|
Canada8157 Posts
The LurkerWelcome to the second week of the focus topic! Last week was a success, with lots of great answers and discussion going around. This week will feature the lurker, a new unit to Zerg in LotV. Originally conceived in Brood War and a staple unit in the ZvT matchup, Blizzard recreated the unit into SC2. Its SC2 counterpart shares almost all the same features as the Brood War variation, from its recognizable linear spine attack, to the graphical design of the unit. Here are its stats in LotV: - Costs 150/150
- 42 second build time
- 3 supply cost
- 200 health
- Ground damage: 20 (+10 vs armored)
- 4.13 speed and 5.37 on creep
- Attack Range : 9
The total cost of the unit is 150/150, with the hydralisk taking 100/50 to produce, and the lurker morph 50/100. A total supply of three is needed, with two coming from the hydralisk, and the last one coming from the lurker morph, similar to that of a brood lord morph. The lurker den is morphed from the hydralisk den, taking an additional 71 seconds to morph on top of the 29 seconds that the hydralisk den takes. Compare that to the 43 seconds it takes for a baneling nest to make, and you get the idea of just how long it takes to make a lurker den. While morphing, the egg has 100 health, and one armor. Two lurkers can be transported at a time in overlords, making one shotting workers possible off of a drop. The lurker also features the ‘Hold Fire’ ability found on ghosts, intended to catch clumps of units off guard and use its splash damage attack to mow them down. The seismic spines upgrade was removed early on in the beta, giving the lurker its full nine range right off the bat. - Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
- Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
- How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
- Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
- Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
- It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
- Is the lurker model too big?
- Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
- Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
Again, leave your answers to these questions in a comment below along with your twitter handle, and we’ll be selecting a few responses to tweet out on @TeamLiquidNet.
|
1. Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Hard to say since its a costly investment. so might for higher level play.
2. Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
imo overlaps a bit with brood lord but atm seems to fit what zerg needs for ground.
3.How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
traps and positioning. for maximum damage inbetween bases of opponent.
4.Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Defiently siege unit with the right comp can do alot of damage verse ground heavy armies.
5.Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
no should not be reverted be too big a nerf.
6.It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
it should remain this way imo increases micro capacity for both sides of gameplay.
7.Is the lurker model too big?
i thinks a little big but the size is not an issue.
8. Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
lurker speed is great since it still need to burrow for it to damage.
9.Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
either the build time of lurker den reduced or the gas cost reduced a little. seems quite atm considering how much gas time is needed to get there.
Need more open questions many seemed short for answers.
Twitter: @ascarecrow101
|
1. Probably not since it has to burrow so they will always have time to pull workers.
2. Broodlord is probably a better siege unit but the lurker is better in engagements and defense so a tiny bit.
3, Sometimes if you time that right you get to one shot an army so traps can be pretty effective.
4. Siege Unit/defensive unit
5. Its already got a long tech time and if they put that back it would take even longer since no one is going to be building 6 range lurkers.
6. Sidestepping is good more micro is almost always good.
7. I think its fine.
8. They are already very powerful more buffs really aren't needed.
9. If they reduced it anymore we would probably see lurkers in just about every game, because they are just too good to not tech to at that point.
|
Zerg doesnt need another mid-game ground-army AoE damage unit that can be used defensively / harrass. (Overlaps banelings role)
Zerg needs a competent unit that can take out enemy air units, such as mass BCs / Liberators, or mass Toss air, not corrupters.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
I feel like a lurker drop isn't so different than a colossus or an immortal drop. It will do a lot of damage if the opponent doesn't deal with it but otherwise it's putting some expensive units in a vulnerable place. Lurkers will make doom drops a lot more deadly though.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
I don't feel that it overlaps.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
It could be quite good to put right outside of a Terran players base, somewhere that they wouldn't normally be scanning. Baneling mines are difficult to use because they have to be in the perfect spot. Lurkers are more forgiving.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege, no doubt.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I don't really mind the range, but there will be some frustrating timings for Protoss players to deal with I think.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
I don't feel that Lurker should just be able to get guaranteed kills in small numbers, otherwise lurker harass might be a little too powerful. In large battles its not really feasible to avoid the spines anyways.
Is the lurker model too big?
It's cool to see some bigger units for zerg. Most of them are so small (except the ultra).
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
They don't seem that fast to me.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
I was watching a GM level stream where the Zerg player was hitting some very deadly queen/lurker timings against Protoss. If you want to reduce the tech time, then maybe put the 9 range back on an upgrade.
|
On October 08 2015 10:08 Jer99 wrote:- Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
- Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
- How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
- Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
- Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
- It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
- Is the lurker model too big?
- Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
- Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
1. I think to a certain degree it already has in beta, will that continue seems to be unlikely. However this could def pop up with zergs like Rogue and TLO
2. Without the defiler its hard to say for certain the exact unique role of the lurker due to the existence of banelings. However the healthy range of the lurker presents potential siege opportunities that the baneling doesn't really have
3. Similarly to burrowed banes, wait for a moment where you can get max potential damage burst out.
4. Possible both...however I think it will be rare to see it used for harass at a professional level
5. I don't think leaving it at 9 is good, but I'm not entirely sure the upgrade is the solution either... I will have to see for myself the exact effectiveness of lurker range. Currently I'm leaning towards the upgrade being available at Lair perhaps? Hive seems too late
6. In my personal experience from BW (im gold/plat in hots) it is possible to dodge the spikes somewhat but it is very difficult. From a pro game perspective leave it as it is. That can produce really cool micro potential. Perhaps nerf the damage a little to compensate. On second thought, Legacy is already far more fast paced, micro based etc...so perhaps the non avoidable weaker spines would be good?
7. The lurker model is too big, its def more clunky than the BW version I feel (I could totally be wrong here but if I'm not...my point stands  )
8. Speed seems okay, lurkers shouldn't be too fast, their dps and burrow should be punished in some way.
9. I don't see why the BW approach (upgrade from hydra den) can't be adopted.
|
1. It's very costly and with how long it would take to to get the Lurkers and not either die to a timing (you can almost never ever just tech to Lurkers) or give your opponent ample time to prepare, maybe in very high level play it will find it's uses via drop play.
2. Not really, Zerg doesnt have any type of positional control unit, the baneling doesn't fill the same roll at all so I have no clue what people are bringing it up for.
3. Burrowed baneling style son
4. Always for siege and to take mid game engagements more on the Zerg's terms.
5. Nerf it to maybe 8 with the upgrade going to 9, slightly tone it down right off the bat (maybe so it's not quite so difficult fo Protoss to deal with) but not cripple it and let it more smoothly translate into the mid late game.
6. It's difficult to do, but let it be difficult for the pros to show themselves as a level above us, more skill in the game is not a bad thing.
7. I like it the size it is, I don't know I don't picture it as being small, I see it being the size of like a 15 foot long Alligator/Spider, not the size of a pony.
8. It has to burrow, just because the tank for some reason has to suck doesn't mean the Lurker should have to, making it slow is not the way to do it, it's tech time alone justifies a strong unit. For the record, buff the siege tank and take away the medivac crap, now that the Lurker is super good I think they could make the Siege Tank a bit better at holding ground.
|
Speaking as Terran Mech player. Masters hots and lotv
1. Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Why not-but its simply not worth it when baneling drop does the same job at less the cost
2. Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Ravager and Baneling are only parrallel I can see but lurker provides constant zoning out. Its a good siege unit role that Swarm Host should have never filled in first place.
3. How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
I mean its straight forward.
4. Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Has and always been siege unit.
5. Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I think its fine given how long it takes to get hydra den, but if it does, make it 7 to 9 so it doesnt get outraged by stalkers early game
6. It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Its really right now way too fast to be dodged really. It feels way faster than it did on bw. You should make it slightly slower.
7. Is the lurker model too big?
Fine as it is.
8. Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
Fine as it is-speed isn't an issue but Burrow speed and its HP is.
9. Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
It completely justifies the co tand length to get it. Siege units should be feared and used careful against. The damage it does while invisible is great, but it could do way less on HP department and burrow time department, so it can't burrow right in face of armies. It should take a bit more time to burrow so it encourages positioning.
Right now, SC2 doesn't really have this sort of powerful siege unit until lotv. Tanks weren't great and used more as supporting but with lurker, we see how it should be- opponents threading carefully against it. Its a welcome addition to zerg arsenal.
On October 08 2015 11:20 parkufarku wrote:
Zerg doesnt need another mid-game ground-army AoE damage unit that can be used defensively / harrass. (Overlaps banelings role)
Zerg needs a competent unit that can take out enemy air units, such as mass BCs / Liberators, or mass Toss air, not corrupters.
Vipers mate.
|
On October 08 2015 11:20 parkufarku wrote:
Zerg doesnt need another mid-game ground-army AoE damage unit that can be used defensively / harrass. (Overlaps banelings role)
Zerg needs a competent unit that can take out enemy air units, such as mass BCs / Liberators, or mass Toss air, not corrupters.
in broodwar zerg didn't have strong air vs air neither and still the game wasn't broken as long as they could force the battle to the ground. it was the synergy with a strong but not op support spell (dark swarm, which back in in the days took me years to figure out what it actually did^^) that made it work I guess...
|
I LOVE THE LURKER! And I didn't expect to coming in. I'll be honest, I sort of thought the love of lurkers was just a bit of BW elitism sneaking in. But holy hell is the lurker fun and changes the race in wonderful ways.
Does the lurker overlap? Maybe a tiny bit with brood lords, but even then I don't think so. I don't actually consider it as overlapping with the baneling. One is ranged AOE, one is melee AOE, and your entire army comp will change based on which one you elect to use as your AOE, this is the case in both ZVZ and to some extent ZvT (If terran goes bio). Vs Protoss I still use the lurker but I'm guessing at higher leagues that's likely not viable due to the disruptor being quite good against them.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
That depends on the drops. At the current time it's a bit like baneling drops, very powerful but costly and when the opponent reacts fast enough the risk is often not worth the cost.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
It's a very unique unit. The other ranged splash option for zerg would be the infestor, which has a very low damage output and cannot siege buildings or any higher health units effectively. That being said the lurker feels very weak if the opponent brings sufficient amounts of siege tools or is just mobile enough to go around it.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
I personally used it a bit in my muta-->lurker style in ZvZ. With mutas you can often aggressively snipe overseers, or the opponent doesn't bring them to begin with not suspecting a very fast lurker transition behind. Combined with the hold fire this can give you a very quick victory as the lurker is devastating if you unleash it on an army in close range with no means to kill the source of the damage.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege of course.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
6 range would be way too little. The seismic spines upgrade is a bad idea currently because the lurker den morph already takes as long as a spire - on top of having to build a hydralisk den. Whether 9 range is the perfect number I'm not sure, but I think 9 is the smallest siege range value in starcraft. If the range falls below 8-9 the lurker would lose a lot of its purpose.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
It's very good as it is, but the attack could be a little more consistent with the animation, hitting every target the moment the spines travel through them instead of unleashing line splash damage at the end of the animation.
Is the lurker model too big?
I think it's pretty perfect in size. It represents the power of the unit properly and makes the unit not too slippery, requring some control to get into position properly.
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
Maybe against Protoss. It feels already insufficient at forcing bio/tank or bio/liberator compositions to fight with the lurker already.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
Yes, at the current point in the game I think teching to lurkers is going to be too hard in comparison to other splash or siege options. Also losing the lurker den has too much impact on the game, as rebuilding it just takes forever.
I feel like the lurker could help a lot with zerg gameplay issues (ZvZ roach/ravager wars, TvZ ranged compositions). But the more fleshed out and aggressive the metagame is getting, the harder it becomes to even just plan with them.
|
5. Please revert to original. It makes no sense that lurkers out shoots collosus
|
- Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
I think lurker drops will be extremely rare, since they are very expensive and compared to medivac drops or warp prism harass, overlords usually don't escape alive, neither does their cargo.
- Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
The Lurker is very uniquie imo, no other zerg unit can control space like the lurker does. Brood Lords don't compare since they come way later, are less mobile and are an air unit. Broodlords are also way more dependent on support units than Lurkers.
- How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Well setting up traps at ramaps and choke points, good creep spread is important to see enemy units coming.
- Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Better for sieging/defending locations I think. For harassing Mutas or ling runbys are still superior since they can get in and out faster. Lurker harass can still be very annoying in spread out games since it forces your opponent to bring detection.
- Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Since the lurker den itself takes a long time to morph, I think an upgrade would delay Lurkers too long. It's fine as it is.
- It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Side stepping micro should be possible, the Lurker spines could travel a bit slower too imo to make it easier to dodge them (same with the disruptor shot btw, but this is offtopic ).
- Is the lurker model too big?
I think it's fine, it should not be too hard to target so you can kill it fast during a scan for example and it's size represents it's strength.
- Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
The lurker has to be fast, since it is completely helpless while moving around. It can only run if caught.
- Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
I think the lurker is good enough to justify the lurker den moprh time.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
I can definitely see potential drops / harassment oriented attacks happening. If you're already teching to Lurkers and have a few to defend, it's not a big leap to upgrade overlord speed and morph an overlord to drop.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
For what it does, I don't feel it really overlaps with other zerg units.I think it's strong, but I also think that it's not something you 100% have to build all the time.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
There are a bunch of crazy positions you could setup with a few lurkers and an unsuspecting opponent. A crossfire with a few lurkers will tear any army to pieces
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
I think it's better as a siege unit than a harass unit, but it could be used as both. It's also great in a defensive position. It's the zerg's version of a liberator. A unit that can do everything (but shoot up)
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Yeah, making that an upgrade would hit lurkers hard. It's already a large investment to tech into lurkers. When instead of wasting time, I could just tech to Ultras. I guess it really depends on the upgrade. The cost, how long it took to finish, and if it works well with what my opponent is doing. As of right now, Siege tanks already counter Lurkers with range, and are much easier to access for Terran, so it wouldn't really be worth the investment imo.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Yeah I like this. It gives bio and blink stalkers a way to be played and kind of out-play your opponent with Micro. Which is what I think Blizzard is going for with LOTV.
Is the lurker model too big?
It's a little large, but it's a giant hydra that shoots spikes. What do you want from it?
