aspect. Even terran players dont like BC teleport | ||
|
Majick
398 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:15 Obamarauder wrote: Nerf queen and just remove BC teleport completely. its such a dumb gimmick and takes away any strategic aspect. Even terran players dont like BC teleport It's not only BC that forces you into massing queens early. So many other flying units that can come and kill you. Also hellions, adepts, early tank pushes cannot be defended cost efficiently without queens. Then you have to constantly inject and spread creep as well. If you remove BC teleport, Zergs will still mass queens because they can (and have to). | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia17187 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:30 Majick wrote: It's not only BC that forces you into massing queens early. So many other flying units that can come and kill you. Also hellions, adepts, early tank pushes cannot be defended cost efficiently without queens. Then you have to constantly inject and spread creep as well. If you remove BC teleport, Zergs will still mass queens because they can (and have to). I'd be down with nerfing queens range and moving hydras to tier one units. Upgrades for hydra would still require a lair. To clarify how this will work effectively, hydras are still speedy on creep for defense and would still be too slow off creep to be effective on offense prior to lair. | ||
|
Snakestyle11
76 Posts
Also current hydras at t1 would still not work because for how much they cost you cant get enough and get them overwhelmed by hellions/bcs. They would also create super hydra/ling all ins against protoss that would be almost unstoppable. | ||
|
Elentos
48924 Posts
On November 28 2019 04:54 Snakestyle11 wrote: Queen were giving extra range so libs cant deny mining til spire unit. Queens were given extra range primarily for this, but also the strength of tankivacs and possibly 2-1-1 back in 2016. 2-1-1 is a dead build, tankivacs were removed a few months after the queen buff and liberators no longer have the range they used to. On top of that, mapmakers in this day and age are very aware that liberators exist and have that in their mind when they set up their maps. Functionally, the 8 range anti-air queen is a relic from a time where Zerg had it a lot worse. It has outlived every reason it was implemented for. So I think the question of whether it's still necessary to have that +1 extra range that snipes air units in the middle of the map from the natural is at the very least justified. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom19650 Posts
| ||
|
sneakyfox
4353 Posts
On November 28 2019 05:14 Elentos wrote: Queens were given extra range primarily for this, but also the strength of tankivacs and possibly 2-1-1 back in 2016. 2-1-1 is a dead build, tankivacs were removed a few months after the queen buff and liberators no longer have the range they used to. On top of that, mapmakers in this day and age are very aware that liberators exist and have that in their mind when they set up their maps. Functionally, the 8 range anti-air queen is a relic from a time where Zerg had it a lot worse. It has outlived every reason it was implemented for. So I think the question of whether it's still necessary to have that +1 extra range that snipes air units in the middle of the map from the natural is at the very least justified. Another great relic of Zerg's struggles in dealing with Liberators is the faster root speed of Spore Crawlers. This is helping us get highly entertaining Zerg late game where creep is all over the map and Spores run around like units and "siege up" almost as fast as Liberators... disclaimer: sarcasm may have been used | ||
|
Allred
United States348 Posts
| ||
|
Snakestyle11
76 Posts
On November 28 2019 05:14 Elentos wrote: Queens were given extra range primarily for this, but also the strength of tankivacs and possibly 2-1-1 back in 2016. 2-1-1 is a dead build, tankivacs were removed a few months after the queen buff and liberators no longer have the range they used to. On top of that, mapmakers in this day and age are very aware that liberators exist and have that in their mind when they set up their maps. Functionally, the 8 range anti-air queen is a relic from a time where Zerg had it a lot worse. It has outlived every reason it was implemented for. So I think the question of whether it's still necessary to have that +1 extra range that snipes air units in the middle of the map from the natural is at the very least justified. True,It could maybe be reverted to 7 range, especially with WP pick up nerf, lib range nerf, and tankivacs removal. Too bad they had to break the game even more by adding free teleport battlecruisers that can shoot while moving and be in your main base at the 5minute mark. Now if you remove 1 range from queens, BCs can just kite them away and kill everything on their path while moving away. Lmao. Its kind of ridiculous that its viable way to open is with a BC as your first gas unit, and harass workers with it. Why does every damn terran unit has to be a worker harass unit. Dont mean to offend anyone, but this is what happen when our game is balanced by the ppl in charge of coop commander. I really think they are the same ppl, and probably dont have the resources they need to properly balance this game or change the design... | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States6906 Posts
