StarCraft® II

"Queen and spawn larvae are fine" ..wait what

Posts: 868
I always hear this from those I talk to about the state of Zerg. I loved Zerg in brood war, massable expendable units that you didn't need to concern yourself with.

Why? How can they possibly be seen as good?

I've heard some insane arguments too, "Mules are needed because terran lose minerals when their workers build something".

NO THEY DON'T *SLAP* You don't lose minerals, if anything the Zerg need mules for the extra cost for drones sacrificing themselves just to build something! Especially when the mules gather minerals faster than a Justin beaver video gathers views on youtube.

The Zerg don't get to stack spawn larvae on the same hatchery, and to say "use it on other hatcheries" defeats the argument, otherwise you'd have a cooldown added to the mule so you can't spam them in succession.

As for the Queen as a unit, people whinged enough when they had a much needed range buff.
They needed it desperately, it was that, or run awkwardly away like a duckling on creep from reapers and zealots. One Queen died to one Zealot, and the reaper nerfs may have never been needed if the queen had a decent attack to begin with!

Transfuse can only be spent on other queens, buildings, or anything that has the health in the first place to warrant it, in which case it should be more like the medivac auto heal.

Creep tumors don't have que'd pathing available, so that's more to the macro demand.... on top of needing to split up and micro your army so ultralisks don't spaz out when a zergling gets in the way, or zerg force goes up against a ball of MMM.

So much cool stuff was cut from The zerg as well, even before the beta I recall. morphing queen that gets stronger with your hatchery main? NOPE, multiple costing flimsy squishy things instead. Roachs lost regen above ground and therefore altogether (late tech+detection=roach useless) Lost lurker has no anti air flyer what so ever (corruptor only deals bonus to massive and has the worst spell in the game)

I always get the sense that if I want to play as Zerg in starcraft two, I have to go Protoss for warp in spam. "templarx10 morph archon zealotx10 zealot, A-move win game etc.

Also loss of rally point A-move......sad day for us all.
Reply Quote
Posts: 133
I'm sorry you are off your rocker. What are you trying to accomplish with this post?
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,339
11/05/2012 01:11 AMPosted by Huntsvoski
I'm sorry you are off your rocker. What are you trying to accomplish with this post?
Reply Quote
Posts: 382
So your pretty much saying you want zerg to have FASTER income? You want queens to pretty much become medivacs? theyre already great at healing broodlords in the late game. Maybe if you actually tried using them in the right situation.

You think terran doesn't need mules? Are you high? Protoss has chrono boosts, zerg has injects. how is terran supposed to keep up with the other races economies when they have no mules?

Corrupters spell is very useful, especially when your trying to FOCUS down massive units like carriers. If you fungal and use corruption it does even more damage so dont say its !@#$ing useless.

Roaches regen while burrowed is amazing, and all zerg units REGEN HEALTH REGARDLESS.

If you got out of bronze and learned to play this game then you wouldnt be making idiotic posts like this.
Reply Quote
Posts: 869
11/05/2012 05:56 AMPosted by Vest
Corrupters spell is very useful, especially when your trying to FOCUS down massive units like carriers. If you fungal and use corruption it does even more damage so dont say its !@#$ing useless.


No, it is useless. There are massive threads on TL with the maths behind why, and the arguments are rock solid.

Casting corruption before fungal will make one unit take 43 damage up from 36. That's an extra 7 damage. That's all well and good until you take into account the fact that you're hindering the corruptor's physical attack by doing so, which does 15 if I remember correctly.

In 95% of scenarios, casting corruption actually reduces the damage you do overall.
Edited by DaisyCutter on 11/5/2012 7:35 AM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 709
lol Justin Beaver he said
Reply Quote
Posts: 710
11/05/2012 07:22 AMPosted by DaisyCutter
Corrupters spell is very useful, especially when your trying to FOCUS down massive units like carriers. If you fungal and use corruption it does even more damage so dont say its !@#$ing useless.


No, it is useless. There are massive threads on TL with the maths behind why, and the arguments are rock solid.

Casting corruption before fungal will make one unit take 43 damage up from 36. That's an extra 7 damage. That's all well and good until you take into account the fact that you're hindering the corruptor's physical attack by doing so, which does 15 if I remember correctly.

In 95% of scenarios, casting corruption actually reduces the damage you do overall.

The last sentence of your post is just not true. The math posts are all convoluted, rely on an assumption that only corruptors are attacking the units in question, and are frankly just bad math.

You can think of it like this: Casting corruption takes about the same time as attacking once or twice. If the missed corruptor attack(s) is 1/6 of the hp of the unit it is attacking, then the 20% damage gain will be equivalent to 1 corruptor attack. So corruption is always worthwhile against ground units that the corruptor cannot attack (e.g. immortals, archons, thors, tanks, other high priority targets). Against a viking, which has 125 hp, the corruptor attack does 14 dmg, so casting corruption does increase the damage, especially when you factor in that queens, fungals, and ITs are also doing damage to the vikings.
Reply Quote
Posts: 503
11/05/2012 08:47 AMPosted by JDub


No, it is useless. There are massive threads on TL with the maths behind why, and the arguments are rock solid.

Casting corruption before fungal will make one unit take 43 damage up from 36. That's an extra 7 damage. That's all well and good until you take into account the fact that you're hindering the corruptor's physical attack by doing so, which does 15 if I remember correctly.

In 95% of scenarios, casting corruption actually reduces the damage you do overall.

The last sentence of your post is just not true. The math posts are all convoluted, rely on an assumption that only corruptors are attacking the units in question, and are frankly just bad math.

You can think of it like this: Casting corruption takes about the same time as attacking once or twice. If the missed corruptor attack(s) is 1/6 of the hp of the unit it is attacking, then the 20% damage gain will be equivalent to 1 corruptor attack. So corruption is always worthwhile against ground units that the corruptor cannot attack (e.g. immortals, archons, thors, tanks, other high priority targets). Against a viking, which has 125 hp, the corruptor attack does 14 dmg, so casting corruption does increase the damage, especially when you factor in that queens, fungals, and ITs are also doing damage to the vikings.


Oh? Did you factor in overkill and the fact that the Viking will not survive a barrage from Queens, ITs, and Fungal anyway REGARDLESS of the presence of Corruption?

Link me one game where Corruption was a pivotal asset in the outcome, to the same degree that Stim, Storm, Fungal, EMP, Blink, or Burrow are.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,485
just face it zerg will be nerfed into the dirt again till terrans can make gm on pure marine instead of just masters
Reply Quote
Posts: 873
11/05/2012 07:22 AMPosted by DaisyCutter
Corrupters spell is very useful, especially when your trying to FOCUS down massive units like carriers. If you fungal and use corruption it does even more damage so dont say its !@#$ing useless.


No, it is useless. There are massive threads on TL with the maths behind why, and the arguments are rock solid.

Casting corruption before fungal will make one unit take 43 damage up from 36. That's an extra 7 damage. That's all well and good until you take into account the fact that you're hindering the corruptor's physical attack by doing so, which does 15 if I remember correctly.

In 95% of scenarios, casting corruption actually reduces the damage you do overall.


20% damage is +1 damage increase for every 5 damage a unit deals.

Landing one corruption is the same as getting +3 attack upgrades for your roach army.

Landing one corruption is the same as getting +2 air attack for your Mutas

getting just 1-2 corruptorts to corrupt high priority units in a fight will cost you less time and less resources than getting +3 attack upgrades.

I'm not saying Corrupters are OP, I'm just saying that math says they're not.
Reply Quote
Posts: 209
Corruption is only useful against Massive units.. the only issue is the Massive units are still behind meat walls, so you can't actually do any damage to them until you get rid of all the smaller units first ><

Someone made a suggestion that it would be better if Corruption lowered ATK spd instead of what it currently does.. That would be much much more useful.. then you can cast it on the massive and immediately reap it's benefits.

