The Zerg Problem -- Statistical Analysis

[Blazur]

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.

Damn, you might be on to something with this. Give the Roach a morph upgrade that allows it hop up and glide for a very brief period of time...essentially allowing it to traverse cliffs and pounce over units. This gain in mobility comes at a cost in that the unit can no longer burrow. So players who prefer raid attacks can launch in with their roaches, unleash some damage, and they fly away to safety. Those who prefer an aggressive play style could continue to use the burrowed roaches which can pop up and down to avoid hazards.

Now Zerg players have one more choice in Tier 2 which synergizes well with the morph theme.

-or-

If the hopping/gliding adjustment is too similar to the Reaper, then allow the Roach to hover for a very brief period of time during which you can control its flight but cannot attack.

[PsiWarp]

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.

Aside from the Roach Warren, the Roach costs 100 minerals 2 control, how's that awkward in conjunction with Hydralisks?

There's also a trait they might possess in the latest "latest" build, that is Burrow Movement: http://starfeeder.gameriot.com/blogs...2-review/page5


-Psi

[Nicol Bolas]

the Roach costs 100 minerals 2 control, how's that awkward in conjunction with Hydralisks?

Is that from recent info, or is that back when the Roach was Tier 1?

If this is recent, this makes no sense. So Roaches can cost no gas, but Medivacs cost 100 gas? How does any of this make sense?

[pure.Wasted]

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.

Well, I love your black-and-white approach. The argument between us boils down to two separate points. The first is the "inherent lameness" of the Zerg race, which you seem to think is unavoidable. I already addressed this point many times in the last thread; unfortunately and, I suppose, typically, you chose to ignore all of them.

Roaches are not boring. Lurkers are not boring. Lurkers are from the BW era. Roaches are from the S2 era. So are Banelings, which also take far more skill to use than A+click.

That means it is possible to make Zerg units take involved amounts of micro in battle -- and not "move away/surround/attack/move away" kind of micro; ANY unit has the potential for that, so this does not count. Do the Roaches and Lurkers compromise the Zerg identity? No, they do not. Nobody's ever complained about the micro requirements of either, even when Lurkers make up a great deal of ZvT and ZvP, and Roaches have been in the spotlight as bread-and-butter units for a long time.

This is what I want. -- no more, no less: a Zerg unit tree that is as involving to play as the Lurker and the Roach. There is absolutely no reason it cannot be done. NONE. It would not compromise the Zerg racial identity because it's already been tried, successfully, and found completely in line with that racial identity.

"How does a Cliffalisk solve this problem?" would be the next logical question, and this specific approach is the second point that needs addressing. For one thing, it breathes new life and identity into the Hydralisk; even if it is still A+click, the potential provided by cliff-walk makes the Hydra seem exciting all over again. But it's not as simple as A+click, because if the stats are tweaked to compensate while "keeping its damage" is a core idea, what the unit ends up losing out on is attack speed and HP. In combined armies, the Hydra is no less devastating than ever before. However, in unit vs. unit showdowns, it becomes much less straight-forward, as the Hydra is obviously weak against a foe that is going out of his way to kill it.

That's where cliff-climb comes in, opening up strategies that Reapers and Colossi wouldn't know about because they are hardly as massable. Consider this Hydralisk vs. Zealot battle. The Zealots have always been more powerful, which makes this showdown even worse for the Z. But as his Hydras start dying, he sends them, one by one, to climb the nearby cliffs. Now, there's one Hydra above low ground that the Zealots can't get to, but they still have an advantage, right? They're not going to run away just 'cause there's one Hydra attacking from an unassailable position, right?

Then there's 2 up and only 10 down. Then there's 3 up and only 9 down. 4 and 8. 5 up and 7. 6 and 6. And at this point, the Zerg tells all of his remaining Hydras to climb up; the Zealots can't fight this, so they start running off while still taking a pounding from those Hydras already perched on the cliffs. At what point should the Protoss have disengaged?

Notice how much more involved the unit got in just this ONE example of THE MOST BASIC one vs. one unit showdown scenario, without becoming complicated and bogged down with abilities? Now add Roaches to the above scenario; the amount of Hydras below gets smaller and smaller while it still appears that there is an army left to fight. But add Stalkers to the Protoss, and suddenly the Protoss might be able to follow the Zerg around, rendering the cliff-climb advantage only a change of circumstance for the Zerg, as opposed to a clear-cut improvement.

