The future of the carrier - Page 14

On January 21 2012 10:55 Tump wrote:
Make Carriers function like SC1.

boom fixed

On November 29 2011 22:33 VPFaith wrote:
Why build carriers when you can just make chargelots lol? Not that hard to press W, and then ZZZZZZZZ hehe
I mean ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, yeah, that's about right.

User was warned for this post

On January 21 2012 20:18 Abrafred wrote:

you do realize that holding shift and clicking z will save you from spamming it.

On January 21 2012 19:50 MateShade wrote:
Great OP, I hate every new unit introduced into hots and hate what they are removing. EDIT: Protoss units

In my opinion, the colossus is a bullshit easy to use barely micro-able unit that obliterates what it 'counters' with support and is absolutely trash against its own 'counters'. This is just a ridiculously stupid way to design a unit.

with some reworking of the game of course I would love to see:

Protoss

- Collosus removed
- Stalker ultra significantly nerved in HP and damage, starting with default blink. (Think reaper, solves the protoss scouting issues as well as early game harassment issues and reduces the power of the 'death ball'.
- Carrier with improved ai
- A stronger high templar

Terran

- Marauder removed
- Viking removed
- Tanks buffed
- Strong ground anti air (such as war hound)

Zerg

- Roaches removed
- Hydras buffed
- Corruptors removed
- Ground siege unit (swarm host, hopefully)

I'd like a discussion on why you think this could be a bad idea from a DESIGN point of view. Obviously I'm not saying this automatically balances everything. I understand that many of the steps blizzard has taken in brainstorming hots has ticked some of these boxes, but I still think there is a long way to go.

With weaker Tier 1 ground forces the clump syndrome would be less of an issue in death balls, and also would allow for more space controlling with stronger higher tier units such as a decent tank, a lurker type unit and a strong high templar.

Without colossus, the need for marauders and roaches is drastically reduced, as well as the need for vikings and corruptors. This also means that terran and zerg will have a much easier time dealing with a protoss ground army, and in fact be at an advantage on the ground. The way this could work is that clever high templar and dark templar play can keep this at bay until protoss can get a carrier out that is improved and less easily countered to start pushing away siege lines etc.

I'm not saying this is perfect, but I believe the reason the carrier is not viable is dues to the power of the colossus, and the units blizzard has created in response to this. I would love to see a game that does not revolve around a-moving these units repeatedly, and instead a game that punishes a-moving. I think what i have suggested is a good place to start, I'd love to discuss it though, in a civilised way. I don't think many disagree that there is nothing clever about stalkercollosus/roachcorruptor/marauderviking play. It's easy, uninteresting and is imbalances other aspects of the game from a game design point of view.

On January 21 2012 19:50 MateShade wrote:
Great OP, I hate every new unit introduced into hots and hate what they are removing. EDIT: Protoss units

In my opinion, the colossus is a bullshit easy to use barely micro-able unit that obliterates what it 'counters' with support and is absolutely trash against its own 'counters'. This is just a ridiculously stupid way to design a unit.

with some reworking of the game of course I would love to see:

Protoss

- Collosus removed
- Stalker ultra significantly nerved in HP and damage, starting with default blink. (Think reaper, solves the protoss scouting issues as well as early game harassment issues and reduces the power of the 'death ball'.
- Carrier with improved ai
- A stronger high templar

Terran

- Marauder removed
- Viking removed
- Tanks buffed
- Strong ground anti air (such as war hound)

Zerg

- Roaches removed
- Hydras buffed
- Corruptors removed
- Ground siege unit (swarm host, hopefully)

On January 21 2012 20:24 bumwithagun wrote:


The stalker idea is GREAT!I have been thinking the same thing on removing the collos-roach-maurauder-viking-corrupter and getting rid of that whole boring relationship. I wish someone with power would read this because I honestly think this would make sc2 SOO much more dynamic and fix toss.

props yo

On January 21 2012 20:46 d00fuz wrote:
^ Remove viking and corruptors in a thread about carriers...riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight lol

On January 21 2012 20:53 CeroFail wrote:
Stupid set of ideas. Imbalanced as hell and would not only destroy the game in terms of balance, but make it super boring.

On January 21 2012 21:01 Destructicon wrote:
It is kind of going of topic, but I'll lend my thoughts on the matter.

I think that, if Marauders and Roaches where mearly nerfed, than it would be justifiable ot also nerf the Colossus, and than maybe even Vikings and Corrupters, thus BCs and Carriers could maybe see more use. However I don't agree with Carriers and BCs having no counters, you need to have at least two responses to carriers and BCs, that way you need to scout what the enemy is doing to counter you and have your own appropriate counter ready.

Though really, I'd rather have the Colossus replaced with something more micro-able, or the colossus itself is made much more micro-able, then I could let the unit live.

I really don't see the reason to remove Marauders and Roaches though. If you remove Marauders you make terran bio unviable. As a response mech has to be buffed in TvP, because pure marines melt, and then you'll only have mech TvP, which will get stale just as fast as pure bio has.

Marauders I find to be an interesting unit, because they can help kite for the terran army. While I know many people probably hate concusive shell, I the skill and APM involved in doing a succesfull stutter step, while also controling your ghosts and vikings, its really entertaining to watch and execute. Though maybe Marauders still do require a nerf in the damage department and maybe HP. I bet a lot of the hate associated with Marauders stems purely from their hard countering of anything and everything that is armored.

Roaches, I'd keep, but make them more micro friendly, put much more emphasis on burrow micro. Maybe give roaches a boost of like 10 armor for 1-2 seconds after they burrow, so you could potentially save wounded roaches as well as Protoss can save wounded stalkers with Blink micro. However if they unborrow the armor boost would disapear, to prevent abuses and such.

I'm not sure a stalker nerf is needed. If that would happen than the stalker gets relegated to a simple scouting role, simmilar to the reaper, and then never sees further use, which would be a shame. Blink micro is one of the most entertaining things to see done correctly, it would be a great waste to nerf the unit with this ability to such an extent that it becomes just a scout. If the stalker is nefed in damage and HP then it also can't fulfull its role of a harass unit and marines/hydras would just laugh and destroy it.

Also note, a nerf to the stalker, and simultaniously to the colossus, would be bad, the protoss army would not be able to fight toe to toe with the terran or zerg, you'd have to adjust it in other areas, probably creating or buffing old gimiks like Guardian shields and FFs.

If the colossus is nerfed than Stalkers should be buffed, then it could be a stronger harass unit, and the efficiency of the Protoss army would go up, it would be able to fight toe to toe with the terran and zerg army and you might see smaller engagements and skirmishes.

Though, I'd not nerf just the colossus. I'd make FFs destructible, with a HP and armor ratio that makes them good for early game and worst towards late game. And, I'd re-adjust Warp in mechanic, regular gateways produce units faster, but warp gates allow you to warp in anywhere on the map, for the price of producing units slower.

The GW mechanic would give a defenders advantage to protoss at long last and allow PvP to climb out of the stone age that seems to be 1 or 2 base plays and 4 Gate. Also a weaker WG, Colossus and FF would be enough justification to buff the GW army, make it more efficient and then it could again, fight face to face with both terrans and zergs, conduct better harass, hit and runs etc.

Vikings, I'd keep, but maybe add an upgrade so they transform faster, that way they become a better raiding unit. I find them somewhat interesting because they are relatively fragile, they die fast to fungals, storms and stalkers, so you need to hit and run and position them corectly to counter colossus. And you also need to hit and run with them to destroy BCs and Carriers, which is a good thing.

Corrupters are a bit worst in that department, you can't really hit and run because they always come into range of marines and stalkers, esentially when they move in, they need to stay there. The only saving grace is corruption, which in a good spell, requires a micro investment and focus fire to make full use of it.

