| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Chicane
United States7875 Posts
On October 19 2011 10:55 joyeaux wrote: let's not jump to conclusions. The only thing we can know for sure right now is that marines will undoubtedly counter it. Hahaha well played sir. | ||
|
AegonC
United States260 Posts
| ||
|
ckw
United States1018 Posts
| ||
|
Inschato
Canada1349 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:35 ckw wrote: Well, lets be honest here. What DON'T marines counter in mass? Buildings hiding in the corners of the map? | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:41 Inschato wrote: Buildings hiding in the corners of the map? Burrowed banelings when you've killed all the ravens and command centers. Takes a lot of work to figure a unit out though -_-. | ||
|
ePBuckets
Canada207 Posts
| ||
|
forumtext
575 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:35 ckw wrote: Well, lets be honest here. What DON'T marines counter in mass? Other Marines? | ||
|
Blacklizard
United States1194 Posts
Not the harassment unit Dustin was talking about... that will come later. Can't wait to see it, too. | ||
|
ckw
United States1018 Posts
| ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:03 RogerChillingworth wrote: Unfortunately, having carriers like they were in BW would break the game. Maybe. Then I really think they either need to be replaced or changed drastically. If you are gonna have unit from Brood War that is now nearly obsolete, stop keeping that junk around. But I guess this is a whole another discussion. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:35 ckw wrote: Well, lets be honest here. What DON'T marines counter in mass? Colossi. Siege Tanks. Get enough of either of those, and they can kill infinite numbers of Marines. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On October 19 2011 11:03 RogerChillingworth wrote: Unfortunately, having carriers like they were in BW would break the game. In what way? Carriers in SC2 are better than their SC1 equivalents. No carrying capacity upgrade, Intercepters do more damage, etc. The problem isn't the Carriers themselves. The problem is that SC1 Carriers never had to deal with Corruptors and Vikings. So long as units like them exist, it will be more cost effective to kill Carriers than to keep them alive until you get enough to make a real Carrier-based push. | ||
|
Skwid1g
United States953 Posts
On October 19 2011 12:34 OneOther wrote: Maybe. Then I really think they either need to be replaced or changed drastically. If you are gonna have unit from Brood War that is now nearly obsolete, stop keeping that junk around. But I guess this is a whole another discussion. People still think carriers are bad/useless? Makes me sad to hear that honestly. I really hope this unit isn't another corsair though. Hope for an interesting spell caster, but I have doubts. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
On October 19 2011 14:22 NicolBolas wrote: In what way? Carriers in SC2 are better than their SC1 equivalents. No carrying capacity upgrade, Intercepters do more damage, etc. The problem isn't the Carriers themselves. The problem is that SC1 Carriers never had to deal with Corruptors and Vikings. So long as units like them exist, it will be more cost effective to kill Carriers than to keep them alive until you get enough to make a real Carrier-based push. That and since Colossus is the standard everyone always has those units already. Might be a decent tech switch should you go Zealot/HT/Archon though. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On October 19 2011 14:22 NicolBolas wrote: In what way? Carriers in SC2 are better than their SC1 equivalents. No carrying capacity upgrade, Intercepters do more damage, etc. The problem isn't the Carriers themselves. The problem is that SC1 Carriers never had to deal with Corruptors and Vikings. So long as units like them exist, it will be more cost effective to kill Carriers than to keep them alive until you get enough to make a real Carrier-based push. Marines are better in SC2 as well, and terrans don't go pure mech vs. toss. Interceptors don't auto-repair upon return to the carrier like they did in BW, and they can't be micro'd the way they could in BW where you launched the interceptors then pull it back. | ||
|
Ballistixz
United States1269 Posts
On October 19 2011 14:22 NicolBolas wrote: In what way? Carriers in SC2 are better than their SC1 equivalents. No carrying capacity upgrade, Intercepters do more damage, etc. The problem isn't the Carriers themselves. The problem is that SC1 Carriers never had to deal with Corruptors and Vikings. So long as units like them exist, it will be more cost effective to kill Carriers than to keep them alive until you get enough to make a real Carrier-based push. the problem with carriers is that A) they are hard countered by 3-3 rines. litterally atk move the rines and all the interceptors vanish instantly..... B) they take forever to build. C) they are hard countered by vikings which can be produced 2 at a time. D) they are hardcountered by corruptors. E) hydras do "ok" against them as long as hydras are on creep. F) they suck without upgrades in general for there cost. in PvP they are ok i guess if PvP ever miracolously goes into the very late game as a "surprise". but then again enought blink stalkers can easily take care of carriers at that point. so ummm ya, G) blink stalkers....... blizzard honestly made the wrong derp choice by buffing the Mship (a unit that needs to be REMOVED from the game) instead of carrier. now carriers either need to be removed and replaced or buffed. ALSO, in SC1 carriers had to deal with scourge which were alot better then any anti air unit in SC2. devourers were also extremly good against carriers. | ||
|
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On October 19 2011 14:28 Skwid1g wrote: People still think carriers are bad/useless? Makes me sad to hear that honestly. I really hope this unit isn't another corsair though. Hope for an interesting spell caster, but I have doubts. They are bad primarily because they are not micro-able as they were in Brood War. Again, this is a whole another topic of discussion because many units in SC2 are now less micro-able than they were in BW. I understand that Carriers have become relatively weaker due to Vikings and Corruptors, as well as Marines or Hydras or mentioned above. But that's not even really my point. Carriers in Brood War were actually quite vulnerable if you could not micro them well. But if you did perfect the micro, they became exponentially stronger, and that's what make them so "cool." I suppose the same thing applies to units like Mutas - watching a good Zerg player micro Mutas in BW were one of the greatest things in Starcraft. My bad for digressing but yea, it is what it is and we gotta deal with it, I will stop now. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 19 2011 12:34 OneOther wrote: Maybe. Then I really think they either need to be replaced or changed drastically. If you are gonna have unit from Brood War that is now nearly obsolete, stop keeping that junk around. But I guess this is a whole another discussion. It's ridiculous to say they would break the game. If you fix micro, you STILL have to get critical mass with carriers, and if they get too strong, you nerf DPS or HP or shields. Not that hard people. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On October 19 2011 14:37 OneOther wrote: They are bad primarily because they are not micro-able as they were in Brood War. Again, this is a whole another topic of discussion because many units in SC2 are now less micro-able than they were in BW. I understand that Carriers have become relatively weaker due to Vikings and Corruptors, as well as Marines or Hydras or mentioned above. But that's not even really my point. Carriers in Brood War were actually quite vulnerable if you could not micro them well. But if you did perfect the micro, they became exponentially stronger, and that's what make them so "cool." I suppose the same thing applies to units like Mutas - watching a good Zerg player micro Mutas in BW were one of the greatest things in Starcraft. My bad for digressing but yea, it is what it is and we gotta deal with it, I will stop now. Great point. The problem is that Blizzard has only attempted this once, with the phoenix, and the results were simultaneously horrendous and hilarious. Then again, maybe they fired the guy who gave Raven's HSM inverse dps AoE dispersion, and have a more competent guy now? We can only hope... | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Ladder Legends
BSL 21
StRyKeR vs TBD
Bonyth vs TBD
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs Solar
Clem vs Classic
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
|
|
|
EPT
