Putting an end to the Zerg Opening Economy debate.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 10:03 GMT

EDIT: This thread is a little outdated now. For a thread with better results, data, and graphs, try this link:
A Second Look at Zerg Openings

I have seen many threads on TL debating whether hatch first, 9 pool, 10 pool, 16 pool, etc. is the most economical. These threads have rarely reached a consensus or conclusion. Therefore:

The purpose of this thread is to scientifically conclude as best as possible which opening build order is the most economical for Zerg, and also to provide data to compare the relative strengths of one build to another.

The scientific method:
+ Show Spoiler +

1. Define the question
2. Gather information and resources (observe)
3. Form hypothesis
4. Perform experiment and collect data
5. Analyze data
6. Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis
7. Publish results
8. Retest

Please post your suggestion for the most economical zerg build order, being as thorough, detailed, and specific as possible (ie. maynarding, overlord timing, queen locations, etc.) to avoid confusion or disagreement regarding results. Any dispute regarding published results must supply a replay to counter. Each recommended build will be tested in a custom game, (not a tester/optimizer/etc.) by a diamond zerg player with solid APM playing at slow game speed. Every game will be run on the same location on the same map. The time will be stopped at intervals from 4:30 to 7:00 for data to be assessed. Posted results are taken from 6:00. ALL data will be assessed in making a determination, including:

Total minerals mined (Minerals spent + minerals unspent - necessary corrections for extractor trick)
Drone count
Overlord count
Mineral count
Units in production
Unspent larva
If relevant, queen energy.

The most weighted data will be total minerals mined and drone count. Units in production will be prorated based upon their level of completion. The percentage of minerals mined from one base compared to another will not be factored into the data, nor will minerals in transit.

What this thread is NOT for: Theorycrafting, claims without specific builds or replays, results from "optimizers" or testers, any strategy discussion including a build's safety, creep spread, hatch blocking, etc... We are only trying to deduce how to maximize economy to build a foundation for further discussion.

This area of the original post will be reserved for the current leading economy build order along with a replay for analysis:

Current Leader(s):
+ Show Spoiler +

See graph for results over time.

1st Place:
Submitted by Fenam, modified by jdseemoreglass
9 Overlord
14 Hatch
15 Pool
17 Overlord
17 Rally main to expo
19 Queen
21 Queen
26 Overlord
30 Overlord
30 Overlord
42 Rally main to main
43 Overlord
54 Overlord

2nd Place:
Submitted by Lomilar, modified by jdseemoreglass
10 Extractor trick
11 Overlord
11 Pool (finishes @ 2:38)
16 Queen
18 Hatch (finishes @ 4:44)
17 Overlord
18 Overlord
21 Queen
28 Overlord
28 Maynard 7 drones
36 Overlord

Sample diamond replays of this build in action:
+ Show Spoiler +

I played five games today on diamond ladder (2200+) using the 11pool and won 4/5 convincingly.

The first game illustrates how flexible this build is in reverting to an all-in attack. I scout my opponent opening hatch first, so that is exactly what I go for. Going hatch first or 14 pool would prevent this sort of pressure, and would potentially negate what is for me an easy victory.

Game two illustrates how well this build can hold up against a 4gate. This felt like the easiest 4gate I have ever held off because I had many units out quickly. At first I assumed my opponent was making a mistake, or was possibly going 3gate-expand, but the replay shows he did fairly well in keeping his resources low and drone count high.

After holding off two attacks I prepare for a mid-game timing attack before his late expansion can reap dividends.

In this game my opponent opened with a 7 roach rush into expansion. I thought at first the 18 hatch would be vulnerable to such a rush, but I held it off fairly well with only minor damage taken. If you look at the harvester count after the attack, you will see we are even despite my having lost several drones. If I had cut a couple drones I think I could have held off the even attack better.
From there it is a +1,+1 roach timing push ftw.

This is the game I lost. I did not anticipate how quickly the attack was coming. If I had just a few more seconds to complete the third spine crawler and roaches, I think this could have gone differently. Protoss does a good job of showing how to exploit a window of opportunity when at close positions.

In this final replay, I faced something that has become quite common since Foxer GSL... a 2rax marine-scv rush. Even with an 18 Hatch down, I survive. I have to pull drones to defend, but the lings get out just in time to clean up, and I counter attack. Here I made the unfortunate mistake of thinking his barracks had a clean wall-off, when it is clear to me now they didn't. I retreated from 1 marine when I could have won outright.

From here Terran expands and walls in his natural fairly well. I decide he has over-extended himself too much, and decide to punish with a baneling bust. Stream after stream of zerglings rush to the front, and he does well barely surviving again and again. Eventually, I kill off enough SCV's to justify the attack just as he bunkers himself in.

From there we switch to a macro game. His mid-game push is just not enough to hold off the swarm. Overall a pretty exciting match.

Link to new thread discussing this build as the potential new standard:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=173430

Discarded builds: (ordered by resources mined)
+ Show Spoiler +

Submitted by Douillos
9 Overlord
16 Hatch
15 Pool
15 Overlord
18 Queen
20 Queen

Results:
Drones: 40 + 25/17 = 41.47
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 4100 + 570 = 4670

Submitted by Phrencys
9 Overlord
14 Pool
16 Hatch
15 Queen
17 Overlord
20 Overlord
20 Queen
32 Overlord
40 Overlord

Results:
Drones: 40 + 31/17 = 41.82
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 4200 + 415 = 4615

Submitted by Nafaltar
9 Overlord
15 Pool
16 Hatch
16 Queen
18 Overlord
21 Queen

Results:
Drones: 40 + 10/17 = 40.58
Overlords: 6 + 14/25 = 6.56
Resources Mined: 4000 + 600 = 4600
Queen energy: 18 + 21 = 39

Submitted by McMasters
13 Pool (finishes @ 2:52)
16 Hatch (finishes @ 4:26)

Results:
Drones: 40 + 21/17 = 41.23
Overlords: 6
Minerals Mined: 4000 + 564 = 4564
Queen Energy: 14 + 18

Submitted by Saechiis
(Note: I will have to retest this build getting an earlier overlord to prevent the 6.5 overlord differential, but in the mean-time it loses on Resources Mined. Providing more detailed build orders will help prevent these problems.)
9 overlord
16 pool (finishes @ 3:12)
17 hatch (finishes @ 4:32)

Results:
Drones: 40.5
Overlords: 6.5
Resources Mined: 3800 + 715 = 4515
Queen energy: 12 + 9 = 21

Submitted by niloh

10 Double extractor trick
12 Hatch
11 Overlord
14 Pool

Results:
Drones: 39 + 3/17
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 3900 + 540 = 4440

Submitted by mindwarp
14 Pool (finishes @ 3:00)
15 Over
16 Queen
22 Hatch (finishes @ 5:30)

Results:
Drones: 34 + 8/17 = 34.47
Overlords: 6
Minerals Mined: 3600 + 715 = 4315
Queen energy: 19 + 50

Submitted by Shikyo
10 pool (finishes @ 2:16)
Double extractor trick
12 overlord
12 queen
18 overlord
18 hatch (finishes @ 4:57)
24 overlord
24 queen

Results:
Drones: 37.75
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 3750 + 543 = 4293
Queen energy: 20 + 35 = 55

If anyone would like to submit replays of their own to speed the process, then complete them on the southern position on the map Xel' Naga Caverns. To provide uniformity of results, rally your hatchery to the center mineral and do not manually reposition drones on closer patches.

EDIT: State of the Thread Report, and thoughts on the criteria of larvae vs minerals in assessing economy.
+ Show Spoiler +

There has been some debate regarding the criteria of larvae vs. minerals to determine the overall "economy" of a build. I thought perhaps it could be resolved by placing a constant conversion rate for one in relation to another. However, after considering my studies of economics, and the law of diminishing marginal utility, I recognize that the subjective value of a good relative to another is dependent upon the constraints the user is presently facing. To illustrate my point, consider the following thought-experiment constraints:

Suppose you have 1 larva and 50 minerals. Which would you prefer more of? Certainly you would prefer more minerals, as that would increase the utility or benefit derived from a single larva. Adding additional larvae would be worth nothing, since you do not have the resources to make use of them.
Now suppose you have 1 larva and 500 minerals. In this case, you would clearly prefer more larvae, since additional minerals would not be of much use given the larva constraint.

Therefore, the more valuable resource depends upon what is currently the greater constraint the player faces. So which is the greater constraint?
In an actual game, this answer would of course depend upon what the player was attempting to accomplish at that time: expanding, saturating, teching, attacking, defending... Up until now we have assumed our player's goal was simply to maximize long-run economy. My first instinct is to say that larvae are the current greater constraint, for we are beginning to stockpile resources faster than we can spend them on larvae. However, this problem could be assuaged by building additional hatcheries and queens, which could perhaps place the constraint on minerals.

The true constraint we have here is neither larvae nor minerals, it is mineral patches. If we had an infinite pool of mineral patches, clearly the 11 pool build would be the most efficient and economical. If we wanted a faster third or fourth hatchery, then we would prefer the 15 hatch build. I know from my own experience that it is very rare to want to take a third hatchery before the 6 minute mark in an actual game.

This is a difficult, if not impossible, question to answer. For now I think we have two very effective builds that serve to satisfy each constraint while still being generally efficient in the other. An earlier queen provides more long-term production capacity than a hatchery, and a hatchery provides greater resource gathering potential than a queen. Let us simply continue gathering data for now. That data, and not the theorycrafting, is after all the true value of this thread.

I am not content with the current pool of builds. We can't claim either of these builds are the leaders until we can test a greater variety of submissions. Go outside the box, if even to provide good evidence of what DOESN'T work, and why. I am still recieving requests to test more refined versions of previous builds. And we still haven't concluded the effects of delaying an exact build by supply timing.

For now I will be expanding the data sample timing to see if perhaps I underestimated the time required to overcome the initial investment of a second hatchery. If the results are significant, we can consider placing the data into a graph of some kind.

-jdseemoreglass

EDIT: After doing repeated tests and analyzing many replays, I am starting to think the X Hatch, X+1 Pool will naturally have a stronger foundation, due to the pool and queen being timed equally to completion. Also, I think an earlier hatch than 16 will allow us to optimally begin maynarding drones without experiencing any diminishing mining returns while on one base.

I will try to perfect the 14 Hatch 15 Pool build order and post my results soon. If my theory is correct, this will likely replace the 16 Hatch 15 Pool build as the leader in resources mined.

EDIT: Testing has been done on the leading builds at various time intervals. The douillos' build has been overcome by a refined 14 Hatch, 15 Pool build. Note there is some variation from the published results due to the additional overlords, and also some optimization in maynarding techniques, which actually smoothed the differences between builds significantly.

