EPTIf blizzard doesnt patch this like they did with the ultralisk it will only serve as a BM/look at me im so far ahead i can make carriers type of unit in which case it should be removed
We Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 30
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
tsango
Australia214 Posts
If blizzard doesnt patch this like they did with the ultralisk it will only serve as a BM/look at me im so far ahead i can make carriers type of unit in which case it should be removed | ||
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
In general I've noticed an alarming pattern of toss just not being able to deal with air units effectively in any matchup. Phoenix in PvP, Mutas in PvZ and Banshees in PvT (think 1/1/1) are all nightmares to deal with if you don't have phoenix on the way already, but unfortunatly the stargate tech path doesn't lead anywhere, because carriers are super easy to counter and deal with by any race. I am very bothered and dissapointed by this whole situation, not only because of carrier lore or iconic reasons but for actual ballance reasons. Since the amulet nerf toss has been in real need of a late game / tier 3 unit that is scary especially when massed. Think of that "o shit" feeling you get when you see 8+ broodlords, or ghosts. Right now toss "o shit" late game unit is the Mother ship, and that is only because of the archon toilet, which is really the only answer toss has to a very late game zerg hive composition. Honestly, it's a really stupid way to decide a game that has gone on that long and I play toss..... It would be very cool if carriers were awesome because then protoss could have the option for builds based around stargate play. Opening with some phoenix/void and going for a mothership/carrier late game. I am very worried about HOTS in general as a toss player, simply because how good the new terran mech looks, how crazy the new zerg upgrades and casters look compared to the retarded gimmicky crap that has been proposed for toss. In Blizzards mind is toss just not allowed to have an army that can straight up win a fight at any point in the game without abusing FF/blink/vortex? Because carriers certainly have the potential to fill this gaping hole in protoss's arsenal as a scary as fuck late game unit that will steam roll you if you don't scout it and prepare properly for it. Becuase that's pretty much how protoss has to play every matchup from early to late game. GOD SAVE THE CARRIER! /end rant ;P | ||
|
tsango
Australia214 Posts
| ||
|
KJSharp
United States84 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
I had to buff the Interceptors HP a bit but it's possible to go in attack, move out, then depending on the unit (lets say Corruptors for example), the Carrier could move out of sight while the Interceptors are the only remaining units visible and attackable. Things that would make this more useful: 1. Interceptors would need much more health (probably 3x more HP). Also probably at least 2 health regeneration per second (lore wise this can simply be explained by Interceptors having self repair systems). Also increase the sight radius from 7 to 10 (It's under stats tab). 2. The "leash" range needs to be at least 16 or so (right now it's only 12). 3. BW Interceptor AI (I'll explain how to do it below). (Basically Interceptors that continue to attack as long as there are enemy targets present.) With those 3 things, this basically makes the Carrier a "siege" type air unit. Go in, attack with interceptors, go out, then let interceptors attack. Since Carriers by default have 8 range (more than Corruptors), this means the Corruptors will automatically go after the Interceptors and not the Carriers. If you move the Carrier out of range (with BW Interceptor AI), the Corruptors will keep attacking the Interceptors and vice versa (you can move the Carriers out of sight too). The combination above allows the Carrier to potentially deal with Corruptors and Void Rays (both have less range the Carrier) by attacking, then quickly moving out of sight. To make Interceptors mimic the BW AI - Go to Unit Tab > Interceptors > Combat Tab > Set the "Default Acquire Level" to "Offensive" instead of None. Then click on the Carrier - Set the "Minimum Scan Range" to 16. Finally go to the rightmost tab on the weapon, and under "Target Sorts" add "TSPriority" (make sure TSPriority is the topmost one) and "TSDistance" (this makes it so the Interceptors automatically go after anything that is attacking, then if there are the same, they go after the nearest target) (Overall what the changes do is make the Interceptors automatically attack every enemy within 16 range. That also means that as long as there are enemies present, the Interceptors will never return to the Carrier unless you move out of the "16 leash" range distance or you press stop.) There you go. Carrier Brood War style! Additionally, if you want to keep SC2 Interceptor AI but allow an upgrade that upgrades the Interceptor into BW AI + Show Spoiler + First give the Interceptors a behavior that has "Passive Flag" on it "after" the above changes are made (give the behavior to the interceptor of course). Passive makes it so the interceptors won't auto acquire (it will still attack anything the Carrier attacks; again this should be done after the above changes). Once the upgrade is researched, you could have a validator disable the buff and thus enabling BW Interceptor AI for the Carrier. You'd need a Validator that checks if an upgrade is "not" researched. So - make a requirement that has "this upgrade is complete" under "use", make a Validator that does "not" have "Find" check and make it target that requirement, then add that Validator under "Disable" to the Behavior with the passive flag on it, finally add the behavior to the interceptor. Anyway that's how you can mimic the Brood War Interceptor AI for SC2. | ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
