| Forum Index > BW General |
|
TMNT
2316 Posts
I mean, for example: 75 probes from 3 bases have just enough mining as 54 probes from six bases Wtf is this supposed to mean as an in game strategy? what mode are you playing lol? No rushes before 10 min? This guy is like a troll but given the amount of calculations he put into this it doesn't seem like a troll so I dont know what it is haha. | ||
|
iopq
United States838 Posts
On January 25 2025 05:59 FlaShFTW wrote: you're right, all the pros have never tried to cut more probes from their build ever. You've discovered the secret! You should switch to protoss to show all these bad pros how to do it wut pros make mistakes in builds all the time people still go 12 hatch even though it doesn't gain anything over 11 hatch (since you don't delay any drones) it's a minor thing, but you gain 5 minerals per each drone you produce from an 11 hatch since they are all 5 seconds faster, so if you make 10 drones 5 seconds earlier you just gain free 50 minerals which makes your third hatchery faster | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey146 Posts
On January 26 2025 20:26 TMNT wrote: Why are you guys trying to argue over a few seconds of timing for the Nexus why the freaking elephant in the room is not addressed: what are you gonna do when the lings come from a 9 pool? I mean, for example: Wtf is this supposed to mean as an in game strategy? what mode are you playing lol? No rushes before 10 min? This guy is like a troll but given the amount of calculations he put into this it doesn't seem like a troll so I dont know what it is haha. The fact that you don't understand six bases mining one probe per patch vs three bases mining three probes per patch both having the same mineral income - which is 3200 minerals per minute - gives me the grounds for having to explain it. You sure you play starcraft with all its intricate aspects before you criticize me for having tried my luck at explaining it? | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey146 Posts
On January 26 2025 16:05 QRCode wrote: Bro don't be a number guy. The audio world is full of you and those guys are insufferable. Numbers don't get the big picture. You are coming up with total costs and taking them out of in game context. It's like comparing images in two different photographs, and trying to argue they should be switched. Doesn't make sense. Your numbers are not even right anyway, you keep saying Bisu got his nexus at 3:45, but I watched the game and he got it at ~2:55. The way he opened is pretty ideal, if you hope to have a standing army, tech fast, and establish map control, things which you say are good. Going nexus first is just not worth it because you will die to pool first builds, or need to make cannons early, which is not meta anymore. The tempo of the game is so tight right now that any wasted minerals for Protoss in the beginning is basically gg. I wasn't aware of that, must have missed it by a year lol. Thanks for understanding my perspective. I got lost in the numbers, but was following the meta in my own way. I still liken Starcraft to those other games and like to verify the math. Truth be told, not even AI can replicate what humans do in starcraft, so it is still not fully mapped out. PS: I didn't go out of my way and do a stunt against FE builds out of ignorance. I just wanted to say FE is not core meta and people make such false assumptions like bigger maps will strengthen 'FE' 12 Nexus and small maps will reinforce gate first openings #44 and #60 that I felt compelled to verify. Even there was a personal commentary #75 embellishing his FE corsair DT rush. So, even before myself and my erroneous ways showed up people were making these false assumptions and arguing for a patch to make two wrongs one right. | ||
|
TMNT
2316 Posts
On January 26 2025 21:21 mtcn77 wrote: The fact that you don't understand six bases mining one probe per patch vs three bases mining three probes per patch both having the same mineral income - which is 3200 minerals per minute - gives me the grounds for having to explain it. You sure you play starcraft with all its intricate aspects before you criticize me for having tried my luck at explaining it? Everyone understands that. No need to even explain. But it means jack shit if you can't protect 6 bases. In the real game you can only have 3 bases because you can only afford to protect them. So all your economical analytics means nothing. | ||
|
QRCode
United States22 Posts
What do you mean? You don't think a bigger map and more travel distance to being attacked helps when you want to expand so early? Or the opposite, having less distance between you and the enemy will help with your attacks? | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey146 Posts
On January 27 2025 02:49 QRCode wrote: "People make such false assumptions like bigger maps will strengthen 'FE' 12 Nexus and small maps will reinforce gate first openings" What do you mean? You don't think a bigger map and more travel distance to being attacked helps when you want to expand so early? Or the opposite, having less distance between you and the enemy will help with your attacks? Expanding early is only good when you can keep expanding and have map control, so you don't hand over the late game to the zerg. It is better to expand naturally, like fibonacci numbers. No base sooner than necessary, but no turtling thereafter. I schemed up a 62.5 minerals counter to see how long probes pay for themselves including their pylon cost. If you make 17 probes like those games mentioned earlier, no matter how soon you have fast expanded, newer probes take longer to fill their shoes to cover their 62.5 mineral cost. Such comparisons can be found on the fighting spirit mineral rates thread and ideal mining thoughts thread. You can make money, however your mineral counter rises slower than what you put into your base economy. Suppose 41 minerals per scv, taken from 2.8 scv density per patch(9 mineral patches). At 25 probes your probes take 1:31 minutes to pay themselves back when normal probes at 1/1 saturation take 60 seconds, even 48 seconds in boosted examples. In order to make up the time for the lost minerals, there might be a far fetched strategy(that only I can think of) to pace probes according to the supply count to never fall below natural scaling rate of previous probes. Those that mine less don't matter because after the initial minute they have already paid for their initial 62.5 minerals cost and actually provide to the protoss economy. Likewise FE is only good because there are more 1/1 patches, but that can get totally screwed if you get boxed in. No moment in the game is the same. FE is just one of the instances to make more probes hit their target 60 second payback window. Apart from that, the economy does not matter. All that matters is map control and your initiative. TL;DR: I went on this wild tangent to make new ground rules for economy to see in an instant how many probes you should be queueing from your nexuses and therefore always having surplus minerals to never fall behind zerg in the game. I said before I had high hopes for the protoss. Even if a noob like me can surmise that protoss probes can harvest faster and nexuses can be setup cheaper, economy wise there should not be anything that puts the protoss at a disadvantage. | ||
|
TMNT
2316 Posts
Except that I forget I also have to pay rents, buy foods,... | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey146 Posts
On January 27 2025 04:30 TMNT wrote: So your entire theory crafting is like saying if I make 5k per month I'll be able to have 100k in my bank account in 20 months. Nothing can stop me from getting rich. Except that I forget I also have to pay rents, buy foods,... I think you are trying to change the topic. PS: I'm trying to explain how you don't need FE. Unless you are changing your stance and suggesting rapid expanding after all, each nexus can make its own probes. According to how much time new probes harvest 62.5 minerals, 1.0 scvs/patch mined 59 minerals/scv per minute. > 63.6 seconds, 1.3 scvs/patch mined 54 minerals/scv per minute. > 69.4 seconds, 1.6 scvs/patch mined 50 minerals/scv per minute. > 75 seconds, 1.9 scvs/patch mined 47 minerals/scv per minute. > 79 seconds 2.2 scvs/patch mined 45 minerals/scv per minute. > 83.3 seconds, 2.5 scvs/patch mined 43 minerals/scv per minute. > 87.2 seconds, 2.8 scvs/patch mined 41 minerals/scv per minute. > 91.4 seconds, 3.1 scvs/patch mined 41 minerals/scv per minute. 91.4 seconds. •9th scv could be stalled 4 seconds, •12th scv could be stalled 8 seconds, •14th scv could be stalled 12 seconds, •17th scv could be stalled 12.5 seconds, •20st scv could be stalled 17 seconds, •22nd scv could be stalled 19 seconds, •25th and later scvs could be stalled 20.5 seconds in each base. PS2: I just noticed Impervious said in his ideal mining thoughts thread he didn't like fastest game time. Maybe he did his tests at fast which would increase his 59 mineral harvesting rate to - you guessed it - 68.9 minerals per scv. That would align with fighting spirit tests perfectly. I didn't rewrite the upper section, but estimated that it takes near the 12th consecutive probe that the probes start generating a surplus while you are probing. Will develop on this later. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23732 Posts
On January 27 2025 03:37 mtcn77 wrote: Expanding early is only good when you can keep expanding and have map control, so you don't hand over the late game to the zerg. It is better to expand naturally, like fibonacci numbers. No base sooner than necessary, but no turtling thereafter. I schemed up a 62.5 minerals counter to see how long probes pay for themselves including their pylon cost. If you make 17 probes like those games mentioned earlier, no matter how soon you have fast expanded, newer probes take longer to fill their shoes to cover their 62.5 mineral cost. Such comparisons can be found on the fighting spirit mineral rates thread and ideal mining thoughts thread. You can make money, however your mineral counter rises slower than what you put into your base economy. Suppose 41 minerals per scv, taken from 2.8 scv density per patch(9 mineral patches). At 25 probes your probes take 1:31 minutes to pay themselves back when normal probes at 1/1 saturation take 60 seconds, even 48 seconds in boosted examples. In order to make up the time for the lost minerals, there might be a far fetched strategy(that only I can think of) to pace probes according to the supply count to never fall below natural scaling rate of previous probes. Those that mine less don't matter because after the initial minute they have already paid for their initial 62.5 minerals cost and actually provide to the protoss economy. Likewise FE is only good because there are more 1/1 patches, but that can get totally screwed if you get boxed in. No moment in the game is the same. FE is just one of the instances to make more probes hit their target 60 second payback window. Apart from that, the economy does not matter. All that matters is map control and your initiative. [b]TL;DR: I went on this wild tangent to make new ground rules for economy to see in an instant how many probes you should be queueing from your nexuses and therefore always having surplus minerals to never fall behind zerg in the game. I said before I had high hopes for the protoss. Even if a noob like me can surmise that protoss probes can harvest faster and nexuses can be setup cheaper, economy wise there should not be anything that puts the protoss at a disadvantage1/b]. There are two ways this can go: 1. The new pair of eyes can find some new angle to revolutionise how a game is played. One that had a full professional scene for years, and probably cumulatively billions of hours of collective playtime from its entire player base over 2 decades and counting. Everyone has just missed this simple truth the entire time. 2. Convention is convention for good reason. | ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands577 Posts
| ||
|
Kyle8
10 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23732 Posts
On January 27 2025 11:43 Kyle8 wrote: balance issues, but they'll probably ban me just for saying it Will ‘they’ fuck lmao | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10645 Posts
| ||
|
RJBTVYOUTUBE
Netherlands577 Posts
On January 27 2025 12:25 TelecoM wrote: It's simply because there aren't enough Man Toss anymore, time to man up boys. SnOw is the chosen one! | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10022 Posts
On January 27 2025 03:37 mtcn77 wrote: Expanding early is only good when you can keep expanding and have map control, so you don't hand over the late game to the zerg. It is better to expand naturally, like fibonacci numbers. No base sooner than necessary, but no turtling thereafter. I schemed up a 62.5 minerals counter to see how long probes pay for themselves including their pylon cost. If you make 17 probes like those games mentioned earlier, no matter how soon you have fast expanded, newer probes take longer to fill their shoes to cover their 62.5 mineral cost. Such comparisons can be found on the fighting spirit mineral rates thread and ideal mining thoughts thread. You can make money, however your mineral counter rises slower than what you put into your base economy. Suppose 41 minerals per scv, taken from 2.8 scv density per patch(9 mineral patches). At 25 probes your probes take 1:31 minutes to pay themselves back when normal probes at 1/1 saturation take 60 seconds, even 48 seconds in boosted examples. In order to make up the time for the lost minerals, there might be a far fetched strategy(that only I can think of) to pace probes according to the supply count to never fall below natural scaling rate of previous probes. Those that mine less don't matter because after the initial minute they have already paid for their initial 62.5 minerals cost and actually provide to the protoss economy. Likewise FE is only good because there are more 1/1 patches, but that can get totally screwed if you get boxed in. No moment in the game is the same. FE is just one of the instances to make more probes hit their target 60 second payback window. Apart from that, the economy does not matter. All that matters is map control and your initiative. TL;DR: I went on this wild tangent to make new ground rules for economy to see in an instant how many probes you should be queueing from your nexuses and therefore always having surplus minerals to never fall behind zerg in the game. I said before I had high hopes for the protoss. Even if a noob like me can surmise that protoss probes can harvest faster and nexuses can be setup cheaper, economy wise there should not be anything that puts the protoss at a disadvantage. First off, expanding early is not only good if you keep expanding. Expanding early opens up timing windows that are not afforded to you when you don't expand early. Examples like going 1 rax FE in TvP opens up more opportunities for early pushes compared to fact FE. The same is said with 14cc vs 1 rax fe vs fact FE in TvZ, especially in the context of mech play, where there's a huge difference in how the game feels/plays out when you go 14cc into 3 fact before ebay compared to even 1 rax FE where you can only get 2 facts before ebay to deal with muta. In none of these examples is Terran looking for a super fast 3rd base. In the context of PvZ, if Protoss early expands, they can afford more gateways faster, meaning Zerg can't just expand freely across the map, compared to if they don't expand earlier, their timings are later, meaning Zerg has more time to set up what you consider an invincible setup. Finally, you still don't address the idea that, while each probe after 1 per patch loses efficiency, how a player is supposed to afford production from more gateways later in the game when they only have 1 probe per patch. Unless of course, your concept is: well, just make enough units to take another base then make probes to saturate that base 1 per patch when it's done, then you can afford more gates. The problem with this concept is: how do you afford the 3rd base when you can only afford like 4 gate production compared to the current meta of 8 gate production. Like we've said constantly before, we'd love to see you play some games with your own theory in action and see how you do. Please post replays so we can track your progress and analyze the gameplay, because again, if you can figure this out, then maybe we'll see a new meta born. Until then, everything said here is pure theory and if you're not going to backup your theory with actual testing, then your words are empty. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey146 Posts
