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.
Uhm...the whole point of this debate is to show that the reasons Blizzard chose not to implement the lurker are not that strong, and that the concept of the lurker works better than the SH. Though the possibility of Blizzard changing their minds is very small at least this helps somewhat.
Btw, it's not just me contradicting their choice. Look at the goddamn poll. And before you say that the SH isn't out yet, its concept has been revealed in full and can be tested. I doubt Blizzard is going to change it much before beta if they decide to stick with that POS. I would rather they revert to the concept of a lurker b/c it is superior in every aspect.
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.
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.
you say that burrowing and unburrowing does not count as micro...
then you go on to explain all the lurker micro you can do by burrowing it... o_o
also: guys, that poll doesn't mean anything. anyone at all can vote on the poll. and it compares two wildly different units from two wildly different games, one of which has not even been released, and asks us to pretend that they are both in the same game and then asks our opinion... and oh yeah, one of those units is the fan favorite from the game that has been out for years... that's not exactly a fair poll...
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.
Uhm...the whole point of this debate is to show that the reasons Blizzard chose not to implement the lurker are not that strong, and that the concept of the lurker works better than the SH. Though the possibility of Blizzard changing their minds is very small at least this helps somewhat.
Btw, it's not just me contradicting their choice. Look at the goddamn poll. And before you say that the SH isn't out yet, its concept has been revealed in full and can be tested. I doubt Blizzard is going to change it much before beta if they decide to stick with that POS. I would rather they revert to the concept of a lurker b/c it is superior in every aspect.
Okay again
Many people making the mistake (like the thread itself) that they try to compare swarm hosts mechanics with lurkers mechanics.
They don´t have the same roll. If you would compare banelings with lurkers well i would give you a shot. The second mistake that comes with this comparison is - that people look only yet for the unit alone. One have used lurkers alone very well. Swarm hosts are not that kind of unit. They will always have backup in form of Viper, Infestor and dmg dealing units as you could see in the Battlereport ZvP. But also one shouldn´t read too much into battlereports because you will not see the conjunction with other units like roaches, banelings, infestors, mutalisk and broodlords or even ling sorounds while the locust are the real dmg dealer in that combination.
The design itself is really interesting when you look at the current meta in zergs mid and late game in form from ling/bling/muta(old) roach/bling infestor/brood ling/ultra/infestor roach/infestor etc. Doesn´t matter though if one likes it or not. Also one note they can attack air. What that means isn´t fully clear to anyone here.
So please when you try to look at the swarm host don´t just view the unit itself, see the conjunctions.
On July 14 2012 02:57 wcr.4fun wrote: Well sure you can give any reason why everything is possible 'theoretically'. I won't bother with it anymore. But zerg were daemonic space dinosaurs more than they were insects, at least in my eyes.
I just feel they'd be a lot cooler if they'd return to the more dinosaur/dragon like theme than the insects. After all a zergling, hydralisk and mutalisk, I consider them to be the coolest models do not really resemble insects imo.
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...
that made me quite sad bro =( perhaps ultralisks was made of dinosaurs like creatures =)
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
How on earth did the poll on how the units look favour the lurker? The swarmlord is a million times more badass than the WoL model of the lurker. That's BW bias for you :p
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.
Uhm...the whole point of this debate is to show that the reasons Blizzard chose not to implement the lurker are not that strong, and that the concept of the lurker works better than the SH. Though the possibility of Blizzard changing their minds is very small at least this helps somewhat.
Btw, it's not just me contradicting their choice. Look at the goddamn poll. And before you say that the SH isn't out yet, its concept has been revealed in full and can be tested. I doubt Blizzard is going to change it much before beta if they decide to stick with that POS. I would rather they revert to the concept of a lurker b/c it is superior in every aspect.
Okay again
Many people making the mistake (like the thread itself) that they try to compare swarm hosts mechanics with lurkers mechanics.
They don´t have the same roll. If you would compare banelings with lurkers well i would give you a shot. The second mistake that comes with this comparison is - that people look only yet for the unit alone. One have used lurkers alone very well. Swarm hosts are not that kind of unit. They will always have backup in form of Viper, Infestor and dmg dealing units as you could see in the Battlereport ZvP. But also one shouldn´t read too much into battlereports because you will not see the conjunction with other units like roaches, banelings, infestors, mutalisk and broodlords or even ling sorounds while the locust are the real dmg dealer in that combination.