We didn't even need to add an activated ability!

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.

Look at your own signature!!!

Blizzard should not settle for fine! I don't care that it's "very difficult." They haven't even been trying. And they have the tools available to them now.

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.

"Plus there's the fact that the Zerg are typified by having large masses of units, which makes giving units strong passive powers like flight a very bad idea."

Doesn't stop Blizzard though, does it? Mutas are the most massable air unit in the game AND THAT'S OK! That's part of their identity! They also have AoE damage!!! So Hydras would be the most massable cliff-climbing unit in the game! Why can't that be part of their identity?

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

It is not absolutely necessary to do both at the same time. I believe that there is absolutely nothing inherently wrong with a unit being both a cliff-climber and having siege range, especially if one or both require an upgrade. However, IF I am wrong and there is something inherently imbalanced about the concept that the tweaking of numbers cannot fix (very, very doubtful), then giving it either one would already be more interesting than what we have... though I'd prefer cliff-climb, of the two, as it is more micro-intensive.

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.

As I explained above, ranged GtG and GtA becomes a non-issue because the Zerg should be swarming different types of units, not simply relying on a mass of Hydras to get the job done. One unit fits all is not what we want, and the fact that this needs to be voiced at all I find very disconcerting.

If the Hydra's damage goes up and its attack speed goes down, its DPS remains the same, but the unit becomes much more vulnerable to fighting alone. At the same time, its GtA capabilities only increase -- every single shot they get off on a flying unit flying past them deals that much more damage, and has that much higher of a chance to kill it. In any case, the Corruptor being as reactionary as you say, I think it's a pretty good idea to give the Zerg as many excuses to use the unit as we can. If that excuse is that Hydras are no longer the be-all, end-all, then we should be happy that an otherwise useless (read: significantly limited) new unit that takes up an entire slot in the Zerg line-up, a line-up that is already so underwhelming, will see more action than it otherwise would.

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.

Sigh. Yes, someone can harass with a Nydus. And what units would they use to harass from a Nydus? Zerglings. The same ground unit they would use to harass anything, anyway. The Nydus has 100 HP, building it in the middle of an enemy base is absurd; if you've done that, you're already on your way to winning the game Nydus or not. It's not like the Overseer is going to be dodging Missile Turret attacks with its high speed or anything. The Warp Ray is faster... before its speed upgrade. The Warp Prism is faster. So I'd like to see this harassment that can be done by one of the slowest air units in the game.

So, again, if you manage to get your Nydus into his base to get Roaches/Banelings in and out at your leisure, you're doing more than harassing. You're destroying. And if you can't get it into his base directly, then it isn't going to magically make your Hydralisks capable of harassment when they couldn't do it before.

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.

This problem never came up in previous BlizzCons, when PC was non-existent and the Protoss did not have a significant economy advantage over the Terran and Zerg.

See the connection? I'm sure you do, because we were just talking about it in Supersonic's thread a few days ago. There's nothing inherently imbalanced about it even IF I grant that it may be difficult to find that golden middle.

1. They should still try. They haven't been.
2. We never heard that Stalkers were imbalanced until now. Good, yes. Imbalanced? No.

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.

Or maybe not! But I love how you use the most ambiguous line imaginable as actual support of your argument. That takes audacity of a very admirable level.

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.

You don't think I realize that the chances of success are low? Chances are low with macro mechanics getting swapped, too. That doesn't mean I'm going to shut up about either. There's a higher chance of a Hydra being CHANGED than REPLACED at this point; if even by 1%, then it's worth suggesting this rather than the alternative.

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).

And the Lurker becoming a siege unit with siege range? That's already in the game. And the Overlord losing its ... oh, wait, you're getting into that now!

Overlords are, first and foremost food. Ghosts are stealthy spellcasters.

Overlords are, first and foremost food, huh? So a unit can retain its primary characteristic and gain a secondary one?! It IS possible?!

Overlords gained Creep Drop, they became a macro unit. The Hydra gaining cliff-climb would still be a very capable GtA unit. Air units aren't balanced the same way ground units are; less than half of ground units can attack them, and that's reflected in their lower HP:cost ratio. That means that EVEN if the Hydra was forced to take a damage reduction (not necessary as long as its damage goes up and its rate goes down), it could still be viable against air even when it is not against ground (hardly necessary; the Stalker's still viable against everything).

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.

Well, let's see here. Nydus Worm at best balances out Warp-In. And then... what are those "mechanics" that I'm isolating niftiness from, that are supposed to make them very improved and quite powerful?

