|
On September 27 2020 22:50 skdsk wrote:
I think the reason isnt because zerg is too good or whatever or players became to good, the reason is simple zergs builds lots of queens for defense, in old days you would get 1queen per hatch and 1-2 queens for creep spread, now you get like 5-8queens creep spreading and getting involved into fights (use banes/lings for attacks/runbies and use queens for defense), this actually is really balanced and well made strategy. Now the problem with this mass queen style is creep spread is insane and makes zerg seem OP.
How to solve this?
If you make queens for expensive you are nerfing entire race, which is bad idea.
Make creep more expensive mana wise, bad idea again, it wont solve the mass queen strategy and zergs still get more queens and every other playstyle will get nuked.
1. Possible solution
Make creep tumor actually cost mineral or gas, something like 30 minerals. Now when you trade units to kill tumors, you actually trading for minerals instead of energy, now zerg needs to decide if he wants 50 creep tumors to see everything, just like terran or protoss building depots/pylons sending marines and observers around the map and using scans.
you are implying that creep is a choice for zerg while it is a necessity. if you dont have creep in front of your 4th when terran is pushing you its gg. its not a choice of creep or units, you need both or you are dead because zerg units are trash off creep. you cant make creep cost money because then zerg wouldnt have either units or creep to defend timing attacks. it would make all sorts of all ins and timings super op in both zvp and zvt.
|
I remember the days when we all admired July's ardent refusal to spread creep.
Good times. I mean, not really, I've never hated anything in SC2 as much as GomTvT, but also good times.
|
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage.
|
On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage.
But you are robbing the Protoss of the opportunity to whine if they lose a game that didn't involve Viper.
This cannot work because Vipers are almost never used below Diamond and rarely below Masters, but Zerg is OP on all levels as is the general consensus here and on Reddit, right? It must be creep spread otherwise it's hard to fit Zerg OP narrative to every game. Blaming creep is much more convenient because it supports the point of all the whiners.
|
On September 27 2020 04:43 [Phantom] wrote:
I don't completely agree it's necessary. You could flank or use infestors for example to slow units down, which was exactly what zergs did when their creep spread wasn't as good.
When Terran is pressuring your 4th, the last thing you're thinking about is infestors, and flanks can be prevented- in most recent Reynor/Clem matches you can see Clem, when pushing, separating a chunk of marines to the back to halt any potential flanks. Reynor has also tried burrowed infestors in the past against mech, but one scan and they get demolished.
Clem is an absolute monster, and you can see him consistently snipe banes even on creep, let alone off of creep, and his splits are insane. Without creep Reynor and Serral will get rolled over by Clem, like he has already done with lesser zergs. Zerg relies on good creep spread because it has to- you rarely see the zerg take fights off of creep on even ground because those are fights the zerg cannot win.
Making tumors cost 50 minerals is absurd; the earlygame is already so fragile and having the zerg sacrifice a drone's worth of minerals for a mechanic that's absolutely imperative for a chance to win the game is going to just remove zerg entirely. Zerg's units are designed to take cost inefficient trades, and if you can't have the economy to back that up then you just lose. Making tumors visible as well will render creep nowhere near viable; hellions move so quickly that even on large maps any terran will be able to kill almost the entire spread.
|
On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage.
I pretty much agree with this wholeheartedly. Absolutely detest the Viper - it has so much utility on one unit. It's also super frustrating when I see vipers coming towards my army and I'm spamming feedback commands but the abduct still goes off. The 10 range vs 9 range doesn't feel like it matters since Vipers can fly / maneuver easier. I've watched replays where it really looks like feedback lands first but the abduct still goes through, it's weird. (I know thats not possible, just illustrating how incredibly thin the line is on stopping abducts, feels like the counter to it is inconsistent.) I definitely feel like a "Guaranteed kill on a very expensive unit" ability should cost more than 75 energy
.
To align it with PvT for example and how Patience has been playing it, I want to be able to retain my expensive units while being okay sacing my gateway units, slowly building a more and more powerful army -- You can't do that with the viper in the game, it just doesn't work.
|
If Zerg didn't have Viper, there will be nothing stopping late game protoss from rolling over Zerg.
|
Northern Ireland25319 Posts
It’s worth considering that while there’s overlap of course, creep spread has different priorities and impacts in vP and vT.
Versus Protoss its function as an early warning system about movements out and what particular composition is pushing you so you make adjustments accordingly, ideally as late as possible to keep dat droning hardcore.
