|
What if there was a Structure that Protoss had to build to enable WarpGates? Much like the Dark Shrine enable DTs, morph to warpgates would need a structure. When powered-down/destroyed, all Warpgates turn to reguar Gateways.
For the sake of this discussion, lets call it the "Protoss Transport Matrix"
Pros:
1. Warp gate can have its own timing and blizzard has free reign on adjusting this timing.
- It can require either a Gateway or a Cybernetics core, but it will be balanced so that the fastest first warpin off a 12 Gate is ~5:40 into a game.
- It can also move it up and down the tech tree, irrespective of other buildings, It can even become a tech path unto itself.
2. It can be used to research upgrades related to warp-in time or warp-ins of specific units.
3. If balanced well, It can even allow for warp-ins of Robotics or Stargate Units via upgrades.
Cons:
1. The tech can be sniped by the enemy
2. It can be designed so that if un-powered, warp-ins will not work
3. In-coming Warpgate agression will be easier to predict.
4. Structure build time is constant and cannot be chrono-boosted
So, what do you think guys of a Transport Matrix? Is it a good idea or a bad? I've had this idea for a while now and decided to make a thread since Warpgate is a hot topic right now because of HOTs Patch6 comments by the devs.
Lets discuss, is Research really better than a Structure, design wise?
Replies to feedback as the thread grows:
+ Show Spoiler +For comments regarding a sniped warp matrix/early game vulnerabilities:
1. It is very hard to even snipe a well placed pylon before 8 minutes into a game without resorting to cheese. I assume the Transport Matrix would at least have the same stats as a Cybernetics Core and placed better and safer.
2. Mid-game to Late game, a sniped Transport Matrix will have the same impact as sniped pylons, probes, or research buildings. Protoss can actually be played like Terran where reinforcements are queued. Handicapped, but playable. It's just another setback we have to learn not to GG to. I mean if your Cybercore/Robo/Nexus gets sniped is the game over?
3. If you see the Transport Matrix is vulnerable, you can start making another one or preemptively morph Warpgates to Gateways. You can even have that one last warpcyle then morph all Warpgates to Gateways and start queuing up units and build a new Transport Matrix. Warpin is cooling down anyways BTW. Once your new Matrix is up you can start warping in again. Production did not stop. Doesn't sound too bad right?
4. Since the Transport Matrix is a building, presumably balanced to finish at an effective time, more chronoboosts are available for standard units before it finishes. This means more defensive units early game. This makes any 4-gate like scenarios where a Transport Matrix can be sniped unlikely because it will be common to have more than 2 units before the first warpin of the game takes place (this also applies to early proxy rax/gate, 6pool and cannon rushes).
Try this: Play a game and see how many units you can chronoboost before 6:00.
|
being protoss overall i like the concept, but i belive one problem will arise - protoss early agression may be geting shout down way to easly. Having to w8 for reinforcements protoss player imo will be more likely to turtle for 200/200 endgame army than try to put some pressure risking lossing their whole army (aside from stalkers army can be easly chased by speedlings/mm)
|
![[image loading]](http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lltzgnHi5F1qzib3wo1_400.jpg)
I dunno mang, I don't be like those zergs having to keep rebuilding my spawning pool cause its late game and I can't run a big army of broodlord/infestor and is wp dropped dt's.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
I like the idea. And most of the cons you mention are not even cons imo. Although i am zerg so maybe I'd just like more snipeable tech 
|
I don't really see what it changes or fixes, just makes things more complicated really
|
Interesting idea but
Warpgates would remain primary/necessary to protoss play so it would not be a choice you just get this building.
Secondly it would create a large weakness that a protoss player would have to keep protected all game long.
