|
A lot of people feel that zerg is lacking unit diversity. It is true, but do they need more units to balance out zerg options a bit? Do they need more heavy gas units? Does something feel like it's missing but you can't quite put your finger on it?
![[image loading]](http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/6/63/Lurker_SC2_DevRend1.jpg)
So anyways, I was talking with my team earlier about what units zerg could get in HotS expansion later down the road. We had a couple ideas for units like this one:
+ Show Spoiler [Zephyrling] +I had the idea for a tier 3 hive (or tier 2.5 spire) upgrade at pool that allows lings to morph into air units that are melee and attack for less damage/dps than their ground counterparts. However, they have a passive ability that goes off every couple hits or attaches them to the hulls of air units like a DoT. This DoT would cause the unit to be slowed.
This would give zerg air a more swarm like feeling, as well as allows better response times to dropships all over the place when zerg has many bases up (since you could just patrol them outside bases like scourge used to).
They upgrade would be similar cost as the bling upgrade, and possibly reduce the HP of the unit to 10-25.
The main unit we discussed was the good ol' Lurker, my favorite unit (second is the baneling).
![[image loading]](http://c4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/52/l_d0f4a0bc8e0c42ea90b9cc37acfdb6e3.jpg)
As far as the unit's role, people feel that it overlaps with current units such as; baneling, roach, or even ultralisk. To some extent that is true. But I think it could still work.
![[image loading]](http://starcraft.incgamers.com/gallery/data/504/medium/Lurker.jpg)
Ideas we had:
-Make it tier 2, but morph from a roach (since hydra itself is already tier 2). Research cost 150/150 OR 50/50 and burrow must be researched as well 100/100. After all They do kinda look similar, and zerg evolve however they want so it fits ok lorewise.
-No additional cost in food (since roach and hydra are 2)
-Make it cost mostly gas because as it is right now, there is not a single zerg unit that costs more gas than minerals. So something like 25/125.
-It's HP would be between 150-170 and would come with 1 or 2 armor. It would be a armored bio unit ofc.
-The damage should be something like 15 + 20-30 to armored and be 7 range with a tier 3 upgrade giving them 9 range. +2 per upgrade or +1/+1 on attacks.
-Possibly an additional tier 3 upgrade to burrow move underground with lurkers for 150/150.
So the roles they would fill are many. Early game opening (to keep players honest with detection), Base raiding (harassment, drops, nydus, etc), reinforcement blocking (get in the middle of that rally), base defense (keep those drops busy at least for a while), surprise ambushes, defense against massive tier 1 & 1.5 units (zealots, stalkers, marauders, marines, reapers, hellions, sentries, templar, lings, blings, roach, hydra,).
Obviously you'd need 3-5 lurkers to 1 shot anything, and more like 6-10+ to 1 shot any kind of mass of hellions, zealots, marines, or hydra.
The main thing they would be effective at is versus masses of marauders, vikings, stalkers, and roaches, and to provide a more efficient non disposable unit to hold ground with. So they don't really hard counter anything (unless there is simply no detection), but they are pretty decent vs a lot of things. More of a soft counter.
They would still be greatly hard countered by; Immortals, Collossus, Tanks, Thors, Ultras, and of course air units. Hell, even zealots with charge would be pretty good vs any amount of lurkers under 10 or so.
What do you guys think about a semi anti-armored/light unit like this?
Could you see it being used in ways that (burrowed) blings/roaches couldn't?
Would it be more balanced and more exciting for Esports than sc2 is currently?
What other ideas can you think about for the Lurker?
What other ideas can you think of for more (gas heavy?)units for zerg to address unit diversity problems and options?
|
Lurker is probably(most likely) gonna make an appearance in the Heart of the Swarm. So no need to theorycraft on it right now.
|
On July 10 2010 08:59 Illison wrote:
Lurker is probably(most likely) gonna make an appearance in the Heart of the Swarm. So no need to theorycraft on it right now.
So anyways, I was talking with my team earlier about what units zerg could get in HotS expansion later down the road.
and that's all the more reason TO theorycraft on the unit imho.
|
I thought there was a comment from a Blizzard employee in some interview saying that lurkers were unlikely to be patched into Wings of Liberty, or a later game.
I may be incorrect but it's something I remembered.
|
On July 10 2010 09:01 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 08:59 Illison wrote:
Lurker is probably(most likely) gonna make an appearance in the Heart of the Swarm. So no need to theorycraft on it right now. Show nested quote +So anyways, I was talking with my team earlier about what units zerg could get in HotS expansion later down the road. and that's all the more reason TO theorycraft on the unit imho.
Oh I guess I didn't read that part. Selective reading ftl. Thought you were mostly talking about getting it patched in. Sorry about that.
|
Blizzard won't put all their "eggs in one basket" so to speak. Illison is right.
|
Honestly, why do people still insist on posting about the lurker? The lurker as we knew it, the infantry massacring stealth attacking unit, is obsolete in SC2 and will not be back. We have the baneling and that is fine by me.
It is not really possible to postulate about what units may or may not be seen in HOTS at this point. The new units added to brood war were done to help fill gaps, perceived or otherwise, of each race. SC2 is still too young to know what gaps do or do not exist, so it is impossible to theorycraft the ideal unit for filling them.
The lurker is obviously the poster child of the zerg race and everyone wants them for nostalgia's sake. But we need to move on if we are to make real progress.
|
On July 10 2010 09:02 Tone_ wrote:
I thought there was a comment from a Blizzard employee in some interview saying that lurkers were unlikely to be patched into Wings of Liberty, or a later game.
I may be incorrect but it's something I remembered.
Well, the Lurker was in the alphas up until the last blizzcon. And Blizzard said they would (and are known for) adding units in expansions.
On July 10 2010 09:04 SnakeChomp wrote:
Honestly, why do people still insist on posting about the lurker? The lurker as we knew it, the infantry massacring stealth attacking unit, is obsolete in SC2 and will not be back. We have the baneling and that is fine by me.
It is not really possible to postulate about what units may or may not be seen in HOTS at this point. The new units added to brood war were done to help fill gaps, perceived or otherwise, of each race. SC2 is still too young to know what gaps do or do not exist, so it is impossible to theorycraft the ideal unit for filling them.
The lurker is obviously the poster child of the zerg race and everyone wants them for nostalgia's sake. But we need to move on if we are to make real progress.
I'm not saying we need light unit counter, in fact I'm saying it won't be that good vs marines and such (especially since they have more hp to begin with and shield upgrades).
The gaps with zerg are clearly outlined in the OP, unit diversity, gas heavy units, etc.
Besides being a fan favorite unit, I just feel that the unit brought so much more than banelings or roaches or ultras can by themselves. I'm leaning towards it being a more entertaining unit for esports
|
Please dont start mixing Heroes of Newerth into sc2 :p
|
I've been thinking that I'd like to see the zerg gain back the devourer's armor reducing spores ability in the form of an artillery unit. Could work on a lurkerish unit I suppose.
|
On July 10 2010 09:16 mucker wrote:
I've been thinking that I'd like to see the zerg gain back the devourer's armor reducing spores ability in the form of an artillery unit. Could work on a lurkerish unit I suppose.
I've also though about a ground unit like this. dubbed it 'smoker'. Evolves just like a lurker and works the same kind of way, but it shoots a cloud of smoke out and does devourer type damage.
|
as long as the baneling is in the game there is no need for the lurker in particular, but it does leave a big hole in the zerg's artillery for a good defensive unit (especially with no defiler/swarm either). the expansion should add a unit that can cover this role well.
I like the idea of having the queen morph into a unit at tier 2 that is a strong defense unit (by way of spells instead of macro mechanics). it becomes a faster stronger unit and then gains good defense spells.
