|
On August 05 2012 15:30 Flexis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 12:03 Aetherial wrote:
After watching the OSL finals where Jangbi used carriers I'm convinced they need to keep and 'fix' the carrier in HotS... I hope they do. I say thesame. I want carriers more than the tempest.
That cannot be the most important argument for a decision. If Blizzard would have asked the fans how they want SC2, we would now have Broodwar with widescreen graphics. Even though if you don't like this particular change for HotS, you should be able to see the greater good of developing a franchise forward instead of using the same old content over and over.
In this case, a 'fixed' carrier would make the unit very unlikely like a carrier, so it is good that the unit gets replaced entirely instead of keeping the name for an effectively new unit.
|
Two other points about the Tempest which im trying to figure out:
1) The Carrier overlaps with the Collosus because they are both countered by the Viking/Corruptor. Yet from BR3 the Tempest also appears to be countered by the Viking and therefore suffers from the same problem.
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Void Ray role.
|
On August 15 2012 00:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Tempests role.
Hmm? You mean the void ray?
|
Canada13389 Posts
On August 15 2012 00:33 Gfire wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 00:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Tempests role. Hmm? You mean the void ray?
The tempest doesnt die to chain fungals as easily though which is what I think they want to go for?
|
to be honest, i feel like protoss players can be glad they get a new toy to play with. You think the Tempest is too similar to what other protoss units do? Try comparing the swarm host to an infestor specialized on infested Terrans/Minute with less range and more movement speed for the infested Terrans (and no burrow movement, no fungal)
|
On August 15 2012 00:36 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 00:33 Gfire wrote:On August 15 2012 00:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Tempests role. Hmm? You mean the void ray? The tempest doesnt die to chain fungals as easily though which is what I think they want to go for?
How does that help? I guess what I am missing is whether the void ray is still supposed to be the anti-massive unit and if not then what is its role in HOTS?
|
The tempest has no depth as a unit. It has long range, that's one layer of depth. Boring and stupid and not that fun.
The carrier already has 3-4 layers of depth (proxy attackers, long-tail resource cost, long range, exponentially scalable, moving shot). Just give the carrier more range and a better art design.
|
United States15580 Posts
The tempest is like an even worse version of the colossus in terms of 1-dimensional'ness. Its niche is so overlapping its out of control. They shouldn't be adding absurdly slow, useless units.
|
United Kingdom20284 Posts
On August 15 2012 00:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
Two other points about the Tempest which im trying to figure out:
1) The Carrier overlaps with the Collosus because they are both countered by the Viking/Corruptor. Yet from BR3 the Tempest also appears to be countered by the Viking and therefore suffers from the same problem.
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Void Ray role.
Yea, im really scared for that.
If you want a decent number of tempests, you will really need 2-3 stargates and a fleet beacon, which will take a bunch of time and many many resources, and it seems really scary to me that one could build 6 tempests, only to be met with 15 vikings and killed without ever getting a chance to take a second shot. The vikings would be cheaper and the opportunity cost for protoss would be greater too as naked gateway cant stand against bio nor mech.
|
On August 15 2012 00:25 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 15:30 Flexis wrote:On August 05 2012 12:03 Aetherial wrote:
After watching the OSL finals where Jangbi used carriers I'm convinced they need to keep and 'fix' the carrier in HotS... I hope they do. I say thesame. I want carriers more than the tempest. That cannot be the most important argument for a decision. If Blizzard would have asked the fans how they want SC2, we would now have Broodwar with widescreen graphics. Even though if you don't like this particular change for HotS, you should be able to see the greater good of developing a franchise forward instead of using the same old content over and over. In this case, a 'fixed' carrier would make the unit very unlikely like a carrier, so it is good that the unit gets replaced entirely instead of keeping the name for an effectively new unit.
I agree with the first part, sometimes you need to buckle up and stick to your ideas even though other people can't understand it at first.
Second part, you've got it all wrong. The SC2 carrier is the one that's "very unlikely like" the real carrier due to micro. This fix helped a lot, hopefully in HotS we will have both the tempest and the carrier because it seems to me that they really are nothing alike. If anything, they should remove the void ray for the tempest, not the carrier.
EDIT: I really think that they should have replaced the voidray with the tempest, not the carrier.
The new tempest would be 22 range and anti massive, cost a bit less but less durable and probably uses dark templar tech. I feel that the tempest is too gimmicky and 1 dimensional to become the new "capital ship". It lacks the feel of an awe inspiring and exponentially overpowering main battleship. It's more like an artillery piece.
Hell, this is total theorycraft, but you can even keep the whole "prismatic core" thing and the original void ray beam attack, but add the upgrade in the fleet beacon that give the new tempest/void ray the 22 range long cool down attack. Once the upgrade finishes, the 3 "arms" of the void ray opens up and transforms to a tempest like circle thing with a beam in the middle.
It'll automatically use the beam attack if an enemy is less than 6 range.
This adds micro potential between using "beam attack" or "long range attack".
