|
I don't like carriers, void rays, colossus, or even corruptors. I don't know what to say about corruptors aside from their bland special ability though — maybe my dislike of them is undeserved (aside from the special ability which I hope gets revamped).
I also don't like hydralisks, or thors, but considering that neither unit are very relevant, I won't talk about that.
Carriers and void rays have the problem of just being units where you can mass them and a-move them and be at least somewhat effective vs anything. Carriers aren't nearly as much of a problem in that sense as void rays though because their attack isn't instant, they have a slower movement speed, they're higher tech, and they're massive.
Colossus are mindless support units. Yes they're strong, but that's not what's whine-worthy. The problem is unlike siege takes they take no damn skill to use, and don't condone fun matches.
I think scrapping the carrier and colossus could work, and replace it with something to fill in both roles, like a freaking reaver-carrier — a giant flying reaver that launches scarabs which shoot beams and can self-destruct like banelings. Most likely it wouldn't actually fly because it would be robo tech
LOL while it might seem—and very likely could be— OP, it could be an interesting concept.
|
srsly? screw the carrier ! sorry, but I dont see much use in such unit -
we rather must fight for the MOTHERSHIP! Holy crap°!? Could u imagine a toss without mothership aka Vortex?????
What can a toss do against broodlords then??? Or even against 20+ BCs??? Kinda nothing?
Recently I watched a pvp, one got zealot/archon + mothership the other (dumb guy) got collosus only. The funny fact is, without the mothership the collosus only guy would have won, but thx to archon toilet and good positioning from the other guy, he got punished for playing collosus only.
I mean srsly! Imagine: No more ARCHON TOILET 
kk, its a bit op, but what can we as toss do then?
Fight for the mothership
(This post is a bit exaggerated, dont take it that serious  )
|
|
|
Yeah, I knew someone would bring that up. A full on hidden retech to maxed out carriers with 3/3/3 upgrades, and it didn't even dominate, in fact some mistakes were still made by the zerg, or he could have still won. I thought the game was good proof that carriers need to be changed or replaced. For comparison, imagine the awesome MVP Squirtle battlecruiser mothership game, if Squirtle had been denied scouting the BC tech until it MVP had remaxed on BCs. It would have been a comical win for MVP. Most tier 3 remax's by surprise are just dominating. Carriers... give the potential to win.
|
I actually only played SC1 becouse i was in love the carrier back in the time.
I only played Protoss becouse of the carrier and i never regret it.
It was such a strong transittion vs Terran that goliath become one of the main units for a terran in TvP it was just awesome how the history of the matchup envolved around the carrier.
SAVE THE CARRIER (and improve it by the way)
Attack while moving isnt possible? what a shame :/
|
I know we don't get to see much carrier use in sc2 right now but the design of the unit generally makes for EPIC games whenever it does show up. I sincerely hope it stays in for HoTS.
|
SAVE THE CARRIER! RETURN THE OLD INTERCEPTOR MICRO!
I probably already posted in this thread but just wanted to make sure :D
|
SAVE the CARRIER! i mean really blizzard? why not get rid of battle cruiser and broodlords too?
|
On May 30 2012 02:35 Haustka wrote:
SAVE the CARRIER! i mean really blizzard? why not get rid of battle cruiser and broodlords too? Brood lords are pretty much zerg's only way of dealing with all sorts of things. They're the slowest [attacking/upgraded] air unit in the game and can't attack up, so the hardly even apply to the same category.
Thors are rather similar to carriers in some ways (a-moveable support powerhouse unit) and they already got removed (essentially). Battlecruisers are quite similar to carriers (although they do have a reasonable special ability) — but in my opinion that's OK as long as only one of the units exist. There's no need for both races to have units that work in such similar ways — it makes them less dynamic.
I'm not strongly in favor of the carrier getting removed -— but I really think both the carrier and colossus could use a re-vamp or morph/merge to different units.
|
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME?
|
On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME?
That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot
|
On May 30 2012 05:41 mataxp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME? That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot
PvT would be a nightmare without the colossus, sorry. Carrier seriously needs 2 things:
1. a simple toggle button on it, called interceptor phasers or something, that changes interceptor damage from single target to aoe (balance taken into account ofc).
