On September 07 2012 13:28 PauseBreak wrote: Honestly, if the Carrier is so great why don't we see it more in high level pro games? Rarely, does it ever make an appearance. Either fix the Carrier or just remove it.
Because they're an extreme late-game unit, which isn't a common point to hit? You do see them pretty often in ultra-late PvZ.
No, you don't see Carriers because they're hard to transition to, cost an obscene amount of money and are easily countered. Terrans always make Marines/Vikings vs P, thanks to the Larvae mechanic Zerg can just instantly remax on Corruptors which demolish Carriers and if you go Carriers in pvp you're already dead
Stop hating, it was already proven that you can use high templars to defend carriers from corruptors, infestors, marines and vikings.
This thread is to fight for the carrier, we want it back. If you don't want to contribute then don't post here.
and your plan to make it stay is just blindly ignore all it's problems?
Actiblizzard just has no real respect for the iconic nature of a lot of unit's from SC1, probably Browders hand in this whole mess, they could have easily made the front of the carrier a bit more open, create some holes in the side for effect and have a huge power vortex like you see in the tempest's center, then give the thing a siege mode to switch over between interceptor and tempest mode.
Also, the tempest looks pretty uninspired and bland, I suppose because a lot of iconic spaceship designs have clear similarities with natural or human things that inspire grace or awe, the carriers similarities with a medieval ship, the Battlecruiser with hammerhead sharks, the Star Trek design's with swans, the Mass Effect Normandy with racecars.
The tempest looks like a fucking frying pan. A frying pan with a tesla coil.
On September 08 2012 18:38 WorkerArmy wrote: So this is it? the Carrier is not in the beta... Do we have any hope left?
they are afraid people would only get carriers instead of their useless spoon throwing reaping hook. (throws spoons at the enemy till they attack into a terrible position) Have to think about the act1 boss in d3, when i think about the tempest :X .
On September 08 2012 18:38 WorkerArmy wrote: So this is it? the Carrier is not in the beta... Do we have any hope left?
they are afraid people would only get carriers instead of their useless spoon throwing reaping hook. (throws spoons at the enemy till they attack into a terrible position) Have to think about the act1 boss in d3, when i think about the tempest :X .
I dunno, i just refuse to believe that the tempest will make it to release. Forget that the carrier is iconic, its more interesting, cool looking, and strikes fear into you when you hear those interceptors launch(or used to :/ ) and proceed to fill your screen with death.
On September 07 2012 13:28 PauseBreak wrote: Honestly, if the Carrier is so great why don't we see it more in high level pro games? Rarely, does it ever make an appearance. Either fix the Carrier or just remove it.
Because they're an extreme late-game unit, which isn't a common point to hit? You do see them pretty often in ultra-late PvZ.
No, you don't see Carriers because they're hard to transition to, cost an obscene amount of money and are easily countered. Terrans always make Marines/Vikings vs P, thanks to the Larvae mechanic Zerg can just instantly remax on Corruptors which demolish Carriers and if you go Carriers in pvp you're already dead
Stop hating, it was already proven that you can use high templars to defend carriers from corruptors, infestors, marines and vikings.
This thread is to fight for the carrier, we want it back. If you don't want to contribute then don't post here.
and your plan to make it stay is just blindly ignore all it's problems?
good luck, see how that works out for you
Actually the plan is to see to it brought back to it's BW predecessor i.e. all it's nerfs taken away. That, and different metagames allow for different styles. Carrier could be amazing in HotS.
On September 08 2012 11:49 Brutaxilos wrote: I think a good reason to keep carriers IS that it is rare. Think about it, when someone in a pro game actually goes carriers, the crowd LOVES it. If we get a unit that 1. is super common and 2. has a range so long that you can't even see any action, it ruins the spectating. :\
2) SC needs at least one “ OMG I can’t believe he just used that unit to win!” Starcraft 2 needs at least one unit that the pros can surprise the spectators by making it viable. Taking a unit no one thought was good and using it to dominate is one of the greatest events in Esports, both for playes and spectators. Starcraft 1’s history shows this many times: Science Vessels, defilers, reavers, all once considered worthless. Yet as Brood War evolved so did these units until they were metagame staples. And many of these units made this transformation without any balance changes at all.
A perfect Starcraft 2 example of this transformation was seen with the Mothership. When SC2 first came out the Mothership never saw action. And this continued for months. Players complained that it was too slow for a support unit. That the mothership cost too much for players to use mass recall like arbiters. They said that cloak meant it was always targeted first and therefore could never contribute to the battle. And some of those points may have been correct.
But it didn’t mean it wasn’t viable.
Sure some players, most notably HUK, had managed to pull of incredible games by getting the Mothership out. But nothing metagame changing. And on an night like any other night I saw this video and knew the Mothership was finally viable.
But it didn’t end there. Blizzard patched Vortex to remove forcefields. And what did the players do? They rose up and innovated once again. Substituting Archons for Colossi and Forcefields to create the most awesome sounding tactic yet, the Archon Toilet. And now we can see the Mothership in all its glory in standard play.
And the Mothership is still getting more work done on it in HOTS. And the Reaper is as well. The reaper, which along with the hydra and raven, are rarely if ever seen in the current meta game and yet they are all getting a second chance in HOTS. And when some player finally uses Reapers to win a game I am sure fans will say “OMG I can’t believe he used that unit to win!” But I doubt they'll jump to their feet.
