EPTLurker vs Swarm Host - Page 25
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
acrimoneyius
United States983 Posts
| ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On July 13 2012 02:27 Velr wrote: That vid makes me laugh everytime. If this is Blizzards best shot at showing how "exciting" Hots will be, they might better not try at all. Yeah. The whole thing sounded scripted, which is not a good thing. As for the thread, although the lurker may be a unit which is better when compared to the swarm host in a vacuum, SC2 isn't a vacuum. The lurker, if I recall correctly, was removed because it overlapped roles with the baneling. If Blizzard just decided to throw the lurker in the game for HotS instead of the swarm host, they would: A: Be in the same bind as they were before B: Be adding a unit that didn't really enhance the gameplay that much C: Ironically enough, be bashed for adding in an unoriginal unit just to appease the BW crowd D: Be adding a unit that isn't as good as the swarm host, for the overall game Although adding in the lurker instead of the swarm host is a great idea when you first think about it, the swarm host fulfills more roles and fills more missing niches in the zerg army than the lurker ever could. | ||
|
Forumite
Sweden3280 Posts
I think Swarm Host could work, but I think they need to spawn Locusts more often than every 25 seconds. | ||
|
PermaScrub
32 Posts
On July 13 2012 02:17 0neder wrote: Please review my last post, I edited it with a more in-depth explanation. I just explained how it dilutes zerg. It gives them another unit that has the same paradigm as 2-3 existing units. The less difference there is between the units, the less exciting strategic decisions are, and the less exciting the race is. You're talking super-late game and main armies. I'm talking early-mid game posturing and late game tactical maneuvers. You've never seen lurkers RUN INTO a group of units, burrow, and wipe it out or force retreat? I just can't take this comment seriously because it means you barely watched any BW, so you aren't equipped to fully understand the comparison. I agree that stylistically, broodlings, ITs, and locusts have a lot of similarities. However, the three all have different strategic uses. Broodlings are used to mess with pathing and add dps. ITs are used for added dps and anti-air. Locusts should be used to seige turtlers before broodlords are available. The cooldown of spawn locusts adds back and forth battle as the zerg will try to push with his locusts then retreat for the next locust wave, much different from the quick battles in wol. I have watched/played a lot of brood war. I think the lurker is a great unit and has an amazing design. But this is SC2 and I don't see a unique niche that the lurker can fulfill. People say that the lurker should replace the swarm host because it has more micro opportinities. But the swarm host has a unique purpose that zerg does not already have that the lurker is unable to accomplish. Blizzard added the swarm host because they thought the zerg needed a unit that can help them break defensive positions, not because they thought another zerg burrow unit would be cool. | ||
|
Nachtwind
Germany1130 Posts
On July 13 2012 03:00 Forumite wrote: My biggest worry about the Swarm Host is that they won´t be able to defend themselves. Before upgrading the Locust duration, there´s a 10s gap between the first Locusts die and the next wave is spawned. Even with the upgrade, when one wave dies then there´s almost always a gap when there are no Locusts, especially as using the rally point near the enemy will result in Locusts that die early in the 25s cycle. Unless the Locusts stay behind and defend their Swarm Host, the enemy could just move forward and kill them when they are defenceless. I think Swarm Host could work, but I think they need to spawn Locusts more often than every 25 seconds. Well, if you build one or just burrow all your hosts simultaneous + non disabled autocast then i would give you a point. You can decide if you want a big consistent wave once for a while or just little pressure all the time. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On July 13 2012 03:09 Nachtwind wrote: Well, if you build one or just burrow all your hosts simultaneous + non disabled autocast then i would give you a point. I think that's the problem most people have with understanding the unit at the moment. They watched the newest battle reports thinking that's how everyone would use them. Obviously if you leave them burrowed "pressuring" a terran base, he's just going to vaporize them the instant there is no locusts. You're going to have to decide manually when you spawn the locusts, when you burrow, etc. or you'll lose the swarm hosts before you inflict any significant damage. And as for the topic at hand, I think we should give the swarm host a chance. Battle reports aren't played by good players. The actual potential of the units being added in can't really be known until we've dicked around with them for a couple of months. The lurker being back in would be nice, but who knows? Maybe the swarm host will be awesome too. It can work as a drop harass unit (like the lurker) and an ambush unit (with autocast off, like hold position lurkers). It can be pretty versatile if we give it the chance I think. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On July 13 2012 02:39 wcr.4fun wrote: tell me about the gamebreaking micro they pull of with their collussi. And put it in perspective to a noob versus a pro (like jaedong) using mutalisks in brood war and then tell me I'm wrong. i've seen Naniwa use less colossi with superior micro and superior positioning to beat a player who had the high ground and (at first) a superior spread. i've also seen other players pull off some pretty amazing things with the colossus. it's not impossible to micro the colossus, it's just very difficult to do it effectively because they are so slow. same with broodlords. if you take a "noob" and put them with a BLord-based 200/200 army against MVP with a 200/200 army, they will get destroyed no matter how many BLords they have. however, take a player like DRG or Symbol or even Nestea and it becomes a different story, because of better micro and positioning. sure, MVP might still win, but it won't be a sure thing. watch some recent PvP in the GSL to see what i mean about colossus micro, or even some PvT. notice how the Toss players are constantly shifting their colossi around their army, poking in and out, cliffwalking, etc. also, slow units like that actually increase the amount of micro you need to do with your supporting army, because if they get too far ahead or behind then you will lose them, and they are often the backbone of the army. i haven't watched enough BW to make any accurate comparisons. and it may very well be that Jaedong's muta micro is more intense and effective than anything humanly possible with colossus (comparing BW zerg vs SC2 protoss... yeah okay...) but 1) that doesn't mean anything and 2) that doesn't mean the colossus is only an "a-move unit" and 3) the BW muta and the SC2 colossus have WILDLY different uses and are not really comparable in any meaningful way tbh, i don't think it helps your case when you over exaggerate that badly. part of the problem Blizzard probably has is that half the time the complainers (be their complaints/solutions actually valid or not) completely overstate their case and it makes their arguments look ridiculous. i have no problem with saying that you'd like the colossus to be more micro friendly. i think anyone (and Blizzard more than anyone) would agree with that. but just saying that the colossus needs to be more micro friendly is useless. if you don't have an answer for HOW it can be more micro friendly, than you might as well not even make the statement. and if you are going to make a completely untrue argument like saying that a noob can micro his colossus as effectively as Squirtle, than you definitely shouldn't make any statements because you would only be hurting your case. this next part isn't necessarily addressed to you but to everyone who makes a balance/game-play complaint: i promise you that Blizzard cares more about making their game interesting and challenging and spectator friendly than you ever could. leave the childish conspiracy theories and ridiculous assumptions about David Kim and Dustin Browder out of the argument. they don't belong and they destroy any credibility you might have. also leave out the ridiculous BW-bias. i got no problem with loving BW and hating SC2, i have absolutely no problem in thinking that BW is the shit and that SC2 needs to be more like it. i have a huge problem with the automatic assumption that SC2 is pure crap and that BW is the solution to everything. i have an even bigger problem with the automatic assumption that everyone feels exactly the same you do about watching the games. i've actually gone and looked at some of the most highly recommended BW vods, and they were awesome, but personally, i still enjoy SC2 more. sure there is room for improvement in SC2, and i will absolutely agree that at this stage in the development of the two games, BW is probably a step ahead. maybe it's even a couple steps ahead. but tbh, that doesn't mean anything, and it definitely doesn't mean that you have to look backward to BW for the solutions to problems. i don't want SC2 to be as good as BW, i want it to be better. | ||
|
AirbladeOrange
United States2573 Posts
On July 13 2012 02:29 thoraxe wrote: I think that video should clear up who I prefer. Swarm host to me seems like the response from Blizzard from players to add in a seige unit for Zerg since they don't have one at the moment. It should technically better since you can dance around it (ah, the good old days). I wonder what Blizz's reason for not adding the lurker is? Perhaps if it was added, the game would have turned out to be a brood war 2.0 and they needed a big enough change to call it a new game. Or it could have been that zerg would've been imba with lurkers in SC2. Some people may miss it, but Blizz has to make some necessary sacrifices and it's just the way it is. It's kind of like the Science Vessel, I think many Terrans would like it back, but it became an essential unit in brood war that they had to remove it to make SC2 feel like a new game. Broodlords are zergs seige unit. On July 13 2012 02:48 Sated wrote: Noobs will get their Colossi sniped by a-moving them into bad positions or not reigning them in when they cliffwalk away from the deathball, they won't move them over their own units if they get flanked to prevent them taking excess damage, they won't move them away from Vikings in order to draw Vikings over the top of Stalkers etc. etc. etc. Ergo, it is flat out not true that "A noob can use a collussi [sic] just as well as a pro". Yeah, colossi definitely take some (but not crazy) micro but you went from saying they are used the same by pros and noobs to asking citations for "groundbreaking micro." You're taking it from one extreme to the other when the answer is somewhere in the middle. | ||
|
phiinix
United States1169 Posts
As it stands in WoL: Lurkers get absolutely demolished when they're detected, and decent terrans save up a lot of scan when moving out I personally think burrowed banelings to way more damage than lurkers ever could. Get hit by spikes once, don't have scan, walk away. Walk over banelings, no scan, get exploded on, gg. Hydras, which are required to make lurkers, are awful zvt Honestly think people want the lurker way more for nostalgia than for practicality in game | ||
|
Nachtwind
Germany1130 Posts
On July 13 2012 03:31 phiinix wrote: Honestly I would love to see the lurker in HotS as a terran, it'd be such an awful unit. As it stands in WoL: Lurkers get absolutely demolished when they're detected, and decent terrans save up a lot of scan when moving out I personally think burrowed banelings to way more damage than lurkers ever could. Get hit by spikes once, don't have scan, walk away. Walk over banelings, no scan, get exploded on, gg. Hydras, which are required to make lurkers, are awful zvt Honestly think people want the lurker way more for nostalgia than for practicality in game Actually if you look at hydras one should also view the new speedupgrade + viper support they ~could~ get viable. Because no matter what. If you look at their stats and they don´t get annihilated in an instant and make dmg they are the beasts they are. The second point i would say yes  | ||
|
adius
United States249 Posts
| ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Worst thing about the host swarm is that it doesnt seem like it does what it's intended for: being able to push trenched positions. Siege tanks just obliterate the units they spawn and they won't end up doing anything. I don't see it being a fun unit against terran at all as it now and only another way to push protoss which will already be doable with the viper. I can fully understand they don't want to make an expansion for a game and include units from it's predecessor, for the casual gamer that just feels really lame. I just hope they seriously alter the locust swarm though, it feels uncool as the whole unit spawning is already done by broods and infestors. Plus zerg could use some more interesting aoe and they surely need a way to make hydra tech more interesting. If anything let the swarm host at least morhp from hydralisks at least, would be 10x cooler already. | ||
|
Durp
Canada3117 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 13 2012 03:00 Forumite wrote: My biggest worry about the Swarm Host is that they won´t be able to defend themselves. Before upgrading the Locust duration, there´s a 10s gap between the first Locusts die and the next wave is spawned. Even with the upgrade, when one wave dies then there´s almost always a gap when there are no Locusts, especially as using the rally point near the enemy will result in Locusts that die early in the 25s cycle. Unless the Locusts stay behind and defend their Swarm Host, the enemy could just move forward and kill them when they are defenceless. I think Swarm Host could work, but I think they need to spawn Locusts more often than every 25 seconds. This sounds as if you are thinking about the Swarm Host only from the Zerg side of the battle. Now change your perspective and be the Terran with Siege Tanks. You are facing yet another - and in this case not even late late tier 3 - unit which spawns "free units" which trigger your Siege Tank fire and doesnt cost the opponent anything. Would you feel that this unit is "fair" when it clearly screws up your siege line and allows the Zerg to overrun you even easier and cheaper as they are already doing? So the consequence is ... Terrans stop trying to use mech against Zerg ... which is fine for them since they can deal with that relatively easily already. Just get good at locking down parts of their forces with Fungal Growth and eliminate them with cheap masses of Zerglings and Banelings. You even get every Zergs favorite back ... DARK SWARM (and it doesnt matter its called something else when it clearly does the same thing). So yeah, the Swarm Host (and the Viper) can do awesome things and be