We Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 87

Carriers > Terran ground army

On September 15 2012 05:04 isaachukfan wrote:

I'm sorry are your A and T keys broken?


WE HAVE VICTORY!!!!!!

On September 15 2012 04:59 Mohdoo wrote:
SICKEST NERD CHILLS TASTELESS!!! CARRIER IS BACK!!!

On September 15 2012 05:08 Zrana wrote:


Well i meant vs mech in HotS. For vs bio just replace carrier with collosus.

On September 15 2012 05:11 SarcasmMonster wrote:


GJ with the thread. Mohdoo, savior of skytoss.

On September 15 2012 05:33 Kingsky wrote:
We won boys! we won!!!

On September 15 2012 05:39 Tsunami49 wrote:


Not really. Its still kind of useless. It needs a micro'ing aspect integrated into it. An in SC2 the interceptors just die far to fast and end up being a terrible mineral sink.

On September 15 2012 04:54 Zrana wrote:
Gotta say i kinda disagree with this thread, i actually think blizz can do a better job than than a load of players. Look at the mothership; it was going to be removed at one point but the reddit-reading, mlg-watching bronze to gold leaguers loved it so much it stayed in the game, and now any lategame PvX is decided on a single vortex, instead of any strategic or clever play.

Apart from looks, what's actually interesting about the carrier? You just mass a bunch of them and win (or otherwise). The carrier and collosus are extremely similar in terms of function and how using them affects a match. It's simply, "Does my opponent have enough vikings/corruptors to beat my army?" If yes, game continues as if i'd never built carriers - if no, win. Such hard-counter based design is not interesting. Look at interesting units like siege tanks in tvz. They don't really have a unit that can be said to counter them, instead you beat them by engaging when they unsiege or flanking them or attacking elsewhere. The carrier in bw was countered by goliaths, but goliaths are ground units so there was still some depth to the interaction between carrier/goliath even after both units were on the field as the carriers could use terrain to their advantage.

In SC2, goliaths fly and are called Vikings. Now instead of a positional battle you get a counter-based battle. Carriers > Terran ground army > stalkers > vikings > carriers. This is not without depth and interest but it just leads to more deathball play.

Terran and zerg have a load of cool stuff that allows positional play or mobility/multi-pronged play. Protoss is still stuck with herp derp put my units in a big group and shove them across the map.

On September 15 2012 05:43 rd wrote:


Your arguments earn no credence making highly opinionated, uneducated generalizations. Even further, I question how one makes the absolutely incorrect to statement that a Colossus and Carrier serve the same function when their functions are world's apart -- so much so that they're polar opposites in usage.