|
Anyone who's gotten into a ZvZ Lurker stalemate in LotV knows that it can almost feel like a Terran siege tank war, with big stationary armies that are completely unable to attack into each other.
Lurkers can be left stationary because with 9 range, there's hardly a reason to move them. This completely loses a big part of what was cool about lurkers in Brood War: having to move and burrow lurkers during a fight. (usually assisted by Dark Swarm) You didn't "siege up" lurkers and use them as a siege-tank zone-denial, you had to move them with your ling/hydra and burrow them right next to the enemy.
***** Now, from what we saw in LotV when the 9-range required an upgrade, 6-range lurkers are not terribly useful in SC2. Unlike in Brood War, ranged units in SC2 usually have 6 range. This allows them to attack-move into 6-range lurkers without taking much damage. That sucks for Lurkers, right?
But wait, being weaker on defense might be a good thing. After all, ground units should stand some nonzero chance of successfully attacking into Lurkers. What we need to do is buff the Lurker's offensive abilities to offset a weaker defensive utility.
******** I would be interested to see an *offensive* lurker buff like this: - Lurkers gain +100% attackspeed for 2.5 seconds after Burrowing.
This would make Lurkers quite strong when used in the SC1 style of moving them and burrowing right next to your opponent, while making them much weaker on defense.
|
I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect.
I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all.
So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san!
|
I feel the lurker has the potential to be so much more than just a bw-lurker-clone with extra range.
|
I feel Lurker is a great unit in all matchups and brings another layer to the XvZ battles; but need a bit of tweaking. 8 range instead of 9 would go a long way IMO and wouldn't feel as much of a siege tank than it feels now. This is probably the only change i'd do right now because it so early and I think it's OK to have to play around a strong unit and not just with direct counters.
|
I think the concept of the lurker is a great for zerg. It gives zerg the option to play defensive and use positioning to compensate for lack of army supply. It's not replacing the close-combat units rather its an alternative/supplement and thus will create more strategic depth. I think in the end it comes down to if you prefer action over strategy/decision making whether you like the lurker or not. Me personally i enjoy watching starcraft but i mostly watch in order to improve my own play. So watching a game of ZvT in the current state is pretty useless for me since i learn nothing from seeing the mechanically superior player succeed (not counting in the generic cheese/all-ins). As far as zvz goes we have to wait and watch if it comes the lurker vs lurker stalemates. I don't think there will be any stalemates close to what the swarmhost did in the other matchups.
|
Maybe it should be 6 range but have an upgrade giving it a speed increase for a few seconds after unburrowing so that you can move it more easily in a fight?
|
I don't like Lurkers starting with 9 range, but I could maybe see it working as a Hive upgrade as originally intended.
I think they should go back to 6 range, but make the lurker more accessible with added durability.
1) The Hydralisk should be moved to hatchery and down to 1 supply with the stats nerfed accordingly. This ensures a less cumbersome tech path.
2) For durability: - Lurkers now biological only (ensures only archons have bonus damage against them) - +1 armor while burrowed only (much better vs the new marauders at range 6)
|
I dislike your suggestion, but I like FrostedMiniWheat's rather severe redesign, in conjunction with a bunch of other ones, of course. 1-supply Hydras are a good idea in the long run.
ZvZ can indeed get a little bit trench warfarey, but I'd like to see the Ravager more greatly empowered to counter Lurkers. Hell, if they just removed their auto-attack and very slightly bumped up the range and splash of corrosive bile, it could be fantastic for executing burrowed Lurkers.
|
Lurkers are the same they were in BW but retuned a bit up because they are more expensive, cost 1 more supply, and are slower.
They have been rebalanced to be more like a siege unit having a bit more damage and HP than on BW. If you decrease the HP back to to BW levels, it's much weaker defensively.
Also, the Ravager rework is needed. Ravager is intended to break lurkers. And being as they were on Blizzcon they should work.
|
You can still Blinding Cloud or Abduct the Lurkers in ZvZ, can't you? I think that makes Lurkers more attackable. I don't say it is easy to attack a well-spread Lurker comp, but maybe it is possible. Also, there are Brood Lords as well. Now these solutions seem like work-arounds, but they may still work.
|
I like the lurker as it is. It may not be the most "zergy" unit but it feels good to have a new unit that is not gimmicky (unlike every other new unit and a lot of older units *cough*MSC*cough*)
|
I think attack speed could be downed a little bit. The HP could be nerfed. Range doesn't have to be 9, even 8 would outrange static Ds if that's the goal. Just tweak it and test it. The unit concept is fine and fun, but it is just too good at what it should do but there could be a sweet spot.
|
I love playing with and against it. I love everything in Zerg LoTV to be honest, from the new economy to the two new units, it makes the game so much better. Sure there is some tweaking to be done, but it looks to be in a good place game-design wise. I like protoss too, I am much more concerned about terran right now.
|
Ther Lurker's the most fun new unit for me, much better than cyclone / ravager / adept (haven't seen / used disrupter yet interestingly). Although sometimes they feel a bit like higher damage 3 supply Collosi that vikings can't attack xD
|
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.
|
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. It's not wrong if that unit is upgrading the game.
|
I haven't played lotv but I do feel that 6 range would make them useless in anything besides zvz. They would need the HP of an ultralisk to be able to walk up to a bio ball of stimmed marines and marauders without getting focus fired and killed in 0.5 seconds. The same principle is likely to be true against P not to mention mech, you want to run up to sieged tanks and burrow next to them? Sounds like it wont work so well in sc2.
|
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.
The royal we?
|
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. Don't group me together with that we >.>
|
On May 07 2015 19:03 Vanadiel wrote: I love playing with and against it. I love everything in Zerg LoTV to be honest, from the new economy to the two new units, it makes the game so much better. Sure there is some tweaking to be done, but it looks to be in a good place game-design wise. I like protoss too, I am much more concerned about terran right now.
I can understand that you love Zerg in LotV...
|
They should worry about fixing the attack animation, I want like 300 spines jetting out from the beast.
|
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 ...
|
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.
|
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.
|
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/projectile increase.
|
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)
|
"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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
|
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
|
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.
|
Are they 1 shot by disruptors?
|
On May 08 2015 04:00 Zidane wrote: Are they 1 shot by disruptors?
Lurkers are not 1 shot by disruptors.
|
Lurker are pretty good offensively from what I've seen in ZvP. They can attack through forcefields with a good range, they make forcefields really hard to use. I think they actually overlap with the ravager in that sense. 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.
|
On May 08 2015 03:42 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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)
|
Aren't Ravagers killing turtle lurkers super easily?
|
On May 08 2015 04:11 Mephtral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 03:42 Hider wrote: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. 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
|
Another concept would be to mess with the width/hitbox of the aeo line, making it even 20% thinner would increase the ability to micro against it, making it more of a dynamic
edit: the repositioning of lurkers has been super cool in the lotv games I've watched, for instance, to kill retreating units...
|
On May 08 2015 01:02 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I use roach + hydra + lurker and viper cloud to deal with mech. Roaches tank while the lurkers get in position and start shredding.
Anyhow, P/T are used to a very passive Zerg play style that has been in the game since WOL - namely one where zerg has very few aggressive options especially in the early and mid game, and those options are very easily countered if scouted.
Protoss in particular is used to just rolling over Zerg with a macro'd gate/robo deathball and Zerg not being able to do much about it other than out macro it. Now you can roll in lurkers and yeah an a-moved deathball will lose.
|
On May 08 2015 04:42 Quateras wrote: Aren't Ravagers killing turtle lurkers super easily?
You can unburrow Lurkers in time if you watch closely. It requires micro on both sides and whoever micros better wins.
All in all I think the lurker is a great unit for Zerg's armada. I think it's too strong atm, but the design of it is great. There were some decent suggestions. Personally think moving the upgrade to hive could work out if in turn you make the general lurker path more accessible.
|
On May 08 2015 06:52 tili wrote: Another concept would be to mess with the width/hitbox of the aeo line, making it even 20% thinner would increase the ability to micro against it, making it more of a dynamic I'd much rather see the spines move slower than the width limited even further. Lowering the width would lessen its ability to force deathballs to break up, and I really appreciate that role. Lowering the speed would make the counter micro easier to perform.
|
I wish they added a more sc2 specific unit than the lurker. the timing they come out is so awkward, maybe it's the tech requirement (needing hydra tech) that makes it just very weird to play in zvt
|
lurker zvz is atrocious and i've always thought the siege tank was one of the worst designed units in the game so i'm not really a fan lol
|
On May 08 2015 10:10 Pontius Pirate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 06:52 tili wrote: Another concept would be to mess with the width/hitbox of the aeo line, making it even 20% thinner would increase the ability to micro against it, making it more of a dynamic I'd much rather see the spines move slower than the width limited even further. Lowering the width would lessen its ability to force deathballs to break up, and I really appreciate that role. Lowering the speed would make the counter micro easier to perform.
I like this idea as well!
|
9 range is just too long. Try 7 or 8.
On May 08 2015 13:06 brickrd wrote: lurker zvz is atrocious and i've always thought the siege tank was one of the worst designed units in the game so i'm not really a fan lol
This is why you are not a game designer^^
|
On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san!
Wah wah. Unfortunately until WoL came and removed Lurkers from BW it was one of the most frustrating things in the game. but the best design of a zerg unit I've seen. Learn to split END OF STORY. P.S. Get air. or idk use drops or nydus worms. Its not that hard to GO AROUND. Sometimes I wish people would sit and think of alternatives rather then just posting a post saying this unit imba match up is boring. Heck cloud thing from vipers work too.
|
On May 08 2015 14:53 FabledIntegral wrote:9 range is just too long. Try 7 or 8. Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 13:06 brickrd wrote: lurker zvz is atrocious and i've always thought the siege tank was one of the worst designed units in the game so i'm not really a fan lol This is why you are not a game designer^^
At least 7. However you need to buff Immortal range a bit now IMAO. Lurkers and Ravagers would be easier to deal.
|
On May 08 2015 16:23 Rukis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Wah wah. Unfortunately until WoL came and removed Lurkers from BW it was one of the most frustrating things in the game. but the best design of a zerg unit I've seen. Learn to split END OF STORY. P.S. Get air. or idk use drops or nydus worms. Its not that hard to GO AROUND. Sometimes I wish people would sit and think of alternatives rather then just posting a post saying this unit imba match up is boring. Heck cloud thing from vipers work too. Wait, what? Ummm... what did you think I meant? You reply as if I was balance-whining. >_>
|
I've waited 5 years to do this. This is the greatest post that has ever graced TL.
+ Show Spoiler +
Same logic all race. Now ur Nada.
|
On May 08 2015 18:05 EarthwormJim wrote:I've waited 5 years to do this. This is the greatest post that has ever graced TL. + Show Spoiler +Same logic all race. Now ur Nada. Ahhh, well done! Remember to a-move far behind the lurkers, to avoid the marines from clumping up on the way there.
|
On May 07 2015 23:18 atrox_ wrote:Show nested quote +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. The royal we? LMAO, yes having a unit that is a bw clone would make the game another broodwar. SC2 is already broken beyond saving. It will never be as good as broodwar now, so why not try saving it by introducing a little bit of broodwar into this heap of mess.
|
On May 08 2015 12:29 ETisME wrote: I wish they added a more sc2 specific unit than the lurker. the timing they come out is so awkward, maybe it's the tech requirement (needing hydra tech) that makes it just very weird to play in zvt
Ling Hydra is almost playable vs bio if you rush armor upgrades and play defensively for a while(which is more or less the same than Lurker play). It shuts down drops in a breeze, and Hydras come out much earlier than Mutas. 5 Hydras kill a medivac in 3 volleys, (4 Hydras with +1 upgrade)
Obviously it isn't that effective as lingbane in fights, but the costs and macro is the same (2banes = 1 hydra), changing meele upgrades for ranged ones. You exchange banes for Hydras.
And Obviously it is quite weak against mech openers, but I won't change Zerg schemes vs Bio much considering how Zerg is defending Banshee-Hellion openers into Bio, almost always without roaches.
|
I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW
|
On May 08 2015 22:22 Merkmerk wrote: I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW
TvZ Bio is pretty iconic though.
|
The lurker unit seem silly right now. Range 9 linear aoe? 200 hp? Really, this seems like the next collosus unit. Welcome to legacy of the swarm
|
On May 08 2015 22:22 Merkmerk wrote: I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW While I enjoyed BW lots, let's not pretend that the game was the ultimate perfect flawless RTS. I think having half of the tech completely unviable in TvP was not one of the great parts of BW that we should strive to copy... And I'd argue that ZvBio is one of the better working MUs in hots, so I'd be sad to see it go. As spectator more than player I'd think.
|
On May 08 2015 23:12 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 22:22 Merkmerk wrote: I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW While I enjoyed BW lots, let's not pretend that the game was the ultimate perfect flawless RTS. I think having half of the tech completely unviable in TvP was not one of the great parts of BW that we should strive to copy... And I'd argue that ZvBio is one of the better working MUs in hots, so I'd be sad to see it go. As spectator more than player I'd think.
So far in beta TvZ is still Bio-heavy and still MMMMvsLBM mainly, as a Lurler-based takes a significant time to be set up, tons of gas, and the availability of scans + flying siege tanks restricts that kind of strategy.
The Ultralisk/Marauder change has been fairly more significant in TvZ, forcing a transition into BioCyclone/BioMech in the lategame. So far, I feel that the matchup is very very rich and Lurkers still have to find their place, since they are used much more defensively than aggressively.
And even if Lurker gets to a mainstream spot in TvZ, it's not like BioTankRaven + the new air unit vs LingHydraLurker is going to be boring at all, and there will be a lot a lot of skill involved in.
So I think that we are making things too drastic, as the mentality of Terran players during 5 years has been mostly: "MMM or death". There is a lot of beta testing time to go yet, and we'll see how much Lurkers affect the dynamics of the matchup. IMAO the Lurker has been much more relevant in ZvZ than on ZvT, were suppposedly we wanted to see the lurker to bring new styles in and have some area control.
|
Lurkers were not often used in ZvZ during brood war days. Only a select few scenarios and games ever saw this.
ZvZ was always Muta/Ling which in turn became Muta/ling/bling or now Roach/Hydra (Roach/Ravager in lotv).
|
I like the current Lurker. The Ravager is dead, of course next it would be the Lurker's range.
My ZvZ are more fun and better than the HOTS Roach vs Roach wars. Lurkers are now used to get positional advantages and allow you to transition into higher tier units like Ultras or Viper. Please for once allow Zerg to have ONE cost effective unit.
|
On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please
|
On May 09 2015 08:11 AssyrianKing wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please
I hardly think Lurker play can be chalked up to, "crappy chipping away from a screen away" even at 9 range. A huge problem with Zerg design in general is they are all melee units with ranged units being inherently more beneficial to micro/possessing a higher skill ceiling in almost all situations.
A snipe buff to deal with Ultralisks (which I'm sorry to say are laughably overpowered, I want Zerg to be strong not bio to go extinct from an a move unit being overbuffed) is by far the best way to go. The Ghost needs an excuse to be in late game ZvT bio, it along with the Infestor are pitifully underused in the match up and in just as much need of buffs/redesigns as the Cyclone and the Disruptor.
Protoss shouldn't be the only race that can field reliable and strong mid-late game spell casters. Then again Protoss shouldn't be the race with the worst tier 1 units in the game by far but one problem a time I guess.
|
On May 09 2015 09:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 08:11 AssyrianKing wrote:On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please I hardly think Lurker play can be chalked up to, "crappy chipping away from a screen away" even at 9 range. A huge problem with Zerg design in general is they are all melee units with ranged units being inherently more beneficial to micro/possessing a higher skill ceiling in almost all situations. A snipe buff to deal with Ultralisks (which I'm sorry to say are laughably overpowered, I want Zerg to be strong not bio to go extinct from an a move unit being overbuffed) is by far the best way to go. The Ghost needs an excuse to be in late game ZvT bio, it along with the Infestor are pitifully underused in the match up and in just as much need of buffs/redesigns as the Cyclone and the Disruptor. Protoss shouldn't be the only race that can field reliable and strong mid-late game spell casters. Then again Protoss shouldn't be the race with the worst tier 1 units in the game by far but one problem a time I guess. Snipe buff to deal with ultralisks is a laughably broken solution. If snipe counters ultralisks, that means snipe can kill Zergs tankiest unit from a range greater or equal to any zerg unit. Hence it can counter EVERY zerg unit like that. The only restriction being click-speed, which is no restriction since the rapidfire hotkey trick exists - which people didn't use back in the days when Snipe was already overpowered because it countered too many zerg techs. With rapidfire a trained player could even take out huge amounts of banelings before they connected if snipe did >=30damage to bio.
Oh, and Protoss has far better T1 units than zerg. Might want to check on Sentry/Stalker demolishing zerg players these days, even if they go for for necessary higher tier units like hydralisks. Zergs and Terrans would get absolutly demolished by Protoss T1 units if they didn't rush out higher tech units to deal with Protoss gateway units.
|
On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote: Snipe buff to deal with ultralisks is a laughably broken solution. If snipe counters ultralisks, that means snipe can kill Zergs tankiest unit from a range greater or equal to any zerg unit. Hence it can counter EVERY zerg unit like that. The only restriction being click-speed, which is no restriction since the rapidfire hotkey trick exists - which people didn't use back in the days when Snipe was already overpowered because it countered too many zerg techs. With rapidfire a trained player could even take out huge amounts of banelings before they connected if snipe did >=30damage to bio.
Oh, and Protoss has far better T1 units than zerg. Might want to check on Sentry/Stalker demolishing zerg players these days, even if they go for for necessary higher tier units like hydralisks. Zergs and Terrans would get absolutly demolished by Protoss T1 units if they didn't rush out higher tech units to deal with Protoss gateway units.
Zerglings, Banes, Roaches and Hydras are all cheaper than Protos units. And resource-wise, they are all more cost efficient, and have good upgrades earlier. 4 Zerglings > 1 Zealot 5 Roaches (speed upgrade)> 3Stalkers
"Tier" is a question of time delays when comparing the 3 basic gateway units to the 4 basic Zerg units (Yes, hydras are basic, only delayed in time to balance early AA and timings, since they cost less than a stalker) since their costs and efficiency are on par. And zerg has a fairly easier time expanding and prducing units That asymetrical balance leads to FF as a compensatory measure for Protoss.
The problem there is how FF plays out ,but also, and more important, the lack of true Midgame units from Zerg other than Mutas and good strategies that provide treasy transitionigs as Protoss has. Spire units have very specific purposes.
Protoss have a fairly better transition into mid-midlategamegame with Sentry-based plays (the gas cost makes heavy FF strategies a true midgame option), Immortals, Warp prism, and sometimes some Phoenixes, and can transition relatively easily intp HT or Colossus.
Zerg lacks of progression in terms of diversity and strategies compared to Protoss. You have to try to gain advantage of your supperior econ forcing trades of your 3 low-cost units (lingroach hydra), trying to beat an army that has a good caster support and can use it to split your oubviously outnumbering force. The problem is that as long as the game progresses, Protoss gets stronger units that can counter your basic army, and the almost the only solution for Zerg is to try to win bruteforce and tech heavily for lategame units (Infestor, Viper, Ultras) as your basic army doesnt scalate that well into game. Zerg lacks of good control/defensive units to delay the Protooss while you go into Hive plays. So that teching doesn't really provide flexible transitionig strategies other than Infestor support, which usually hurt your true intentions as you want to save gas for Ultras, Vipers or even BL.
The effective removal of the SH as a direct combat unit has hurt Zerg options vs Protoss, as it offered a good transition point. SwarmHost forced Colos and HT in high numbers or air switch (forced the Protoss to tech itself towards lategame army) while the Zerg was given the opportunity to transition to Hive and adapt to the Protoss reaction (air style or pure AoE deathball). Effectively, the Zerg teching process of InfestationPit>Hive>Ultras + Great Spire was smooth.
In most cases, SH forced both players to tech to almost every tech in the game. Protoss almost needed their complete tech tree (Stargate units, Colossus, HT + gateway) to deal with SH plays, and Zerg needed almost all their tech(Spire,Infestors, Vipers and Ultras) to beat Protoss lategame.
In LotV, this problem will be aliviated with Ravagers and Lurkers and pssoibly some readjusted SH, offering more dynamics and flexibility, specially in the midgame.
|
On May 09 2015 09:50 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 09:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 09 2015 08:11 AssyrianKing wrote:On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please I hardly think Lurker play can be chalked up to, "crappy chipping away from a screen away" even at 9 range. A huge problem with Zerg design in general is they are all melee units with ranged units being inherently more beneficial to micro/possessing a higher skill ceiling in almost all situations. A snipe buff to deal with Ultralisks (which I'm sorry to say are laughably overpowered, I want Zerg to be strong not bio to go extinct from an a move unit being overbuffed) is by far the best way to go. The Ghost needs an excuse to be in late game ZvT bio, it along with the Infestor are pitifully underused in the match up and in just as much need of buffs/redesigns as the Cyclone and the Disruptor. Protoss shouldn't be the only race that can field reliable and strong mid-late game spell casters. Then again Protoss shouldn't be the race with the worst tier 1 units in the game by far but one problem a time I guess. Snipe buff to deal with ultralisks is a laughably broken solution. If snipe counters ultralisks, that means snipe can kill Zergs tankiest unit from a range greater or equal to any zerg unit. Hence it can counter EVERY zerg unit like that. The only restriction being click-speed, which is no restriction since the rapidfire hotkey trick exists - which people didn't use back in the days when Snipe was already overpowered because it countered too many zerg techs. With rapidfire a trained player could even take out huge amounts of banelings before they connected if snipe did >=30damage to bio. Oh, and Protoss has far better T1 units than zerg. Might want to check on Sentry/Stalker demolishing zerg players these days, even if they go for for necessary higher tier units like hydralisks. Zergs and Terrans would get absolutly demolished by Protoss T1 units if they didn't rush out higher tech units to deal with Protoss gateway units.
Pray tell why would a snipe buff vs Ultras be broken? I'm hardly saying we should buff snipe back to the way it was previously, that was just OP as hell and everyone knows it. I'm recommending a not broken version of snipe, maybe something like reducing armor with a piercing shot? Maybe a crippling shot that makes it move slower for a short amount of time? I don't know, Ghosts just suck in TvZ and since Infestors already suck in general it just doesn't much sense to leave the spell caster side of the match up totally gimped.
And no they don't, I'm not even a Protoss player to know that. Zergs are getting wrecked because the metagame shifts and or new abusive flavor of the months are always harsh towards Zerg and thanks to David for taking away a vital anti death ball tool (whether we as a community despised the unit or not it WAS necessary in later game ZvP to zone out High Templar which are 10X the issue then Stalkers) and completely not compensating for it with appropriate buffs.
Oh sorry, I forgot Blinding Cloud got more range, which is more of a buff vs. mech then late game Protoss armies with Templars feedbacking/instakilling Vipers or simply...moving out of the cloud O__o
Back on topic though, buff snipe to combat Ultras and make Ghosts a part of the match up. Don't buff Ghosts and make them OP vs. Zerg lol
|
On May 09 2015 10:37 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 09:50 Big J wrote:On May 09 2015 09:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 09 2015 08:11 AssyrianKing wrote:On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please I hardly think Lurker play can be chalked up to, "crappy chipping away from a screen away" even at 9 range. A huge problem with Zerg design in general is they are all melee units with ranged units being inherently more beneficial to micro/possessing a higher skill ceiling in almost all situations. A snipe buff to deal with Ultralisks (which I'm sorry to say are laughably overpowered, I want Zerg to be strong not bio to go extinct from an a move unit being overbuffed) is by far the best way to go. The Ghost needs an excuse to be in late game ZvT bio, it along with the Infestor are pitifully underused in the match up and in just as much need of buffs/redesigns as the Cyclone and the Disruptor. Protoss shouldn't be the only race that can field reliable and strong mid-late game spell casters. Then again Protoss shouldn't be the race with the worst tier 1 units in the game by far but one problem a time I guess. Snipe buff to deal with ultralisks is a laughably broken solution. If snipe counters ultralisks, that means snipe can kill Zergs tankiest unit from a range greater or equal to any zerg unit. Hence it can counter EVERY zerg unit like that. The only restriction being click-speed, which is no restriction since the rapidfire hotkey trick exists - which people didn't use back in the days when Snipe was already overpowered because it countered too many zerg techs. With rapidfire a trained player could even take out huge amounts of banelings before they connected if snipe did >=30damage to bio. Oh, and Protoss has far better T1 units than zerg. Might want to check on Sentry/Stalker demolishing zerg players these days, even if they go for for necessary higher tier units like hydralisks. Zergs and Terrans would get absolutly demolished by Protoss T1 units if they didn't rush out higher tech units to deal with Protoss gateway units. Pray tell why would a snipe buff vs Ultras be broken? I'm hardly saying we should buff snipe back to the way it was previously, that was just OP as hell and everyone knows it. I'm recommending a not broken version of snipe, maybe something like reducing armor with a piercing shot? Maybe a crippling shot that makes it move slower for a short amount of time? I don't know, Ghosts just suck in TvZ and since Infestors already suck in general it just doesn't much sense to leave the spell caster side of the match up totally gimped. And no they don't, I'm not even a Protoss player to know that. Zergs are getting wrecked because the metagame shifts and or new abusive flavor of the months are always harsh towards Zerg and thanks to David for taking away a vital anti death ball tool (whether we as a community despised the unit or not it WAS necessary in later game ZvP to zone out High Templar which are 10X the issue then Stalkers) and completely not compensating for it with appropriate buffs. Oh sorry, I forgot Blinding Cloud got more range, which is more of a buff vs. mech then late game Protoss armies with Templars feedbacking/instakilling Vipers or simply...moving out of the cloud O__o Back on topic though, buff snipe to combat Ultras and make Ghosts a part of the match up. Don't buff Ghosts and make them OP vs. Zerg lol
Well, if your suggestion is a redesign of snipe and not some rather simple buff, I appologize. But I think you need to come up with a specific suggestions, if you go into the wilds of design changes.
|
On May 08 2015 22:27 Masq wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 22:22 Merkmerk wrote: I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW TvZ Bio is pretty iconic though.
TvZ Bio can still work though, getting hydras into lurkers takes time and is an investment. It's not like zerg just suddenly has them and they're suddenly in range of the Bio and suddenly the bio is dead. There's a whole lot of variables Terran can influence.
|
On May 09 2015 00:20 FT.aCt)Sony wrote: Lurkers were not often used in ZvZ during brood war days. Only a select few scenarios and games ever saw this.
ZvZ was always Muta/Ling which in turn became Muta/ling/bling or now Roach/Hydra (Roach/Ravager in lotv).
well no not really because of the update recently its now ling/bane early into either Mutas or Roach/Hydra/(optional) Ravanger. I guess Ravangers lost some effectiveness but after that its Ultras, lurkers or Brood lords. starts out simple gets complicated lool
|
On May 09 2015 12:14 Rukis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 00:20 FT.aCt)Sony wrote: Lurkers were not often used in ZvZ during brood war days. Only a select few scenarios and games ever saw this.
ZvZ was always Muta/Ling which in turn became Muta/ling/bling or now Roach/Hydra (Roach/Ravager in lotv). well no not really because of the update recently its now ling/bane early into either Mutas or Roach/Hydra/(optional) Ravanger. I guess Ravangers lost some effectiveness but after that its Ultras, lurkers or Brood lords. starts out simple gets complicated lool
Was referencing BW's reasoning of Lurkers.
Muta/Ling was Bw. WoL/Hots was Muta/ling/bling or Roach/Hydra (which in LOTV is now Roach/Ravager from what I have seen).
|
On May 09 2015 11:01 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2015 10:37 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 09 2015 09:50 Big J wrote:On May 09 2015 09:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 09 2015 08:11 AssyrianKing wrote:On May 07 2015 15:38 Cascade wrote:I think the lurker goes against what I want zerg to be in general, mainly due to its large range. I want zerg to be more of a in-your-face melee range race that runs up to and over enemy armies, rather than this crappy chipping away from a screen away. ZvT-bio is doing that really well, and I think many agree that that matchup is the most entertaining game-play in sc2. The new ultra completely killing bio in TvZ kindof ruins that aspect. I'd like to give terran a late-game (make it expensive to tech to, like the ultras) long ranged unit from the barracks that maybe not hard-counters, but at least can handle ultras, so that we can maintain the ZvBio from HotS, with a more varied T3 stage with the new T unit. And no, the cyclone doesn't fit that at all. So give zerg more useful melee units instead of more ranged units, and balance around that. pretty pl0x, tyvm Blizzard-san! Sniper buff please I hardly think Lurker play can be chalked up to, "crappy chipping away from a screen away" even at 9 range. A huge problem with Zerg design in general is they are all melee units with ranged units being inherently more beneficial to micro/possessing a higher skill ceiling in almost all situations. A snipe buff to deal with Ultralisks (which I'm sorry to say are laughably overpowered, I want Zerg to be strong not bio to go extinct from an a move unit being overbuffed) is by far the best way to go. The Ghost needs an excuse to be in late game ZvT bio, it along with the Infestor are pitifully underused in the match up and in just as much need of buffs/redesigns as the Cyclone and the Disruptor. Protoss shouldn't be the only race that can field reliable and strong mid-late game spell casters. Then again Protoss shouldn't be the race with the worst tier 1 units in the game by far but one problem a time I guess. Snipe buff to deal with ultralisks is a laughably broken solution. If snipe counters ultralisks, that means snipe can kill Zergs tankiest unit from a range greater or equal to any zerg unit. Hence it can counter EVERY zerg unit like that. The only restriction being click-speed, which is no restriction since the rapidfire hotkey trick exists - which people didn't use back in the days when Snipe was already overpowered because it countered too many zerg techs. With rapidfire a trained player could even take out huge amounts of banelings before they connected if snipe did >=30damage to bio. Oh, and Protoss has far better T1 units than zerg. Might want to check on Sentry/Stalker demolishing zerg players these days, even if they go for for necessary higher tier units like hydralisks. Zergs and Terrans would get absolutly demolished by Protoss T1 units if they didn't rush out higher tech units to deal with Protoss gateway units. Pray tell why would a snipe buff vs Ultras be broken? I'm hardly saying we should buff snipe back to the way it was previously, that was just OP as hell and everyone knows it. I'm recommending a not broken version of snipe, maybe something like reducing armor with a piercing shot? Maybe a crippling shot that makes it move slower for a short amount of time? I don't know, Ghosts just suck in TvZ and since Infestors already suck in general it just doesn't much sense to leave the spell caster side of the match up totally gimped. And no they don't, I'm not even a Protoss player to know that. Zergs are getting wrecked because the metagame shifts and or new abusive flavor of the months are always harsh towards Zerg and thanks to David for taking away a vital anti death ball tool (whether we as a community despised the unit or not it WAS necessary in later game ZvP to zone out High Templar which are 10X the issue then Stalkers) and completely not compensating for it with appropriate buffs. Oh sorry, I forgot Blinding Cloud got more range, which is more of a buff vs. mech then late game Protoss armies with Templars feedbacking/instakilling Vipers or simply...moving out of the cloud O__o Back on topic though, buff snipe to combat Ultras and make Ghosts a part of the match up. Don't buff Ghosts and make them OP vs. Zerg lol Well, if your suggestion is a redesign of snipe and not some rather simple buff, I appologize. But I think you need to come up with a specific suggestions, if you go into the wilds of design changes.
No need to apologize, I took no offense. I just don't pretend I know enough to offer an actual solid Ghost buff vs. Zerg for balanced and dynamic late game scenarios. As I said vs the Ultralisks maybe something along the lines of an armor destroying shot or something to immobile it?
Not too sure, just would like to see some spell casting brought into TvZ.
On May 09 2015 11:09 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2015 22:27 Masq wrote:On May 08 2015 22:22 Merkmerk wrote: I have to lol at Terran players who insist on their playstyle being viable - "bio doesn't work!!" - so?
Bio didn't work against Protoss at all in BW TvZ Bio is pretty iconic though. TvZ Bio can still work though, getting hydras into lurkers takes time and is an investment. It's not like zerg just suddenly has them and they're suddenly in range of the Bio and suddenly the bio is dead. There's a whole lot of variables Terran can influence.
+1 Terran needs more time to explore counter measures before nerfs, it's not like the unit doesn't have any weaknesses. Beyond the substantial investment both in time and resources the tech path is pretty easily scouted out. After that well positioned tank lines, drops, and air play just in general are all very strong vs. Lurker compositions. Korean Terrans I'm sure will have very little issue not allowing their bio to get massacred by running into Lurker lines.
On top of Lurkers maybe or maybe not being OP which time will ultimately tell, attention needs to be focused on other areas in the beta, at least the Lurker is a high micro high skill cap unit that opens up strategies in all 3 match ups, soe of the other units in the Beta are just awful design wise.
We should focus our attention to removing siege tank drop, reworking Immortals to make them and their ability not suck, make Gateway (or the units whatever is easier) good, focus on redesigning or tweaking the Cyclone and Disruptor to be actually good units, and fine tuning the adepts stats and abilities.
|
I haven't played in LOTV yet so I haven't experienced the SC2 lurker yet, but I can see how they may feel immobile and not zerg-like. To me, the way to fix this would be to reduce their range a little (maybe 7) and give them faster move speed and burrow times. This way, they still out range standard ranged units like stalkers, but are able to move with your army better than say a siege tank can.
I agree that in general zerg just isn't as mobile a swarm-like as in BW, other then lings which just melt facing almost any army by themselves. I think the major reason for this is the changes that were made to hydras in SC2. I wish they would give us back the less lethal hydra that is cheaper and costs 1 supply and change roaches to be more of a tank unit for absorbing tank damage and what not.
|
I feel like there's no real definition of what "zerg like" is.
For me, lurkers are just as race defining as zerglings and mutalisks. It makes sense to keep their original design even in SC2.
|
On May 10 2015 00:13 ApBuLLet wrote: I haven't played in LOTV yet so I haven't experienced the SC2 lurker yet, but I can see how they may feel immobile and not zerg-like. To me, the way to fix this would be to reduce their range a little (maybe 7) and give them faster move speed and burrow times. This way, they still out range standard ranged units like stalkers, but are able to move with your army better than say a siege tank can.
I agree that in general zerg just isn't as mobile a swarm-like as in BW, other then lings which just melt facing almost any army by themselves. I think the major reason for this is the changes that were made to hydras in SC2. I wish they would give us back the less lethal hydra that is cheaper and costs 1 supply and change roaches to be more of a tank unit for absorbing tank damage and what not.
The burrow time is what makes the lurker a defensive unit and creates the actual engagements. Delete the burrow time and it deletes the micro interactions. Absolute worst thing they can do to fix. i'd rather just see a range reduction altogether and make them easier to obtain, cheaper units is better for zerg.
|
Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz
User was warned for this post
|
On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz
"There are tons of ways to break it, I just won't name any of them because I can't think of anything reliable".
Are people seriously defending overpowered units in an early beta just so they can get a couple of free wins in unranked games? That's just pathetic.
|
The only thing i dislike about the lurker is the sound of the attcack. It sounds like a sweet caress coverr by smooth jazz music. It should be : "MOTHERFUCKING SPIKES OF DEATH".
For what i tested lurker is really long to make but is strong as fuck (especially ZvZ).
|
On May 10 2015 19:08 xyzz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz "There are tons of ways to break it, I just won't name any of them because I can't think of anything reliable". Are people seriously defending overpowered units in an early beta just so they can get a couple of free wins in unranked games? That's just pathetic.
Uhh if your opponent actually goes over 3 bases you can easily outmanouvre him if you are the better player. Also Nydus and broodlords are a really viable option vs lurker players. Actually Ultra armies can also be extremely powerful at cleaning up small amounts of lurkers. But I guess it's too hard for people like you to come up with stuff to try and break them. Turtleling is really not that effective if you actually want more then 3/4 bases
|
On May 10 2015 20:34 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 19:08 xyzz wrote:On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz "There are tons of ways to break it, I just won't name any of them because I can't think of anything reliable". Are people seriously defending overpowered units in an early beta just so they can get a couple of free wins in unranked games? That's just pathetic. Uhh if your opponent actually goes over 3 bases you can easily outmanouvre him if you are the better player. Also Nydus and broodlords are a really viable option vs lurker players. Actually Ultra armies can also be extremely powerful at cleaning up small amounts of lurkers. But I guess it's too hard for people like you to come up with stuff to try and break them. Turtleling is really not that effective if you actually want more then 3/4 bases I think I have only lost a single ZvZ in which I was allowed to safely go mutalisks against an opponent who opened ground, because from there I can just go lurkers and win. People have gotten fairly creative, but air control + lurkers is pretty good a denying everything. I think the overpoweredness of the lurker will push everyone into mutalisk openings, so the matchup will go to shit if blizzard doesn't patch it, because it will be back to muta wars everygame. Though that is as much a problem with the mutalisk, as with the lurker I guess.
|
On May 10 2015 20:54 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 20:34 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:On May 10 2015 19:08 xyzz wrote:On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz "There are tons of ways to break it, I just won't name any of them because I can't think of anything reliable". Are people seriously defending overpowered units in an early beta just so they can get a couple of free wins in unranked games? That's just pathetic. Uhh if your opponent actually goes over 3 bases you can easily outmanouvre him if you are the better player. Also Nydus and broodlords are a really viable option vs lurker players. Actually Ultra armies can also be extremely powerful at cleaning up small amounts of lurkers. But I guess it's too hard for people like you to come up with stuff to try and break them. Turtleling is really not that effective if you actually want more then 3/4 bases I think I have only lost a single ZvZ in which I was allowed to safely go mutalisks against an opponent who opened ground, because from there I can just go lurkers and win. People have gotten fairly creative, but air control + lurkers is pretty good a denying everything. I think the overpoweredness of the lurker will push everyone into mutalisk openings, so the matchup will go to shit if blizzard doesn't patch it, because it will be back to muta wars everygame. Though that is as much a problem with the mutalisk, as with the lurker I guess.
Yeah but even in hots opening mutas into SH was extremely strong in that case. But in pro games everyone opened roach anyway, because roach timings are actually really strong and hard to not take damage from as mutalisk player. Anyway there is no Metagame and no really good players are playing the beta, it's too early to say mutas into lurkers can't be punished. Also i think the ravager will get a buff again soon aswell, since it just has become useless since the last patch, and that will play a key role in zvz pressure aswell
|
On May 10 2015 21:02 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 20:54 Big J wrote:On May 10 2015 20:34 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:On May 10 2015 19:08 xyzz wrote:On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz "There are tons of ways to break it, I just won't name any of them because I can't think of anything reliable". Are people seriously defending overpowered units in an early beta just so they can get a couple of free wins in unranked games? That's just pathetic. Uhh if your opponent actually goes over 3 bases you can easily outmanouvre him if you are the better player. Also Nydus and broodlords are a really viable option vs lurker players. Actually Ultra armies can also be extremely powerful at cleaning up small amounts of lurkers. But I guess it's too hard for people like you to come up with stuff to try and break them. Turtleling is really not that effective if you actually want more then 3/4 bases I think I have only lost a single ZvZ in which I was allowed to safely go mutalisks against an opponent who opened ground, because from there I can just go lurkers and win. People have gotten fairly creative, but air control + lurkers is pretty good a denying everything. I think the overpoweredness of the lurker will push everyone into mutalisk openings, so the matchup will go to shit if blizzard doesn't patch it, because it will be back to muta wars everygame. Though that is as much a problem with the mutalisk, as with the lurker I guess. Yeah but even in hots opening mutas into SH was extremely strong in that case. It was an exotic strategy that we saw a handful of times, and had a hard time dealing with opponents timings. Apart from shitmaps like Deadwing where you could hold 3bases and acquire a 4th with swarm hosts. On other maps, your opponent could just take more bases, go swarm hosts himself and laugh in your face.
But in pro games everyone opened roach anyway, because roach timings are actually really strong and hard to not take damage from as mutalisk player. This is not the main reason why people don't open mutas as much as they go plain roach. Defending those roach timings isn't that hard (and should be identified by your zergling/baneling play) if you just want to commit to spines, but even if they don't do any timing on you mutalisk play isn't that strong, unless you can really catch an opponent offguard.
Anyway there is no Metagame and no really good players are playing the beta, it's too early to say mutas into lurkers can't be punished. People not having enough information for something justifies both, the not-brokenness as well as the brokenness of a situation so it is a worthless argument.
|
On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz
Honestly this is more of a problem with the fact that Zerg *still* doesn't have any openings which are even remotely threatening to a wall-off / turtle. I thought Ravager was going to fix this.
|
On May 11 2015 00:42 Merkmerk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz Honestly this is more of a problem with the fact that Zerg *still* doesn't have any openings which are even remotely threatening to a wall-off / turtle. I thought Ravager was going to fix this. I used to think the same way but imo if walling is not that effective, the early game may get too snowball heavy.
Zerg has the most flexible production but also the most limited aggressive opening, which is funny in a way
|
On May 11 2015 00:42 Merkmerk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2015 15:55 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Please don't touch the lurker yet, you can't turtle on 3 bases like a faggot anymore. There are tons of ways to break it, just wait it out a little. Anyway I've been looking forward to a unit since WoL that can actually trade cost efficient vs terran and protoss armies without the need of free units Reducing their range to 7 like some people suggest makes them useless like the ravager zz Honestly this is more of a problem with the fact that Zerg *still* doesn't have any openings which are even remotely threatening to a wall-off / turtle. I thought Ravager was going to fix this. Ravager did fix that, at least until they overnerfed it and it is now bigger, expensive and weaker(!?) Roach...
I'll be honest, I liked the Ravager a lot, but if you think about it in the early game you have Roach burrow movement now that can deal with Force Fields just fine if you have enough Roaches, and in the mid game there are Lurkers so I don't know if Force Fields are that big of a deal anymore. I wouldn't mind if Ravager is completely redesigned to a specific role which supports early aggression or something like that.
|
I don't get how to beat them int he current state, thinking they must be patched eventually. Lost a 7 base Protoss vs 4 base Zerg, fully mining, maxed out armies, couldn't touch the lurkers (more like 2 base zerg vs 5 base protoss given our mains and nats were mined out). Should have tried carriers but I had used all my gas already trying HT/Colo/Immortal/Archon/Disrupters on them (in a single maxed army).
(lots of things are broken right now though, for example adepts vs T seem insanely brokenly strong. Not even sure you can play bio as adepts SHRED through bio and pick any engagement they want with their ability).
|
On May 11 2015 03:19 FabledIntegral wrote: I don't get how to beat them int he current state, thinking they must be patched eventually. Lost a 7 base Protoss vs 4 base Zerg, fully mining, maxed out armies, couldn't touch the lurkers (more like 2 base zerg vs 5 base protoss given our mains and nats were mined out). Should have tried carriers but I had used all my gas already trying HT/Colo/Immortal/Archon/Disrupters on them (in a single maxed army).
