|
On July 13 2012 16:22 RogerChillingworth wrote:
the best thing about the lurker would be that it morphs from the hydra. :-)
this, i feel there should be more evolution
|
On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders.
The problem is, by saying "wait until beta" you are saying you want the swarm host instead of the lurker? I can't really understand that. Not that we have any influence on the matter, but saying that negates said influence.
Swarm hosts aren't intriguing. The concept is boring. When I watched them...I didn't think they were awesome at all. The lurker looks awesome on a spectator level, is fun to play with, and opens up more strategic options than the SH.
|
On July 13 2012 17:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 16:53 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way.  Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base. marauder is a stimmable dragoon now? It does almost no dmg to zealots and pitiful against zerglings. These terrible comparison are worthless anyway when not integrating with game dynamics and talking about marines stimming past locusts to nat is about as credible as running stalkers past bunkers or hellions past queens. Sure, it can work sometimes, but also incredibly risky and you can lose alot of units. As of current build, those locusts are no joke either. They evaporate terran or protoss forces if you don't deal with them properly Dragoons are terrible against Zealots and Zerglings. It is literally, a stimmable dragoon, but with more than half a brain. Dude, you lose INFINITE BIO UNITS against TWO lurkers above a ramp. INFINITE. A 200/200 bio army cannot beat TWO lurkers above a ramp. Even with stim! I cannot for the life of me see the same thing happening with even 5 Swarm hosts above a ramp. Now go watch those vods. :D
dragoons are not terrible against zealots or zerglings. They are vulnerable against them, but not terrible. Terrible would be something like requiring 17 shots for 1 marauders to kill a single, 100 mineral worth, zealot. And 17 shots is a long time in world of sc2 given warp-ins, charges, colossus and tons of gamebreaking aoe dmg
again, why are you comparing two units directly? anyway 1 lurkers on open ground can be killed by just 2 marines with incredible micro. Let see you do that on swarm hosts. Silly comparison isn't it?
What should matter is potential dynamics swarm host or lurkers can bring into the game, how it weaves with rest of the army, and how two armies interact with each other given swarm host's presence. Comparing pure raw power or over very selected scenarios (that we can't really test till beta comes out) doesn't seem that useful to me
|
Any idea of how long the range of SH will be? As in how close must a target be before it spawns the minis? (not how long they walk)
|
Swarm Host + Hydra is ganna be a beast combo. Go in with the locusts and attack, when the locusts die back up.
On another note, yes lurkers are awesome! They can do so much cool, effective, and entertaining stuff. But its not going to be in SC2. Adding lurkers in would upset the balance the game because they are that good.
|
On July 13 2012 17:19 exog wrote:
Any idea of how long the range of SH will be? As in how close must a target be before it spawns the minis? (not how long they walk)
They are working like a production building you need to lay down a rally point. Locusts going there attacking anything in the path.
|
On July 13 2012 17:19 exog wrote:
Any idea of how long the range of SH will be? As in how close must a target be before it spawns the minis? (not how long they walk)
They don't require a target, they just automatically spawn them, I believe.
|
On July 13 2012 16:51 Cirn9 wrote:
25 seconds between locusts spawns seems like an eternity
Who forces you to burrow all the swarm host at the same time? Burrow half and the rest 10 seconds later.
|
dragoons are not terrible against zealots or zerglings.
That one was funny.
|
i feel that the SH will be a unit just for one match, zvz probably. the big problem for mee is that to make it decent for midgame will need missile upgrade and that is a really uncommon right know.
|
On July 13 2012 17:31 rivurivurivurivu wrote:
i feel that the SH will be a unit just for one match, zvz probably. the big problem for mee is that to make it decent for midgame will need missile upgrade and that is a really uncommon right know.
The swarm host was made to counter siege tanks lines... so yeah they are pretty good ZvT. And like I said earlier hydras + swarm host will be pretty good ZvP and even in any matchup.
