Putting an end to the Zerg Opening Economy debate. - Page 14

This is just a waste of time. Finding out the best economy does NOTHING except waste time especially since there are other limiters that will never allow you to use most of the builds that are better economy. For instance 14pool is generally standard to be safe because you are extremely likely to die if you are more greedy. You cant hardly go 15hatch now because of the counters.

For instance Fruitdealer goes (at least he did) 12 overlord with double extractor instead of 9 ovy because it is more flexible even though it is slightly less economical.

On November 30 2010 21:35 mlbrandow wrote:


I feel like I should quote my own post from 2 pages ago that no one responded to .

There's a big question on how to define the question, but a simple graph of these openings and total resource count would aid in both asking and answering the ultimate question here:

What is the most economical build until time T=t, the transition point to an actual build? (2-base saturation is about 6:30, so the longest this should go is ~6:30, not the arbitrarily defined 6 minutes.)

If at any time any ONE build has the most minerals at any point between 0 and 6 minutes, that build should be counted. Because eventually you transition beyond pool, queen and workers.... and at THAT point, whichever opener is in the lead is the one you need to use for your build.

If you make nothing until 6 minutes, then whichever has the most at 6 minutes is the most economical.

What's being done right now isn't practical whatsoever because no reasonable build (at least in one player) only makes workers for the first 6 minutes. And insofar as there is one, it is certainly very rarely executed.

If you drone until 3:30 then drop a warren, you need to know what's going to set you up for the most possible minerals until 3:30, and then THAT is the most economical build.


There is no ultimate opening because the terminal transition time varies depending on what you decide to make.

However, there IS an ultimate answer in that at any point in time T, there is some build X that is definitively most efficient.



THIS question is easily answerable with the current replay archive that is available. In other words, the data already collected should be enough to answer this question.

One graph with these builds and their total mineral count as a function of time would actually, definitively end this debate. And I think out to ~6:30 is sufficient (The time it takes to make 60 drones on 2 bases with 2 queens according to evo chamber.)





AAAAnyway... carry on.

On December 01 2010 11:59 mlbrandow wrote:
not a single person read this post, so I'm quoting it to hopefully provide some insight.

People keep introducing new constraints for an ultimate build which is unattainable, since you're going to advance beyond only drones after a certain point. What is the most economical build at 6:00 likely isn't at 3:30 or 4:00. There may be 5 or 6 builds that end up being most efficient over the course of 6 minutes if you stop measuring some time before that.

If we could just get a graph of the total minerals mined as a function of time up until 2-base saturation for the submitted builds, the debate would 100% be over. Because whenever you finish this opening with an actual build order, you'll know which opener to use to get you the most possible minerals up until that point.

Or we can continue to propose additional constraints to further limit the already very limited utility of the experiment underway. The data being collected is of high value, but what's being done with it isn't... yet.

On December 01 2010 12:38 Ender9 wrote:
Please do upload more reps roadrunner

On December 01 2010 12:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:


You complain about people not reading your post, but you didn't even bother to read the OP. There is a HUGE GRAPH right on the front with resources mined at various points in time... and guess what? As I have been saying all along, despite all the protests, the time is practically irrelevant to the results. The most economical build is the most economical, period. Obviously we aren't talking about pre-4:30 mark either.

Is the debate 100% over now?

On December 01 2010 12:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:
You complain about people not reading your post, but you didn't even bother to read the OP. There is a HUGE GRAPH right on the front with resources mined at various points in time... and guess what? As I have been saying all along, despite all the protests, the time is practically irrelevant to the results. The most economical build is the most economical, period. Obviously we aren't talking about pre-4:30 mark either.

Is the debate 100% over now?

On December 01 2010 13:27 Sanasante wrote:

I'm not sure why you are flaming that post. His point being pre 6:30 there are various builds that are superior at different points in time. At 6:30 or when Zerg is able to reach saturation that is considered the most economical build for at that time and all future times. He is 100% accurate and you cannot argue with that logic.

On December 01 2010 13:29 mlbrandow wrote:

First, that graph was only added a few hours ago... after my posts. (and thanks a lot OP for adding it! It's highly appreciated.)

Second, instead of countering the points I proposed with your own supporting argument, you simply say "it isn't, end of discussion"..

There is NO most economical build for all times less than 6 minutes because there is no one build that nets you the most minerals for all times before 6 minutes.

Whatever produces the most minerals at 6 minutes is only necessarily the most economical build at that time.

It does NOT (emphasis NOT) follow that whichever build is most efficient at 6 minutes also leads for every other time.


If the OP extends the original graph to the beginning, (i.e., before 40 supply), you will definitely see where those builds aren't consistently even. The same build isn't optimal over all time increments.


And if you want to find out what gets you the most minerals at 6 minutes because you think that's going to help you in your build... you're sorely mistaken. All that will tell you definitively is what works best for 6 minutes.

On December 01 2010 14:44 Zergneedsfood wrote:
This is all really good information, and I give you kudos for making such a big effort....

But the title of this thread is pretty misleading. I think you've done the opposite of putting an "end" to this debate. xD

'Tis all good though. As long as Zergs get something out of it.

On December 01 2010 14:21 Pwere wrote:
Wouldn't 11Pool before OV be better than 11OV -> Pool ? Then 14 Queen instead of 16.
That's the build I remember from back in the beta, and the build the evo chamber sometimes come up with.

On December 01 2010 15:06 roadrunner343 wrote:


From my experience with the build, no. The reason you have the overlord first is so that you are not wasting any larva. You use up your larva, the put down the pool, and when the pool completes, you will just be getting your third larva.

For all the doubters, I really do urge you to at least try this build. It feels very, very economic despite being an 11 pool. I am not saying this is the best build (Not saying it isn't either) but it does give you a ton of flexibility to get an FE, a lot of drones, or you can switch to lings if needed.

And to those saying you need lings and a scouting drone... of course you do. Just modify this build a tiny bit to your liking. Check out the one replay I posted so far. I droned hard until I absolutely had to get lings, and defended the attack. That's the beauty of this build, it is so flexible to do what the situation dictates. More replays coming soon.

On December 01 2010 14:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:


The data regarding the current best economical build is overwhelming and indisputable in my opinion. A build that leads every other tested at every time tested in minerals mined and ends with the highest drone count is clearly the leader.

Some people are simply trolls who would debate you for weeks if you told them that 2 + 2 = 4.