I've read a lot that infestors are great for stopping air harass/drops (FG + infested terrans) but this unit would be for expansion defense and strong/slow forward pushes. something to help hold chokes etc
|
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^
|
On July 10 2010 09:22 Ideas wrote:
as long as the baneling is in the game there is no need for the lurker in particular, but it does leave a big hole in the zerg's artillery for a good defensive unit (especially with no defiler/swarm either). the expansion should add a unit that can cover this role well.
I like the idea of having the queen morph into a unit at tier 2 that is a strong defense unit (by way of spells instead of macro mechanics).
this combined with the lurker
the lurker that only can morph from queens in t2 and only use its spikes on creep
it would mostly be defensivly used
and you could work out some nydus creep strat
or even going for mass creep on the map
sounds interesting 
|
On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^
troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus
|
infestors cost 100/150 and overall the lurker does overlap with quite a few units. Also if it is anything like it was in BW then yeah it needs additional cost in food atleast make it a 3 supply unit(2 for roach and 1 additional when morphed into lurker, but probably 2 additional supply).
IMHO we dont need the lurker in the game though, Focusing on a new unit to put in the game for diversity is where energy should be spent, There is enough of old units in the game.
What do you guys think about a semi anti-armored/light unit like this?
Could you see it being used in ways that (burrowed) blings/roaches couldn't?
Would it be more balanced and more exciting for Esports than sc2 is currently?
What other ideas can you think about for the Lurker?
What other ideas can you think of for more (gas heavy?)units for zerg to address unit diversity problems and options?
1) I think it would be great to have a unit like that but the lurker isnt it, overlaps with too many units.
2) Not really,
3) Maybe, but you can achieve the same effect with something fresh
4) Focus on a new unit instead of trying to get the lurker into the game(even though it is a sweet unit I have to admit)
5) I dont think making a unit gas heavy, and hence very powerful, is the solution to the zergs problem. Zerg needs something thats different and has a somewhat fun to use ability. But honestly I think the zerg is more or less fine as it is. There's some tweaking to be made but we'll see how the latest patch has affected the game.
Could the zerg use a new unit for diversity? Yes, but I dont know if it is actually needed. I'm inclined to say no.
|
On July 10 2010 09:29 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^ troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus
Siege Tanks need to be sieged.
Thors are more expensive 3x the supply
Immortals have a much shorter range
Collosus get raped by AA, 3x the supply
A 9 range unit that does this much damage and is 2 supply. Not even mentioning the splash damage. You high...?
|
On July 10 2010 09:04 CharlieMurphy wrote:
The gaps with zerg are clearly outlined in the OP, unit diversity, gas heavy units, etc.
Besides being a fan favorite unit, I just feel that the unit brought so much more than banelings or roaches or ultras can by themselves. I'm leaning towards it being a more entertaining unit for esports
The "gaps" you quoted are not gaps. Lacking unit diversity is an opinion and one that I happen to disagree with. I don't really think zerg qualifies as gas heavy, and even if it did, that would be a trait or even a "feature" of the race and not a gap.
Gaps are gameplay deficiencies, not a subjective disagreement with game design. As a theoretical example, consider the following completely made up statement: the only viable option for Zerg to deal with Terran siege tank + turret creep across the map is to not allow the game to reach that state. Clearly this indicates that there is a deficiency in this matchup. Perhaps the solution is tweaking some numbers. Or perhaps the solution is to add a new unit.
The game is too young to claim any such gaps exist. People have still not experimented enough with all of the units. For example, I rarely see any use of Nydus worms unless you are trying to win immediately by dropping one in the back of their base. What about flanking with them? What about using them as a front to peel defenders away from the main so you can just walk in the front door? Until these tactics are explored there is no way to tell if there really are any gaps in any of the races.
That being said, they may still choose to add new units just to mix things up a bit. In that case they could add what ever they pleased as long as it doesn't step on any existing roles or units. The new units would need to bring some kind of compelling change to gameplay for Blizzard to add them just because.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
I love how the answer to every Sc2 unit problem is to just put a BW unit in. Why not just play BW then?
I think and hope we'll see new units as opposed to recreations of the original. It's not that the originals are bad, obviously, but I think part of the fun of Sc2 should be dealing with new stuff.
|
On July 10 2010 09:34 Philip2110 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 09:29 CharlieMurphy wrote:On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^ troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus Siege Tanks need to be sieged. Thors are more expensive 3x the supply Immortals have a much shorter range Collosus get raped by AA, 3x the supply A 9 range unit that does this much damage and is 2 supply. Not even mentioning the splash damage. You high...?
Lurkers also need to be seiged.
Thors obliterate air so they better.
Immortals hard counter armored shit and do 50+ damage move fast and have special shields, why would they need longer range.
Collosus, have a range upgrade (+3 to 9)same tier level as well and they have a ton of HP, lurker can get raped by any air in general.
The 9 Range upgrade is hive tech btw, which means you should be able to counter it with any of the above mentioned units very easily. As well as banshee, muta, ravens, void rays, pheonix (lift).
Why all the negativity? This is not meant to be a whining thread, The ideas I have are not OMFGWTF imbalanced. I don't see why you guys can't have a constructive discussion.
|
From your description
looks like the lurker does everything. Like the PS3.
Maybe one of us can make a SC2 mod with a (different colored) roach model with lurker abilities or attributes?
|
On July 10 2010 09:41 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 09:34 Philip2110 wrote:On July 10 2010 09:29 CharlieMurphy wrote:On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^ troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus Siege Tanks need to be sieged. Thors are more expensive 3x the supply Immortals have a much shorter range Collosus get raped by AA, 3x the supply A 9 range unit that does this much damage and is 2 supply. Not even mentioning the splash damage. You high...? Lurkers also need to be seiged.
and are invisible while doing so
|
this reminds me of AoX
Armies of Exigo. a not that well known sc remake in which the ling counterpart could be upgraded to be able to fly
|
On July 10 2010 09:34 Philip2110 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 09:29 CharlieMurphy wrote:On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^ troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus Siege Tanks need to be sieged. Thors are more expensive 3x the supply Immortals have a much shorter range Collosus get raped by AA, 3x the supply A 9 range unit that does this much damage and is 2 supply. Not even mentioning the splash damage. You high...?
best part is, he calls me a troll 
giving feedback is called trolling? ^^
9 range
splash dmg over the whole 9 fields
45 dmg vs armored (literaly 3hits and killing 10marauders if placed lucky?^^)
51 dmg with upgrades?
burrowed/stealthed
only mid costs
only 2 supply
only tier 2
if and only if a unit would include all those aspects, it would be something like the toss yo'mama ship, what only can be build once.
put this lurker 6 range behind your choke and wait how everything gets instantly stealth-oneshot
this should not mean, that i'm against the lurker, i would love it
and i think it would need a very high range like 7-9, because zerg needs something vs sieged tanks with mass bio in front
but please make it somehow balanced ^^
|
if you are wondering why you are getting whiners 90% of the people posting in this thread are terran.
|
One thing people seem to forget is that when trying to create a new unit, consider the implications of OTHER newer units. For example Lurkers seemed a little overkill considering only SC1. Imagine pure marines. But considering BW where you have medics and infantry became that much more powerful, I can totally see them coming in. (Note it's not the best example by far, but you can see what I mean).
I'll wait for the game to evolve and see if interesting NEW dynamics come up. I don't care about balance. That is what strategy is for. What fosters strategy is units that are unique and how they behave in the game, and with/against other units, which should not overlap with another unit (or even a set of units).
I think I agree that the Lurker's behaviour and role is taken up by banelings and burrowed roaches, and that ground siege is somewhat compensated by Broodlords etc making the Lurker LESS UNIQUE. Roaches can hold the line like Lurkers. Banelings can deal with those pure marine balls. And overall ground siege is taken up by powerful Broodlords. Yes, the lurker can do all three but it isn't that unique.
