|
This question is directed mostly to Protoss and Terran users, because the zerg system is quite different and perhaps more natural (you automatically add producing facilities as you expand).
What rules do you follow and what general tips can you give about the timing of adding unit producing facilities (such as factories, barracks, gateways) as your economy improves or you finish teching (etc.) ?
Is it better to pause production and teching and add many at once?
Is it better to add gradually just when you have cash?
What is the general priority of this with respect to other things.
I realize that this is very much situational, but I'm sure almost everyone does certain things in certain ways because they think those ways are better. So what are those ways?
I tried to find an effecient way, for instance, to reach 200/200 with zealots and probes on LT. First time I got 3 expos first and then gradually added gateways while making zealots and probes, as I gathered enough money. The second time around, I got 3 expos, and then I made about 12 gateways quickly without producing any zealots, to start producing in full spin right away. Both ways gave roughly equal results, with the second being a little bit faster, but I did not reach a worthwhile conclusion.
From studying high level replays though, the main thing I have picked up is that pausing units even for a short time, to add fact/gate, especially in early-middle game, slows down macro.
Discuss
|
I do a mix.
Gradual mostly but when a new expand is about 20 seconds from comming online i will add 1-2 facts or so cutting production/cancelling if needed to do so. Might be worth while expiermenting with cutting SCVs/Probes so you can macro units + start buildings.
|
while reading this i thought that your example of 200/200 with probes and zeals was a serious strategy for a minute. maybe im just stupid though
i usually make almost constant probes and make addons when its possible while still making probes
i know when you double expo vs t though you need to halt probes to get enough men to stop a terrans first attack
|
Similar to your zeal/probe experiment, notice how a toss can add gateways more gradually and have say 8gateways and 160psi by 12:00 or they could add the gates later and have say 12 of them and 160spi by 12:00. I believe the gradual buildup is the prefered way becuase then you have units to fight with and have a stable force at all times. Besides, It takes alot of minerals to support 12gates and you may not be able to pump constantly.
From studying high level replays though, the main thing I have picked up is that pausing units even for a short time, to add fact/gate, especially in early-middle game, slows down macro. Hum, why would pausing units slow down macro. By pausing units from time to time you can get more gateways out faster then just produce the unit(s) afterwards. This slows down the time you get the units, but i think it improves overall macro if done correctly.
Heres a real game expample of some pvt. make 2gate, 7goons then expand. 2more goons then expand. 2goons, then 2gate+citadel. Thats a pretty general model of efficient macro in a pvt. Now they can choose to hold units off a bit to get more gates out or they can make units but add gates when they have the money. I think adding the gates would produce better overall macro in the future while producing the units gives you more mass quickly. Its a ratio that the player has to decide how to keep.
For pvt macro i think pusan and anytime tend to add gates before units, while players like reach build the units first. This is not all-encompesing though, just wondering if anyone else has noticed this. Some players use ~6gates off of 2-3 nex's then add a bunch(4 or so) all at one time when they get their 3 or 4th nex. In general, thats a pretty easy and efficient way of doing things.
|
ideally you are gradually increasing them
it's only logical that it's an advantage when all your production facilities are utilized as often as possible (except when you just don't need anything that that building can produce of course)
but I mean it's illogical to stop using one gateway to build another
|
if you want to use your money to build units AND all your gates are already building units and you still have money left, you can add more gateways
|
I tend to add gateways as soon as my expo gets online or when I see that minerals are starting to accumulate and i have more than one unit constantly queued in each... You should amost never pause production to make more gateways/factories... I measure macro by efficiency and if you buildings are not constantly pumping, then you are not being very efficient
|
Knickknack, good comments,
I'm not talking about suddenly making 12 gateways in a real game. But logically, (this is for you too Grot), I think adding many gateways at once has its merits. If you are adding gradually while making units, 2 minutes from when your expo comes up, you have, say 4 gateways as protoss. But an expo allows you to produce from 6-7 gateways. That means in the same 2 minutes, if you paused unit production, you could have 6-7 gateways capable of constant production (though a smaller immediate fighting force). Those 6-7 gateways will give you a greater flow of units, and if, say the fight is on the edge (your and the opponent's forces are constantly getting wasted) this extra flow will make a big difference.
So, in a way, this seems more solid in the long run, but you are giving your opponent a window of opportunity. That's my thought. How big the window is depends on how many gateways you add.
I've often seen in replays known players pumping their economy for a while and then adding 4-6 producing facilities at once. New age macro favours gradual addition though, maybe the "many-gate" addition is an archaism. Waiting to hear from the gosus 
|
check out this replay and tell me what you think please
http://yaoyuan.com/show.php?SID=28759
Some more games i noticed:
-kindgom rep vs wayo in which he makes 6gates off of just him main+nat in a pvp rather quickly. He went 2gate robo to expo which allowed hiim to get his economy up rather quickly.
-2 daezang[gnh] games. both also, also going 2gate->expo. One pvp in which he goes from 3 to 5 gates quicky The other a pvz in which he goes from 2 to 6( if i remember corectly).
These reps show me that if one goes 2gate->expo getting gate count up to 5 or 6 quicky will allow one to produces masses of units effectively. These reps have helped me to decide to almost never go off of more then 6gates off of only 2 bases. more then that and it just doesnot make much sense unless you are contained and need to mass hard or some similar case. off of 3bases I believe 9gates is the the prime. I dont have any figures to back this up really. Just a sense ive gotten from watching reps, playing, etc.
|
rule of thumb for me.
when you have gained yourself some time, get tech or get expo.
not enuff money to support facilities, make more expos and workers.
not enuff facilities to support cash flow, make more facilities.
|
On March 30 2005 16:00 dTrAn wrote:
I tend to add gateways as soon as my expo gets online or when I see that minerals are starting to accumulate and i have more than one unit constantly queued in each... You should amost never pause production to make more gateways/factories... I measure macro by efficiency and if you buildings are not constantly pumping, then you are not being very efficient
This is for you and ahk-gosu. This is a decent way, but at a high level it's not good enough, I think. You should add gateways in advance, not when your minerals start to accumulate - that's the thing. THe question is timing. What is it?
|
I watched that game, Knickknack,
That was pretty incredible. I was going to comment - "why is he double expoing, adding gates while not making anything! Those gates are idle for so long, inefficient! This is not going to be good macro"
But then I realized I was wrong. He had like 12 gateways at 9-10 minutes or something? Off 2 expos.. . Don't you agree that that worked for him? Then why do you say only 9 gates off 3 base? Though its a decent point you make - if you want to have good macro, every little bit of saving counts and throwing down a whole lot of gateways can be.. a big waste. I think that's part of the secret to NaDa's "mineral hack" - he only builds 6 factories.. very effecient - doesn't throw money around.. except to buy drinks for friends
|
On March 30 2005 19:54 MPXMX wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2005 16:00 dTrAn wrote:
I tend to add gateways as soon as my expo gets online or when I see that minerals are starting to accumulate and i have more than one unit constantly queued in each... You should amost never pause production to make more gateways/factories... I measure macro by efficiency and if you buildings are not constantly pumping, then you are not being very efficient This is for you and ahk-gosu. This is a decent way, but at a high level it's not good enough, I think. You should add gateways in advance, not when your minerals start to accumulate - that's the thing. THe question is timing. What is it?
dood. im saying. if you cannot support the amount of expos you have running you make gateways.
i didnt say wait for it to go up.
im saying. if you are going to expo, you make enuff gateways to supress the cash flow.
|
Some things to note about the game:
-no reason to go 3gate before double expo, 2gate would have been fine.
-his gates were inactive much of the time.
-he was held back by supply at least 2 times that i noticed. He could have had about 160psi at 12:00 if not held back.
-Untill his 12gate massing took effect a more gradual 9gate buildup would have given him more units up to that time, and about the same number of units at 12:00. Though perhaps not as fast 200psi count and not as many gates.
ya it was 12gate at 10min or so. 3base. I think it did work for him well enough as he won. i think his main mistake in the game was that he should defenately have had anther expanson to send probes to after his main ran out. He was only able about to pump 2 rounds out of those 12gates untill he hit 200psi. Then barely able to support carriers and some units. If he had another expo to xfer his probes to his macro would have been rediculous.
for 9gate examples(i believe) check out these games:
http://yaoyuan.com/show.php?SID=34751 - a good example, note the good timeing of the expo after taking his 2nd nat, but he used that and his next expansion poorly. He reallyshould have flanked or taken his 2nd expo somewere else as well.
http://yaoyuan.com/show.php?SID=35060 - pusan, super game i really enjoyed watching this. Has all that i like(would be able to do really :/) in a pvt that i have been describing. 9gate with 3bases->expo->carrier tech and more gates.
http://yaoyuan.com/show.php?SID=34957 - iloveoov vs bul_t, again and intresting gateway game. Shows why its good to add more gates later. Shows why having many 3-4 mineral lines to mine from fast is important.
like i said i think getting the 3bases then 9gates, then massing units for a while, then take another expo and some tech + add more gates. The ilovoov vs megulari(sp) game showed his but the protoss made some crucial mistakes.
Thats all for today, im going to bed. I feel ive said almost all i have to say about this anyway.
|
it all depends on various situations but i think the non-stop unit production is better bec it gives you the maximum amount of units in that certain period of time.. so what if your opponent attacks you the moment you are adding more facs or gateways so you have less unit count compared to him who didnt stopped making units. so grot is right add more facilities when you have extra.
|
On March 31 2005 02:06 stimpack[pG] wrote:
it all depends on various situations but i think the non-stop unit production is better bec it gives you the maximum amount of units in that certain period of time.. so what if your opponent attacks you the moment you are adding more facs or gateways so you have less unit count compared to him who didnt stopped making units. so grot is right add more facilities when you have extra.
u should see what if's before they occur and should adapt accordingly.
|
I usually double my production facilities as my expansion is making so that when its online, i have immidiate double production.
And it's not uncommon for me to skip making 3 zealots from 3 gateways in order to start making an additional 2 gateways. The money spent on zealots that would sit infront of my expo will not benefit anything. The money spent on making earlier gateways so that you can have all 5 zealots waiting at ur expo instead seems to be much wiser.
Timing is everything: Do not attack your opponent until the greatest reward can be reaped. Do not build anything that does not have as close to as immidiate a use as possible.
That should be applied to every single aspect of the game. Constantly doing actions that have immidiate positive effects are innately better than doing actions that do not also have said effects.
|
I never gave this enough thought
well I think we can at least all agree that this system is entirely worthless for terran users using mech, because factories are too expensive and take too long to build
I do sometimes build vultures first because they are cheaper and I can add facts faster than if i would have built tanks
I think gateways are so cheap and build so fast that the "window" you're talking about isn't very big at all.. just do it with only 2-3 gates and be safe, the window will be small and you're very sure you can afford the extra gates soon. People used to even regularly get away with carriers, now that's a window
oh and good thread!
|
Canada9720 Posts
Grot you said it's "illogical to stop using one gateway to build another" but many people do just that right before an expansion is finished. (which im sure you know).
it makes sense to prepare yourself to be able to keep up unit production with regards to how much money you're taking in.
|
I drew a couple of shitty diagrams to illustrate how I think economy works. The thick gray line is your economy right before and after the expansion. It's slanted slightly upwards because you are continuously improving your economy by making more workers. After the expansion, it immediately almost doubles because workers aren't waiting anymore and there are more available mineral patches. And then it improves up at a decent rate (for a while) as you saturate your expansion with workers. Whatever fits under that line is what your economy can support.
-Filled dirty yellow boxes are command centres/nexuses that are constantly producing
-Filled blue boxes are factories/barracks/gateways constantly producing
-Blue outlines are "construction in progress". Facts/gates/raxes take longer to complete than units so symbolically I make them active after 3 "rounds".
So in the first example, you are constantly producing until your expansion comes up, at which point you start adding producing facilities as you have enough money. BUT, you don't want to make more producing facilities than your economy can support (which I made about 7 in this example). I think that create a gapin macro and unit production.
However... if you build production facilities before expo comes up, by sacrificing actual unit production ... Look what could happen
What do you make of this? The second method theoretically leaves no gaps in economy and gives more units
_____________________________________________________________________
EDIT: I notice there are some details that are incorrect in the above diagrams - for example, one producing facility disappears after the expo goes online (oops ) or the activation period for Facts/Gates in 2nd diagram is 2 instead of 3, but generally the idea still holds, I think.
|
well depends. If the gameflow allows me to stop unit production and add a bunch of gateways I will go for it. Usually I go gradually.
|
nice job MPXMX... all of this also depends on what you are going to do and to what your enemy is doing.. if you want to attack earlier(before or the time you are expanding) use the 1st diagram but if you turtle a bit and rely on macro use the 2nd... what u think guys?
|
Those are illustrations of course, what you wanna do is get as close to the effecient model as the current game situation allows. If you are given time, say when a terran fast expands, you want to get as close as time allows to the second model.
Thing is though, that as we have discussed here, adding producing facilities gradually is the popular system. But as my theory seems to show, adding many simultaneously is far more effecient in the long run...
Therefore it is good to approach that model as close as is possible without being overrun. That can be achieved by for example using stalling tech (such as DT drop PvT) while adding gateways.
