|
Hey guys, my id is Probe, and I am a Australian Protoss player currently on the team ROOT. Regarding my league last season I had two accounts in KR GM, although both aren't very well ranked  .
I really should be studying for exams next week but oh well. Felt like writing something.
This will be my third topic.
You can find my first one about Oracles here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/514763-changing-the-oracle
and my second one about the mothership core here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2/514878-changing-the-mothership-core-probes-thoughts
With blizzard making changes to LOTV at the end of this year, now is as good a time as any to think about these aspects of Starcraft 2.
Even if you don't agree with them at all, let's have a discussion!
My third topic is on...
The lurker
![[image loading]](http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/c/cb/Lurker_SC2_Art1.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20140512134143)
The problem:
ZvT
The lurker does not exist in this matchup. We have had Pro Lotv for like a year now, and how many times has this been built in ZvT? Zero times? Maybe once or twice near the beginning. Even if I just can't remember probably, all of those styles have now long gone.
Why do we not see the lurker in ZvT? A combination of medivacs, the cost of lurkers, and tanks.
To actually build lurkers you need to commit to hydralisk, which in the current ZvT meta just isn't viable. Furthermore you then have to wait for the hydralisk den to morph into a lurker den which takes forever (in order for PvZ to be balanced). They also clearly cost money. It just isn't worth it.
So what is the goal when you build lurkers? I believe it is to lock down an area. You would put 2 lurkers at the top of a ramp or right in a choke point and Terran should never be able to break it with just bio. This would work if Terran was just running around with bio, but for the most part that isn't the case. Terrans are doing drops, going behind these areas. Putting the lurkers then in bases to stop the drops isn't worth the investment, when you could just have other units there with possibly some static defense.
With the addition of the tankivac also, the ability to push the lurkers back really quickly is there as well. So overall what I am saying in this matchup is that the investment is too large, and you do better with other things.
ZvZ
The lurker sees a bit of use in this matchup and it probably is in a decent spot for ZvZ. I really am not a ZvZ expert, but we see them as a early lategame transition. They are really strong although not too overwhelming. Not really a problem in this matchup in my mind, but maybe other people will disagree.
ZvP
ZvP is the lurker's matchup! At the beginning of legacy of the void, lurkers were causing all kinds of problems for Protoss players. Their massive range, high damage, burrowed attack and quick build time eventually led to the lurker den build time being dramatically increased to allow Protoss to get into the stage where they could deal with them. Still they caused problems, and were a strong unit definitely. In order to counter the lurker centric play you saw the Phoenix Immortal Chargelot Archon style develop and caused masssive problems for Zerg. This changed over time to mass mass mass immortal play to even harder counter lurkers.
Then lurkers dropped out of the meta a bit. It was all about hitting hydra bane timings or other timings to cripple the Protoss before they managed to get their immortal count high. Protoss players then starting playing adept into stalker sentry immortal disruptor stuff that you see today, and Zergs now respond to that with Ling Bane Ravager.
In the future with the hydralisk and baneling buff you might see lurkers come back up again, but I think they should be changed. Because of the 9 range balancing them for zvt and zvp becomes really difficult.
Sorry for a bit of the history of ZvP meta in lotv, but this is where we stand today. The lurker is a decent unit in ZvP. We definitely do see them being built, and on some maps they are really strong and difficult for the Protoss to deal with (Like King Sejong Station. Knock down the natural rocks and do a drop into the main at the same time as you push the natural from both sides). However, because of it's 9 range attack it can't be "too strong", resulting in them being really strong before the critical count of units is reached, and then being walked over as soon as the Protoss has enough immortals and a small concave.
My suggestions:
Lurker range reduced to 6(maybe less)
Lurker damage changed to 40(maybe even less) from 20 (+10 to armoured)
Reduce lurker den morph time to 71 seconds from 86 seconds (maybe even less)
I included this "maybe even ..." statement because without proper testing you can't figure out where the values should be.
Reasoning:
1. The general idea is to make they stronger in holding locations, whether that be a choke point or your mineral line, while reducing the offensive power of the lurker. The lurker den morph time is to make them more available in all matchups.
2. The damage change is trying to make it stronger at defense. Lurkers will be stronger at defending adept/zealot/hellion/bio/etc runbys and stronger at holding the big deathball pushes. Hopefully this encourages splitting up of the army a bit more on both sides.
3. I suggest range 6 so that the damage can be really increased. With hydralisk getting a range buff they hydralisk will be able to sync with the lurkers to cover them. The hydralisk buff as well already encourages lurkers to be built, so I don't agree with a cost change on the lurker.
Conclusion: While it is sometimes used in ZvZ, the lurker isn't used in zvt, and in PvZ it is either really strong or quite weak in PvZ depending on the game time. These two things will continue no matter how much you change the current unit statistics. Let's try and find a good role for the lurker.
The only way to try these changes is to test them in game. Hopefully I will have a test extension mod some time.
Do you agree with (any) of my changes? Do you have other changes? Do you disagree completely? Post below and let's all have a discussion.
|
The lurker does not exist in this matchup. We have had Pro Lotv for like a year now, and how many times has this been built in ZvT? Zero times? Maybe once or twice near the beginning.
I believe soO used them this morning in his OlimoLeague matches against Gumiho. Gumiho was using a TvZ mech style and lurkers do have a niche role there. With good viper usage, you can viably use hydras versus mech and since there's a reason to have a hydra getting the lurker den isn't as cost inefficient as it would be.
Otherwise you described the problem very accurately for ZvT. If bio acts like it did in brood war then lurkers would be really powerful. But we've spent 6 years distancing from that and despite having the same names and fundamental designs, they behave very differently. A protoss gateway army is closer to BW bio than SC2 bio is now. There is no reason to go down the expensive path to get lurkers when other units "do it better", and lurkers don't really do all that much except against a head on un-micro'd engagement against an army that isn't in a concave. So never.
Your ZvZ assessment is underselling the value of lurkers and how valuable they are in both zoning, and really blocking out an effective ultralisk transition. ZvP I will just pass on and say you understand it better than me.
The suggestion is interesting and I'd be willing to try it. Their range isn't supposed to be their valuable component. It's their ability to deliver gruesome amounts of splash damage in a zone. Switching it up to be more damaging at a shorter range would be alright by me. The challenge here is using a lurker offensively. 5 range is a pretty damn short area. Tanks (which are definitely getting buffed against lurkers), disruptors, colosii, storms, hydras, libs, hell even a ravagers standard 6 range attack is gonna hit the lurker outside its zone. Not bile, just its regular attack.
So it'd be interesting, but it'd dramatically change how the lurker functions and fights would be really tricky and involve a lot of positioning micro.
|
arent they buffing hydras significantly. Thats gonna put it right in the meta
|
Lurkers are a siege unit, and making their range a hydra like range (even shorter up to your post) will make it hard to use them offensively. Zerg units cannot be used for defense only, as usually zerg has less army supply as it has more drones then toss probes, and especially then terran SCVs (who can mine using Orbital energy).
On the other hand, in case in your opinion making the lurker short ranged will solve the problems with early lurkers in PvZ, a change which can be done is making the lurkers short ranged, cutting to some extent the Lurker Den morph time, and adding an upgrade at the lurker den which will increase the lurker range. It can make the lurker take part in ZvT, as they will be in reach sooner then they are now, and on the other hand going for offensive lurkers in ZvP will be a quite a commitment as it will require another upgrade (besides the hydra upgrade).
In other words, may be a smaller change to the lurker can be interesting.
|
Yup, the entire problem with the Lurker summed out pretty nicely, you're way underselling it in ZvZ, it's phenomenal, going into a defensive Roach early game into a Roach/Hydra very nicely deflects early Mutalisk play and then the transition into Lurkers is just straight up deadly with Brood Lords being the only effective.
In ZvZ my opinion is he who get's to Lurker tech without dying will find himself in a good spot vs. his opponent because the only reliable counter takes far longer to reach then getting Lurkers out does (Hive, Greater Spire, nooo...)
The entire problem with the unit's viability vs. Terran is that the Siege Tank just fantastically wrecks them and drops neuter their potential, even if it was cheaper and better I still can't imagine it finding a way in this match up. Kind of like how mech will kind of ALWAYS suck vs. Protoss because the Immortal just rofl stomps armored units so cost efficiently, primarily the tank.
Tldr I think weaker Lurkers hitting the field faster would promote interesting skirmish opportunities in both ZvP and ZvZ and make them feeling less overwhelming in the mid to late game, flip side I think it's always going to be crap vs Terran because mobility is the Lurkers real weakness and bio is not lacking in that department by a long shot.
|
Lurkers supposed to be siege unit. That's their part. With 6 range they can siege shit. I mean 6 range??? Same as Stalker? Same as Immortal? This proposal is riddiculous.
With current game design, Zerg doesn't need more defensive tools, but they need offensive ones. Already Protoss can turtle with shooting pylons and get free and deadly harras thanks to adepts. Man, i know that everybody loves his race, but this is too much. To be honest i don't think it's accurate to say that Protoss has problems with Lurkers. They have soooo many tools to deal with it. U mentioned phoenixes, there are disruptors, immortals, psionic storms even. Fun fact- u did mentioned that Lurkers were pushed from PvZ meta because of immortals, right? So what's the problem?
I wouldn't worry about Lurkers. With design changes coming, i think they will be more used in TvZ. Blizzard said that they want Hydralisk to be core unit for Zerg even in this matchup. That's why they buffed it's speed and range. With that, morphing them to Lurkers for some ground control and extra damage will fit perfectly. Especially as they remove cancer tankivacks. Combined with blinding cloud, i think that Lurkers could be a tool to break siege lines vs Terran.
Overall, i like that u think creatively about the game we all love, but this changes of Lurkers are in my opinion unacceptable.
|
Here is the list of non viable terran units until very unique situations, including "mech" wich you can only pull of on certain maps against weaker opponents.
Mines
Raven
Thor
Hellion (or you do hellbat marine)
Cyclone
Banhsee
Battlecruiser
Viking (until Broodlords, then you need to make 10-25 in a hurry)
None of this units you will ever need in the TvZ MU wich goes reaper into Bio Tank into "oh god I hope my Liberator count is good"
Nerf the Broodlord and give Terran a decent Anti-Air Ground unit, and soooon (TM) you will see a combination of Lurker Broodlord.
|
There is no way that Blizzard will nerf Broodlord more than they did already. Must i remind u that they already nerfed Ultralisk lately? I fu want an autowin with your race just go play vs easy computer. That will fit your demands.
|
Why would I wanna risk getting into lurkers when I can just play roach ravager infestor? Maybe its more a cost issue.
|
You missed every point so far.
+
I dont get the approach to make units strong as duck to bring them back into consideration.
Terran operates on the weakest units from slow production and gets constant nerfs, but has to "finde a way".
Make this approach for Protoss and Zerg too, and you will have a great game.
When it was true for Protoss, they came up with Archon toilett, and Sentry immortal or Forge Expand. Yes most of it got stale after a while, but when discovered it was mindblowing.
Now they just make MOAR adepts and warp prismsms.
When Zerg was on the back foot against MMMM Dark came UP with Roach Corruptor Ling..wich ultimatively ends in modern RR-Zerg of Snute.
Muta Ling Bling was hard to play (because Missing injects costing you the abilty to sustain) and there was a solution other than to give Lings 100HP buff.
|
"Terran operates on the weakest units from slow production and gets constant nerfs, but has to "finde a way".- is this a joke? BIO is the most cost effective and rounded composition in the game. With great dps, great mobility and conciderably low cost (more mineral based composition). U have production issues with BIO? I mean, nah...it must be a joke. I refuse to believe that u are serious with that.
I agree with Protoss though. I feel like it's not fair that with overcharge on pylons, they have easy defence (they don't even make photon cannons anymore to be honest) and cheap because based on energy from one hero unit, combined with warpin tech. Constant chrono on nexuses in early and early midgame gives them greater economy than Zerg's even and they have the strongest harras in the game. Adepts are mindless units. The worst part is that even if u scout them, even if u have units to defend splitted perfectly- there i s no way u can stop the damage. U just loose bunch of drones and cannot even counter attack. That's often GG already.
Everybody loves Neeb now, i respect him, but to be honest he just abuses perfectly all elements in Protoss play that by design are giving them edge over other races.
|
I think you're committing a little too much on that hiroshOne. It is safe and accurate to say that pylon overcharges have replaced early game cannons. However late game, in PvZ at least, cannons are standard. It's getting a fast forge just for cannons that have been replaced.
Protoss that don't are either: Really far ahead, really above the opponents level, or really dead when 30 lings do a runby.
|
Sentry stops runby perfectly. As it was stopping this since WOL. Pylon overcharge stops almost every counter attack, and Protoss can fully commit in being agressive. I would be ok with Pylon overcharge, as i understand the need of defending things like drops or runby but not combined with such imba unit as Adept is. Adept supposed to be tanky unit, that is more mobile than Zealot. At least that's what Blizzard was saying. But they failed. Instead Adept became mineral line destroyer. I feel like u should play some Terran or Zerg and feel the pain yourself. It's not so rare to see player prepared on Adepts, with his army of roaches, lings or bio splitted between their bases, waiting for Adepts in mineral lines. But as soon as they come- that matters not. You loose 20+ workers as if your army wasn't there. Ha! and probably most of the adepts will still survive, as the cooldown on shade is so short, that they start another one just after the first finish. It's bad design. If u're in Root just ask Catz, as he states the same all the time on his stream.
|
I main Zerg at 4200 MMR. I'm obviously not a professional but you do see cannons in professional replays, and I see them in my own games. I'll dredge up some vods if that will help.
mGGrinehart, the OP of the thread, is the Probe you're thinking of.
|
I don't entirely know how we get talking about protoss again but anyway.
On October 26 2016 15:09 Phaenoman wrote:
Why would I wanna risk getting into lurkers when I can just play roach ravager infestor? Maybe its more a cost issue.
Possibly it is a cost issue (and I presume you are talking ZvT). However, even with their current kit, if you made them cheaper would this benefit ZvT majorly? Would we see it more often? Hard to say but that would impact ZvP greatly as well.
On October 26 2016 14:41 hiroshOne wrote:
With current game design, Zerg doesn't need more defensive tools, but they need offensive ones. Already Protoss can turtle with shooting pylons and get free and deadly harras thanks to adepts. Man, i know that everybody loves his race, but this is too much. To be honest i don't think it's accurate to say that Protoss has problems with Lurkers. They have soooo many tools to deal with it. U mentioned phoenixes, there are disruptors, immortals, psionic storms even. Fun fact- u did mentioned that Lurkers were pushed from PvZ meta because of immortals, right? So what's the problem?
I didn't actually say that Protoss struggled with lurkers. Like you pointed out, once you get those later units then Protoss often just rolls even defensive lurkers. But of course you have to get to them.
On October 26 2016 13:21 bulya wrote:
On the other hand, in case in your opinion making the lurker short ranged will solve the problems with early lurkers in PvZ, a change which can be done is making the lurkers short ranged, cutting to some extent the Lurker Den morph time, and adding an upgrade at the lurker den which will increase the lurker range. It can make the lurker take part in ZvT, as they will be in reach sooner then they are now, and on the other hand going for offensive lurkers in ZvP will be a quite a commitment as it will require another upgrade (besides the hydra upgrade).
The reason I didn't suggest this is because we already had that in the game. Blizzard moved away from a range upgrade in the beta, so for w/e reason they did that, I wanted to provide a new suggestion.
|
EDIT: Double post
It's interesting to hear that soo used it. I think armani used it as well recently. Except he got shrekt.
|
I feel like this change would make them significantly worse in nearly every situation except for ones involving players who literally just A-move into them.
Liberators would demolish them, the new 70 dmg siege tank and tankivacs in general would demolish them.
Protoss would have a much easier time beating away at them with disruptors or hell even collosi at that point.
Zerg would have an even easier time dealing with them as well with bile heavily outranging it. Basically everything in the game would be able to avoid its huge dps increase because its range would be laughable.
|
So with Tankavacs going away, it's possible that Lurkers might find a use in TvZ. Now if you pull off a flank, medivacs grab tanks and the tanks are fine. With the new patch, Tanks would get slaughtered and don't have the mobility.
Not saying it's going to happen, but I am hoping Lurkers become more viable in TvZ now that Tankavacs are going away, this is imo one of the biggest reasons they aren't used right now is because of flying tanks.
|
Isn't your lurker the one we had at the start of lotv.
It had 6 range and a shorter morphing time and an upgrade for 9 range. Then blizzard changed it to the current state.
The only difference is the damage, where i agree with Jamileon, that it probably would not compensate the lesser range.
I'm just speaking from memory, but it seems like they tried your idea already and thought it didnt work.
Am I wrong?
|
On October 26 2016 16:39 hiroshOne wrote:
Sentry stops runby perfectly. As it was stopping this since WOL. Pylon overcharge stops almost every counter attack, and Protoss can fully commit in being agressive. I would be ok with Pylon overcharge, as i understand the need of defending things like drops or runby but not combined with such imba unit as Adept is. Adept supposed to be tanky unit, that is more mobile than Zealot. At least that's what Blizzard was saying. But they failed. Instead Adept became mineral line destroyer. I feel like u should play some Terran or Zerg and feel the pain yourself. It's not so rare to see player prepared on Adepts, with his army of roaches, lings or bio splitted between their bases, waiting for Adepts in mineral lines. But as soon as they come- that matters not. You loose 20+ workers as if your army wasn't there. Ha! and probably most of the adepts will still survive, as the cooldown on shade is so short, that they start another one just after the first finish. It's bad design. If u're in Root just ask Catz, as he states the same all the time on his stream.
that was a lot of things that I doubt I've ever said, though granted I have a -personal- issue with adepts it's hardly from a design perspective, I think the unit is powerful and that's being addressed in the patch at the end of the year. I think adepts are a lot easier to do damage with or execute than they are to defend against, on a mechanical front that is challenging for a player like myself who has trouble keeping up with all of it. I think that can be mitigated in many other ways or areas, in fact I am a fan of adepts and shades, from a design perspective I think the unit is cool and unique. A small tweak like just reducing the shade's vision will increase the risk of shading adepts, that risk may be enough to even things out on other fronts such as the amount of attention required, as attention spend would in this case pay off more often for zerg and prevent P from committing as often in the first place (also forcing additional actions such as determining if to, and canceling the shade more often than now).
|
On October 26 2016 10:31 mGGrinehart wrote:
1. The general idea is to make they stronger in holding locations, whether that be a choke point or your mineral line, while reducing the offensive power of the lurker. The lurker den morph time is to make them more available in all matchups.
2. The damage change is trying to make it stronger at defense. Lurkers will be stronger at defending adept/zealot/hellion/bio/etc runbys and stronger at holding the big deathball pushes. Hopefully this encourages splitting up of the army a bit more on both sides.
3. I suggest range 6 so that the damage can be really increased. With hydralisk getting a range buff they hydralisk will be able to sync with the lurkers to cover them. The hydralisk buff as well already encourages lurkers to be built, so I don't agree with a cost change on the lurker.
I agree with most of what you said, but I think Lurkers would need to do friendly fire if you really want to change how ZvP with Lurker compositions is played out. The range reduction might work too, but I don't think it will change the ZvP dynamic drastically.
Right now in ZvP, Lurkers seem to just grant zone control to the Zerg until the Protoss can steamroll the Zerg. If the Protoss can't get there, the Zerg will vice versa steamroll the Protoss. This is obviously very binary and pretty unexciting to watch.
A range reduction and damage increase will likely not change that. The Protoss might have to turtle/harass more heavily, but in the end will only win with a superior army.
Friendly fire on the other hand implies that an engagement in a zone controlled by Lurkers might reset both armies. This adds a third—potentially more exciting—outcome.
|
Ok. I'm done with reading this topic just because it's a gateway to the realm of more and more stupid ideas like:
"but I think Lurkers would need to do friendly fire if you really want to change how ZvP with Lurker compositions is played out."
Yeah, lets make Zerg splash damage friendly fire Zerg units, as that doesn't matter that most of Zerg units are melee and fight within enemy lines. Time to visit a doctor.
|
On October 27 2016 17:53 ROOTCatZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2016 16:39 hiroshOne wrote:
Sentry stops runby perfectly. As it was stopping this since WOL. Pylon overcharge stops almost every counter attack, and Protoss can fully commit in being agressive. I would be ok with Pylon overcharge, as i understand the need of defending things like drops or runby but not combined with such imba unit as Adept is. Adept supposed to be tanky unit, that is more mobile than Zealot. At least that's what Blizzard was saying. But they failed. Instead Adept became mineral line destroyer. I feel like u should play some Terran or Zerg and feel the pain yourself. It's not so rare to see player prepared on Adepts, with his army of roaches, lings or bio splitted between their bases, waiting for Adepts in mineral lines. But as soon as they come- that matters not. You loose 20+ workers as if your army wasn't there. Ha! and probably most of the adepts will still survive, as the cooldown on shade is so short, that they start another one just after the first finish. It's bad design. If u're in Root just ask Catz, as he states the same all the time on his stream. that was a lot of things that I doubt I've ever said, though granted I have a -personal- issue with adepts it's hardly from a design perspective, I think the unit is powerful and that's being addressed in the patch at the end of the year. I think adepts are a lot easier to do damage with or execute than they are to defend against, on a mechanical front that is challenging for a player like myself who has trouble keeping up with all of it. I think that can be mitigated in many other ways or areas, in fact I am a fan of adepts and shades, from a design perspective I think the unit is cool and unique. A small tweak like just reducing the shade's vision will increase the risk of shading adepts, that risk may be enough to even things out on other fronts such as the amount of attention required, as attention spend would in this case pay off more often for zerg and prevent P from committing as often in the first place (also forcing additional actions such as determining if to, and canceling the shade more often than now).
Maybe i overreached, but that's because i noticed that few times as u were upset about adepts. I thought i heared "I hate this unit" few times on your stream. Sorry for pulling you in this. I always cheered for idea of increasing the cooldown on shade itself. Shading left and right wouldn't be so forgiving as it is now. Ofc we can concider Adepts good design, but at the moment, especially in ZvP i feel like it went the wrong way.
|
On October 27 2016 19:35 hiroshOne wrote:
Ok. I'm done with reading this topic just because it's a gateway to the realm of more and more stupid ideas like:
"but I think Lurkers would need to do friendly fire if you really want to change how ZvP with Lurker compositions is played out."
Yeah, lets make Zerg splash damage friendly fire Zerg units, as that doesn't matter that most of Zerg units are melee and fight within enemy lines. Time to visit a doctor.
You're absolutely right! How stupid stupid of me to expect Zerg players to build a ranged composition when going for Lurkers. It cannot be done. Obviously Zergs can only build Lings and Ultras. Also very dumb of me to expect Zerg players to have unit control (like idk maybe hold position or sth). My bad! Very Sorry!
|
I personally think that Lurkers are useless as soon as liberator range finishes (and personally in TvZ I think that is an important upgrade to get as the ultralisk den is building) and just vs liberators and tanks in general. The Lurker I think right now wouldn't need a damage boost but maybe something else? Idk if it would be over powered but what if it slowed the area it attacked? kind of like marauder concussive shell but it wouldn't attack as fast? or instead of that give it like a Damage over time or ability to do more. What that ability would be I'm not really sure sorry if this post is unnecessary and doesn't help haha but um yeah thats my suggestion!
PS: Overlords picking up lurkers 8) IN SIEGE MODE! :D
|
After thinking it over, I feel that ZvP is one of the best match ups and easily the best matchup for Z in SC2. That is in terms of enjoyment from playing and watching for me personally. I could care less what the win rate is. It's fun to play. There's lots of thinking, lots of timings, reactions, builds, strategies, all sorts of shit that makes it a really unpredictable match that lets whoever had the better idea express themselves.
Compare that to ZvT. If you could place liquibets on what a player will do in a TvZ we'd all be rolling in the points. It isn't so much that the lurker has a problem. It's certainly fine in ZvZ, and it's very good in ZvP, but it's absolutely shit in ZvT.
And ZvT has had problems since beta in 2010. People say the best time of ZvT was in HotS. Not currently and that's an important distinction since a lot of people say SC2 is at its best today. Unless it's on this topic. So instead of looking at the lurker like it needs to change, the road I see is the match up needs to change. So much damage has been done to this game because a specific thing was too strong or too weak, and instead of addressing the underlying problem we focus on dicking around with % buffs/nerfs. Which have undesirable effects on the other matchups. The queen buff is no better candidate to say how badly a buff to fix a problem created by a buff will have unintended and undesirable consequences across all matchups and strategies.
Rather than change the lurker, I'd like to change TvZ. Evaluate what made it so enjoyable previously and what makes it less enjoyable now. Find the underlying problems that make the hydra (and by extension the lurker) a dogshit unit against bio, and improve it from there.
That last bit is the most important part to me. I'd gladly experiment with lurkers if it didn't mean going down a suicidal path of fast lair into hydra den into lurker den against bio which shreds hydras.
On October 27 2016 21:29 Ryu3600 wrote:I personally think that Lurkers are useless as soon as liberator range finishes (and personally in TvZ I think that is an important upgrade to get as the ultralisk den is building) and just vs liberators and tanks in general. The Lurker I think right now wouldn't need a damage boost but maybe something else? Idk if it would be over powered but what if it slowed the area it attacked? kind of like marauder concussive shell but it wouldn't attack as fast? or instead of that give it like a Damage over time or ability to do more. What that ability would be I'm not really sure sorry if this post is unnecessary and doesn't help haha but um yeah thats my suggestion! PS: Overlords picking up lurkers 8) IN SIEGE MODE! :D
Oh but that'd never work since T is the end all be all ranged attack with bio. So obviously now we're gonna have to add fart boosters and and immortalesque shielding on overlords!
|
6 range on lurker is bad, protoss will be allowed to move foward with HT and storm your army, making you retreat and leave the lurkers without support.
After 6 years it's not likely they'll work on the protoss deathball, hell, took them 5 to give zerg some antiair. Still, it's less painful to die to archon immortal amove than forcefields, at least if feels like you had a chance to do better.
In a macro game, Zerg goes for a timing and if it fails they lose, that's the match up.
|
Protoss is too well rounded race compared to others. They got perfect defence, and perfect offence with denying defender's advantage technique which is warpin. They got great economy, because of auto chronoboost, that with shooting pylons and warpins are free to abuse without problems. Also they got the strongest units and the best splash damage in the game...Actually they don't have weak points, well, maybe in early game- that's why u see so many Zergs trying allin protoss in that stage.
In ZvT the problem is with design. Zerg was dynamic, makro oriented race with weaker units but the possibilty of making lots of them (swarmlike). In LOTV Zerg macro was nerfed hardest of all races. Since the only advantage over Terran is Zerg's late game, it was unavoidable they they develop super turtle defending style to rush to Hive. It's basically the only chance of winning vs Terran. I found very strange, that Blizzard nerfed Zerg's macro so hard and in the same time made harras so much stronger.
Lots of Terrans whine and cry over Zerg's late game- especially about Ultra armour. Now they are nerfin ultra effective armour in late game -1. I'm ok with that as i always stated that there is a room for that change which is nerfing Zerg's late game. But only if Blizzard buff midgame for Zerg in the same time. I wish that Blizzard revised their idea of bringing back 4 larva, at it would make Zerg swarmlike as it should be and give back this race it's only advantage over others- macro.
|
I think it's okay that the Lurker isn't used in ZvT very often. BIO with Medivacs are too mobile, micro-able, and cost effective for Lurkers to be the answer. If you try to fix that, you'll end up making Lurkers OP in the other MU's (ZvP especially). Plus, I don't really see how Lurkers become a viable option ZvT. With Mass select, no high-ground advantage, etc. it's far to easy to combat them compared to what it was in Broodwar (which is okay).
|
On October 27 2016 21:56 Probe1 wrote:
Rather than change the lurker, I'd like to change TvZ. Evaluate what made it so enjoyable previously and what makes it less enjoyable now. Find the underlying problems that make the hydra (and by extension the lurker) a dogshit unit against bio, and improve it from there.
I know this is going to go really off topic, but Terran Starport units are the problem with the TvX, and the entire game, in general.
Terran is far too reliant on Medivacs in the early game to be able to be aggressive before they're out. In all 3 matchups, Medivac's combined healing power and harassment potential is paramount to the race functioning, to the point that Terran generally doesn't even leave the safety of their base because unstimmed bio has no way to defend itself against basic Gateway units or mass Ling/Baneling. The multi-task and dropping aspects of it are fun to watch, but it's created an arms race that makes dictates the entirety of SC2 because the other races are then forced to only play styles that can defend drops (Ling/Muta for the first two expansions) or we get band-aids for Protoss like Photon Overcharge where the developers really couldn't think of anything better.
I want Medivacs to lose their ability to heal and Medics to be re-added to the game, which will have two significant outcomes: Terran will be able to move out of their base earlier in the game, because Medics will provide just enough sustainability to small bio forces where you can reasonably trade units; and the last outcome will be that we can stop the "drop harassment" arms race because by definition, Terran will have either less DPS or less sustainability in dropship harassment and we can remove the bandaids like Photon Overcharge.
You might ask yourself how Terran will be viable at the pro level with their harassment options so limited, and I would answer that the incoming Siege Tank buff is so game-changing that Terran map control will be our new focus, and not just our APM. We joke about Terran player's wrists' ending their careers, and the general community consensus is that at the highest level Terran is harder to play than Zerg or Protoss because it requires such a large amount of APM that it's just unsustainable for everyone but the absolute best Korean Terrans. If Terran became less harassment focused and more map control focused, would we see more Terran players having success at the amateur, semi-pro and foreign pro scenes? I think so.
---
Do I really have to go into why Liberators are a problem?
Flying units which do not have to obey map terrain which are far more effective than Siege Tanks at creating map control. They siege up quicker, they do more damage, are harder to kill because they fly, more massable and require less infrastructure. Like Medivacs, their effectiveness is so extreme that once again both other races are getting ridiculous buffs to counter them (queen range) or are forced to play with units that can specifically counter them (mostly Stalkers, which isn't bad considering how prevalent Adepts are, or Tempests)
Liberators need their roles changed from an air-to-ground killing machine to a supplement to an actual Siege Tank army. This can partly be addressed already with the incoming Siege Tank buff since Terran does need a way to retain map control, so we are free to give Liberators a different function or just remove it, since it's already redundant with the Banshee and Viking at the exact same time.
|
Lunareste this is such a stupid idea you gave me that I have to share it and edit my post after I read and fully digest what you wrote right now.
You know how hellions were kinda meh at dealing with mass light units and easily surrounded? So we got hellbats? Give lurkers an upgrade that allows them to switch to a conical attack like hellbats.
Why is this helpful against bio? Bio largely negates lurkers because of its mobility, lack of high ground advantage, and speed in which it can spread from a ball to a concave. That last aspect comes into play here. Instead of the lurkers now unhelpful straight attack, it can hit bio simultaneously in a cone directly combatting the concave. Obviously at full damage this would be ridiculous and it'd have to have a significant penalty to damage done in exchange, as well as having the arc only face the lurkers front for the same reasons as a hellbat. Unlike a hellbat, it can't turn without unburrowing so positioning would be integral.
This will obviously never happen since it's too close to another unit but it made me smile when I thought of it. It combines Probes idea of reducing its range for higher damage while maintaining what makes the lurker good in other matchups.
---
On removing medivacs and replacing them with medics. I'd love it, I'd play Terran more often, and most importantly - Blizzard will never do it. It's just not the game they've spent all this time making. Maybe (cough probably) it'd make it a better game. We wouldn't have this silly harass arms race where everything that doesn't need buffs ends up getting them because of the strength of harass. But will Blizzard realistically change something so fundamental to the core of the game? I seriously doubt it. No matter how much I want it. They just won't. And I hate to say this but these are the people that can't even figure out how to release a portrait pack BEFORE the WCS championship so we can show our support. These aren't the best and brightest minds in esports here. I don't see them taking such a brave risk even if they wanted to.
Liberators are just an all around mess of a unit. When I got back to the game last August they, along with widow mines, were two of the three things that made me constantly mutter (also swarm hosts just what the fuck). I think the upcoming balance patch that will curtail their dominant anti air power will do some good and it's worth re-evaluating their role afterwards. I probably won't love them but as long as they aren't a Mary Sue "My everything hurts" unit then okay, I can accept them.
|
I think the luker is fine atm. Its fine if not all units should be used in every single situation, there are already too many "too versatile" units. At this moment we have the situation: Made too many roaches? make some ravagers. Too many hydra's? turn them into lurkers. Adding an extra morph mode to the lurker and the question is: why make a different unit instead of mass hydra lurker. Which is already the case in pvz (at least in a lot of the games i saw), yes thats why you suggest 6 range, but that would make the protoss "amove" more effective instead of positioning.
Lurkers already have an extra feature, you dont see them at all. Unlike a mine, stasis ward etc. no burrow mark.
Instead of adding/changing units they should be more consistent on unit design, that will help/improve the game a lot more.
|
On October 26 2016 14:57 hiroshOne wrote:
Must i remind u that they already nerfed Ultralisk lately?
r u referring to the PTR nerf where they increased the base armor by +1 and decreased the amount of the Chitinous Plating by 2?
that's not much of a nerf.
|
You can now play the extension mod to test these changes.
Just search Probe and you will find the 2 test mods so far.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/s6m9SbS.jpg)
I am a real noob with the editor and actually couldn't figure out as few things. So at the moment lurker range is now 6 and damage is 40+10(armoured). Lurker den build time is the same. Hopefully I can figure these things out but this gives a good idea imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
