As Zerg, it's not that bad even if you do not have that choke. Roaches kill near infinite amount of Zealots on creep, and Spine Crawlers do a hefty amount of damage. It's only problematic if it's really early proxy gate rush, but even then it is rather easily beaten, assuming you scouted it. Overlord on patrol does wonders.

The things that give me issues against Protoss aren't their low-tier units. It's me sucking and/or them teching to something that is actually scary, like Colossi.

Missed this the first time around, but this just in: This does not work. You cannot cast anything on your unit tab in SC2. This includes both Transfusion and Spawn Larva. And dropship pickups. I figure this was implemented so it would be harder to pick off/heal weaker units. You have to click on the actual unit.

Zealots are pretty OP from a 2 gate, and worse from a proxy 2 gate. The build time will lessen the amount of zeals you can spam

If it's scouted it's easier, but they can always put the damn things in some offbeat location. I am not complaining though, any nerd that isn't z is fine by me

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 6 2010, 10:11 pm by Fisty.

I personally feel that the whole Concept of the queen for the Zerg just doesn't work.

This is extremely open for discussion, but I'm just going to throw it out anyway.

The reason why I think the concept behind the queen is broken is because Zerg players MUST use the queen because it is such a staple for the zerg's macro. But that is really the only thing the queen is good at. That's where the flaw is. The queen is too unifunctional.

Lemme explain, queen costs 150 minerals, and can spawn larva, creep tumors, and do transfusions, mostly used on spine crawlers and other queens. Unless you have 2 queens, you're going to use up all the queen's energy on spawning larva. This, keyed with the fact that the queen moves slower than an ensnared reaver off the creep, basically Dictates the queen stays as a defensive, macro-unit. Any players can totally cripple the zerg's macro by destroying the queen.
But, what my question is, why can't it have more functions than that?

I mean, if zerg queens were to have any value other than macro/defense, it may be then possible to use the queen other than for its ability to spawn larvas and macro.
I also feel that, because it is SO unifunctional, Blizzard somewhat mitigated this by making the zerg queen Physically very strong (for its price/tier). The thing is, this doesn't feel like zerg at all.


Here's what I propose: (extremely theorycrafting and debatable )
1. Make queens cost 100 minerals.
2. Make them proportionally weaker.
3. Make the queen a capable unit off the creep (I.e. not slow as a reaver).
4. MAYBE make Transfusion cost more E OR Make it an upgradable spell (to even things out)
5. OORR make transfusion another name, and have it heal your own or your allies' zerg buildings, while "infesting" enemies' buildings, like the overseer's ability. (srsly, I dont' feel that it works with Overseers, because they aren't usually part of your troops)

I think this would be a much better, more adaptive type of zerg. Queens would cost just as much as an overlord, but can at least be effective off the creep, and not cripple the zerg macro as much. (u know what'd be cool, a skill by the queen that lets one overlord have more unit capacity.. sort of like supply call-down ) Moreover, the zerg players can at least use the queen for something else..

Still, not that hard. Having trouble just with this just proves oneself a low level player.

Pretty interesting Unholy. But, you're still going to need the Zerg to be able to match the Protoss chrono boost, and the Terran MULE.

Issue is not not being able to spit. The issue is having to spit when your 'toss and Terran counterparts do not have to. Given all things equal, the player who has to use at the very least 3 APM/queen every minute is at disadvantage against the player who doesn't. And even when you look at a lot of top-tier Zerg players such as Dimaga or Idra, there is usually a 2-sec delay between them being able to spit and them actually doing it. Sometimes when they are in the middle of a micro-intensive battle, even more.

So, what you are basically claiming is that every Zerg payer is a low-level one.

And how much experience do you have actually playing Zerg?

@Cecil

Cheaper Queens = more Drones + more versatility.
Tho, I'd still say the whole concept of the spit is weak compared to chrono boost n mule...

Maybe they can make it so that you can multi-spit one hatchery if you forgot to use ur queen.

Okay, less money for more drones. But, chronoboost and MULEs allow the other two races to achieve greater income when all three races are constnatly making drones, probes, and SCVs. Zerg needs an equal skill to allow this, somewhere.

That's not the issue. You could just still look at the Hatchery and spit with ease. Frankly, that's not much of a disadvantage when every other race has to use their special abilities. If you want to compare the opportunity costs, then Zerg has the upper hand in special-usage efficiency.
Also, nobody expects an amateur player to micro and macro at the same time. Even in high tiers of game play, people usually pull back and then macro, not macro while micro. A few milliseconds of lost attention in a battle may just lose you the game. It doesn't mean pros can't do it. It just means they don't tend to do it, because it's a dangerous idea.

What I'm claiming isn't in comparison to other races. And Idra isn't really having trouble with not being able to spit. Although it would be a different statement from him having a personal problem with the fact that he needs to spit, but if he actually had trouble spitting, then he wouldn't be winning a single game in his scene. It's the fact that it's easier in comparison to the prequel of StarCraft 2. I mean, it's not up for debate.

Uhh, my main is T. But I've played around 70 games as Zerg. But that's enough to tell me that it isn't that hard spitting. And in comparison to the most likely more than a thousand games in BW as Zerg (it wasn't my main though.)- it's most definitely enough to tell me that the Zerg in SC2 is infinitely easier than Zerg in SC1. Although in SC1, Zerg was considered the most hardest race.

Taking a look at BW, Zerg was always disadvantaged resource wise. It always had to have more bases then the other two races to win a war of attrition. Also, with Zerg, many strategies involved heavy gas usage, requiring more bases. This part hasn't changed in SC2. I wonder if Zerg could get a gas boost, instead of mineral boosts like the other two. It would actually be more helpful, considering how most Zerg armies lose not because it lacks Zerglings, but other gas heavy units such as Infestors, Ultralisks, Mutalisks, Etcetc.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 9 2010, 2:49 pm by BeDazed.

I actually REALLY like that idea. Chrono Boost and MULEs are definitely more convenient than spitting, although spitting is the hardest macro mechanic, it's also the most necessary to the race's survival than any other. Having an extra macro mechanic for gas would be great, since the Zerg is constantly clawing for their fix of gas.

Also; BeDazed, I apologize for lashing out. I wasn't sure of your melee footing (not to say mine is great but I should really be in a higher league...), so I wasn't particularly sure if you weren't just a pissed off terran all lolumad about their siege tanks and reapers.

Didn't they remove that in Beta? AFAIK you actually have to visually look at the hatchery and use SL on it. I'll try the other way, might help me out some. Thanks, btw. And bear in mind SC2 isn't my life. I'm not Korean. I don't care about it as much as if I were getting paid for it.

You CAN, however, spit from the minimap. Hotkey all queens into one and target your hatcheries from the minimap.

...what about making the zerg less spit-dependant and increase the larva spawn rate of say... 10 to 15% ?

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Oct 6 2010, 1:46 pm by Dungeon-Master. Reason: French canadian does writing mistakes

Really? Why should the zerg be able to gain a free macro advantage, while the Protoss and Terran players need to spend APM chronoboosting and MULEing?

Very interesting thread...

Few things I like: Queen boosting Vespene for Zerg... Maybe make the Queen function as a Worker? Can harvest Minerals at 10/per trip, or Vespene at between 6 and 10/per trip... At least then, when she's not spitting or creep tumoring she'll be doing something other than sitting on her fat zerg ass.

The real problem I have with Zerg... is this misconception that "oh, a Hatchery costs 300... it is a really cheap fast expo..." - when in reality, a Hatchery gives no supply... Last time I checked, Nexus and Command Centres (don't get me started on Orbitals) gave extra Supply? So, when you factor in the Hatchery + Overlord + Drone... a Zerg player needs to spend 450 to effectively expo... And this is excluding the (+150) for the Mandatory Queen...

