• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 20:41
CEST 02:41
KST 09:41
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic7Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3
Community News
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event5Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster11Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1Weekly Cups (June 9-15): herO doubles on GSL week4Firefly suspended by EWC, replaced by Lancer12
StarCraft 2
General
HSC 27 players & groups The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Jumy Talks: Dedication to SC2 in 2025, & more... Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event $200 Biweekly - StarCraft Evolution League #1 SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series EWC 2025 Online Qualifiers (May 28-June 1, June 21-22)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] Darkgrid Layout
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House
Brood War
General
ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion Preserving Battlereports.com Where is effort ?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - WB Finals & LBR3 [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - LB Round 4 & 5
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Social coupon sites UK Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024 Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
How Pro Gamers Cope with Str…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 697 users

We Must Fight For The Carrier

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
1 2 3 4 5 92 93 94 Next
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15637 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-09-14 20:05:02
January 26 2012 00:05 GMT
#1
FINAL EDIT: On this day, the 14th of September, the Carrier has been restored to its rightful place. Thank all of you SO much for your support. No doubt that your support helped make this happen.


EDIT: On February 10th, 2012, the Temptest has effectively been replaced with Phoenix Fleet Beacon Tech! REJOICE MY BROTHERS! THE CARRIER MAY STILL HAVE SOME HOPE YET!

I write this as a long time Blizzard RTS fan. First BW, then WC3, TFT, BW again, SC2, and now a spectator and avid e-sports enthusiast.

The Carrier should not be removed from Starcraft 2. The Carrier does not pose glaring imbalance issues, it does not overlap with the colossus and it holds the capacity to completely transform the late game protoss metagame. In this post, I will be describing what value the Carrier has to Starcraft as a franchise, Starcraft 2 as a game, and Starcraft 2 as a source of entertainment. I would like people to consider this post without considering current values the carrier possesses. Look at how roaches, ghosts, high templar, stalkers, phoenix, siege tanks, brood lords, ultralisks, archons and many other units have been changed to fit the game. The current numbers of the carrier are not of relevance, as they can be patched. At the end of my description of why the carrier is a valuable unit, I will recommend what small changes I feel could make the carrier an easy choice without being imbalanced.


The Protoss Deathball
[image loading]
Firstly, I would like to bring up the Protoss late-game army and how 1-dimensional, 1 size fits all it has become. We are all very familiar with the deathball. A few zealots to tank, a lot of stalkers, 3-5 colossi, 3-5 high templar, few archons, perhaps a mothership, perhaps a immortal or 2, observer. This army can be seen as the 200 food army in nearly any match up. It doesn't need to be this way. The Carrier poses a new playstyle, as seen in BW. In BW, Carriers allowed Protoss to play the game in a way that was more about securing territory, then using the carriers to fortify that territory, then eventually slowly pushing your way forward. Carriers were not a unit that you would get enough of, then charge across the map, as we typically see with the Protoss deathball. Sure, in PvT we dance with Ghosts and in PvZ we dance with infestors, but it is more or less the same thing. The Carrier provides the capability to launch air assaults, cliff-hugging harassment, etc. I don't think I need to describe to everyone the sort of play styles that were available in BW.

Carriers present those who play SC2 more ways to enjoy playing as protoss as well as against Protoss. No matter what the strategy is, when its the same thing every time, it gets boring for everyone. There are many avenues through which the deathball comes to be, but it is the 200 food Protoss army. It took a very long time for the Infestor to get the use it gets now, and that's while being a good unit. There is no telling what sort of creative uses for the carrier professional players could come up with if it were tweaked to be more viable.

The Carrier does not overlap with the colossus
The Carrier attacks both ground and air units. The Carrier is not bound by ground and it can defend its self quite well against air. It is indeed true that vikings and corrupters do well against Carriers, but I do not find this to be a check-mate situation. Corrupters and vikings also do quite well against Colossi, yet as we all know, Colossi are very viable. Blizzard has argued that the Colossus being so standard, any race commonly has the capacity to counter carriers, but that is honestly not a reason to get rid of it. In both PvT and PvZ, it is very common to see corrupters and viking counts reset to 0 during large engagements. More recently, high templar have been used to gain positional advantages and help actually kill squads of corrupters or vikings.

