|
On July 10 2010 10:34 Logo wrote:
I really don't see the value in something that's going to protect a ramp. Any stationary unit like a straight up lurker is going to be worthless for zerg because it solves a problem they don't have. If it can't move in on tanks, then zerg doesn't need it in my opinion.
The 'problem' with banelings is that they're insanely expensive in larvae for any use other than mowing down light infantry. yeah you can wreck a formation of tanks reasonably well with them, but you're shooting yourself in the foot in terms of larvae.
yes that is true
sc2 is all about having a huge chunk of units and roam around the middle where all battles are, but where are you at the harassment point? abusing cliffs? i very much feel like zerg need a unit that can use terrain such as cliffs by natural. as a mapmaker i just put up a cliff and i know ok this cliff is only gonna make it better for terran and worse for zerg, its poor design by blizzard to make zerg this one-way-race of gameplay so i think lurker would be the perfect unit to fill this void
|
I think the lurker would be a hell of a problem for Terran, considering how their detection is significantly more limited compared to SC1; the energy that might have originally been used for scan is going to be used for Mules instead, so basically unless Terran has to go for putting up turrets everywhere, go for a quick Raven, or basically stunt your economy in favor of paranoia of lurkers. Before any significant detection is available, Zerg basically has complete map control if they can get a few lurkers at your choke. Protoss doesn't have this kind of problem because a quick robotics facility isn't a problem since that Observatory isn't necessary from Starcraft 1.
I'm thinking that any of the problems I mentioned up there would be fixed if the Lurker was put on the tech tree slightly before the Ultralisk, maybe once hive is done the research would be available, since otherwise, I could see a lot of potential for the lurker being overpowered: burrowed, fairly long range, and the line of attack.
|
On July 10 2010 10:38 MorroW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 10:34 Logo wrote:
I really don't see the value in something that's going to protect a ramp. Any stationary unit like a straight up lurker is going to be worthless for zerg because it solves a problem they don't have. If it can't move in on tanks, then zerg doesn't need it in my opinion.
The 'problem' with banelings is that they're insanely expensive in larvae for any use other than mowing down light infantry. yeah you can wreck a formation of tanks reasonably well with them, but you're shooting yourself in the foot in terms of larvae. yes that is true sc2 is all about having a huge chunk of units and roam around the middle where all battles are, but where are you at the harassment point? abusing cliffs? i very much feel like zerg need a unit that can use terrain such as cliffs by natural. as a mapmaker i just put up a cliff and i know ok this cliff is only gonna make it better for terran and worse for zerg, its poor design by blizzard to make zerg this one-way-race of gameplay so i think lurker would be the perfect unit to fill this void
Hmm I do agree with that, it's really sound logic and as a map maker myself I do understand how annoying it is that zerg have nothing to utilize cliffs.
At the same time I just feel like a stationary unit like a lurker would fill the gap that I don't have at the moment. I wonder if there's a way to possibly combine the two things into one delicious unit.
Really it's almost like zerg need a big mixup in the mid game to break their current style of play. They're pretty balanced from win %, but man that early-mid game is really void of something to make Zerg sparkle like Sentries, tanks, Thors, etc. all do. Everything is pretty much flank and a-move until you get drops, burrow move, or infestors.
Maybe a lurker would be sufficient to cover the gap between when Zerg hit tech 2 and when they have their harassment options open up. I just don't know. It's possible that a lurker being super effective at holding off hellion harass could help a transition to the mid game.
|
On July 10 2010 10:34 Logo wrote:
I really don't see the value in something that's going to protect a ramp. Any stationary unit like a straight up lurker is going to be worthless for zerg because it solves a problem they don't have. If it can't move in on tanks, then zerg doesn't need it in my opinion.
The 'problem' with banelings is that they're insanely expensive in larvae for any use other than mowing down light infantry. yeah you can wreck a formation of tanks reasonably well with them, but you're shooting yourself in the foot in terms of larvae.
You don't see the value of something that can hold a piece of terrain?
That's not a problem with a unit, but a problem with your knowledge of StarCraft...
Terrain control is PARAMOUNT to success in higher levels of play.
|
On July 10 2010 10:23 MavercK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 10:21 ELA wrote:
As someone pointed out in one of the milion previous discussions like this on the Lurker-topic, Zerg as a race dosn't really go well with a tactical unit that can wipe out entire armies while being cloaked.. They need some badass, spammable overpowering units with low supply-count. like the zergling?
lol you sir are a baller.
For the Lurker I want to see it take on as much differentiating features as possible from the baneling, and siege tank.
|
Currently the infestor can shoot infested terrans while burrowed. I think we need even more zerg units which can attack while burrowed, or even only while burrowed. The lurker makes AWESOME games in BW, not just for the zerg, but for their opponents also. It's tricky and interesting to control lurkers and to beat lurkers.
I think in HotS there could be 2 more burrow-attacking units - one like the lurker that deals ranged splash damage, and one which can move while burrowed and deals melee burrowed damage, but for example loses health while burrowed, so you should unburrow it often enough, if you don't suicide it (and it can't attack while unburrowed).
The reason is - the other races have plenty of good detecting options (especially terran), they should be pressed to use them more; and also the other two races have cloaking units both on the ground and in the air. Zerg has no cloaked air units, and the compensation is that all ground units can burrow. But DTs, banshees, ghosts can deal serious damage while cloaked, so Zerg need 1 or 2 units that also can attack while burrowed. (when i say "need" i rather mean "in order to make more interesting games to watch"; i have no doubt zerg can achieve 50/50 in all matchups even only with lings and hydras)
|
If you haven't noticed, Zerg units do not have bonus damages. Only the Ultralisk and Corruptor (+something vs massive) have bonus damages. If they add the Lurker in HotS, do you think it should have a damage bonus or not at all?
|
I think that lurkers do have a valid point in later parts but can someone enlighten me whether lurkers + infestors would completely nullify any sort of bio play and make nearly t go for mech? I dont think that the lurkers would actually help to fill the hole since that what zerg needs now is to have something with terran mech instead which is a more pressing issue right now. Also hold lurkers wont work since that was a bug in scbw -.-
|
On July 10 2010 12:24 streamofhonour wrote:
I think that lurkers do have a valid point in later parts but can someone enlighten me whether lurkers + infestors would completely nullify any sort of bio play and make nearly t go for mech? I dont think that the lurkers would actually help to fill the hole since that what zerg needs now is to have something with terran mech instead which is a more pressing issue right now. Also hold lurkers wont work since that was a bug in scbw -.-
Events where hold lurkers are considered legal are:
Kespa sanctioned tournaments
World Cyber Games
TeamLiquid Starleague
A bug would have been patched. An unintentional feature that was determined to add variability and liquidity of units, and subsequently left in the game, is not a bug.
|
3rd stage for zergling-baneling- ?? ?
Lurkling?
|
On July 10 2010 12:24 streamofhonour wrote:
I think that lurkers do have a valid point in later parts but can someone enlighten me whether lurkers + infestors would completely nullify any sort of bio play and make nearly t go for mech? I dont think that the lurkers would actually help to fill the hole since that what zerg needs now is to have something with terran mech instead which is a more pressing issue right now. Also hold lurkers wont work since that was a bug in scbw -.-
Ignoring the rest of your post, you just made me think of something almost as good as swarm/lurker which is fungal/lurker.
This would be fucking awesome to see and use.
On July 10 2010 10:41 Animostas wrote:
I think the lurker would be a hell of a problem for Terran, considering how their detection is significantly more limited compared to SC1; the energy that might have originally been used for scan is going to be used for Mules instead, so basically unless Terran has to go for putting up turrets everywhere, go for a quick Raven, or basically stunt your economy in favor of paranoia of lurkers. Before any significant detection is available, Zerg basically has complete map control if they can get a few lurkers at your choke. Protoss doesn't have this kind of problem because a quick robotics facility isn't a problem since that Observatory isn't necessary from Starcraft 1.
