|
I've never seen anyone doing this in a game. The only reasonable explanations I can see are that either the players don't know about it, or that they've decided it's too damn hard to get any benefit from.
I'm going to assume the top players are good enough to benefit so they must have just not thought of this.
Protoss produces units faster by switching between gateways and warpgates. I'm going to have all times in game-seconds in this post.
It takes 13 seconds to switch from a warpgate to a gateway and back. Gateways can produce units while the warpgate part of that gateway is on cooldown, and the cooldown continues to decrease while it's not in warpgate form. For the most extreme benefit, consider making a templar (either type) and a zealot from one gateway/warpgate:
As a warpgate, it takes 45 + 23 = 68 seconds to warp-in both units and then have the warpgate off-cooldown again. If instead you warp-in the templar, immediately switch to a gateway, and gateway-build the zealot then change back to a warpgate, you will have both units done and your warpgate off cooldown in 46 seconds (13 to switch + 33 for zealot).
For building even two stalkers you speed up production by doing this: warping in 2 stalkers is 64 seconds. Warping in one then gateway-building the other completes both in 55 seconds. You can do the math yourself for other unit combinations.
This does not speed up straight zealots, but does speed up every other two-unit combination. You always want to warp-in the longer build time unit and gateway-build the other.
The only real downsides I see are that this doesn't give you as much control over where your units spawn as just using warpgates and that you need to time a lot of different actions pretty well to benefit. I'd still think this has some in-game applications since it potentially offers as much of a production benefit as chrono boost (and of course you can chrono boost on top of it for even more production benefit), though at my level it's more beneficial to just build another warpgate or three instead.
|
isn't changing back to gateway faster? (lol never used it obviously) but I thought it changed back a little faster than gateway -> warpgate
nice tip but I'll just add another warpgate :D
|
If units warp-in faster, why ever use a gateway after the upgrade is done?
|
I can just trust what you are saying since it seems you've done some research, but you gave me an idea, that I haven't tested, and I don't have the timing in my mind. What I'm thinking is : if the cooldown time of a warp gate is longer than turning the warpgate into a gateway and back, couldn't you , instead of wayiting for the waprgate cooldown to finish, just turn the warpgate into a gateway and back to be able to warp another unit faster ? I'm not sure this is true, so that's why I'm asking.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 18 2010 03:40 Amber[LighT] wrote:
If units warp-in faster, why ever use a gateway after the upgrade is done?
The Gateway can begin production sooner than the Warpgate cooldown ends. Since Warpgate build time is backloaded, you can do warp->gate->warp and get more units than if you just did warp->warp
|
If all of the micro and macro problems in SCII are fixed and it sees professional play, you can be sure to see protoss players with Julyzerg level APM adding the warp-unwarp shuffle to their to-do lists.
|
Clarification:
A warpgate/gateway is really two separate buildings in one, with separate timers (according to the OP).
That is, you can warp in a unit, and while you are waiting for the warpgate cooldown you can switch it back to a gateway, produce a unit the 'normal' way, and when that unit is finished, switch back to a warpgate again to repeat the procedure.
Sounds really mechanically demanding to me, but cool that it is possible. I wonder if that is by accident or design 
|
You're forgetting turning it back into the warpgate at the end, so the difference is ~12s if you want to be able to end at your original state - 56 seconds (13 to switch + 33 for zealot +10 back to WG). If you're managing six warpgates, you'll have to do add 12+ actions (warp to gateway and back) for those 12s to be realized...plus half your units will be popping out without a rally point because that gets reset...the benefit doesn't outweigh the work required, imo.
|
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
|
On May 18 2010 03:38 PaterSin wrote:
isn't changing back to gateway faster? (lol never used it obviously) but I thought it changed back a little faster than gateway -> warpgate
nice tip but I'll just add another warpgate :D
It's 3 seconds warpgate -> gateway, and 10 seconds gateway -> warpgate.
13 seconds for the full cycle, which is what really matters here since you want to start each cycle as a warpgate.
On May 18 2010 03:41 bubusls wrote:
I can just trust what you are saying since it seems you've done some research, but you gave me an idea, that I haven't tested, and I don't have the timing in my mind. What I'm thinking is : if the cooldown time of a warp gate is longer than turning the warpgate into a gateway and back, couldn't you , instead of wayiting for the waprgate cooldown to finish, just turn the warpgate into a gateway and back to be able to warp another unit faster ? I'm not sure this is true, so that's why I'm asking.
Edit: The cooldown remains on the warpgate if you just do that. If you build a unit in the middle you can take advantage of the otherwise "dead" time on the warpgate.
@Putrio, no, see my first comment above.
On May 18 2010 03:48 Tin_Foil wrote:
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
No. Warpgate warp-in times are 10 seconds shorter than that unit's production time.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Warpgate
|
On May 18 2010 03:32 crate wrote:
I've never seen anyone doing this in a game. The only reasonable explanations I can see are that either the players don't know about it, or that they've decided it's too damn hard to get any benefit from.
I'm going to assume the top players are good enough to benefit so they must have just not thought of this.
Protoss produces units faster by switching between gateways and warpgates. I'm going to have all times in game-seconds in this post.
It takes 13 seconds to switch from a warpgate to a gateway and back. Gateways can produce units while the warpgate part of that gateway is on cooldown, and the cooldown continues to decrease while it's not in warpgate form. For the most extreme benefit, consider making a templar (either type) and a zealot from one gateway/warpgate:
As a warpgate, it takes 45 + 23 = 68 seconds to warp-in both units and then have the warpgate off-cooldown again. If instead you warp-in the templar, immediately switch to a gateway, and gateway-build the zealot then change back to a warpgate, you will have both units done and your warpgate off cooldown in 46 seconds (13 to switch + 33 for zealot).
For building even two stalkers you speed up production by doing this: warping in 2 stalkers is 64 seconds. Warping in one then gateway-building the other completes both in 55 seconds. You can do the math yourself for other unit combinations.
This does not speed up straight zealots, but does speed up every other two-unit combination. You always want to warp-in the longer build time unit and gateway-build the other.
The only real downsides I see are that this doesn't give you as much control over where your units spawn as just using warpgates and that you need to time a lot of different actions pretty well to benefit. I'd still think this has some in-game applications since it potentially offers as much of a production benefit as chrono boost (and of course you can chrono boost on top of it for even more production benefit), though at my level it's more beneficial to just build another warpgate or three instead.
Pretty sweet idea, but doesn't this just fix bad macro?
Ideally, starcraft players with the exception of zerg maybe, wants to keep their resources at a super minimum through-out the game. To do this right, you have sufficient production facilities to meet your resources to bring them down to 0 every 'round'.
With your idea, you'll need an odd number of gateways, and weird timings to keep your resources 0. You might need less gateways if you do it right, but I would rather have more warp gates warping rather than less gateways rallying.
Even if you are pro, this would be super hard to pull off correctly and not as beneficial of having your army warped across the map.
|
Hmm.. I would like to see how this is useful in-game. Having 3 gateways/warpgates doing this method compared to the 4-5 warpgate warp in may seem more cost effective at first, but as a battle drags on you have to deal with the walk distance from your base, where with 4 or 5 warpgates you have the instant spawn and you can still keep your money down. Ultimately you're looking at saving some money on gateways/warpgates for the initial attack but having a diminished ability to reinforce quickly.. You could try to even these options out by using 3 gateways/warpgates for the initial attack, then adding in more warpgates as your attack continues.. This would mean a stronger initial attack (due to not using the saved minerals at the beginning not spent on warpgates/gateways), but then a period where you have to back off and wait for your reinforcements to arrive / more warpgates to finish.. so the prospect of a constant attack is lost.
On the other hand, for builds where you aren't doing timing attacks this could definitely save some cash at certain points.
|
This could probably be used very effectively for some early rushes or timing pushes. Perhaps later in the game when the warping is needed to protect all of the protoss basses it may not be as useful, but if you can get out a bunch of stalkers for a timing push much faster than you would have been able to without using this technique it would definitely be worth it.
|
I stand corrected - as I've never tried to warp one *back* I assumed the time was the same both ways. If you take into consideration mobility though, especially on larger maps, unless you're just massing an army, I don't see it being that much of a benefit. If you're trying to defend on multiple fronts, you're going to need to be able to warp in units as fast as possible, and that decreases that ability by nearly the same amount of time as the total. I'm at work so I can't test exact times, but assuming a 3s warp in and 30s cooldown, you could warp in 6 units given my initial scenario in one base, wait 30s and warp 6 into another base with solely warpgates. If you went back to GWs, you'd warp in 6, transform back, 3s, summon/build zealots, 33s, and then have to run them to your other base. If that makes any sense at all, haha.
|
On May 18 2010 03:48 Tin_Foil wrote:
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers...
Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units.
5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers
Versus pure Warpgate for Stalkers.
Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in= 3 units
5 + 32 + 5 + 32 + 5 = 79 seconds for 3 Stalkers
The down side is one Stalker will be at your base, but if you are just Macro'ing before you push out, that won't be an issue. But during an attack, it would be better to just warp in at your forward pylon, as travel distance would negate any gain from slightly faster production.
However, I fear for many people this will be to APM taxing and will require solid timing and using both W and a hotkey for the Gateways.
I could see this being extremely useful in clutch situations where a push has failed, and you need to replace units ASAP for defense against a counter-push.
|
That's very interesting actually. But like Azuremen said, it would probably be way too APM taxing. If people can successfully pull off a crazy timing push using this method, blizz will probably just make it so the warp gate cooldown only decreases while the building is in warp gate mode, which would easily and effectively kill this very creative strategy.
|
On May 18 2010 03:55 Azuremen wrote:
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers...
Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units.
5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers
You can start changing out of a warpgate before the 5 second warp-in of the unit is completed. Once the unit starts warping in, it'll finish even if the warpgate is changing to a gateway.
|
personally I just have enough warpgates to spend all my money, so switching back and forth wouldn't make a difference because I can't produce off that.
would be a cool trick for lategame when your money is too high though.
|
It's really not that taxing on APM...
|
On May 18 2010 03:59 crate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 03:55 Azuremen wrote:
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers...
Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units.
5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers You can start changing out of a warpgate before the 5 second warp-in of the unit is completed. Once the unit starts warping in, it'll finish even if the warpgate is changing to a gateway.
Thank you for that. So 60 seconds versus 79 now, nearly 75% the total time, so basically a 5 to 4 ratio of unit production over time. Not massive but that means 4 Warp/Gateways instead of 5, which is an extra Stalker or Zealot, or maybe that Immortal you need, etc. And as anyone knows, one more unit can make all the difference.
|
On May 18 2010 03:55 Azuremen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 03:48 Tin_Foil wrote:
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers... Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units. 5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers Versus pure Warpgate for Stalkers. Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in= 3 units 5 + 32 + 5 + 32 + 5 = 79 seconds for 3 Stalkers The down side is one Stalker will be at your base, but if you are just Macro'ing before you push out, that won't be an issue. But during an attack, it would be better to just warp in at your forward pylon, as travel distance would negate any gain from slightly faster production. However, I fear for many people this will be to APM taxing and will require solid timing and using both W and a hotkey for the Gateways. I could see this being extremely useful in clutch situations where a push has failed, and you need to replace units ASAP for defense against a counter-push.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you will only be at a significant advantage when warping in an odd number of units. Thus if a fourth stalker was warped in off pure warp gates then it would be almost or equally efficient as compared to warp->gate->warp->gate. This combined with the fact that it is very mechanically demanding and you can only warp in every other unit to any location make it a bit impractical.
Still it's a very good find and may have uses in the early game.
|
Interesting. Unfortunately, one would think Blizzard would prevent this from ahppening if it turns out to be viable.
|
I can see this really making a difference in the early game when I am being pressured by marauders. Warp in a stalker, switch to gateway, make a zealot, switch to warpgate, warp in a stalker...
|
On May 18 2010 04:21 Sabu113 wrote:
Interesting. Unfortunately, one would think Blizzard would prevent this from ahppening if it turns out to be viable.
not necessarily. blizzard does realize little things like this make the game more interesting
|
On May 18 2010 04:09 getSome[703] wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 03:55 Azuremen wrote:On May 18 2010 03:48 Tin_Foil wrote:
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers... Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units. 5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers Versus pure Warpgate for Stalkers. Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in= 3 units 5 + 32 + 5 + 32 + 5 = 79 seconds for 3 Stalkers The down side is one Stalker will be at your base, but if you are just Macro'ing before you push out, that won't be an issue. But during an attack, it would be better to just warp in at your forward pylon, as travel distance would negate any gain from slightly faster production. However, I fear for many people this will be to APM taxing and will require solid timing and using both W and a hotkey for the Gateways. I could see this being extremely useful in clutch situations where a push has failed, and you need to replace units ASAP for defense against a counter-push. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you will only be at a significant advantage when warping in an odd number of units. Thus if a fourth stalker was warped in off pure warp gates then it would be almost or equally efficient as compared to warp->gate->warp->gate. This combined with the fact that it is very mechanically demanding and you can only warp in every other unit to any location make it a bit impractical. Still it's a very good find and may have uses in the early game.
Significant gain can still be had. I used 3 units because to see the full benefit from a Warpgate to Gateway back to Warpgate, you need 3 unit cycles.
Basically, to get a Stalker from a Warpgate, you have a 37 (5 + 32) second cycle between Warp in. So each cycle +5, thus 6 Stalkers from Gates is
5(37) + 5 = 190 seconds
The math on the Warp/Gate system is a bit different due to benefits only occuring every 2 unit cycles, thus ready for production every 55 seconds with Stalkers, but you get 2 in those 55 seconds. And since it was noted you can change to a Gateway immediately after Warp in, the 5 second period can be ignored till the "end" of your production cycles, and you can subtract 10 seconds from initial math in even numbers as the time to move back to a Warpgate is not part of the cycle. So 6 Stalkers using this mechanic would be...
3(55) - 10 = 155 seconds
And note if you include Warpgate change over of 10 seconds
3(55) = 165 seconds, and you are ready to Warp in another unit, so 7 units in 170 seconds versus 6 in 190 seconds.
Gains are higher with DT or HT and Stalkers or Sentries due to the longer Cooldown being ignored, since Cooldown would count during the 42 + 3 + 10 production/change over time for a Stalker.
Though, I am at work so my math maybe flawed, and if so, please let me know.
|
im assuming you don't know that you can chrono boost a warpgate while is cooling down for faster cooldown
|
Wait. If it's running the warpgate cooldown and building a unit as a gateway at the same time, won't chronoboosting speed up both those timers?