I don't know, I'm just giving some ideas for your consideration
|
Well Periodically the graph shows the economic values of the the new technoligcal advacements with more
|
hmm i've thought about this for a while, for a way to summarize my thoughts.. here's the best i can come up with-
gradual shifts, using all of your buildings 100% of the time are the best in the long run. the only time you wouldnt do a gradual shift is when you think you wont survive, so you focus all on units, or on cannons, or whatever. the opposite of this being you can survive so easily, that you stop building units, and build more nexus, probe... but you want to stay as close to gradual as possible
edit: one more comment. if you are constantly making probes and as many nexus as you want, then it doesnt matter how quickly you add your gates. if in the end, gradual or not, you are gonna have 8 gateways and x amount of minerals mined, then you're gonna have the same amount of units. however if you add 5 gateways and sacrifice a nexus/probes during that time, then you'll have more units than the gradual player sooner.. but the gradual will eventually come out ahead with the minerals he gained that you lost out on. conclusion: the closer you can get to gradual and smooth, using your judgment based on the specific game you're in, the better you'll be in the long run.
|
Any specific comments about when to add facts/gates (e.g. expo is half done, units are building in existing facilities, add 2, expo up, add 2 more) ?
|
Any specific comments about when to add facts/gates (e.g. expo is half done, units are building in existing facilities, add 2, expo up, add 2 more) ?
Okay, I made an example replay to showcase my overall game plan in PvT.
Check battlereports.com
Key points are:
-2gate->expo->expo
-add 2 gates so i can pump units so opponent can not overrun me.
-add citadel and 5gates start mass zeal production. stop probes and make units, pylons.
-time expanson so i can transfer probes in my main to anther mineral line to keep up macro. Tech to carriers.
Time is about 13:30, im maxed out. 4 nexi(right?) Can begin to produce 2 carriers as soon as i lower my psi count enough, heh.
This is pretty much as good as it gets, as far as i know... at least for now. The only significant things i forgot were to add a forge sooner so i could have +1 around the time i want to attack as well as cannnons perhaps. Also, ild probably want a shuttle. Sure expoing 2 time with no gates then massing them all up is more effective in the end, but i do want to survive in the meantime.
MPXMX you post concerting the diagrams is correct. Thats what this thread has been about and we are basically agreed. Doing the best gameplan for macro without getting overrun is best for macro, but perhaps not best for winning the game which leads to my points bellow.
We both know that we are not taking certain things into account though(like micro), which is why its good to ge a real game example. I have posted some expamle reps and a rep of my own. We are not taking into account the other player much, and if he manages his units better then hell likely win even though your macro was more effective.
using all of your buildings 100% of the time are the best in the long run. This is just not practical. Sometimes one must decide if they want a probe building now and then a goon or the opposite. But, you are right in that you should not build 3gates when 2 will do before an expansion (note the anytime vs gloomy rep).
edit: one more comment. if you are constantly making probes and as many nexus as you want, then it doesnt matter how quickly you add your gates. if in the end, gradual or not, you are gonna have 8 gateways and x amount of minerals mined, then you're gonna have the same amount of units. Yes, but timing plays a very important role in a real game.
however if you add 5 gateways and sacrifice a nexus/probes during that time, then you'll have more units than the gradual player sooner.. but the gradual will eventually come out ahead with the minerals he gained that you lost out on. conclusion: the closer you can get to gradual and smooth, using your judgment based on the specific game you're in, the better you'll be in the long run. Yes, if the opponent trys some risky build(say dt tech) is not able to take a large advange( enough to win the game) you are pretty much guaranteed to win. The other way around is if the opponent is able to macro well enough and is able to beat you anyway because of his unit choice, micro, etc.
Ive been using pvt as an example the whole time because its just soooo much easier to deal with then pvp or pvz.
|
this is what i do if i go fastCC... nonstop tank from 1 fac then make CC then ebay.. while CC finishes add 1 more fac then 2 facs producing non-stop tanks. as soon as expo is running and you have extra cash add 4 facs at the same time cutting scv production but not tank production.. as soon as 4 facs are almost done begin to push... use 6facs for nonstop vulture reinforcement...
result is you have 8-10 tanks and 6facs creating vulture... this works well for me if P responds to double expo and your expo is little ahead than his.. and assuming hes not going reavers or DTs..
|
Yeah that's just it
Stimpack's post counters your example rep, Knickknack..
If we lived in an ideal world on the other hand... yeah that's what protoss would like to be able to do
|
well give an example rep too stimpack, heh. Watch the example rep though to understand that that macro is compariable to iloveoovs macro. Watch that pusan rep that i posted. the guy tried that counter I believe but pusan quickly beat that attack down and it was basically gg. Also watch the iloveoov vs megulari game. It was similar to my example game. It was rather close, but to bad the toss made some bad mistakes.
I admit, if terran does 1fact expo then masses hard it will be difficult to deal with....if you have iloveoovs macro. But, what he heck else are you goign to do? not double expo? The terran will just add another cc fast if hes good and screw you over later. Yes vs 1fact expo iloveoov maco is very difficult to deal with but dont make it seem impossible.
1 fact expo is pretty damn filthy on LT. If i suspect the opponent will do it I may just go for a fast 2z/goon drop->reaver drop->dt drop and hope the positions are close.
|
Yeah it's iloveoov's macro in perfect conditions without anything to worry about... You know you can produce 60 zealots in about 9 minutes time if the conditions are right, but that will never happen.Plus iloveoov macro of terran units is much scarier than iloveoov macro of toss units. Regardless, what you showed is very close to an ideal way of playing standard protoss with a good teching pace, and no redundancy. Against fact-CC it's good, but there are many things that beat it.
I think PvT vs 1 fact expo is pretty easy on most levels except the very highest, because the protoss can play his own game. But we are beginning to stray away from the topic - "when to add facts/gates?" and just general macro.
I agree that constant production while gradually adding producing facilities, logically seems effective - as a rule - without going into the many details and situational specifics. However there are things in this world that are outside of common sense logic, beneath the obvious. Don't know if there are such applications in SC macro but it would certainly be interesting to find something.
i lost my trale of thoutgh.. pvz's GYA.,..
|
I did not mean that my example rep was as if iloveoov was playing toss. I just meant that it would stand up to his 1fact build well enough. Also, its similar to his 1fact build because it is superb macro wise and stands up well against many terran builds.
I think 1fact expo is in many cases the best build for a terran to do on LT. That's pretty evident by ilooeoovs success with it. If you look at pgtour though much[gm] is getting the better of iloveoov.
Sc is preset. Its got its timing and stats. Its all logic. Perhaps if i was a genius i could come up with some system for working out the best build for almost every situation.....too bad. :p
Giving out useful info in PvZ, pvp are much more micro intensive and counter intensive then pvt. I don't really want to deal with them besides generalities like what I said about 2gate->expo before.
Ah well, ill attempt some about pvp, but its not just going to be about pure macro. The first decision of course is to 2gate or to 1gate tech. If only one 2gates usually the other will stick up a 2nd gate. So they are on equal terms that way. If they both 2gate then it may turn into a mass zealot game, but i think its usually wisest to be the one that gasses up faster.
1gate tech is hard to get a handle on because there are ~6variations that have to do with going zeals out of one gate. Though, the option to go gate before range or robo is always present.