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
Nah, I think it's speed is fine.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
As of right now, I'd say yes. The Lurker won't end the game on it's own (unless you do some crazy harass and kill all the mineral lines and production), but it does enough to justify it's cost
|
Canada8157 Posts
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them?
|
On October 08 2015 18:23 Jer99 wrote:
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them?
I used them in zvp before Protoss started doing Skytoss every game. It was great fun, the games were really exciting. Playing ling/hydra/lurker vs adept/stalker/disruptor was incredibly fun! Didn't use them much in zvt yet.
|
On October 08 2015 18:23 Jer99 wrote:
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them?
I use them ZvZ and ZvP when the opponent goes for a groundbased macro game (so not very often  ). They are very powerful in those matchups against ground compositions in the later stages of the game.
In ZvZ mass lurker is the single strongest ground compositions by kilometres.
Tried them in ZvT with various compositions. They didn't feel any useful.
|
On October 08 2015 18:23 Jer99 wrote:
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them?
I haven't used them that much, they seem very strong vs aggressive bio styles. Ling bane muta or corrupter into ultras seems better due to liberators being very good at killing lurkers. Against mech I still try the queen ultra viper timing.
Disruptors are one of the major reasons why I'm hesitant to use them vs toss, but I think they're very strong vs the "classic deathball".
Also most protoss players I've been playing against seem to favor carriers. Lurkers aren't good at shooting up.
I can't say much about them in zvz as I don't understand that matchup since the economy+ larva change. I think I've used them a total of 3 times in zvz. First time I lost to ravagers, second vipers+ roach hydra and the 3'd game I won. He kept running roaches without detection...
For reference I'm about mid-masters hots with a bunch of BP, haven't had time to ladder on the beta that much so its only diamond.
|
On October 08 2015 17:50 shin_toss wrote:
5. Please revert to original. It makes no sense that lurkers out shoots collosus
It doesn't outrange the Colossus anymore, which is exactly how it should be.
|
On October 08 2015 17:15 MrMischelito wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 11:20 parkufarku wrote:
Zerg doesnt need another mid-game ground-army AoE damage unit that can be used defensively / harrass. (Overlaps banelings role)
Zerg needs a competent unit that can take out enemy air units, such as mass BCs / Liberators, or mass Toss air, not corrupters. in broodwar zerg didn't have strong air vs air neither and still the game wasn't broken as long as they could force the battle to the ground. it was the synergy with a strong but not op support spell (dark swarm, which back in in the days took me years to figure out what it actually did^^) that made it work I guess...
Scourge was solid
Problem is that air in sc2 is very powerful compared to what was in BW and G2A had become weaker in comparison
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
I have my doubts about 2 Lurkers being used as harassment, the burrow time gives workers plenty of time to move away and avoid all damage. Lets not forget the overall cost for that drop is 325 gas, it's not like the overlord has a boost to get away from sticky situations making it a very risky proposition.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
It's a unique unit no one can deny that, but the problem isn't that its role is already filled it's that the units don't exist to effectively complement it in a realistic example. (No fungal/blinding cloud set up) The difference between Dark Swarm and Blinding Cloud is huge. Dark swarm the onus is on you to effectively place it and keep your units inside it's AOE, Blinding cloud on the other hand the responsibility is on the opponent to escape it's AOE and the AI even tries to.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Probably going to be most seen in ZvT, since it's the only matchup where mobile detection isn't prevalent, but even then it's not going to be too effective and what I blame that on is the Medivac. The most effective position for a lurker would be on the top of a chokepoint, like a ramp but since the Medivac is an air unit it provides vision to the top of the ramp allowing an observant opponent (Which I hope most professionals are) to either avoid them, or scan and kill them. They will not function like they did in Broodwar, with a lack of strong zerg complementary units and large changes in the matchups (Medic to Medivac, prevalence of drops and the stronger air armies of the other races) negating most of the positional holding strength of the Lurker. To compensate the potential damage this unit can dish out is ridiculous but I find it all very hit or miss making the unit either a game winner or an expensive dud. We're bashing the square Lurker through a circular hole forgetting that a lot of the "small" changes between the games will massively change how they functioned.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Neither. Terran bio is mobile enough to avoid it containing them too effectively (assuming a level playing field economy/army wise in all these examples) Terran mech, trying to out siege what is considered the ultimate composition seems pretty futile. Protoss has the Tempest, sure you will have a pretty large window where they don't but Warp prisms are very effective at pulling back the supporting units for the Lurker and the protoss army can run over lurkers if left alone (as most races can) The exception is in ZvZ, where it's an excellent siege unit due to spores you get into pretty awkward matches where the best option is always to sit back creating a stalemate play with little room for outskilling your opponent, you can't run in a ground army vs already set up Lurkers you can't harass effectively without committing a large portion of your army and if they position the accompanying units correctly it's very unlikely to be cost effective. Mutalisk just get run down by spores until you have a massive clump and you can't split them up because spores would decimate them and if your opponent managed to run down the smaller clumps you've lost the game. ZvZ with Lurkers and an even footing is not in a good state, a matchup is never in a good state if the best play you can make is to sit back and not engage or harass.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
It was buffed up to that range for a reason the "small" changes between BW and SC2 mean if we want the unit to exist in SC2 it's stats needs to be seriously amped up.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
The animation makes it very hard for you to count the amount of lurkers as it seems to adjust the positions of the already popped up spines in a sort of ripple effect. My suggestion would be for each popped up spine to remain stationary until the animation is completed. The spines also look more complex than they should as they've been curved backwards and flick backwards slightly during the animation, they should be a little more plain with a vertical spike. They should be spaced out more so imagine each . is a spine so currently it's . . . I would suggest . . .
The largest complaint is the sound, for such a powerful unit you need a powerful audio cue, the current one needs to be is quiet an unassuming you need something that really conveys the strength of this unit.
Is the lurker model too big?
The size is fine but the aesthetics are not, it looks far to willowy in it's torso making it looks a bit like a preying mantis the front claws are as pathetic as a T-rex's arms and what in the hell is that spike on it's head. Make it bigger and more armored on the back give it more menacing front claws and scale that spike way down also adding a bit more of a contrast between the claws and it's appendages would help.
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
It's fine it's what makes the unit effective due to it's set up time and comparatively small range for a siege unit.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
The unit either wins games or is an expensive dud, usually the former. So yes it's justified.
|
On October 08 2015 11:41 Cricketer12 wrote:
9. I don't see why the BW approach (upgrade from hydra den) can't be adopted.
It's to give a better scouting que about lurkers than an upgrade could.
|
The Lurker is one of my favourite units since BW. That being said I don't like one aspect of the LotV version of the unit: speed. IMO siege units should not have good mobility AND good damage output. Colossi have shown just how bad that combination can be for the game. Not having good dps is the only reason Tempests are not breaking the game. Siege tank pick up is another example of this and I'm sure that it will be nerfed or removed from the game eventually.
I would like the Lurker to have even greater damage, but to have slower movement speed and to take longer to burrow. Preparation and good positioning should count for something. Remember the way Lurkers worked in BW? 2 of them could hold a narrow ramp against seemingly infinite numbers of Bio. LotV Lurkers can't do that, but they can bum rush you and burrow faster than you can blink (pun intended). And I find that sort of dynamic rather dumb.
|
1. No, Banes would have been used for that far more often if it was something zergs wanted to do.
It might however popularized doom drops with lurkers at ramps/chokes to slow down army.
2. Similar to Broodwar, the lurker is a situational unit. Range 9 however makes it slightly too powerful.
3. Bio traps similar to bane mines.
4.siege.
5. I would actually put the range at 6.5 or 7. 9 is way to powerful and 6 is simply not worth the investment.
6. In broodwar it was micro-able and it lead to great things. Id keep it this way.
7. Yes, but especially to "fat". Its hard to make precice clicks this way.
8. No idea on this subject.
9. Lurker is never going to be a mainstream unit like the ultras or even vipers. The tech length is something that can be tweaked once the game has been out for a while.
|
1. Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Yeah, for sure. I see a lot of people here disagreeing with that, but lurker drops are something I've been playing with extensively in the beta. For an actual opening, 2 base lurker drops have been working very well for me, actually. Against terran, it's kind of a 50% chance of "Do they have 2 scans" or not, but if they don't, or they don't have any air to deal with them, the lurkers pay for themselves many times over before they die.
As for sporadic drop harassment throughout the game, I think lurkers are going to be fantastic. You only need a small number of lurkers to obliterate any attacking army, so your main army can be much, much smaller. If you choose to toss some of that money into 2 extra lurkers to drop near a base, I think it would be incredibly worth it. This is just compounded by their range, since you don't need to facehug a planetary to try and do damage, you can place the lurker at the edge of the radius and still pull the attention of the terran player, for example.
2. Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
The lurker is unique in the zerg army, easily. Lurkers are space control. You burrow a lurker, and everything in range of that lurker is in danger of being ripped apart. The baneling does this too, except the range is something like 1.5, and only kills marines.
With the addition of the lurker, the baneling moves on to a brute force role (It's always had a brute force role, lets be real). I don't think banelings ever served the role of the lurker, I don't think they ever came close. You have this small, expensive suicide unit with a range of 0, then diminishing returns the further the enemy is from it. Once it attacks, that's it. It's over. You need another one. That's the opposite of space control. That's kamikaze. Lurkers are on the expensive side, but they pay for themselves extremely quickly if you place them in good positions. They will hold a choke indefinitely, and that's really what separates them from a baneling.
Regarding the broodlord, I don't think they compare. The broodlord serves as an 'infinite swarm' unit. They spawn temporary units and complement your army. They're not so useful for controlling a choke, for example.
3. How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Definitely chokes. Ramps, entrances to expansions. Those two bridges on bridgehead. Ideally, you want a couple of lurkers sitting on one side of the bridge on hold fire. When the opponent fills the bridge, you let loose. Everything dies.
You can do that in an open field, too. Except you run the risk of losing all your lurkers.
Any case is good, really. If you can trap a large army deep in lurker range, you're going to destroy it, plain and simple. Even if you lose all the lurkers, you're more than likely going to be making a beneficial trade.
4 .Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Its better as a siege unit. It's long range, invisible, and dishes out terrible, terrible damage. It's the perfect siege weapon. That said, the invisibility factor of the lurker is what makes it a viable harassment option. A lurker in the main can't be dealt with with a single banshee. You need a scan, or a raven. It's different from other harassment because you need more to deal with it, in addition to it being a standard part of the army.
Look at the banshee, or the oracle. Harassment units. You don't see them in the main army. Dealing with them is part of your build. The only time you see them is during your respective openings, and you know how to deal with them. Very rarely do we see a cloaked banshee going to town on a mineral line in the mid-game. The reason is simple: You only made the one banshee, and it doesn't usually make it to the midgame.
A lurker on the other hand, is a midgame unit. It's a standard part of your army. You're always going to have some on hand (if you're going lurkers). This is different from the banshee/oracle situation. Those aren't core army units. You can drop a single lurker inside the enemy's base, and it will be more annoying than a cloaked banshee or oracle, all while leaving your army more or less in the same state it was before you dropped it.
Unlike the banshee/oracle, the lurker is a ground unit. A turret isn't going to shut it down. It's invisible, and obliterates light units. You can't send 6 marines at a burrowed lurker, you'll lose all your marines.
5. Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I think the current range gives a lot of options to zerg, defensively and offensively. At 9 range, lurkers are enticing. You want to make them. I haven't played any games where my lurkers were overwhelmingly powerful, most people know how to deal with them.
6. It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Remain the same. If you can dodge it, let people dodge it. I've never seen someone do it, so it can't be easy.
7. Is the lurker model too big?
No, I think the size is fine. You don't make many of them, and units can walk on them. It's not a problem.
8. Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
Probably. Lurkers are speed demons. I haven't seen many complaints about the speed, though. Probably because they spend most of their time stationary. I think if they were going to nerf the lurker, speed is what they would change, though.
9. Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
Lurkers are so fucking good. It definitely justifies the end product. If the lurker den build time was reduced, zerg would become completely safe from any 2 base aggression, and we all know what happened the last time zerg was safe from 2 base aggression.
|
1. Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Assuming the opponent don't react in time, lurkers will kill many workers. However, banelings would have deal the same amount of kills and are less expensive.
So the lurker drop is useless unless the zerg player can save his lurkers, which is very unlikely, we don't have speedivacs or recall.
During the era of macro mechanics removal terran had a lot less scan so burrowed lurkers behind mineral lines was very useful : terran players couldn't both kill lurkers and clean the creep very often.
2. Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Lurker is unique, some people may argue that lurker overlap broodlords but it is not true.
Lurkers are a strong siege unit because of his very high dps and very bad mobility (the unit has to be burrowed to attack).
Broodlords are terrible siege unit, protoss players can blink under broodlords to kill them and marine/marauders can stim in broodlords.
Broodlords are units that force the opponent to attack because their long range allow to attack the opponent for free.
There is a huge synergy between lurkers and broodlords. Lurkers protect broodlords while broodlords can attack the opponent for free... unless there are air units.
3. How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Isn't it obvious ? wait for unit to be clumped up on top of the lurkers then attack.
4. Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege unit. The unit is too expensive to be used alone has a harass unit.
5. Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I think lurkers come very late in the game, so there are no imbalanced lurkers timings.
If the lurker start with 6 range nobody will produce lurkers until the seismic spines upgrade is researched because a lurker with 6 range is useless.
So this upgrade simply add a certain amount of time before zerg players can produce a lurker and this add nothing else interesting to the game.
6. It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
At this time, terran players simply split their bioball and a-clic in lurkers. They never try to dodge the lurkers attacks.
I think the opponent should not be able to engage so easily in lurkers and try to attack from an other angle or do some drops.
I think it might be interesting that lurkers deal higher damage against bioball (for example bonus damage against light units so the lurker can kill the marine in one shot) but slower the attack of the lurker so terrans players can avoid lurkers attacks, even in big fights.
Also, the attack animation of the lurker should be changed to be more clear. It's difficult to see the exact size of the attack.
7. Is the lurker model too big?
I would prefer a smaller lurker but i don't think it is something important.
8. Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
I don't think the lurker's speed is an issue, but it might be a good idea to have a slower lurker out of creep but a stronger lurker on creep (for example, higher damage against bioball).
This way, it will increase play around creep spread and zerg players will have to be more careful with their lurkers when they are not on creep.
9. Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
Yes. No.
|
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason.
|
On October 08 2015 22:44 Tiaraju9 wrote:
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason.
What a superb idea. Reducing strategic options and depth is great for the game.
|
On October 08 2015 22:59 CheddarToss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 22:44 Tiaraju9 wrote:
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason. What a superb idea. Reducing strategic options and depth is great for the game.
Massing one imbalanced unit is "great for the game" ?
|
On October 08 2015 23:12 FireCake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 22:59 CheddarToss wrote:On October 08 2015 22:44 Tiaraju9 wrote:
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason. What a superb idea. Reducing strategic options and depth is great for the game. Massing one imbalanced unit is "great for the game" ?
How is it imbalanced? Was watching Stephano yesterday and he kept wrecking Protoss who go for Carriers with nothing but Speedlings and Spores. And Skytoss isn't about building Carriers only.
|
1.Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
I think that it takes too long to get to lurkers for them to be effective in overlord drops in SC2.
2. Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Lurker gives Zerg some good space control which is nice and adds variety to the race.
3. How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
If the enemy doesn't know the lurkers are there it can be devastating. Best use is to not allow the enemy to see you've got Lurkers. Same as Baneling bombs.
4. Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege. The 9 range is ridiculous against anything but Tanks, Liberators and Tempests and the damage is nothing to laugh at either.
5. Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I think the Lurker should not exceed 8 range. 9 range is a little too strong I think vs. Protoss ground. It forces air units.
6. It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Lurkers are very strong as is. I'd like to retain the ability to dodge their attack so that good players can micro against them.
7. Is the lurker model too big?
Seems fine to me, maybe a TAD smaller? But it's okay.
8. Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
I think its movement speed is okay, but its burrow speed is a bit too fast. I think leapfrogging Lurkers to siege a Protoss early is very hard to stop and you can hardly attack them while they're getting in position.
9. Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
I think Lurkers are a very strong unit and I'd be scared to see them come out earlier.
|
On October 08 2015 23:12 FireCake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 22:59 CheddarToss wrote:On October 08 2015 22:44 Tiaraju9 wrote:
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason. What a superb idea. Reducing strategic options and depth is great for the game. Massing one imbalanced unit is "great for the game" ?
Getting to mass Carriers is a lot more difficult than it seems.
PvZ is actually so hard that I think if you reach mass Carriers your reward should be to win the game :p
|
On October 08 2015 23:20 CheddarToss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 23:12 FireCake wrote:On October 08 2015 22:59 CheddarToss wrote:On October 08 2015 22:44 Tiaraju9 wrote:
The fact that every lazy protoss is going skytoss is making hard to predict and analyze the state of Lurker in PvZ (and other ground units such as ultras, disruptor).
Blizzard should really nerf the carrier for this very reason. What a superb idea. Reducing strategic options and depth is great for the game. Massing one imbalanced unit is "great for the game" ? How is it imbalanced? Was watching Stephano yesterday and he kept wrecking Protoss who go for Carriers with nothing but Speedlings and Spores. And Skytoss isn't about building Carriers only.
Why is it imbalanced ?
Skytoss beats every zerg army, no matter how well the zerg can micro his army.
So the only way to beat a protoss going skytoss is to kill him before (impossible) or get a lot more ressources and trade ressources.
Since protoss players can go for very early third base (which is safe), zerg players have to get at least 80 drones to out-produce protoss players and in the meantime harass the protoss player to trade ressources.
This is why Stephano is playing speedlings and spores.
Speedlings harass might still work now, but protoss players will learn to make good base build to use photon overcharge/canon to defend.
So the zerg player will have to find other units to trade ressources against skytoss player... And we don't have other units to trade ressources against a player defending on 3/4/5 bases.
Zerg players had the same problem to trade ressources against skytoss players in the early days of HoTs. The only answer was the SwarmHost because it makes free unit (so the trade is obviously very good for the zerg).
In LoTv we have these new options :
ravager : useless since the removal of his range upgrade
lurker : doesn't shoot air but can protect hydralisk, however hydralisk still lose against carrier...
viper : his new spell doesn't work on interceptor and can't reach carrier (they are too far)
Skytoss, SwarmHost play, broodlord infestor, mech ...
At the beginning all these strategies are very difficult to play because you have to know how to defend everything.
This is why you see these strategies either never play or almost always play. Look broodlord infestor, once zerg players learnt how to secure 3/4 bases every zerg was going for broodlord infestor. Same with mech camping, every koreans terran players were playing bio in ZvT, now they have learnt how to defend 3/4 bases with mech and use this strategy all the time. It was almost the same with Swarmhost play but David Kim decided to nerf much earlier than broodlord infestor and mech play.
Protoss players know that skytoss beats every army zerg can make, so they are trying to find ways to play this style, like zerg was trying to play broodlord infestor or terrans trying to play Battlecruisers.
It took months (if not years) for zergs to learn how to play broodlords/infestors or SwarmHost.
It took months (if not years) for terrans to learn how to play mech.
I hope protoss players will need more than 2 weeks to learn how to play skytoss.
|
Anyway have videos/replays of successful, in-game, Lurker micro?
I've seen the theoretical tests, where a handful of marines split and decoy lurkers on a flat plane with nothing else happening, but can you really dodge spines in real-world in-game scenarios in LotV? It seems that what they mean by "dodging" is "not being there when the line spawns" because it looks like the line hits the whole line at the beginning of the animation.
|
You have to reach 4 and 5 base so fast in lotv that it feels like I'm giving up map control going lurkers, which is what they were actually good at in broodwar.
I'm sure I'm doing it wrong, but I just get my rear handed to me when I try for them.
|
- Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Probably not, but this isn't really a strategy I have much interest in.
- Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Nothing comes close. The Lurker is unique and fresh.
- How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
In areas that are common for armies to move through without scanning, yet are not popular locations for burrowed Lurkers in the metagame. Thus, this will change constantly, but will never be on creep.
- Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege, for sure. Although it's usable for harass, assuming your opponent is not defending an expansion attentively, and you sneak the Lurkers into the mineral line and burrow them so that your opponent doesn't notice until the "workers are under attack" warning.
- Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Seismic Spines should return and be adjusted on cost and time, so that it can be used to control the timings at which very strong Lurkers can be accessed. However, 6 range just isn't too hot for an immobile set-up unit in SC2, with 6 range Hydras, Marauders, and Stalkers, all with high dps density and long scan range for easy attack moving commands. There's not really any solution for this without severely restructuring the game, unfortunately. I feel that the Lurker Den itself needs to be cheaper and morph faster, and be available on Lair, and then have Seismic Spines be available on Hive. This allows Lurkers to be used as a defensive and harassment option sooner, and then have their formidable space control abilities take effect in the late game.
- It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
This should be increased in effectiveness even further, with spines traveling at one-half to two-thirds their current speed. I would maybe also like the see the line deal damage out to a range of 10, while keeping the targetable range at 9, similar to the attacks of Hellions.
