|
On January 27 2012 09:39 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 09:27 MandoRelease wrote:I don't really mind the carrier being gone. Because I didn't play the original starcraft, I have no attachment whatsoever to the unit. From what I understand the carrier was a symbol for the original starcraft, but SC2 being a different game, I find it OK to remove it. It's not being remove from the original starcraft, it's just removed from a game in which it is heavily underused though balanced (that's right, I said it). And in order to replace it by a unit we'll see more of, hopefully. So I don't really understand, nobody uses the carrier, why keep it ? + Show Spoiler +It's a rethorical question, because nothing in this topic has convinced me so far. the main stupidity i see in removing the carrier, is because "there is no reason to build it over the collosus" according to kim, and so if thats the reason, why not just do something about the collosus make the collosus start dealing damage faster (not overal dps increase but make it a little more front loaded) and take away some of it's speed so that it needs to be used in prisms make it have more shields than regular armor, stuff like that removes the role overlap alot.
The problem with colossus is the cliff walking ability. to 'balance' that they have made the colossus vulnerable to air units which is where the problem comes in with the carrier. Why get carrier when the safer, stronger tier 3 units forces the 'counter' to the carrier before you even think about getting them.
|
On January 27 2012 09:57 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 09:39 PrinceXizor wrote:On January 27 2012 09:27 MandoRelease wrote:I don't really mind the carrier being gone. Because I didn't play the original starcraft, I have no attachment whatsoever to the unit. From what I understand the carrier was a symbol for the original starcraft, but SC2 being a different game, I find it OK to remove it. It's not being remove from the original starcraft, it's just removed from a game in which it is heavily underused though balanced (that's right, I said it). And in order to replace it by a unit we'll see more of, hopefully. So I don't really understand, nobody uses the carrier, why keep it ? + Show Spoiler +It's a rethorical question, because nothing in this topic has convinced me so far. the main stupidity i see in removing the carrier, is because "there is no reason to build it over the collosus" according to kim, and so if thats the reason, why not just do something about the collosus make the collosus start dealing damage faster (not overal dps increase but make it a little more front loaded) and take away some of it's speed so that it needs to be used in prisms make it have more shields than regular armor, stuff like that removes the role overlap alot. The problem with colossus is the cliff walking ability. to 'balance' that they have made the colossus vulnerable to air units which is where the problem comes in with the carrier. Why get carrier when the safer, stronger tier 3 units forces the 'counter' to the carrier before you even think about getting them.
exactly and a slow front loaded collosus means it's more likely to be used for it's intended purpose as a semi raiding unit and a unit that requires micro.
putting collosus in a warp prism will be a must, since they won't be able to get around well without them.
even though they are also weak to air, the fact that they have to be micro'd more than carriers will put carriers as the main army tier 3 while collosus get to be the aggression based tier 3. like RIBA RIBA RIBA RIBA RIBA RIBA 's were in BW
|
Needs more speed and it's so called 14 range micro working then I think it would be balanced and viable. Right now it's really worthless so what's the point? Almost any other air unit of any race currently is preffered and I'm sure Tempest will be better and thus used. Seriously as worthless as people say BC's or Corruptors are I see them used 100x more than Carrier. You'd have to screw up pretty bad to make a worse unit.
|
The carrier has been an iconic unit for over a decade and for blizzard to remove it just breaks my heart.
|
Protoss has got to bring the heat on ladder, Carriers every game! I'm gonna bring back 2base carrier make Stork proud :,)
|
On January 27 2012 08:33 Kharnage wrote:The carrier as it stands is a very very expensive broodlord. Not only is it more expensive to build, but it costs more supply and has ongoing costs to keep it functioning and lacks the broodlings blocking ability to help keep units back from it. In a nut shell, it sucks. The carrier needs to be faster and micro-able and the interceptors need to be stronger and stay in combat while the carrier is manoeuvring. Reading the latest battle net blog on balance it looks like their hots testing isn't going particularly well. If they are looking at buffing the pheonix to deal with mutas before hots and keeping the carrier as was implied, then they are probably ditching the tempest. Honestly I can't see them keeping the replicator, and if someone can tell me how terran is meant to open with anything other than MM+ stim vs a protoss going 2gate robo observer, replicator that would be great. The carrier needs to be re purposed so that it integrates into the protoss army. Should it be an AA unit? Should we be getting 3 colossus and 2 carriers to protect them from vikings?. Should interceptors also function like pdd's sacrificing themselves to eat viking volleys (that would be pretty cool actually)? Or should we be thinking there are 2 protoss armies, robo and stargate like terran bio and mech where we pursue one tech path? The problem right now is that for what it is the carrier costs waaaay too much. it really is very similar to a broodlord except totally shit and expensive. Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 08:20 Fleshcut wrote:
I don't see the point of fighting for a unit nobody uses just because it was good in BW or something... The concept of the carrier is great. It's the execution that sucks.
