|
True and the lack of Dark Swarm which synergized heavily with Lurkers. However, note that they actually buffed the Lurker by ALOT. 75 more HP and +3 range upgrade
Whenever something like this happens, I feel it's symptomatic of a deeper problem. If a unit needs to be buffed so heavily in terms of stat points just to be potentially useful, it's probably not a very good unit. Sort of like how the ultra now completely shits all over bio with the heavily nerfed marauders and uber-chitinous plating, and still being clumsy, unwieldy and irritating to use in the extreme.
The lurker may or may not fit Sc2, but if it needs to have 9 range, tonnes of HP AND be accessible early on just to be attractive enough to build, I think it may just be a case of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Then again, it may be that mass ravagers and ultra/ling do so well in their respective matchups that there is just no need for the lurker.
|
On April 07 2015 18:02 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +We need to remove the Hive requirement for the range upgrade, research and morph times decreased for the Lurker Den and maybe a reduction in cost of the range upgrade to make lurkers work again. Blizzards logic is probably that if 9-range Lurker could come out in the midgame, then they would be able to stomp over protoss with timing attacks (since protoss needs robo units to deal with them). Giving the current state of protoss, that's probably true, but I think this is more of an issue with toss tbh.T erran on the other hand has better counters in terms "free" Siege Tanks and can run around with Medivacs to buy time. In the next patch where Blizzard hopefully buffs protoss midgame by alot, I want Lurkers to be more accessible in the midgame.
Blizzard made Protoss very poorly designed having a poor early game and growing progressively while moving through the midgame and lategame. New econ makes this even more noticeable. So more accessible Lurkers shouldn't be a problem if we adjust Protoss correctly.
I think it's time to pull off better design for many things. Protoss early-midgame, adjusting new Zerg options (Ravager stats are awful, Lurkers too lategame) and giving Terran more flexibility (new bio unit, reworked usable reapers, adjusted ghosts, more mobile mech).
|
Whenever something like this happens, I feel it's symptomatic of a deeper problem. If a unit needs to be buffed so heavily in terms of stat points just to be potentially useful, it's probably not a very good unit.
I don't really agree here. I think we should just take a look at the Lurker and forget a moment about how it worked in BW. Is it fun or not? If the former is true, then there is a place for it in the game. So I don't agree that because it had different stats than in BW, then it doesn't fit into Starcraft. From my perspective it fits in if creates an interesting dynamic and interactions.
Sort of like how the ultra now completely shits all over bio with the heavily nerfed marauders and uber-chitinous plating, and still being clumsy, unwieldy and irritating to use in the extreme.
I don't know why Blizzard didnt try out a faster off-creep Ultra with lower model size instead. An amove super strong clumsy unit that hardcounters bio sounds dumb on paper at least.
|
I wish it was this:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LhI6P.gif)
|
Italy12246 Posts
Games are more action packed because people are making OP units that are easily available and attacking with them more or less randomly to try and figure things out, not because of some inherent benefit of the Lotv economy. We don't know if the end product will be like this. More importantly, protoss or not i think it just feels awful to have half a base suddenly go out, and play most of the game as a race against your own workers.
Making an expansion should be a strategical decision, not something that the game forces on you. In the current model (which i still hope will be looked at) that is not the case at all, and playing like this just feels worse than hots.
|
Lurkers are fine, other units (ravager and ultra) are just way better. Also it's "hard-to-get-to-unit" just like vipers, it will take a while before people figure out timings for them, it's only been few days no need to make threads about it.
|
I don't really agree here. I think we should just take a look at the Lurker and forget a moment about how it worked in BW. Is it fun or not? If the former is true, then there is a place for it in the game. So I don't agree that because it had different stats than in BW, then it doesn't fit into Starcraft. From my perspective it fits in if creates an interesting dynamic and interactions.
I'm not entirely sure why you brought up BW here; my point has nothing to do with the lurker in its previous incarnation. All I said was that the unit does not seem to dovetail into SC2 very smoothly, and has some core issues that won't be solved by just making it do more damage. It was a comment on general RTS design, not BW specifically.
|
Games are more action packed because people are making OP units that are easily available and attacking with them more or less randomly to try and figure things out, not because of some inherent benefit of the Lotv economy
If the below two conditions are met you get more action:
(1) The army size/bases-ratio is reduced
(2) Units can both function to secure bases and be used offensively.
When on the other hand you reduce the first ratio but make defensive units better than offensive units, you reward a style of gameplay where acuquring and defending bases is further rewarded --> Stale midgame.
However, in LOTV it is heavily rewarded to acquire a new base which expose your self to enemy harass or timing attacks, while at the same time harassing the enemy player. If you didn't have any economic changes here, the efficiency of harass from both players would be less as its easier to defend 3 bases than 4 bases.
So the combination of the unit changes and the new LOTV economy has a clear effect on the action in the midgame.
|
Ive seen Zergs defend vs Protoss really well with a couple of Lurkers and a spore. Shuts down Zealots pretty hard.
I think the reason you're not seeing them more is because frankly the other new units are all OP. As the beta gets closer to release version you'll see things smooth out. There is no way that Ravager/Disruptor/Cyclone will stay the way they are now...
|
On April 06 2015 21:58 Charoisaur wrote:
why play lurkers when you can just win with ravagers or ultras?
It seems like lurkers actually counter crackling/ultra at least the few games i saw them in.
Ravenger counter lurker if they know where tehy are so not sure.
But i really love that big damage output on them i would try play lurkers alot.
If they really would be unplayable they can make them crazy good with borrow movement.
|
lurkers can't take map control with their invisibility as they used to cuz it's so high tech. Terran will have 3 CCs + Starport + Ebay up, Protoss will have easily have a Robo/Stargate, so both races can easily deal with them. makes them a bit weak in that regard, was fun to get early lurkers in StarCraft 1 to harass/abuse lack of detection.
|
Well, in BW you also needed a robotics + Observatory for obs whereas you can get obs from Robotics alone. Add that to the fact that you're getting a pretty quick Robo almost every game and Lurkers have less time to be harassing on the map (maybe no time at all).
If you reduce the time they take to get to you can counter this. Also, defensive lurkers with a spore are really good.
|
5 days of beta and calling things imbalanced... lol!
Give it some time, imagine the game being adjusted with every whine :D
|
Lurkers OP from Demuslim stream!
|
On April 07 2015 22:32 Teoita wrote:
Games are more action packed because people are making OP units that are easily available and attacking with them more or less randomly to try and figure things out, not because of some inherent benefit of the Lotv economy. We don't know if the end product will be like this. More importantly, protoss or not i think it just feels awful to have half a base suddenly go out, and play most of the game as a race against your own workers.
Making an expansion should be a strategical decision, not something that the game forces on you. In the current model (which i still hope will be looked at) that is not the case at all, and playing like this just feels worse than hots.
I think making should be strategical decision too but I don't really think you can already claim that games being action packed are not the product of the new economy. It may very well be for the better or worse.
I myself am pretty fine with turtling because after all it's one of strategic decision as long as it's not the best way to play in most cases. I am not really a fan of the idea that turtling is always bad and you should expand out as fast as you could.
|
On April 08 2015 00:48 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
5 days of beta and calling things imbalanced... lol!
Give it some time, imagine the game being adjusted with every whine :D
Not sure if you are in the beta or not, but Ravagers are unreal strong. ZvZ is 1 base baneling allin or Ling/Roach/Ravager already, and I'm sure people were using the hell out of Ravagers for a while in the beginning. I'm not an incredibly high level player by any means, and I haven't lost to a protoss if I open with a 5 ravager rush, there are too much for the flimsy protoss units to deal with. Terran I suck against and get mauled XD
This thread has a bit of whining, but a lot of this is pretty constructive and it is needed. We have to speak out with what we do and do not like EARLY or Blizzard may ignore everything.
It will change, and should, but we need to be a catalyst for change to the game we love.
|
On April 08 2015 03:27 Wildmoon wrote:
Lurkers OP from Demuslim stream!
they sure shined in that game, but every game i have seen from people(mostly stephano) who seemed to know what to do with them they seemed pretty strong, this might just be stephano having sick talent and people not knowing yet how to respond.
|
On April 08 2015 03:31 Pseudorandom wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2015 00:48 PinoKotsBeer wrote:
5 days of beta and calling things imbalanced... lol!
Give it some time, imagine the game being adjusted with every whine :D Not sure if you are in the beta or not, but Ravagers are unreal strong. ZvZ is 1 base baneling allin or Ling/Roach/Ravager already, and I'm sure people were using the hell out of Ravagers for a while in the beginning. I'm not an incredibly high level player by any means, and I haven't lost to a protoss if I open with a 5 ravager rush, there are too much for the flimsy protoss units to deal with. Terran I suck against and get mauled XD This thread has a bit of whining, but a lot of this is pretty constructive and it is needed. We have to speak out with what we do and do not like EARLY or Blizzard may ignore everything. It will change, and should, but we need to be a catalyst for change to the game we love.
I can assure you that the Ravager will be changed lol. Noone not even Blizzard expects it to come out i this form.
|
Yeah, lurker looking pretty good vs. bio on Demuslim's stream right now.
|
1-2 at the top of a ramp really shred marines with just a shot or two. They force a lot of scans and can do a lot of damage if you place them somewhere unexpected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