Now if there was a unit like an infestor (not our infestor but a building infestor etc.) that would present a new dynamic...
|
Why all the negativity? This is not meant to be a whining thread, The ideas I have are not OMFGWTF imbalanced. I don't see why you guys can't have a constructive discussion.
well i really tried.
but it turned out you called me a troll, because i didn't instantly posted how much i loved your picturesupported idea.
if you really want to go into further conversations, you should stop beeing mean
and again, i love zerg, i love lurkers
but i also love balance, as it turns out - only long and hard fights are good fights ;-)
|
arent zergs trying to get more massable units? lurker would totally undermine that ideal. Part of the reason the lurker went missing, from my understanding, is that the lurker is anti-swarm. id rather see a unit called an ant that costs 1 gas and takes 1/3 a supply and just mass it like crazy with zerglings or something. at least then zerg could be called a "swarm" better.
So you zergs definitely need to choose, lurker or swarm, you really cant ask for both.
+ Show Spoiler +well you can, but you probably shouldnt
|
On July 10 2010 08:55 CharlieMurphy wrote:
What do you guys think about a semi anti-armored/light unit like this?
I think that Zerg is really lacking as it is in, for example and especially, ZvT. Nothing counters armored units as it is. I think it's a great idea.
Could you see it being used in ways that (burrowed) blings/roaches couldn't?
Yes, many.
Banelings can attack while burrowed, but are a one-use suicide unit. They can hold chokes, until you run out of burrowed banelings.
You must also either time the explosions manually, or risk losing all of your burrowed banelings in one area to a single zergling (marine, zealot, etc) tripping all of the baneling mines. Lurkers auto-attack (obviously) and can hold a choke without you having to specifically tell it what to do. 1 unit near a lurker group means you kill 1 unit. 1 unit near an autocast burrowed baneling group means you lose all of them to kill 1 unit.
Thought both are AoE damage, splash damage is NOT line damage.
If you have a heavy marauder wall in front of a bunch of tanks, banelings do indeed do splash to the marauders, but the tanks are pretty much immune to damage. Line damage would allow a player to do damage to the tanks in the back as well, forcing Terran players to rethink the "1 hotkey marauder+tank attack move, siege all tanks in one strategically unsound blob, and win", mechanic that seems to be so very common.
Would it be more balanced and more exciting for Esports than sc2 is currently?
Balanced? Yes. For all the reasons you listed above, such as diversity, etc., as well as give players a reason to actually control tank positions and unsiege if caught in a bad position. Similarly so for lurkers being caught in an off position by tanks.
Exciting? Yes. Hold lurkers anyone? ^^
What other ideas can you think about for the Lurker?
Given the relatively small map sizes (not absolute sizes pixel by pixel, just unit size/speed/damage to buildings/pace etc) in SC2 as compared to SC1, it might make sense to have the lurker start out with a medium move speed, upgradable to a fast move speed, similar to how the Hydralisk was in SC1. (An upgrade removed in SC2, curiously.) I feel this upgrade should not be a Hive upgrade, and that the lurker should a tier 2 or 2.5 unit. The upgrade should take a while to finish researching, though, similar to times on Blink, or Charge. The research time would prevent imbalance of being able to rush lurkers across to every expansion before other races have time to fortify, 8 minutes into the game.
This Tier 2.5 option gives Zerg an alternative form of gameplay, i.e., to not tech to hive every single game, and also adds an incentive for opponents to scout the Zerg player more often, similar to SC1, where you had to scout your Zerg opponent often to check the timings/existence of a Lair/Hive in order to counter correctly. I believe this scouting mechanic is necessary in BW, but even MORESO in SC2, given the sheer economic advantages MULEs impart. Without so many free MULEs/minerals (traded for intel on the enemy with Scanner sweeps), this might also add an additional element to TvZ gameplay, forcing the T player to consider expanding more often, as they do not have as many free MULEs when forced to scan, possibly leading to 2-base turtle Terran being less used in sought of a 3base strategy. Diversifying Terran strategy and Zerg army units at the same time? Sounds good to me.
What other ideas can you think of for more (gas heavy?)units for zerg to address unit diversity problems and options?
A Low-Mid Gas Tier-2 melee unit. Zerg has a T1 melee unit, the Zergling, and a T3 melee unit, the Ultralisk. With ultralisks being so expensive, and needing so many armor upgrades, it really sometimes feels like a roll of the dice with Ultras. Some games you will make one step in the wrong direction and have Ultras die before being able to do too much damage, and with their long build times, you are not able to mass up again before the counter-wave hits; compare this to others it seems like your opponent got completely crushed by Ultralisks.
I think a low to mid gas consuming melee unit would diversify the Zerg problem of having to choose between either:
a) a fuckton of no-gas instant zerglings that evaporate but swarm nicely; or
b) a very small amount of very expensive, slow-building ultralisks that either rape or get raped
Zerg needs a damage sink that isn't the Ultralisk. I think a T2 melee unit would fill this role nicely, as well add diversity to the Zerg. Think about it, every unit Zerg has is ranged, besides the Zergling/Baneling combo and the Ultralisk (excluding Broodlings, which spawn from a Ranged Flying unit anyway.) True, the other races are mostly ranged as well, but given that zerg EVOLVES, rather than makes ranged technology...wouldn't this be fitting to have more melee units in the Zerg? I mean, turn on the discovery channel. Nearly all predators (Zerg!) in existence have a melee attack. They've evolved that way.
Thanks Eddie 
Also, this:
+ Show Spoiler [is a terrible post.] +On July 10 2010 10:01 JiYan wrote:arent zergs trying to get more massable units? lurker would totally undermine that ideal. Part of the reason the lurker went missing, from my understanding, is that the lurker is anti-swarm. id rather see a unit called an ant that costs 1 gas and takes 1/3 a supply and just mass it like crazy with zerglings or something. at least then zerg could be called a "swarm" better. So you zergs definitely need to choose, lurker or swarm, you really cant ask for both. + Show Spoiler +well you can, but you probably shouldnt
That's like saying, Terran: you definitely need to choose, Bio or Mech. You really can't ask for both.
Edit: accidentally missed a quote tag and ended up quoting all my responses. Fixed
|
On July 10 2010 10:01 JiYan wrote:arent zergs trying to get more massable units? lurker would totally undermine that ideal. Part of the reason the lurker went missing, from my understanding, is that the lurker is anti-swarm. id rather see a unit called an ant that costs 1 gas and takes 1/3 a supply and just mass it like crazy with zerglings or something. at least then zerg could be called a "swarm" better. So you zergs definitely need to choose, lurker or swarm, you really cant ask for both. + Show Spoiler +well you can, but you probably shouldnt
the good intention in lurkers is, that they maybe could close the whole in zergs unit composition
while zerg already only has 9 combat units, which is 1-2 less then the other races, it also lacks of good abilities vs high range (colossi/tanks) and vs armored ground units.
i'm not saying zerg is UP, no zerg is really good balanced. but the whole playstyle lacks of one or two more ways to be competative
|
On July 10 2010 10:01 JiYan wrote:arent zergs trying to get more massable units? lurker would totally undermine that ideal. Part of the reason the lurker went missing, from my understanding, is that the lurker is anti-swarm. id rather see a unit called an ant that costs 1 gas and takes 1/3 a supply and just mass it like crazy with zerglings or something. at least then zerg could be called a "swarm" better. So you zergs definitely need to choose, lurker or swarm, you really cant ask for both. + Show Spoiler +well you can, but you probably shouldnt
Well it's tough. There's not really much in the way of a defensive unit that can swarm, though if Zerg had a swarming unit it'd probably help Zerg be offensive.
Right now Zerg can be seen as in a bit of an awkward position. Zerg is incredibly reactionary at the moment, but you're expected to play reactionary without any defensive unit to help.
I don't think zerg really want a general combat unit, what they need is a more tactical unit that can help break up their problems.
Essentially where I find the biggest gap in Zerg, and this may not be fully accurate of course, is in the transition from tier 1 to tier 2 vs Terran. The time between when the Terran has access to factory units and you have access to dropship overlords and burrow move Roaches Zerg is really in an awkward spot. It's hard to rely on above ground roaches, lings, or banelings to deal with those threats.
|
Yea, Zerg doesn't really have efficient tactical units right now. That's a good way of putting it.
Interesting ideas InfiniteIce
|
i agree with day9 when he says there are very few units in the game currently that act in controlling "space"
lurker does not overlap with the baneling
the baneling is a suicide unit.
|
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.
|
On July 10 2010 10:14 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Yea, Zerg doesn't really have efficient tactical units right now. That's a good way of putting it.
Interesting ideas InfiniteIce
Thanks
I'd also like to add the following I thought of..
Protoss and Terran have wall-offs. The wall-offs deny scouting or all-in rushes, allowing the player to amass for a timing push to which (especially) Zerg has no defense, as they were unable to scout (you can't always sac an overlord crossmap on larger maps. Don't give me that.) to prepare for the units being made by the T/P, as well as unable to wall off to prevent things like 3 hellions with the preigniter upgrade suiciding for 3 shots to take down 30 drones. A few lurkers on a ramp would substitute nicely for the lack of ability to really wall off.
This brings me to another point, that Terran and Protoss players have the option to "contain" their opponents. Terran obviously has siege tanks. Protoss has ramp forcefielding (not the traditional use of the term "contain", but is quite a literal one!) as well as things like proxy cannons. Zerg does not really have the option to contain their opponent. Lurkers would add this option
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.
Who are you to say what doesn't go well with what?
PS: Have you ever played Brood War?
It goes quite well. Also, Zergling.
|
the lurker would probably overlap with the baneling or ultra at a straight up killing a big army of marines for example. but i still feel they could implant the lurker and give it a role as mainly harassment/defense. keep in mind zerg has no unit at all to put on that lost temple cliff and gay around with, maybe lurker is the perfect role for this kind of harassment, i for one know it was used like this in sc1 when it was not owning out on the field
i would just love if they brought back the lurker, but id like if it had even longer range this time but worse in other areas, so banelings would be better on field while lurker on ramp would be better than baneling on ramp. i hope u understand what i mean, i want them to be good at different things and if u straight up just add lurker like i t was in sc1 it will either replace baneling or wont get used at all im afraid
right now all zergs units look different and have different stats, but at the end of the day all of them are just as good as defending, attacking, harassing while terran units are divided so beautifully
|
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?
|
On July 10 2010 10:23 MorroW wrote:
the lurker would probably overlap with the baneling or ultra at a straight up killing a big army of marines for example. but i still feel they could implant the lurker and give it a role as mainly harassment/defense. keep in mind zerg has no unit at all to put on that lost temple cliff and gay around with, maybe lurker is the perfect role for this kind of harassment, i for one know it was used like this in sc1 when it was not owning out on the field
i would just love if they brought back the lurker, but id like if it had even longer range this time but worse in other areas, so banelings would be better on field while lurker on ramp would be better than baneling on ramp. i hope u understand what i mean, i want them to be good at different things and if u straight up just add lurker like i t was in sc1 it will either replace baneling or wont get used at all im afraid
I agree with this. Well put Morrow.
Though, another solution would be to change the baneling, as opposed to the lurker.
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of banelings. They seem so very ineffective past a certain point in the game...
|
On July 10 2010 10:26 InfiniteIce wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 10:23 MorroW wrote:
the lurker would probably overlap with the baneling or ultra at a straight up killing a big army of marines for example. but i still feel they could implant the lurker and give it a role as mainly harassment/defense. keep in mind zerg has no unit at all to put on that lost temple cliff and gay around with, maybe lurker is the perfect role for this kind of harassment, i for one know it was used like this in sc1 when it was not owning out on the field
i would just love if they brought back the lurker, but id like if it had even longer range this time but worse in other areas, so banelings would be better on field while lurker on ramp would be better than baneling on ramp. i hope u understand what i mean, i want them to be good at different things and if u straight up just add lurker like i t was in sc1 it will either replace baneling or wont get used at all im afraid I agree with this. Well put Morrow. Though, another solution would be to change the baneling, as opposed to the lurker. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of banelings. They seem so very ineffective past a certain point in the game...
Me too. Beautifully summed up points Morrow. I commend your thinking and your English .
|
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.
|
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.
|
On July 10 2010 10:01 JiYan wrote:arent zergs trying to get more massable units? lurker would totally undermine that ideal. Part of the reason the lurker went missing, from my understanding, is that the lurker is anti-swarm. id rather see a unit called an ant that costs 1 gas and takes 1/3 a supply and just mass it like crazy with zerglings or something. at least then zerg could be called a "swarm" better. So you zergs definitely need to choose, lurker or swarm, you really cant ask for both. + Show Spoiler +well you can, but you probably shouldnt
I recall absolutely nobody saying this.
|
the zergling air unit doesn't seem like a good idea because the ling is suppose to be countered by air units, and that was part of the balance because they were so darn cheap. making them swarm over land AND air is waay too overpowered and makes it the end all unit for everything.
anything resembling air units should definitely be part of a different tech tree outside of overlords,
|
Rofl ... a 9 range unit which can fire while cloaked? Even 7 range unupgraded is longer than standard ground unit range. Make it 4 basic range and upgrade it to 7 and we can talk about it ...
Zerg already have a "huge range unit" and that is the Brood Lord. It is only the unwillingness of Zerg players to build ONE building (and then upgrade it) to be able to produce this unit which keeps them from realizing that they have this awesome unit. Most Zerg players are stuck in their "I must get a ground horde" mentality and ignore air completely.
|
Roaches already have Tunneling Claws.
Roaches morph into Lurkers.
The Roach Warren evolve to Lurker Warren at lair tech for an expensive cost (similar to Templar Archive's cost or Fleet Beacon).
Lurkers have the identical melee attack to Roaches above ground (same damage, melee range) and their special Subterranean Spines while burrowed.
Lurkers can move while burrowed faster than Roaches, but must stop to fire.
|
On July 10 2010 15:29 Kakisho wrote:
Roaches already have Tunneling Claws.
Roaches morph into Lurkers.
The Roach Warren evolve to Lurker Warren at lair tech for an expensive cost (similar to Templar Archive's cost or Fleet Beacon).
Lurkers have the identical melee attack to Roaches above ground (same damage, melee range) and their special Subterranean Spines while burrowed.
Lurkers can move while burrowed faster than Roaches, but must stop to fire.
It's useless then. That's way too late to be helpful to zerg to be honest. You're giving zerg a buff at the point in the game where they're strongest. What's the point in that?
Well useless is strong, but why buff zerg at a point in the game where they're already good. Zerg doesn't need mid/late game strength, they need a more powerful early/mid transition unit so they can handle Terran early/mid play.
|
On July 10 2010 15:58 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 15:29 Kakisho wrote:
Roaches already have Tunneling Claws.
Roaches morph into Lurkers.
The Roach Warren evolve to Lurker Warren at lair tech for an expensive cost (similar to Templar Archive's cost or Fleet Beacon).
Lurkers have the identical melee attack to Roaches above ground (same damage, melee range) and their special Subterranean Spines while burrowed.
Lurkers can move while burrowed faster than Roaches, but must stop to fire. It's useless then. That's way too late to be helpful to zerg to be honest. You're giving zerg a buff at the point in the game where they're strongest. What's the point in that? Well useless is strong, but why buff zerg at a point in the game where they're already good. Zerg doesn't need mid/late game strength, they need a more powerful early/mid transition unit so they can handle Terran early/mid play.
Zerg does need mid game strength. Lurkers at lair tech is fine, imo.
Mech doesnt come out early game.....
|
On July 10 2010 15:20 Rabiator wrote:
Rofl ... a 9 range unit which can fire while cloaked? Even 7 range unupgraded is longer than standard ground unit range. Make it 4 basic range and upgrade it to 7 and we can talk about it ...
Zerg already have a "huge range unit" and that is the Brood Lord. It is only the unwillingness of Zerg players to build ONE building (and then upgrade it) to be able to produce this unit which keeps them from realizing that they have this awesome unit. Most Zerg players are stuck in their "I must get a ground horde" mentality and ignore air completely.
I still don't understand this idea. Broodlords require Hive tech, greater Spire, and freakin' corrupters with a useless ability. How is this even remotely practical to tech up to unless you are ridiculously in the lead and have full map control? Lurkers are the answer to holding back aggression. Imo, they provide a lot of interesting mechanics to the metagame. Yet, there are those who are against the Lurker coming back - mainly non Zerg players, ironically.
|
On July 10 2010 16:11 moon` wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 15:20 Rabiator wrote:
Rofl ... a 9 range unit which can fire while cloaked? Even 7 range unupgraded is longer than standard ground unit range. Make it 4 basic range and upgrade it to 7 and we can talk about it ...
Zerg already have a "huge range unit" and that is the Brood Lord. It is only the unwillingness of Zerg players to build ONE building (and then upgrade it) to be able to produce this unit which keeps them from realizing that they have this awesome unit. Most Zerg players are stuck in their "I must get a ground horde" mentality and ignore air completely. I still don't understand this idea. Broodlords require Hive tech, greater Spire, and freakin' corrupters with a useless ability. How is this even remotely practical to tech up to unless you are ridiculously in the lead and have full map control? Lurkers are the answer to holding back aggression. Imo, they provide a lot of interesting mechanics to the metagame. Yet, there are those who are against the Lurker coming back - mainly non Zerg players, ironically.
1. The proposed Lurkers wouldnt require that much less in investment compared to Brood Lords.
2. Flying units are always a good choice due to their limitless maneuverability.
3. Zerg players are constantly whining about Terran mech, but look at the Zerg air units (and I DONT mean the Mutalisk), which are armored and have very high hp while the Thor deals almost no damage to them due to its specialization against light air units.
4. The Brood Lord exploits one of the weaknesses of sieged tanks and that is its splash damage. The Broodlings are FREE (unlike the Interceptors on a Protoss Carrier) and have a very high targeting priority for units, thus they are actually "absorbing damage" which would otherwise hit your units.
5. You DONT need to have 20 Brood Lords to be effective, just 2-3 are enough to support your units with a bunch of mini-meatshields (the main Brood Lord damage is the IMPACT damage anyways, so the life span of the Broodling doesnt matter). So you get a ton of Corruptors and gain air superiority and just a few Brood Lords to support your ground units with "artillery" fire.
6. Brood Lords are MOBILE ATTACKING units while Lurkers are IMMOBILE DEFENDING units.
Zerg players always whine about requiring to build ONE building or an upgrade to ONE of their hatcheries to get additional tech, but they fail to see the effort it requires for other races to get to higher tech (its not like you only need one tech lab to be able to build Marauders from every Barrack, but for Zerg larvae are larvae). You need to build TONS of production buildings in addition to the CC / Nexi you need to expand your income capability. Zerg however just need a new Hatchery at 300 minerals (dirt cheap compared to Protoss and Terran) to expand both resource and unit production.
The big problem is that many Zerg players fail to see their superiority as a race especially in the late game, but when you havent prepared for a tech switch after a loss to a bunch of sieged tanks you wont win that with a new unit on the ground either. This isnt BW but rather SC2 and we have new units available. Learn to live with it OR ask for siege tanks to be 2 food again (and 25 less gas) while asking for Lurkers ... plus Spider mines and yadda yadda yadda. They will most likely come back in future expansions anyways ...
|
Rabiator, all you need are a few vikings what the hell man? and with cover from tanks/thors don't tell me that it's easy to stop those vikings.
|
On July 11 2010 01:59 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Rabiator, all you need are a few vikings what the hell man? and with cover from tanks/thors don't tell me that it's easy to stop those vikings.
"A few Vikings" depends upon the number of Corruptors you build ... and if you build LOTS the Terran has to build lots too and then it isnt a MECH TERRAN anymore. Vikings however are easily led into traps with just a few Hydralisks (you do research burrow for that) and all of a sudden the Terran requires lots of new Vikings to get rid of your air force. Dont tell me that this cant be done or that it is too expensive, because the Terran units arent free and if he "has to" build an air force he needs to build lots of Starports to be able to get the replacements fast enough or he loses. Vikings dont work well against ground forces and if you want to see how it is done just watch THIS from the Altitude invitational. Let me just quote Day[9]: "The Corruptor count was just too high." and "[IdrA] expected this air battle to be the most important part".
|
Chris Sigaty did an interview on this, stating "more is not better, not to mention all the extra mechanics zerg has on his plate...". I agree with some aspects of this post, but for the most part(as much as i miss that fucking amazing unit!) It just doesnt seem like it would fit. I don't agree with making burrow something you have to get for the lurker. That defeats the whole "sc2 zerg has evolved status"
|
Early-mid game harass, melee unit, good for stopping siege tanks, a 'leaper' perhaps? Zerg don't have a fancy terrain bypassing unit, why not have a cheaper massable melee unit that can jump up or down cliffs, moves slightly fast, and when engaging enemies it can leap over obstacles to that target at a considerable range? You could swarm a bunch and have them leap over the terran army into the tank line and start attacking them. Or you could put them on cliffs to hop down, kill harvesters, then hop back up. Yeah, its like a melee cross between reapers and stalkers, but fills 2 roles with a new unit that fits the evolved swarm feel where its all about trying to become more mobile.
|
On July 11 2010 05:10 DarkKiwi wrote:
Early-mid game harass, melee unit, good for stopping siege tanks, a 'leaper' perhaps? Zerg don't have a fancy terrain bypassing unit, why not have a cheaper massable melee unit that can jump up or down cliffs, moves slightly fast, and when engaging enemies it can leap over obstacles to that target at a considerable range? You could swarm a bunch and have them leap over the terran army into the tank line and start attacking them. Or you could put them on cliffs to hop down, kill harvesters, then hop back up. Yeah, its like a melee cross between reapers and stalkers, but fills 2 roles with a new unit that fits the evolved swarm feel where its all about trying to become more mobile.
It's a tricky thing though. Zerg early game are really tough to deal with except for the fact that you can wall-in. Still I think it does fit a need that Zerg have.
In my experience here's the gaps in Zerg's army. Not saying these need to be fixed, but if you're talking about a new unit here's where I'd look into....
1. A unit that can effectively use terrain/cliffs
2. A unit that can, using cute tactics, be really cost effective vs 2-3 pop armored units ( armored things too large for FG & too small for NP)
3. A unit that's efficient in larvae and with a high mineral:gas ratio. Roaches somewhat fill this, but not particularly well. Lings are nice, but they're not larve efficient and will still cause a mineral float unless you pump hatcheries (which may be fine)
4. A unit that can help vs tanks while transitioning from tier 1 to tier 2 + burrow move/overlord drops. I feel like there's an explosion of tech that you want to get (banelings, roaches, overlord dropping) right at tier 2 and there's nothing all that effective to cover the time until you get them.
|
On July 11 2010 02:15 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2010 01:59 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Rabiator, all you need are a few vikings what the hell man? and with cover from tanks/thors don't tell me that it's easy to stop those vikings. "A few Vikings" depends upon the number of Corruptors you build ... and if you build LOTS the Terran has to build lots too and then it isnt a MECH TERRAN anymore. Vikings however are easily led into traps with just a few Hydralisks (you do research burrow for that) and all of a sudden the Terran requires lots of new Vikings to get rid of your air force. Dont tell me that this cant be done or that it is too expensive, because the Terran units arent free and if he "has to" build an air force he needs to build lots of Starports to be able to get the replacements fast enough or he loses. Vikings dont work well against ground forces and if you want to see how it is done just watch THIS from the Altitude invitational. Let me just quote Day[9]: "The Corruptor count was just too high." and "[IdrA] expected this air battle to be the most important part".
Vikings are cheap and build fast with reactor addon, and they have 10 range which outranges the broodlords and corruptors. If Z is making more corruptors (which are not very cost effective versus vikings) then his ground army will be lacking all that much more.
I didn't say run around with vikings all over the place. Just keep the broodlords nullified.
4-5 vikings is plenty enough to handle a few broodlords with your tank thor hellion army. And if you end up making a ton more, then now you have a harassment strike force as well as some extra compliment to your tanks on the floor.
|
Why should they do bonus damage to armored? I feel like spikes would do little damage to armored and do much more to light.
|
On July 11 2010 05:38 DrTossRulezz wrote:
Why should they do bonus damage to armored? I feel like spikes would do little damage to armored and do much more to light.
armor piercing spikes ok?
|
On July 10 2010 11:41 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 10:23 MavercK wrote: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.
Lings would work against mech if they actually got a significant improvement in damage at hive tech.
On July 11 2010 05:38 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2010 05:38 DrTossRulezz wrote:
Why should they do bonus damage to armored? I feel like spikes would do little damage to armored and do much more to light. armor piercing spikes ok?
yarly.
|
I also want the lurker to come back in SC2. Morphing it from a roach is a very good idea. You have my complete support !
|
I really like the idea of seeing the Lurker come back(it's just such a fuckin' awesome unit), and there are some solid reasons as to why it could fit, but there are also very good reasons as to why it really isn't needed. To be honest, I think that for the most part, everything is balanced well enough at this point that I am fine with the lurker not making it back for SC2. I'll still miss it anyways. <3 Lurkers <3
|
On July 10 2010 09:57 loadme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2010 09:34 Philip2110 wrote:On July 10 2010 09:29 CharlieMurphy wrote:On July 10 2010 09:25 loadme wrote:
the unit you describe is way out of line
armored, at good health, mid-cost
9 range ?!?!
+20-30 vs armored? making it 35-45 vs armored?
the way, the lurker works is by creating a line from him to his target.
everyone on this line will take the damage.
and it is splash dmg
so 35-45 over this distance, with this amount of hp, for those costs
its way out of line ^^ troll post? Siege Tank, Thor, Immortal, Collosus Siege Tanks need to be sieged. Thors are more expensive 3x the supply Immortals have a much shorter range Collosus get raped by AA, 3x the supply A 9 range unit that does this much damage and is 2 supply. Not even mentioning the splash damage. You high...? best part is, he calls me a troll giving feedback is called trolling? ^^ 9 range splash dmg over the whole 9 fields 45 dmg vs armored (literaly 3hits and killing 10marauders if placed lucky?^^) 51 dmg with upgrades? burrowed/stealthed only mid costs only 2 supply only tier 2 if and only if a unit would include all those aspects, it would be something like the toss yo'mama ship, what only can be build once. put this lurker 6 range behind your choke and wait how everything gets instantly stealth-oneshot this should not mean, that i'm against the lurker, i would love it and i think it would need a very high range like 7-9, because zerg needs something vs sieged tanks with mass bio in front but please make it somehow balanced ^^
I thought it was pretty well accepted that Zergling/Baneling/Mutalisk was the counter for Vio plus Tanks.
|
On July 11 2010 05:35 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2010 02:15 Rabiator wrote:On July 11 2010 01:59 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Rabiator, all you need are a few vikings what the hell man? and with cover from tanks/thors don't tell me that it's easy to stop those vikings. "A few Vikings" depends upon the number of Corruptors you build ... and if you build LOTS the Terran has to build lots too and then it isnt a MECH TERRAN anymore. Vikings however are easily led into traps with just a few Hydralisks (you do research burrow for that) and all of a sudden the Terran requires lots of new Vikings to get rid of your air force. Dont tell me that this cant be done or that it is too expensive, because the Terran units arent free and if he "has to" build an air force he needs to build lots of Starports to be able to get the replacements fast enough or he loses. Vikings dont work well against ground forces and if you want to see how it is done just watch THIS from the Altitude invitational. Let me just quote Day[9]: "The Corruptor count was just too high." and "[IdrA] expected this air battle to be the most important part". Vikings are cheap and build fast with reactor addon, and they have 10 range which outranges the broodlords and corruptors. If Z is making more corruptors (which are not very cost effective versus vikings) then his ground army will be lacking all that much more. I didn't say run around with vikings all over the place. Just keep the broodlords nullified. 4-5 vikings is plenty enough to handle a few broodlords with your tank thor hellion army. And if you end up making a ton more, then now you have a harassment strike force as well as some extra compliment to your tanks on the floor.
Exactly. See, this comes from a fellow Zerg player who knows what I'm talking about. Broodlords are supposed to be the freakin' same tier as Battlecruisers but they fall like flies to several Vikings. You say: Oh, protect your BLs with corrupters noob, but if the Terran is at least a competent individual he'll focus Broodlords down and who cares if he loses Vikings? He loses Vikings, but takes down broodlords.
Zerg STILL has to contend with the mech army, which the Broodlords are SUPPOSED to take care of. What's to hold back a mech army? Burrowed Hydralisks? One raven and your army is potentially effed.
The reason why Lurkers were so damn good in BW was because of territorial and semi-siege ability. Simply put, once mass tanks and thors rolls in what are you going to do to hold it back?
Flying units are always a good choice due to their limitless maneuverability.
...No. Both Corrupters and BLs are slower than BW Battlecruisers. Mass thors counters mutas. The only way I can win with Broodlords is if my Hydra/Roach army completely outnumbers his. Even then, half my Broodlords have fallen due to a couple of Vikings and immobility.
3. Zerg players are constantly whining about Terran mech, but look at the Zerg air units (and I DONT mean the Mutalisk), which are armored and have very high hp while the Thor deals almost no damage to them due to its specialization against light air units.
Emphasis on the 9-range Viking taking Tier3 Broodlords
Brood Lords are MOBILE ATTACKING units while Lurkers are IMMOBILE DEFENDING units.
That's the POINT. They are used for holding back masses as well as providing territorial control. They also provide potential uses for harass, something the Zerg SERIOUSLY lacks. By using, say, Overlord Lurker drops you could decimate mineral lines.
My apologies for big wall of text. But my main point is not to start an argument with you. It is simply why I can't understand Blizzard's reasoning of taking the Lurker away: If it works, who gives a flying zergling it's the same unit from BW?
|
Lurkers, defilers and scourges were my prefered BW units. I love them because of their defensive usage.
In sc2, I feel that everything zergs has is offensive. There is nothing to defend a position in the middle of the map.
I hope they come back in the future expansions
|
wow, zerg doesn't need another gas heavy unit (there are tons of) rather a good late game mineral heavy. you want the lurker for static defense / map control gaining / pushing unit with +dmg vs armored ? build spine crawlers.
The main thing they would be effective at is versus masses of marauders, vikings, stalkers, and roaches, and to provide a more efficient non disposable unit to hold ground with
the hydralisk holds this spot as well as the (gas heavy) ultralisk.
