In Response to David Kim re: SC2 Economy - Page 17

In response to: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/17085919227

Danglars

United States12133 Posts

April 25 2015 21:26 GMT

#321

I hope Blizzard gives a response letting us know their thoughts on the efficiency curve. Long term, I hope the risk/reward of taking new bases feels more appropriate to the map design of risky thirds/fourths.

FabledIntegral

United States9232 Posts

April 27 2015 02:46 GMT

#322

On April 24 2015 13:58 BlackLilium wrote:

Show nested quote +

DH2x4 should not be mixed with BW/SB. While there are similarities in the curve shape, Starbow didn't have double-harvesting and relayed solely on AI bouncing.

I prefer this the most actually (BW/SB) as opposed to what I just saw on DH9.

PineapplePizza

United States749 Posts

April 27 2015 07:11 GMT

#323

Did I miss something, or is there data on how 16 - 24 workers fare with DH as compared to SC2:BW / sbow?

BlackLilium

Poland426 Posts

April 27 2015 07:22 GMT

#324

On April 27 2015 16:11 PineapplePizza wrote:
Did I miss something, or is there data on how 16 - 24 workers fare with DH as compared to SC2:BW / sbow?

The Old DH 3x3 was compared to Starbow directly in the thread of mine:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/471776-mod-double-harvesting-better-saturation-curve

It has also been compared to actual Broodwar recently:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/483640-economy-data-collection-thread-hots-dh10-dh8#9

The current TeamLiquid DH 3x3 has not been directly compared to those, but you can check the TL and Old versions of DH 3x3 here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/483640-economy-data-collection-thread-hots-dh10-dh8#9

The graphs include data for workers in range 1 to 32, which includes the case you are asking.

Cheren

United States2911 Posts

April 30 2015 17:54 GMT

#325

One thing to note is that worker pairing is not intuitive for casuals, which is a factor that seems to influence many Blizzard decisions. Intuitively more workers = more minerals, and more mineral patches being mined = more minerals. When I started playing SC2 I would split my workers after expanding so that half were at the main and half were at the natural. Apparently in BW this actually gives more efficiency and in SC2 it feels like it should but doesn't. Mining more mineral patches doesn't give you more minerals unless you have more than 16 workers at a base, which feels arbitrary and adds a burden of knowledge.

fruity.

England1711 Posts

May 05 2015 16:39 GMT

#326

Am curious head honchos: Has there been any additional communication with the dev team over this? Perhaps over email or some such?

crbox

Canada1181 Posts

May 05 2015 20:00 GMT

#327

I really hope Blizzard tries out these changes in LotV. It would make sc2 much more dynamic and would eradicate the nasty 3 basing that has been around for too long.

StalkerFang

Australia68 Posts

May 05 2015 23:38 GMT

#328

The more I play LotV the more I like the new econ model, AS LONG AS blizzard gives protoss some stronger options for defense. It basically lets blizzard go crazy with strong defensive units since turtling will never be a strong strategy. Would still like this model to be tested out for a couple of weeks or something though.

Shield

Bulgaria4824 Posts

May 06 2015 00:14 GMT

#329

I think LotV with its economy definitely improves PvP. Proxy gateways is a legitimate strategy in HotS, but it's not fun to play against even if you defend properly.

Prev 1 15 16 17 All

Please or register to reply.

In Response to David Kim re: SC2 Economy - Page 17

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming