|
Can you comment on which units are still on the operating table? You mentioned something about the carrier not being here but still possible to stay in the game.
Browder: The carrier is in question. We’ve heard a lot of complaints from players who want the carrier to be in and I haven’t yet heard an argument about why it has to be in except “It’s cool, don’t take it out!”.
Nostalgia, maybe…
Browder: Yes, but I think we’ve shown that the game can work with many of the old units gone and can still be a fun gameplay experience. We went through a lot of that in Wings, removing the medic and the reaver and we got a good game despite that those units are not here. I don’t know, we’re still not sure and we’re waiting for the feedback that will say “OK, here’s a real good reason to keep it”. And then again, it could be nostalgia. We could just leave it in. It bothers me from a design perspective that we would keep something useless in the game just because and we didn’t do that throughout WoL. We could’ve had a reaver and a colossus but we needed to make room for the units, we needed to have new cool stuff. Nostalgia is not enough of a reason and have in mind that the reaver had legitimate gameplay, right? Carriers don’t have that. They are just pretty.
Source
|
Canada11379 Posts
^^
AHHHH!
Have they not read about the micro potential from BW carriers?
The actual skill of kiting carriers and keeping the interceptors constantly attacking while hugging cliffs?
And collosi as an interesting replacement for reavers 
This is very disappointing to hear.
|
If you want a lazy way to make the carrier useful, buff its stats. If you want a more difficult way, improve its handling. There's no excuse for the carrier to be 'useless' when you're the ones who decide what's useful and what's useless.
Besides, aren't carriers + templar really really strong? To my eye, the carrier's problem is it can't be microed much and is therefore crappy in small numbers, so it's difficult to transition to.
|
Protoss without Carrier? That's like...United States without Abe Lincoln. People might think he's been overshadowed by other vampire hunters then and now, but you dont fuck with legacy man. Don't cast him away like pennies on the ground, respect your forefathers!
|
browder continues to prove how much of a terrible designer he is
I think you can say that the tempest is very similar to the carrier,
I’ve certainly heard complaints from some players that in the original StarCraft, the siege tank and the lurker were very similar. They both stop, they both deploy, they both do splash damage but come on – they are not that similar, right?
da fuck?
|
On June 10 2012 09:49 Severedevil wrote:
If you want a lazy way to make the carrier useful, buff its stats. If you want a more difficult way, improve its handling. There's no excuse for the carrier to be 'useless' when you're the ones who decide what's useful and what's useless.
it annoys me how he says the carrier is useless yet they are struggling to find ways to keep the reaper in the game
|
It may have already been said, but I always felt like the biggest problem with the carrier was the vulnerability exposed to any player who attempted to start producing them.
You build stargates (money + time), fleet beacon (more money + time), and then carriers themselves are very expensive and take around 2minutes each to build.
There is never really a situation in game where you can comfortably make the tech switch to carriers and not open a huge attack timing window for the opposing player, unless you're so far ahead that you're probably going to win anyway, in which case there's better options to close out the game.
Carriers need their build time reduced first and foremost - blizzard did it with the ultralisk and it made them much more viable.
Without seeing that in effect i don't want to speculate on what other changes may or may not be necessary
|
Seriously, with the tempest now being a long range single target siege unit, we can just have the carrier back doing the same row. Carrier's mechanic is so much more badass than a giant hadouken ship
|
The carrier is an iconic Brood war unit but not an iconic wings of liberty unit I barely see anyone use it so i am glad that they are getting rid of it for HOTS. But all hope is not lost because after HOTS come out the next game in the series is maw of the void which is the protoss edition of sc2 they most likely will re-add a better version of the carrier that isn't broken.
|
Carrier is so much better than that crappy retarded dps tempest u.u
|
Bah. Browder answers. He wants a good argument for keeping it in, but what exactly is the great argument for taking it out? Is it hurting everyone by simply being an option as a unit? Does it detract from the game by existing? Even if it's not currently used a lot, who cares. "It's not cool, take it out!" -_-
I'll reserve judgment on the Tempest until I actually play the game, but what if that unit bombs too and no one uses it, so that it's similar to the carrier's status now? Will they take that out as well? Just fix the damn carrier lol.
|
Carrier has arrived...best quote from SC.
|
On June 11 2012 08:23 Soliloquy. wrote:
The carrier is an iconic Brood war unit but not an iconic wings of liberty unit I barely see anyone use it so i am glad that they are getting rid of it for HOTS. But all hope is not lost because after HOTS come out the next game in the series is maw of the void which is the protoss edition of sc2 they most likely will re-add a better version of the carrier that isn't broken.
As currently planned, Blizzard is going to make no changes to the multiplayer component with Legacy of the Void. Supposedly only minor balance patches will follow after release of HotS.
|
Is there a petition on this matter?
|
What I don't understand is why they are removing the carrier and replacing it with...a flying capital ship with seige range and anti-air and anti-ground attack. Isn't that pretty close to the description of a carrier? Would hate to see such an iconic unit going the way of goons, reavers and arbiters, especially when its going to be replaced with something the carrier could easily be with a few tweaks.
|
Just bring back the SC1 Carrier. Model and all!
|
On June 11 2012 12:54 HelioSeven wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 08:23 Soliloquy. wrote:
The carrier is an iconic Brood war unit but not an iconic wings of liberty unit I barely see anyone use it so i am glad that they are getting rid of it for HOTS. But all hope is not lost because after HOTS come out the next game in the series is maw of the void which is the protoss edition of sc2 they most likely will re-add a better version of the carrier that isn't broken. As currently planned, Blizzard is going to make no changes to the multiplayer component with Legacy of the Void. Supposedly only minor balance patches will follow after release of HotS.
what, really? where did they say this? i find it hard to believe that they would try to sell an entire expansion on promises of continued minor balance patches.
|
Not a single patch has been made on the carrier. Bowder seems to have no interest in it.
Losing faith tbh.
|
On June 11 2012 13:26 Doc Daneeka wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 12:54 HelioSeven wrote:On June 11 2012 08:23 Soliloquy. wrote:
The carrier is an iconic Brood war unit but not an iconic wings of liberty unit I barely see anyone use it so i am glad that they are getting rid of it for HOTS. But all hope is not lost because after HOTS come out the next game in the series is maw of the void which is the protoss edition of sc2 they most likely will re-add a better version of the carrier that isn't broken. As currently planned, Blizzard is going to make no changes to the multiplayer component with Legacy of the Void. Supposedly only minor balance patches will follow after release of HotS. what, really? where did they say this? i find it hard to believe that they would try to sell an entire expansion on promises of continued minor balance patches.
Khaldor said something about it in his interview with Hot Bid, but no idea if its just speculation or fact.
|
On June 10 2012 12:11 a176 wrote:browder continues to prove how much of a terrible designer he is Show nested quote +I’ve certainly heard complaints from some players that in the original StarCraft, the siege tank and the lurker were very similar. They both stop, they both deploy, they both do splash damage but come on – they are not that similar, right? da fuck?
What the hell?
The Tempest is no where CLOSE to being similar to the Carrier in ANY way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