Additionally, PvT has began to not involve colossus right away. Instead, many Protoss players are opting for High Templar first, then transitioning into Colossi later. With Phoenix play recently also gaining popularity, is it really such a stretch for (given a better carrier) a fleet beacon to get thrown down instead of a robotics bay? Colossus are phasing out as being the "no matter what" go-to unit for the Protoss mid-game.

The Carrier holds intrinsic, cultural value to the Starcraft community
[image loading]
When anyone thinks of Starcraft, they instantly think of a few key units. Zerglings, marines, zealots, siege tanks, and Carriers. How many times do you hear your noob friends joke about mass carriers or mass zerglings? Carriers have, since SC1, been the hero of the Protoss army. The Carrier represented a lot of what gave Protoss the image it still holds today. It represents not only massive strength in its HP and damage, but the awesomeness of watching over a hundred interceptors swarming the screen. The Carrier has always been an awesome unit. It may be in a weak stage right now, but it remains an awesome unit. I see removing the Carrier as wrong as removing the siege tank or zerglings. All of these units represent a fundamental feeling and history of the races. The Carrier is NOT hopeless and it is NOT a unit that overlaps too greatly with the colossi.

I view the Carrier as nothing more than a unit so barely under-powered that its never quite worth getting. I suggest the following changes be made to the Carrier:

-MOST IMPORTANTLY: It must be able to attack while moving. This was KEY to its usefulness in BW.

- Carrier speed increased by some amount that makes it capable of both entering and leaving a fight. It can be a strong unit, but currently, retreating is never an option. Colossi can retreat with Stalker cover in most times, but Carriers can not. Brood Lords have the luxury of Infestors, which make escape much easier than it could be.

- Interceptors build for free, yet perhaps build slightly more slowly. Alternatively, the research for interceptors to fly out quicker should not need to be upgraded. Perhaps both, perhaps only one of these.

I hope I have convinced you all that the Carrier is a unit worth protecting. It is not an intrinsically flawed unit, and it is FAR from the type of unit that warrants removal. In strategy games, it is diversity and depth that makes the game so great. Removing a unit should only happen for extremely good reasons. I see no such reasons for the Carrier. The Brood Lord, the Phoenix, Roach, and other units have all been substantially re-worked since release. The Carrier, the icon of the entire Protoss legacy deserves the same respect.

Jibba said this very well, so I wanted to add this to the OP
On January 27 2012 02:31 Jibba wrote:
Meanwhile, the carrier is the quintessential Protoss unit. When you think of BGH, you think of carriers. When you think of Tassadar, you think of the carrier. When you think of the Overmind, you think of the carrier. Hyperion might be cooler, but Gantrithor is the most impressive and most important ship in the Starcraft universe, and it is a culmination of the entire race.

It might be difficult to fix, but it seems like Blizzard hasn't even tried. :| It's a shame given its one of the best units Blizzard has ever designed in any game, and it has a long and powerful history.
RetoX
Profile Joined October 2010
Hong Kong252 Posts
January 26 2012 00:14 GMT
#2
+1


Carrier is an emblem of protoss such as Zealots, don't remove them :/ Honnestly they're not that hard to fix cf : BW

Protoss don't need another slow anti air unit, it won't solve muta's harass x)
Twitter : http://bit.ly/twitt-RetoX ♦ facebook http://on.fb.me/RetoX ♦
Amlitzer
Profile Joined August 2010
United States471 Posts
January 26 2012 00:17 GMT
#3
Long live the carrier!

Death to the deathball!
"Not even justice, I want to get truth!"
R3DT1D3
Profile Joined January 2012
285 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-26 00:22:51
January 26 2012 00:22 GMT
#4
It does need some micro though as it's still only an a-move unit with the changes you mentioned.

"Carrier has arrived."

Fishriot
Profile Joined May 2010
United States621 Posts
January 26 2012 00:23 GMT
#5
The carrier is an iconic Protoss unit no doubt. Sadly, I felt the same way about the Lurker :/
Tppz!
Profile Joined October 2010
Germany1449 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-26 00:27:14
January 26 2012 00:24 GMT
#6
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)
EternaLLegacy
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
United States410 Posts
January 26 2012 00:30 GMT
#7
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


Oh how wrong you are...

Carriers were used in PvZ on very rare occasion, but it was extremely map dependent.

Terran needs anti-air to shoot shuttle very early on, and to clear out observers and arbiters later. You should always have some goliaths on hand past earlygame.

Every race in BW had a long range ATA unit too: Scouts, Wraiths, and Devourers.

Carriers melt because dps of units in SC2 is higher, and they have I believe 2 base armor vs the 4 they have in BW.

Carriers are actually quite useful vs T, but you are correct, they are simply outclassed by so many other options, and very few T gets mech these days cause it's not viable. It's not that carriers are useless and have to be removed, it's that mech is stupid and bad and needs to be fixed.
Statists gonna State.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15637 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-26 00:37:31
January 26 2012 00:34 GMT
#8
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)

Nothing makes carriers more vulnerable than colossus other than their speed. If they had a better capacity to pull in and out of engagements, there would be no difference. As of right now, they struggle to keep themselves alive, but this would be true for any air unit with their speed. As I said in the op, Brood Lords are commonly assisted with infestors, which is how they manage to stay alive. All they need is a little speed!
Tppz!
Profile Joined October 2010
Germany1449 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-26 00:37:44
January 26 2012 00:36 GMT
#9
On January 26 2012 09:30 EternaLLegacy wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


Oh how wrong you are...

Carriers were used in PvZ on very rare occasion, but it was extremely map dependent.

Terran needs anti-air to shoot shuttle very early on, and to clear out observers and arbiters later. You should always have some goliaths on hand past earlygame.

Every race in BW had a long range ATA unit too: Scouts, Wraiths, and Devourers.

Carriers melt because dps of units in SC2 is higher, and they have I believe 2 base armor vs the 4 they have in BW.

Carriers are actually quite useful vs T, but you are correct, they are simply outclassed by so many other options, and very few T gets mech these days cause it's not viable. It's not that carriers are useless and have to be removed, it's that mech is stupid and bad and needs to be fixed.


Even though i was wrong on very rare occasions. (you build turrets early on vs shuttles, right )

Sure BW had longrangeA-A units. But were they as powerful as Corruptors and Vikings, I dont think so.
Sure 2 Armor on a Tier3 units is complete bullsh*t. I agree. I dont see why hightechunits have to suffer so hard because of the upgrades, new idea about hightechattacks (eg battlecruiser shooting X lasers so they are bad all the time) etc.

And yes carriers are useless cause there is no mech.. And in SC2 WoL there cant even be cuase you need to rely on Vikings as antiair instead of goliath (damn you thors!). Carrier wont have a role in SC2. No matter what


On January 26 2012 09:34 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)

Nothing makes carriers more vulnerable than colossus other than their speed. If they had a better capacity to pull in and out of engagements, there would be no difference. As of right now, they struggle to keep themselves alive, but this would be true for any air unit if their speed. As I said in the op, Brooks are commonly assisted with infestors, which is how they manage to stay alive. All they need is a little speed!


Read again. There is no place in the Game were Carrier would fit more than another unit. Not even in TvP Mech. Speed wont do anything since Interceptors dont attack when you move the carrier.
snively
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States1159 Posts
January 26 2012 00:36 GMT
#10
On January 26 2012 09:22 R3DT1D3 wrote:

"Carrier has arrived."



My religion is Starcraft
J.E.G.
Profile Joined May 2010
United States389 Posts
January 26 2012 00:39 GMT
#11
The carrier should stay in the game regardless of how viable it is. Sure it doesn't fit any practical roles, but I think I can speak for any sc2 fan when i say that as soon as a carrier pops in a pro level game, everyone watching goes "OH SHIT HE GOT CARRIERS!!!!!" and proceeds to shit pants. Is this not a good enough reason in and of itself?

Also, I still feel it is too early to count them out. How long had BW been out until Bisu popularized phoenix/dt?
Do or do not; there is no try.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15637 Posts
January 26 2012 00:39 GMT
#12
On January 26 2012 09:36 Tppz! wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:30 EternaLLegacy wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


Oh how wrong you are...

Carriers were used in PvZ on very rare occasion, but it was extremely map dependent.

Terran needs anti-air to shoot shuttle very early on, and to clear out observers and arbiters later. You should always have some goliaths on hand past earlygame.

Every race in BW had a long range ATA unit too: Scouts, Wraiths, and Devourers.

Carriers melt because dps of units in SC2 is higher, and they have I believe 2 base armor vs the 4 they have in BW.

