EPTI don't have anything to add to the discussion other than I hope they rework the Carrier. I just felt I was obligated to post here to show my support for the OP and what he wrote, well done.
The future of the carrier - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Eishi_Ki
Korea (South)1667 Posts
I don't have anything to add to the discussion other than I hope they rework the Carrier. I just felt I was obligated to post here to show my support for the OP and what he wrote, well done. | ||
|
Baum
Germany1010 Posts
On November 29 2011 22:57 Big J wrote: Gonna go quickly over that, though I read most of the OP and know that much more discusable/interesting things have been written there: ad 1) Yes and no... Chronoboost evens that out. With Zerg having no useful anticarrier T1 unit and hydralisks neither being a standard tech route for Zergs, nor good vs Carriers (that's true! Hydras get owned by Carriers BIG time... OP focused too much on how hydras are "only a little different from marines"... The truth is, that hydralisks are like 3-4times less costefficent than stim marines, even without hydrahardcounters on the battlefield), it become particulary hard to implement the carrier, as 2base carrierrushes could become quite powerful. Yet I think a little bit could be done about that. (small build time/cost buff) ad 2) Yes. But on the other hand, in most situations I feel like it wouldn't change too much. Flagships as composition unit vs zerg are always a rather bad idea due to corruptors. If Carriers suddenly could beat corruptors on the other hand, the game would turn into a a big joke, with Protoss maxing on 2base carriers, as they would beat everything from zerg. For vT... The Carrier really shouldn't be able to be playable vs bio+vikings... It's the strongest antiair build in the game, if carriers where still playable against it, terrans couldn't even react to them, as they are already playing as hardcore AA as possible. I would even go further and say that Carriers are viable against bio + vikings if you combine them with storms. It's an even deadlier combo than Broodlord/Infestor because Carriers can't be sniped. The Problem is just getting there. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
Even after the Carrier is out, it takes another 32 seconds to fill it with intercepters. | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1603 Posts
Carrier vs T - Vikings and Marines dominate them. Carrier vs Z - mutas and corruptors again dominate also hydras eliminate interceptors very quickly. Carrier vs P - VR and blink stalkers Issue is that late game units are not the late game units of BW Why build BC, Thors, Carriers, Mothership, Ultras and even Broodlords. Broodlords and Thors are built more often, but they're not what they would have been in BW. Broodlords have the ability to siege an area, but unless they have a substantial ground army below them they are weak. Thors are made to prevent mutas from stacking, but they're actually not that effective in killing mutas when split. Again not worth it. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
Some abilities have been changed 30 times, removed, re-added, altered, and then readjusted, and they ended up being the same as their original forms. Seriously, it could come back, or never leave at all. | ||
|
TheStonedGuest
United States19 Posts
Also if you're going to post this on b.net forums with the hopes of attracting the devs attention, perhaps you should emphasize the unit mechanic points first rather than the metagame ones interspersed. By your own admission, and I agree wholeheartedly, the metagame points are necessary but almost moot to a point because we've never seen any incentive to actually seriously use carrier transitions because they suck so hard. For similar reasons you never see carrier builds that you'd see back in BW (jangbi's final win with 2base carrier against fantasy this last OSL comes readily to mind...) because 'skyprotoss' is just too much of a joke after the midgame. Anyways, just my .02 cents on article structure  I do hope that blizz actually tries to bother fixing the carrier rather than throwing in the towel and replacing it with the just-as-boring-as-the-colossus tempest -_- | ||
|
BrosephBrostar
United States445 Posts
| ||
pPingu
Switzerland2892 Posts
| ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3491 Posts
I currently use it quite a bit vs zerg and when i see terrans going mech (never happens.) Though i've always been against the Carrier staying in the game, since beta. The voidray/colossus/carrier roles are too closely related in terms of roles. There does however have to be the need for getting the fleet beacon and air upgrades and a proper end game counter to mech and other similiar death balls. In broodwar however i much rather loved the option of going arbiters vs mech and as the mothership is on the way out, i'd love some kind of arbiter with non already existing abilities. | ||
