|
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!"
Same thing happen to Goliath. Unit was removed "because it didin't fit SC2", and now Goliath returned with new name and model, and some tweaks (warhound). "Hey, we were right, Goliath do not Fit terran in SC2!".
In Warhound case it is not as critical as in SH case. SH is simply badly designed, If SH could fill Lurkers role in even 50%, I would not care. But this unit has limitations in every single aspect, on top of multiple unique disadvantages Lurker didn't have... Blizz can change some things by buffing/nerfing unit, but SH will be always less micro-friendly, less interesting and less gamechangeing unit then Lurker. Basically everything SH is able to to, other Zerg units are able to do already. SH add NOTHING interesting/unique to zerg arsenal, it is basically mix of few already existing units (mostly BL, but there is also some relations Infestors and masslings), SH will not create any new strategy - it will do same things other Zerg units. It is total opposite of new Terran/Toss units adding multiple unique strategies to their factions arsenal.
|
I wasn't sure about all this, but with the new "simulator"-video posted in the other thread, it really does seem like this unit serves no unique purpose at all.
There's probably a better unit to have in each and every conceivable circumstance. Broodlords seem way better in lategame for taking down natural defenses, for army-fights I suppose you'd prefer to have some infestors....
strange unit indeed
|
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.
Lurkers in the SC2 alpha had an upgrade which gave them +3 range, for a total of 9, the same as the Colossus. That would be more than enough to see them used extensively late game.
On October 31 2011 14:59 HughJorgen wrote:
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?
They would be extremely good against mid-game gateway pushes with mass forcefields which are very hard to hold in ZvP. It's also extremely common in mid-to-late game for expansion Hatcheries to be sniped by small groups of Marines and Marauders or Zealots; the Lurker would give Zerg players an effective space control unit to counter that type of harass.
The Lurker would also have an extreme effect in slowing or outright stopping the standard Marine/Tank pushes that Terran uses to deny a Zerg third. By burrowing Lurkers just outside of the Terran natural, and unburrowing/retreating and then reburrowing outside of the scan range, you would be able to significantly delay the push, and essentially force Terrans to make a Raven if they want to be able to hit a timing.
|
On October 31 2011 18:06 sleepingdog wrote:
There's probably a better unit to have in each and every conceivable circumstance. Broodlords seem way better in lategame for taking down natural defenses, for army-fights I suppose you'd prefer to have some infestors....
I agree, that simulation video does make the swarm host seem redundant :/
|
On October 24 2011 23:40 Gfire wrote:+ 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.
I think the idea of a T2 groundbased zerg carrier(with flying locust) is awesome! The damage don't have to be much either, as long as there is stuff in the air getting shot at. Making the units spawn often and be killed easily is also much more swarmy than the 20ish second poptime the swarmhost currently has. The locusts should slowly be eating away at any static defense of the opponent, thus the range should be something like that of a siegetank.
|
I don`t see how the SH can siege bases succesfully. The spawnrate is low and the spawned units are slow. There is no garuanted damage, because you can kite the units while killing the swarm host. Well it is right that zerg needs a unit to controll spaces, defend expansions and siege enemy bases. But the swarm host with the current design will not be able to do that (effectively).
examples:
-right now zergs cant harass a planetary fortress, unless they attack with a huge force, which leaves their bases vunerable for attacks. the swarm host wont change that, since the locust have to run into the range of the PF, will be aggroed by the PF and therefore try to attack it, which will fail.
-same goes for sieging a turteling terran or toss. The zergplayer brings the SH in position, but before the locusts can do any damage, they have to move towards the bunkers, cannons, defensive placed buildings(wall), tank-line and they will take damage before they even reach their target. Depending on how many units/cannons are defending they will do none or just minimal damage.
