Is it me, or . . . ?

Does Zerg . . . suck now?

I feel like all of what Zerg is (aside from aesthetics) was either nerfed or completely taken away. Everything from the inviability of cloaked-attacks (due to Overlord) to one's ability to mass them with relatively little spawn-cost.

One of the great things, I thought, from the original SC, was the fact that the three races were completely different, but balanced—they weren't simply compilations of "counter-units" playing rock-paper-scissors.

Is this just me?

 

Mech is OP.
Infested terrans are OP.
Zerg suck.
Terran are op.
Protoss void rays need to be nerfed (again).

I've heard it all.

Everything is coming together right now, people still haven't found the right play style for Zerg and playing against other races. Well most people haven't.

The problem is that Zerg play so much different than the other two races. For me, they are just difficult to use, because of that difference. Now while I might slightly agree with Zerg being a bit weak, or not having the benefits of other races, in the hands of a good player, this doesn't really matter.

Starcraft 2 is still at the start, let it evolve, let people find out on their own that you can't attack tanks straight on, that void rays do in fact have a weakness.

Hell, the actual game hasn't even released, I wouldn't worry about it, if there is in fact a problem.
Blizzard will fix it.

 

Like sniper64 said it's how you play the race, and I do as well feel Zerg need some work but simply because I don't really like some of the new and want more old school, (even though when I first saw the new Zerg units I freaked out cuz it felt like they were all old units with a couple new things)

but Zerg has always (in my opinion) been one of the harder races, where Terran is better in some ways for beginners and Protoss can also be helpful because they to have a similar play style to the Terran but Zerg is an entierly different breed.

Therefore my prognosis is Zerg need to be experimented with, try throwing banelings in overlords and letting it rain acid rain, or using burrow witch blizzard tryed to do with roach/infester movment while burrowed, but I don't see that much either. To be a good Zerg player you really need to do crazy things but have the know how to pull it off, then rinse and repeat until it is countered, then you choose more crazyness!

 

I have to agree. Considering the original Starcraft has was released over 10 years ago, I was originally hoping for a 4th race (since you can basically do anything with science fiction), but when they announced it was the same three races, I was hoping they would be more creative with the Zerg. The only new unit is the Roach. The baneling is just a scourge on the ground instead of the air, the Brood Lord is the Guardian with the Queen's Spawn Broodlings, and the Corruptor is the Devourer. I hope Blizzard fixes whatever they are going to fix. Isn't the game out in 2 weeks?

 

A bit less then two weeks, and i will unfortunatly play Zerg still if things are not fixed because they are one of the more fun races in my opinion, where the Terran and Protoss don't eccell the Zerg should so it's up to you as a player to find those things and use them vs you're enemy. (I don't knownabout z.v.z cuz I hate mirror match ups with a passion.)

 

I felt this way when i started to play zerg, but now I've manage to get into a groove with them, play aggressively, and time everything better. I ranked back up to platinum today, so I'm no pro but zerg still has the swarm feel. Maybe it's because I favor speedlings and try to be relentless with spawn larva, but they still have a unique feel. Toss is the easiest race, I think. Then terran, Zerg is the hardest. It wasn't until recently I actually started to understand ZvZ,ZvP,ZvT. I used ti play the same Z every game. Every race is different, and each matchup needs to be treated as such. I feel like SC2 is dumbed down a tad, but unit diversity is there. Like Sniper said, let the game breathe a bit, like wine when opened, and really give it a chance before to give you a good buzz after a few glasses before you go saying it's no good! =)
I think zerg takes a bit more ingenuity, game sense, timing, and other aspects of the game that are more finely tuned than other races. Kind of feeling like I don't belive what I just said, because zerg are meant to smash, build more, smash again. But that was SC1, SC2 dumbs down some aspects, but also promotes others like in game awareness.

Let me try to say what I'm trying to say; If you attempt to play a race to play starcraft, you will only get so good. If you learn to play the race like the race is meant to be played, you will have much more success. Trying to one base all in and attack at the 10 minute mark with zerg will not give you AS favorable an outcome as if you were to do that with terran or toss.

 

From my own minor dabbling to some of the Day[9] videos I've seen, I have come to the conclusion that just because Zerg are not currently what everybody wanted in terms of ease-of-use or pure numbers, that doesn't mean that they are bad.

The way zerg work now is they are incredibly flexible, economically strong, and an overall strong rebuilding race.

People complain that they aren't a huge "swarm" anymore. While I agree that you will not be seeing excessive amounts of units at once (for that would mean each unit is much weaker to compensate, which would provoke even more QQ) the swarm factor is still there. Zerg need one building to enable construction of certain units. That means a zerg player can build one hydra den and make hydras in all of their hatcheries. That means that suddenly, from one building, you can make 10 hydras at once.

You find yourself losing half of your army? No problem, go to your hatcheries and construct a unit mix that can best fight whatever killed you.

Your opponent then sees that despite killing so many units, more and more and more are coming. This leads protoss and terran players to realize that to kill terran or protoss, you kill the army and then clean up at whatever pace you feel like. Against zerg though, terran and protoss players know that you cannot just kill the army, you need to go to the source or else you will be stuck facing endless waves until the map is mined out.

So that is why I feel that the swarm element is still strongly in play with zerg. Are they harder to learn? Absolutely. Do they value a different style than terran or protoss? Absolutely. Does that mean they are any worse than the other two races? Absolutely not.