made to "work", but at what cost for the balance of the game? Just look at it from all three sides of the fence and you see that many many many of the units in HotS have terrible design. On July 13 2012 03:56 Durp wrote: These polls, beyond the looking cooler one, make no sense. I'd guess that maximum 0.1% of TL users have even played with the Swarm Host. Let's have this conversation when the HotS beta is out and people know what they're talking about This is TL. We can recognize a stupid thing before we play it ourselves. Just simple thinking about cause and effect is enough. It actually isnt that hard. Just think how fair you think an ability is which pulls one of your very expensive units into the midst of a group of enemies without being able to do anything against it. Just think about how fair you would think a "free unit" is which triggers your tank fire and consequently lets the horde of Zerglings run into range of your tanks without getting shot at again. Any "free unit" is totally unfair IMO. Thus the Broodlings from a Broodlord and the Swarm Host are unfair, but an Infested Terran isnt. The range of the Swarm Host unit makes the unit itself "potentially invulnerable" just like the Tempest with the range upgrade and that is BAD. These units are designed in such a way and fiddling with their combat stats doesnt matter ... it is the general concept which is terrible. P.S.: The color of the Marauders boots is IMBA! | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
One point people have brought up is that the player can control the unit stream of a group of Swarm Hosts by controlling how many burrow and when. I will add that to the original OP. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 13 2012 04:07 Archerofaiur wrote: One point people have brought up is that the player can control the unit stream of a group of Swarm Hosts by controlling how many burrow and when. I will add that to the original OP. Just burrow them at a distance of "1/2 siege tank radius" (plus a bit of safety) and you wont have a shot hit two of them ... it doesnt even require complicated micro. | ||
|
goiflin
Canada1218 Posts
On July 13 2012 04:12 Rabiator wrote: Just burrow them at a distance of "1/2 siege tank radius" (plus a bit of safety) and you wont have a shot hit two of them ... it doesnt even require complicated micro. I don't think it'll be a problem for the seige tanks to kill the hosts slower. Tank lines can do their work slowly if they need to. It's not like the locusts are going to get anywhere near the tanks in the first place with units protecting it. On July 13 2012 03:37 adius wrote: Yay for the lurker and being 13 forever, boo to the swarm host and the concept of my own mortality! All dose strawmen. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
Have you ever played bw? Do you know how much skill it takes to achieve mutalisk micro to the point that you can use it against people like flash? You need years and years of practice to get good enough muta micro to be able to compete with players like flash (on that aspect of the game). The collussus requires no such thing. I might have overstated it, but it's clear to anyone with a history in bw that there's no potential in a collussus whereas there's unlimited potential in mutalisk micro. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 13 2012 05:29 wcr.4fun wrote: The definition of a noob varies greatly, I'm not talking about a bronze player here. A master player is a noob compared to gsl pro's like MC. That master player can probably control his collussi just as well as a pro protoss. Have you ever played bw? Do you know how much skill it takes to achieve mutalisk micro to the point that you can use it against people like flash? You need years and years of practice to get good enough muta micro to be able to compete with players like flash (on that aspect of the game). The collussus requires no such thing. I might have overstated it, but it's clear to anyone with a history in bw that there's no potential in a collussus whereas there's unlimited potential in mutalisk micro. And I'm telling you again, it's because of things like pathing and AI, not because of the unit design. Just look at your example: Mutalisks are still here in WoL and they are basically exactly the same, yet it's not like in WoL they would have the potential you talk about. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On July 13 2012 05:37 Big J wrote: And I'm telling you again, it's because of things like pathing and AI, not because of the unit design. Just look at your example: Mutalisks are still here in WoL and they are basically exactly the same, yet it's not like in WoL they would have the potential you talk about. Except they are not exactly the same as the previous model. If you tune in to one BW game and a SC2 one that features Mutalisks usage. You can clearly see with great visual representation that in Brood War, you are able to do so much more with the units with the Stacking bug in place, a feature which I do believe that Blizzard have taken out in the sequel. | ||
| ||
