Gateway vs Warpgate, Blizzard listen

Protoss Discussion
Post Limit:
If Bizzard removes the button to switch back and forth and just has gateways become warpgates once the upgrade finishes--these threads will disappear.
If Bizzard removes the button to switch back and forth and just has gateways become warpgates once the upgrade finishes--these threads will disappear.
No.
If Bizzard removes the button to switch back and forth and just has gateways become warpgates once the upgrade finishes--these threads will disappear.
No.


Option A: Rebalance and retweak an entire tech tree and its implications throughout the metagame.

Option B: Remove a button

I wonder which one is a better option.
FOR GOD'S SAKE STOP POSTING ABOUT THIS. It is one of the key mechanics of the Protoss race and Blizzard is NOT going to change it. Why would they want all three races to have to same boring macro mechanic?

Besides, this is like saying to to make not using Inject Larvae a viable alternative over using it. It makes no sense, is a bad idea, and you should DEFINITELY feel bad.
09/11/2012 09:09 PMPosted by oVi
there is no reason to go back to gateways


It's an UPGRADE.

Your logic is beyond flawed.

It is like saying, "once you upgrade colossus range, there is no reason to ever go back to short range colossus"

No $h1t. It decreases warp in time and adds positional strategy. Its a race mechanic, like larva or add ons.
they should remove reactors and tech labs then
Well there is also no disadvantages of doing larva injects....Lets do it this way, that if you choose to inject, it will take 50% longer to make a unit....how about that??
Also it should be obviously to anyone that by making warp-in ability viable, Blizzard drastically decreased strength of protoss gateway units, meaning that our units are specifically weaker to make sure there is a balance with warp-in system. So its all good, when we are attacking....our units are weaker but we can reinforce really fast, however when we are defence we still have bad units, thus sentry was made with amazing forcefields to make sure we can actually defend ourselves.

If we are to remove warpins, which are fine with me, I would expect to see drastic increase in strength for our gateway units, and we'll actually be able to fight stupid m and m without needing to have tier-3 units. Make it happen, I am all for that.
Gateways produce units at a steady rate whereas warpgates produce units in bursts. Technically gateways make units faster than warpgates because they dont have to cool down. Warpgates on the other hand give you instant gradification in terms of a fast army in waves. There is a difference it just hasnt been explored yet.
10/23/2012 10:29 PMPosted by Sizzlor
Gateways produce units at a steady rate whereas warpgates produce units in bursts. Technically gateways make units faster than warpgates because they dont have to cool down. Warpgates on the other hand give you instant gradification in terms of a fast army in waves. There is a difference it just hasnt been explored yet.


This is factually incorrect. Warpgates produce all units faster than gateways. The cooldown for a warp gate is less than the build time for each gateway.

The only way you won't get more units is if you don't use them as much.
I think it's a really fun and totally cool mechanic that isn't destroying actual gameplay even though it may be unpopular. My reasoning for keeping it in the game is this: if Protoss develops warp gate technology (I assume it's based on the tech Protoss uses to warp in buildings), why would they go back to an inferior technology? What would be the reason to get it, then, in the first place?
I think the warpgate system is fine as it is.

Arguments i will address;
Dynamic playstyles
buff to gateway units
It's a straight upgrade

Dynamic playstyles; i understand that if you have a mix of both it would be dynamic but if i wanted to build units like a terran i would play terran. blizzard did their best to differentiate the unit build styles of all the races, if every race produced units the same way there wouldn't be as much strategy to the game.

Buff to gateway units; while i agree that gateway units do need a buff i believe that in the current state of the game they're serving the purpose. most of the QQ comes from people that get repeatedly cheesed or mismicro alot and there are ways to compensate for that, practicing, learning how to counter the cheese

It's a straight upgrade from gateway; this one is less common and i heard it a long time ago. it is a straight upgrade from the gateway and i dont see that as a problem because all the other races have that option too. hatcheries by themselves straight up produce less units then when they have a queen. there is no advantage to having a barracks without a tech lab or reactor, because it builds different units with a tech lab and more units with a reactor

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In conclusion i think that warpgate/gateway system is fine as it is and it has been proven again and again to be pretty balanced in both professional and unprofessional play. Lots of the QQ comes from either players who dont micro properly or players that dont understand the advantages certain races have at certain stages of the game. while protoss isn't as strong in the early game, it has many advantages in it's t3 tech and there's no problem with that, we just have to adapt.
You could say the same thing about a tech lab, that there is no disadvantages.