If so, chronoboosting this would be insanely awesome. I'm going to go test it.
|
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. There is absolutely no benefit to swapping your gates.
|
question: if you chrono a gateway that has recently been changed from a warpgate...does the chrono help the warpgate cooldown as well as speed up the building unit in the gateway?
|
On May 18 2010 04:42 smore wrote:
question: if you chrono a gateway that has recently been changed from a warpgate...does the chrono help the warpgate cooldown as well as speed up the building unit in the gateway?
Yes, but read my post above.
|
On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same.
Explain?
I factored in the warpgate production boost: it's 10 seconds less cooldown for every unit (I already linked to the relevant Liquipedia page). This is never actually a 30% reduction, though it's pretty close for zealots.
For zealots you indeed get no boost.
For every other unit combination you get at least a small production boost for each pair of units.
Re: chrono boost: I haven't tested this explicitly IIRC, but I think it should speed both the warpgate cooldown reduction and the gateway production.
|
On May 18 2010 03:59 thebluehawk wrote:
That's very interesting actually. But like Azuremen said, it would probably be way too APM taxing. If people can successfully pull off a crazy timing push using this method, blizz will probably just make it so the warp gate cooldown only decreases while the building is in warp gate mode, which would easily and effectively kill this very creative strategy.
but if you make gateways less valuable, on one would use them once warpgates are upgraded
|
On May 18 2010 04:45 crate wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. Explain? I factored in the warpgate production boost: it's 10 seconds less cooldown for every unit (I already linked to the relevant Liquipedia page). For zealots you indeed get no boost. For every other unit combination you get at least a small production boost for each pair of units. Re: chrono boost: I haven't tested this explicitly IIRC, but I think it should speed both the warpgate cooldown reduction and the gateway production.
When I tested it it was exactly the same. I'm not sure where this "10 seconds" thing came in, I could have sworn it was 30% reduction off of the original build time, not a flat 10 seconds.
|
On May 18 2010 04:38 Project.SmyD wrote:
im assuming you don't know that you can chrono boost a warpgate while is cooling down for faster cooldown
I believe anyone looking at this would be fully aware of that you can Chronoboost a cooldown on a Warpgate. See below...
On May 18 2010 04:41 randomnine wrote:
Wait. If it's running the warpgate cooldown and building a unit as a gateway at the same time, won't chronoboosting speed up both those timers?
If so, chronoboosting this would be insanely awesome. I'm going to go test it.
This would be nearly OP I feel, as you can also Chrono Warpgate change over as well, so literally half the math involved, plus ignoring the 5 second Warp in phase as I don't think you can cut the Warp in time (please correct me if I am mistaken, I usually Chronoboost my gates after Warp in finishes)
On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. There is absolutely no benefit to swapping your gates.
You are mistaken. As has been mentioned several times in this thread, Cooldown is unit Production time minus 10 seconds. See my math above.
And before you attempt to tell us we are wrong again, Liquipedia entry on Warpgates.
|
On May 18 2010 04:51 Azuremen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:38 Project.SmyD wrote:
im assuming you don't know that you can chrono boost a warpgate while is cooling down for faster cooldown I believe anyone looking at this would be fully aware of that you can Chronoboost a cooldown on a Warpgate. See below... Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:41 randomnine wrote:
Wait. If it's running the warpgate cooldown and building a unit as a gateway at the same time, won't chronoboosting speed up both those timers?
If so, chronoboosting this would be insanely awesome. I'm going to go test it. This would be nearly OP I feel, as you can also Chrono Warpgate change over as well, so literally half the math involved, plus ignoring the 5 second Warp in phase as I don't think you can cut the Warp in time (please correct me if I am mistaken, I usually Chronoboost my gates after Warp in finishes) Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. There is absolutely no benefit to swapping your gates. You are mistaken. As has been mentioned several times in this thread, Cooldown is unit Production time minus 10 seconds. See my math above. And before you attempt to tell us we are wrong again, Liquipedia entry on Warpgates.
Dare I say liquipedia could be wrong? Until someone tests it and provides proof I am going to go with what I observed through my own testing months ago. You do realize liquipedia is a WIKI right?
The only source quoted on the wiki page is this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=114353
Which supports my claims. Warp gate is -30% not -10 seconds. If you disagree, feel free to test it and prove me wrong. I encourage you, because I do not currently have access to a computer with SC2.
|
The thought of chronoboost doubling up on warpgate + gateway AND having warp->gate->warp be faster anyways sounds more like a nightmare (as a zerg player) than anything else.
It's something I've always wondered about though, so glad to see the math on it. Sure you lose the warp, but if you're trying to mass units for a push who cares? The earlier your push comes the harder it is to defend, and you are initially making the units in your base anyways.
Also I've always thought that there has to be a reason you can turn warpgates back to gateways. I suppose it's just a noob friendly thing, but that seems silly.
|
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that some Blizzard guy had said that they dont expect good players to ever go from Warpgates back to Gateways, so I think its safe to say this is not intended.
I hope they dont fix it though, because it sounds interesting.
|
I thought that you couldn't change from a Warpgate to a Gateway while the Warpgate was cooloing down?
|
On May 18 2010 04:54 Wr3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:51 Azuremen wrote:On May 18 2010 04:38 Project.SmyD wrote:
im assuming you don't know that you can chrono boost a warpgate while is cooling down for faster cooldown I believe anyone looking at this would be fully aware of that you can Chronoboost a cooldown on a Warpgate. See below... On May 18 2010 04:41 randomnine wrote:
Wait. If it's running the warpgate cooldown and building a unit as a gateway at the same time, won't chronoboosting speed up both those timers?
If so, chronoboosting this would be insanely awesome. I'm going to go test it. This would be nearly OP I feel, as you can also Chrono Warpgate change over as well, so literally half the math involved, plus ignoring the 5 second Warp in phase as I don't think you can cut the Warp in time (please correct me if I am mistaken, I usually Chronoboost my gates after Warp in finishes) On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. There is absolutely no benefit to swapping your gates. You are mistaken. As has been mentioned several times in this thread, Cooldown is unit Production time minus 10 seconds. See my math above. And before you attempt to tell us we are wrong again, Liquipedia entry on Warpgates. Dare I say liquipedia could be wrong? Until someone tests it and provides proof I am going to go with what I observed through my own testing months ago. You do realize liquipedia is a WIKI right?
I'll screenshot the game for you when I get home in 4 hours. Or you can do it yourself right now and look at the cooldown timers displayed in the overlays at the Warpgates.
With a Zealot, it is 30%, but with a Stalker/Sentry its around 22%, a HT/DT is around 18%.
This could explain your testing results.
|
I'm pretty excited about the early game implications of this I'm also interested in the timings, because I read on other sites as well that warpgate is -10s from the original build time. I'll have to do some testing when I get home, unless someone else does it first ^^
|
On May 18 2010 05:00 Azuremen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 04:54 Wr3k wrote:On May 18 2010 04:51 Azuremen wrote:On May 18 2010 04:38 Project.SmyD wrote:
im assuming you don't know that you can chrono boost a warpgate while is cooling down for faster cooldown I believe anyone looking at this would be fully aware of that you can Chronoboost a cooldown on a Warpgate. See below... On May 18 2010 04:41 randomnine wrote:
Wait. If it's running the warpgate cooldown and building a unit as a gateway at the same time, won't chronoboosting speed up both those timers?
If so, chronoboosting this would be insanely awesome. I'm going to go test it. This would be nearly OP I feel, as you can also Chrono Warpgate change over as well, so literally half the math involved, plus ignoring the 5 second Warp in phase as I don't think you can cut the Warp in time (please correct me if I am mistaken, I usually Chronoboost my gates after Warp in finishes) On May 18 2010 04:42 Wr3k wrote:
You are wrong, switching the gateway back and forth results in the exact same production rate as leaving it a warpgate. The 30% reduction in build time is not factored into your calculations. I thought about this very early in the beta and tested it. Provided warp gates have not been stealth changed it is still the same. There is absolutely no benefit to swapping your gates. You are mistaken. As has been mentioned several times in this thread, Cooldown is unit Production time minus 10 seconds. See my math above. And before you attempt to tell us we are wrong again, Liquipedia entry on Warpgates. Dare I say liquipedia could be wrong? Until someone tests it and provides proof I am going to go with what I observed through my own testing months ago. You do realize liquipedia is a WIKI right? I'll screenshot the game for you when I get home in 4 hours. Or you can do it yourself right now and look at the cooldown timers displayed in the overlays at the Warpgates. With a Zealot, it is 30%, but with a Stalker/Sentry its around 22%, a HT/DT is around 18%. This could explain your testing results.
If I had access to SC2 at I would. Could someone please post the cooldown times for each unit on the warp gate? Because all empirical testing I have done and seen done indicates that it is 30%, which if it is true, makes this thread pointless.
|
I just tested this with Stalker->Zealot->Stalker and got a difference of 5 seconds total.
Replay.
Whatever the cooldown reductions, it does work. Whether 5 seconds is enough to make it worthwhile is another question.
[edit] So you dont have to pay attention:
First I test Warpgate->Gateway->Warpgate. The first Stalker begins warping in at 6:11, and the final Stalker finishes at 7:07, for a total of 56 seconds.
Then I test Warpgate->Warpgate->Warpgate. The first Stalker begins warping in at 7:44, and the final Stalker finishes at 8:45, for a total of 61 seconds.
|
On May 18 2010 05:15 kzn wrote:I just tested this with Stalker->Zealot->Stalker and got a difference of 5 seconds total. Replay. Whatever the cooldown reductions, it does work. Whether 5 seconds is enough to make it worthwhile is another question. [edit] So you dont have to pay attention: First I test Warpgate->Gateway->Warpgate. The first Stalker begins warping in at 6:11, and the final Stalker finishes at 7:07, for a total of 56 seconds. Then I test Warpgate->Warpgate->Warpgate. The first Stalker begins warping in at 7:44, and the final Stalker finishes at 8:45, for a total of 61 seconds.
Did you take into account the 5 seconds it takes to convert to warp gate each cycle?
It should be Warp Stalker> Convert to gateway> Build stalker> Convert to warp gate
Compared to the time it takes to warp 2 stalkers.
|
You should try with the higher tier units as well. As said previously in the thread, the difference is bigger if you warp in HTs and build a zealot, for example.
I'd try myself but B.net is down in Europe atm.
-Edit- @Wr3k: Obviously, he just did as the OP said that he should do and took the time when it ended and subtracted it with the time it started. Everything is accounted for within.
|
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look.
|
On May 18 2010 04:31 Tozar wrote:
I can see this really making a difference in the early game when I am being pressured by marauders. Warp in a stalker, switch to gateway, make a zealot, switch to warpgate, warp in a stalker...
Agreed, very interesting, and the only practical application I can see for this. It would be most useful in the early game when 150 minerals is more than just a drop in the bucket, and possibly mid-late game if your macro slips during a battle.. but it's pretty easy to keep your macro up during a fight as long as you have enough pylons and production facilities. I will definitely give this a shot next time I'm dealing with early aggression!
|
On May 18 2010 05:22 kzn wrote:
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look.
It makes no sense to test it by making 3 units like that, you are essentially including 1.5 "cycles" you need to be very specific about whether or not you are including the conversion time, and test it in one FULL cycle (one unit from gate one from warp), otherwise you are gaining or losing 5 seconds depending on how you time it.
To test it properly you need to time:
Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker
and compare it to:
Warp stalker > Warp Stalker
Look, when my desktop computer is available I will do a comprehensive analysis of this.
|
On May 18 2010 05:32 Wr3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 05:22 kzn wrote:
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look. It makes nosense to test it in a cycle of 3 units like that, you need to be very specific about whether or not you are including the conversion time, and test it in cycles of 2 or more, otherwise you are gaining or losing 5 seconds depending on how you time it. To test it properly you need to time: Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker and compare it to: Warp stalker > Warp Stalker
I don't see what you're trying to get at. You can start converting the warpgate back to a gateway while you're warping in the stalker. Also, to me, it makes more testing a cycle of 3 instead of two.
|
Bnet shut down as I was testing, but I can confirm that Liquipedia is wrong about warpgates. Stalkers certainly warp in faster than Liquipedia thinks they should.
You can't easily get the benefit of chronoboost on both timers. When building a stalker and a zealot [using constant chronoboost], the normal stalker warp-in cooldown finishes before you can build the zealot and transform the gateway back to a warpgate. I'll test with templars after the system comes back up, since their basic build time is longer at 55s.
|
8751 Posts
Unfortunately, paying for units in advance (regular Gateway) kinda sucks. When the Warp cooldown finishes, you pay for a new unit, then 3 seconds later you pay for another new unit. It's generally better for builds to pay for things more gradually. Getting slightly faster build times but having to pay for units two at a time is kinda iffy. I'm not sure if any builds can actually use this to be more effective. I guess it's worth looking into but the time sink isn't the only trade-off going on here. I guess some panic situations might use it in early game. For late game, it's definitely better to spend a few hundred extra minerals on Gateways and spend more time looking after your army and economy.
|
On May 18 2010 05:38 Aldehyde wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 05:32 Wr3k wrote:On May 18 2010 05:22 kzn wrote:
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look. It makes nosense to test it in a cycle of 3 units like that, you need to be very specific about whether or not you are including the conversion time, and test it in cycles of 2 or more, otherwise you are gaining or losing 5 seconds depending on how you time it. To test it properly you need to time: Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker and compare it to: Warp stalker > Warp Stalker I don't see what you're trying to get at. You can start converting the warpgate back to a gateway while you're warping in the stalker. Also, to me, it makes more testing a cycle of 3 instead of two.
If something has two phases, why would you ever measure one cycle as 3 phases? It makes each alternating cycle different, warp>gate>warp vs gate>warp>gate.
|
I'm so confused 
|
Changing back and forth when building units with the same cooldown is effectively a 23 second buildtime for every second unit built, no matter the actual unit buildtime.
Using it to mass zealots is obviously useless, since they have a 23 second warp in anyway.
Sentry/Stalker production is effectively increased to 2 per 55 seconds, instead of 2x32=64 seconds.
HT/DT production is effectively increased to 2 per 68 seconds, instead of 2x45=90 seconds.
It is of course most effective if you're warping in high cooldown units and training low cooldown/buildtime units from the gateways. For example: warping in a HT, switching and training a zealot, then switching back will take a total of 46 seconds, while the cooldown of the HT is normally 45 seconds, so you effectively get an extra zealot for 1 second of buildtime.
Here's the gateway and warpgate build data copied directly from the data files from the latest patch:
+ Show Spoiler [Warpgate] + <CAbilWarpTrain id="WarpGateTrain"> <EditorCategories value="Race  rotoss,AbilityorEffectType:Structures"/> <InfoArray index="Train1" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Zealot"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="100"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="23"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Zealot" State="Restricted"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train2" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Stalker"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="50"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="32"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Stalker" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train4" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="HighTemplar"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="150"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="45"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="HighTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveTemplarArchives"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train5" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="DarkTemplar"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="125"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="45"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="DarkTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveDarkShrine"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train6" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Disruptor"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="100"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="32"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Disruptor" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/>
+ Show Spoiler [Gateway] + <CAbilTrain id="GatewayTrain"> <EditorCategories value="Race rotoss,AbilityorEffectType:Structures"/> <InfoArray index="Train1" Time="33"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="100"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Zealot" State="Restricted"/> <Unit value="Zealot"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train2" Time="42"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="50"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Stalker" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> <Unit value="Stalker"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train4" Time="55"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="150"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="HighTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveTemplarArchives"/> <Unit value="HighTemplar"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train5" Time="55"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="125"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="DarkTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveDarkShrine"/> <Unit value="DarkTemplar"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train6" Time="42"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="100"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Disruptor" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> <Unit value="Disruptor"/>
The Sentry is reffered as Disruptor in the data files.
As you can see all units have their cooldowns set to be 10 seconds less than gateway training time. Having it as a percentage would be more intuitive, but it's just a flat reduction.
|
On May 18 2010 05:54 lololol wrote:Changing back and forth when building units with the same cooldown is effectively a 23 second buildtime for every second unit built, no matter the actual unit buildtime. Using it to mass zealots is obviously useless, since they have a 23 second warp in anyway. Sentry/Stalker production is effectively increased to 2 per 55 seconds, instead of 2x32=64 seconds. HT/DT production is effectively increased to 2 per 68 seconds, instead of 2x45=90 seconds. It is of course most effective if you're warping in high cooldown units and training low cooldown/buildtime units from the gateways. For example: warping in a HT, switching and training a zealot, then switching back will take a total of 46 seconds, while the cooldown of the HT is normally 45 seconds, so you effectively get an extra zealot for 1 second of buildtime. Here's the gateway and warpgate build data copied directly from the data files from the latest patch: + Show Spoiler [Warpgate] + <CAbilWarpTrain id="WarpGateTrain"> <EditorCategories value="Race rotoss,AbilityorEffectType:Structures"/> <InfoArray index="Train1" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Zealot"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="100"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="23"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Zealot" State="Restricted"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train2" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Stalker"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="50"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="32"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Stalker" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train4" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="HighTemplar"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="150"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="45"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="HighTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveTemplarArchives"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train5" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="DarkTemplar"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="125"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="45"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="DarkTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveDarkShrine"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train6" Category="Army" Time="5" Unit="Disruptor"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="100"/> <Cooldown Link="WarpGateTrain" Location="Unit" TimeUse="32"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Disruptor" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> <CAbilTrain id="GatewayTrain"> <EditorCategories value="Race rotoss,AbilityorEffectType:Structures"/> <InfoArray index="Train1" Time="33"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="100"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Zealot" State="Restricted"/> <Unit value="Zealot"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train2" Time="42"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="50"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Stalker" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> <Unit value="Stalker"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train4" Time="55"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="150"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="HighTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveTemplarArchives"/> <Unit value="HighTemplar"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train5" Time="55"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="125"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="125"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="DarkTemplar" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveDarkShrine"/> <Unit value="DarkTemplar"/> </InfoArray> <InfoArray index="Train6" Time="42"> <Resource index="Minerals" value="50"/> <Resource index="Vespene" value="100"/> <Button DefaultButtonFace="Disruptor" State="Restricted" Requirements="HaveCyberneticsCore"/> <Unit value="Disruptor"/> The Sentry is reffered as Disruptor in the data files. As you can see all units have their cooldowns set to be 10 seconds less than gateway training time. Having it as a percentage would be more intuitive, but it's just a flat reduction.
Cool beans, so you can actually see some significant advantages with this if you are making templar. I'm glad someone with a copy of SC2 available was able to get some real numbers here, because this thread was getting wayyyy derailed. I guess I was mistaken about the 30% its only 30% for zealots and on the tooltip, so you will infact see slight production increase for stalkers/sentry and even more for templar. I'm surprised I didn't notice this when I tested it before, must've only tested with zealots.
Assuming you do this perfectly you save:
-4.5 game seconds per stalker or sentry
-11 game seconds per templar (WOAH)
|
Tested it and yes it works. But it felt like the time gained from making just stalkers was very small (who builds ht's anyway ). Even though switching back and forth between gateway and warpgate does increase the production rate, the 2nd unit you build always pops earlier if you just warp them in which kind of ruins the chance of it saving you in most heated moments. Still cool though, hope blizzard keeps it this way just for the crazyness.
|
|
|
On May 18 2010 06:38 airen wrote:Tested it and yes it works. But it felt like the time gained from making just stalkers was very small (who builds ht's anyway ). Even though switching back and forth between gateway and warpgate does increase the production rate, the 2nd unit you build always pops earlier if you just warp them in which kind of ruins the chance of it saving you in most heated moments. Still cool though, hope blizzard keeps it this way just for the crazyness.
Yeah, 4.5 game seconds isn't much. You probably lose half of that with the slight delays between conversions unless you are constantly babysitting your gates, but the templar production reduction is pretty huge. Might be very useful if you have saved up gas and your templar tech finishes.
|
I've done the math for this so many times >.>
The way it works out, both methods (Pure Warpgate vs ReGating, which I like to call it) get their second unit out at around the same time. HOWEVER, ReGating means you can get a THIRD unit MUCH earlier, while the pure Warpgates will have a huuuuuuge wait before you can get the third unit.
Here are a couple of links:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=117241
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113568¤tpage=15#287
In the end, it's generally worth switching between them. It's a huge APM sink that grows by tremendous amounts as you get more Warpgates, and it speeds up your production by quite a bit.The ONLY moment that just using Warpgates will get units out faster is when you create only 2 units, but when are you going to make JUST 2 units? >.>
Note that if you're not using a Warpgate build, it would be negligible in the first place. But the more Warpgates you have, the quicker it all adds up (Imagine pumping out 3 units from 5 Warpgates, assuming you have infinite APM [just for the purposes of this example]; You have your units minutes before you would have them otherwise)
EDIT: Here's the most interesting part (I think) from the posts I linked:
On March 26 2010 09:12 Zeke50100 wrote:
A small list, if you guys are wondering:
Without the Trick (Standard Warpgate)
Templar + Zealot = 50 seconds to finish Zealot, 73 seconds for third unit
Stalker/Sentry + Zealot = 37 seconds to finish Zealot, 60 seconds for third unit
Templar + Stalker/Sentry = 50 seconds to finish St/Se, 92 seconds for third unit
With the Trick (Reverting WarpGate - ReGate?)
Templar + Zealot = 46 seconds to finish Zealot, 51 seconds for third unit
Stalker/Sentry + Zealot = 46 seconds to finish Zealot, 51 seconds for third unit
Templar + Stalker/Sentry = 55 seconds to finish St/Se, 60 seconds for third unit
Note that what the third unit is doesn't matter, because it will always take 5 seconds to warp in. Of course, it does matter if you want to continue the math, but you get similar results.
|
i tried that in the beginning of beta and considered it to be not worth it. Maybe they changed times? Well, maybe it's good for templars.
|
So the question is, how good of a player do you have to be to really take advantage of this. It would seem if you don't time it right the gain won't be that significant.
|
On May 18 2010 05:32 Wr3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 05:22 kzn wrote:
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look. It makes no sense to test it by making 3 units like that, you are essentially including 1.5 "cycles" you need to be very specific about whether or not you are including the conversion time, and test it in one FULL cycle (one unit from gate one from warp), otherwise you are gaining or losing 5 seconds depending on how you time it. To test it properly you need to time: Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker and compare it to: Warp stalker > Warp Stalker Look, when my desktop computer is available I will do a comprehensive analysis of this.
I fixed this for you:
Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker
and compare it to:
Convert to warpgate > Warp stalker > Warp Stalker
|
Can't check this for all units right at the moment because I'm off to dinner, but the game tells you how much cooldown is left on your warpgate right after you warp in a unit. Hover your cursor over any unit and it'll say.
Zealots have 23 warpgate cooldown and stalkers have 32, consistent with Liquipedia. I didn't check the rest.
|
On May 18 2010 07:21 crate wrote:
Can't check this for all units right at the moment because I'm off to dinner, but the game tells you how much cooldown is left on your warpgate right after you warp in a unit. Hover your cursor over any unit and it'll say.
Zealots have 23 warpgate cooldown and stalkers have 32, consistent with Liquipedia. I didn't check the rest.
They're all correct; just the normal build times -5.
|
On May 18 2010 07:13 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 05:32 Wr3k wrote:On May 18 2010 05:22 kzn wrote:
Thats what I did. I only built one Gateway, researched warpgate, and build Stalker->Zealot->Stalker with each methodology.
I'm fairly certain there is no reason to do this if you're just trying to spam out identical units (I could be wrong) but that it works only on the basis of different build times (and therefore cooldowns) for each unit.
[edit] Its probably a second less than 5, since I forgot what to hit to turn Warpgates back into Gateways and had to look. It makes no sense to test it by making 3 units like that, you are essentially including 1.5 "cycles" you need to be very specific about whether or not you are including the conversion time, and test it in one FULL cycle (one unit from gate one from warp), otherwise you are gaining or losing 5 seconds depending on how you time it. To test it properly you need to time: Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker and compare it to: Warp stalker > Warp Stalker Look, when my desktop computer is available I will do a comprehensive analysis of this. I fixed this for you: Convert to warpgate > warp stalker > convert to gateway > build stalker and compare it to: Convert to warpgate > Warp stalker > Warp Stalker
The convert to warpgate in the 2nd case is a 1 time cost, you don't lose 10 seconds after every 2 stalkers once you have made your warp gates. Either way the math is done and proven correct now.
|
People should read my post >.> Making more than 2 units will always result in a net gain. Don't test just 2 and say "OLOL IT SUCKS," because you're not going to just make 2 unit in a situation where it matters in the first place.
|
I don't see how this would work. Using the following data I know to be true:
Zealots take 33 seconds to build from a Gateway
Zealots take 5 seconds to place from a Warpgate
Zealots have a 23 second cooldown from a Warpgate
The Warpgate cooldown starts when the Zealot is placed
It takes 10 seconds for a GW to become a WG
It takes 3 seconds for a WG to become a GW
Gateway only: Zealots
1) 33 seconds
2) 66 seconds
3) 99 seconds
4) 132 seconds
Warpgate only: Zealots
1) 5 seconds
2) 28 seconds
3) 51 seconds
4) 74 seconds
Warpgate -> Gateway -> Warpgate -> Gateway
1) 5 seconds (Warp one in at the start)
2) 41 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
3) 56 seconds (10 seconds to become a WG, 5 to make a Zealot)
4) 92 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
You're basically alternating Zealots every 15 and 36 seconds. 15 comes from 10 to turn it into a WG, then 5 to Warp in, and 36 comes from 3 to turn it into a GW and 33 to create the Zealot.
The average of 15 and 36 is 24, which is longer than the base Warpgate cooldown of 23 seconds.
|
United States22883 Posts
I think the OP said it didn't work with zealots.
|
Zealots are the only unit it doesn't work for.
The other units' long cooldowns save you time with this method. At least how I understand it.
This does not speed up straight zealots, but does speed up every other two-unit combination. You always want to warp-in the longer build time unit and gateway-build the other.
^ From OP
|
so with # gates
W-Shift+(templar hotkey)-click*#-(hold W)-(Zealot Hotkey)*#-wait-1-(hold W)- Shift+(Sentry Hotkey)-click*#
you can make # lots, # Templar and # Sentry much faster. thats not taxing on your APM thats pretty much what zerg does every day with queen and egg micro. (as a zerg player i could do this easily)
Also it only works with warping in units with longer cooldowns alternating with low train time units.
I might play some toss games with this mechanic.
|
On May 18 2010 07:42 Bibdy wrote:
I don't see how this would work. Using the following data I know to be true:
Zealots take 33 seconds to build from a Gateway
Zealots take 5 seconds to place from a Warpgate
Zealots have a 23 second cooldown from a Warpgate
The Warpgate cooldown starts when the Zealot is placed
It takes 10 seconds for a GW to become a WG
It takes 3 seconds for a WG to become a GW
Gateway only: Zealots
1) 33 seconds
2) 66 seconds
3) 99 seconds
4) 132 seconds
Warpgate only: Zealots
1) 5 seconds
2) 28 seconds
3) 51 seconds
4) 74 seconds
Warpgate -> Gateway -> Warpgate -> Gateway
1) 5 seconds (Warp one in at the start)
2) 41 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
3) 56 seconds (10 seconds to become a WG, 5 to make a Zealot)
4) 92 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
You're basically alternating Zealots every 15 and 36 seconds. 15 comes from 10 to turn it into a WG, then 5 to Warp in, and 36 comes from 3 to turn it into a GW and 33 to create the Zealot.
The average of 15 and 36 is 24, which is longer than the base Warpgate cooldown of 23 seconds.
While the unit warps in the gateway can still cool down, so the 5 seconds is irrelevant.
|
I just got done trying this in PvP, it was hard to micro and get the timings right but in one game, i tryed it, mirrored his build and had 3 more stalkers then he did
|
Testet it just now and my result is:
CD for a WG is 10 sec less then original production time in a GW. but then you have a production time in youre WG for 5 sec, and a 10 sec GW to WG convert time. And the GW saves the raily point between converting.
So it could be intresting to use as it means a free Zelot on each Templar, or for a bit of extra time, you could get two units instead of one if you are producing Stalkers or Sentrys however for only Zelot production, it will be slower.
So for my test i used two warpgate's of wich i converted one of them and had a "CD production" (CDP)
test1:
+ Show Spoiler +"CD production"(CDP) = Zelot and "Main production" (MP) = Dark Templar
for WG1(non converting):
t0 start Warp-in of DT
t5 DT ready
t45 CD done
for WG1(converting):
t0 start Warp-in of DT
t1 converting to GW (3sec)
t4 GW done
t5 DT ready, start production of zelot
t38 Zelot done
t39 start converting to WG
t49 converting done
so for an extra production time of 4sec you recived one extra Zelot.
This test would work the same for a High Templar as the CD and production time is the same
test2:
+ Show Spoiler + CDP = Zelot and MP = Stalker
for WG1(non converting):
t0 start Warp-in of Stalker
t5 Stalker ready
t32 CD done
for WG1(converting):
t0 start Warp-in of Stalker
t1 converting to GW (3sec)
t4 GW done
t5 Stalker ready, start production of zelot
t38 Zelot done
t39 start converting to WG
t49 converting done
Production time for the extra Zelots = 17sec.
