I'm not sure if there was a discussion about this yet, so I'll start one.
This is a small thing. Pylons receive the quick warp-in if they are adjacent to a nexus, even while its building (I'd imagine it would be the same for a gateway). Should this intricacy stay in the game? Or should gateway units be given the slow warp-in if the building that powers the pylon is incomplete? The only thing this achieves is giving protoss a much easier way to secure an expansion. Whether or not this is a good or bad thing is up for discussion, and I will argue that it is not (zerg bias ftw).
When securing a new base, the player is obliged to use their army (or a portion of it) to secure the position before defenses are up and running (not doing so is greedy, or the player knows that it cannot be attacked). This quick warp-in makes the window for punishing a new expansion with a small force fairly difficult. Securing a new expansion is a critical part in any game, and it should usually create action, whether the opposing player wants to attack or secure a new base of his own (the latter not really being too action packed). It is easiest for terran to secure a new base thanks to lift-off, but it can still be punished if no army is nearby while the planetary/bunkers/missile turrets are in construction. Zerg bases have very little defenses that need to go up, and usually relies on a few spines/mobile defense force and (more importantly) map vision to determine if the base is safe
Isn't this abusable? With offensive warp-ins you could just throw down a nexus, get the fast warp-in speed on your pylon and cancel the nexus to get 300 minerals back. It would cost you 100 minerals to get the 2-second warp-in temporarily. I imagine you probably have the time for something between 2 and 4 warp-ins before you need to cancel the nexus. This could be done in a reactionary fashion as well... If the battle is going bad and you need quick reinforcements, throw down the nexus and you immediately get the fast warp-in option. If the battle is going good, then you can afford to wait and you save the 100 minerals that this trick would cost you.
Sure, it will require you to have an extra 400 minerals to put out followed by how much the warp-in itself is going to cost, but the fact that this is a reactionary thing makes this viable in my opinion.
On September 30 2015 20:58 Big J wrote: I think it is a bug and will be fixed soon.
Hm I don't know, this got a lot of attention before on Reddit and the consensus was that it's a feature, not a bug. Blizzard saw the discussion for sure and did not come out and say it's a bug or will be fixed.
Guys, you act like Protoss can just warp in shit at any time. To reactively warp in units to defend an expansion you need to be saving money and warp cycles actively. If the Zerg is building an army to attack your third and you're not hitting every warp cycle in the first place then you're falling behind.
Knowing when to warp in units and when to tech is one of the skills that defines good Protoss players, just like droning/building units does Zerg players.
On September 30 2015 20:58 Big J wrote: I think it is a bug and will be fixed soon.
Hm I don't know, this got a lot of attention before on Reddit and the consensus was that it's a feature, not a bug. Blizzard saw the discussion for sure and did not come out and say it's a bug or will be fixed.
It's gotten attention only in the last 2weeks or so, right? Big chance that blizzard simply hasn't responded to it yet. I don't think it was an intentional decision, unfinished stuff providing functions is not really a thing in this game. It's rather easy to have an oversight like this, the original intention was to only make warpgates give you the extra warp-in in power which is easier to implement, because you for a warpgate to be recognized as a warpgate you need to build a gateway and finish the warpgate-transformation. But I think what happend is that then they took a community suggestion and added the nexus thing, forgetting that they can only do that with the warpgate that easily in the engine because the warpgate is not a warpgate but a gateway during its construction. For other buildings to work like that they would need to add a "finished" identifier somewhere in the pylon radius search that is looking for a nexus.
I don't think the "have 400 extra minerals" in any way invalidates this as an offensive strategy. As DinoMight put it, if you want to do warp-ins you have to prepare accordingly and have the minerals saved up. Say you have 7 warpgates and 700 minerals. What you can do as opposed to 16 second slow warp-ins, is start nexus (300 minerals left), warp in 3 fast zealots (0 minerals), cancel nexus (300 minerals) and warp in another 3 zealots. You then have 3 zealots after 2 seconds, and 6 zealots after 18 seconds. In fact: if you have a fully saturated base (800 minerals/minute), you can already start using your last warpgate at the 8 second mark since you have earned the 100 minerals needed for your last zealot. I.e. you are going to have 2 sec: 3 zealots 18 sec: 6 zealots 24 sec: 7 zealots as opposed to 16 sec: 7 zealots
The above calculation was coined at those concerned that this trick was not useful for timing attacks. It is indeed useful for timings, but I think its biggest utility is late-game where you actually often *do* have an extra 400 lying around. At least players like myself who is not grand master yet. In those cases, it can be used in a reactionary way when you need really quick reinforcements and get 300 out of 400 minerals refunded anyway.
On September 30 2015 20:58 Big J wrote: I think it is a bug and will be fixed soon.
Hm I don't know, this got a lot of attention before on Reddit and the consensus was that it's a feature, not a bug. Blizzard saw the discussion for sure and did not come out and say it's a bug or will be fixed.
It's gotten attention only in the last 2weeks or so, right? Big chance that blizzard simply hasn't responded to it yet. I don't think it was an intentional decision, stuff providing functions is not really a thing in this game. It's rather easy to have an oversight like this, the original intention was to only make warpgates give you the extra warp-in in power which is easier to implement, because you for a warpgate to be recognized as a warpgate you need to build a gateway and finish the warpgate-transformation. Then they took a community suggestion and added the nexus thing, forgetting that they can only do that with the warpgate that easily in the engine because the warpgate is not a warpgate but a gateway during its construction. For other buildings to work like that they would need to add a "finished" identifier somewhere in the pylon radius search that is looking for a nexus.
I think you might be right that it was not intentional, makes sense from a programming point of view as you explained. Still weird that they didn't adress it yet since we already had a community update. And usually community managers even post on reddit if it's a confirmed bug. So maybe they like it now and decided to keep it.
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: I don't think the "have 400 extra minerals" in any way invalidates this as an offensive strategy. As DinoMight put it, if you want to do warp-ins you have to prepare accordingly and have the minerals saved up. Say you have 7 warpgates and 700 minerals. What you can do as opposed to 16 second slow warp-ins, is start nexus (300 minerals left), warp in 3 fast zealots (0 minerals), cancel nexus (300 minerals) and warp in another 3 zealots. You then have 3 zealots after 2 seconds, and 6 zealots after 18 seconds. In fact: if you have a fully saturated base (800 minerals/minute), you can already start using your last warpgate at the 8 second mark since you have earned the 100 minerals needed for your last zealot. I.e. you are going to have 2 sec: 3 zealots 18 sec: 6 zealots 24 sec: 7 zealots as opposed to 16 sec: 7 zealots
So as expected it is slower than just warping in units w/o the nexus.
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: The above calculation was coined at those concerned that this trick was not useful for timing attacks. It is indeed useful for timings, but I think its biggest utility is late-game where you actually often *do* have an extra 400 lying around. At least players like myself who is not grand master yet. In those cases, it can be used in a reactionary way when you need really quick reinforcements and get 300 out of 400 minerals refunded anyway.
But why on earth would you do that, when you can just build a WP instead? It's late game after all.
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: I don't think the "have 400 extra minerals" in any way invalidates this as an offensive strategy. As DinoMight put it, if you want to do warp-ins you have to prepare accordingly and have the minerals saved up. Say you have 7 warpgates and 700 minerals. What you can do as opposed to 16 second slow warp-ins, is start nexus (300 minerals left), warp in 3 fast zealots (0 minerals), cancel nexus (300 minerals) and warp in another 3 zealots. You then have 3 zealots after 2 seconds, and 6 zealots after 18 seconds. In fact: if you have a fully saturated base (800 minerals/minute), you can already start using your last warpgate at the 8 second mark since you have earned the 100 minerals needed for your last zealot. I.e. you are going to have 2 sec: 3 zealots 18 sec: 6 zealots 24 sec: 7 zealots as opposed to 16 sec: 7 zealots
So as expected it is slower than just warping in units w/o the nexus.
Seriously? Did you even read my post? The point is the 3 zealots which can wreck havoc for 14 more seconds while the slow warp-in is still being summoned. At 13.3DPS it should be enough to output 560 dmg or soak a considerable amount of damage.
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: The above calculation was coined at those concerned that this trick was not useful for timing attacks. It is indeed useful for timings, but I think its biggest utility is late-game where you actually often *do* have an extra 400 lying around. At least players like myself who is not grand master yet. In those cases, it can be used in a reactionary way when you need really quick reinforcements and get 300 out of 400 minerals refunded anyway.
But why on earth would you do that, when you can just build a WP instead? It's late game after all.
The point is of course the word reactionary. When stuff happens that you did not plan and you need fast warp-in right now for some reason. Even better: if you do decide to attack late-game, and set up a proxy pylon with your main army, you can start warping in with fast warp-ins the second the pylon is finished instead of starting to warp in your gateway and transforming this into a warpgate before your first fast warp-in can take place.
