| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 17 2012 22:29 forsooth wrote: Lurkers are way cooler but I shudder to think what stop lurkers and infestors could do in combination with each other. Thats why they would "force detectors" to accompany armies ... which is good, because it adds more used unit types to the game. See them before running into them and if you dont its your own fault. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On July 17 2012 22:33 Rabiator wrote: Thats why they would "force detectors" to accompany armies ... which is good, because it adds more used unit types to the game. See them before running into them and if you dont its your own fault. Terrans are still just going to scan and Protoss are always going to have Observers with their main armies. Its really not even a factor worth considering since both races already use detection with their armies to kill creep, detect burrowed Infestors, and kill burrowed Roaches. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On July 17 2012 22:33 Rabiator wrote: Thats why they would "force detectors" to accompany armies ... which is good, because it adds more used unit types to the game. See them before running into them and if you dont its your own fault. I don't think that's necessarily a good thing. Terran armies against protoss are often something like marine, marauder, medivac, viking, ghost and in that case the marine and marauder perform mostly the same role, the medivacs are there to support those, the ghost is there as a way to negate shields and the vikings as a way to negate colossi, so you get an unwieldy army composition with way too many units merely as support. Flash v Fantasy || spoilers! || today just had vulture/tank for main army and it was fun enough. Fantasy's wraiths are there to fly around to pick off dropships and tanks and Flash used goliaths to try and defend, but it was mostly still vulture/tank. Ideally all units are viable in a match-up, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea for all units to be viable in a single army composition. For a unit like the raven I think it's more fun if you can get away with using scan because the raven is so expensive and slow, but in a few cases it's worthwhile to use them. They're not a core unit, why should they be in every game? | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
If anyone can find better examples for why the lurker should be in SC2 let me know. | ||
|
SuperGnu
Sweden240 Posts
One that spawn 2 units every 25s, units that will be instantly killed and leaving the host useless for 25s... If the spawned units lasted lobger than the CD for respawn then it would be a decent unit. And one that is complete trash and can be dodged and killed so easy. Only use for a lurker vs non retarded ppl in BW was for Mineral harass or mineral defence. Anything other and it would not do anything at all as you can dodge it so easily. | ||
|
SCVfighting
United States14 Posts
| ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:19 SuperGnu wrote: Both are shitty units. One that spawn 2 units every 25s, units that will be instantly killed and leaving the host useless for 25s... If the spawned units lasted lobger than the CD for respawn then it would be a decent unit. And one that is complete trash and can be dodged and killed so easy. Only use for a lurker vs non retarded ppl in BW was for Mineral harass or mineral defence. Anything other and it would not do anything at all as you can dodge it so easily. LOL. So every pro bw gamer is a retard? praise the lord. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:19 SuperGnu wrote: Both are shitty units. One that spawn 2 units every 25s, units that will be instantly killed and leaving the host useless for 25s... If the spawned units lasted lobger than the CD for respawn then it would be a decent unit. And one that is complete trash and can be dodged and killed so easy. Only use for a lurker vs non retarded ppl in BW was for Mineral harass or mineral defence. Anything other and it would not do anything at all as you can dodge it so easily. I don't think you know what are you talking about. | ||
|
SuperGnu
Sweden240 Posts
On July 18 2012 06:03 wcr.4fun wrote: LOL. So every pro bw gamer is a retard? praise the lord. That is not what i said, i said Lurkers where bad, really really bad and easy to counter/avoid, pro players never had a problem vs Lurkers. | ||
|
SuperGnu
Sweden240 Posts
On July 18 2012 06:04 Xiphos wrote: I don't think you know what are you talking about. I think i do. | ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
You really, really don't. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On July 18 2012 01:54 Grumbels wrote: I don't think that's necessarily a good thing. Flash v Fantasy || spoilers! || today just had vulture/tank for main army and it was fun enough. Fantasy's wraiths are there to fly around to pick off dropships and tanks and Flash used goliaths to try and defend, but it was mostly still vulture/tank. Ideally all units are viable in a match-up, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea for all units to be viable in a single army composition. For a unit like the raven I think it's more fun if you can get away with using scan because the raven is so expensive and slow, but in a few cases it's worthwhile to use them. They're not a core unit, why should they be in every game? Wait, wait, you just said tank vulture was fun enough, right? Did either player get spider mines? If so, then your point illustrates the opposite of the one you're trying to make. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 17 2012 22:41 Zambrah wrote: Terrans are still just going to scan and Protoss are always going to have Observers with their main armies. Its really not even a factor worth considering since both races already use detection with their armies to kill creep, detect burrowed Infestors, and kill burrowed Roaches. Scanning would be stupid, because on the huge maps we have nowadays you would need to scan every step of the way. Thats a lot of wasted resources compared to one or two "lousy Ravens" ... which are obviously useless. You could even go Lurker hunting with a Raven solo or with a Banshee added to it and that just adds a new facet to the game. Swarm Hosts could require the same thing, BUT they are terribly overpowered in that they can be burrowed far far away and still take part in a fight. Thus the potential area to search is MUCH bigger, which leaves the Swarm Host less vulnerable compared to the Lurker. An advantage - invisibility due to burrowed attack - should come at a cost - immobility - but the range for the SH gives it the same stupid advantage the 22 range Protoss ship gets. Being able to fight from FAR outside vision range is simply bad design, but making the Swarm Host spawn his units faster for a shorter lifetime isnt an answer since these units are sooo durable. On July 18 2012 11:01 SuperGnu wrote: That is not what i said, i said Lurkers where bad, really really bad and easy to counter/avoid, pro players never had a problem vs Lurkers. One of the points of a unit might be to force the opponent to avoid it. If you increase the damage of a Siege Tank for example it would be stupid to attack where the tank is and smart players would go around it and ignore it (kinda like people do with Broodlord armies in a baserace scenario). That tank would kill nothing, but its job would be done. It doesnt make the unit shitty. Damage isnt the only goal in the life of a unit; controlling space is another equally viable one. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On July 18 2012 11:27 0neder wrote: Wait, wait, you just said tank vulture was fun enough, right? Did either player get spider mines? If so, then your point illustrates the opposite of the one you're trying to make. I don't get your point, what do you mean? | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
Oh, and SC2 Lurker deals different damage compared to the BW Lurker. The BW Lurker does 20 normal damage, whereas the SC2 Lurker does 15 (+15 vs armored). It just fills a different role than the BW Lurker as this weird late-game siege unit/anti-armor splash damage dealer. Maybe it might discourage stuff like mass Stalker or mass Roach or mass Marauder play since those involve a lot of clumped-up, armored units that would be mincemeat for the SC2 Lurker, though an opponent should have the proper counters by the time Lurker tech is up. It is essentially a late-game siege unit that overlaps with the Broodlord's role as a siege unit. Looking at the Swarm Host, it's a mid-game unit designed to pressure an enemy, especially a turtling one, without risking too much supply. I don't think it will be good space control, as an enemy can just use sheer numbers or micro to brute-force their way through a few of them "defending" an area unsupported, kinda like how a few stray, unsupported Siege Tanks can easily be dealt with. In fact, I think a similar situation might happen to the Lurker if it was in SC2. | ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
On July 18 2012 03:19 Archerofaiur wrote: Ok I added these videos for the lurker. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8ySBRthwFY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZNdaEM9SfI If anyone can find better examples for why the lurker should be in SC2 let me know. these videos are pointless. u can do the same thing with 2 burrowed banelings and get the same exact reaction, and in BOTH cases its a result of negligence from the opponent not being careful when he KNOWS there are burrowed lurkers/banelings around the area. and if he does not know then its purely a surprise factor. so ppl need to stop using these videos as an example. 2 stoped lurkers killing 40+ marines is no different from 2 burrowed banelings killing 40+ marines in SC2. and as for the marine micro against lurkers? again, u can do the same thing against banelings with marine splitting/micro. refer to MKP for examples. | ||
|
Tyree
1508 Posts
However that said, the Lurker is one of the best unit designs in RTS games, it is the perfect unit that fits the Blizzard philosophy, easy to learn hard to master. The unit seems super weak in the hands of a lesser player and downright overpowered in the hands of a great player, just like you want it to be. Dont mind the Swarm Host, but having another "siege" type unit seems unnecessary and does not quite fit the Zerg race. Broodlords are fine. They dont strike me as a race that: Hydra: "Yo stand around and let the Swarm Host do damage, then move in okay?" Zerglings: "Yes sir" Lurker changed how Terrans played in BW, i am interested in knowing whether that will be the case for T or P when the Swarm Host comes out. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 18 2012 16:48 Ballistixz wrote: these videos are pointless. u can do the same thing with 2 burrowed banelings and get the same exact reaction, and in BOTH cases its a result of negligence from the opponent not being careful when he KNOWS there are burrowed lurkers/banelings around the area. and if he does not know then its purely a surprise factor. so ppl need to stop using these videos as an example. 2 stoped lurkers killing 40+ marines is no different from 2 burrowed banelings killing 40+ marines in SC2. and as for the marine micro against lurkers? again, u can do the same thing against banelings with marine splitting/micro. refer to MKP for examples. I disagree with your assumption that you can have the same excitement with burrowed Banelings simply because the Banelings die if used, but "stop burrowed Lurkers" can be saved and thus there is a significant difference between these two. A slower damage unit is always more interesting, because you have the same excitement far longer. | ||
|
dashmode
60 Posts
On July 18 2012 16:44 eviltomahawk wrote: A BW Lurker would be nice, but it obviously overlaps with the Baneling in unit role. However, the SC2 Lurker that got cut in the alpha frankly sucks. Its so high up in the tech tree at Hive tech, not to mention you still have to morph the Hydra Den into a Lurker Den, at least that was the case in the latest alpha build before the Lurker was removed. With such a high position in the tech tree, it can't take advantage of any timings to catch an opponent off-guard with lack of detection, not to mention Brood Lords and Ultralisks share that part of the tech tree and may be better alternatives to an investment into Lurker tech. Lurkers should be on a lair tech, this way they would serve their purpose. Why would u need to go to hive to morph hydralisk den? I don't think it is really needed, you just morph it into lurker den as soon as you have a hydralisk den. Just like it is with a spawning pool, you have to get it first to get a baneling nest and guess what? Banelings are morphed from zerglings, all on the same tech tier. I would love to see lurkers in a current zvz, that would be end of this stupid 30min long roach vs roach battles. Zerg is too much of a 1a race, you get a lot of zergling, banelings, roaches and roll everything in one attack, then people are disappointed that game lasted 1 hour into 1 battle which took 15 secs at most. Lurkers would add more strategy, less 1a to this race. And one last thing, lurkers do not overlap with a banelings, banelings are useless vs armored. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On July 18 2012 11:01 SuperGnu wrote: That is not what i said, i said Lurkers where bad, really really bad and easy to counter/avoid, pro players never had a problem vs Lurkers. You said 'the only use versus non retarded players was for mineral harrass and mineral defence.' I'll explain my response: lurker gets used for millions of other reasons in pro games -> that must mean all the pro gamers are retards because lurkers only get used for mineral harrass/defence vs non-retarded ppl. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Team League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
IPSL
Hawk vs TBD
StRyKeR vs TBD
BSL
n0maD vs perroflaco
TerrOr vs ZZZero
MadiNho vs WolFix
DragOn vs LancerX
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Team League
OSC
BSL
Sterling vs Azhi_Dahaki
Napoleon vs Mazur
Jimin vs Nesh
spx vs Strudel
IPSL
Artosis vs TBD
Napoleon vs TBD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
