EPTLurker vs Swarm Host - Page 46
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45529 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On July 16 2012 13:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Quite frankly, I'm just excited to see a pro-gamer use Stop/ Hold Position Swarm Hosts effectively in a GSL match. How can it be so exciting when there is no high-speed element to it? There is no instant punishment, no Terrible Terrible Damage. | ||
|
PermaScrub
32 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On July 16 2012 13:03 PermaScrub wrote: There is no way that a lurker can do the job of a swam host, which is to apply pressure on a entrenched position. ?!?!?? Some more surrogate units in sporadic waves is pressure? I'd say constant fast AoE damage is pressure. Didn't all those games where lurkers applied pressure to entrenched positions come to mind before you just typed that out? | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On July 16 2012 13:19 PermaScrub wrote: That's why we have burrow banelings. Suicide units are completely different. This has already been addressed. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 16 2012 12:34 Archerofaiur wrote: Alternatively I guess you could just decrease the aoe size rather then nerf the damage. That makes AoE rather pointless. The purpose of buffing AoE is to PUNISH THE DEATHBALL and that would be good! Especially any Siege Tank positions can be overrun too easily by Zergling-Baneling hordes. The SC2 Siege Tank deals less damage and costs more supply compared to the BW version and thats totally wrong and the real reason why mech isnt viable (in addition to not having a mobile anti-air unit). The damage of the Lurker would have to be adjusted in a similar way and since it has the same "locked into place" downside as the Siege Tank it should be capable of dealing similarly awesome damage even though it is buried and thus cloaked. "Active AoE damage" like Psi-Storm or Fungal Growth need more careful adjustment if you want to punish people for playing with a deathball because they can be stacked actively unlike Siege Tank/Lurker which cant be told to attack a certain spot. The main point when looking at unit design and the deathball playstyle is that a good and interesting unit / playstyle balances ADVANTAGES with DISADVANTAGES. The deathball only has advantages ... for such mobile races as Zerg and Protoss. Adding disadvantages to the deathball - like static units which can kill a good chunk of it in a few shots - will force players to add new strategies to the repertoire and that would be good for the viewers. When was the last time any pro game included a fixed positional battle where a Sieged Tank line was supported by turrets and bunkers full of Marines? | ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
Why does it still exist ?  There's litteraly NO WAY to know. You have a poll about which of the two units is the most fun to play with... But you can't even play with them ! What the hell is wrong with you people | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 16 2012 13:23 Noocta wrote: So this thread is a massive theorycrafting about which of these 2 units noone actually played with would be better ? Why does it still exist ? There's litteraly NO WAY to know. You have a poll about which of the two units is the most fun to play with... But you can't even play with them ! There is. You just need a little imagination to know how you actually use them. The Swarm Host is boring (no disadvantages which endanger it balance the advantages it has, the only disadvantage is the rate of fire and that is a boring one) / potentially useless (if the units they spawn are useless and too weak) / potentially OP (if the units are too good) and in any case it is just a ground based early-tech Broodlord and that is simply yuck. See? Its easy when you just use your brains a little to think about cause and effect and weigh the pros and cons of unit design ... which is indepentant of the stats of the units!!!!!! Oh and you need to think about more than just the Zerg side to come up with "1 Swarm Host minion (which costs nothing) will draw Siege Tank fire and will make an assault into a siege line safer for the Zerglings" to notice that the Swarm Host is a TERRIBLE design since it creates free units at a perfectly safe distance which can be used to crack a siege line more easily than they are already overrun now. The Lurker is a known factor when it comes to unit design and could fill in a gap. Only then - during beta - would the stats play any role, but it could be used to give us more different playstyles on the battlefield. | ||
|
Qwyn
United States2779 Posts
On July 16 2012 13:23 Noocta wrote: So this thread is a massive theorycrafting about which of these 2 units noone actually played with would be better ? Why does it still exist ? There's litteraly NO WAY to know. You have a poll about which of the two units is the most fun to play with... But you can't even play with them ! What the hell is wrong with you people HOTS Custom. Go ahead and try the current version of the swarm host. You can also try the lurker in mods like Starbow. Ofc stats need to be updated, but you can play with it in SCII yourself. You can also play BW...yeah. | ||
|
prowala
United States147 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 16 2012 14:14 prowala wrote: I feel like people will come with really creative uses for swarm hosts, maybe in conjunction with cool new nydus worms ^^ Those REALLY screw up Terrans ... since they have no small and cheap anti-ground turret to spread throughout their bases and kinda have to use part of their army to cover the bases. A worm attacking buildings would really need such a defense. From a weapons tech standpoint it might make sense to give the turrets the ability to shoot ground as well, but that would be a break with tradition and I would prefer not to have that. There are enough creative uses for Swarm Hosts already especially since you can just "burrow it anywhere" and the spawned unit will waddle off to the nearest opposing target and that is bad. Thus it is at least a "throw away harrass unit" which you dont have to reproduce. You should at least have to actively see a target IMO before the unit moves out or else it is "too powerful" in that it can attack things which are in the "dark areas which no one sees through". Can Siege Tanks shoot something which they know exists (Sensor Tower) but which isnt in sight range? Thats what I would compare it. [I honestly dont know.] Since the unit shoots air it might be used to kill Overlords in ZvZ for example. | ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
On July 16 2012 14:12 Qwyn wrote: HOTS Custom. Go ahead and try the current version of the swarm host. You can also try the lurker in mods like Starbow. Ofc stats need to be updated, but you can play with it in SCII yourself. You can also play BW...yeah. SC2 isn't BW, the Lurker would probably not have the same impact at all. Specially since they would justfix the Hold Lurker thing. And being creative about the Swarm Host don't prevent all this thread to be theorycrafting. You can argue about a unit being bad all day, in the end it's playing like a hundred game with it that will make your final thought. edit : And they don't even do the same thing anyway. Swarm host are here to break siege position before Hive tech, what does Lurker have to do with that ! | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote: SC2 isn't BW, the Lurker would probably not have the same impact at all. Specially since they would justfix the Hold Lurker thing. And being creative about the Swarm Host don't prevent all this thread to be theorycrafting. You can argue about a unit being bad all day, in the end it's playing like a hundred game with it that will make your final thought. edit : And they don't even do the same thing anyway. Swarm host are here to break siege position before Hive tech, what does Lurker have to do with that ! Yet another stupid argument. It is stupid simply because everyone who likes to have the Lurker always includes a readjustment of all AoE damage upwards in the argumentation. As a method to add punishment to the deathball style of playing this would be good - which has only advantages right now and seems to be the only viable late game style. This is boring and needs to be changed to make SC2 a game with more variety. The Lurker can help with that, the Swarm Host cant without being clearly overpowered. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
There is just no way that blizzard would 'fix' this because there's nothing to fix. The equivalent would be removing 'Attack' from other units. Hold position and Attack are a pivotal ubiquitous element of the game. Although then again, this dustin browder idiot is capable of anything.... Lurkers are commonly used for contains. This contain can put pressure on your opponent if you decide to put your lurkers in range of their wall off or w/e they have at their front. Contains were typically lurkers, zerglings, (hydralisks), scourges, overlords. This was especially the case versus protoss. Overlords are there to detect observers, scourges to kill the observers really quick. Zerglings as meatshields versus mainly zealots, but also against the dragoons. There's no reason why you can't put the lurkers in range of your enemies wall off and put on even more pressure. Lurkers actually have a drawback because they can't sit on the other side of the map and send in these locusts (albeit worthless). I can't see what a bunch of locusts are going to do versus a ball of 20+ marines. I predict they'll die just like a (too small) group of zerglings running in on their own would do. They'd die before they can do any damage, but this can be tested rather easily. Lurkers guarantee damage. The marines can't bunnyhop over those spikes. (I actually watched the video of sc2 lurkers, their in game model + sound was a huge disappointment, but then again it's an old model with little work put into it and changes can be made.) Lurkers can break small siegelines as well. How else would the zerg ever survive in zvt before dark swarm came out? Tanks come way before dark swarm. Marine medic tank is pretty much the most standard strategy in zvt. Lurkers sucked against mech though, but that's because siegetanks were just so strong (and how they should be). Their single target damage and splash was insane, killing anything even underneath dark swarms (spider mines played an important role as well). That's why defilers and lurkers were bad against mech and you'd just go mass zerglings hydralisks while putting up expansions across the entire map and keeping the terran in his base so he can't expand. Mass mutalisks were a common choice as well, but goliaths and some valkyries can be a pain in the ass. The lurker would open up the possibilities for zerg. How I would love to have my third at the other side of the map again, making the other play choose whether he wants to attack my main and natural or my third. Creating tons of possibilities to counter attack, flanking possibilities etc And also making sure I won't just be dead if the opponent manages to kill my army once. | ||
|
MassacrisM
