There is a fundamental balance between the number of workers you can get, and the army size you can have. If a player has 120 workers, their economy will be great, but they will lose because their army will be too small. Based on years of experience in SC2, players have found the right balance to be about 60-80 workers, and the rest of the supply going to army.
With Blizzard's solution, experience so far has shown players still tend to have three bases at a time (or even less!), so there are still the same number of (meaningful) places to attack. If a player has 60 workers, the player will want a mineral/gas patch for each one. Once that is satisfied, the player will never add another base until patches run out. Thus we come to my solution:
Reduce the food needed for a worker. If a player can fit 100 workers and still have 120 food left for army, then the player will be benefited from mineral patches for each of those workers. Whether you like this solution or not, I hope you can see that there is a fundamental reason players expand the way they do. If you want to change the pattern, you need to address the fundamental reason.
Another approach would be to try moving the base closer to the minerals, so the player will only be able to fit two workers on each mineral patch, giving a huge benefit to getting another base. I'm sure you can think of other approaches, too.
One of the lessons from Broodwar is that a base only needs to be up long enough to collect ~1000 minerals or so for it to be cost effective (enough to pay for workers and CC/Nex/Hatch). I'm not sure how to integrate this point into strategy, but it's a relevant point.
Starcraft is Fun! I made some test maps, in case anyone wants to play. To play:
1) Open Starcraft (any region) 2) Go to "Custom Games" 3) Search for "Happy Harvesters" in the top-right search box 4) Play one of the maps 5) There is now a "Happy Harvesters" mod, so this can be experimented on any map
I reduced the food used for all harvesters to 1/2. I reduced the cost for the Town Halls. Orbital Command is slightly more expensive.
NB: I modified this version of Inferno Pools to be vertical spawns only.
Try it out! Let me know what you think.
Thanks to ZeromuS: he gave the idea that anyone can come up with Starcraft Ideas and try them out. He gets the credit for starting everyone thinking about economy. He made things better for all of us.
On June 22 2015 16:44 Huxii wrote: Haven't tested your map yet, will do so later, but i think 1/2 worker supply might be too drastic? What about 2/3?
That's a good idea, and ultimately that will probably be a better balance, but I went to extremes to make it more clear what the effects (and problems) will be.
Once the effect is well understood, then later we can focus on calibration. And who knows? Maybe 1/2 won't be enough, and we'll want to change it down to 1/4..
This post is based on my experience playing with the Happy Harvesters. This analysis will be divided into two sections, one for competitive play, and one for casual play. I would love to hear other people's experience.
Competitive play As soon as you jump in game, your timings will feel off because the food count is wrong. This can be fixed by looking at the SCV count on the nexus.
What about early rushes? 6-pool hits at the same time, because it's not dependent on supply. 4-gate hits at the same time, but with a stronger economy because you have 100 minerals to build extra probes. 2-rax hits at the same time, because you still need to build a supply depot first. surprisingly, most timings hit around the same time, because harvesters still cost just as much.
What about getting up an economy? Getting the economy up is easier, but you'll still probably max-out around minute 14.
A maxed out economy is powerful: Four bases allows constant production of units off 12 barracks, + medivacs + widowmines. Of course, producing more units means you need to attack with them more quickly.
Getting a fourth is a risk. If you manage it, you will win; but that allows for more choices, more opportunities for timing attacks.
Casual play Think bronze league heroes. This guy will still be able to rock his widow-mine/viking composition. Admit it, if you had played this game (before you were good), you would have thought it was epic.
The Blizzard economy is annoying for casual players, because forced-taking of extra bases is one more thing to worry about, which becomes overwhelming and not fun.
Supply block happens less often, so it's easier for noobs to get their economy going.
Happy Harvesters allows to have fun without worrying about that, but still being rewarded.
One advantage here is that it's not confusing, there are no changing color minerals, etc, so it's better than GEM.
What I like most about this is that CC's, Nexus, Hatchery don't have to give additional Supply, with 12 Worker start. Depot/Overlord/Pylon would probably need to be changed to 5-6 Supply.
Have you considered doubling all supply, instead of Workers instead? Knowing your exact Supply is quite crucial information and it would solve the old 0.5 Supply Zergling/Baneling aswell. Would also allow for more detailed balancing, 1 Supply Roach might be too low, but 2 Supply Roach might not be what is wanted either, with doubled up Supply you can suddenly make it 3 Supply and would essentially be the same as a 1.5 Supply Roach.
On June 29 2015 04:09 Geiko wrote: I have a question for you. Can you edit the graph present on the GEM thread to place "Happy Workers" as a basis for discussion ?
Here is my estimate, based on this criteria (these were the criteria used to make the original graph): Community goals: -introducing inefficiencies -Rewarding expansions
Blizzard goals: -Simplicity -"Fresh feel" to the game -More expansions -Bases more spread out
Feel free to disagree with the placement based on those criteria. (Note that my view of Blizzard's goals and the community goals are different, but this is Geiko's chart, so it should be placed based on those criteria).
On June 29 2015 04:26 ejozl wrote: What I like most about this is that CC's, Nexus, Hatchery don't have to give additional Supply, with 12 Worker start. Depot/Overlord/Pylon would probably need to be changed to 5-6 Supply.
I like that too.
On June 29 2015 04:26 ejozl wrote: Have you considered doubling all supply, instead of Workers instead? Knowing your exact Supply is quite crucial information and it would solve the old 0.5 Supply Zergling/Baneling aswell. Would also allow for more detailed balancing, 1 Supply Roach might be too low, but 2 Supply Roach might not be what is wanted either, with doubled up Supply you can suddenly make it 3 Supply and would essentially be the same as a 1.5 Supply Roach.
It's a good idea, worth considering if people decide they like this sort of economy (but I don't want to do it right now because that kind of mod is a lot more work ).
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bkH4SDN.jpg?1)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/26092C2.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hRxg1nX.jpg?1)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/b/bc/6pool.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ac2xXJF.jpg)
). 