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: I don't think the "have 400 extra minerals" in any way invalidates this as an offensive strategy. As DinoMight put it, if you want to do warp-ins you have to prepare accordingly and have the minerals saved up. Say you have 7 warpgates and 700 minerals. What you can do as opposed to 16 second slow warp-ins, is start nexus (300 minerals left), warp in 3 fast zealots (0 minerals), cancel nexus (300 minerals) and warp in another 3 zealots. You then have 3 zealots after 2 seconds, and 6 zealots after 18 seconds. In fact: if you have a fully saturated base (800 minerals/minute), you can already start using your last warpgate at the 8 second mark since you have earned the 100 minerals needed for your last zealot. I.e. you are going to have 2 sec: 3 zealots 18 sec: 6 zealots 24 sec: 7 zealots as opposed to 16 sec: 7 zealots
So as expected it is slower than just warping in units w/o the nexus.
Seriously? Did you even read my post? The point is the 3 zealots which can wreck havoc for 14 more seconds while the slow warp-in is still being summoned. At 13.3DPS it should be enough to output 560 dmg or soak a considerable amount of damage.
What kind of "havoc" can 3 zealots wreck at the 7 gate timing? Please explain in practical terms, not with some weird theorycarfting dps or health value.
Because when I'm doing or pro Protoss players are doing such timings, the goal is to make your BO as efficient as possible, which means that you want to line up your warpin in cycle. So what kind of benefit could a P player have at such a timing, in order to pay 700 minerals up front for 3 zealots?
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: The above calculation was coined at those concerned that this trick was not useful for timing attacks. It is indeed useful for timings, but I think its biggest utility is late-game where you actually often *do* have an extra 400 lying around. At least players like myself who is not grand master yet. In those cases, it can be used in a reactionary way when you need really quick reinforcements and get 300 out of 400 minerals refunded anyway.
But why on earth would you do that, when you can just build a WP instead? It's late game after all.
The point is of course the word reactionary. When stuff happens that you did not plan and you need fast warp-in right now for some reason. Even better: if you do decide to attack late-game, and set up a proxy pylon with your main army, you can start warping in with fast warp-ins the second the pylon is finished instead of starting to warp in your gateway and transforming this into a warpgate before your first fast warp-in can take place.
This is far fetched. So it's "reactionary" but I just happen to have a probe with my army and somehow a couple of seconds make all the difference? The time advantage is not as great in practice, as you make it out to be, because you have to click on the probe, order it to build a nexus, switch to WGs and warp in your units, instead of just warping in directly.
I can't think of a situation, where I'd want to do this, instead of just making sure that I have a WP with my army. Nor can I think of any advantage.
On September 30 2015 20:58 Big J wrote: I think it is a bug and will be fixed soon.
Hm I don't know, this got a lot of attention before on Reddit and the consensus was that it's a feature, not a bug. Blizzard saw the discussion for sure and did not come out and say it's a bug or will be fixed.
It's gotten attention only in the last 2weeks or so, right? Big chance that blizzard simply hasn't responded to it yet. I don't think it was an intentional decision, unfinished stuff providing functions is not really a thing in this game. It's rather easy to have an oversight like this, the original intention was to only make warpgates give you the extra warp-in in power which is easier to implement, because you for a warpgate to be recognized as a warpgate you need to build a gateway and finish the warpgate-transformation. But I think what happend is that then they took a community suggestion and added the nexus thing, forgetting that they can only do that with the warpgate that easily in the engine because the warpgate is not a warpgate but a gateway during its construction. For other buildings to work like that they would need to add a "finished" identifier somewhere in the pylon radius search that is looking for a nexus.
I think Big J has the right of it, guys.
This seems very much like unintended behavior and probably has something to do with the tag used to evaluate the super pylon conditions.
Example:
IF (pylon.radius collides with tag:warpgate){superPylon = true}ELSE{superPylon = false}.
Then, since this is the beta, and they wanted to add the Nexus to the mix, they probably just quick-and-dirty threw it in, maybe like:
IF (pylon.radius collides with (tag:warpgate OR tag:Nexus)){superPylon = true}ELSE{superPylon = false}.
This condition registers as true if the warping in nexus is tagged as a Nexus. They probably just need to add a clause to the condition that says:
AND Nexus.tag:building == false.