United Kingdom149 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote: SC2 isn't BW, the Lurker would probably not have the same impact at all. Specially since they would justfix the Hold Lurker thing. And being creative about the Swarm Host don't prevent all this thread to be theorycrafting. You can argue about a unit being bad all day, in the end it's playing like a hundred game with it that will make your final thought. edit : And they don't even do the same thing anyway. Swarm host are here to break siege position before Hive tech, what does Lurker have to do with that ! Give it up. When you point to the obvious (SC2 =/= BW, therefore units will work differently), they are just going to tell you that Dark Swarm should be in the game and hydralisks should be T1 and high ground advantages should be there and the pathing should be changed and AoE should be increased and so on and so on. I mean, how can you argue with that? If you make a lurkerfriendly enviroment, then the lurker will obviously be great and fun. It's just not going to happen in SC2, because they would have to scrap the whole game they have made until now. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On July 16 2012 20:45 Big J wrote: Give it up. When you point to the obvious (SC2 =/= BW, therefore units will work differently), they are just going to tell you that Dark Swarm should be in the game and hydralisks should be T1 and high ground advantages should be there and the pathing should be changed and AoE should be increased and so on and so on. I mean, how can you argue with that? If you make a lurkerfriendly enviroment, then the lurker will obviously be great and fun. It's just not going to happen in SC2, because they would have to scrap the whole game they have made until now. I like you. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
On July 16 2012 20:45 Big J wrote: Give it up. When you point to the obvious (SC2 =/= BW, therefore units will work differently), they are just going to tell you that Dark Swarm should be in the game and hydralisks should be T1 and high ground advantages should be there and the pathing should be changed and AoE should be increased and so on and so on. I mean, how can you argue with that? If you make a lurkerfriendly enviroment, then the lurker will obviously be great and fun. It's just not going to happen in SC2, because they would have to scrap the whole game they have made until now. Hey dont kill our hopes ;( Starcraft ---> BW big WC3 ----> also was big i honestly hope for bigger changes | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 16 2012 20:45 Big J wrote: Give it up. When you point to the obvious (SC2 =/= BW, therefore units will work differently), they are just going to tell you that Dark Swarm should be in the game and hydralisks should be T1 and high ground advantages should be there and the pathing should be changed and AoE should be increased and so on and so on. I mean, how can you argue with that? If you make a lurkerfriendly enviroment, then the lurker will obviously be great and fun. It's just not going to happen in SC2, because they would have to scrap the whole game they have made until now. The ONLY argument which you can bring is that SC2 =/= BW and that is about as useless as anything. The people who you want to shut up actually use BW and its mechanics and so on as an example because it is a SIMILAR GAME. It is obvious that they are NOT THE SAME, but even you blithering idiots have agree that they are similar and thus certain conclusions can be drawn. In fact SC2 is as similar as it can be and you should accept the fact that there is some wisdom in looking at BW when judging about SC2 units. Your claims that we are calling for Dark Swarm to be adopted and t1 Hydralisks and such are totally ridiculous and in case you didnt notice ... they will have Dark Swarm in HotS, its just called different and cast by a different unit (which incidentally also has a "mana leech ability" just like its BW predecessor). This truly shows how creative Blizzards SC2 designers have become and your argument that the games arent the same is getting ever more pointless since the games are becoming more of the same with the next expansion. Sure the units have different names and shapes and work differently, but the general purpose is the same. The purpose of the Swarm Host does not fit the purpose of the Lurker, but since AoE damage is considered OP in a game which has tight unit formations and has the deathball as the most successful mid-late game strategy, this has to be expected when the target generation is a bunch of whining kids who dont want to work for a victory and instead a-move for it. Thats "newer and better (Blizzard style)" for you. User was warned for this post | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
Incidentally, the fact that people are so vehemently demanding a unit from Broodwar says that a lot of them just want Broodwar, to a certain extent people need to understand that while, yes, Broodwar is both comparable and a good model to follow, it is not what StarCraft II is, and while using Broodwar as a guide for the betterment of StarCraft II is a way to go about it is not the only way to go about it, and its a terrible idea to just implant Broodwar units into StarCraft II because the games ARE different and their impact will NOT be the same as it was in Broodwar. People need to work within the confines of reasonable, the Lurker is NOT coming in Heart of the Swarm no matter how bad the demanding gets, its just not coming in Heart of the Swarm, maybe Legacy of the Void, but not Heart of the Swarm. Until the time when Blizzard releases their intent for Legacy of the Void, its best to work within the confines of reality here, the Swarm Host is not leaving, the Lurker is not entering, so work with what we are given, the Swarm Host. If you don't like it then suggest ways to better it, bitching is doing nothing, zippity do da, if you're going to say that the Swarm Host is poor design than offer up ways to perhaps better its design, either mechanically or conceptually. If you're just blatantly saying that the Swarm Host's entire being is awful and terrible and shouldn't exist then you're doing nothing helpful and might as well say nothing at all because ITS NOT LEAVING. IT IS HERE FOR HEART OF THE SWARM. If you believe that the Lurker's role is needed in StarCraft II then think of ways that the Swarm Host might be used as such, but just complaining that StarCraft II needs Lurkers is pointless right now. Save it for Legacy of the Void. | ||
| ||
