EPTBlizzard interview: Why the lurker isn't in SC2 - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
MavercK
Australia2181 Posts
| ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
On June 18 2010 08:46 iNty.sCream wrote: get rid of banelings, they suck ass. i just cant type "wow, that was skilly!" if a zerg owns me with a-moving 25 banelings into my army. 'nuff said. Maybe you should do something to stop it then? Also, most of the time it's better to move banelings instead of a-moving. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3132 Posts
On June 18 2010 08:51 MorroW wrote: i dont think lurker would be easy to balance. marauders would make them useless but they would totally rape zealots and so why would u even want to build the lurker when the baneling is 10 times better and easier to control a) you don't necessarily have to make the lurker armored with 200 hit points (so that they get 'raped by marauders') b) don't know where you're coming with that 10x better statistic. Better in perfect situations against light units? Hell yeah. Better overall? Not nearly. You're forgetting: hold position, strategic placement, base defense, needed-detection, anti-mech play. | ||
|
uNiGNoRe
Germany1115 Posts
On June 18 2010 08:44 heishe wrote: I hate units like the baneling, and I can't say for sure why. I hated the scourge, I hated the firebat in WC3 and I hate the baneling. I just don't like units which only purpose is to blow themselves up, lol. maybe I'm really anti terrorist. I have exactly the same feeling about those kind of units. I think it's because no matter what you do with it, as soon as you use it to fight your opponent, the unit is gone. You can't use any kind of micro to keep it alive, which is usually the case for all other units. That being said, I'd prefer the Lurker over the Baneling for that reason and because the Lurker is more versatile in it's use. But I'm actually ok with it being replaced by the Baneling. We can't expect SC2 to have all the units of SC:BW. You can play SC:BW if you only want those units and nothing new. | ||
|
Wr3k
Canada2533 Posts
| ||
|
btlyger
United States470 Posts
On June 18 2010 08:51 MorroW wrote: i dont think lurker would be easy to balance. marauders would make them useless but they would totally rape zealots and so See heres the thing, Zealots were in SC1, Lurkers were in SC1. Are you going to say brood war was imbalanced? People have said it a million times that there are so many OP units in BW, but it all ended up balancing out which was awesome. I do agree that a direct adaptation of the lurker would overlap some rolls that are being filled by other units. It could have been done though, and Zerg definitely needs more units because atm less is not better. EDIT: I will re-emphasize the fact that banelings in no way fit the role of the lurker. The combination of the baneling infestor and burrowed roach may overlap it in some ways, but I still think the lurker would have fit in fine. | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
Constantly coming back to check and adjust. In most cases, a few moments of hero micro here and there will help a lot. Marauders with concussive shell, in your army, Move-Shotting back at the Banelings should help you win unless you're terribly out numbered anyways or resign yourself to a similar A-Move type attack. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3132 Posts
On June 18 2010 08:52 Teddyman wrote: Maybe you should do something to stop it then? Also, most of the time it's better to move banelings instead of a-moving. I agree with him, though. It seems banelings are used because they're just so good at what they're good against. And they're not used at all when the composition is different (not to stab myself in the back by talking too much about meta-game, but I think it's important to note). Lurkers, by default, influence a very unique back-and-forth. -pick off the observer -position well -micro better -more zergling-integrated play (especially if maps are released with single gas or mineral only expansions :- )) It would also nerf the unreal mule micro mechanic slightly, as more scans might be needed. | ||
|
onmach
United States1241 Posts
| ||
|
iNty.sCream
Germany195 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
I agree with Morrow as well. Lurkers add a positional tension like the siege tank and would fit in well with the new creep mechanics and queens. | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
I think his point is, that for the vast majority of gamers, it's far too much to ask to make it enjoyable- without the Lurker also being terribly imbalanced at the higher levels. If lurker is going to work and be balanced at Pro-Level, then its going to be very hard to play Zerg at intermediate levels. If it's going to be balanced at intermediate- it's going to be Overpowered in pro. What- with the macro mechanic remaining as it is. Banelings are more of a blanket usage unit that wont unequally imbalance the game. Imagine having to go back and larva inject in BW just to be competitive. Could have been detrimental to Zerg, with Lurker and Muta micro bascially NEEDING to be done to compete. | ||
|
iNty.sCream
Germany195 Posts
| ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
Banelings serve the same purpose as lurkers, nope. Banelings do not serve the same purpose as lurkers, burrowed banelings can never outright prevent a warpgate centric push that sacrifices tech (detection) for a massive ball of stalkers, sentries and zealots. Ever. marauders would make them useless not more so than roaches are made useless by marauder, diffence is that you would need to scan to kill off A lurker and even then you can never be certain that you got them all and your Marauder push would have to run back to your own main or wait for raven. | ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10305 Posts
| ||
|
Fanatic-Templar
Canada5819 Posts
On June 18 2010 09:15 iNty.sCream wrote: balance an "esports" game in regards of the nooblevel is a big blunder imho, why no one screamed like "uh damn god lurkers are imbalanced" or "high templars kill off my hole eco in 2 seconds this suxx man, PHOQUE" back in broodwar? cant get it, really. You think nobody complained back in Brood War? Ever heard a Terran talk about Dark Templar?  | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3132 Posts
On June 18 2010 09:25 SmoKim wrote: why not something new and interesting instead of more old units? there are plenty of them already hey, if blizz can't hack new units, i'm perfectly content with the old. If it's done right, fuck it. I'll take the good stuff over the new stuff any day. Especially the good stuff in a new, more improved environment. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
| ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
It has good range; it has to burrow in order to dish out damage; last but not least, more micro opportunities (rather than just running into an army like the baneling (scourge anti-air predecessor) the spines can be danced around). Like I said before, lurkers have more than just splash damage. They have a lot more depth than the developers are giving credit to them. | ||
|
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
On June 18 2010 09:29 Half wrote: If we do bring out the Lurker, make it a t2.5 unit. You can upgrade it directly from the Hydra den without any hive tech requirement. better yet a roach upgrade for burrowed splash damage attack as your lair finishes because it already looks like a lurker and while the previous upgrade was from the hydralisk in brood war do keep in mind that hydralisk used to be tier 1.5. The roach is in prime position to take over as host for the lurker upgrade. | ||
| ||