I just wanted to write some code-looking stuff : )
I think it makes sense that Protoss can warp in units beside a Nexus that is building, its not like your opponent is going to offensive nexus then warpgate all in you instead of making a warp prism or proxy warpgate lol
On October 01 2015 01:24 CheddarToss wrote: No, this is not a bug. It makes perfect sense to everyone, who is not biased against Protoss.
Well, unintended behavior is slightly different than bug. It very well could be intended behavior. I don't know. It could just as easily not be. Unintended behavior is extremely common in programming.
If this is intentional behavior, it is the only instance in the game where an incomplete structure grants one of its abilities or attributes. It is for this reason that I think it is harder to believe that this is intentional than unintentional. Has nothing to do with bias against Protoss.
Try this test: Build a pylon and then a gate way. While the gateway is building, select the pylon. It should display a normal (slow) warp-in field. Once the Gateway is finished, order the transformation into Warpgate. As quickly as possible (maybe set up a hotkey), switch back to the pylon. Does the pylon's powerfield change to fast warp-in while the Gateway is transforming, or does it switch over once the Warpgate is complete?
On October 01 2015 01:24 CheddarToss wrote: No, this is not a bug. It makes perfect sense to everyone, who is not biased against Protoss.
Well, unintended behavior is slightly different than bug. It very well could be intended behavior. I don't know. It could just as easily not be. Unintended behavior is extremely common in programming.
If this is intentional behavior, it is the only instance in the game where an incomplete structure grants one of its abilities or attributes. It is for this reason that I think it is harder to believe that this is intentional than unintentional. Has nothing to do with bias against Protoss.
Try this test: Build a pylon and then a gate way. While the gateway is building, select the pylon. It should display a normal (slow) warp-in field. Once the Gateway is finished, order the transformation into Warpgate. As quickly as possible (maybe set up a hotkey), switch back to the pylon. Does the pylon's powerfield change to fast warp-in while the Gateway is transforming, or does it switch over once the Warpgate is complete?
I'd be interested to see what happens here.
....I can't believe the level people are going to try to understand this. Once the game is more balanced and even still now, Protoss requires the ability to be able to warp in near a building expansion in order to defend, it makes perfect sense and is common sense even.
I dunno you could potentially get multiple warp ins off of a single building nexus and then cancel it at the last minute...doesn't really seem that unfeasible to start a nexus and warp in a round immediately and then leave it while warping in (rather than waiting for pylon + gateway to finish)...
If you are building a nexus offensively in order to a warp in it is 100% NOT cost efficient and should never work. Only in low levels would this even work, even then it shouldn't work and still should just be disregarded.
On October 01 2015 05:08 GGzerG wrote: No, just no.
If you are building a nexus offensively in order to a warp in it is 100% NOT cost efficient and should never work. Only in low levels would this even work, even then it shouldn't work and still should just be disregarded.
There's nothing that is better than it in every way so it remains an option to keep in mind. Depending on how valuable timing is, it can be the most efficient choice since it can be the fastest. Everyone should be aware of how to abandon all their plans and put together the strongest attack they can as soon as possible, especially in LotV where there are a lot more interactions going on that may create an opportunity to win the game. I don't expect it to come up that often, since the warp prism is the mothership core of LotV -- every protoss should always have one -- but it can happen. Take a good trade, feel that you can all-in to capitalize and win, and the proxy nexus is the best way to maximize the power of your attack at that moment.
And anyway, listen to yourself saying it should never work, as if no one ever won a game while down a few hundred minerals, or with minerals unspent in the bank. The game isn't often THAT precise, even in the GSL.
Obvious application is a rush involving a proxy pylon that is more limited by gas than by minerals. So maybe we'll start seeing Protoss players briefly warp in a Nexus when they rush DT? That'd be kinda cool I guess.
Seems fine, not overpowered, and I kinda think the option to spend 100 minerals and temporarily keep 300 minerals tied up in order to get your warp-ins faster is kinda cute. Like a couple times in WoL when players would proxy a Nexus to pre-charge up their void rays before attacking in. Maybe I'll change my mind when proxy nexus gateway rushes are killing me over and over, but for now I kinda like it.
On September 30 2015 20:35 Genesis128 wrote: Isn't this abusable? With offensive warp-ins you could just throw down a nexus, get the fast warp-in speed on your pylon and cancel the nexus to get 300 minerals back. It would cost you 100 minerals to get the 2-second warp-in temporarily. I imagine you probably have the time for something between 2 and 4 warp-ins before you need to cancel the nexus. This could be done in a reactionary fashion as well... If the battle is going bad and you need quick reinforcements, throw down the nexus and you immediately get the fast warp-in option. If the battle is going good, then you can afford to wait and you save the 100 minerals that this trick would cost you.
Sure, it will require you to have an extra 400 minerals to put out followed by how much the warp-in itself is going to cost, but the fact that this is a reactionary thing makes this viable in my opinion.
I doubt it will see regular use. Either way, a nexus under construction shouldn't be subject to long, vulnerable warp ins. The idea was to make expansion easier, not harder, than it was in hots.
I would find it interesting if Protoss has to establich defenders advantage slowly and not instantly have it. That would be like Terran pressing PF and the upgrade drops from the orbit. I mean getting up a Nexus requires some work, but when its there its hard to get rid of. But I usually dislike things that just hit you out of nowhere in a strategy game. But I guess thats to be expected if the speed up their already fastest rts.
As for using it offensively. Since as protoss you stock up minerals anyway, the 100 minerals might be worth it for being 8 seconds faster. Spam out those sentries and have the Zealots come afterwards. I mean faking an expand was common practive as protoss haha.
On October 01 2015 01:24 CheddarToss wrote: No, this is not a bug. It makes perfect sense to everyone, who is not biased against Protoss.
Well, unintended behavior is slightly different than bug. It very well could be intended behavior. I don't know. It could just as easily not be. Unintended behavior is extremely common in programming.
If this is intentional behavior, it is the only instance in the game where an incomplete structure grants one of its abilities or attributes. It is for this reason that I think it is harder to believe that this is intentional than unintentional. Has nothing to do with bias against Protoss.
Try this test: Build a pylon and then a gate way. While the gateway is building, select the pylon. It should display a normal (slow) warp-in field. Once the Gateway is finished, order the transformation into Warpgate. As quickly as possible (maybe set up a hotkey), switch back to the pylon. Does the pylon's powerfield change to fast warp-in while the Gateway is transforming, or does it switch over once the Warpgate is complete?
I'd be interested to see what happens here.
....I can't believe the level people are going to try to understand this. Once the game is more balanced and even still now, Protoss requires the ability to be able to warp in near a building expansion in order to defend, it makes perfect sense and is common sense even.
What do you mean? It's the beta, man. It's not like it took a detailed take-down thought process to see that a building under construction is passing an attribute to another game element. It seems unintentional, but I made it clear that I don't know the intent of the behavior. Maybe it is intended. If so, it would be a unique game dynamic.
As far as the game implications? *shrugs* It will certainly help Protoss secure expansions without having to dedicate supply or static defense.
Hm, given that it was not adressed today it is probably intentional or blizzard likes it. Still dunno what to think of it, it was definitely weird when I played one of my first games with the new warpgate and the protoss just warped in fast with his gateway unfinished. Probably not a big deal though, the only thing that comes to my mind in which it is really abuseable would be something like a DT rush or lategame having an offensive nexus for that nearly-free recall and fast reinforcements.
It doesn't make sense, protoss should be vulnerable when securing a new base as its the nature of it. Its like your hatchery in construction already starts spreading creep
On October 02 2015 08:35 Aegwynn wrote: It doesn't make sense, protoss should be vulnerable when securing a new base as its the nature of it. Its like your hatchery in construction already starts spreading creep
Well, you have to build the pylon there. And you can try to connect a new base with creep before you take it. And a Terran base is never really vulnerable when it is built within its other bases and then flown out. Pylon overcharge is a much bigger deal when it comes to securing an expansion as protoss, than the ability to warp in 3seconds faster than in HotS.
But I also think it doesn't make sense just functionally that the building nexus provides a power itself. I don't like these tiny extra rules. Though I gotta say as a zerg we are abusing that shit since 2010 when we cancel a hatch and build an evolution chamber at the opponent's expansion because a hatchery for some weirdo reason also spreads 3x3 creep underneath it even when it is only constructing.
abusing evo trick? Thats not even useful compared to building a single pylon or e-bay. Pylon overcharge is already making ridiculous amount of damage, why uncompleted nexus should give fast warp-ins? Beside the balance, this little non-sensical designs makes look game ugly. Like warp prism picking units from other planets, picking/unloading sieged tanks, yellow acids falling from the sky...
Well the alternative would be to have 16 second warp ins at the 4th while defending it, or to pull back the warp prism which would stifle harassment opportunities. Neither of those make much sense, it was never the intent of the warp in nerf to make it more difficult for protoss to expand.
