|
Russian Federation100 Posts
This may or not be new to some, but i was certainly surprised by doing a few tests with turrets in the mineral lines.
I have always thought that by placing the turret inside the mineral line would hurt economy, and it does, but not as much as i thought.
Usually i would put up turrets around the mineral lines, but this is not optimal, because they are generally harder to repair and easier to pick off. By placing the turrets right up against the CC you are forcing your opponent to draw in much closer, allowing your support units to help quicker
Also, awhile ago i wanted to see if moving your command center back a space or two would have any effect on full base saturation, and found out that it does not, but it does impact gathering rate once turrets are present.
In these two replays you will see the following
MINERAL MATH (game 1)
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/92894-1v1-terran-xelnaga-caverns
base gathering of 24 scv's (saturation) is 800-820/min (game time)
with the 2 turrets places against the minerals, and having 1 scv trapped, the gathering rate was 720-740
with the 2 turrets placed against the CC, gathering rate was constricted to 760-780
with the CC moved back 1 space, the gathering rate went back up to 800-820
moving the CC 2 spaces dropped my gathering to ~780
MINERAL MATH 2 (game 2)
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/92895-1v1-terran-zerg-xelnaga-caverns
in this game i used only 18 scv's, which is more typical of early game/light expansion type saturation
base gathering rate was 680-700
with the 2 turrets gathering rate dropped to around 650
moving the CC back 1 space proved to be a horrible idea, with the gathering rate dropping to 580
so conclusions:
1. if you're gonna place turrets in your mineral line, put them against the CC rather than against the minerals
2. 50 minerals per minute is your realistic cost of having efficient turret protection in an un-saturated base
3. if you are approaching saturation, turret placement will have no effect on your economy if you slide your CC 1 space outward
|
1. no one puts static defense against minerals... in conclusion it would be ideal to put turret/cannon on the outside of the min line, or off to the side....
2. sure
3. no one is going to move their cc back whilst mining, whats the cost of lifting and moving CC on a full saturation base?
|
Russian Federation100 Posts
on a map like delta quadrant i would argue that putting your turrets on the outside is not as effective
also by putting turrets behind the mineral lines means air units can attack the CC from the other end without penalty
|
On October 19 2010 14:10 Fork wrote:
on a map like delta quadrant i would argue that putting your turrets on the outside is not as effective
also by putting turrets behind the mineral lines means air units can attack the CC from the other end without penalty
without penalty? They're not doing guaranteed damage by hitting the CC instead of the workers, and scvs can just repair from the mineral line side (unless its void rays). Also, the other side of the CC is often closer to the inside of the base, from where troops will come to defend = the aerial harass units will get caught between army and turrets and have a harder time running away.
but behind the mineral line can be a problem as turrets can get sniped before you can start repairing them. Maybe i'll begin building one of them against the CC from now
|
+ Show Spoiler +On October 19 2010 13:53 s4m222 wrote:
1. no one puts static defense against minerals... in conclusion it would be ideal to put turret/cannon on the outside of the min line, or off to the side....
2. sure
3. no one is going to move their cc back whilst mining, whats the cost of lifting and moving CC on a full saturation base?
People do put static defenses in their mineral lines. it allows it to detect over more important areas as well as cover the areas closer to the mineral line with static defense. A cannon off to the side wouldn't cover the entire expanse of the minerals, as minerals in SC2 are pretty spaced out. Two structures would need to be placed for maximum detection/coverage.
There was also actually a thread by Aether about planting the CC back a space to increase miner efficiency. At one space out, each patch can support three workers without any of them bouncing around, thus maximizing worker efficiency. But no one really does this because it increases harass potential.
|
I see that putting turrets along the CC minimize mineral "loss", but wouldn't it make it harder for the SCVs to repair the turrets when under attack? Putting the turrets in the middle of the space between CC and minerals would let the SCVs surround the turrets if needed, making aerial harassment a lot harder. Of course I "lose" a bit more minerals this way, but could it be worthwhile anyway?
|
i think having 1 turret inside the mid field is best because you can repair it instantly. Its cost efficient way to ward off the 1st muta harass./
|
Can we get some screenshots of the turret placement?
|
|
|
Russian Federation100 Posts
actually that thread does not say that it has NO influence, just very little
my replays, just not you-tube embeded, clearly demonstrate an impact (ever so slight) on mineral production if you bothered to watch them while having the income tab open
|
Putting your cc centre 1 or 2 spaces back does not change mining rate at full saturation and off course its logical that the more space between centre and mineral line, the less the turret will influence the pathing
This is true but you forget something
You can even put your cc on the other side of the map and still have the same income with full saturation but the thing wich gets forgotten is that you need more suvs to get full saturation the further your command centre is away
|
They way I always saw it is- it takes 3 workers to saturate a mineral patch. The 3rd worker doesn't add near as much income as the first two.
This means there's some waiting time (as I'm sure you all know). So if you add a bit to the travel time of the workers, really your mostly only cutting out of the wait time.
I actually remember a test somebody did where a turret had no negitive effect on mining times when placed in the right spot. I don't know all the details though.
|
On October 19 2010 22:46 DamageInq wrote:
They way I always saw it is- it takes 3 workers to saturate a mineral patch. The 3rd worker doesn't add near as much income as the first two.
This means there's some waiting time (as I'm sure you all know). So if you add a bit to the travel time of the workers, really your mostly only cutting out of the wait time.
I actually remember a test somebody did where a turret had no negitive effect on mining times when placed in the right spot. I don't know all the details though.
This is the wrong way to think about things.
If you're running in to workers switching minerals due to saturation, its time to set up a new base, not move your current one further away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