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

That you think this would be balanced (or is not so difficult to balance as to render the idea null and void before it came out of your fingers) and a Hydralisk that climbs cliffs cannot be boggles the mind. Seriously.

You think that one (or two) cliff-climbing units would be more imbalanced than units that can move around the map completely undetected. This is your idea of balance.

Oh, but I forget. You also think Stalkers are not inherently overpowered, and Mutalisks are not inherently overpowered, but Hydralisks would be.

[electricmole]

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.

yes, ideas are just idea. no one should take it seriously and be afraid that blizzard might actually use it. it just an idea for people and blizzard to realize, well if it gets implemented then good job.

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.

i have to say this but no bats in starcraft. hahha

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

i don't know but swarming zerg basic unit and just command attack them is the usual thing you do with the zerg than using any of their new mechanics like nydus, creep drops by overlord, tumor etc. So basically its build hydralisk, roach, zerglings, etc, move, attack, move, attack, and the new zerg mechanics are just strategical support which all other races also have like warp, mule, supply drop, etc.

So the main point is what are the interesting new changes in each races core attack units. Terran and toss got many new core attack units, which have fresh roles and mechanics. How about the zerg? its only the roach and corruptor. banelings is just like a zergling suicide skill, i like banelings though i sc2. So the zerg play style have not change a lot in terms of their basic attack units, you will still use hydras, mutuas, lurker, broodlord (guardian), and ultras, which are predictable and very sc1 like.

Please do! I'd love to see them, and also see what other ideas people on this forum have dreamed up for the Zerg.

yeh lets make all crazy ideas for the zerg.

[pure.Wasted]

So the main point is what are the interesting new changes in each races core attack units. Terran and toss got many new core attack units, which have fresh roles and mechanics. How about the zerg? its only the roach and corruptor. banelings is just like a zergling suicide skill, i like banelings though i sc2. So the zerg play style have not change a lot in terms of their basic attack units, you will still use hydras, mutuas, lurker, broodlord (guardian), and ultras, which are predictable and very sc1 like.

Nicol thinks that that's the way the Zerg MUST be and so if we don't like it, the race wasn't meant for us.

Which is the most ridiculous thing imaginable. No one in their right mind could have guessed that the Protoss would gain so many harassment options and become as maneuverable as they have; maneuverability was far from a racial trait for them in SC1 -- Reavers, anyone? But it has only created fun and interesting gameplay and everybody is pleased with it, Blizzard first and foremost.

Fun Stalker + Fun Warp-In = Fun x2
Fun Roach + Fun Nydus = Fun x2
Lame Hydra + Fun Nydus = Fun x1

It's in the math, really.

[Islandsnake]

Hydras are awesome o.0 wtfisgoingonhere

[Nicol Bolas]

Roaches are not boring. Lurkers are not boring. Lurkers are from the BW era. Roaches are from the S2 era. So are Banelings, which also take far more skill to use than A+click.

What do Lurkers and Roaches have in common? They're both support units.

The Zerg essentially have 2 kinds of units: massable generalists, and support units. They have a stronger divide between these than any other race.

Look at how Mutalisks and Devourers interact. Devourers are terrible units on their own, even against their natural prey (Corsairs). But throw in some Mutalisks, and suddenly those Acid Spores really add up.

You aren't going to win with Devourers, Lurkers, or Defilers. You're going to win with Zerglings, Hydralisks, and/or Mutalisks.

But it's not as simple as A+click, because if the stats are tweaked to compensate while "keeping its damage" is a core idea, what the unit ends up losing out on is attack speed and HP. In combined armies, the Hydra is no less devastating than ever before.

So, you want the Hydralisk to keep it's effective damage over time, but do more damage in fewer shots.

In short, you want to turn the Hydralisk into a Dragoon.

This falls prey to racial identity yet again. No Zerg unit in SC1 did more than 25 damage in a single shot, and that was the Devourer. Other than him, only Ultralisks and Lurkers hit 20 damage per shot. Everything else was lower than this.

Zerg are all about the damage over time, not single-shot damage. Not slow cooldowns.

Now maybe you'll turn to dropping their Hp. Well, then they're Marines; glass cannons.

Look at your own signature!!!

Blizzard should not settle for fine! I don't care that it's "very difficult." They haven't even been trying. And they have the tools available to them now.

