|
This has been on my mind for quite some time, even though the game's been out for about 3-4 years, but before that, I want to say something first.
It is my humble opinion that elements that have no role in a competitive game either be removed or changed that it fills a role. Also, if there are two or more elements that fulfill the same role, only one of them should fill that role and the rest should be changed or discarded.
Also, I do not work for Blizzard and these are just my opinions on a blog on a particular element in Starcraft 2. There is a fair chance that I am wrong. (But if the reader, you, says so here, I will ask you to explain your argument.)
Now, to the topic at hand.
Warp Gate(WG). Or rather Gateway(G). Why does G as a structure exist in competitive multiplayer when WG is superior in every way?
I do not understand. WG can produce all of the units that G can, and also produce them at a considerably faster rate, despite the fact that units can be potentially produced anywhere on the map from WG.
As a brief aside, with WG, there is a "transform to gateway" option. But why would anyone turn WG into G if there are absolutely ZERO benefits from making such a choice? This option is pointless and it is completely baffling to me as to why the game designers left this option in the game. I have not seen ANY Protoss players revert to G unless they were trolling or were trying out the game for the first time.
I have stated most of the advantages earlier, but I will list them here for a slightly easier read.
1. WG produces all units that G can.
2. WG can produce units potentially anywhere on the map.
3. WG can produce units at a considerably faster rate than G.
4. WG has no resource cost in its individual construction, apart from G's cost.
Now, I would understand why WG would have all such benefits over G under the condition that the tech required for WG was very deep, meaning that it is reserved for late-game use. However, everyone who plays this game knows this is not the case. WG research and use are mandatory. It is not an option to NOT to use WG (unless it's cheese).
I see this as a poor design in the context that G has no real place in the game and this should have been changed since WOL beta. I can come up with two ways to change this at the current state of the game (January 2014).
1. Tone down the said advantages WG has over G in order to make players decide which structure to use for different situations or strategies they themselves prefer.
OR
2. Make WG require a very deep tech path, with one or more building requirements, and keeping most of its advantages over G.
I find option 1 to be conservative, as this is saying to compromise the use between WG and G and have both structures be essential and active elements in the game. Option 2 is a bit more radical, as it wants to use WG as a supplement for G units in terms of production. (It is a little funny that for a BW player can find option 1 to be more "new" and 2 to be more "old-fashioned"). One thing is for certain and it is that either choice will result in significant changes to Gateway units (most likely buffs).
One question lingers in my mind though. Why did Blizzard keep G around if it is an irrelevant part of gameplay compared to WG? Were they lazy to not bother with it? Did they think it was a good idea to emphasize WG to such an extent that G is unnecessary (because I sure don't think so.)?
I have a lot of questions for Blizzard besides from the ones in this blog post, but even if I did ask, they will probably go unanswered.
Some personal thoughts below (disregard if you wish):
When Warp Gate was introduced in competitive multiplayer in WOL beta, I was intrigued by the concept of having the ability to warp in potentially anywhere on the map. I thought it would be a nice addition to the Protoss gameplay, as long as this concept was not abused and moderated to an extent.
I later found out I was wrong and a bit disappointed as the implementation of this simple concept would affect the balance of the Gateway units in a very detrimental manner. I played Protoss in BW and I appreciated the robustness of my Gateway units. In SC2, they are just pathetic. In fact, I would prefer the Dragoon with its bad pathing, rather than the Stalker. Plus, Sentry Force Fields are just gimmicky and a bit OP in certain unit compositions.
I am disappointed with SC2 in a lot of ways, but I won't talk more about this right now. I might do it later if I felt like it.
 
|
warp gate requires a mouse click per unit to spawn and can't queue up units
|
On January 06 2014 08:45 opsayo wrote:
warp gate requires a mouse click per unit to spawn and can't queue up units
No, you can hold down the mouse button and hotkey to spawn units.
So, is not being able to queue units an advantage or disadvantage? It's most likely the former in most situations.
|
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back.
|
I think that bringing G back and not have GW would make protoss easier to balance (since it would be similar to the other two races). And the sentry is also kinda meh, not sure what to make of it. Sometimes it's OP, sometimes without it protoss players would just die all the time.
|
Why are there slow lings in the game if everyone just upgrades speed anyway?
|
On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back.
It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G?
I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up.
|
You should have constructed your post around what is hurtful to the game, not what "has no role".
