Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (89 users) | |
|
| Shady Sands United States. July 10 2012 21:41. Posts 3573 | Profile Blog # |
A friend and I were shooting this idea back and forth last night, and I thought TL might be an ideal place to flesh this out (or shoot it down ^_^).
Basically, we were thinking that one of the reasons the protoss deathball can be so strong compared to other armies is that the P army can always be reinforced, on the spot, at the same rate as if it were being reinforced at home. Basically, a P army sitting in the middle of the map can be reinforced just as quickly as if it were sitting the in the Protoss base.
I'm not sure if this was a conscious design choice on the part of Blizz or not, but it might make sense for Protoss warp-in to take longer depending on how far away the warp-in is from the Protoss warpgate doing the warp-in. So for example, if the gate warping in the unit was in the main, and you were warping in units at the Terran base, it would take twice as long to warp the unit in, and the post-warp cooldown would also be twice as long, compared to if you were warping the unit in at home. At the same time, you would buff the warp cooldown and warp-in rate, so Protoss could produce more quickly if they were just producing at home--possibly keeping pace in supply growth with a Zerg or reactored Terran. Finally, we were thinking that since right now the Protoss basically has no choice between using normal gateways and actual warpgates (warpgates build things faster and give you faster reinforcements and are free past the initial research cost) it might make sense to give gateways a build time reduction bonus while warpgates build units slightly slower in comparison.
Again, the point of this is not to buff or nerf a specific race. This is to give the Protoss player some interesting strategic choices--"do I choose quick macro at home, or do I choose faster reinforcements on the front lines in exchange for slower overall production."
We both thought HotS would be the best time to actually test the warp-in change, since this is fairly substantial, and there would be a 1-month beta to figure it out.
This idea is obviously very "beta" right now, and would probably need to be balanced a lot to make it viable. So I guess there are two questions here:
1. Is this general train of thought viable?
2. If it is viable, what sort of balancing mechanisms should follow-on from here? |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| sVnteen Germany. July 10 2012 21:43. Posts 2162 | Profile # |
| hm it's a nice idea but I don't think it is completely viable because it would stop a lot of early agression by protoss especially in PvP |
| |
|
| Molybdenum United States. July 10 2012 21:45. Posts 356 | Profile Blog # |
This has been brought up over and over.
No, it's not viable. It's too complicated. Something like build-time and CD should not change in a game like SC2. How would the CDs be presented to the player? A tooltip displaying them when you're choosing to warp in your units would be awkward, to say the least.
The only way this could be implemented is a sort of 'if you are more than X away, warp in takes Y longer), where there is one set distance and one change in CD or warp in time. However, if this is added, normal warp ins (or the units) would need to be buffed to compensate for the big nerf to reinforcements.
Warpgate is an all-or-nothing kind of thing in SC2. Either it should work everywhere or not at all. Personally, I'm in the not at all camp. WG makes protoss gateway units too weak.Last edit: 2012-07-10 21:50:50 |
|
|
| Zanno United States. July 10 2012 21:50. Posts 1433 | Profile Blog # |
this will probably be closed because generally speaking rampant speculation of theoretical ideas is frowned upon, but before it does, i'm just going to throw out the idea that maybe warp gate would better if
A) the warp in animation was twice as long
B) if you chronoed a gateway, the warp in animation time would decrease to WOL speed or perhaps even be so fast that the unit hits the field instantaneously
out of chronoing probes, ups, and gates, gates are the least useful option, because you can accomplish the same thing by just building more gateways. but if chronoing a gate also improved warp in speed, then there's a much stronger mechanical skill gap to warp gate timingsLast edit: 2012-07-10 21:51:49 |
| |
|
| Shady Sands United States. July 10 2012 21:50. Posts 3573 | Profile Blog # |
On July 10 2012 21:43 sVnteen wrote:
hm it's a nice idea but I don't think it is completely viable because it would stop a lot of early agression by protoss especially in PvP
Hmmm, that might be true. Are there any tweaks that could fix it, though?