Carriers are actually quite useful vs T, but you are correct, they are simply outclassed by so many other options, and very few T gets mech these days cause it's not viable. It's not that carriers are useless and have to be removed, it's that mech is stupid and bad and needs to be fixed.


Even though i was wrong on very rare occasions. (you build turrets early on vs shuttles, right )

Sure BW had longrangeA-A units. But were they as powerful as Corruptors and Vikings, I dont think so.
Sure 2 Armor on a Tier3 units is complete bullsh*t. I agree. I dont see why hightechunits have to suffer so hard because of the upgrades, new idea about hightechattacks (eg battlecruiser shooting X lasers so they are bad all the time) etc.

And yes carriers are useless cause there is no mech.. And in SC2 WoL there cant even be cuase you need to rely on Vikings as antiair instead of goliath (damn you thors!). Carrier wont have a role in SC2. No matter what


Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:34 Mohdoo wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)

Nothing makes carriers more vulnerable than colossus other than their speed. If they had a better capacity to pull in and out of engagements, there would be no difference. As of right now, they struggle to keep themselves alive, but this would be true for any air unit if their speed. As I said in the op, Brooks are commonly assisted with infestors, which is how they manage to stay alive. All they need is a little speed!


Read again. There is no place in the Game were Carrier would fit more than another unit. Not even in TvP Mech. Speed wont do anything since Interceptors dont attack when you move the carrier.


Ok, so lets say that interceptors were able to attack while the carrier moved. Just as it did in BW, and just as Blizzard did with the phoenix. What then? My point is that all that is needed are small changes. It doesn't need to be removed, obviously, as the reasons you outline are easy fixes that would not make it imbalanced. If it is not imbalanced, and it becomes useful, there is no reason for it to be removed.
Mystgun
Profile Joined September 2010
Hong Kong311 Posts
January 26 2012 00:40 GMT
#13
I like the spirit of your post and I agree that carriers are so inherently flawed that they need to be removed. I am hoping that Blizzard will give carriers some active skill to make them more viable and synergistic to the Protoss playstyle without adding having it be another unit that adds to the deathball. minor buffs like increased interceptor armor to 1 and having them do 10(+1)x1 damage instead of 5(+1)x2 will make them a lot better. Another cool ability is to let interceptor shields quick charge like they did in BW (or maybe it does this already)
The_Templar
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
your Country52797 Posts
January 26 2012 00:40 GMT
#14
I, sir (or ma'am, whichever you may be), will assist you in fighting for our beloved carrier.
Let me know where you need me, executor.
Moderatorshe/her
TL+ Member
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15637 Posts
January 26 2012 00:42 GMT
#15
On January 26 2012 09:39 J.E.G. wrote:
The carrier should stay in the game regardless of how viable it is. Sure it doesn't fit any practical roles, but I think I can speak for any sc2 fan when i say that as soon as a carrier pops in a pro level game, everyone watching goes "OH SHIT HE GOT CARRIERS!!!!!" and proceeds to shit pants. Is this not a good enough reason in and of itself?

Also, I still feel it is too early to count them out. How long had BW been out until Bisu popularized phoenix/dt?


Thanks! And see, imagine that same feeling, but without the worry that they might be behind in the game as a result. Archons were made massive and given an additional range. This for a unit that Blizzard at one point said was just as a secondary unit for when HT ran out of energy. The changes I suggest are much less drastic, and for a more pivotal unit.
Tppz!
Profile Joined October 2010
Germany1449 Posts
January 26 2012 00:44 GMT
#16
On January 26 2012 09:39 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:36 Tppz! wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:30 EternaLLegacy wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


Oh how wrong you are...

Carriers were used in PvZ on very rare occasion, but it was extremely map dependent.

Terran needs anti-air to shoot shuttle very early on, and to clear out observers and arbiters later. You should always have some goliaths on hand past earlygame.

Every race in BW had a long range ATA unit too: Scouts, Wraiths, and Devourers.

Carriers melt because dps of units in SC2 is higher, and they have I believe 2 base armor vs the 4 they have in BW.

Carriers are actually quite useful vs T, but you are correct, they are simply outclassed by so many other options, and very few T gets mech these days cause it's not viable. It's not that carriers are useless and have to be removed, it's that mech is stupid and bad and needs to be fixed.


