|
i just wish this is not some baneling shooting unit lol
|
On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them.
How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role.............
|
On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role.............
Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe
|
On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe
That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units.
|
Was the protoss unit supposed to be revealed on the 15th?
|
On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units.
The truth was this... Bluepost
The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17.
|
On October 16 2011 20:07 nShade wrote:
Was the protoss unit supposed to be revealed on the 15th?
I believe it's going to be revealed on monday around 18:00 PM CEST
|
On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost Show nested quote +The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17.
That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles
|
On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles
Interview with Dustin B. just for you
http://gameaxis.com/exclusive-interview-with-dustin-browder-starcraft-2s-lead-designer-part-1/
|
Canada13389 Posts
On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles
I don't think blizzard expected mkp aka fixer to do what he did against kyrix a year ago. I think they underestimated players and micro when they designed WoL you see a lot of stuff which makes this somewhat apparent
|
On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles
Lollllll, that is soooo dumb
Why don't we split the siege tank, have one unit that shoots map crossing arclite cannons, and one unit that sieges but doesn't actually shoot.
That is basically what they did to the lurker, with roach baneling.
On October 16 2011 20:42 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles Interview with Dustin B. just for you http://gameaxis.com/exclusive-interview-with-dustin-browder-starcraft-2s-lead-designer-part-1/
I just don't believe it. Lurkers are harder to use than banelings but incredibly cost efficient, most of the balance team probably just weren't good enough to use them.
|
On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles
rofl. I guess you got everything figured out :O What are you doing sitting behind your keyboard posting on TL? Your genius is wasted on us. Send in your application with all your ideas and be showered with money. Clearly you understand the game better than anyone, what are you waiting for? XD
|
On October 16 2011 20:50 VoiceOfDecember wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles rofl. I guess you got everything figured out :O What are you doing sitting behind your keyboard posting on TL? Your genius is wasted on us. Send in your application with all your ideas and be showered with money. Clearly you understand the game better than anyone, what are you waiting for? XD
Thanks for putting words in my mouth straw man. Ideas are next to meaningless without proper implementation, and I went to school for music, not game development.
|
![[image loading]](http://stuff.tednoob.se/peek.png)
Definitely a firing hole up on top.
|
On October 16 2011 20:42 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:On October 16 2011 16:21 terran0330 wrote:
Lurker wouldnt work in sc2, withmarauders hp and their range lurkers would be nullified More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger. Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings. ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles Interview with Dustin B. just for you http://gameaxis.com/exclusive-interview-with-dustin-browder-starcraft-2s-lead-designer-part-1/
It's not like Browder has impressed at all with how he's helmed SC2. He's the ultimate everyman gamedev. Marginally talented, intellectually uninteresting, and as such I'll keep take anything he says with a grain of salt.
The fact that SC2 turned out as good as it did probably has more to do with it being based on a really good game and that it kept its focus narrow and concise, more so than anything Browder contributed to it.
|
I want my goddamn lurkers BACK!
|
I know it's weird, but it's what I first thought when I saw the picture. Thoughts?
![[image loading]](http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2029/gvxau.jpg)
|
On October 16 2011 21:09 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2011 20:42 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:33 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:12 Nachtwind wrote:On October 16 2011 20:05 acrimoneyius wrote:On October 16 2011 20:01 VoiceOfDecember wrote:On October 16 2011 19:53 ZaaaaaM wrote:On October 16 2011 19:12 lindn wrote:On October 16 2011 19:01 DARKHYDRA wrote:On October 16 2011 18:09 -Archangel- wrote:
[quote]
More marauders = less marines/tanks so mutas/lings are stronger.
Lurker would not work because as soon as Zergs got to Tier2 they would stop making banelings and spend that gas on Lurkers and Blizzard wants us to use Banelings.
ZvT would become ling/lurker/muta That pretty much covers it. But it is sad that alot of people bought into the whole overlapping roles thing. "bought into the whole overlapping roles thing." that's what blizzard meant with saying that, if lurkers were in they would overlap with banelings and no one would use them. How on EARTH do banelings and lurkers fulfill the same role............. Technically splash/aoe dmg I believe That's like saying spider mines/siege tanks fulfill the same role, so there's no point in having both. Clearly they have different advantages/disadvantages and it would be fine if they had both units. The truth was this... Bluepost The developers say that Lurkers were taken out because their goal is to keep the unit count of the game as small as possible so that players know their choices and understand their enemy choices as well. They feel that the Roach uses the Lurker's burrow ability well, while Ultralisks and Banelings have the splash damage covered. Many units took over Lurkers’ roles over the period of development, so they didn't think they were as valuable anymore. But we all do miss them!
Well this is our point of view. I think that Lurkers should not really be Tier2 in the current build, because they don't really fit in there and they wouldn't really be a good counter to Roaches, given the fact that ZvZ is a very dynamic matchup and you would probably still prefer Ultralisks or Broodlords at T3. What do you think about it?
Kapeselus. 2010-03-17.
Blizzard please bring back Zerg Lurkers.
StarCraft II Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Accessed 2010-03-17. That is..really bad logic for design choices. Roaches can be focused down as they unburrow and cannot attack while burrowed, lurkers force detection in the proper way. Also for the baneling, a unit that relies so heavily on bad splitting or lack of siege tank focus firing leads to a lot of stupid battles Interview with Dustin B. just for you http://gameaxis.com/exclusive-interview-with-dustin-browder-starcraft-2s-lead-designer-part-1/ It's not like Browder has impressed at all with how he's helmed SC2. He's the ultimate everyman gamedev. Marginally talented, intellectually uninteresting, and as such I'll keep take anything he says with a grain of salt. The fact that SC2 turned out as good as it did probably has more to do with it being based on a really good game and that it kept its focus narrow and concise, more so than anything Browder contributed to it.
This is true. The reason why WoL are fairly decent is because what it borrowed from BW. The only good new unit design is the baneling and queen. Also, the best match up is the ZvT since it reminds the most of the BW ZvT, and because the only race that Dustin et al made a good job of designing. Protoss was changed the most from BW without adding anything well designed except perhaps..., I am actually trying to think of a well designed WoL unit for Protoss to balance my complaints but I just can't think of any. Hence, the utterly disastrous matches involving Protoss from a spectator point of view.
PS1. BTW, help me out here, what WoL Protoss unit is well designed?
PS2. OT: I think the new Zerg unit is a morphed Roach, that perhaps shoot these creep thingies we remember from the WoL single player. You know that goo that fall from the skies to add creep and mobs, something like that.
|
Its the evolution of a baneling and a zerg reaver!!! And you need to train more acid when you shoot... (baneling hasnt unlimited amount of acid!)
|
so around what time blizzard will announce protoss' new unit? kinda excited 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
