EPT[D] Swarm Host Redundant? - Page 20
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
| ||
|
fleeze
Germany895 Posts
On October 25 2011 21:23 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: You didn't answer my question and address how Lurkers could control a Terran's space, given the existence of medivacs and marauders. There IS however a small window where lurkers can be useful, between the time the marine/tank/medivac counts get too high (10-12 min). Compared with the utility of Roaches, infestors and banelings; I hope you get idea. i did... but i wasn't talking about a terran's space at all. if i get 2-3 lurkers and it forces a terran to make marauders i have my goal achieved. what more did i want? he has less marines and tanks when he's building marauders. and lurkers still do AOE damage which is good against marine/marauder balls. swarming in with ling/bane and lurkers behind against tank/marine (/marauder), probably backed up by a vipers disruption web would definatetly work better as with swarm hosts, where your still left against the marines afterwards. in your Zerg example, you suddenly pulled out BL in mid-game AND roaches AND hydras. no, i didn't? you just pulled this out of your ass. i was talking you can COVER them the same as broodlords: with roaches below. roaches are pretty much the standard midgame unit against protoss, sometimes hydras too which i also mentioned (but not necessarily at the same time as you say...). so i don't see anything wrong with my statement. An average game WITH BL AND ROACHES AND HYDRAS, an equally competent Protoss, EGHuK, the protoss death ball would already be out with at least 5 Colossi backed by HT and Zealots and Observers. Where are the Lurkers in that comp? Am I missing something here? i dunno what your talking about. perhaps try to read and understand my post again. i was NEVER talking about a BL, ROACH, HYDRA army... i was just comparing cover of lurkers with cover of broods as it is standard atm. btw: lurkers do AOE damage. AOE damage is pretty good against clumped up balls of deaths, add a few infestors and it could even be pretty imbalanced. the rest of your argument is bullshit. How does supposed to do damage to armored units suddenly result in interesting micro decisions and backup an army with AoE damage? Huh? The current BW burrow time would result in the battle being already over given how fast roaches and lings are already. well a unit with AOE damage and bonus against armored would compliment nearly any zerg army really well. the armies would be more diverse if terran would have to add marauders (as an example) to their composition. the sniping of lurkers would require micro and skill and the zerg would have to care about lurker positioning. i think that's interesting enough. now stop derailing the topic, terran. this is none of your business. edit: On October 25 2011 21:23 poorcloud wrote: Its frankly people like you who close off their minds to every possible strat/ideas which is why we get so many calls of OP/imba and so little innovation. These locusts are used to break a fortified terran base, including ghosts + vikings + thors+ marines+tanks. Broods can get stuttered step by vikings + thors. These locusts can come from a way back even before siege tank range and did you see how much damage they were able to tank? Why would you need locusts to break into a terran base if your exchanging free units for terran units? Even then, this may be at lair tech or something so it may make more sense to get this earlier than before broodlords. lol i could say the same about you. we get these inferior units because there's always people saying we should take everything from blizz unquestioned. the concept of swarm hosts is BORING. on top they have no real role in the game. if i can't break a fortified terran base with broodlords i will never be able to with swarm hosts. 1 Planetary and the swarm host is useless btw (autotarget, non-friendly damage splash). all terran has to do is repair a bit perhaps. and i don't even want a unit designed to "break" a heavily fortified base. that's a niche role and even for this role they take AGES to break a base. also we already have broodlords... redundancy this is what the topic is about. | ||
|
FluXxxx
Germany57 Posts
the swarm host itself does absolutely nothing. it just spawns 2 zealoty things with a 10 second timer! it has no attack. so just discuss how well slow zealots work against a siege line might be better. | ||
|
Klystron
United States99 Posts
