StarCraft® II

Ideas for Carrier Buffs

Posts: 1,205
They need to build faster. They're still a very powerful fire support platform that flies. Making them 90 second build time would fix pretty much every problem with the carrier.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,083
1. Carriers should only take 95 seconds to build, not a whopping 2 minutes (120 seconds).
Effect: builds 25 seconds faster so you can mass them much sooner.

Probably a good change. But also 25 sec is too much. More like 5-10 sec. You do have chrono. If carriers come out at 95 sec then even battlecrusiers build way way slower.
11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
2. Make Carriers cheaper by making interceptors cheaper.

Carrier cost has never been a problem. Carriers cost almost just as much as battlecrusiers. They just take soo long to make which is why sky terran is more successful. Cost is a mandatory balance check.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
A. Have Carriers start with full interceptors (much like Brood Lords start with both broodlings ready).

Too much a buff. The general build time decrease is already good enough but with this buff people won't even have to build much interceptor. Removes the purpose of building up small drones to attack. The very mechanic that makes the carrier special.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
C. Decrease interceptor cost to 10 minerals or lower.

Absurd. Just think about it.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
D. A combination of C and either of the above.

What, straight up mass carriers at 10 min? This is too much. WAY TOO MUCH. You can't have carriers become this fast and easy.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
Effect: Carriers are on the battle field even sooner, and cost less too.

Why don't we nerf their attack and hp. They are supposed to be strong but slow building fleets. Not midgame tech rush. Kinda like saying "broodlords should be at lair tech to get them out faster".

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
Why: You already waited up to 2 minutes and got a massive flying machine for more than the cost of a base, you'd need a toss version of MULEs to have enough mins for the entire intended unit! I absolutely would not want to wait yet another 32 seconds for a unit to reach critical mass (ties into buff #1), especially if that minute is when the enemy death ball is moving to my main.

The time decrease was a good buff but the interceptor changes are too good. We want protoss to build up a decent force of lower tier before starting the long transition to carriers. Buffs should be made to help the transitioning not to make it occur earlier.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
Even Terran battle cruisers (90 sec build time), they're ready to go and are probably ready to Yamato something by the time Carriers are at critical mass. Worse, BCs have Behemoth reactors (the +25 starting energy), so I very seriously doubt it would be fair not to give carriers a "fully ready sooner after arrival" upgrade.

By the time terran crusiers come out and regen enough energy for yamoto protoss can have 8 interceptors on a carrier easily. Grav catapult is your behemoth reactor.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
A. Damage buff vs something

That would nerf the overall damage...

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
B. Some ability to scare off AA based units.

We can't have protoss build nothing but carriers.

That was because colos were filling the original role of carriers like a boss

Carriers are not meant for anti light. Their role is a massive general purpose ship that hits hard late game. Once you cover the weaknesses the carriers would kill everything.

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
damage vs structures is to crack a Terran turtle,

-_-
11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
Terran turtle

-_-

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
when trying to keep an expansion

A warp prism is all you need...

11/28/2012 11:35 AMPosted by Setho
Carriers could be turned into a form of late game, base killing, map controlling harass (maybe throw in a speed buff too).

The tempests already does that. Plus the carrier is meant for strong core armies not hit 'n run. The speed is unesessary. If carriers were to become hit 'n run base killers then there would need to be some major nerfs on their attack and hp/shields to reduce their combat capability.

What if Carriers were refitted to be a terrible threat to bases in the late game? The idea for bonus damage vs structures is to crack a Terran turtle, or give Zerg something to watch out for when trying to keep an expansion. Paired with MS recall, Carriers could be turned into a form of late game, base killing, map controlling harass (maybe throw in a speed buff too).

The idea with bonus vs armored is to scare off AA, since colos can be targeted by AA weapons. Carriers could be a death ball unit in response to vikings, coruptors, or void rays. This seems capably quite OP though, so I doubt that's the answer.

Carriers are too all around and universal to have such a specific role. If they were to have air dominance then they should have a way way weaker air to ground attack or none at all. The carrier is too versatile. Carriers are just a strong supply efficient core army for the late game.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,083
1. Carriers should be ready to roll out sooner.

2. Interceptors shouldn't be mineral hogs, and Carriers should start w/ more than 4 of them.

3. I think Carriers could be capable anti-expansion/map control units if used right and buffed vs structures.

Do you even know how the carrier functions and how their mechanics apply? This is all absurd no offense :). Responded to your post already.

The only carrier change needed is 5 sec time decrease and spell immunity for interceptors.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,083
12/01/2012 02:18 PMPosted by Jimbo
They need to build faster. They're still a very powerful fire support platform that flies. Making them 90 second build time would fix pretty much every problem with the carrier.

Heard of chrono...
Reply Quote
Posts: 10,720
12/01/2012 10:26 PMPosted by MappyTinfoil
They need to build faster. They're still a very powerful fire support platform that flies. Making them 90 second build time would fix pretty much every problem with the carrier.

Heard of chrono...


Heard of spending your chrono well so you don't have 3 bases with full chrono to conveniently get as many Carriers as you want?

1 Carrier takes 4 chronoboosts, at least. If you have 4 chronoboosts for every Stargate you are making Carriers with (basically, any less than 3 Stargates is a joke), then your macro is !@#$ and you shouldn't be making Carriers. Even if you had full chronoboost on 3 bases, you chrono 3 Carriers... congrats, 3 Carriers don't do anything.

But yeah, great idea brah.
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,083
Heard of spending your chrono well so you don't have 3 bases with full chrono to conveniently get as many Carriers as you want?

1 Carrier takes 4 chronoboosts, at least. If you have 4 chronoboosts for every Stargate you are making Carriers with (basically, any less than 3 Stargates is a joke), then your macro is !@#$ and you shouldn't be making Carriers. Even if you had full chronoboost on 3 bases, you chrono 3 Carriers... congrats, 3 Carriers don't do anything.

Battlecrusiers take 90 sec to make...

12/01/2012 02:18 PMPosted by Jimbo
Making them 90 second build time


12/01/2012 10:26 PMPosted by MappyTinfoil
Heard of chrono...

The time decrease buffs are too much. Some can argue that interceptors take time but that is part of the deal with carriers. Slow but supposedly powerful. Even battlecrusiers have to regen energy for yamtoto.
Reply Quote
Posts: 10,720
12/02/2012 09:25 AMPosted by MappyTinfoil
Battlecrusiers take 90 sec to make...


Still 30 seconds less than Carriers and BCs come out at 100% attack power. Carriers still need another 24 seconds to be at full attack power.

Maybe you should get to a league where 54 seconds of build time actually makes a difference, then come back and tell me Carrier build time is okay.
Reply Quote
Posts: 5
carrier speed buff would b nice
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,362
problem with carriers is if u manage to max them out they decimate any army cause of interceptors ai taking all the damage and carriers not actually attacking. They should make the carrier on a smaller scale similar to the current phoenix and reduce the number of interceptors to 2 when built to max 4 and lower the supply cost to 2 from 6. So the carriers become more useful as a mid game fighting unit as well as harassing without making them op since it becomes harder to mass them out on supply and they're easier to shoot down individually
Reply Quote
Posts: 65
No.Make them like the SC1 carriers, something we actually liked
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]