EPTWe Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 42
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
IndridCold
United States385 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15322 Posts
On June 09 2012 08:28 RUFinalBoss wrote: GG CARRIERS RIP carriers :D This battle is far from over. Even Dustin Browder said that there is still heavy debate at Blizzard over whether to keep it or not. I have faith that they will eventually realize the tempest is terrible and keep the carrier. The important thing is that Slayers`Crank came out in support of the Carrier and said it is a good unit, but takes intricate builds. I believe him. Also consider that we see Carriers more often than Battle Cruisers nowadays, despite the fact that BCs have been buffed in ways that Carrier has not. | ||
|
GhostFall
United States830 Posts
| ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
| ||
|
Kaiyotic
United States90 Posts
On June 09 2012 12:26 GhostFall wrote: I dont understand why they wouldnt just give carriers 22 range. It's the same role as the tempest. Define OP: 22 range carriers. You can't even stop them with their current range once they hit critical mass; you want to basically double their range? | ||
|
KalWarkov
Germany4126 Posts
| ||
|
Random_Guy09
Canada1010 Posts
On June 09 2012 08:49 IndridCold wrote: tempest looks kinda weak imo. the range is the only thing it has.... i'd rather they tweaked the carrier or find a way to keep it. Only because blizzard is too stubborn to remove the phoenix upgrade(as it was stupid to use it as an excuse to take away AOE in the fist place) and give tempest their AOE and make it only do AOE dmg to air units so its not completely OP. Tempest is pretty much useless against Zerg air units. Viper just drags them into the fray to get melted. And tempest requires fleet becon. Better off keeping carrier (and tweaking it to actually be useful instead of the joke unit it is now) and giving tempest aoe against air only and getting rid of the phoenix upgrade. Right now toss air units are just a waste of tech late game when they're really needed (as it takes a while to even get there after teching for the rest). Blizzard really need to look and see how badly they messed up toss air.. | ||
|
MeLo
Australia192 Posts
| ||
|
sjperera
Canada349 Posts
| ||
|
althaz
Australia1001 Posts
On June 09 2012 12:37 Kaiyotic wrote: Define OP: 22 range carriers. You can't even stop them with their current range once they hit critical mass; you want to basically double their range? This is absolutely wrong, a decent-size group of marines will stop them dead in their tracks and corruptors can be emergency built and wipe out any number of carriers with EASE. If you've already lost the game these things might not be doable (but I've seen players who are out of games almost come back because their opponent built ten carriers). 22 range carriers wouldn't be OP, they'd be used hardly more often than they are now, to be frank (which means giving carriers 22 range would be fucking stupid). They'd still be late-game PvZ only to force engagements. What carriers need is a general buff (eg: +2 armour, +1 armour on interceptors), repair AI on the interceptors and the ability for them to be microed whilst letting the interceptors continue fighting. They need to be faster also. | ||
|
larse
1611 Posts
On June 09 2012 13:37 althaz wrote: This is absolutely wrong, a decent-size group of marines will stop them dead in their tracks and corruptors can be emergency built and wipe out any number of carriers with EASE. If you've already lost the game these things might not be doable (but I've seen players who are out of games almost come back because their opponent built ten carriers). 22 range carriers wouldn't be OP, they'd be used hardly more often than they are now, to be frank (which means giving carriers 22 range would be fucking stupid). They'd still be late-game PvZ only to force engagements. What carriers need is a general buff (eg: +2 armour, +1 armour on interceptors), repair AI on the interceptors and the ability for them to be microed whilst letting the interceptors continue fighting. They need to be faster also. It is not that complicated. Make carrier 22 range and make it the same DPS as tempest then the two units are basically the same. I just don't know what's point of replacing the carrier while you can adjust it to the same as tempest. | ||
|
GhostLink
United States450 Posts
| ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On June 09 2012 13:37 althaz wrote: This is absolutely wrong, a decent-size group of marines will stop them dead in their tracks and corruptors can be emergency built and wipe out any number of carriers with EASE. If you've already lost the game these things might not be doable (but I've seen players who are out of games almost come back because their opponent built ten carriers). 22 range carriers wouldn't be OP, they'd be used hardly more often than they are now, to be frank (which means giving carriers 22 range would be fucking stupid). They'd still be late-game PvZ only to force engagements. What carriers need is a general buff (eg: +2 armour, +1 armour on interceptors), repair AI on the interceptors and the ability for them to be microed whilst letting the interceptors continue fighting. They need to be faster also. i have seen a lot of stupid stuff on tl, but that has to rank at #1 "22 range carriers wouldn't be OP". | ||
|
Haustka
United States221 Posts
| ||
|
Alexj
Ukraine440 Posts
| ||
|
moofang
508 Posts
| ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On June 09 2012 08:42 larse wrote: It's so easy. They can just reduce the attack speed or damage of the interceptors to match the DPS of tempest. Or they could just extend the range of the carrier without making it the ridiculous 22 of the tempest. Hell, I think even the carrier's current extended range of 14 is perfect, it just needs the ability to re-target the interceptors without having to get back within range 8 of the new target. Think about it: if interceptors could re-target within range 14, but new interceptors could only be launched at range 8, it would make for a fairly significant incentive for your opponent to actually target down the interceptors: your carrier could easily remake them, but it would have to move in close again to be able to launch the new interceptors into battle, creating a temporary vulnerability (especially to things like fungal growth, or the new viper's abduct). Can not think of a more simple tweak that would have such a vast and rewarding impact on the usage of the carrier. | ||
|
Arolis
United States496 Posts
On June 09 2012 13:41 larse wrote: It is not that complicated. Make carrier 22 range and make it the same DPS as tempest then the two units are basically the same. I just don't know what's point of replacing the carrier while you can adjust it to the same as tempest. That's not really an argument for the Carrier. I can just as easily say that if the Carrier and Tempest are functionally the same, why not just go ahead and implement the Tempest to give Protoss some extra freshness to attract new or returning players? | ||
|
Evangelist
1246 Posts
Ah yes. Because building a crapload of banshees is exactly what every terran in the game wants to do. What with their marvellous range 6 and all. The Thor is remaining as it is. The simple truth is, the Carrier is a crap unit (much worse than the Battlecruiser) and the Tempest actually fills a role that the Carrier can never fill - that of a long range seige unit. The definition of a seige unit is it has low DPS. A carrier can't do this because it's DPS comes from its interceptors. There is no fix worth using on it. Toss will use Tempests in critical numbers (4-5) to focus fire Broodlords and Ultras because of the sheer damage they do to massive units. They won't use them to deal with Terran air because of Vikings and because a Tempest is absolutely no match for a Battlecruiser in close quarters. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On June 09 2012 19:55 Evangelist wrote: Ah yes. Because building a crapload of banshees is exactly what every terran in the game wants to do. What with their marvellous range 6 and all. The Thor is remaining as it is. The simple truth is, the Carrier is a crap unit (much worse than the Battlecruiser) and the Tempest actually fills a role that the Carrier can never fill - that of a long range seige unit. The definition of a seige unit is it has low DPS. A carrier can't do this because it's DPS comes from its interceptors. There is no fix worth using on it. Toss will use Tempests in critical numbers (4-5) to focus fire Broodlords and Ultras because of the sheer damage they do to massive units. They won't use them to deal with Terran air because of Vikings and because a Tempest is absolutely no match for a Battlecruiser in close quarters. Siege tanks, the epitome siege unit in SC2, doesn't exactly have low DPS. 50 damage a shot with considerable splash gives it fairly decent DPS vs small units like lings and marines... But keep on with your argument, it sounds nice. Personally, I'd rather they just give the tempest splash, make it attack ground only, and use it to replace the colossus. But it doesn't really matter what I want, does it? | ||
| ||
