|
I didn't know if this was worth it to post in the Strategy forum, nor if it has been posted before! I did search many varieties of "income." The main reason why I posted this in blogs and not Strategy, was because I didn't think anyone would understand my logic (I know my math teacher doesn't), and also that things just happen in-game that throw off your macro.
![[image loading]](http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc47/warrockdot/graph1.jpg)
This is a basic rundown of your income. In Starcraft 2.
Optimal income on 1 base is 940 Minerals, 232 gas every minute. This means 20 on minerals, 1 mule, and 6 on gas.
Here I wanted to make a Graph that could show both Mineral and Gas Income, but Idk how to do that and I'm too lazy to make one on paint. I don't has microsoft office sorry!
Please note: Blue = Minerals, Green = Gas, Yellow = Time (Seconds)
![[image loading]](http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc47/warrockdot/graph2.jpg)
I tried my hand at making a formulaic way of calculating "optimal" production. Ofcourse it is skewed because I do not include upgrades.
Just pick a random variable representation for the units, the way I'm going to do it is:
Ma= Marine (2.4/minute)
Mr= Marauder (2 /minute)
R= Reaper (1.33 /minute)
G= Ghost (1.5 /minute)
S= Siege Tank (1.33 /minute)
T= Thor (1 /minute)
H= Hellion (2 /minute)
V= Viking (1.423 /minute)
M= Medivac (1.423 /minute)
B= Banshee (1 /minute)
Ra= Banshee ( 1/minute)
B= Battlecruiser (0.667 /minute)
SCV = You guessed it. (3.523 /minute)
+ Show Spoiler +D= Depot (2/minute)
I wasn't sure If I wanted to add this one because depot production is not always constant, and the later the game gets the more you make at a time.
Then the way I do it is line up two formulas and assign them mineral and gas values.
940 = Ma(50) + Mr(100) +M(100)
232 = Ma(0) + Mr(25) + M(100)
And through trial and error you try to get exactly 940, or slightly below.
Let's see how my 2 base TvP production looks like:
(4x2.4x50) + (3x2x100) + (2x1.432x100) = 1479 mineral cost per minute
+ Show Spoiler +Translation: (4 Marines x 2.4 Marines/minute x 50 minerals cost)
(3x2x25) + (2x1.432x100) = 436 gas cost per minute
My mineral income is 1880/min and my gas is 464/min. Meaning that I have just enough leftover income for Upgrades, SCVs, Command Centres, and Depots.
Tell me what you think guys, am I just doing the math wrong, is this information simply not worth knowing due to in-game mishaps, or am I on to something interesting?
  
|
I absolutely love this idea, but it's probably better to do this sort of thing for zerg if you play it since zerg players are always unsure of when to drone and when to max out armies (at least at the lower levels).
This is pretty good though, but are you accounting for the saturation?
|
I don't play zerg, but I don't see how to do it as that race.
I guess you could use larvae/minute and then how long the units take to make. Look complicated.
What do you mean by saturation?
|
Your income diagram is wrong right, it shows 760 for 20 workers and 780 for 24, but 932 was the max for 24. Does that mean that 760 minerals for 20 workers is correct?
|
760 for 20 workers with no mule. 24 workers = 780 income with no mule.
Mule adds 180/min
|
My biggest issue is that it suffers the typical "Glass Box Syndrome" (my term) of a lot of mathematical analysis. All your elements you're putting together only work if they're in a glass box, where all variables remain constant.
The second any factor throws a spanner in the works, like slow macro, a depot or tech structure getting sniped, needing to throw down static defense, needing to tech switch for a minute to counter an adjusted unit comp, or anything else that will happen in a real game, the careful math goes out the window, unless you try to memorize an insane number of combinations.
Don't get me wrong, I can see some limited use, maybe with a spreadsheet to try and figure out rough early game builds and stuff, but it seems like it's best used as a rough tool to help throw out the things that just can't be made reasonably viable for openings.
|
I do know that JingleHell, hence I didn't post it in the Strategy Forum (read first line or so.)
|
On October 08 2011 10:02 Thaniri wrote:
I do know that JingleHell, hence I didn't post it in the Strategy Forum (read first line or so.)
I read the part where you didn't put it in Strat because you didn't think people would follow the logic, must have missed the part that wasn't in there  Not trying to thrash you at all, like I said, I can think of use for it, I was just pointing out that too much reliance would be risky.
|
Here's 5/5 for the effort.
Good read, I've always had this kind of theory lingering in my head. But I tend to have this sort of "mineral and gas token' playstyle, it helps because my brain works pretty mathematically.
As a toss player, say a Zealot is worth 1 mineral token, Stalker is 1 mineral token, 0.5 gas token. A base can produce 4 mineral tokens, and 2 gas tokens. Pretty fkn simple since you can support 4 gates off 1 base.
If I go HT's (1 gas token) and I am on 2 bases, I would want to probably want to spend 2 tokens on HT's, leaving me with 8 mineral tokens and 2 gas tokens. Which means I would most likely have to use up the minerals with zealots.
Before my 2 bases gets saturated, I must compensate probe production by having 1 less mineral token for my army buildup. I constantly analyse how many tokens I have based off how many probes I have at a point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