I do agree that they are too close to a Broodlord in function and role. A t2-2.5 ranged aoe unit would have been better. I really think that zerg needs something different at t2-2.5, but I think that there is still room for the host swarmer at t3. When I think of locusts I think of a flying swarm of bugs that covers and consumes everything. I think that it would be better if the Host Swarmer was closer to a cross between a Brood Lord and a Carrier with flying, free locusts, that died after a short time. | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On October 25 2011 22:33 FluXxxx wrote: i just do not know why people argue about the swarm host. the swarm host itself does absolutely nothing. it just spawns 2 zealoty things with a 10 second timer! it has no attack. so just discuss how well slow zealots work against a siege line might be better. As a Protoss player I have to take issue with this. Did you SEE the amount of firepower those things survived? And how fast stuff started dying? You can't compare them because Zealots would just instadrop against that much. Frankly I'm sure most Protoss players would be delighted if Zealots were that durable and strong. Far as the Swarm Host goes, I think it looks alright; looks decent enough, perhaps a little boring to use but fairly solid as an idea and appropriate for zerg. The balancing on it is going to be a nightmare though methinks. | ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
On October 25 2011 21:02 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Tell me how that will be possible against Marauders backed by medivacs of equal supply. They have the same range and without scan, just load into the medivacs and continue on. Tell me how that will be possible against blink stalkers of equal supply. They have same range and would basically just blink over the lurkers. Well, f*ck, there goes your theory. In both situations, you would not want to attack into a base that is covered by several or more lurkers because you are guaranteed losses due to the line splash damage. For Terran, it'll cost a Scan to attack into it, and would be difficult to kill units and buildings without dying to Lurker spines quickly. With Stalkers, they'll either die or sustain heavy damage before doing any sort of sustainable damage. Put the Swarm Host in the same situation. Locust just get kited and all drone dies to target firing without raiding army sustain much, if any loss. | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
| ||
|
FluXxxx
Germany57 Posts
On October 25 2011 23:53 Lightspeaker wrote: As a Protoss player I have to take issue with this. Did you SEE the amount of firepower those things survived? And how fast stuff started dying? You can't compare them because Zealots would just instadrop against that much. Frankly I'm sure most Protoss players would be delighted if Zealots were that durable and strong. Far as the Swarm Host goes, I think it looks alright; looks decent enough, perhaps a little boring to use but fairly solid as an idea and appropriate for zerg. The balancing on it is going to be a nightmare though methinks. i just wish blizzard gave them a "real" attack. | ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
What I would like to see from the SH though is, that it is strong enough to force the opponent into using detection and get out on the Map to destroy it. Like 2hatch Lurkers in SC:BW to combat FE's of the Toss. The toss either had to be out on the Map to make the Lurker have to leapfrog to buy time, he had to use storms, he had to kill the Lurkers somehow or just loose the buildings from his wall-in. As it is now, I kinda think the swam-host might be too weak; It's sth. you can burrow to constantly pressure a certain area, but I don't see it being enough pressure to force the opponent to do sth. more drastic than just adding a cannon or two. If the waves of the spawns were fast enough though, I could really see some nice strats, like offensive Hatches/creeptumors with spines+spores(anti-observer) and burrowed SH's to pressure, similar to the Lurker+offensive buildings used in BW on certain Maps. It could really be a decent Unit, similar in it's applications to the Lurker, but very different in how it does that nonetheless. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
This thing would be a proper siege unit while also being different then tanks and colossi. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
| ||
|
kickinhead
Switzerland2069 Posts
On October 26 2011 01:27 bonifaceviii wrote: This unit is going to be a headache for Blizzard to balance, as said before. It's either going to be OP as hell or barely useful at all. What leads you to believe that? | ||
|
Fadetowhite
Korea (South)302 Posts
this works because a dark swarm is cast as protection for the lurker instead of the spell the viper has which is Dweb and is a pure offensive ability. it does not give map control at all due to the fact that it is cast on the enemy's army and not cast as protection for the zerg's unit. also the pure nature of the zerg is the fact that we can play really greedy if we know what the opponent is doing why would we ever want to put pressure on in midgame when we should be droning and preparing for endgame when we have a siege unit readily avalaible the Brood lord. from what is released about the viper it feels to me like it is a offensive unit; get over here spell: pull the enemy's long range unit into melee range for fast snipes so the zerg forces can overrun their position. Dweb; Cast on the enemy's army before engaging ensuring that almost all melee units will get in range without being killed. but then it's role is shifted with the fact that it gives detection, to me this just feels like a oh shit zerg needs