On September 08 2012 20:27 FakeDeath wrote: SH is okay. I think.
But what happened to the Hydralisk??? No one is using them at all?????
Why would they? Nothing changed, their speed upgrade doesn't provide anything that good creepspread didn't do better in WoL already in defensive situations. For offensive situations you still need siege/high dps units, what the hydralisk is not. For reinforcing (=issue of costefficiency), roaches and zerglings are still better, unless the opponent has a lot of anti air.
So basically Hydralisk is still the shitty unit as it is in WoL. How sad such an iconic unit fallen when it was such a mainstay unit in BW.
On September 08 2012 20:27 FakeDeath wrote: SH is okay. I think.
But what happened to the Hydralisk??? No one is using them at all?????
Why would they? Nothing changed, their speed upgrade doesn't provide anything that good creepspread didn't do better in WoL already in defensive situations. For offensive situations you still need siege/high dps units, what the hydralisk is not. For reinforcing (=issue of costefficiency), roaches and zerglings are still better, unless the opponent has a lot of anti air.
So basically Hydralisk is still the shitty unit as it is in WoL. How sad such an iconic unit fallen when it was such a mainstay unit in BW.
it is sad, that Blizzard neglects pretty much all WoL Zerg unit "problems" but i would kindly ask you to keep the discussion in this thread swarm host related and discuss problems with the hydralisks in the appropriate thread thank you and have a nice day
You can also drop Swarm Hosts and Drones to the island and kill rocks/expand without Nyduses or Ovie drops
Or place proxy-Extractors (cheapest building that can be placed everywhere without creep) to "energize" vipers without needing them to fly back to base.
What about Swarm Hosts - they are ok. And it's my favourite unit. I think they should rename it from Swarm Host to a "Siege Mushrooms"
I usually hate posts like this but I have to agree with you, the swarm host just feels like a bad creation to me, I wish they would just redesign it instead of trying to balance it by changing damage.
On September 09 2012 00:46 ROOTFayth wrote: lost all his banelings, didnt kill all the swarm hosts, doesn't look like an official counter to me
Look at costs of both armies. Add a bit more banelings and it will kill everything. 1500m/750g vs 4200m/2400g.
Add a bit more banelings to something like 2000/1000 (added 10 more Banes) and they will solve problem finally. And I don't say about supply cost. Banes takes A LOT LESS food than swarmhosts. So they are EXTREMELY effective counter to swarm-hosts, if they're nearby
Plus it was not an ideal baneling atack. But still it killed 80% of all Swarm Hosts. Compare costs again! In real game if explode those banes at the middle of SH field, they can do more damage.
On September 09 2012 00:27 Existor wrote: I think, in ZvZ there will be no mass SH+festor battles, because Banelings are official counter to swarmhosts!
You forget that Infestors can just fungal the Banelings. And even if they dont that only works if the SH are all stacked together.
On September 08 2012 16:27 zoohairZ wrote: I've been saying the same thing.. I think the design of the Swarm Host is pretty flawed. It's overpowered in some cases where it shouldn't be yet it still sucks at what it's meant to do...which is be a siege unit.
Really? Wondering how you came to that conclusion that they suck at being a Siege Unit, when all of the top Zerg players are destroying with Swarm Host because of their Siege range.
Well, I didn't make myself very clear. I didn't exactly mean that it sucks at being a siege unit itself, I meant the time window where it can be used to lay siege in each matchup is very short, which ultimately makes it feel like a rather gimmicky unit that can either end up working really well or really bad depending on what build the opponent is doing. Refer to the OP's post where he mentions these timing windows.
I dunno I am seeing zergs like idra/stephano (those are the only 2 i'm really watching as they use the swarmhost good) make swarmhosts and use them for the whole game and not really once do I ever feel the swarmhost looks like a bad decision to keep making. Swarmhost with hydra/viper support is incredibly powerful from what I have seen :D.
I couldn't disagree more with some of the OP's points. The swarm host does control space (which in my opinion makes it awesome). The "hit me here" sign that you claim it brings is another way of saying it controls space, because you can either "hit the zerg there" or you have to back up your army. That's the definition of controlling space.
Also, I feel that the swarm host is a fantastic siege line breaker, but only in large numbers. The fact that the locusts sometimes die before doing any damage is usually because you don't have enough swarm hosts, and isn't bad for game design at all.
I love the swarm host, and it's units like these that made me come back from a year of quitting sc2 because it's getting to be a little more like sc:bw. IMO the swarm host is conceptually like if you took the lurker, made it better for offense and worse for defense -- but still viable for both.
I just had a few thoughts on the swarm host and I'm looking for opinions:
- Swarm hosts are obviously designed for 2 polar opposite situations: contains and flanking harassment (like with lurkers) -> I feel that swarm hosts are WORSE than lurkers at contains, and BETTER at harassment (via drops).
Here's why: - During a contain, you are bound by the locusts' timers, and the cycle time of the swarm hosts. Opponents can exploit this. If you try to work around that by unburrowing swarm hosts, you are now bound by burrow/unburrow times. - During a contain, your locusts will need enemy units to run very close to them (as if to commit suicide) due to their short range. -> The net effect is that when an opponent can push out past your contain, you will lose a big investment or at least not be able to deal significant damage back to them in the ensuing fight.
