well, the range is what makes them a viable counter to hellion/stalker/marine pressure.


So when you can make 6 queens instead of ling speed and 30 lings, you get more drones

Queens can kill probe/scv scouts without flexing.
Zerg is left free to drone or tech or all in until the proper scout comes out

infestors are going to continue to be a problem in hots until they move vipers from hive to spire, and sway incentive towards mid-level tech instead of 2.5/3.

having zerg open up at 2.5 is really the core of the problem with regard to infestor strength. if they nerf infestors, suddenly any t3 transitional phase is gutted, and zerg is left with an arsenal of cost-ineffective low tier units that might as well be slapping their toss/terran counterparts with noodles.

and don't kid yourself -- zerg units ARE cost-ineffective; the only argument to the contrary is based purely off the economic advantage fronted to every zerg player by grace of mechanical superiority.

>zerg suffers terrible units until 2.5
>the response is high econ/defensive play until 2.5 opens
>suddenly zerg is unkillable

or

>zerg suffers terrible units until 2.5
>opponent toss/terran attempts to follow suit at the cost of no alternative for early/mid-game aggression
>zerg reactive allin with no defensive units to stifle the INSTANTANEOUS response

tech choices are part of the issue, the other part is giving zerg a gasless macro mechanic that doubles as an offensive/defensive paradigm of the zerg early-mid game.
however, you could again say that queens are justifiably strong due to the ineffective nature of our low-tier unit choices without a booming economy to back them, so it's really tough to point at a single unit and call it broken.
once infestors are nerfed, there are still a myriad of core mechanic issues in sc2 that affect all three races, but since chronoboost and mules aren't doubling as defensive/offensive units, it's very easy to see the "advantage" that zerg has from a defensive/macro standpoint.

so once the nerfs are out and infestors are knocked down a peg with missile delay and the inability to fungal ghosts/templar, i think blizzard is going to have to reconsider the queen buff. slight as it may have been, the fact that it's on a multipurpose macro/offense/defense mechanic makes it more than ~just~ a slight buff.

all of this is in the same vein as morrow's post about forcefields in zvp as well.

by mechanical superiority you mean larvae inject mechanic right?

I'd gladly give up chronoboost just to have either both fungal/it nerfed or remove one of the two spells completely.

And lol...
speedlings/speedbanes/mutalisks/speedroaches are terrible units?
Zerg maxes out on 4 bases, 70+ drones and 1/1 speed roach/lings at 11:30 vs protoss
1. they're not cost ineffective at all what so ever, they are the most cost effective units in the game asides from marines which requires micro unlike ling/roach
2. as long as you're injecting you can spam out 6 larvas out per hatchery every minute, no other race has this ridiculous bullshit production cycle
3. you can force battle on creep to give free maphack over creeps and speed boost for units

Nothing about zerg is cost ineffective.

cost inefficient is correct ........... was like this in BW. but to think that every zerg player right now is better than the rest because they're mechanically superior? lolz ....


The race enables you to have a larger economy because roaches and lings are cost inefficient .... and then you get to BL/infestor and barely need minerals anymore

This post was edited by eyewuvd2 on Nov 19 2012 11:35pm

yes, the injection mechanic coupled with the fact that queens aren't purely a macro mechanic makes them too strong.



1. yes, zerg units are cost ineffective. consider each baneling costs as much as a roach does, and you'll lose a great deal of banelings simply approaching an engagement to a few tank shots. like i mentioned, it's tied into morrow's post about forcefields in zvp. zerg a-moves into a surround and doesn't micro, unless you count stutterstepping roaches into range and splitting before an engagement. while that's beneficial to low level players, at higher levels of play, zerg players are stuck splitting before an engagement, and then once the engagement is picked, just waiting to see if we win or lose. it's frustrating to see terran and toss players able to micro their units to improve their effectiveness in a combat setting, whereas zerg players just have to sit and watch it happen.
2. i'm not defending zerg production mechanics, i am agreeing that they're too strong.
3. it's a "free" maphack that takes at least 60 APM to maintain, and without creep, trying to kite forcefields is impossible, and engaging a terran who has the luxury of marine micro at his disposal off creep is a death sentence.



i'm not saying zerg players are all mechanically superior; i'm saying zerg as a race has superior macro mechanics. as in the larva injection mechanic is superior to the terran/toss counterparts.

e2: and to clarify what i mean by superior, i mean, it's flat out better.

This post was edited by nerobellum on Nov 19 2012 11:41pm