The idea of the Queens morphing when you upgrade to Lair-Hatch seems kinda kool actually lol.
Edited by Vinnx on 11/5/2012 10:21 AM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,890
OP, answer this question.

Q: Terran macro can keep up with zerg, NO MULES ever used from start to finish.

True/False?
Reply Quote
Posts: 873
Corruption is only useful against Massive units.. the only issue is the Massive units are still behind meat walls, so you can't actually do any damage to them until you get rid of all the smaller units first ><

Someone made a suggestion that it would be better if Corruption lowered ATK spd instead of what it currently does.. That would be much much more useful.. then you can cast it on the massive and immediately reap it's benefits.

The idea of the Queens morphing when you upgrade to Lair-Hatch seems kinda kool actually lol.


This is false--it's a 20% damage buff for all units attacking the target--it's most effective when amassing ranged units since they get +3 from it as opposed to +1 or +2 for most everyone else.

Broodlords get +4 damage for example.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,736
So your pretty much saying you want zerg to have FASTER income? You want queens to pretty much become medivacs? theyre already great at healing broodlords in the late game. Maybe if you actually tried using them in the right situation.

You think terran doesn't need mules? Are you high? Protoss has chrono boosts, zerg has injects. how is terran supposed to keep up with the other races economies when they have no mules?

Corrupters spell is very useful, especially when your trying to FOCUS down massive units like carriers. If you fungal and use corruption it does even more damage so dont say its !@#$ing useless.

Roaches regen while burrowed is amazing, and all zerg units REGEN HEALTH REGARDLESS.

If you got out of bronze and learned to play this game then you wouldnt be making idiotic posts like this.


Terran's really don't need MULEs. There's a few spots in the early game that they need them to keep up, but for the most part an early expand keeps up just fine with Zerg and Protoss. MULEs are used as a crutch to keep lower ranked players on 2 bases longer than the pros do. Late game they can be used to get that supply edge in army against the other two races. Its probably needed against Protoss, but not as much needed against Zerg. MULEs are poorly designed, but its unlikely to see any changes even with HotS.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,485
OP, answer this question.

Q: Terran macro can keep up with zerg, NO MULES ever used from start to finish.

True/False?


answer this question

Q:Once terran is done using mules to catch up in worker count then how does zerg or protoss keep up with terran economy?
Reply Quote
Posts: 869
11/05/2012 08:47 AMPosted by JDub
The last sentence of your post is just not true. The math posts are all convoluted, rely on an assumption that only corruptors are attacking the units in question, and are frankly just bad math.


Convoluted how? I think it's all pretty straight forward. It's not bad maths either, I'm not sure why you think so, you didn't explain why.

Whether it is only corruptors or not makes no difference. It's always a 20% damage increase regardless of the unit making the attack.

11/05/2012 08:47 AMPosted by JDub
You can think of it like this: Casting corruption takes about the same time as attacking once or twice. If the missed corruptor attack(s) is 1/6 of the hp of the unit it is attacking, then the 20% damage gain will be equivalent to 1 corruptor attack.


Yes, if we're talking about spherical units in a vacuum. But it's more complicated than that. You're forgetting a very important combat mechanic.

Generally in the mid to late game (when we can get corruptors out) any big targets are focus fired first, these "volleys" are of course bursts of damage.

--

Let me build a scenario to demonstrate a closer to real example. Maths isn't my strong point so if I've made an error in my calculations do let me know.

We have an enemy BC that we want to cast corruption on so it "dies faster". It has 550 hitpoints. We have 5 hydras and a corruptor. Each hydra does 12 damage (for the sake of simplicity we will ignore upgrades). We are of course going to focus fire it.

Note: There are differences in attack speed, but again for the sake of simplicity we are going to assume the corruptor attacks once every 2 hydra attacks (it's actually 2.1 or something). Corruptor does 20 damage to battlecruiser, so we'll add 10 to each volley and 12 for attacks against corruption (again, simplicity).

