[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by 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.

Wait, what? This doesn't make any sense at all.

50,000+ games as Zerg over BW and SC2? So that makes you a pro? You can play that many games and still suck. Not sure whether this is that case or not, but I have my suspicions.

As for what Idra goes through, he's very, very good at complaining, but I don't think he cares nearly as much as you think he does, and he would likely hate the changes you are suggesting.

[Satu]

Originally Posted by 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.

The amount of games you've played isnt as important as the level of play you're at. If you've done 50,000 games at a level of play similar to bronze league, then all of your games would have been full with incorrect decisions and reactions, and thus shouldn't be considered as having any kind of weight in an argument.

[ProAnnn]

If you want synergy, go play warcraft 2. Its very balanced . Seriously? Symmetry? If you wan just make the game 1 race.

[MazEi]

If what you're saying is true, NesTea should never win any games, IdrA should never have beaten BoxeR at MLG Orlando, the team SlayerS will win every single GSTL, the GM leagues will not have any Zergs and I mean 0 Zergs.

But tell me, how many of the things above are actually happening? Have you taken a look at the statistics from Blizzard about Win/Loss ratios between races?

Are you even qualified to talk about balance? I play Terran and lose a lot of my games against Protoss and Zergs, but that doesn't mean Terran is underpowered or the game is 'unbalanced'. Just means I suck and I should l2p the game. I think you should stop posting and do the same.

I feel as if you're learning game design on what ever college/university course you're taking, heard of this term called symmetry, and wanted to flaunt about it by applying it to every game you play.

[FaDeEvetS]

...I don't wanna be that guy, so I'll just quote some generic battlenet forum messages. "lololol l2p platinum talking about balance lololol"
-DiamondGuy

"lolololol l2p you're not masters"
-Mastersguy

if you really wanna prove imbalance through...questionable 'facts'....use bnet forums
/thread

Quick Comments

Mayo:

Good :)

[AtlasMeCH]

I just simply cannot agree that for a race that "Has to make defense" in order for cost effective macro, but also "Has to make offense" which also interferes with economic production... in order to force their opponent to make defense as well is in a fair state of gameplay.

It can only be labeled as torn mechanics when you factor the overlord in larvae production along with split defense ground to ground and ground to air...

Along with the fact that queens occupy 2 control, where you need to make more overlords using up more larvae that is needed to then compensate for queens.

Queens which are most certainly not cost efficient with their 150 cost, How can it cost 150/2 control when it is terrible compared to spine crawler... at best more comparable to the spore with a somewhat better attack... yet still no where near spore and costing twice as much as spore.

Queens are totally unrealistic to be used offensively ... ultimately..unless you reach the 5 armor ultralisk to transfuse it.

That was at one time my theory as to "The true" and perhaps only strength of zerg... transusion of a 5 armored unit.

Yet transfusion is even degrading zerg production.

[MazEi]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

I just simply cannot agree that for a race that "Has to make defense" in order for cost effective macro, but also "Has to make offense" which also interferes with economic production... in order to force their opponent to make defense as well is in a fair state of gameplay.

It can only be labeled as torn mechanics when you factor the overlord in larvae production along with split defense ground to ground and ground to air...

Along with the fact that queens occupy 2 control, where you need to make more overlords using up more larvae that is needed to then compensate for queens.

Queens which are most certainly not cost efficient with their 150 cost, How can it cost 150/2 control when it is terrible compared to spine crawler... at best more comparable to the spore with a somewhat better attack... yet still no where near spore and costing twice as much as spore.

Queens are totally unrealistic to be used offensively ... ultimately..unless you reach the 5 armor ultralisk to transfuse it.

That was at one time my theory as to "The true" and perhaps only strength of zerg... transusion of a 5 armored unit.

Yet transfusion is even degrading zerg production.

Here is a simple solution, go play some boring game where every race is the same. Just don't play SC2 or even SC:BW(which has been played for about 12 years now and back then there wasn't even inject larvae for Zergs).

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

I just simply cannot agree that for a race that "Has to make defense" in order for cost effective macro, but also "Has to make offense" which also interferes with economic production... in order to force their opponent to make defense as well is in a fair state of gameplay.

It can only be labeled as torn mechanics when you factor the overlord in larvae production along with split defense ground to ground and ground to air...

Along with the fact that queens occupy 2 control, where you need to make more overlords using up more larvae that is needed to then compensate for queens.

Queens which are most certainly not cost efficient with their 150 cost, How can it cost 150/2 control when it is terrible compared to spine crawler... at best more comparable to the spore with a somewhat better attack... yet still no where near spore and costing twice as much as spore.

Queens are totally unrealistic to be used offensively unless you reach the 5 armor ultralisk to transfuse it.

That was at one time my theory as to "The true" and perhaps only strength of zerg... transusion of a 5 armored unit.

Yet transfusion is even degrading zerg production.

Queens are insanely cost efficient. This discussion has been raging else where on these forums today. A queen is ~2 extra hatches worth of larvae, and a not terrible defensive unit, for 150 mins.

Other than that, you are rehashing the same points: "I have to use larvae for stuff other than drones, but other races can constantly produce workers". This is NOT a balance issue. You can produce workers at least twice as fast as any other race when left alone. If they -don't- force you to spend half your larvae on defensive units (either making lings, or saccing drones to make spines/spores) then you should be -insanely- far ahead and never lose a game.

That's not balance.

[Satu]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

I just simply cannot agree that for a race that "Has to make defense" in order for cost effective macro, but also "Has to make offense" which also interferes with economic production... in order to force their opponent to make defense as well is in a fair state of gameplay.

It can only be labeled as torn mechanics when you factor the overlord in larvae production along with split defense ground to ground and ground to air...