Again, while you probably see Vikings and Corrupters as the sole reason why Carriers can't be viable, it still wouldn't be a good idea to remove them. They serve their purpose and are good units. The real issue is for the meta-game to change as such that, zergs and terrans have more options in composition versus protoss, compositions that don't contain corrupters and vikings. If the meta-game can stear into that direction (which is looking very likely in HoTS), than Carriers will find a place in the game.

I don't think we should jump to conclusions to quickly and ask for the removal of some units, some can be re-worked such that they can find a use, or can be made more interesting and micro-able, I see tons of wasted potential in the roach, just as much as I see in the carrier. I believe it would be best to try and fix them first, and if it doesn't work, than remove them. Those are my thoughts on the issue.

On January 21 2012 20:18 Abrafred wrote:

you do realize that holding shift and clicking z will save you from spamming it.

You obviously didn't read the post. Every single expansion is 'destroying the game in terms of balance' have you even seen the proposed hots ideas? And your idea of boring differs from mine and the general consensus of sc2 players, at the least I hope it does.

On November 29 2011 22:13 Destructicon wrote:
To put it into perspective, the build speed is so slow that, even the Tempest, the replacement for the carrier is supposed to have a build time of 70 seconds without chrono, and even the Battlecruiser, which started life in SC2 with a build time of 110 seconds quickly came down to 90 seconds.

On January 21 2012 19:50 MateShade wrote:
Great OP, I hate every new unit introduced into hots and hate what they are removing. EDIT: Protoss units

In my opinion, the colossus is a bullshit easy to use barely micro-able unit that obliterates what it 'counters' with support and is absolutely trash against its own 'counters'. This is just a ridiculously stupid way to design a unit.

with some reworking of the game of course I would love to see:

Protoss

- Collosus removed
- Stalker ultra significantly nerved in HP and damage, starting with default blink. (Think reaper, solves the protoss scouting issues as well as early game harassment issues and reduces the power of the 'death ball'.
- Carrier with improved ai
- A stronger high templar

Terran

- Marauder removed
- Viking removed
- Tanks buffed
- Strong ground anti air (such as war hound)

Zerg

- Roaches removed
- Hydras buffed
- Corruptors removed
- Ground siege unit (swarm host, hopefully)

I'd like a discussion on why you think this could be a bad idea from a DESIGN point of view. Obviously I'm not saying this automatically balances everything. I understand that many of the steps blizzard has taken in brainstorming hots has ticked some of these boxes, but I still think there is a long way to go.

With weaker Tier 1 ground forces the clump syndrome would be less of an issue in death balls, and also would allow for more space controlling with stronger higher tier units such as a decent tank, a lurker type unit and a strong high templar.

Without colossus, the need for marauders and roaches is drastically reduced, as well as the need for vikings and corruptors. This also means that terran and zerg will have a much easier time dealing with a protoss ground army, and in fact be at an advantage on the ground. The way this could work is that clever high templar and dark templar play can keep this at bay until protoss can get a carrier out that is improved and less easily countered to start pushing away siege lines etc.

I'm not saying this is perfect, but I believe the reason the carrier is not viable is dues to the power of the colossus, and the units blizzard has created in response to this. I would love to see a game that does not revolve around a-moving these units repeatedly, and instead a game that punishes a-moving. I think what i have suggested is a good place to start, I'd love to discuss it though, in a civilised way. I don't think many disagree that there is nothing clever about stalkercollosus/roachcorruptor/marauderviking play. It's easy, uninteresting and is imbalances other aspects of the game from a game design point of view.

On January 21 2012 20:18 Abrafred wrote:

you do realize that holding shift and clicking z will save you from spamming it.

On January 21 2012 21:01 Destructicon wrote:
It is kind of going of topic, but I'll lend my thoughts on the matter.

I think that, if Marauders and Roaches where mearly nerfed, than it would be justifiable ot also nerf the Colossus, and than maybe even Vikings and Corrupters, thus BCs and Carriers could maybe see more use. However I don't agree with Carriers and BCs having no counters, you need to have at least two responses to carriers and BCs, that way you need to scout what the enemy is doing to counter you and have your own appropriate counter ready.

Though really, I'd rather have the Colossus replaced with something more micro-able, or the colossus itself is made much more micro-able, then I could let the unit live.

I really don't see the reason to remove Marauders and Roaches though. If you remove Marauders you make terran bio unviable. As a response mech has to be buffed in TvP, because pure marines melt, and then you'll only have mech TvP, which will get stale just as fast as pure bio has.

Marauders I find to be an interesting unit, because they can help kite for the terran army. While I know many people probably hate concusive shell, I the skill and APM involved in doing a succesfull stutter step, while also controling your ghosts and vikings, its really entertaining to watch and execute. Though maybe Marauders still do require a nerf in the damage department and maybe HP. I bet a lot of the hate associated with Marauders stems purely from their hard countering of anything and everything that is armored.

Roaches, I'd keep, but make them more micro friendly, put much more emphasis on burrow micro. Maybe give roaches a boost of like 10 armor for 1-2 seconds after they burrow, so you could potentially save wounded roaches as well as Protoss can save wounded stalkers with Blink micro. However if they unborrow the armor boost would disapear, to prevent abuses and such.

I'm not sure a stalker nerf is needed. If that would happen than the stalker gets relegated to a simple scouting role, simmilar to the reaper, and then never sees further use, which would be a shame. Blink micro is one of the most entertaining things to see done correctly, it would be a great waste to nerf the unit with this ability to such an extent that it becomes just a scout. If the stalker is nefed in damage and HP then it also can't fulfull its role of a harass unit and marines/hydras would just laugh and destroy it.

Also note, a nerf to the stalker, and simultaniously to the colossus, would be bad, the protoss army would not be able to fight toe to toe with the terran or zerg, you'd have to adjust it in other areas, probably creating or buffing old gimiks like Guardian shields and FFs.

If the colossus is nerfed than Stalkers should be buffed, then it could be a stronger harass unit, and the efficiency of the Protoss army would go up, it would be able to fight toe to toe with the terran and zerg army and you might see smaller engagements and skirmishes.

Though, I'd not nerf just the colossus. I'd make FFs destructible, with a HP and armor ratio that makes them good for early game and worst towards late game. And, I'd re-adjust Warp in mechanic, regular gateways produce units faster, but warp gates allow you to warp in anywhere on the map, for the price of producing units slower.

The GW mechanic would give a defenders advantage to protoss at long last and allow PvP to climb out of the stone age that seems to be 1 or 2 base plays and 4 Gate. Also a weaker WG, Colossus and FF would be enough justification to buff the GW army, make it more efficient and then it could again, fight face to face with both terrans and zergs, conduct better harass, hit and runs etc.

Vikings, I'd keep, but maybe add an upgrade so they transform faster, that way they become a better raiding unit. I find them somewhat interesting because they are relatively fragile, they die fast to fungals, storms and stalkers, so you need to hit and run and position them corectly to counter colossus. And you also need to hit and run with them to destroy BCs and Carriers, which is a good thing.

Corrupters are a bit worst in that department, you can't really hit and run because they always come into range of marines and stalkers, esentially when they move in, they need to stay there. The only saving grace is corruption, which in a good spell, requires a micro investment and focus fire to make full use of it.

Again, while you probably see Vikings and Corrupters as the sole reason why Carriers can't be viable, it still wouldn't be a good idea to remove them. They serve their purpose and are good units. The real issue is for the meta-game to change as such that, zergs and terrans have more options in composition versus protoss, compositions that don't contain corrupters and vikings. If the meta-game can stear into that direction (which is looking very likely in HoTS), than Carriers will find a place in the game.

I don't think we should jump to conclusions to quickly and ask for the removal of some units, some can be re-worked such that they can find a use, or can be made more interesting and micro-able, I see tons of wasted potential in the roach, just as much as I see in the carrier. I believe it would be best to try and fix them first, and if it doesn't work, than remove them. Those are my thoughts on the issue.