- Is the lurker model too big?
It would be nice to actually increase the size of the model, particularly the burrowed one. This would make them less susceptible to splash, yes, but it would decrease the ability of a group of Lurkers to burrow all at once and immediately send out a freaking explosion of synchronized spines and absolutely shred everything within range of the Lurker group. As another commenter mentioned, it would also make them easier to click on.
- Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
I think it's speed is good, as it should be. It could even have a greater on-creep speed bonus, up to maybe 1.5x, as is the unupgraded Hydralisk. However, burrow time is blatantly too fast. You should not be able to advance your Lurkers against enemy fire and burrow them right in the enemy's face without other measures such as Blinding Cloud support, or a flanking attack distracting them. I'm tempted to say they should unburrow slower too, but I'm worried that would make them too vulnerable to Corrosive Bile shots. I'm thinking a full 4 seconds of burrow time, like siege time of the tank, would make the most sense.
- Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
It does justify the end product, but I feel that both the product and the tech path should be slightly reduced in stature. Quicker to tech to, but add Seismic Spines back in, so that the fully decked-out Lurker is just as strong and takes just as much time and investment to reach, but weaker Lurkers are available with more ease.
As a further note, as many, many people have suggested, those attack sounds need to be sharper and more aggressive.
|
Lurker used to have a long burrow animation but short unburrow in BW. Also, the spines moved slower and they gradually hit everything in the path not all at once.
I'd really like it if they changed those two things back to how they were in BW. Allows the Lurker to escape if it needs to but prevents them from just running up and burrowing and slaughtering everything, which is what they do now. Also, the spines look a little dinky. BW spines looked better IMO.
Basically, change everything back to Brood War lol. BW Lurker was a boss.
And the unit design had a lot more.... finesse to it than the SC2 Lurker.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
It already is. The power of midgame lurker harassment, combined with the inexpensive single overlord drop upgrade, has created a great tool for zerg to slow down opponents en route to late game armies. Overall, zerg economy in LOTV is much less dependent on being a base up from your opponent as it was in HOTS, so lurker drops provide an avenue for gaining an economic advantage in a new meta where beefy zerg ground armies are increasingly becoming the norm in zvp and zvt.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
The lurker is very unique as it provides the only sustained splash damage in the zerg arsenal, and the most reliable backbone unit for roach hydra armies, allowing zergs to go for ranged upgrades without fear of getting overrun due to reliance on weak unupgraded banes. Lurkers are especially useful when combined with fungals, and can provide support for air in the late game (more on that later)
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Like a ranged bane mine: wait for units to clump, and shoot
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
I'd say it's better as a siege unit, but the flexibility in deciding when to morph em makes it great for both. Another role that hasn't been mentioned here is its usefulness as an ANTI-harass unit, especially vs mech and protoss. 1 lurker can wipe out a hellion squad in seconds, and the fact that it is borrow gives it the usefulness of a DT when it comes to defending drops
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Keep 9 range, or make initial range 7 with upgrade to 9. A critical role the 9 range plays is against templar in Zvp. With the prevalence of airtoss nowadays, the only reliable way to protect a corruptor/viper ball from storms is to zone templar with lurkers.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
I would keep the animation the way it is but make it just a tad slower. It's very very hard to dodge spines the way the animation plays out right now
Is the lurker model too big?
Just fine imo
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
Might be a tad too fast, but I think it should have a minimum speed fast enough to keep up with roach hydra balls, as a lurker's primary utility is to make roach/hydra viable
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
It does. Lurkers take a very long time to produce, but are by far the most versatile and powerful weapon in a zerg's arsenal once they complete. Besides, it's not like corruptors where sometimes you'll have this useless unit while you wait for the GS to finish (like when facing terran w/o vikings or zerg). You have hydras to keep you safe, which are generally a great midgame unit
|
Just want to say I generally agree with the comments here; overall I think the Lurker is tons of fun to play with, doesn't overlap hugely, and can work quite well balance wise with maybe a few small tweaks. Glad it's here finally!
|
1. Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment? Potentially I think it could be, but I think it is more leaning towards your opponent making a mistake in order for this to happen. Right now in ZvT I think it would be too easily picked off to make it worth while with 2 overlords and 4 would be an over compensation if lost, but is the amount you would need to drop to be efficient. In ZvP I think most Protoss are going Skytoss so it COULD potentially work, if you it isn't seen by pheonix's around the map.
2.Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique? I think the Lurker most definitely overlaps with other Zerg units as it dominates the ground, which is why most Protoss players just go Skytoss as Carriers are also extremely powerful, and it avoids having to try to attack lurkers, really nullifies them completely and renders them useless.
3.How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively? I have used Hold fire effectively recently in ZvT vs bio, really had me remenissing of ZvT in Broodwar 
4.Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit? The lurker is best as a defensive unit in conjunction with spines and spore crawlerss I feel, but I haven't used them offensively much yet.
5.Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range? I think that the lurker should retain the range, but the spike speed should be nerfed so it is possible to micro against it.
6.It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better? I haven't been able to micro against the lurkers actually, I would need to see this done in action.
7.Is the lurker model too big? I think the lurker model is the right size, but it is often hard to notice along with all of the other Zerg units, they blend it a lot for me. T_T
8.Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is? I think the speed is fine.
9.Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time? I feel like if Blizzard decided to drastically nerf the Lurker (Spine speed / damage output) , having the tech time reduced would be a really nice move and help to diversify Zerg a little more, right now I feel Lurkers are a pretty defensive unit as you hope to not die while getting to T3, but I may not be using them correctly.
|
oops sorry double post --
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
They seem to get the job done as their damage potential is great, meaning that alternatively many other units would need to be used to get the same worker damage done. This way an expensive unit can actually make a purpose cheap through the drop. Still, they may be better used defensively as Zerg drops can not be played as reactively as Terran and Protoss drops.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Definitely remains unique. They allow zerg to play a static positional card similar to Siege Tanks and to some extend Disruptors. This allows zerg to do different army maneuvres outside of the concaved split/attack micro we see otherwise from most of the their units.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
It would be best used similarily to a Baneling by waiting for a cluster of units to pass by. It could also work when "hiding" as you would likely do after you do some harass from a drop and wait to escape andd perhaps harass later, hoping your opponent missed it.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
I believe it is "best" as a Siege Unit, but it is going to depend on the development of the meta-game and other units. It may not even be best as a Siege unit but rather as a defensive unit. It has potential to protect mineral lines and fronts allowing zerg to tech. This is especially true since reaching Tier 3 for zerg is harder than for the other races.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
I think the range is in a good place, it helps protect against Tier 2 units like Immortals and Stalkers more effectively allowing them to buy time. This is likely true as well versus Terran and Lurkers should therefore very likely retain the native 9 range.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
I believe the micro potential is more interesting, but the opposite argument would be that it is necessary for lurkers to do gauranteed damage. Well in perspective, Lurkers are often able to do damage because of the unit clumping. In smaller intercations the micro would be more explicit.
Is the lurker model too big?
Probably not. I think it needs to be visible when detected.
