|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GbDxiF2.gif) 1. Pew
2. Pew
3. .???
4. Pew
Blizzcon 2011. Dustin Browder & David Kim hold a multiplayer panel introducing all the units that will eventually get cut or redesigned for HotS.
The Tempest announced at this panel was Browder's latest attempt to kill the Carrier. A unit that does serious, serious damage to muta flocks and viking flowers, and has a long range siege 'laser beam' of sorts.
This Tempest would never make it far though, like many of its new HotS brethern. A newly redesigned Tempest which now fired a ball of plasma debuted for the HotS beta, the 'siege' characteristics were still present. Over the course of the beta, the Tempest was refined into an anti-massive counter unit, a far cry from its original role present at Blizzcon. The Carrier was also eventually reintroduced (note, for the second time in Starcraft 2's history).
The Tempest, among other units, represent one of my biggest criticisms with Blizzard. A unit designed with no real vision, no role, no purpose. I don't mean from a gameplay point of view, but from a design point of view. A failure in design. How can a unit change so radically?
Its easy to get the impression that Blizzard truly half assed it when thinking about "what to do" with this unit. The Tempest fulfills an extremely niche role (we call 'em 'hard counters'), with its incredible anti-air massive damage. In PvP, it is an 'alternative' to mass colossus. And, uh, other Tempests. In PvZ, it give protoss a direct counter to Brood Lords. In PvT ... uh, well, it counters BCs? (players have found limited use for it against lower hp units thanks to its high single attack damage, but beside the point)
You get the idea. The Tempest ended up being a band aid solution to the biggest gameplay problems that were present with Wings of Liberty.
But it doesn't end there. Another problem I have with the unit - overlap. Blizzard talks about 'unit overlap' alot in its panels. The one term they kept spouting against the inclusion of the Lurker in Starcraft 2. The aim to not design units that serve similar functions. I would ask, how many of you are actually aware of the Carrier's stats?
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/b/b7/Carrier.png/200px-Carrier.png) This mofo. Yes.
They both cost approximately the same, 300/200/4 vs 350/250/6. They both do incredible amounts of damage, the Tempest being in a single shot, the Carrier being sheer dps. They both have the same health, at 300/150/2, and are both massive, so they equally fall victim to the same units. They both have about the same range (Carrier leash range is 14).
But the biggest difference between the two is the fact you can make 2 Tempests in the time you can make 1 Carrier. Did you also know you can make a Tempest faster than you can make a Colossus? Or that even the VR has the same build time as the Tempest?
I just don't understand the Tempest. Its absolutely terrible, boring design as a unit. The protoss version of the corruptor. Literally the definition of pew, pew. The weapon attack sound even sounds like it!
I would ask Blizzard, why didn't you just change the Carrier? Its an infinitely more interesting unit with its interceptors. The leash range mechanic introduces control opportunities for the player. Allows players to take advantage of map terrain features, like they used to do with Brood Lords. Rather than, you know, having 5 tempests sitting half a screen away pew-pewing the enemy.
I don't main Protoss, but I do enjoy playing Protoss for fun. As a matter of rule, I never build Tempests, because they are the exact opposite of a fun, interesting unit.
  
|
Blizz did change the Carrier. They added the leash zone micro from BW.
|
You get the idea. The Tempest ended up being a band aid solution to the biggest gameplay problems that were present with Wings of Liberty.
I think this is your strongest point by far, though I do agree with what you've said. Blizzard made the Tempest to fix WoL balance issues, not HotS balance issues, and they certainly didn't make it to add to game play or watch-ability.
I do main Protoss, and Tempests are now a solid mix between Scouts in BW and the corrupter in SC2. They are RARELY useful and mostly a joke, but their presence in the Protoss arsenal forces the metagame away from it's hard countered strats (i.e. mass Colossi PvP of WoL)
|
I feel like the only thing holding carriers back is its incredibly long build time. The transition into carriers is pretty much impossible because of how long it takes to build a round of carriers. The battlecruiser takes 90 seconds to build while carriers take 120 seconds... Yes Protoss has chrono boost but in order to be constantly be chronoboosting a stargate you need to be in the super late game where you have a lot of nexus and energy. I feel that even shaving off 10 seconds will make carriers that much more viable. Regarding tempests, I agree at the moment it is pretty boring as a unit. I really really liked the original idea of tempest where they have splash versus air units but oh well...
|
Just so you know, they wont make any BW unit better. They may create a Tornado, Whirlwind or something but they wont modify Carrier build time
Oh and isnt sc2 all about hard counter & terrible damage?
|
tempest is actually cool, I remember during the beta, tempest slow siege push was kinda cool to play (and HARD to deal with)
it is only boring because it is way too strong as a counter.
at least in diamond league, using tempest to shoot down medivacs while you both are dancing around is awesome. you can even snipe ghost etc
|
Devourers can now be built from a standard spire for half-price, and goliaths can fly.
The Carrier is 100% fucked until the statements above become false.
By the way, their first carrier assassination attempt involved the introduction of a cheaper, air-to-ground DT-themed carrier, that used ninja stars instead of interceptors: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Cut_Features
Truly, truly bizzare company.
|
Simply put, a unit that removes more game play, than it adds to the game.
I hate it!
|
I'm pretty sure TL could make a better balanced game than blizzard
|
On October 02 2013 14:41 PineapplePizza wrote:Devourers can now be built from a standard spire for half-price, and goliaths can fly. The Carrier is 100% fucked until the statements above become false. By the way, their first carrier assassination attempt involved the introduction of a cheaper, air-to-ground DT-themed carrier, that used ninja stars instead of interceptors: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Cut_FeaturesTruly, truly bizzare company.
If the corruptor had acid spore like effect (reduce target attack speed), instead of +damage, it would have been such an amazing unit.
|
On October 02 2013 16:22 imBLIND wrote:
I'm pretty sure TL could make a better balanced game than blizzard
Except it is very balanced... just look at racial spreads at recent tournaments. Stop bandwagoning the hate and come up with a criticism that makes sense.
|
On October 02 2013 16:44 Scarecrow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2013 16:22 imBLIND wrote:
I'm pretty sure TL could make a better balanced game than blizzard Except it is very balanced... just look at racial spreads at recent tournaments. Stop bandwagoning the hate and come up with a criticism that makes sense.
TL could mke a more interesting and community-friendly game than blizzard, while maintaining balance.
|
On October 02 2013 09:57 Antylamon wrote:
Blizz did change the Carrier. They added the leash zone micro from BW.
The leash micro is AWFUL in its current implementation. You have to retarget another unti the second you kill a unit. If interceptors start heading back it is already too late.
In BW if you retarget and the corsairs are just about to hop into the hangar they'll still retarget.
|
I wish I had a carrier with corsairs. D-Web the entire map. And let the scouts clean it up. dadadadada
|
A carrier with corsairs, you say? That would a sick muta counter!
|
I wouldn't call it the Protoss' version of the corrupter. More like the flying immortal. Specifically designed to HARD-counter a select few units. The perfect example of poor and lazy design.
|
It could be better it could be worse.
If I had designed the tempest(with the same model) I would have designed a completely different unit...
Bottomline it's not that bad and I've seen some interesting late game scenarios involving mass tempest(PvT).
|
It's not that bad. It has grown on me. And, I say this as someone who originally despised the unit. I characterised it in the beta as a flying Stalker, but really, as others have commented, it is more a flying Immortal. Now, I like the Immortal. A lot more than I like the Tempest. But, I think, the Tempest is more interesting as a unit. And this is purely because of its range.
It creates interesting synergy with other units (specifically observers or oracles; or changelings or scanner sweeps in team games), and allows for different usage of maps.Despite the limitations of its design (a flying hard counter to massive air units - I hate that so much, by the way), players have shown the ability to take it in interesting directions (such as in PvT and in PvZ). It can be used as a siege weapon or as a zoning weapon. And there is a lot more left to explore with it, I think.
Overall, like I said, it has grown on me.
|
I agree it's a boring and poorly designed unit. It's also very much an extreme "hard counter." I think you forgot to point out in your analysis that the mere existence of the tempest at 4 supply also has basically completely invalidated mech TvP because of how good they are for their cost vs mech and vikings.
So while they're not always seen vs bio Terran, they are on the opposite end of the scale vs mech Terran - they almost make an entire strategy obsolete.
Also it's ironic that tempests help break up mass collosus in PvP lategame...but then turn the game into mass tempest vs mass tempest, which of course is poor design.
|
On October 02 2013 16:22 imBLIND wrote:
I'm pretty sure TL could make a better balanced game than blizzard
It's not balance that's the problem, it's how fun the unit/game in general is to play and watch that's the real problem with SC2 at the moment, and the Tempest is part of that problem.
|
Despite being "boring" or "bad" design in a vacuum, the tempest has actually improved all the protoss matchups by shifting the composition endgame and timetable. I also feel it serves a much need role in defining protoss as the "unmatchable technology" race on the flavor/lore side of things. Before, protoss was on a timer in both matchups and could only ever fight scrappy / have diceroll big engagements. The tempest restores that perception I believe protoss always should have had that they can make a super army that dictates the game, if they want to. That is not to say that the other races don't have answers, but they should be the ones to use guerilla tactics / backstab plays, not protoss. (This is, of course, my opinion on race identity, and if you're wondering yes I do play protoss and have always favored them since BW.  )
I would much prefer the tempest had some kind of depth to its design in addition to "longest range in the game", even though that is a reasonable and probably sufficient identity/roll for a unit. For example, tempest shots impose a temporary stun or other sort of debuff that stacks with multiple hits, but which is basically negligible with 1 or 2 tempests. This would give them a certain amount of usefulness against targets that aren't flying + massive, and would require a bit of micro to make use of. This is just as an example of adding depth, I'm sure there are better ideas.
|
On October 03 2013 05:24 EatThePath wrote:Despite being "boring" or "bad" design in a vacuum, the tempest has actually improved all the protoss matchups by shifting the composition endgame and timetable. I also feel it serves a much need role in defining protoss as the "unmatchable technology" race on the flavor/lore side of things. Before, protoss was on a timer in both matchups and could only ever fight scrappy / have diceroll big engagements. The tempest restores that perception I believe protoss always should have had that they can make a super army that dictates the game, if they want to. That is not to say that the other races don't have answers, but they should be the ones to use guerilla tactics / backstab plays, not protoss. (This is, of course, my opinion on race identity, and if you're wondering yes I do play protoss and have always favored them since BW. )
i would argue the tempest makes the pvp matchup worse. its the MSC that really helps to eliminate the 'diceroll' of rush strats and allins, and helps to bring more games into the midgame.
but then when you get to the midgame, what do you do? colossus are so hard countered by tempests its not even funny; you only need ~5 tempests to oneshot a colossus, and just consider how quickly you can build them. so then you build tempests, to counter tempests. in the end the unit itself negates its own existence.
i mean, you watch a pvp. and the moment you see a player going tempests, the other player doesnt know what to do anymore. they all in attack into gg once their colossus get vaporized. or dance around for an hour hoping to lure the tempests into wide open terrain. its so silly at times.
|
On October 02 2013 19:27 decemberscalm wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2013 09:57 Antylamon wrote:
Blizz did change the Carrier. They added the leash zone micro from BW. The leash micro is AWFUL in its current implementation. You have to retarget another unti the second you kill a unit. If interceptors start heading back it is already too late. In BW if you retarget and the corsairs are just about to hop into the hangar they'll still retarget.
and yes, this is true. its very difficult to work at moving and attack-move commands to effectively use leash.
|
On October 03 2013 05:38 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 05:24 EatThePath wrote:Despite being "boring" or "bad" design in a vacuum, the tempest has actually improved all the protoss matchups by shifting the composition endgame and timetable. I also feel it serves a much need role in defining protoss as the "unmatchable technology" race on the flavor/lore side of things. Before, protoss was on a timer in both matchups and could only ever fight scrappy / have diceroll big engagements. The tempest restores that perception I believe protoss always should have had that they can make a super army that dictates the game, if they want to. That is not to say that the other races don't have answers, but they should be the ones to use guerilla tactics / backstab plays, not protoss. (This is, of course, my opinion on race identity, and if you're wondering yes I do play protoss and have always favored them since BW. ) i would argue the tempest makes the pvp matchup worse. its the MSC that really helps to eliminate the 'diceroll' of rush strats and allins, and helps to bring more games into the midgame. but then when you get to the midgame, what do you do? colossus are so hard countered by tempests its not even funny; you only need ~5 tempests to oneshot a colossus, and just consider how quickly you can build them. so then you build tempests, to counter tempests. in the end the unit itself negates its own existence. i mean, you watch a pvp. and the moment you see a player going tempests, the other player doesnt know what to do anymore. they all in attack into gg once their colossus get vaporized. or dance around for an hour hoping to lure the tempests into wide open terrain. its so silly at times.
I think you are unfairly judging from bad games. There are more composition inflection points during all stages of pvp, including lategame, and I'm not referring to the stability the msc affords in the early game (which is still somewhat dicerolley but just deferred after tech leads sort themselves out). There are a lot of games that stick to robo + twilight tech even after one or both players opened stargate. So tempest aren't the metagame-ruining hardcounter you make them out to be, at least not in pvp.
On October 03 2013 05:46 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 02 2013 19:27 decemberscalm wrote:On October 02 2013 09:57 Antylamon wrote:
Blizz did change the Carrier. They added the leash zone micro from BW. The leash micro is AWFUL in its current implementation. You have to retarget another unti the second you kill a unit. If interceptors start heading back it is already too late. In BW if you retarget and the corsairs are just about to hop into the hangar they'll still retarget. and yes, this is true. its very difficult to work at moving and attack-move commands to effectively use leash.
Agreed, I've tried to practice a bit and even when I can get it to behave somewhat the way I intend, it feels awful and clunky and hardly better than a-move, compared to BW which felt like you were using a powertool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/gqiws9C.jpg)