Blizzard made a pretty pathetic 1.1 Patch Attempt in my opinion... Siege Tanks... reduced damage to everything but same damage to Armoured? Fair enough... But, this means they still munch through Structures (which are all Armoured...) What really needed a nerf was the MMM / Bioball / Tier 1 Hacks...

The only realistic counters, both Zerg and Protoss have against this Tier 1 spam is
a) Banelings ((100m + 50g) + (200m) + (50m + 50m)) = 400 Minerals & 50 Gas to get a Baneling Nest... This is excluding Centrifugal Hooks or Burrow... Which both require the Lair...
b) Psi Storm ((150m) + (150m) + (150m + 100g) + (200m + 200g) + (50m + 150) = 500 Minerals & 500 Gas to get a Templar with Psi Storm researched... This is excluding the Pylons you require to do this...

I have recently started playing as Terran in 2v2 and 1v1 matches. My win rate has gone from 50/50 (as Random/Protoss majority) to about 80/20... You might as well scrap the Psi Storm opportunity... When you factor in Ghosts to the Terran Bioball. Psi Storm (or Feedback - which is the High Templar's answer to Ghosts) both have a shorter range than the AoE EMP - which destroys shields + energy alike.

The sad fact is, that Blizzard have left some wide-open holes in the logic of Starcraft 2. And, this is why the community is completely divided over the state of play.

As for someone who quoted 'Idra' as being a 'really good' player... His 'micro' is pathetic. I am willing to wager that most Gold League players can match him. Although, his 'macro' is good. I presume, since you quoted 'Idra', that you know what micro/macro is...

Anyways, my two cents.

*note: my overly critical stance on Blizzard Entertainment is drawn from the conclusion that they design all their games for the 12 to 20 y/o market (which I have no problem with, that is good business...) But, it is in such a way, that they neglect people who have been playing Blizzard games since 94... Warcraft 1: Orcs and Humans... War2, Diablo 1, Starcraft... The Classics... all we 'old school' fans of Blizzard get is a little 'arcade shooter' called the Lost Viking??!? I'm sorry, but this cuts a true fan deep. Peace out.

Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Oct 7 2010, 10:12 pm by Cardinal.

Seeing that Idra is in the pro scene, I'd say his micro is as good as he wants it to be. You could sit and watch a replay of Idra, and criticize him for mismicro of a couple units here and there, but this is because he knows that he needs to focus his attention on whatever is currently the most significant. Often times your macro is more important than some micromanagement.

Sure the hatcheries give only one supply, but do the zerg have to spend minerals on warpgates or barracks? Nope. They do have to spend 100 minerals on an overlord however. Supply depots and pylons also cost 100 minerals. SC2 is balanced in such an elegant way, that you need to take a very deep and broad look at how any sort of minor change will affect the game in it's entirety. It's easy to suggest changes to solve a single problem, but how easy is it to suggest a single change to solve say two, or three problems at once, without creating a single new problem? It's very, very hard, and even the professionals at Blizzard need to release patches. One thing to keep in mind is that designing a game is a pretty non-intuitive process, and requires experience for refinement. Since the game has been released, there has been a lot of player experience, and with this new experience Blizzard can make necessary changes they hadn't seen necessary before.

While I agree with your understanding that refining and balancing a game is an elegant and time-consuming task... I think that Blizzards lack-lustre effort in patch 1.1 highlights their over-all approach to Starcraft 2... Don't get me wrong, I think Starcraft 2 is pretty awesome (not what it should be, but still...)...

Let's compare shall we...

This is what Blizzard officially released as their documentation for the 1.1 patch:

http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/554901

This is what the Patch actually did:

• General Gameplay
  A few issues regarding on-death vision
  Added Destructible Rocks to Desert Oasis
  AStandard US Hotkey options available in all regions...
  
