EPTAlthough I miss the lurker, I do like the mobility that ling/baneling. Lurkers are better suited for defensive plays, but Zerg need more offensive options. lings, banelings and mutas do that for us.
Lurker Strength - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ShadowReaver
Canada563 Posts
Although I miss the lurker, I do like the mobility that ling/baneling. Lurkers are better suited for defensive plays, but Zerg need more offensive options. lings, banelings and mutas do that for us. | ||
|
Aikin
Austria532 Posts
| ||
|
Tiaan
United States35 Posts
Could've just been me.. | ||
|
SyyRaaaN
Sweden136 Posts
Blizzard removed the two most interesting units from the game and replaced them with... junk. Colossi are so boring and dull that one vomits when you realize that the Reaver got tossed out because of it. Also - Lurkers - It has been stated in this thread like 50 times - yes, it was a king unit which would have added so much to the Zerg game play. Lurker drops, lurker defenses, cliff lurkers - lurker contain. For the love of god - the removed it to make room for the baneling which has 2 uses? Kill off badly microed light units + baneling bust all in strats. Urgh... Bad decision making - but i bet that they will add it in the expansion to yield some more $$$$$. | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On September 08 2010 00:57 007Kain wrote: Can anyone tell me where I find the lurker in the editor? I tryed watching the list of all units but there are no lurkers or the units that are only in the campaign like the heroes usw. What do I have to do to find and spawn them? Under File > Dependencies, add the campaign header. | ||
|
Radio.active
United States121 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
But at the same time, Lurkers are so cool. The entire concept of them is so cool. I would be ecstatic if Lurkers were added to multiplayer, and probably even more ecstatic if Terran/Protoss each got something to balance it out. Really though, we know more units are going to be added to multiplayer with the expansions, and I'm sure those units will be awesome, and slate my new unit thirst, so I'm not too upset. | ||
|
SOCOMICEPICK
87 Posts
i miss lukers man.....and scourge, even showed those in SP....damn blizz | ||
|
SCdinner
Canada516 Posts
| ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
On September 08 2010 03:18 Ketara wrote: I always trust Blizzard when it comes to balancing stuff. If they think Lurkers shouldn't be in the game, then they shouldn't. But at the same time, Lurkers are so cool. The entire concept of them is so cool. I would be ecstatic if Lurkers were added to multiplayer, and probably even more ecstatic if Terran/Protoss each got something to balance it out. Really though, we know more units are going to be added to multiplayer with the expansions, and I'm sure those units will be awesome, and slate my new unit thirst, so I'm not too upset. why do you trust blizzard with balancing? they dont have the exactly best history with it. wc3 was never even close to balanced overall and very limited in gameplay. wow is a joke and there wasnt any timeframe ever where the classes were ever even close in pve or pvp strength.d2 isnt worth mentioning. broodwar was a lucky strike with great mapmakers and community fixing the flaws(vanilla sc1 balance was nonexistant). also the thing about lurkers is that they brought certain dynamics into the game that simply dont exist anymore. be it forcing the enemy to get proper detection, the defensive power they provide ( try to break a sunken/spore/lurker wall) beeing able to contain,forcing the opponent to micro carefully or forcing the enemy into getting certain units. none of that exists anymore and the banelings which somewhat is the substitute to the lurker has pretty much no role outside of lolsplashing rines and lings. | ||
|
SRY
31 Posts
On September 08 2010 03:29 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: why do you trust blizzard with balancing? they dont have the exactly best history with it. wc3 was never even close to balanced overall and very limited in gameplay. wow is a joke and there wasnt any timeframe ever where the classes were ever even close in pve or pvp strength.d2 isnt worth mentioning. broodwar was a lucky strike with great mapmakers and community fixing the flaws(vanilla sc1 balance was nonexistant). This is very true. SC1 pre BW and even when BW came out balance was pretty bad. WoW balance is a complete joke with certain classes being essentially redesigned over and over(Paladin, Warlock, Druid). I dont have experience in wc3 so I can't comment. Unfortunately you are stuck with blizzard as your balancing authority for anything other than maps :X. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
I've thought about Lurkers in SC2 and I think they'd be pretty bad in SC2 and that's why: - Tanks and Storms will pwn them just like they did in SCBW. - Basically every Unit in SC2 has a larger range than Units from SCBW, Lurker looks like he has about the same. - There are no more Scourges to snipe Observers so you could stall with Lurkers - Collossi will absolutely pwn them. - in SCBW, it was mainly used against Terran Bio, but Terran Bio now has the Marauder, which has much health and large range ---> 1 Stim+Scan and even a mediocre split will suffice to totally pwn Lurkers. To Split you could just abuse the Magic-box-trick and you'd basically need no Micro at all to make the Lurkers just do minimal DMG. - Lurkers were extremely good above ramps to protect expansions, but without any kind of High-ground-advantage, Cliff-hoppers and stuff like that, you won't be able to use them in that .fashion as effectively as in SCBW. - Terran could use HSM similarly against Lurkers as Irradiate in SCBW, but with no threat of Scourges. - Lurkers in SC2 don't have the extremely powerful Dark Swarm to hide under. - Ghost could Snipe them very easily and they are good against other Zerg Units like Mutas, Broodlords, Ultras and Infestors as well, so they'd be pretty viable overall in that MU. - Air-Units like Banshee's could kill Lurkers very easily in 1 Scan. If you wanted to use Wraith's for that, you'd need either a lot of Wraith's or more than 1 Scan. Besides, Banshee's are better overall than Wraith's were in SCBW... - I also don't think the Hold-position-trick would work in SC2 if Blizzard does no implement something like that for the Lurkers on purpose, which I don't think, cuz Blizzard apparently still thinks they should cater to noobs more and make the game as noob-friendly as possible and watching the Map all few seconds to attack at the exact same time would just be too much for those poor Bronze-players to handle... I really think Lurkers would be kinda similar to Archons in SC2: They were powerful in SCBW, but in SC2 - not so much... I hope Blizzard won't just add Lurkers as the next Zerg-Unit, because it would totally suck, without even thinking about what powerful Units T and P could get... Just compare those Lurkers against, let's say Collossi. Collossi deal about the same amount of AoE, maybe a bit less, but the range is 9, they can fire without having to burrow, they can walk over cliffs etc. and even Collossi get pwnd by Marauders if they don't have a big Army protecting them. For Lurkers to be viable in SC2, I think they'd need to have the following features: - They'd need to come out on the Field extremely fast, which means for example Upgraded from Roaches with small morphing-time and a cheap and fast Upgrade at T2 in the Roach-Warren. This way, you'd at least have a timing-window until Collossi/Tanks get out on the Map, which will completely rip apart Lurkers without them doing any DMG at all. - They'd need about range 8, to outrange Marauders, or better, Marauders should have their range reduced to 6 and Lurkers would have Range 7. - They'd need to make heavy additional DMG to armored Units, so Marauders/Stalkers etc. could not just pwn them very easily. | ||
|
okrane
France265 Posts
On September 08 2010 03:42 kickinhead wrote: Thx for the Vid, but when I read: "Lurkers are like cloaked Tanks" or sth. I really had to laugh. I've thought about Lurkers in SC2 and I think they'd be pretty bad in SC2 and that's why: - Tanks and Storms will pwn them just like they did in SCBW. - Basically every Unit in SC2 has a larger range than Units from SCBW, Lurker looks like he has about the same. - There are no more Scourges to snipe Observers so you could stall with Lurkers - Collossi will absolutely pwn them. - in SCBW, it was mainly used against Terran Bio, but Terran Bio now has the Marauder, which has much health and large range ---> 1 Stim+Scan and even a mediocre split will suffice to totally pwn Lurkers. To Split you could just abuse the Magic-box-trick and you'd basically need no Micro at all to make the Lurkers just do minimal DMG. - Lurkers were extremely good above ramps to protect expansions, but without any kind of High-ground-advantage, Cliff-hoppers and stuff like that, you won't be able to use them in that .fashion as effectively as in SCBW. - Terran could use HSM similarly against Lurkers as Irradiate in SCBW, but with no threat of Scourges. - Lurkers in SC2 don't have the extremely powerful Dark Swarm to hide under. - Ghost could Snipe them very easily and they are good against other Zerg Units like Mutas, Broodlords, Ultras and Infestors as well, so they'd be pretty viable overall in that MU. - Air-Units like Banshee's could kill Lurkers very easily in 1 Scan. If you wanted to use Wraith's for that, you'd need either a lot of Wraith's or more than 1 Scan. Besides, Banshee's are better overall than Wraith's were in SCBW... - I also don't think the Hold-position-trick would work in SC2 if Blizzard does no implement something like that for the Lurkers on purpose, which I don't think, cuz Blizzard apparently still thinks they should cater to noobs more and make the