[AtlasMeCH]

I've been working on putting together my best expression of what I feel to be the zerg problem... I recently posted 4 messages on another forum, I will try to condense them down on to this one.

I'm just really curious what people who actually know what they are talking about think about it.

Message 1:

I've always found it ironic how symmetry is such a major deal when it comes to the map making for melee competition yet when it comes to the balance of race design it seems to be considered very little if any, yet being just as significant if not more important then map design.

Symmetry = Balance

What seems to have been overlooked in Sc2 and just starcraft in general, do not ask me how, is that in order to have 3 unique race designs that are balanced, symmetry is a necessity...

But now there is the issue of achieving an optimal uniqueness of design between all 3 races.

Achieving symmetry between two unique races is simple, you just make the design of each race in opposition to each other by inverting the design and then you have two totally unique races but maintain balance.

3 races is more complex because you can not have 3 totally unique designs, they can now only, at best, be partially (50% unique and 50% similar) to one another.

Because of this, all three races should, if designed well feel totally unique from each other, but at the same time, totally not.

This yes and no principle can be referred to as a paradox.

Paradoxi have been a major root theme to the field of philosophy itself, and this mathematical concept of 3 unique bodies generate paradoxi so purely, it can be used as solid evidence that philosophy has an intimate relationship with math via the number 3.

But because only partial uniqueness between 3 races can be attained, generating an opposite design from one race to the next by a means of inversion becomes somewhat obscure and unclear.

In starcraft, the terran and protoss races produce offense linearly separate from their main base which also produces linearly. Neither economic unit is permanently lost when making defense.

Zerg does not produce linearly, but SHARES production between offense, economy, and overlord...

This is supposed to be made up for by having non linear production, and they do to a degree.

However, when it comes to macro, defensive structures are essential when you are in the "economic" (non warrior) mode of production.

The problem is that you simultaneously must be sacrificing a drone permanently for that defense structure when you make it.

What has been overlooked, is that in order to have symmetry, balance, and beauty, zerg's defense structures, spore and spine crawler, should have produced linearly from the hatchery itself.

It should have always been this way... it should have been this way in broodwar, the sunk and spore colony producing linearly from the hatchery itself.

It utilizes the inversion principle for generating uniqueness between race designs while retaining symmetry.

Terran and protoss produce offense linearly.... zerg produces defense linearly...
Protoss can suddenly warp in mass amounts of defense...
Zerg should not be able to because they have no need to due to being able to generate offense so quickly.

But someone "thought" they were creative when they would give zerg a so called "Defensive" unit (queen) and have it produce from the hatchery thinking that it would be the perfect solution to zerg.

it is simply not, and the fact that the queen costs 150 minerals compared to the 100 mineral spine/spore crawler is sheer insanity.

Message 2:

I also want to add one more VERY SOUND piece of reasoning to support my point.

Through out the game of starcraft, you can notice a pattern of design which exists as 2 similar, 1 different, or 2 same one different.

For example, the barrack and the gateway both cost 150 while the spawning pool costs 200.

Or how the zergling and the zealot are both melee while the marine is missile.

Or how the zergling and the marine are both small while the zealot is medium sized.

Then the question is perhaps, "What do the zealot and the marine share that the zergling does not have?"

You can see this 2 same 1 different pattern woven through out the game, but when it comes to the economic functions of each race

There is no apparent 2 similar 1 different pattern implemented... Why doesn't blizzard adhere to the 2 similar 1 different design pattern on such a basic yet critical level?

Protoss: Warp
Terran: Contruct (Momentary economic loss)
Zerg: Sacrifice (Permanent economic loss)

Now.... if the spine and spore crawler produced linearly at the hatchery, or even the spawning pool... you might say "how does this adhere to the 2 similar 1 different pattern as opposed to drone sacrificing for defense"

Simple.... In the same way that that an scv is occupied for a period of time when constructing a building... zerg would pay the price of having to produce split defense "anti air defense (spore) or anti ground defense (spine crawler)" in a linear fashion from a single building.

The consequence SHOULD NOT be the sacrifice of drone because zerg's defense is already split between anti air and anti ground....

While the marine, although has to fill a bunker, the bunker can be quickly dumped and also repaired.

The marine also has natural defensive ability, but this makes sense because it fits terran's theme.


The truth is and has always been that zerg's design functionality is Critically Flawed and has a MAJOR impact on the game despite being subtle enough that it isn't easily noticeable.

Message 3:


An argument to this might be that zerg, with their multiple hatcheries would be able to match terran and protoss' offense with defense at any given time... thus making the macro of the game stale.