On September 08 2012 18:38 WorkerArmy wrote: So this is it? the Carrier is not in the beta... Do we have any hope left?
they are afraid people would only get carriers instead of their useless spoon throwing reaping hook. (throws spoons at the enemy till they attack into a terrible position) Have to think about the act1 boss in d3, when i think about the tempest :X .
I dunno, i just refuse to believe that the tempest will make it to release. Forget that the carrier is iconic, its more interesting, cool looking, and strikes fear into you when you hear those interceptors launch(or used to :/ ) and proceed to fill your screen with death.
Yeah I thought reavers, goliath's, guardians, dragoons etc. would be far too iconic to simply give the boot. Don't forget Browder doesn't give a fuck about BW, he's far more interested in showing his new 'cool' units, he was probably young when he made Red Alert 2, he didn't boot most of the old unit's just added to them, respected what was created before him by more experienced designers and built upon it.
Yet now for SC2 he needs to reinvent the godamn wheel, about 70% of the unit's in BW where booted and replaced with his microless ego trip units. Why couldn't he have treated SC2 with the same kind of respect he had for RA2? My guess is he's getting old, and realizing he needs to make a mark on his field, that's what this game feels like, a way for him to create a game truly his own and immortalize himself. Not make a worthy sequel to probably the best RTS ever made.
So basically the Carrier is dead because Browder's ego got in the way.
O_o Carriers are becoming stronger and stronger in pvz.... At least on entombed valley seems like they can get to mass carriers easy... prob only map tho.
I love carriers for sure, but as a Z player ill be more than happy if its one less thing i have to worry about in super late game..
This way, i can sit and turtle even longer until 25 3-3 broodlords without worrying of having to face 15+ cariers when i decide to make my move. Lots easier to kill tempests than carriers with corruptors seems like
On September 09 2012 17:19 Snake.69 wrote: O_o Carriers are becoming stronger and stronger in pvz.... At least on entombed valley seems like they can get to mass carriers easy... prob only map tho.
I love carriers for sure, but as a Z player ill be more than happy if its one less thing i have to worry about in super late game..
This way, i can sit and turtle even longer until 25 3-3 broodlords without worrying of having to face 15+ cariers when i decide to make my move. Lots easier to kill tempests than carriers with corruptors seems like
Carriers as a late-game transition aren't really map-dependent. Larger maps are obviously better, but it doesn't make a huge difference one way or the other.
As a Protoss player, though, I disagree with the "one less thing to worry about" sentiment, though. Carriers are, in my experience at least, pretty much the only way to beat the late-game infestor/corruptor/BL/spine/spore problem. I have no idea how people beat that comp without using carriers, seems next to impossible to me.
On September 07 2012 23:39 KingAce wrote: Question. Why do interceptors cost money? Broodlings are free. Infested Marines are free. Those locust things are free.
Sup wit dat?
Comes from a BW balance, control group of carriers is ridiculously powerful when microed even more. So there are TWO ways of dealing with it, either you catch carriers with your goliaths so you can deal massiveamount of demage to the ship itself. Remember sometimes you may be zoned out and its almost impossible to catch carriers itself or it will be too cost inneficient.
OR
you starve protoss economically by shooting incerceptors (hold position goliaths), kill his bases and he will die from having full group of useless supply
Why it costs money in SC2 and why nothing ever changed about carrier in sc2, dunno. Seems like they brought this unit for legacy purpose and then wanted to kill it, because they didnt even try or propose anything.
Actually for some reason they nerfed its armor a lot in the transition. From 4 in BW to only 2.
There are so many other way to fix the carrier but I think blizzard just doesn't want to for some reason. They want us to love the new unit and play the way they think we should. The attitude was the same way in D3 during launch and beta "play the game the way we want you to and we will tell you how to have fun".
Why can't they just design interesting kickass units and let the players get creative with how they should be used.
Warhound = boring a-move unit. Tempest concept so boring compared to carries and interceptors. Oracle = FF minerals, so one dimensional and no room for player creativity =(
On September 07 2012 23:39 KingAce wrote: Question. Why do interceptors cost money? Broodlings are free. Infested Marines are free. Those locust things are free.
Sup wit dat?
Comes from a BW balance, control group of carriers is ridiculously powerful when microed even more. So there are TWO ways of dealing with it, either you catch carriers with your goliaths so you can deal massiveamount of demage to the ship itself. Remember sometimes you may be zoned out and its almost impossible to catch carriers itself or it will be too cost inneficient.
OR
you starve protoss economically by shooting incerceptors (hold position goliaths), kill his bases and he will die from having full group of useless supply
Why it costs money in SC2 and why nothing ever changed about carrier in sc2, dunno. Seems like they brought this unit for legacy purpose and then wanted to kill it, because they didnt even try or propose anything.
In terms of flavor unit design, it has more to do with race differentiation. See, SC1 gave Protoss two "produce stuff in the field" units: the Carrier and the Reaver. They both cost money to use, though obviously there are differences (Reavers are per-shot).
In SC2, it doesn't really fit flavor-wise because they didn't have any other "produce stuff in the field" units. They effectively replaced this concept with Warp-In, which is in the field production for all Gateways. So it's just a legacy wart from a flavor point of view.
EPT
. Lots easier to kill tempests than carriers with corruptors seems like