Along with the fact that queens occupy 2 control, where you need to make more overlords using up more larvae that is needed to then compensate for queens.

Queens which are most certainly not cost efficient with their 150 cost, How can it cost 150/2 control when it is terrible compared to spine crawler... at best more comparable to the spore with a somewhat better attack... yet still no where near spore and costing twice as much as spore.

Queens are totally unrealistic to be used offensively ... ultimately..unless you reach the 5 armor ultralisk to transfuse it.

That was at one time my theory as to "The true" and perhaps only strength of zerg... transusion of a 5 armored unit.

Yet transfusion is even degrading zerg production.

1. Zerg doesnt need to produce offense and defense at the same time, so I dont see what the problem there is.

2. Queens give an additional 4 larvae per 40 seconds, on top of what hatcheries already give. That makes them really cost effective. Thats not even considering how they can spread creep, transfuse hurt units, kill air units easily... They are much better than you'd think you should watch spanishiwa play, or even see how zergs are using them in recent ZvTs on GSL. Stop looking at queens as units that are meant to be slow and really strong units that are meant to defend all attacks, and start looking at them as good support units.

3. Tranfusing doesnt degrade zerg production unless you have perfect injects and you have no extra queens.

Read the post above mine for a better summary, though.

[AtlasMeCH]

Originally Posted by SatuSPR

1. Zerg doesnt need to produce offense and defense at the same time, so I dont see what the problem there is.

Zerg has to be the aggressor and expand... after doing such they can't just magically combine their offense together to make defense as a means of recovery.

Example (4 lings merging together to make a spine crawler) coming back home after having caused the opponent to (hope to god) make defense.


The queen is ultimately not cost effective with their 2 control because it is cutting in to the overall 200 control army, especially, and I mean especially not for 150 minerals.

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

Zerg has to be the aggressor and expand... after doing such they can't just magically combine their offense together to make defense as a means of recovery.

Example (4 lings merging together to make a spine crawler) coming back home after having caused the opponent to (hope to god) make defense.


The queen is ultimately not cost effective with their 2 control because it is cutting in to the overall 200 control army, especially, and I mean especially not for 150 minerals.

lolwat?

Seriously... ZERG DOES NOT NEED TO BE THE AGRESSOR AND FORCE OTHER RACES TO MAKE DEFENSE. As I said before, your worker production is at least twice as good as any other race. If they are not attacking drone. Make more drones. Nothing but drones. If Idra could drone to 80 before making units, he would, every game. The best zergs are the ones which get away with the fewest lings/spines/spores without dying.

The queen is still good. Normal hatcheries will never go above 3 larvae, so you lose your 200/200 army, and you can't spend half your resources. If you keep up your injects, you remax straight away and go roflstomp what remains of the T/P army after the first engagement. 50 extra supply of units after a battle is generally a worthwhile trade for having 6 -8 supply worth of queens.

[FaDeEvetS]

play some other races, they're hard too!
This form of theory crafting leads to AND accomplishes nothing; Zerg's a good race! build a macro hatch or shh. >

[AtlasMeCH]

I do not agree that 1 queen = 2 hatcheries worth of production.

[ikki]

Originally Posted by AtlasMeCH

I do not agree that 1 queen = 2 hatcheries worth of production.

not sure if...

[nard]

If Ur not happy playing the game... Why play it then?

[Apth]

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.

This, right here, annoys the crap out of me. It really sounds like you've just finished your first year of Philosophy at uni and want to impress us with big words and fancy concepts.

Paradoxes, dude. Not paradoxi. Paradoxes.

In response to your actual argument, balance in a game as complicated as Starcraft 2 - and it's freakin' complicated - isn't as simple as you're making it out to be. You make some interesting points, but your argument doesn't quite follow, and is hardly convincing.

I suggest instead of presenting your argument as a suggestion, rather than as something that is true and we aren't clever enough to realise, and you'll avoid pissing off a lot of people with your arrogance.

Including me.

[ROOT`iaguz]

Oh Christ this thread hurts.

OP. You're wrong. I could get into a LOT of detail why you're wrong and why your Broodwar background doesn't make you less wrong and how Starcraft is actually ASYMMETRICAL (a symmetrical RTS would be Warcraft 2) and how balance does NOT equal design and how your suggestions at the end of the thread are fuckingg retarded and that every possible bullshit aggression strategy can be deflected with spines, queens and lings (and maybe roaches?) with the zerg able to just drone like crazy once they fend it off and that Zergs who lose to such strategies have been outplayed but this seems like too much effort for too little gain.

Quick Comments

PiG:

I'm too nice to say it. But you do it for me ... :P

[TAEdgE]

Originally Posted by xGKingiaguz

Oh Christ this thread hurts.

OP. You're wrong. I could get into a LOT of detail why you're wrong and why your Broodwar background doesn't make you less wrong and how Starcraft is actually ASYMMETRICAL (a symmetrical RTS would be Warcraft 2) and how balance does NOT equal design and how your suggestions at the end of the thread are fuckingg retarded and that every possible bullshit aggression strategy can be deflected with spines, queens and lings (and maybe roaches?) with the zerg able to just drone like crazy once they fend it off and that Zergs who lose to such strategies have been outplayed but this seems like too much effort for too little gain.

Hi

10char

[DtorR]

If you want symmetry then go back and play warcraft 2 where the only difference between the two races were orge-magis, death knights, paladins and mages. Furthermore, if you feel that zerg is flawed then I would kindly suggest you uninstall sc2 where you won't ever have to worry about balance let alone symmetry.

[AtlasMeCH]

But again... this is why I believe my solution makes the most sense, in regards to symmetry, in regards to balance, the whole thing...

Having zerglings form together in some way to make a spine crawler would never qualify in "Lore sense"