Melee Interceptors?

and interceptors pass by the target anyways when they converge and then loop around.

 

Actually, I think it's not. Units that can attack only ground couldn't attack the ranged interceptors back, but they will probably be able to attack the melee interceptor when it hits them. At least it should be that way, imo. It does sound logical.

 

I really doubt that, it just sounds to detailed.

 

I doubt anything would have enough time to react some something flying that fast AND hitting them

 

I don't know much about the WC3 editor an its functions, but in-game, all missile attacks that can't "attack ground" all track, such as archer arrows and whatnot. Again, I don't know too much about the editor, but I suspect the ability to turn off homing exist in the first place because of siege units and the how they had attack ground which didn't track anything. Also, beam type attacks don't need to bend to track. All they need to do is keep points A and B connected with a line, even if B keeps on moving.

The most important thing about ranged vs melee for interceptors is how they interact with darkswarm. Ranged is useless against darkswarm, but anything melee would be able to deal damage. That's the only gameplay effecting application I could think of so far.

As for the difference between a tempest essentially having a ranged attack with interceptors(baterangs) as its projectiles, and interceptors being separate units while tempest itself has no attack, is that the tempest not having an attack cooldown from it having no attack. A devourer's acid spore, which increase attack cooldown, has no slowing effect on carriers because they do not have an attack themselves.

 

I was making an example. I didn't mean the tempest had an actual attack. I meant that using it's attack button controls the interceptors
But yes, colossi energy weapons don't home in on targets so why would other energy weapons?

 

Might as well bump this just in case someone makes a new topic of this.

Sooo the tempest interceptors are melee and they attack both air and ground. (I can see they attack air because of that screenshot with the tempest and the bunches of mutas that are attacking).

[img width=200 height=150]http://www.starcraft2forum.org/gallery/10_12_07_07_6_31_12.jpg[/img]

Thoughts?

 

Btw they are called Shurikens, yes, like the ninja throwing star.

And yes, they can attack air but still have NO AIR SHIELDS.

 

I like em makes it where you have to watch over your carriers or tempest more so than you did in sc

 

Yeah, in SC1 you could just attack move you massed carriers just about anywhere and get satisfying results.

 

Devourers would hit the interceptors with their attacks splash goo effect and slow their movement and attack speed. The same could happen to these shuriken things. Slows them down so it takes longer for them to circle around and attack again.

 

i wanna know what those towers are in the screenshot.

 

They need to release more protoss buildings (i know they arent as interesting as units but cmon they are important).
Also they need to update the site with more screen shots! The shurikens seem to act just like interceptors in the way they move. Im sure they will be attackable just like interceptors. Which is a nuisance for every other unit because its so hard to him them.

 

Agreed.
Besides, as soon as an interceptor gets hit by one attack, it'll return to the tempest/carrier and instantly recharge its shields. So their life expectancy is very high.

 

If the tempest indeed has an air attack then I'm confused.

I see everywhere that it is emphasized that the tempest has no air shield and was described as having no defense against air whatsoever.  But if it has an air attack, shouldn't the heavy emphasis be on has shield against ground?? And instead of "no defense against air whatsoever," it should really be "even better defense against ground."

Not only is it not much difference from a carrier at all, it has improved defenses against attacks from the ground.  I'm very curious as to what having no shield against air actually means.

 

it means that when attacked by air the tempest has no sheild at all...

 

That's my point exactly. When has a carrier had shield against anything?

It is strange that they're not emphasizing this new found strength versus ground attacks, but rather emphasizing to point out something that has always been the case. Makes no sense at all.

 

im not sure what you mean by the carrier not having a sheild against anything???

 

Carriers have always had basic Protoss shields against air and ground units. The Tempest doesn't have the basic shield against air units. Therefore every hit it takes from an air unit will immediately start chipping away at its hp. Even though the Tempest is capable of attacking air units, it remains very vulnerable to them.

Personally, I love the tempest. Its the Protoss counterpart to the Terran banshee and (if it's in starcraft 2) the Zerg guardian. Only, instead of being incapable of attacking air units, it's simply more vulnerable to aerial attack.

 

I can't say I can that I fully agree that the "shield" in question is the generic Protoss shield.  Even visually, there is a special shield graphic against incoming GTA attacks.

There is no other instance where there is something similar other than the immortal's hardened shield.  Not only that, Protoss taking damage has been represented graphically in the exact same way for everything else we've seen so far, whether it's buildings, units, the Mothershipe, all the same.  Even immortals taking hits from reaper pistols is the same.

In the leaked vid, in the tempest section, there is one tempest that falls to two missile turrets.  For the first 16 hits, you can see the anti-ground shield activating, but not after that.  It takes 7 more unshielded hits and falls from an approximate total of 23 missile turret hits.  By SC1 stats, turrets deal 20 explosive damage per hit, I fail to see why they would make turrets weaker in SC2.

Based on that, if the anti-ground shield was merely generic Protoss shield, and the first 16 hits was what it was, then that's approximately 320 shield and 140 HP for a tempest.  Whether the shield is "Protoss shield" or not, that's 460 total life pool we're looking at for a tempest, I find that unlikely.

In the leaked vid, twilight archon section, you can also see that a tempest falls to a single yamato, as well as another falling to 7 normal BC attacks.  The yamato is a special ability and is spell damage, it is unlikely that yamato does close to 500 damage.  It is possible to argue that even though it's a spell, it was considered an air attack, although I find it unlikely.

Whichever the case, the 7 BC shots killing a tempest does not support the Protoss shield theory.  For it to be Protoss shield, the tempest can not have more than 140 HP(7 missile turret shots worth of HP to be exact).  BCs did 25 damage in SC1, and based on what I've seen in videos and counting hits, I would say they do about the same in SC2.  Based on all this, if it was Protoss shield and BC was hitting raw HP, the tempest should've fell in 6 hits not 7.  6 hits would be 150 HP, there shouldn't have been a 7th hit.

I believe the "shield" to be a damage reduction shield similar to that of the immortal's hardened shield, only in tempest's case it is universal against GTA attacks.  It makes all around better sense that way.

My personal belief is that each tempest will have less than 200 total HP but will greatly reduce incoming GTA attacks for a fixed amount of damage.  I also think that the tempest will be more accessible compared to SC1 carriers, such as a lower mineral/gas cost.