Say the enemy player uses nydus/banling drop/banling bust/zergling runby/warpprism drop/dts/marauder drop/ect the list goes on to snipe the tech you would be unable to defend and react quickly enough to save expansions (notably your third) from enemy aggression
This forces multiple of the structure to keep you safe or the structure must be beefy and as i stated before it needs to be cheap to be viable for early aggression so this either buffs the protoss wall in and leaves room for some silly uses like blocking expos with a cheap high health structure or leave protoss with a noted weakness and forces multiples
So you have to buff gateway stargate and robo to have this structure be viable
gateways have to have faster output (2 gate would become a problem like 2 rax)
or
you would have to add buffs in the matrix to make mid and late game buffed witch is unnecessary(for the lategame)
or
gateway upgrade allows faster production(found in matrix) with a warpgate speed upgrade
For stargate and robo to make them an option instead of always having to make the matrix you have to make them viable against it but since it is such a weakness not huge buffs
My point is it is forcing a mandatory weakness onto protoss removing most of their early agression unless timing was rather early and cheap, and not offering a buff to early/midgame where lategame is strongest early is weakest for protoss.
I would love the structure but I just can't make it viable.
Feedback is appreciated.
|
There is already the cybercore that you can destroy to prevent sentries/stalker production. And its already a big weakness of the protoss tech structure.
Denying also the zealots production seems... totally op.
|
On October 14 2012 03:07 MugenXBanksy wrote: I dunno mang, I don't be like those zergs having to keep rebuilding my spawning pool cause its late game and I can't run a big army of broodlord/infestor and is wp dropped dt's.
I really love that reddit meme. On topic, yeah, suggestion is not bad.
|
On October 15 2012 23:29 Insoleet wrote:
There is already the cybercore that you can destroy to prevent sentries/stalker production. And its already a big weakness of the protoss tech structure.
Denying also the zealots production seems... totally op.
you wouldn't be denying production at all, only warp-in. Together with the change of cooldown of unit production of gate ways to a more effecient production than warpgates, this could be a great change.
|
Just curious, did you think of this by yourself? Or did you read my post on sc2 forums? Not a big deal, just wondering, sometimes good ideas get thought of by a bunch of people at the same time 
Also yeah, I like it.
|
I would rather just have WG require a T2 structure (Robo/SG/Twilight) to research. Have new Warpgate have a cooldown around 10 seconds longer than it would take to produce with a Gateway. Then balance the Zealot and Stalker accordingly and leave alone sentry. Maybe dial back the Colossus and HT a notch if necessary.
With stronger gateway army, less would be needed, mitigated by needing more warpgates to produce the same amount of units as before. Therefore you would have "more" gas to tech with.
Edit: Also I believe this would kill 4gate PvP. Trying to do a Gateway 4gate would be fruitless because of defenders advantage, while trying to do Warpgate 4gate wouldn't work either because by the time WG is done both players will have T2 units/tech.
|
On October 15 2012 23:35 wcr.4fun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2012 23:29 Insoleet wrote:
There is already the cybercore that you can destroy to prevent sentries/stalker production. And its already a big weakness of the protoss tech structure.
Denying also the zealots production seems... totally op. you wouldn't be denying production at all, only warp-in. Together with the change of cooldown of unit production of gate ways to a more effecient production than warpgates, this could be a great change.
So your warpgates are ready, you could spawn 8 zealots, but then your warpgate den is destroyed. So now... you have to go to each warpgate and start slow production of units again, with buildtime? Despite the cooldown already having been done? And if your warpgate den was only unpowered and you built a pylon or even reactivate it with a prism or something... you have operative warpgates slowly producing units, then switching to cooldown after that?
Seems pretty convoluted really. You can always just have the research have "Requires 1 Advanced Tech Building (Twilight Council, Robotics Bay, Stargate)" or something for similar effect. Regardless having to switch back and forth is actually not fun or intuitive at all so I'm glad it doesn't happen. It's already a nuisance to have to convert every Gateway so instead of saying "well maybe the convert key should matter" just have it be automatic, don't let players convert it back, and done
|
Gateways should make units faster, warpgate problem solved
|
|
|
On October 16 2012 00:56 TheLunatic wrote:
Gateways should make units faster, warpgate problem solved
Yes thats it... the game would be sooo much better if Gateway production was faster than Warpgate production, because there is just another decision to be made... and decisions are what makes the game great!