But remember, zerg is still splitting between ground to ground and ground to air defense, Plus, when teching to lair, this would interrupt the defensive production.

But now that zerg have the queen which already produces at the hatchery, it would be too much to have the spine and spore crawler also produce there...

The only and ultimate solution to this would be to have the spine and spore crawler produce at the spawning pool in a linear fashion.

Zerg already gets a slight yet insignificant ground to ground defensive edge with the queen.

But if the spawning pool could be zerg's one building, besides the hatchery, that could be placed anywhere on the map, and had its own creep, and could produce spine and spore crawler in a linear fashion, it would make things ridiculously interesting...

It would

A.) Give zerg an aggressive proximity element to their options...

and

B.) You would be able to place your spawning pool in your allies base which would make abandoning a hatchery that your opponent is focusing on, and still be capable of surviving (by moving your workers to a second base) more viable as your spawning pool would not be stuck at your main... easily being the next building to be taken out.

Final Message:

As a final conclusion my suggestion is a host of changes to the spawning pool and the creep to make this idea the best that it can possibly be.


- The spawning pool can be built anywhere.
- The spawning pool has its own creep
- Creep, now slowly eats away at any structure it comes in to contact with (Just to have its own perks considering it's not as fast as proxy cannon)
- Each spawning pool comes equipped with one creep tumor, creep tumor is removed from the queen.
- The spawning pool can uproot and crawl so that it can potentially be saved as it crawls back to your base and you try to protect it with lings.
- The spawning pool has an upgrade similar to the reactor upgrade for the barracks that gives it 2 slots of production for defense... Spine and spore crawler.
- When a spine/spore crawler is produced from the spawning pool, it emerges from the pool itself already uprooted... The time duration is now applied to uprooting while rooting is now instant.

-Remember, zerg would now no longer be able to make defense structures with the drone, but this is ideal because sacrificing drones for defense structures is not intelligent design function.

I personally feel like that these changes are the only way to function my idea with blizzard's current design functions...

But I feel like it is truly the best Idea that you are going to find out there in regards to correcting zerg.

Quick Comments

	Dox:	Zerg is fine!
	nirvAnA:	nice effort
	ROOT`iaguz:	David Kim?
	syfPhoenix:	i believe you are correct though toss need a buff in some areas 2
	Nvdeth:	so much garbage here, also dont use big words to make yourself look smart. Its Para -doxes, not -doxi.
	dippa:	overthinking things m8
	NvRossi:	wait is this actually David Kim iaguz?
	Frogmite:	Try to cut your left leg and you will understand what is imbalance
	TAhackdZ:	not sure if want....

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

First post wall o' text complaining about balance!!! o_O

I guess I should probably read this so I can comment on it, but from the title, yeah SC2 is an asymmetrical game. There are always going to be advantages/disadvantages to playing different races. If they win ~50% of the time against the other races it's still balanced.

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

Paradoxi have been a major root theme to the field of philosophy itself, and this mathematical concept of 3 unique bodies generate paradoxi so purely, it can be used as solid evidence that philosophy has an intimate relationship with math via the number 3.

I'm up to here, and I'm not sure whether I should keep on going. This is getting scary already.

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

But someone "thought" they were creative when they would give zerg a so called "Defensive" unit (queen) and have it produce from the hatchery thinking that it would be the perfect solution to zerg.

A Queen is a MACRO unit, not a DEFENSIVE structure.

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

- The spawning pool can be built anywhere.
- The spawning pool has its own creep
- Creep, now slowly eats away at any structure it comes in to contact with (Just to have its own perks considering it's not as fast as proxy cannon)
- Each spawning pool comes equipped with one creep tumor, creep tumor is removed from the queen.
- The spawning pool can uproot and crawl so that it can potentially be saved as it crawls back to your base and you try to protect it with lings.
- The spawning pool has an upgrade similar to the reactor upgrade for the barracks that gives it 2 slots of production for defense... Spine and spore crawler.
- When a spine/spore crawler is produced from the spawning pool, it emerges from the pool itself already uprooted... The time duration is now applied to uprooting while rooting is now instant.

- What, like a creep colony in SC1? Or like a Hatch? I assuming hatch.
- This point would be interesting. Offensive Overlords.
- Meh, this would be annoying as all hell, but it could work.
- It's a pool. If it moved, all of the genetic slush would spill out the sides and then no more Zerglings.
- Why not just give it the Reactor upgrade? That'd be easier right?
- You can distribute the time duration between rooting and uprooting and it will still have the same net effect if you plan on moving them to a specific spot. If you reduce rooting time then you don't have the tension of will I be able to kill of the crawler before it roots and I'm rooted. Also, that is a scary, scary sentence. o_O

Also, I've been massively ed, haven't I?

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

First post wall o' text complaining about balance!!! o_O

I guess I should probably read this so I can comment on it, but from the title, yeah SC2 is an asymmetrical game. There are always going to be advantages/disadvantages to playing different races. If they win ~50% of the time against the other races it's still balanced.



I'm up to here, and I'm not sure whether I should keep on going. This is getting scary already.



A Queen is a MACRO unit, not a DEFENSIVE structure.

Keep going... and how isn't my point there spot on?

The queen is actually classified as a "Defensive Unit"

But the spine and spore crawler should technically also be considered defensive units because of their mobility... technically.

[Satu]

I read through all of it and actually understand what you're saying.

Basically you're saying that drones are used to make spines and spores, but other races have defenses for both air AND ground without having to do permanent economic damage to themselves. While this is true, if you look at that in isolation it looks imbalanced, but its much more balanced than you'd think due to the other mechanics of zerg.

Zerg can create a lot more workers than the other races with a lot more safety. Because of this, not only do you usually have the extra money you could be using on static defences, but you also can sacrifice some of your economy towards defences without it having a noticeable impact on your economy in the long run.

Another thing you don't take into consideration is how cost-effective spines and spores are. Eight zerglings take up 200 minerals and 4 larvae, two spines take up 300 minerals and 2 larvae. Test out the maximum amount of marines each can kill and you'll see that spines are actually more cost-effective than other possible earlygame defences. Spores are pretty essential to hold some timings themselves, and are yet again really cost effective when used correctly. I dont see how either is really underpowered.

In short, I think you're looking at it the wrong way, or just looking at a small part of zerg mechanics in isolation.

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:	Unlike overlord theory, i agree with this!
	PiG:	Yes.

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by SatuSPR

I read through all of it and actually understand what you're saying.

Basically you're saying that drones are used to make spines and spores, but other races have defenses for both air AND ground without having to do permanent economic damage to themselves. While this is true, if you look at that in isolation it looks imbalanced, but its much more balanced than you'd think due to the other mechanics of zerg.

Zerg can create a lot more workers than the other races with a lot more safety. Because of this, not only do you usually have the extra money you could be using on static defences, but you also can sacrifice some of your economy towards defences without it having a noticeable impact on your economy in the long run.

Another thing you don't take into consideration is how cost-effective spines and spores are. Eight zerglings take up 200 minerals and 4 larvae, two spines take up 300 minerals and 2 larvae. Test out the maximum amount of marines each can kill and you'll see that spines are actually more cost-effective than other possible earlygame defences. Spores are pretty essential to hold some timings themselves, and are yet again really cost effective when used correctly. I dont see how either is really underpowered.

In short, I think you're looking at it the wrong way, or just looking at a small part of zerg mechanics in isolation.

I don't personally feel like I'm wrong though in an educated sense... as you can tell, my approach to zerg would almost make them "seem" similar to terran and protoss but people do not want that.

I want you to look at it this way though coming from the philospohy of Hegel in generating 3 unique bodies.

Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis.

By having the spine and spore crawler produce linearly from the spawning pool as I said.. it shows a synthesis between protoss and terran.

For example, a pylon has a build radius for cannon, while the spawning pool would have creep (Build radius) for spine/spore.

The pool would produce defense in a linear fashion but have the upgrade for 2 slots.

Marines which are technically defensive produce linearly from the barracks, (They fill bunkers)

So you can see the synthesis there which creates an entirely unique because of the synthesis and inversion yet BALANCED because of the symmetry.

When you say that zerg can "Mass" drones... yes, but you have to remember that t and p are building offense when you're doing this... and B. zerg also shares production with the overlord.

[Satu]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

I don't personally feel like I'm wrong though in an educated sense... as you can tell, my approach to zerg would almost make them "seem" similar to terran and protoss but people do not want that.

I want you to look at it this way though coming from the philospohy of Hegel in generating 3 unique bodies.

Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis.

By having the spine and spore crawler produce linearly from the spawning pool as I said.. it shows a synthesis between protoss and terran.

For example, a pylon has a build radius for cannon, while the spawning pool would have creep (Build radius) for spine/spore.

The pool would produce defense in a linear fashion but have the upgrade for 2 slots.

