[Idea] Poll: Void Ray Replaces Carrier

[Rake]

I love the carrier, but it has gameplay problems that I think could justify its heavy modification or even replacement.

Its main problem, as Squid has pointed out before, is that it is useless in small numbers and indefatigable in larger numbers. This means that if you want to go carriers at economic parity there will be a point when you are behind militarily that then turns into an unstoppable advantage. In pro games I have seen more players loose by going carriers than winning by it.

Perhaps they could put an aura effect on the carrier that means that you can get 1 and not be too far behind (because it improves other units) but as you get more the aura doesn’t become more powerful thus flattening out the power curve.

If this doesn’t work I would be behind replacement.

[GRUNT]

I never thought the Carrier felt Zergy. It's robots, and robots are totally Protossy. Yes, they appear to "swarm" when you mass them, but all the interceptors follow very ordered paths. Again, Protossy. You're the only person I've ever seen describe them as Zergy.

The 'ordered paths' thing is just the visual aesthetics. I could have a Zerg Siege Tank, and as long as it was slimy and had a slithering animation, I could say that that's Zergy.

The mechanic of a unit which attacks by making more units is a very Zergy thing, since Zerg are supposed to be a swarmy race. :]

I've also always thought that the Carrier was very Zergy, but now with the Brood Lord, the Zerg probably don't need two tier 3 flyers which can generate swarms .

[MattII]

Perhaps they could put an aura effect on the carrier that means that you can get 1 and not be too far behind (because it improves other units) but as you get more the aura doesn’t become more powerful thus flattening out the power curve.

I don't think an Aura would really work, it'd increase the cost of the Carrier, yet do little for actual 'mass-effect'. I had though you might be able to make it work by limiting the number Interceptors operating in a single area (say 25-30 max in a 10*10 area), under the guise of having a limited number of control channels, but that still doesn't solve the issue of it being a returning unit, and a fairly boring one at that.

[Rake]

I don't think an Aura would really work, it'd increase the cost of the Carrier, yet do little for actual 'mass-effect'. I had though you might be able to make it work by limiting the number Interceptors operating in a single area (say 25-30 max in a 10*10 area), under the guise of having a limited number of control channels, but that still doesn't solve the issue of it being a returning unit, and a fairly boring one at that.

In order to balance the extra power of the aura you would have to reduce its damage and/or life. So if you got one it would increase the power of your army by its aura and if you have 10 it would be very powerful (but not as much as they are now because the damage/life would be reduced).

[Norfindel]

Well, they already have a big buff to the attack. I didn't use them yet, but it's maybe worth to try. 5x2x8 is 80 dmg per volley, that's a lot, and they have a big attack range.

I don't know if it's a good idea to use them alone, probably it's better mixed with VRs.

[Josue]

Well, they already have a big buff to the attack. I didn't use them yet, but it's maybe worth to try. 5x2x8 is 80 dmg per volley, that's a lot, and they have a big attack range.

I don't know if it's a good idea to use them alone, probably it's better mixed with VRs.

I think SC2 goal was that having a mixed army is better than massing only one thing, so what you say is not just logical, but I think it's also a smart strategy.

About solving the carrier's problem, D.S. made some points about it and it's mass effect.
This is what he suggested to fix it:

[...]Fake it. By fake it, I mean make the Interceptors nothing more than an animation for the Carriers attack. Make them untargetable. In the same way the BC fires 8 lasers of 8 damage, make each Interceptor a single "laser" which deals damage. Make the Carrier exactly like every other unit.

I thought it was already fixed in SC2 since I remember a game in which I couldn't select nor target the interceptors... I thought it was already done but:

They are individual units just like SC1, and you can focus fire them, and they can die.

So, if it's still like it was in SC1 what happened the time I played?
Even if they're still selectable and a target waste, it would be good that -like the improved pathing- they also improved this by making sure your units try to find and attack the actual carrier instead of the interceptors unless the carrier is out of range and the unit is unable to reach it.

About making it more interesting, improving it's model, adding some kind of GtG only planet cracker styled beam or something like what Rake suggested, sounds better than just scrapping it because it's not new.
C'mon the Tempest was going to be just a carrier styled ship with mediocre shielding and melee interceptors named "shurikens". Pretty much the same.
I guess that's why the Carrier is still with us.

[newcomplex]

The mechanic of a unit which attacks by making more units is a very Zergy thing, since Zerg are supposed to be a swarmy race. :]

You know, Dustin rarely has such apt words of wisdom, but he has a really good one that applies to this.

I can't remember it exactly, but it more or less goes "Blizzard defines the races, and every single addition or change we make redefines them"

The marine is weaker the the hydralisk and is massed more easily. Hence, the marine belongs to zerg? In fact, they're is no way you can prove that a marine is a terran unit without referencing itself. The vulture is fast, agile, easily produced, and extremely fragile. The lurker is very immobile, the strongest zerg ground unit outside of the ultralisk, very slow, and possess a mechanic almost identical to siege tanks with less range.

The ONLY argument you can make is "X unit shifts the playstyle or thematic direction of Y race into a direction I PERSONALLY do not like". Now in terms of gameplay, the carrier is totally congruous with how you'd expect toss to play, so you can only argue thematically, and thematically, the carrier is a super iconic and longstanding part of the protoss fleet and racial identity., so any thematic argument would be invalidated on that alone.

Some suggested giving it planet cracker styled skill, I think it could be cool.

If it's single target it overlaps with void ray, which is the preceding unit in the same tech tree, if it's multi target it overlaps with both the collosus AND the templar, which have enough of an overlap.

[Josue]

If it's single target it overlaps with void ray, which is the preceding unit in the same tech tree, if it's multi target it overlaps with both the collosus AND the templar, which have enough of an overlap.

Overlap, since when that overused argument is a problem?
Thor's cannons Yamato gun and the Siege Tanks siege attack overlap when it comes to bring down buildings, yet the three are still there. I was thinking Thor's should get Missile Barrage, and it should be AoE with stunning effect for those caught within the clash.

The Carrier's planet cracker could just leave an area of the terrain impassable for some time due to heavy destruction or something...

But... I guess that's just me.

[Cotcan]

I agree, I see more void rays than carriers. Carriers die to easy and aren't really cost and time efficient, but the void ray is. I think we should replace the carrier with an anti-ground air unit. Think about it, the protoss have 3 capital ships and just 1 cheep attack ship. This cheep attack ship, only attacks air. In order to kill some one from the air, you have to wait a long time and spend a lot of resources. Then it dies. The Terran and Zerg both have cheep anti-ground air units. Mutas, Banshees, Vikings, Ravens, the list goes on. So far in beta, I have really only seen people mass 1 unit and not get a mix. When I do see mixes, they dominate. Protoss needs their anti-ground air unit.

[Noctis]

So you want the Tempest then...cuz that's what it was.