Right now you haven't talked about any real problem so I don't even know what to discuss here.
|
1. Warp gate is an upgrade, and so starting with gateways forces the Protoss player to upgrade Warp gate tech if they want the better unit-producing structure. It also prevents Protoss players from warping in units 4 minutes into the game.
2. As said before, you can't queue units with warp gates. This makes macroing significantly harder, as even a few seconds late on the cycle means you're falling behind in macro.
3. Similarly, you must warp in at a pylon, which makes macroing during a fight incredibly hard (either you fall behind on your macro and pay attention to the fight, or you leave the screen to warp in at a pylon and mess up the battle).
Warp gates are definitely better in general than gateways, but it makes sense that these trade-offs exist.
|
The devs didn't intend for vanilla Gateways to serve any purpose once Warp Gate tech was finished...or so I read from someone who claimed to have read a blizz response / interview / who the hell knows.
I don't know for sure if the 'add counterbalance to warpgates' idea has received the Browdersquad's official "fuck off please" response, but I wouldn't hold out hope.
|
On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves. I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up.
Well, how are force fields gimmicky?
|
WG are always better because it is an upgrade that levels up Protoss production. Originally WG (if WOL beta is an indication) had a much shorter research duration (50 or 60 seconds or thereabouts). However, that made Protoss pushes absurdly strong so WG research was pushed back further (note that Gateway units were not nerfed!) to about 140 seconds. It stayed there for a long time before being pushed back to 160 seconds so that builds other than 4 gate could be viable in PvP.
As to why the G option remains in the game, I think it a mistake from Blizzard. One really not worth fixing in any meaningful way because no-one in their right minds would have Gates when they can have Warpgates. Blizzard have better things to do.
Also, Zealots are strong and Stalkers are alright and Sentries are handy support units and FF and GS are handy abilities. Gateway units are not weak. It is just that the window in which they are dominant is relatively small as factors like Terran/Zerg upgrades, hard counters, and production all have an impact when it comes to the effectiveness of these units.
|
On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up.
looks like you are just nitpicking for something to complain about sc2 :S
from arguing about warp gate design, to forcefield being gimmicky to boring game to ladder system being broken
|
On January 06 2014 16:22 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up. looks like you are just nitpicking for something to complain about sc2 :S from arguing about warp gate design, to forcefield being gimmicky to boring game to ladder system being broken
Well, I wouldn't nitpick if I personally found the game disappointing. Now, is that wrong?
Right now, I watch more BW than sc2 because it's more fun to watch.
|
On January 06 2014 23:48 midnight999 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 16:22 ETisME wrote:On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up. looks like you are just nitpicking for something to complain about sc2 :S from arguing about warp gate design, to forcefield being gimmicky to boring game to ladder system being broken Well, I wouldn't nitpick if I personally found the game disappointing. Now, is that wrong? Right now, I watch more BW than sc2 because it's more fun to watch.
nitpick means you are looking for things to complain about on purpose rather than the problem itself is really a problem.
look back at your arguments again.
read all the responses.
You can watch more of whatever you like and play whatever you find more fun.
but this blog shows you don't even know what you really want to complain about, you just completely change to all other "problems" when most disagree with your warp gate point.
(how does ladder system broken even affect a non active player like you for example)
|
On January 06 2014 11:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
1. Warp gate is an upgrade, and so starting with gateways forces the Protoss player to upgrade Warp gate tech if they want the better unit-producing structure. It also prevents Protoss players from warping in units 4 minutes into the game.
2. As said before, you can't queue units with warp gates. This makes macroing significantly harder, as even a few seconds late on the cycle means you're falling behind in macro.
3. Similarly, you must warp in at a pylon, which makes macroing during a fight incredibly hard (either you fall behind on your macro and pay attention to the fight, or you leave the screen to warp in at a pylon and mess up the battle).
Warp gates are definitely better in general than gateways, but it makes sense that these trade-offs exist.
1. Sure, it is an "upgrade" (which I'm not sure that term is appropriate for WG), but the problem with WG is that it is not a simple improvement over G like a reactor or tech lab on barracks; it changes the entire mechanic on how that structure operates. If one did not want Protoss players warping in units so early, then one should make it require deeper tech.
2. With practice, this is hardly an issue.
3. Well, you can get around this issue by having pylons/Warp prisms close to the battle. It's not very APM-demanding or time-consuming to warp-in a bunch of units either. Plus, battles in sc2 end way too quickly and are unforgiving on the tiniest of mistakes, which I think is a bad thing.