detection if we remove the overseer. The swarm host is noone of the things a lurker is meant to be; It has no splash, Small ammount of them will not control a certain location of the map due to the nature of spawning units. the reason most pro-gamers want the lurker back is the fact that 2 of them on a ramp can stall the enemy for a reasonable ammount of time due to splash and being burrowed until the zerg can get their army over to the location they are defending. They make it dangerous to go on a ramp cause you have to worry about "lining them up" thus making it a very bad engagement for the enemy if they do engage. all in all i feel like these new units are not the zerg feel of what i am used to coming from Broodwar. when you let the enemy push over the map and just keep stalling him with 5 to 8 lurkers and maybe a swarm while you mass a force at your base to defend the push. ps: i hope i am very wrong about this  | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On October 26 2011 01:22 -Archangel- wrote: If they wanted to make a Zerg siege unit (which is what they state this is) it would be better if this locusts were a cloud they fire at a location that does damage over time. This cloud couldn't be stopped but you can get out of it. Lets say that total damage is something similar to tank damage but he can only fire one cloud at a time so you need to wait for one cloud to expire to use the next one. Overlapping damage does not work, you need to fire manually but range is at least 9 if not more (more will be needed if these things will need to burrow first). Friendly fire would be available so it is more similar to storm and tank blasts This thing would be a proper siege unit while also being different then tanks and colossi. That is just too much work Compared to the current operation. 1. Burrow 2. Set rally point. 3. Set lings and roaches to pounce the moment opponent engages SHs. 4.??? 5. Profit! | ||
|
udgnim
United States8024 Posts
On October 25 2011 23:53 Lightspeaker wrote: As a Protoss player I have to take issue with this. Did you SEE the amount of firepower those things survived? And how fast stuff started dying? You can't compare them because Zealots would just instadrop against that much. if you're talking about what was shown in OP's video, most of that damage was from Siege Tank splash damage | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On October 26 2011 01:43 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: That is just too much work Compared to the current operation. 1. Burrow 2. Set rally point. 3. Set lings and roaches to pounce the moment opponent engages SHs. 4.??? 5. Profit! Too simple is the whole point. Because it is too simple to use unit will be either weak or useless. I would rather have a more interesting and more powerful unit that requires micro. | ||
|
Callynn
Netherlands917 Posts
Poll: Do you think the Swarm Host will be redundant in HotS? Yes, the Swarm Host's role is already taken by another Zerg unit. (9) No, I think the Swarm Host is fine as he is now. (7) No, but I think he needs to be balanced quite a bit. (6) Yes... other reason than stated in this poll. (1) No... other reason than stated in this poll. (0) 23 total votes Your vote: Do you think the Swarm Host will be redundant in HotS? (Vote): No, I think the Swarm Host is fine as he is now. | ||
|
isneakattack
43 Posts
Zerg Symbiant Poll: Walking Zerg Carrier a good idea? NO (8) YES (1) 9 total votes Your vote: Walking Zerg Carrier a good idea? | ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
i honestly cant see it being used offensivly in a zerg army because of how long the cooldown is to spawn locust. however counter atking with these things should be pretty good. from the looks of it it looks like it has no range and works just like a racks/factory/robo bay/etc. that means that i can actually put these things into the fog of war somwhere, spread them out, set rally point, and my opponent will have no clue on where it is and will probally struggle to find all of them. if that is the case then that will actually be sick. they will have a hard time looking for burrowed units at random locations outside of there base somewhere. but we will have to see during beta. | ||
|
Ariakan
United States1 Post
On October 24 2011 23:51 jeeeeohn wrote: I don't think the Swarm Host is redundant, but I do agree that it doesn't feel swarmy in the slightest. Big clunky units that shoot out glorified broodlings once every 15 seconds? How worthless. A Terran will wait for them to expire, scan, then stim, then destroy them. Tada, dead Swarm Hosts. I can see their defensive potential, or maybe nydus/drop harass, but as a siege unit it's pretty terrible. Your assuming that the swarm host will be at the front by itself in a normal game, and if one does that, they are essentially sacrificing their swarm hosts, siege tanks sit near the front, "sieging" a base, but they are usually backed by some # of marines for cover, i could see these units working well with some hydra's upgraded with speed, and infestors actually, it could make for a terrifying lair tech unit composition | ||
| ||