They would still be greatly hard countered by; Immortals, Collossus, Tanks, Thors, Ultras, and of course air units. Hell, even zealots with charge would be pretty good vs any amount of lurkers under 10 or so.
the hydralisk holds this spot except of immortal/air.
i liked the lurker alot but there is really just no room anymore for it in sc2. it's overlapping to much with the rest of the arsenal.
|
Hydralisk doesn't really hold any spot. It's this fragile unit that does good damage but can't do anything off creep. Basically it's a unit that relies on someone else taking damage and is extremely immobile without creep thus isn't really effective when it comes to attacking or containing.
I don't really see the lurker as an anti-armoured t2 unit overlapping with any role. The only anti-armoured unit zerg has is the ultra and that is t3. Roaches/Hydra are both really clones of each other but slightly twisted. Roach used for offence, Hydra used for defence. Either way none of these units allow for map control or any form on containment that lurkers could potentially provide. Banelings are anti-light and also don't provide the same roles so I really don't see any overlap at all.
|
why another anti armored zerg unit ? why another T2 anti armored unit ???? no need at all. use your freaking hydras, roaches banelings zerglings mutas et cetera.
you wanna contain ? use the units you have. lurker would not do a better job than spine crawlers hydras or roaches banelings zerglings ... only difference is it could attack while cloaked. great.
|
The hydralisk is a glass cannon. It deals good damage but can't take much itself. It needs fodder in front to have time to deal that damage.
The Lurker would certainly help us Zs. Maybe 9 range is a bit much but 7-8 would be great. I don't see how the Lurker overlaps the baneling, when the baneling is just a suicide AoE unit. A solid anti-armoured unit would be greatly appreciated on T2. Cutting into balls or even defending expansions from them would become much less daunting. We finally wouldn't have to rely on T3 Broodlords to do everything.
As people here said, we currently don't have a unit that has the role of standing his ground such as a tank or an immortal/colossi.
Lurkers, defilers and scourges were my prefered BW units. I love them because of their defensive usage.
In sc2, I feel that everything zergs has is offensive. Their is nothing to defend a position in the middle of the map.
I hope they come back in the future expansions
Exactly. Those 3 units were absolutely the core of Z. They had both great defensive and offensive capabilities which were essential. Scourge sniping observers and vessels, lurkers holding back ground units and defilers to provide long-livety to the masses of fragile units.
|
once again: why anti armoured ? for what. why would a "solid anti armored unit be greatly appreciated on T2".
the lurker is a cloaked unit with a decent range and bonus dmg vs armored units. (OP)
that's basically a spine crawler.
contain with your units. contain with your spine crawlers. kill stuff with your available units.
there's no situation in this game where i'm desperately looking for an anti armoured unit that's cloaked.
|
On July 11 2010 20:11 Ciddass wrote:
once again: why anti armoured ? for what. why would a "solid anti armored unit be greatly appreciated on T2".
the lurker is a cloaked unit with a decent range and bonus dmg vs armored units. (OP)
that's basically a spine crawler.
contain with your units. contain with your spine crawlers. kill stuff with your available units.
there's no situation in this game where i'm desperately looking for an anti armoured unit that's cloaked.
If you want to make a point please make it. Senseless blabbering isn't really what this thread is far. You can't contain with Spine crawlers past early mid game and any other form of contain you need a larger force to do this. The whole point of the lurker is the fact that you can hold ground with a smaller force which zerg is lacking currently.
There is no anti-armoured unit at t2 currently. Roaches semi fill that void late game but not really in the mid game since roaches aren't a pure anti-armoured unit. Rather they have good hp so do alright in mass. Hydra are fragile and get ripped by armoured units if they don't have any fodder(Aka roaches). Banelings are mainly for anti-light and don't really do well against armoured unless in mass and combined with ovie drop or the likes. Zerglings get demolished by any splash.
At the end of the day there isn't one unit that allows for smaller zerg force to hold ground like defiler and lurker did.
|
On July 11 2010 20:20 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2010 20:11 Ciddass wrote:
once again: why anti armoured ? for what. why would a "solid anti armored unit be greatly appreciated on T2".
the lurker is a cloaked unit with a decent range and bonus dmg vs armored units. (OP)
that's basically a spine crawler.
contain with your units. contain with your spine crawlers. kill stuff with your available units.
there's no situation in this game where i'm desperately looking for an anti armoured unit that's cloaked.
If you want to make a point please make it. Senseless blabbering isn't really what this thread is far. You can't contain with Spine crawlers past early mid game and any other form of contain you need a larger force to do this. The whole point of the lurker is the fact that you can hold ground with a smaller force which zerg is lacking currently. There is no anti-armoured unit at t2 currently. Roaches semi fill that void late game but not really in the mid game since roaches aren't a pure anti-armoured unit. Rather they have good hp so do alright in mass. Hydra are fragile and get ripped by armoured units if they don't have any fodder(Aka roaches). Banelings are mainly for anti-light and don't really do well against armoured unless in mass and combined with ovie drop or the likes. Zerglings get demolished by any splash. At the end of the day there isn't one unit that allows for smaller zerg force to hold ground like defiler and lurker did.
so what.
8 spine crawlers + 3 hydras hold alot. there you have your small ground force holding ground.
what's the point of a small ground force as zerg ? just to add the lurker ?
the lurker has NO point at the moment.
as someone mentioned before. roach / hydra are awfully similar to each other. and now you wanna add the lurker in T2 as anti armored. that makes no sense.
you say theres no anti armored T2 unit for zerg. there is no need for it at all. you have everything you need at T2 to handle anything thrown at you. if it's getting tough you have ultras and broodlords in T3.
i just don't get the point why zerg needs a anti armored unit. with no gimmick besides "attacks while burrowed" which is quite similar to the baneling. "banelings are vs light !!!!!!!!!!!11111" .. yeah right ... so add the lurker ??????
it fills no gap. so don't put it into the game.
|
It's an interesting and well-thought out idea (props to OP), but personally I think that the lurker, either BW version or this version, doesn't have a place in the current Zerg for SC2.
Banelings function well as splash and anti-clustered units (they're surprisingly effective on huddled groups of stalkers or marauders without the slow), and I really like Roaches' offensive use of burrow.
I definitely agree that Zerg's ground army lacks a reliable anti-armored or long-range unit, but perhaps that is a weakness that ought to be left in, just as Terran Mech armies are immobile or Protoss players who forgo an early robo bay are vulnerable to cloaked units.
As for being gas-heavy, Hydras, Infestors, and Ultras cost a lot of gas (Roaches aren't light either), as well as Zerg air. I don't find myself with gross excesses of minerals or zerglings when I play Zerg.
|
If they are going to put the lurker in heart of the swarm , they better make a new unit model for it this one is pretty ugly .
|
On July 11 2010 21:35 Ciddass wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2010 20:20 Numy wrote:On July 11 2010 20:11 Ciddass wrote:
once again: why anti armoured ? for what. why would a "solid anti armored unit be greatly appreciated on T2".
the lurker is a cloaked unit with a decent range and bonus dmg vs armored units. (OP)
that's basically a spine crawler.
contain with your units. contain with your spine crawlers. kill stuff with your available units.
there's no situation in this game where i'm desperately looking for an anti armoured unit that's cloaked.
