Melee Interceptors?

I assumed that by defense they meant their shield. Cause if you really want to take the liberal stance on the word "defense" as also being offensive capabilities, then do you also assume that the armor modifiers don't come into effect when air units attack it? That is also part of the defense. Same with the regular HP if you want to be really liberal about it.

So, I think defense means the shield.

 

that also explains the weakness of the tempests.

 

I hope one may expect some serious cost reduction for all of these "weaknesses".

 

you'd presume so.

 

The green sparks you speak of are from stalker attacks, not tempest "interceptors."

I'm with Fenix on this one. No defense against air WHATSOEVER sure sounds like no air attack to me.

But not just that. It seems like this time around tempests are cheaper and weaker versions of carriers, you see one die to a single yamato in the leaked vid. I counted 7 regular BC hits to take down the second one, when it seemed like it took 3 BC hits to take down a stalker.

It would also go well with everything else that's happening with SC2 so far. Blizz is pushing unit mixing and hard counters much harder for SC2, as well as more unit specialization. It is quite logical in this sense for Blizz to force you to have AA accompanying the tempests.

While not necessarily lower on the tech tree, cheaper tempests will also mean that they will be more accessible. It is feasible to believe that Blizz wants to see more tempest usage in multiplayer. All in all, it makes sense to me to have a cheaper more accessible carrier unit at the cost of no air attack.

I don't understand why people are fussing about no air attack. Who the hell got carriers for AA any damn way? I for one was never impressed with carriers in the first game. They were resource/food hogs that could still be taken care of quite easily. If time/cost is reduced to get them out sooner to do their job vs ground, then it is only better on a whole for Toss players.

 

i agree with fenix too if it could engage a single mutalisk attacking it it would probably kill it and therefore have defence vs air..

i personally like a cheaper ground only tempest ive hardly ever seen someone using carriers in a multiplayer game they were just for single or vs comp. when already winning and didnt need to care about resources...

tempest looks like a great defense earlier in the game assuming its cheaper than a carrier.. buzz saws from interceptors sounds like full damage to ground units to me and therefore will be quite effective especially against zerg
as well i really like the fact that actually someone will build them in mp games owerup:

 

[img width=265 height=228]http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a125/flyswimmer716/tempest.jpg[/img]

eh when I still look at this description, it seems like they are still talking about the shield. I know semantics definetly come into play here. I mean yes an offense can equal a defense, but an offense can also mean, well, an offense. However, Fenix does have a good point. And the word whatsoever just makes me convince otherwise. lol we will seeeeeee

 

im with fenix too. blizzard doesnt want you to mass carriers so you automatically win, so they give them a weakness. all you need to do is mix them in with warp rays and pheonix to have a kickass armada

 

Well you couldn't mass carriers to win in SC either even after they reduced it to 6 food. If you did get away with it, it was because your opponent sucked.

 

yea mass carriers that are prolly going to get stacked with careless micro and go against a good terran (EMPs/lockdown) or protoss (high templars/other carriers?) or zerg (deiflers + scourges) player and you will be in for a surprise.

 

God the tempest looks so cool, and so does the shield. i also like the only ground sheild becuase there is an easier way to killing them now. also those inteceptor thingies look awesome. can't wait. btw i'm new!
I saw the little lazer it shoots out though, and i don't think it is a melee thing.

 

haha yea they have some sort of disc launcher.

welcome to the forums! ^_^

 

Massing carriers was one of my favorite strats in SC1... as Zerg. When I see that, 99.9% of the time meant that I've already won.

Putting the validity of mass carrier strat aside, taking away air attack while making them cheaper and weaker does serve to keep players from massing them, all the while making them more accessible in general multiplayer.

I must give props to Blizz on this one. I really had so little respect for carriers that I was almost sure that they had to be scrapped, especially after I saw the MS. But they've really found the perfect solution on that one. /applause

 

LOL The chat with Protosses sound very funny

 

Same with terran

By making them even easier to kill?
At least people wont mass tempests... hopefully.

 

well now there's an easier counter fro the carriers and you can't just win with only them.

 

You could only beat people who sucked before.

 

well these new carriers still fit a niche. they can effectivly eliminate ground forces and static defences. and they're cheaper.

 

They can supposedly effectively do that.

 

well they have the special GTA shield and no ATA shield... what else would you use them for?