Carrier Ideas

Hey, how about upgrades for the carrier that allow it to build and store a variety of mini-aerial units? Thinking the interceptors, mini-bombers, and blade ships that melee other air units in a rapid fashion (Similar to the ships used by the now defunct "Tempest"). The carrier would still store a max of 8 units and the unit types could be mixed and any Carrier could building any combination. I'm thinking the interceptors are a "best of both worlds" and are the cheapest, whereas the bombers are highly effective anti-ground, and the blade ships are highly effective anti-air, they would however cost considerably more. So a player with a dominant economy would soon be able to exploit a fleet of the multi-ship Carrier, a very formidable force indeed.


Any other ideas?

(Happy Lordkerwyn? )

 

Edited out quotes. Please read the forum rules and refrain from quoting unnecessarily.


That's a great idea! Because then you could seriously use carriers to brepare for battles. You could use one for specifically air, one for ground, and one for both, plus interceptors. That's awesome. You should seriously send this to Blizzard. This is genious.

 

Didn't someone already come up with that idea, I mean, that has been half this thread in one post I think lol.

 

Ya know, i really thought that the carrier was pretty well done in the original SC2, sure it could change but i cant really see how it could be improved THAT much. Though some of the ideas are good I just think carriers are fine as is(coming from a terran player)

 

Carriers Rule!
But it would be cool if you can have more than one type of interceptors.
Battlecruisers have yamato cannon and plasma torpedo, so why not have another set of interceptors (Hell, i would even go for those canceled shurikens from tempests)

 

Because the Carriers easily can kill a BC without?
I think they need no new things...
The Carrier is just as I think it should be, adding something new would make it less capital like... because the Carriers are so special already.

 

I am always like the opinion that the carrier are in defensive is,but also the idea with the different Interceptors pleases me.
Thus my other idea is that the carrier as the Battlecruiser two aspect has -dark or classic

If are selected the dark aspect,becomes the carrier tempest class and can build the beautiful Shuriken
(In additional will the carrier blue like the Tempest )

If are selected the classical aspect,becomes the carrier classic class and can build the good old Interceptors.
(In additional will the carrier attractively golden like classic the carrier)

Only then, after the aspect selecting can they use the Harden Ground Shield(after my idea)

 

Carriers arent defensive at all, they are mostly used for harass in PvT to destroy tanks + miners + buildings.

 

So you're going for the, More than one target but less damge. And, more damage but focused on one target. Its a nice idea which balances its self out. But then it becomes a Mothership without casts.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the Mothership for that.

The Tempest model would have a higher damage than Interceptors and attack more than one target randomly, but of course you could focus the attack on one unit.
That balances it out since the Tempest aspect would be easier to target since it uses the Shuriken attack which can't be targeted, but with it being slightly stronger it isn't much of a problem. Also it would be vulnrable to air meaning more balance to its powerful attack.
On the other hand, the Carrier remains the same, with its Interceptors acting as dummoes so the AI doesn't fire at the Carrier it's self meaning less damage but higher survivability.

owerup:

 

carriers have been a dominating force so I think blizz tried to nurf them by making them the tempest. So I don't think blizz will give them any more buffs. The tempest couldn't attack air and with the immortals, and colossus's inability to also attack air protos were screwed. so blizz says lets bring back the carrier and make every one happy. I think the carriers main weakness is its need for time to get ready for battle. it takes a huge pop and enough spare resources to build one and then after its built it takes time to make Interceptors. this balanced out its ridiculous ability to send in five to 10 carriers and sit them over an enemy base and watch the wake of destruction.

I guess my point is that yea it would be cool to give the carrier a buff but blizz would need to nurf it that much more in order to balance them out. I love the idea of different types of Interceptors but would making them cost more be big enough of a nurf, NO WAY. by the time you build carriers usually your economy is stable or surplus.

I think the carrier is good as is and if anything they should put in dark interceptors.

 

these are all awesome ideas and everything, but i dont think they will be adapted into SC2

what we end up doing is trying to think of how to improve a unit, but as an overal effect on the game, we could be having a negative effect.

The point of the unit system is to have good combinations of units. Each must have a weakness that can be backed up by a different unit with that strength. If we make the carrier any bette, it will be unstoppable. 8 carriers with AA 8 carriers with bomber units. You have an unbeatable swarm of more than 120 interceptors killing efficiently. Now what? does that make the game better? No, it makes it unfair

in SC1, a dedicated AA unit can kill carriers, if u make carriers dedicated to air or ground, a combo will be sooo cheap.

wow i guess i didnt read the post right above mine same idea i agree

 

ya i too disagree with the idea, even though it sounds cool. Because the carrier is so good already why bother improving it? the way it is now makes a powerful unit without being unbalanced. By giving it anti-ground and anti-air attacks, carriers would destroy all.

 

Interceptors currently can attack both air and ground... Having 8 Carriers with just AtA fighters and 8 Carriers with just AtG bombers would be pretty much the same thing as having 16 Carriers atm...

Adding mutualy exlusive options tend not to affect balance very much beyond giving more choice to a player. For example is a Battlecruiser with Plasma Torpedos any more powerful than a Battlecruiser with the Yamato Cannon?

 

I'd like to see something a little more creative than "just AtA" or "just AtG" Interceptors. How about single-use Interceptors, that act as bombers, as Scourge... ones that do splash damage, or have a bonus against structures. How about Interceptors that phase from the Carrier to the maximum attack distance (charging past any defense in-between) when the Carrier engages? How about Interceptors that can cloak for short periods, doubling the already-insane confusion factor?

 

If they cloaked it would be a problem for the Carrier as all the fire will be focused upon it.
The bomber Interceptors sounds nice. But to be honest, the confusion that the Interceptors gave was good enough as it made it harder for enemy unit to target your main ones.

 

I actually think it would be really cool if Blizzard added a "Flying Scarab" that Carriers could build so Reavers could return in some form but without the pathing nightmare Scarabs had in the original.

 

Lol you could call them Seekers. Since they would follow the air unit everywhere.

But doesn't Overload kinda act as a Scarab anyway just with jess range.

 

I think that they idea for two types of interceptors would be cool.

a bunch of little bombers above your base would be a pretty grim sight lol
also the animation for the bomb could be really cool looking

 

i say that three types would be great, one type be ATA , one type be ATG , and one with lower damage that is ATA and ATG This would add a whole new level of strategy to the carriers :thumbup:, because you would have to decide whether you favor a ground atack, air attack, or protection , the both one, they should also make it start with five slots and have a +five addition owerup: