Battle.net

11/22/2011 02:21 PMPosted by Maestus

2 different types of interceptors that could be built by the Carrier. Both would have 60 health and 40 shield but have different damage ratios. The first would deal 7x2 damage to Ground targets but would deal 3x2 damage to Air targets. The second would be the reverse dealing 3x2 damage to Ground targets and 7x2 damage to Air targets.

I kinda don't think the carrier needs a Anti Ground interceptor. You can tell me off though :)
The Carrier "sucks" because its AA sucks, therefore it needs just a better AA. Another AG is kinda overkill. But still, I can change my mind.

11/22/2011 06:08 PMPosted by SkullCapp

How about Carriers produce Pheonixes, Scouts, and Interceptors?

Sorry, but no. Lol, however.

11/22/2011 06:08 PMPosted by SkullCapp

How about Carriers being able to attack AND releashing Interceptors? I mean, they're still freaking capital ships. What kind of Capital Ship that can't attack and can only releash Interceptors? Don't Carriers have ability to "purify" infested planet?

I have Mixed feelings.
Good: I like it because it would make it so when its Interceptors are gone it isn't absolutely useless. Also it makes sense.
Bad: The Point of the Carrier is a indirect attacker. Many Fanboys will scream about how it ruins the game. Other Races will spam OP threads.

New idea:
5#

Carriers can Attack while Moving.
- The Carrier can release interceptors while moving. Self Explanatory.
- This would allow it to do hit-and-run attacks, strike foes while fleeing, and not be so hard Countered.
- Not too many balance issues.

How about Carriers being able to attack AND releashing Interceptors? I mean, they're still freaking capital ships. What kind of Capital Ship that can't attack and can only releash Interceptors? Don't Carriers have ability to "purify" infested planet?

How about Carriers produce Pheonixes, Scouts, and Interceptors?

Actually, the U.S. Navy considers its aircraft carriers capital ships. And if a carrier is having to fire weapons directly chances are they've already lost. No, just allow multiple interceptor designs and possibly upgrades for inceptor capacity. Then the interceptors will have specialized functions.

carrier can have turrets that attack more individualy instead of all on the same target, they do pretty close to same damage as intceptor

OR

The carrier can have some abilities/spells it can use to help turn the tide of battle

Carriers are the only Protoss unit left from the original Protoss fleet!

Please don't take them away. They're not (I don't think so, at least) overpowered or anything...

If they plan to scrap the Carrier, at least make its replacement a worthy successor to the glory of the Protoss arsenal...

While I don't hate the Tempest, it feels too much like a role-fitting unit than a general weapon of mass destruction. In Brood War you massed up 20 carriers just to overwhelm the opponent. The Tempest sounds like it will fall really easily to mass GtA fighters, like Warhounds, or general AtA other than Mutas, such as Corrupters. Or Vikings.

Also, at least for me, the design of the Tempest doesn't quite match the massive, elegant form of the Carrier. The Tempest is a giant ball of energy surrounded by a thin gold shell. Where does the pilot stand? How well-protected is that thing? It looks more like a stealth bomber, a flimsy shell with a heavy payload. Isn't that something the Terrans should have?

loving the creativity of you guys, but you can't change it THAT much.

11/24/2011 07:35 PMPosted by Maximus

In Brood War you massed up 20 carriers just to overwhelm the opponent

and then he pushes out with his tank/goliath/vulture and craps all over your base.

^ Exactly. We need to find a way to beat the hard counters of the Carrier.

I was just thinking, (although alot of people don't realize this) the tempest is just as tough and slow as the carrier, so it isn't really useful for fighting muta harass, but ironically, it would be perfect for obliterating swarms of intercepters in a capital ship v. capital ship battle against it's predecesor.

11/26/2011 05:35 PMPosted by Engineer

I was just thinking, (although alot of people don't realize this) the tempest is just as tough and slow as the carrier, so it isn't really useful for fighting muta harass, but ironically, it would be perfect for obliterating swarms of intercepters in a capital ship v. capital ship battle against it's predecesor.

Whereas the Phoenix is fast and light and quite capable of catching up to mutas. Now if it had the Overload ability... That would buff Protoss with all the Anti-Air it needs (perhaps a slight exaggeration, but still something to consider).

Hey guys, I'm right now working on making Storm Drones for the Carrier in the Map Editor. Its kinda tough, but I'll tell you when its ready. I'm doing everything in my power to make carriers good vs Mutas, Vikings and Voids.

EDIT: Man, it's tough to make two types of interceptors! So far I managed to make the two different types, attach weapons to them and them to the Carrier, but i haven't been able to make them fire out of it! Keep posting if you want, I will comment.

I think giving the carrier multiple interceptors might make it too confusing, as good of an idea as it is...

What if the carrier had a separate cool-down ability of some sort? Like blink :) Or maybe a defensive matrix?

A cool idea would be if it created a massive shockwave/psionic storm/vortex when destroyed, kinda like when Tassadar destroyed the Overmind, but if it were created around the destroyed carrier it would be ineffective against enemy units with long range (thors, vikings). Maybe the energy of the explosion could be redirected toward the unit that fired the killing shot. Kind of a ridiculous idea, I know.

