Just a thought.

General Discussion
Post Limit:
In addition to Interceptors, give Carriers a secondary weapon (just a little pulse gun or beam weapon) with a range of 6-8 and low damage (maybe 10 damage, 1.3 attack speed or so). The sole purpose of this would be so that Fungal growth does not entirely cut off the damage output of Carriers, and that they would not be entirely defenseless without Interceptors. I find it pretty sad when Marines shoot down a ton of Interceptors, and then a single unit kills the Carrier because it can't return fire. Thoughts on this?

Note: Exact numbers can be changed, they're just to give a feel of what it would be like.
You mean like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjtgxjrINgI

Voidray beams are cool.

Apparently carriers need some fixing with the way their range and interceptor range and retargetting works. Apparently it's different from SC1 and eliminates all micro possibilities. THere is a youtube video where a guy shows you how it all works between both games but I forget what it is. It's on a thread in the Protoss forum I think.
You mean like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjtgxjrINgI

Voidray beams are cool.

Apparently carriers need some fixing with the way their range and interceptor range and retargetting works. Apparently it's different from SC1 and eliminates all micro possibilities. THere is a youtube video where a guy shows you how it all works between both games but I forget what it is. It's on a thread in the Protoss forum I think.
I saw both videos already, but a smaller beam than that. Something like what you briefly see Scouts firing in here (epic video, btw): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kAJSswZPvI&feature=related

Also, I somewhat disagree with the thing about the changes from BW, I kind of like them as is. Just my opinion though, I understand if people disagree.

edit: Meant to say Scouts.
I want that I think that fixes carriers
So Carrier + Void Ray?
In addition to Interceptors, give Carriers a secondary weapon (just a little pulse gun or beam weapon) with a range of 6-8 and low damage (maybe 10 damage, 1.3 attack speed or so). The sole purpose of this would be so that Fungal growth does not entirely cut off the damage output of Carriers, and that they would not be entirely defenseless without Interceptors. I find it pretty sad when Marines shoot down a ton of Interceptors, and then a single unit kills the Carrier because it can't return fire. Thoughts on this?

Note: Exact numbers can be changed, they're just to give a feel of what it would be like.


So your solution is to give a unit that already has good damage and range more damage? I'm opposed to this idea completely.
In addition to Interceptors, give Carriers a secondary weapon (just a little pulse gun or beam weapon) with a range of 6-8 and low damage (maybe 10 damage, 1.3 attack speed or so). The sole purpose of this would be so that Fungal growth does not entirely cut off the damage output of Carriers, and that they would not be entirely defenseless without Interceptors. I find it pretty sad when Marines shoot down a ton of Interceptors, and then a single unit kills the Carrier because it can't return fire. Thoughts on this?

Note: Exact numbers can be changed, they're just to give a feel of what it would be like.


So your solution is to give a unit that already has good damage and range more damage? I'm opposed to this idea completely.
About +7 dps in total. Would be about equal to a Stalker's weapon, with maybe a little bit more range.
I'd rather the Interceptors have meaningful DPS after the first wave and the Interceptors and Carriers actually be able to take real hits cost effectively. Oh, and a shorter build time.
11/12/2012 06:09 PMPosted by Doncroft
I'd rather the Interceptors have meaningful DPS after the first wave and the Interceptors and Carriers actually be able to take real hits cost effectively. Oh, and a shorter build time.


Correct me if I am wrong but is the instant deployment that is in that one video from sc1 allow you to control and execute repeated burst damage?
I'd rather the Interceptors have meaningful DPS after the first wave and the Interceptors and Carriers actually be able to take real hits cost effectively. Oh, and a shorter build time.


Correct me if I am wrong but is the instant deployment that is in that one video from sc1 allow you to control and execute repeated burst damage?

Correct. It's that old glitch with the Interceptors getting stuck behind the Carrier. Ended up being really good with micro. Super burst damage. The Graviton catapult accomplishes almost the same thing by design. The problem is, after the Interceptors' first volley, their fire rate is terrible compared to the BW Carriers.

Another Protoss that wants a buff to the most OP unit. Maybe someday Protoss will figure it out.

Now I'm just "another Protoss"?
11/12/2012 06:16 PMPosted by Doncroft
Now I'm just "another Protoss"?


Don't bite the worst troll this forum has seen yet.

He is like a hemorrhoid, but with out the perks.
Doncroft you're doing it wrong. Here's how you SHOULD have responded to his first jab:

11/12/2012 06:14 PMPosted by Polychrome
I'd rather the Interceptors have meaningful DPS after the first wave and the Interceptors and Carriers actually be able to take real hits cost effectively. Oh, and a shorter build time.


Another Protoss that wants a buff to the most OP unit. Maybe someday Protoss will figure it out.


"You're right. Carriers are definitely the most OP unit when compared to Civilians and Changelings.

"AHA!!! I have found the secret! The key is not to buff Carriers against units that aren't terrible, but NERF THOSE GOOD UNITS. I shall come up with a large, pointless balance thread as soon as possible."

There's also the editing of the person you're quoting's post. Polychrome pulled that on me as an excuse to start spamming.
11/12/2012 06:09 PMPosted by Doncroft
I'd rather the Interceptors have meaningful DPS after the first wave and the Interceptors and Carriers actually be able to take real hits cost effectively. Oh, and a shorter build time.


carriers actually have the highest dps in the game. each interceptor is like a stalker, and the carrier has 8 stalkers.....

They also benefit the most from upgrades, as each interceptor has 2 attacks. so its X16 for the effective upgrade.

The problem is that interceptors die too easily once armies become big and that carrier can easily be sniped without the BW leashing micro.

PS: did I mention the BW leashing micro?
11/12/2012 06:40 PMPosted by Enigma
carriers actually have the highest dps in the game. each interceptor is like a stalker, and the carrier has 8 stalkers.....

Not really. Not if you consider Colossus splash damage or the overall cost of the Carrier and the Interceptors for its DPS or how fast the Interceptors die, thus dropping the DPS. It's actually quite terrible.
carriers actually have the highest dps in the game. each interceptor is like a stalker, and the carrier has 8 stalkers.....

Not really. Not if you consider Colossus splash damage or the overall cost of the Carrier and the Interceptors for its DPS or how fast the Interceptors die, thus dropping the DPS. It's actually quite terrible.


The splash damage only makes colossus dps greather than carrier dps when attacking clumped up small units. against single target or large units, Carriers win. Its better this way since it separates their roles.

Colossus for aoe and crowd control and Carriers for sniping and taking out big units.

PS: you need the leashing micro from BW for sniping.
11/12/2012 06:44 PMPosted by Doncroft
carriers actually have the highest dps in the game. each interceptor is like a stalker, and the carrier has 8 stalkers.....

Not really. Not if you consider Colossus splash damage or the overall cost of the Carrier and the Interceptors for its DPS or how fast the Interceptors die, thus dropping the DPS. It's actually quite terrible.
also thor's and battlecruiser's ground attacks both have higher dps

Join the Conversation