1. We attack without corruption.
  • Each hydra attack does 12 damage.
  • Our volleys do (12+10)*5 damage (110).
  • -
    End result: The BC goes down in 5 volleys.

    2. We attack with corruption.
    (I'm assuming corruption hits the target before the hydras get a chance to attack, which rarely happens)
  • We cast corruption, our first two attacks will ignore corruptor damage
  • Each hydra attack does 14.4 damage.
  • First two volleys do 14.4*5 damage (72)
  • The rest of our volleys do (14.4+12)*5 damage (132)
  • -
    End result: The BC goes down in 6 volleys.

    So, what we have done with corruption is not only wasted APM by casting it, but it has actually allowed the battlecruiser to survive longer and let our units take more damage. Potentially losing us the engagement.

    11/05/2012 08:47 AMPosted by JDub
    So corruption is always worthwhile against ground units that the corruptor cannot attack (e.g. immortals, archons, thors, tanks, other high priority targets).


    We should assume the the corruptor was built for a real reason. There must be something it can attack else we would not react by building it. In this case we are still wasting a corruptor attack on an enemy unit, which the above applies to.

    If corruptors were built solely for casting corruption I do not think I need to explain the inefficiency.

    Building three corruptors could almost be another two infestors (-100 minerals). This would obviously more than offset the damage bonus.
    It could be an expansion with 300 gas still left in the bank, it could be upgrades, anything.

    Against a viking, which has 125 hp, the corruptor attack does 14 dmg, so casting corruption does increase the damage, especially when you factor in that queens, fungals, and ITs are also doing damage to the vikings.


    I factored this in with the BC example using hydras.
    Also as I said previously in this post, it's always a 20% damage increase regardless of the unit making the attack.

    There are very few times where corruption will work out in the favour of the player casting it, but these are not scenarios most people (particularly idiots like me) can run through in their head and work out in the time between seeing a threat and attacking it. So it is better to assume it's going to be detrimental and not use it.

    edit: fixed broken quote
    Edited by DaisyCutter on 11/6/2012 3:24 AM PST
    Reply Quote
    Posts: 873
    11/05/2012 02:51 PMPosted by DaisyCutter
    The last sentence of your post is just not true. The math posts are all convoluted, rely on an assumption that only corruptors are attacking the units in question, and are frankly just bad math.


    Convoluted how? I think it's all pretty straight forward. It's not bad maths either, I'm not sure why you think so, you didn't explain why.

    Whether it is only corruptors or not makes no difference. It's always a 20% damage increase regardless of the unit making the attack.

    You can think of it like this: Casting corruption takes about the same time as attacking once or twice. If the missed corruptor attack(s) is 1/6 of the hp of the unit it is attacking, then the 20% damage gain will be equivalent to 1 corruptor attack.


    Yes, if we're talking about spherical units in a vacuum. But it's more complicated than that. You're forgetting a very important combat mechanic.

    Generally in the mid to late game (when we can get corruptors out) any big targets are focus fired first, these "volleys" are of course bursts of damage.

    --

    Let me build a scenario to demonstrate a closer to real example. Maths isn't my strong point so if I've made an error in my calculations do let me know.

    We have an enemy BC that we want to cast corruption on so it "dies faster". It has 550 hitpoints. We have 5 hydras and a corruptor. Each hydra does 12 damage (for the sake of simplicity we will ignore upgrades). We are of course going to focus fire it.

    Note: There are differences in attack speed, but again for the sake of simplicity we are going to assume the corruptor attacks once every 2 hydra attacks (it's actually 2.1 or something). Corruptor does 20 damage to battlecruiser, so we'll add 10 to each volley and 12 for attacks against corruption (again, simplicity).

    1. We attack without corruption.
  • Each hydra attack does 12 damage.
  • Our volleys do (12+10)*5 damage (110).
  • -
    End result: The BC goes down in 5 volleys.