Do you have a link to this blog? Good ideas on the carrier. Faster all around build/move and more microable.
I don't think replactor is going anywhere. Solves blizz;z 1/1/1 problem without buffing Protoss or nerfing Terran. See 1/1/1 make seige tanks on top of your ramp GG. Protoss' whole problem with it is no early AOE and replicator solves that.
|
On January 27 2012 09:57 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 09:39 PrinceXizor wrote:On January 27 2012 09:27 MandoRelease wrote:I don't really mind the carrier being gone. Because I didn't play the original starcraft, I have no attachment whatsoever to the unit. From what I understand the carrier was a symbol for the original starcraft, but SC2 being a different game, I find it OK to remove it. It's not being remove from the original starcraft, it's just removed from a game in which it is heavily underused though balanced (that's right, I said it). And in order to replace it by a unit we'll see more of, hopefully. So I don't really understand, nobody uses the carrier, why keep it ? + Show Spoiler +It's a rethorical question, because nothing in this topic has convinced me so far. the main stupidity i see in removing the carrier, is because "there is no reason to build it over the collosus" according to kim, and so if thats the reason, why not just do something about the collosus make the collosus start dealing damage faster (not overal dps increase but make it a little more front loaded) and take away some of it's speed so that it needs to be used in prisms make it have more shields than regular armor, stuff like that removes the role overlap alot. The problem with colossus is the cliff walking ability. to 'balance' that they have made the colossus vulnerable to air units which is where the problem comes in with the carrier. Why get carrier when the safer, stronger tier 3 units forces the 'counter' to the carrier before you even think about getting them.
If the Carrier was brought back to its workings as in BW, it would no longer be so directly countered, as it would actually do really well in air to air combat if it was micro'd properly. With perfect micro, Carriers with interceptors had 14 range. That is tough, of course, and it usually ends up being less. In BW, you'd keep them moving around, so that they wouldn't have to accelerate away, kinda like the phoenix right now.
|
On January 27 2012 10:30 tdt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 08:33 Kharnage wrote:The carrier as it stands is a very very expensive broodlord. Not only is it more expensive to build, but it costs more supply and has ongoing costs to keep it functioning and lacks the broodlings blocking ability to help keep units back from it. In a nut shell, it sucks. The carrier needs to be faster and micro-able and the interceptors need to be stronger and stay in combat while the carrier is manoeuvring. Reading the latest battle net blog on balance it looks like their hots testing isn't going particularly well. If they are looking at buffing the pheonix to deal with mutas before hots and keeping the carrier as was implied, then they are probably ditching the tempest. Honestly I can't see them keeping the replicator, and if someone can tell me how terran is meant to open with anything other than MM+ stim vs a protoss going 2gate robo observer, replicator that would be great. The carrier needs to be re purposed so that it integrates into the protoss army. Should it be an AA unit? Should we be getting 3 colossus and 2 carriers to protect them from vikings?. Should interceptors also function like pdd's sacrificing themselves to eat viking volleys (that would be pretty cool actually)? Or should we be thinking there are 2 protoss armies, robo and stargate like terran bio and mech where we pursue one tech path? The problem right now is that for what it is the carrier costs waaaay too much. it really is very similar to a broodlord except totally shit and expensive. On January 27 2012 08:20 Fleshcut wrote:
I don't see the point of fighting for a unit nobody uses just because it was good in BW or something... The concept of the carrier is great. It's the execution that sucks. Do you have a link to this blog? Good ideas on the carrier. Faster all around build/move and more microable. I don't think replactor is going anywhere. Solves blizz;z 1/1/1 problem without buffing Protoss or nerfing Terran. See 1/1/1 make seige tanks on top of your ramp GG. Protoss' whole problem with it is no early AOE and replicator solves that.
Blog here!
http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/210995/Questions_from_the_Community-1_25_2012#blog
Read between the lines: The tempest isn't working out.
+ Show Spoiler +For all the reasons the community brought up the tempest can't work. At some point critical mass of tempest will mean vikings and corruptors can't kill colossus. the entire viking flock will just die in 1 or 2 shots leaving 4 to 6 colossus alive to kill everything on the ground. Nothing that can shoot up is strong enough to not melt in the face of 6 colossus which means the tempest have free reign to shoot whatever they want while the protoss players focuses on keeping those colossus alive. The gracious answer is to fix the current situation with mutas shutting down all options for protoss apart from getting a mothership, 200 supply army and base trading. Or being a Genius. So instead balance the muta / pheonix issue and keep the carrier and claim they are 'listening to the community' so they don't have to admit the tempest is a stupid idea.
Off topic rant about how bad the replicator idea is.
+ Show Spoiler +Look at it from the terran point of view though.
If you open fast banshees, protoss has an observer and some stalkers to shut down your fast banshee AND they have a cloaked banshee to harass you with.
If you open Marine tank, protoss have a siged tank on the high ground
If you open medivac drop, protoss counter with a +1 armour zealot medivac drop. combine that with a WP and terran is screwed. those zealots are never going to die.
1/1/1, protoss have that siege tank AND banshees.
terran fast expand, protoss replicate an scv and expand to their nat with a CC and unlock the entire terran tech tree.
Protoss with mules, are we balanced yet?
Basically there is no opening that terran can do apart from a MM stim timing all in which won't give protoss an equal or greater advantage.
The only way to even approach balancing the replicator is to make it cost a gazllion resources and supply or have it far down the tech tree which breaks it's ability to counter the 111. So basically it's a stupid unit that won't work. Ever.
|
I would put money on it going away for HoTS, coming back completely reworked in LotV.
|
Unfortunately as it stands, collossi outclass carriers, and that is the issue. It has no advantages that are useful. Their roles pretty much overlap because the carrier playstyle of BW does not work in SC2. Protoss has no choice but to go the deathball route unless they are seriously reworked in HOTS.
What are the benefits of the carrier? Can't be hit by ground only, it can hit air, and has higher single target DPS. Also bulkier I guess.
But these advantages are not very significant. Proper positioning means that marines, marauders, roaches, hydras (basically anything) won't be hitting them anyway.
Hitting air is, in practice, worthless; when fighting primary zerg/terran builds, the danger is the units on the ground. Lings, roaches, marauders, marines, hydras, etc. Take that together with high single target DPS instead of enormous splash, and you see the problem. Because gateway units are not very good, they typically present the role as a meatshield/finisher, while the tech units like collossi/HTs provide the real firepower. Whether or not the collossi/HT die is not that big of an issue in big fights; their job is to wipe out the bulk of the army quickly so that the protoss can charge in with blink stalkers/charge zealots and mass warpgate reinforce to finish. Carriers fail compared to the collossi for this reason. They don't do as good of a job in helping destroy the ground units as fast as possible, and they are killed by vikings/corruptors anyway. Because they don't kill ground fast enough, the enemy ground army can deal much more damage to the protoss gateway army, and reduce the ability of the protoss to go in for the kill. And the carriers will die to the same things collossi die to anyway.
|
Honestly, the most insulting thing about the entire Carrier debacle is that Blizzard has never once tried to fix it. Dustin didn't want it in the game and had gotten rid of it for the Tempest (original) and is essentially bringing the Tempest back now that the community has been able to go "Hey, the Carrier sucks," but the reason it sucks is that they stripped it of anything that could make it work and then never tried to adjust it later.
I mean the build time is atrocious, even with Chronoboost, you still have 32 seconds of build time that cannot be decreased in any way. When a BC comes out it's battle ready from the word go, the only thing you need to wait for it energy for Yamato provided you researched it/want it at that point in time. Brood Lords pop ready to do damage and if you wait a bit (~ 1/6th the time it takes for a Carrier to be fully outfitted for combat once it has already spawned) they can do a little extra for free, the Carrier has to pay for having the maximum damage its capable of. I would think just reducing the Carrier's build time would be a pretty obvious matter based on these numbers. Even with reducing it to 90 like a BC, that's still 92 seconds for a fully combat ready carrier assuming full CB on the Stargate. It would be nice if this went along with a cost decrease as well. Free Interceptors sounds nice, but Broodlings time out, Interceptors don't, I'd rather the cost of both the Carrier and the Interceptors just came down some.