(lots of things are broken right now though, for example adepts vs T seem insanely brokenly strong. Not even sure you can play bio as adepts SHRED through bio and pick any engagement they want with their ability).
Lurkers probably will be ever so slightly toned down, but let's be honest here, the reason that Protoss is having a hard time (hardly against Lurkers) is because Gateway still has not been reformulated to allow smaller packs of low tier units to actively be on the map. I would way rather buff Protoss then nerf units that are actually good. Let's at least nerf the Cyclone and give the Disruptor a few (or alot) of tweaks and let people adapt to Lurker based strategies.
On a related note, not sure how Skytoss armies wouldn't just totally rofl stomp Lurker comps. Hydras are useless once enough Voids and Templar are out, Infestors are STILL bad, and Corruptors got an anti-ground buff, the only AA that Zerg got is the laughably broken Irradiate and that is definitely going to be tuned down, like alot.
|
On May 11 2015 04:33 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 03:19 FabledIntegral wrote: I don't get how to beat them int he current state, thinking they must be patched eventually. Lost a 7 base Protoss vs 4 base Zerg, fully mining, maxed out armies, couldn't touch the lurkers (more like 2 base zerg vs 5 base protoss given our mains and nats were mined out). Should have tried carriers but I had used all my gas already trying HT/Colo/Immortal/Archon/Disrupters on them (in a single maxed army).
(lots of things are broken right now though, for example adepts vs T seem insanely brokenly strong. Not even sure you can play bio as adepts SHRED through bio and pick any engagement they want with their ability). Lurkers probably will be ever so slightly toned down, but let's be honest here, the reason that Protoss is having a hard time (hardly against Lurkers) is because Gateway still has not been reformulated to allow smaller packs of low tier units to actively be on the map. I would way rather buff Protoss then nerf units that are actually good. Let's at least nerf the Cyclone and give the Disruptor a few (or alot) of tweaks and let people adapt to Lurker based strategies. On a related note, not sure how Skytoss armies wouldn't just totally rofl stomp Lurker comps. Hydras are useless once enough Voids and Templar are out, Infestors are STILL bad, and Corruptors got an anti-ground buff, the only AA that Zerg got is the laughably broken Irradiate and that is definitely going to be tuned down, like alot.
Ever so slightly? I have yet to win a single PvZ against lurkers. Just lost another with an insane advantage. Literally, they are so ridiculously cost efficient, even toned down "ever so slightly" they are arguably the most OP unit in the entire beta right now. They are far more OP than cyclones.
Skytoss isn't as strong because gas constraints are notably worse. Of course, as Z you have to scout it, and would stop building lots of lurkers. However, skytoss is hard to take bases in the first place, and your limited gas income makes it really hard to start up like a normal skytoss build in HOTS.
Carriers are definitely better than before, but that viper buff IS good vs skytoss. While I still won my game in HOTS, I was very ahead. 4 vipers came in and dropped 4 of those bombs and every shield on all carriers were down (i instantly split). It isn't a hard counter but will likely do something.
|
Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air.
|
On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air.
No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is?
Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were.
Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P.
EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work.
|
I guess you are supposed to clear the path with Disruptors/Psi Storm and then kill the Lurkers with Blink Stalkers and Immortals. You can always blink few Stalkers in to make them waste their attacks with not-so-great attack speed against individual Stalkers.
Just thinking of ways you can try to deal with them right now. Immortals are probably a ton better than Colossi.
|
Lol k fine. Then lets call lotv the upgraded brood war.
|
On May 11 2015 07:15 Ramiz1989 wrote: I guess you are supposed to clear the path with Disruptors/Psi Storm and then kill the Lurkers with Blink Stalkers and Immortals. You can always blink few Stalkers in to make them waste their attacks with not-so-great attack speed against individual Stalkers.
Just thinking of ways you can try to deal with them right now. Immortals are probably a ton better than Colossi.
Problem is you can't really use HT or Disrupters due to the range. Sure, you can send two disrupters in and kill two lurkers (one disrupter leaves a lurker injured), but then you lose two disrupters... which are far more expensive.
HT don't have the range to storm them.
Lurkers beat Stalkers in cost efficiency as well...
I had immortals in my composition but the new barrier is shit, only absorbs a single lurker spine volley from the lurkers. Near worthless. Tried them regardless with archons tanking the front but got mauled.
I actually asked the Zergs I played against if they were losing to Protoss at all, I only had a single Zerg state "Well I lost to CJ_Hero's adept rush micro". All the Zergs I've talked with have stated they pretty much aren't losing to P right now... just as T is pretty much always losing to P.
|
On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work.
Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it.
And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp.
Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them.
|
there is no effective way a ground Protoss army can fight a Zerg army with Lurker support, you have to go air if you want to have a chance in the late game, if you want to use ground units, you have to kill the zerg before lurkers.
the lurker work just like the old colossus in big fights, adding stupid amounts of splash dmg to your army, with the benefit that they can also stand their ground when left outside your zerg deathball unlike colossus for protoss.
I think the colossus should be reworked into a siege unit for protoss, like the lurker/siege tank.
with the new viper ability (Air splash dmg), and the possibly new terran unit (air unit with AtA splash dmg) The tempest should be reworked to fight mass air units, this way, every race can reliably fight off stupid amounts of air units that requires no micro and ignores terrain.
|
On May 11 2015 09:16 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work. Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it. And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp. Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them.
I'm in fact GM on NA =/.
And I was saying it was in fact fun in BW, not sure if I didn't word it well.
Immortal/Templar/Archon/Colossi is exactly what I did, and they got minced. Lurkers have too much range. As mentioned, had like 7 base to 4 base, had enough money to throw a lot of shit.
The only Zergs I beat today did not go lurkers. Not kidding. Managed to finish it perfect vs Terran though because of adepts.
|
On May 11 2015 11:23 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 09:16 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work. Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it. And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp. Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them. I'm in fact GM on NA =/. And I was saying it was in fact fun in BW, not sure if I didn't word it well. Immortal/Templar/Archon/Colossi is exactly what I did, and they got minced. Lurkers have too much range. As mentioned, had like 7 base to 4 base, had enough money to throw a lot of shit. The only Zergs I beat today did not go lurkers. Not kidding. Managed to finish it perfect vs Terran though because of adepts.
Ok well I feel tremendously stupid for labeling you low level so I apologize and debase myself, I respect an American that is a good Terran player lol I recognize son x]
To be fair though I did admit that people at your level have relevant opinions on balance <3
Back to topic, perhaps 7 range? I mean the Roach range buff made the unit go from underpowered to a staple unit so it has potential maybe?
|
On May 11 2015 12:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 11:23 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 09:16 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work. Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it. And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp. Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them. I'm in fact GM on NA =/. And I was saying it was in fact fun in BW, not sure if I didn't word it well. Immortal/Templar/Archon/Colossi is exactly what I did, and they got minced. Lurkers have too much range. As mentioned, had like 7 base to 4 base, had enough money to throw a lot of shit. The only Zergs I beat today did not go lurkers. Not kidding. Managed to finish it perfect vs Terran though because of adepts. Ok well I feel tremendously stupid for labeling you low level so I apologize and debase myself, I respect an American that is a good Terran player lol I recognize son x] To be fair though I did admit that people at your level have relevant opinions on balance <3 Back to topic, perhaps 7 range? I mean the Roach range buff made the unit go from underpowered to a staple unit so it has potential maybe?
Perhaps somehow having "siege range" being an upgrade again, available at the Lair, where it gets it's 9 siege range but decreases the rate of fire by 50%. So you pick between shorter range, fast dmg, or longer range, less dmg.
|
On May 11 2015 12:50 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 12:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 11:23 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 09:16 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work. Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it. And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp. Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them. I'm in fact GM on NA =/. And I was saying it was in fact fun in BW, not sure if I didn't word it well. Immortal/Templar/Archon/Colossi is exactly what I did, and they got minced. Lurkers have too much range. As mentioned, had like 7 base to 4 base, had enough money to throw a lot of shit. The only Zergs I beat today did not go lurkers. Not kidding. Managed to finish it perfect vs Terran though because of adepts. Ok well I feel tremendously stupid for labeling you low level so I apologize and debase myself, I respect an American that is a good Terran player lol I recognize son x] To be fair though I did admit that people at your level have relevant opinions on balance <3 Back to topic, perhaps 7 range? I mean the Roach range buff made the unit go from underpowered to a staple unit so it has potential maybe? Perhaps somehow having "siege range" being an upgrade again, available at the Lair, where it gets it's 9 siege range but decreases the rate of fire by 50%. So you pick between shorter range, fast dmg, or longer range, less dmg.
Hmm, good question honestly. I think it's more about what role should the Lurker really be relegated to? Longer range probably benefits turtling a bit more where as shorter range might encourage aggressive Lurker re positioning?
|
On May 11 2015 12:56 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2015 12:50 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 12:01 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 11:23 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 09:16 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 11 2015 06:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 11 2015 06:17 Merkmerk wrote: Carriers basically end Zerg once you hit a certain number.
Lurkers can't be a-moved by gateway units. Protoss has to go for an early timing or early air. No one thinks you can A-move them. It's "how do you actually kill them." I will accept Skytoss is good vs lurker strats but if you go into skytoss they can just do other strats, and that's an entirely different matter. You have to commit to skytoss before seeing lurkers, so I'm not quite sure what the answer is? Colossi were TERRIBLE vs the lurkers, and outranged even with Thermal lance (whcih is reduced). Disrupters are not even a little cost efficient vs them, as one it doesn't one shot them and they are typically spread out. Storm is not a good counter, although it helps. Everything else MELTS. Zealot trick from BW isn't as good because chargelots are slower than speedlots were. Goon/templar in BW were awesome vs lurkers. Just frustrating and not quite fun is the issue. At least breaking siege tank lines and lurker lines in BW were fun as P. EDIT: Forgot Tempests even existed, I would really hate the playstyle if this unit became the counter to lurkers, but alas I'm thinking it could work. Yes I say "slightly tuned down" because not everything that is strong needs a nerf, literally half the time it's an issue of practice and figuring it out. Also something to note, if you got in from the top 20% invite then unless your at the top 2% and master league or GM and struggling then honestly it's because your a lower level player and not because Lurkers are OP. Zero insult in that by the way, I'm top diamond and Disruptor/Prism drops ruin my life because I'm just terrible where as someone as good as say even Kane or Vibe would probably say Disruptors suck shit at the higher level because if your at least GM or high masters then your micro is good enough to nullify it. And it looks like you answered your own question, look to BW to fight a BW unit, Storm and Dragoons with Reaver support was how it was done, and I don't know why you would hate that play style if that came to be the case, it's a battle of pure micro and unit control on both P and Z and Templars are the best spell caster in the game at least at this point. You have to remember that the tech path to Lurkers is long, easily scouted and isn't exactly cheap gas wise. You should have more then adequate time to prepare. I'm curious if Immortal/Templar/Archon comps would be effective. Immortals and Archons to soak up the shots and storm to rofl stomp. Lurkers probably are a bit OP at the moment but do we really want them to get the Ravager treatment? Those nerfs obviously need to be offset or why bother even putting a new unit in the damn game if your just going to nerf it into uselessness. I don't want to see any unit from any race in the Beta get nerfed to oblivion because it's strong and people don't like playing against things that are unfamiliar and beat them. I'm in fact GM on NA =/. And I was saying it was in fact fun in BW, not sure if I didn't word it well. Immortal/Templar/Archon/Colossi is exactly what I did, and they got minced. Lurkers have too much range. As mentioned, had like 7 base to 4 base, had enough money to throw a lot of shit. The only Zergs I beat today did not go lurkers. Not kidding. Managed to finish it perfect vs Terran though because of adepts. Ok well I feel tremendously stupid for labeling you low level so I apologize and debase myself, I respect an American that is a good Terran player lol I recognize son x] To be fair though I did admit that people at your level have relevant opinions on balance <3 Back to topic, perhaps 7 range? I mean the Roach range buff made the unit go from underpowered to a staple unit so it has potential maybe? Perhaps somehow having "siege range" being an upgrade again, available at the Lair, where it gets it's 9 siege range but decreases the rate of fire by 50%. So you pick between shorter range, fast dmg, or longer range, less dmg. Hmm, good question honestly. I think it's more about what role should the Lurker really be relegated to? Longer range probably benefits turtling a bit more where as shorter range might encourage aggressive Lurker re positioning?
Which is why I was thinking the extra range could have a longer cooldown time - easier to break it.
Perhaps have it so in order to switch between each attack, you need to unburrow and reburrow. Increase burrow time as well for the "siege" lurker.
Just some thoughts. It's clear it can't stay how it is, even this early on.
|
My issue with the lurker is separate from game balance. They could probably balance the lurker by reducing its damage or attackspeed by a large flat number, so that it doesn't counter every zerg and protoss ground unit in the game. However, this would not make it any more interesting.
IMO: It's boring to play Zerg with long-range area-denial units. Just look at the past few years of HotS Swarm Hosts. The Lurker at least has to get within 9 range to attack, but it still heavily favors defensive play and immobility. Right now it is horrifically overpowered, but if it was nerfed to the point of "balanced", the Lurker would still be strong on defense but it would be useless for attacking.
If nothing else, balancing the Lurker at 6 range (and buffing it so that it is useful) would make it less purely defensive than a 9-range Lurker.
|
Just played another one... was up 4base to 3base vs Zerg, better econ, higher army counter, then he goes lurkers... I manage to snipe his fourth... he has to stay on 3 base... but then his cost efficiency is SO ridiculous I can't beat it. Tried large amounts of blink stalker, some disrupter, immortals, and HT this game. Failed miserably cost effective wise. Then the ultras came and couldn't touch them.
Completely at a loss, the only games I've won today vs Zerg are where they don't go lurker or I go skytoss. Majority of games I have a significant advantage, and then lose...
http://i.imgur.com/V8of5ZD.jpg?1
He was on 45 workers the entire second half of the game.
The second battle is when he comes in with ultra lurker, i flank the lurkers from the back (so i don't even have to attack the ultras).
http://i.imgur.com/hQTth9O.png?1
|
Does binding cloud work on lurkers? It could help if there are lurker stalemates in zvz
|
On May 11 2015 23:53 Superouman wrote: Does binding cloud work on lurkers? It could help if there are lurker stalemates in zvz It does work on lurkers.
|
|
|
|