View Poll Results: Which of these buffs would you like on the Queen?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • 50 energy units when spawns

    22 52.38%
  • Quicker off creep movement

    7 16.67%
  • Both of them

    8 19.05%
  • I don't like these proposals

    5 11.90%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: A better Queen

  1. #11
    Raisk's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    148

    Default Re: A better Queen

    Quote Originally Posted by Jabber Wookie View Post
    First of all, you would only have an additional 25 energy per queen because once you use the energy it rebuilds at the same frequency as before. Secondly, a queen wouldn't be able to efficiently spawn larva from both if it doesn't produce a creep tumor to increase its speed, thus allowing it to travel back and forth between bases that quickly. So I really don't see a problem here.
    Well, you could build the fast hatchery next to your original one, which is what I think he meant.

  2. #12
    WhoamI's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    59

    Default Re: A better Queen

    That is exactly what I meant. 50 energy is broken. Just forget about it.

  3. #13
    horror's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    169

    Default Re: A better Queen

    50 energy is not broken. If you seriously think that after spending 300 minerals on a hatch which you pointlessly dropped in your main, then SL on both, you'll have the econ to do anything with those larvae? You'd be mining out of one base, which means your income isn't all that much (for a Zerg), and the amount of resources you spend trying to kick-start your production buildings would leave you with no viable choices. You'd have a very limited opportunity to tech/expand, and the food you would have to produce rids you of any change you thought you could use on a fast rush.

    All the while, if your opponent is half decent, he/she would have scouted and have been left with many choices, ie. expand, turtle, tech, rush etc.

  4. #14

    Default Re: A better Queen

    Quote Originally Posted by horror View Post
    50 energy is not broken. If you seriously think that after spending 300 minerals on a hatch which you pointlessly dropped in your main, then SL on both, you'll have the econ to do anything with those larvae? You'd be mining out of one base, which means your income isn't all that much (for a Zerg), and the amount of resources you spend trying to kick-start your production buildings would leave you with no viable choices. You'd have a very limited opportunity to tech/expand, and the food you would have to produce rids you of any change you thought you could use on a fast rush.

    All the while, if your opponent is half decent, he/she would have scouted and have been left with many choices, ie. expand, turtle, tech, rush etc.
    You can very easily support the production from 2 hatches, 1 with spawn larva, off of one base, making solely lings or drones.

    On the other hand, increasing the Queen's energy to 50 will give you exactly 8 zerglings or 4 drones, the latter of which is very obviously more valuable at that early in the game. The effects of 4 added drones are likely diminished by your lack of an expansion, and I would go as far as to say that it would be more worth it to put those 300 minerals at your expansion than in your base, in order to get out a whopping 4 drones.

    8 lings will not break the game. A single zealot can hold far more than 8 lings at a standard sized choke. Perhaps on Scrap Station, you might have an issue. Any good player will wall off vs. Zerg anyway, and if they don't, you don't need 8 extra lings to finish them off.

  5. #15

    Default Re: A better Queen

    Poll ended with:

    1) 50 energy units when spawns 52,38% (22 out of 42)
    2) Quicker off creep movement 16,67% (7 out of 42)
    3) Both of them 19,05% (8 out of 42)
    4) I don't like these proposals 11,90% (5 out of 42)

    Considering that option 3 virtually includes option 1 and 2 we can sum up this way

    1) 50 energy units when spawns 71,43% (30 out of 42)
    2) Quicker off creep movement 35,71% (15 out of 42)

    I think the result proves that a large part of this community likes a Queen with more initial energy

  6. #16

    Default Re: A better Queen

    thats not a big sample.


    i dont think i ever voted; i think its laregly a non-issue faster queen movment offcreep has proven problematic and 50 energy upon spawn would remove a big part of the already scarce energy-tention that she has.

    ... IMO the queen is highly useful. the complaints about her that have spoken to me int he past (and to sopome extent, still do) is about the energy tention.. if anything, Queen use needs to become more dynamic. its not that the queen herself needs to become "better".
    I am an enthusiast of good strategy games, sc2Esports and rollplay, although i dont really play anything atm.
    I work an internship at a government agency this fall, and have a good time at it.
    I'm being more social, active and honest lately. in all forums.

    Hi.

  7. #17
    alexamasan's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    43

    Default Re: A better Queen

    I personally think the queen is just fine the way it is DDDDD

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: A better Queen

    what about an "autocast" for the injekt larva?
    just like the sorc spells in Warcraft3. so you can play your macrogame and never have to care about the energie of the queen.

    even top lvl players cant realy build 1 queen per hive cz they cant realy use all the energie.

    T and P can keep the energie and power it out then they need it (mule spam). but Z is the loser in this part

    Semi Aktive EU player

Similar Threads

  1. The queen and you.
    By TheRabidDeer in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-14-2010, 05:08 AM
  2. Queen rushing?
    By Twilice in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-02-2010, 05:42 PM
  3. Queen Upgrade
    By moosh in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-02-2010, 12:58 PM
  4. Queen-Hatchery tip
    By horror in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 05:13 AM
  5. If you think there is a problem with the Queen...
    By ArcherofAiur in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 04-16-2010, 01:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •