EPTMake the carrier good instead of bad.
We Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 67
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Kharnage
Australia920 Posts
Make the carrier good instead of bad. | ||
|
Le BucheRON
Canada619 Posts
On August 13 2012 09:49 Kharnage wrote: You know what? Fuck timmy. Make the carrier good instead of bad. Best post in thread for a long time. | ||
|
Morton
United States152 Posts
On August 13 2012 09:49 Kharnage wrote: You know what? Fuck timmy. Make the carrier good instead of bad. +1 User was warned for this post | ||
|
Zergneedsfood
United States10671 Posts
I didn't say it should be gotten rid of for that reason. I'm saying that this argument for keeping it is invalid for that reason. I'm arguing against the argument, not (necessarily) the position. That being said, there is harm in keeping useless units around. You don't want a game with a bunch of "noob-trap" units in it. Think about how many SC1 players honestly think the Scout is a powerful if not devastating unit. That's not a good thing. ..... What. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
You've never heard that? I don't recall the specific game, but I remember a comment on a pro match that said something to the effect of, "why didn't he just build 24 Scouts and win the game?" It's a popular "strategy" among players who never play on anything other than Fastest or similar money maps. And among such people, it's actually pretty successful. Of course, the fact that this strategy is a dead-end once you're outside of those kinds of maps (or even just playing against someone who knows how to play) makes it very difficult for players to transition to actual strategies. | ||
|
Zergneedsfood
United States10671 Posts
You've never heard that? I don't recall the specific game, but I remember a comment on a pro match that said something to the effect of, "why didn't he just build 24 Scouts and win the game?" Pretty sure it was a troll comment, iirc. It's a popular "strategy" among players who never play on anything other than Fastest or similar money maps. And among such people, it's actually pretty successful. Of course, the fact that this strategy is a dead-end once you're outside of those kinds of maps (or even just playing against someone who knows how to play) makes it very difficult for players to transition to actual strategies. Not sure what players you play against in Fastest and money maps, but no one decent on those maps will make scouts either. | ||
|
fenrysk
United States364 Posts
more general use despite being underpowered ---> buffs ----> more use because they are decent for play ---> keep for hots | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 13 2012 15:34 fenrysk wrote: if more pros start trying to go carriers in their games (which i'm honestly starting to see more of in general, both in Korean pro-matches and also international games), we might see a buff for them (ie movement speed, targetting range, cost nerf, build time nerf, etc), kind of like how raven buffs are being proposed in the current test map, mainly because more terran pros are starting to use them. more general use despite being underpowered ---> buffs ----> more use because they are decent for play ---> keep for hots I sure hope so, because at this point if they still remove the Carrier, I'd lose all faith in Blizzard. | ||
|
Quateras
Germany867 Posts
and how it acts similar to broodwar now. The interceptors are actually changing targets instantly now if you focus fire, instead of returning to the carrrier like before. You can actually micro as well, since it shoots from a 360degree angle too now :D /edit am having so much more fun playing with Carriers now, compared to before | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On August 13 2012 15:48 Quateras wrote: I'm surprised that there is not more talk about the Carrier change, and how it acts similar to broodwar now. The interceptors are actually changing targets instantly now if you focus fire, instead of returning to the carrrier like before. You can actually micro as well, since it shoots from a 360degree angle too now :D /edit am having so much more fun playing with Carriers now, compared to before Any chance we can get some videos of your Carriers in action? On August 13 2012 09:11 NicolBolas wrote: [/B]I didn't say it should be gotten rid of for that reason. I'm saying that this argument for keeping it is invalid for that reason. I'm arguing against the argument, not (necessarily) the position. That being said, there is harm in keeping useless units around. You don't want a game with a bunch of "noob-trap" units in it. Think about how many SC1 players honestly think the Scout is a powerful if not devastating unit. That's not a good thing. The Colossus already is a Timmy unit. Why does the Protoss need two Timmy units? Timmy doesn't care about DPS. Just like in M:tG, Timmy likes big numbers. So what if that dragon requires like 15 mana to get onto the field, or can only attack once every three turns. It does 20 damage, and that's enough to get Timmy to use it. Ya but even if you just look at its attack its only 35 as opposed to the Carrier's 80(+16). What the Tempest lacks in attack ability it makes up for in range. And even more so than the numbers its the impact the unit has on the game. But Timmy doesn't want to sit back and whittle away at the enemy. He wants to win big. The Carrier has never been a "smash through his enemies front lines" unit. Even among noob players in SC1, you can't just a-move Carriers and expect to win. And in SC2 this is even less likely, with Vikings and Corruptors out there that can mop them up quickly. Not in pro play. But defiantly for the casual player or the 4v4 scene. Build 20 Carriers and A-move to win. My points are these: Timmy already has a unit: the Colossus. If you're going to make another Timmy unit, why does it need to be the Carrier? The Tempest is rather Timmy-like as is, due to its massive range. The Colossus is a Timmiesque unit. But its not the perfect Timmy unit. Its relatively fragile and requires additional unit support. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
I hope Blizzard wake up somewhere in the beta. | ||
|
wswordsmen
United States987 Posts
On August 13 2012 15:48 Quateras wrote: I'm surprised that there is not more talk about the Carrier change, and how it acts similar to broodwar now. The interceptors are actually changing targets instantly now if you focus fire, instead of returning to the carrrier like before. You can actually micro as well, since it shoots from a 360degree angle too now :D /edit am having so much more fun playing with Carriers now, compared to before When did this happen? While I generally try to avoid internet cliches (especially on TL); Pics or it didn't happen! Seriously, present evidence or admit you are wrong/trolling. edit: This sounds more accusatory than it is meant to. It was supposed to be disbelief while not being accusatory. and I can't spell. | ||
|
Rorschach
United States623 Posts
I could give a shit if it could fire all the across the map. such a boring unit with no micro it was painful to watch... | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20294 Posts
On August 14 2012 13:53 wswordsmen wrote: When did this happen? While I generally try to avoid internet cliches (especially on TL); Pics or it didn't happen! Seriously, present evidence or admit you are wrong/trolling. edit: This sounds more accusatory than it is meant to. It was supposed to be disbelief while not being accusatory. and I can't spell. 1.5 ninja changes. Try it out yourself. Its perfect until an infestor comes along and two-shots 50 interceptors with a pair of fungals because they cover a quarter of the area they used to in their flight paths. | ||
|
Revelatus
United States183 Posts
FFS I hope so. | ||
|
cpc
Australia126 Posts
Theres still time everyone can start using carriers and there won't be allowed to put the tempest in right? | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
On August 13 2012 13:48 Zergneedsfood wrote: Pretty sure it was a troll comment, iirc. Not sure what players you play against in Fastest and money maps, but no one decent on those maps will make scouts either. well the scouts are pretty good vs air unit, especially vs those... large? units. I can expect on money maps some players to just get tanks to def and battlecruiser all the way and scouts will be quite good against those. | ||
|
Kindred
Canada396 Posts
![[image loading]](http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb57887/starcraft/images/a/a8/Carrier_SC2_DevRend1.jpg) Vs ![[image loading]](http://cdn2.gamefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Tempest.jpg) Vs ![[image loading]](http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/c/c3/Tempest_SC2_Game1.jpg) The Tempest (earlier idea for Carrier replacement) "In comparison to the carrier, the tempest was slightly weaker, but cost fewer resources to build." (^ already a huge reason not to doubt the viability of the Tempest) The tempest had powerful shields and, while having no armaments of its own, carried a number of small fighter-type drones called shuriken that launched, surrounded and swarmed a target, doing little damage individually but significant damage when combined whilst maneuvering rapidly, making it difficult to destroy. The drones could be auto-built with a right click, a behavior which was carried over to the carrier. The shuriken made melee attacks. Special Shields The tempest was strong against ground targets, but was ill-equipped to handle air-to-air encounters; it had poor air defense as its shields did not activate against air attacks, but the shields took little damage from ground attacks. First thoughts are: This is a really cool replacement for the Carrier, and although it may not have “worked” in their eyes, the current Carrier is far less “working” than I think this idea would have been. During the beta especially, players will most definitely experiment with new units, coming to find a use for a unit that is far in the tech tree is vital for feedback purposes. The SC2 community was not even given the chance to experiment with this unit. For one, this unit is so similar in design that the only difference is the name, its interceptors were melee and the Tempest had way better maneuverability. Having this unit be almost the same as a carrier, but weaker and cheaper would support Protoss making phoenix and voidray for air support along with the Tempest to have something to combat A-A, and would also open up the possibility to get a Mothership because you now have air support. I cannot say if I want a Carrier or Tempest, because it should have been for the community to decide seeing as Carriers in SC2 are not nearly as formidable as in BW. According to Dustin Bowder, "the Tempest didn't feel right and that there was too much of an emotional connection with the original unit(Carrier)." The “Carrier” and the “Tempest” are the idealistically, the same unit, deciding to keep its name should not warrant it’s own death because of its previous success and (more so) viability. Also, I think the emotional connection was to the design and look of the SC1 Carrier, the latter not being at all the same anyway. source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128071 While this might be a bit outdated I think the core message is sound. I would rather see the old tempest idea come back instead of the new one. The new tempest fires so slowly, moves so slowly and damages so badly for its characteristics that it almost feels like wasted minerals. Nobody has really played the game yet so this might very well change for the better(i hope) or for worse | ||
|
dcemuser
United States3248 Posts
On August 13 2012 13:48 Zergneedsfood wrote: Pretty sure it was a troll comment, iirc. Not sure what players you play against in Fastest and money maps, but no one decent on those maps will make scouts either. Scouts are actually quite decent on those kind of maps. Day9 talks about them some in his old BW dailies about BGH. | ||
|
TheDougler
Canada8304 Posts
On August 14 2012 13:35 RavenLoud wrote: That PvT battle report was SCREAMING for carriers the way I see it. I hope Blizzard wake up somewhere in the beta. Absolutely. It'd force marines in that situation as the tempests allegedly should keep the skies clear of vikings, and then the protoss would need a more varied unit composition as well. Instead the protoss was able to control the skies but that didn't do anything in the current version. | ||
| ||
Tempest has the hit points and shields of a Timmy unit. But it lacks the pure DPS. Carrier has 26.7(+5.3) vs Tempest 8.17. Timmy doesn't want to sit back and ping his opponent to death. Timmy wants to smash through his enemies front lines. But your right the Carrier in its current state could use a buff. Most people in this thread would probably agree with that.
