The Zerg Problem -- Statistical Analysis

[Xyvik]

Sorry guys, got to agree with Nicol on this one.

I couldn't disagree with him more. Thankfully pure.Wasted saved me the trouble of dissecting Nicol's faulty reasoning. Another tip of my hat to you, sir!

Endless debates one way or the other will probably get us nowhere. But beta won't be here, by all accounts, for another three months. So what else is there to do?

I'll be pondering the Zerg Problem (and yes, unless you're really that blind, there really is a Zerg problem) for the next few days, see what I can come up with.

I do, however, anxiously await Nicol's rebuttal. Even if I don't agree with his previous reasoning, he at least is also looking at the issue logically.

[Nicol Bolas]

The foundation of your assessment is equally faulty -- you assume that if the units were not directly responsible for the race's appeal in the original game, doing nothing to update them in a sequel ten years newer is acceptable, and does not diminish our interest.

I make no such assumption. My statement and argument is that unit "interest" is not the only viable metric for race interest. Thus your claim that the Zerg are uninteresting because their units are uninteresting is incorrect.

revamping units is also necessary to make the game appeal to casual gamers and critics.

StarCraft 2 is going to sell metric assloads even if every Critic gives it a 1.0. Appealing to critics is foolish, for any artform.

it is not the Zerg racial identity that their units should be lame

Actually, it is. Except for Burrow and spellcasters, all Zerg units have no activated abilities. That alone makes it very difficult to make "non-lame" units. Plus there's the fact that the Zerg are typified by having large masses of units, which makes giving units strong passive powers like cliff-climbing a very bad idea.

One of those racial identities has to go before you can start making "interesting" Zerg units.

Salvage is discussed with more interest than the Nydus Worm these days, let alone any other Zerg "mechanics."

Oh please. Everyone panned Neural Parasite until BR3 where they saw it kick ass. The fact that some people can't see the possibility in something in no way negates the value of that proposal.

Obviously you and I have very varying definitions of "spell caster," as pertains to the purposes of this discussion.

That's because I have this silly notion that the meaning of a word should be relatively constant. And if it is to mean something different in the context of a discussion, that difference should be explained beforehand.

When you say "caster", I think, "unit that has a palette of spells it can cast with a shared pool of energy between those spells." If that's not the definition of a caster that you're going for, be upfront about it.

Just earlier on this page we were discussing making the Hydralisk, at least in part, a siege unit. Just give it the range, lengthen its attack cooldown, decrease its movement speed, and you've got yourself a unit that's dangerous around cliffs where it can maneuver, and like a fish out of water on flat terrain.

So you want to not only make the Hydralisk a cliff climber, you want to make it a Siege-ranged cliff climber.

Balance is not a river in Egypt.

Also, exactly what is it that makes it "dangerous" around cliffs but a "fish out of water" in flat terrain? Also, if we accept that this "Cliffulisk" is what you say it is, what are Zerg supposed to do in open terrain for ranged GtG and GtA? Marines and Thors don't have any such open terrain concerns, and neither do Stalkers.

By nature of the three-pronged assault, it must inherently be a full on assault. The Zerg are able to do damage because they attack from range, from OUTSIDE of the enemy base, and once the defenders come around to attack... they hop QUICKLY into a Nydus, hope out of another on the other end, and attack.

It takes maybe 5 seconds to throw up a Nydus. You most certainly can harass with it. What you describe is simply one method for attacking with a Nydus; it is far from the only one.

So what you're trying to say is that... the Stalker's Blink is much more versatile than cliff-climb, meaning that the Stalker's Blink, available in tier 1, is much more powerful than Hydralisk cliff-walking would be.

Which is obviously the reason you said Hydralisks with cliff-climb would be terribly imbalanced earlier.

Yes.

How much stat tweaking do you think the Stalker has undergone? This is a low-tier unit, so it can't be too expensive. Yet in skilled hands, a group of them can be almost unkillable, cost-for-cost. Yet it still needs to be able to be useful in unskilled hands.

At BlizzCon 09, it was reported that going mass Stalkers was a viable strategy for which there was little if any counter. Admittedly a few hours of playtime with a game that's still in development doesn't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. However, it does suggest that it's very easy to make something like a Stalker highly overpowered.

If we're quote mining from Browder, he once said he wasn't sure if the game was actually balanceable. Maybe it's because of things like the Stalker that he feels this way.

Further, there's a difference between "massable for Protoss" and "massable for Zerg". For the only race that can have more than 200 units on the field, massability is a very different thing from a race that can only field an army of, at best, 100 offensive units. Massable for Protoss means you can get them in the 20-40 range. Tier 1 massable for Zerg means swarms: 50+. Great hosts of units that assault the battlefield.