| ||
|
Telenil
France484 Posts
On March 10 2012 18:50 Goldfish wrote: 1. Interceptors would need much more health (probably 3x more HP). Also probably at least 2 health regeneration per second (lore wise this can simply be explained by Interceptors having self repair systems). Interceptors do not need more health, and I speak as a carrier user and fan. They have 80hp for 25 minerals, cost-for-cost, that makes interceptors the most durable unit in the game - they are better meatshields than zealots. Interceptors could use the ability to switch target at range greater than 8, and carriers could certainly use a decrease in their build time, and that would already significantly improve the unit. | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On March 10 2012 14:41 tsango wrote: The carrier needs its build time reduced desperately - they're half decent but when you sink the money into the tech tree to get to it and then need to sink an extra 300/200 per carrier (+ upgrades) the return on investment is often too late because of the build time. Anyone going carriers creates this HUGE timing attack window where your vulnerable because such a large portion of your money has been sunk into tech which wont be on the field for another 3minutes. If blizzard doesnt patch this like they did with the ultralisk it will only serve as a BM/look at me im so far ahead i can make carriers type of unit in which case it should be removed I agree - especially if you compare it with broodlords. Zerg can build 10 corruptors simultaneously and then morph 10 Bls simultaneously, if you let them. Protoss just can't because it would also need 10 stargates. By making the carrier so weak, Blizz somehow seems to have forgotten that the reason for its strenght has always been the difficulty of even GETTING a handful of them in the first place. Carriers are awsome in BW, I've rarely seen a boring carrier-based game. And I come from warcraft 3. | ||
|
Lorch
Germany3691 Posts
Also I feel like the interceptor amount upgrade from bw should make a return, that way even interceptors with standard help would be a lot more viable as you could get way more of them. | ||
|
L4mppu
Finland40 Posts
But then they'd have to give zerg hero too. How 'bout making making stank a multiplayer unit? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On March 10 2012 14:43 Reborn8u wrote: What bothers me most is the utter lack of effort by blizzard to make carriers usefull and cost effective. People weren't using BC's enough, so they got a speed buff. People weren't using ultras enough so they got a build time buff. Void rays have had thier damage changed 2 (or 3?) times to balance them out, the speed upgrade for voids was also removed. Phoenix got changed to auto attack while moving, build time then decreased, now the range upgrade added for phoenix as well. Look at how many changes ghosts have gone through, and bunkers! With all of this in mind Why has there been not a single attempt to fix the carrier?!?!" In general I've noticed an alarming pattern of toss just not being able to deal with air units effectively in any matchup. Phoenix in PvP, Mutas in PvZ and Banshees in PvT (think 1/1/1) are all nightmares to deal with if you don't have phoenix on the way already, but unfortunatly the stargate tech path doesn't lead anywhere, because carriers are super easy to counter and deal with by any race. I am very bothered and dissapointed by this whole situation, not only because of carrier lore or iconic reasons but for actual ballance reasons. Since the amulet nerf toss has been in real need of a late game / tier 3 unit that is scary especially when massed. Think of that "o shit" feeling you get when you see 8+ broodlords, or ghosts. Right now toss "o shit" late game unit is the Mother ship, and that is only because of the archon toilet, which is really the only answer toss has to a very late game zerg hive composition. Honestly, it's a really stupid way to decide a game that has gone on that long and I play toss..... It would be very cool if carriers were awesome because then protoss could have the option for builds based around stargate play. Opening with some phoenix/void and going for a mothership/carrier late game. I am very worried about HOTS in general as a toss player, simply because how good the new terran mech looks, how crazy the new zerg upgrades and casters look compared to the retarded gimmicky crap that has been proposed for toss. In Blizzards mind is toss just not allowed to have an army that can straight up win a fight at any point in the game without abusing FF/blink/vortex? Because carriers certainly have the potential to fill this gaping hole in protoss's arsenal as a scary as fuck late game unit that will steam roll you if you don't scout it and prepare properly for it. Becuase that's pretty much how protoss has to play every matchup from early to late game. GOD SAVE THE CARRIER! /end rant ;P i agree with the missing airsuperiority (that's what the Tempest is for). i disagree with the rest: -) the carrier has lategame roles: PvT vs Mech; and the Carrier has seen use in lategame PvZ and PvP -) techpathes don't need a T3 follow up unit (see zerg range tech; see terran bio tech) - though it can/could benefit from it. -) protoss has those scary lategame units: colossus, archon, HT... even immortals and void rays en masse are extremly scary, at least in PvP and PvZ. | ||