Even though i was wrong on very rare occasions. (you build turrets early on vs shuttles, right )

Sure BW had longrangeA-A units. But were they as powerful as Corruptors and Vikings, I dont think so.
Sure 2 Armor on a Tier3 units is complete bullsh*t. I agree. I dont see why hightechunits have to suffer so hard because of the upgrades, new idea about hightechattacks (eg battlecruiser shooting X lasers so they are bad all the time) etc.

And yes carriers are useless cause there is no mech.. And in SC2 WoL there cant even be cuase you need to rely on Vikings as antiair instead of goliath (damn you thors!). Carrier wont have a role in SC2. No matter what


On January 26 2012 09:34 Mohdoo wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)

Nothing makes carriers more vulnerable than colossus other than their speed. If they had a better capacity to pull in and out of engagements, there would be no difference. As of right now, they struggle to keep themselves alive, but this would be true for any air unit if their speed. As I said in the op, Brooks are commonly assisted with infestors, which is how they manage to stay alive. All they need is a little speed!


Read again. There is no place in the Game were Carrier would fit more than another unit. Not even in TvP Mech. Speed wont do anything since Interceptors dont attack when you move the carrier.


Ok, so lets say that interceptors were able to attack while the carrier moved. Just as it did in BW, and just as Blizzard did with the phoenix. What then? My point is that all that is needed are small changes. It doesn't need to be removed, obviously, as the reasons you outline are easy fixes that would not make it imbalanced. If it is not imbalanced, and it becomes useful, there is no reason for it to be removed.


So they are able to attack when you get focusfired by some stalkers/marines etc. It still whouldnt have enough armor, dps (enemy armor upgrades destroys your dps horribly), and still no role to fit in.
Did you see HerO vs whoever zerg it was at IEM?
HerO build Carriers and evn though the zerg was _dead_ the carriers got killed by a few corruptors.
No small change will keep the carrier in this game.
archonOOid
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
1983 Posts
January 26 2012 00:48 GMT
#17
the sc lore is not set in stone. maybe the carrier must die in order bring out new and up-and-coming hero units, protoss evolution, no?
I'm Quotable (IQ)
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15637 Posts
January 26 2012 00:48 GMT
#18
On January 26 2012 09:44 Tppz! wrote:
Show nested quote +
On January 26 2012 09:39 Mohdoo wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:36 Tppz! wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:30 EternaLLegacy wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


Oh how wrong you are...

Carriers were used in PvZ on very rare occasion, but it was extremely map dependent.

Terran needs anti-air to shoot shuttle very early on, and to clear out observers and arbiters later. You should always have some goliaths on hand past earlygame.

Every race in BW had a long range ATA unit too: Scouts, Wraiths, and Devourers.

Carriers melt because dps of units in SC2 is higher, and they have I believe 2 base armor vs the 4 they have in BW.

Carriers are actually quite useful vs T, but you are correct, they are simply outclassed by so many other options, and very few T gets mech these days cause it's not viable. It's not that carriers are useless and have to be removed, it's that mech is stupid and bad and needs to be fixed.


Even though i was wrong on very rare occasions. (you build turrets early on vs shuttles, right )

Sure BW had longrangeA-A units. But were they as powerful as Corruptors and Vikings, I dont think so.
Sure 2 Armor on a Tier3 units is complete bullsh*t. I agree. I dont see why hightechunits have to suffer so hard because of the upgrades, new idea about hightechattacks (eg battlecruiser shooting X lasers so they are bad all the time) etc.

And yes carriers are useless cause there is no mech.. And in SC2 WoL there cant even be cuase you need to rely on Vikings as antiair instead of goliath (damn you thors!). Carrier wont have a role in SC2. No matter what


On January 26 2012 09:34 Mohdoo wrote:
On January 26 2012 09:24 Tppz! wrote:
The problem is that the Carrier was only used in BW because of PvT. There was no Voidray or Phoenix that could have lifted Tanks. Terrans didnt need Antiair until the opponent goes for Carriers. The only real Flying Air-Ground Threat. Nowadays in SC2 we have sick DPS and every Race has a longrange Air-Air Counterunit. Carriers melt like they are flys. And they arent even a big threat to Terrans cause Terrans cant go mech. And if they go Voidrays, Immortals, Chargelots, Blinkstalkers etc are a lot better at dealing with mech.
So there is no Unitrole where the Carrier fits. The Colossus is also a longrange siegeunit but has AoE, doesnt depend so hard on upgrades, is faster, you can micro him, and benefits on the same upgrades as your gteway units do.