Shikyo

Finland33997 Posts

November 28 2010 10:07 GMT

EDIT: Meh not now

My BO is 10pool 10double ex 12ov 12queen -> 18ov 18hatch 24ov 24queen -> ov/drone

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 28 2010 10:13 GMT

.... obviously the best opening economy is 15/16/17/18 hatch. 14/15/16/17 pool.

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 28 2010 10:27 GMT

On November 28 2010 19:13 mikell wrote:
.... obviously the best opening economy is 15/16/17/18 hatch. 14/15/16/17 pool.

In a scientific environment comments such as these are meaningless, for every claim must be supported with theory, model or a set limitation on reality.

I've seen claims that 15 hatch 14 pool is worse than 14 pool 15 hatch. I will investigate.

the p00n

Netherlands615 Posts

November 28 2010 10:28 GMT

On November 28 2010 19:27 ayadew wrote:

Show nested quote +

In a scientific environment

dis is starcraft 2, bro

mansnicks

Latvia120 Posts

November 28 2010 10:29 GMT

If I give you a build order - then i suspect that it must have such things as scouting drone, 2-4 zerglings, 2-3 spine crawlers, right? Coz it would be stupid if this thread would end with:

+ Show Spoiler +

"and the winner is... this build order! you will have 2x more drones after the 10th minutes mark as any other... don't worry that you probably allready lost the game... at least you have most drones

And i have another question - why the 6minutes mark? o_O
----
ohh and btw. i have a feeling that 12/10 pool is more economical than 15 hatch. why? because you will get your queen faster => more larva => at the 6th minutes mark more drones. (don't ask me at what food to make expand

)

Edit: So say this newbie - what must be in a "The most economical BO" suggestion?
Just a precise build order? Thats all from our side?

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 28 2010 10:29 GMT

On November 28 2010 19:28 the p00n wrote:
dis is starcraft 2, bro

Not anymore ! :D

faylayen

Netherlands62 Posts

November 28 2010 10:33 GMT

Yay, a nice thread with good intentions already being smudged with shit comments...

If you do not like the scientific/serious attempt at solving this 'problem'. please just do not comment.

On a more on topic note. I'm looking forward to see the results and maybe contribute when I have a little more spare time on my hands.

Shrewmy

Australia199 Posts

November 28 2010 10:36 GMT

On November 28 2010 19:28 the p00n wrote:

Show nested quote +

dis is starcraft 2, bro

That's why science is awesome, you can do it even in video games.

PrideNeverDie

United States319 Posts

November 28 2010 10:40 GMT

#10

time: 4:57
minerals: 814
drones: 30

obviously not usable in a real game, but interesting implications about queens ... wonder if this can be an all-in zergling speed rush with the addition of 100 gas

+ Show Spoiler +

@0:00 M:50 G:0 L:3 S:6/10 BuildDrone
@0:15 Spawned: Larva+1
@0:17 Spawned: Drone+1
@0:17 M:54 G:0 L:3 S:7/10 BuildDrone
@0:27 M:51 G:0 L:2 S:8/10 BuildDrone
@0:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@0:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@0:38 M:55 G:0 L:2 S

/10 BuildDrone
@0:44 Spawned: Drone+1
@0:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@0:55 Spawned: Drone+1
@0:55 M:103 G:0 L:2 S:10/10 BuildOverlord
@1:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:06 M:77 G:0 L:2 S:10/10 ExtractorTrick
@1:06 M:52 G:0 L:2 S

/10 BuildDrone
@1:08 Spawned: Extractor Trick Finished, Drone Restored
@1:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:20 Spawned: Overlord+1
@1:20 M:116 G:0 L:2 S:11/18 BuildDrone
@1:20 M:66 G:0 L:1 S:12/18 BuildDrone
@1:23 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:37 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:37 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:55 M:303 G:0 L:2 S:13/18 BuildHatchery
@2:01 M:53 G:0 L:2 S:12/18 BuildDrone
@2:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:07 M:53 G:0 L:2 S:13/18 BuildDrone
@2:13 M:53 G:0 L:1 S:14/18 BuildDrone
@2:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:18 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:24 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:30 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:45 M:309 G:0 L:2 S:15/18 BuildHatchery
@2:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:55 M:106 G:0 L:3 S:14/18 BuildOverlord
@3:00 M:54 G:0 L:2 S:14/18 BuildDrone
@3:05 M:53 G:0 L:1 S:15/18 BuildDrone
@3:10 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:10 M:51 G:0 L:1 S:16/18 BuildDrone
@3:17 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:20 Spawned: Overlord+1
@3:22 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:25 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:25 M:152 G:0 L:1 S:17/26 BuildDrone
@3:27 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:35 Spawned: Hatchery+1
@3:40 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:40 M:271 G:0 L:2 S:18/28 BuildDrone
@3:40 M:221 G:0 L:1 S:19/28 BuildDrone
@3:42 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:55 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:55 M:351 G:0 L:2 S:20/28 BuildDrone
@3:55 M:301 G:0 L:1 S:21/28 BuildDrone
@3:57 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:57 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:10 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:10 M:451 G:0 L:2 S:22/28 BuildDrone
@4:10 M:401 G:0 L:1 S:23/28 BuildDrone
@4:12 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:12 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:25 Spawned: Hatchery+1
@4:25 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:25 M:574 G:0 L:3 S:24/30 BuildDrone
@4:25 M:524 G:0 L:2 S:25/30 BuildDrone
@4:25 M:474 G:0 L:1 S:26/30 BuildDrone
@4:27 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:27 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:40 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:40 M:661 G:0 L:3 S:27/30 BuildDrone
@4:40 M:611 G:0 L:2 S:28/30 BuildDrone
@4:40 M:561 G:0 L:1 S:29/30 BuildDrone
@4:42 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:42 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:42 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:55 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:57 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:57 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:57 Spawned: Drone+1

Azzur

Australia6255 Posts

November 28 2010 10:40 GMT

#11

On November 28 2010 19:13 mikell wrote:
.... obviously the best opening economy is 15/16/17/18 hatch. 14/15/16/17 pool.

Actually, I'm going to dispute this "obviously". There are some ppl claiming that pool first = more economy than hatch first.

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 28 2010 10:47 GMT

#12

@OP you forgot to specify the map we should use. Waiting for that
I suggest Xel'Naga or Lost Temple

Maicro

Australia7 Posts

November 28 2010 10:53 GMT

#13

Well technically one build cannot work best for all maps such as steppes of war for examples

HonIE

Ireland2 Posts

November 28 2010 11:06 GMT

#14

Is this test based on an assumption that no offensive units are required (no opponent contact either way) for the first 6 minutes?

mansnicks

Latvia120 Posts

November 28 2010 11:18 GMT

#15

I suppose that we just give the build orders and OP will test them....

blitzkrieger

United States512 Posts

November 28 2010 11:27 GMT

#16

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.

Dacendoran

United States825 Posts

November 28 2010 11:49 GMT

#17

People here should stop derailing this thread and posting about how it is completely pointless etc. And just not post if its so useless why can you be arsed to open the thread just to complain.

On topic:I Read somewhere that 15 pool 17 hatch was the most economic build order, though Im not sure of the subelties of the extractor trick or what all goes into that.

Gnax

Sweden490 Posts

November 28 2010 11:56 GMT

#18

On November 28 2010 20:27 blitzkrieger wrote:
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.

This thread is obviously not about the safest or most solid build. l2read.

It's good to know which build is most echonomical so you can try to get as close to that as possible without dying. That should be the goal for anyone who wants to play a macro game.

Markwerf

Netherlands3728 Posts

November 28 2010 13:44 GMT

#19

Ugh this has been debated a 100 times already.
The fact is that pool before hatch or hatch before pool are nearly identical economy wise. Pool first gives slightly more drones at first but also has the 2nd queen later which compensates for that again. Especially if the neccesity to build units are taken into account the builds are extremely close.
ALso this approach is completely useless as it doesnt even take gas usage into account for example.

There are only 2 differences between hatch first and pool first:
- hatch first has a much higher chance of getting the hatch down unblocked
- pool first has more variety, ie you have more time to adopt into 1 base play, you can be aggresive earlier and it's more difficult for your opponent to read what you are doing.

In the end I think it just boils down to 14 pool being more popular on 2 player maps (as the hatch gets blocked anyway there) and 14 hatch being more popular on 4 player maps (as many zerg's prefer getting the hatch down for sure instead of the options of a pool first).

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 28 2010 14:11 GMT

#20

1,7k diamond Z, 130 apm average

Hi,

first, very good initiative, and I hope people continue discarding these posts because "dis is sc, bro", so we can continue having an edge.

for my part, id would go for:

9 ovie
16 hatch
15 pool
15 over
18 queen
18 lings
19 lings
20 second queen at second hatch
move 4 drones and double gas at main

I will come back this afternoon with info to confirm this.

PS: why slow speed???

Ryukku

Singapore545 Posts

November 28 2010 14:42 GMT

#21

reduce the significance of human error and improve accuracy

Saechiis

Netherlands4989 Posts

November 28 2010 14:43 GMT

#22

9 Overlord, 16 pool, 17 hatch

Niguana

United States36 Posts

November 28 2010 14:48 GMT

#23

9 ovie
13 hatch
15 extractor
16 pool

Slakter

Sweden1947 Posts

November 28 2010 15:01 GMT

#24

My standard ZvT build on Shakuras:
16 hatch
15 pool
17 gas
16 overlord
17 queen

Nah

Poland50 Posts

November 28 2010 15:28 GMT

#25

Hi! I hope this scientfic approach will not only come up with a best economic build order but also some great conclusions that will allow us to understand starcraft 2 better (thus making us more flexible and capable to deviate from the best build orders in an intelligent manner)

McMasters

6 Posts

November 28 2010 15:31 GMT

#26

You are going about this all wrong, and you shouldn't BM this post because you are sad.

If you really wanted a Scientific Method, you need to place a limiter on your 'Zerg Economy' function, Otherwise, the best build is 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 200 pool.

You need to say something like "Assuming no harassment by either part until X:XX, which requires Y units to push/hold, what is the best build order?"

Zerg grows at X/sec speed on one hatch, no queen. A queen is -150 Minerals, + X^1.3. A Hatch is -300 Minerals, X(top)*2.

So the longer you wait to Hatch / Pool, the faster you grow after that. The (max) function for two bases at 6 minutes - a common 'start point' - is 13 Pool 16 Hatch (search this board), but during the transitions when -150 / -300 are not yet allayed by the exponential growth you are vulnerable, and those two 'times' are when the Terran 2 rax and the 4 gate hit, within 30 seconds.

So, they fail, by design. They are the perfect Rock, and T and P have made the perfect Paper.

So, you need to say when Paper hits, so you can spend your Minerals on Scissors.

Against Z, if you pool AFTER the other Z pools, but BEFORE (his first attack reaches you - spawning time for defense), you are ahead. too far after and you die, too far sooner and you win, within the tolerance but sooner and you are behind. Welcome to Starcraft.

Don't get all uppity because people aren't answering your essay question with multiple choice.

Here, you want to test? Ladder up and go 13 Pool 16 Hatch.

Write down the awesome number of drones and minerals you have at the MOMENT an MM/Ling/Stalker ball rolls your nat and gg's you like a bronze. Do this 10 times.

Your Scientific Result? Your Win Rate is 0-10. The rest doesn't matter. QED.

Viruuus

Germany451 Posts

November 28 2010 15:37 GMT

#27

I like the approach, ive been doing something like this on my own lately, but i dont have time to do it with ALL the builds, and ive stopped at 5 minutes which i think isnt that good.

One of my favorites was:
Double extractor trick
12 pool
11 overlord
drones as soon as overlord pops, queen as soon as pool pops
17Overlord
expand at 19 (send the 18ths drone out to be there)

falstag

United States55 Posts

November 28 2010 15:52 GMT

#28

Okay, you want to stop at the 6 min mark. Thats enough time for a expo and 2nd queen. I ran evo chamber and told it ot build 40 drones, 2 queens, and 2 bases in 6:00. It was able to complete those requirements at 5:49. 40 drones will fully saturate two mineral lines, but you will have no gas. my evo chamber claims that 16 hatch 18 pool is the way to do it. It leaves you supply blocked at 40/38, and leaves you with 1146 mins.
+ Show Spoiler +

/10 BuildOverlord
@0:55 M:53 G:0 L:2 S

/10 BuildDrone
@1:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:12 Spawned: Overlord+1
@1:12 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:12 M:106 G:0 L:2 S:10/18 BuildDrone
@1:12 M:56 G:0 L:1 S:11/18 BuildDrone
@1:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:19 M:53 G:0 L:1 S:12/18 BuildDrone
@1:29 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:29 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:32 M

5 G:0 L:1 S:13/18 BuildDrone
@1:36 Spawned: Drone+1
@1:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@1:47 M:177 G:0 L:1 S:14/18 BuildDrone
@1:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:02 M:270 G:0 L:1 S:15/18 BuildDrone
@2:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:10 M:300 G:0 L:0 S:16/18 BuildHatchery
@2:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:17 M:68 G:0 L:1 S:15/18 BuildDrone
@2:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:32 M:171 G:0 L:1 S:16/18 BuildOverlord
@2:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@2:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@2:47 M:234 G:0 L:1 S:16/18 BuildDrone
@2:57 Spawned: Overlord+1
@3:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:02 M:349 G:0 L:1 S:17/26 BuildDrone
@3:03 M:310 G:0 L:0 S:18/26 BuildHatchery
@3:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:17 M:163 G:0 L:1 S:17/26 BuildDrone
@3:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:25 M:202 G:0 L:0 S:18/26 BuildSpawningPool
@3:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:32 M:79 G:0 L:1 S:17/26 BuildDrone
@3:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@3:47 M:196 G:0 L:1 S:18/26 BuildDrone
@3:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@3:50 Spawned: Hatchery+1
@4:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:02 M:326 G:0 L:2 S:19/28 BuildDrone
@4:02 M:276 G:0 L:1 S:20/28 BuildDrone
@4:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:17 M:417 G:0 L:2 S:21/28 BuildOverlord
@4:17 M:317 G:0 L:1 S:21/28 BuildDrone
@4:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:30 Spawned: Spawning Pool+1
@4:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:32 M:479 G:0 L:2 S:22/28 BuildDrone
@4:32 M:429 G:0 L:1 S:23/28 BuildDrone
@4:32 M:379 G:0 L:0 S:24/28 BuildQueen
@4:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:42 Spawned: Overlord+1
@4:43 Spawned: Hatchery+1
@4:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@4:47 M:453 G:0 L:3 S:26/38 BuildDrone
@4:47 M:403 G:0 L:2 S:27/38 BuildQueen
@4:47 M:253 G:0 L:2 S:29/38 BuildDrone
@4:47 M:203 G:0 L:1 S:30/38 BuildDrone
@4:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@4:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:02 Spawned: Larva+1
@5:02 M:389 G:0 L:3 S:31/38 BuildDrone
@5:02 M:339 G:0 L:2 S:32/38 BuildDrone
@5:02 M:289 G:0 L:1 S:33/38 BuildDrone
@5:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:04 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:17 Spawned: Larva+1
@5:17 M:506 G:0 L:3 S:34/38 BuildDrone
@5:17 M:456 G:0 L:2 S:35/38 BuildDrone
@5:17 M:406 G:0 L:1 S:36/38 BuildDrone
@5:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:19 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:22 Spawned: Queen+1
@5:32 Spawned: Larva+1
@5:32 M:657 G:0 L:3 S:37/38 BuildDrone
@5:32 M:607 G:0 L:2 S:38/38 ExtractorTrick
@5:32 M:582 G:0 L:2 S:37/38 BuildDrone
@5:32 M:532 G:0 L:1 S:38/38 ExtractorTrick
@5:32 M:507 G:0 L:1 S:37/38 BuildDrone
@5:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:34 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:34 Spawned: Extractor Trick Finished, Drone Restored
@5:34 Spawned: Extractor Trick Finished, Drone Restored
@5:37 Spawned: Queen+1
@5:47 Spawned: Larva+1
@5:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:49 Spawned: Drone+1
@5:49 Spawned: Drone+1
-------Goal-------
Drones: 40
Queens: 2
Bases: 2
At time: 6:00
Minerals: 1146 Gas: 0 Supply: 40/38 Larva: 3
Drones: 36
Overlords: 4
Queens: 2
Bases: 1
Spawning Pools: 1
Sun Nov 28 09:45:54 CST 2010: 2111.146

Syro

Germany113 Posts

November 28 2010 16:01 GMT

#29

My Favourite is:

9 Ovi
16 Hatch
15 Pool
14 Gas

Bona Fide

United States70 Posts

November 28 2010 16:42 GMT

#30

I think FruitDealer does something like:

9 Overlord
10 Drone
10 Extractor-trick (11/10 supply now)
14 Hatch
15 Pool
14 Gas

I think the point of the 9OV+Extractor is just to keep larva count low, since you can get to 12 drones at the same time with or without Extractor trick, but with the trick you get #11 out faster.

VWXYZ

Denmark18 Posts

November 28 2010 17:08 GMT

#31

Great initiative :D! I'll definitely keep an eye on this thread as I've had a hard time playing really economicly.

I can't help much though ): I'm only gold, can't post replays.

butter

United States785 Posts

November 28 2010 17:30 GMT

#32

It might simplify your problem to make it a little more general. Instead of looking for the one unique best economy, since there are many variables (eg. number of minerals/larvae/drones/overlords/queens etc. as a function of time), consider the "non-dominated" builds which give some advantage in at least one metric.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 17:35 GMT

#33

Hi guys.

I regard to many of the comments, I want to clarify that this is simply to PROVIDE EVIDENCE which general order timing will yield best economy in the long run. (For example, 14 hatch 15 pool, 16 pool 15 hatch, etc...) There are already claims on this thread that build X will simply be the best without any evidence to support it. Supporting the theory with data it is what we are trying to accomplish here. It may not result in the strategically strongest opening, but it will at least provide a framework for further discussion regarding what is ideal and how closely to reach that ideal without being killed in the process.

Builds that end on 16 or so supply is not necessarily the precision I was looking for. I will still test them, but keep in mind that later overlord timing, maynarding, etc. are all very relevant to the results. Also, adding gas or an extractor that isn't canceled adds an additional and unnecessary factor to the equation.

If anyone would like to submit replays of their own to speed the process, then complete them on the southern position on the map Xel' Naga Caverns. To provide uniformity of results, rally your hatchery to the center mineral and do not manually reposition drones on closer patches.

I will begin testing later today.

mindwarp

United States30 Posts

November 28 2010 18:46 GMT

#34

I wish a mod would clean up the off topic posts. Most people are posting early hatch builds but i remember a post awhile back that claimed that standard gas pool builds were just as economical. So here it goes

14 gas @ 100 minerals
14 pool
15 ovie
16 queen
19 ling
20 ling
21 drone
22 hatch at nat

Looking forward to the results

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 18:59 GMT

#35

The premise of this thread is flawed -- that there is a "best" initial build. What will instead be found (as I have found many times in the past doing similar tests) is that there is a trade-off between larvae and minerals. The best initial build choice will vary between openings A mineral/gas hungry opening will work more efficiently if they choose an initial build that favors minerals, and other builds will want to sacrifice minerals/gas for larvae, so as to get either extra drones or extra units (or both).

In any case, I would like to suggest another condition: only two Hatcheries.

Yoshi Kirishima

United States10316 Posts

November 28 2010 19:12 GMT

#36

To help with the independent variables, I think you should also note that at the beginning on the bottom side of Xel' Naga, players are to not split their workers but also send them all to the center mineral patch (similar to how you noted they should rally all their workers there).

I'm a bit surprised at the 10 pool build, although it's 400 minerals behind you do have a lot more energy which you can use for faster creep spread if needed... it's like having an extra creep tumor vs 2 spine crawlers (defense wise). And the 10 pool gives them a good flexibility too, especially if the opponent 6 pools (10 pool gets lings out in time for 6 pool).

Great thread so far, good job guys.

QUESTION:

I remember there was another thread testing out the best economical Zerg opening, but it didn't test so far as this. Basically it was testing just the beginning, pitting openings like 1 extractor trick vs 9 overlord, vs 10 overlord, etc.

Does anyone know if they tested out 10 overlord, 10 extractor trick, and whether or not that is worse than 9 overlord? (in the long run, although information about how much or how long a benefit the 10 overlord 10 extractor trick lasts will be nice too).

Guerrilla705

United States16 Posts

November 28 2010 19:24 GMT

#37

I regard to many of the comments, I want to clarify that this is simply to PROVE which general order timing will yield best economy in the long run

ok that is a VERY vague statement. Like others have said, the best economic build is to never pool, you can't say that we are doing this build independant of other pressure, but we still need a spawning pool. If you are going to put in a spawning pool then what the other player is doing must be factored in, because Zerg is a reactionary race. We don't get to just start every game however we please, we must respond to what the opponent is doing.

Also, you discredit yourself as a scientist if you are saying this single experiment proves anything. Science never PROVES anything, only attempts to disprove.

If you want to make a scientific argument you need to recognize your uncontrolled variables, the problems with this experiment, and suggest ways to improve the experiment. It needs to be repeatable for others and they need to be able to do it better

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 19:33 GMT

#38

Also, it is relevant to note where in the larvae cycle the hatcheries are, as well as the spawn larvae. There's a big difference between having the next spawned larvae drop at 6:01 and 6:39!

IronInko

United States19 Posts

November 28 2010 19:51 GMT

#39

On November 29 2010 04:24 Guerrilla705 wrote:

Show nested quote +

ok that is a VERY vague statement. Like others have said, the best economic build is to never pool, you can't say that we are doing this build independant of other pressure, but we still need a spawning pool. If you are going to put in a spawning pool then what the other player is doing must be factored in, because Zerg is a reactionary race. We don't get to just start every game however we please, we must respond to what the opponent is doing.

Also, you discredit yourself as a scientist if you are saying this single experiment proves anything. Science never PROVES anything, only attempts to disprove.

If you want to make a scientific argument you need to recognize your uncontrolled variables, the problems with this experiment, and suggest ways to improve the experiment. It needs to be repeatable for others and they need to be able to do it better

I think your argument might be a bit flawed. You're saying that strictly hatcheries is the more economic opening, but you aren't backing it up at all. This post is to prove what the best opening is. The idea that never building a pool and expanding constantly is the best economic build is nothing more than an idea. The point of this experiment, as I read it, was to discover what the best possible economic opening was by testing them and getting conclusive results. You're argument is based around the idea that we don't need to test what the best economy build is, because constant expanding is obviously the best economy build. Considering how much you go on and on about how science works, you should recognize that the word "obviously" shouldn't be used and you should also recognize the importance of testing and repeatable results.

To give a different counter argument with more bearing on the game than the theoretical possibilities of pure macro zerg, every good zerg opener will quickly get both a pool and a hatchery. If we come up with what the best ideal economy is within those restrictions, we can then plan actual strategies around them. I just assumed those restrictions were in place when I read the OP and, while you obviously won't be able to use the ideal economy build every game, having one that is similar to real builds will help give a reference point for what would be best, if not safest.

Ugh, I don't know why, but I can't shake the feeling that both of those paragraphs and both of my points were worded grossly incoherently. Sorry if they were.

Jago

Finland390 Posts

November 28 2010 20:05 GMT

#40

On November 29 2010 04:24 Guerrilla705 wrote:

Show nested quote +

ok that is a VERY vague statement. Like others have said, the best economic build is to never pool

This is of course, not true. You need a pool to make queens to make larvae to make drones faster.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:15 GMT

#41

On November 29 2010 04:24 Guerrilla705 wrote:

Show nested quote +

Ok thanks for splitting hairs in regard to semantics.

If you honestly think a no pool build is more economical, maybe you should submit it for testing... but I doubt you would like the results.

Let's try to keep the trolling to a minimum here please.

ducis

Canada96 Posts

November 28 2010 20:19 GMT

#42

I think that you its worth noting that the ideal eco build, would obviously be unobtainable in a real game. Its a balancing act of risk and reward, there no point in seeing who can load the most on one side of the scale

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 20:21 GMT

#43

Anyways, here's an 11 pool FE build. In my test, whenever I sent a drone to minerals, I always sent it to the same patch (the fourth one, clockwise). When using drones to build things, I tried to take them from the middle, or rally them from eggs.

10 Extractor trick. (rallied an egg)
11 Spawning Pool
10 Overlord
10 Extractor trick
14 Queen (note: I didn't have to wait for minerals)
17 Hatchery (note: rallied the egg made after queen, and it arrived just in time)
17 Overlord
Use spawn larvae when queen pops (same time as overlord is started)
20 Queen
Use spawn larvae again when available (~25 supply), then send queen to expansion
26 Overlord
@160 minerals (about) send 6 drones to expansion, and set both rally points to expansion
Use spawn larva twice, when available
33 Overlord
36 Overlord
Use spawn larva twice, when available
44 Overlord
Reset main rally point to main

My results:
Supply = 49/60: 41 drones, 6 overlords, 2 queens, 2 drone eggs at 16/17, and 2 drone eggs at 1/17
Current minerals = 343
Both hatcheries have about 13 seconds before making a larva
Both hatcheries are at 30/40 in the spawn larva cycle

Edit: I can't figure out how you're counting drones or minerals. The above number for drones is what's actually out and mining at that second.

Edit2: I slacked a bit on spawn larvae, and didn't optimize my starting drones like encRoach did

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:26 GMT

#44

On November 29 2010 04:33 Hurkyl wrote:
Also, it is relevant to note where in the larvae cycle the hatcheries are, as well as the spawn larvae. There's a big difference between having the next spawned larvae drop at 6:01 and 6:39!

This is an important point that I'm glad someone mentioned...

However, I feel these numbers are less relevant toward overall economy than drone count (including production) and minerals mined. If two builds are very similar in these regards, then the "larva in production" data would also be factored in.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 20:33 GMT

#45

On November 29 2010 05:26 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

The problem with ignoring this data is that an inferior build would look better than a superior build if you sample just as the inferior build gets its benefit from spawn larvae -- this can be up to an 8 drone difference!

If you're looking at supply, for example, the current leader gets a lot of benefit from this effect since a spawn larva finishes just before 6:00, giving it a temporarily inflated supply count.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:35 GMT

#46

On November 29 2010 00:52 falstag wrote:
Okay, you want to stop at the 6 min mark. Thats enough time for a expo and 2nd queen. I ran evo chamber and told it ot build 40 drones, 2 queens, and 2 bases in 6:00. It was able to complete those requirements at 5:49. 40 drones will fully saturate two mineral lines, but you will have no gas. my evo chamber claims that 16 hatch 18 pool is the way to do it. It leaves you supply blocked at 40/38, and leaves you with 1146 mins.
+ Show Spoiler +

/10 BuildOverlord
@0:55 M:53 G:0 L:2 S

The fact that this build ends with 4 overlords and leaves you supply blocked pretty thoroughly discredits it as the most economical build. Try this with a longer time frame than 6 minutes and then provide the order for a more reasonable assessment.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:43 GMT

#47

On November 29 2010 05:33 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

Hurkyl wrote:
Edit: I can't figure out how you're counting drones or minerals. The above number for drones is what's actually out and mining at that second.

Note that I am not basing my data on supply or simple current drone count. I stated that all units in production will be prorated based upon their degree of completion. For example, if a drone is half done, it counts as .5 drones. If two drones are half done, it counts as 1 drone.

This would prevent the recently created drones from adding 8 supply, because the drones would only be about 5% complete and therefore would only equate to (5% * 8) = 40% of a drone.

Hope this clarifies things.

FlayedOne

Poland47 Posts

November 28 2010 20:46 GMT

#48

On November 29 2010 05:33 Hurkyl wrote:
The problem with ignoring this data is that an inferior build would look better than a superior build if you sample just as the inferior build gets its benefit from spawn larvae -- this can be up to an 8 drone difference!

If you're looking at supply, for example, the current leader gets a lot of benefit from this effect since a spawn larva finishes just before 6:00, giving it a temporarily inflated supply count.

This is of course true and a big problem.

A question - do you actually know how the replay 'spendings'(spent? I have a different language version) tab works? In the winners replay it shows 4100 total resources spent, which is bollocks, since if you count them yourself you get 3400 minerals spent. -> the tab shouldn't be trusted unless someone knows whats up.

Also, the 'leader' has 40 drones at 6 minutes, not 41.

-edit- Ahhh, I see. It counts the starting hatch+6xdrones+overlord in. Anyway, it's important to state whether someone uses the tab values or real ones.

Voros

United States222 Posts

November 28 2010 20:49 GMT

#49

Using this methodology rather than optimizers (what you dismiss as "theorycrafting") introduces human error into the equation. Your initiative to employ the scientific method is admirable, but the reality is that reductionistic approaches (i.e., the genetic algorithm that has become so popular these days) are going to be far more accurate in this very limited sphere than any method whose results depend on perfectly consistent performance from both the player as well as the network. Since neither is possible, you are in effect introducing hundreds, if not thousands, of variables in each game that you play.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:56 GMT

#50

On November 29 2010 05:46 FlayedOne wrote:

Show nested quote +

Note that at replay start, the game counts the initial starting units at 750 minerals spent. Perhaps I should subtract this from the totals, but it will be the same for every game and will only change the relative ratios of one spending to another instead of total spending.

Also note I included drones in production to reach 41 in the replay provided.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 20:58 GMT

#51

On November 29 2010 05:43 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

This still works out to a little over a 4 drone error. While the difference between 20/40 and 0/40 is 2 larvae, you count it as 4 (because the 20/40 just had its 4 drones pop)

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 20:59 GMT

#52

On November 29 2010 05:49 Voros wrote:
Using this methodology rather than optimizers (what you dismiss as "theorycrafting") introduces human error into the equation. Your initiative to employ the scientific method is admirable, but the reality is that reductionistic approaches (i.e., the genetic algorithm that has become so popular these days) are going to be far more accurate in this very limited sphere than any method whose results depend on perfectly consistent performance from both the player as well as the network. Since neither is possible, you are in effect introducing hundreds, if not thousands, of variables in each game that you play.

If the builds were close enough that only tens of minerals or fractions of a drone were the determining factor then I would agree with you. So far this has not been the case and the differences between builds have been wide enough to exclude the very minor effects of human error or variability.

Also, if anyone is able to beat the results I have provided on any build, I will be willing to provide them in place of my own.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 21:05 GMT

#53

I'm surprised the classic 14 hatch 15 pool isn't in the list of things to compare against. My results are:

39 drones
one done at 14/17
one drone at 0/17
one drone at 11/17
6 overlords
One hatchery at 40/40 in the spawn cycle
One hatchery at 0/40 in the spawn cycle, with 4 larvae in the air
764 minerals

Incidentally, anti-optimizing (rallying all drones to the same patch that's a bad one) drones feels like it makes a big difference. The build didn't flow as smoothly as when you do normal things with your drones.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 28 2010 21:27 GMT

#54

Overpool, no extractor trick
Queen at 15
Overlord at 17
Hatch at 18
Queen at 20
After second queen spit, go to second hatch
Overlord at 23
Overlord at 30
At this point, I maynarded 5 drones over, probably should have been more.
Overlord at 32
Overlord at 35

At 6minutes
43 drones
6 overlords
2 queens
345 in the bank
2 drones in production, just started, putting me at 49/52 supply.

Edit: The retarded thing is, this is almost the 7RR opening, making drones/expansion instead of double-OL and roach warren around 18. Tricky!

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 21:44 GMT

#55

12 pool FE:

10 Trick
11 Overlord
12 Spawning Pool
16 Queen, send drone to expo
18 Hatchery
18 Overlord
18 Trick
19 Queen
23 Overlord
(After spawn larvae, set rally to expo and transfer 4 drones. Also send second queen to expo)
29 Overlord
36 Overlord
39 Reset main rally point to main

This gets
41 drones
4 drone eggs at 8/17
1 drone egg at 6/17
1 drone egg at 3/17
6 overlords
Spawn cycles are at 27/40 and 9/40 (but I was slacking)
498 minerals in the bank

(I really should put another overlord in there, but it's not relevant by 6:00)

donut boi

United States154 Posts

November 28 2010 21:54 GMT

#56

isnt this conclusion a bit obvious...? hatch first will mean better eco ofc... unless u dont use the extra larva for drones

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 22:00 GMT

#57

On November 29 2010 06:54 donut boi wrote:
isnt this conclusion a bit obvious...?

Only if you forget about queens.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 22:13 GMT

#58

On November 29 2010 05:58 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

This still works out to a little over a 4 drone error. While the difference between 20/40 and 0/40 is 2 larvae, you count it as 4 (because the 20/40 just had its 4 drones pop)

Also, even ignoring spawn larvae, your method of counting drones has the same flaw. After 17 seconds, there is no difference between a drone egg that has just started, and a drone egg that's almost hatched. With your reckoning, your drone count at 6:00 does not directly correlate to your drone count at 6:17!

Said differently, the only difference between a 1/17 drone egg and a 16/17 drone egg is a flat 5-10 minerals, depending on how saturated your base is. After 17 seconds, both are harvesting minerals at the same rate.

The difference between 1 drone and 0 drones is that the former harvests an extra 20-40 minerals every minute, depending on saturation.

The two situations are very different, yet your method of counting production by drones + fractional drones treats them as roughly the same.

In nearly every circumstance, I would rather have two drone eggs at 1/17 than 1 drone and no egg.

This is why I have always measured production via supply and position in the larva cycles.

Nerski

United States1095 Posts

November 28 2010 22:14 GMT

#59

While I think the purpose of this makes sense, and is clearly defined. Whether the most economical or not, is there any weight to whether the build is viable in game? IE in TvZ 16 hatch 15 pool sounds awfullly awfully risky.

so my question would be have you actually game tested doing this?

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 22:32 GMT

#60

On November 29 2010 07:13 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

In nearly every circumstance, I would rather have two drone eggs at 1/17 than 1 drone and no egg.

This is why I have always measured production via supply and position in the larva cycles.

The difference between a 1/17 drone and a 16/17 drone is clearly 15 SECONDS. Those have to be weighted more when measuring the prorated value of a drone in production.

And clearly 1 finished drone is superior to two drones at 1/17... I have no idea what you are trying to get at here. Please stop filling up the thread with this convoluted logic, as it is not even relevant to any stated build or situation yet encountered.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 28 2010 23:09 GMT

#61

On November 29 2010 07:32 jdseemoreglass wrote:The difference between a 1/17 drone and a 16/17 drone is clearly 15 SECONDS. Those have to be weighted more when measuring the prorated value of a drone in production.

Yes, the difference has to be weighted. I'm saying you're weighting it wrong. (well, actually I'm saying you're measuring the wrong thing, and possibly compensating for that inaccurately)

For this to have any relevance to real builds, the point of the drone count has to be a measure of how many units the build is producing. The relevant comparison statistic has to be something like "On average, build X has produced Y more units than build Z."

The statistic you're actually computing is loosely correlated, but I assert it introduces a lot of unnecessary error into the comparison. The hypothetical examples I mentioned were just to demonstrate that your ad hoc statistic measures a lot of irrelevant things.

PackAttack

United States80 Posts

November 28 2010 23:18 GMT

#62

Reading this makes me cringe. You cannot PROVE anything using the scientific method, only DISPROVE. You are really just gathering data to support which theory you believe is correct.

Boysarn

Sweden77 Posts

November 28 2010 23:20 GMT

#63

On November 29 2010 08:18 PackAttack wrote:
Reading this makes me cringe. You cannot PROVE anything using the scientific method, only DISPROVE. You are really just gathering data to support which theory you believe is correct.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 23:27 GMT

#64

I have removed the word PROVE from my OP... perhaps now you can submit a comment that is actually helpful or constructive to the discussion?

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 28 2010 23:40 GMT

#65

On November 29 2010 08:09 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

But resources mined is just as relevant, if not more, than current number of drones. Take a look at the top two builds right now. The hatch first build results in fewer drones and overlords, but because the drones mined longer on two bases, it has higher total resources mined. The overpool build may produce more units, but so much early gathering is sacrificed by staying on 10 drones for so long and also oversaturating the main before the expansion finishes.

You cannot just use a simple measure of supply and larva... That is why so many threads before this one failed to produce meaningful results.

SpadeT

United States2 Posts

November 28 2010 23:54 GMT

#66

I've been wanting to do something like this myself for quite a while, but haven't had the time. So, props to you for taking this on. Can I suggest, though, that you add two additional pieces of data to your results:

The time the spawning pool finishes.
The time the expansion hatchery finishes.

While I understand that you want to test solely based on economy, in large part because that is something you can look at rather objectively, the reality is that your ability to hold off early rushes also matters. What these times will show is how much early "safety" a build is giving up for its benefit in economy. Both the spawning pool and the hatchery finishing make you much safer. Being able to say" I am sacrificing 20 seconds on my hatchery to gain 2 drones" is much more useful than just "I get 2 extra drones, but who knows how unsafe I am." While I'm not saying optimize based on these points, I think we do want to know what the tradeoffs are.

Igakusei

United States610 Posts

November 28 2010 23:55 GMT

#67

On the philosophy of science and SC2:
Take your silly "science can only disprove" logic back to biology and physics where things are actually complicated. You can't objectively "prove" what the "best" openings are because you can't predict where the metagame will be next week/month/etc, but given specific opponent openings it's perfectly possible to prove what the most economical responses are, which seems to be what this thread is about. Give me a break.

On topic:
Most of these threads/posts seem to be assuming that an opponent doesn't exist, and for the most part don't seem to be factoring in larvae/zergling timings, and what your opponent is likely to do based on your opening. For example if I FE vs protoss he might cannon or zealot rush me, if he doesn't FE himself. If I do a 13 pool expand, he's likely to do something totally different. Removing all that context might make for an interesting mathematical debate, but seems pretty useless as far as strategy goes.

Subversion

South Africa3627 Posts

November 29 2010 00:04 GMT

#68

i wish people would stop nitpicking. the point of this is to look for the best opening, while OBVIOUSLY balancing risk. noone is going to actually suggest 22hatch 21pool or something.

stop fucking splitting hairs and arguing over semantics, its not constructive. YOU KNOW what the OP is asking you, so stop expecting him to babysit you and hold your hand and draw pictures. People who are trying to act intelligent in this thread are actually sounding like idiots, i.e. like you know nothing about the game/don't understand the OP.

please stop trolling by trying to sound clever.

Yilar

Denmark90 Posts

November 29 2010 00:06 GMT

#69

This actually showed me something a lot more interesting. When you play at slower speeds you can actually manage your drones perfectly (getting that 100% mining uptime). I ended up with 1100 minerals (a lot more than the current "optimal" build) and 40 drones with 2 larva ready and 8 injected larva almost done with just a regular 14 hatch 15 pool build on my 1st try.

Guerrilla705

United States16 Posts

November 29 2010 00:20 GMT

#70

My whole point is this: You cannot say at the beginning "omg dont worry about other player just build" then later on write "no you idiot we have to do builds that are part of the metagame".

You are telling me first of all to not worry about what the other player is doing because we need to "work on just general BOs", and then you say that we cant do 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch on every expansion on the map then just drone because its impractical vs another player? Be consistant. Either care about the other player's actions or dont. I submit that the most economic build order if you give an unlimited time is 16 hatch 16 hatch 16 hatch across the map then make spawning pool and a queen for each hatch then drone to 200. Thats the most economic build. Of course its not practical, but you said we arent worrying about the other player. If we ARE worrying about the other player, than the entire thread is moot, because there isn't one general build you can do vs everything! you dont even factor in scouting workers! I bet 13 pool 16 hatch loses to a 6 pool rush or a 2 gate proxy.

So dont tell me that 16 hatch across the map is unrealistic because it doesnt take into account the other player, then turn around and tell me that we only want to focus on "general builds" or "sound builds". You are just telling me I can only pick builds from the metagame, and test those.

On the secondary note of the science thing, I'm just saying if you want to do this in the scientific method, which I took to be OP's original intent, then we must realize there is no way all of these builds account for anything. Without factoring in scouting workers, for instance, every one of these builds is useless to use every time, because while you may be sitting on 42 drones and a queen at 6 minutes, a 6 pool rush kills you way before that.

You are pretty much asking "Hey what's the best chess opening?"

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 00:21 GMT

#71

On November 29 2010 08:54 SpadeT wrote:
I've been wanting to do something like this myself for quite a while, but haven't had the time. So, props to you for taking this on. Can I suggest, though, that you add two additional pieces of data to your results:

The time the spawning pool finishes.
The time the expansion hatchery finishes.

While I understand that you want to test solely based on economy, in large part because that is something you can look at rather objectively, the reality is that your ability to hold off early rushes also matters. What these times will show is how much early "safety" a build is giving up for its benefit in economy. Both the spawning pool and the hatchery finishing make you much safer. Being able to say" I am sacrificing 20 seconds on my hatchery to gain 2 drones" is much more useful than just "I get 2 extra drones, but who knows how unsafe I am." While I'm not saying optimize based on these points, I think we do want to know what the tradeoffs are.

Sure, I will add this data in the OP to help people make informed decisions.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 00:25 GMT

#72

On November 29 2010 09:20 Guerrilla705 wrote:
My whole point is this: You cannot say at the beginning "omg dont worry about other player just build" then later on write "no you idiot we have to do builds that are part of the metagame".

You are telling me first of all to not worry about what the other player is doing because we need to "work on just general BOs", and then you say that we cant do 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch 6 hatch on every expansion on the map then just drone because its impractical vs another player? Be consistant. Either care about the other player's actions or dont. I submit that the most economic build order if you give an unlimited time is 16 hatch 16 hatch 16 hatch across the map then make spawning pool and a queen for each hatch then drone to 200. Thats the most economic build. Of course its not practical, but you said we arent worrying about the other player. If we ARE worrying about the other player, than the entire thread is moot, because there isn't one general build you can do vs everything! you dont even factor in scouting workers! I bet 13 pool 16 hatch loses to a 6 pool rush or a 2 gate proxy.

So dont tell me that 16 hatch across the map is unrealistic because it doesnt take into account the other player, then turn around and tell me that we only want to focus on "general builds" or "sound builds". You are just telling me I can only pick builds from the metagame, and test those.

On the secondary note of the science thing, I'm just saying if you want to do this in the scientific method, which I took to be OP's original intent, then we must realize there is no way all of these builds account for anything. Without factoring in scouting workers, for instance, every one of these builds is useless to use every time, because while you may be sitting on 42 drones and a queen at 6 minutes, a 6 pool rush kills you way before that.

You are pretty much asking "Hey what's the best chess opening?"

I am simply trying to find the most efficient build possible. That certainly seems like relevant data, even if the specific build is not viable to the game. If you really want me to try 6 hatch 6 hatch 6hatch I will, but I can almost guarantee you will reach the 6 minute mark with almost nothing to show for it. You are making an assumption about what is most economical and we are trying to break open the assumptions here.

Guerrilla705

United States16 Posts

November 29 2010 00:37 GMT

#73

If we are trying to break open assumptions why does it have to be 6 minutes? You cant claim "X is completely and utterly proven to be the best BO because it has the most drones and minerals at 6 minutes". 6 minutes is a completely useless number unless you also test each one of these at 0:00-5:59, and 6:01-9999

9. The whole experiment is just based on one arbitrary time, we need to accept the implications of this. It means: yes, this may prove the best economic strategy is you are playing a 6 minute game. It does NOT prove anything about the most economic strategy as a whole.

To my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, you are trying to find a balance for the most economic opening while still being able to do this practically and not have to worry about unit production in non-cheese games. I submit that to figure this out we need to find a very specific time for when the majority of openings finish, and I bet its not a pretty number like 6 minutes. To do what you are trying to do will take a much more in depth sequence of experiments than is presented here. In the true manner of science you need to make an experiment that is only testing 1 very speicfic thing and can come up with evidence of a conclusion one way or another. So you need to refine this experiment to somehow take into account all final times of all builds as well as all possible opponents builds. Or, you need to specify that this experiment is NOT proving what is the most economic opening for zerg; rather, this experiment reasonably demonstrates to us which build produces the most drones and minerals at the 6 minute mark.

tl:dr, refine your variables, its just too broad of an experiment to do.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 00:51 GMT

#74

On November 29 2010 09:37 Guerrilla705 wrote:

Show nested quote +

You are wrong in suggesting that 6 minutes is an arbitrary or unreliable standard. I could explain that long-term economy is necessarily predicated upon consistently maximizing short-term economy, beyond the point at which necessary investments are overcome by their payoff, due to the exponential-multiplier effects which an economy naturally assumes, but until I provide evidence to support it, it is a meaningless assertion.

Please, just submit whatever build you want and see how it stands up to the current leaders and stop wasting time theorycrafting, as I specifically requested in the OP that it be excluded from the discussion. If you want to extend your build to a later time, go ahead, but if I can produce a build from those listed here which surpasses it then I hope you would put the discussion to a rest.

McMasters

6 Posts

November 29 2010 00:59 GMT

#75

OP has been shown time and again that they need to add more variables to their question if they want an answer: either a time constraint or a min+drone+hatch+queen restraint.

They aren't giving it.

Therefore, this is a troll thread - it is here to get Zerg players to spend time and energy on it when they could be elsewhere talking about something constructive, and generating ill-will when their hard work in attempting to get enough information to actually help is met with derision.

I'm done here, and my fellow Z, you should be too.

Guerrilla705

United States16 Posts

November 29 2010 01:06 GMT

#76

ty mcmasters. this experiment is far too broad to work. I respect your attempts OP, but please make it more confined next time please.

And I'm not arguing that short term economy is important, I am arguing that claiming short term economy = 6:00 is a rash assumption. Why not 5:46?

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 29 2010 01:14 GMT

#77

I can't believe people are complaining about increasing the amount of data we have available to draw conclusions.

How else do you think we'll ever work it out? Of course it's not perfect. Welcome to real science, where you go and test things and it's messy but you do your best and it seems to work. Bashing the investigation for being complicated is fruitless! Of course it's complicated. But we've solved harder things in science.

The timing question is in interesting one, and it makes for a nice followup investigation - can an opening that appears sub-optimal at 5.46 become superior at 6.00? Exploring that would help us interpret this data a lot more.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 01:16 GMT

#78

On November 29 2010 10:06 Guerrilla705 wrote:
ty mcmasters. this experiment is far too broad to work. I respect your attempts OP, but please make it more confined next time please.

And I'm not arguing that short term economy is important, I am arguing that claiming short term economy = 6:00 is a rash assumption. Why not 5:46?

So I need to make it more confined but 6:00 is too confined? lol...
Go back and choose 5:45 if you like... I bet you will find the some builds come out in the same exact order. The variables aren't defined? I clearly stated that minerals mined and drone count were the primary variables being tested. I think that is what 99% of us mean when we talk about economy. The methods here are sound. If you have a problem with the constraints, then put out a build that tests the constraints and by all means we will analyze it. Otherwise put the whining to a rest or get off the thread.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 29 2010 01:20 GMT

#79

I may try and do the 13 pool, 16 hatch build myself, or at least look at the replay. EvoChamber has predicted this to be very solid, so I'm surprised it's not a top contender.

Galaxy77

Hong Kong256 Posts

November 29 2010 01:29 GMT

#80

I haven't read all the comments but I think you should allow for the fact people will try and block hatch, so once your pool spawns you should dedicate at least 1 larva for lings. Take it into consideration and see how it affects going like 10 pool compared to 15 hatch

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 01:29 GMT

#81

On November 29 2010 10:14 Dragar wrote:
I can't believe people are complaining about increasing the amount of data we have available to draw conclusions.

How else do you think we'll ever work it out? Of course it's not perfect. Welcome to real science, where you go and test things and it's messy but you do your best and it seems to work. Bashing the investigation for being complicated is fruitless! Of course it's complicated. But we've solved harder things in science.

The timing question is in interesting one, and it makes for a nice followup investigation - can an opening that appears sub-optimal at 5.46 become superior at 6.00? Exploring that would help us interpret this data a lot more.

Every investment we make takes a period of time to pay for itself and from that point on all future benefits reach a stable and consistent equilibrium. I think the 6 minute mark is more than enough time for a queen or hatch to reap dividends in relation to it's initial investment. Anything far beyond the 6 minute mark will begin to yield irrelevant results due to the diminishing returns of over-saturation and will require a third base to analyze. Hopefully we can just ignore those who are trolling this thread to death and we can move forward.

Despite the trolling, I think we have some very helpful data to draw conclusions from already. For example, while the worker count is mixed in regard to hatch-first vs. pool-first, it is clear that hatch first yields more mined minerals due to the efficiency of lower saturation. However, we can see that an overpool and 15 hatch build yields surprisingly similar results, which has some interesting implications for the game. Also, note that the overpool build greatly outperformed the simple 10pool builds.

I am interested to see if anyone can improve the build provided by lomilar so that perhaps we can begin to envision a solid yet flexible overpool opening for Zerg.

Nafaltar

Germany302 Posts

November 29 2010 01:32 GMT

#82

Well 6 minutes for a pure econ 2 base build works decently because at that point in time you will easily be over saturated so it pretty much covers any later point in time as well (when disregarding taking a third and not taking gas). Of course most of the time you will want a drone scout, as well as gas and at least 2-4 lings but finding a hand full of contenders comes before you increase the complexity of the experiment.

That said:

9 Overlord
15 Pool (finishes @ 2:59)
16 hatch (finishes @ 4:14)
16 Queen (finishes @3:49)
18 Overlord
21 Queen (finishes @4:40)

Results:
Drones: 41 + 8/17 = 41.5
Overlords: 6 +14/25 ~ 6.5
Resources Mined: 4000 + 820 = 4820
Queen Energy: 23 + 20 = 43
Remaining Larva: 0 (4 in air from 23 energy queen inject/other inject @36/40)

pwadoc

271 Posts

November 29 2010 01:39 GMT

#83

This is a really great thread, thanks for making it.

Guerrilla705

United States16 Posts

November 29 2010 01:40 GMT

#84

As I said in a previous post, no this is fine. You have put constraints awesome. Now label it correctly, you are by no means proving what is the most economic build for zerg. You are reasonably determining what build order willl provide the most drones and minerals at the 6 minute mark. Thats been my prolem this whole time, that youre experiment and what you are claiming to do are totally separate, and that makes both look bad. If you fix the OP to say what you are truly analyzing, I would be content.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 29 2010 01:48 GMT

#85

On November 29 2010 08:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

I never said to use just supply + larva. I said that production capacity should be measured via supply + larva. I agree that both production capacity and income are important.

I assert that so long as you measure production capacity in the way you have, this thread will also produce meaningless results.

(I also think ignoring the effect of building zerglings or getting gas is a problem, but at the moment I'm not pushing that)

Antisocialmunky

United States5912 Posts

November 29 2010 01:59 GMT

#86

Okay...

What happens to these builds vs early pressure. I think the 16 hatch/pool just dies to early marine pressure since it can be barely defended by a hatch first. The 10 pool is inflated. You would not have more drones because you would need to pop a few sets of zerglings to actually be safe.

You should account for ~6-12 sets of lings on each build as a worse case for mass marine timings.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 02:02 GMT

#87

On November 29 2010 10:32 Nafaltar wrote:
Well 6 minutes for a pure econ 2 base build works decently because at that point in time you will easily be over saturated so it pretty much covers any later point in time as well (when disregarding taking a third and not taking gas). Of course most of the time you will want a drone scout, as well as gas and at least 2-4 lings but finding a hand full of contenders comes before you increase the complexity of the experiment.

That said:

9 Overlord
15 Pool (finishes @ 2:59)
16 hatch (finishes @ 4:14)
16 Queen (finishes @3:49)
18 Overlord
21 Queen (finishes @4:40)

Results:
Drones: 41 + 8/17 = 41.5
Overlords: 6 +14/25 ~ 6.5
Resources Mined: 4000 + 820 = 4820
Queen Energy: 23 + 20 = 43
Remaining Larva: 0 (4 in air from 23 energy queen inject/other inject @36/40)

Please do not rally drones to specific patches, simply let the hatch rally do it's work. This has inflated your resource results to a point I have not been able to reproduce.

