That's what I said above. This is important if you have a relatively short time horizon you care about - in the very long run you just want the same number of SCVs per patch.

Did you read what I said o_o or were you planning on cutting SCVs after maynarding?

citi.zen

2509 Posts

May 15 2009 17:19 GMT

#22

I read it, but had not fully "internalized" it. You make a good point - the ratio of main/expo scvs will get closer to 1 as you keep making workers from both CCs.

SuperJongMan

Jamaica11586 Posts

May 15 2009 22:13 GMT

#23

On May 16 2009 01:15 MiniRoman wrote:
I hate all these calculations. YOU MUST USE YOUR GUTS!!!!!!!!

YALL HEAR???
Word son word.

Too_MuchZerg

Finland2818 Posts

May 15 2009 23:21 GMT

#24

isn't it with zerg, longer distance to expansion, more drones you maynard. Mainly because larva system.

richlol

28 Posts

May 15 2009 23:37 GMT

#25

Typically expansions have less mineral patches so the SCV to mineral patch ratio increases faster with the production of a single SCV than a main base with more mineral patches. So in a real-game scenario you want to maynard less SCVs than stated in my original post. I mentioned this in the Method section, that no SCVs were produced during these trials. But when I get time after finals, I will include more factors like production of SCVs, travel time between CCs, how these affect how many to maynard, and how these can be optimized to short term vs long term gains.

In reality of course when more of the conditions (ie SCV production, SCVs on gas/construction, etc) are factored in, the optimal amount to maynard is less. But again, like I said earlier, these trials were bound to very specific conditions to provide someone a very basic understanding of how to maynard.

Marksman

Malaysia523 Posts

May 15 2009 23:43 GMT

#26

Very nice effort done. This'll be handy for most of us.

Nothing else to say since what I could say, you probably know (Experiment constants etc)

Anyway, good job! ;p

richlol

28 Posts

May 15 2009 23:44 GMT

#27

On May 16 2009 00:44 RaGe wrote:

Show nested quote +

You forgot that theres a distance between main and natural, resulting in mining time loss when workers are transferred.

The effect of travel time/distance was negligible during these trials as you can see that even in the short term (@30 seconds), there was no net loss of minerals from transferring SCVs up until about 17-18 SCVs. Following from this, what probably played a bigger role in the loss of minerals at that point were other factors such as the oversaturation at the natural (17) and a lack of SCVs at the main (10).

petzergling

538 Posts

May 16 2009 10:10 GMT

#28

On May 15 2009 10:28 RaGe wrote:
Like mentioned in your notes you kinda oversimplified things imo, not splitting up in races, for instance, is already a pretty big mistake.

no, he did the calculations with scvs and terran is the only race that matters

Zapdos_Smithh

Canada2620 Posts

May 16 2009 10:26 GMT

#29

I just grab a bunch and move em.

StylishVODs

Sweden5331 Posts

May 16 2009 15:44 GMT

#30

Nice thread.

If you consider that

3 scvs might already be mining gas
some scvs might be building buildings
one scv is already making the cc
When producing scvs from the natural cc the scv/miningpatches ratio will increas faster than in the main.

This will generally lead to a decreased amount of transfered SCVs to your expansion.
In you test, 11 SCVs transfered seems optimal whereas in reality, considering the points above, a number of 7-8 is more accurate.

I've tried different ammounts of SCVs transfered over a number of games when I used the standard opening in singleplayer, and I've looked at the replay alot to find out which ammount gives me the fastest growing economy.

So my aswer to how many SCVs is the optimal number to send when you do 1rax 2suply FE is 7-8 SCVs.

If the expansion is faster, transfer less SCVs, if it's later transfer more.

omninmo

2349 Posts

May 16 2009 16:31 GMT

#31

you should look for the ratio. the ratio is all that matters. for example:

what is the optimal ratio of farmers z:y when the total amount of mining farmers equals z and x farmers remain in the main with a mineral patches after y farmers are transferred to the natural with b mineral patches.

z is the amount of farmers you have devoted to mineral mining. it does not include building, scouting, gas mining or any other non mineral mining farmers

y is the amount you maynard.

the ratio of z to y should be the same for each race, yes? even though the variables themselves will be different.

obviously, we are not factoring in the distance to the expo and i am not a proponent of counting all your scvs before maynarding. but the fact is.. there IS an optimal number and knowing that is helpful.

so for Terran we supposed the total amount of SCVs was 27 and through testing we found that 7-8 miners should be transfered, yes? assuming we dont need to make subtractions from that 27 and that they are all mining minerals then our ratio is 27 to 7 or ~25%.

Can we say that if zerg has 16 mining drones when he maynards he should only send 25% or 4 drones?

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh