EPTThe gas at the naturals on Scrap yard are the same way.
Great article, if you still feel ambitious running data for the spots I have mentioned would likely help the community a ton.
[SC2B] Gas Matters - Page 3
| Forum Index > News |
|
Arragoth
Canada9 Posts
The gas at the naturals on Scrap yard are the same way. Great article, if you still feel ambitious running data for the spots I have mentioned would likely help the community a ton. | ||
|
Synwave
United States2803 Posts
Thanks for the work Arrian! | ||
|
LiquiDLegend
United States61 Posts
And im still enjoying Sc1, i've tried sc2 already...but i just didnt get quite with the new feel but it was entertainment and wasn't hard to play. | ||
|
BladeRunner
United States407 Posts
On April 26 2010 23:59 Shikyo wrote: SSBM, GGXX, any competitive fighting game. And this specific kind of analysis is ultimately quite pointless. Don't forget EVE online, they've got a Ph.D. economist who does quarterly reports that are much more in depth than this. I agree with other replies, reasonably good info but not very in-depth and way too verbose. The graphs all say the same thing, why not analyze minerals not mined when moving workers to gas? Or how about do a graph of mineral+gas income and overlay it onto a popular build order to give an example of what timing to move from gas to minerals or vice versa. That would have been a lot more informative. | ||
|
Kickchon
Germany12 Posts
however I recently did those measurements myself and as your results differed from mine I have redone my experiments and I would like to share my findings. My experiments were done on Blistering Sands on the southwest main on faster speed. I measured every race for the southern geyser and the northern geyser for protoss additionally to compare both. Table in spoiler: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/5067/collectionblisteringsan.jpg) My results have the following implications: 1. All 3 races gather at the same speed. (Requires creep for the zerg, but the hatchery is there anyway) 2. The northern geyser might be a little bit more efficient because of its distance. Even if it is insignificant building the northern geyser first has no drawback. 3. Maybe the most drastic: The diminishing returns of the 3rd worker are nearly non-existant on both geysers. This should demonstrate the differences on different maps more clearly. And in conclusion the statement 3(2) > 3(1) might not be generalizable and would require further research. Edit: I just noticed I should have done 4 workers as well. :/ | ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
So running with 4 on gas instead of 6 is more efficient provided your minerals aren't saturated... but in most cases once you get to that point gas is the limiting factor anyway so it's ultimately not very useful. | ||
|
Uthgar
United States21 Posts
| ||
|
shoop
United Kingdom228 Posts
On April 26 2010 23:37 itzbrandnew wrote: Take your math major and shove it up your ass, the first thing people do in "real" life is make a set of assumptions for each situation. Wow, that's a very well-balanced and constructive remark. I'm just pointing out where I think this article is weak. No need for the hating. | ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
|
Piski
Finland3461 Posts
| ||
|
Fugitive
Netherlands32 Posts
| ||
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
* 1(1) | 0.74 gas/second * 2(1) | 1.50 gas/second * 2(2) | 1.48 gas/second * 3(1) | 2.00 gas/second * 3(2) | 2.23 gas/second * 4(2) | 3.05 gas/second * 5(2) | 3.33 gas/second * 6(2) | 3.94 gas/second how is this possible? 5(2) should be simply the rates of 2(1) and 3(1) added together.. clearly this means not all gas geysers are spread at an equal distance, which means if you have a 5(2) situation you should put the 3 workers on the further geyser, and the 2 worker geyser on the closer one. just look at how little the gain is between 4(2) and 5(2) in your data. and then look at the gain from 5(2) to 6(2), that's .61 gas/second increase when it should be .50 according to the difference between 2(1) and 3(1). something's wrong with the data here, and if 4(2) and 5(2) are accurate than clearly the gain for adding another worker on that closer geyser is a very marginal gain in gas collection | ||
|
Zalan
Canada18 Posts
Would like to have more info on those 4 miners geysers, is there a list somewhere? Must be hard to find just by looking at their position... | ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
Also other things come into play, if i feel they might cheese and i scout a little early I have to adjust the timing on when i make the 2nd refinery a little later to make up for lost minerals and then I consequently have to add a 3rd scv earlier to make up for the missed gas effectively giving me the same gas with a later refinery, but vs P i usually will take refinery earlier if I'm going to do this build so they don't gas steal it. how is this possible? 5(2) should be simply the rates of 2(1) and 3(1) added together.. clearly this means not all gas geysers are spread at an equal distance Yea.. I'd think it's pretty obvious... The geysers that are further away don't mine at 100% efficiency. There are a couple on the new 2v2 maps that are especially bad. I think one on the left of metalopolis is bad too. I was obsing a game vs 2 friends and noticed that one had faster gas income even though they had 6 on gas each. Just like in sc1 some geysers benefit from 4. | ||
|
FrontalMonkey
United States90 Posts
| ||
|
josemb40
Peru611 Posts
| ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
What this means for actual play could be very significant, or not so much. This could be extremely important......or not at all. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
 | ||
|
Xerrea
Denmark41 Posts
| ||
|
GreatDestroyer
United States3 Posts
| ||
| ||
