|
On July 16 2012 21:17 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 20:45 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote:On July 16 2012 14:12 Qwyn wrote: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. 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. 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.
I don't want to shut anybody up. I'm just saying how the discussion will go on, because it's already circlejerking since days and always leads to the arguments I put above: how SC2 should be changed to make the lurker work.
examples from this thread:
Discussion that hydras should be T1 to make lurkers more useful in SC2.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 14 2012 12:03 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2012 10:56 Infernal_dream wrote:On July 14 2012 10:37 sunprince wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Two lurkers easily gank a group of marines. Two swarm hosts does nothing. 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. Hydras would obviously be scaled down appropriately for t1.5, to stats similar to those of BW hydras (as was the case when they were t1.5 during alpha development).
The last posts of this discussion are about dark swarm and high ground:
+ Show Spoiler +Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2012 12:29 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 10:44 Big J wrote:On July 15 2012 10:29 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:On July 15 2012 09:27 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 08:58 moskonia wrote:On July 15 2012 07:43 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 04:55 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
if the swarm host were a BW unit, i would imagine most of the people in this thread would prefer the swarm host. Your assumption is that people prefer BW units just for the sake of nostalgia? Then why isn't anyone clamoring for the return of the scout, devourer, or science vessel? People miss good games they seen, and I guess the lurker brought some good plays, but they don't thin about it in the current sc2 game, they just care for nostalgic, and I guess they are more nostalgic towards the lurker then the other guys. Also you can see how silly people can be by saying they want things like - luker back, hydra back to tier 1 and baneling removed, I mean why not just play BW or if u want shiny graphics play the SC2 BW mod. Fixing broken things in SC2 using inspiration from BW ≠ BW. On July 15 2012 08:58 moskonia wrote:
The swarm host seems very cool imo, and for anyone who wants to play with the lurker you can still play bw if you so crave to. This is a ridiculous and completely illogical argument that is seen on TL far too much. People obviously want the lurker in SC2, and being able to use it in BW is totally irrelevant to the actual arguments at hand (whether or not it would make for a better SC2). On July 15 2012 09:19 Assirra wrote:On July 15 2012 07:43 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 04:55 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
if the swarm host were a BW unit, i would imagine most of the people in this thread would prefer the swarm host. Your assumption is that people prefer BW units just for the sake of nostalgia? Then why isn't anyone clamoring for the return of the scout, devourer, or science vessel? While that is true but in this case people are comparing thoughts of a unit that is not even out with a unit that got totally figured out in the last 10 year including all tricks and ways to use it. It is not a fair comparison however you look at it. Some things don't require as much figuring out. For example, it's not like we couldn't predict how the marauder or immortal would be used the moment we first heard of them. There are tricks to using the lurker because it's an inherently complex unit (burrowed attacker, line splash, tier 2, synergizes with dark swarm), but the swarm host is fairly simple. Yeah, I know, I'm gonna continue taking part in a discussion that circlejerks, has nothing to do with realitly because the counterarguments to my argument are never going to get fullfilled anyways as they would basically mean that blizzard gives up on SC2 and instead goes for SC3 with SC2 graphics in HotS (moveing Hydras to T1; maybe removing banelings, roaches; reintroducing lurkers; mayby change the pathing completly and completly rebalance the game around it; maybe remove/buff/nerf some other things like larva inject, income and whatever), but whatever... 1) broken means unbalanced. I don't see this in SC2 right now. If you mean it's "not well designed" say so, but design is an opinion, not an absoulte. Looking at the b.net forums and all the balance thread (attempts) on TL I have to say, people that actually think about SC2 design being the biggest problem rather than just "really balancing it out" are extremly (like 1:100) in the minority and therefore blizzard rightfully can think that people like their game overall. A lot. Broken doesn't not mean unbalanced. Broken can also mean poorly designed. For example, TvZ could have balanced win-rates with with an enormous Z late-game advantage by allowing T to have a huge advantage with all-ins, but that makes for a broken game. Or a 4 player map could have balanced win-rates in that P always wins in close spawns and always loses cross-map spawns, but the map is broken. On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:
2) No, people don't obviously want the lurker in SC2. Lots of people like the lurker. However, compared to the people who don't give a shit about threads as this, those are WAY (and I mean like WAY WAY) in the minority.
Not saying I don't give a shit. Lurkers are awesome. Are they needed? I'm not sure. Are SH needed? probably not! What role is zerg with mass vision from OLs, creep and very mobile troops lacking. Space control, or attacking possibilities?
As any Zerg attack before 70drones + hive + 4 (or more) bases is an allin, due to the lack of offensivly safe powerunits is an allin, I think it's the second thing: attacking possibilities. Yeah lurkers control space even better than lingswarms and baneling landmines and mutalisks and all the speedy vision giving - opponent overrunning, if he is not careful - stuff.
However, the way larva is being balanced. The way Zerg units operate (basically they are faster then the opponents whatever units), I don't see a role for the lurker in the current metagame, and due to it's lacking capabilities to attack on it's own (basicially due to too limited range and due to detection being part of any P/T/Z gameplan), I would much rather have a unit that actually is not as good as lurkers at space control (if I had to choose; if not I'd choose both, as I think Zerg desperatly needs T3 range units like the original lurker desing, so that T3 range is not just a bullshit short term move in ZvZ before Ultras and/or Broods and/or mass infestors are out), but rather can force the opponent to not just attack at special timings.
After all, TvZ has been in shambles for 2years now. Probably not balancewise (Zergs had an edge at certain times as well), but designwise, as it has always been up to the Terran to control the pace of the game. Zerg desperatly needs strong offensive options in the midgame, which are not limited by larva (like lings, blings and roaches), but rather limited by ressources (like the swarm host). Somthing that doesn not need to cut each and every drone, but something that is very very larva efficient for a longer periode of time (which is the problem of infestor attacks. like a baneling attack, it's only one move and then the energy is out. Then proplayers dont have the time to just wait until energy is back up, even if in lowleagues those strategies might be extraordinarily good, due to the opponents not having the skill to take advantage of it).
In this regard, I think a very longrange, air and ground attacking unit is really what zergs need, to switch up their gameplay from "drone to 70+ and then push", to "drone to 70+ slowly, while trying to keep the pressure on the opponent with units that have longterm potential, don't die easily and have the ability to win you the game against very greedy opponents) What Zerg actually needs is a big nerf to spawn larvae, in return to units that are actually good. The lurker would be merely one example of a good unit. On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:
3) the lurkers design is "burrow - then attack with line splash". There is nothing more about it in the very basics. Predicting micro tricks like "hold fire", "pushing siege lines the moment those unsiege" and similar stuff was not possible.
I don't see why it should be possible to predict that such swarm host moves don't exist.
Saying that those don't is basically just pillaring on experience (lurker) against nonexperience (swarm host). Yes, this way probability suggest that you will be right. But then we would not have needed SC2 at all. Probability suggests that BW was a great game and SC2 cannot reach it, if it is not just a graphical update. However, time has told us that there are quite a ton of people who prefer SC2 over BW. If you like BW, go and play it. It's not about saying you should not play SC2. It's about saying, BW is a great game and if you think it is better than SC2, you are wasting your time with SC2.
I mean, if you are off the opinion that BW was the best game yet, how big is the probability that ANYTHING will ever satisfy your longings for a game that can beat BW? Very slim! It's like saying, spain is the best football team in the world, when you saw 1958-1970 brasil. Spain is great and would beat that brasil team anytime because football moved on. Does that mean football with 0 forwards is more interesting than football with 4 forwards? Probablity not, though it may be more effective (which means in SC2 terms, closer to AI like optimal strategies). BW is an old game that is full of engine idiosyncracies that took considerable time to figure out, and the competitive scene (along with general understanding of RTS's) was in its infancy. SC2, on the other hand, is a modern game with no ways to break the engine (and ways that are discovered are patched into oblivion), and competitive gamers have far better understanding of tactics and strategy. If you don't understand why it's far easier to understand units now, then consider the fact that no major discoveries have been made regarding any SC2 unit thus far. Drop the assumptions about BW. I'm certainly not of the opinion that BW was the best game; there are certainly areas that could be substantially improved. To insist that people like certain BW elements because they are BW fanboys is an ad hominem that ignores the arguments actually being advanced. -) Broken means unbalanced. What you mean is "poorly designed", "not interesting" or somthing along those lines. If something is broken, it's overpowered. That's it. -) Yes and no. I would love to see some spawn larva nerf (like to 3 or 2.5 per queen in return for better units). However that doesn't make the lurker a better concept for SC2. After all, it still only has rather limited range (so easy to kill with tanks and blink stalkers and even units that have to walk to them like marauders and immortals on 1a). The lurker is a good unit, but I don't see how it achieves anything that you can't achieve with just an overpowering force of ling/bling. Basically the only intersting interaction would be lurkers shooting through FFs. But then they would not deal a lot of splash (from maximum range), again making them somewhat weird. Well, there is another advantage of them. They don't require burrow to be upgraded and therefore you force opponents (so only Protoss) down a certain (detection) path. That effect however could be acquited by giving any unit (like the swarm host will have) burrow from the start. Are you completely unfamiliar with lurker usage in BW? Lurkers aren't used just by having them sit there and fight at the enemy's maximum range. SC2 units don't change anything if you use lurkers that badly; dragoons, siege tanks, reavers, storm, and even goliaths all beat lurkers that just sit there. What lurkers are actually for is controlling chokes, sitting/advancing under dark swarm, and tearing apart enemy balls by running up to burrow next to them while they are surrounded/pinned down by lings and/or hydras. Are you completly unfamiliar with SC2? Dark Swarm is not in SC2, highground chokes and ramps that you wanted to hold with lurkers don't give 50% dodge anymore and hydras are straight up not useful most of the time in SC2. Your argument is lacking SC2. The concept of the lurker does not offer a lot of those roles you described, because they require BW. In SC2 a Lurker will most likely be used to add ranged splash damage in a combat, force detection and maybe some extra defensive strengthes in choke points.
(didn't get any answer for this one, else I would include it)
That AoE should be reworked:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 16 2012 19:21 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote:On July 16 2012 14:12 Qwyn wrote: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. 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.
And you can find similar arguements about pathing, removement/rework of "dragoonlike units" (which people point out to counter lurkers too well) as well.
And blinding cloud is not dark swarm. It's "mass blind" and only work vs bio. It will probably have a similar dynamic for melee units as dark swarm had for melee units, but it's not the same. Things under it are not protected, everything that is outside of the cloud is not effected.
And everyone has stated that Swarm host and Lurker have different roles. I don't see why people like you keep pointing it out and then tell us lurkers should be in the game instead of swarm hosts. It doesn't make sense. You could as well ask for lurkers instead of mutalisks.
You want me to comment on the insults as well?
|
On July 16 2012 19:55 wcr.4fun wrote:
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.)
Yeah, exept in SC2 you need overseers to detect observers, and corruptors(?) to kill observers.
Oh, and you have frocefields to deny mitcheading, and you have Blink to instantly get stalkers in firing position, or out of danger.
|
|
|
On July 16 2012 21:32 Zambrah wrote:
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
Like the shredder?
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/6/6e/Shredder.png)
|
On July 16 2012 22:40 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 21:32 Zambrah wrote:
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
Like the shredder?
Like the Tempest.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Swarm Host is, to the available knowledge, stlll in Heart of the Swarm, and considering how close Beta is to release, I'd bet you my right testicle that Swarm Host makes Heart of the Swarm.
|
Hahah, the artistic designers for SC2 are so awful. How could they not see that even the shredder and the swarm host are the same silly shape structure. At least the shredder is mechanical so that top-heavy thing would be possible.
|
On July 16 2012 22:44 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 22:40 Archerofaiur wrote:On July 16 2012 21:32 Zambrah wrote:
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
Like the shredder? Like the Tempest. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Swarm Host is, to the available knowledge, stlll in Heart of the Swarm, and considering how close Beta is to release, I'd bet you my right testicle that Swarm Host makes Heart of the Swarm.
I mean chances are your right and it will make HOTS. But I feel its a mistake to assume thats written in stone. In fact, IIRC their was a burrowing zerg unit removed right before the WOL beta started :p
|
On July 16 2012 22:51 0neder wrote:
Hahah, the artistic designers for SC2 are so awful. How could they not see that even the shredder and the swarm host are the same silly shape structure. At least the shredder is mechanical so that top-heavy thing would be possible.
What is seen, cannot be unseen. jesus -__-
And I wouldn't say the swarm host is destined to end up in HOTS. They were really quick to give up on the shredder and were talking the same about the widow mine as well. They also gave up on the lurker (alpha, beta don't know). I don't see why they can't change the swarm host or remove it. I mean stuff like that literally takes 5 seconds of work. (If they'd swap it with the current lurker model etc). It's not like they'd have to revamp the entire game. But I wouldn't have any issues with it if they had to do so. The expansion is coming up, so far it's looking pretty disappointing, we only have one expansion left after this one. I was told 'wait for HOTS', I don't want to be told 'wait for LOTV' only to get disappointed again.
The game needs to be more exciting and more about multitasking across the entire map. The lurker would be one step in the right direction.
And I don't exactly get why the lurker would have to be tier 3, even if hydras are tier 2 you coud make them tier 2.5. And it would also be cool if they'd keep the 'egg blocks' on ramps. I want to be able to morph 2 or 3 lurkers on the ramp and have the eggs block anything from passing. It's these little things that made BW the best RTS ever.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On July 16 2012 22:44 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 22:40 Archerofaiur wrote:On July 16 2012 21:32 Zambrah wrote:
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
Like the shredder? Like the Tempest. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Swarm Host is, to the available knowledge, stlll in Heart of the Swarm, and considering how close Beta is to release, I'd bet you my right testicle that Swarm Host makes Heart of the Swarm.
so you lost your left testicle in a bet already?
|
On July 17 2012 00:09 amazingxkcd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 22:44 Zambrah wrote:On July 16 2012 22:40 Archerofaiur wrote:On July 16 2012 21:32 Zambrah wrote:
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
Like the shredder? Like the Tempest. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Swarm Host is, to the available knowledge, stlll in Heart of the Swarm, and considering how close Beta is to release, I'd bet you my right testicle that Swarm Host makes Heart of the Swarm. so you lost your left testicle in a bet already?
Lefty is more potent, I'd never risk him...
EDIT: And the Swarm Host is a completely fresh unit, theres not a whole lot of chance that Blizzard is just going to decide to wholly scrap it before beta, maybe if it was one of the more gimmicky units like the Replicator, the Shredder or the Widow Mine, but its more like the Tempest.
Which I'd much rather see removed.
|
Bisutopia19330 Posts
Can phoenix lift burrowed units? If so, stargate is even better tech versus zerg in the future match ups.
|
On July 17 2012 00:44 BisuDagger wrote:
Can phoenix lift burrowed units? If so, stargate is even better tech versus zerg in the future match ups.
If they could do the lift - why would it be good? Because you are able to kill an armored SH in between a wave of air-shoting locust while the hydras or infestors ( that most of time will guard them ) are out of position because you lurked them with halluzinations away?
Not saying it wouldn´t be possible but there are better ways ^.^
Also the stargate poke to lurk an zerg into producing hydras then switching to collosi will not be good anymore because of hydra speed, abduct and blind.
|
am i the only one who thinks that swarm host is a cool unit?
|
They can and it wouln't be good versus swarm hosts. Locusts can attack air. It would be good versus lurkers, since they can't attack air.
|
Bisutopia19330 Posts
On July 17 2012 00:48 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 00:44 BisuDagger wrote:
Can phoenix lift burrowed units? If so, stargate is even better tech versus zerg in the future match ups. If they could do the lift - why would it be good? Because you are able to kill an armored SH in between a wave of air-shoting locust while the hydras or infestors ( that most of time will guard them ) are out of position because you lurked them with halluzinations away? Not saying it wouldn´t be possible but there are better ways ^.^ Also the stargate poke to lurk an zerg into producing hydras then switching to collosi will not be good anymore because of hydra speed, abduct and blind.
Because let's say the Lurker/SH is being used for zone control and the army isnt with it. Then you can fly in and lift the defending units and march your army through to the location you wanted. What if there was a SH drop in your mineral line, you can quickly nuetralize it by lifting them and waiting till your army is there to make it safe. Lots of different options involved.
|
On July 17 2012 00:51 TsGBruzze wrote:
am i the only one who thinks that swarm host is a cool unit?
Nope. I do too.
|
On July 17 2012 01:00 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 00:48 Nachtwind wrote:On July 17 2012 00:44 BisuDagger wrote:
Can phoenix lift burrowed units? If so, stargate is even better tech versus zerg in the future match ups. If they could do the lift - why would it be good? Because you are able to kill an armored SH in between a wave of air-shoting locust while the hydras or infestors ( that most of time will guard them ) are out of position because you lurked them with halluzinations away? Not saying it wouldn´t be possible but there are better ways ^.^ Also the stargate poke to lurk an zerg into producing hydras then switching to collosi will not be good anymore because of hydra speed, abduct and blind. Because let's say the Lurker/SH is being used for zone control and the army isnt with it. Then you can fly in and lift the defending units and march your army through to the location you wanted. What if there was a SH drop in your mineral line, you can quickly nuetralize it by lifting them and waiting till your army is there to make it safe. Lots of different options involved.
You can't just lift up Swarm host without having any detection units for example observers to detect that lurker wannabe into the air .
|
On July 16 2012 21:53 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 21:17 Rabiator wrote:On July 16 2012 20:45 Big J wrote:On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote:On July 16 2012 14:12 Qwyn wrote: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. 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. 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. I don't want to shut anybody up. I'm just saying how the discussion will go on, because it's already circlejerking since days and always leads to the arguments I put above: how SC2 should be changed to make the lurker work. examples from this thread: Discussion that hydras should be T1 to make lurkers more useful in SC2. + Show Spoiler +On July 14 2012 12:03 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2012 10:56 Infernal_dream wrote:On July 14 2012 10:37 sunprince wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Two lurkers easily gank a group of marines. Two swarm hosts does nothing. 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. Hydras would obviously be scaled down appropriately for t1.5, to stats similar to those of BW hydras (as was the case when they were t1.5 during alpha development). The last posts of this discussion are about dark swarm and high ground: + Show Spoiler +Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2012 12:29 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 10:44 Big J wrote:On July 15 2012 10:29 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:On July 15 2012 09:27 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 08:58 moskonia wrote:On July 15 2012 07:43 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 04:55 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
if the swarm host were a BW unit, i would imagine most of the people in this thread would prefer the swarm host. Your assumption is that people prefer BW units just for the sake of nostalgia? Then why isn't anyone clamoring for the return of the scout, devourer, or science vessel? People miss good games they seen, and I guess the lurker brought some good plays, but they don't thin about it in the current sc2 game, they just care for nostalgic, and I guess they are more nostalgic towards the lurker then the other guys. Also you can see how silly people can be by saying they want things like - luker back, hydra back to tier 1 and baneling removed, I mean why not just play BW or if u want shiny graphics play the SC2 BW mod. Fixing broken things in SC2 using inspiration from BW ≠ BW. On July 15 2012 08:58 moskonia wrote:
The swarm host seems very cool imo, and for anyone who wants to play with the lurker you can still play bw if you so crave to. This is a ridiculous and completely illogical argument that is seen on TL far too much. People obviously want the lurker in SC2, and being able to use it in BW is totally irrelevant to the actual arguments at hand (whether or not it would make for a better SC2). On July 15 2012 09:19 Assirra wrote:On July 15 2012 07:43 sunprince wrote:On July 15 2012 04:55 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
if the swarm host were a BW unit, i would imagine most of the people in this thread would prefer the swarm host. Your assumption is that people prefer BW units just for the sake of nostalgia? Then why isn't anyone clamoring for the return of the scout, devourer, or science vessel? While that is true but in this case people are comparing thoughts of a unit that is not even out with a unit that got totally figured out in the last 10 year including all tricks and ways to use it. It is not a fair comparison however you look at it. Some things don't require as much figuring out. For example, it's not like we couldn't predict how the marauder or immortal would be used the moment we first heard of them. There are tricks to using the lurker because it's an inherently complex unit (burrowed attacker, line splash, tier 2, synergizes with dark swarm), but the swarm host is fairly simple. Yeah, I know, I'm gonna continue taking part in a discussion that circlejerks, has nothing to do with realitly because the counterarguments to my argument are never going to get fullfilled anyways as they would basically mean that blizzard gives up on SC2 and instead goes for SC3 with SC2 graphics in HotS (moveing Hydras to T1; maybe removing banelings, roaches; reintroducing lurkers; mayby change the pathing completly and completly rebalance the game around it; maybe remove/buff/nerf some other things like larva inject, income and whatever), but whatever... 1) broken means unbalanced. I don't see this in SC2 right now. If you mean it's "not well designed" say so, but design is an opinion, not an absoulte. Looking at the b.net forums and all the balance thread (attempts) on TL I have to say, people that actually think about SC2 design being the biggest problem rather than just "really balancing it out" are extremly (like 1:100) in the minority and therefore blizzard rightfully can think that people like their game overall. A lot. Broken doesn't not mean unbalanced. Broken can also mean poorly designed. For example, TvZ could have balanced win-rates with with an enormous Z late-game advantage by allowing T to have a huge advantage with all-ins, but that makes for a broken game. Or a 4 player map could have balanced win-rates in that P always wins in close spawns and always loses cross-map spawns, but the map is broken. On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:
2) No, people don't obviously want the lurker in SC2. Lots of people like the lurker. However, compared to the people who don't give a shit about threads as this, those are WAY (and I mean like WAY WAY) in the minority.
Not saying I don't give a shit. Lurkers are awesome. Are they needed? I'm not sure. Are SH needed? probably not! What role is zerg with mass vision from OLs, creep and very mobile troops lacking. Space control, or attacking possibilities?
As any Zerg attack before 70drones + hive + 4 (or more) bases is an allin, due to the lack of offensivly safe powerunits is an allin, I think it's the second thing: attacking possibilities. Yeah lurkers control space even better than lingswarms and baneling landmines and mutalisks and all the speedy vision giving - opponent overrunning, if he is not careful - stuff.
However, the way larva is being balanced. The way Zerg units operate (basically they are faster then the opponents whatever units), I don't see a role for the lurker in the current metagame, and due to it's lacking capabilities to attack on it's own (basicially due to too limited range and due to detection being part of any P/T/Z gameplan), I would much rather have a unit that actually is not as good as lurkers at space control (if I had to choose; if not I'd choose both, as I think Zerg desperatly needs T3 range units like the original lurker desing, so that T3 range is not just a bullshit short term move in ZvZ before Ultras and/or Broods and/or mass infestors are out), but rather can force the opponent to not just attack at special timings.
After all, TvZ has been in shambles for 2years now. Probably not balancewise (Zergs had an edge at certain times as well), but designwise, as it has always been up to the Terran to control the pace of the game. Zerg desperatly needs strong offensive options in the midgame, which are not limited by larva (like lings, blings and roaches), but rather limited by ressources (like the swarm host). Somthing that doesn not need to cut each and every drone, but something that is very very larva efficient for a longer periode of time (which is the problem of infestor attacks. like a baneling attack, it's only one move and then the energy is out. Then proplayers dont have the time to just wait until energy is back up, even if in lowleagues those strategies might be extraordinarily good, due to the opponents not having the skill to take advantage of it).
In this regard, I think a very longrange, air and ground attacking unit is really what zergs need, to switch up their gameplay from "drone to 70+ and then push", to "drone to 70+ slowly, while trying to keep the pressure on the opponent with units that have longterm potential, don't die easily and have the ability to win you the game against very greedy opponents) What Zerg actually needs is a big nerf to spawn larvae, in return to units that are actually good. The lurker would be merely one example of a good unit. On July 15 2012 10:19 Big J wrote:
3) the lurkers design is "burrow - then attack with line splash". There is nothing more about it in the very basics. Predicting micro tricks like "hold fire", "pushing siege lines the moment those unsiege" and similar stuff was not possible.
I don't see why it should be possible to predict that such swarm host moves don't exist.
Saying that those don't is basically just pillaring on experience (lurker) against nonexperience (swarm host). Yes, this way probability suggest that you will be right. But then we would not have needed SC2 at all. Probability suggests that BW was a great game and SC2 cannot reach it, if it is not just a graphical update. However, time has told us that there are quite a ton of people who prefer SC2 over BW. If you like BW, go and play it. It's not about saying you should not play SC2. It's about saying, BW is a great game and if you think it is better than SC2, you are wasting your time with SC2.
I mean, if you are off the opinion that BW was the best game yet, how big is the probability that ANYTHING will ever satisfy your longings for a game that can beat BW? Very slim! It's like saying, spain is the best football team in the world, when you saw 1958-1970 brasil. Spain is great and would beat that brasil team anytime because football moved on. Does that mean football with 0 forwards is more interesting than football with 4 forwards? Probablity not, though it may be more effective (which means in SC2 terms, closer to AI like optimal strategies). BW is an old game that is full of engine idiosyncracies that took considerable time to figure out, and the competitive scene (along with general understanding of RTS's) was in its infancy. SC2, on the other hand, is a modern game with no ways to break the engine (and ways that are discovered are patched into oblivion), and competitive gamers have far better understanding of tactics and strategy. If you don't understand why it's far easier to understand units now, then consider the fact that no major discoveries have been made regarding any SC2 unit thus far. Drop the assumptions about BW. I'm certainly not of the opinion that BW was the best game; there are certainly areas that could be substantially improved. To insist that people like certain BW elements because they are BW fanboys is an ad hominem that ignores the arguments actually being advanced. -) Broken means unbalanced. What you mean is "poorly designed", "not interesting" or somthing along those lines. If something is broken, it's overpowered. That's it. -) Yes and no. I would love to see some spawn larva nerf (like to 3 or 2.5 per queen in return for better units). However that doesn't make the lurker a better concept for SC2. After all, it still only has rather limited range (so easy to kill with tanks and blink stalkers and even units that have to walk to them like marauders and immortals on 1a). The lurker is a good unit, but I don't see how it achieves anything that you can't achieve with just an overpowering force of ling/bling. Basically the only intersting interaction would be lurkers shooting through FFs. But then they would not deal a lot of splash (from maximum range), again making them somewhat weird. Well, there is another advantage of them. They don't require burrow to be upgraded and therefore you force opponents (so only Protoss) down a certain (detection) path. That effect however could be acquited by giving any unit (like the swarm host will have) burrow from the start. Are you completely unfamiliar with lurker usage in BW? Lurkers aren't used just by having them sit there and fight at the enemy's maximum range. SC2 units don't change anything if you use lurkers that badly; dragoons, siege tanks, reavers, storm, and even goliaths all beat lurkers that just sit there. What lurkers are actually for is controlling chokes, sitting/advancing under dark swarm, and tearing apart enemy balls by running up to burrow next to them while they are surrounded/pinned down by lings and/or hydras. Are you completly unfamiliar with SC2? Dark Swarm is not in SC2, highground chokes and ramps that you wanted to hold with lurkers don't give 50% dodge anymore and hydras are straight up not useful most of the time in SC2. Your argument is lacking SC2. The concept of the lurker does not offer a lot of those roles you described, because they require BW. In SC2 a Lurker will most likely be used to add ranged splash damage in a combat, force detection and maybe some extra defensive strengthes in choke points. (didn't get any answer for this one, else I would include it) That AoE should be reworked: + Show Spoiler +On July 16 2012 19:21 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 19:05 Noocta wrote:On July 16 2012 14:12 Qwyn wrote: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. 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. And you can find similar arguements about pathing, removement/rework of "dragoonlike units" (which people point out to counter lurkers too well) as well. And blinding cloud is not dark swarm. It's "mass blind" and only work vs bio. It will probably have a similar dynamic for melee units as dark swarm had for melee units, but it's not the same. Things under it are not protected, everything that is outside of the cloud is not effected. And everyone has stated that Swarm host and Lurker have different roles. I don't see why people like you keep pointing it out and then tell us lurkers should be in the game instead of swarm hosts. It doesn't make sense. You could as well ask for lurkers instead of mutalisks. You want me to comment on the insults as well?
You are right in that there is the same arguments over and over in this thread, but that also has its good sides, because it keeps this topic on the front page and it keeps people thinking about the whole issue. I havent seen any good argument for the design of the Swarm Host and there are undoubtedly many flaws in its design. Sure it can be "made to work" or "interesting strategies" can be found, but what does the unit add to the Zerg arsenal that is new and original and fun? Nothing really. The Lurker on the other side is an old unit from BW and it had its job there. You could deny positions and force opponents to have detection. Which Terran nowadays has a Raven accompanying his armies? None. In BW you basically had to have a Science Vessel, because you could meet Lurkers everywhere and using scans wouldnt work for that. Ravens would be kinda useless against Swarm Hosts since they can be burrowed "anywhere" (due to the duration of 25 seconds they could be FAR AWAY and out of danger. Thus the whole comparison of concepts between the two leads me to a "Lurker design interesting; Swarm Host design boring and either useless or OP" which is all this thread is about more or less.
The difference in roles dont really matte IMO since there are only two rather goofy roles for the Swarm Host IMO:
1. Harrassment with the free units.
This is the part where the unit can easily become OP if the spawned free unit (if it dies there is no cost in minerals or gas to rebuild it) is very powerful and a group of 5 can easily take down a Supply Depot, Pylon or Extractor. If the unit is terribly weak this purpose is pretty much useless.
