I play Protoss.

In SC1, it always felt as though if you had more than say, 300 minerals, your macro was poor.

In SC2, it seems like no matter how hard I try, my minerals always ends up hovering around 1000 during mid-late game (2 or 3 base).

Am I playing really poorly, or perhaps higher unspent minerals is more acceptable in SC2 because of things like Warpgates, higher unit costs (Colossus).

I dunno, what do you guys think? If my unspent minerals are hitting 1000, is my macro poor, or is it acceptable in SC2?

Cpt.beefy

Ireland799 Posts

March 06 2010 03:04 GMT

Its never acceptable in any RTS.

What to spend it on hmm... more gateways?? thats the sc1 answer but it should be true for sc2, hopefully :o

Floophead_III

United States1832 Posts

March 06 2010 03:04 GMT

Why would it be acceptable? Macro is the goal of spending all your money to have the most benefit from economy. This isn't even a good question. Of course your macro is bad. Work on it and make more mineral only units/gateways/expansions/probes/cannons. Don't sit on money.

Insane

United States4991 Posts

March 06 2010 03:05 GMT

Your macro is generally poor if you are hitting 1000 minerals (which is not to say there aren't lots of good players right now who have poor macro

), although if you can spend it all in one cycle right away it's not too grievous.
One thing to remember to help your macro out is (especially when you have 3-4 Nexuses) you can constantly be chrono boosting your warp gates, which will decrease their cooldown.

bodysnatcher21

Australia147 Posts

March 06 2010 14:23 GMT

OK I think I kind of came across the wrong way.

What I'm really trying to do is make a comparison between sc1 unspent minerals and sc2 unspent minerals.

In Sc1, a good goal is say, keep your minerals under 300 at all times unless expanding

But perhaps this is an unrealistic goal in SC2?

Does anyone think that it is harder to keep minerals lower in SC2?

Talic_Zealot

688 Posts

March 06 2010 14:30 GMT

Of course there is the macro issue. But when money starts to build up, but I can't expand and can't really support more gates for more than a few minutes I get the forge considerably earlier than in BW and pump upgrades.

dustdust

Germany76 Posts

March 06 2010 14:35 GMT

On March 06 2010 23:23 bodysnatcher21 wrote:
Does anyone think that it is harder to keep minerals lower in SC2?

no, it is easier.

Kiante

Australia7069 Posts

March 06 2010 14:35 GMT

i find that my money usually stays in increments of my warpgate count. Eg: if i'm on 3 bases with 10 gates, i'll find i'll have around 1000 minerals building up, then i'll drop a wave of 10 zealot/sentry/templar and make a coll kind of thing. Makes macro easier to manage if you do it in waves, kind of like a cue sort of thing

Perseverance

Japan2800 Posts

March 06 2010 15:16 GMT

If anything macroing is entirely easier in SC2 than in SC1. Especially for toss because all you have to do is press 'w' and then press 'z' 10 times rapidly while clicking around a pylon and suddenly that 1000 minerals is gone. In SC1 you had to select each gateway which most of the time was all over the map and then press 'z' for each one respectively as well as worry about where your rally points were set etc. etc.

MorroW

Sweden3522 Posts

March 06 2010 15:42 GMT

#10

when u macro with warp gates
can u click z then hold in shift and just mass click instead of having to click z all the time? u can do this when u make buildings anyway and it feels like sort of same thing

firebound12

Canada274 Posts

March 06 2010 15:59 GMT

#11

Assuming you have full econ, yes it is bad having 1k minerals, even in SC2. Although it may very well be caused by how fresh SC2 beta is. It's not like we had years of experience in SC2, compared to SC1.

Maybe you can change the timing when you build your assimilators in early game and in expo.

Or, you can spend it in mineral-only units and structure. Now with the new unit production mechanism, all races can pop zerglings/marines/zealots (get lots of warpgates :D) real fast. You can also strategically build some defences around your bases (rear, in mineral lines, at expo, ramp, cover your sides maybe).

I also think that the lings/rines/lots are the fundamental units of all troops in SC2 if anyone feel a surplus of minerals (though I might be dead wrong). They make it much harder for the enemy to kill your units that are gas expensive.

3FFA

United States3931 Posts

March 06 2010 16:15 GMT

#12

by the way, unless your opponent is getting some cloaked unit and ur only defense is cannons for detection, then get them but only get enough to take care of the cloaked units, no more. You should always keep some army at home and defend with that, not spend excess minerals on cannons. Especially since(at least in SC1) 1 cannon is the same cost as 1 gate. Just mass gates/expo every once and a while and u can easily keep your minerals below 300.

Also, Talic Zealot, can you explain to me what u mean when u can't expand and can't support gates for more than a couple minutes?

sob3k

United States7572 Posts

March 06 2010 16:19 GMT

#13

The reason you are floating 1k is because you are making higher-tech units and running out of gas (which is super limited in SC2). All you have to do to fix this is add a bit more production and just pump out extra ling/rine/lot/hellion and mineral only units.

at least this was my problem.

(8 hellions flanking hydra is rape too)

Klive5ive

United Kingdom6056 Posts

March 06 2010 22:20 GMT

#14

This is a conscious design decision by Blizzard.
Minerals are much easier to come by in SC2 which forces you to use mineral heavy units late into the game. I LIKE this decision since it means you'll always see a mixture of units.

I understand what that guy was saying about how it's hard to keep your minerals low. It's not "actually" harder, you just have to be aware that you'll always need to make mineral heavy units.

For instance as Terran even if you're going Banshees you'll usually find you have excess minerals to invest in a Marine ground army.

yoshi_yoshi

United States440 Posts

March 06 2010 22:27 GMT

#15

You can always have more stuff!

The only exception I can see is P, if you are preparing to warp mass units at a proxy pylon all at the same time.

Hammy

France828 Posts

March 06 2010 22:43 GMT

#16

On March 07 2010 07:20 Klive5ive wrote:
This is a conscious design decision by Blizzard.
Minerals are much easier to come by in SC2 which forces you to use mineral heavy units late into the game. I LIKE this decision since it means you'll always see a mixture of units.

I understand what that guy was saying about how it's hard to keep your minerals low. It's not "actually" harder, you just have to be aware that you'll always need to make mineral heavy units.

For instance as Terran even if you're going Banshees you'll usually find you have excess minerals to invest in a Marine ground army.

Absolutely, I think it's a great plan as well.
However... I also think this makes Zerg very challenging because of their macro mechanic. Oh how many games i've lost because I just couldn't keep up my harass and micro while spawning perfect larvae. When a queen hits 50 energy, unless I've got an extra hatch that isn't manned by a queen, I feel like I've just lost four units that could have won me the game. I hope I'll have the dedication to get past this, or I might end up being better at my offrace :/

Chairman Ray

United States11903 Posts

March 06 2010 22:47 GMT

#17

My rule of thumb is 3 warp gates per base. It always keeps my minerals at a stable level.

slained

Canada966 Posts

March 06 2010 23:00 GMT

#18

Just make mineral only units. Generally I add a lot of raxes in any match up just to balance. Either that, turret, bunker, or expand

timmins

Canada31 Posts

March 06 2010 23:14 GMT

#19

Yeah, as terran, I am finding I bottleneck badly with gas, too. And floating minerals is a lot easier with a macro mechanic that creates so many minerals in such a short time.

I am just trying to get into the habit of pumping more hellions.

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh