EPTTheoryCraft: Lurker - Page 6
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
theDOMO
United States5 Posts
| ||
|
Hott
United States7 Posts
| ||
|
Garrl
Scotland1971 Posts
On July 12 2010 01:37 Hott wrote: More isn't better. Why make burrow something you have to get in order to use the lurker?! thats not good at all. Lurkers in BW automatically got burrow; you didn't need to research it to use them. | ||
|
Hott
United States7 Posts
On July 12 2010 01:45 Garrl wrote: Lurkers in BW automatically got burrow; you didn't need to research it to use them. I know that, In the main post he mentioned making it something you had to get for the lurker... -____- | ||
|
Ksyper
Bulgaria665 Posts
-Possibly an additional tier 3 upgrade to burrow move underground with lurkers for 150/150." This is way too imba, 9 range and moving underground is just insane. But I would like to see the lurker in SC2. But maybe give him +damage to light and not to armored. | ||
|
Dystisis
Norway713 Posts
I wonder if they could function as an anti-Mech unit, though. That seems to be the general consensus what Zerg needs the most; something to counter Siege-Tanks. The problem is that they are stationary attackers, making anything besides holding back tanks difficult. Also, they actually would fare bad against tanks anyway since tanks can siege up out of their range, use a scan, then shoot them/drive them back. I think a possible solution to this could be to make the Lurker have an ability to move somehow, burrowed. But it shouldn't be fast movement, I think that would be overpowered if it was able to constantly move under ground and cause havoc to ground units. Rather, I would be interested in it having the ability to move at the speed of f.ex. Queens off-creep, underground. Perhaps even slower than that, so that in reality moving it underground is very impractical except for certain situations. The point is that then it could dig its way under a tank line. Of course, it would need to be stationary (and underground) to attack. | ||
|
moon`
United States372 Posts
On July 11 2010 23:18 Garrl wrote: Everyone seems to think lurkers are purely for defence, which is a complete fabrication. Almost every BW ZvT I've played in which I've made lurkers I've used them aggressively to either contain my opponent, slow push in, or flank their army with. Watch some of Savior's games. It's ridiculous how dynamically he makes his games with just a set amount of Lurkers and a hanful of zerglings hold back a huge terran ball. He stalls and stalls until Hive tech is up and that's when he truly shows who is the better player. And that's why Lurkers are so damn good.. not because banelings blow up and kill a shit ton. Because they can be used offensively and defensively while maintaining usefulness within the army, unlike suicidal units. Savior also makes use of the offensive capabilities of Lurkers with drops, counter-pushing a terran ball, etc. Why mess with something that worked so well in BW? It seems Blizzard (and many other's..) stance on the Lurker is that it doesn't fit with current trends in SC2. I ask you: why not? If you really put the time and dedication to think about ways to implement the unit instead of facebook integration, maybe Zerg would be a far more appealing race to newer players.. | ||
| ||