Against Terran where the matchup is more trade-oriented yeah sure the info helps too, but there creep is an aid/necessity for efficient engagements. Terran’s army comps are able to be split so well that the movement bonus or lack thereof makes a big difference in fights.
Which makes it very tricky to balance. Personally I like the mechanic and the interplay it introduces, its more about finding a sweet spot.
|
On September 28 2020 23:03 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
If Zerg didn't have Viper, there will be nothing stopping late game protoss from rolling over Zerg.
Same goes for mech. Broodlords are not good enough if there is a lot of Thors and/or Vikings.
I would agree Viper is broken but without it Zerg stands no chance vs P/T late game armies. It is also needed to avoid stalemate. If not for Viper we would have a lot 40+ minutes turtle games in all matchups, because you can't attack into some armies without Viper. It's a sad state of the game but the unit is at the same time ugly and necessary.
|
Northern Ireland25319 Posts
On September 28 2020 23:00 LHK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage. I pretty much agree with this wholeheartedly. Absolutely detest the Viper - it has so much utility on one unit. It's also super frustrating when I see vipers coming towards my army and I'm spamming feedback commands but the abduct still goes off. The 10 range vs 9 range doesn't feel like it matters since Vipers can fly / maneuver easier. I've watched replays where it really looks like feedback lands first but the abduct still goes through, it's weird. (I know thats not possible, just illustrating how incredibly thin the line is on stopping abducts, feels like the counter to it is inconsistent.) I definitely feel like a "Guaranteed kill on a very expensive unit" ability should cost more than 75 energy . To align it with PvT for example and how Patience has been playing it, I want to be able to retain my expensive units while being okay sacing my gateway units, slowly building a more and more powerful army -- You can't do that with the viper in the game, it just doesn't work.
Myself and some other annoying theorycrafting types had discussed turning abduct into a (short) channelling spell.
Say even something as short as a half second or a full second.
A feedback or a successful viper kill would leave the abducted unit as far as it had been dragged by a percentage of the channel.
I think, ignoring specific numbers aside this would introduce more premium on viper positioning by introducing counterplay while not completely neutering.
A fast Protoss could land a feedback slightly after an abduct was cast and if quick enough pull their Collosus back to the lines for example, or the Zerg could still pounce quickly on it. On the other hand if a Protoss have their Templar out of position and that sloppy play is punished by their opponent yoinking them to their death.
Little off topic mind so apologies for that!
|
Maybe tumors can cost more queen energy without breaking the game. I always thought that as heavy queen production became more commonplace (because of how vesatile and tanky they are early game), that creep spread would innevitably be easier and clearing it harder.
My case for tumors costing 50 energy is when I see 4 queens walk around and drop 16 tumors on 4 attack paths, every 3 minutes or so, not to mention each tumor continues to spread free tumors. Perhaps a limiter on how many advancements each first tumor can make would be worth exploring?
I don't think quick-casting or any other ease-of-life interface adjustments are a bad thing. Anything that can help you turn thought into action faster is worth keeping in the game because it's supposed to be faster and slicker than Broodwar.
EDIT: This discussion seems to really be about PvZ strugs... I remember a time (WoL) when Protoss could really abuse Zerg with colossi and forcefields, but their ground army now seems far more impotent with ravagers, lurker range+burrow speed upgrades and vipers being a thing. What if a ravager/queen was a massive unit and corrosive bile didn't break forcefields?
|
I always hated the mechanic, its not very zergy at all because it promotes turtling and defensive gameplay too much. Every Zerg unit is like50% worse off creep and it sucks.
|
![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/3ypsFLM/sc2.jpg)
tumors with an armor equal to 3 or 4 to prevent small units of cleaning creep too fast (and more hp)
that s why i think it s idiot to spend multiple scan to reveal each part of the creep (in the case of a better world for casu with balanced features like mules, warp in and creep)....
|
On September 28 2020 16:51 ytherik wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2020 22:50 skdsk wrote:
I think the reason isnt because zerg is too good or whatever or players became to good, the reason is simple zergs builds lots of queens for defense, in old days you would get 1queen per hatch and 1-2 queens for creep spread, now you get like 5-8queens creep spreading and getting involved into fights (use banes/lings for attacks/runbies and use queens for defense), this actually is really balanced and well made strategy. Now the problem with this mass queen style is creep spread is insane and makes zerg seem OP.
How to solve this?
If you make queens for expensive you are nerfing entire race, which is bad idea.