This test would work the same for a Sentry as the CD and production time is the same
test3:
+ Show Spoiler +"CD production"(CDP) = Sentry and "Main production" (MP) = Dark Templar
for WG1(non converting):
t0 start Warp-in of DT
t5 DT ready
t45 CD done
for WG1(converting):
t0 start Warp-in of DT
t1 converting to GW (3sec)
t4 GW done
t5 DT ready, start production of Sentry
t47 Zelot done
t48 start converting to WG
t58 converting done
So for an extra production time of 13sec you recived one extra Stalker/Sentry.
This test would work the same for a High Templar as the CD and production time is the same
All test could prob. be cut with like 3 sec as this was my first time testing.
I did not do ant further testing as the benefit is 0 if the MP and CDP production is Zelots.
however the benefit for this trick will be diminished as the game goes on for two+one reasons:
1. The more Warpgates to manage the more time goes spoild in each transition (needs more time clicking keys and mouse)
2. The running distance will EAT up the benefit.
3. (the +1 reason) APM, this will consume you're APM, actions you may have bigger need on for managing something else.
However an interesting idee for a timed push with stalkers/Sentrys and Zelots would be possible using the Warp-in, Convert, Build, Convert, Warp-in as it will make you for ex. 2 stalkers and one Zelot in 54 sec and when on CD Push forward!
But ill guess the argument against this as a valid strategy is that it takes time before you have you're warpgate research, and the 1-4 extra Zelots may not be as great as it seams on paper.
Edit: added a third test with CD of Stalkers/Sentrys
|
While it is surely possible, I REALLY doubt the gain is worth it.
1) Heavier demand on resources, meaning less non-gateway units or more expos to defend, meaning this is very late game, meaning you should have 10 warpgates anyhow which should be plenty to replenish your army and you'll have enough other tasks to handle, see 2.
2) Attention demanding - delay one cycle for 5 seconds and you won't benefit at all.
Whilst 2 might end up being irrelevant at pro-level, I doubt that most of us got the mechanics to actually pull it off without messing up at one point - I know I wouldn't be able to.
|
United States47024 Posts
On May 18 2010 03:50 Chunkybuddha wrote:
Pretty sweet idea, but doesn't this just fix bad macro?
Ideally, starcraft players with the exception of zerg maybe, wants to keep their resources at a super minimum through-out the game. To do this right, you have sufficient production facilities to meet your resources to bring them down to 0 every 'round'.
With your idea, you'll need an odd number of gateways, and weird timings to keep your resources 0. You might need less gateways if you do it right, but I would rather have more warp gates warping rather than less gateways rallying.
Even if you are pro, this would be super hard to pull off correctly and not as beneficial of having your army warped across the map.
There are exceptions. The most obvious example is varying the number of gates because you want to take an expansion earlier.
What this does is let you narrow the timing window in which your unit production has to catch up just after you lay down an expansion, because using this, you can immediately up your rate of unit production, without having to wait for additional gateways to finish building. It will only likely speed up 1 round of units, but games have been won and lost on stuff like that.
|
Ah, I see.
Gateway: Stalkers
1) 42 seconds
2) 84 seconds
3) 126 seconds
4) 168 seconds
5) 210 seconds
Warpgate: Stalkers
1) 5 seconds
2) 37 seconds
3) 69 seconds
4) 101 seconds
5) 133 seconds
WG -> GW -> WG -> GW: Stalkers
1) 5 seconds
2) 50 seconds
3) 65 seconds
4) 110 seconds
5) 125 seconds
GW -> WG -> GW -> WG: Stalkers
1) 42 seconds
2) 57 seconds
3) 102 seconds
4) 117 seconds
5) 162 seconds
You do save a bit of time, here and there, but you have to start with Warpgates.
It obviously works better with longer build-time units.
Gateway: HTs
1) 55 seconds
2) 110 seconds
3) 165 seconds
4) 220 seconds
5) 275 seconds
Warpgates: HTs
1) 5 seconds
2) 50 seconds
3) 95 seconds
4) 140 seconds
5) 185 seconds
WG -> GW -> WG -> GW: HTs
1) 5 seconds
2) 63 seconds
3) 78 seconds
4) 136 seconds
5) 151 seconds
So, build times alternate between 15 seconds one way and (x+3) the other, versus constant Warpgate production of (x-10). So, you calculate for x:
15 + (x+3) < 2(x-10)
x > 38
So, when the build time is 38 seconds or longer, the swapping method is more beneficial.
PROVEN WITH MATH.
|
On May 18 2010 07:52 Wr3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 07:42 Bibdy wrote:
I don't see how this would work. Using the following data I know to be true:
Zealots take 33 seconds to build from a Gateway
Zealots take 5 seconds to place from a Warpgate
Zealots have a 23 second cooldown from a Warpgate
The Warpgate cooldown starts when the Zealot is placed
It takes 10 seconds for a GW to become a WG
It takes 3 seconds for a WG to become a GW
Gateway only: Zealots
1) 33 seconds
2) 66 seconds
3) 99 seconds
4) 132 seconds
Warpgate only: Zealots
1) 5 seconds
2) 28 seconds
3) 51 seconds
4) 74 seconds
Warpgate -> Gateway -> Warpgate -> Gateway
1) 5 seconds (Warp one in at the start)
2) 41 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
3) 56 seconds (10 seconds to become a WG, 5 to make a Zealot)
4) 92 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
You're basically alternating Zealots every 15 and 36 seconds. 15 comes from 10 to turn it into a WG, then 5 to Warp in, and 36 comes from 3 to turn it into a GW and 33 to create the Zealot.
The average of 15 and 36 is 24, which is longer than the base Warpgate cooldown of 23 seconds. While the unit warps in the gateway can still cool down, so the 5 seconds is irrelevant.
Are you saying you can turn a Warp Gate into a Gateway while the unit is still warping in?
|
On May 18 2010 08:05 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 07:52 Wr3k wrote:On May 18 2010 07:42 Bibdy wrote:
I don't see how this would work. Using the following data I know to be true:
Zealots take 33 seconds to build from a Gateway
Zealots take 5 seconds to place from a Warpgate
Zealots have a 23 second cooldown from a Warpgate
The Warpgate cooldown starts when the Zealot is placed
It takes 10 seconds for a GW to become a WG
It takes 3 seconds for a WG to become a GW
Gateway only: Zealots
1) 33 seconds
2) 66 seconds
3) 99 seconds
4) 132 seconds
Warpgate only: Zealots
1) 5 seconds
2) 28 seconds
3) 51 seconds
4) 74 seconds
Warpgate -> Gateway -> Warpgate -> Gateway
1) 5 seconds (Warp one in at the start)
2) 41 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
3) 56 seconds (10 seconds to become a WG, 5 to make a Zealot)
4) 92 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
You're basically alternating Zealots every 15 and 36 seconds. 15 comes from 10 to turn it into a WG, then 5 to Warp in, and 36 comes from 3 to turn it into a GW and 33 to create the Zealot.
The average of 15 and 36 is 24, which is longer than the base Warpgate cooldown of 23 seconds. While the unit warps in the gateway can still cool down, so the 5 seconds is irrelevant. Are you saying you can turn a Warp Gate into a Gateway while the unit is still warping in?
Yep try it
|
I'm at work
But, that would mean build times alternate between 15 seconds, and (x-2) seconds, meaning the build time only needs to be larger than 33 seconds to gain a benefit:
Zealots: WG
1) 5
2) 28
3) 51
4) 74
5) 97
Zealots: Alternating
1) 5
2) 36
3) 51
4) 82
5) 97
Stalkers: WG
1) 5
2) 37
3) 69
4) 101
5) 133
Stalkers: Alternating
1) 5
2) 45
3) 60
4) 100
5) 115
HTs: WG
1) 5
2) 50
3) 95
4) 140
5) 185
HTs: Alternating
1) 5
2) 58
3) 73
4) 126
5) 141
Makes you wonder if they deliberately picked those numbers for Warpgate/Gateway swapping times to allow this kind of stuff.
|
Haven't read much of the thread but I think this would be very helpful when only getting 1 gateway early game. Other than that I don't think anyone below A+ and above will be able to do it effectively.
|
I predict by.hero will use Protoss when he switches to SC2 because he'll finally have something to do with that 400 APM.
But this is fantastic. Hopefully it won't get patched away...
|
can someone test stalker (or sentry) from warp-gate -> change to gateway -> zealot from gate -> back to warpgate -> stalker/sentry -> gateway -> zealot etc.etc. timings like you've done with pure stalker, zealot and templar above.
If this works it could make being agressive off 3 gates rather than 4 or 5 viable for PvZ and make gateway agression a LOT stronger.
edit: in my head, you could get 3 stalkers 2 zealots in the time it usually takes to get 5 zealots from warpgates doing this switch back and forth way 100% efficiently from one gateway?
eg:
switching between every action
1s)5
1s:1z)36
2s:1z)51
2s:2z)82
3s:2z)97
Does this make sense or if this is wrong? Cos this will seriously change how i play pvz if this works
|
I'll just repost a quote from me:
A small list, if you guys are wondering:
Without the Trick (Standard Warpgate)
Templar + Zealot = 50 seconds to finish Zealot, 73 seconds for third unit
Stalker/Sentry + Zealot = 37 seconds to finish Zealot, 60 seconds for third unit
Templar + Stalker/Sentry = 50 seconds to finish St/Se, 92 seconds for third unit
With the Trick (Reverting WarpGate - ReGate?)
Templar + Zealot = 46 seconds to finish Zealot, 51 seconds for third unit
Stalker/Sentry + Zealot = 46 seconds to finish Zealot, 51 seconds for third unit
Templar + Stalker/Sentry = 55 seconds to finish St/Se, 60 seconds for third unit
Stalker/Sentry -> Zealot -> Stalker/Sentry would take 60 seconds with regular Warpgating, and 51 seconds with a reversion.
EDIT: Ah, you wanted a continuous list. Just keep on adding the time it takes to convert from Warpgate to Gateway (3 seconds), as well as the Zealot build time + 10 seconds.
|
So everyone knows. i did this in thre 2v2's and my average APMS for the 2v2's were 68, 104, 83. Also i don't spam at the start of the game so that artificially lowers my APM compared to others, but regardless i'm just showing the level of APM required to pull them off. the 104 game was do to crazy blink micro i was doing not the managing of the base. 68 was a map control mineral starve game where i just sat and macro'd and 83 was a regular game.
|
On May 18 2010 08:11 NuKedUFirst wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 08:05 Bibdy wrote:On May 18 2010 07:52 Wr3k wrote:On May 18 2010 07:42 Bibdy wrote:
I don't see how this would work. Using the following data I know to be true:
Zealots take 33 seconds to build from a Gateway
Zealots take 5 seconds to place from a Warpgate
Zealots have a 23 second cooldown from a Warpgate
The Warpgate cooldown starts when the Zealot is placed
It takes 10 seconds for a GW to become a WG
It takes 3 seconds for a WG to become a GW
Gateway only: Zealots
1) 33 seconds
2) 66 seconds
3) 99 seconds
4) 132 seconds
Warpgate only: Zealots
1) 5 seconds
2) 28 seconds
3) 51 seconds
4) 74 seconds
Warpgate -> Gateway -> Warpgate -> Gateway
1) 5 seconds (Warp one in at the start)
2) 41 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
3) 56 seconds (10 seconds to become a WG, 5 to make a Zealot)
4) 92 seconds (3 seconds to become a GW, 33 to make a Zealot)
You're basically alternating Zealots every 15 and 36 seconds. 15 comes from 10 to turn it into a WG, then 5 to Warp in, and 36 comes from 3 to turn it into a GW and 33 to create the Zealot.
The average of 15 and 36 is 24, which is longer than the base Warpgate cooldown of 23 seconds. While the unit warps in the gateway can still cool down, so the 5 seconds is irrelevant. Are you saying you can turn a Warp Gate into a Gateway while the unit is still warping in? Yep try it
Well damn. Its true.
|
3 scenarios (TL;DR option is available at the bottom so dont worry if you cba to sift through this =])
zealots - 33 sec build time (23 sec cd)
stalkers/sentries - 42 sec built time (32 sec cd)
templar - 55 sec build time (45 sec cd)
zealots:
Warp gate usage:
Produce zealot
wait 23 seconds on cooldown (yes there is a 5 second warp time but the cooldown activates during this time not afterwards so in terms of continuous production it is irrelevant)
produce zealot
wait 23 seconds
produce zealot
add 5 seconds at the end of whatever number of zealots you want to create
so for 4, 97 seconds, as for continuous production, we're going to leave it out, as we're assuming a production that can support infinite cycles.
23 seconds per zealot, 92 for 4
Switch method:
Create zealot & beging morphing to gateway
3 seconds
Create zealot
33 seconds
Morph to gateway
10 seconds
produce zealot and begin morphing
3 seconds
produce zealot
33 seconds
Morph to warpgate
10 seconds
92 seconds, exactly the same.
Where the confusion may have come from is that in your tests you are counting the first 3 zealots produced, the problem is that this is not a complete cycle! As this method produces very burst production (33 seconds wait time then two zealots in 10 seconds) so by cutting off your test at the correct time will give an untrue value.
Stalker/sentry
warpgate:
32 seconds per stalker
32 * 4 = 128 seconds for 4 stalkers
suggested method:
Produce stalker and begin morphing to gateway
3 seconds
produce stalker
42 seconds
morph to gateway
10 seconds
produce stalker & begin morphing to gateway
3 seconds
produce stalker
42 seconds
morph to gateway
10 seconds
= 110 seconds for 4 stalkers, 27.5 seconds per stalker, an increase of 4.5 seconds per unit (14%)
Templar
Warpgates:
45 seconds per templar
45*4 = 180 seconds for 4
switch method:
Produce templar & begin morphing to gateway
3 seconds
produce templar
55 seconds
morph to warpgate
10 seconds
Produce templar & begin morphing to gateway
3 seconds
produce templar
55 seconds
morph to warpgate
10 seconds
= 136 seconds for 4, 34 seconds per templar, an increase of 11 seconds (24%)
As you can see for anything above zealots this method does produce faster over an infinite loop; however its important to remember at what cost this comes
1. it is obviously a HUGE apm sink, and one missed cycle can leave your warpgates completely out of action for a long period and cost you games
2. You lose the really primary reason for getting warpgates, 10 seconds off the production time from a normal gateway pales in comparison to the ability for burst production in any location desired, for instance the above method would be useless for reinforcing a push
TL;DR:
warpgates:
zealots : 23 seconds per
stalker/sentry: 32 seconds per
templar: 45 seconds per
Switch method:
zealots: 23 seconds per
stalker/sentry: 27.5 seconds per
templar: 34 seconds per
|
Neat idea, but i guess its only viable for early game-mid gameplay where you are trying to squeeze out units for defending or for an all-in rush. Imagine having to do that on >6 warpgates, the amount of multitasking taken is insane.