TimeSpiral, why am I not surprised you're in one of these threads and advocating against anything that gives a non-Terran race a benefit? Is it so hard to believe that an intended behavior exists? For example, a DT back in BW could 1 hit a drone or probe and it would not have the alert sound 'your units are under attack.' Everyone assumed it was intended behavior. Wait..I'm just gonna stop arguing with you. It's pointless
On October 01 2015 02:24 TimeSpiral wrote: If this is intentional behavior, it is the only instance in the game where an incomplete structure grants one of its abilities or attributes. It is for this reason that I think it is harder to believe that this is intentional than unintentional. Has nothing to do with bias against Protoss.
Come on, there are already a few tricks working around incomplete buildings. I am not even considering the basic which is that they already take up the space they will when completed which is pretty useful to block something (ebay block, walling etc.). Sure Terrans won't have much on this aspect, but to be fair they already have a lot of gimmicks with buildings (lifting, having units enter some of them and bunker salvaging mainly). I don't think it is an issue to have an extra rule.
- all: incomplete buildings allow you to not to lose a game (the one biggest rule of Starcraft) - zerg: incomplete buildings free up the supply of the drones used, cancel trick gets you over the 200 supply rules - zerg: cancelling an hatchery provide a small amount of creep for short amount of time allowing proxying small buildings or tumors
On October 01 2015 02:24 TimeSpiral wrote: If this is intentional behavior, it is the only instance in the game where an incomplete structure grants one of its abilities or attributes. It is for this reason that I think it is harder to believe that this is intentional than unintentional. Has nothing to do with bias against Protoss.
Come on, there are already a few tricks working around incomplete buildings. I am not even considering the basic which is that they already take up the space they will when completed which is pretty useful to block something (ebay block, walling etc.). Sure Terrans won't have much on this aspect, but to be fair they already have a lot of gimmicks with buildings (lifting, having units enter some of them and bunker salvaging mainly). I don't think it is an issue to have an extra rule.
- all: incomplete buildings allow you to not to lose a game (the one biggest rule of Starcraft)
Because it is already a building. It has to count as something, and the most logical rule is that it counts as structure. It's also nothing special to a single building, it's that structures count as structures in any phase of their existance.
- zerg: incomplete buildings free up the supply of the drones used, cancel trick gets you over the 200 supply rules
That's the very normal process of a transformation/production. A mothership costs 6more supply the moment you start the morph. A marine costs one supply the moment you give the production order. The same obviously goes for units morphing into something that costs less supply. Or would be if there was a unit Again, this is just the consistent ruling with everything else, just that the drone morph into a structure is the only morph in the game into something that costs less supply.
- zerg: cancelling an hatchery provide a small amount of creep for short amount of time allowing proxying small buildings or tumors
Yup, that is actually a special rule. I think the problem here was that they either have to make a special rule that hatcheries don't lose health of creep, or that they already sit on creep somehow.
This is just to point out that the first two are not special rules! I do agree that there is no reason not to have special rules if they benefit the game somehow. I'm not sure that this is the case here, but whatever, it's somewhat small of a thing I guess. There's probably going to be some abuse around it, and we will have to learn and live with it instead of just having a solid solution to protoss defense problems, the way it has always been in this game. Personally I mainly found it weird to see fast warp-ins at an incomplete nexus, but one gets used to it. I usually read patch changes carefully and when I get into a game and expect things to work in a certain way but then they don't because the patch notes were incomplete and the behavior was not logically predictable from what was said I find it a bit distrubing at first.
I find it funny that people are arguing over this. If I could, I would force every poster here to play Protoss in a version of the game, in which there are no fast warpins at Nexi under construction. Maybe after a several dozen easily crushed expos and devastating losses it might get obvious why this warpin behaviour makes perfect sense.
On October 02 2015 20:18 CheddarToss wrote: I find it funny that people are arguing over this. If I could, I would force every poster here to play Protoss in a version of the game, in which there are no fast warpins at Nexi under construction. Maybe after a several dozen easily crushed expos and devastating losses it might get obvious why this warpin behaviour makes perfect sense.
Or you could have your army closer to protect it or use the pylon cannon to defend your expo while you warp in or bring back some units. I doubt it´s as dramatic as you make it sound like.
I'd be more okay with incomplete nexus providing the warpin buff if photon overcharge wasn't so strong. Protoss has a lot of defenders advantage already, so this just compounds that. On the other hand, it makes sense for an incomplete nexus to provide the warpin buff.
I think in a perfect world, protoss would have an existing army to defend an expansion, and would supplement that with overcharge to defend. In an even more perfect world they'd be able to defend using their army like anyone else, no overcharge, no panic warpins.
Just my 2 cents. Protoss deems to have a lot of special rules, and I'm not a huge fan. I'd rather they be more traditional.
On October 02 2015 20:31 InfCereal wrote: I'd be more okay with incomplete nexus providing the warpin buff if photon overcharge wasn't so strong. Protoss has a lot of defenders advantage already, so this just compounds that. On the other hand, it makes sense for an incomplete nexus to provide the warpin buff.
I think in a perfect world, protoss would have an existing army to defend an expansion, and would supplement that with overcharge to defend. In an even more perfect world they'd be able to defend using their army like anyone else, no overcharge, no panic warpins.
Just my 2 cents. Protoss deems to have a lot of special rules, and I'm not a huge fan. I'd rather they be more traditional.
That's what you get when you balance the first 5 years of the game around having weaker core units than the other races and mechanics that remove defenders advantage
On October 02 2015 20:31 InfCereal wrote: I'd be more okay with incomplete nexus providing the warpin buff if photon overcharge wasn't so strong. Protoss has a lot of defenders advantage already, so this just compounds that. On the other hand, it makes sense for an incomplete nexus to provide the warpin buff.
I think in a perfect world, protoss would have an existing army to defend an expansion, and would supplement that with overcharge to defend. In an even more perfect world they'd be able to defend using their army like anyone else, no overcharge, no panic warpins.
Just my 2 cents. Protoss deems to have a lot of special rules, and I'm not a huge fan. I'd rather they be more traditional.
That's what you get when you balance the first 5 years of the game around having weaker core units than the other races and mechanics that remove defenders advantage
Yeah, and now you get a stronger core unit, so why do you leave that out of the equation?
On October 02 2015 20:31 InfCereal wrote: I'd be more okay with incomplete nexus providing the warpin buff if photon overcharge wasn't so strong. Protoss has a lot of defenders advantage already, so this just compounds that. On the other hand, it makes sense for an incomplete nexus to provide the warpin buff.
I think in a perfect world, protoss would have an existing army to defend an expansion, and would supplement that with overcharge to defend. In an even more perfect world they'd be able to defend using their army like anyone else, no overcharge, no panic warpins.
Just my 2 cents. Protoss deems to have a lot of special rules, and I'm not a huge fan. I'd rather they be more traditional.
That's what you get when you balance the first 5 years of the game around having weaker core units than the other races and mechanics that remove defenders advantage
Yeah, and now you get a stronger core unit, so why do you leave that out of the equation?
I thought stalker/sentry has proved that protoss has super strong core units?
On October 02 2015 20:31 InfCereal wrote: I'd be more okay with incomplete nexus providing the warpin buff if photon overcharge wasn't so strong. Protoss has a lot of defenders advantage already, so this just compounds that. On the other hand, it makes sense for an incomplete nexus to provide the warpin buff.
I think in a perfect world, protoss would have an existing army to defend an expansion, and would supplement that with overcharge to defend. In an even more perfect world they'd be able to defend using their army like anyone else, no overcharge, no panic warpins.
Just my 2 cents. Protoss deems to have a lot of special rules, and I'm not a huge fan. I'd rather they be more traditional.
That's what you get when you balance the first 5 years of the game around having weaker core units than the other races and mechanics that remove defenders advantage
Yeah, and now you get a stronger core unit, so why do you leave that out of the equation?
I thought stalker/sentry has proved that protoss has super strong core units?
Of course it has, but you could argue that's only in PvZ and you still have to rely somewhat heavily on the MsC to take the 2nd and 3rd expansion. (though so far they have managed without overcharge being there before the nexus was done; yet with fast warpins, though not with 2sec but 5sec, or whatever value that is in real time...)
On October 02 2015 12:10 parkufarku wrote: TimeSpiral, why am I not surprised you're in one of these threads and advocating against anything that gives a non-Terran race a benefit? Is it so hard to believe that an intended behavior exists? For example, a DT back in BW could 1 hit a drone or probe and it would not have the alert sound 'your units are under attack.' Everyone assumed it was intended behavior. Wait..I'm just gonna stop arguing with you. It's pointless
But you don't argue with me. You just pop up every once in a while to slander me personally, lol. Get over it.
