|
here is how I would change them
My idea for carriers was to take away the launcher upgrade and make that already included and replace that with an upgrade that makes their shield have more armor and regen faster or while in combat
And also for interceptors to stay attacking even if the carrier is given a move command so there would be a way to micro them in fights like pulling back so that stalkers can pick off vikings,corrupters or voidrays but the interceptors would still attack
they would still have to stay within a certain distance of the carrier but with how slow they move you would still be getting alot more shots off with the interceptors instead of them withdrawing immediately like they do now
10 seconds off build time maybe more
|
can't make carriers faster then other units with a lower range, if units are slower then the carrier can stay in range but evade the opponent, while attacking with interceptors, was really fun when the bc was slightly slower. You could stay in range and attack always without getting damaged. All they could do was shoot the interceptors, sadly bcs are really good at killing anything that is air within their range. Also the viking is barely able to fight carriers on its own, if carriers would be a bit faster the vikings would be chanceless.
Also air upgrades are important, the terran gets it just because there is a chance of broodlords and because they need the upgrades to not lose the air control to corrupters, if the zerg got air upgrades before.
In bw the carrier just like the bc worked without upgrades, which is the main difference. But that worked, because anti air damage was just huge in bw. Either aoe and lil damage for small air units, or big devestating single target damage. Compared to the wraith the scout or the terror, anti air damage against armored units is laughable in sc2. So a carrier can't start with an armor of 4 and be upgradeable to with +3.
Also the range upgrade is needed or atleast some upgrade, as rushing to carriers on 2 base, can be really deadly for the opponent, which makes it impossible to reduce their cost or production time. Changes to the fleet beacon or an additional upgrade could change that though.
And i guess the problem with the carrier is, if controlled right and at best every carrier alone, they are really strong on even upgrades (which isn't hard to catch up thanks to chrono boost), because they basically never cease to attack while avoiding the enemy, if you control them right.
So imo they are already good, and personally i think they are different enough from the colossus to be viable, their biggest advantage for me is that they are air only but able to attack air, making them the best weapon against broodlords. Of course voidrays work as well, but they are no siege weapon, making attacking more risky.
The biggest issue i guess was the + against massive units that was handed out like candy because of the colossus and bc, so a small hull increase would work, as they already do good against their air conters.
Besides that i would find it funny if they had a reaver mechanic, shooting an interceptor that explodes, though able to be shot down and a bit slower heh, maybe only against air units (stacked air units vs toss problem solved). The reaver mechanic was already given to the raven, but i guess seeker missile in its current form is just to weak to work as a 125 energy spell, where the opponent has to mess up and stack in the moment the seeker missile hits.
The ultra will get an ability with hots as well hehe. But the carrier is pretty hard to control already, but i guess a cooldown skill wouldn't be to hard to use and it would be fun to have terrors back.
Would also make a nice decision making, as the interceptor count is highly important in sc2, since carriers can attack as long as they want, the interceptors die fairly easily if you don't pay attention and if they are gone, your carriers can be chased down.
In the current pvz where broodlord infestors en mass are the order, i think carriers will become a go to unit as soon as the zerg manages to avoid the archon toilet and that will probably happen by the next bigger tournament heh. While voidrays work as well, they will be easy victims for neural parasite unless the ground army engages in battle as well and colossus have more important things to do then to snipe infestors, when broodlords are around.
Well either that or spines will soon cost 1 supply.
edit: Interceptors stay outside and attack unless the carriers defined target is destroyed or leaves the range of 13 or 14.
As long as the target is alive, they can move around just as they like, the interceptors will only return if the upper conditions are met. If you select a new target within the launch range, while the interceptors are flying another attack wave, that will destroy the target, they will still fly their last attack before switching. That way they will not return but attack the new target. And of course as long as that target is alive and stays in range, the carriers can move around as they like.
So carriers can attack while moving, they just can't launch their interceptors and select new targets in a range of 13, as for example a retreating viking/corrupter group, would lose 1 or 2 units per carrier just for retreating.
|
On January 26 2012 11:49 sickle wrote:
I agree 100%. If a protoss unit needs to be removed, it should be the collosus rather than the carrier.