- With drop harassment, lurkers need to burrow and shoot repeatedly to deal damage. If they're doing damage, they're burrowed near enemy stuff. - Swarm hosts only need to burrow when they release their locusts - in between locust cycles they can unburrow, run around, or get back in overlords, while locusts deal damage. -> The net effect is that swarm hosts are much less 'risky' to use for drop harassment, and the only major tradeoff is that the damage you do to an opponent who doesn't react at all is strictly lower than with lurkers.
Here is an example situation: - You pressure the front of a protoss base with roach/ling - At the same time, you casually drop 2 swarm hosts into the far back of their main, release locusts and attack workers/assimilators/pylons/etc - You pick the swarm hosts up and then release some locusts elsewhere (maybe the main front, if your roach ling attack is becoming effective with the opponent under stress), or maybe you pull in more roaches/lings to make the swarm hosts hard to remove
Every stream I watch so far has people just throwing swarm hosts in their army and pointing them at the main front (or at a ramp). They call it a 'contain' because their main army just happens to be near the enemy's expansion path, but a doom drop could go around their army and make their 'contain' look pretty weak.
Admittedly, I'm not watching a LOT of streams, so: Is anyone doing drop harass with swarm hosts? Is it viable? Am I wrong?
On September 09 2012 03:32 Beef Noodles wrote: I couldn't disagree more with some of the OP's points. The swarm host does control space (which in my opinion makes it awesome). The "hit me here" sign that you claim it brings is another way of saying it controls space, because you can either "hit the zerg there" or you have to back up your army. That's the definition of controlling space.
Also, I feel that the swarm host is a fantastic siege line breaker, but only in large numbers. The fact that the locusts sometimes die before doing any damage is usually because you don't have enough swarm hosts, and isn't bad for game design at all.
I love the swarm host, and it's units like these that made me come back from a year of quitting sc2 because it's getting to be a little more like sc:bw. IMO the swarm host is conceptually like if you took the lurker, made it better for offense and worse for defense -- but still viable for both.
I think you're wrong. I don't look at it as controlling space because when you control space with siege tanks it creates a line where the enemy has their own safe zone but if they come out of it or try to break out they're gonna have to deal with the tanks. The swarm host constantly sends locusts so there is no real "safe zone" and it kinda forces the enemy to break out ASAP so instead of controlling space it's almost like it forces them to be aggressive instead of keeping them in their base.
On September 09 2012 03:32 Beef Noodles wrote: I couldn't disagree more with some of the OP's points. The swarm host does control space (which in my opinion makes it awesome). The "hit me here" sign that you claim it brings is another way of saying it controls space, because you can either "hit the zerg there" or you have to back up your army. That's the definition of controlling space.
Also, I feel that the swarm host is a fantastic siege line breaker, but only in large numbers. The fact that the locusts sometimes die before doing any damage is usually because you don't have enough swarm hosts, and isn't bad for game design at all.
I love the swarm host, and it's units like these that made me come back from a year of quitting sc2 because it's getting to be a little more like sc:bw. IMO the swarm host is conceptually like if you took the lurker, made it better for offense and worse for defense -- but still viable for both.
I think you're wrong. I don't look at it as controlling space because when you control space with siege tanks it creates a line where the enemy has their own safe zone but if they come out of it or try to break out they're gonna have to deal with the tanks. The swarm host constantly sends locusts so there is no real "safe zone" and it kinda forces the enemy to break out ASAP so instead of controlling space it's almost like it forces them to be aggressive instead of keeping them in their base.
That is if you are using it offensively. It does control space in a defensive position.
On September 09 2012 03:32 Beef Noodles wrote: I couldn't disagree more with some of the OP's points. The swarm host does control space (which in my opinion makes it awesome). The "hit me here" sign that you claim it brings is another way of saying it controls space, because you can either "hit the zerg there" or you have to back up your army. That's the definition of controlling space.
Also, I feel that the swarm host is a fantastic siege line breaker, but only in large numbers. The fact that the locusts sometimes die before doing any damage is usually because you don't have enough swarm hosts, and isn't bad for game design at all.
I love the swarm host, and it's units like these that made me come back from a year of quitting sc2 because it's getting to be a little more like sc:bw. IMO the swarm host is conceptually like if you took the lurker, made it better for offense and worse for defense -- but still viable for both.
I think you're wrong. I don't look at it as controlling space because when you control space with siege tanks it creates a line where the enemy has their own safe zone but if they come out of it or try to break out they're gonna have to deal with the tanks. The swarm host constantly sends locusts so there is no real "safe zone" and it kinda forces the enemy to break out ASAP so instead of controlling space it's almost like it forces them to be aggressive instead of keeping them in their base.
That is if you are using it offensively. It does control space in a defensive position.
You're right, it does, but it's getting boring to keep giving zerg stuff to have them play defensive T_T
EPT
thank you and have a nice day![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ebSo7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wX9Cy.jpg)