On January 28 2025 01:18 FlaShFTW wrote: First off, expanding early is not only good if you keep expanding. Expanding early opens up timing windows that are not afforded to you when you don't expand early. Examples like going 1 rax FE in TvP opens up more opportunities for early pushes compared to fact FE. The same is said with 14cc vs 1 rax fe vs fact FE in TvZ, especially in the context of mech play, where there's a huge difference in how the game feels/plays out when you go 14cc into 3 fact before ebay compared to even 1 rax FE where you can only get 2 facts before ebay to deal with muta. In none of these examples is Terran looking for a super fast 3rd base. In the context of PvZ, if Protoss early expands, they can afford more gateways faster, meaning Zerg can't just expand freely across the map, compared to if they don't expand earlier, their timings are later, meaning Zerg has more time to set up what you consider an invincible setup. Finally, you still don't address the idea that, while each probe after 1 per patch loses efficiency, how a player is supposed to afford production from more gateways later in the game when they only have 1 probe per patch. Unless of course, your concept is: well, just make enough units to take another base then make probes to saturate that base 1 per patch when it's done, then you can afford more gates. The problem with this concept is: how do you afford the 3rd base when you can only afford like 4 gate production compared to the current meta of 8 gate production. Like we've said constantly before, we'd love to see you play some games with your own theory in action and see how you do. Please post replays so we can track your progress and analyze the gameplay, because again, if you can figure this out, then maybe we'll see a new meta born. Until then, everything said here is pure theory and if you're not going to backup your theory with actual testing, then your words are empty. Let me see the ups and downs of my math first. For instance, I figured nonstop probing starting from scratch, a single probe does not raise an economy until the 13th probe is started. Probing nonstop with 4 probes like in the starting position, make a return after the 9th probe is started, meaning you would have a higher economy until the 9th probe if you didn't make any probes which indicates an inverse economy that enables a 4 pool rush. Like I said I want to sort out the ins and outs of the economy and find where the opportunities lie. These might be basic, but I want to lay out the whole economy tree when to start when to stop making probes. After all, good games, either macro oriented games, or micro oriented games like the 4 pool, build upon good economy. PS: my early tests with making bases from a single probe demonstrate; •9 SCVs: -1,547332857 - I'm losing minerals, •12 SCVs: 2,361872234 - I'm gaining minerals, •14 SCVs: 1,860399886 - I'm gaining minerals, •17 SCVs: 3,185123583 - I'm gaining minerals, •20 SCVs: 3,823084222 - I'm gaining minerals, •22 SCVs: 2,763149521 - I'm gaining minerals, •25 SCVs: 4,349133812 - I'm gaining minerals, •28 SCVs: 5,267775539 - I'm gaining minerals. I still haven't figured how this translates, it should be the time gained, or lost to mine one SCV's cost. It should be the mining output in a 12,6 second period, but it still doesn't translate according to my expectations. | ||
|
kogeT
Poland2029 Posts
| ||
|
Bonyth
Poland534 Posts
| ||
|
TMNT
2316 Posts
On January 28 2025 21:50 kogeT wrote: Didn't read the thread, but what about the argument that Protoss player population is the biggest? Both T and Z get much more practice vs P than P gets practice vs T and Z. This should, in macro perspective, result in T>Z>P as terran is only 25% of player base. At pro level they practice with selected partners so this rule (if true) doesn't apply at all. | ||
| ||
WardiTV Invitational
Round of 8 & 4 and Finals
Spirit vs SHIN
Clem vs SKillous
herO vs TBD
TBD vs GuMiho
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Weekly #81
SKillous vs RyungLIVE!
ByuN vs TBD
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Mong Dota 2 1113Pusan  807actioN  523firebathero 430BeSt 389Larva 328GuemChi 262Last 253ggaemo 170Leta 123[ Show more ] League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games tarik_tv42150 B2W.Neo1478 sgares412 Pyrionflax249 Fuzer  231RotterdaM218 Happy210 Hui .59 DeMusliM19 trigger1 Organizations Counter-Strike StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
AI Arena 2025 Tournament
Replay Cast
Clem vs Zoun
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
SOOP
SKillous vs Spirit
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