On November 28 2019 00:20 Harris1st wrote: Bit offtopic but here it goes anyway: Isn't in unranked all kinds of MMR's play versus each other? I think the chance of getting crushed is higher in unranked than in ranked where you actually play vs people with your skill level. Or maybe I'm just wrong I am newer to this game, so feel free to correct me if I am wrong. When I played ranked, I get m3 or d1 almost exclusively (my rank). When I play unranked I get d3-d2 90% of the time. When I am playing a few fun games, I find unranked way easier to play. | ||
|
BisuDagger
Bisutopia17187 Posts
On November 28 2019 07:12 Snakestyle11 wrote: True,It could maybe be reverted to 7 range, especially with WP pick up nerf, lib range nerf, and tankivacs removal. Too bad they had to break the game even more by adding free teleport battlecruisers that can shoot while moving and be in your main base at the 5minute mark. Now if you remove 1 range from queens, BCs can just kite them away and kill everything on their path while moving away. Lmao. Its kind of ridiculous that its viable way to open is with a BC as your first gas unit, and harass workers with it. Why does every damn terran unit has to be a worker harass unit. Dont mean to offend anyone, but this is what happen when our game is balanced by the ppl in charge of coop commander. I really think they are the same ppl, and probably dont have the resources they need to properly balance this game or change the design... This is just theory crafting: I'm not opposed to going a step further to make hydras attainable. Zergs get the least units unlocked per structure built. Pool, hydra den, lurker den, ultra etc... All are buildings that unlock one unit. I would be okay if the roach warren (renamed?) also unlocked hydras that way they can be built without the extra building investment and provide the extra has for more just as earlier. | ||
|
Allred
United States348 Posts
This is just theory crafting: I'm not opposed to going a step further to make hydras attainable. Zergs get the least units unlocked per structure built. Pool, hydra den, lurker den, ultra etc... All are buildings that unlock one unit. I would be okay if the roach warren (renamed?) also unlocked hydras that way they can be built without the extra building investment and provide the extra has for more just as earlier. [/QUOTE] zerg might only get 1 unit per building, but they only have to build 1 of them.... I wouldn't mind hydras coming out earlier from a design perspective, but it would still need to require a hydra den IMO | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States6906 Posts
On November 28 2019 10:59 BisuDagger wrote: This is just theory crafting: I'm not opposed to going a step further to make hydras attainable. Zergs get the least units unlocked per structure built. Pool, hydra den, lurker den, ultra etc... All are buildings that unlock one unit. I would be okay if the roach warren (renamed?) also unlocked hydras that way they can be built without the extra building investment and provide the extra has for more just as earlier. Not to nitpick but a roach warren unlocks 2 units right - roach and ravagers? | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic8924 Posts
On November 28 2019 13:42 AttackZerg wrote: Not to nitpick but a roach warren unlocks 2 units right - roach and ravagers? You can't make ravagers without making roaches though  | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany2790 Posts
Zerg: Queens -1 range Hydralisk Den moved to Hatchery Hydralisk move speed off creep -20% Hydralisk upgrade Muscular Augment move speed aditional 20% off creep Terran: Fusion Core build time +20 secs Thoughts? Alternative route could be one Queen per Hatchery but buff their damage and maybe give them an energy upgrade. This could bring back the macro hatch (which I always loved) | ||
|
sneakyfox
4353 Posts
On November 28 2019 17:47 Harris1st wrote: Summary: Zerg: Queens -1 range Hydralisk Den moved to Hatchery Hydralisk move speed off creep -20% Hydralisk upgrade Muscular Augment move speed aditional 20% off creep Terran: Fusion Core build time +20 secs Thoughts? Alternative route could be one Queen per Hatchery but buff their damage and maybe give them an energy upgrade. This could bring back the macro hatch (which I always loved) Good ideas but then Spore crawler root speed should also be increased. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 WinterStarcraft1130 StarCraft: Brood WarPolt  999ViBE  607JimRising  349puck  235Livibee 210ROOTSuperNova 199PvP 37sOs 20Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Other Games Organizations Counter-Strike: Global Offensive StarCraft 2 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 |
|
OSC
Blazing Series
Rex vs Creator
Nice vs Bomber
StarCraft2.fi
GG of the Year
StarCraft Sundays
SpeCial vs Awers
Bly vs Awers
DnS vs Bly
SpeCial vs DnS
DnS vs Awers
SKillous vs DnS
SpeCial vs SKillous
SKillous vs Awers
Proxy Tempest
The Pizza Pie
OlimoLeague
StarCraft2.fi
GG of the Year
[ Show More ] |
|
|
WCS