I guess you are better off doing this in the early-mid
phase of the game, but when you reach late game its generally better to get more warpgates and babysit your army so it doesnt die due to the fact that you are so busy trying to do this for a huge amount of warpgates
|
It's indeed very interesting.
It isn't really useful in mid to late game, where you can easily add 1-2 warpgates.
But it might be viable in the early game / for a timing push, even tho you have to consider what nony said earlier in this thread. The fact that you have to pay your units in advance is HUGE, especially for the early game / timing push.
Which of both weight more (paying in advance or faster building-time) in a specific build is nothing math can tell us (right now), only time will tell.
It might be used for something like pimpest play when the bases of both the players are destroyed in the late game and someone is using it to win the game tho :D
|
On May 18 2010 03:55 Azuremen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2010 03:48 Tin_Foil wrote:
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
Um, no. Warpgate cool down is the unit's Gateway production time -10 seconds, starting after the 5 second Warp in period. So, according to the OP's suggestion, the math goes as such for Stalkers... Warp In + Gateway Change + Production + Warpgate Change + Warp in = 3 units. 5 + 3 + 42 + 10 + 5 = 65 seconds for 3 Stalkers Versus pure Warpgate for Stalkers. Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in + Cooldown + Warp in= 3 units 5 + 32 + 5 + 32 + 5 = 79 seconds for 3 Stalkers The down side is one Stalker will be at your base, but if you are just Macro'ing before you push out, that won't be an issue. But during an attack, it would be better to just warp in at your forward pylon, as travel distance would negate any gain from slightly faster production. However, I fear for many people this will be to APM taxing and will require solid timing and using both W and a hotkey for the Gateways. I could see this being extremely useful in clutch situations where a push has failed, and you need to replace units ASAP for defense against a counter-push.
The APM problem is why I don't use it (instead, I do a straight 4-gate right off, leaving the option for a 6-gate if I can stay defensive long enough when a second Nexus comes online). It still leaves the option of combining a Warp Pylon (in Pylon mode, naturally) as an adjunct to a 4-gate or larger to reinforce a push if you get stonewalled. in the area of the opponent's base.
|
I think this is a lot more powerful than people realize. I also expect it will get nerfed at some point. When spamming a single unit, the gain isn't very much, but when using units with different build times nets you a huge production boost. The time saved when using warpgate>gateway adds up over time to be quite signficant, and that time applies to every single warpgate, so it's actually quite a gain. Also, I believe the cooldown on the warpgate begins immediately, not after the warp in is complete, unlike what liquipedia says.
To be fair, late game it probably will be much less useful, because once you hit 200/200 it's better to have a ton of warpgates to replenish your army immediately in battle, right by the front line to overwhelm the enemy. However I see a lot of early game potential with this, once it is properly worked into a build, as building 1 less gateway could mean a faster expansion, or a whatever you wish to put the minerals towards. Switching does require building 2 units practically at once and bursts your spending, but if Zerg can adapt to saving money for the 4 larva that pop from Spawn Larva, then Protoss can adapt to 2 units at once.
With the best combination (templar warp zealot build), your production ends up being close to twice as efficient as a regular gateway, whereas warpgates aren't even half that. 6 Templar x 55t + 6 zealots x 32t would take 522 time. Just warpgate takes 6T x 45t + 6Z x 23t = 408 time. If switching back and forth, it only takes 266 time, which is only 10 time units longer than half of Gateway time, almost double efficiency. At this most extreme example, switching back and forth actually gives you MORE (additional 142 less time) of a boost than the Warpgate gave to your Gateway(114 less time).
A second Warp Gate is better than 1 Gate switching, but switching is better than getting a 3rd gate. It does require more macro, but the extras macro is spread out over transform time, so its not necessarily more intensive apm wise. Also, the delay on even units dissapears very rapidly. If making Stalkers/Sentries (zealots are useless to switch for) the 2nd and 4th stalkers are delayed (by 13 and 4 time respectively), but every stalker thereafter comes out faster .
Warpgate Stalkers
4@96
5@128
6@160
7@192
vs Warp>Gate Stalkers
4@100
5@110
6@155
7@165
13 time is quite negligible of a delay, thus it really doesn't hurt your army strength too much to switch outside of 1/2 the units spawning instead of warping to where you want them. Here are some other interesting times.
Z=Zealot S=Stalker/Sentry T=HIgh/Dark Templar
All times go until beginning of Warp in of last unit, beginning WG cooldown.
Warp Only
Units Time Food
11S 320 22
8T 315 16
Switching
Units Time Food
13S 330 26
8S+7Z 322 30
11T 340 22 (9 T @ 272)
8T+7Z 322 30
7T+6S 330 26
Liquipedia lists both Templars as 2 food, though this doesn't sound right, may be flawed on food.
Unfortunately Templar build times don't stack so well, but since this is in game time, the 15 total time difference will only amount to just over 10 seconds difference, so they're all fairly close to the same time. Also observe that when spamming the same units the gain is much smaller (2-3 units) as opposed to using different units (4-7 units). Switching the Warpgate back into a Gateway when building different units can significantly boost your production, even over the boost gained from warpgate. The extra units are also gained at a good oportunity cost in most of the combinations, such as 1 templar and 15 more time for 7 zealots. If chrono boost affects both the Warpgate cooldown and the Gateway unit build time, you are also effectively chronoboosting 2 things for the price of one.
Conclusion: Late game it is better to have many warp gates to instantly replenish a 200 army while it is in battle, as well as the warping around for mobility. While not as good as a 2nd gateway, the cumulative effect of faster time when switching and this effect applying to ALL gateways you build, make this quite powerful. Since switching provides an even greater boost than warp gate itself gives, warp gates are only half as effective as they could be if not switched. Chronoboost can also be used twice as effectively, saving you 10 time from 2 units per cast, instead of 10 time from 1 unit/research. If not spamming a single unit type, this adds a significant boost. As soon as the beta comes back up, this sort of mechanics should absolutely be worked in standard protoss play until late-midgame, when minerals start to accumulate for more gates and mobility becomes more important.
|
Took long enough for this to get attention, it's been documented here in the forums for like, ages...
Someone even named it "ReGating" back then.
EDIT:
something I didn't see in this thread:
This is all compatible with Chrono Boost. It will affect both the Gateway production time and the WG cooldown simultaneously.
Now, can someone test if CB will reduce the transformation period?
|
I think the best use of this, as someone pointed out in another thread, is getting a 'free' Zealot in between Warping of HTs.
0:00 Drop HT (cooldown starts), start turning into a Gateway
0:03 Start building a Zealot
0:05 HT finishes warping in
0:36 Zealot finishes building, start turning into a Warp Gate
0:45 HT cooldown finishes
0:46 Finished turning into a Warp Gate
So, for 1 extra second, you can fit in a free Zealot while the 45s cooldown of the HT is plodding along and now you can warp-in the next unit.
|
Wouldn't chrono boosting your warpgates be better? I mean in mid-late games where you have 3+ nexus up, you are bound to have excess energy on all of then. Just spam chrono boost on warpgates to make units faster. Isn't that more straight forward?
I don't think sacrificial APM needed to pull of this maneuver of converting a wg to gateway and back again is worth it in a real match unless it's for a timing push.
|
On June 22 2010 08:51 brocoli wrote:
Now, can someone test if CB will reduce the transformation period?
It does.
I had no idea that it would be faster to swap back and forth. I never understood why there was even a button to revert back, as I always thought WGs were just strictly better than GWs.
|
On June 22 2010 10:05 dbddbddb wrote:
Wouldn't chrono boosting your warpgates be better? I mean in mid-late games where you have 3+ nexus up, you are bound to have excess energy on all of then. Just spam chrono boost on warpgates to make units faster. Isn't that more straight forward?
I don't think sacrificial APM needed to pull of this maneuver of converting a wg to gateway and back again is worth it in a real match unless it's for a timing push.
early game this could be huge. late game mere mortals can't micro this effectively probably.
|
I guess this is the one of the first "bugs" (if not intended) that actually comes in handy for professional play. The Gateshuffle! Well....it isn't Mutastacking but I am sure there is more of those things to explore.
|
Can you even gather enough minerals fast enough off 1 or two bases to really utilize this technique with 3-4 gates without being all in?
|
I don't know if this was already covered but...
We also have to take into account the fact that Gateway units have to move to a certain position on the map (starting from the Gateway), whereas Warpgate units almost always have a shorter distance (through proxy Pylons). I wonder if this would make the "Gateshuffle" completely useless... imagine needing to warp-in units, but they all happened to be Gateways at the time :-/
|
On May 18 2010 03:32 crate wrote:
...
As a warpgate, it takes 45 + 23 = 68 seconds to warp-in both units and then have the warpgate off-cooldown again. If instead you warp-in the templar, immediately switch to a gateway, and gateway-build the zealot then change back to a warpgate, you will have both units done and your warpgate off cooldown in 46 seconds (13 to switch + 33 for zealot).
...
Alright so this is definitely a great post. I would really like to highlight what might be the largest and most awesome tactical use for this feature of the gateway-warpgate switch.
As the OP exemplified, you can produce a templar with warp gate, or other unit aside from a zealot plus a zealot with the gateway-warpgate switch and have time to spare in comparison to making those 2 units with just the warp gate.
So, what really seems practical is using your warpgates to warp in anything but a zealot (unless of course that's your plan) and using the switch to pump reinforcement zealots in the down time.
I hear people complaining about rally points with this, I really think people are exaggerating how hard this is. As a player who doesn't use just the "W" key for his warpgate/gateway selection setting a rally point while either transformation is going on is not hard at all, it's 1 more click, lol.
I know for a fucking fact I will be using(trying and probably failing, but practice makes perfect) this when I am not in dire need of more zealots to mass reinforce my attacking army with zealots. AWESOME SUGGESTION OP! <3
|
I hear people complaining about rally points with this, I really think people are exaggerating how hard this is. As a player who doesn't use just the "W" key for his warpgate/gateway selection setting a rally point while either transformation is going on is not hard at all, it's 1 more click, lol.
It's not really about rally points. It's just the fact that if you are on Desert Oasis and have a pylon at the enemys base, the shuffle is pretty much useless, as it takes "not-warped-zealots" longer to get to the place where they are used than through warpgates. If you are defending it may be useful but then again, you are busy with other stuff when marauders try to kick your pylons/gates.
If you really want to do the math: try to calculate the break even for Gateshuffle vs straight warp. Something like "if you are moving more then 70 yards with zealots you better warp!" Ah and if you are at it, you would also have to do it for every warpgate unit in the different combinations. Ah and also remember to take stalker blink into account because the faster you have them out, the faster the cooldown of blink is gone.
I'll pass on that....
|
I see this mostly being useful in the early game. Being able to produce a starting force off of 2/3 gates that is comparable to 3/4 warpgates saves 150 minerals that can be put towards a robo or a nexus. I agree that later on when you need reinforcements *now* then it's better to just leave them as warpgates but when you would be warping them into the front of your natural anyway this could be a great way to optimise your play.
|
On June 22 2010 11:31 Turbo.Tactics wrote:Show nested quote +I hear people complaining about rally points with this, I really think people are exaggerating how hard this is. As a player who doesn't use just the "W" key for his warpgate/gateway selection setting a rally point while either transformation is going on is not hard at all, it's 1 more click, lol. It's not really about rally points. It's just the fact that if you are on Desert Oasis and have a pylon at the enemys base, the shuffle is pretty much useless, as it takes "not-warped-zealots" longer to get to the place where they are used than through warpgates. If you are defending it may be useful but then again, you are busy with other stuff when marauders try to kick your pylons/gates. If you really want to do the math: try to calculate the break even for Gateshuffle vs straight warp. Something like "if you are moving more then 70 yards with zealots you better warp!" Ah and if you are at it, you would also have to do it for every warpgate unit in the different combinations. Ah and also remember to take stalker blink into account because the faster you have them out, the faster the cooldown of blink is gone. I'll pass on that....
Uhm... the fact that the rallied GATEway unit will be in existence(1 more unit that wouldn't exist if you didn't warpgate-gateway switch) when it shouldn't completely negates the fact that they have a long travel distance. Also, the fact that rally can be set before the unit is even started also negates any further micro other than right clicking a previous zealot already on the field.
Distance really isn't much of a factor when you are producing and having finished that unit before you could even produce in the other fashion.
I'd rather have reinforcements on the way or guarding my base (PvZ, thanks poster below me)during the warpgate cooldown than not having reinforcements while my warpgate is on cooldown, wouldn't anyone in a situation where this is viable?
Regardless whether you find this worth it or not, a player who does this WILL have more units than someone doing the same thing aside from the gateway-warpgate switch. In PvP I see this being a huge deal. People are also mentioning this would only be worth it early game, I see this as so, but not as effective as late game considering early game you don't have the money or warpgates to really pump all these extra zealots unless you're specifically using this tactic in your strategy. Imagine a mid-game 2 exp with 6 warpgate and 2 robo's, you could get a ton of collusus and have fucking 6 more zealot meat shields in between WarpG cycles, have you the minerals, not to mention how effective if you had more warpgates or more emphasis on units that are gas heavy or meat-shield needy.
|
This is probably the most exciting thing I've read in the SC2 forum yet, we're finally learning cool little things about the engine that hopefully will be exploited at a pro level. If we can find a few more of these type of things SC2 might just turn out to be a worthy successor to BW after all. I'm sure if we put as much time into this as we have into BW it'll turn out fantastic.
edit: In response to the above post, it'd probably actually be good to do and not reinforce with your gate-zeals in a PvZ in case of a ling backstab or something
|
10387 Posts
On June 22 2010 10:05 dbddbddb wrote:
Wouldn't chrono boosting your warpgates be better? I mean in mid-late games where you have 3+ nexus up, you are bound to have excess energy on all of then. Just spam chrono boost on warpgates to make units faster. Isn't that more straight forward?
I don't think sacrificial APM needed to pull of this maneuver of converting a wg to gateway and back again is worth it in a real match unless it's for a timing push.
I'm sure it'll be no problem for people who can go 200-300 apm
|
this sounds like something very bw-esque that helps out the mechanical players....I LOVE IT! this is genious, and i would love to see that little extra something that separates the pros from the noobs ^___^
|
this is exactly the kind of thing crazy koreans with crazy apm are going to be doing in a couple of years as standard.
|
I'm not sure what's happened the last few pages since I last read this thread, but I just felt inspired to test, and yes. It works pretty well. The attention required is also pretty minimal, as long as you keep to a few rules. Testing done on qxc's BO tester.
All it does is change your unit building keys from W-D-Click to W-D-Click-M-Z or similar (I used zealots and DT's for my testing), and then when your zealot finished you just press spacebar-click (or gateway hotkey)-G to repeat the cycle.
Yes, it's a bit impractical if you're trying to micro at the same time, but I see this being most useful on defense anyway - you'll be in your base no matter what.
A note though.
I noticed this becomes exponentially harder if you're using complex unit mixes, so that your warpgates become unsynced. I was able to manage three gateways using this method just fine while they were alternating zealot/DT, but as soon as I tried two of them producing zealot/DT and one of them was doing zealot/sentry, things became hard to manage.
Sentries shorter cooldown made it so that I'd have to 'micro' that gateway separately from the rest. The mechanics aren't that much harder, but keeping track of the different timers and remembering to change back and forth quickly becomes a pain in the ass.
I feel like I made so many mistakes using this separate gateway that my production advantage was completely negated.
Anyway, testing results:
1 Warpgate, 2 minutes: 4 DT's, 1 Zealot, 40 seconds cooldown left.
1 Alternating, 2 minutes: 4 DT's, 3 Zealots, 1 Zealot 2/3 done.
Short version: 1 extra zealot per minute per gateway.
Long version: This method of production is quite like Zerg's, it works in bursts. So similarly, one second you might be behind, then two seconds later you're ahead in unit count.
Had I continued testing 10-12 seconds longer, that last zealot would have been done, resulting in a difference of three zealots.
I could have chosen to test how long it takes to build 5 DT's and 4 Zealots instead of just testing for two minutes, but I felt that this would highlight the 'burst production' even more.
|
Maybe I missed it, but was there a particular reason you used DTs in your test? What influence (if any) would other units have?
|
The warpgate doesn't use unit production times. Warpgates always cool down in the same amount of time, I think its 30 seconds, so your times are incorrect.
I think you method may be faster once, but if you tried it again youd have to add the change time in twice, Im not sure though.
You sir, are wrong.
Warpgates are sexy, and you can warp units anywhere whenever, so its super cool to have a ton of warpgates ready. Not only that but they look cooler, and even the units get an auto +50 damage output for spawning in style.
|
On June 22 2010 20:58 DarQraven wrote:
I'm not sure what's happened the last few pages since I last read this thread, but I just felt inspired to test, and yes. It works pretty well. The attention required is also pretty minimal, as long as you keep to a few rules. Testing done on qxc's BO tester.
All it does is change your unit building keys from W-D-Click to W-D-Click-M-Z or similar (I used zealots and DT's for my testing), and then when your zealot finished you just press spacebar-click (or gateway hotkey)-G to repeat the cycle.
Yes, it's a bit impractical if you're trying to micro at the same time, but I see this being most useful on defense anyway - you'll be in your base no matter what.
A note though.
I noticed this becomes exponentially harder if you're using complex unit mixes, so that your warpgates become unsynced. I was able to manage three gateways using this method just fine while they were alternating zealot/DT, but as soon as I tried two of them producing zealot/DT and one of them was doing zealot/sentry, things became hard to manage.
Sentries shorter cooldown made it so that I'd have to 'micro' that gateway separately from the rest. The mechanics aren't that much harder, but keeping track of the different timers and remembering to change back and forth quickly becomes a pain in the ass.
I feel like I made so many mistakes using this separate gateway that my production advantage was completely negated.
Anyway, testing results:
1 Warpgate, 2 minutes: 4 DT's, 1 Zealot, 40 seconds cooldown left.
1 Alternating, 2 minutes: 4 DT's, 3 Zealots, 1 Zealot 2/3 done.
Short version: 1 extra zealot per minute per gateway.
Long version: This method of production is quite like Zerg's, it works in bursts. So similarly, one second you might be behind, then two seconds later you're ahead in unit count.
Had I continued testing 10-12 seconds longer, that last zealot would have been done, resulting in a difference of three zealots.
I could have chosen to test how long it takes to build 5 DT's and 4 Zealots instead of just testing for two minutes, but I felt that this would highlight the 'burst production' even more.
To do a proper test, you have to measure how much time it takes for each production cycle, so your initial state should be the same as the end state, i.e. the warpgate should be ready to spawn a unit and not on cooldown or as a gateway, exactly like it was, when you started counting the time.
If you're doing the trick perfectly, you should get a DT/zeal every 46 seconds(game time), while DT cooldown is 45 seconds, so the zealot is almost for free.
Since you can't do it perfectly it will be a bit over 46 seconds, but still much faster than just using warpgates.
|
if this becomes something very common among pros, i might just switch back to terran
|
On June 23 2010 00:08 SiNiquity wrote:
Maybe I missed it, but was there a particular reason you used DTs in your test? What influence (if any) would other units have?
HTs and DTs have the longest build time (55 seconds). Warp Gates have a cooldown that is always 10 seconds lower than the standard build time (so, 45 seconds for those two units).
Warping in an HT or DT, you spend 45 seconds on Warp Gate cooldown, and 3+33+10=46 seconds switching to a Gateway, building a Zealot and switching back to a Warp Gate.
So, with the longest WG Cooldown unit (HT or DT), you can fit in a 'free' creation (1-second overlap) of the shortest build-time unit (Zealot). If you're trying to do it with Sentries/Stalkers, you're going to end up with a bigger overlap.
Doing any other combo isn't going to be as efficient as just alternating between HTs/DTs and Zealots, but it will still give you a benefit because you're basically giving the building something useful to do while its Warp-Gate cooldown is in effect.
The only combo that is completely useless to do is Zealot->Zealot. 23 seconds for the WG to cooldown and 46 seconds to make the second Zealot...you might as well just leave it as a Warp Gate and summon two Zealots that way (23s each = 46s total) and save yourself the trouble.
|
God I hope this actually turns out to be useful enough for high level players to use. Not only will it be awesome visually to see a players gateways constantly in flux, It'll permanently rape any chance anyone could ever have of saying protoss is easy
|
this is amazing! i did it in the build order tester, and it works like a charm. however i doubt many people have the skills to master this in the actual game. it takes 3 seconds from a warp gate to turn back to a gateway in which you should NOT be watching it transform. now hotkeys should be sufficient here although since each unit produces at a different time you will need extreme dicipline in knowing what gateway to change back, and what still needs to produce a unit before warping back in to a gateway. im sure that pros will eventually come to master this, but for an average player this would most likely require to much micro management, and thus hurt their production rather than increase it
|
On June 22 2010 11:03 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Can you even gather enough minerals fast enough off 1 or two bases to really utilize this technique with 3-4 gates without being all in?
More like using 2 gates to produce more units and making a strong push without building 3th gate. So you have your strong attack without being all in.
|
On June 23 2010 02:25 lololol wrote:
To do a proper test, you have to measure how much time it takes for each production cycle, so your initial state should be the same as the end state, i.e. the warpgate should be ready to spawn a unit and not on cooldown or as a gateway, exactly like it was, when you started counting the time.
If you're doing the trick perfectly, you should get a DT/zeal every 46 seconds(game time), while DT cooldown is 45 seconds, so the zealot is almost for free.
Since you can't do it perfectly it will be a bit over 46 seconds, but still much faster than just using warpgates.
Yeah, that's why I included the cooldown/production 'leftovers' in the results. That basically achieves what you mention. The reason I did testing like this was to figure out what this technique could mean in a game situation, what it 'felt' like. Sure, "you shave x seconds off of DT/zealot production per cycle" is probably more accurate. With the results I have now, however, I know what kind of a difference in actual units out on the field it makes. I have a concrete feel how much faster it is.
Also, I can imagine that this technique is probably, at first, going to be used as crisis management - pumping out much needed units just a bit faster to hold your defense. In that situation, the absolute numbers of a full cycle aren't too relevant, it's how fast you can have additional units that counts.
|
This is awesome. Can't wait to try it when the beta comes back up and see it worked into BOs of top players. I'm sure there has got to be some way to benefit from it by being able to cut a Gateway somewhere.
One question I have though: how does chronoboost most effectively help this technique?:
It seems like chronoboost would be best used on a Stalker/Sentry being made in the Gateway after a HT/DT warp in, or on a Zealot being made in the Gateway after a Stalker/Sentry warp in. I'll go ahead and be lazy and leave that to you numbers guys in here
This technique will really help an all-in DT rush, as you can squeeze in the extra Zealots while waiting for the DT cooldown. Same goes for mid-late game HTs, as you can do a round of HTs and pop out the Zealots.
Also, if I read everything right, assuming you start with Warpgates then you only see the time increase on the odd cycles (*WG* > GW > *WG*) if you were going strictly for Stalkers. So doing 3 or 5 cycles would definitely bolster a Stakler timing push.
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 22 2010 11:03 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Can you even gather enough minerals fast enough off 1 or two bases to really utilize this technique with 3-4 gates without being all in?
I wouldn't use this for consistent production, but it does mean you can burst out an extra round of units quicker right after taking an expansion, making you less vulnerable (instead of having to wait for new gateways to finish building).
|
I think people saying this is going to become totally standard are expecting a little much. It only really makes a difference if you're pumping ht/dt AND zealots. and it's an awful lot of apm too, and if your gates are chrono boosted it sees even less of an effect.
that being said i think this could be seen with some interesting all ins but i doubt itll become standard protoss macro down the line.
|
Has anyone run the numbers to see how much of a benefit Chronoboost has on production? Since it effects WG cooldown GW production and both transformation cycles.
I imagine this will become extremely useful for players who are trying to tech hard without sacrificing defense, since they can spawn low gas units and spend their gas on teching while using the extra minerals on "free" zealots.
I also feel this will make 2 gating against a zerg extremely more difficult to defend since you can get a sudden burst increase in production without needing the extra gate.
|
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting
|
I, as some said, also think that this cool as fuck but will be used only on a need basis.
|
On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting
Very interesting, so 20% is 20% even though it effects two things
|
anyone think this might be highly effective for a 2 gate timing push with Stalker / zealot vs Z?
|
For those wondering about the chronoboost, I don't have exact numbers but in concept the only thing that matters is WHEN you use the chronoboost. Chronoboosting before you use the warpgate would not be optimal for this tactic.
Supposing you chronoboost before you warp, timeline;
Chronoboost -> Warp in -> WG-GW
With this method, you just lost about 5seconds of the chronoboost effecting both production (Gateway AND Warpgate cooldown) times equally
If you want to maximize in a general way, with this tactic, try this;
Warp-in unit, start WG-GW swap, Chronoboost once your zealots have been started at the GATEway.
Ok,so, same thing, different order, but you will effectively get your extra zealots out a lot (~17seconds vs. 33) faster and your warp gate cooldown will be done before the Zealot is done, BUT you just saved yourself ~10 seconds waiting for the Zealot so it effectively cut time by 5-10seconds.
The largest problem concerning chronboost with this tactic is the 2 transformation periods, 3 seconds from gateway to warpgate and 10 for warpgate to GW. Another reason why chronoboosting the gateways seems more reasonable with this tactic.
If someone could run the numbers for this I'd appreciate it, I don't think I am wrong or off by much.
Players able to withstand the intense micro can really make a lot larger forces then your opponent would expect. If you go 3 gate robo, you can most definitely squeeze in 6-12 extra zealots before your immortal/collosus push. Effectively equal to a 4 or 5 gate, with the exception those extra units will be zealots and not stalkers or sentrys.
Edit: Using chronoboost can actually get you out sentrys and stalkers from your gateways when making HT/DT. 45second WG cooldown for HT/DT, 35 with chrono started once gateway begins production, stalker or sentry is out in 42 seconds, 32 with chrono. You'd have an overlap of ~10seconds for the 2 transformations, but with 3 warp gates youd have 3 extra units compared to 1 extra if you stayed all warpgate. It would take ~20seconds more with warpgates to reach the same unit count/comp.
Chronoboost, just like the Warpgate, takes off 10 seconds from build time.
|
Sounds quite feasible since I know pro players, from looking at their replays, will often hotkey tech buildings about half a minute before the reserach finishes, and then while checking every few seconds when they can, to start the next research immediately.
Obviously this strategy is good for early to mid game play. Late game it might just be better to add a gate and use your APMs on other more effective matters.
|
United States313 Posts
In my own theorycrafting I started taking out certain numbers such as build time and unit count and noticed a few things that seem to be overlooked thus far in this thread. I admit its been a less than complete analysis while I'm waiting on an experiment to finish, but I figured I wasn't the only one with these thoughts / questions, and I'd love someone to explain it to me if I'm just missing something.
All of these tests have ignored a very simple, yet vitally important concept. Regardless of production rate, all of these units still have standard unit cost. These extra produced units are not "free" unless your macro has slipped and you have excess resources to begin with. If you have excess resources I suggest improving other areas of your macro, it'll have bigger effects than this.
Here is an example, one of the simplest situations I considered. Your doing a 4 gate all in push using all 4 gates. You have army X at Y minutes. Now compare it to doing the equivalent push using this technique. Regardless of travel time or anything else, the simple fact of the matter is the only advantage of the warpgate shuffle (great name btw) is an extra 150 or 300 minerals.
Don't get me wrong, this additional amount of resources can have a huge impact, especially since it is available somewhat early in the build. However, no matter how long you continue to shuffle, you'll still only ever have the extra 150 or 300 resources, which makes sense considering you'll be a little more vulnerable early game until the shuffle catches up production wise. If you spend the extra resources on non gateway tech realize you won't have the resources to maintain unit production past what you normally could if you actually had the number of warpgates the shuffle is simulating. If you let down on shuffle production before catching up to the production of increased warpgate count, then your not actually shuffling, your just using a fewer gate opening.
So while the numbers are good for some "oooh"s and "ahhh"s, why isn't this thread trying to flesh out a new build order that makes use of the extra resources? It'd be fun to know exactly what time the shuffle catches up to 4 gate production so it can push with its hard earned extra 1.5 or 3 zealots. Considering that gateway units need to be the focus into the midgame, another build order to find would be squeezing out an earlier twilight council for faster charge or blink while still having full unit production.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On June 23 2010 04:55 TrueRedemption wrote:
In my own theorycrafting I started taking out certain numbers such as build time and unit count and noticed a few things that seem to be overlooked thus far in this thread. I admit its been a less than complete analysis while I'm waiting on an experiment to finish, but I figured I wasn't the only one with these thoughts / questions, and I'd love someone to explain it to me if I'm just missing something.
All of these tests have ignored a very simple, yet vitally important concept. Regardless of production rate, all of these units still have standard unit cost. These extra produced units are not "free" unless your macro has slipped and you have excess resources to begin with. If you have excess resources I suggest improving other areas of your macro, it'll have bigger effects than this.