If you want to make a point please make it. Senseless blabbering isn't really what this thread is far. You can't contain with Spine crawlers past early mid game and any other form of contain you need a larger force to do this. The whole point of the lurker is the fact that you can hold ground with a smaller force which zerg is lacking currently. There is no anti-armoured unit at t2 currently. Roaches semi fill that void late game but not really in the mid game since roaches aren't a pure anti-armoured unit. Rather they have good hp so do alright in mass. Hydra are fragile and get ripped by armoured units if they don't have any fodder(Aka roaches). Banelings are mainly for anti-light and don't really do well against armoured unless in mass and combined with ovie drop or the likes. Zerglings get demolished by any splash. At the end of the day there isn't one unit that allows for smaller zerg force to hold ground like defiler and lurker did. so what. 8 spine crawlers + 3 hydras hold alot. there you have your small ground force holding ground. what's the point of a small ground force as zerg ? just to add the lurker ? the lurker has NO point at the moment. as someone mentioned before. roach / hydra are awfully similar to each other. and now you wanna add the lurker in T2 as anti armored. that makes no sense. you say theres no anti armored T2 unit for zerg. there is no need for it at all. you have everything you need at T2 to handle anything thrown at you. if it's getting tough you have ultras and broodlords in T3. i just don't get the point why zerg needs a anti armored unit. with no gimmick besides "attacks while burrowed" which is quite similar to the baneling. "banelings are vs light !!!!!!!!!!!11111" .. yeah right ... so add the lurker ?????? it fills no gap. so don't put it into the game.
Ok, while we're at it let's build some bunkers and cannons to supplement our armies amirite? Wtf?! Have you even played BW to know that the Lurker's role is maintaining territory while holding off pushes? What are 8 spine crawlers going to do with your army? Sit there?
I never suggested anything about Anti armor; that's for another time to decide if the Lurker is even coming back. Your analogy of the Lurker as a unit that can attack while burrowed is overly simplified.. that's like saying DTs are invisible zealots.
The problem I see with banelings is the cost-effectivenes ratio. Okay, you blew up a ton of stuff with your banelings, now what? Do you take control or instead, secede it simply because banelings are suicidal units? Yes, they are awesome units but when you think about it, scourge did the same thing with air. Yet, in PvZ Protoss can maintain air dominance with mass corsairs simply because once your scourge blow up, you don't have air unless you went Mutas. Same concept with Banelings. There is nothing to complement containment nor map control for Zerg besides having a mass swarm of units just sit in front of your opponent.
|
Ok, while we're at it let's build some bunkers and cannons to supplement our armies amirite? Wtf?! Have you even played BW to know that the Lurker's role is maintaining territory while holding off pushes? What are 8 spine crawlers going to do with your army? Sit there?
?
??? am i wrong or is the lurker "sitting there" as well ? quasi with your army ? maintaining territory. like a spine crawler. pushing forward to contain, like a spine crawler.
whatever.
it's a pity that the lurker is gone but we have to say that it was the right decision.
|
I thought spine crawlers needed creep to move?
I guess I was wrong...
|
On July 11 2010 22:23 Ciddass wrote:
Ok, while we're at it let's build some bunkers and cannons to supplement our armies amirite? Wtf?! Have you even played BW to know that the Lurker's role is maintaining territory while holding off pushes? What are 8 spine crawlers going to do with your army? Sit there?
?
??? am i wrong or is the lurker "sitting there" as well ? quasi with your army ? maintaining territory. like a spine crawler. pushing forward to contain, like a spine crawler.
whatever.
it's a pity that the lurker is gone but we have to say that it was the right decision.
Lurkers don't take 12 seconds to burrow -_-;
Hope the marauder gets removed in HotS. Clearly what is a bunker that can be healed and stimmed doing with your army?
|
On July 11 2010 22:28 MoneyHypeMike wrote:
I thought spine crawlers needed creep to move?
I guess I was wrong...
yeah you are wrong, they need creep to burrow.
there was a game on lost temple i guess where idra pushed and contained with a hand full of spine crawlers pooping creep with overlords etc.
|
-No additional cost in food (since roach and hydra are 2) exactly, but roaches should be 1 or 1.5 supply not two lurker upgrade should come at a +1 or even +2 supply cost purely to match siege tank or at least give a semblance of tension put into just how many roaches you intend to morph at any given time (particualry late game focus here). Because your version of the lurker will simply be better than the roach it is spawned from, if it did not come at increased supply why would you ever have roaches late game?
-Make it cost mostly gas because as it is right now, there is not a single zerg unit that costs more gas than minerals. So something like 25/125. awesome, i love it but i think this is particulary costly, it should be 25/75 with around corruptor into broodlord morph timer.
-It's HP would be between 150-170 and would come with 1 or 2 armor. It would be a armored bio unit ofc. hmm, i would measure its usefullness with tankshots, 150 with 2 armor gives tension, now suddenly getting +1 veichle will allow for one less shot and its sturdy against marines with a few carapace upgrades. Love it.
-The damage should be something like 15 + 20-30 to armored and be 7 range with a tier 3 upgrade giving them 9 range. +2 per upgrade or +1/+1 on attacks. Yes it should be anti armored but do you want it to come in line damage like the original design or single target spread aoe like storm? with the current trends of having units stack perhaps a re design on that part would be warranted?
-Possibly an additional tier 3 upgrade to burrow move underground with lurkers for 150/150. Here is the jist of it, roaches already have a move while burrowed upgrade. Simply let it be included that lurker benefits from this (as well as the added regen) and let it be at lair tech.
Overall i like the idea, and as an advocate of additional zerg units this is something i would love to see in play before commenting on anything related to balance. It is hard to reason with the thought that blizzard may have stripped zerg of its most versatile and fun units just to look at its performance and then as heart of the swarm arrives these things might make apperances along with reaper / vulture spidermine etc.
Just admit this:
Zerg is bland, it lacks in tricks and tactics and their plays can be seen from a mile away. Rather than having multiple choices like bio or mech or even Bio mech. it has two ways to approach the midgame: Hydra roach, Muta baneling. the drops and nydus worms can be seen from a mile away and there is very little a zerg can "get away with" that is not purely relying on their opponent to not do this or to not do that.
The lurker in a sense, helps Zerg with that aspect more than a row of spinecrawlers. It forces ravens or gives tension to the relationship between mules and scan. SUDDENLY zerg has a unit that can punish terran or protoss for attempting to deviate too far away from robo facility or starport play.
What? zerg punishing players from deviating from standard play? Suddenly zerg has a unit that if you do not go this and that you will die. THAT IS UNHEARD OF! AN OUTRAGE!
Banelings cant do this, no amount of nydus worms or drop play can force opponent to deviate away from the plan.
Its so easy to account for and is always the player being dropped or nydus wormed fault for not paying attention. so yes, i hope a unit like this will come with heart of the swarm. Its very simply the fact that every Zerg player follows a set of rules and patterns are easily established, they should get units that lets them bend these rules and change their pattern. The lurker is one such unit.
|
Need swarm and defense... just make the broodlings producable out of any zerg building. 50min = 4 broodlings, queuable from any building except spore/spine crawlers.
Yeay \o/
|
put lurker in as the normal hydra upgrade but only allow the lurker to attack when unburrowed. give it the auto-unburrow attack toggle that the baneling has if you are terribad at managing them. a offcreep movement speed of roach or ling would be fine. a range of 8 seems fair seeing as the hellion is 6 and it can run around happily with no gas cost. this way zerg can at least siege cliffs and expos but are still outranged by tanks and arent too detection heavy.
funnily enough blizzard made tank splash damage not overkill but hellion and collossus do not "link" up with each other to max damage.
tbh i still think if they made the roach smaller physically, spawn in twos and take 1.5 food it would be way more fun to play as the swarm.
|
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.
|
make it so you morph a hydra and a roach together to get a lurker LOL
|
More isn't better. Why make burrow something you have to get in order to use the lurker?! thats not good at all.
|
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.
|
On July 12 2010 01:45 Garrl wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I know that, In the main post he mentioned making it something you had to get for the lurker... -____-
|
"-The damage should be something like 15 + 20-30 to armored and be 7 range with a tier 3 upgrade giving them 9 range. +2 per upgrade or +1/+1 on attacks.
-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.
|
If Lurkers were added for Zerg I would probably switch from P to Z, as they are perhaps my favorite unit.
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.
|
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..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
