EPThaving them synced is nice and convenient, but inefficient.
[D] Simple T build got me to #1 in Diamond - Page 12
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
waffling1
599 Posts
having them synced is nice and convenient, but inefficient. | ||
|
Captain
United States204 Posts
On July 22 2010 16:56 waffling1 wrote: why would u be saving up 750 minerals? u can lay them down one by one and get ahead in unit production. having them synced is nice and convenient, but inefficient. In the case of this build, it's because there's only a very narrow window where this will work: If you were to build the raxes one at a time, it'd take you five times longer. The premise here is to fake out your opponent, kill their scout, and then blitz out five more raxes before they notice. It's critical to save up to 750 with this sort of plan, because the timings simply don't work out if you fail to. ...And then there are the people in this thread who seem to believe that the economic advantage of not taking your SCVs off to build things outweighs the benefits of having units. There's nothing wrong with OP's build if your goal is to win quickly; in fact, I imagine that sometimes, against even moderately skilled protoss players, it works brilliantly. But a lot of very popular builds will beat it, such as anything involving banelings, fast colossi, fast storms, banshees, marauders, force field, fast mutas, roaches, and I think one clever fellow mentioned early stalker pressure. OP might consider trying a SC2 variation of a deep six: essentially what he's already doing, but with the additional raxes proxied to somewhere they likely won't be scouted. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:12 Captain wrote: In the case of this build, it's because there's only a very narrow window where this will work: If you were to build the raxes one at a time, it'd take you five times longer. The premise here is to fake out your opponent, kill their scout, and then blitz out five more raxes before they notice. It's critical to save up to 750 with this sort of plan, because the timings simply don't work out if you fail to. That doesn't make sense. Waffling is right. Imagine that the scout enters your base. You get a marine out and kill it. At this point you have 0 minerals and 1 marine. Let's say that by time you are ready to attack, after placing the 5 raxes, you've acquired 1500 resources from the point at which you killed the scout. This allows you to get 15 more marines. Now, if you didn't start with 5 rax, and instead spent all the money on marines and only built rax when you accumulated 150 as waffling is suggesting, you would still acquire 1500 minerals (actually more - because you're wasting less SCV work time - but we'll ignore that). So you'd still be spending 1500 minerals. Those minerals either go into marines or rax. There is no way those minerals go into anything else, and as a result, you have the same or more marines by time you are ready to attack. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
| ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:36 Sabresandiego wrote: Saving up minerals is better, the reason being that you are maximizing the mining time of the workers who are building the rax. When you build them all at once what you are doing is trading a window of having only 1 rax for a stronger economy. What? That makes even less sense. Each worker has to sit at a barracks for x seconds no matter what way you build them. Explain please? | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:38 iEchoic wrote: What? That makes even less sense. Each worker has to sit at a barracks for x seconds no matter what way you build them. Explain please? I dont know how better to explain this. Lets pretend that a rax takes 60 seconds to build and in that time 1 SCV mines 60 minerals. Therefore each rax takes 150 minerals + 60 minerals where the scv could be mining. Lets say I am building 4 rax. If I build all 4 at once, then I can use all my SCV's to maximum efficiency until the very second I plop down all 4 rax. If I build them one at a time one after another I am spending an additional 60 minerals in SCV time thus delaying the completion of all 4. You maximize efficiency by building all 4 at the same time. You will have 4 completed rax much faster if you build all 4 at once, then if you build them one at a time. The thing you give up when doing this sort of construction is the use of the building for that time period. From an economic standpoint it is stronger to build all at once. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:44 Sabresandiego wrote: I dont know how better to explain this. Lets pretend that a rax takes 60 seconds to build and in that time 1 SCV mines 60 minerals. Therefore each rax takes 150 minerals + 60 minerals where the scv could be mining. Lets say I am building 4 rax. If I build all 4 at once, then I can use all my SCV's to maximum efficiency until the very second I plop down all 4 rax. If I build them one at a time one after another I am spending an additional 60 minerals in SCV time thus delaying the completion of all 4. I get what you're saying about now, but we're talking about different things. You're talking about the fastest way to get 5 raxes down. You're right, getting 5 raxes down would be faster if you waited to plop all 5 down. I'm talking about how to get the most marines possible the fastest. However, you can keep introducing new raxes as you get 150 and keep producing marines, and you will end up with either greater or equal the number marines at every point in production, even if you have less raxes. And there's no economic advantage to doing what you're saying, you'd just make up the minerals afterwards when the scv gets back to work faster than it normally would. You'd have exactly the same minerals after all raxes are complete either way. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:49 iEchoic wrote: I get what you're saying about now, but we're talking about different things. You're talking about the fastest way to get 5 raxes down. You're right, getting 5 raxes down would be faster if you waited to plop all 5 down. I think you're talking about only making raxes 1 by 1 with no marines until you have all 5 raxes. However, you can keep introducing new raxes as you get 150 and keep producing marines, and you will end up with either greater or equal the number marines at every point in production, even if you have less raxes. This is not as good of a strategy for several reasons. First, all your rax are out of sync and you have to do roughly 5 times the amount of macro management to accomplish roughly the same task. Second, this is economically weaker due to the opportunity cost of SCV mining time when they are building rax. The benefit to building one at a time like your describe is that you have your second rax sooner, but your 3rd, 4th, and 5th come later, your economy is weaker, and you had to do 3-4 times the macromanagement. The only time it is stronger to build the rax one at a time, is if you are hit with some sort of push that happens in the window where you delay rax. Considering that is highly unlikely, due to walling off and your single rax producing marines, building all rax at once is the stronger option. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:53 Sabresandiego wrote: This is not as good of a strategy for several reasons. First, all your rax are out of sync and you have to do roughly 5 times the amount of macro management to accomplish roughly the same task. Really? That's the only thing you're doing. You could execute it flawlessly with like 20 apm. Second, this is economically weaker due to the opportunity cost of SCV mining time when they are building rax No, this isn't right. It's like the old question often asked in physics: two racers are racing down a two-part track. In the first part, they go 40mph. In the second part, they go 60mph. Racer A takes a 10-minute pit-stop in the first part, Racer B takes a 10-minute pit-stop in the second part. Who wins the race? The answer is that they finish at the same time. You would answer that Racer B wins. It doesn't matter when you construct the buildings, your SCV has to spend 60 minerals in scv time no matter when you construct it. The racer has to take a 10-minute pit stop no matter where he takes it. Your logic is a classical fallacy. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:57 iEchoic wrote: Really? That's the only thing you're doing. You could execute it flawlessly with like 20 apm. No, this isn't right. It's like the old question often asked in physics: two racers are racing down a two-part track. In the first part, they go 40mph. In the second part, they go 60mph. Racer A takes a 10-minute pit-stop in the first part, Racer B takes a 10-minute pit-stop in the second part. Who wins the race? The answer is that they finish at the same time. You would answer that Racer B wins. It doesn't matter when you construct the buildings, your SCV has to spend 60 minerals no matter when you construct it. The racer has to take a 10-minute pit stop no matter where he takes it. Your logic is a classical fallacy. It is not the same as that question you provide at all. The reason is that when you build all four at once, the 60 mineral opportunity cost does not effect the completion time of the rax. When you build them one at a time, the opportunity cost does effect the completion time. And about the APM comment, it does not matter what your APM is, creating more complex macro for yourself is never a good thing. The more APM you have free due to efficient micro and macro, the more APM you have to use to do other little things that you wouldnt have done had you been busy doing some complex macro management (not that this is a good example). Anyways, you can build one at a time if you want. That is completely viable, just not optimal. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
On July 22 2010 18:03 Sabresandiego wrote: It is not the same as that question you provide at all. The reason is that when you build all four at once, the 60 mineral opportunity cost does not effect the completion time of the rax. When you build them one at a time, the opportunity cost does effect the completion time. The completion time of the rax doesn't matter. I'm not sure why you keep bringing that up. I'm talking about producing marines, not raxes. I'm 100% sure I'm correct on this one. Hopefully a fellow math nerd SC gamer can come in here and explain better than I because I'm getting tired and we're just going in circles at this point. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
It doesmakes sense to save up to 750 if ur goal is to get down 5 rax as early as possible. but that does not translate to having the most marines as early as possible, which is the real goal. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:36 Sabresandiego wrote: Saving up minerals is better, the reason being that you are maximizing the mining time of the workers who are building the rax. When you build them all at once what you are doing is trading a window of having only 1 rax for a stronger economy. the strategy is an all in timing push. why would u sacrifice early firepower for econ advantage? btw, there is no economic advantage in having scv's build later. u make up for it afterwards (while the barracks are training) like iEchoic said. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On July 22 2010 17:53 Sabresandiego wrote: This is not as good of a strategy for several reasons. First, all your rax are out of sync and you have to do roughly 5 times the amount of macro management to accomplish roughly the same task. Second, this is economically weaker due to the opportunity cost of SCV mining time when they are building rax. since when did apm and macro ever come in higher priority than efficiency? u SPEND apm and attention and mouse clicks in order to get more efficient output, in this case UNITS as early as possible. and it doesnt take much more apm at all. u hotkey all your rax in one number and press A A A A. u tell one scv to build a rax, and shift click minerals. not hard at all. if u have money, and you're not doing anything with it, you're wasting time. plopping down 5 rax at once is very different from saving up 900 900 for 9 mutas, or saving up 500 500 for a wave of warp ins b/c nothing is stopping u from making rax immediately. in the latter two cases, you can't do anything about it. you're waiting for warpin cooldown or ur waiting for your spire to finish. in the terran barracks case, there's nothing holding you back from buliding rax, and getting started on pumping marines asap. you instead choose not to get started when you're waiting for 750 minerals. 5 rax all at once is inefficient ESPEEEECIALLY for a timing push. | ||
