Siege Range Lurker is boring; a suggestion - Page 2
Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
Hexe
United States332 Posts
| ||
404AlphaSquad
838 Posts
On May 07 2015 22:58 TimKim0713 wrote: The thing is that lotv isn't bw. We don't want another bw with just better graphics... Wrong for blizzard to bring back the old unit. Just how arrogant do you need to be to claim to speak on behalf of the entire sc2 community ... | ||
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On May 07 2015 23:42 OtherWorld wrote: I think that the Lurker could use a major rework ; replacing its spine attack with small spine-units spawning for free every ~20 seconds seems good. I agree, but it would need to be able to move underground. Then we would have complete trio of burrow-movement-free-unit-spawning units of Infestors, Lurkers and Swarm Hosts. On a serious note, I am still not exactly sure how good Lurkers are. I've seen them being too effective in certain cases(ZvZ, especially after the Ravager nerf) and then I've seen them not being that good(in TvZ where Marauders with Medivacs simply didn't die and crushed Lurkers with ease). We sitll have to see what will Koreans do with them, with their positioning, timings etc. I wouldn't be surprised if we find them to be too strong even outside of ZvZ, and I agree with others 8 range sounds good to me. | ||
Hider
Denmark9237 Posts
- Lurker --> Less hp or range, but give it an (off creep) movement speed upgrade. - Siege Tank Buff + Raven redesign - Make it easier to get out extra Immortal and perhaps increase Immortal range and mobility/responsiveness to make it easier to target fire Lurkers. - Ravager Skillshot range buff and radius/damage/projectile increase. | ||
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On May 07 2015 23:56 Hider wrote: IMO the Lurker is still a very fun unit fundamentally, but it needs to better offensively, and opponents needs to have proper tools to break it down. Below are some of the changes I would like to see: - Lurker --> Less hp or range, but give it an (off creep) movement speed upgrade. - Siege Tank Buff + Raven redesign - Make it easier to get out extra Immortal and perhaps increase Immortal range and mobility/responsiveness to make it easier to target fire Lurkers. - Ravager Skillshot range buff and radius/damage increase/projectile speed increase. Offensively better¿?¿?¿?¿? U Mad bro¿? It is really good offensively, really tanky and with good range. It's much better than a Colossus offensively. Immortals IMAO need some rework, I think that they have to put more enphasis on "Immortal" and allow the unit to be more usable, trading it for damage. I have a small concept for the Immo, making it more micro intensive, moving towards a more versatile unit.It's based on the concept arts for immortals More core unit: Upgrade to have 7-8 range. Bonus damage vs amored decreased. Increased speed to 2.6-2.7 (HotS standards) Cost decreased to 200/100. Ability activates the Barrier/hardened Shields as a "soft" siege mode. The immortal cannot move if the ability is activated, but gains incredible tankiness (with some restrictions). You can swap into normal mode/soft siege mode (ultratankiness) at your will as long as the Immo has X shields, or you have some type of charge/energy. Offers decision making, constant micromanagement on immortals, and a positional plays to Protoss. What's more, a god-like micromanagement could make you to "block" slow attacks from units like Lurkers, SiegeTanks, or Tempets. This will offer a bit more micro interactions than the dull "Press button gain tankiness for X seconds" Barrier ability. If applied correctly, you could send Immortals into sieged lines and let them soak damage tactically, abusing siege units that are not target fired. Micro intensive, micro counterplay. Easy concept, almost the same as barrier, but hard to master (constant micro) | ||
Merkmerk
United States96 Posts
Lurkers are fantastic now. They're a great response against mech and actually need to be played around. Beta needs some more time as Terran/Protoss adjust to Zerg actually having a serious threat that needs to be scouted, countered, and dealt with. Fortunately Terran has dropship harass and the new siege tank drop nightmare harass, and Protoss has disruptors and the new warp prisms. I love ZvZ now because it can differentiate - you can break the roach vs roach with lurkers, but you're vulnerable to a muta transition. Or you can go for a burrow + speed roach push/harass. | ||
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On May 08 2015 00:52 Merkmerk wrote: "This unit is boring" = dog whistle balance whine. Lurkers are fantastic now. They're a great response against mech and actually need to be played around. Beta needs some more time as Terran/Protoss adjust to Zerg actually having a serious threat that needs to be scouted, countered, and dealt with. Fortunately Terran has dropship harass and the new siege tank drop nightmare harass, and Protoss has disruptors and the new warp prisms. I love ZvZ now because it can differentiate - you can break the roach vs roach with lurkers, but you're vulnerable to a muta transition. Or you can go for a burrow + speed roach push/harass. "Unit is boring" is actually whining about design perspective, not a balance perspective. I don't know how are Lurkers great response to Mech, they are pretty much the only unit you shouldn't play against Mech as they are taking too much supply, can't deal with Thors while Siege Tanks and Cyclones out-range them. They only counter Hellions, but you can make cheap Roaches to deal with Hellbats/Hellions. Maybe they can be good against constant Hellion run-bys but someone with better Hellion control will simply avoid them. I agree with the rest of your post. | ||
Beelzebub1
997 Posts
On May 08 2015 00:52 Merkmerk wrote: "This unit is boring" = dog whistle balance whine. Lurkers are fantastic now. They're a great response against mech and actually need to be played around. Beta needs some more time as Terran/Protoss adjust to Zerg actually having a serious threat that needs to be scouted, countered, and dealt with. Fortunately Terran has dropship harass and the new siege tank drop nightmare harass, and Protoss has disruptors and the new warp prisms. I love ZvZ now because it can differentiate - you can break the roach vs roach with lurkers, but you're vulnerable to a muta transition. Or you can go for a burrow + speed roach push/harass. I don't know if calling it a dog whistle balance whine is very fair. it is the beta and everyone is supposed to be coming out with their opinions and this is a huge addition to our arsenal, although the OP's idea for the Lurker is probably the worst on the thread besides the swarm host burrow spine thing lol I'm really of this mind set though, while the Lurker definitely could use some of the suggested buffs (I really like the increasing of offense in exchange for defense with the 8 range nerf with perhaps a mild HP nerf to just make it overall less tanky and remove a bit of turtle potential) and nerfs Terran and Protoss are going to need an adjustment period where in essence they have to learn to deal with Zerg having a much much more powerful mid game with Lurker zoning capabilities, stronger Infestors and the Ravager. It's not like Protoss or Terran don't have their own share of nice and broken units/abilities right now either, the Disruptor Prism combo is pretty ridiculous and in the hands of a Korean and not the top 20% is going to be way broken, the Siege Tank drop thing hardly even justifies being in the game balance wise (WHY will they just not buff the damn siege tank? Now more then ever with the spread out bases that LOTV is going to use can tanks not receive just a straight up non gimmicky damage buff?) and design wise I'm not sure it even belongs/is good to use/is good to watch in the game. I kinda lump it in there with Cyclones on design potential, which is about a 2.5/10 T__T I'm more of the belief that instead of Zerg needing nerfs honestly the other races just need buffs to compensate. Stronger tanks would go a long way to making Lurkers seem less strong if Terran had some ranged firepower of their own to work with instead of the tank being transformed into a gimmick unit. Protoss just needs the Disruptor removed or redesigned, the Adept made into an actual core unit and a gateway or gateway units rework, Protoss is pretty bad right now and I'm not surprised their complaining about the beta balance wise, the race feels totally gimped and the economy changes hit Protoss way harder then Zerg, totally skewing ZvP in Zerg's favor based on sheer economy while all they got in return was pretty much more gimmicks. | ||
BronzeKnee
United States5208 Posts
On May 08 2015 01:02 Ramiz1989 wrote: "Unit is boring" is actually whining about design perspective, not a balance perspective. They are inseparable. Day9 once made an argument that I'm going to repeat here, though I've changed parts of it to make it more clear, and it may not have the same meaning (I only said it came from Day9 because I don't want people to think I'm plagiarizing him): The game is always balanced. Nothing is stopping anyone from playing any given race or build, and therefore if the 6 pool defeats everything, then everyone would play Zerg and 6 pool, and the skill of the players would decide which 6 pool wins. But then SC2 turns into Pong, which is balanced too. But pretty boring. And therefore we want asymmetrical game design where both sides have an equal chance of winning, despite the fact they have different abilities and skillsets. And because SC2 only consists of 3 races, but each race has a lot of units, we want different tactical play styles. We want Terran Bio to be different than Terran Mech, we want Roach/Hydra play to be different than Ling/Muta, ect... But asymmetrical game design can only exist if both sides are balanced. If Terran Mech isn't strong, people will only play Bio and vice versa. And that is what Blizzard gave us for most of Starcraft 2. Now what the author is arguing is that Lurkers shouldn't be a set and forget siege unit, but rather an AOE combat unit that requires micro to use. I agree, and that is both a design problem and balance problem. On May 08 2015 01:59 Beelzebub1 wrote: I'm more of the belief that instead of Zerg needing nerfs honestly the other races just need buffs to compensate. Stronger tanks would go a long way to making Lurkers seem less strong if Terran had some ranged firepower of their own to work with instead of the tank being transformed into a gimmick unit. I agree with you. But the hard counters of high tech units in general have to go in order to make that work. I got sick to my stomach when I was watching a WCS TvT and a couple of Ravens annihilated a huge group of well positioned Siege Tanks. The Viper does the same too, renders them completely useless. It really doesn't matter how strong Siege Tanks are, or how well someone uses them and protects them as long as they can be hit with Abduct, Blind Clouding or HSM. Those things render Tanks useless far more than the Immortal ever did. Just terrible game design. A proper counter is the relationship between the Stalker or Roach and the Marauder, where skillful unit positioning and movement over a long period of time (compared to the single click and point it takes cast a spell like FF, or Blinding Cloud) matter, despite the fact Marauders counter Stalkers and Roaches. | ||
BronzeKnee
United States5208 Posts
| ||
sparklyresidue
United States5521 Posts
On May 07 2015 23:42 OtherWorld wrote: I think that the Lurker could use a major rework ; replacing its spine attack with small spine-units spawning for free every ~20 seconds seems good. YESSSSSSSSS x1000 more rename spinehost | ||
Hider
Denmark9237 Posts
It is really good offensively, really tanky and with good range. It's much better than a Colossus offensively. If you read OP's complaint, it is related to how stale games can be with the Lurker. On the other hand, it could function both as a defensive and offensive unit in BW. I do think its lack of speed hurts it in that regard. | ||
Zidane
United States1683 Posts
| ||
TokO
Norway577 Posts
On May 08 2015 04:00 Zidane wrote: Are they 1 shot by disruptors? Lurkers are not 1 shot by disruptors. | ||
KingAlphard
Italy1705 Posts
I think they are a good substitute to the swarm host. They have a high range which makes your army hard to engage in a defensive posture but they are also pretty mobile. Lurker harass can destroy a worker line faster than widow mine drops. Right now I think that their dps is a bit too high because they absolutely dismantle everything that gets within their range. It wasn't really like that with swarm hosts. Other than that, they are fine, at least in ZvP. One of the nicest addition to the matchup in a long time. | ||
Mephtral
Sweden60 Posts
On May 08 2015 03:42 Hider wrote: If you read OP's complaint, it is related to how stale games can be with the Lurker. On the other hand, it could function both as a defensive and offensive unit in BW. I do think its lack of speed hurts it in that regard. In my experience (so far) it doesn't create stale games at all Most of my ZvZ is 5+ bases, with lurkers to defend different bases, and a few with the army, if they go too heavy on the lurkers, or dont position them correctly, you can use blinding cloud to get close to them and pick them off easily, or invest into broodlords, and i think lurkers are a good response in lategame zvz vs people that use 2-2 or 3-3 adrenal lings to harass bases around the map ZvT i love them, not having to rely on massive amounts of suicide units again, and i feel that i as a zerg can really shut down areas of the map with a couple of lurkers+support against the terran player unless they really bring tanks and use scans, or ravens. And playing as terran, i love the aggresion in several places on the map with marine tank medivac vs lurkers, theres alot more decisionmaking and positioning all over the map i feel, compared to throwing biomine armies straight into lingbane muta for 15 minutes. (The problem imo is that going bio in tvz is pretty silly , once ulltras are out.) As for ZvP, i think they are completely broken vs protoss ground, but then again, i think that's a problem with protoss, rather than a problem with lurkers. and so far i dont think my zvp games have been stale at all, even with lurkers (and i use them mostly aggresively in that matchup) | ||
Quateras
Germany867 Posts
| ||
Beelzebub1
997 Posts
On May 08 2015 04:11 Mephtral wrote: In my experience (so far) it doesn't create stale games at all Most of my ZvZ is 5+ bases, with lurkers to defend different bases, and a few with the army, if they go too heavy on the lurkers, or dont position them correctly, you can use blinding cloud to get close to them and pick them off easily, or invest into broodlords, and i think lurkers are a good response in lategame zvz vs people that use 2-2 or 3-3 adrenal lings to harass bases around the map ZvT i love them, not having to rely on massive amounts of suicide units again, and i feel that i as a zerg can really shut down areas of the map with a couple of lurkers+support against the terran player unless they really bring tanks and use scans, or ravens. And playing as terran, i love the aggresion in several places on the map with marine tank medivac vs lurkers, theres alot more decisionmaking and positioning all over the map i feel, compared to throwing biomine armies straight into lingbane muta for 15 minutes. (The problem imo is that going bio in tvz is pretty silly , once ulltras are out.) As for ZvP, i think they are completely broken vs protoss ground, but then again, i think that's a problem with protoss, rather than a problem with lurkers. and so far i dont think my zvp games have been stale at all, even with lurkers (and i use them mostly aggresively in that matchup) +1 to the better ZvZ games with Lurkers, being able to transition away from roaches is soooo nice Protoss ground is just pitiful in general right now against more then just Lurkers T__T | ||
tili
United States1332 Posts
edit: the repositioning of lurkers has been super cool in the lotv games I've watched, for instance, to kill retreating units... | ||
| ||