1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

New Carrier

Discussion in 'Protoss' started by 1n5an1ty, Mar 4, 2009.

New Carrier

Discussion in 'Protoss' started by 1n5an1ty, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    Hmmm...that makes sense
    anyways, seriously, did ANYONE go to the link i gave?
     
  2. LordKerwyn

    LordKerwyn New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,259
    Likes received:
    9
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Deep Space
    It's interesting, I think it was suggested on this forum a long time ago though. More than a year we argued both the Carrier and Mothership to death. My favorite idea for the Carrier is still give it about the same stats it had in SC1 and give it the ability to make 1 or 2 Scarab Drones on top of its Inceptors that are set to either fire when ready or on command (the autocast option in WC3 comes to mind here). Pretty much you would be givng the Carrier an ability that lets it deal with heavy units or groups of units easily at the cost of micro and minerals.
     
  3. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    Scarabs? then at least 2 cuz 1 would take too long to fire
     
  4. overmind

    overmind Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,188
    Likes received:
    3
    Trophy points:
    38
    From:
    New Zealand
    I think the best thing now would be for the return of the tempest.
     
  5. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    Ok since nobody is looking at the link (or so i think) im just going to post the stuff here myself

    Suppressive Fire Formation: A constant stream of repeated bursts from the Intercepter's Pulse Blasters is a result of each Intercepter firing in turn, one after another, so that the damage is racked up individually 5x2 at a time. This would be especially useful versus low-armor units and the Hardened Shields of the Immortal.
    -> interceptors can attack separately but they would still fire in turn one right after the other.

    Concentrated Fire Formation: Every single Intercepter converges upon the target at the exact same time, with every single Pulse Blaster striking the enemy at the exact same time, to deal devastating damage at the cost of having every single Intercepter wait on its slow-speed cooldown at the same time. In this formation, assuming there were 8 Intercepters, Instead of dealing (5x2)x(8), it would deal (8x5)x(2), so it would deal 40x2 dmg instead of 10x8 damage, thusly reducing the amount of damage that the enemies armoring can shrug off at the cost of DPS. It would be nigh-worthless against the Protoss Immortals and kill low-armor units slightly slower, but give great results against more armored foes. -> would only be focus-fire (all interceptors can only attack one target at one time)

    In order to prevent attack-cooldown-bypassing-glitches, every time that the Formation starts to change, none of the Intercepters can attack until every single Intercepter has finished its cooldown and is ready to commense firing in the new Formation.

    Formations need to be researched and switching has a cooldown of 10 sec

    then up the carrier HP to 300 and we'll all be fine
     
  6. Cotcan

    Cotcan New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    237
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    I'm not sure blizzard has told us anything about interceptor formations. But that would be cool. But then they will probably fire slower, or get picked off easier. I like the old attack for the carrier, and the carrier is fine. The carrier is suppose to support other units. Like the void ray, or ground units, like the zealot. The void ray is the bc killer, not the carrier. But the carrier can kill it. It's just not prepared for that.
     
  7. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    Still... i wish the carrier would be back on par with the bc
    interceptor formations would absolutely solve that, and it doesnt even need much micro
     
  8. Flamingdts

    Flamingdts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    Messages:
    65
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    The Gantrithor is probably the strongest hero unit in starcraft. Only appeared in one mission, in the battle against the overmind. Has 800 health and 500 shields, it's also Tassadar's ride, and is most importantly a carrier.

    It's a hero carrier, but in the lore Gantrithor singlehandedly took out Edmund Duke's fleet of Battlecruisers.

    The carriers need to be at least as strong as battle cruisers, or at least make the interceptors strongers. I wouldn't mind if there were strategies involved such as interceptor formations, though I can't think of how different formations of interceptors would benefit the carrier.

    Protoss are known to possess powerful unit, so I don't see how mothership and carriers overlap.

    I can already imagine the epic sight of a mothership accompanied by a fleet of carriers. Hell, I can even imagine the artwork for it.
     
  9. necromas

    necromas New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    292
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Minneapolis, MN
    I don't think we need to start worrying too much quite yet, if they don't give the carriers something special then I'm sure they'll just give it a buff. One reason they haven't shown high tier units much in the battle reports is so they don't give out all the info about the game at once, but another huge reason is that the higher tier units still need balancing and Blizzard is aware of this.
     
  10. lvhoang

    lvhoang New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    171
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Seattle, WA, USA
    well I saw karune s post in the Bnet forum (sry cant find the link anymore, but wiki and many other sites mention it too) that the carrier got a significantly higher range than its initial 8...). This may be a good alternative to make it on par with the BC... (yet not enough I think, because of lower HP/SP and lower fire rate).
     
  11. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    The range really just helps carrier as artillery or support.
    @flaming dts : One of the formations would allow all hits to land at hte same time, dealing 80 damage ( 1hit )instead of 5x2x8 damage. (16 hits)
    that way, the carrier would be more effective against armored units, whereas it is weak against armored units currently
     
  12. lvhoang

    lvhoang New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2009
    Messages:
    171
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Seattle, WA, USA
    well I quite like the idea :) many people have talked about the unit formation for interceptors (some even wanted different types of interceptors) but it was scrapped... dunno what blizz thinks about this idea though :D
     
  13. Dragon God

    Dragon God New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    232
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Vancouver
    The interceptor formation would be pretty good!
    If they did do something like that, maybe the intercepters could also act like suicide bombers, striking one target causing a fair amount of damage while destroying the interceptor.

    I'd guess it would do about 40-60 dmg each for the suicide (i'd only use it when the carrier is near death)
     
  14. Aurora

    Aurora The Defiant

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,732
    Likes received:
    15
    Trophy points:
    38
    From:
    The Netherlands
    The Interceptors are no Scourges.
    The Protoss don't sacrifice units if they can avoid it. -The Scrarabs were just really advanced ammo, but the Interceptors are robot fighters, not suicide bombers-
     
  15. Flamingdts

    Flamingdts New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    Messages:
    65
    Likes received:
    0
    Trophy points:
    0
    The thing is, what is the point of interceptor formations?

    The most useful formation I can think of is only effective against Thor. That is to have the interceptors fly around the thor in circles to exploit the Thor's slow turning speed, but why would you need that if the Thor is only going to attack the carrier anyways?

    Interceptor formations were most likely scrapped because it offers no advantages. Enemies will never aim for interceptors, so having interceptors line up and fire or fire in circles will not give a combat advantage for the carrier. Formations will most likely be useful for direct attacking air units like Banshees.
     
  16. 1n5an1ty

    1n5an1ty Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    879
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    18
    From:
    Reality
    ...
    Offers advantanges vs armored units and slightly better power vs. light units
     
  17. Bthammer45

    Bthammer45 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    741
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    Well the carrier is going to be powerful in raids and battle because of its increased damage and range but I still don"t think it makes a very good capital ship if the mothership remains unique.
     
  18. necromas

    necromas New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    292
    Likes received:
    1
    Trophy points:
    0
    From:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Kamikaze interceptors would be pretty dang powerful if they did 40-60 damage.

    Times 8 interceptors that comes out to 320 to 480 damage. Even a yamato cannon can't compete with that.