Make creep more expensive mana wise, bad idea again, it wont solve the mass queen strategy and zergs still get more queens and every other playstyle will get nuked.
1. Possible solution
Make creep tumor actually cost mineral or gas, something like 30 minerals. Now when you trade units to kill tumors, you actually trading for minerals instead of energy, now zerg needs to decide if he wants 50 creep tumors to see everything, just like terran or protoss building depots/pylons sending marines and observers around the map and using scans.
you are implying that creep is a choice for zerg while it is a necessity. if you dont have creep in front of your 4th when terran is pushing you its gg. its not a choice of creep or units, you need both or you are dead because zerg units are trash off creep. you cant make creep cost money because then zerg wouldnt have either units or creep to defend timing attacks. it would make all sorts of all ins and timings super op in both zvp and zvt.
Ofcourse, you shouldnt be able to fight high tech armies with ling/bane off of creep, the issue right now is creep became to easy to spread. Creep spread needs to be nerfed, because with mass queen style its to easy to spread whole map full of creep. Also saying zerg cant fight high tech army with high tech army themself is disingenuous, zerg have most insane late game unit line up with insane casters like Viper and Infestor, incredibly strong lurker, which destroys all ground armies, ultras and bl as finishing options, dont forget Nydus, edrenal lings.
|
On September 26 2020 20:06 ytherik wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2020 18:08 Luolis wrote:On September 26 2020 13:07 Aesto wrote:
The main reason Zerg got more effective at creep spread is because Zerg players use a lot more Queens than they used to in WoL and HotS. The reasons for that are a) Queens got buffed, b) Zerg players realized how good they are for defense (most Zerg units are good at exactly one thing - but Queens are super versatile), and c) the LotV economy allows it. The reason Zergs didn't used to spread as much creep back in the day is because Zerg just couldn't afford those extra queens. In WoL and HotS, Zerg economy was always balancing on a razor's edge, there was no margin for error, you couldn't afford to be too greedy nor too safe. Now there is a bit more of a margin for error, and Zergs realized that they could spend this money on Queens which are an excellent insurance policy. And thanks to creep spread, they pay off even if they're not needed for defense. That being said, IF Zerg is too strong, I don't think it is because of creep spread. Creep is more of a symptom than the 'disease'. D) Spreading creep is much faster with rapidfire, since you can hold a button down for a sec and it puts down like 10 tumors. I don't think rapidfire should be allowed in competitive sc2. Following your logic using keyboards should not be allowed in competitive SC2 because they allow you to do things faster while clicking less. Competitive SC2 should be mouse only.
Mouse only tournament consisting top players seems to be interesting, they can only use key board for command group and mouse for all the rest
|
|
|
On September 29 2020 01:18 Howard_Kao wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2020 20:06 ytherik wrote:On September 26 2020 18:08 Luolis wrote:On September 26 2020 13:07 Aesto wrote:
The main reason Zerg got more effective at creep spread is because Zerg players use a lot more Queens than they used to in WoL and HotS. The reasons for that are a) Queens got buffed, b) Zerg players realized how good they are for defense (most Zerg units are good at exactly one thing - but Queens are super versatile), and c) the LotV economy allows it. The reason Zergs didn't used to spread as much creep back in the day is because Zerg just couldn't afford those extra queens. In WoL and HotS, Zerg economy was always balancing on a razor's edge, there was no margin for error, you couldn't afford to be too greedy nor too safe. Now there is a bit more of a margin for error, and Zergs realized that they could spend this money on Queens which are an excellent insurance policy. And thanks to creep spread, they pay off even if they're not needed for defense. That being said, IF Zerg is too strong, I don't think it is because of creep spread. Creep is more of a symptom than the 'disease'. D) Spreading creep is much faster with rapidfire, since you can hold a button down for a sec and it puts down like 10 tumors. I don't think rapidfire should be allowed in competitive sc2. Following your logic using keyboards should not be allowed in competitive SC2 because they allow you to do things faster while clicking less. Competitive SC2 should be mouse only. Mouse only tournament consisting top players seems to be interesting, they can only use key board for command group and mouse for all the rest
Pros would end up having to retire at age 20 due to completely destroyed wrists.
|
On September 28 2020 23:18 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2020 23:00 LHK wrote:On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage. I pretty much agree with this wholeheartedly. Absolutely detest the Viper - it has so much utility on one unit. It's also super frustrating when I see vipers coming towards my army and I'm spamming feedback commands but the abduct still goes off. The 10 range vs 9 range doesn't feel like it matters since Vipers can fly / maneuver easier. I've watched replays where it really looks like feedback lands first but the abduct still goes through, it's weird. (I know thats not possible, just illustrating how incredibly thin the line is on stopping abducts, feels like the counter to it is inconsistent.) I definitely feel like a "Guaranteed kill on a very expensive unit" ability should cost more than 75 energy . To align it with PvT for example and how Patience has been playing it, I want to be able to retain my expensive units while being okay sacing my gateway units, slowly building a more and more powerful army -- You can't do that with the viper in the game, it just doesn't work. Myself and some other annoying theorycrafting types had discussed turning abduct into a (short) channelling spell. Say even something as short as a half second or a full second. A feedback or a successful viper kill would leave the abducted unit as far as it had been dragged by a percentage of the channel. I think, ignoring specific numbers aside this would introduce more premium on viper positioning by introducing counterplay while not completely neutering. A fast Protoss could land a feedback slightly after an abduct was cast and if quick enough pull their Collosus back to the lines for example, or the Zerg could still pounce quickly on it. On the other hand if a Protoss have their Templar out of position and that sloppy play is punished by their opponent yoinking them to their death. Little off topic mind so apologies for that!
I quite like that idea, and in my head that's what it always felt like it should be - It feels bad to see the feedback happen but the spell still go off like that. There's precedent there of course with Neural Parasite - infestor dies, NP ends.
The viper is just way too strong in my opinion. Corruptors are meant to counter Collo / Capital ships. In order to do that you need a good bit of supply tied up in them and it takes a bit more time / has counter play as opposed to abducts getting units for free. If the corruptor can't do the job, it should be helped out until it can. The viper is just an ugly bandaid unit to fix way too many issues. Splash Anti Air spell, blinding cloud area denial, and single target kill spell.. I'm rambling a bit but if you tell someone there's a unit in a game that can do all of that they'd immediately say it can do too many things.
The problem *is* the viper, but the viper is the problem because zerg doesn't have viable alternatives, which is the real core issue. Protoss could play an entirely different strategic game if the viper wasn't in its current state. I don't have any alternatives to propose, however. I like the channeling idea / being able to cancel abducts. If I had it my way I'd remove the viper but do a lot of reworking to zerg endgame so the viper wasn't even a necessary unit. Scourge would be a good place to start, Lol.
|
Northern Ireland25319 Posts
On September 29 2020 02:42 LHK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2020 23:18 WombaT wrote:On September 28 2020 23:00 LHK wrote:On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage. I pretty much agree with this wholeheartedly. Absolutely detest the Viper - it has so much utility on one unit. It's also super frustrating when I see vipers coming towards my army and I'm spamming feedback commands but the abduct still goes off. The 10 range vs 9 range doesn't feel like it matters since Vipers can fly / maneuver easier. I've watched replays where it really looks like feedback lands first but the abduct still goes through, it's weird. (I know thats not possible, just illustrating how incredibly thin the line is on stopping abducts, feels like the counter to it is inconsistent.) I definitely feel like a "Guaranteed kill on a very expensive unit" ability should cost more than 75 energy . To align it with PvT for example and how Patience has been playing it, I want to be able to retain my expensive units while being okay sacing my gateway units, slowly building a more and more powerful army -- You can't do that with the viper in the game, it just doesn't work. Myself and some other annoying theorycrafting types had discussed turning abduct into a (short) channelling spell. Say even something as short as a half second or a full second. A feedback or a successful viper kill would leave the abducted unit as far as it had been dragged by a percentage of the channel. I think, ignoring specific numbers aside this would introduce more premium on viper positioning by introducing counterplay while not completely neutering. A fast Protoss could land a feedback slightly after an abduct was cast and if quick enough pull their Collosus back to the lines for example, or the Zerg could still pounce quickly on it. On the other hand if a Protoss have their Templar out of position and that sloppy play is punished by their opponent yoinking them to their death. Little off topic mind so apologies for that! I quite like that idea, and in my head that's what it always felt like it should be - It feels bad to see the feedback happen but the spell still go off like that. There's precedent there of course with Neural Parasite - infestor dies, NP ends. The viper is just way too strong in my opinion. Corruptors are meant to counter Collo / Capital ships. In order to do that you need a good bit of supply tied up in them and it takes a bit more time / has counter play as opposed to abducts getting units for free. If the corruptor can't do the job, it should be helped out until it can. The viper is just an ugly bandaid unit to fix way too many issues. Splash Anti Air spell, blinding cloud area denial, and single target kill spell.. I'm rambling a bit but if you tell someone there's a unit in a game that can do all of that they'd immediately say it can do too many things. The problem *is* the viper, but the viper is the problem because zerg doesn't have viable alternatives, which is the real core issue. Protoss could play an entirely different strategic game if the viper wasn't in its current state. I don't have any alternatives to propose, however. I like the channeling idea / being able to cancel abducts. If I had it my way I'd remove the viper but do a lot of reworking to zerg endgame so the viper wasn't even a necessary unit. Scourge would be a good place to start, Lol.