The fact the swarm host does no immediate damage (unlike the lurker), makes his succes (due to gamedesign) very questionable. Even in big fights the SH wont help much, since his spawnlings will just die in AOE damage.
|
To me this seems like a faster teched broodlord, except that it cant move like broodlords can. _IF_ the metagame stays the same and terran keeps the sort of marine tank (add in new unit), then this style wont work anymore. Broodlords made siegetanks unsiege, swarm of banelings and lings run in = dead marines.
Wanna run forward and snipe Swarm hosts ? Fungal, blings.
I would much rather have the zerg get lurkers again. Same range as siege tanks and maybe not burrowed but a prep time. Then again this doesn't feel zergy...
I think most of the units added in feel very unsatisfying. Replicator? Seriously ? "We cant think of a new unit type, so lets make one that can be all..."
I'll have to wait for beta and release to make my final call, but to me HotS feels a little weak. WoL seems more interesting.
|
@Zul
Exactly, SH add nearly nothing to Zerg gameplay. Almost everything SH is able to do, other Zerg units can do with similar or even better cost effectiveness. On top of that entire unit concept is mix and copy-paste from already existing Zerg units. SH is the least unique, interesting and versatile new unit in entire HotS.
On top of that SH is addressing nearly NONE of zerg race design holes. It is not real siege unit, it is not unit able to engage enemy with number advantage, it has no real ground-holding capabilities, it has no AoE.
Basically everything SH added, zerg race already had in their arsenal in more interesting form (BL, Infestor etc.). It mean SH will not open area for new tactics/strategies, SH will not give us new combos, will not fix any of Zerg race issues, will not allow us to do anything new. Even if people say of "amazing Blinding Cloud - SH combo", other Zerg units will benefit this awesome spell far more then SH. I see no single reason of making SH in expansion, I can't see any real-game situation where SH is even slightly more useful then other Zerg options.
And why Mr. Browder hate Lurker so much, if he replaced it with something as boring and limited as SH?
|
Can someone link the simulation here?
Edit: What? The shredder thread had it, no wonder I couldn't find it.
It seems to scream "MAKE ZERGLINGS INSTEAD", but the fact they keep spawning might mean lings don't make it redundant, we'll see.
|
|
|
Russian Federation473 Posts
i wish this thing evolved from hydra.
and yes, i don't see much in this thing. but we'll have to wait, hopefully blizzard know what they do.
|
The swarm host looks like it will be a staple map control unit for the zerg, which is going to be very important in hots since the shredder basically nullifies speedlings.
|
Shredder also nulify slow locusts... SH is definitely not good choice to deal with these things.
|
On October 31 2011 18:45 zul wrote:
I don`t see how the SH can siege bases succesfully. The spawnrate is low and the spawned units are slow. There is no garuanted damage, because you can kite the units while killing the swarm host. Well it is right that zerg needs a unit to controll spaces, defend expansions and siege enemy bases. But the swarm host with the current design will not be able to do that (effectively).
examples:
-right now zergs cant harass a planetary fortress, unless they attack with a huge force, which leaves their bases vunerable for attacks. the swarm host wont change that, since the locust have to run into the range of the PF, will be aggroed by the PF and therefore try to attack it, which will fail.
-same goes for sieging a turteling terran or toss. The zergplayer brings the SH in position, but before the locusts can do any damage, they have to move towards the bunkers, cannons, defensive placed buildings(wall), tank-line and they will take damage before they even reach their target. Depending on how many units/cannons are defending they will do none or just minimal damage.
The fact the swarm host does no immediate damage (unlike the lurker), makes his succes (due to gamedesign) very questionable. Even in big fights the SH wont help much, since his spawnlings will just die in AOE damage.
At least try the unit in the HOTS custom map before commenting on it's usefulness. These things do huge damage to a planetary - like 5 will bring a planetary to half health assuming no repair/support; any kind of fortified, immobile position inevitably takes huge damage. Their dps/health is seriously impressive when you consider the cost.
Of course if you move in on 8 cannons with 1 swarm host it won't work; try 6 swarm hosts and that base will go down (eventually), much like siege tanks.