|
Archybaldie
United Kingdom818 Posts
Zealot: Standard unit functionally a bit boring but in my eyes its a pretty "cool" unit. Stalker: Boring unit but has alot of micro potential making it quite a good unit. Microable Sentry: Good forcefields can swing a game in your favour great unit. Microable High templar: Fun spellcasting unit storms can be great no standard attack and is squishy. Microable Dark templar: Cloaked unit deals tons of damage easily killed. Needs to be micro'd to focus down detection or specific units. Immortal: Beefy unit needed the range upgrade but has the potential to be the meaty backbone of an army. Colossus: I hate this unit, It forces the deathball reduces mobility on the map and the only real micro is to pull it to the back or away from anti air. Archon: Fun transition from a dt or a ht when you need a unit to actually fight in your forces. Warp prism: Increases army mobility ... forces more multi tasking. Phoenix: Incredibly fun unit can give alot of harassment potential, map control and forces multi tasking. Voidray: Bit of a boring unit but keeping the charge going atleast gives it "micro potential" . Mothership: Fun spellcasting unit also promotes mobility on the map. I left the carrier out because the OP does a good explanation of the carrier. Honestly i believe that if the carrier was more cost effective, more time effective or microable. It could be a great backbone of the protoss "fleet". Now looking at the replacement for the carrier "the tempest" while the "stats" of the tempest might change the idea is the problem. The tempest appears to be a large slow unit slow units in general arnt that microable. Add onto it that it would probabaly be a costly investment. Both of these lead it to be more favoured in a deathball situation where it can be protected. Additionally the tempest in general appears to be just a boring "deals alot of damage unit without much functionality unit" Personally id much rather they removed the colossus and fixed the carrier just going by the concept a microable carrier could provide much more enjoyment then a tempest. The tempest also appears to fill quite a niche spot (mainly vs mutalisks). The problem with the "phoenix vs mutas" situation (which the tempest seems to be specifically designed for) is when the mutas get to a large enough number that 1 micro slip up and you lost multiple phoenix's in 1 shot. But on the same token theres a number of factors that specifically lead to that. If you end up in a phoenix vs muta situation, Your less likely to get air upgrades just because your late game air tech isnt as valuable as lategame ground. Fixing the carrier would give more of a reason to get these air upgrades. Also if the "muta problem" still appears to be an issue add a minor splash to the phoenix (something like 2 damage in a small range to punish clumped up mutas but not enough of an increase that it removes the micro needed to keep the nix's alive). I really really hope they dont remove the carrier and find some way to fix it, the tempest is a dull replacement for the carrier and would just lead to more deathballs. Add a minor splash to the phoenix and fix the carriers micro ability or something just dont get rid of the carrier. If the carrier must go then the tempest in its current form just isnt a good enough replacement. Wow i cant believe i typed so much hopefully it makes sense and wasnt too "rambley". | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 29 2011 23:12 BrosephBrostar wrote: Dustin Browder has said again and again that if you want to play BW then you should play BW. The carrier is a BW unit that has no place in SC2. For better or for worse Blizzard didn't attempt to recreate the race dynamics that made the carrier useful in BW and I don't see this changing. At least carrier fans can be glad that it's just being removed in it's original state instead of being left to suffer in gimped form like the hydralisk. That's crap. The only reason the Carrier was included in SC2 was because of BW nostalgia to start with... Further, the article isn't calling for the BW carrier to return rather that we don't let the carrier simply be removed without any shred of effort to improve the unit. I mean, the BC is getting a fucking redline reactor for crying out loud and ultralisks are getting charge. Adding a skill gradient to the carrier (while making it marginally more accessible) would go a long way to improving the unit and improving the game. | ||
|
Levistus
1134 Posts
| ||
|
TheButtonmen
Canada1403 Posts
On November 29 2011 23:24 Plexa wrote: That's crap. The only reason the Carrier was included in SC2 was because of BW nostalgia to start with Back before SC2 came out the community that they were responding to were old BW fans who loved the carrier, BW fans are now a tiny minority of the SC2 scene, there is no longer the nostalgia for the carrier. To SC2 fans the carrier is a slow, boring, useless unit who's only purpose is massing in 4v4s. It's time has come and gone, let something new replace it. | ||
|
Archybaldie
United Kingdom818 Posts
On November 29 2011 23:29 TheButtonmen wrote: Back before SC2 came out the community that they were responding to were old BW fans who loved the carrier, BW fans are now a tiny minority of the SC2 scene, there is no longer the nostalgia for the carrier. To SC2 fans the carrier is a slow, boring, useless unit who's only purpose is massing in 4v4s. It's time has come and gone, let something new replace it. But replace it with the tempest? The tempest is a slow and even more boring unit. I'd rather see them attempt to make the carrier a useful unit then get rid of it and replace it with a much less exciting unit designed to fulfill 1 role. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On November 29 2011 23:29 TheButtonmen wrote: Back before SC2 came out the community that they were responding to were old BW fans who loved the carrier, BW fans are now a tiny minority of the SC2 scene, there is no longer the nostalgia for the carrier. To SC2 fans the carrier is a slow, boring, useless unit who's only purpose is massing in 4v4s. It's time has come and gone, let something new replace it. Bwohoho at the bolded What's wrong with wanting a T3 unit whose effectiveness increases with the player's ability to micro? Is that the antithesis of what this supposed majority of non-BW-fan SC2 players want? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 29 2011 23:34 Archybaldie wrote: But replace it with the tempest? The tempest is a slow and even more boring unit. I'd rather see them attempt to make the carrier a useful unit then get rid of it and replace it with a much less exciting unit designed to fulfill 1 role. how much have you played with the tempest in its final state? | ||
|
targ
Malaysia445 Posts
Give it the wormhole transit that the mothership had in beta! The one that lets it teleport to any place with a pylon field. That way carriers could strike around the map like mutas, and it would go well with warp-in too. That kind of mobility would really give players to use carriers instead of colossi for certain strats. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Maybe you should have tried them out until you could say with no doubt that this is true. So they are slow to build, true because they are op in the early game and chronoboost is the problem for most production times toss has. So lategame, you are able to chrono 4 interceptors, basically that way its faster then bw yay. And i am not sure, but my interceptors return to my carrier if i reach the range of 13 from the target, so lovely, you can actually micro when your interceptors return yay, no more losing interceptors. Basically you need really good control for it ;o . The upgrades agreed it sucks for t3,5 units to have same upgrades as the opponent, but again this is because early game +1 carriers (+1 is super easy to get) owns the opponent who can't have +1 by that time. Hehe easy to conter is funny, you can chase vikings enough to let the interceptors kill them, you can pull back and swiftly turn around for another wave after you returned your interceptors. Thats because vikings have a bad acceleration. If vikings chase you they die like flies if you still have enough interceptors (which is one issue by the way, interceptor production time). Oh another easy to counter think is, there is this 3 colossi is perfect because of the viking amount to conter them. 1 carrier forces an even bigger amount of vikings. Marines and hydras do well against the interceptors, but nothing against the carrier itself, making it the perfect super range unit to snipe ghosts and without ghosts, yay storm time gainst marines. Corrupter same as for the viking, you need to many to counter a few carriers. Carriers role overlaps yes, but yay it can fly and has super long range. and can retreat while shooting, which the voidray cannot. Yeah interceptors die fast, but you can easily prevent sending them into their doom, and if they wouldn't die fast, there would be no weakness on carriers near cliffs, since vikings for example are absolutely no threat to them without support. I enjoy using carriers and bcs lategame and i use them all the time if the lategame allows it. And strangely i have no problem using those units. But i am not playing them bw like, get 4 stargates and pump 8 carriers with +0 and hope you don't get scouted. And carriers take alot of micro out of me to be really effective and a few tricks as well. edit: of course that is just my masterish experience with them, which doesn't mean alot. But then again i only know one fulltime protoss that actually uses carriers and often successful without being ahead, hmmm strange... | ||
|
M2
Bulgaria4167 Posts
 )))))) and everyone will be happy coz we would have still have the carrier but actually useful) | ||
|
Souljah
United States423 Posts
| ||
| ||