  
• Protoss
  Zealot - Build Time 33s to 38s (+5 Seconds)
  Warpgate - Cooldown 23 to 28s (+5 Seconds)
  
  
• Terran
  Reaper - Build Time 40 to 45s (+5 Seconds)
  Bunker - Build Time 30 to 35s (+5 Seconds)
  Siege - Tanks 50 to 35 + 15 vs Armoured
  Battlecruisers - Ground Damage 10 to 8
  
  
• Zerg
  Ultralisk - Attack 15 +25 Vs Armoured to 15 +20 Vs Armoured.
  Ultralisk - removed Ram Attack
  
  

Now, I don't know about you guys - but to me, my way of neatly ordering simply, in black and white, what changes have been made - looks a lot more like a Patch than what Blizzard released.

To the untrained eye, you might think that it is very nice and thoughtful for Blizzard to explain to us why certain changes were made. The truth of the matter is, at least in my most humble opinion, that Blizzard have made a pretty weak patch, and attempt to disguise it with a fancy write-off.

The most substantial change is to the Siege Tank... So, instead of doing 50 damage against, well, everything... it now only does 50 damage to Armoured units... and 35 to everything else...

Let's take a look at what (ground) units are Armoured. And what Units are not?

• Marauder
  
• Siege Tank
  
• Viking (ground mode)
  
• Thor
  
• Stalker
  
• Immortal (exception)
  
• Colossus
  
• Roach
  
• Ultralisk
  

So, a fairly substantial category of units there... still take full whack from the Siege Tank... This is not including Structures. Which are ALL Armoured. Units which are not armoured still do not stand much of a chance against a Siege Tank. Zerglings, Marines and even Zealots (to a certain degree) crumble when faced by 1 or even 2 Siege Tanks...

But, my rant (and main problem) here is not to do with the Siege Tank. It is easily countered by a smart Dark Templar (usually) or a swarm of Air units..

My problem is that Marines + Medivacs pretty much (with Marauders occasionally) counter anything.

Anyways, back to the topic (sort of) at hand.

I feel this patch is a poor excuse for a 'balance patch'... They even make schoolboy errors which result in a very quick 'fix-me' patch (being released days later).

5 Second Build time alterations to Protoss and Terran, and a change to the Ultralisk? Right. I do agree that it is a fine and precarious task to balance a RTS game such as Starcraft 2. But these sorts of changes do very little overall. Sure, a Proxy Gate-way is now ' a hell of a lot weaker' - to quote the general discussion on EU servers regarding the patch... Now, a Proxy Rax is now proving a bit dominant. Instead of nerfing units across the board, why not improve other, less used and shockingly pathetic units?

The Hydralisk - for one. Zerg Tier 2 main assault unit. Iconic Starcraft unit... 80 Hitpoints, 12 Damage, cost 100 Minerals + 50 Gas...

Compare this to the Marauder, Tier 1.5 assault unit for Terran... Brand new unit... 125 Hitpoints, 10 Damage (20 vs Armoured), cost 125 Minerals + 25 Gas. Plus, 1 Armor level to start off with, 3 seconds less build time.. a Passive Slow attack and Stim-Packs??

The Hydra has what? Burrow (which now has a 'cast-time' compared to SC1) and Grooved spines? A bit of range. Why not bring back the Speed Upgrade for Hydralisks?

Currently they are only good against Air. Any other races ground units can munch them. Zerglings, Chargelots, Marines + Marauders... Collosi? Siege Tanks?
- Just on an aside, compare the Hydra to the Hellion. The Hellion has 90hp and moves 2x faster... The Hellion gains an upgrade which makes it do +10!! Yes, PLUS TEN damage, vs Light units...

The Hydra (and it's anti-air capabilities) correct me if i'm wrong, but anti air is the only use I ever find for mass hydra.. Is a little bit redundant in this role due to the Corrupter? A specialised air superiority fighter... Which does very poorly at it's role of Anti Air.

Anyways, I am going to stop ranting now. I appreciate if people have read my views, and if they have, they are welcome to flame me all they want!