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
For movement speed it overall seems to be fine. I would like to see perhaps a very tiny buff alongside a more significant buff to unburrow speed to allow Lurkers to dodge Disruptor shots. This would also justify the potential to micro against the Lurker attacks.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
I think at this point it is too early to say, but I do not think Lurkers - due to cost - would be a "rushy" thing to do as they also need support. This means that allin versions of Lurkers will likely be weaker and give opponent time to build a sizeable force to deal with this as well, and this may justify that Lurkers could get a slight tech reduction, but only a slight, in case they could be needed defensively. Currently I think not.
|
On October 08 2015 18:54 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 17:50 shin_toss wrote:
5. Please revert to original. It makes no sense that lurkers out shoots collosus It doesn't outrange the Colossus anymore, which is exactly how it should be.
collosus back to 9 range with upgrades? yay. THo im a random player
|
- Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
It would be more like a suicide attack than an airdrop harassment.
- Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
Nope it doesn't. The unit's design is brilliant since the Brood War era. It's real good old school stuff.
- How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Wait a min. Wouldn't this ability expose lurker's position if you wanna ambush your opponent? Nevertheless the unit is cloaked when attacking!
- Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege!
- Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Only if hive is the requirement to unlock the upgrade, making it a tier-3 tech.
- It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
Of course it should, so its power is limited when in small number as the opponent can dodge the spikes by micro.
- Is the lurker model too big?
Definitely not. Big model gives you a good reason to spread them around and deploy them at strategic positions. You can't clump them up into a death ball like you did with other units. Besides, the higher the supply cost, the bigger the model. That applies to all units in all three races.
- Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
It's fine.
- Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
Lurker is worth the time and resources investment, no doubt.
|
Wait.. are burrowed lurkers have markings on the terrain like widow mine or moving roaches? iirc they dont have but I think they should have since widow mines are kinda the same. if you walk your GW units they are gone in 2 secs :|
|
I'm not really answering any of these questions, but I was thinking how other people think about splitting the burrow and unburrow hotkeys. I think it'd be nice to be able to micro groups of lurkers the same way you could micro siege tanks.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
- Yes. It's much more rewarding than any other zerg drop option
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
- Very unique. Better at defending than spines, but more costly. Better at containing than any other Zerg unit. More reliable damage output than banelings.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
- When they don't know your lurkers are there? Standard. Lol.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
- Harass. It's "siege" capabilities are limited, although it does make for good contains.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
- I can't say whether this would be good or not. This is a wait and see.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
- No. I really dislike guaranteed hits with units like that. Units like the lurker should be powerful, but able to be micro'd against.
Is the lurker model too big?
- Maybe ever so slightly too big.
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
- Seems fine the way it is, but this is another wait and see.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
- Lurker Den should be reduced in build time.
Maybe reduce lurker den build time significantly, but bring back the range upgrade for the lurkers. Faster lurkers, but range upgrade required to help with siege.
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
Lurker overlord drop is effective but I have always though that zerg's main strength is brute force and consistency as opposed to gimmicks and lurker drops do not seem to be a repeatable strategy to me.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
I can think of no zerg unit even remotely like the lurker
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Hold fire the lurkers and move your army close to the enemy base (but don't let them see the lurkers!) burrow and engage the enemy with your otherwise tiny army, pull back, fire the lurkers and see how long it takes them to notice :D
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Siege definitely, lurker pushes are very strong at the moment
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
Hard to say. If the upgrade is returned it will probably need to be removed in a few months when people get more used to dealing with lurkers.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
I am in favor of additional micro opportunities, things like invulnerability and guaranteed hits should be kept to a minimum.
Is the lurker model too big?
I think it's a good size. Lurkers have a large impact in fights so they deserve a large model
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
They're pretty fast right now, it's something that could be investigated if offensive lurker play is deemed to be too strong.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
To a diamond zerg (i.e. me) lurkers come out fast enough. My opponents rarely attack in time to catch me building lurkers unless I was very far behind.
|
Lurkers are great vs Protoss until they get 5 Disruptors out then you need to tech switch.
In ZvT this unit is useless, it will never work because Siege Tanks and Liberators outrange them hard and bio is way to fast for them.
The only way they could be helped is if they reduce the time to get into lurkers
|
On October 08 2015 18:23 Jer99 wrote:
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them?
Random player here.
I've been using Hydra/Lurker as my main composition for all Zerg matchups. I have yet to find something I haven't been able to beat when including timing attacks and Ultralisks/Mutas in the lategame (and map presence). I've had little experience vs Skytoss as it is, but I can usually do pretty well against Protoss in general with a timing attack involving Lings in addition to plenty of Hydras and a few Lurkers to take care of Zealots and Adepts.
|
On October 12 2015 08:19 NinjaDuckBob wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2015 18:23 Jer99 wrote:
Have you guys been playing vs. Lurkers much in LotV? I've only seen one Zerg player use them out of ~100 games.
And as a Zerg player do you actually use them? Random player here. I've been using Hydra/Lurker as my main composition for all Zerg matchups. I have yet to find something I haven't been able to beat when including timing attacks and Ultralisks/Mutas in the lategame (and map presence). I've had little experience vs Skytoss as it is, but I can usually do pretty well against Protoss in general with a timing attack involving Lings in addition to plenty of Hydras and a few Lurkers to take care of Zealots and Adepts.
What level are you playing at if I may ask? I'm a diamond and cannot seem to make Ling/Hydra/Lurker in any match except ZvP and currently I feel like Skytoss or heavy double pronged Adept/Zealot Warp Prism play wrecks it although the recent nerfs is just making most Protoss I know go Skytoss.
I find that banelings are still totally necessary vs. bio which still mows down Hydras just as effectively as it always has lol
|
As a Terran, I usually kill Zerg players teching straight to 2 base Lurker early on, and when Zergs are going for a more macro based Roach / Ravager / Hydra / Lurker composition I'm already making 3 fact tank production so the lurkers more fulfill a role as buying time rather than actually killing things. 2-3 lurkers in a good position can stop a crazy amount of bio though, they're kinda like Collosi in the sense that 1-2 aren't very threatening but 3-4+ start to one shot your army and it's almost impossible to dodge. 3-4+ lurkers with a few units / spines to support can't be broken without tanks / liberators to outrange them.
The problem is that with speedvacs and the new warp prisms there isn't any need to attack into fortified positions. I rip Zergs who overcommit to lurkers apart by dropping everwhere the lurkers aren't. Terrain simply doesn't matter enough for such a positional unit to be good on the defensive. Lurkers are basically only good when on the offensive where the opponent is forced to attack into them or when used for gimmicky traps / drops (similar to banelings) at the moment.
|
they really butchered the lurker from its original design. side stepping against them came through a natural form of competitive gameplay, unlike lotv's version where it was designed with an intention to allow it. same with hold fire.
they ruined my favorite unit of all time. now its just some stupid, ugly, dungeness crab.
|
They will buff it sooner or later when they realize that teching to Lurkers in sc2 is not like BW and Lurkers are tier 2.5
Its the same problem as hydra when they moved it to tier 2
|
Can the lurker popularize overlord drop harassment?