|
Maginor
Norway505 Posts
On March 10 2012 19:09 L4mppu wrote: MAYBE THEY COULD MAKE ACARRIER NEW PROTOSS HERO UNIT TO REPLACE THE MAMASHIP! But then they'd have to give zerg hero too. How 'bout making making stank a multiplayer unit? I'd rather they not have hero units. I want carriers that are a viable addition to the overall game plan in certain situations, but is not a win-all lose-all kind of thing. | ||
|
MajorityofOne
Canada2506 Posts
It's not like giving the races more options is going to break the fundamentals of the game. I say keep not just Carriers, but Overseers and Motherships (and I'd say Thors too, but at least those will still exist in some capacity). At the end of the day you get 200 supply no matter how many options you have on how to use it. Yes, having more units creates redundancy and makes the game harder to balance, but those things have a funny way of working themselves out over time if the foundation is good. Wings of Liberty (and more indirectly, Brood War) is a great foundation...keep what you've given us thus far, and give us new toys to play with. Don't take things away from the game just as people are finally starting to work them into high level play! If you give this community time, it will find a way for Carriers to work. Maybe they need a buff, maybe they're just waiting for the right user to figure them out. But nobody wants to see them go, and there isn't a good reason for them to be removed. Hell, they're actively trying to IMPROVE TERRAN MECH in HOTS, which is EXACTLY the thing the Carrier could find a legitimate role against! | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
Rorschach
United States623 Posts
That being said they could probably at least try and make them work against zerg... Really not sure how without screwing up the relationship that the corrupter has to other units like colossi. Once a zerg gets of BL/infestor/spine wall I don't know of anything that can actually break it aside from something gimmicky like landing a sick archon toilet or speed WP all over the place trying to abuse the lack of mobilty. it would be great if blizzard could turn the carrier into a toss seige unit worthy of its cost and bld time. Would love to see more sky toss and phx openings! | ||
|
K_osss
United States113 Posts
| ||
|
TheRealPaciFist
United States1049 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:01 Forikorder wrote: oh ya becuase the Thors spell was so amazing that adding it onto the carrier would make it awesome that was sarcasm, adding storm to carrier wouldnt make it good Thor isn't board control, and why not make carrier an energy unit? | ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On March 10 2012 19:07 Lorch wrote: The fact that Goldfish was able to recreate BW carrier so easily shows that blizz must have expiriemented with this internally, I just can't believe that they remove it without atleast having some internal builds with some changed stats. Also I feel like the interceptor amount upgrade from bw should make a return, that way even interceptors with standard help would be a lot more viable as you could get way more of them. They definitely should try it out again. From *testing against the computers, I found Carriers can actually be viable against anything (to be fair though, the computer likes to focus fire on the Interceptors first). Against Void Rays or Corruptors, if you attack first (Carriers have +2 range), then immediately move back, you might be able to move out of sight before the Void Rays attack the Carriers (this is useful if the opponent isn't paying attention and gets caught off guard by the Carriers). *I kind of cheated a bit. I set the Carrier leash range to 18 (it's 12 in BW). Take note though that the practical range is probably closer to 16 or so (if the Interceptors move out of range while attacking (they always strafe while attacking), then they'll return). For Vikings and Corruptors, even though they both have higher speed than the Carrier, you can kite them to a certain extent (you can't kite Void Rays since they can move and attack at the same time). The BW style Interceptors allow Carriers to much more maneuverable. Combined with Stalker support, it really increases the potential of Carriers. If anyone is interested, search (Bread) and look for either "Outpost (Bread)", "Megaton (Bread)", or "Lavaflow (Bread)" (the other Bread maps aren't updated). You need to research the upgrade through Fleet Beacon first (it's called "Enhanced Interceptors") before interceptors auto attack similar to BW. The map is just something I edited for fun (AKA it's not balanced) but those maps do have the BW style Carrier (again, need to research from Fleet Beacon first) if anyone is interested. Search for the map in the "Create Game" menu so you can set the # of players and computers. | ||
|
Anima4
Australia59 Posts
we should start a 'CARRIER 2012' campaign, where we make the carrier famous and raise awareness of it's need in starcraft. | ||
| ||