|
Sabresandiego
United States227 Posts
On July 22 2010 18:17 waffling1 wrote: since when did apm and macro ever come in higher priority than efficiency? u SPEND apm and attention and mouse clicks in order to get more efficient output, in this case UNITS as early as possible. and it doesnt take much more apm at all. u hotkey all your rax in one number and press A A A A. u tell one scv to build a rax, and shift click minerals. not hard at all. if u have money, and you're not doing anything with it, you're wasting time. plopping down 5 rax at once is very different from saving up 900 900 for 9 mutas, or saving up 500 500 for a wave of warp ins b/c nothing is stopping u from making rax immediately. in the latter two cases, you can't do anything about it. you're waiting for warpin cooldown or ur waiting for your spire to finish. in the terran barracks case, there's nothing holding you back from buliding rax, and getting started on pumping marines asap. you instead choose not to get started when you're waiting for 750 minerals. 5 rax all at once is inefficient ESPEEEECIALLY for a timing push. All rax at once is best and Im not going to keep explaining why. If you don't understand the concept, you are probably one of those who also thinks bunkers are free. Timing is everything in this game. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On July 22 2010 18:32 Sabresandiego wrote: All rax at once is best and Im not going to keep explaining why. If you don't understand the concept, you are probably one of those who also thinks bunkers are free. Timing is everything in this game. but it isn't.. asap rax does not mean asap marines. i said "if u have money, and you're not doing anything with it, you're wasting time." i agree time is everything. not spending minerals to produce when u could have is wasting it. it's nice that you know opportunity cost. idk why u can't see that not spending money is opportunity cost as well. the pitstop example is best. anyways, im done here, im' not trying to argue with u. no way in hell im gonna save up 750 when theres nothing stopping me from spending it. | ||
|
whatthemate
Australia51 Posts
Practically speaking you have a much larger window of opportunity of attack if you place down barracks consecutively early asap and get more marines. If you attempt the float 750 minerals style you will have less marines and timing attack goes out the window because all it takes is just a sentry to force field their ramp or your ramp and its all over while protoss tech so insanely fast to colossi. Also in the mean time protoss could easily get out a second nexus and more gas and mass cannon > marine. scvs mine what less than say 50 minerals per minute because of diminishing returns. It's better to have less scvs on mineral line and use that scv to make rax because of diminishing returns. There are already dimishing returns as soon as your have more than 8 scvs on mineral line. So its better to make rax earlier and then return to mining. | ||
|
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On July 22 2010 19:21 whatthemate wrote: At first I was confused as to what Sabresandiego said, but now I understand what he theoretically suggested, but that doesn't change the fact that he is completely WRONG. Practically speaking you have a much larger window of opportunity of attack if you place down barracks consecutively early asap and get more marines. If you attempt the float 750 minerals style you will have less marines and timing attack goes out the window because all it takes is just a sentry to force field their ramp or your ramp and its all over while protoss tech so insanely fast to colossi. Also in the mean time protoss could easily get out a second nexus and more gas and mass cannon > marine. scvs mine what less than say 50 minerals per minute because of diminishing returns. It's better to have less scvs on mineral line and use that scv to make rax because of diminishing returns. There are already dimishing returns as soon as your have more than 8 scvs on mineral line. So its better to make rax earlier and then return to mining. if there are 16 scvs on minerals that have had time to adjust to each others mining cycles i cannot imagine that there are diminishing returns since they never interfere with other scv's mining. Other than that i fully agree, the waiting for 750 minerals is like the (double) extractor trick, feels kinda cool and effective, but is economically worse off. | ||
|
Snowfield
1289 Posts
 But i can't really see a huge difference between wait for 750 and make constant raxxes, i think there is no difference at all, except that it gives you a smaller gap where you are scout-ableSo given that you don't make marines when you finish your first raxxes (making it harder to save up for all 5) i think the timing will be roughly exactly the same But if you plop down raxes as you save, and make marines while you save, you arent going to get 5 raxxes any time soon But should that be the ultimate goal? or should it be to get the most amount of marines fastest | ||
|
ChickenLips
2912 Posts
On July 22 2010 19:48 Snowfield wrote: This needs testing But i can't really see a huge difference between wait for 750 and make constant raxxes, i think there is no difference at all, except that it gives you a smaller gap where you are scout-ableSo given that you don't make marines when you finish your first raxxes (making it harder to save up for all 5) i think the timing will be roughly exactly the same But if you plop down raxes as you save, and make marines while you save, you arent going to get 5 raxxes any time soon But should that be the ultimate goal? or should it be to get the most amount of marines fastest I think you don't understand, you're at 24 Marines faster AND you have 5 Raxes up and running. The advantage over saving stays the same. Also saving makes no logical sense whatsoever (except scouting but you have to delay to around 300 minerals AT MOST to deny the scouting probe, 750 is way over the top. | ||
| ||