Finally, if there are trade-offs between G and WG, then why does everyone use WG every single time? The trade-offs don't matter then if there is clearly a better solution between the two.
(Now, I just might be ranting about something that's not really an issue. However design-wise, WG and G are very different on how they work and it is just my opinion that a strategy game should involve lots of decision-making in order for it to be interesting and intriguing to play.)
|
On January 07 2014 00:38 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 23:48 midnight999 wrote:On January 06 2014 16:22 ETisME wrote:On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up. looks like you are just nitpicking for something to complain about sc2 :S from arguing about warp gate design, to forcefield being gimmicky to boring game to ladder system being broken Well, I wouldn't nitpick if I personally found the game disappointing. Now, is that wrong? Right now, I watch more BW than sc2 because it's more fun to watch. nitpick means you are looking for things to complain about on purpose rather than the problem itself is really a problem. look back at your arguments again. read all the responses. You can watch more of whatever you like and play whatever you find more fun. but this blog shows you don't even know what you really want to complain about, you just completely change to all other "problems" when most disagree with your warp gate point. (how does ladder system broken even affect a non active player like you for example)
If you have such a problem with the blog, then why are you still here? You don't have to stay here and read all this stuff.
It said in the blog to disregard the stuff at the bottom, but people kept insisting on talking about it so I just joined in. Does a blog have to stay on one topic the whole time?
If you want the complaint spelled out, here you go. IMO, WG is OP compared to G and because they have the same role in producing combat units, they should be re-balanced for more complex gameplay or just simply take one of them out due to redundancy.
|
On January 07 2014 01:08 midnight999 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2014 00:38 ETisME wrote:On January 06 2014 23:48 midnight999 wrote:On January 06 2014 16:22 ETisME wrote:On January 06 2014 10:14 jkim91 wrote:On January 06 2014 09:25 ninazerg wrote:
What opsayo said.
Other than that, I don't see why this deserves its own rant. It doesn't really seem like a real problem. But what really stood out to me is that you think Sentry Force Fields are "gimmicky"? How can making spellcasters be a gimmicky strategy? That just seems like a pretty fundamental part of playing StarCraft/WarCraft in general. But if you don't care for it, we'd love if you'd come over to the BroodWar side with us so you can have your dragoons back. It may not be a problem, but my point was that if WG is ALWAYS better than G, then why does G exist? And is it a bad thing that WG has numerous advantages over G? I think you misunderstood me. I was trying to say force fields are a bit gimmicky, not making the sentries themselves.
I don't play games much nowadays, but I did play Brood War for about 9 years. SC2 just got really boring and I stopped playing it about a year ago. Plus, I heard recently that the ladder is really screwed up. looks like you are just nitpicking for something to complain about sc2 :S from arguing about warp gate design, to forcefield being gimmicky to boring game to ladder system being broken Well, I wouldn't nitpick if I personally found the game disappointing. Now, is that wrong? Right now, I watch more BW than sc2 because it's more fun to watch. nitpick means you are looking for things to complain about on purpose rather than the problem itself is really a problem. look back at your arguments again. read all the responses. You can watch more of whatever you like and play whatever you find more fun. but this blog shows you don't even know what you really want to complain about, you just completely change to all other "problems" when most disagree with your warp gate point. (how does ladder system broken even affect a non active player like you for example) If you have such a problem with the blog, then why are you still here? You don't have to stay here and read all this stuff. It said in the blog to disregard the stuff at the bottom, but people kept insisting on talking about it so I just joined in. Does a blog have to stay on one topic the whole time? If you want the complaint spelled out, here you go. IMO, WG is OP compared to G and because they have the same role in producing combat units, they should be re-balanced for more complex gameplay or just simply take one of them out due to redundancy.
If instead of having to manually upgrade each G->WG and when the upgrade finished all existing G became WG and you can only make WG from that point, would you still have a problem with a WG?
G has about as much strategical importance as a slow zergling.
|
What if you only have 1 pylon, and every hex of it is taken up by buildings and gateways, then you need to turn the warpgates into gateways so you can make units ;D
|
On January 07 2014 15:53 9-BiT wrote:
What if you only have 1 pylon, and every hex of it is taken up by buildings and gateways, then you need to turn the warpgates into gateways so you can make units ;D
lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
