For what they do now? They should be 4 supply and still be very strong.
I’ve always hated how strong casters were in this game and yet they keep making this same mistake.
AoE/mind control abilites plus smart cast = problems.
Zerg just happens to have two VERY powerful casters that can invalidate any army when used correctly together.
How do you fix this?
3 supply is an idea, less infestors less spamming of spells…
Increasing cost of neural parasite is another idea.
But I’m not sure how they didn’t see this coming. We’ve already gone through broodlord/winfestor once and it was obvious what was going to happen when they buffed the infestor.
3 Likes
2 infestors before. 4 supply.
2 infestors after. 6 supply.
50% increase in supply.
2 Likes
Its pretty obvious he didn’t learn fractions
2 Likes
You are hyper biased.
I won.
1 Like
2,718281828459 or bust
List evidence or your statement means nothing.
If i do will you start hate Zerg? It will be hard cuz someone hide his forum posts
In other words, you called me “hyper biased” without any example in mind ergo your statement had no factual basis. Got it.
What a meaningless cliche answer that haven’t a single connection to the quote. This shows me your will for communication. Ok.
1 Like
3 infestors -> 2 infestors. 1/3 less units = 1/3 less power (sort of; it’s not quite that direct, because not every infestor in the group is able to do things in every fight when you have a lot of them). Not 50% less.
3 supply on infestors also helps with the problem of neural vs high supply units that form the core of protoss late game armies being completely broken. They might need to also compensate infestors a bit, maybe with increased HP or something, but the suggestion is actually a pretty good one.
Also Protoss late game was nerfed, and has always had a point where it fell off. The biggest advantage of Protoss late game has always been that they hit it earlier than T/Z if they’re trying to do so, because the transitions were smoother (same upgrades for most early/late game units, and a branched tech tree reducing the cost of reaching a specific tech + Chrono to accelerate the upgrades that were behind) and tech advantages matter.
2 Likes
What about decreasing cost of Hydralisks to 75\25 and 1 supply?
I think making infestor cost 3 control instead of 2 will not only reduce number of infestors by 3/2 but moreso reduce its limit cuz dps decrease that should be compensated with other units. This is good for PvZ but can be too good for TvZ. It can hurt statement that by design Zerg lategame is the strongest.
That is not what rabiDrone said liar.
He said it was a 50% reduction to the number of Infestors. That means he expects a 1 supply increase to a 2 supply unit to cut the number of Infestors in half.
To call a 50% increase to supply a 50% nerf is always wrong.
Hydralisks would need heavy DPS nerfs to balance that out. Possibly some health nerfs too if their DPS isn’t nerfed enough.
On average, the StarCraft II Hydralisk has 80% more DPS than a Brood War Hydralisk. The Brood War Hydralisk is specialized against armored (large) units and deals 5 damage to non-armored units (7.5 damage to medium, but that doesn’t exist in SC2) and 10 damage to armored units on about the same attack cooldown. That’s why Hydralisks were changed into 2 supply unit.
Brood War Hydralisks also have 1 less range at all times. It starts at 4 and increased to 5 with the upgrade.
3 Likes
Now i get it. Okay, about Hydralisks the problem is solved. May be Hydralisks should be brought to BW state.
Maybe. They would definitely be more resistant to splash damage and better against armored units that way, while the specialization against armored units would help balance them out.
Link to where I said a 1 supply increase is a 50% decrease in the number of infestors.
1 Like
Well, that is their goal…
Terrans already have a crazy strong late game against Zerg and still feel the need to whine.
No one brought up a 50% reduction to the number of Infestors before you.
1 Like