Are the Zerg really Evolved?

[Eligor]

I am totally for this! But, each unit should have visual cues as to what evolution choices have been made as the more drastic changes should be detectable.

Haven't thought about that but yes, visual cues should definitely be there.

[phazonjunkie]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the zerg, at least in the the earliest builds, require you to upgrade units buy unit type rather than basic attack type; i.e. range, melee, air, etc? If so, it seemed like an interesting mechanic, why did that fall by the wayside?

[ArcherofAiur]

The zerg used to upgrade units individually (like youd upgrade all zergling stats to tier 2). The switched it back to the old way for some reason.

[Triceron]

Customizable lings with faster attack/speed or higher armor/damage would be interesting but insanely hard to balance.

If Blizzard was open to a sort of 'talent tree' for unit customization, it could work. However, the idea would make it a lot harder to balance. If you chose to make Toughlings instead of Cracklings, you might encounter some situation where cracklings would have been the best counter. This opens up a lot more ways of making mistakes that are hard to learn from, since games become more random based on player choices. It's an idea for players who want choices and don't care about the e-sports balance of classic SC.

[Santrega]

This opens up a lot more ways of making mistakes that are hard to learn from, since games become more random based on player choices.

=-O

Making mistakes is the entire point of the game. I don't believe any mistake is hard to learn from when you list online or in a strategy guide what counters what, and then you have the replay to go back and look at the game to see what you did.

Since when does player decisions create random situations? If the player is entirely ignoring whats happening in the game and just doing this randomly, then its random. If a player is making something with a plan, or doing something in reaction to what the other player is doing then it is not random, it is strategy.

I do believe there are lucky and unlucky scenarios where a player accidentally finds a player or a big army is on the move and finds a little army in an odd place, or a player finds a sneak attack moments before it hits and stops it. However, there are things you can do in the game that make you get lucky more often than not, you just have to get into the habit of doing them over and over.

A zerg tree may be harder to balance, but it wouldn't be much harder to balance, and it certainly would not be difficult to see your mistakes. If replay wasn't available, i might agree with that, but replay is available.

[don]

I don't think it would be a balance issue as long as no one path in the "upgrade tree" is overpowered.

There is already a "tree" (we have been calling it the tech-tree right??) effect in SC1 but it is enforced by the game's economy. You scout your enemy and you then choose which units to build. Once you choose, you spend resources which you may have otherwise spent on other tech paths. The suggestion that Zerg have a per-unit "upgrade tree" only reinforces this type of gameplay and the Zerg's identity.

Balance is not measured only by the stats of the units. It is more a question of utility vs. cost. So, lings with faster attack/speed or higher armor/damage would still be lings, the balance team would have to set the stats of the upgrade to the same utility vs. cost ratio as the "vanilla upgrade".

What would change is how lings will be used though. Obviously, Toughlings wont work like Cracklings, but, you wont choose one over the other unless you have plan would you?

This branching upgrade feature would not make the race balance lopsided, imo. I dont think its a change for the advantage of the Zerg but a change to make the Zerg more interesting.

[Triceron]

It's effectively a handicap that is difficult to balance, especially if this change is made to early game units. The point is if the game was balanced around cracklings having a specific role to counter a particular unit (say the speed helped get to siege tanks), choosing to upgrade to toughlings instead limits your ability to counter them, permanently. This kind of upgrade can't just be a temporary or slight change either, since it would be defeating the purpose of being meaningful choices.

It would make the zerg more interesting, but it would also make them a lot harder to balance. Blizzard would have to ensure other ways to fill in the gaps that the evolved unit would leave behind.

@ Santrega

The reason it would be harder to learn from mistakes is the fact that you now have decisions that affect the way Zerg are played, permanently. It's a slight change, but an impactful one. No matter what mistake you make in SC, you can always correct them in the same game given you have the time and resources. If the Zerg player lost due to improper Toughling use, he has no real indication if it was because he was using Toughlings wrong or if he made the wrong choice in having Toughlings over Cracklings. It's potentially an added layer of confusion. This is very important to Starcraft because it's designed to be Chess, a finely tuned E-sports game. It's a matter of if Blizzard will add something like this.

[don]

Well the difference between 1v1 Starcraft and Chess is that Chess is perfectly balanced. One player has the same resources as the other.

Hmm, except when you evolve your pawn, in which case, you have to choose between a knight or a queen... and there is no turning back once you choose..

[Santrega]

Well the difference between 1v1 Starcraft and Chess is that Chess is perfectly balanced. One player has the same resources as the other.

Hmm, except when you evolve your pawn, in which case, you have to choose between a knight or a queen... and there is no turning back once you choose..

What kind of chess do you play? I'm pretty sure that you can choose any piece to transform a pawn into... however, anyone who doesn't choose a queen is pretty dumb :P

[don]

What kind of chess do you play? I'm pretty sure that you can choose any piece to transform a pawn into... however, anyone who doesn't choose a queen is pretty dumb :P

The knight has its uses for some situations. But yes, choosing bishop or rook over queen is dumb.