I know this is going into stupid radical ideas suited for bnet forums.  I don't claim to know better than Blizzard but I would try this out instead of removing the carrier.
|
|
|
4) The Carrier can diversify the Protoss air fleet.
One of Brood Wars more ambitious ideas was the air balance model. Brood War added 3 new Support Air Units (Corsair, Devourer, Valkyrie). These Support Air Units would counter the Tactical Air Units (Scout, Mutalisk, Wraith). These Support Air Units were supposed to be weak against Capital Ships (Carrier, Battle Cruiser). Now admittedly it didn't quote work out that way once pros got a hold of these units. Who could have predicted Muta Micro after all. But I feel that there is still value in having a system of counters that encourages unit diversity.
Allow me to use an overly dramatized example (just an example don’t beat me up to much over it)
Terran Player Bob: Ah got my mech army of Siege Tanks and Warhounds. Now to move out against that goofy Protoss.
Terran Player Bob: Oh know! He’s brought out Carriers to attack my seige long. No worries, I will just pump out some Vikings!
Terran Player Bob: Ack! He has warped in some Tempest 2.0. These slow moving capital ships do AoE air damage and when combined with Phoenix are great for wiping out Viking balls. Better switch to Thors.
Terran Player Bob: In the name of Mengsk! He now has Void Rays the perfect unit against my massive Thors.
The current Protoss metagame consists of little more than variations of Protoss gateway deathballs. Now, more than ever, is the best time to reinvent Protoss air. Lets look at the situation. We have two air units which don't see wide use (Void Ray and Carrier although the Carrier is making a comeback). We have one air unit that is being completely reworked (Mothership). And we have two air units being added (Tempest and Oracle). Now if these units were locked in complex balance relationships that were good for Esports, like the Marine and Baneling relationship, then the game would be upturned by changing these units. But all five of these Protoss Air Units exist in alpha limbo and thus can be crafted into something great. And the Carrier is amply positioned to take up the role of tanking and heavy damage dealer for this new Protoss Air Force.
However, if the Tempest remains unchanged and the Carrier is removed I see two problems arising. First, the Tempest deals +Massive damage thus overlaping with the Void Ray role. And secondly, the Tempest is countered by the same unit that the Colossus is countered by (which was one of Blizzard reasons for removing the Carrier). Both of these problems, if I had to guess, would further limit Protoss air diversity.
|
Why not have Protoss have BOTH capital ships
after all they do 2 different things.
Zerg is getting the viper... which means they have 2 main spellcasters now
Terran is getting the Thor and warhound
Rocks now can be killed 2 times
Why not let protoss have 2 capital ships?
|
On August 15 2012 00:25 [F_]aths wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 15:30 Flexis wrote:On August 05 2012 12:03 Aetherial wrote:
After watching the OSL finals where Jangbi used carriers I'm convinced they need to keep and 'fix' the carrier in HotS... I hope they do. I say thesame. I want carriers more than the tempest. That cannot be the most important argument for a decision. If Blizzard would have asked the fans how they want SC2, we would now have Broodwar with widescreen graphics. Even though if you don't like this particular change for HotS, you should be able to see the greater good of developing a franchise forward instead of using the same old content over and over. In this case, a 'fixed' carrier would make the unit very unlikely like a carrier, so it is good that the unit gets replaced entirely instead of keeping the name for an effectively new unit.
Actually, fixing the Carrier entails making it more like the BW Carrier.
Also, the Tempest isn't moving the game forward; it's moving it backwards towards units that are terribly designed and promote boring, a-move/deathball type play.
|
On August 15 2012 12:25 Zergrusher wrote:
Rocks now can be killed 2 times
lol, awesome
On August 15 2012 12:25 Zergrusher wrote:
Why not let protoss have 2 capital ships?
That way they can have 2 units they never make! Brilliant!
|
I really wonder how did the designers could even think that Tempest is very deep and fun to watch unit, not to mention good.
|
Did anyone notice the Carrier will be the ONLY unit taken out of the game... T and Z gain extra units, while Protoss loses 1 albeit the addition of 2 or 1.5 units... should just let it be... I wonder if a Carrier+Tempest fleet would be OP... lol
|
I was laughing hard at the last PvT battle report. It's like the Terran forgot about the Tempest all together. Besides; vs a bio army the Tempest is useless anyways. I can't believe the things they are doing to promote the Tempest and they just won't do anything for the carrier.
|
remove Tempest
Buff Carrier
... yes, it could be that easy
|
On August 15 2012 00:29 Archerofaiur wrote:
Two other points about the Tempest which im trying to figure out:
1) The Carrier overlaps with the Collosus because they are both countered by the Viking/Corruptor. Yet from BR3 the Tempest also appears to be countered by the Viking and therefore suffers from the same problem.
2) The Tempest deals +Massive damage. Yet this overlaps with the Void Ray role.
This is what I don't get about it—what is the Tempest supposed to be used for? It won't (as far as I can see) do anything to change the state of late game PvZ. Corruptors will negate any attempt to use Tempests against Brood Lords, so Protoss will again be stuck trying to make Mothership/Archon work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
