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?
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)
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.
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.
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
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 23:29 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
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 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 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.
On October 16 2012 07:11 norterrible wrote: 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.
That sounds cool, but I don't see why that couldn't just be a researchable thing instead of a building.
Addressing the OP though, the part I really like is how you cannot chrono it. Plus, the enemy can see when you place it, and then know when it will finish because you can see the production bar. Whereas as you can't see the progress of warp gate tech research currently.
While warpgate tech actually limits the strength of the gateway units and a lot of things had to be balanced around this ability, it's not as easy to change as most of you might think.
First of all the suggestion of the op wouldn't change all that much, because instead of a warpgate research you would invest that money into another tech structure with the only drawback being for the protoss player that he can't use cb on the construction and the big downside that whenever in the later stages of the game it gets sniped the protoss player is totally screwed because the building would need at least 100sec buildtime (getting temp archives or robo bay sniped is not even nearly as bad).
If you also increase the cost of warpgates a lot (like 200/200 instead of 50/50) early game protoss will just suck a lot. It's like increasing the cost of lair or roachwarren/bane nest a lot or the cost of bio upgrades or factory.
A lot of people think that if you move warpgate tech up the tech tree (like to twilight or even higher) would allow Blizzard to buff gateway units. But a change like this would only mean that protoss has a harder time defending early game or doing aggressive moves like 3/4gate blink or plain 3/4gate pressure/allin if you don't change gateway units along and this stage of the game is quite well balanced right now.
If you also buff the gateway units along this change this would make up for not having warpgates that early (a lot of balance would have to go into this but it could be done) but once warpgates are out all of a sudden protoss has the ability to do mass warpins with gateway units that are way stronger than they used to be and every decent player is aware what mass chargelot warpins or blink stalker warpins are capable of. A lot of balance tweaks to units of the other races would most likely have to go into having the right stuff to deal with it. It's not that gateway units alone are scary in 200/200 fights on their own. It's the fact that once a broodlord/infestor army died for instance it takes a bit to reinforce again and if you have the ability to warpin 20 more blink stalkers in the lategame that are way stronger than they used to be it simply means that both terran and zerg need to be able to have units that they can use to reinforce quicker with than it is right now that can deal with it. Having quicker output of low tech units like roaches/lings etc or bio + maybe hellions would again result in a total shift in all matchups making it way harder to get tech units out.
You might be able to go on like this, but the key point here is:
You can't simply buff gateway units if you move warpgates up in tech tree/make it more expensive or something similar because it will create huge issues in the later stages of the game. And without buffing gateway units along warpgates the only chance is to give protoss even way way better early game defence (like stronger mothership core etc) to make up for it. However, this would most likely be the worst thing that could happen to the game. Protoss not being able to do any scary early game pushes means other races know protoss can only turtle up or tech while harassing and would create a super one-dimensional gamestyle.
Warpgate tech is definitely a really interesting aspect of the game and can be a lot of fun to use (just as stimming bio etc). Unfortunately it requires the protoss game to be balanced around it. Going it only halfway will not only result in Blizzard having to rebalance most of the game but also not provide the best results due to new issues arising. So the only two real possibilities here are:
1. Let warpgate be because the game is balanced around it and it is indeed an interesting mechanic. 2. Remove warpgates completely. Don't move it up the tech tree, change it's cost or something, but remove it completely. I've spent quite much time thinking about it and that's the only longterm solution possible which would allow protoss to have decent gateway units. The whole game will need to be rebalanced though for this.
terrible idea, protoss already has the most structures. Besides that it would probably have to be 50m50g structure to remain balance which is too cheap, it would be used for walling very much for example. It just doesn't fit without a complete overhaul for basically no reason whatsoever..
Id rather just be the nexus, mothership,and prism get a field matrix or whatever and take it away from the normal pylon. Then allow individual pylons to be upgraded at some lost cost like 50min/gas and decent build time ontop of a pylon build time so you have to commit more to proxy style pylons but defensive advantage would still be in play. Best yet we even have the art assets available with the monolyth/dark pylon. Your opponent could more easily take out the proxy pylon too since it would be obvious which one it was and would be less of them.
why not make the warp gate building work as a nydus network. Build units from gate way and they go in to the building and deploy them self around ares where u have pylons. 1 way trip if u don't recall them with mothership core.
Or maybe something like the webgate network in dawn of war:
Hm... sniping the Transport Matrix would also stop counters at the same time (which usually come from some warp-in pylons somewhere on the map) and would delay the Protoss from making new units. Plus you get the 3 seconds where the warpgates go back to gateway mode. I think this would give a massive (read: unfair) advantage to the attacker.
For comments regarding a sniped Transport 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.
EPT![[image loading]](http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lltzgnHi5F1qzib3wo1_400.jpg)