@OP
I like the general idea, because there are just way more things that can "happen".
Also I cant stand upgrades that are just soooo necesarry, that you cant DECIDE to skip/delay them.
Good idea, small idea, but your pro and con list are most of the time just a PRO list
|
On October 16 2012 00:56 TheLunatic wrote:
Gateways should make units faster, warpgate problem solved
i have always wondered why isnt like this... Warpgate allow toss to reinforce near a pylon, thats a great advantage but it should cost some warping time, in the other case Gateways allows to produce units faster thatn WP allowing a more easy defence. This will make Protoss users to decide whether they want gates or warps whenever they atack or defend
|
On October 16 2012 01:41 Topin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2012 00:56 TheLunatic wrote:
Gateways should make units faster, warpgate problem solved i have always wondered why isnt like this... Warpgate allow toss to reinforce near a pylon, thats a great advantage but it should cost some warping time, in the other case Gateways allows to produce units faster thatn WP allowing a more easy defence. This will make Protoss users to decide whether they want gates or warps whenever they atack or defend
It's supposed to be like ling speed, as in the game is designed around using only the upgraded version eventually, but only being able to upgrade them after a certain time and investment.
Sure, you could make it so that the ling speed is a toggle and that you gain some other benefit for disabling it (like bonus HP), but more complexity isn't necessarily a good thing. Reducing complexity in one field allows the player to focus on something else.
|
i think it could be very possible to see however i feel that zealots stalker sentry will need some sort of buff because of the lack of units in the early game and not as strong of units in the late game
|
On October 16 2012 00:38 Trotim wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2012 23:35 wcr.4fun wrote:On October 15 2012 23:29 Insoleet wrote:
There is already the cybercore that you can destroy to prevent sentries/stalker production. And its already a big weakness of the protoss tech structure.
Denying also the zealots production seems... totally op. you wouldn't be denying production at all, only warp-in. Together with the change of cooldown of unit production of gate ways to a more effecient production than warpgates, this could be a great change. So your warpgates are ready, you could spawn 8 zealots, but then your warpgate den is destroyed. So now... you have to go to each warpgate and start slow production of units again, with buildtime? Despite the cooldown already having been done? And if your warpgate den was only unpowered and you built a pylon or even reactivate it with a prism or something... you have operative warpgates slowly producing units, then switching to cooldown after that?Seems pretty convoluted really. You can always just have the research have "Requires 1 Advanced Tech Building (Twilight Council, Robotics Bay, Stargate)" or something for similar effect. Regardless having to switch back and forth is actually not fun or intuitive at all so I'm glad it doesn't happen. It's already a nuisance to have to convert every Gateway so instead of saying "well maybe the convert key should matter" just have it be automatic, don't let players convert it back, and done
well this is you assuming it will work like that. I didn't think about any such situations because you can always tinker with it to be 'fair' (or balanced).
I was thinking more along the lines of letting warp-in just be another mechanism of putting the unit in play independent of cooldowns. For example if you have 8 zealots ready to be warped in (cooldown is done) and the warp-in gets destroyed, these units are in a 'pool' of production so that when you give the command to remake the zealot (after you've changed them from warpgates to gateways), they'll spawn immediately next to the gateways.
And I kinda lol'd at your comment about switching between gates would be a 'nuisance'. In brood war I have to select every drone I make and tell it to mine minerals, it's an incredibly nuisance but that's not stopping me from enjoying brood war. This change will (in my eyes) make the game play of toss (if it reaches the desired effects e.g. multiple skirmishes across the map, the possibility to intercept reinforcements (if toss want to stay even on production) etc) a lot better than the current death ball style of play.
|
How about, Protoss starts with warpgate, but the range is limited to really close to the the gateway at first. Build this structure and you can upgrade the structure for range increases to your warpgate. If you lose the structure you lose the range of the warpgate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