The design itself is really interesting when you look at the current meta in zergs mid and late game in form from ling/bling/muta(old) roach/bling infestor/brood ling/ultra/infestor roach/infestor etc. Doesn´t matter though if one likes it or not. Also one note they can attack air. What that means isn´t fully clear to anyone here.
So please when you try to look at the swarm host don´t just view the unit itself, see the conjunctions.
On July 14 2012 02:57 wcr.4fun wrote: Well sure you can give any reason why everything is possible 'theoretically'. I won't bother with it anymore. But zerg were daemonic space dinosaurs more than they were insects, at least in my eyes.
I just feel they'd be a lot cooler if they'd return to the more dinosaur/dragon like theme than the insects. After all a zergling, hydralisk and mutalisk, I consider them to be the coolest models do not really resemble insects imo.
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...
that made me quite sad bro =( perhaps ultralisks was made of dinosaurs like creatures =)
It's not a mistake. Don't call the arguments here a mistake, b/c they aren't. The swarm host is a knockoff of the lurker. I am saying that conceptually, the SH is boring. Now obviously you'll say that the SH is designed to siege areas. That is not what zerg needs. Zerg needs space control, which we lack. Besides the siege tank and the spine crawler, all the races lack space control. And Blizzard has repeatedly nerfed the siege tank.
And besides the fact that they both deal splash damage, the lurker and baneling ARE NOT similar at all. The baneling is designed to trade armies. It does not control space. baneling mines cannot control space. And it is already countered by high amounts of firepower.
The reason why DB turned to the swarm host is b/c Blizzard currently holds this mentality that somehow splash damage is bad. That is why they created an alternative to the lurker that functions like a land broodlord. Look at all the units presented in the HOTS expansion and you will see that they are inferior knockoffs of BW units presented for the sole purpose of being "original."
The SH cannot siege an area effectively. And it most definitely cannot control space, which is what most players are looking for in the first place.
You say that I should not view the unit itself - but its interactions? We are looking at the lurker vs. the swarm host on a conceptual level. Lurker is superior in entertainment and usability.
All those "interactions" that the swarm host might have with other units can also be had with the lurker, and the lurker has much more utility as a whole.
Forgive my rash language but I'm feeling extremely jaded.
I do not argue this out of nostalgia. I argue this b/c I think this is what EVERY race needs, and what SCII lacks.
On July 14 2012 10:06 kuroshiro wrote: How on earth did the poll on how the units look favour the lurker? The swarmlord is a million times more badass than the WoL model of the lurker. That's BW bias for you :p
Gotta disagree there. The lurker definitely needs to be bonier and lower to the the ground, but its model definitely looks sharper than the SH.
The SH just looks like a giant, fat, slow moving sloth. In videos it looks like it too, lol.
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
Well don't Zerg still need a unit to delay pushes? I mean they make zillions of spine crawlers or else fade away from the main army until they can remax. But hydras being tier 2 makes lurker tech rather awkward. And of course there's probably too many tanky units for lurkers to work. (Marauders, roaches, etc.)
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
That's the thing. I would rather rearrange the tech tree than have to deal with the mess zerg has now.
Lurker could either evolve from hydra or roach. I would rather hydra, which means there is an upgrade at lair tech to make lurkers, sort of a tier 2.5. This way you can keep lurkers in the game.
Now the more attractive solution is just to remove roaches entirely lol.
Baneling and lurker can coexist IMO. They are both so heavy in gas cost that they end up being balanced. They both have different roles.
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
You're saying a unit that costs money for 1 attack is better splash than a unit that doesn't disappear after it murders marines.
I like the lurker for esports, banelings are cute sure but you can really like the baneling that just killed a bunk of marines. You like the IDEA of the baneling to remember the baneling after its passing. When that lurker kills 20 marines you link WOOW I can't believe that lurker still isn't dead yet.
It is interesting, it makes you want to watch. Lurker still has a place in the game design, that is why they are marking the swarm host.
Swarm host, isn't a bad idea but it is a bad and boring design. Slow units like that aren't exciting. The BL is exciting because the unit itself is slow so it is ominous but when it attacks shit hits the fan and broodlings rain down instantly. Locusts on the other hand spawn.... And tank damage.... and maybe hit once.... But it relies on the fact that people care about damage and AI. Nobody cares about AI, personally it is the reason I find LoL boring because of all the AI factors in there. If you watch the battlereports you see the locusts moving in slowly sometimes not doing any damage and sometimes just being stupidly powerful. In both moments of stupidity and awesomeness they were really boring because it is just slow...
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
That's the thing. I would rather rearrange the tech tree than have to deal with the mess zerg has now.
Lurker could either evolve from hydra or roach. I would rather hydra, which means there is an upgrade at lair tech to make lurkers, sort of a tier 2.5. This way you can keep lurkers in the game.
Now the more attractive solution is just to remove roaches entirely lol.
Baneling and lurker can coexist IMO. They are both so heavy in gas cost that they end up being balanced. They both have different roles.
Bannelings + Lurkers feels too much like a Terran combosition of the Spider Mines + Siege Tanks
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
You're saying a unit that costs money for 1 attack is better splash than a unit that doesn't disappear after it murders marines.
I like the lurker for esports, banelings are cute sure but you can really like the baneling that just killed a bunk of marines. You like the IDEA of the baneling to remember the baneling after its passing. When that lurker kills 20 marines you link WOOW I can't believe that lurker still isn't dead yet.
It is interesting, it makes you want to watch. Lurker still has a place in the game design, that is why they are marking the swarm host.
Swarm host, isn't a bad idea but it is a bad and boring design. Slow units like that aren't exciting. The BL is exciting because the unit itself is slow so it is ominous but when it attacks shit hits the fan and broodlings rain down instantly. Locusts on the other hand spawn.... And tank damage.... and maybe hit once.... But it relies on the fact that people care about damage and AI. Nobody cares about AI, personally it is the reason I find LoL boring because of all the AI factors in there. If you watch the battlereports you see the locusts moving in slowly sometimes not doing any damage and sometimes just being stupidly powerful. In both moments of stupidity and awesomeness they were really boring because it is just slow...
90% of the community cries for slower battles and suddenly the problem is that a new unit leads to such a thing?
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
You're saying a unit that costs money for 1 attack is better splash than a unit that doesn't disappear after it murders marines.
I like the lurker for esports, banelings are cute sure but you can really like the baneling that just killed a bunk of marines. You like the IDEA of the baneling to remember the baneling after its passing. When that lurker kills 20 marines you link WOOW I can't believe that lurker still isn't dead yet.
It is interesting, it makes you want to watch. Lurker still has a place in the game design, that is why they are marking the swarm host.
Swarm host, isn't a bad idea but it is a bad and boring design. Slow units like that aren't exciting. The BL is exciting because the unit itself is slow so it is ominous but when it attacks shit hits the fan and broodlings rain down instantly. Locusts on the other hand spawn.... And tank damage.... and maybe hit once.... But it relies on the fact that people care about damage and AI. Nobody cares about AI, personally it is the reason I find LoL boring because of all the AI factors in there. If you watch the battlereports you see the locusts moving in slowly sometimes not doing any damage and sometimes just being stupidly powerful. In both moments of stupidity and awesomeness they were really boring because it is just slow...
90% of the community cries for slower battles and suddenly the problem is that a new unit leads to such a thing?
The Speed of the Battle is entirely because of SC2's engine. No units added or being changed is EVER going to change that.
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.
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.
you say that burrowing and unburrowing does not count as micro...
then you go on to explain all the lurker micro you can do by burrowing it... o_o
I said positioning is a lot more important and you actually need to know stuff about the unit like it's range. Instead of just burrowing and setting the rally point. You also have to spread out your lurkers a lot better, who's going to care if your swarm hosts are clumped up? If your lurkers clump up, they'll do way too little damage, aren't in range of anything and get owned by one storm. Since swarm host has hundred times lurker's range and people were already talking about using it from incredibly far distances. Try again.