The lack of immediate damage does a good job of keeping different races different. In it's current form the swarm host just feels/looks cool; I'd be sad to see it go. Compared to lurkers in BW the two units fill totally different roles, and if the lurker replaced the swarm host it wouldn't really be a lurker anymore =(
On October 31 2011 19:21 Cyber_Cheese wrote:
Can someone link the simulation here?
Edit: What? The shredder thread had it, no wonder I couldn't find it.
It seems to scream "MAKE ZERGLINGS INSTEAD", but the fact they keep spawning might mean lings don't make it redundant, we'll see.
The simulation in the shredder thread looked super inaccurate and buggy - at any given time only about a third of the locusts that should have spawned were out (ie. it was closer to the damage of 3-4 swarm hosts).
|
IMHO swarm host is not a very good unit at controlling a zone. The real problem is that it spawn locusts very slowly, and locust can be killed. So, if you put 2 or 3 of them for example in a location, i think 8 marine + medvac can easily clean em up. The same thing applies for drops: SH is useless against drops...
|
Couldn't agree more with the OP. When you have two units that already create weaker disposable zerg units to barrage your enemy with it sounds dumb to create ANOTHER one that does the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I love the unit, I just think the Lurker would have gave more contrast here. Along with the fact that everyone wants it back, everyone but the terran/toss of course. 
|
On October 31 2011 20:22 Competent wrote:Couldn't agree more with the OP. When you have two units that already create weaker disposable zerg units to barrage your enemy with it sounds dumb to create ANOTHER one that does the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I love the unit, I just think the Lurker would have gave more contrast here. Along with the fact that everyone wants it back, everyone but the terran/toss of course.
I'm a toss and I would rather a lurker (or even better, OP's carrier style locust idea) come back than have the swarm host. Those arguing to try out the swarm host before dismissing it completely miss the point. Numbers can always be adjusted yes, but the real question to ask would be if the unit design is actually exciting. For the player, I see little micro potential in the swarm host. For the spectator, the swarm host is extremely underwhelming to watch. It plays out like other zerg units and works too similarly to a brood lord. There is hardly any "feeling" of distinction and inspiration/horror when you see a swarm host. You don't get an "Oh shit, that's a swarm host!" feeling at all.
|
Numbers can always be adjusted yes, but the real question to ask would be if the unit design is actually exciting.
Exactly. Unit is boring, and feel like copy-paste mix of already existing units. Nothing new in terms of strategy, tactics or fun. Lurker is over 9000 times more exciting both to use and to deal with. It's simple: Interesting unit filling multiple holes in Zerg arsenal was replaced by boring units doing same things as already existing units on top of not being able to fill most of the holes.
|
the only reason i can see this unit making it is that the SH shoots with small hydra models, so the model will finally be useful o.O
|
On October 31 2011 20:39 DigitalDevil wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2011 20:22 Competent wrote:Couldn't agree more with the OP. When you have two units that already create weaker disposable zerg units to barrage your enemy with it sounds dumb to create ANOTHER one that does the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I love the unit, I just think the Lurker would have gave more contrast here. Along with the fact that everyone wants it back, everyone but the terran/toss of course. I'm a toss and I would rather a lurker (or even better, OP's carrier style locust idea) come back than have the swarm host. Those arguing to try out the swarm host before dismissing it completely miss the point. Numbers can always be adjusted yes, but the real question to ask would be if the unit design is actually exciting. For the player, I see little micro potential in the swarm host. For the spectator, the swarm host is extremely underwhelming to watch. It plays out like other zerg units and works too similarly to a brood lord. There is hardly any "feeling" of distinction and inspiration/horror when you see a swarm host. You don't get an "Oh shit, that's a swarm host!" feeling at all.
I actually had to laugh at the image of Day9 wispering...."ohh....it's a swarm host....uhhhhh"
In all honesty: the swarm host just seems like an imbecile broodlord who never learned how to fly when he was a kid and decided to just burrow himself instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
