EPTI'm only half joking here
. The sound is really shitty compared to BW.The State of Lurkers - Page 2
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
I'm only half joking here . The sound is really shitty compared to BW. | ||
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
On April 06 2015 15:15 Wildmoon wrote: It seems pretty good in this game. WOW, loved this ZvZ. It seems you need to do a lot of tech switches, from different tiers and thats awesome! | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44971 Posts
1. Transitioning from roach/hydra to lurkers is hypothetically feasible because of the tech path... certainly easier to do than if you opened ling/bling/muta. (More about this in #3.) 2. However, if roach/hydra is being countered, half the time it's because Protoss has a robo and can start producing units that happen to counter both of them (immortal/ observer/ disruptor/ colossi). These counter lurkers too, so why would you transition into something that doesn't force the opponent to create a new unit composition? 3. Ravagers seem to have better utility than lurkers. They're more mobile, they keep up with roach attacks and retreats, their ability can crush forcefields, and they're just easier and quicker (no lurker den) to make than lurkers. So if you open roach/hydra and want to add in a third unit, why bother making that unit a lurker when you can make it a ravager? 4. Lurkers are arguably redundant with swarm hosts too. They're both Zerg siege units, but it appears that locusts just do it harder/ better/ faster/ stronger than the lurker spikes. (I don't know how much of this translates into ZvT and ZvZ also, but I'd imagine there's at least some overlap.) I think that if Zerg had lurkers back in WoL, they would have utilized them a ton. But with swarm hosts in HotS and ravagers in LotV, it doesn't seem obvious to me what the niche is that makes lurkers ideal. Obviously, it's still the early early stages of the closed beta, and I do love the BW lurker, but we'll see if it ends up having any unique utility. | ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
| ||
|
Sholip
Hungary422 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9405 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:06 StarscreamG1 wrote: WOW, loved this ZvZ. It seems you need to do a lot of tech switches, from different tiers and thats awesome! Yeh ZvZ could easily go from the worst to one of the most skillful matchups. Ravagers, Roach burrow and Lurker all create new interactions and dynamics. ' Lurkers are arguably redundant with swarm hosts too. They're both Zerg siege units, but it appears that locusts just do it harder/ better/ faster/ stronger than the lurker spikes. I agree with most of your points but I think its better to look at the Swarm Host purely as a harass unit now and the Lurker as a postitional unit. The SH will probably be scrapped becasue I don't think it can be properly balanced. | ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
I'm beginning to think that the only way to save lurkers is to remove the lurker den morph requirement from the hydra den and also give them the 9 range to start with. | ||
|
Ovid
United Kingdom948 Posts
| ||
|
SC2Towelie
United States561 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9405 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:41 neoghaleon55 wrote: I asked Vibe to play some lurker games last night. It seems the fastest you can get them out is around 8 minutes real time. Before that you are literally stuck on hydra ling vs terran, which is awful. I'm beginning to think that the only way to save lurkers is to remove the lurker den morph requirement from the hydra den and also give them the 9 range to start with. I have been testing similar changes. To be more specific; - Starts with 9 range - Starting movement speed = 2.25-2.5, but speed-upgrade added to 3.25-3.4 (creep-modifier reduced/removed) --> They start out as being good defensively but need upgrade to be used well offensively. - Lurker morph build time reduced from 100 to 50 seconds. So you get Lurkers alot faster here, but you can't rush them and go directly kill your opponent. Instead, you can get them, secure expos and then use them offensively later in the midgame. Also not really sure what the 6-9 range upgrade accomplishes. What is the larger point here. Since Lurkers are so hard to tech to, wouldn't it make more sense that they immedaitely are very cost-efficient in engagments. The 6-range on the other hand seems to just further extend the period before it becomes viable for no real reason. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44971 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:18 Wildmoon wrote: SH is not a siege unit anymore. I disagree. It doesn't have to burrow, sure. It is certainly more mobile now. However, it can still assume the role of a siege unit if the player wants it to. Since the role of the SH can still be to send off locusts to consistently chip away at buildings and armies, I think that still makes it a siege unit. Hell, with the ability for locusts to fly now, it can even siege areas that were previously unreachable (e.g., directly into the main). | ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I disagree. It doesn't have to burrow, sure. It is certainly more mobile now. However, it can still assume the role of a siege unit if the player wants it to. Since the role of the SH can still be to send off locusts to consistently chip away at buildings and armies, I think that still makes it a siege unit. Hell, with the ability for locusts to fly now, it can even siege areas that were previously unreachable (e.g., directly into the main). I am not in the beta but isn't the locust cd pretty long now? If it's too long now then it would be hard to use it to hold position. | ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:49 Hider wrote: I have been testing similar changes. To be more specific; - Starts with 9 range - Starting movement speed = 2.25-2.5, but speed-upgrade added to 3.25-3.4 (creep-modifier reduced/removed) --> They start out as being good defensively but need upgrade to be used well offensively. - Lurker morph build time reduced from 100 to 50 seconds. So you get Lurkers alot faster here, but you can't rush them and go directly kill your opponent. Instead, you can get them, secure expos and then use them offensively later in the midgame. Also not really sure what the 6-9 range upgrade accomplishes. What is the larger point here. Since Lurkers are so hard to tech to, wouldn't it make more sense that they immedaitely are very cost-efficient in engagments. The 6-range on the other hand seems to just further extend the period before it becomes viable for no real reason. Yeah, I think there's no point in having the upgrade when it doesn't serve to make the unit stronger but to make the unit viable. Just in cooperate the upgrade into the unit right away. Something like blueflame or speed for lings serve a purpose. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On April 06 2015 16:55 blade55555 wrote: They are incorrect. I have been using lurkers to great effect in zvp. I don't do it versus mech because I am prety sure it's bad, but versus bio they aren't that bad either. People don't use them because they prefer the easier way to win atm with ravager rushes. Still think they are correct, Lurkers are retarded easy to outmicro. But you are right with people going for the easy way atm. But Imo Protoss is just not used to this sort of micro which is why Lurkers work rather well against them running almost head on into them. And the fact that Disruptors do pretty bad against them. | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
On April 06 2015 21:59 Musicus wrote: They need to change the sound of the attack animation, doesn't sound scary at all, nobody will build it. I'm only half joking here . The sound is really shitty compared to BW.Attack, death, and burrow sounds all need to be improved. Same can be said for many other SC2 units. Each unit needs to feel powerful and unique. BW sounds are so iconic and awesome, you get things like Sadly, SC2 will never have that. | ||
|
Wildmoon
Thailand4189 Posts
On April 06 2015 23:41 purakushi wrote: Attack, death, and burrow sounds all need to be improved. Same can be said for many other SC2 units. Each unit needs to feel powerful and unique. BW sounds are so iconic and awesome, you get things like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP1JbM9uuT0 Sadly, SC2 will never have that. Not only subjective but unnecessary too. | ||
|
BretZ
United States1510 Posts
On April 06 2015 22:18 Wildmoon wrote: SH is not a siege unit anymore. What role should it fill now? In all honesty I don't see it making it out of the LOTV beta. I can't really see how the SH and Lurker can exist together without changing or removing one of them completely. (plz sh plz) | ||
|
Tyrhanius
France947 Posts
| ||
|
Ovid
United Kingdom948 Posts
25 Minerals per Locust, Locust amount starts at 1 and each locust has to be built the time to build one locust is 15 seconds (Bearing in mind the change the old game that would be 21 seconds only 4 seconds off the old locust time but that's per locust. Maximum amount of Locusts stored is 5. Can only be released every 40 seconds I also think 200 gas is quite steep, so it should be 100, 150 keeping the 4 supply as in Lotv not the 3 in Hots. The locust itself should be a middle ground between HoTs and Lotv leaning more to Hots side. It has the effect of making it powerful yet not massable and more on the harrass/buffer rather than core unit side of things. 2 of them is 8 supply and waiting 75 ingame seconds with 2 swarmhosts is equivalent of the same power as 5 Hots SH or 15 supply meaning time makes them supply efficient but vulnerable. Poll: Good Idea? No (10) Fuck this Unit (Remove it) (9) Yes (2) 21 total votes Your vote: Good Idea? | ||
|
Pseudorandom
United States120 Posts
ZvT I have only found a decent spot if the T goes for early tank drops, which mutas are so much better at punishing. Not too sure if the lurkers will be good for base defend, but I could see a few lurkers in the mineral lines for drop defense being strong. We are also only ~1 week into beta so who knows where they (along with other units) will end up. | ||
| ||