On July 13 2012 14:24 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Watching that battle report, the swarm hosts don't create a fast paced kind of a battle, butt he battle did look much more drawn out and even though it was pretty slow paced, the constant waves of locusts make the battle feel longer and add a kind of tense atmosphere.
On July 13 2012 00:48 iky43210 wrote: [quote] swarm host is not useless. go play with them in the custom map and you can tell me if they're useless or not
I played the custom map 9 months ago when it was made - its a bit outdated now you know. Swarm hosts don't perform the same way they do in the latest build that was displayed at MLG.
This is the most recent build of hots - Go to 10 minutes 51 seconds, watch all of the damage it does to the terran expansion after it kills 1 battle hellion - you can also see at 11 minutes 13 seconds another powerful wave of locusts causing their massive damage to the terran expansion.
10 minutes 51 seconds , looks pretty useless - caster even says "its a good unit to absorb siege tank fire"
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.
How you came to this conclusion is beyond me.
The lurker serves in the surprise gank, detection forcing, splash damage, anti-infantry, turtling, map control, midgame siege, containment, and ramp defense roles.
The swarm host does... what, bait siege tank fire and slowly cause minimal damage when not detected?
Stop autocasting to surprise gank, forces detection like lurkers, has splash damage in the effect that it spawns more than one unit, forces terran to push slower, has map control in the same effect that you need to bring a real force to move through a portion of the map with them there, they contain int he same respect that you need certain units (detection, tanks) to move through them and ramp defense. I don't think marine hit squads are going to be running up ramps with two hosts without autocast for the locusts, but that'd just be a numbers game really.
It's completely ridiculous to assert that a few locusts constitute a surprise gank the way that high splash damage does.
Swarm hosts do not force detection, contain, or defend any area as you can simply gun down the locusts while moving past the swarm hosts (compare that to the difficulty of running past lurkers in chokes).
Spawning more than one unit is not splash damage; c'mon, are you even trying?
One lurker doesn't gank a group of marines, nor does one swarm host. You have to have multiples.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: I'll give you splash damage if you can't see how multiple units can attack multiple units, and you can't move past locusts in a choke easily. You do know units block eachother in this game, right?
You clearly don't know what "splash damage" means. Spawning two units is not a form of splash damage, and only someone who has no idea what they're talking about would call a swarm locust or a broodlord "splash" units. You can easily move past locusts in a choke, by simply gunning them down with enough marines and running past the swarm hosts.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: They fufill the same roles. You're just refusing to see how the swarm host fufills those roles because it doesn't fufill them identically to the lurker.
And fyi, I'm for the lurker being included instead of the swarm host, but saying the swarm host can't fill the roles of the lurker is kinda silly because it absolutely can.
They absolutely don't. Just because you think ridiculously stretched definitions count and because you ignore all of my relevant points doesn't change the fact that any reasonable person understand their roles are not the same.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: Edit; why does zerg need more splash? Fungal and banelings are handling groups of units just fine at the moment.
Zerg doesn't need more splash. What it actually needs are the lurker's other roles, many of which partly require splash to serve those roles effectively. Banes are a poorly designed unit that don't belong in the game to start with, and Zerg would be a far more balanced and fun race with lurkers instead of banes.
Well you're not able to use hold lurkers anymore right? So lurkers aren't as effective as shown in the video.
Also, burrowed banelings already serve the role of "ganking" marines. If swarm hosts were just like lurkers, they may overlap with burrowed banelings too much.
Hold lurkers could easily be allowed if they were included. As for your second point, if you take a look at my other posts you can see that I'd remove banelings and move hydras to Tier 1.5 in conjunction with adding lurkers.
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: It's not a mistake. Don't call the arguments here a mistake, b/c they aren't. The swarm host is a knockoff of the lurker.
Sorry i read the whole thread still i don´t see arguments what you are calling. The only thing swarm hosts and lurkers are sharing is burrow.
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: I am saying that conceptually, the SH is boring.
Subjective opinion. Don´t count for discussions.
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: Now obviously you'll say that the SH is designed to siege areas. That is not what zerg needs. Zerg needs space control, which we lack. Besides the siege tank and the spine crawler, all the races lack space control. And Blizzard has repeatedly nerfed the siege tank.
