• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 15:50
CEST 21:50
KST 04:50
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL46Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4[ASL19] Finals Preview: Daunting Task30
Community News
[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th12Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0EWC 2025 Regional Qualifier Results26Code S RO12 Results + RO8 Groups (2025 Season 2)3
StarCraft 2
General
The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview Magnus Carlsen and Fabi review Clem's chess game. Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th
Tourneys
Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
Mihu vs Korea Players Statistics BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion [BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 2
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Path of Exile Mechabellum
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0 Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread Cleaning My Mechanical Keyboard
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Cognitive styles x game perf…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Poker
Nebuchad
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 22176 users

Forging a Protoss Capital Ship - Page 2

Blogs > Vindicarian
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 All
Shady Sands
Profile Blog Joined June 2012
United States4021 Posts
August 24 2012 04:53 GMT
#21
This is very thoughtful. Well written 5/5
Что?
AlpacaFury
Profile Joined September 2011
United States3 Posts
August 24 2012 06:12 GMT
#22
I just wanna point out that vikings lose to pheonix in 1v1 fights. Also if there were a spreading out of the capital ships for the vikings to hunt down then the pheonix could come into play as a mobile defense for the capital ships. I think that if the armies spread out and acted dynamically like this then it would give pheonixes some pvt action.
AzureD
Profile Joined September 2010
United States320 Posts
August 24 2012 07:22 GMT
#23
This is a pretty good idea. I like the idea of giving the carrier extreme range for a 1 time deployment. Actually I would like it if at extreme range you could launch the interceptors and have them fire once before returning to the carrier. This would give them very weak dps at super long range but at close range they would retain very strong dps.
jetburger
Profile Joined December 2011
United States87 Posts
August 24 2012 07:51 GMT
#24
Just some quick rough ideas off the top of my head as I was reading the OP.

According to Blizzard, the Tempest is designed to...

Use an extremely long range attack to force opponents into unfavorable engagements by damaging or destroying high priority units from a distance.
Serve more as a "strategic" unit rather than a "tactical" unit, thereby functioning in part as a form of zone control and map presence


What if the Tempest...

1. has an AoE attack that does full damage to targets within close range and gradually less and less damage to targets farther and farther away. In other words, the projectile loses potency as it travels.

Rough numbers as an example:
100% AoE damage to targets within range 3
75% AoE damage to targets between range 4 and 5
50% AoE damage to targets between range 6 and 8
25% AoE damage to targets between range 9 and 11

This would allow it to do long range gradual siege and do zone control at closer range, I believe.

(Remember in BW how players would run units away from reaver scarabs to minimize damage? Maybe the same could be done here)

-or-

2. has a chain lightning attack (like d2 or wc3). Except instead of lightning, it would probably be some kind of reflective/refractive laser that bounces and hits up to 4 or 6 targets. Each bounce would reduce the damage by 10% or 15%. (Now that I think about it, it's a lot like Glave Wurms, isn't it?)

I'm thinking the range of the attack should be 7 to match Turrets/Cannons/Spores. But what gives it the ability to siege is the bouncing effect. Imagine if you could place a sacrificial zealot within range of the static defenses and then attacked it with your own Tempest in order to initiate the bouncing attack. This would effectively extend the range of the Tempest and allow it to attack far off targets without being in range itself as long as the zealot lasts. Maybe the zealot takes reduced or no damage from your own Tempest (as long as it has shields?). Maybe you could use a hallucination instead. Maybe the Tempest has a spell that can place a temporary stationary mirror or prism to bounce off of. Maybe the Tempest suffers no damage penalty or maybe even a damage boost if the initial target is a Pylon or Warp Prism. Getting too complicated, perhaps?

I think this would be another way for the Tempest to fulfill both the long range siege and zone control roles.

Anyway, just some rough ideas.
Vindicarian
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States22 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 08:13:26
August 24 2012 08:13 GMT
#25
I'm collecting my retorts to concerns/issues/counterarguments throughout the threads on Reddit, BNet, and here, adding them to a subsection at the bottom of my write-up. I encourage people to read them to help clarify some points I failed to appropriately develop and explain.
Telenil
Profile Joined September 2010
France484 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 12:12:11
August 24 2012 12:05 GMT
#26
With the definition of zone control as punishing enemies that enter a fire range without offensive intents, wouldn't the vulnerability of the interceptors be a problem? Sufficient fire power can destroy interceptors fairly quickly or force them to retreat - cost-effectively, if the interceptors are not free. So they wouldn't prevent a large force from sitting in a given area.

Siege tanks deal direct damage at long range - every shot does something. Swarm hosts send free units at a fast rate, so even if every locust is shot down before it does any damage, no big deal. Broodlords do both. But if the interceptors are not free, trying to engage in the same way will drain your resources. If they are not fast to build, then their destruction means it will be some time before you can "punish" the troops entering the area again. If the interceptors are free and fast to build, they become something akin to locusts.

Not sure how important of an issue it is, but it hasn't been covered as far as I can see.
Mass Recall: Brood War campaigns on SC2: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=303166
MrASAP
Profile Joined May 2011
United Kingdom63 Posts
August 24 2012 13:02 GMT
#27
nice post, well written with good points on both sides.
Vindicarian
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States22 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-24 20:37:36
August 24 2012 20:35 GMT
#28
On August 24 2012 21:05 Telenil wrote:
With the definition of zone control as punishing enemies that enter a fire range without offensive intents, wouldn't the vulnerability of the interceptors be a problem? Sufficient fire power can destroy interceptors fairly quickly or force them to retreat - cost-effectively, if the interceptors are not free. So they wouldn't prevent a large force from sitting in a given area.

Siege tanks deal direct damage at long range - every shot does something. Swarm hosts send free units at a fast rate, so even if every locust is shot down before it does any damage, no big deal. Broodlords do both. But if the interceptors are not free, trying to engage in the same way will drain your resources. If they are not fast to build, then their destruction means it will be some time before you can "punish" the troops entering the area again. If the interceptors are free and fast to build, they become something akin to locusts.

Not sure how important of an issue it is, but it hasn't been covered as far as I can see.



      An excellent point. I opted not to address this in the initial post, as I figured it was a secondary design concern. There are many different ways this can be circumvented. We could develop the Interceptors such that they deal large amounts of damage as a cost for this fragility. We can look also look at their range and speed to see if we can slightly remove them from the thick of enemy fire. Tweaking the "numbers" of an Interceptor might address this problem.
      Alternatively, one of my Interceptor ideas mentioned in the write-up was "less, bigger, manually controlled Interceptors." This also help counteract the Interceptors fragility, as they can now be controlled manually so as to focus fire/avoid enemy fire and thereby increase their effectiveness. We can also front the notion of Interceptor control/micro in an automated Interceptor model as well via commands the Carrier can issue to its deployed Interceptors. This would require some very sleek, intuitive design but it could theoretically work. We can pick and choose these options (and many of the others I've introduced) in order to better tailor what we want our Interceptors to be effective against and vulnerable towards.
Bobnoble
Profile Joined October 2011
Luxembourg52 Posts
August 25 2012 15:25 GMT
#29
Now if I get your idea right, the carrier(s) create a cloud of interceptors and will then be able to move away. You can determine an area where where the opponent needs to bring suffient army in order to be able to pass through.
Lets say I have a fourth base and I want to protect it. I'll tell my 3 carriers to deploy at the ramp that leads to the expo and then take the actual carriers with my deathball. When a major battle occurs I recall my interceptors and I can use my carriers as a straight up fighting unit. This has a few very cool effects:

- While my interceptors fly back my carriers are helpless in the fight so you sccrifice quite a lot but on the other hand you get a great defence at my imaginary ramp.
- An opponent will be able to abuse this and so time his harrassing (lets say a ling runby). He'll fake an engage but run away but during this he makes his runby.

Actually I don't like the fuel idea. First you won't be able to send you interceptors towards a main army anyway. Marines/infestors/... will kill them quite quickly without taking to many losses. And even if you see an unprotected high value target you'll always commit your interceptors since there could be 20 marines or some burrowed infestors nearby to kill them. If this happens your carriers will have to rebuild the interceptors and thus be less effective for a while.

