Carrier's alternative cargo

[Blazur]

The Carrier as a unit was clever for the original game, but as a returning unit in SC2 has lost much of its appeal in my opinion. I really like the premise behind a capital ship that serves as a launch pad for smaller sentient ships, and would really like to see Blizzard take this concept and expound upon it. I'd like to invite everybody to discuss alternatives for the Carrier.

Consider this: the Carrier of SC2 still has limited capacity, but now offers some choices on the types of ships you can train within it. You can mix and match your cargo provided you don't exceed the cargo limit, or optionally auto-train any ship by right-clicking the icon. The Carrier still has an upgrade available at the Fleet Beacon which extends its cargo holding.

Here's a few different types of ships it can offer.

Interceptor: Same as the original, the Interceptor is a quick and versatile attacker able to attack any target. These take one cargo slot and are relatively inexpensive.

Bomber: Bombers take 2 slots and can only attack ground targets. They're slower than interceptors and cost slightly more. These ships carry one bomb from the hull of the Carrier and drop them at a designated ground target, dealing explosive AOE damage. Once its payload is dropped it needs to return to the Carrier to arm another bomb. Bombers can be controlled independently, and will remain inside the hull of the Carrier until engaging ground targets.

Phantoms: Phantoms are more fragile than Interceptors and can only attack airborne targets. These stealth fighters emerge from the Carrier cloaked, and will only reveal themselves when engaging hostile threats with their plasma surges. Each takes 2 capacity but is more powerful than Interceptors against air targets.

Defender: Defenders take 4 capacity and cost x gas to train, with a limit of one per carrier. Once built the Defender will emerge behind the Carrier where it will remain, although the player can control the ship within a limited radius of the Carrier (a range shows up when selecting the defender indicating the perimeter). Once a Defender is trained 1/2 of the Carrier's available shield is permanently transferred to this ship (the Carrier cannot regain back that 1/2). Any damage sustained to the Carrier is absorbed by the Defender at 1/3 of the amount. The Carrier itself receives no damage until the Defender is destroyed, and any direct damage with a Defender active shows up visually as the original Tempest shield.

While this ability is slightly more complicated, the premise is with a little micro it can be used to prolong the life of the Carrier. You can control the flight of the Defender to evade threats. It can be positioned in a fortified spot while the Carrier ventures out into hostile territory to gain reach. And overall it adds strategy to the Carrier.

[unentschieden]

I´m afraid this would turn the Carrier omnicapable. What is supposed to be the weakness of the new Carrier?

[Blazur]

I´m afraid this would turn the Carrier omnicapable. What is supposed to be the weakness of the new Carrier?

These suggestions are not meant to address any weaknesses, but rather to expand upon its potential as the highest-tier ship. Any new abilities can be balanced out with cost or other tradeoffs worked into the formula (slower speed, less available cargo, etc).

If the BC is allowed 3 individual upgrade paths, then it would be a shame if the Carrier remains as it always has been.

Perhaps the mix-and-match ideal of the unit is a bit drastic, and each Carrier should be designated as a type of cargo (ground, air, or dual). Whatever the case may be, I'd just like to see more potential with this unit in terms of what it can store inside its hull.

[Eligor]

Very interesting, no suggestions of my own at the moment, but I like the ideas. Especially that of the cloaked Interceptors.

[Perfecttear]

I think that the interceptor is the only thing what a carrier needs and nothing more. Why complicate things. IF you need more damage, just build more interceptors. Do you have any lore background on the new type of ships?

[Blazur]

Do you have any lore background on the new type of ships?

Nah, I have neither the interest or energy to discuss ideas as they relate to lore. I just enjoy sharing thoughts that could make the game more fun and exciting

Plus it helps to pass the time while waiting for the next official discussion to surface...

[SpiderBrigade]

Interesting, although ideas like this have been tossed around before - especially the Bomber. The problem is usually that there either isn't enough difference between the options to make the choice meaningful (in other words not worth spending micro/time to choose), or else one of the options is always clearly better than the others.

As far as carrier fixes go, I'm still sticking by my "mobile bunker for Phoenix" idea. In other words the Interceptor is scrapped and the Carrier just loads/protects your Phoenix units.

[Pandonetho]

I think that the interceptor is the only thing what a carrier needs and nothing more. Why complicate things. IF you need more damage, just build more interceptors. Do you have any lore background on the new type of ships?

Um what? Lore is easy as hell for something like this. Protoss have upgraded their arsenal simple as that.

Any I like some of Blazur's ideas. If the BC can have such massive changes, then why the hell is the carrier the same old? It was fun in SC1, but in SC2 it's just the exact same thing with a new paint job. Boring.

[Perfecttear]

I wold like if there would be only 2 choices, but not 4, they are really not needed in my opinion.Having 4 different units for a unit that won't see much use is excesive.
This could work:

Option1 :

Interceptor
Type: Light
Movement: Fast
Modifiers: Mechanical - Ai
Pulse Blaster
Damage: 5 (x2)
Range: 8
Speed: Slow
Targets: Ground, Air

Option2 :

Bomber
Type: Light
Movement: Normal
Modifiers: Mechanical - Ai
Particle Disrupter
Damage: 8 (x2)
Range: 7
Speed: Slow
Targets: Ground

.

[mr. peasant]

If the Carrier is indeed to have customizable payloads, I think two types would be sufficient to make things interesting. As for what they are, I have two ideas:

Suggestion 1
1. ATA Interceptors
2. ATG Interceptors

Suggestion 2
1. Interceptors (same as before)
2. Scarabs (1 use only and requires constant manufacturing; either ATG only or targets both)

Especially with Suggestion 1, you can hence choose to either specialize your Carriers as purely ATA or ATG or mix it up (whether with a ratio of 1:1, 1:3, etc). With Interceptors and Scarabs, they would be more specialized along the lines of low armor vs high armor units.