New Zerg Unit in Heart of The Swarm - Page 49
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ectonym
United States147 Posts
| ||
|
tigerfuzza
2 Posts
| ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
| ||
|
MattBarry
United States4006 Posts
| ||
|
Roblin
Sweden948 Posts
notice that both protoss and terran have ranged AoE basic attack units, (colossus, archon and hellion respectively, tank might also be put in this cathegory, though it cannot be a-moved while retaining its splash ability) while this is not the case for zerg (baneling and ultralisk are both melee (I call the ultralisks 2 range melee)). all races have AoE damage spells though (HSM, nuke, psi storm, fungal growth) | ||
|
synkronized
United States125 Posts
On October 11 2011 05:28 Chapes wrote: ![]() I think it's an infested Tachikoma. Thanks alot. People stared at me strangely when I burst out laughing at the school library. | ||
|
archon256
United States363 Posts
On second thought, it'd be too depressing when one dies. ![]() | ||
|
tigerfuzza
2 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:17 MattBarry wrote: I can't imagine this thing shooting banelings. Reaver shots didn't cost gas. Would you even want it to shoot banelings? It'd be so fucking expensive. The expensive part is losing all your rolling banelings to marine splits off creep. If this thing can shoot banes, then the banes would be VERY cost effective against marines. Overpowered but effective. | ||
|
ChoiBoi
United States130 Posts
HOPEFULLY ROACH MORPH INTO A LURKER | ||
|
Stropheum
United States1124 Posts
Anyone else think of this when they saw it? | ||
|
Noxblood
Norway374 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:15 venom0us wrote: Is it just me or does this make absolutely no sense? I'm not knocking on his idea, I just think that people are way over thinking this. It's really not too difficult to see that it's obviously a siege unit. Probably upgraded from a roach or hydra, maybe even a queen. My theory is that it's an armored melee unit when it's walking, but then when it burrows it turns into a siege-like unit. Think of it like a spine or spore crawler except with a melee attack and a siege attack. My 2 cents. there was a unit that was very similar too that inn sc1...... Hmmm, what was it again? was something starting with Lu.. aaa yes Lurker! | ||
|
Hassybaby
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:21 Stropheum wrote: http://starshiptroopers.wikia.com/wiki/Plasma_bug Anyone else think of this when they saw it? YES! The first thing I thought of when I saw that silhouette was "Didn't they use those in Starship troopers as siege units?" | ||
|
wildstyle1337
Poland514 Posts
| ||
|
413X
Sweden203 Posts
| ||
|
blindsniper
United States143 Posts
Blizzard can't bring back lurker because of hydra design in sc2, but they can give the ability to the roach, essentially solving the problem. Lurker-Roaches ftw. Thoughts? | ||
|
BeeNu
615 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:18 Roblin wrote: notice that both protoss and terran have ranged AoE basic attack units, (colossus, archon and hellion respectively, tank might also be put in this cathegory, though it cannot be a-moved while retaining its splash ability) while this is not the case for zerg (baneling and ultralisk are both melee (I call the ultralisks 2 range melee)). Maaaaaaan, this just makes me realize that Blizzard really dropped the ball with designing the Colossus. Back in BW all of the splash damage units were either basically melee range [Archon, Firebat] or required some serious micro and positioning and/or target firing to be effective such as the Siege Tank, Reaver and Lurker. Now we get to SC2 and it's nearly the same, Banelings are melee, Siege Tanks the same...but then we get to the A-Move Colossus and it breaks my heart. ok sry /end rant | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
If the rear section really did taper down to a single 'hole', then - to me - the whole rear section looks like it would have to be twisted to one side in order to look the way it does. When I do this: ![]() it looks more lined-up with the rest of the body. | ||
|
ForeverSleep
Canada920 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:18 synkronized wrote: Thanks alot. People stared at me strangely when I burst out laughing at the school library. I just watched the third movie like 2 days ago, so I say well played . (hopefully they don't keep their very annoying voice lol aside from that, it looks like roachesque unit if you ask me. | ||
|
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On October 11 2011 06:08 ectonym wrote: + Show Spoiler + On October 11 2011 03:56 Zelniq wrote: ______________________ Okay so after writing this post I had a bit of on epiphany: So the front 2 claw-legs (yes both, see the bottom of this post) are clearly designed for tunneling, probably for tunneling deep into the earth. Notice the extended arm to the claw, with the joint towards the end to allow it to pivot as well. Now look at the rear claws. MUCH shorter, and no extended 'arms.' However it's still a claw, it can still likely dig somewhat into the earth. But really they're just for movement and keeping it standing. Also notice the 3 spikes jutting from it's belly, also to help a little with the digging. So my theory is that the front 2 claws will allow it to burrow itself heavily towards the front, submerging its entire head, while the back claws will only burrow a short amount, relative to the front. It would become a sort of siege-like unit that attacks while burrowed. Perhaps the reasoning is that the cannon's recoil is too strong to be used while standing on claws, so it needs to burrow itself to stabilize it, much like a siege tank. So basically while burrowed the only thing above the ground would be its hardened shell-cannon back. Hardened to protect itself of course... ...But then the question lies with the opening or "cannon." It seems as though it would be nearly parallel to the surface, and lay just atop it. What kind of cannon lies just above the ground? Perhaps it's not a cannon (or other such way to shoot something out of it), but then why would they design a hole there? And how would it attack? It's claws aren't designed for attacking, and it has no other visible way to attack. It's no caster, it doesn't just sit there, surely something has to come out of that opening, but what? Something unique, that we haven't seen before perhaps? Another question that arises is despite being burrowed, wouldn't the shell-cannon be target-able? Meaning you don't need detection to attack it? Not sure.. But anyway I'm still sticking by the front-heavy burrow theory as being the major feature of this new unit. ______________________ so here is what I can gather: It's obviously not a spellcaster, and the only way it could possibly attack is through that 'cannon' on top of it. The cannon looks beefy, kind of like a shell, although the opening is clearly narrow, it possibly widens towards the back, that part is unclear though. The cannon is also long and aimed directly forward..clearly attacking ground units, and likely long ranged. Without the ability to attack air, it's just further evidence that it's ground attack is pretty strong, unless the cannon can be pivoted to point upwards, but that seems unlikely as there doesn't appear to be anything to allow it to do that. As for launching banes, well the opening is way too small for that. Note the opening has sharp edges and is clearly rigid. With 4 claw-like legs that are decently long, it's going to be fairly mobile but not as quick as the 6 legged roach, but certainly not slow like the hydralisk which has to wiggle like a snake. This is my greatest concern, I had really hoped they learned their lesson with the colossus that powerful siege units should not also be mobile, but rather be incredibly immobile like the siege tank/lurker was..basically "controlling space," putting a few units at a ramp or choke and knowing that area was secure. There is however the chance that it can only attack while burrowed. The "reasoning" could be that above ground it's unable to brace for the recoil of the powerful cannon attack, so it needs to burrow its long claws to root itself firmly. This idea isn't new of course, as the siege tank functions the exact same way almost and is not unlike the lurker in this respect either. Perhaps the cannon will act more as a shell to protect it while above ground. Like I said the claws definitely look meant for tunneling, especially with the way the 'arm' extends out to the claw. It certainly was intentional for it to look like it has a strong ability to tunnel. It's unlikely that it can move while burrowed as it lacks the 2 frontal claws that look like they can dig ahead of them, that both the roach/infestor share. Also Starcraft 2's zerg is the only race out of the "6" (between both games) that lacks any unit that can attack while burrowed, banelings don't quite count.. as all the units that attack while burrowed (banshee, dt, lurker, wraith, ghost) can attack the enemy constantly while invisible and forces defender to get detection. It only seems natural they'd add some unit to do this, and Burrow is zerg's way of being invisible. It's almost certainly a mutated form of a hydralisk. The head resembles it much too closely, which is the feature you'd assume would remain somewhat the same in a mutation. Also they've said they are replacing/removing units, units that they don't like in its current state. The hydralisk is a great example of an unliked, fairly un-used unit. The question however is that is this new unit something you mutate in-game from the hydralisk, or mutated 'out of game' to replace it? If it mutated in-game they'd have to make some changes to the hydralisk, if I had to guess I'd think this unit just "replaces" the hydralisk, and zerg will get some other new and better unit to be their ground-to-air unit, as well as a replacement to corruptor as their air-to-air unit (they've basically stated the corruptor is gone). Also, as for why the 2 front legs seem to be different, I agree with this picture: ![]() There's no reason for it to have mismatched front legs, and look at the 3 ridges near the bottom of the leg, they match each other. The rest of the shape matches, and the way it comes to a point towards the top matches as well. I want to take everything Zelniq said but replace the type of artillery this thing fires. Does anyone remember Razor Plague? (Karune's article where it was mentioned) Here were Razor Plague's abilities: Creates a controllable swarm cloud that deals damage to enemy units inside it. Given that there was a lot of talk about the sharpness of the 'mouth of the cannon,' might it make sense that this new Zerg creature carries a bunch of tiny creatures in it's sac and that sharp-edged opening is the exit? That would mean the creature would have to burrow (as per Zelniq) to unleash it's attack: the cloud of tiny critters. It could be used as a sort of dark swarm-esque position-grabbing offensive spell. This could be really useful for the Swarm in holding onto positions. It's an ability Blizzard once already had and could be revived. So....Hydralisk mutation that only attacks while burrowed and uses that sac on it's back to fire Razor Swarm. called it ^^ Zelniq's cannon idea can't be true seeing as that's basically a siege tank and Blizzard have been trying to keep units from each race diverse as possible. Your razor cloud idea, however, might just be what the unit does. | ||
|
Marth753
United States40 Posts
I don't think it's an AoE style unit because I think it would be OP as hell for zerg to be able to mass produce ranged AoE attackers. Think about it, if T or P could easily produce 5-10 siege tanks or colossi at a time with no investment in more factories or robos, wouldn't that be ridiculous? | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/MFN0c.jpg)

![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/TMoC7.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/NxUix.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1EX2B.png)