• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 13:40
CEST 19:40
KST 02:40
  • 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
ByuL, and the Limitations of Standard Play1Team Liquid Map Contest #22: Results and Winners7Code S Season 2 (2026): RO4 and Finals Preview12TL.net Map Contest #22 - Voting & Ladder Map Selection7Code S Season 2 (2026) - RO8 Preview8
Community News
[TLMC] Summer 2026 Ladder Map Rotation05.0.16 patch for SC2 goes live (8 worker start)80ZeroSpace at Steam NextFest - Last free demo36Weekly Cups (June 8-14): Clem and Solar double, PTR tested0RSL: S6 Finals played at BlizzCon 202611
StarCraft 2
General
5.0.16 patch for SC2 goes live (8 worker start) Is the larve respawn broken? The future of the SC game model Daily SC2 Player Grid - feedback wanted The Death of Cheese: From a Professional Cheeser
Tourneys
Douyu Cup 2026: $20,000 Legends Event (June 26-28) Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule ! RSL Revival: Season 6 - Qualifiers and Main Event INu's Battles#17 <BO.9> Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
New Map Maker - Looking for Advice - Love or Hate Work In Progress Melee Maps [D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3
External Content
The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 531 Experimental Artillery Mutation # 530 One For All Mutation # 529 Opportunities Unleashed
Brood War
General
ASL 22 Proposed Map Pool Data needed Best thing happen to StarCraft since Remastered? BW General Discussion Fact based Zerg Upgrade Tier List
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL21] Grand Finals The Casual Games of the Week Thread [BSL22] GosuLeague Casts - Tue & Thu 22:00 CEST
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Creating a full chart of Zerg builds Relatively freeroll strategies Why doesn't anyone use restoration?
Other Games
General Games
ZeroSpace at Steam NextFest - Last free demo Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Looking for a Dota Mentor Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread The Games Industry And ATVI Canadian Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
The HerO Fan Club! The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! Series you have seen recently... [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books [TV/BOOK] *SPOILERS* Game of Thrones Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion McBoner: A hockey love story TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 Cricket [SPORT]
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Listen To The Coaches!
TrAiDoS
An Exploration of th…
waywardstrategy
I'm an arrogant trash talke…
FlaShFTW
Gauntlet SC2: A Retrospectiv…
Ctone23
ramps on octagon
StaticNine
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 10505 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
Online Event
15:00
Yamato Cup #6
LiquipediaDiscussion
BSL22 NKC (BSL vs China)
14:00
Final Day
Mihu vs TBD
ZZZero.O332
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Harstem 786
BRAT_OK 76
SHIN 43
MindelVK 33
StarCraft: Brood War
Mini 1006
ZZZero.O 332
Mong 99
Hyun 46
Pusan 35
HiyA 23
Rock 19
Dota 2
Gorgc8289
qojqva2172
Counter-Strike
x6flipin1081
edward654
zeus417
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox556
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor352
Other Games
Grubby3448
FrodaN2654
Liquid`RaSZi1224
JuggernautJason785
Beastyqt604
B2W.Neo424
byalli251
KnowMe174
ArmadaUGS96
Mew2King71
UpATreeSC43
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream14328
Other Games
EGCTV1678
gamesdonequick1551
StarCraft 2
TaKeTV 649
Other Games
BasetradeTV259
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 68
• StrangeGG 27
• LUISG 16
• Freeedom8
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Other Games
• Shiphtur404
• imaqtpie254
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
8h 20m
WardiTV Weekly
17h 20m
RSL Revival
1d 16h
RSL Revival
1d 23h
Bombastic Starleague
2 days
Kung Fu Cup
2 days
OSC
3 days
CrankTV Team League
3 days
Bombastic Starleague
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
The PondCast
4 days
HomeStory Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
HomeStory Cup
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
HomeStory Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 21: Qualifier 1
Maestros of the Game 2
Heroes Pulsing #2

Ongoing

IPSL Spring 2026
Acropolis #4
CSCL: Masked Kings S4
YSL S3
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
CSL Season 21: Qualifier 2
SCTL 2026 Spring
Murky Cup 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
IEM Rio 2026

Upcoming

CSL 2026 Summer (S21)
ASL Season 22:Wild Card Qualifier
CSLAN 4
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Revival: Season 6
CranK Gathers Season 4: BW vs SC2 Team League
HSC XXIX
BCC 2026
Light Tournament 2026
Eternal Conflict S2 Finale
Eternal Conflict S2 E1
Heroes Pulsing #3
FISSURE Playground #5
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026
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 © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.