Anyway, that's just one idea, and there are a ton more based on how the game evolves with a Carrier that doesn't take forever to get.
Mutalisks vs P is a problem
1) New spell on Phoenix, Gravity Bomb the Phoenix fires a projectile that stops enemy air units from moving away and actually drags them back towards the epicenter of the blast. The effect can last for a few seconds and the amount it drags and possibly damage it deals can scale with unit size (bigger things take more damage/get dragged from further away) since it's supposed to be gravity based. Research at Fleet Beacon to make the thing more useful.
2) Already mentioned a few times, give the Carrier the ability to produce Scarabs in addition to Interceptors. If it's too powerful make them target air only. Now you have to choose between how many Interceptors and how many Scarabs you want to have, although since Scarabs build faster it'd likely be better to have more Interceptors. You'd also have micro for switching between the 2 attacks.
Protoss needs splash alternative to Colossus
1) Replace the lost Flux Vanes on VR, with Diffusion Crystal upgrade at Fleet Beacon. The upgrade would allow you to switch out the normal second stage of the VR beam with a conical shaped attack that does linear splash that gets wider the farther out the target is. You would need to switch between the 2 focusing crystal options and it would need to take a bit of time to switch.
Interceptors/Carrier die too easy
Note: All of these would replace the Graviton Catapult upgrade and the Carrier would get faster launching Interceptors by default
1) Give the Carrier a new ability: Overshield the Carrier donates its shields evenly among its Interceptors (Interceptors gain +1 shield armor as well). During this time the Carrier shields regenerate like normal Toss shielding so long as it doesn't take damage, but instead generates extra shielding on the Interceptors, granting them regenerating shields in combat. A cooldown ability, it'd last until turned off or all the Interceptors die.
2) Give the Carrier a new ability: Time Bomb which does exactly what the Mothership's ability of the same name did, as others have mentioned. Requires adding energy to the Carrier
3) Give the Carrier a new ability: Defense Screen the Carrier pre-emptively launches its Interceptors that set up a defensive screen around the ship with a radius equal to the Carrier's attack range. Any projectile entering this radius is fired upon by the Interceptors and destroyed. Any energy/spell based attack enering this area is met by an Interceptor which takes the damage. Introduces micro since this let's the Carrier launch before battle and then switch to attack mode and then go back to defense so it can retreat. During combat you'd obviously want to have some Carriers using Defense Screen to protect your forces. Defense Screen would be a cooldown ability.
Collosus is too good
1) Modify Extended Thermal Lances. The Colossus is using a laser, so its range is limited by line of site and the focusing of the beam/beam power. Have the Colossus spawn as a shorter unit (can't be attacked by air) with less range, slower speed, slightly less damage, and slightly smaller cooldown. When the upgrade is researched (call it Strider Mode or something) the Colossus rises up on its legs gaining cliff-walking and increases in speed, range, damage, and cooldown to match its current form, along with the weakness to air. You can either make the change non-reversible or reversible depending on how much you'd rather not get into Siege Mode territory. Also, in its regular form, it wouldn't be able to stand on top of the Protoss ball so that weakens the Deathball until the upgrade is researched. Depending on how that works the Colossus might need a range buff in its base mode say 7/10 instead of 6/9.
These are just a few ideas that can all be mixed and matched to try and make Protoss (and Carrier play) a little more interesting. I'm sure Blizzard can do even better, it's just I don't think they want too, and that just sucks, it's a little disrespectful of the fans as well. Anyway those are just some of the thoughts and ideas I've had rolling around in my head for a while.
|
On January 27 2012 11:58 dave333 wrote:
Unfortunately as it stands, collossi outclass carriers, and that is the issue. It has no advantages that are useful. Their roles pretty much overlap because the carrier playstyle of BW does not work in SC2. Protoss has no choice but to go the deathball route unless they are seriously reworked in HOTS.
What are the benefits of the carrier? Can't be hit by ground only, it can hit air, and has higher single target DPS. Also bulkier I guess.
But these advantages are not very significant. Proper positioning means that marines, marauders, roaches, hydras (basically anything) won't be hitting them anyway.
Hitting air is, in practice, worthless; when fighting primary zerg/terran builds, the danger is the units on the ground. Lings, roaches, marauders, marines, hydras, etc. Take that together with high single target DPS instead of enormous splash, and you see the problem. Because gateway units are not very good, they typically present the role as a meatshield/finisher, while the tech units like collossi/HTs provide the real firepower. Whether or not the collossi/HT die is not that big of an issue in big fights; their job is to wipe out the bulk of the army quickly so that the protoss can charge in with blink stalkers/charge zealots and mass warpgate reinforce to finish. Carriers fail compared to the collossi for this reason. They don't do as good of a job in helping destroy the ground units as fast as possible, and they are killed by vikings/corruptors anyway. Because they don't kill ground fast enough, the enemy ground army can deal much more damage to the protoss gateway army, and reduce the ability of the protoss to go in for the kill. And the carriers will die to the same things collossi die to anyway.
I'll be honest, as a Protoss player, I don't see Vortex staying as it is. I think it is way too strong against Brood infestor, and I see archon toilet no longer being possible. I really see Carriers as perhaps the one thing that might work, IF they are allowed to have shoot while moving micro that they had in BW. Make them a little faster, give them attack while moving, and I think we have a way more entertaining, way more skilled method of dealing with brood infestor.
|
possibly add slight AOE to interceptor attack. would allow carriers to be a good counter to any massed air units (looking at you mutalisks)
personally i only find Carriers useful in team games where you have a teammate to provide a large ground army to prevent units stimming/blinking underneath, versus verg muta/corruptor is extremely common and just owns them 
|
On January 27 2012 11:11 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2012 10:30 tdt wrote:On January 27 2012 08:33 Kharnage wrote:The carrier as it stands is a very very expensive broodlord. Not only is it more expensive to build, but it costs more supply and has ongoing costs to keep it functioning and lacks the broodlings blocking ability to help keep units back from it. In a nut shell, it sucks. The carrier needs to be faster and micro-able and the interceptors need to be stronger and stay in combat while the carrier is manoeuvring. Reading the latest battle net blog on balance it looks like their hots testing isn't going particularly well. If they are looking at buffing the pheonix to deal with mutas before hots and keeping the carrier as was implied, then they are probably ditching the tempest. Honestly I can't see them keeping the replicator, and if someone can tell me how terran is meant to open with anything other than MM+ stim vs a protoss going 2gate robo observer, replicator that would be great. The carrier needs to be re purposed so that it integrates into the protoss army. Should it be an AA unit? Should we be getting 3 colossus and 2 carriers to protect them from vikings?. Should interceptors also function like pdd's sacrificing themselves to eat viking volleys (that would be pretty cool actually)? Or should we be thinking there are 2 protoss armies, robo and stargate like terran bio and mech where we pursue one tech path? The problem right now is that for what it is the carrier costs waaaay too much. it really is very similar to a broodlord except totally shit and expensive. On January 27 2012 08:20 Fleshcut wrote:
I don't see the point of fighting for a unit nobody uses just because it was good in BW or something... The concept of the carrier is great. It's the execution that sucks. Do you have a link to this blog? Good ideas on the carrier. Faster all around build/move and more microable. I don't think replactor is going anywhere. Solves blizz;z 1/1/1 problem without buffing Protoss or nerfing Terran. See 1/1/1 make seige tanks on top of your ramp GG. Protoss' whole problem with it is no early AOE and replicator solves that. Blog here! http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/210995/Questions_from_the_Community-1_25_2012#blogRead between the lines: The tempest isn't working out. + Show Spoiler +For all the reasons the community brought up the tempest can't work. At some point critical mass of tempest will mean vikings and corruptors can't kill colossus. the entire viking flock will just die in 1 or 2 shots leaving 4 to 6 colossus alive to kill everything on the ground. Nothing that can shoot up is strong enough to not melt in the face of 6 colossus which means the tempest have free reign to shoot whatever they want while the protoss players focuses on keeping those colossus alive. The gracious answer is to fix the current situation with mutas shutting down all options for protoss apart from getting a mothership, 200 supply army and base trading. Or being a Genius. So instead balance the muta / pheonix issue and keep the carrier and claim they are 'listening to the community' so they don't have to admit the tempest is a stupid idea. Off topic rant about how bad the replicator idea is. + Show Spoiler +Look at it from the terran point of view though.
If you open fast banshees, protoss has an observer and some stalkers to shut down your fast banshee AND they have a cloaked banshee to harass you with.
If you open Marine tank, protoss have a siged tank on the high ground
If you open medivac drop, protoss counter with a +1 armour zealot medivac drop. combine that with a WP and terran is screwed. those zealots are never going to die.
1/1/1, protoss have that siege tank AND banshees.
terran fast expand, protoss replicate an scv and expand to their nat with a CC and unlock the entire terran tech tree.
Protoss with mules, are we balanced yet?
Basically there is no opening that terran can do apart from a MM stim timing all in which won't give protoss an equal or greater advantage.
The only way to even approach balancing the replicator is to make it cost a gazllion resources and supply or have it far down the tech tree which breaks it's ability to counter the 111. So basically it's a stupid unit that won't work. Ever.
Read between the lines? Sounds like a posters opinion about tempest not blizzards. I don't see anything wrt Tempest having issues in Blizz' mind yet.
Protoss won't have gas for these defenses and counter attack. They still need stalkers to shoot air which cost gas while Terran can do it with gasless marines. The only thing Replicator does is allow those with an OBS a chance against 1/1/1. And even if it did shut down some of terran early game all ins it's not like I'd feel bad seeing games go later nor Terran given parity with protoss lack of all in options vs terran.
|
I really hope Blizzard drops the Replicator since it's so NOT Protoss, and instead just fixes the Carrier instead.
|
the reason why carrier is going to get removed in HOTS is becuz there is truly no real anti-carriers in zvp for zerg not to mention if u focus only on dealing with carrier zvp u will die to other stuff like stalkers/storm zealot and its all up to u as a zerg to move out and kill the protoss whenever they do that carrier build... toss will learn to just turtle up to mothership carriers and vr/high templar to storm vortex holy shit enough say... tell me how do u counter such thing with zerg... its exactly right to get removed u people need to stop mixing up BW/SC2 its a whole new game... learn to move on with the new way of starcrafting... and i believe blizzard know what they're doing.
|
Everyone time I hear or see a carrier, that doesn't belong to me or my teammates, in either BW or SC2, I shit my pants.
Therefore I support this cause fully sir.
|
The carrier needs:
-Its own niche use
-The ability to be microed better
-To not be a unit that's only useful once the game is already won
-Something else exciting that isn't just lore (and I loved the carrier from BW, but that doesn't make it practical in SC2)
I would be extremely happy to see the carrier stick around for HotS if these changes could be implemented.
|
On January 27 2012 14:54 PZyungprince wrote:
the reason why carrier is going to get removed in HOTS is becuz there is truly no real anti-carriers in zvp for zerg not to mention if u focus only on dealing with carrier zvp u will die to other stuff like stalkers/storm zealot and its all up to u as a zerg to move out and kill the protoss whenever they do that carrier build... toss will learn to just turtle up to mothership carriers and vr/high templar to storm vortex holy shit enough say... tell me how do u counter such thing with zerg... its exactly right to get removed u people need to stop mixing up BW/SC2 its a whole new game... learn to move on with the new way of starcrafting... and i believe blizzard know what they're doing.
How could a Zerg deal with Carriers in Broodwar? They had about the same anti-air options, except for the addition of Scourge.
|
On January 27 2012 14:54 PZyungprince wrote:
the reason why carrier is going to get removed in HOTS is becuz there is truly no real anti-carriers in zvp for zerg not to mention if u focus only on dealing with carrier zvp u will die to other stuff like stalkers/storm zealot and its all up to u as a zerg to move out and kill the protoss whenever they do that carrier build... toss will learn to just turtle up to mothership carriers and vr/high templar to storm vortex holy shit enough say... tell me how do u counter such thing with zerg... its exactly right to get removed u people need to stop mixing up BW/SC2 its a whole new game... learn to move on with the new way of starcrafting... and i believe blizzard know what they're doing.
Carriers are getting removed because they're overpowered in PvZ? Don't you find it somewhat odd that we almost never see them in pro-games then? You'd think it would be just as standard a late game transition as archon toilets!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