2. Reduced build time by about 20 seconds
|
On May 29 2012 07:57 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +If it's just a underused unit. Then let it be underused. It doesn't mean that that it's an impossible unit which can not come and go with the times.
And if it's not going to be used at all, like the scout from Brood war.
Then so be it. There's no harm in that, rather the opposite. Nonsense. There are only a certain number of units in the game; they're not going to make a game with 20 units on each side. There is no point in having worthless units in the game. At best, worthless units allow someone to use them every now and then and pull an undeserved victory out of nowhere. Or just to BM someone who's clearly beneath their skill. Personally, I can do without that. Otherwise, these units are just taking up space. Blizzard is not going to have 2 fake units at the StarPort and 3 real ones. They would much prefer to just have 3-4 real units there, and I completely agree with this. The game doesn't get better from having failed units in it. Failed units are a sign of failed game design. I would rather Blizzard spend the time to make a Protoss air force worth using as a whole. I want the Protoss to have serious air options that can augment their ground forces significantly. Personally, I don't care about the Carrier. I've seen enough Carrier play in SC1; I don't have any particular need for it in SC2. As long as they replace it with something good, that requires thought and effort to use, I'm fine.
NONSENSE
jk, but I think it'd kind of a unnecessary way of arguing. And if You think there's none of sense in it then there's no need to edit out stuff from the post you are questioning.
Anyway to get on with it. The misunderstanding lies in how big a point you make mine to be. I'm not saying " let's fill the games with worthless units for the fun of it.
I'm saying that there's not much harm in units being underused.
The Valkyrie was hardly used at all for many years until Boxer and Fantasy brought it back in a certain mech style in around 2008. That was clever clever, and the boxer lovers which meant all bw fans loved his brains out.
I can't say the same thing will happen to the carrier in 5 years. Nor can I say it about the mothership.
I can't know that. So maybe removing them now is the right thing to do.
Maybe my argument is screwed because of that.
But then again u can't know that that the carrier won't make a BO comeback in a couple of years.
Nukes were underused in brood war. But when they came, we in the audience came as well.
Seeing an underused unit intelligently used by a player who's seen potential us mortals have not seen.
That's something I love about pro gaming. How something can change from useless to worthy through a pro gamers intelligent use.
This is the point of E-sport Viewing value I'm trying to defend.
"There are only a certain number of units in the game; they're not going to make a game with 20 units on each side. There is no point in having worthless units in the game."
Which certain number is this? The supply cap?
I think you mean that the game will be unnecessarily difficult to learn with too many units.
If so I agree.
Though for example, the mothership.
It's built from the nexus. It's not making looking at what you can build from a stargate feel difficult to learn for a new beginner. It's one big unit, not another zealot making the protoss balls unit mixture stupidly hard to counter.
It's one unit and you can only build one of them.
Dustin Browder even described it as a fuck you unit like the scout of brood war during alpha.
But because of it being a "fuck you" unit it made watching pro sc2 very exciting at times.
I especially remember kiwikaki making a comeback on LT. He was loosing the game, but through intelligent overuse of the underused Mothership he recalled his army around the map and finished off with an archon toilet. I think it's a favourite for more people than me, and it involves the concept I'm defending.
How something that seems useless can be turned useful.
Maybe the majority of players and viewers just want things to be useful.
But at least for the viewing part, taking away all underused units takes away gasps and adoration.
To me those moments when I'm just sitting there with a big stupid open mouth amazed at what I just saw is why I watch brood war. And sc2. I don't think Blizzard should slize away those parts of the game unless they really really have to and it's shitting up the game by just existing even if not used.
|
Imo, colossus should be removed. Carriers are one of the crucial parts of lore in the game. Look at Gantrithor. (For those unfamiliar, Gantrithor is Tassadar's flagship in the first game.) The Hyperion may be slightly more so but, still, look at all the carrier has done for SC and SC2. It has gotten us the great idra rage quit, it has been a major part of the lore, and it has given us the great speshul taktiks. Vikings and Corruptors should be nerfed so as not to absolutely eliminate the possibility of any real air for protoss. I hate the damn things anyway. DIE COLOSSUS! LONG LIVE THE CARRIER!
|
On May 30 2012 06:01 tehemperorer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 05:41 mataxp wrote:On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME? That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot PvT would be a nightmare without the colossus, sorry. Carrier seriously needs 2 things: 1. a simple toggle button on it, called interceptor phasers or something, that changes interceptor damage from single target to aoe (balance taken into account ofc). 2. Reduced build time by about 20 seconds
The colossus can be taken out and the carrier can be made AOE. Simple. :D
|
|
|
On May 30 2012 09:22 Psychonian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 06:01 tehemperorer wrote:On May 30 2012 05:41 mataxp wrote:On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME? That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot PvT would be a nightmare without the colossus, sorry. Carrier seriously needs 2 things: 1. a simple toggle button on it, called interceptor phasers or something, that changes interceptor damage from single target to aoe (balance taken into account ofc). 2. Reduced build time by about 20 seconds The colossus can be taken out and the carrier can be made AOE. Simple. :D
Carrier doesn't need to be AoE, though. It sees use in PvZ and may even see more as the meta game evolves. PvT marines are just too good vs everything that isn't a colossus/high templar/archon. It'd be way too OP in PvZ with AoE, imo. Just needs various buffs and the right map pool to see use.
Aside from that, once they're out they leave you with few minerals and a lot of gas to follow up with storm. Interceptors just need to be a little less fragile and the carrier needs a little more armor. Oh, and fix the AI, too.
|
On May 30 2012 02:26 Chilling5pr33 wrote:
Attack while moving isnt possible? what a shame :/
I don't get why people think this, they do... they just don't re-autotarget. That is to say, if you attack a unit, and the interceptors are sent out, the carrier can then move away (quite a ways away, actually, range 14 if I recall) and the interceptor will continue to attack that unit. What the interceptors won't do is automatically re-target onto another unit after the first unit is dead (unless of course the second unit is within range 8 of the carrier). Someone in this thread a while back suggested that the only buff carriers really need is better re-targeting, and in many ways I'm inclined to agree. Either that or they should have 9 or 10 range, to better avoid anti-air threats the way colossus can after extended lance.
Also, on a semi-related note, I just played a PvT where I managed to use carriers to great effect. I opened with a DT harass build into mass stalker with a few colossi to support, to which my opponent responded with mostly marauder bio with a few vikings to support. As I was setting up my 4th I put up a second cyber core and started researching air upgrades, then as soon as my 4th was established I put up 4 stargates and massed carriers. He had vikings out for the colossi, but without upgrades they went down after one volley and then with just a single colossus left over and a handful of zealots to get in the way, the half dozen carriers absolutely rolled over his mostly marauder bio ball. Thing is, the guy was doing really well in all other respects: drop harass was good, sniped my templar archives twice in the mid-game, set up our 5ths and 6ths at about the same time, his supply was greater than mine most of the game, and he had better production; I think the sheer surprise factor of it caught him massively off guard. I just remaxed on chargelots and carriers and a-moved to victory.
Replay for those interested.
|
On May 30 2012 06:01 tehemperorer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 05:41 mataxp wrote:On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME? That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot PvT would be a nightmare without the colossus, sorry.
Removing the colossus wouldn't happen in a vacuum. It would allow for a buff to carriers, storm, and archons, and a nerf to marines.
|
On May 30 2012 10:03 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 06:01 tehemperorer wrote:On May 30 2012 05:41 mataxp wrote:On May 30 2012 05:29 e945x01 wrote:
Remove the colossus and buff carriers.
ANYONE WITH ME? That would be the best thing ever, we should start a campaign to remove the colossus. I hate it as much as I need it, wich is a lot PvT would be a nightmare without the colossus, sorry. Removing the colossus wouldn't happen in a vacuum. It would allow for a buff to carriers, storm, and archons, and a nerf to marines.
Lol
Terran dont like colossus but they dont hate them that much that they would like to change it for weaker marines (More weak even?) , stronger carrier, strom and archon.
I for one am glad the carrier is removed as imo it is one of the most imba unit in the whole game beside the 4 suply archon and broodlord.
Also i would be realy happy if the colossus did stay, it is an awesome and beautifull unit (war of the world classic)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