Here is an example, one of the simplest situations I considered. Your doing a 4 gate all in push using all 4 gates. You have army X at Y minutes. Now compare it to doing the equivalent push using this technique. Regardless of travel time or anything else, the simple fact of the matter is the only advantage of the warpgate shuffle (great name btw) is an extra 150 or 300 minerals.
Don't get me wrong, this additional amount of resources can have a huge impact, especially since it is available somewhat early in the build. However, no matter how long you continue to shuffle, you'll still only ever have the extra 150 or 300 resources, which makes sense considering you'll be a little more vulnerable early game until the shuffle catches up production wise. If you spend the extra resources on non gateway tech realize you won't have the resources to maintain unit production past what you normally could if you actually had the number of warpgates the shuffle is simulating. If you let down on shuffle production before catching up to the production of increased warpgate count, then your not actually shuffling, your just using a fewer gate opening.
So while the numbers are good for some "oooh"s and "ahhh"s, why isn't this thread trying to flesh out a new build order that makes use of the extra resources? It'd be fun to know exactly what time the shuffle catches up to 4 gate production so it can push with its hard earned extra 1.5 or 3 zealots. Considering that gateway units need to be the focus into the midgame, another build order to find would be squeezing out an earlier twilight council for faster charge or blink while still having full unit production.
Well, I think its really hard to say how much extra resources you will have at whatever point and it will usually differ per-game some what. Yea, people haven't looked at whether you'd have the extra resources but I think this tactic is one for using up all those extra minerals when you can. Also, if you were going to stick with this tactic for your strategy, you will likely want to drop 1 gateway/warpgate from the build as you'd have 1 zealot and sentry/stalker from each gateway in about the same time you'd just have the 1 sentry/stalker. (chronoboost is definitely necessary for this to work on anything but HT/DT)
However, I would like to see more in-depth analysis so we can actually see indeed how viable and potent this tactic is.
Edit: This tactic continually seems to be really effective in any matter when you have the chronoboost to spend on the GW's.
Depending on the unit composition you're shuffling, there will be a compounding 5-10seconds of unused Warpgate production for anything not HT/DT into extra unit from gateway. But this is still worth it, need you the zealots, as you will also have a compounding bonus zealot number. So the viability inevitably boils down to needing Zealots or using Warpgates to warp in HT/DT.
|
United States313 Posts
Why will resources vary based on different games if you're going the same build? Its a theoretical argument exploring "perfect" timing, but this technique isn't really going to apply to players who through a combination of errors suddenly realizes they have enough extra resources for a couple of zealots. They should probably worry about cleaning up the rest of their play a little bit before practicing this.
For shuffling to be useful you need to be making a lot of gateway units with constant production, otherwise you're not actually chipping away at the warpgate cooldown, you're just increasing the apm needed to produce the same number of units. If you switch from gateway units to another tech before you've made enough shuffled units to catch up to normal warp gate production, once again you've only managed to make standard play more difficult.
So given optimal playing ability you can still only produce as much as you can spend, as shown by the 1 base 4 gate push. It can be all in-ish because there is little to no accumulation of resources if unit production remains constant, therefore no expansions or tech unless you stop your push. By exchanging the 4gate for 3 gate shuffle you provide the player an additional 150 minerals and an equal size army somewhere down the line. The delay in catching up to the production an additional warpgate would provide may do more harm than good should the investment of your opponents tech or expansion pay off by then.
Based on numbers earlier up in the thread, it appears that you need to produce at least 5 cycles of units with the transition in order for a single shuffling gateway to outproduce a normal warpgate. That is only to exceed itself, something like 135% production, so to actually equate to an additional gateway you'd need 3 gateways shuffling for 8 or so cycles (remember you need to make up ALL of the units an extra gateway would've provided in that time).
Chronoboost overlap and mixed unit compositions can help bring that number of cycles down, but I'd like to point out how late in the game this is. Shuffling can only occur after warpgate tech is completed. While the upgrade is very often started as soon as the cybernetics core finishes, this still means that a shuffle can't begin to make up for lost production until the heart of the early game. I am not at home and cannot test this right now, but I hardly believe the shuffle will catch up to production in time for a bolstered early game push, if anything you're slightly weaker militarily speaking, so once again the only advantage present here comes back to the 150 minerals you did not have to spend on a gateway earlier.
If someone can find a use for this 150 minerals which establishes some advantage that synergizes with the constant warpgate production, it'll be an incredible technique which offers a unique opening. Perhaps 2 gate shuffle into a slightly faster expansion if a normal 2 gate into expansion suffered from an unnecessarily large early game army but still needed that many gateway units in the mid game?
|
![[image loading]](http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/8509/gatewaytimes.jpg)
Mathy goodness.
Those are all of the different unit combinations you can do in a 2-unit cycle with the timings involved. T = Templar (DT/HT), S = Stalker/Sentry and Z = Zealot
Basically what its saying, as an example (2nd line), if you build a Templar unit from the Warp Gate, switch to a GW and build a Sentry, you'll have access to that Sentry 5 seconds sooner than had you done it with WGs alone. You'll also be able to build, and access a 3rd unit (whatever it is, it'll take 5 seconds to 'deploy' from this point) 22 seconds earlier via Shuffling than had you just used Warp Gates.
So, if you start with a Sentry or Templar in the Shuffle rotation, you'll get the 3rd unit 9 or 22 (respectively) seconds quicker than just WGs. If you start with a Zealot in the Shuffle rotation, you're not gaining anything (regardless of what the 2nd unit is).
If you keep building units of the same type (S-S, Z-Z or T-T), the second one is always going to be ACCESSIBLE 8 seconds later (13 seconds to flip back and forth between building types, minus 5 seconds of time you save from the warp-in), but the third one will always be quicker if you started with a Sentry or Templar.
And if you build units of the following combos: T-S, T-Z or S-Z (i.e. longer build-time unit followed by a shorter build-time one), you're ALWAYS going to get access to that second unit quicker, AS WELL as quicker access to the 3rd unit.
The math:
Overlap = Build Time (2nd unit) + 13 - Cooldown (1st unit)
Access to 2nd unit: WG = Place a unit, wait on cooldown, place another one, wait on warp-in = Cooldown + 5
Access to 2nd unit: Shuffle = Swap to gateway, build the second unit = Build Time (2nd unit) + 3
Access to 3rd unit: WG = Place a unit, wait on cooldown, place another, wait on cooldown, place another = 2x(Cooldown) + 5
Access to 3rd unit: Shuffle = 2nd unit built, swap to Warp Gate, place 3rd unit, wait on warp-in = Access to 2nd unit: Shuffle + 15
|
Thanks to all of you posting the test results in this thread. I've long suspected that there's a benefit from switching back and forth but I've just been too lazy to figure out for myself exactly what/how large it was.
I think it'll be really interesting to see how this evolves at high level play. I kind of doubt it will become the norm, but perhaps it will be seen somewhat regularly. If a lot of people start using it, I'm really hoping Blizzard won't patch it out, because that seems like something they would do. Although I'm not sure why else they would allow warpgates to be converted backwards if they didn't see this coming.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On June 23 2010 06:18 Bibdy wrote:Mathy goodness. Those are all of the different unit combinations you can do in a 2-unit cycle with the timings involved. T = Templar (DT/HT), S = Stalker/Sentry and Z = Zealot Basically what its saying, as an example (2nd line), if you build a Templar unit from the Warp Gate, switch to a GW and build a Sentry, you'll have access to that Sentry 5 seconds sooner than had you done it with WGs alone. You'll also be able to build, and access a 3rd unit (whatever it is, it'll take 5 seconds to 'deploy' from this point) 22 seconds earlier via Shuffling than had you just used Warp Gates. So, if you start with a Sentry or Templar in the Shuffle rotation, you'll get the 3rd unit 9 or 22 (respectively) seconds quicker than just WGs. If you start with a Zealot in the Shuffle rotation, you're not gaining anything (regardless of what the 2nd unit is). If you keep building units of the same type (S-S, Z-Z or T-T), the second one is always going to be ACCESSIBLE 8 seconds later (13 seconds to flip back and forth between building types, minus 5 seconds of time you save from the warp-in), but the third one will always be quicker if you started with a Sentry or Templar. And if you build units of the following combos: T-S, T-Z or S-Z (i.e. longer build-time unit followed by a shorter build-time one), you're ALWAYS going to get access to that second unit quicker, AS WELL as quicker access to the 3rd unit.
Tyvm, very helpful. I knew the stalker/sentry could work also.
+ Show Spoiler +On June 23 2010 06:17 TrueRedemption wrote:
Why will resources vary based on different games if you're going the same build? Its a theoretical argument exploring "perfect" timing, but this technique isn't really going to apply to players who through a combination of errors suddenly realizes they have enough extra resources for a couple of zealots. They should probably worry about cleaning up the rest of their play a little bit before practicing this.
For shuffling to be useful you need to be making a lot of gateway units with constant production, otherwise you're not actually chipping away at the warpgate cooldown, you're just increasing the apm needed to produce the same number of units. If you switch from gateway units to another tech before you've made enough shuffled units to catch up to normal warp gate production, once again you've only managed to make standard play more difficult.
So given optimal playing ability you can still only produce as much as you can spend, as shown by the 1 base 4 gate push. It can be all in-ish because there is little to no accumulation of resources if unit production remains constant, therefore no expansions or tech unless you stop your push. By exchanging the 4gate for 3 gate shuffle you provide the player an additional 150 minerals and an equal size army somewhere down the line. The delay in catching up to the production an additional warpgate would provide may do more harm than good should the investment of your opponents tech or expansion pay off by then.
Based on numbers earlier up in the thread, it appears that you need to produce at least 5 cycles of units with the transition in order for a single shuffling gateway to outproduce a normal warpgate. That is only to exceed itself, something like 135% production, so to actually equate to an additional gateway you'd need 3 gateways shuffling for 8 or so cycles (remember you need to make up ALL of the units an extra gateway would've provided in that time).
Chronoboost overlap and mixed unit compositions can help bring that number of cycles down, but I'd like to point out how late in the game this is. Shuffling can only occur after warpgate tech is completed. While the upgrade is very often started as soon as the cybernetics core finishes, this still means that a shuffle can't begin to make up for lost production until the heart of the early game. I am not at home and cannot test this right now, but I hardly believe the shuffle will catch up to production in time for a bolstered early game push, if anything you're slightly weaker militarily speaking, so once again the only advantage present here comes back to the 150 minerals you did not have to spend on a gateway earlier.
If someone can find a use for this 150 minerals which establishes some advantage that synergizes with the constant warpgate production, it'll be an incredible technique which offers a unique opening. Perhaps 2 gate shuffle into a slightly faster expansion if a normal 2 gate into expansion suffered from an unnecessarily large early game army but still needed that many gateway units in the mid game?
This is a perfect technique for someone who made errors and has extra resources, how is it not? Ok, if they made the errors they probably can't handle the micro but that's not always true.
Also, even if you're doing the same build, you may not be using the same units each time. Obviously if you're doing the SAME EXACT build and strategy you shouldn't have any large variance in your resources but aside from that 1 scenario you'd have a different amount of resources.
I pointed out earlier that people emphasizing using this tactic for early game isn't as formidable because there aren't really much extra resources, but in % comparison in effectiveness, producing 1 or 2 extra zealots early game is probably comparable to a lot more Zealots later on. The effectiveness of the GW shuffle never really changes, unless you are not constantly producing, but I don't see why you would use this tactic if you did not need the extra production, so that really doesn't matter.
|
On June 23 2010 06:32 Cofo wrote:Thanks to all of you posting the test results in this thread. I've long suspected that there's a benefit from switching back and forth but I've just been too lazy to figure out for myself exactly what/how large it was. I think it'll be really interesting to see how this evolves at high level play. I kind of doubt it will become the norm, but perhaps it will be seen somewhat regularly. If a lot of people start using it, I'm really hoping Blizzard won't patch it out, because that seems like something they would do. Although I'm not sure why else they would allow warpgates to be converted backwards if they didn't see this coming.
I don't see it getting removed. You're always cockblocked by resource income and supply, no matter how much you want to spam units and you kind of have to plan in advance what units you're going to get.
It doesn't give you an immediate benefit the moment you decide to use it. You're only going to see gains if you're building units in certain combinations (and you might not always want HTs or DTs) or if you're constantly pumping units. If you're using that constant unit pumpage during an assault, this is just a reward for having the skill the keep switching things back and forth, while fighting.
|
On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting
I'm not a math guy (English Grad), but it seems like Chronoboost wouldn't provide a significant extra benefit for the Templar/Zealot shuffle because the cool down time from the Templar warp and build time for the Zealot are already optimally streamlined.
However, if you wanted to fit in a Stalker or Sentry after the Templar, it seems like using Chronoboost on those would help get the unit out of the Gateway quicker, so little to no Warp Gate time is wasted. (Because the Stalker/Sentry would finish closer to Zealot timing, giving it the optimal Zeal/Temp shuffle timing)
Here's how I see Chronoboost being used most effectively:
Warp in Templar > Change to Gateway > Chronoboost Stalker/Sentry > Change to Warpgate > Repeat
OR
Warp in Stalker > Change to Gateway > Chronoboost Zealot > Change to Warp Gate > Repeat
Does this make sense?
This all depends on something I may have missed. Does chronoboost speed up the Warpgate cooldown even if the it is in Gateway mode? If that's the case then it won't make a difference.
|
On June 23 2010 06:40 BOOWOO wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting I'm not a math guy (English Grad), but it seems like Chronoboost wouldn't provide a significant extra benefit for the Templar/Zealot shuffle because the cool down time from the Templar warp and build time for the Zealot are already optimally streamlined. However, if you wanted to fit in a Stalker or Sentry after the Templar, it seems like using Chronoboost on those would help get the unit out of the Gateway quicker, so little to no Warp Gate time is wasted. (Because the Stalker/Sentry would finish closer to Zealot timing, giving it the optimal Zeal/Temp shuffle timing) Does this make sense? This all depends on something I may have missed. Does chronoboost speed up the Warpgate cooldown even if the it is in Gateway mode?