There is no place in SC2 for Carriers. Its sad but its just a decorative element of the game. There are a lot units taht do a lot better than the carrier in its "role" in the game.
You cant save something that isnt used AT ALL.


IF Blizzard wants to keep the Carrier they have to remove the Voidray, remove the Viking and nerf Terran Bio A LOT. So if you look at it you could
a) edit the game while removing at least 3 units and break the whople game or
b) remove a unit that isnt needed and hasnt had a use in nearly 2 years of SC2 (beta included)

Nothing makes carriers more vulnerable than colossus other than their speed. If they had a better capacity to pull in and out of engagements, there would be no difference. As of right now, they struggle to keep themselves alive, but this would be true for any air unit if their speed. As I said in the op, Brooks are commonly assisted with infestors, which is how they manage to stay alive. All they need is a little speed!


Read again. There is no place in the Game were Carrier would fit more than another unit. Not even in TvP Mech. Speed wont do anything since Interceptors dont attack when you move the carrier.


Ok, so lets say that interceptors were able to attack while the carrier moved. Just as it did in BW, and just as Blizzard did with the phoenix. What then? My point is that all that is needed are small changes. It doesn't need to be removed, obviously, as the reasons you outline are easy fixes that would not make it imbalanced. If it is not imbalanced, and it becomes useful, there is no reason for it to be removed.


So they are able to attack when you get focusfired by some stalkers/marines etc. It still whouldnt have enough armor, dps (enemy armor upgrades destroys your dps horribly), and still no role to fit in.
Did you see HerO vs whoever zerg it was at IEM?
HerO build Carriers and evn though the zerg was _dead_ the carriers got killed by a few corruptors.
No small change will keep the carrier in this game.


wtf lol, how is that any different than any other air unit? The fact that they would die to focus fire by marines or stalkers makes them a bad unit? Does the same not hold true for the void ray, banshee, or brood lords? The same also holds true for colossi. If they were able to attack better while moving and had better speed, they would be able to keep up. I don't see what you have against the carrier man, there is nothing about it that makes it so useless. And quoting a single game? What about all the games Hongun and other players have won with carriers? Even in their current state? I don't think any certain games should be used to justify the death of the carrier, especially when I am suggesting methods to eliminate the excessive weakness it currently has. Did you really hate carriers that much in BW? :p
rkshox
Profile Blog Joined November 2011
Taiwan536 Posts
January 26 2012 00:51 GMT
#19
If the carrier will no longer exist, casters will no longer have the privilege to say

"OMG he's going for the fleet beacon will we be seeing carriers?"

C'mon blizzard, get your heads out of your asses, fix it, don't remove it. Here here!
@ranleee /// "first we expand, then we defense it'
Acayex
Profile Joined December 2010
United States26 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-01-26 00:53:37
January 26 2012 00:52 GMT
#20
Really hoping for the Carrier to stay and maybe Blizzard would look at the Colossus and the general Deathball style of Protoss instead so the Carrier can maintain its role, instead of having it overlap. It's extremely dull and uninteresting to both players and viewers IMO.

Here's hoping for the Colossus to get replaced with a non-Deathball AoE unit. (/prays for Reaver-style unit)
1 2 3 4 5 92 93 94 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
Road to EWC: DreamHack Dallas
CranKy Ducklings83
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft542
Livibee 161
NeuroSwarm 144
RuFF_SC2 96
ProTech59
Nina 11
StarCraft: Brood War
Artosis 888
Aegong 41
LancerX 24
NaDa 20
Icarus 4
yabsab 4
League of Legends
Grubby4509
Cuddl3bear1
Counter-Strike
summit1g9647
Stewie2K1176
taco 452
Foxcn193
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox581
AZ_Axe139
Mew2King122
Other Games
shahzam999
monkeys_forever377
ViBE186
Maynarde161
JimRising 29
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1182
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta20
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler34
League of Legends
• Doublelift6041
Other Games
• imaqtpie1315
• Scarra762
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
9h 19m
Replay Cast
23h 19m
HomeStory Cup
1d 10h
HomeStory Cup
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
BSL: ProLeague
2 days
SOOP
3 days
SHIN vs ByuN
HomeStory Cup
3 days
BSL: ProLeague
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
5 days
WardiTV European League
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Rose Open S1
2025 GSL S2
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.