EPTI just thought it would be cool to show this vid.
Lurker vs Swarm Host - Page 36
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
FrosTByTe11
United States21 Posts
I just thought it would be cool to show this vid. | ||
|
TheTurk
United States732 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:33 FrosTByTe11 wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wJjw56OdGs I just thought it would be cool to show this vid. yeah, that is how you kill deathballs. Build a deathball of lurkers hahahaha :D | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 14 2012 04:01 Nachtwind wrote: I could give you the answere and not only "theoretical". The stump as you said is a counterweight. It has aerodynamic reasons. If you look at the front part you know why. Also it isn´t that unnatural that dragonflys have a great "stump". You could look for yourself. If you look at the unit itself i would and here comes the theroy it´s an artifact of the evolve or a mutation for its abilitys.The original purpose though was reproduction =) But with the dragon/dinosaur thingy. Actually nearly every breed ( counter ex.: banelings, lurkers are mutations of creatures that are allready assimilated or defiler that are a summary of all zergs dns) of the zerg swarm was a form of an arthropodal or molluscas (slugs, catterpillars, mantis, bees and such on). There are units such like Scourge or Mutalisk where it´s not very clear (but the name "mantis-screamer" as the origin for the mutalisk resemble an insect). And hydras f.ex was created from catterpillars. The original "zergs" where considered as worms that assimilate dns of others species, change it and add the dns to its own. Just fyi. sry for offtopic np at all this is very interesting. It's a little sad seeing my child hood ideas/notions being shattered though... | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:03 Qwyn wrote: On July 14 2012 00:23 wcr.4fun wrote: The lurker model didn't get any work, of course it looks ugly. Check out some concept art of it, they could make an equally as cool model. Besides not only is the swarm host a horror for people with trypophobia, it's basically parasect with teeth. Uhm, that definitely looks like a roach. That's terrible art lol. We are entering the realm of the subjective here as well. For all those people saying to let the discussion die....the only way to get things noticed is to keep talking about them. And ffs stop saying wait until beta. I want the lurker instead of the swarm host for HOTS... I'm sorry but how can the lurker look like the roach? Roach comes after lurker.. And I thought it was a really cool depiction of the lurker. *sorry double post | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:03 Qwyn wrote: On July 14 2012 00:23 wcr.4fun wrote: The lurker model didn't get any work, of course it looks ugly. Check out some concept art of it, they could make an equally as cool model. Besides not only is the swarm host a horror for people with trypophobia, it's basically parasect with teeth. Uhm, that definitely looks like a roach. That's terrible art lol. We are entering the realm of the subjective here as well. For all those people saying to let the discussion die....the only way to get things noticed is to keep talking about them. And ffs stop saying wait until beta. I want the lurker instead of the swarm host for HOTS... If they were going to implement the Lurker, they would have already. They have a model for it already and they know it's a popular unit. They obviously have their reasons for not, simply saying you want it doesn't mean a damn thing if there's solid balance or gameplay reasons on Blizzard's end that contradict it. I would love for them to add back in Spider Mines and Reavers too but they aren't budging there either. Every race has their favorites from SC1 that are not available in SC2's multiplayer. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:40 Big J wrote: yeah, that is how you kill deathballs. Build a deathball of lurkers hahahaha :D I know right? | ||
|
fairymonger
United States81 Posts
| ||
|
Weson
Iceland1032 Posts
| ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:52 fairymonger wrote: They should take some of the best things from broodwar and incorporate them into sc2. In this case the lurker is by far the funnest unit of the two. So why would blizz want to introduce a lesser fun unit in the game? because of something along the line of introducing something new taking priority over what is fun, especially if it already exists in bw. (just stating what i feel dustin's goal is towards sc2) i personally vote vulture for funnest unit of all time | ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:04 jinorazi wrote: because of something along the line of introducing something new taking priority over what is fun, especially if it already exists in bw. (just stating what i feel dustin's goal is towards sc2) i personally vote vulture for funnest unit of all time I'll agree mostly because of their sound bites. | ||
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:57 Weson wrote: Voted Swarm Host because i've never played Desert Strike and therefore never tried the Lurker. Watching 6 lurkers kill a nexus, with 60 vikings floating over the other nexus is some of the best fun I've had in SC2 | ||
|
Primal666
Slovenia418 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:06 archonOOid wrote: the swarm host lets you micro both the swarm host itself and its minions = therefore more skill based unit than a lurker this post gave me cancer. it's like saying brood lords are more skill based than marines because you can micro broodling and the unit itself. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:17 Primal666 wrote: this post gave me cancer. it's like saying brood lords are more skill based than marines because you can micro broodling and the unit itself. out of all the terrifying infective diseases, you chose cancer  and no, he didn't say more skillbased than marines. He said more skillbased than lurkers. | ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:17 Primal666 wrote: this post gave me cancer. it's like saying brood lords are more skill based than marines because you can micro broodling and the unit itself. this post gave me syphilis. it's like saying 1>2 and that locusts are just as bad as broodlings are to micro when in fact it would be like comparing a marine to a zergling. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:17 Primal666 wrote: this post gave me cancer. it's like saying brood lords are more skill based than marines because you can micro broodling and the unit itself. What is there to micro about a swarm host? And who is going to do it? People already talked about putting the swarm host miles away from harm, sieging a base. (Un)burrowing a swarm host is not micro. You put it's rally point and you're finished. Lurkers positioning on the other hand is a lot more important, if I put my lurkers in the wrong positioning they'll deal practically no damage. You want your lurkers to be spread out just enough so that they hit the biggest amount of units possible without overlapping too much. You also have to atleast know the range of the unit, doesn't matter where you position a swarm host. And nobody is going to micro locusts because they're way too slow and their attack animation is way too slow based on the video I saw. Marines can be micro'd so wel because their attack animation is really short and they're insanely fast with stim. Plus I imagine the range of a marine to be a lot bigger than the range of a locust. I guess I'm biased, but you can't honestly say that it would require MORE skill than the lurker. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 14 2012 08:51 wcr.4fun wrote: What is there to micro about a swarm host? And who is going to do it? People already talked about putting the swarm host miles away from harm, sieging a base. (Un)burrowing a swarm host is not micro. You put it's rally point and you're finished. Lurkers positioning on the other hand is a lot more important, if I put my lurkers in the wrong positioning they'll deal practically no damage. You want your lurkers to be spread out just enough so that they hit the biggest amount of units possible without overlapping too much. You also have to atleast know the range of the unit, doesn't matter where you position a swarm host. And nobody is going to micro locusts because they're way too slow and their attack animation is way too slow based on the video I saw. Marines can be micro'd so wel because their attack animation is really short and they're insanely fast with stim. Plus I imagine the range of a marine to be a lot bigger than the range of a locust. I guess I'm biased, but you can't honestly say that it would require MORE skill than the lurker. No you're not putting its rallypoint and you are finished. You put its rallypoint, wait for the spawn and immediatly reposition it. You will probably want to spread them out, like you want to spread out drops, try to pull his army into multiple directions and when you have done so, try to overrun a position with the waiting army. You will have to reposition your army behind your locusts, anytime you use swarmhosts, and when you are in a fight and the swarmhosts rally from behind, then you will have to move your army in ways to let the locusts pass. And you are probably not going to control the locusts more than you do with roaches, but everything around them is forced to let them pass, if you want to use them optimally. And yes, you wont kite locusts. But micro means way more than kite. Not to mention that there might be microtricks, things like preventing a spawn by unburrowing fast enough. Things like running away, burrowing spawning locusts to mess with the opponents AI and running againt. Things that are just unexplored right now... | ||
Falling
Canada11489 Posts
On July 14 2012 07:40 Big J wrote: yeah, that is how you kill deathballs. Build a deathball of lurkers hahahaha :D Well what stopped that from happening were powerful storms and siege tank splash damage. Or else just keep their numbers down with irradiate. On a side note, why did the lurkers get so top heavy/ fat compared to the old artwork? They used to be very low to the ground ![[image loading]](http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071101072521/starcraft/images/0/07/SC1_Lurker.gif) Fun vids of Lurkers both SC2 and BW + Show Spoiler + Lurker trap Micro potential Why Deathball Lurkers don't work with other powerful AoE Just look at all those lurkers die | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: Well what stopped that from happening were powerful storms and siege tank splash damage. Or else just keep their numbers down with irradiate. On a side note, why did the lurkers get so top heavy/ fat compared to the old artwork? They used to be very low to the ground http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071101072521/starcraft/images/0/07/SC1_Lurker.gif Fun vids of Lurkers both SC2 and BW + Show Spoiler + Lurker trap http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8ySBRthwFY&feature=related Micro potential http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig7VrZCB0R4&feature=related Why Deathball Lurkers don't work with other powerful AoE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmrkzuy_SSU&feature=relmfu#t=13m20s Just look at all those lurkers die I was just trolling around. Lurkers are awesome and I don't think they would be used like this, but this video does not really help their case. I mean 20+ lurkers killing some afk marines, is basically as impressive as when blizzard first presented a bunch of battlehellions fighting 10zealots in a choke while being backed up by siege tanks and still all of them got smashed, while any somewhat decent player could have just microed normal hellions and killed those zealots with hardly any losses. | ||
| ||