2. creating decoy units to draw siege tank fire
This is the part where it gets really annoying, because right now it is already very easy for a Zerg to overrun a Terran siege line. They dont need to do it "for free" and thus the Swarm Host will really break one potential counter strategy and the most infuriating thing is that Blizzard says they want to "buff mech". The point where it gets ridiculously frustating is where the Viper gets yet another spell to break those siege lines easily and thus Blizzard are adding two unnecessary mechanics for the same goal.
These two points are "totally obvious" to me and make the Swarm Host a really really REALLY bad design which cant be fixed by fiddling with the stats a little bit. Thus any "but you havent tried it out yet" argument is totally moot and pointles ... the core unit design is JUNK. Using the "Swarm" Host as an "attack unit" is probably a really terrible idea and part of the reason is its uncontrollability and the fact that it crreates a free unit. Zerg already have the best economy in the mid-late game and if you start giving them more "free units" to reduce the number of units which need to replaced the whole game balance is going to tilt.
The Lurker on the other hand is a known quantity and although it would have to be of different efficiency in SC2 compared to BW due to the different movement mechanics and unit selection size we know what it is capable of and even the Siege Tank has been adjusted to perform in SC2. None of the Zerg units fill the same role atm and thus it would be something new. The adjustment made mech pretty powerless and would leave the Lurker less powerful than they were in BW, but that is something completely different to the bad unit design of the Swarm Host.
You are free to argue my points and if you come up why my criticism is invalid I am willing to listen. Until then I am beliving in my own "totally obvious" conclusions which leave the Swarm Host as a terrible concept (and not "swarmy" at all) while the Lurker could prove to be useful even in SC2. I have already given my suggestion - on how the Swarm Host could be redesigned to be unique and useful without the problems above - elsewhere in this thread.
|
Bisutopia19330 Posts
On July 17 2012 01:04 Sawamura wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 01:00 BisuDagger wrote:On July 17 2012 00:48 Nachtwind wrote:On July 17 2012 00:44 BisuDagger wrote:
Can phoenix lift burrowed units? If so, stargate is even better tech versus zerg in the future match ups. If they could do the lift - why would it be good? Because you are able to kill an armored SH in between a wave of air-shoting locust while the hydras or infestors ( that most of time will guard them ) are out of position because you lurked them with halluzinations away? Not saying it wouldn´t be possible but there are better ways ^.^ Also the stargate poke to lurk an zerg into producing hydras then switching to collosi will not be good anymore because of hydra speed, abduct and blind. Because let's say the Lurker/SH is being used for zone control and the army isnt with it. Then you can fly in and lift the defending units and march your army through to the location you wanted. What if there was a SH drop in your mineral line, you can quickly nuetralize it by lifting them and waiting till your army is there to make it safe. Lots of different options involved. You can't just lift up Swarm host without having any detection units for example observers to detect that lurker wannabe into the air .
Obviously, but why wouldn't I have the observer with my phoenix or cannons in the main? xD
|
I havent seen any good argument for the design of the Swarm Host and there are undoubtedly many flaws in its design. Sure it can be "made to work" or "interesting strategies" can be found, but what does the unit add to the Zerg arsenal that is new and original and fun? Nothing really
Yeah... unlike the lurker which is new and original right?
I don't get your argument that lurkers require a raven while the SH does not, if something it is the other way around, since you know where the lurkers are (they attack you) you can scan them, while you have no idea where the locusts are coming from exactly so you have to get a raven for them.
The harass you make with the SH while "free" is not really free, since it did cost you to make those SH's, if you make 1 harassment butt hen the Terran comes and cleans your DH's you just had really expensive lings, so as long as the Terran reacts fast and right he can make the SH not cost efficient, but if teh Terran is afraid and lets the locusts waves come and come of course they will lose stuff, the whole point of the SH is to force Terran players into action instead of turtling.
The SH gives Zerg the swarm feeling, I really don't understand how you cant see it, since sending waves after waves of units is the ultimate Zerg swarm style.
About them being OP or very weak, well that is what there is balancing for, I am sure Blizz will find the right values to make the locusts able to do damage but not overpower the opponent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
