|
i freaking hate warpgate mechanic, such a strange thing to put into RTS game
idea: make warpgates the worse option opposed to gateway.
- gateways makes unit faster or cheaper or whatever, that means you want warpgates only in lategame scenario and in some kind of specific timing attack.
f.e. you have 20 gateways and 4 warpgates, so you're able to warpin some DTs for harass if you want or warpin couple HTs at far away base, but you use 20 gateways to produce your core army
but i believe it's too late already to make such a massive change, would need to rebalance a lot of units
|
You make it sound like getting an early forge is such a burden but most builds will start very early upgrades out of it and coupled with chrono boost you will have an upgrade advantage all game long. Defense, detection and upgrades, pretty good investment if you ask me.
|
On September 08 2011 19:30 CSN_Kaelaris wrote:
As a brief side note, it's really weird that (I play random a lot) when i'm playing Z and T, I feel a lot more comfortable expanding than I do with my own bloody race : / I don't know if anyone else gets that so maybe it's just me.
Its not just you! In fact, I think, that was the whole point of my post lol. Expos as Protoss always sacrifice something, unless you get a good map you can defend with sentries to abuse the ramp advantage.
On September 08 2011 19:32 vol_ wrote:
You make it sound like getting an early forge is such a burden but most builds will start very early upgrades out of it and coupled with chrono boost you will have an upgrade advantage all game long. Defense, detection and upgrades, pretty good investment if you ask me.
Defense, detection, and upgrades are all passive investments. Which is why we've seen the fast 4 hatch no gas Ret style completely dominate FFE's.
|
this has been around for a year, this is the sort of post you'd expect during the beta. Its like saying that the terran race has changed because we can now make 2 marines at one barracks, you are simply stating the obvious. Protoss units that come from the gateway are kind of rubbish but they are quite fast and you can warp them anywhere - that is their advantage.
the issue with PvP is not 4gate which you can hold - its a lack of scouting options after 4 gate.
|
On September 08 2011 19:32 vol_ wrote:
You make it sound like getting an early forge is such a burden but most builds will start very early upgrades out of it and coupled with chrono boost you will have an upgrade advantage all game long. Defense, detection and upgrades, pretty good investment if you ask me.
I think your use of "Defense" and "Detection" need to have the word "Static" added somewhere before them. Exploitable on multiple levels if Z and T know what they're doing.
I'm not saying that's the case for every single game every conceived, just something to consider and most definitely should not be overlooked.
|
On September 08 2011 19:07 MCMXVI wrote:
Good read, and I agree. Not only is it easier for terran to macro than for protoss and zerg (warp in and larva injects instead of queue queue queue), but to your question; how should they make offensive warp-ins weaker? Units spawn with less shields or armor or something?
Eh, Protoss macro is not harder than Terran. As Protoss you have less units because they take more supply, you have less hoykeys for macro and you can see the cooldown progress on your warpgates without checking your base.
On topic though I mostly agree with OP.
|
On September 08 2011 19:32 PredY wrote:
i freaking hate warpgate mechanic, such a strange thing to put into RTS game
idea: make warpgates the worse option opposed to gateway.
- gateways makes unit faster or cheaper or whatever, that means you want warpgates only in lategame scenario and in some kind of specific timing attack.
f.e. you have 20 gateways and 4 warpgates, so you're able to warpin some DTs for harass if you want or warpin couple HTs at far away base, but you use 20 gateways to produce your core army
but i believe it's too late already to make such a massive change, would need to rebalance a lot of units
I echo these ideas. It makes no sense to have a mechanic that has absolutely no downside. They both negate distance AND make stuff faster. It just makes no sense. It's like if stim didn't remove hp, that would just be incredibly overpowered and the whole race would have to be readjusted(weakened) in order to compensate for it. Or if reactors didn't limit to mineral only units.
It just feels like protoss has been nerfed because of Forcefields and Warpgates far too much. I'd much rather see a more dynamic gateway protoss without these overpowering abilities than the current fragile ball.
|
On September 08 2011 19:36 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 19:07 MCMXVI wrote:
Good read, and I agree. Not only is it easier for terran to macro than for protoss and zerg (warp in and larva injects instead of queue queue queue), but to your question; how should they make offensive warp-ins weaker? Units spawn with less shields or armor or something? Eh, Protoss macro is not harder than Terran. As Protoss you have less units because they take more supply, you have less hoykeys for macro and you can see the cooldown progress on your warpgates without checking your base. On topic though I mostly agree with OP.
I find all macro to be more or less even, but I get more straight up sensory feedback when macroing as P and Z - the feeling of planting down warp-ins and the sound of larvae injects just feel... satisfying and significant. Macroing as terran is so mundane and theres no feedback, I often forget that I've made units, or forget to make units.
|
I think the OP is right, but let's face it : Blizzard is not gonna touch something as core as warpgate mechanic probably until the protoss expansion.