You lay words in my mouth. I played the custom map with friends quite often and yes the SH controll areas quite good. If (and here comes the if) you don´t let him guard space alone. (As i stressed the point of leaving the SH alone comes from the comparison to the lurker)
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: And besides the fact that they both deal splash damage, the lurker and baneling ARE NOT similar at all. The baneling is designed to trade armies. It does not control space. baneling mines cannot control space. And it is already countered by high amounts of firepower.
Sry, then you don´t understand the design of both units. They were both build to counter t1/2 massed units (aka marine sani-bw). They were/are be used for controll space. If you look at hold lurker / baneling mines it comes down to the very exact same result.
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: The reason why DB turned to the swarm host is b/c Blizzard currently holds this mentality that somehow splash damage is bad. That is why they created an alternative to the lurker that functions like a land broodlord. Look at all the units presented in the HOTS expansion and you will see that they are inferior knockoffs of BW units presented for the sole purpose of being "original."
Again zerg allready have alternatives. Also you are very wrong if you take Locust and Broddlings in the same drawer. Locusts are powerfuller, last longer, can attack air, slower, and microable (focus fire cause of 2 range)
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: You say that I should not view the unit itself - but its interactions? We are looking at the lurker vs. the swarm host on a conceptual level. Lurker is superior in entertainment and usability.
Yet again personal opinion. There isn´t even a beta and yet still one try to make a point with the "entertainment". That´s nonsense. I have had my momentums with lurkers I´ve had them with burrowed banelings. And also again the comparison SH <-> lurker
On July 14 2012 10:12 Qwyn wrote: All those "interactions" that the swarm host might have with other units can also be had with the lurker, and the lurker has much more utility as a whole.
It would be a multiplier because you have allready the same rolls in the game.
On July 14 2012 09:14 Falling wrote: 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
Yah I liked the wider more tarantula-like Lurker more.
As stated before the main problem with putting the Lurker in HOTS is it just doesnt fit any more. What would it be built for that another Zerg unit doesnt already cover? How do you get it out early enough in the game without rearranging the tech tree?
Well don't Zerg still need a unit to delay pushes? I mean they make zillions of spine crawlers or else fade away from the main army until they can remax. But hydras being tier 2 makes lurker tech rather awkward. And of course there's probably too many tanky units for lurkers to work. (Marauders, roaches, etc.)
Hydras should be moved to Tier 1 (after being appropriately scaled down, of course) in conjunction with the addition of lurkers.
As for too many tanky units, lurkers can still delay them effectively in conjunction with other units (particularly spines, fungal, and hydras). A small squad of 2 lurkers/4 hydras/3 spines + an infestor could hold a choke very effectively, and the viper's blinding cloud has great potential too.
Lurkers and Swarm Host are siege units in a way, both are stealthy except Lurkers can be use as mineral line harass unit which I believe Blizzard do not intent to and hence the Swarm Host in favor. If this is not strong of a reason of balance for you read the next line.
Let's add the scenario of Spine Crawlers and Creep spread near the siege line. You will now see even clearer why Lurkers is not being implemented in favor of Spine Crawlers ability to uproot and root anywhere on creep like Tank with its ability to siege up. And with the issue of balance, it's either Lurkers or Spine/Spore Crawlers not being able to uproot. The ability of Zerg static defenses being used for siege is often not adopted due to range even though it doesn't cost supply, and hence the Swarm Host that cost supply with units to support the siege line hence the ability of burrow for stealth and air attack for the Locust it spawn, it may even be self-sufficient without requiring any Spine Crawlers and Creep Spread and hence it's rather high cost factor being higher than that of Infestor.
Zerg is simply design as a race that to turtle and siege a good amount of economy cost is required, but it will be made possible in terms of economy and supply comparable to Terran if Lurkers and Spine Crawlers is available since Creep Tumor is essentially free and that you almost always have to make Queen for each Hatchery. Keep in mind the original intent of the unit that it is design for. How you use it for offense and defense is your skill and strategy, and in situations when the unit perform better than expected in a particular scenario, it will definitely be nerfed.
SC2 is different from Broodwar almost to an extent it is a different universe with the same context.
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.