My point is that this is the way the Zerg are for a reason. The whole generalist vs. specialist thing. It synergies very, very well with Zerg production flexibility.

Doesn't stop Blizzard though, does it? Mutas are the most massable air unit in the game AND THAT'S OK! That's part of their identity! They also have AoE damage!!! So Hydras would be the most massable cliff-climbing unit in the game! Why can't that be part of their identity?

Are you honestly comparing the massability of Hydralisks to Mutalisks?

Even ignoring that in SC1, the 12-unit selection limited the utility of large swarms of Muta, there is only so much massability you can get out of a unit that costs 100 Gas and 2 food. Mutas are massable like Dragoons (less, even); Hydralisks are massable like Hydralisks.

And it should also be pointed out that Mutas have a crippling weakness: all AoE kills them quick and bloody (for their cost). Hydralisks are defined by having no weaknesses. No real strengths either.

There's a higher chance of a Hydra being CHANGED than REPLACED at this point

First, I don't support changing or replacing the Hydra.

Second, as you point out, Blizzard shouldn't settle for fine. If the right course of action is to replace the Hydralisk, changing is by comparison the wrong course of action and they should therefore not take it. So suggesting that they do the prudent thing instead of the right thing is wrongheaded.

Well, let's see here. Nydus Worm at best balances out Warp-In. And then... what are those "mechanics" that I'm isolating niftiness from, that are supposed to make them very improved and quite powerful?

If you want, I'll do it your way:

New/Significantly Changed Terran Mechanics:

1: TechLab vs. Reactor.
2: OCC.
3: Salvage.

New/Significantly Changed Protoss Mechanics:

1: Warp-In.
2: Warp Prism with Warp-In.
3: Obelisk.

New/Significantly Changed Zerg Mechanics:

1: Queens (Spawn Larva and Creep Tumors).
2: Overlord Creep Drop.
3: Creep Movement Speed.
4: Semi-mobile defensive buildings.
5: Nydus Canals at Tier 2.

The Zerg have almost as many new mechanics as the other two races put together. And this should be taken with the fact that the Zerg already had the most unusual mechanics in SC1.

You think that one (or two) cliff-climbing units would be more imbalanced than units that can move around the map completely undetected. This is your idea of balance.

Nobody said that burrowed movement was particularly fast. Just fast enough to matter.

i don't know but swarming zerg basic unit and just command attack them is the usual thing you do with the zerg than using any of their new mechanics like nydus, creep drops by overlord, tumor etc. So basically its build hydralisk, roach, zerglings, etc, move, attack, move, attack, and the new zerg mechanics are just strategical support which all other races also have like warp, mule, supply drop, etc.

Um, was there a sentence in there somewhere?

The basic gist I get is that you don't think that the new Zerg mechanics matter. Um, so?

Lame Hydra + Fun Nydus = Fun x1

What's so lame about the Hydralisk? Why must every unit have some stupid gimmick in order to be not "lame"? Indeed, SC2 is so full of gimmick units that the Hydralisk not having a gimmick is itself a gimmick.

[Brutaxilos]

im in this

[electricmole]

Um, was there a sentence in there somewhere?

The basic gist I get is that you don't think that the new Zerg mechanics matter. Um, so?



What's so lame about the Hydralisk? Why must every unit have some stupid gimmick in order to be not "lame"? Indeed, SC2 is so full of gimmick units that the Hydralisk not having a gimmick is itself a gimmick.

they don't matter much bcoz both toss and terran also have new mechanics. so that makes them more or less equal in that department.

Now lets go to each races basic core attack units that you will always use in battles, the zerg got all 6 back from sc1 and that is less fun and exciting that the other races in sc2.

I agree that zerg should be like this as you said, just like they were in sc1. But why not make new units and introduce new roles to make them look and feel exciting in sc2. Why do you want to play most of the old zerg main attack units again for another 10 years?

dragoons were removed in place of new ones like stalkers and immortals. scout, corsair and reavers as well.

vultures, goliaths, valkyrie, firebat and wraith were removed.

What was remove in sc1 zerg attack units? only the devourer. and thats the problem.

Hydaralisk were not like marines and zealots. they are kinda imba in sc1 and seems like it again in sc2. imba in this case means always usable/effective in most if not all battles and the one unit that you will always use which makes other units useless most of the time.

zergling (not hydra) = zealot = marines are the basic, most iconic thus needs to stay forever. Hydras are iconic but overrated imo and i don't mind them getting a new evolution or completely remove.