Shouldn't be too difficult to test. Build a Templar, then spam CB on it while you're building the Zealot. If the HT cooldown is NOT finished when its finished turning back into a WG, then you know that CB does NOT affect the HT cooldown in the background. If the cooldown is finished, then you know it does.
|
On June 23 2010 06:43 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2010 06:40 BOOWOO wrote:On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting I'm not a math guy (English Grad), but it seems like Chronoboost wouldn't provide a significant extra benefit for the Templar/Zealot shuffle because the cool down time from the Templar warp and build time for the Zealot are already optimally streamlined. However, if you wanted to fit in a Stalker or Sentry after the Templar, it seems like using Chronoboost on those would help get the unit out of the Gateway quicker, so little to no Warp Gate time is wasted. (Because the Stalker/Sentry would finish closer to Zealot timing, giving it the optimal Zeal/Temp shuffle timing) Does this make sense? This all depends on something I may have missed. Does chronoboost speed up the Warpgate cooldown even if the it is in Gateway mode? Shouldn't be too difficult to test. Build a Templar, then spam CB on it while you're building the Zealot. If the HT cooldown is NOT finished when its finished turning back into a WG, then you know that CB does NOT affect the HT cooldown in the background. If the cooldown is finished, then you know it does.
I would test it, but I don't have anything to run in the beta right now. If anyone wants to take it up, that would be awesome
Off topic question: Can you still run things like QXC's BO tester even though the beta is down?
|
On June 23 2010 06:40 BOOWOO wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting I'm not a math guy (English Grad), but it seems like Chronoboost wouldn't provide a significant extra benefit for the Templar/Zealot shuffle because the cool down time from the Templar warp and build time for the Zealot are already optimally streamlined. However, if you wanted to fit in a Stalker or Sentry after the Templar, it seems like using Chronoboost on those would help get the unit out of the Gateway quicker, so little to no Warp Gate time is wasted. (Because the Stalker/Sentry would finish closer to Zealot timing, giving it the optimal Zeal/Temp shuffle timing) Here's how I see Chronoboost being used most effectively: Warp in Templar > Change to Gateway > Chronoboost Stalker/Sentry > Change to Warpgate > Repeat OR Warp in Stalker > Change to Gateway > Chronoboost Zealot > Change to Warp Gate > Repeat Does this make sense? This all depends on something I may have missed. Does chronoboost speed up the Warpgate cooldown even if the it is in Gateway mode? If that's the case then it won't make a difference.
From what I see in the quoted post, there is a huge difference (contrary to what he said) in times on the chrono'd GATEway which is expected, however there is a 30s difference in the "gate shuffle", those 30 seconds are coming from the 3 chronoboosts, whether they are effecting the gateway AND warpgate is unknown, but chronoboost does take 10seconds off production so it makes sense here that it doesn't, but he said ~30 so hard to tell. Regardless you will have the units out quicker and your transformation started if chrono just worked on the GATEway. I HIGHLY doubt chronoboost does not effect WG cooldown while it is a GW, but its possible.
Edit: What you have to consider (even if chrono doesn't work on both)is that if you finish your Zealot earlier using chronoboost, you can switch the Gateway to a Warpgate earlier, negating overlap time.
However, either way, you are correct, chronoboosting after the warp and transformation is ideal, I talked about that a little bit in an earlier post.
|
On June 23 2010 06:50 BOOWOO wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2010 06:43 Bibdy wrote:On June 23 2010 06:40 BOOWOO wrote:On June 23 2010 03:55 Geiko wrote:
Tested it myself regarding chronoboost:
One full cycle for building 3HT + 3Zeal (begins with operational warpgate and ends with operational warpgate.
Gateshuffle : ~130 secs
Normal WG ~190 secs
ratio : 1.46
Chronoed Gateshuffle : ~100secs
Chronoed Normal WG : ~145sec
ratio 1.45
I screwed up here and there but, the ratio (Gateshuffle)/(NormalWG) seems overall unafected by chronoboosting I'm not a math guy (English Grad), but it seems like Chronoboost wouldn't provide a significant extra benefit for the Templar/Zealot shuffle because the cool down time from the Templar warp and build time for the Zealot are already optimally streamlined. However, if you wanted to fit in a Stalker or Sentry after the Templar, it seems like using Chronoboost on those would help get the unit out of the Gateway quicker, so little to no Warp Gate time is wasted. (Because the Stalker/Sentry would finish closer to Zealot timing, giving it the optimal Zeal/Temp shuffle timing) Does this make sense? This all depends on something I may have missed. Does chronoboost speed up the Warpgate cooldown even if the it is in Gateway mode? Shouldn't be too difficult to test. Build a Templar, then spam CB on it while you're building the Zealot. If the HT cooldown is NOT finished when its finished turning back into a WG, then you know that CB does NOT affect the HT cooldown in the background. If the cooldown is finished, then you know it does. I would test it, but I don't have anything to run in the beta right now. If anyone wants to take it up, that would be awesome Off topic question: Can you still run things like QXC's BO tester even though the beta is down?
Yeah, just open the map editor, load up the level and hit File -> Test, or something like that.
Probably quicker to make a custom map that gives you a couple of Nexus' with full energy, though 
|
The fact that it affects both the cooldown and the production time means it will retain its 20% effectiveness. If it affected only one of them, it would be less effective than a normal CB. Not the opposite.
(in the sense that "since it affects 2 timers when you CB a WarpGateWay, it should be twice as effective" - this is wrong, it will obviously affect the mean build time by 20%)
You ARE though taking more out of that chronoboost, since CBs last a fixed duration of time, and your WGW production time is more efficient than your WG production time. (20% of awesome for N seconds is better than 20% of nice for N seconds)
|
Where I really think this mechanic is going to shine is long games where armies were 200/200 or near cap for some time / resources are stockpiled and the P has just lost a battle and therefore a good number of infantry. Using the shuffle method you could replenish your forces much much faster, and in pro level play those 9-22 seconds could mean the difference between defending the counter attack, and not. Another time this would be great is in a case where the P army is hard countered (most likely in PvP) and you can shuffle-in a corresponding counter (for example Dark Templar Stalker Army > Immortal Zealot Army > Stalker Sentry Army) in many cases having Stalker Sentry beaten by Immortal Zealot can result in a counter attack that simply comes to quickly to defend. The extra time saved by doing the shuffle could sometimes make the difference in having DTs out faster. Of course DTs aren't the best counter to Immortal/Zealot - VRs are, but DTs are the best gate/warp level counter available but of course this is mostly just an example.
|
United States313 Posts
On June 23 2010 06:18 Bibdy wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
Also, even if you're doing the same build, you may not be using the same units each time. Obviously if you're doing the SAME EXACT build and strategy you shouldn't have any large variance in your resources but aside from that 1 scenario you'd have a different amount of resources.
I pointed out earlier that people emphasizing using this tactic for early game isn't as formidable because there aren't really much extra resources, but in % comparison in effectiveness, producing 1 or 2 extra zealots early game is probably comparable to a lot more Zealots later on. The effectiveness of the GW shuffle never really changes, unless you are not constantly producing, but I don't see why you would use this tactic if you did not need the extra production, so that really doesn't matter.
I agree exact unit composition varies from game to game, but that has zero effect on unit cost. The only difference between shuffling production and standard warpgates using one more gateway is 150 saved minerals vs time. The efficiency of shuffling never changes, but neither does the efficiency of one more warpgate if you're not limited by cost of unit production.
I still don't think this concept is useless though. Shuffling can offer a unique level of gateway production in a more standardized opening. If early pressure is not a concern, shuffled 2 gate would act like a 2.5 gate opening, saving 150 minerals to offer an earlier tech or expansion. The way shuffling needs to be thought about is what could I do with 150 minerals right now if I know I want roughly 3 gate production a little later on. Do notice however that you will have to pay more earlier with shuffling than your normally would if you just added a third game later in the build order. These are some very specific requirements but the subtitles it provides I feel could have great potential if applied appropriately.
|
Oh wow this is awesome. I usually go chargelots into HT when I scout Bio/mech against terran (a common occurance as I play random). I'm usually starved for minerals until I hit HT production, at which point I'm swimming in it but don't have the extra gates since I didn't have the resources earlier. This will really help the build!
|
So I was reading over this thread and decided that the information was useful but hard to apply, on paper everything seems great, however it more the doubles the macro required of me when the gains are not that large but a gain none the less. so I did some thinking, in a professional replay I see that their resources are low their warpgates stay warpgates and they are able to keep on par with other races in supply. If for some reason they had high mineral I think more warpgates would be the best solution late game. in early- mid game toss players often go 3 and 4 warpgate pushes but if you can produce the same size army as a 3 gate on 2 gate or a 4gate on 3 gateby swapping them between warpgates and gateways then thats amazing. plus having the extra mineral allows you to not have to dump resources on say a 2nd gas to produce centrys during a mineral deficit plus the saving on not building the extra gateway.
This might seem a bit off but I ran some test in the build order tester and the results were that 2 warpgates could produce a supply count of 48-52/58 at the 5 min mark well 2 warpgates swapping between gateways and warpgates could produce 56-60/72 in the same time. not a large jump in production but it ended with over 200/200 on my resources showing clear signs to improve that even further maybe even by a large amount if you did something weird like have 1 warpgate and 2 gateways swapping back and forth
Take this all with a grain of salt but I really think that this could have drastic effects on the sc2 meta game
|
This could help a lot if you used this technique early game, 20% more units is very significant, later game sometimes its ineffective however since warp gates can warp the units right next to your army and normal gates don't.
|
I read a lot of the posts, but there was a lot of data to go through, so I might have missed it, but...
Did anybody factor into their graphs or math the mineral+gas per minute on warpgates vs gate-shuffle? So like 2 warpgates making sentry zealot alternating, its expense / minute VS 2 warpgate-shufflers sentry zealot ?
Basically the disadvantage of getting units faster means spending money faster. So there is a cut off point, and probably a sweet spot depending on what kind of income your dealing with.
More income means you need more gates and more APM or focus to actually produce from more gates at that faster rate. So if we figure out the cost per min, we can factor in how much a fully saturated 1 base can support, or an under-saturated all-inning 1 base could support, and see about making a few BOs.
If 1base can support a 4gate production, then it could probably only support a 3gate shuffle (my hypothesis) The end result would be you could only get units that your income can support, but you would be getting them faster and more burst like, (like zerg) so you could potentially play more like zerg, making units when you need to.
|
Hypothetical situation:
Harass takes out one of your pylons and deactivates one of your warpgates. Compensate for loss in production by shuffling the other (two) gates until the warpgate goes back up.
This definitely has its uses, I'd say.
To be perfectly honest though, I'm too rusty on normal build orders at the moment to really contribute much on that front.
I'm sure I can figure out some kind of build that exploits this in some way, but I'd much rather do it when beta comes back online or come release time, so I can actually do it in the context of a real match.
If this trick can even achieve as little as P players having to build one gate less while still being relatively safe on defense, that's an expansion that comes 150 minerals earlier. Could be insignificant, could be helpful.
|
Main loss: flexibility / tempo.
So it's a trade-off, and not a straight gain; which is great.
Should be more useful in PvT (heavy macro armies), than in PvZ (fast army switches).
Also in PvP, suppose one goes GW-WG switching, the other one goes pure WG; then it's a stronger army vs a more flexible army, because the pure WG player could warp in more units at once, at the right spot of the map, with the right composition - vs the bigger force of his opponent. It would make pretty interesting games to watch.
|
On June 23 2010 15:25 P00RKID wrote:
I read a lot of the posts, but there was a lot of data to go through, so I might have missed it, but...
Did anybody factor into their graphs or math the mineral+gas per minute on warpgates vs gate-shuffle? So like 2 warpgates making sentry zealot alternating, its expense / minute VS 2 warpgate-shufflers sentry zealot ?
Basically the disadvantage of getting units faster means spending money faster. So there is a cut off point, and probably a sweet spot depending on what kind of income your dealing with.
More income means you need more gates and more APM or focus to actually produce from more gates at that faster rate. So if we figure out the cost per min, we can factor in how much a fully saturated 1 base can support, or an under-saturated all-inning 1 base could support, and see about making a few BOs.
If 1base can support a 4gate production, then it could probably only support a 3gate shuffle (my hypothesis) The end result would be you could only get units that your income can support, but you would be getting them faster and more burst like, (like zerg) so you could potentially play more like zerg, making units when you need to.
Agreed, can’t spend more then you make (unless you’re an American with a credit card) however, this may or may not be offset by the fact that you are indeed spending less money on infrastructure. I think this might have the greatest effect in the PvP MU as when one player tries to be extremely aggressive (say, 2 gate pressure -> 4 gate) the defending player generally needs an equal or greater number of gates to defend, however once they defend they generally have some form of advantage. If you could defend a 4 gate with a 3 gate truffle shuffle of doom then that advantage is that much more amplified once you defend because you have spent 150 less minerals then they have (which is one more photon cannon to secure your choke or natural).
Now that I think about it, this technique might be best suited for use when a player needs to use photon cannons to defend (since 1 photon cannon = 1 gateway cost wise) meaning if you have to throw up cannons for defense you can use this to bolster your forces until you can afford to get the additional gateways up later on.
|
I just tested the Chrono-Boost thing. If you make an HT, switch to a GW, build a Zealot and switch back to a WG, all with constant Chrono-Boosting, the HT cooldown is ready when its finished turning back into a Warp-Gate.
So CB does affect the WG cooldown in the background, while simultaneously accelerating the production of the building in Gateway mode as well as the speed at which it changes forms.
|
Transforming to Gateway takes 10 seconds instead of 3, and zealots have 5 more build time now. I was hoping to work on this some, but I knew it was too powerful to stay. Shuffling gave more boost over warp gate, than warp gate gave over gateway.It needed the nerf, but I wish I played around with it more.
At this point, it's really not worth it anymore. Even HT Zealot is shot.
Warp HT (45) >Transform to Gateway (10) > make Zealot (38) > Transform to Warp Gate (10)
It now takes 58 seconds to complete a cycle, 12 seconds longer than it did before.
Now shuffling has too high of an opportunity cost (20 extra secs, 10 before production begins). None of the timings are pretty anymore, 38 zealot build time and 10 sec warp-gate transform have have pretty much killed shuffling and taken away any boost you could get.
I haven't tested this, but I think the cooldowns don't tick seperately anymore, i.e. as long as your gateway is transforming, cooldown is paused.
Edit: Warpgate cooldown doens't decrease while in gateway form anymore. I wish this was still in the game, maybe just a little nerfed, instead of completely gone.
|
It wasn't that powerful you still needed the economy to support it, normaly u just drop 1 extra warp gate, however with this u can save that warpgate money and get 1.5 zealots. Which isn't much AT ALL especially requiring so much macro. I feel sorry for this game, getting dummed down to one hand half asleep = perfect macro.
Leaving this in would allow for people who want 150 minerals to save it and spend it elsewhere, it wouldn't change much and would make the game feel so much more intense when needing to macro.
You also lose the ability to warp in units anywhere in psi power which is a fair trade off.
I don't see why everything has to be done for you in sc2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