    2. We attack with corruption.
    (I'm assuming corruption hits the target before the hydras get a chance to attack, which rarely happens)
  • We cast corruption, our first two attacks will ignore corruptor damage
  • Each hydra attack does 14.4 damage.
  • First two volleys do 14.4*5 damage (72)
  • The rest of our volleys do (14.4+12)*5 damage (132)
  • -
    End result: The BC goes down in 6 volleys.

    So, what we have done with corruption is not only wasted APM by casting it, but it has actually allowed the battlecruiser to survive longer and let our units take more damage. Potentially losing us the engagement.

    So corruption is always worthwhile against ground units that the corruptor cannot attack (e.g. immortals, archons, thors, tanks, other high priority targets).


    We should assume the the corruptor was built for a real reason. There must be something it can attack else we would not react by building it. In this case we are still wasting a corruptor attack on an enemy unit, which the above applies to.

    If corruptors were built solely for casting corruption I do not think I need to explain the inefficiency.

    Building three corruptors could almost be another two infestors (-100 minerals). This would obviously more than offset the damage bonus.
    It could be an expansion with 300 gas still left in the bank, it could be upgrades, anything.

    Against a viking, which has 125 hp, the corruptor attack does 14 dmg, so casting corruption does increase the damage, especially when you factor in that queens, fungals, and ITs are also doing damage to the vikings.


    I factored this in with the BC example using hydras.
    Also as I said previously in this post, it's always a 20% damage increase regardless of the unit making the attack.

    There are very few times where corruption will work out in the favour of the player casting it, but these are not scenarios most people (particularly idiots like me) can run through in their head and work out in the time between seeing a threat and attacking it. So it is better to assume it's going to be detrimental and not use it.

    edit: fixed broken quote


    Or...

    It's cheaper to get 2 corruptors than it is to get +2 range attack so when Hydras hit BC's, you get a cheaper +2 damage upgrade.

    It's the same with getting 1-2 corruptors while amassing roaches--corruptors give roaches +3 attack. So 2 corruptors following your roach army allows you to fight with +3 upgrades pre-hive.

    The corruptor is still bad--but you're skewing data to fit your argument.
    Reply Quote
    Posts: 2,412
    licking this thread
    Reply Quote
    Posts: 869
    11/06/2012 09:34 AMPosted by Lorkac
    It's cheaper to get 2 corruptors than it is to get +2 range attack so when Hydras hit BC's, you get a cheaper +2 damage upgrade.


    Assuming for some odd reason we are getting both melee and missile attacks, sure (rarely happens). If we are getting either missile or melee it works out 50/50 cheaper to just get the upgrades.

    Also, it only affects units that are attacking a single unit for the duration of corruption.
    Interesting thought but it is still far more beneficial to get the same effect for all your units across the board.

    It's the same with getting 1-2 corruptors while amassing roaches--corruptors give roaches +3 attack. So 2 corruptors following your roach army allows you to fight with +3 upgrades pre-hive.


    Above principle applies. No it most decidedly does not replace +3 in practice, because we're not casting corruption on every single unit we attack. There are also buildings to consider.
    Corruption is not some passive "aura" around corruptors that grants +x damage to everything in a radius, I fear that would be a little overpowered to say the least.

    11/06/2012 09:34 AMPosted by Lorkac
    The corruptor is still bad--but you're skewing data to fit your argument.


    What data was skewed there? It was as close as possible to a real scenario. I didn't choose 5 hydras for any particular reason, it was just a convenient unit and number to serve as an example.

    If I'm bored enough one day I may code a calculator that will work it out for everything, but I'm not about to do the maths for every single number of units in any type of unit composition against all types of targets, there are thousands. If you are so inclined to build such a list, be my guest. I'd love to see it.
    Edited by DaisyCutter on 11/6/2012 11:12 AM PST
    Reply Quote
    Posts: 485
    Daisy makes sense. Lorkacs theory only works when corruption is cast on a unit the corrupter can't potentially attack.
    Reply Quote

    Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

    Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

    Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

    Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

    Forums Code of Conduct

    Report Post # written by

    Reason
    Explain (256 characters max)
    Submit Cancel

    Reported!

    [Close]