But perhaps it could have some other ability that is automatically triggered when the carrier dies/is reduced to X amount of HP?

Carriers can Attack while Moving.
- The Carrier can release interceptors while moving. Self Explanatory.
- This would allow it to do hit-and-run attacks, strike foes while fleeing, and not be so hard Countered.
- Not too many balance issues.

Being able to move while attacking seems like it could be a bit too powerful - perhaps a base attack it could revert to when moving? Like a weak, medium range psi assault created by the pilot focusing psionic energy through the carrier itself...?

OR maybe the interceptors could be programmed to suicide crash into the nearest enemy when the carrier is destroyed. The energy powering the shields of the interceptors could be sacrificed to boost the interceptors into one final attack. Obviously it couldn't be too powerful, but just enough to create another problem for the enemy.

The possibilities are endless...

I don't think multiple types of Interceptors would be confusing. In Command & Conquer 3 there was a unit called the Mechapede where you bought the head (Carrier), and could then add abdominal sections (Interceptors) up to a maximum of 8. Where it differed from the Carrier, however, is that you could make each section good at one of four things: Anti-infantry, anti-armor, anti-building or anti-air. Now, obviously things would need to be different, but giving the Carrier the ability to deploy Interceptors (Strong vs Light, Ground and Air), Bombers (Strong vs Armored, Ground only), Psi-Fighter (Strong vs Biological, Air only).

Obviously those are just quickly thought up, but it would allow the Carrier itself to be the counter to Mutalisk spamming (By stocking Psi-Fighters). Alternative tactics would involve loading them full of Bombers for base bombardments, or Interceptors to clean up against infantry. The creative team at Blizzard would obviously be able to come up with better names/designs/tactics, but personally, I believe the key to making the Carrier useful lies in making them able to specialize better. Perhaps a Fleet Beacon upgrade for hanger size would also allow them to be better combat units in general, especially late game (Considering their cost to deploy, they're awful).

I know I'm being a party-pooper, but what if that "purifying" was a tactic only viable in space and only when not in battle where the interceptors fire from within the Carrier?

Carriers lost a lot of small but significant details between Brood War and SC2. I still don't want Blizzard to take them out of multiplayer.

Their biggest advantage in Brood War was their combination of mobility and DPS; it was very difficult to force an engagement against a Protoss going Carriers, but this isn't really the case anymore. This is mostly the current map pool in action, though it's easier to counter heavy air play now as well. Considering Carriers lost 2 base armour between BW and SC2, this is a pretty big factor.

That aside, I think the changes to the Interceptors are the biggest reason for their underuse compared to Brood War. In BW, each Interceptor dealt 6(+1) damage, compared to SC2's version, dealing 5(+1)x2 damage. While this is obviously a big improvement in base DPS, it drastically changes the interaction between upgrades. Because the Carrier's DPS is spread across 16 seperate attacks, if your opponent gets just one armour upgrade the Carrier's DPS is reduced by 20%; Vice versa if you have an attack upgrade advantage. This is way too big a number, and upgrades should't be THAT important for a unit that already costs a fortune.

Theorycrafting time. I propose:

-Changing the damage model for Interceptors from 5(+1)x2 damage to something more like 8(+2) damage. This reduces the impact of armour upgrades, scaling their damage better late game, without giving them an even bigger DPS advantage if you rush for them in the mid-game.

-Bringing back interceptor auto-repair when they are docked, just as they did in BW. It's not like they're particularly durable in the first place.

-Giving them at least 1 more base armour. Alternatively, giving them +2 base armour on their shields. They're just way too fragile compared to what a protoss can get elsewhere for 350+100/250 and 6 supply.

11/28/2011 05:38 PMPosted by Wilce

Bringing back interceptor auto-repair when they are docked, just as they did in BW. It's not like they're particularly durable in the first place.

Wait, I didn't know that interceptors don't repair when they return to the Carrier, that's completely stupid.

to something more like 8(+2)

I'm not trying to criticize, but I think that 2 additional damage per upgrade for a 8 damage attack is unheard of in Starcraft (you may correct me if I'm wrong)

"I'm not trying to criticize, but I think that 2 additional damage per upgrade for a 8 damage attack is unheard of in Starcraft (you may correct me if I'm wrong)"

It's no different than the +1 applied twice (The way it currently is) if I'm not mistaken.

-Bringing back interceptor auto-repair when they are docked, just as they did in BW. It's not like they're particularly durable in the first place.

-Giving them at least 1 more base armour. Alternatively, giving them +2 base armour on their shields. They're just way too fragile compared to what a protoss can get elsewhere for 350+100/250 and 6 supply.

I agree. Maybe also make the Interceptors hp and shields be 50 sh/ 50 hp. Atm it is 40 sh/ 40 hp.

-Changing the damage model for Interceptors from 5(+1)x2 damage to something more like 8(+2) damage. This reduces the impact of armour upgrades, scaling their damage better late game, without giving them an even bigger DPS advantage if you rush for them in the mid-game.

Hmm, I think that I have to dissagree. The Interceptors fire two shots. I don't think we need to decrease the damage over a relatively small deal. Besides, if they can afford upgrades, why can't you?