While in theory the Lurker can be used for really effective drop harass, an Overlord with 2 Lurkers is a bit too much of an investment. It's a high risk, high reward scenario, but I believe that you can use lower risk drops such as Baneling or Speedling drops while doing enough economic damage to justify it, instead of risking a huge amount of resources into a Lurker drop that may or may not work.
Does the lurker overlap with current Zerg units, or does it remain unique enough for its own clique?
It slightly overlaps with the Brood Lord, in the sense that it's an anti-ground siege unit. But it does this job differently in a few ways. The first one is the fact that it's a ground unit, not an air unit. So it has different' vulnerabilities than the Brood Lord. It also uses a straight line AoE to do damage, rather than spit out Broodlings to do simultaneously single-target damage to multiple units. The Lurker is also a burrowed unit, so it requires that there is some form of detection in order to fight it. So it fits in it's own, separate siege roll than the Brood Lord, which is definitely fine.
How can the hold fire ability be used most effectively?
Generally you want to use Hold Fire when you can get your opponent to get overconfident and go right on top of your army. One really useful scenario would be in a ZvP where the Protoss believes they have enough army to aggressively blink all of their Stalkers on top of the Roach/Hydra army. If you then release fire, you have a pretty good chance at killing all of the Stalkers since they deal 30 damage to armored. And since Stalkers have 80/80 health, 6 Lurkers will 1 shot a line of Stalkers, so they'll go down pretty fast with the added support of the surrounding Roach/Hydra army.
Another cool maneuver that can be done is using the Viper's Blinding Cloud to force your opponent to re-situate themselves. If you keep your Lurkers on Hold Fire, they may be tempted to go towards your army. Once they're in a good range, you can release and let the Lurkers do their work.
Is the lurker better as a siege unit, or a harass unit?
Definitely better as a siege unit. It's too costly to be used as an effective harass unit in most scenarios (though this could always change, as they are super annoying to deal with in a mineral line since they out-range static defense). But in general, they do a lot better job at killing enemy ground units rather than workers, and there are other units that do the worker harass with less risk and similar rewards.
Should the lurker retain its nine range, or should the seismic spines upgrade return, reverting the lurker back to six range?
The nine range promotes a few issues that can be seen. The nine range is likely introduced because the Colossus also has nine range. If the Lurker had six range vs a nine range Colossus, then it makes the Colossus a sort of hard counter to Lurkers, which isn't what Blizzard wants (I assume). The issues the nine range brings though (in reference of PvZ), is that a unit which in theory should be able to deal with Lurkers because of it's high mobility and bonus damage vs Armored, the Stalker, is out-ranged by 3. So in order to get in close enough range to try to fight Lurkers, the Stalkers will take about 2 free shots on the way, which is about half their health. If the Stalkers mass Blink on top of the Lurkers, even if they end up in a good position, they simply do not kill Lurkers fast enough, and will die in the meantime.
The units to make, at the moment, to deal with Lurkers are:
- High Templar: Storm is 9 range, does 80 damage over 4 seconds. After 3 Storms, dealing 240 damage, the Lurker will die in about 10 seconds. A bit negated by good Lurker positioning.
- Disruptor: Does 155 damage at 9 range. Takes 2 shots to kill the Lurker, with 110 damage overkill. Also has a long cool down. A bit negated by good Lurker positioning.
- Tempest: 15 range, air unit. Can hit Lurker without getting hit by other units, but requires an Oracle to cast Revelation to have the vision to do so. Slow moving unit, very costly, takes a while to get, and will never really kill Lurkers, just force re-positioning.
It wouldn't be as much of a problem for the Disruptor or High Templar to deal with the Lurkers, except for the fact that they have so much health, that by the time you can kill them, Zerg would have built up a bank behind the siege.
So what does this mean? If the Lurker started with 6 range, with a 9 range upgrade, it would give Protoss a window of opportunity to use the Stalker to fight the Lurker, since they both initiate damage at the same time, and wouldn't require Protoss to tech quickly to either Disruptors or Storm to deal with the Lurkers. While I'm not sure if this is the best, I do believe a more suitable nerf would be either in the health or damage area.
It’s possible to micro against the lurker's attack by sidestepping the spines. Should this remain the way it is, or should a slower, but guaranteed to hit attack work better?
I would argue that with the current iteration, it is not possible to micro against the Lurker. The shots happen really fast, and are not that apparent initially. In a big fight, Lurker Spines will not be dodge able, even with good Blink and pull back micro. They traverse the ground at a slightly faster rate than they did in Brood War (1.43 cool down in SC2 compared to 1.54 cool down in Brood War) and it seems that it doesn't quite apply damage as the Spine goes on, it feels like it's rather instant, but that could be a latency problem on my end. For the Lurker to be micro'd against, the Spines need to be more obvious (either by sound or visuals) and move at a slightly slower speed so that there is a reasonable reaction time to seeing a Lurker Spine, and avoiding a Lurker spine. The map would also have to be fairly open, so that there is actual room. Currently, map design has a lot of choke points, which really favors the Lurker because its spines get more concentrated damage and there's less maneuverability for the opponent.
If they can make dodging the Lurker's spines more feasible, then I would definitely prefer that over slower, more guaranteed damage. But as of right now, it feels like it's fast, guaranteed damage over promoting counter micro from the opponent outside of "attack where the Lurkers aren't".
Is the lurker model too big?
I would say it's fine. It is actually a bit helpful to have bigger units in an army composition, as it helps spread your units out more by taking more space. Archons and Ultralisks are good examples of this. If you ever watch an Archon or Ultralisk heavy army move around, they are, in general, moving out in larger concaves due to their collision detection knocking other units out of the way. Aside from that, there isn't much other gameplay elements this affects outside possible trouble getting through an opponent's sim city, but that also promotes a form of defender's advantage with you definitely need vs a siege unit.
Is the lurker's speed an issue, or is it fine the way it is?
In my experience, the Lurker is a bit too fast. I haven't seen many Zergs be super careful about their Lurkers. In general, they'll march them towards the opponent's army and just burrow them as soon as they're close enough without much thought. The Siege Tank design (at least pre-medivac pick up buff) was beautiful in the fact that the Siege Tank was a slow moving unit with high range and good damage output. While the Lurker has a lower range, it attacks at almost twice the speed of a Siege Tank (Lurker: 1.43 cool down, Siege Tank: 2.8) and thus has almost double the DPS vs non-Armored units and similar damage vs Armored units (Lurker: 21 DPS, Siege Tank: 12.5 DPS normal, +9.6 vs Armored). So in order to make the Lurker positioning a more conscience choice, I believe that their speed off of creep should be reduced a little bit, so that a Zerg player has be more careful and methodical when positioning Lurkers offensively.
Does the lengthy tech time justify the end product? Should the lurker den be reduced in time?
I would argue, yes. The Lurker is possible the most powerful siege unit in the game at the moment vs ground units. Getting it too quickly would prevent their opponent from getting effective counter units (Liberators, Siege Tanks, Disruptors, High Templar, etc), so they need to appear at a time where it is reasonable for their opponent to have access to counter measures so that mid game Lurker sieges aren't too powerful. I would actually argue that requiring the upgrade would be a good idea, to slow down their aggressive potential and mostly have them as a defending unit until the later stages of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
