On September 17 2012 17:56 winthrop wrote: so in starcraft 2 the carrier bug is fixed. dont whine
You know that many things you are using nowadays were first unintended(daily life)? So in programming language they were bugs or unintended mechanics. But because they proved to be useful they remained untouched or even built upon, thus switching up their official unintended status for intended, because letting it stay was concious acceptance of its usefulness.
there are so many things in sc2 designed poorly, but anybody rarely speaks out about it... i remember lalush posting a huge thread about micro, that was very good.
On September 17 2012 15:24 Talin wrote: The programming solution should be rather simple actually, and shouldn't involve tweaking the underlying engine or breaking the general unit behavior.
First they need to make Interceptors an actual unit - which should be simple enough, given that there's already a class for similar type of "swarm" units (Broodlings, Locusts). That way, Carriers would need range 8 to release Interceptors on a target inititally, but Interceptors themselves have a normal unit behavior and can be ordered to attack at maximum leash range once they're already out.
Also, didn't SC2BW already make Carriers (and most other units) control like in Brood War? That should be evidence enough that "it's complicated" is just a copout reason to not make the changes.
in the SC2BW mod Carriers don't work like they do in BW I just tested it so they might not even have known about it or a way to make it work.
your absolutely right. but this just became my priority. it's hard to find extremely specific information about BW like this.
Excellent video. I hope that if Blizzard decides not to go with this that we get to see a thought out response from their side that addresses the suggestions brought up here.
On September 17 2012 05:28 AxiR wrote: I think Blizzard is hesitating to implement the "old" carrier because it would overlap a little bit with role of the tempest.
On September 17 2012 05:28 AxiR wrote: I think Blizzard is hesitating to implement the "old" carrier because it would overlap a little bit with role of the tempest.
In that case remove the tempest.
Oh yes that too, but i agree just remove the tempest then. It was already just a stripped down carrier to gain some range in exchange for everything the carrier was good at. And the carrier even now fills the role almost better imo. (going into fungal range is no issue anymore with the new oracle skill.)
Excellent post, and I agree with Nazgul, if this isn't implemented I would really like to know why as I feel this would help carriers a lot and have wondered for over a year why it was not implemented to encourage carrier use since they felt it wasn't used.
NonY, thanks for sharing this. There are what seemed to be so many problems with the Carrier in SC2, but what you've said nails the one and only real issue.
The most interesting part about it, is that it'd be a mechanical buff, instead of a stat buff. All in all, I really can't see them not doing these changes, because quite frankly it seems they didn't even know this stuff, or that it didn't survive from BW-SC2 mechanically.
I'm all for this. More micro and more skill required actions makes for a way cooler game. And it just makes it that more awesome when you see someone pull it off in a game where a lot is at stake.
We should realise that this won't be the magic bullet that a lot of people reckon it is, although it is definitely a very much needed change.
For carriers to be viable, we need disruption web (shuts down units, use it on clumps of AA units) or the other races to use AA units with slow rates of fire like the goliath, so that the interceptors wont get obliterated as soon as they launch out. Then the intercepters have time to be repaired.
Requirements for Carrier are: Terran goes mech and sacrifices a bit of AA by going goliaths instead of marines, which can't shoot down interceptors easily. or Protoss can prevent AA with a spell like disruption web. Maybe give it to the Phoenix.
On September 17 2012 19:09 dafnay wrote: nony should post this in the "pro only" battle net forum section to get blizz attention like Grubby did.
Didn't know there was one, but this sounds like a good idea. Or at least someone should refer it.
Naww, we don´t need to copy every last thing in bw. Matchups work different, so mech versus Protoss isn´t a natural choice. Carriers are probably going to be more relevant versus Zerg as that race lacks anti air by default.
Just hope this gets into the beta and see from there. Micro ability will go a long way to make a fringe unit a staple unit, I´m sure.
On September 17 2012 07:33 puppykiller wrote: It's funny because it actually goes much deeper than this. Nony didn't even get to mentioning how goliath vs carrier works. If carriers are left in the open goliaths (which are a bit faster than carriers) can simply walk under them and kill them very quickly. For this reason carriers tend to be deployed in areas in which the terran can't maneuver there goliaths very well. Usually this means over mineral lines or from behind cliffs that are near key points of the map. In these locations the carriers can easily retreat if goliaths get to close and since often times few goliaths will be able to shoot at a time, the carriers will have significantly more dps. In order for the goliaths to combat this, they will often back off from the ridge a bit and shoot down the carriers interceptors rather than put themselves in an area in which they are at the carriers mercy near by the maps obstructions. This forces the carriers to move forward, which in turn leaves them vulnerable to the goliaths running under them and dispatching of them rapidly. However if the goliaths move too far back the carriers will just ignore them and continue kill whatever buildings/expansion they were attacking in the first place. This creates a really high level of skill micro dynamic between the players that is very interesting for an observer to watch.
EDIT: lol looks like while I was writing this post someone already posted the vod above.
A further point about gol vs carrier is when it's best for the gols to shoot directly at carriers and when its best to pick off interceptors. If a terran can get a clean shot at the carriers its usually best to take the shot. But if the toss has very little eco left, staying further out of range and targeting interceptors becomes a viable option. Flash would often use this tactic: During scouted carrier switch break up army into small working groups. Send those small working groups to assault each of the remaining active toss bases with the goal of killing the nexus/workers. Make tons of gols, but never run them in so close to the carriers that they get picked off easily, make the toss micro the carriers well. Staying back, the only units you can really target are the ints, but you can essentially starve him by picking off interceptors and keeping his mining bases to a minimum. Once the interceptor count gets low the toss will attempt a retreat, if you have an opportunity, pick off a few carriers.
Very informative video. I always wondered why the Carrier was so weak in WoL. Now I can totally understand and these ways of micro look funny and strong.
EPT