I believe a major decision about the game should be made after one has 2 gates. Ill assume the toss does not have range or robo yet. Now, he can stick up a 3rd gate, or go rane or robo or even dt/ht tech. I think the option to go for a 3rd gate is almost never, if ever, the best option. The only hope a 3gate goon build has against a 2gate build is to just overwhealm the opponents forces. If the opponent keeps up in macro and micros well its really no trouble. The problem comes if a 2gate person mismanages his units -- then he can get screwed over.
Well, thats a bit, but i dont think thats quite what your looking for so ill stop for now.
Anyway, i think this has been a good thread. I have not really learned much from it but I enjoyed the discussion and hope others got some useful info out of it. Though, i somehow doubt this. :/
|
That was completely off topic :-)
Thanks anyway;
hoping to hear from more people
|
I think one thing u guys are missing, correct me if I'm wrong, is timing. The strength of Nadas or Oovs fast expansions is in perfect timing. I have observed on multiple occasions both these players adding up to 4 factories at once. Why? Because they just got their exp up and are safe for the moment. They stop producing SCVs and focus on just pumping units. Some call this tornado terran or something. If a protoss goes double nexus vs this and gradualy adds gates he will lose simply because the terran will attack with a mighty force and the protoss will have gates and probes instead of units. Yes in the long run the protoss would win 100% beacause of 1 more expo more probes more gates but at the moment he is caught with his pants down. So to answer the question - have a game plan. Add factories as u have it in ur plan. U want to turtle and prepare for a long game?Add ur factories or gates gradually to be effective. U want to pressure early on? Skip a few units and scvs /probes to add mutiple gate/facts to be able to build a lot of units quickly.
|
I dunno i thought the stuf about pvp was somewhat revelant. it delt with gateways and good macro. oh well.
Perfect timing entails that they have the timing down to the second. I doubt this. I have the first 5:00 or so of the game down but after that I think in generalities such as 2gate->expo->expo, etc as i showed above. I'm guessing this is how they do it, but they have much more experience then me so it translates into the game more exactly.
[/quote]If a protoss goes double nexus vs this and gradualy adds gates he will lose simply because the terran will attack with a mighty force and the protoss will have gates and probes instead of units.[/quote] ive been over this. Its hard to deal with but not an auto-lose... I dont think the problem is so much the toss gets caught off guard usually(we have obs...) but that the massive terran blob is really hard to deal with with just zeal/goon. The strength of the fast expo build is that its generally very safe. It is great for macro and you can choose to mass hard after getting your expo or to expo again fast. Also, many protoss players dont expand early enough which gives the terran the advantage almost right off the bat.
This thread is starting to be about 1fact expo, heh.
|
|
|
On April 01 2005 03:41 imRadu wrote:
im a pirate!!!!!
O_X
The best pirate I've ever seen
|
Knickknack, it was off topic because you didn't mention anything at all about when to add gateways/factories or what affects the timing, your PvP was less relevent than anything. Wicked (whom you quoted) was actually on topic, I can't throw my two cents in as this is waaaaay over my head but great thread anyways!
|
im blinded and mesmerised by the sheer complexity and beauty of this diagram and give you a  for effort. i normally just add gateways as i get more money as its more convenient i find, perhaps n00b though.
|
Easy, buddy
It didn't take that long. I tried to make up a system to realistically illustrate economy, and I think that works.
|
What many people are saying here is simply and plainly, utterly wrong. The logically and mathematically correct approach, I would say it is almost self-evident, is to prioritize resources in the following manner:
- Add workers.
- Add worker-producers/drop-off points.
And there we have the quickest and fastest way to get 200. Never build anything but probes. In this model, you will be adding a nexus approximately per every fourth worker, seeing as four workers is exactly what it takes to support continous worker/zergling prodction, not counting supply. Curiously, building nexuses in this manners means you will never need any pylons anyway. The fact that you aren't actually racing to 200 psi, but playing vs a human player, complicates the model. Note, however, that extremely long term and not considering the psi-limit, the above mentioned is actually the one which will give you the best economy and thus the most units.
- Pause worker-producer production to add enough units to defend all your workers by following these steps, in the given priority.
- Add a unit from unit-producer.
- Add a unit-producer.
Complications to this model is potential drops in economy - a mineral line emptied, probes destroyed. Also, seeing as basic units aren't always the answer:
- Pause unit-production to add enough tech to spend your resources in the most efficient manner.
The pausing gateway-production to add gateways example is rather similar to 8drone->lord vs 9drone->lord. We all know which the koreans use. I assume they have put them to the test, and don't want to advantage of a slightly earlier overlord to scout.
Bottom line is, the question is at exactly which point you want to have the maximum amount of units. Three years from now? Probes only, until approximately a ten minutes remain. Note that every workers produced pays for itself in...well, less that a minute. The best way to muster a force in two minutes, for example, is some 7drone->pool build. The best way to muster a force in ten minutes involves some ten hatcheries before spawning pool.
The second bottom line is: never halt production in a unit-producer to add another of the same unit-producer. However, not being allowed to operate in decimals can produce results such as these:
- Zealot: 40 time, 100 minerals.
- Gateway: 80 time, 150 minerals.
- Income: 100 minerals per 20 TUs.
- 1 gateway in place
00: Idle.
20: Produce zealot in gateway.
50: 150 minerals available. Do NOT produce gateway, because:
60: 200 minerals available. Produce zealot. 1 Zealot done.
70: 150 minerals available. Produce gateway.
100: 150 minerals available. Produce zealot. 2 Zealot done.
140: 250 minerals available. Produce zealot. 3 Zealot done.
150: 200 minerals avaialable. Produce zealot in new gateway.
(310: 8 more zealots produced. Resources stabilized at 100 minerals. 11 Zealots total, +1 1/4 done).
00: Idle
30: 150 minerals available. Produce gateway.
50: 100 minerals available. Zealot.
90: 200 minerals available. Another zealot. 1Z done.
110: 200 minerals avaialable. Another zealot. 1Z done total.
130: 200.... New zealot. 2Z done.
(310: 9 more zealots produced. Total 11 + 2/4)
|
You lost me with that one ^_^
|
On May 03 2005 16:25 Babibo wrote:
What many people are saying here is simply and plainly, utterly wrong. The logically and mathematically correct approach, I would say it is almost self-evident, is to prioritize resources in the following manner:
- Add workers.
- Add worker-producers/drop-off points.
And there we have the quickest and fastest way to get 200. Never build anything but probes. In this model, you will be adding a nexus approximately per every fourth worker, seeing as four workers is exactly what it takes to support continous worker/zergling prodction, not counting supply. Curiously, building nexuses in this manners means you will never need any pylons anyway. The fact that you aren't actually racing to 200 psi, but playing vs a human player, complicates the model. Note, however, that extremely long term and not considering the psi-limit, the above mentioned is actually the one which will give you the best economy and thus the most units.
- Pause worker-producer production to add enough units to defend all your workers by following these steps, in the given priority.
- Add a unit from unit-producer.
- Add a unit-producer.
Complications to this model is potential drops in economy - a mineral line emptied, probes destroyed. Also, seeing as basic units aren't always the answer:
- Pause unit-production to add enough tech to spend your resources in the most efficient manner.
The pausing gateway-production to add gateways example is rather similar to 8drone->lord vs 9drone->lord. We all know which the koreans use. I assume they have put them to the test, and don't want to advantage of a slightly earlier overlord to scout.
Bottom line is, the question is at exactly which point you want to have the maximum amount of units. Three years from now? Probes only, until approximately a ten minutes remain. Note that every workers produced pays for itself in...well, less that a minute. The best way to muster a force in two minutes, for example, is some 7drone->pool build. The best way to muster a force in ten minutes involves some ten hatcheries before spawning pool.
The second bottom line is: never halt production in a unit-producer to add another of the same unit-producer. However, not being allowed to operate in decimals can produce results such as these:
- Zealot: 40 time, 100 minerals.
- Gateway: 80 time, 150 minerals.
- Income: 100 minerals per 20 TUs.
- 1 gateway in place
00: Idle.
20: Produce zealot in gateway.
50: 150 minerals available. Do NOT produce gateway, because:
60: 200 minerals available. Produce zealot. 1 Zealot done.
70: 150 minerals available. Produce gateway.
100: 150 minerals available. Produce zealot. 2 Zealot done.
140: 250 minerals available. Produce zealot. 3 Zealot done.
150: 200 minerals avaialable. Produce zealot in new gateway.
(310: 8 more zealots produced. Resources stabilized at 100 minerals. 11 Zealots total, +1 1/4 done).
00: Idle
30: 150 minerals available. Produce gateway.
50: 100 minerals available. Zealot.
90: 200 minerals available. Another zealot. 1Z done.
110: 200 minerals avaialable. Another zealot. 1Z done total.
130: 200.... New zealot. 2Z done.
(310: 9 more zealots produced. Total 11 + 2/4)
This is an amazing post. Take a look at nada's whirlwind push where he adds many factories at once - he still makes vultures out of his two factories. Take this build for example:
2fac vult -> expand -> nonstop tank -> reap benefits of expo -> 2 fac -> pump
OR
2 fac vult -> expand -> stop tanks -> 2fac -> reap benefits of expo -> pump
However, even when you make the two facs, you are still pumping vulture and nonstop scv from the two ccs, nonstop unit production. This post along with discussion with some players clarified that the first is the better build.
About the 8lord, 9lord comment, I think this is similar to cutting an scv to put down an expansion CC down quicker, which is certainly weird if you are going for a fast expo build, where each scv in that early game matters.
Vs 1 fac CC, my recommendation is going to DT tech with two base vs two base (with his being earlier and him having advantage), then taking min only or another main w/DT w/shuttle backup (after making sure he builds adequate turret protection in his main/natural against DT tech). Him having to build turrets + academy + wait for that will give you the time to secure 3rd base. Unfortunately, it becomes a lot harder once he expands shortly after becuase he sees you have two base. Terran vs Protoss is generally considered difficult for Terran, but a good T is just such a pain in the ass 
|
|
|
One thing that is slightly tangential to this topic but still important nonetheless is that I used to debate whether I should get the dragoon sooner (cut a probe for a few secs), or build the probe and delay the dragoon 2-3 seconds. Most of the time I ended up halting the probe production to get the thing a few seconds faster.
THIS IS WRONG.
In most cases (non rush), it is far superior to get the probe, then the goon shortly after. Obviously if you are doing something rushy then you must forgo economic advantage for the potential to hurt his economy, and you should cut as much that you feel is necessary.
|
Yeah I find that if i start cutting probes to get things slightly faster, then I am much poorer, have to wait for next probe the time after I get the unit too, then have to wait for minerals for pylon - when i have enough, i can either build the pylon and miss another probe or build a probe and get a late pylon. THen I don't have enough for another dragoon and this trend goes on. Cutting a few probes early game ca be very detrimental
|
I found a better way to put it.
1Build worker = increase your capability to build units
2Build drop-off = increase your capability to increase capability to build units AND make each worker more efficient
3Build unit-producer = increase your capability to build units within the capacity provided by workers
4Build unit = increase your power
If there are any math geniuses out there. We call our function, f(x), which describes actual power in terms of attacking and defending. Unit-producers increase the derived, units increase the function's value. This is provided our g(x) is sufficiently high, which describes income. Workers increase it, drop-offs increase the derived (and the value through better workerspread).
Who said maths suck?
|
On May 03 2005 23:47 Babibo wrote:
I found a better way to put it.
1Build worker = increase your capability to build units
2Build drop-off = increase your capability to increase capability to build units AND make each worker more efficient
3Build unit-producer = increase your capability to build units within the capacity provided by workers
4Build unit = increase your power
If there are any math geniuses out there. We call our function, f(x), which describes actual power in terms of attacking and defending. Unit-producers increase the derived, units increase the function's value. This is provided our g(x) is sufficiently high, which describes income. Workers increase it, drop-offs increase the derived (and the value through better workerspread).
Who said maths suck?
Can you go further into detail on the 1Build Dropoff and what you mean by each of those 4 categories? Increase your power? Do you mean, unit count currently or potential unit count in the future? Thanks.
|
Adding lots of gates at once is good if your spending your money on something else than units and plan to produce a lot of units in the near future, since you won't be able to use those gates anyway. Usually if you expand or tech, once it's finished you'll be left with a significant boost to cash for unit production.
Most of the time when I play toss I go for a pretty long time with only 2 gates producing non stop for my unit needs, working my way up to cyber core. (Depending on MU, usually vs toss or possibly zerg.)
You use the units you have optimally and after a while you secure an expo (possibly skipping a unit or so) which you have to defend, probably with 1 cannon for detection. Your still using your two gates 100 % because you do things while your income increases due to more probes.
Then your expo goes up and you will notice a definite economic boost since you still only have two gates.
Now since you probably want to both increase your gateway count and tech and add extra probes you have a choice. Either you can mass from gates while adding gates slowly, produce probes and can tech slowly. This will mean that once your done your going to have x ammount of units and x tech in some near future.
But personally I find that you can tech really hard (either to templar tech, robo tech or perhaps citadel of adun + 1 grades from your forge, it really doesn't matter) while adding probes and keep producing units from your 2 gates your better off. This will mean that your tech comes in much faster than in the first situation. Then since your in a pretty good situation defensivly you can stop most attacks anyway so rigth then you don't need those extra units. Then once you paid for the tech which is pretty expensive you'll have a good ammount of probes so you stop teching and stop producing probes/units (you'll be close to max or maxed on probes anyway) and add 6 gates for the money which is coming in and once that's done you can focus all of your income and speed on just getting as many units out of those gates as possible.
I gives you more units pretty soon and much faster tech.