Marines which are technically defensive produce linearly from the barracks, (They fill bunkers)

So you can see the synthesis there which creates an entirely unique because of the synthesis and inversion yet BALANCED because of the symmetry.

When you say that zerg can "Mass" drones... yes, but you have to remember that t and p are building offense when you're doing this... and B. zerg also shares production with the overlord.

Would it actually make it more balanced if zerg could produce spines and spores without any cost to larvae, though? You'd be able to drone up like a madman and not actually worry about timings at all because you're producing spines super easily from your spawning pool.

I think you're trying to say that making zerg more similar to terran and protoss in the respect of linear production would make it more balanced, but tbh, you'd have to change how drones are produced as well. Larvae is a resource for zerg that has to be taken into consideration on top of minerals, gas and supply. If you suddenly make it so spines and spores do not cost any larvae, then suddenly the zerg race will have a much easier time producing a ton of units.

I think some of your points were valid, but your solution doesn't match up too well with those points when you actually consider the larvae mechanic of zerg.

[Benji]

Step 1: Install Command and Conquer Generals: Zero Hour
Step 2: Play any of the following matchups: Nuke vs Tank, AirForce vs Vanilla USA, Airforce vs Super Weapon, Toxin vs Vanilla GLA, Toxin vs Stealth, Airforce vs Nuke, Nuke vs Vanilla China, Infantry vs Everything.
Step 3: Realize the balance in SC2 is actually already pretty amazing

Quick Comments

	mGGDaedalus:
	StitcH:	OMG ur so right! C&C Generals the last patch before Zero Hour was pretty alright until they screwed up everything in Zero hour. :(
	EXCL:	nuf said!

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by xGKingBenji

Step 1: Install Command and Conquer Generals: Zero Hour
Step 2: Play any of the following matchups: Nuke vs Tank, AirForce vs Vanilla USA, Airforce vs Super Weapon, Toxin vs Vanilla GLA, Toxin vs Stealth, Airforce vs Nuke, Nuke vs Vanilla China, Infantry vs Everything.
Step 3: Realize the balance in SC2 is actually already pretty amazing

The balance of starcraft itself as a whole could be much better with out losing the uniqueness between the races.

The problem, is that in the classroom of "Philosophy of Design"

It is not being taught that Symmetry is the key for a design foundation of balance.

Uniqueness is achieved through the inversion principle in regards to symmetry.

Symmetry IS balance, with out it there can not be a design that is to be taken seriously on a competitive level.

And with that said, I'm very concerned about the competitive scene which is the heart and soul of starcraft.

[Benji]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

The balance of starcraft itself as a whole could be much better with out losing the uniqueness between the races.

The problem, is that in the classroom of "Philosophy of Design"

It is not being taught that Symmetry is the key for a design foundation of balance.

Uniqueness is achieved through the inversion principle in regards to symmetry.

Symmetry IS balance, with out it there can not be a design that is to be taken seriously on a competitive level.

And with that said, I'm very concerned about the competitive scene which is the heart and soul of starcraft.

You quoted my post but completely ignored what I wrote.

Balance discussions are used in 2 situations, the first is in a scenario like I listed above, where some races have something like an 80% winrate.

The other situation is when you lose a game and you cannot admit that you lost simply because your opponant played better. This makes you feel better, but ultimately slows the ability you can learn, and makes you seem like abit of an idiot.

From my point of view the game is fine. When I picked up players for my team, I wasn't going 'Oh this race has a significant advantage, I better get players from X race'. I got players based on their individual skill.

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by xGKingBenji

You quoted my post but completely ignored what I wrote.

Balance discussions are used in 2 situations, the first is in a scenario like I listed above, where some races have something like an 80% winrate.

The other situation is when you lose a game and you cannot admit that you lost simply because your opponant played better. This makes you feel better, but ultimately slows the ability you can learn, and makes you seem like abit of an idiot.

From my point of view the game is fine. When I picked up players for my team, I wasn't going 'Oh this race has a significant advantage, I better get players from X race'. I got players based on their individual skill.

Yes, from your point of view... but is your point of view educated?

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

Yes, from your point of view... but is your point of view educated?

Considering he's a pretty pro caster and has a kick-ass pro team, I would say yes, his point of view is fairly educated in the realm of SC2.

Quick Comments

lolwut:

I would. TBH I think the OP is either a fail troll or a bronze that doesn't want to admit this game is balanced and all races are unique. Making races the same would be. UUGGHHH

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

Yes, from your point of view... but is your point of view educated?