It is a sad thing they didn't realize warpgate had such an offensive power. 3 months into beta warpgate pushes were discovered and since then they have been increasing its research time and toying with the building time of gateway units, but they didn't address the issue properly.
|
Why does it matter if protoss timings are balanced on a short rally distance? as long as it is balanced.
Also you have to remember that you are warping in gateway units only, so no colossus or other tech is going to warp into your base.
|
I think the only thing truly missing is a "choice" between Warpgates and Gateways.
Why do Gateways even exist? Except for Blizzard rather having a "Warpgate research" instead of a "Warpgate range research".
|
You make some good points. However I'd argue that WG gives a (slight?) defender's advantage too, as you can reinforce more quickly at home as well (5 seconds for units to become functional) and respond more quickly to the incoming enemy composition than the build times of Terran and Zerg.
But probably a lot of these issues would be non-existent without warp, although warp makes Protoss what it is in SC2, so I don't know if Blizzard will make big changes to it.
|
On September 08 2011 19:25 Pzar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 19:07 MCMXVI wrote:
Good read, and I agree. Not only is it easier for terran to macro than for protoss and zerg (warp in and larva injects instead of queue queue queue), but to your question; how should they make offensive warp-ins weaker? Units spawn with less shields or armor or something? Well, jus thinking out loud here, but I never understood why warpgates allowed for higher production throughput than gateways. It made more sense to me that you should be giving up -something- (resources or time) to gain the front-loaded anywhere there's a power field style of unit creation. Especially given that you can convert warpgates back to gateways. Plus it'd be cool to see gateways<->warpgates happening as protoss move between defensive and offensive =P
I definitely agree with this, sounds awesome
|
On September 08 2011 19:42 Scythe90 wrote:
Why does it matter if protoss timings are balanced on a short rally distance? as long as it is balanced.
Also you have to remember that you are warping in gateway units only, so no colossus or other tech is going to warp into your base.
Because Protoss timings are balanced on short rally, Protoss defenses have what is normally an advantage balanced away. So defensive play as Protoss is difficult, cannon tech being shitty notwithstanding
|
On September 08 2011 19:40 NormandyBoy wrote:
I think the OP is right, but let's face it : Blizzard is not gonna touch something as core as warpgate mechanic probably until the protoss expansion.
It is a sad thing they didn't realize warpgate had such an offensive power. 3 months into beta warpgate pushes were discovered and since then they have been increasing its research time and toying with the building time of gateway units, but they didn't address the issue properly.
When the most recent Warpgate tweak was announced, the one that increased it's research time by like 40 seconds and then down to a 20 second increase, but also they wanted to decrease the time units made from standard Gateways, I was excited about the possibilities.
It's been stated a few times in this thread already but I think it would have been an amazing dynamic to actually have Gateways have a small defensive advantage over Warpgates (i.e. units trained slightly faster from them than Warpgates), creating the choice there for Protoss players given certain situations.
Alas as I said before, they decreased the change to 20 seconds and removed all the build decrease times from Gateway units, so my excitement was taken away from me lol.
EDIT: I understand the implications of slightly decreased build times for things like 2gate Zealots etc so please don't try to counter my opinion in such fashion  It's manageable for Z as long as they don't play like as greedily as the World's banking system.
|
On September 08 2011 19:42 Scythe90 wrote:
Why does it matter if protoss timings are balanced on a short rally distance? as long as it is balanced.
Also you have to remember that you are warping in gateway units only, so no colossus or other tech is going to warp into your base.
It makes it so gateway units can't be isolated and work well. So you get all these "Balls" when playing protoss.
|
I still don't see why bringing back shield batteries isn't an answer to this.
They add nothing to attacking armies (although I suppose technically Protoss could use them offensively as part of a push) and provide the missing defender's advantage.
|
On September 08 2011 19:54 FuRong wrote:
I still don't see why bringing back shield batteries isn't an answer to this.
They add nothing to attacking armies (although I suppose technically Protoss could use them offensively as part of a push) and provide the missing defender's advantage.
Thats why I offered them as a possible solution? I'd love to see them. Who said they wouldn't help?
|
On September 08 2011 19:44 susySquark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 19:42 Scythe90 wrote:
Why does it matter if protoss timings are balanced on a short rally distance? as long as it is balanced.
Also you have to remember that you are warping in gateway units only, so no colossus or other tech is going to warp into your base. Because Protoss timings are balanced on short rally, Protoss defenses have what is normally an advantage balanced away. So defensive play as Protoss is difficult, cannon tech being shitty notwithstanding
Protoss also have sentries which can be used to delay pushes, and buy time to warp in more units, in addition with chrono boost on gateways you can increase production. I think there are defensive capabilities to deal with timings if they are scouted.
I wouldn't assume balance on protoss timing attacks strictly assumes no rally distance. Keep in mind if T/Z don't have bunkers/spines they will fall to a lot of gateway attacks, T/Z have to respond to scouting with defence capabilities, which just happen to be buildings, while protoss have other methods.
|
Make warp-ins only possible near a Nexus or under a warp-prism.
Problem solved?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