And missile upgrade is common. The majority of people in ZvZ go roach/hydra or roach/infestor rather than ling/festor/ultra.
|
On July 13 2012 17:12 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 17:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:53 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way. Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base. marauder is a stimmable dragoon now? It does almost no dmg to zealots and pitiful against zerglings. These terrible comparison are worthless anyway when not integrating with game dynamics and talking about marines stimming past locusts to nat is about as credible as running stalkers past bunkers or hellions past queens. Sure, it can work sometimes, but also incredibly risky and you can lose alot of units. As of current build, those locusts are no joke either. They evaporate terran or protoss forces if you don't deal with them properly Dragoons are terrible against Zealots and Zerglings. It is literally, a stimmable dragoon, but with more than half a brain. Dude, you lose INFINITE BIO UNITS against TWO lurkers above a ramp. INFINITE. A 200/200 bio army cannot beat TWO lurkers above a ramp. Even with stim! I cannot for the life of me see the same thing happening with even 5 Swarm hosts above a ramp. Now go watch those vods. :D dragoons are not terrible against zealots or zerglings. They are vulnerable against them, but not terrible. Terrible would be something like requiring 17 shots for 1 marauders to kill a single, 100 mineral worth, zealot. And 17 shots is a long time in world of sc2 given warp-ins, charges, colossus and tons of gamebreaking aoe dmg again, why are you comparing two units directly? anyway 1 lurkers on open ground can be killed by just 2 marines with incredible micro. Let see you do that on swarm hosts. Silly comparison isn't it? What should matter is potential dynamics swarm host or lurkers can bring into the game, how it weaves with rest of the army, and how two armies interact with each other given swarm host's presence. Comparing pure raw power or over very selected scenarios (that we can't really test till beta comes out) doesn't seem that useful to me
Dude, marauders literally do the same damage (zealots and lings) and have almost the exact same health and cost. Only dragoons don't have concussive shells and stim.
1. 2 marines killing 1 lurker is fucking awesome.
2. The example of 2 marines killing 1 lurker almost never happens, however 2 lurkers above a ramp happen ALMOST EVERY GAME.
3. I didn't see anything in the beta that swarm hosts did better than lurkers, go watch the beta vod then watch ALL of the vods in "God of the Battlefield".
4. The lurker already has really good utility. It helps zerg occupy a much needed proxy 3rd base relatively quickly and easily. Its a much better dynamic, because now zerg can choose to get a close or distance third. With the destructible rocks at the 3rd, Zerg can get two lurkers and build a 3rd far away instead, and then build a 4th near the proxy 3rd. Now you have much more interesting base layouts. With the SwarmHost you are still required to build your 3rd close to home because its front load damage is 10x worse than the lurker.
5. 4 alone is good enough for me.
|
|
|
On July 13 2012 17:12 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 17:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:53 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way. Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base. marauder is a stimmable dragoon now? It does almost no dmg to zealots and pitiful against zerglings. These terrible comparison are worthless anyway when not integrating with game dynamics and talking about marines stimming past locusts to nat is about as credible as running stalkers past bunkers or hellions past queens. Sure, it can work sometimes, but also incredibly risky and you can lose alot of units. As of current build, those locusts are no joke either. They evaporate terran or protoss forces if you don't deal with them properly Dragoons are terrible against Zealots and Zerglings. It is literally, a stimmable dragoon, but with more than half a brain. Dude, you lose INFINITE BIO UNITS against TWO lurkers above a ramp. INFINITE. A 200/200 bio army cannot beat TWO lurkers above a ramp. Even with stim! I cannot for the life of me see the same thing happening with even 5 Swarm hosts above a ramp. Now go watch those vods. :D dragoons are not terrible against zealots or zerglings. They are vulnerable against them, but not terrible. Terrible would be something like requiring 17 shots for 1 marauders to kill a single, 100 mineral worth, zealot. And 17 shots is a long time in world of sc2 given warp-ins, charges, colossus and tons of gamebreaking aoe dmg again, why are you comparing two units directly? anyway 1 lurkers on open ground can be killed by just 2 marines with incredible micro. Let see you do that on swarm hosts. Silly comparison isn't it? What should matter is potential dynamics swarm host or lurkers can bring into the game, how it weaves with rest of the army, and how two armies interact with each other given swarm host's presence. Comparing pure raw power or over very selected scenarios (that we can't really test till beta comes out) doesn't seem that useful to me
Dragoons do 20 explosive damage, which means only 10 damage to small units.
Zealots are small and have 100hp 60shield. With regen it takes 14 shots to kill. Its pretty similar I think.
|
On July 12 2012 04:03 Greggle wrote:
People really think the Lurker model looks better? I always thought it looked lazy and shitty. It just looks like a blob of zergy shit. It looked much better in BW.
I agree, lurker in BW looked really badass, but in SC2 it's mediocre.
Didn't know locusts could attack air :O that makes it a bit different from the lurker too.
|
On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor).
Then, have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion.
Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they the win rates differ from swarm host and lurkers. On the other hand, have the original 4 master players play 100 games each of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games of each match up with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. It will take months but I think that's how we should end the debate.
If there are any other suggestions to this lurkers v. swarm host experiment, please reply to this post.
You certainly know how to make a valid statistic ... NOT.
On July 13 2012 16:47 FrosTByTe11 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way. Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base. There's no problem in doing that analysis, but I think it would be more beneficial to complete a whole entire game so that the effect of adding swarm host or lurkers can be weighed out entirely rather than looking at the effect of a few isolated situations that only involves micro. By playing an entire game we can see how the positions, timings, economy, macro, micro, and play style can be affected with the addition of either lurkers or swarm host. LOL...this was the most serious answer to a joke. I totally misread the response.
This isnt a topic for jokes ...
On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way. Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base.
You could also try attacking a bunch of Banelings with a group of Marines without Stim. The Swarm Host is NOT a good unit against bio and probably never intended as such. The main use for it is to assault siege lines and walloffs "for free" and from VERY far away.
On July 13 2012 18:22 Slithe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 17:12 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 17:00 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:53 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:22 sluggaslamoo wrote:On July 13 2012 16:18 iky43210 wrote:On July 13 2012 16:11 Velr wrote:On July 13 2012 16:04 iky43210 wrote:
I liked the idea behind swarm host mechanics and the potential dynamics it may bring. Lurkers and swarm hosts don't even have the same role.
Just wait for the beta to come out before people make their judgement/impression. I have a good feeling alot of "disappointment" will be gone upon releases Yeah, like with the Colossus, Roach and Marauder.. right? RIGHT? what is your point? not only have I never made any claims regarding those units, swarm hosts are much more intriguing and are loaded with potentials that players can explore Also there is nothing wrong with marauders. There is a lot wrong with the idea of a stimmable dragoon, siege unit that doesn't need to siege, and a T1 high supply low dps Zerg unit designed to tank damage. On July 13 2012 16:19 FrosTByTe11 wrote:
You know guys, this debate can be settled. I propose an experiment, in one experiment, one can use the map editor to make a mod similar to hots, but have one be a lurker mod (which is already in the map editor) and the other with swarm host (im pretty sure someone can figure out how to remake it in the map editor). Have 4 master's player with one of each race and one more Zerg and let the Zerg familiarize with the lurker and swarm host mechanic first. Then have them play a couple games and post a video of each match up playing with lurkers and each match up with swarm host so you have a better opinion. Then after that, release both of these mods and record the win rates of each matchup TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ and see how much they differ with lurkers or swarm host. On the other hand, have the original players then play 100 games of TvZ, PvZ, and ZvZ with lurkers and 100 games with swarm host and record precisely what the strategies are, their timings, the maps, length of game, win rates, and etc. to see precisely how much each impacts others and release all of that information for all of us to decide. I think that's how we should end the debate. I was actually thinking of showing some strategies in a much more facetious way. Like putting 2 swarm hosts above a ramp and watching marines just stim past the locusts and snipe the swarm hosts. Or doing a runby by burrowing the swarm hosts at the nat, and watching the marines just stim past the locusts and easily defend the base. marauder is a stimmable dragoon now? It does almost no dmg to zealots and pitiful against zerglings. These terrible comparison are worthless anyway when not integrating with game dynamics and talking about marines stimming past locusts to nat is about as credible as running stalkers past bunkers or hellions past queens. Sure, it can work sometimes, but also incredibly risky and you can lose alot of units. As of current build, those locusts are no joke either. They evaporate terran or protoss forces if you don't deal with them properly Dragoons are terrible against Zealots and Zerglings. It is literally, a stimmable dragoon, but with more than half a brain. Dude, you lose INFINITE BIO UNITS against TWO lurkers above a ramp. INFINITE. A 200/200 bio army cannot beat TWO lurkers above a ramp. Even with stim! I cannot for the life of me see the same thing happening with even 5 Swarm hosts above a ramp. Now go watch those vods. :D dragoons are not terrible against zealots or zerglings. They are vulnerable against them, but not terrible. Terrible would be something like requiring 17 shots for 1 marauders to kill a single, 100 mineral worth, zealot. And 17 shots is a long time in world of sc2 given warp-ins, charges, colossus and tons of gamebreaking aoe dmg again, why are you comparing two units directly? anyway 1 lurkers on open ground can be killed by just 2 marines with incredible micro. Let see you do that on swarm hosts. Silly comparison isn't it? What should matter is potential dynamics swarm host or lurkers can bring into the game, how it weaves with rest of the army, and how two armies interact with each other given swarm host's presence. Comparing pure raw power or over very selected scenarios (that we can't really test till beta comes out) doesn't seem that useful to me Dragoons do 20 explosive damage, which means only 10 damage to small units. Zealots are small and have 100hp 60shield. With regen it takes 14 shots to kill. Its pretty similar I think.
"New and improved" Zealots only have 100hp50shield, so a Dragoon would kill that one a little bit easier.
----
One suggestion for Blizzard to fix these "free unit generators":
- give the "mother unit" (Swarm Host and Broodlord) energy (no starting energy upgrade!)
- balance the quality of the Broodling to make them less survivable
- let each "autocast"-shot of the Broodlord cost some energy (~5 energy should be enough for the Broodlord)
- switch the Swarm Host to be able to "swarm" (spawn 4 of his units for 50 energy with a duration of 10 seconds BUT requiring a target in sight before they start moving)
|
On July 13 2012 18:52 Rabiator wrote:
One suggestion for Blizzard to fix these "free unit generators":
- give the "mother unit" (Swarm Host and Broodlord) energy (no starting energy upgrade!)
- balance the quality of the Broodling to make them less survivable
- let each "autocast"-shot of the Broodlord cost some energy (~5 energy should be enough for the Broodlord)
- switch the Swarm Host to be able to "swarm" (spawn 4 of his units for 50 energy with a duration of 10 seconds BUT requiring a target in sight before they start moving)
You should consider if you make Broodlings weaker they could get vaporized in an instant leaving the broodlords defensless. Sometimes you need the broodlings as a wall of units.
Also if they have energy they would be useless against ghost emp´s and feedback one could say. Sure there would be more micro.
The last point : What if i just pull one marine again and again till all energy is gone from the Hosts.
Not saying i don´t like your thoughts but they would need to be tested a shit ton =)
|
On July 13 2012 19:06 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 18:52 Rabiator wrote:
One suggestion for Blizzard to fix these "free unit generators":
- give the "mother unit" (Swarm Host and Broodlord) energy (no starting energy upgrade!)
- balance the quality of the Broodling to make them less survivable
- let each "autocast"-shot of the Broodlord cost some energy (~5 energy should be enough for the Broodlord)
- switch the Swarm Host to be able to "swarm" (spawn 4 of his units for 50 energy with a duration of 10 seconds BUT requiring a target in sight before they start moving) You should consider if you make Broodlings weaker they could get vaporized in an instant leaving the broodlords defensless. Sometimes you need the broodlings as a wall of units. Also if they have energy they would be useless against ghost emp´s and feedback one could say. Sure there would be more micro. The last point : What if i just pull one marine again and again till all energy is gone from the Hosts. Not saying i don´t like your thoughts but they would need to be tested a shit ton =)
Broodlords are "defenseless" if they arent supported by Infestors/Corruptors/... right now already. The Broodlings on the other hand are an unfair unit because they are FREE and block movement for any unit trying to get close to the Broodlords. In this regard they are worse than Forcefield or Fungal Growth. If I understand it correctly the Broodling also deals AoE damage when it lands and that is really [too?] powerful against Terran bio.
I dont think you understood my concept for the Swarm Host. Broodlord gets autocast, but Swarm Host doesnt. It is supposed to spawn a SWARM for a significant amount of energy instead of just one every 25 seconds with super long duration and no energy involved. Having an ability where you can spawn such a small swarm gives the Zerg player control over the ability and the energy part makes them vulnerable to EMP and Feedback. Thus a potentially focused burst power is balanced by an achilles heel.
|
lol this is just stupid. how can u judge a unit that hasnt been released yet?
|
On July 13 2012 19:43 IIIOmegaIII wrote:
lol this is just stupid. how can u judge a unit that hasnt been released yet?
It has been released. It has been shown to us in full, and can be tested in the HOTS emulator. Blizzard gave us the concept, and what we are saying here is that the concept of the SH is terrible. I would rather the lurker, OR something even better.
SH just sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
