Wards costing scrap instead of gems
Just thought I'd bring this up to see what anyone else thought.
I feel like wards would be better costing scrap instead of gems since gems are the most contested resource in the game and is used for things like units and upgrading your buildings, while wards are for vision. Since there's not many gems early on it can sometimes make it difficult to acquire proper vision with wards since they cost 2 gems each. I think if they were invisible it would make it better, but you could potentially just be throwing 2 gems away by placing a ward in a bush that will get cleared out in a second.
Perhaps making them cost like 25 or 50 scrap to encourage more ward play and not cut into an already limited and contested resource that should be saved for units could work. With gems being required to build so many other different things I think something cheap like wards would be better for scrap, but that's just my opinion.
Comments
I could get behind this idea. Vision is often absolutely essential for returning from behind and often in that case you won't have the gems to spare. Scrap is also important as having the merc count is often the sign of how well a player is doing, but even moreso gems.
Agreed, I feel like wards are prohibitively expensive.
Same. I found myself never using wards due to needing to save the gems for units.
I believe it makes sense for them to cost gems. You have to make the decision, is this vision more important or less important then getting some mercenaries. I feel like you lose that strategic decision if you just gave the wards to Scrap because early game scrap is usually in high abundance allowing you to place a bunch of wards at no real immediate "cost" and without having to make a possibly very impacting strategic decision.