EPTLurker sounds more awesome than (wtf is a...) "Swarm Host"?
[D] Swarm Host Redundant? - Page 28
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Black[CAT]
Malaysia2589 Posts
Lurker sounds more awesome than (wtf is a...) "Swarm Host"? | ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
On October 31 2011 11:45 Maekchu wrote: I just found it funny you suggest them as meatshields that's why I took up the numbers. But yeah, Blizzard can adjust the stats. But that doesn't change the fact, that I still disagree this is what the Zerg needs. I still believe Zerg needs an AoE projectile based siege unit. Having even more units to clump up a choke, is simply not what I think we need. I presume you mean an equivalent of the Tank and the colossus? If so explain to me how that is supposed to fit into the swarm image. I am not sure if Sotg was incorrect, but their numbers was 120hp on the locusts. Thats pretty beefy for a disposable unit to knock against a door. And yes the siege tank splash killed the bunker, but that is a common problem for turtling Terrans. Do we unsiege our tanks to stop our own splash? but if we do that won't that friggin wave of banelings which is always just out of sight roll in and kill us? Thats the point of the Swarm host as far as i can see it. It isn't supposed to replace the lurker (frankly the banelings have already done so) it's supposed to add some ability to attack a turtling opponent with disposable units (that don't cost larva or ressources). If you dislike that and wish for a siege unit like the other races have, then i am sorry but it doesn't look as if you will get your wish (and frankly i am glad, because if Zerg got THAT then Terrans would be straight up fucked as much as they have to rely on marines) | ||
|
Maekchu
140 Posts
On October 31 2011 11:56 Tula wrote: I presume you mean an equivalent of the Tank and the colossus? If so explain to me how that is supposed to fit into the swarm image. I am not sure if Sotg was incorrect, but their numbers was 120hp on the locusts. Thats pretty beefy for a disposable unit to knock against a door. And yes the siege tank splash killed the bunker, but that is a common problem for turtling Terrans. Do we unsiege our tanks to stop our own splash? but if we do that won't that friggin wave of banelings which is always just out of sight roll in and kill us? Thats the point of the Swarm host as far as i can see it. It isn't supposed to replace the lurker (frankly the banelings have already done so) it's supposed to add some ability to attack a turtling opponent with disposable units (that don't cost larva or ressources). If you dislike that and wish for a siege unit like the other races have, then i am sorry but it doesn't look as if you will get your wish (and frankly i am glad, because if Zerg got THAT then Terrans would be straight up fucked as much as they have to rely on marines) I used Liquipedia in order to check up on the HP. According to that it is 80HP. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Locust Personally, I cannot give less in regards how lore-wise some unit would fit into a race. I play the game, and I only care about gameplay. But following your logic, the “Lurker” from BW would also not be a Zerg unit. Then please, explain to me how the “Lurker” even found its ways into the Zerg army at that time? Have the lore really changed that much from BW to SC2? So you really think this will be a threat to a turtling player? I really have to disagree on this. People will find new ways of turtling. So a T will not use the new units he would have at his disposal and just turtle with bunkers and tanks? In my first post, I wrote that a player turtling with shredders and tanks would completely shut a SH harass. I do not deny that a SH might have a window where the opponent is weak to this contain. But discussing specific scenarios with units that are not even in Beta is quite hard. But as a Zerg player, I just have to say that I don’t need another unit that can spawn even more melee units. Once you have a decent army of zerglings/banelings and broodlords, there will be a big portion of your melee units that can’t attack. Since melee, they can only attack where there is available space. Another small unit, to just occupy more of the melee space is really not what I think I need. Of course it is just my opinion, and that alone won’t change anything and I just have to wait and see what Blizzard will throw at us in the end. | ||
|
HughJorgen
Australia37 Posts
On October 31 2011 11:45 Maekchu wrote: I just found it funny you suggest them as meatshields that's why I took up the numbers. But yeah, Blizzard can adjust the stats. But that doesn't change the fact, that I still disagree this is what the Zerg needs. I still believe Zerg needs an AoE projectile based siege unit. Having even more units to clump up a choke, is simply not what I think we need. Hey, an extra 80hp doubles the health of a hydra! But fair enough. I see what you're saying on the siege unit but I think there are major design issues preventing a Zerg AoE siege unit. Firstly, where do you set the range? Greater than a Collosus? Greater than a Siege tank? Either of those option would turn the whole game on it's head. So assuming you go for less range how does that help Zerg as a whole when they can still get contained and still can't break a siege line? I've already said why I don't think the lurker would work. We have the Brood lord which works because it's flying. At best I see a ground based siege unit making Zerg play very similarly to Terran and Toss (Z deathballs!). At worst it wouldn't be able to compete and would get ignored in favour of the BL. With blinding cloud it might still work I guess, but I think the Swarm host is more interesting. Edit: I also think that the fact that the Swarm Host won't fit into the main Zerg army which is already full of melee units is massive part of it's appeal. Blizzard have said they want to make the balls of death smaller. I like the idea of pressuring somewhere with this and attacking somewhere else. | ||
|
Klystron
United States99 Posts
On October 31 2011 12:24 HughJorgen wrote: Edit: I also think that the fact that the Swarm Host won't fit into the main Zerg army which is already full of melee units is massive part of it's appeal. Blizzard have said they want to make the balls of death smaller. I like the idea of pressuring somewhere with this and attacking somewhere else. Its also a massive problem. Zerg already has too many short range / melee units. Adding in more just means that you are going to have less stuff attacking, significantly reducing the efficiency of the zerg army. Zerg really needs a unit with a long attack range, or at least something that is not going to take up valuable melee space. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2781 Posts
Zergs have enough melee units. Give us a straight up long range bombardment unit. Hmmm.... However, if the SH is buffed and rips shit up, you won't see me complaining  .I just want to see SHs make up the backbone of a zerg force, with lings and the like to defend. This feels like the role the unit should be used in, IMO. | ||
|
Tishe
Singapore17 Posts
| ||
|
Ziggitz
United States340 Posts
If you look at Terran, siege tanks and planetary fortresses can deal devastating damage to enemy force, without any micro from the Terran, just a bit of mismicro and you take losses without inflicting any. With protoss, force fields, regenerating shields and harass with phoenixes and like cna accomplish the same. Even when you just consider trying to engage marines and then realizing you won't even kill one and then lose several lings in the process of running away. Banelings always take losses when killing due to their very nature and lings by their low hit point nature just constantly die without any chance to regenerate. The swarm host seems like an opportunity to reduce bleed damage to your low hit point forces by flinging high hit point free units in front of them. It enables you to fight in less than maxed out engagements because the locusts can buy you time to pull units like lings and banelings back before the siege tanks and marines go town on them, and the colossi start frying. Two other benefits are that you can actually siege a protoss or terran who is behind you economically but you lack the hive tech units to break their wall, dealing more damage and getting further ahead at a point when the Terran or Protoss would just fucking kill you if the positions were reversed. The second is that it is another lair tech unit you can spend gas on when mutas or infestors become ineffective. You can only spend so much gas on more infestors when a protoss player goes high templar and archons and mutas aren't an option, having another option to pour gas into seems highly desirable as there's only so much you can get done with roaches. | ||
|
DARKHYDRA
United States303 Posts
On October 31 2011 12:24 HughJorgen wrote: Hey, an extra 80hp doubles the health of a hydra! But fair enough. I see what you're saying on the siege unit but I think there are major design issues preventing a Zerg AoE siege unit. Firstly, where do you set the range? Greater than a Collosus? Greater than a Siege tank? Either of those option would turn the whole game on it's head. So assuming you go for less range how does that help Zerg as a whole when they can still get contained and still can't break a siege line? I've already said why I don't think the lurker would work. We have the Brood lord which works because it's flying. At best I see a ground based siege unit making Zerg play very similarly to Terran and Toss (Z deathballs!). At worst it wouldn't be able to compete and would get ignored in favour of the BL. With blinding cloud it might still work I guess, but I think the Swarm host is more interesting. Edit: I also think that the fact that the Swarm Host won't fit into the main Zerg army which is already full of melee units is massive part of it's appeal. Blizzard have said they want to make the balls of death smaller. I like the idea of pressuring somewhere with this and attacking somewhere else. How bout set the range to represent the lurkers range from BW, greater than basic ranged units(rine, hydra, goon) but not greater than static defense. I think the reason why we are getting this host unit rather than the lurker is because browder wants terran bio to remain relavent even towards end game and the lurker would defenitly make that hard to accomplish but with the swarm host it would take many more of them(compared to lurkers) to combat bio. | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5713 Posts
On October 24 2011 23:40 Gfire wrote: Introduction I want to talk a little bit about the new unit they've shown for Heart of the Swarm, the Swarm Host. This is the Swarm Host in action. It's supposed to be the burrowed unit with an attack that we all wanted. I think this is great, but there are some things about it that concern me just a little. + Show Spoiler [Redundancy] + It seems to me like the Swarm host is too much like other Zerg units. People have mentioned the Brood Lord. I think to some extent, the Brood Lord is pretty close to this in concept, but I thought of another unit: The Infestor. The Infestor can burrow and launch Infested Terrans. Infested Terrans are a timed life unit, like the Locusts the Swarm Host launches. The player can choose where to launch the Infested Terran as well, giving more control over it. You have the ability to launch one over a cliff or a building, whereas the Swarm Host will only be useful in an open area, because the Locusts (I assume) have to walk around everything. You also get more control because you can choose when to build them and how many. The energy cost allows you to store up many and launch them all at once, or you can choose to use just enough to take out a dropship or something. The Infested Terrans have a ranged attack so they can hit air as well as other units at a distance. In addition, the Infestor can move while burrowed. And we can't forget, the Infestor can unburrow and use some other very strong spells as well. All in all, I think the Infestor just has much more utility as well as being able to do everything the Swarm Host does. It's not a very effective use of Infestor energy, so we don't see it in play. So it's not like the two units (as well as the Brood Lord) can't exist side by side, because they can be used for different things, but I think it would be even better to change the attack of the Swarm Host in some way to make it less like the other units. More diversity would be more fun and interesting, good from a spectator perspective, etc. + Show Spoiler [Damage Output] + I would say they're having a hard time balancing this unit between "Free Units = Too Strong" and "Low Damage Output=Too Weak." I think this concept of throwing free units at the opponent works better on the Hive Tech units (Brood Lords,) because they can get away with having some ridiculous damage output as well. With such long recharge time and low damage output, I don't really get the "swarm" feel I should. Dustin Browder says "Slow, methodical grind" but that doesn't seem to be consistent with "swarm" to me. Obviously they will be adjusting all the numbers for balance, but I think adjusting it in a more extreme way, not just basic numbers, would be good. I'm wondering if Locusts move faster on creep. Broodlings don't, but they hover off the ground. These guys look like they walk, so I would guess they do move faster on creep. That would be very interesting, it would make them stronger at defending than attacking. + Show Spoiler [My Idea] + I don't want to go into a lot of detail about the idea I had. It's just a way I thought in might make it better. Blizzard says they're open to suggestions, so since I did think of this, I guess I will post it on the bnet forums. I thought I'd share it here as well to see what everyone thought. With the removal of the carrier, maybe it could be a little more carrier-like. The Locusts could be more locust-like, something like a melee Interceptor I guess. They could fly out and stay until dying or the Swarm Host unburrows, and they could be replaces by an autospell like on the Carrier. They should of course have a different flight pattern than interceptors, something less geometric, more swarm-like. I guess there would be a maximum of 6, which is I think the number of holes on the back of the Swarm Host. Whether or not you'd pay for them would depend. They could be free, and this would line up with the current Swarm Host (probably a good idea,) as well as make it less like the carrier. This is a lower tier unit, as well, and having them for free makes more sense. On the other hand, getting to dump some minerals here, where there is no larva cost, could be helpful. I'd probably make them stay free, though. Labels Swarm Host redundant with the Broodlord, proceeds to explain why it should fly like the BL and act like a Carrier. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On October 31 2011 13:15 [5th]Sybaris wrote: The more and more that I think about it, I invariably come to the conclusion that the Lurker or something similar is a better option than the Swarm Host. However, knowing Blizzard, I get this disturbing feeling that the unit designs we have seen from Blizzcon are unlikely to change too much from now until beta, meaning that I can only hope and pray that the Swarm Host (while cool looking) is not crap. Zergs have enough melee units. Give us a straight up long range bombardment unit. Hmmm.... However, if the SH is buffed and rips shit up, you won't see me complaining .I just want to see SHs make up the backbone of a zerg force, with lings and the like to defend. This feels like the role the unit should be used in, IMO. Zergling, Ultra, Broodlord The SH does a SHIT LOAD of damage. If you guys don't want it us toss will gladly take it. | ||
|
Maekchu
140 Posts
On October 31 2011 14:37 Silidons wrote: Zergling, Ultra, Broodlord The SH does a SHIT LOAD of damage. If you guys don't want it us toss will gladly take it. Please take it... We'll gladly take your Collosus :D | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
| ||
|
DigitalDevil
219 Posts
On October 31 2011 14:36 Zooper31 wrote: Labels Swarm Host redundant with the Broodlord, proceeds to explain why it should fly like the BL and act like a Carrier. I think OP said the locusts would fly like the carrier's interceptors, not the swarm host itself. The swarm host would need to burrow like a lurker to release the locusts. The locusts being able to fly doesn't exactly make it brood lord like. And with the carrier being removed in hots, giving it's characteristics to another unit isn't really duplicating the unit. OP's idea is pretty ingenious to be honest. The swarming interceptors have always given me the zerg vibe and giving it to a burrowed unit creates such an interesting design and gameplay dynamic. Something like this would actually be an acceptable design difference in SC2 and would justify Blizzard's stubborn refusal to bring back the lurker. The current swarm host design reeks of blandness with barely any creative thought put into the design process. OP, I think you should take your idea out of the spoiler tags so more people wouldn't miss it. You really need to give this idea more attention because it's actually a design decision that would make sense moving forward into hots. | ||
|
HughJorgen
Australia37 Posts
On October 31 2011 14:21 DARKHYDRA wrote: How bout set the range to represent the lurkers range from BW, greater than basic ranged units(rine, hydra, goon) but not greater than static defense. I think the reason why we are getting this host unit rather than the lurker is because browder wants terran bio to remain relavent even towards end game and the lurker would defenitly make that hard to accomplish but with the swarm host it would take many more of them(compared to lurkers) to combat bio. As I mentioned, the lurker worked in BW because Zerg also had dark swarm. I just don't see how a straight up 6 range (the range of the original lurker) unit would help at all in SC2. It'd be outranged by collosus, tanks, thors (what's the range on the warhound? still 7?) and equalled by stalkers, immortals and bunkers. Plus air-to-ground is a lot scarier in SC2 and zerg have less access to anti air. Lurkers in SC2 couldn't be used to break a contain and they couldn't be used to assault a turtling Toss or Terran, not without dark swarm. I honestly think that if Blizzard put the lurker into SC2 we'd all wind up very disappointed. I'll be the first to agree that banelings are a poor substitute vs Terran Bio, but we have fungal now and hopefully burrow move banelings will be effective. Please tell me what gap the lurker would fill that isn't already filled? | ||
|
Tishe
Singapore17 Posts
| ||
|
Qwyn
United States2781 Posts
On October 31 2011 14:37 Silidons wrote: Zergling, Ultra, Broodlord The SH does a SHIT LOAD of damage. If you guys don't want it us toss will gladly take it. Certainly you cannot forget the baneling...nor the fact that zerglings, due to their very nature, take up much more melee space in a fight because you often have up to one hundred plus. They are not comparable to the zealot in any regard, as the zealot is much more cost efficient than the zergling and takes up far less space. Toss do not build DTs in any great quantity, and...hmmm...what other melee unit does Protoss have (no probe, bro)? Zerglings (take up enough space due to quantity), ultras (too fat, bad pathing), BROODLINGs (more space to take up, often zerglings cannot get into engagement), banelings (a derivative, yes, but still crucial). This would up that again. Just saying, if they get the stats right then I'm not complaining, all I'm looking at is the design of the unit and how it functions. It's far too early to worry about stats (thus the hope they get them down). | ||
|
DARKHYDRA
United States303 Posts
On October 31 2011 14:59 HughJorgen wrote: As I mentioned, the lurker worked in BW because Zerg also had dark swarm. I just don't see how a straight up 6 range (the range of the original lurker) unit would help at all in SC2. It'd be outranged by collosus, tanks, thors (what's the range on the warhound? still 7?) and equalled by stalkers, immortals and bunkers. Plus air-to-ground is a lot scarier in SC2 and zerg have less access to anti air. Lurkers in SC2 couldn't be used to break a contain and they couldn't be used to assault a turtling Toss or Terran, not without dark swarm. I honestly think that if Blizzard put the lurker into SC2 we'd all wind up very disappointed. I'll be the first to agree that banelings are a poor substitute vs Terran Bio, but we have fungal now and hopefully burrow move banelings will be effective. Please tell me what gap the lurker would fill that isn't already filled? The lurker got out ranged by tanks, reavers and static defenses and the upgraded dragoon also matched its range, yet the lurker still was usefull. And about air units that is a hydralisk problem nothing to do with GtG units so I'm not sure why you bring that up, they would be a problem to lurkers just as much as they would be to swarm hosts. And true dark swarm doesn't exist anymore, but I've heard some noobs claim lurker + fungal would be OP so who knows what these new sc2 spells abd units will do in combination with the lurker, also blinding cloud seems like a good support spell for lurkers. I think the problem with your view of the lurker is that you expect it to break contains and engage siege lines or something, that's not what's its for, its for bio. Banes and infestors are good against bio as well but the lurker is not single use(suicide) nor energy based. So IMO its better than both. Bottom line is that swarm host is not ranged splash dmg and its not really a cloacked attacker so its not a true replacement to the lurker. | ||
|
Exarian
Poland58 Posts
One of main reasons behind removing Lurker was it's role being to similar to Baneling (!!!) and Roach (!!!). Now Blizzard introduced unit being basically copy-pasted ground broodlord (+some tweaks) as replace of Lurker... I don't even care of Swarm Host replacing Lurker. Main problem is SH not being able to fill Lurkers role. Unit is less micro-friendly, is nearly useless if enemy has number advantage (Locusts killed before engaging enemy - 0 damage done), is neither able to hold ground nor able to work as harasser. It's IMO pure example of good, unique unit being replaced by bad, copy-pasted unit. If Blizz want Zerg to look more swarm-like, they should give them 1 food generalist unit (like SC1 Hydra). SH is neither going to make Zerg more "swarmish", not fill Lurkers role. Zerg desperately need pre-hive ground-holding unit with siege capabilities, something every other race have. Zerg desperately need better AOE, ATM Zerg is limited to one spell and one 1-range suicide unit... (Terran in HotS has at least 5 different AoE weapons, Toss in HoTs has at least 4 different AoE weapons). Finally, Zerg desperately need some transition from hydra-tech, ATM everyone who go hydras is punished after 1-minute window (hello Colossi, hi Siege Tank  ). Yes, Blinding Cloud and Speed Upgrade in HotS are going to help, but neither is going to turn Hydra into lategame unit as valuable as other options Zerg already have.Summary: - Lurker is able to fill multiple critical roles in Zerg arsenal and fix many design problem with Zerg army (AoE, Stealth attacker, siege unit, ground-holder, transition for hydras etc...) - Swarm Host is not able to fill most of these roles (no AoE, no transition for hydras, extremely limited siege/ground holding capabilities, stealth don't affect locusts), and on top of that has it's unique problems (If enemy has number advantage, SHs do 0 damage, SH cannot attack down-cliffs...) Basically perfectly designed, interesting and useful unit got replaced by badly designed (copy-pasted BL), boring (no micro-intense...) unit with limited usefulness. [BTW: Hi, I'm new here] | ||
|
Mjolnir
912 Posts
To me the Swarm Host is the design team being too stubborn to just give us Lurkers. The damage looks lackluster. Honestly, in that video the defence is so spread out it's silly. If those marines are closer to the front the damage done by the Zerg would be greatly diminished because everything would die before it got in range of the bunkers. As it is currently, it's probably too slow and too weak to be of tremendous use. More importantly, though, as per my first point, it's just a silly replacement for a Lurker; which is a unit everyone wants and fills a role Zerg needs help with Unfortunately Mr. Browder seems too determined to replace core SC units with weaksauce ones, just to show everyone that "Hey guys, see!? We were right all along!" | ||
| ||