game as noob-friendly as possible and watching the Map all few seconds to attack at the exact same time would just be too much for those poor Bronze-players to handle... I really think Lurkers would be kinda similar to Archons in SC2: They were powerful in SCBW, but in SC2 - not so much... I hope Blizzard won't just add Lurkers as the next Zerg-Unit, because it would totally suck, without even thinking about what powerful Units T and P could get... Just compare those Lurkers against, let's say Collossi. Collossi deal about the same amount of AoE, maybe a bit less, but the range is 9, they can fire without having to burrow, they can walk over cliffs etc. and even Collossi get pwnd by Marauders if they don't have a big Army protecting them. I disagree. The only problem with the Lurkers you are picturing is their range. If lurkers outranged Stalkers and Marrauders by a good amount: say they had range 9 they would be very effective against these types of units. A range 9 would also let them go toe to toe with collosi and thors. Also if they would actually burrow and unborrow faster that in BW would make them easier to reposition againsts other threats like air. They wouldnt be as hopeless as you make them imo. A lurker with 9 range and dps against armored units comparable to a marrauder would be viable imo. EDIT: you've edited your post to explain exactly what I said here. I really think Lurkers could be good. Why remove the coolest unit in BW? There are ways to make it work and make the game less bland. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
I've edited my post above to suggest what Lurkers should look like to be viable in SC2 IMHO. But I still think that Lurkers, even with Range 9 and huge DMG etc. cannot be a T3-Unit for Zerg. They'd really need to get out by the time a 4-warpgate-push or a Marauder/Marine Biopush with Tanks would occur, which is, even if the Zerg techs extremely fast, only a short timespan after T2... You'd basically need to have 3-5 Lurkers rdy by the time a rather fast teching Zerg gets out a group of Hydras in PvZ, cuz that's just the timing-window where they would be effective and force the opponent into investing into detection or when they could barely manage to contain the opponent a bit etc. But I guess Mutas into Lurker against Terran would still work pretty fine, even if the Lurkers would get out a bit later, but atm. Zerg has huge problems with even getting into those stages of the game with a decent eco. | ||
|
SureYouCan
United States38 Posts
| ||
|
cocosoft
Sweden1068 Posts
I don't really understand why Zerg needs lurker. The motivation blizzard had for removing lurkers was that baneling takes the role. While I do agree on that point I still feel that zerg needs to be overlooked a bit... of course. | ||
|
ghettohobbit2
United States93 Posts
I wonder about the lurker though... if this thing could be squeezed into lair tech it might well be viable, otherwise it'll def. be Hive, and have a tech time comparable to Brood Lords :-/ | ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
| ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On September 08 2010 03:29 BeMannerDuPenner wrote: why do you trust blizzard with balancing? they dont have the exactly best history with it. This is just such an ignorant statement. I don't want to derail the thread but I have to point this out. Every time I see this statement I just feel stupider. Even if you don't think WoW is very well balanced, which I admit can be arguable, Blizzard made Starcraft and Starcraft 2. I guess Blizzard doesn't have a good track record of balancing strategy games, because neither Starcraft game is very good, and other video game companies are making much better RTS games. Saying that Blizzard hasn't made Starcraft 2 perfect yet and there is still work to be done is an acceptable and true statement, but saying Blizzard is bad at making good games is just so overbearingly idiotic that I can't stand it. | ||
|
SCdinner
Canada516 Posts
On September 08 2010 04:34 Ketara wrote: This is just such an ignorant statement. I don't want to derail the thread but I have to point this out. Every time I see this statement I just feel stupider. Even if you don't think WoW is very well balanced, which I admit can be arguable, Blizzard made Starcraft and Starcraft 2. I guess Blizzard doesn't have a good track record of balancing strategy games, because neither Starcraft game is very good, and other video game companies are making much better RTS games. Saying that Blizzard hasn't made Starcraft 2 perfect yet and there is still work to be done is an acceptable and true statement, but saying Blizzard is bad at making good games is just so overbearingly idiotic that I can't stand it. I agree with the whole of my heart. I want to know who makes these amazing RTS' people are compairing favoritably over blizzards. I've never heard anyone give an example of an rts as ballanced as the starcraft series. | ||
| ||