Benji:

• Plays at a relatively high (masters) level.
• Commentates at a relatively high level.
• Manages a pro team and interacts with high level players.
• Analyses replays and helps his pro team with strategy.

AtlasMeCH:

• Plays in Platinum on NA (according to the account he created today).
• Can't use proper english.

And the winner is...

Quick Comments

	Bugalugs McScruffin:	Erasmus!!! :)
	nirvAnA:	Yea Atlas you shouldn't have went there!
	Zepph:	<3
	TAsCarLet:	is it atlas?
	lolwut:	Yeh pretty sure it's Atlas. Benji has absolutely no chance there
	Mayo:	Cute +1!
	Zealo:	<3

[Benji]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

Yes, from your point of view... but is your point of view educated?

I am one of, if not THE leading commentator in the region, as well as that I manage and own a professional starcraft 2 team that has some of the most impressive results of any team.

So yes, its educated.

Quick Comments

	TAsCarLet:	edercation
	Nvdeth:	Sorry but you really need to lower your ego a notch or seven. There is so much wrong with your post.
	TAkrunch:	ewwww
	TADivinity:	Hit by "THE" train
	[TA]LoSt:	Xeria results are because they are amazing players, not you. Enough of the 'MY' team bs?
	dippa:	that is completely unnecessary, show some class for god's sake.
	SilentNoodle:	do you do coaching too?
	TACosmic:	Results of players is the most innacurate representation of a managers skill
	StarScream:	Kelly is better caster by a long shot cum diddy
	iM yang:	Don't recruit players with good results and claim the results were even remotely influenced by you
	NvRossi:	my head hit my desk
	TAriiChard:	HOLY SHIT WE'RE GONNA GET BANNED!
	Dox:	Step the **** back SlayerS
	TAEdgE:	if dox reps i rep
	Danny:	sooo arrogant
	TAnom:	;( You made a girl cry because of your arrogance.
	Fourby:	xGKBenjiLight, xGKBenjiMafia, xGKBenjiiaguz, xGKBenjijazbaz, xGKBenjiBenji. ????
	VoxMSI.Rogue:	lol wtf, mayte, get that ego in check. such a benjamin!
	toneg:	Dude, I'm gonna type as sober as possible, you're honestly pathetic.
	NvPinder:	Holy hell... New low big boy. New low.
	Champi:	you have no, and deserve no respect from our community with your misguided and egotistically arrogant attitude
	Mayo:	That's a little disappointing. Chin up and soldier on.
	kellyMILKIES:	Wow
	cRSenSei:	interesting

[|Erasmus|]

Sounds like a zerg player whining about how he can't make nothing but drones from his hatch without dying (while T/P can not cut workers and still get offensive/defensive units).

The only real thing to say to that is: learn to manage your larvae better. If you accidentally overdroned, throw down 3 spines to get up that defensive capability.

Zerg has the ability to make 10 drones at once after you hold a push, and even though you spent one or two cycles on units you often still end up ahead on worker count then.

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by |Erasmus|

Sounds like a zerg player whining about how he can't make nothing but drones from his hatch without dying (while T/P can not cut workers and still get offensive/defensive units).

The only real thing to say to that is: learn to manage your larvae better. If you accidentally overdroned, throw down 3 spines to get up that defensive capability.

Zerg has the ability to make 10 drones at once after you hold a push, and even though you spent one or two cycles on units you often still end up ahead on worker count then.

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3341757085

[Satu]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/3341757085

I know this is me doubleposting, but please don't link anything from the strategy section of the battle.net forums. They are never reliable, due to usually being made by really biased individuals. A good way of seeing that this is the case is trying to count how many people claim that something is overpowered or imbalanced on the forums.

[inFeZa]

The only thing that's imbalanced for zerg is the spawning pool. In SC1 that thing was a Pimpin' in-ground pool. now it's an inflatable kiddy pool.



SC2


SC1

[TABjornbrandr]

I'm at school at the moment and don't feel like writing an essay on an iPhone so I shall edit this post when I'm home, but until then let it be known that from what I can see the issue with the OP is the blurred line between qualitative and quantitative analysis.

[Dox]

I read this entire thread and I still don't understand why you think symmetry/homogeny is a critical element in balance. I actually feel a little bit ill now.

[AtlasMeCH]

I'm mostly concerned about pro players who I can very much understand how they feel...

I have a total surpassing 50,000 plus games with zerg going from brood war to sc2.

I can totally understand "The feelings" idra goes through, and those feelings understand on a greater level then what is apparent.