| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
On May 18 2014 07:39 Faust852 wrote: Why not just remove SH, it isn't vital in any match up. They are nice in terms of unit design, and the average idea/concept is cool too. Just need more stats tuning | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On May 19 2014 11:28 Existor wrote: They are nice in terms of unit design, and the average idea/concept is cool too. Just need more stats tuning basically protoss needs a harder counter to swarm hosts (aside from 20 tempests) and a softer counter to other zerg tech. i'm fine with protoss being able to build an army that crushes my swarm host ball off the map as long as that army is actually vulnerable to some alternate tech i can use. but what can i switch to against a maxed 200/200 army of colossus/tempest/templar? | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
aka_star
United Kingdom1546 Posts
| ||
|
Facultyadjutant
Sweden1876 Posts
On May 19 2014 12:33 aka_star wrote: Wait what, I don't get it. Since when were spore crawlers an affective counter to brood lords ? Viper + spore crawlers has been used for a while, while not korean, one of the latest usages is - mostly due to him prioritating late game, else lategame and thus bl+spore happens pretty rarely - in stephanos run. | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On May 19 2014 12:33 aka_star wrote: Wait what, I don't get it. Since when were spore crawlers an affective counter to brood lords ? you abduct them into the spores | ||
|
aka_star
United Kingdom1546 Posts
ah I see, I've been away too long to know that issue. | ||
|
NKexquisite
United States911 Posts
| ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
Hi Blizzard | ||
|
LingBlingBling
United States353 Posts
On May 18 2014 09:20 Faust852 wrote: For TvZ vs Mech, I might give you some replay where I lose to a Zerg against Ultra Viper, you'll see how strong this style is. I think it's much stronger than SH play. And about ZvP, I saw so much macro game without SH, I'm 100% you don't need them to win. There are also the ultra/gling style, in addition with viper. Roach hydra viper corru is a totally viable type of play too. Not sure if you understand how zvp works. If you remove swarm host, zerg would have to rely on silly timing attacks, if protoss chooses to play safe and macro into late game sky toss, Zerg has almost nothing other then Queens and infestors, as everything else is 100% garbage vs that comp. Swarm host/viper/corrupter is needed to break that style. Removing swarm host would break a lot of crap in Pro Korean scene. Only zerg that has some what success with other styles vs sky toss not using swarm host, would be SoO doing muta/corrupter vs zest late game with tech switches, but that was map reliant and only works on huge maps like alterzim stronghold. Protoss just have to many tools to keep them safe to be able to macro up into a powerful skytoss late game army. It would be incredibly difficult on smaller maps for zerg to go to late game vs protoss in that stage with out swarm hosts and static d. Once again, Korean Protoss have 100% no issue dealing with swarm host, they figured it out. Sorry Europe and NA is behind, don't mean Blizzard needs to remove units that are not even a issue. Are swarm host terrible design to begin with? Yes, are they even close to being OP or WOL brood lord infestor?? hell no. | ||
|
KOtical
Germany451 Posts
On May 19 2014 16:08 LingBlingBling wrote: Not sure if you understand how zvp works. If you remove swarm host, zerg would have to rely on silly timing attacks, if protoss chooses to play safe and macro into late game sky toss, Zerg has almost nothing other then Queens and infestors, as everything else is 100% garbage vs that comp. Swarm host/viper/corrupter is needed to break that style. Removing swarm host would break a lot of crap in Pro Korean scene. Only zerg that has some what success with other styles vs sky toss not using swarm host, would be SoO doing muta/corrupter vs zest late game with tech switches, but that was map reliant and only works on huge maps like alterzim stronghold. Protoss just have to many tools to keep them safe to be able to macro up into a powerful skytoss late game army. It would be incredibly difficult on smaller maps for zerg to go to late game vs protoss in that stage with out swarm hosts and static d. Once again, Korean Protoss have 100% no issue dealing with swarm host, they figured it out. Sorry Europe and NA is behind, don't mean Blizzard needs to remove units that are not even a issue. Are swarm host terrible design to begin with? Yes, are they even close to being OP or WOL brood lord infestor?? hell no. i dont know much about PvZ since im a terran, all i know is PvZ matches with swarm hosts are the most boring matches i´ve seen in rts history... thats all i have to say... | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
Why do people keep comparing a 2 screen range siege unit with a midrange aoe unit? SH is more similar to siege tanks not lurkers. You can say they both burrow to attack but so do Widow Mines, Banelings, and Spider Mines. It really doesn't makes sense. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On May 19 2014 11:22 FabledIntegral wrote: Regardless of whether he played worse or not, SK clearly chose to employ that strategy. To say it's a "nonfactor" is silly, SH still play a role without question. Not to mention that they are boring as shit to watch. I'm not sure if it's just me being biased or not given my hatred to play against them (as random, hate them in TvZ, ZvZ, and PvZ), whether or not I lose. The playstyle you have to adapt to in order to play against the SH is what's so lame. I realize my posts haven't had too much quality as opposed to more of a rant, but I'm wondering if there are more people out there that have the mindset "regardless of whether or not it's a problem, SH are an overall negative on the game." I'm all for Zerg having appropriate adjustments (even implementation of a new unit, although probably wait til LOTV) in order to compensate for the lack of this unit (or even just threat of this unit), but I just want to see it changed.  .Well get to brainstorming then. Saying the unit sucks and should be removed with no consideration for the fact that it breaks zerg is not getting you anywhere. We've tried that approach with force fields for 4 years now. And in order to make any sensible suggestions you have to understand why zerg relies so heavily on the unit and how entangled it is with other core issues of the game. If you have any more considered ideas, please post them. Basically, classic zerg strategies of overwhelming with numbers don't work, hosts allow a zerg to circumvent this problem. Remove SH and zerg now has to kill P or T with a massive timing or just die horribly in the late game. Once people figure out these timings, zerg is complete shit. If you want to make any kind of real contribution, you have to take everything into account. Posting vacuous nonsense like "remove SH it sucks" or "don't let P and T get to their super comps then!" is just ignoring the reality of how the game works. This unit really does produce an unprecedented amount of rather uninformed posts, it's aggravating to have to sift through them for 46 pages. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9368 Posts
After having tweaked values in the editor, I discovered that you can actually recreate the Lurker effect by keeping the Swarm Host with tehse changes: - Locust duration reduced to roughly 3-4 seconds - Cooldown reduced to around 4-5 seconds - Swarm host mobility increased - Locust DPS increased by around 150% (2.5 times) - The spawn time of Locust eggs set to 0. - Burrow/unburrow duration reduced This reduces the effective range of the Locust to around 10 which means Siege tanks can outrange them. On the other hand, they are are really good at holding postions. I would almost argue that they feel better than Lurkers, because they are even more microintensive since you can constnatly unburrow --> reposition --> move them --> reburrow. | ||
dravernor
Netherlands6181 Posts
| ||
|
kiLen
Finland97 Posts
On May 20 2014 01:24 Hider wrote: After having tweaked values in the editor, I discovered that you can actually recreate the Lurker effect by keeping the Swarm Host with tehse changes: - Locust duration reduced to roughly 3-4 seconds - Cooldown reduced to around 4-5 seconds - Swarm host mobility increased - Locust DPS increased by around 150% (2.5 times) - The spawn time of Locust eggs set to 0. - Burrow/unburrow duration reduced This reduces the effective range of the Locust to around 10 which means Siege tanks can outrange them. On the other hand, they are are really good at holding postions. I would almost argue that they feel better than Lurkers, because they are even more microintensive since you can constnatly unburrow --> reposition --> move them --> reburrow. That sounds like a really cool idea, would you mind recording a short video and show us all what that might look like? | ||
|
purakushi
United States3300 Posts
- whenever a SH/locust kills an enemy unit, that unit becomes a locust (spawn broodling...) | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 20 2014 05:02 purakushi wrote: I always thought they should do this for broodlords, but I guess it could sort of be cool for SH (combined with some other drastic changes to it, of course. Hider's idea is great.) - whenever a SH/locust kills an enemy unit, that unit becomes a locust (spawn broodling...) SH vs SH would break the game... Not the metagame, or the abstract concept of gaming. The actual code would break as Locus kills locus producing locust that makes more locusts and aosdighdkofsdfhsdjkfhsdkgfsdkjfghskdfjh blue screen of death | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On May 20 2014 01:24 Hider wrote: After having tweaked values in the editor, I discovered that you can actually recreate the Lurker effect by keeping the Swarm Host with tehse changes: - Locust duration reduced to roughly 3-4 seconds - Cooldown reduced to around 4-5 seconds - Swarm host mobility increased - Locust DPS increased by around 150% (2.5 times) - The spawn time of Locust eggs set to 0. - Burrow/unburrow duration reduced This reduces the effective range of the Locust to around 10 which means Siege tanks can outrange them. On the other hand, they are are really good at holding postions. I would almost argue that they feel better than Lurkers, because they are even more microintensive since you can constnatly unburrow --> reposition --> move them --> reburrow. I love how you came up on the spot with a better idea than years of developpement of Blizzard. ^^ | ||
|
HeavenResign
United States702 Posts
On May 20 2014 01:24 Hider wrote: After having tweaked values in the editor, I discovered that you can actually recreate the Lurker effect by keeping the Swarm Host with tehse changes: - Locust duration reduced to roughly 3-4 seconds - Cooldown reduced to around 4-5 seconds - Swarm host mobility increased - Locust DPS increased by around 150% (2.5 times) - The spawn time of Locust eggs set to 0. - Burrow/unburrow duration reduced This reduces the effective range of the Locust to around 10 which means Siege tanks can outrange them. On the other hand, they are are really good at holding postions. I would almost argue that they feel better than Lurkers, because they are even more microintensive since you can constnatly unburrow --> reposition --> move them --> reburrow. This needs to be put in a test map and posted on reddit. Sounds awesome. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
