| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:26 RavenLoud wrote: Not a single patch has been made on the carrier. Bowder seems to have no interest in it. Losing faith tbh. Quick someone tell him instead of shooting out interceptors it can shoot out rocks. | ||
|
Doc Daneeka
United States577 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:31 Fueled wrote: Khaldor said something about it in his interview with Hot Bid, but no idea if its just speculation or fact. oh, well i dunno, blizzard employees are known to be really cagey about these kinds of questions. they'd say something like 'we have no plans at the moment to add more units in Legacy' but it probably translates to something more like 'we aren't even thinking about it because HotS isn't even finished yet'. but i dunno, i could be wrong. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:32 Fueled wrote: Quick someone tell him instead of shooting out interceptors it can shoot out rocks. Browder- Makes Broodlords for Sc2- And doesn't think Carriers have a place. WHAT THE FUCK!?!?!?! Thanks for making decent Carriers Air to Ground and giving them to Zerg, so that you can just remove one of the most interesting and old unit concepts from the game to make way for some P.O.S you made up. Stop stroking your own ego you bastards. Give me back my Protoss Warship! | ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:35 Doc Daneeka wrote: oh, well i dunno, blizzard employees are known to be really cagey about these kinds of questions. they'd say something like 'we have no plans at the moment to add more units in Legacy' but it probably translates to something more like 'we aren't even thinking about it because HotS isn't even finished yet'. but i dunno, i could be wrong. Ya. I can't see them not adding more units for LoV. Maybe some nice spell casters? Who knows | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
| ||
|
freakhill
Japan463 Posts
- it is microable (BW behaviour) - it has a unique attack mechanism to play with The tempest is a slow, single-target attacking unit, with ultra long range and no setup time. Most boring unit, ever... It seems even worse than the collosus... Plus, it is ugly... but hopefully thanks to their long range they won't ever appear in streams of casted pro-games. | ||
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
I was unstoppable with stasis field, disruption field, and recalling probes into opponents base and cannoning inside their base. Looking back, Carriers permitted all of this. Do not get rid of the Carrier. Now I switched to Terran in WoL, but I will always have a soft spot for the Carrier. <3 | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:56 freakhill wrote: A simple reason to keep Carrier in is that it betters the skill level of the game for simple reasons: - it is microable (BW behaviour) - it has a unique attack mechanism to play with The tempest is a slow, single-target attacking unit, with ultra long range and no setup time. Most boring unit, ever... It seems even worse than the collosus... Plus, it is ugly... but hopefully thanks to their long range they won't ever appear in streams of casted pro-games. If you think the Tempest is ugly, take a look at some of the Terran units :D. However, I tend to agree. The tempest doesn't have the same feel as a fleet of carriers, even if you massed them. | ||
|
bhfberserk
Canada390 Posts
On June 11 2012 14:02 zmansman17 wrote: If you think the Tempest is ugly, take a look at some of the Terran units :D. However, I tend to agree. The tempest doesn't have the same feel as a fleet of carriers, even if you massed them. Yea.. Warhound is still so ugly.. totally agree with Carrier being a better micro-able unit. Tempest is just another simple, brainless unit now. | ||
|
cahtush
Sweden15 Posts
| ||
|
covetousrat
2109 Posts
| ||
|
Conquistador
United States40 Posts
Make it microable, make interceptors free. You could also give it an ability, mabey a low damage splash yamato (to help deal with 'rines and mutas, or to give toss a good alternative to collosii) or something else. Actually, I was wondering why they never considered having the Carrier be able to launch an AOE attack, but have it only be able to launch either the aoe or single target like before and have the player choose which. That way, it gives the unit more flexibility and forces the Protoss to choose what role the unit would serve for each engagement. | ||
|
i)awn
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46310 Posts
| ||
|
freakhill
Japan463 Posts
put back bw micro slightly shorten build time and you're good to go! | ||
|
Baum
Germany1010 Posts
On June 11 2012 18:46 Conquistador wrote: Actually, I was wondering why they never considered having the Carrier be able to launch an AOE attack, but have it only be able to launch either the aoe or single target like before and have the player choose which. That way, it gives the unit more flexibility and forces the Protoss to choose what role the unit would serve for each engagement. Protoss doesn't need another AOE attack especially not on a unit like the carrier. The carrier is in fact a good unit by itself the problem is that it doesn't have a clear role. There are already situations in which Protoss players want to transition to carriers in PvZ. If you can get to a 4-5 base economy and you have a mothership ready replacing all of your Stalkers with carriers is very viable. But it's just very rare for this to happen. | ||
|
HeeroFX
United States2704 Posts
| ||
|
SometimesIworkout
Cambodia75 Posts
| ||
|
arb
Noobville17922 Posts
On June 11 2012 18:38 covetousrat wrote: I would build a Carrer than a Tempest anyday. Tempest is totally useless for its cost and so easily counterable. Templar drop is so much stronger. Just keep Carrier and buff it. T_T Why not give the 22 range to carriers lol. 22 range to carriers is a laugh, with interceptors getting a tether it'd be something like 26 or so iirc? dealing with Carriers in BW with Goliath range were a pain int he ass to deal with vs someone who wasnt retarded and kept them over cliffs. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3543 Posts
1. In beta when voids were good masseable they totally overrode the carrier. 2. I felt it didn't have a lot of synergy with the other protoss stargate units in general, like the way voids and phoenix mix together. However i feel the mothership and carrier share some synergies. 3. I felt that lorewise there wasn't even need for the carrier, since Auier was destroyed and everything is being rebuilt on Shakuras. It's much more suitable to have a lategame dark templar caste air capital ship. 4. Since there is no reaver, there doesn't have to be that theme of protoss having stuff that recharges units inside of it, like the carrier does and the reaver scarabs and zerg has the theme of spawning small minions. 5. Since zerg had the strong air to ground capital ship and terran had the all around capital ship, i felt either protoss should not have a capital ship at all or they needed some kind of spellcaster capital ship, since a air to air capital ship is not that much fun xD But now with the tempest, all these points are all so belittled. Tempest: 1:Looks like the phoenix. 2: It seems like it had no interesting attributes/abilities at all and then they just gave it an insane range of 22, just to kinda make it exciting for us to hear about it. It's the most dull thing ever. 3. Tempest is even worse with synergy to the other air units compared to the carrier. 4. It's another air ship from protoss that uses wings, which i just don't think is protossi. Now with the oracle the carrier actually makes sense, it's raiding abilities are so much stronger and you don't even need a mothership to recall the slow moving carrier. I guess my point being is that The Carrier is really the lesser of two evils.. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Kung Fu Cup
RotterdaM Event
Replay Cast
The PondCast
IntoTheTV X SOOP
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