Uhm...the whole point of this debate is to show that the reasons Blizzard chose not to implement the lurker are not that strong, and that the concept of the lurker works better than the SH. Though the possibility of Blizzard changing their minds is very small at least this helps somewhat.
Btw, it's not just me contradicting their choice. Look at the goddamn poll. And before you say that the SH isn't out yet, its concept has been revealed in full and can be tested. I doubt Blizzard is going to change it much before beta if they decide to stick with that POS. I would rather they revert to the concept of a lurker b/c it is superior in every aspect.
Okay again
Many people making the mistake (like the thread itself) that they try to compare swarm hosts mechanics with lurkers mechanics.
They don´t have the same roll. If you would compare banelings with lurkers well i would give you a shot. The second mistake that comes with this comparison is - that people look only yet for the unit alone. One have used lurkers alone very well. Swarm hosts are not that kind of unit. They will always have backup in form of Viper, Infestor and dmg dealing units as you could see in the Battlereport ZvP. But also one shouldn´t read too much into battlereports because you will not see the conjunction with other units like roaches, banelings, infestors, mutalisk and broodlords or even ling sorounds while the locust are the real dmg dealer in that combination.
The design itself is really interesting when you look at the current meta in zergs mid and late game in form from ling/bling/muta(old) roach/bling infestor/brood ling/ultra/infestor roach/infestor etc. Doesn´t matter though if one likes it or not. Also one note they can attack air. What that means isn´t fully clear to anyone here.
So please when you try to look at the swarm host don´t just view the unit itself, see the conjunctions.
On July 14 2012 07:44 wcr.4fun wrote:
On July 14 2012 04:01 Nachtwind wrote:
On July 14 2012 02:57 wcr.4fun wrote: Well sure you can give any reason why everything is possible 'theoretically'. I won't bother with it anymore. But zerg were daemonic space dinosaurs more than they were insects, at least in my eyes.
I just feel they'd be a lot cooler if they'd return to the more dinosaur/dragon like theme than the insects. After all a zergling, hydralisk and mutalisk, I consider them to be the coolest models do not really resemble insects imo.
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...
that made me quite sad bro =( perhaps ultralisks was made of dinosaurs like creatures =)
It's not a mistake. Don't call the arguments here a mistake, b/c they aren't. The swarm host is a knockoff of the lurker. I am saying that conceptually, the SH is boring. Now obviously you'll say that the SH is designed to siege areas. That is not what zerg needs. Zerg needs space control, which we lack. Besides the siege tank and the spine crawler, all the races lack space control. And Blizzard has repeatedly nerfed the siege tank.
And besides the fact that they both deal splash damage, the lurker and baneling ARE NOT similar at all. The baneling is designed to trade armies. It does not control space. baneling mines cannot control space. And it is already countered by high amounts of firepower.
The reason why DB turned to the swarm host is b/c Blizzard currently holds this mentality that somehow splash damage is bad. That is why they created an alternative to the lurker that functions like a land broodlord. Look at all the units presented in the HOTS expansion and you will see that they are inferior knockoffs of BW units presented for the sole purpose of being "original."
The SH cannot siege an area effectively. And it most definitely cannot control space, which is what most players are looking for in the first place.
You say that I should not view the unit itself - but its interactions? We are looking at the lurker vs. the swarm host on a conceptual level. Lurker is superior in entertainment and usability.
All those "interactions" that the swarm host might have with other units can also be had with the lurker, and the lurker has much more utility as a whole.
Forgive my rash language but I'm feeling extremely jaded.
I do not argue this out of nostalgia. I argue this b/c I think this is what EVERY race needs, and what SCII lacks.
Zerg doesn't need space control as much as it did in Brood War, because your units are so ridiculously fast with creep, which allows your army to basically get to wherever it needs ridiculously fast. Combine the fact that creep gives vision, watchtowers on most maps, and the absurd speed of speedlings, and the need for space control drops even further. Add in the raw power of spine crawlers which can move (I believe spines are stronger than sunkens were?), and the space control of baneling land mines, and you start to see why you really actually don't need more space control. Protoss needs space control. Terran has space control in the form of planetary fortresses (more terrans need to build extra cc's for orbitals) and siege tanks. Zerg doesn't need more space control, they need a mid-game pressure option that isn't a suicidal attack.