It doesn't appear like intended behavior to me (and others). But it might be. I am not presuming to know, because I didn't write the fucking code. So, because this is a beta, the issue is being raised and discussed. What could your problem with this possibly be? I don't even ... I just ...
Try this test: Build a pylon and then a gate way. While the gateway is building, select the pylon. It should display a normal (slow) warp-in field. Once the Gateway is finished, order the transformation into Warpgate. As quickly as possible (maybe set up a hotkey), switch back to the pylon. Does the pylon's powerfield change to fast warp-in while the Gateway is transforming, or does it switch over once the Warpgate is complete?
I'd be interested to see what happens here.
I've tested this by accident by warping in units before I transformed a gateway into a warpgate. It won't speed up the warp in until the warpgate transformation is 100% complete.
Try this test: Build a pylon and then a gate way. While the gateway is building, select the pylon. It should display a normal (slow) warp-in field. Once the Gateway is finished, order the transformation into Warpgate. As quickly as possible (maybe set up a hotkey), switch back to the pylon. Does the pylon's powerfield change to fast warp-in while the Gateway is transforming, or does it switch over once the Warpgate is complete?
I'd be interested to see what happens here.
I've tested this by accident by warping in units before I transformed a gateway into a warpgate. It won't speed up the warp in until the warpgate transformation is 100% complete.
Thanks for reporting back on this! I suspected that this would be the case. This appears to demonstrate a logic inconsistency that cuts both ways. Unless of course, the Nexus that is warping in is a unique exception.
Another test: can you recall to a nexus that is warping in? Another test: can you photon overcharge on a pylon that is warping in?
On September 30 2015 21:23 Genesis128 wrote: I don't think the "have 400 extra minerals" in any way invalidates this as an offensive strategy. As DinoMight put it, if you want to do warp-ins you have to prepare accordingly and have the minerals saved up. Say you have 7 warpgates and 700 minerals. What you can do as opposed to 16 second slow warp-ins, is start nexus (300 minerals left), warp in 3 fast zealots (0 minerals), cancel nexus (300 minerals) and warp in another 3 zealots. You then have 3 zealots after 2 seconds, and 6 zealots after 18 seconds. In fact: if you have a fully saturated base (800 minerals/minute), you can already start using your last warpgate at the 8 second mark since you have earned the 100 minerals needed for your last zealot. I.e. you are going to have 2 sec: 3 zealots 18 sec: 6 zealots 24 sec: 7 zealots as opposed to 16 sec: 7 zealots
The above calculation was coined at those concerned that this trick was not useful for timing attacks. It is indeed useful for timings, but I think its biggest utility is late-game where you actually often *do* have an extra 400 lying around. At least players like myself who is not grand master yet. In those cases, it can be used in a reactionary way when you need really quick reinforcements and get 300 out of 400 minerals refunded anyway.
why not just make a robo and a warp prism with additional 100 gas then you can make units anywhere and have blink ability on zealot/stalker/adept/immortal, warp research takes longer time then a robo + warp prism
I've tested this by accident by warping in units before I transformed a gateway into a warpgate. It won't speed up the warp in until the warpgate transformation is 100% complete.
Thanks for reporting back on this! I suspected that this would be the case
I've personally used this in dozens of games and the sped up warp actually starts the moment you start transforming the gateway to a warpgate, not when the transformation finishes after like 7 seconds.
i can see the best (maybe only) offensive use of this beeing something where you use the nexus to warp in DTs very close to your opponent. Then you cancel your nexus and expand.
Its the only build i can think of that "might" have 400 minerals to spare and use it.
On October 03 2015 18:00 weikor wrote: i can see the best (maybe only) offensive use of this beeing something where you use the nexus to warp in DTs very close to your opponent. Then you cancel your nexus and expand.
Its the only build i can think of that "might" have 400 minerals to spare and use it.
I think the most common use would be later in the game, when you have 12 gateways anyway and a temporary expenditure of 400 minerals (to be recovered to only 100 spent) is nothing against the ability to reinforce 2 waves of units in your opponents face after a fight. That's a time where waiting for a pylon and then a gateway to finish while meanwhile warping at home and doing 16 second warp-ins actually makes it a lot harder to attack - a warp prism can bypass all of this, but you may not have one.
I think overall that i'd rather not have lol offensive nexus be the best way to play in some situations - it's the best way to play in some situations at the moment, but it hasn't become routine enough to see lots of abuse.