It's almost never usefull to be moderate with production. A handfull of units extra and slow tech is only better if your not sure that your expansion will hold, but usually the superior defensive postion along with a cannon or so will mean that you don't need those few extra units anyway, but your still giving up map controll to the guy who just added gates and pumped pure units and your still going to have later tech and as many units as the guy who teched hard.
|
i prefer, when i play t, to add on as you macro. thats simple enough, and most people do it. what you have to be good enough to do, though, is to put ur depots down on time and keep your units coming out of your facs or raxs (most likely facs) at all times. if you completely stop your production to add facs on, then you dont have enough bases. you should definitely have two bases+ with 6+ facs constantly producing, given that its TvP, or w/e.
|
Pause worker-producer production to add enough units to defend all your workers by following these steps, in the given priority. Pause unit-production to add enough tech to spend your resources in the most efficient manner.
These are very complicated considerations...
- Add a unit from unit-producer.
- Add a unit-producer. you conclude that this is the best way to go about things. Then you go on to state that the bottom line is the time at which you have so and so. Seems right.
never halt production in a unit-producer to add another of the same unit-producer Agree, but often its negligible. Also, building more then one unit producer before utilizing the first one may be fine.
To sum up, about macro:
-get what you want
-get it when you want it
*both combine in some form to include building placement
Figure out the most efficient way...
Those things combine to give you your overall macro game. Then things like moving units around the map, etc. come into play.
Before I typed something about 9gates, now I use ~6.
Exalted ill try that strat vs 1fact expo. If im pretty surehes going 1fact expo ill just drop a lot or do an elevator. If I adapt to the 1fact expo build ill just go for massing hard off of 3 nex.
Take a normal protoss dilemma 13core or 14 core. if you build pylon on 15 your going to get a 17 goon if you doing things correctly, but the 14core goon comes out ~10sec later. Thus, the next goon is out later and so on. This dilemma is a simple example of the 2most important parts that make up macro that i showed above. I think I'll only go 13core if i want to go range first, and thus offensive from now on.
1Build worker = increase your capability to build units
2Build drop-off = increase your capability to increase capability to build units AND make each worker more efficient
3Build unit-producer = increase your capability to build units within the capacity provided by workers
4Build unit = increase your power This seems good. This has me recall of what ive heard of the NTT style of play. Mass scv as terran vs p, if you get in trouble you can usually just use scvs to get out of it as long as its not too bad. So terran has an advantage this way?
CuddlyCuteKitten makes some good, valid, commonsense, points
Babibo, much appreciated if you would explicate yourself and in commonsense ways.
|
KnickKnack, what were you trying to point out in this post?
" never halt production in a unit-producer to add another of the same unit-producer
Agree, but often its negligible. Also, building more then one unit producer before utilizing the first one may be fine."
Uhh... No. Babido has already covered the only time you would want to do this, and that is during when you stop them to afford your Tech and then build units once the Tech is complete. This discussion obviously does not apply to Zerg, who saves money and larva until a tech is complete to get many/9 of the unit quickly.
You also seem to have qualms about perfect timing. I didn't feel progamers were on such a higher level than top europeans, but eventually you'll realize the level of play that they have is very close to that level of play, especially with the top tier players (not like assem).
Mass SCV is not good vs P, the idea of good macro wasn't fully developed during NTT's time, is not recommended at all - I've lost so many games due to too many SCVs, it also gives you a misinterpretation of your power - many times I move out and in the replay I have the same control 140/140, but its mostly scvs when he has a huge amount of units.
Babido, don't dumb down your material for us - much of Starcraft involves complex mathematics and the reason for this post. We don't need commonsense things that we can see for ourselves.
|
I think an important thing to consider from a Terran point of view is the fact that scvs in the process of building a factory lose a lot of mining time. This could be another reason why you see Terrans in replays simultaneously build multiple factories at once after going 1 fact / CC. Instead of cutting mining time of 1 scv at a time when gradually adding factories, they instead have the scvs keep mining so that more resources can be mined for a set period of time allowing them to add all the factories at once. This will get you a set amount of factories faster than it would by gradually addng them. I know that it's also effective to just add 1 factory after opening w/ 1 fact / CC and slowly push out with tanks and turrets while gradually adding factories, but the two different ways you can add factories is a matter of when the Toss gets their expansion in if you survive the early game.
For Toss, I think it's more beneficial to gradually add gateways since probes lose very little time mining when warping in buildings, so cutting unit production to add more gateways doesn't seem very sensible.
Also, under no circumstances should a unit-producing building be added in place of actually building a unit.
|
well it depends in the distance, map, position and oponents BO. In an ideal situation I once maxed at 13:45 with 3 expos +main and cannons.
|
A critic on MPXMX's model. He is right I think in that you need to stop producing units at some point to build gateways if you want to avoid the "gap" in unit production after an expansion comes up.
However, usually this is purely theoretical. If you can feed 5.5 gates for example, you still need to get 6. Which means over the long run you have the chance to pump away your money you amassed when your expo comes in and gates are not yet built. Same goes for cannons. If you expand in PvZ, it usually never hurts to build a cannon or two to make up for your temporarily inadequate production facilities. Also getting upgrades can be timed to "eat extra money"
Alltogether this makes the "add gates when money stacks" strategy superior to "build gateways in advance". You are much more flexible in when and if to get tech. It is also MUCH easier to pull off perfectly timed.
MPXMX analysis might be valid in really tight scenarios like two toss players boring each other to death with 3gate goons vs 3gate goons. Expanding is dangerous in this situation. If the other player sees you expanding and does full probe stop + 4th gate, you're up to be overrun. The gap will basically kill you. Doing a perfect unit stop build should allow you to expand slightly faster in that case.
Any competent Protoss out there to confirm or counter this ? -.-
|
Say i have 250mins. I decide i want a gateway and a zealot. I build gateway -> i train zeal. By doing this Im not producing in one gate needlessly yet stick up another one. But the gate and the zeal will both start in less then a second, so the time diffrence is negligable.
As for why building more then one unit producer before utilizing the first one may be fine: building 2robos before building a shuttle or reaver or ob. Building 2gates before making a zealot, etc.
qualms about perfect timing?
I have not typed anyting about the diffrence in skill level between progamers and top foreginers. I doubt you know what i realize and/or will realize on the subject.
The point i was getting at for scv's is that scvs are the strongest worker, thus if terran builds too many(for whatever reason) he can use them more effectively to keep himself alive then zerg or toss can use their workers. So terrans have that advantage. I agree that a mass scv style is not the way to go.
Explicating more should certainly not be a dumbing down of the content. Using so-called common sense statements need not be dumbing down either.
Grass.nS), good.
FreeZEternal, ive shown a example rep of one of my older ways of macroing, i had +1done, 3 cannons i think, 9gates, maxed, 4nex at 13:30, stargate warping in. And i was not takign advantage of many very early expos or probes. Expo at 5:30, expo at 8:30, expo at 12:00. all reasonable times in game. Im prety sure i could get maxed by 13:00 with 6gates and a similar build.
He is right I think in that you need to stop producing units at some point to build gateways if you want to avoid the "gap" in unit production after an expansion comes up. Well that was an older model. The ultimate goal is to be able to pump almost constantly.
Alltogether this makes the "add gates when money stacks" strategy superior to "build gateways in advance". You are much more flexible in when and if to get tech. It is also MUCH easier to pull off perfectly timed. "the add gates when money stacks" way is superior for overall macro, but if you want to get a certain ammount of units or tech by a certain time you may build them "in advance" as it were.
Im not sure about the 3gate goon vs 3gate goon. I dont usuallydo 3gate goon, for one. Two, their are things were not taking into account, like parts of efficency, who micros better, etc. But, basically if one guy masses harder then the guy who expanded and manages to kill most of the other guys units(or contains him) and nexus while getting one of his own hes in great shape to go on to win. While if one of them is able to expand and hold it while taking reatively small losses hes in great shape to go on to win.
|
My model didn't account for teching,
Now that I look at it, teching probably fills the gaps that are created in production when you gradually add facts or gateways. And teching is important... That speaks in favour of gradual build-up. Also, gradual addition results in more units until that special time when your many extra-early factories or gateways catch up and overtake it. That means gradual = safer.
So basically, the only time it seems worthwhile to add many producing facilities at once, and perhaps pause production for it is
-right before taking an expo and increasing your economy
-when you don't intend to tech in near future
-when pausing production is not likely to result in death
All those must be true to make adding multiple production facilities at once beneficial for macro, in a real game. The most common scenario for this is when terran is taking his natural or 2nd natural in tvp, when the terran already has turrets, siege mode and mines (most of the significan tech at this point in the game), and when cilffed tanks provide excellent defense that allows a pause in production without death.
For a protoss, a similar non-dangerous period for decision makign occurs when the terran goes fact-cc, but this time, I think teching plays a bigger role
|
On May 06 2005 12:47 Knickknack wrote:
Say i have 250mins. I decide i want a gateway and a zealot. I build gateway -> i train zeal. By doing this Im not producing in one gate needlessly yet stick up another one. But the gate and the zeal will both start in less then a second, so the time diffrence is negligable.
If you have 250 mins, there is no problem. The question is about what happens when you have 100 mins, do you wait to 150 to build a second gateway and then spend 100 on a zealot? Or spend the 100 on zealot then wait to 150 for the gateway. The answer is obvious.
On May 06 2005 12:47 Knickknack wrote:
Im not sure about the 3gate goon vs 3gate goon. I dont usuallydo 3gate goon, for one. Two, their are things were not taking into account, like parts of efficency, who micros better, etc. But, basically if one guy masses harder then the guy who expanded and manages to kill most of the other guys units(or contains him) and nexus while getting one of his own hes in great shape to go on to win. While if one of them is able to expand and hold it while taking reatively small losses hes in great shape to go on to win.
a) We don't care what builds you do, he used this example to talk about when both players are macroing equally
b) Micro and other stuff you can do (go reaver lolz) are NOT part of this discussion - this discussion is about getting units as fast as possible.
c) If he manages to hold his expand and kill the attack forces he wins the game, period. 1 base vs 2 base is not pretty.
Interesting point by grass talking about how scv mining time does get taken into account when building them slowly, but I think that having 2 scvs building, then 2 building is better for the economy then 4 at once - especially this should not be done at the cost of stopping unit production. However, if you need to go for a quick attack, by all means, stop SCV PRODUCTION to get the 6 facs down, but don't stop units at the factory. That is what we all should have learned from this discussion.
|
you guys have too way much time on your hands...
|
I dont care if you care what builds I do. Seriously, lay off. You seem to like to try and be aggressive in your posting. And typing that "we" dont care about your builds is extremely presumptuous, as I posted in a medium were all tl persons could view my comments. Either explain who "we" is or dont speak for anyone who may read my comments.
I was simply showing that he was not considering important parts of the game. Which, if he wanted the most complete view, he/she should include.
c), not necessarily, though, highly probable.
|
On May 06 2005 15:34 MPXMX wrote:
My model didn't account for teching,
Now that I look at it, teching probably fills the gaps that are created in production when you gradually add facts or gateways. And teching is important... That speaks in favour of gradual build-up. Also, gradual addition results in more units until that special time when your many extra-early factories or gateways catch up and overtake it. That means gradual = safer.
So basically, the only time it seems worthwhile to add many producing facilities at once, and perhaps pause production for it is
-right before taking an expo and increasing your economy
-when you don't intend to tech in near future
-when pausing production is not likely to result in death
All those must be true to make adding multiple production facilities at once beneficial for macro, in a real game. The most common scenario for this is when terran is taking his natural or 2nd natural in tvp, when the terran already has turrets, siege mode and mines (most of the significan tech at this point in the game), and when cilffed tanks provide excellent defense that allows a pause in production without death.
For a protoss, a similar non-dangerous period for decision makign occurs when the terran goes fact-cc, but this time, I think teching plays a bigger role
I think I agree with your analysis now, inhowfar you can have more units at a given time. Overall I think it doesn't matter so much though, as it's not gonna be more than one unit worth in troop count. If you defend, you'll have no problem either way, as your units will not need as long to reach battle.
I think the real difference lies more in which style you can play more efficiently with the different approaches. I'd go for the "add gates when money stacks". It is a more defensive style that allows you to react and prepare a counter to your opponents plans, as he will have to decide on adding gates/tech/expansions before you do. This would be in the spirit of von Clausewitz, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_von_Clausewitz. His main contribution to modern military strategies was the new active role of defense in conflicts. While the attacker has the initiative and in the long run can capitalize on free movement of his units and reserves, the defender can use inherent defensive advantages in the short term. This enables him to get around with less troops while preparing a decisive counterstrike.
One such defensive plan would be to keep your troop count lower than your opponent, teching to +1 attack grades and than bust out once it finished, reaching critical mass for an overwhelming attack.
I guess this is one of the differences between "old-school" and "new-school" gaming. Old school would try to have maximum units at a given time X, using the most efficient build order to get there. New school would try to find out the strategy of his opponents and counter it, while possibly harrassing the opponent at crucial steps to delay his plans as much as possible. Getting your gates when money stacks allows you more time to react.
|
Quite honestly, you cant go much ahead by adding more facilities.
Here is an easy example. Tell a friend to play pvp with you on LT.
Share vision and all. Tell your friend to go 2 gates build, into 3 gates when he gets the cash.
And you go 3 gates before first zealots and then spend as you earn.
At like 60 supply, you both will have the exact same number of zealots, gates, and probes.
Pretty much, as long as you dont give up on probes, you will have mined the same amount of minerals, and therefore you will the same purchase parity as the opponent. Since you both have collected the same amount of minerals, if follows you must have spent the same amount a well. If either have more zealots, the other will have extra buildings that will compensate in nearby turns.
Conclusion, is that by giving up units to get building earlier you are only losing initial army that will be recovered in a future round of production.
Why do pros wait to get lie 400 minerals and then throw many buildings at once? I believe this is just so that every units are being produced at the same time, and makes macro more efficient. That would probably be the only reason why you would want to give up on units to get buildings.
Finally, it works for low econ builds. If you give up on workers to get extra buildings, your army does become potentially larger.
Hope that adds to it
|
Do you realize this thread is 3 years old? The OP probably got his answer since then or stopped playing
|
He's made a good addition to the discussion in my opinion, nothing wrong with bumping a recommended thread is there?
|
I actually read the whole and can't see how it adds anything new.
thanks for contributing anyway it was an interesting thread
|
On April 29 2008 08:06 amoxicilline wrote:
I actually read the whole and can't see how it adds anything new.
thanks for contributing anyway it was an interesting thread
I see a bit of irony in that neither of your posts above added anything new either 
On topic, pros timing their gates to coincide with unit production is to compensate for human inadequacies. They just have too much on their hands that not even 300-450 apm is enough. However, optimally, early game, it definitely makes sense to add structures one at a time and only when all gates are full. Late game is where it makes sense to add multiple gates at once.
Here's how I perceive it to work: Economic growth in Starcraft is exponential. It becomes faster and faster as the game progresses. Therefore, if graphed on a chart, the economy grows very slowly early game, meaning that it makes sense to build only one facility at a time when all the other facilities are already building. This way you would have the most units at any given time (which is obviously good). A second advantage is that should you desire to switch tech fast you will not waste any resources on already built facilities.
Then, there is a certain point in time, probably when the natural expansion is kicking into full gear, when economic grown has progressed to where increase on the Y axis is outstripping the increase in time on the X axis. This means that if you continue to only build gates one by one, by the time all gates are building you'll still find MANY more resources to spare. The key then would be to time it so that just as you reach your resource explosion your new buildings will warp in and be able to take advantage of it.
Finally, when the economic growth becomes insane with a 3rd and 4th expo, money probably will not even be an issue anymore, so you can probably slap down 3, 4, even 5 buildings at once without slowing unit production.
|
haha i thought newbistic was shallow for a sec
|
Lol sorry, i actually didnt realize it was old. I have the habit of opening numerous tabs and then answering as I read them. T_T
Sorry about the bump lol.
Was worth the nice response from newbistic though :p
|
if they put up 3 at once they can shift+click to queue the workers to put the 2nd and 3rd up, while they go do something else.
|
You cant queue buildings orders
You can queue Building -> Other Actions
But you cant Other Actions -> Building
It will skip all previous commands if you try and attempt following the last building order.
^^
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
I swear, if I read that "the growth of Y in StarCraft is exponential" one more time, I'm gonna go seek the author and stick a guitar fretboard into his ass.
You don't know what exponential is, please stop using this word to look like a smart guy. I swear, it's like 20th goddamn time I see it used for no fucking reason (i.e. to make impression).
If anything, economy growth in SC is approximately linear with a parametric dependency (with the parameter being the number of working nexii/CC's).
Speaking on the subject, yes, it makes sense to add them all at once. In SC, you don't just build an army. You need to get prepared and maximize your efficiency for specific timings. To get a maximum force at a specific moment of time, you first invest 100% money into economy/tech, then stop both and invest 100% money into units. It's a simplified model and there are many occasions where it is imprecise, but overall, just look at PvZ. First, economy (you don't need units), then you add 3-4 gates at once and go all out zealots. Every pro does it that way, the reason described above. The same thing with a terran tornado push - you don't need many units at first, you just make enough to safely expand from one factory, then you halt SCV's and add 3 factories at once to do a timing attack.
|
|
|
On July 03 2008 11:22 Kunty wrote:
LMFAO
EDIT: oh god, thats good.
|
Agreed with BluzMan, economic growth is pretty linear. Go take a look in BW chart at some game and go to resources. It plots time versus resources, and it's pretty much a linear transgression throughout a standard game. Any bumps along the way come from adding a new mineral house (CC/nexus/hatch), forgetting to make peons, transferring peons, and losing peons. The first of which will increase the slope of your graph while the last 3 will decrease the slope.
|
I like the way when something gets bumped people carry on the conversation-like thread as if it had never stopped, with people agreeing with statements made ages ago. it's as if there had just been a really long embarrassing lull in the conversation.
anyway, I thought BW can only tell you about what you spend, not what you collect. so if you stop spending the money, you won't get a 'linear transgression'; I think you can create bumps just by trying to build loads of stuff without having the money, because the replay doesn't note whether you actually had enough to make the units. It's more a measure of how much you tried to macro. tell me if I'm wrong.
|
On July 03 2008 11:22 Kunty wrote:
I really wanna know what it said before the edit.
|
On July 03 2008 13:13 Jonoman92 wrote:I really wanna know what it said before the edit.
lol me 2... what he say?
|
lol that wasen't even a bump. oh well :S
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On July 03 2008 13:13 Jonoman92 wrote:I really wanna know what it said before the edit.
You really, REALLY don't.
Note to bumper: If you pull something like this again, it will be a permaban without a thought. Your post doesn't even relate to the OP in ANY way, and I read the majority of the link. Tell you and your buddies to stop doing this shit, your spammy posts and blind propaganda are so old.
|
On July 03 2008 12:22 betaben wrote:
I like the way when something gets bumped people carry on the conversation-like thread as if it had never stopped, with people agreeing with statements made ages ago. it's as if there had just been a really long embarrassing lull in the conversation.
anyway, I thought BW can only tell you about what you spend, not what you collect. so if you stop spending the money, you won't get a 'linear transgression'; I think you can create bumps just by trying to build loads of stuff without having the money, because the replay doesn't note whether you actually had enough to make the units. It's more a measure of how much you tried to macro. tell me if I'm wrong.
There's a graph in BWChart that tells you how much you collected in total...it just plots the amount of minerals/gas you've collected up to that point versus the time elapsed in the game. It's the first graph after your APM chart, I believe.
|
BWchart plots mins/gas _spent_ versus time. The program cannot tell what one user has at any time, only what he spends it on and what actions he does. That's why you can't rewind in replays too: the program doesn't store what units there are on the map, only the actions that are made.
|
On July 08 2008 07:57 misterroboto wrote:
BWchart plots mins/gas _spent_ versus time. The program cannot tell what one user has at any time, only what he spends it on and what actions he does. That's why you can't rewind in replays too: the program doesn't store what units there are on the map, only the actions that are made.
Oh...my mistake...
I had no idea.
|
On April 29 2008 11:11 Newbistic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2008 08:06 amoxicilline wrote:
I actually read the whole and can't see how it adds anything new.
thanks for contributing anyway it was an interesting thread I see a bit of irony in that neither of your posts above added anything new either Here's how I perceive it to work: Economic growth in Starcraft is exponential. It becomes faster and faster as the game progresses.
It's actually quadratic
When you constantly add peons the "mineral acceleration" is constant, therefore causing the total mineral income to be x^2.
Gas is linear though.
When you take extra expansion it's bit messy but You can think of it to grow at 2x^2
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img206.exs.cx/img206/6894/econdiagram7ii.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img206.exs.cx/img206/499/econdiagram25ch.jpg)