On July 10 2012 21:45 Molybdenum wrote:
This has been brought up over and over.
No, it's not viable. It's too complicated. Something like build-time and CD should not change in a game like SC2. How would the CDs be presented to the player? A tooltip displaying them when you're choosing to warp in your units would be awkward.
Actually there wouldn't need to be a tooltip--simply changing the color of the warpin icon would be sufficient. Right now it's simply one color if you can warp things in, another color if you can't. Why not make it so that as you get farther away from the gate, the color becomes less blue and more orange, or something? |
| | Check out my buddy's startup: http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/13/strikingly/ |
|
|
| Ryder. July 10 2012 21:52. Posts 809 | Profile # |
You need consistency man. How are protoss going to be able to get their macro down to perfection when the build time for units isn't consistent? You would need to reconsider how many probes you need per base for pushes, how many gateways and robos you would need to keep your money low ect. Way too complicated.
I think an alternative is to only be able to warp in from a warp prism, within proximity to a nexus or a dedicated 'warp pylon' that is upgraded from a normal pylon. They could then buff gateway units to be more cost effective too as a result of this. |
|
|
| ChriseC Germany. July 10 2012 21:52. Posts 381 | Profile # |
alot of ppl had this idea before and i think theoretically it would be better but overall sc2 tries to keep the game as simple as possible. but u are right, distance overall is a major factor in all rts games to give players abit more time to react or to secure their economy, the prime example of how "broke" warpin mechanics can be in in pvp where it is/was nearly impossible to secure ur economy advantage cuz there is/was simple no space between the bases so making 1 small mistake/misjudgement costs u the game.
but honestly it would be too much of a change now |
|
|
| WigglingSquid July 10 2012 21:55. Posts 3257 | Profile # |
This is a very obvious concept, and I suspect that Blizzard tried and scrapped it at an early stage, out of sheer loathing for ever-so-slightly-fancy equations. Most of the game's numbers scale and relate very simply, for some reason. This is also true in Diablo 3, for example.
Besides being easier on the players (which is the main reason, I suspect), this decision might also be due to their interest in reducing server load as much as possible, even if in this case that would be quite... pedantic. (Remember that in SC2/Diablo 3 the whole business logic is resolved remotely.) |
|
|
| saMas Belgium. July 10 2012 21:58. Posts 37 | Profile # |
I don't understand why people allways talk about the warpgate i think it's balanced as it is.
No need to change stuff if it isn't broken and protoss deathball isn't the strongest get your facts straight 
I think before we look at things like this,we should try to balance the game all out and not look at useless things that have been proven to not be OP in any way. |
|
|
| ShatterZer0 United States. July 10 2012 21:59. Posts 1832 | Profile # |
Been brought up multiple times. It's intensely counter intuitive and generally pretty crazy.
Why? Because as a Protoss player it would drive you nuts not really knowing how long it will take for your units to spawn... PLUS, it would make Zerg and Terran go nuts because they could never really counter attack ever again... even faster warp in near production/nexuses would make Protoss basically invulnerable to any counter that was less than double the number of gateways the Protoss has available. |
| |
|
| Emix_Squall France. July 10 2012 21:59. Posts 629 | Profile # |
On July 10 2012 21:43 sVnteen wrote:
hm it's a nice idea but I don't think it is completely viable because it would stop a lot of early agression by protoss especially in PvP
Irrelevant, it's the same thing on both sides.
I like the base idea but wouldn't it make Protoss much stronger in defence? In the current meta some maps like Entombed Valley are heavily criticized because of how easy it is for a Protoss player to get on 3 bases while only defending. The new mechanics you're talking about would require a whole new approach to map-making too since several maps allow for players to take a relatively safe or easy to defend third base. |
|
|
| GMarshal United States. July 10 2012 22:01. Posts 20826 | Profile Blog # |
| Balance suggestions go in the blizzard forums |
| | "life of lively to live to life of full life thx to shield battery" The measure of a terrible day is when you go to bed thinking "man, I wish the zombie apocalypse would start already" | |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
