|
United Kingdom12032 Posts
On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO  I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings.
That's why I think they think it's better.
Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once.
|
On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once.
This is one of things I like about the Tempest. Its also, I think, a reason both could exist in the same army composition.
|
On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once.
I don't see why you'd want to have tempests split apart from your death ball. If storms/stalkers aren't enough to dissuade vikings/corruptors from firing at such expensive, critical units in the protoss ball (colossus/carriers), I don't see how moving them another screen's length distance back and having to split your AA will fix it. It'll just make it impossible to have colossus around if your tempests aren't with them. Maybe if Protoss re-defines slow pushing and masses dozens of cannons/ht's in the middle of the map around their tempests.
That's also if mech even catches on and tempests are a better solution to what protoss currently has. Even in PvZ the exact same scenario of a 5-6 base zerg swarming the tempests with 20-30 corruptors, they'll be wiped out even harder considering how terrible their dps is. The irony is that if tempests can function better in PvZ it'll 90% be more likely because of the better harassment options protoss has to prevent such insane economies -- and everyone will herald the tempest. -_-
|
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb.
|
On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once.
Wouldn't  just camp Tempests on top of their deathballs for safety? Those things shoot so far that it never needs to leave your deathball to siege your opponent.
|
On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb.
They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it. The carrier is a lot worse than the Tempest in every way.
|
United Kingdom12032 Posts
On August 20 2012 05:40 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once. Wouldn't just camp Tempests on top of their deathballs for safety? Those things shoot so far that it never needs to leave your deathball to siege your opponent.
They could give the tempest a minimal range of above the range of any of the normal protoss units to make it so they have to be out of your deathball or they do nothing,
|
On August 20 2012 06:01 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb. They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it. The carrier is a lot worse than the Tempest in every way.
Huh? You're going to have to elaborate on that one. Tempest sacrifices tons of DPS in place of range. They're also virtually the same in every way other than cost/speed/build time.
On August 20 2012 06:04 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 05:40 SarcasmMonster wrote:On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once. Wouldn't just camp Tempests on top of their deathballs for safety? Those things shoot so far that it never needs to leave your deathball to siege your opponent. They could give the tempest a minimal range of above the range of any of the normal protoss units to make it so they have to be out of your deathball or they do nothing,
DB said they don't like imposing random, non-obvious restrictions on units. This suggestion falls within what he described.
|
On August 20 2012 06:01 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb. They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it.
I respect your opinion. Indeed, I think this line of reasoning is behind Blizzard's decision to remove it. But allow me to provide the counter-arguement.
What is too many units? Is 14 too much? Is it a hard line like you absolutely cant have more than 14 or is it a soft line? And if it is a soft line than what unit would be more worthy of bending that soft line then the Carrier.
I agree that that too many units does dilute and damage SC2 but removing the Carrier as your first and only fix for this is cutting off the nose to spite the face. If your going to finally cut a unit from the game you should at least consider how much your community loves the unit, whether the unit represents starcraft and whether the unit is fun to play with. There are many units that arn't used currently and are getting second chances. Battlecruiser, hydra, reaper, warp prism, void ray. Arguments could be made for anyone that they would be better candidates for the chopping board.
The carrier is a lot worse than the Tempest in every way.
The Carrier is not worse than the Tempest in every way. You didn't give any examples of ways the Tempest is better but ill provide some for the Carrier, Lore, DPS, Microability, and viability vs late game PvZ. Its also theorized that the Carrier would be better against the Tempest.
|
Its obvious to me that Blizzard removes the carrier so they can add it back in Lotv but instead of interceptors it will carry laser-robots. They also want it to be more A-move than before so they gave it weakened shields, which is depleted if you try to micro it.
|
On August 20 2012 06:34 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 06:01 Tppz! wrote:On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb. They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it. I respect your opinion. Indeed, I think this line of reasoning is behind Blizzard's decision to remove it. But allow me to provide the counter-arguement. What is too many units? Is 14 too much? Is it a hard line like you absolutely cant have more than 14 or is it a soft line? And if it is a soft line than what unit would be more worthy of bending that soft line then the Carrier. I agree that that too many units does dilute and damage SC2 but removing the Carrier as your first and only fix for this is cutting off the nose to spite the face. If your going to finally cut a unit from the game you should at least consider how much your community loves the unit, whether the unit represents starcraft and whether the unit is fun to play with. There are many units that arn't used currently and are getting second chances. Battlecruiser, hydra, reaper, warp prism, void ray. Arguments could be made for anyone that they would be better candidates for the chopping board. The Carrier is not worse than the Tempest in every way. You didn't give any examples of ways the Tempest is better but ill provide some for the Carrier, Lore, DPS, Microability, and viability vs late game PvZ. Its also theorized that the Carrier would be better against the Tempest.
Sorry I shoudl have said I just quoted what David Kim said.
My opinions mixed with stuff david kim said:
The Tempest is completly new design while the carrier is a a-move unit, which you cant even micro. his dps is always bad in sc2 because you are always behind in air upgrades and it suffers a lot from armorupgrades of the other units.
Also with fast hydras the carrier, especially the interceptors are gettign worse with the addon. Zerg would kill the interceptors with speed hydras like marines do right now. thats why you cant give him a second chance. he has no role in the game and he will get worse in the addon cause of new stuff
the BCs has a role in this game. Its used in every matchup. And it got used since the beta. The carrier just didnt see play ever until a few weeks ago in pvz latelatelategame. Blizzard doesnt want units that arent used in their games.
reaper will be removed anyway imo. david kim didnt say anyhting about it but he is still sticking in cause he has a unique design. he wont see play imo and hopeully he will dorp from the game in the beta.
|
I like they remove the carrier but that they remove vortex against air I dont like at all. mothership now seems almost pointless and it still costs tons of money.
|
On August 20 2012 06:04 Qikz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 05:40 SarcasmMonster wrote:On August 20 2012 05:05 Qikz wrote:On August 20 2012 03:55 Picklebread wrote:On August 19 2012 22:14 kvmetternich wrote:On August 19 2012 16:58 Tppz! wrote:
I had an official meeting with David Kim yesterday and he completely convinced me that the Tempest is a lot better than the Carrier. Im writing an article about everthing he said, but I gotta say its time to say goodabye to the Carrier (although he mentioned it could happen the carrier stays but not because the community wants it. its more a gameplay/design thing) David Kim can say what he want and everyone can agree or not with him, but we all saw the TvP battlereport and tempest was completely useless all the time (takes ages to kill a tank and this unit cost 300/300...) and a pain in the ass to watch. Instead of buid this unit a toss player would build colossi from an additional robo . This is a FACT. Anything that come out from stargate vs t is easilly countered by marines/vikings (oracle too. just put a couple of marines and a turret into mineral line to stay safe) ,so tempest (and oracle) will not change this situation . IMHO I think they were mostly useless because DAKIM was suiciding them and not leaving them freakin stalkers to defend from vikings. That's why I think they think it's better. Carriers just sit on top of the deathball. Tempests are so far away that it's all about microing around with vikings/other AA to kill them splitting atleast the Protoss air units, some Anti Air and Anti Air for Terran away from the big army and forces micro in two places at once. Wouldn't just camp Tempests on top of their deathballs for safety? Those things shoot so far that it never needs to leave your deathball to siege your opponent. They could give the tempest a minimal range of above the range of any of the normal protoss units to make it so they have to be out of your deathball or they do nothing,
As a Protoss, I really like that idea! I've tried the Tempest on the HotS custom map and its range is just ridiculous. I know that nothing is decided yet as the game isn't even in beta yet, but I think that keeping the range as it is + giving it minimal range could work out fine. They should try this change for the beta.
|
On August 20 2012 20:32 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 06:34 Archerofaiur wrote:On August 20 2012 06:01 Tppz! wrote:On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb. They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it. I respect your opinion. Indeed, I think this line of reasoning is behind Blizzard's decision to remove it. But allow me to provide the counter-arguement. What is too many units? Is 14 too much? Is it a hard line like you absolutely cant have more than 14 or is it a soft line? And if it is a soft line than what unit would be more worthy of bending that soft line then the Carrier. I agree that that too many units does dilute and damage SC2 but removing the Carrier as your first and only fix for this is cutting off the nose to spite the face. If your going to finally cut a unit from the game you should at least consider how much your community loves the unit, whether the unit represents starcraft and whether the unit is fun to play with. There are many units that arn't used currently and are getting second chances. Battlecruiser, hydra, reaper, warp prism, void ray. Arguments could be made for anyone that they would be better candidates for the chopping board. The carrier is a lot worse than the Tempest in every way. The Carrier is not worse than the Tempest in every way. You didn't give any examples of ways the Tempest is better but ill provide some for the Carrier, Lore, DPS, Microability, and viability vs late game PvZ. Its also theorized that the Carrier would be better against the Tempest. Sorry I shoudl have said I just quoted what David Kim said. My opinions mixed with stuff david kim said: The Tempest is completly new design while the carrier is a a-move unit, which you cant even micro. his dps is always bad in sc2 because you are always behind in air upgrades and it suffers a lot from armorupgrades of the other units. Also with fast hydras the carrier, especially the interceptors are gettign worse with the addon. Zerg would kill the interceptors with speed hydras like marines do right now. thats why you cant give him a second chance. he has no role in the game and he will get worse in the addon cause of new stuff the BCs has a role in this game. Its used in every matchup. And it got used since the beta. The carrier just didnt see play ever until a few weeks ago in pvz latelatelategame. Blizzard doesnt want units that arent used in their games. reaper will be removed anyway imo. david kim didnt say anyhting about it but he is still sticking in cause he has a unique design. he wont see play imo and hopeully he will dorp from the game in the beta.
i like marines vs carriers. ye they can kill of the interceptors, but not the carriers itself (and in sc2 you can always recall your interceptors with a trick). It will be the same for hydras. So if carriers force marines and hydras, alone building it will help you. Because supply wise the carrier will beat hydras especially. If they want to close in to snipe carriers they are stormed in their clump. And the tempest, they could give a suicide ability to the carrier. Reaver tempest and carrier in one unit!
BCs are used yes, but they are used along with getting double upgrades, things a toss can even chrono out. (if not the bcs suffer exactly the same problem carriers are suffering from).
Protoss is known for being slow with new units, the ms being probably the biggest example and even now they are reluctant to use it for something else then vortex.
I can understand the reason for the tempest though, they want a noob way around stalemates, which will be stay on range and slowly spoon the opponent into attacking your deathball and lose horrible.
Anti air isn't fast though, so the tempest might be used somewhere else, rather then stuck inside a colossus forming the tempossus.
|
I made this post on the battlenet forums, i do know its kinda out of context, but its my argument as to why i think the tempest will be VERY useful. I do fully agree with the guy that said david kim thinks they will be much more useful than carriers.
Just quoting my post
do note, that the tempest will come out alot faster than some people seem to think ( people say stuff like Oh my god, it requires fleet beacon , Takes so long to come out! )
If you look at the mother ship core,it has an ability called energize. if you keep energizing your nexus it will literally have unlimited chronboost. With a permanent chronoboost on your stargates i see these suckers coming out fast.
I definately do not think tempest will be useless, they will pick away so much units from a distance and if you ever fly them into trouble a nexus recall should help.
if you think your base will be weak to timing pushes because of getting the tempest unit. This is where mothership core comes in yet again, it has a huge 13 range 60 damage cannon with just a simple click.
I dont think we can come to any conclusions as yet when determining what units will suck or be op.
Now to answer the question about if i think tempest will have a role?
yes i do think they will have many key roles in the game.
- they will be key units in the fight against swarm host timing pushes with spine crawlers. Think about it, if you loose your ground army to swarm hosts /spine-crawlers there is literally no way you can fight threw it to save your base. Tempests are the only units you have that can attack swarm hosts from a distance . That big cannon from the mothership core only lasts 20 seconds. With swarm hosts beign able to put out infinite units the realistic counter is THE TEMPEST. We all know what happens when protoss trys to engage into mass spinecrawlers /broodlords. There is no reason not to believe engaging into 7 + spine crawlers with swarmhosts/couple lings or roachs + easier to spread creep would present a serious problem for protoss. Tempests are more than likely to be THE answer to fend of this push.
-they will be key units in the fight against the zerg air death ball ( infestor/broodlord) and doing econ damage mid game.
-they will be key units in PvP against the massing of the colosus death ball. Think about it, in pvp what robo unit will counter the tempest? if you think you can blindly mass colosus in pvp late game anymore u will be mistaken. IF you think Blink stalkers will counter these guys, you are wrong, blink stalkers cannot reach that which is not on ground. I see alot of air wars happening in PvP, with both void rays and tempests . I see orcales coming in with energize casted on them and preodain granting vision for tempest to blast probes away from a distance. No robo unit will be able to reach tempest hence air wars will happen. With the mothership core cannon being able to handle 4 gate pushes easily, i think PvP is going to see massive changes in HOTS with literally every unit being used.
-They will be usefull in tvp, but i dont see them being TOO usefull. I personally think that if mech becomes more used in this matchup, voidrays instead will be the units to make a huge return in this matchup, especially for voidray busts.
|
On August 20 2012 20:52 Halozination wrote:
I like they remove the carrier but that they remove vortex against air I dont like at all. mothership now seems almost pointless and it still costs tons of money.
The vortex is back in the beta said david
|
On August 20 2012 21:32 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 20:52 Halozination wrote:
I like they remove the carrier but that they remove vortex against air I dont like at all. mothership now seems almost pointless and it still costs tons of money. The vortex is back in the beta said david
mothership now have mass stasis against air ( 20 seconds), arguably even more broken
Dont come to conclusions so fast.
|
On August 20 2012 20:32 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 06:34 Archerofaiur wrote:On August 20 2012 06:01 Tppz! wrote:On August 20 2012 05:40 Saat wrote:
Anyway, the thing is : on what that is a problem if there are still carriers, useless and not used, in the game, for blizzard ?
Nothing.
They may appear only on 0.5% games, that hurts no one.
And furthemore, i'm pretty sure pgm may find a better place for them. Like MC against Kas. And anyway, they appear more and more in PvZ.
Seriously, Carriers are so important for Starcraft...Removing them seems just...So dumb. They dont want too many units in the game and a unit doesnt isnt used in any matchup or only one isnt worth it. I respect your opinion. Indeed, I think this line of reasoning is behind Blizzard's decision to remove it. But allow me to provide the counter-arguement. What is too many units? Is 14 too much? Is it a hard line like you absolutely cant have more than 14 or is it a soft line? And if it is a soft line than what unit would be more worthy of bending that soft line then the Carrier. I agree that that too many units does dilute and damage SC2 but removing the Carrier as your first and only fix for this is cutting off the nose to spite the face. If your going to finally cut a unit from the game you should at least consider how much your community loves the unit, whether the unit represents starcraft and whether the unit is fun to play with. There are many units that arn't used currently and are getting second chances. Battlecruiser, hydra, reaper, warp prism, void ray. Arguments could be made for anyone that they would be better candidates for the chopping board. The carrier is a lot worse than the Tempest in every way. The Carrier is not worse than the Tempest in every way. You didn't give any examples of ways the Tempest is better but ill provide some for the Carrier, Lore, DPS, Microability, and viability vs late game PvZ. Its also theorized that the Carrier would be better against the Tempest. Sorry I shoudl have said I just quoted what David Kim said. My opinions mixed with stuff david kim said: The Tempest is completly new design while the carrier is a a-move unit, which you cant even micro. his dps is always bad in sc2 because you are always behind in air upgrades and it suffers a lot from armorupgrades of the other units. Also with fast hydras the carrier, especially the interceptors are gettign worse with the addon. Zerg would kill the interceptors with speed hydras like marines do right now. thats why you cant give him a second chance. he has no role in the game and he will get worse in the addon cause of new stuff the BCs has a role in this game. Its used in every matchup. And it got used since the beta. The carrier just didnt see play ever until a few weeks ago in pvz latelatelategame. Blizzard doesnt want units that arent used in their games. reaper will be removed anyway imo. david kim didnt say anyhting about it but he is still sticking in cause he has a unique design. he wont see play imo and hopeully he will dorp from the game in the beta.
Please specify which parts of that was what David Kim said, because this is just wrong on so many levels that I refuse to believe that this is quote on quote David Kim's opinion on the game.
Of course you can micro carriers. Release interceptors, pull back, engage again, pull back... it's not like you're going to be, I don't know, doing blink micro with them... but duh, that's not how carriers are supposed to work. Last time I checked up with BW, carriers were pretty damn microable; a few tweaks to the unit's behavior - which Blizzard has never bothered doing - could make them as good as the BW ones.
Basing future changes on the current metagame is not a good idea. You say Protoss is behind in air upgrades most of the time nowadays. Well... do we currently have any reason, any incentive to go for them?
+ Show Spoiler +
I have no idea about the fast hydras, but hey, it's not like you don't have other options against them, right? You aren't forced to go carriers against zerg.
You can't give the carrier a second chance? If you ask me, Blizzard hasn't even given it a first one.
|
On August 20 2012 21:34 johnny123 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 21:32 Tppz! wrote:On August 20 2012 20:52 Halozination wrote:
I like they remove the carrier but that they remove vortex against air I dont like at all. mothership now seems almost pointless and it still costs tons of money. The vortex is back in the beta said david mothership now have mass stasis against air ( 20 seconds), arguably even more broken Dont come to conclusions so fast.
what?
David Kim said the Vortex has replaced Stasis again
|
On August 20 2012 23:03 Tppz! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 21:34 johnny123 wrote:On August 20 2012 21:32 Tppz! wrote:On August 20 2012 20:52 Halozination wrote:
I like they remove the carrier but that they remove vortex against air I dont like at all. mothership now seems almost pointless and it still costs tons of money. The vortex is back in the beta said david mothership now have mass stasis against air ( 20 seconds), arguably even more broken Dont come to conclusions so fast. what? David Kim said the Vortex has replaced Stasis again
isnt the vortex ground only for HOTS? and the mothership has a new ability called stasis, which puts the mothership + all surrounding air units in an invunerable stasis for 20 seconds or something along those lines.
are you saying the latest changes have removed the stasis ability from mothership?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
