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 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 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.
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)
Last edit: 2012-01-26 09:27:14
EternaLLegacy United States. January 26 2012 09:30. Posts 410
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 United States. January 26 2012 09:34. Posts 3936
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!
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 09:24 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.
Last edit: 2012-01-26 09:37:44
snively United States. January 26 2012 09:36. Posts 1079
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 United States. January 26 2012 09:39. Posts 3936
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 09:24 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 Hong Kong. January 26 2012 09:40. Posts 279
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 United States. January 26 2012 09:40. Posts 4023
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.
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.
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?
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)
Store
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/8sy8c.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/eI9Jw.jpg)
Amlitzer United States. January 26 2012 09:17. Posts 468
)