Aye can’t disagree with much there at all! I’m kind of at a loss on how to retool Zerg and give them other options while toning down the Viper, but I definitely think the game would benefit.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 29 2020 06:15 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2020 02:42 LHK wrote:On September 28 2020 23:18 WombaT wrote:On September 28 2020 23:00 LHK wrote:On September 28 2020 21:18 BronzeKnee wrote:
I feel pretty strongly that the problem Protoss has with Zerg in the meta isn't creep spread, it is the power of the Viper denying so many different late game techs for Protoss.
Whether you build Carriers, Colossus, whatever, the Roach/Hydra/Lurker army that is effective in the game can nearly instantly deal with them in an even game with Vipers and Abduct.
For this reason, we see so many Protoss timings and reliance on Adepts in particular to get an early game advantage. I pretty much agree with this wholeheartedly. Absolutely detest the Viper - it has so much utility on one unit. It's also super frustrating when I see vipers coming towards my army and I'm spamming feedback commands but the abduct still goes off. The 10 range vs 9 range doesn't feel like it matters since Vipers can fly / maneuver easier. I've watched replays where it really looks like feedback lands first but the abduct still goes through, it's weird. (I know thats not possible, just illustrating how incredibly thin the line is on stopping abducts, feels like the counter to it is inconsistent.) I definitely feel like a "Guaranteed kill on a very expensive unit" ability should cost more than 75 energy . To align it with PvT for example and how Patience has been playing it, I want to be able to retain my expensive units while being okay sacing my gateway units, slowly building a more and more powerful army -- You can't do that with the viper in the game, it just doesn't work. Myself and some other annoying theorycrafting types had discussed turning abduct into a (short) channelling spell. Say even something as short as a half second or a full second. A feedback or a successful viper kill would leave the abducted unit as far as it had been dragged by a percentage of the channel. I think, ignoring specific numbers aside this would introduce more premium on viper positioning by introducing counterplay while not completely neutering. A fast Protoss could land a feedback slightly after an abduct was cast and if quick enough pull their Collosus back to the lines for example, or the Zerg could still pounce quickly on it. On the other hand if a Protoss have their Templar out of position and that sloppy play is punished by their opponent yoinking them to their death. Little off topic mind so apologies for that! I quite like that idea, and in my head that's what it always felt like it should be - It feels bad to see the feedback happen but the spell still go off like that. There's precedent there of course with Neural Parasite - infestor dies, NP ends. The viper is just way too strong in my opinion. Corruptors are meant to counter Collo / Capital ships. In order to do that you need a good bit of supply tied up in them and it takes a bit more time / has counter play as opposed to abducts getting units for free. If the corruptor can't do the job, it should be helped out until it can. The viper is just an ugly bandaid unit to fix way too many issues. Splash Anti Air spell, blinding cloud area denial, and single target kill spell.. I'm rambling a bit but if you tell someone there's a unit in a game that can do all of that they'd immediately say it can do too many things. The problem *is* the viper, but the viper is the problem because zerg doesn't have viable alternatives, which is the real core issue. Protoss could play an entirely different strategic game if the viper wasn't in its current state. I don't have any alternatives to propose, however. I like the channeling idea / being able to cancel abducts. If I had it my way I'd remove the viper but do a lot of reworking to zerg endgame so the viper wasn't even a necessary unit. Scourge would be a good place to start, Lol. Aye can’t disagree with much there at all! I’m kind of at a loss on how to retool Zerg and give them other options while toning down the Viper, but I definitely think the game would benefit.
We can start with the insta-burrow of them lurkers, or mitigate that by a tank research(what a new concept and idea!) improving the siege/unsiege time. Also changing abduct into snipe-ish (interruptable) spell can work, especially since zergs are now masquarading vipers with overseers (why has this unit any energy again?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