I agree. Kill the colossus. Keep the carrier. Bring back the reebareebareebareebareeba.
|
I think they should just keep it in the game at the very least as a legacy unit... just because it isn't used in pro gaming oftenly doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the game, look at scouts from BW.
|
Carriers get wrecked so hard by Corruptors and Marines (both requiring a lot less tech than the Carrier), that with your proposed changes, the unit will still suck, no one will get it, and therefore the value of the unit to the Starcraft franchise will keep on being very low.
I will accept your points only if you provide a plausible numerical solution for the Carrier, such that the unit is good enough that progamers will sometimes use it, while still being balanced; if you cannot suggest a plausible numerical tweak, then the assertion that it's not hard to make it fit into the game because "it just needs to be rebalanced" loses quite a bit of credibility, IMO.
|
On January 26 2012 12:28 Zato-1 wrote:
Carriers get wrecked so hard by Corruptors and Marines (both requiring a lot less tech than the Carrier), that with your proposed changes, the unit will still suck, no one will get it, and therefore the value of the unit to the Starcraft franchise will keep on being very low.
I will accept your points only if you provide a plausible numerical solution for the Carrier, such that the unit is good enough that progamers will sometimes use it, while still being balanced; if you cannot suggest a plausible numerical tweak, then the assertion that it's not hard to make it fit into the game because "it just needs to be rebalanced" loses quite a bit of credibility, IMO.
I don't necessarily think that it is for me to specify which numbers it needs to be. What damage, what speed, what armor, HP, etc. My point is more so that the carrier deserves a shot, just like Infestors, Archons, and Phoenix were given. They used to be not the greatest of units, but with attention and desire to make them better, it happened. But they do nothing for the Carrier, then say they may ditch it.
|
Blizzard took out the reaver and lurker for the colossus and banelings.
...
|
The colossus and carrier do overlap some. But so does the high templar.
|
I agree with the OP. I too believe that the carrier should be kept in the game, and I hope to see more different styles of playing protoss other than the typical deathball. I play zerg, and I still think its exciting to see any kind of carrier play be it BW or SC2.
One of the things I really do believe may help protoss decide on carriers more often is if the fleet beacon had more purpose. If the protoss had to upgrade a useful ability or buff for their air unit on the fleet beacon, then carriers would be readily available right after getting the upgrade making transition a little easier. I compare it to sairs with disruption web, where you have the option to get carriers, but don't necessarily have to get them every time.
I also agree with the other buffs necessary for making the carrier more viable, especially the ability to micro it. I'm all for adding micro into the game whenever possible, and if it helps get more out of carriers making each carrier worth the cost it gets to put one onto the field, I would definitely support it.
|
YES PLEASE. I love the carrier. It's probably my favorite unit design.
|
Ehh not really, at this point its just staying because of tradition. I don´t really mind the removal as long as they add in an equivalent unit.
|
I really don't think the carrier needs to be taken out...Even if it's not used much, at some level it will be used, and to me it's the most iconic unit in the game...I'll never forget Tassadar taking out the overmind with it ='(
|
I disagree....it could be replaced with something that will be used.
|
The game was designed terribly with units overlapping its role....unbelievable that the only solution would be to remove the carrier....wtf...
|
I dont know why you say that the carrier won't pose balance issues because if you buff it enough to make it useful it will be a nightmare for zergs to deal with. Even though I love the carrier I have to agree with Blizzard on this one because the carrier just doesn't play any kind of useful role. I think they need to come up with some kind of new air harass or support unit which protoss actually needs and would have some kind of role in the game.
|
I hope they fix the carrier its my favourite unit by far, it sucks that they are removing it >_<
|
On January 26 2012 11:55 KicKDoG wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 11:49 sickle wrote:
I agree 100%. If a protoss unit needs to be removed, it should be the collosus rather than the carrier. no way usa dude! colossus is our precious! removing colossus is like removing broodlords for zerg or thors for terran dude.
Thors are getting removed too sweden dood!
|
Yes please keep the Carrier, Blizzard. It's not Starcraft without Carriers.
|
I don't play Protoss, but personally I'm more sad to see the removal of the Mothership than I am the Carrier. Trading one "swarm air unit" for a super void ray, meh. Losing the most iconic alien unit? That makes me sad.
Good luck with this. They might change their mind.
|
I'm glad the carrier is getting removed its attacks are chaotic in form and in large groups encourage minimal micro.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