My idea of handling it would be giving the carrier a certain range for deploying (10 comes to mind but I'm no balance expert). As soon as the carrier moves away from this range, "reinforcing" interceptors will stay inside the carrier. So you get close once, but then once your interceptors get shot at they will become fewer in numbers and thus less effective. Also I believe interceptors would then need to be cheaper but have fewer hitpoints to make playes less hesitating to use but on the other hand not making them overpowered.

In any case carriers will be a great zone control tool as they can control key areas without beeing there but in exchange they are helpless once they must fight because their interceptors might be too far away. As a siege unit they still won't function as the tempest does BUT in combination with collos or even phoenix and voidrays they can have a siege supporting role: Delpoy your interceports in front of an opponents army -> draw some shots/spells THEN move in with your attacking units or lift key units. Would kinda function like infested marine eggs against siegelines that take a few shots while your lings run in. This adds a lot of skill cap on both sides, T/Z has to focus fire your colossi instead of fighting against interceptors while deploying then attacking + lifting key units + possilbly storm/FF/guardian shield becomes more of a task for protoss.

One addition just came into mind: What if carriers would function exactly the same way they do now but they gain an ability of placing a control drone. This drone would have a certain radius that interceptors can't leave but in exchange the carrier doesn't need to stay colse by. If the drone gets destroyed the interceptors will fly back.

Well so much about my two cents! I really enjoyed reading your blog and I hope it gets a lot of attention as your ideas are really solid! 5/5
Favorite caster: ST Legend
Vindicarian
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States22 Posts
August 28 2012 01:00 GMT
#30
@ Bobnoble: As I've said, there are a dozen different ways you can build on this idea, each of which offers different advantages, drawbacks, and potential strategies/uses. Admittedly, the idea as it stands is pretty rough around the edges, but I think it is a solid basis to build a new Carrier on.


On a side note, this write-up was originally part of a more comprehensive piece on all the HOTS units, but I decided to work on the units one at a time given how long it takes to properly look at, analyze, and explore even a single unit. Given how warmly this first blog was received I'll definitely keep writing these for other units as well though. Hopefully I can improve my writing and arguments to where these write-ups can get spotlighted/featured and eventually get enough attention to wind up on someone's monitor at Blizzard.
Rorschach
Profile Joined May 2010
United States623 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-09-07 23:00:46
September 07 2012 15:30 GMT
#31
Awesome write up.... Thanks for taking the time to really sit down and organize these ideas/thoughts....
En Taro Adun, Executor!
Prev 1 2 All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL: ProLeague
18:00
Bracket Stage: Day 2
HBO vs Doodle
spx vs Tech
DragOn vs Hawk
Dewalt vs TerrOr
ZZZero.O358
Liquipedia
Fire Grow Cup
15:00
#10 - Playoffs
CranKy Ducklings263
MindelVK69
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
mouzHeroMarine 539
IndyStarCraft 199
BRAT_OK 134
ROOTCatZ 94
MindelVK 69
CosmosSc2 69
EnDerr 18
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 3106
Rain 1822
Horang2 620
ZZZero.O 358
Aegong 69
League of Legends
Dendi1369
Counter-Strike
fl0m6821
olofmeister2581
Stewie2K176
Super Smash Bros
C9.Mang08625
Chillindude31
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu586
Khaldor239
Other Games
tarik_tv47025
summit1g3592
FrodaN1798
B2W.Neo998
JimRising 479
Pyrionflax196
ArmadaUGS101
ViBE36
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Secondary Stream5730
Other Games
gamesdonequick911
BasetradeTV167
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 51
• Adnapsc2 23
• Dystopia_ 4
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• 3DClanTV 31
• HerbMon 10
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21591
• Ler137
League of Legends
• Doublelift313
Other Games
• imaqtpie1417
• Shiphtur307
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
1d 4h
Replay Cast
1d 14h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 15h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 15h
GSL Code S
2 days
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
3 days
Replay Cast
3 days
GSL Code S
3 days
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
Cheesadelphia
5 days
GSL Code S
6 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-06-05
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
ECL Season 49: Europe
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.