I'm thinking that any of the problems I mentioned up there would be fixed if the Lurker was put on the tech tree slightly before the Ultralisk, maybe once hive is done the research would be available, since otherwise, I could see a lot of potential for the lurker being overpowered: burrowed, fairly long range, and the line of attack.
There is no problem with detection in this game. In fact since zerg do not have scourge, terran really only ever needs like 1 raven to detect. That makes it even easier to deal with lurkers.
T scouts zerg is going fast lurker, tech to raven, get HSM, bomb those lurkers.
It's not hard to get a raven if you're not planning to get one either, TLO uses the 1-1-1 build which is pretty flexible in reacting to basically anything.
|
i like it but i dont like the range increase. Lurker range should be fine without increase.
|
On July 10 2010 13:52 pzea469 wrote:
i like it but i dont like the range increase. Lurker range should be fine without increase.
Well marauders and stalkers have like 6 range, so if the lurker has the same or barely more lurkers would just get owned. Need more range later on imho.
|
Give up the goddamn lurker. Bio TvZ is already hard enough to play as it is, do you really want 100% of terrans meching every game? They'll go tank/viking/nighthawk and your precious lurkers will be just as useless against that as banelings are against air.
|
Why are people so obsessed with wanting the lurker back?
Yea, I liked arbiters, but i've accepted the fact that they won't be in SC2 and lurkers won't either.
|
On July 10 2010 12:53 InfiniteIce wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 12:24 streamofhonour wrote:
I think that lurkers do have a valid point in later parts but can someone enlighten me whether lurkers + infestors would completely nullify any sort of bio play and make nearly t go for mech? I dont think that the lurkers would actually help to fill the hole since that what zerg needs now is to have something with terran mech instead which is a more pressing issue right now. Also hold lurkers wont work since that was a bug in scbw -.- Events where hold lurkers are considered legal are: Kespa sanctioned tournaments World Cyber Games TeamLiquid Starleague A bug would have been patched. An unintentional feature that was determined to add variability and liquidity of units, and subsequently left in the game, is not a bug.
I dont agree that it was left intentionally in tge game but correct me if im wrong, isnt it that blizzard already gave up on scbw long ago and then stop lurker was found? If thays the vase then why did blizzard remove muta stacking which was also a bug used competetively after it was diacovered? If lurkers was introduced into sc2 blizzard would not overlook something that is so obvious in scbw and would remove it, unless the community cry blasphemy at it.
Sorry for the spelling errors though, my iphone just got fucked over by the chat box
|
I enjoy having a match up where I'm not constantly worrying about an autoloss if I didn't get out an observer, so I am decidedly against this.
|
Honestly, Blizzard really crippled how fun Zerg was. Mutas, scourge, defilers, and lurkers I feel were the most fun units in BW. These require micro/clever placements (lurker), now micro is near impossible with mutas. Zerg went from my main since they were the most fun, to my least favorite just because they're not very fun anymore. I feel the infestor doesn't even come close to how much fun the defiler was. The infestor does a.. mind control. This ability pretty much just steals an opponent unit. There's no more afterthought to it. The fungal growth is ok, but it didn't have the baller PLAGUUUU feel to it. The defiler spells were devastating and complimented the rest of the zerg's units very well and made it very fun (aka DS).
Swarming and all is fun, but Zerg also needs some sense of micro (muta/scourge) or siege (lurker, DS) to balance out the variety of play. I don't know what to add to Zerg to fit those role without just saying "hey, let's put *insert BW unit* back into SC2".
|
I'm thinking about making a blog/topic about why DO NOT bring back the damn lurker
|
I'm going to have to throw my hat in with those that say that this lurker, as described, is preposterously overpowered. 9 range? 2 supply??? that makes these super massable. the only thing that would beat them is well positioned tanks, already sieged. Protoss ground would get completely owned by just a few of these + roaches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