 

Thanks for the responses, guys. They're much appreciated, and serve to put things in a much better perspective than I had prior.

I'm a big Zerg fan myself, and I'll certainly begin approaching the race as you suggested—it seems a lot more progressive.

 

I'm a Zerg player, and it's been hard. I'm not sure about balance, but I do know that the Zerg macro has absolutely wrecked any chance to play any other race. I just can't macro Terran or Toss.

Anyways, what I was going to point out was this...

It sounds like what you are saying is that to win as Zerg, you need to be a better player. Ingenuity, game sense, and timing is the vast majority of them game IMO. Ingenuity sort of encroaches on micro territory (clever micro) and I believe game sense can be somewhat synonymous with macro, when to build what, etc. But you pretty much said that Zerg needs to be better at three very big parts of the game.

Edit: I really haven't made up my mind on this issue. Everything seems pretty balanced to me at this time. I do sort of "theorycraft" that Zerg is weaker, but in practice, they don't seem to be. I do fine, Idra, Sen and Machine do fine as well.

One example that I see of how Zerg requires a bit more cunning to play is the response to a 4 gate push from protoss.

A viable Terran option is to throw down 3 bunkers. It's easy to do, just make the bunkers, load your units in it, and wait. The only part you really need to worry about is macroing it up in time.

The way I deal with it (a strategy I picked up from HD Starcraft) is to macro hard early game. As soon as you see them commit to the fourgate (requiring some skill in scouting) I start building Spine crawlers blocked with evo chambers, roaches and lings. I run the lings out of my base to get a flank.

The difference between the strategies is that Terran just throws down bunkers. Zerg has to do some tricky stuff by blocking to Spine crawlers and get a flank.

 

Sadly, it is true.

Mech and void rays are OP and zerg do actually suck

Its not even their play style - its their diversity and units.....infact there is soooo much wrong with Zerg at the moment its not even funny.
One of the only units worth using got smashed big time (roaches). The additional +1 to farm usage slapped Zerg silly.

And in reality they only have 3units that can shoot air...and as much as broadlords do poon...nothing is strong enough to protect them.

If you also take a look at the 'MASSIVE' units (i will include thors)...Ultralisks, even though are fun to watch smash things whats the point? you can only build two at a time anyways because the AI is so bad on them they just block eachother.

But the AI problem aside look at the damage output they do compared to Thors and Colossi.
Thors smash air and pound ground, Colossi melt ground and climb cliffs and Ultralisks charge and block everything

Terran have so many options and different builds as does Protoss whereas Zerg do not.

The spreading of creep now in SC2 is soooo good and a brilliant idea - its just a shame the units dont back it up

 

Terran is not OP, neither are void rays. They are STRONG. Big difference.

 

Copper league? lol

 

I kinda agree about ultras being somewhat useless. They've always been a clumsy unit and I'd rather have the Lurker with the upgraded range. Btw, are Hyrda one supply or two supply?

 

Hydras are 2 supply.

 

Does anyone know any data about how many players play what race?

I look at http://sc2.vacau.com/sc2/GlobalRanks.php and from what I see the top 10 is mostly terran, the top 50 is about equal terran and protoss, but with only 6 zerg.
Zerger is harder to learn to play (I think the same went in starcraft 1), and fewer people play it(for some reasons, people usually play humanoids), so I have no idea how that influences the numbers.

 

I have found Ultralisks very effective vs a stalker collosus army, even if they have sentries. Both the stalkers and colossi are armored, so the ultras do full damage. Yes it can be difficult to move them, and they can be run from easily, but if you get a flank on them, it's no competition at all.

 

Why are Hydralisks two supply? In the original Starcraft, you could get two Hydralisks, each doing 10 damage, with the same hitpoints as the new Hydralisk, plus a speed upgrade. Now you get one Hydralisk for 2 supply that does 12 damage, as compared to 2 Hydras doing 10 + 10 and, and less speed off the creep. I guess it all has to do with balance, but the Zerg seem less like a swarm if everything has a higher supply cost. The Zerg was my favourite race is Starcraft because you could really mass Hydras, so I'm confused as to why they nerfed Hydras and Roaches. It seemed balanced, at least in the original Starcraft, 10 Hydras against 5 Zealots/Goons would be about equal.

 

@ Mattbaumann777

I didn't play brood war much but from the example you gave us I'd have to say that the units have changed. In SCII, 10 hydras will destroy 5 of anything out of a gateway. Except perhaps the High Templars, and with DTs they'd need an observer.

 

Well, I hope you're right, but I'm disappointed they're taking away from the swarm aspect of the Zerg. I'm not sure I understand the math behind this considering units like Zealots are exactly the same in hitpoints, damage, etc in Starcraft 2.
In Starcraft Brood War, for 2 supply, you get two hydralisks, better speed, each with 80 health, and 10 attack each, so 20 damage a shot.
In Starcraft 2, for 2 supply, you get one hydralisk, only faster on creep, 80 heath, and 12 damage instead of 20.
Zealots have the same stats as Brood War Zealots, Dark Templar have the same health, and 45 attack instead of 40. The Brood War Hydralisks are more economical and more effective.

 

What were the attack speeds like? I've checked the SCWiki and I can't decipher the attack speeds in SCI but maybe Hydras attack faster now.

One small nitpick I sorta feel bad for bringing up, but figure I might as well point out, is that in SCI Zealots had 60 shields, now they have 50. But the shields also regen faster in SCII, 2 per second after ten seconds of not taking damage.