Warpgate is an upgrade. Blizzard wants you to always use it. The only reason they don't start as warpgates is that it would be too strong that early.

Why get +1 attack? Because its an advantage. There are no disadvantages other than the money spent.
actually. I see you're point... when you think of how much it costs to get warpgates they become quite a basic standard of toss play. the only disadvantage is the time it takes to make a warpgate. it's what 160 seconds by then terrans have reactors and zerg has a queen and quite a few worms to go with it. I don't agree with making the gateway a viable asset... that just makes no sense. but doing something like say reducing the time it takes to make a gateway. that way the warpgate makes more sense to have over a robo in early game (let's face it a decently early robo gives observers and a immortals for roach rushes.)

but no. the gateway will never makes sense to choose it. unless you reduced the time it took to make zots... even then I would choose a warp over a gateway.
Actually, there is a small advantage of switching back to gateways. You can pump out a zealot between warp cycles, especially if you chrono boost the gateway's warp of the zealot. If you warp in Stalker, Sentries, or Templar, you can then morph the WG back into a Gateway and start a Zealot. The Zealot build for 38 seconds (28 if chrono boosted once) then you can morph the Gateway back into a WG and drop another Templar or Stalker at your forward pylon as your zealot catches up.

Here is an URL of a page where this trick is explained: http://www.starcraft-replay.com/guides/warpgate-trick-for-faster-zealots.php

Now, because Stalkers take 32 seconds to cool down, even if you chrono boost the gateway once while warping the Zealot, the WG will be ready to warp in another stalker 9 seconds after it would have if you left it as a WG. This means you drop a Stalker once every 3 and a half rounds, but pick up 3 Zealots marching to the fight. If you warp Templar (45 sec Cool) and chrono the gateway's zealot, you only lose three seconds of WG productivity, barely noticeable, especially if you pick up a Zealot.

If no chrono boosts are spent on the gateway or WG, you lose 18 seconds of Stalker production for each warp-in round, dropping a stalker every other round. This is still a boost of you gateway productivity if you want a 50/50 mix of Zealots and Stalker/Sentries. 30% more productive gateways means 30% less gateway required. Can you imagine a 3 gate rush being nearly as affective as 4gates? (with an extra 150 minerals in the bank.)

The down side? More APM required, next to no Chrono being saved, and the Zealots have to walk to the other guy's base.
09/11/2012 09:09 PMPosted by oVi
there is no reason to go back to gateways.


Dude, give it a rest. There is no reason that this is a problem.
09/12/2012 10:03 PMPosted by BadHabit
Why should Warp Gates have a tradeoff when not using add-ons or queens provide no such equalizations?


each queen costs 150 minerals and two supply. how is THAT not a tradeoff?

add-ons, not only each of them costs some mineral and gas (therefore ruling them out of some builds' early game), they take a lot of space AND you have to choose between increasing the production capabilities of the basic units you get from a regular structure with a reactor OR enabling higher tech units with a tech lab. and that's for EACH building. oh, they're also incredibly vulnerable to sniping. and more: your production cease entirely for the building time of the add-on, making you extremely vulnerable.

here's a simple idea: just make the transformation take 40 or so seconds so you have to actually THINK before you select all gateways and hold G down. maybe even spend some chronoboost to speed things up. yeah i like this idea better. heck, could even un-nerf the warpgate research time if this was implemented so warpgates kick in at the same timing it does now.

if anything, just disable gateways entirely and have workers build warpgates instead after the upgrade has been researched since gateways are pointless anyways.
Why are we still doing this. Warp gates are an upgrade and the intended way for Protoss infantry to be produced... The only reason regular gateways exist is for early game balance.

You should never want to go back to gateways just like you would never want to un-research combat shields.
crap i unintentionally unburrowed this topic from 6 months ago.
sorry, got linked to this and didn't remember to check the date
09/12/2012 05:42 AMPosted by FluffyZerg
I think of it more as just a basic mechanic of the race, like having queens at your hatcheries. There's no reason NOT to have one because it's part of the basic way of playing the race.


That's not true, most zergs will opt to only have 3-4 queens injecting no matter how many hatches they have.

But I agree with OP. Warp gate needs to have a downside.


The downside is gate units are trash.

Join the Conversation