EPTWe Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 61
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
| ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3347 Posts
In PvZ they are the endgame better versions of Stalkers. In PvT they can be the answer to mech, but vs standard Terran, they don't really have a place, which is funny because in the beta it was all Carriers/Voidrays vs Terrans late game. | ||
|
MapleFractal
Canada307 Posts
| ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 16 2012 08:11 wcr.4fun wrote: I thought neural parasite was the main counter to carriers. (besides the obvious corruptors) It can be, but it's hard. If you go in one at a time it's way to easy for a mass of carriers to just target fire the offending infestors down, too easy. The way you're supposed to do it with infestors is burrow, throw a ton of infested terrans out, and then when the carriers try and flee unburrow and throw down fungals and NPs. You need a favorable location of engagement, though, and usually an observer snipe. There's always the chance of a mass recall, but he'll always lose the carriers that are currently NP'd. If you whiff it, though, those infested terrans and fungals are a ton of energy that'll take a while to recover. Corruptors kinda die to carrier/void ray, is the thing. My personal logic (as someone who plays Skytoss, mind you, not against it) is that Corruptors should be there mostly to tank damage (dat +2 base armor) and cast corruption on anything and everything. I'm slowly being more convinced that air attack isn't that important against Skytoss, Zerg should go for air armor instead, and use the corruptors to tank damage and just corrupt stuff. Infestors should be the brunt of the damage dealing, but you gotta engage well. Hydras will help against early void rays, but they can't engage the range of carriers without creep, so I would use them sparingly and defensively. Other than that, back up your corruptors with queens (tranfuse and additional anti-air, same upgrades as ITs) and have a greater spire ready when the battle finishes so you can immediately morph your remaining corruptors into BLs and almost immediately push. As soon as HTs are out to feedback infestors, you need BLs to screw their pathing. | ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 16 2012 08:20 ejozl wrote: Carriers are the end-all be-all, lategame army composition for PvP endgame. In PvZ they are the endgame better versions of Stalkers. In PvT they can be the answer to mech, but vs standard Terran, they don't really have a place, which is funny because in the beta it was all Carriers/Voidrays vs Terrans late game. Haha, while I kind of agree with this, carriers are not the end-all be-all of PvP endgame. They counter colossi, sure, and with even moderate numbers of immortals or even a couple colo can completely hold their own against mass blink stalker balls, not disagreeing there. But the PvP counter wheel of stargate>robo>templar>stargate continues deep into the late game. Storms absolutely wreck interceptors, which can render entire carrier fleets useless for several in game minutes. Done well, a HT/archon/void ray comp can decimate carrier/immortal, though the range does become an issue (nothing quite like a money vortex, though). Of course, a simple colo transition and suddenly all that gets rolled, but that's the beauty of PvP, now isn't it. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On July 17 2012 01:09 HelioSeven wrote: It can be, but it's hard. If you go in one at a time it's way to easy for a mass of carriers to just target fire the offending infestors down, too easy. The way you're supposed to do it with infestors is burrow, throw a ton of infested terrans out, and then when the carriers try and flee unburrow and throw down fungals and NPs. You need a favorable location of engagement, though, and usually an observer snipe. There's always the chance of a mass recall, but he'll always lose the carriers that are currently NP'd. If you whiff it, though, those infested terrans and fungals are a ton of energy that'll take a while to recover. Corruptors kinda die to carrier/void ray, is the thing. My personal logic (as someone who plays Skytoss, mind you, not against it) is that Corruptors should be there mostly to tank damage (dat +2 base armor) and cast corruption on anything and everything. I'm slowly being more convinced that air attack isn't that important against Skytoss, Zerg should go for air armor instead, and use the corruptors to tank damage and just corrupt stuff. Infestors should be the brunt of the damage dealing, but you gotta engage well. Hydras will help against early void rays, but they can't engage the range of carriers without creep, so I would use them sparingly and defensively. Other than that, back up your corruptors with queens (tranfuse and additional anti-air, same upgrades as ITs) and have a greater spire ready when the battle finishes so you can immediately morph your remaining corruptors into BLs and almost immediately push. As soon as HTs are out to feedback infestors, you need BLs to screw their pathing. Neural Parasite is wayy too complicated to "counter" the Carrier. Just get a bunch of Hydras at max range for Interceptor and Hydra and then send in Zerglings to draw out the Interceptors and have the machinegun Hydras shoot them down. A Carrier without - slowly reproducing - Interceptors is just dead weight and you can kill the rest of the Protoss army first before killing the Carriers. Maybe one or two Fungal Growths would help to get rid of the Interceptors faster. | ||
|
i)awn
United States189 Posts
+2 Armor; +2 Range -reduce interceptor cost to 10 minerals; increase mineral cost of the carrier to have the same initial costs (now that interceptors are cheaper); -decrease interceptor build time -decrease carrier build time -increase speed to match void ray speed -allow attacking on the move I'm pretty confident we'll see the carrier more often with these small fixes. | ||
|
Darknat
United States122 Posts
| ||
|
goomba
2 Posts
 There are ALL SORTS of ways to slightly modify the unit. Anyone can pull a dozen changes out of their ass: reduce the Interceptor attack to 8, but give them splash? Or increase armor by 1, or Interceptor life by a small amount (maybe 10/10), Perhaps have them start with a full bay of Interceptors (it's weird that they arrive half-full, as though they were made and then warped out in a rush) Or make them re-aquire targets within that sick range 14, instead of moving back into range 8 to relaunch... BW micro? The unit as of now just takes so long to acquire and is very hit-or-miss; it can rock, or it can fail so hard that it's immediate gg. The Colossus is a "safer" choice. As people have said, the unit has received no love since the game launched... it was put here just to satisfy BW fans, and was probably planned to be cut a long time ago and replaced with something easier to use (aka more boring). But just a very slight tweak is all it would need, and then pro's might try to actually use them, and if the unit proves to be viable for pro's, that means it's viable for e-sports, which means Blizzard might consider keeping it. | ||
|
ZeroClick
Brazil63 Posts
| ||
|
ZeroClick
Brazil63 Posts
| ||
|
CakeSauc3
United States1437 Posts
On July 27 2012 12:07 ZeroClick wrote: Oh, and I suggest a spell for Carrier: something like "Critical Mass Shot" where all interceptors will suicide on the target, causing massive damage! It will have the drawback of rebuild all interceptors , but the damage can compensate the use! +1, best thing I've read in this thread Implement this "ultimate shot" idea, make it do like 200 splash damage or something, and there we go! :D Or, since the tempest is supposed to be all interesting with super long range, make the carrier shoot a tempest-like cannon at the cost of mana? Like a long range shot that specifically targets buildings or units (so as not to just copy yamato cannon). Something like that could spice up the carrier reaaaaally nice! | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
1) The Carrier hasn't received any balance changes since beta started 2) The carrier is one of the most iconic Protoss units 3) The Mothership didn't show its potential till late 4) The Carrier diversifies the Protoss air fleet 5) The is really fun for the casual player (Timmy, Power Gamer) 6) There are ramifications for removing a unit in an expansion 7) Goliath carrier micro was incredible for spectators in BW, and something similar could be introduced 8) The carrier fills a vital place in lore going forward 9) The carrier plays an aesthetic role 10) People love the carrier | ||
|
Zushen
275 Posts
| ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 30 2012 00:54 Zushen wrote: werent you guys complaining for the longest time that the carrrier sucked and needed to be replaced? Whats changed? Not replaced, just buffed. If fulfills a very specific niche in late game PvZ (and arguably PvP as well), and has an interesting mechanic in attacking through interceptors and not directly itself. With small balance changes, it could more effectively fill those roles and still be somewhat viable as a general, all-purpose long distance siege unit. Putting all that aside, though, the biggest thing is just that HotS is coming out, and that means huge buffs to mech play in TvP. No one ever sees mech in TvP in WoL, because it sucks so hard, but the carrier is the correct late-game response to mech play, and just as mech play is getting buffed, they're taking the carrier out. It's terrible game design. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On July 30 2012 00:38 Archerofaiur wrote: Top Ten Reasons the Carrier Should Remain in the Game 1) It hasn't received any major balance changes since the game launched 6) Their are ramifications for removing a unit in an expansion 8) The carrier fills a vital place in lore going forward 9) There carrier plays a vital aesthetic role 10) People love the carrier 1: So? How is this a reason for the Carrier to stay? 6: What ramifications? 8: What "vital place in lore"? The Protoss once used Carriers, and now they don't. They're not retroactively saying that Carriers never existed; they're saying that they're not used anymore. 9: Such as? 10: Some people do, but that's not a reason for anything. The developers should do what is best for the game. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On July 30 2012 06:11 NicolBolas wrote: 1: So? How is this a reason for the Carrier to stay? 6: What ramifications? 8: What "vital place in lore"? The Protoss once used Carriers, and now they don't. They're not retroactively saying that Carriers never existed; they're saying that they're not used anymore. 9: Such as? 10: Some people do, but that's not a reason for anything. The developers should do what is best for the game. Don't worry Nicol. Im gonna go through each of these points over the next couple days. Stay tuned  | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On July 30 2012 00:38 Archerofaiur wrote: Top Ten Reasons the Carrier Should Remain in the Game 1) The Carrier hasn't received any balance changes since beta started 2) The is one of the most iconic Protoss units 3) The Mothership didn't show its potential till late 4) The Carrier diversifies the Protoss air fleet 5) The is really fun for the casual player (Timmy, Power Gamer) 6) There are ramifications for removing a unit in an expansion 7) Goliath carrier micro was incredible for spectators in BW, and something similar could be introduced 8) The carrier fills a vital place in lore going forward 9) The carrier plays an aesthetic role 10) People love the carrier Add to that list that the Carrier is more used than the Raven, Hydralisk, and the Reaper, yet both are staying and the Reaper and Hydralisk are actually being changed. | ||
|
Kazahk
United States385 Posts
On July 18 2012 01:47 i)awn wrote: I really think some generic buffs should be considered before dissmissing the carrier: +2 Armor; +2 Range -reduce interceptor cost to 10 minerals; increase mineral cost of the carrier to have the same initial costs (now that interceptors are cheaper); -decrease interceptor build time -decrease carrier build time -increase speed to match void ray speed -allow attacking on the move I'm pretty confident we'll see the carrier more often with these small fixes. These buffs will affect not only the end game; and you know them progamers... the will exploit the shit out of it. And I don't think its worth making a memorable unit viable at the cost of changing the meta game. | ||
|
MeteorRise
Canada611 Posts
I love the unit and dont want to see it go. | ||
| ||