On July 13 2012 14:24 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Watching that battle report, the swarm hosts don't create a fast paced kind of a battle, butt he battle did look much more drawn out and even though it was pretty slow paced, the constant waves of locusts make the battle feel longer and add a kind of tense atmosphere.
On July 13 2012 08:22 sunprince wrote:
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote:
On July 13 2012 06:33 sunprince wrote:
On July 13 2012 06:22 goiflin wrote:
On July 13 2012 06:01 sunprince wrote:
On July 13 2012 03:00 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On July 13 2012 02:27 Velr wrote:
On July 13 2012 01:13 LeGeNDz wrote: [quote]
I played the custom map 9 months ago when it was made - its a bit outdated now you know. Swarm hosts don't perform the same way they do in the latest build that was displayed at MLG.
This is the most recent build of hots - Go to 10 minutes 51 seconds, watch all of the damage it does to the terran expansion after it kills 1 battle hellion - you can also see at 11 minutes 13 seconds another powerful wave of locusts causing their massive damage to the terran expansion.
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.
How you came to this conclusion is beyond me.
The lurker serves in the surprise gank, detection forcing, splash damage, anti-infantry, turtling, map control, midgame siege, containment, and ramp defense roles.
The swarm host does... what, bait siege tank fire and slowly cause minimal damage when not detected?
Stop autocasting to surprise gank, forces detection like lurkers, has splash damage in the effect that it spawns more than one unit, forces terran to push slower, has map control in the same effect that you need to bring a real force to move through a portion of the map with them there, they contain int he same respect that you need certain units (detection, tanks) to move through them and ramp defense. I don't think marine hit squads are going to be running up ramps with two hosts without autocast for the locusts, but that'd just be a numbers game really.
It's completely ridiculous to assert that a few locusts constitute a surprise gank the way that high splash damage does.
Swarm hosts do not force detection, contain, or defend any area as you can simply gun down the locusts while moving past the swarm hosts (compare that to the difficulty of running past lurkers in chokes).
Spawning more than one unit is not splash damage; c'mon, are you even trying?
One lurker doesn't gank a group of marines, nor does one swarm host. You have to have multiples.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: I'll give you splash damage if you can't see how multiple units can attack multiple units, and you can't move past locusts in a choke easily. You do know units block eachother in this game, right?
You clearly don't know what "splash damage" means. Spawning two units is not a form of splash damage, and only someone who has no idea what they're talking about would call a swarm locust or a broodlord "splash" units. You can easily move past locusts in a choke, by simply gunning them down with enough marines and running past the swarm hosts.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: They fufill the same roles. You're just refusing to see how the swarm host fufills those roles because it doesn't fufill them identically to the lurker.
And fyi, I'm for the lurker being included instead of the swarm host, but saying the swarm host can't fill the roles of the lurker is kinda silly because it absolutely can.
They absolutely don't. Just because you think ridiculously stretched definitions count and because you ignore all of my relevant points doesn't change the fact that any reasonable person understand their roles are not the same.
On July 13 2012 06:49 goiflin wrote: Edit; why does zerg need more splash? Fungal and banelings are handling groups of units just fine at the moment.
Zerg doesn't need more splash. What it actually needs are the lurker's other roles, many of which partly require splash to serve those roles effectively. Banes are a poorly designed unit that don't belong in the game to start with, and Zerg would be a far more balanced and fun race with lurkers instead of banes.
Well you're not able to use hold lurkers anymore right? So lurkers aren't as effective as shown in the video.
Also, burrowed banelings already serve the role of "ganking" marines. If swarm hosts were just like lurkers, they may overlap with burrowed banelings too much.
Hold lurkers could easily be allowed if they were included. As for your second point, if you take a look at my other posts you can see that I'd remove banelings and move hydras to Tier 1.5 in conjunction with adding lurkers.
Do you know what t1.5 hydras would do in zvp? Jesus christ P would be fucked. FFE? Lol i'll just hydra rush you. And it'd be nothing like hydra bust of bw, it'd be way worse with how fast toss gateway units die to hydras.
EPT![[image loading]](http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071101072521/starcraft/images/0/07/SC1_Lurker.gif)
