EPTTerrans get ghosts and banshees. Protoss get DTs and everything else. Zerg gets banelings, which are occasionally awesome but don't really serve as board control. It would be cool if Locusts burrow-moved until they were in range to attack, which would make them more of a headache in the kind of small numbers you could afford in the midgame. As it is, they look most useful providing constant reinforcements to an already substantial army - ie, in a deathball.
Lurker vs Swarm Host - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
Terrans get ghosts and banshees. Protoss get DTs and everything else. Zerg gets banelings, which are occasionally awesome but don't really serve as board control. It would be cool if Locusts burrow-moved until they were in range to attack, which would make them more of a headache in the kind of small numbers you could afford in the midgame. As it is, they look most useful providing constant reinforcements to an already substantial army - ie, in a deathball. | ||
|
Phoobie
Canada120 Posts
The Swarm Host is amazing at the job it's been given, pressing the advantage by barrelling down the front door with endless waves of units but it's versatility pales in comparison to the lurker. While the Lurker is not as strong/cost efficient at breaking defence lines/containing the enemy it can serve other functions such as cutting of chokes, base defence, drop harass and such. 2 lurkers by the minerals will fight off drop harass much better than hosts as locusts would get stuck pathing into/around minerals 2 Lurkers dropped into enemy lines will achieve better harass than hosts 2 Lurker up a ramp to defend an expo? no units be running up there! I feel do do the same in segmenting the enemy army, hosts/lurkers in a line between the enemy army and your army killing their base? hell yea Both effectively contain. so, while both are great units Lurker offer more gameplay/versatility by offering drop harass/anti drop defence and base defence while the host offers more punch when containing/breaking an enemy line. Because SC is a game of few but awsome units, the lurker offers more gameplay/usage and the host is basically a tier2 BL (similar methods of attack) I think the Lurker fits the swarm much better. | ||
|
Thienan567
United States670 Posts
But like somebody said, give Zerg some AoE attack unit. You know, like all the other races do... | ||
|
sushiman
Sweden2691 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:12 Antylamon wrote: The Lurker would NOT break up deathball play. Toss would just use obs to detect and Colossi to outrange. Plus, Lurker would be Hive tech, ruining its BW purpose of delaying the game until Hive tech. Ultralisks and Brood Lords overshadow it completely, and the Lurker would barely see any use except for containing, harassing, etc. Nobody seems to understand what it means for Lurkers to be Hive tech -.- How would the swarm host be better in any way? Colossus would just smash the locust to pieces instantly, then you have a unit that can't do a thing for 25 seconds - completely worthless. With lurkers you have a positional ranged splash attack that could be extremely potent with fungal. The swarm host is just a small BL - a unit that makes micro more of a hassle for the other player by creating a wall of annoying free units, than being fun to use and microable. And even then you can at least micro the BL a bit, the swarm host just sits there. | ||
|
ptrpb
Canada753 Posts
so what you're essentially asking is "hey guys, do you like this unit you knew all about and probably loved from broodwar or this unit you don't know and haven't used at all?". incredibly bias. | ||
|
features
Ireland160 Posts
While the Swarm Host looks great, spawning slow mini hydra/roach things isnt particularly exciting, and ignoring mana cost they are actually much more limited in function than infested Terrans (Cant toss them up cliffs or over sim city defenses). Launching banes for splash and spike damage could have been much more entertaining (flying through the air, with time to dodge..... Im suddenly imaging the Swarm Host as a unit launcher, that you load with your own units aka lings, banes, roaches whatever.) or maybe the swarm host could have had mass mind control, where it could take control of a number of units that came into its range. Imagine a single Swarm host passively mind control like 4/5 supply worth or units i.e 4 marines or 2 marauders or 1 tank, no massive. The key for any Lurker replacement has to be some form of instant radius damage imo, which may be something the current Swarm Host lacks. | ||
|
TheAmazombie
United States3714 Posts
It just seems like you are kicking the SH before even giving it a chance to live. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:32 KimJongChill wrote: I have trypophobia so.....Lurker! lol, I thank you sir, for you have opened my eyes to another wonder of the earth, the surinam toad. | ||
|
Broodwurst
Germany1586 Posts
| ||
|
LucidityDark
United Kingdom139 Posts
| ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:42 Phoobie wrote: Both are really awsome but if I had to choose between the two I would side with the Lurker. The Swarm Host is amazing at the job it's been given, pressing the advantage by barrelling down the front door with endless waves of units but it's versatility pales in comparison to the lurker. While the Lurker is not as strong/cost efficient at breaking defence lines/containing the enemy it can serve other functions such as cutting of chokes, base defence, drop harass and such. 2 lurkers by the minerals will fight off drop harass much better than hosts as locusts would get stuck pathing into/around minerals 2 Lurkers dropped into enemy lines will achieve better harass than hosts 2 Lurker up a ramp to defend an expo? no units be running up there! I feel do do the same in segmenting the enemy army, hosts/lurkers in a line between the enemy army and your army killing their base? hell yea Both effectively contain. so, while both are great units Lurker offer more gameplay/versatility by offering drop harass/anti drop defence and base defence while the host offers more punch when containing/breaking an enemy line. Because SC is a game of few but awsome units, the lurker offers more gameplay/usage and the host is basically a tier2 BL (similar methods of attack) I think the Lurker fits the swarm much better. Good post. Interesting analysis. On July 12 2012 04:44 ptrpb wrote: this thread is pointless, we have no idea how the swarm host is going to change in the future and the specifics of the unit so what you're essentially asking is "hey guys, do you like this unit you knew all about and probably loved from broodwar or this unit you don't know and haven't used at all?". incredibly bias. I believe this is accurate as of MLG Type Ground Unit Cost 200 100 40 3 Attributes Armored, Biological Attack Ground Attack: 15(x2) Ground DPS: 34.88 Range: ? Cooldown: .86 Defense 120 1 Source:http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Swarm_Host | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:42 Thienan567 wrote: I always thought Swarm Host should just spawn broodlings every 5 secs or something. Enough to be micro'd but not enough to be absolutely game breaking or something. Also give it like 90 hp just like infestor. But like somebody said, give Zerg some AoE attack unit. You know, like all the other races do... Ultralisks. Banelings, and Infestors are all AOE damage units. Protoss has the collosus high templar and archon Terran has the Siege Tank, Raven, Hellion and Widow Mine in HOTS. Why do you think Zerg needs more splash damage? Doesn't look like that to me at all. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:42 Phoobie wrote: Both are really awsome but if I had to choose between the two I would side with the Lurker. The Swarm Host is amazing at the job it's been given, pressing the advantage by barrelling down the front door with endless waves of units but it's versatility pales in comparison to the lurker. While the Lurker is not as strong/cost efficient at breaking defence lines/containing the enemy it can serve other functions such as cutting of chokes, base defence, drop harass and such. 2 lurkers by the minerals will fight off drop harass much better than hosts as locusts would get stuck pathing into/around minerals 2 Lurkers dropped into enemy lines will achieve better harass than hosts 2 Lurker up a ramp to defend an expo? no units be running up there! I feel do do the same in segmenting the enemy army, hosts/lurkers in a line between the enemy army and your army killing their base? hell yea Both effectively contain. so, while both are great units Lurker offer more gameplay/versatility by offering drop harass/anti drop defence and base defence while the host offers more punch when containing/breaking an enemy line. Because SC is a game of few but awsome units, the lurker offers more gameplay/usage and the host is basically a tier2 BL (similar methods of attack) I think the Lurker fits the swarm much bette. While I think the lurker is a significantly significantly better unit design, I'm not quite with you on your points. While true for BW, in SC2 lurker drops wouldn't be as useful as say infestor drops (and I'd assume they'd cost similar) with fungals, and you can always baneling drop as well. And 2 lurkers up a ramp only stopped marines in BW, that's it. Any protoss unit could simply charge up the ramp, and for Terran, the fact that the bottom of the ramp now has 100% attack hit instead of 55% or whatever it was makes a difference, not to mention marauders could simply charge up and destroy the lurkers very quickly (assuming armored). The only reason it worked vs marines is that the two shots would kill them before they could get up, but even now with 55hp marines it still wouldn't kill them, even if lurkers were dealing 25 dmg as opposed to 20 per shot. Game's two different to compare, to be honest I think useful of the lurker would be significantly less in SC2. But I would be down for anything that could potentially cause an overlap with the infestor and get rid of fungal, the most retarded spell introduced to SC2. On July 12 2012 04:52 Vindicare605 wrote: Ultralisks. Banelings, and Infestors are all AOE damage units. Protoss has the collosus high templar and archon Terran has the Siege Tank, Raven, Hellion and Widow Mine in HOTS. Why do you think Zerg needs more splash damage? Doesn't look like that to me at all. Terran has Thor as well vs air, and if you want to count it (questionable), Nukes. EMP also functions as splash vs Protoss shields. On July 12 2012 04:50 sc14s wrote: I've honestly wanted lurker since WoL came out. banes were imo a boring and bad choice to replace the lurker initially and i think swarm host is another bad patch over.. just give us lurker back. I feel like banelings are one of the things SC2 did right!! They feel super swarmy, are microintensive to fight against, and have awesome potential for harass, to function as mines, to dropped as "bombs" via ovies, yet at the same time are super fragile. <3 banes. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Lets call the colossus lurker, or the swarmhost. Since the bw lurker can't work in sc2 without major changes and then it wouldn't be the lurker. Just the swarmhost. | ||
|
Vetrocide
Norway600 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16109 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:54 FabledIntegral wrote: While I think the lurker is a significantly significantly better unit design, I'm not quite with you on your points. While true for BW, in SC2 lurker drops wouldn't be as useful as say infestor drops (and I'd assume they'd cost similar) with fungals, and you can always baneling drop as well. And 2 lurkers up a ramp only stopped marines in BW, that's it. Any protoss unit could simply charge up the ramp, and for Terran, the fact that the bottom of the ramp now has 100% attack hit instead of 55% or whatever it was makes a difference, not to mention marauders could simply charge up and destroy the lurkers very quickly (assuming armored). The only reason it worked vs marines is that the two shots would kill them before they could get up, but even now with 55hp marines it still wouldn't kill them, even if lurkers were dealing 25 dmg as opposed to 20 per shot. Game's two different to compare, to be honest I think useful of the lurker would be significantly less in SC2. But I would be down for anything that could potentially cause an overlap with the infestor and get rid of fungal, the most retarded spell introduced to SC2. Terran has Thor as well vs air, and if you want to count it (questionable), Nukes. EMP also functions as splash vs Protoss shields. I was debating including the Thor in there. I recognize Terrans have it for that. I didn't include EMP on purpose because it's a special case. It doesn't affect Zerg or Terran units at all it only functions as an effective AOE vs Protoss. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:50 Archerofaiur wrote: I believe this is accurate as of MLG I don't think you understood his point. Pure stats are meaningless and subject to change anyway. The point is that you are making people compare something that has over 10 years of history of creative use to something we barely know anything about. Of course people will pick lurker because they know (or think they know) that it would create all these cool situations we saw in BW. We have no idea what the swarm host could be capable of. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 12 2012 04:57 Vindicare605 wrote: I was debating including the Thor in there. I recognize Terrans have it for that. I didn't include EMP on purpose because it's a special case. It doesn't affect Zerg or Terran units at all it only functions as an effective AOE vs Protoss. Mirrors are generally irrelevant in these kinds of discussions, and EMP can still work as splash against infestors (well, it could, before the nerf of EMP radius, now I struggle to get more than 2 infestors in an EMP and have given up completely on ever going ghosts in the MU). I think you absolutely have to include EMP as a Terran splash attack, although you can have a disclaimer only vs Protoss or something for "damage" output. It's too critical to leave out in discussing comparisons. | ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
Or the BW Reaver vs the Colossus. Or the new mines vs Vultures. | ||
| ||