You might be able to get away with Stalkers, where there are fairly few of them. But you can't do that with the Zerg. And you certainly can't do that with Zerg-style production, where every Hatchery can start pumping "Cliffulisks" instantly.

Also, and this comes back to word definitions and such, there is a big difference between saying, "I want the Zerg to have a ranged cliff-climber" and "I want the Hydralisk to be a ranged cliff-climber." Because if you make the changes necessary to make that balanced, it isn't a Hydralisk anymore. It's a Hydralisk in Name Only.

If you don't think that Blizzard will accept your proposal that removes the Hydralisk in favor of something else, then they're probably not going to accept your proposal of making a HINO unit either. None of the other returning units with the same name have changed so drastically from their intended purpose, even if they got a different set of abilities (Ghosts in SC1 were not intended to suck; they just worked out that way in practice). Overlords are, first and foremost food. Ghosts are stealthy spellcasters.

Note that when they decided to give Dragoons Blink, they made it a different unit, with a new name and model.

Zerg flexibility? Um, last I checked, the Marine was more flexible than the Zergling, the Stalker was more flexible than the Hydralisk, the Banshee was more flexible than the Brood Lord, the Viking was more flexible than the Corruptor, and the Thor was more flexible than the Ultralisk.

And that's why you completely fail at understanding the Zerg. The Zerg's flexibility is in combinations of units, and in the ability to switch between them with ease. Terran units have to be more flexible, with multiple roles, because their production abilities are the least flexible.

That's why your entire analysis falls apart: you're looking at one part of the whole (unit "niftiness") in isolation from the other parts. Yes, the Zerg look boring, if you ignore everything that's cool about them. If you take the whole, however, then you see that they're very improved and quite powerful.

If the generalization of specific Zerg units is getting in the way of them acquiring interesting gameplay tactics (and yes, this is true for many, Hydralisk being foremost), then it's time we cut down on that generalization.

Then you want the Zerg to stop being Zerg.

Let the hydralisk move while burrowed.

Hell, Roaches and Infestors can do it. They may as well make it a Tier 2 upgrade for all Zerg units: Greater Burrow.

[Xyvik]

Hell, Roaches and Infestors can do it. They may as well make it a Tier 2 upgrade for all Zerg units: Greater Burrow.

That's actually not a half-bad idea.

I'll tune in here with my own idea of what's wrong with Zerg: so little has changed, and they still have a Tier 2 problem.

There's a little thing in Balance that must be considered: if something is easier for something and harder for something else, unless it is rectified elsewhere, is an imbalance. At the moment we have a Zerg with a harder-to-survive Tier 2 than both Protoss and Terran. That means imbalance. If Zerg have a powerful Tier 3, if they never make it to Tier 3 it doesn't matter how powerful that Tier 3 ends up being.

In addition to that problem, Zerg still have the least changes, the least that is remarkable about them.

This problem really only needs a few small solutions to fix it. Terran and Protoss have been completely changed, Zerg is the same. Haven't they been sitting in their worlds for 4 years evolving? Where are these evolution changes? Sure there are a few, but not enough to warrant four years of hyper evolution.

something must be done to the Zerg. They have more power than they did, but they still have a Tier 2 problem and an image problem.

[Kraziliak]

I really don't like the idea of greater burrow. Watching huge armies move across the field is a very important aesthetic part of SC. Not to mention it would be OP.

However, I completely agree that some units should be replaced. Personally, I think the lurker and the mutalisk are great targets. Both units have seen wayyyyy to much playtime in the last games and frankly I wouldn't be interested in watching games as much if those units were included. Like seriously, who wants to see MORE muta micro? Mutas look terrible too.

There are so many options when making a new airial harass unit. The mutalisk just wastes all of the potential.

[Xyvik]

I've personally always thought there should be more morph options, it's Zerg iconic and adds to their overall versatility.

The Zergling morphs, the Hydra morphs, the Muta used to morph...why not Roach? Or go completely crazy...the Drones already morph into buildings, why not let them do a pseudo-morph into a killer creature, for a last-ditch base defense? They can morph for only X amount of seconds and then go back to normal.

Or maybe the Roach can morph into an air-based equivilant, a high-regen unit that's hard to kill but doesn't do a lot of damage? Takes hits from Mutas and distracts, also maybe a good counter to carrier/BC since the scourge is gone

I'd have to run numbers, but at least these are ideas

[Nicol Bolas]

At the moment we have a Zerg with a harder-to-survive Tier 2 than both Protoss and Terran. That means imbalance. If Zerg have a powerful Tier 3, if they never make it to Tier 3 it doesn't matter how powerful that Tier 3 ends up being.

There are a number of points here.

One of the big problems in SC1 with the Zerg's Tier 2 wasn't that it was weak. It was that getting to Tier 3 was so hard. To get to Tier 3 anything, you must:

* Build a Queens Nest. Otherwise a useless building.
* Build a Hive. Otherwise a useless building.
* Research/build your Tier 3 stuff.

SC2 gets around that by (presumably) making the Infestor the prereq for Hive. Now the first building has utility of its own. There are reasons to get an Infestor Pit besides just going for Hive tech, so the effective cost and time of Hive tech is lower.

So one problem is solved.

The real question is the nature of SC2's Zerg Tier 2. There are a lot of Tier 2 units: Roach, Infestor, Mutalisk, Corruptor, Overseer. There are also quite a few Tier 2 mechanics: Overlord Creep Drop, Overlord Transport, Nydus.

So the question is this: is that enough?

Pretty much everyone agrees that the Infestor is pretty cool. The Overseer is starting to shape up into a viable support unit as well; Blizzard clearly wants this unit to be useful as an aerial caster. Creep Drop's utility really depends on how well Nydus works and how good the Zerg Creep movement speed works. If movement speed lets the Zerg win battles they should have lost, then it's worthwhile. If not, then it's just something nice you might use at some point. Overlord Transport synergies well with Banelings, and the fact that speed&transport are the same research is very good.

Corruptors are a purely reactionary unit; you get them to shut down certain enemy strategies. Mutalisks are nice and effective generalist air units.

But then there's the Roach. Ah, the poor, forlorn Roach.

What is this thing, exactly? How do you use a ranged Tank unit with a group of melee units? You can't; they'll stop moving right in the way of your Zerglings. So then you're looking at Roach + Hydra, where the Roach acts as a functional meatshield. This is nice, to a degree, except that they both take gas, which makes using them together a bit awkward.

Zerg Tier 2 in SC2 really seems to be about augmenting what already works in Tier 1. Infestors and Overseers as support, Roaches as Tanks, Mutalisks as harassment and snipers, and so on. Really, I think it's the Roach that's the Tier 2 problem. I'm just not really sure what it's for. Infestors and Overseers can support Hydras just as well as Roaches. I just don't know what would give me a reason to build Roaches.

As to the comparative effectiveness of Zerg Tier 2 to other races, this may be a phantasmal problem. In SC1, because the tech to Tier 3 was so long, involved, and expensive, Zerg players think in terms of sitting on Tier 2 for a while. In SC2, that's just not necessary anymore. Tier 3 is more reachable than ever for the Zerg. Especially the juicy Tier 3 research, like the Crack upgrade or whatever.

[RODTHEGOD]

Guys, guys, guys, you're looking too hard into the details of what people are saying here and not looking at the message.

The Zerg are the least changed race in Starcraft 2 by far, they are barely different from their starcraft 1 counterparts. Hell, you could probably reinsert the new zerg into starcraft and it would still be basically the same game.

All pure.Wasted is trying to do, is offer suggestions on how the zerg could be improved so that they are not basically the same thing. You may not like his suggestions(I know I don't ) but that doesn't mean the message is wrong. Try to come up with ways to make the zerg more interesting yourselves and suggest that.

[Xyvik]

Nicol: a nice look at it. I have to say that I agree: Zerg T2 in SC2 is just about augmentation, it's not about really new stuff. It is still, in my opinion, weaker in pure army strength and diversity, but not as bad as SC1 Zerg T2.

I have the idea of moving the Roach to Tier 1.5 (which would give it better use, I think) and giving it a Tier 2 flying morph.

Thoughts?

[Nicol Bolas]

The Zerg are the least changed race in Starcraft 2 by far, they are barely different from their starcraft 1 counterparts.

Only if you only count new/different units. If you count new game mechanics, the Zerg are the most mechanically changed race.

So it all balances out.

I have the idea of moving the Roach to Tier 1.5 (which would give it better use, I think) and giving it a Tier 2 flying morph.

That's a lot of Tier 1 units though.

[Xyvik]

That's a lot of Tier 1 units though.

Perhaps that will be one of Zerg's strengths. Otherwise it could go Tier 2 roach / tier 2.5 upgrade to a morphable flying unit.

Would a flying unit with high survivabililty, low attack help offset the loss of the scourge? I think it might find a good niche, actually, as a meat shield for Mutalisks/corruptors and later as a distraction for brood lords.

All we have to do is call it...*wait for it*...the FLYING COCKROACH!



...or, be the only zerg unit that can morph automatically, without need for an upgrade. That way you have a lot of options available.