|
Do people think there should be a reason to switch your WGs back to GWs?
Because currently I see no reason for that.
WGs are simply superior in every aspect.
They build units quicker.
They save time for moving units.
They have their own hotkey.
So basically, WG research is an automatic decision.
It costs 50/50 and you just have to upgrade it as soon as it's available.
Since that is the case, what's the point in giving us the option of reverting WGs back to GWs?
I feel that if there's an option, there should be pros and cons for each.
I mean, yea, WGs require more APM, cause they require you to constantly produce units and click on the ground, so yo can't build as easily if you're microing a battle.
You can also queue with GWs, which is an advantage lategame, cause that way you are certain to not leave GWs not building anything for few seconds, which happens often with WGs.
And units warping in from WGs are vulnerable to enemy attacks for 5 seconds.
But these small disadvantages still aren't enough to ever consider turning your WGs back to GWs.
I think there should be a disadvantage.
My suggestion would be to make units warping in take double damage (so that the bold "in your face" warp-ins wouldn't be as easy) and also increase the warp-in time to 8 or 10 seconds, while rebalancing WG cooldown time to maintain the overall warp-in time.
So if Zealot can be warped in in 33s using GW, while it takes 23s cooldown + 5s warp-in time to do so using WG, it could be changed to 18+10s or (20+8)
That would make WGs worse in some aspects, like if your base is being under siege and to make offensive warp-ins easier to deal with.
TL;DR
WGs are superior to GWs in every way.
There should be a reason to revert WGs back to GWs.
My suggestion is to increase the "battlefield warp-in" time to 8s or 10s, while keeping the overall build time (cooldown + warp-in) the same.That would make units vulnerable to attacks while they are warping in, giving a reason to revert your WGs to GWs if your base is under siege, for example.Also the damage to units warping-in could be doubled (same reason).
|
Having extremely low APM, even I notice a huge benefit from using Warpgates. If you want to queue stuff up play Terran! Or get mass Robo! 
|
On March 25 2010 20:16 MidKnight wrote:
Do people think there should be a reason to switch your WGs back to GWs?
Because currently I see no reason for that.
WGs are simply superior in every aspect.
They build units quicker.
They save time for moving units.
They have their own hotkey.
So basically, WG research is an automatic decision.
It costs 50/50 and you just have to upgrade it as soon as it's available.
Since that is the case, what's the point in giving us the option of reverting WGs back to GWs?
I feel that if there's an option, there should be pros and cons for each.
In that case, you might as well make a reason to use a barracks or factory without an add-on? I don't get your point? WG's are a unique feature of protoss, just like queens are to zerg and add-on's are to terran. Sure, zerg can just get more hatcheries, but it's not as efficient as using queens.
|
Actually as terran choosing between building an addon or not CAN be a hard decision. If you want to go for a certiain timing window you might need that extra gas while your MULEs might be able to support enough additional barracks to keep up with marine production.
|
Yeah I dont understand the point?
Its a new race feature but you have to research it so its not available from the start to prevent cheese.
|
Which is similar to protoss if you're going for zealot harass (e.g. vs zerg FE), and you're choosing whether to chrono your core researching warp gates or your gateways producing zealots...
But beyond that, it isn't much of a decision.
|
As far as I know units that are being warped in don't just take double, but quadruple damage. That's just a vague number in the back of my head, might be wrong, but they definitely DO take extra damage during warp-in so I think you're just whining for no reason =P. Protoss aren't that imbalanced, and warpgates are a cool feature with lots of neat uses. Just because some of those uses annoy you personally and are a pain to deal with doesn't justify making this game utterly boring
|
The warpgates can return to gateways for the same reason overlords can stop pooping creep :}. I even think this ability is missing on some of the buildings that would be very useful to have, like turning planetary fortress back to command center, so you can float it and turn to orbital command etc ;]. If there were no way to convert warpgates back to gateways, making warpgates would have a potential disadvantage ;].
|
Is there a reason to de-evolve your lair into a hatchery?
Is there an actual good reason to abandon add-ons?
Actually the problem is that the button should be "update to warpgate" and there shouldn't be a button to revert it. This way we wouldn't get this many people saying that there should be a use for gateways without quoting a single good in-game reason other than "because gateways exist".
The things you could base an argument pro-gateways would be increased game-depth and.... that's pretty much it other than "game problems" arguments.
and game-depth is a weak argument, since all it would require is pressing one button to change modes, and this definitely won't add enough depth to the game to make risking the current game balance worth it.
|
There is a benefit if you warp units with WGs and then instantly revert them to normal gates. Then start producing units normally (skipping the WG CD) and when they are finished, revert back to WGs and warp in. This way you get a faster production rate.
|
On March 25 2010 22:06 iounas wrote:
Yeah I dont understand the point?
Its a new race feature but you have to research it so its not available from the start to prevent cheese.
It's amazing how wrong you can be.
Hint, PvP anyone?
|
i like warpgates, but I just don't think other races have it quite the same way. I mean seriously, u get a new MBS mechanics just from an upgrade.
I don't want a change to toss, I think warpgates are a great idea/addition but there is some work to be done on the other races.
|
On March 26 2010 00:04 kme wrote:
There is a benefit if you warp units with WGs and then instantly revert them to normal gates. Then start producing units normally (skipping the WG CD) and when they are finished, revert back to WGs and warp in. This way you get a faster production rate.
It's great can you squeeze in like 95% of a zealot between two templars
|
If you execute it perfectly, you will make units at a rate of two units per standard unit build time + 3(or +6 if you continue to build). I believe that zealots take 33 seconds to make and stalkers 43, so using this trick making a zealot + another unit takes 36 seconds while warping them takes 46 (10 seconds difference, equivalent of using one chrono boost). But with two stalkers it's 46 and 66 (20 seconds, two chrono boosts). Optimally you should build zealots with gateway mode, and warp in other units that have longer CD.
Of course using it in practice requires a lot of micro (macro? ), but it could be viable when you have only 1-2 gateways.
|
so transform back to gateway stays available even while in unit-maing cooldown? o_O
|
I don't think there is much benefit of reverting them if any, because warp gates have a cooldown that is significantly lower than unit build times, for example, if player A and player B both have 4 warp gates, both warp in one round of units, then player A reverts them to gateways, chrono boosts all of them, and puts 4 units on the build list, while player B is waiting for the warp gate cooldown, then both players will get the second round of units out at about the same time, and the time it takes to turn the normal gates back into warp gates for player As next round of production is equal to the time it takes for player Bs warp gates to cooldown again, so both players get round 3 out at about equal times also, etc. I'm not positive on the timing of cooldowns and chrono-boosted gateway build times, but I'm guessing the timings work out so close to equal that there is basically no advantage whatsoever in ever doing this.
|
Calgary25979 Posts
I wish there was some tension in the warpgates vs gateway decision. But as you said, warpgates are ridiculously cheap and better in every sense. I almost think a warpgate should build units SLOWER than a standard gateway.
|
the 1st week i thought addtional to the research cost you need to pay 50/50 for each warpgate to morph.
If it was this way you would have a choice to make...
|
I find myself using gateways more often lately because i'm slow as fuck and the ability to queue units helps alot when you have poor mechanics in mid/lategame. I keep some warpgates but the bulk of my unit production comes from gateways which I infinitely queue from once I have 3 bases or more. Anyone else do this?
|
Warpgates reduce building time by 10 secs.
According to liquipedia, Transform to Warpgate takes 10 secs. Transform to Gateway, 3 secs. (can someone verify this?)
Chrono Boost will speed up anything by 50%, so if both players do it, it will cancel itself out in the equation.
Since Zeals take exactly 23 = 10x2+3 secs to build from warpgates, this technique will only change the timing on units, if both players only build zealots. If A uses the trick and B doesn't, the zealots waves will come out the following order:
A&B / B / a / A&B
where "a" means they are not warped in anywhere with pylon power.
So doing the switch actually works, If you're 100% positive you have enough ressources for all gates, and you are defending, specifically with a mix of 50% zealots 50% anything else, and getting a late wave won't hinder your defense.
That's a lot of ifs. I could see this being used with HT + Zeal vs Terran defense though, since their build time is pretty much the double of zeal's, and they just storm & morph into archon as soon as they are warped in, forcing the Terran to retreat for a few seconds and giving time for the zeals to get into position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