Your method of placing 2 workers on each patch and then rallying all subsequent drones to the natural seems to be very effective though. I will post the results I obtained using this and also update previous builds using the same technique.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 29 2010 02:44 GMT

#88

Certainly will be interesting to see, if oversaturation can be mitigated in this way, the effect on pool first.

Overpool is surprisingly powerful; it may be a nice ZvZ opener for some maps given that.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 29 2010 02:51 GMT

#89

Yeah, my build was not refined at all. I think that was my second try doing it, where I actually succeeded in not supply-blocking myself. So, now that is out of the way, here is _why_ I think it is good.

An overpool means that you get 10 drones as fast as possible, before having to spend money on an overlord, giving a minor boost to initial economy.

Utilizing the time waiting for the overlord to build a spawning pool seems very natural, and you end up dropping the spawning pool at 3 larva for about 7 wasted seconds of larva production while you get 50 minerals again, but zero inefficiently used minerals. Because you are not at any time waiting to fit a spawning pool into the build (you are instead waiting for the OL to pop and spawning pool at the same time), waiting for the spawning pool is basically removed as a factor to the build. Plus, you can start a queen at 15, which is _so_ good.

I then spend all my larva on drones until I run out of larva, and can save minerals based on the full reset of the larva spawn timer. (15 seconds to get enough minerals to build a queen)

I then spend all my larva again, and not sure if this overlord should be at 17 or 18, but that is the point where I need to start production of the hatch. I wait for hatch, then spend all my larva, then wait for queen, and right about that time, the first spawn off the hatch pops. By this time, I really need to have all my core stuff built, and need to spend larva on overlords and drones only, because now I have to keep up with larva pops on 1 queen at first, and 2 queens soon after.

At that point, just maynard and drone and OL until 6 minutes.

----

Core principles:

Build buildings only at zero larva.
If you are going to wait for a building, max your supply (if reasonable) and then overlord, then wait for the minerals for a building. This maximizes drone mining time, because you have to wait anyway.
Building drones early is good. Building queens early is really good, because they are cheaper and better than a hatchery.

pwadoc

271 Posts

November 29 2010 03:04 GMT

#90

On November 29 2010 10:40 Guerrilla705 wrote:
As I said in a previous post, no this is fine. You have put constraints awesome. Now label it correctly, you are by no means proving what is the most economic build for zerg. You are reasonably determining what build order willl provide the most drones and minerals at the 6 minute mark. Thats been my prolem this whole time, that youre experiment and what you are claiming to do are totally separate, and that makes both look bad. If you fix the OP to say what you are truly analyzing, I would be content.

The "build order" part of the game only lasts for about the first 8 minutes. 6 minutes is a reasonable cutoff The question is very clear: what build order results in the strongest early game economy. Drop the semantic wrangling, it's pointless.

Dromar

United States2145 Posts

November 29 2010 03:43 GMT

#91

On November 29 2010 10:39 pwadoc wrote:
This is a really great thread, thanks for making it.

I agree, this is a great idea.

I look forward to reading the results.

ChiknAdobo

United States208 Posts

November 29 2010 06:21 GMT

#92

I think Lomilar's build looks really great, but I was wondering if someone could refine it a bit more. If someone could figure out when to send a scouting drone (if needed), when to make the first zergling to scout the front, and when it would be good to get gas I think this would be a very solid economic build that can hold off early pressure or cheese.

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 29 2010 09:48 GMT

#93

Wow cant believe the best contender is an overpool build!

Fuck this was a good initiative, teaches loads about the game!

gg to the OP !

aka_star

United Kingdom1546 Posts

November 29 2010 09:57 GMT

#94

hmm this build Doesn't stop a meka rax >_< and not sure how well it'd contend with the proxy cannon. So from my point of view this data basically is for those that are risky players or playing against the AI...

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 29 2010 10:25 GMT

#95

On November 29 2010 18:57 aka_star wrote:
hmm this build Doesn't stop a meka rax >_< and not sure how well it'd contend with the proxy cannon. So from my point of view this data basically is for those that are risky players or playing against the AI...

The goal wasnt to find the safest or the riskiest build, or the fastest pool or the fastest ling speed. It's to see the outright most economical build.

OFF TOPIC:
And yeah you can get away with it, a lot of toss go 15 nexus now, but against terran I admit the MAKA rax is qujite popular, and hellion haraass is a pain in the ass! but against a 1 rax expo or (when people eventually start doing it) something like a 15 CC, this is totally viable! Map and positions taken into accouht, ofc

Bair

United States698 Posts

November 29 2010 15:48 GMT

#96

After work I will get a replay of my build order for you op, but basically it is zelniq's zvz order.

Double extractor trick 12 hatch 11 pool 10 ovie. From there my queen timing isn't down but I will play with it and get back to you.

Hammurabio

152 Posts

November 29 2010 16:13 GMT

#97

OP, thanks for the thread. I understand what you are trying to do. Forget the haters.

Xanbatou

United States805 Posts

November 29 2010 16:52 GMT

#98

I am surprised nobody has said anything about the runner-up build:

10 Overlord
10 Pool (finishes @ 2:30)
15 Queen
17 Overlord
18 Hatch (finishes @ 4:55)
20 Queen
23 Overlord
30 Overlord
10 Overlord
10 Pool (finishes @ 2:30)
15 Queen
17 Overlord
18 Hatch (finishes @ 4:55)
20 Queen
23 Overlord
30 Overlord
Maynard Drones
32 Overlord
35 Overlord
Maynard Drones
32 Overlord
35 Overlord

Has this been a standard build for a while now? If it has, I have been really out of the loop. As the second most economical build, this is incredibly flexible, which makes this a big deal. If you scout some fast expanding shenanigans, instead of pumping drones, you can just pump zerglings. Doesn't anyone else have anything to say about this?

Chill

Calgary25972 Posts

November 29 2010 16:59 GMT

#99

I've very happy this thread exists. I've felt helpless not knowing the ideal Zerg FE build.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 17:02 GMT

#100

On November 30 2010 01:52 Xanbatou wrote:
I am surprised nobody has said anything about the runner-up build:

10 Overlord
10 Pool (finishes @ 2:30)
15 Queen
17 Overlord
18 Hatch (finishes @ 4:55)
20 Queen
23 Overlord
30 Overlord
10 Overlord
10 Pool (finishes @ 2:30)
15 Queen
17 Overlord
18 Hatch (finishes @ 4:55)
20 Queen
23 Overlord
30 Overlord
Maynard Drones
32 Overlord
35 Overlord

Has this been a standard build for a while now? If it has, I have been really out of the loop. As the second most economical build, this is incredibly flexible, which makes this a big deal. If you scout some fast expanding shenanigans, instead of pumping drones, you can just pump zerglings. Doesn't anyone else have anything to say about this?

Lomilar claimed this was a variation of the 7RR without the roaches... Unfortunately the longer mining time at ten drones has put it fairly low in the resources mined category relative to all the other builds. Also the overlords seem to be timed for pumping roaches instead of drones at half the supply.

I tried some minor adjustments to the build but haven't come up with anything substantial. Hopefully someone will produce something soon, because I really like the idea of an economical and still extremely flexible build. Once someone can raise the resources mined count higher, I think the added drone and perhaps overlord would make up the remaining difference.

MoreFaSho

United States1427 Posts

November 29 2010 17:10 GMT

#101

On November 30 2010 01:59 Chill wrote:
I've very happy this thread exists. I've felt helpless not knowing the ideal Zerg FE build.

Chill, sarcasm is not allowed on the internets.

Xanbatou

United States805 Posts

November 29 2010 17:10 GMT

#102

Lomilar claimed this was a variation of the 7RR without the roaches... Unfortunately the longer mining time at ten drones has put it fairly low in the resources mined category relative to all the other builds. Also the overlords are clearly timed for pumping roaches instead of drones at half the supply.

I tried some minor adjustments to the build but haven't come up with anything substantial. Hopefully someone will produce something soon, because I really like the idea of an economical and still extremely flexible build. Once someone can raise the resources mined count higher, I think the added drone and perhaps overlord would make up the remaining difference.

First, I'm not sure why that build was copied twice. My bad.

Secondly, if that's true why is it runner-up? I was really hoping for that to be as good as the OP was making it sound, but if what you say is true, that is a damn shame.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 17:21 GMT

#103

On November 30 2010 01:59 Chill wrote:
I've very happy this thread exists. I've felt helpless not knowing the ideal Zerg FE build.

This thread is providing data to compare many builds to eachother in a meaningful way, and not only FE builds. I think this thread has put to rest many misconceptions and confusions being propagated in other threads where the only criteria being used was "first to 50 drones" or some such nonsense. Also, recognizing the potential power of an overpool build is a plus I think.

VWXYZ

Denmark18 Posts

November 29 2010 17:29 GMT

#104

This is great :D Sometimes I want the most economic opening I possibly can. Some of my friends aren't all that great, and if I see them fast expand, I know I will be safe for at least 6 minutes. I might actually try to do one of these builds some day :b just as listed here. Just to see what happens in an actual game.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 17:42 GMT

#105

On November 30 2010 02:10 Xanbatou wrote:

Show nested quote +

I placed this runner-up because it is the current leading build in both drone count and overlords, and I feel that some adjustments could be made to make it's resource count comparable to most other builds submitted, in the range of 4550 or so.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 29 2010 21:22 GMT

#106

I'm trying to determine why 'my' build (sarcasm) mineral count is not nearly as high, and here are my current thoughts:

The 10 overpool seems fine. I kinda wish I could spend one more larva, but at that point we are mineral-capped, not larva capped.

The queen goes down right after the pool pops at 15. That seems fine as well. We have 50 minerals by the time the next larva comes up.

The hatchery timing I wish could be a little earlier, but we risk having 3 larva sitting around. Maybe change OL at 17 and hatch at 18 to an hatchover at 17. This will get the hatch up faster, and we still have one supply to wait for the OL. We sit on 3 larva for a bit here. Overhatch seems better, with maybe a drone inbetween.

At that point, spending all the larva seems to be the priority, but since our hatch went down earlier we need our second queen. I think a 20 timing should remain okay. If we do the earlier hatch, the first queen doesn't quite have enough energy (assuming we are perfect) to spit on the second hatch when it pops up. The 20 timing remains accurate.

At that point, I am not sure of how to time the overlords and drone and spawn larva pops... so... going to try this. Similar, but slightly worse results. I maynarded more drones over, but ended with 290 minerals/42 drones.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 21:43 GMT

#107

I have taken the liberty of adding a build order from another thread which is being claimed as more economical than any hatch-first build, adjusted of course by removing the extractor and creep. The test results have been posted, and here is a direct link to the OP.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=172107&currentpage=8#142

On November 30 2010 01:51 Phrencys wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/35o22a5


9 Overlord
14 Spawning Pool
16 Hatchery (send @200 mineral) > +5 (10 sec)
15 Queen > Spawn Larvae[auto]
17 Overlord
18 Extractor > +3 (2 sec)
20 Overlord
20 Queen > Creep Tumor
32 Overlord
40 Overlord
48 Overlord
56 Overlord
7:00 Checkpoint

Edit: This said I have to agree with the OP's conclusion: I've yet to find a hatch first BO that can match the economy of the above BO. This is all theorycraft assuming no block though, an assertion that can very often go wrong in the real world.

Dominator1370

United States111 Posts

November 29 2010 22:28 GMT

#108

I find it strange that you are invoking the scientific method but haven't bothered to consider the repeatability of your results. There are, inevitably, a number of small timings that could have a slight impact on your results, but since the difference between a number of your "contenders" is a only couple percentage points, it may be worth it to re-run your experiments a few times. One data point is hardly conclusive.

I'm also confused about Overlord timings in the builds you have listed. Some are very specific about them, and others less so. Variation in Overlord timing could certainly create small variations in results. It could certainly be the case that one of your sub-optimal builds, with variation in undefined Overlord timing, could pull ahead.

Gnorme

Canada5 Posts

November 29 2010 23:00 GMT

#109

9 Overlord
12 Pool
15 Overlord
18 Queen
21 Hatch
22 Overlord
30 Queen

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 23:07 GMT

#110

On November 30 2010 07:28 Dominator1370 wrote:
I find it strange that you are invoking the scientific method but haven't bothered to consider the repeatability of your results. There are, inevitably, a number of small timings that could have a slight impact on your results, but since the difference between a number of your "contenders" is a only couple percentage points, it may be worth it to re-run your experiments a few times. One data point is hardly conclusive.

I'm also confused about Overlord timings in the builds you have listed. Some are very specific about them, and others less so. Variation in Overlord timing could certainly create small variations in results. It could certainly be the case that one of your sub-optimal builds, with variation in undefined Overlord timing, could pull ahead.

Your point about the overlord timing is absolutely correct. I have been asking for submissions that are very specific, but most have not been, and therefore I have to make assumptions that might be inefficient in the process of testing. If you think one of the builds previously tested could be refined, by all means submit your own. I can't really perfect every variation of every build order myself, which is why this needs to be a collaborative endeavor.

Regarding your other point: All of the builds have been tested at least twice with the leading result submitted. I myself have been testing the top two builds in order to limit error and also test variations.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 29 2010 23:15 GMT

#111

I am pleased to announce after numerous tests and variations I have come up with an improved version of the Lomilar build. The exact order, with the results and a replay have been posted to the OP.

However, now I face a slight dilemma that I am seeking consensus on. Douillos' build is ahead in regards to total minerals mined, but Lomilar's build is ahead in regards to drone count. In order to decide the leading build, we must come up with a method of comparing the relative worth of drones to minerals.

I have been thinking of valuing a drone as it's original cost + the number of minerals it could mine within the 17 seconds it requires to produce a new one. However, this may be a flawed method. Please give me input regarding this issue so we can reach a conclusion.

pwadoc

271 Posts

November 29 2010 23:29 GMT

#112

I think in terms of economic analysis we've got a pretty good set of build statistics. Both of the winning builds provide a key situational advantage. The 10 overpool build allows for a lot of early game flexibility. I've been having a lot of success with it just because I'm not locked into either an economy or aggression build. The flexibility alone make this build worth the ~300 mineral you lose vs. the 16 hatch. However, the extra minerals mined in the 16 hatch build is just about enough to drop a third hatch. If you're opponent early expands, you could use that money to take a third, but my impulse would be to build an in-base third and use the money and fast base saturation to prepare for a particularly nasty timing attack. If you can get away with a 16 hatch and fight off early pressure, 3 hatcheries off two bases can make for some really scary aggression in the early-midgame.

Fenam

6 Posts

November 30 2010 00:37 GMT

#113

Just playing around with the sc2calc build order calculator I came up with 14 Hatch 15 Pool being the best (beating out both later hatch firsts and all the pool firsts I tried. The calculator has a few flaws, like splitting drones evenly between hatcheries but not accounting for the travel time from where they're produced to when they go to the second hatchery. I think it still gives a strong outline though.

It turns out overlord timing can be pretty important, and can have a sizable impact on the end result. That's something that will have to be fine tuned with these builds. I played around with it and I feel like I have it set pretty good.

Another thing I liked about this build is that queens are synced up almost perfectly (3 seconds apart)

You should try testing this one in game and see how it works out.

9 Overlord
14 Hatchery (send @200 mineral) > +2 (10 sec)
15 Spawning Pool
17 Overlord
19 Queen > Spawn Larvae[auto]
21 Queen > Spawn Larvae[auto]
26 Overlord
30 Overlord
42 Overlord
52 Overlord
60 Overlord
6:00 Checkpoint
7:00 Checkpoint

http://tinyurl.com/37jhkhw

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 00:44 GMT

#114

On November 30 2010 09:37 Fenam wrote:
Just playing around with the sc2calc build order calculator I came up with 14 Hatch 15 Pool being the best (beating out both later hatch firsts and all the pool firsts I tried. The calculator has a few flaws, like splitting drones evenly between hatcheries but not accounting for the travel time from where they're produced to when they go to the second hatchery. I think it still gives a strong outline though.

It turns out overlord timing can be pretty important, and can have a sizable impact on the end result. That's something that will have to be fine tuned with these builds. I played around with it and I feel like I have it set pretty good.

Another thing I liked about this build is that queens are synced up almost perfectly (3 seconds apart)

You should try testing this one in game and see how it works out.

Show nested quote +

http://tinyurl.com/37jhkhw

Ok thanks... I've been meaning to test one of these builds recommended by these optimizers/calculators/testers...

One other question I have though: Do these programs value each drone equally in regard to mining, or do they adjust for the diminishing marginal value relative to the increasing marginal saturation of a base? This seems like a very complicated calculation and I suspect none of them take this into account. This difference though has been the difference between resources mined on many of the builds I have tested that are pool-first.

Fenam

6 Posts

November 30 2010 00:53 GMT

#115

I think they have slightly different mineral calculations, but they do account for diminishing returns when you put 3 drones on a mineral patch. I'm not sure how the other apps work, but this one values each drone at .7 minerals per second and the third as .3 minerals per second on each patch. It spreads the drones out evenly across each base to maximize the income.

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 01:00 GMT

#116

On November 30 2010 09:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

Yes they do account for it, at least EvolutionChamber does. 2 drones per patch is optimal (nearly), after that, there are diminishing returns, and you're better off having your drones at another base.

BnK

United States538 Posts

November 30 2010 01:08 GMT

#117

two ov's in a row for Lomilar's build?

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 01:35 GMT

#118

My attempts at a 10 pool 18 hatch in a ladder game.

My feelings during the game is that, its good.. I love it, I had so much money.. I just felt like I could continuosly produce units.. I like it.. it feels smooth.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 01:45 GMT

#119

On November 30 2010 10:08 BnK wrote:
two ov's in a row for Lomilar's build?

Yes... If you notice, the first overlord is built at 17/18 supply. There is a window of opportunity while supply capped to build a second overlord with exactly 1 larva and 100 minerals. The supply from this additional overlord gets used up quickly, since the simultaneous creation of 4 drones + a queen uses 6 supply instantly. Without the addition of this second overlord you would find yourself quickly supply capped again.

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 01:49 GMT

#120

I think it should be noted that the pool first builds generally provide more larvae, while hatch first builds provide more minerals mined. Knowing this, it seems logical that if you are doing ling based play (high larvae) then a pool first build would be optimal as larvae is the limiting factor in this strategy, while a roach based strategy may benefit more from fewer larvae and more minerals mined, thus making hatch first play more optimal.

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 01:57 GMT

#121

defining the optimal build is unfortunately not so easy, as what is most "economical" depends on what strategy you are doing. An optimal build would have a perfect balance between mineral income and available larvae such that, whatever unit you happen to be building, you have enough larvae to spend all your money, but not too much larvae such that you have extra, as that would indicate possibly a queen or hatchery was built too early. Optimal builds will depend on what strategy you are going, and how early you tech etc..

BnK

United States538 Posts

November 30 2010 02:09 GMT

#122

I'd like to see the result of 14 hatch 15 pool. It's very strong economical build

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 02:14 GMT

#123

Show nested quote +

http://tinyurl.com/37jhkhw

The results from this test have slightly higher resource count, but too few drones to qualify. The overlord timing of 42 seems off, as some time was spent supply capped at 44/44... This is a problem I think with some of these programs... They maximize one aspect of the economy at a specific time, often at the expense of another. If you would like me to test a different overlord timing, please suggest one.

However, creating the overlord earlier would of course result in a later drone, therefore reducing the slight mining edge. It seems many of these Hatch X Pool X +1 builds are very similar. I am interested in testing how similar, and if perhaps an earlier hatch than any presently suggested would yield similar economy. This would help satisfy those who think hatch first is presently too risky, much less 16 hatch...

Dakaru

Netherlands59 Posts

November 30 2010 02:40 GMT

#124

I went playing arround a little (as I dont play zerg as main) and I got these results after a couple of tries:

+ Show Spoiler +

9 overlord
14 pool (finishes @ 2:56)
16 hatch (finishes @ 4:20)
15 queen (larva inject on main then move to natural)
18 overlord
extractor trick
22 queen (right after first finishes)
24 overlord
32 overlord
35 overlord

Drones: 41 + 15/17 = 41.88
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 4050 + 784 = 4834
Queen Energy: 21 + 24 = 45
Remaining Larva: 3

might be possible to get better results as I'm sure I've made a few small mistakes (as I don't play zerg) aswell as slightly oversaturating my main

ps: didn't micro my drones just waypoint to one patch on each hatch

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 02:58 GMT

#125

On November 30 2010 11:40 Dakaru wrote:
I went playing arround a little (as I dont play zerg as main) and I got these results after a couple of tries:

+ Show Spoiler +

I can't seem to reproduce these results... If you could provide a replay of them I would appreciate it. My last test was
Drones: 40 + 37/17 = 42.17
Resources: 4000 + 610 = 4610

These results are close to the Phrencys build results which is similar.
The last replay that had resources in the 4800 range was rallying drones to individual patches, so perhaps that accounts for the discrepancy?

Sanasante

United States321 Posts

November 30 2010 03:00 GMT

#126

"I have been thinking of valuing a drone as it's original cost + the number of minerals it could mine within the 17 seconds it requires to produce one. However, this may be a flawed method. Please give me input regarding this issue so we can reach a conclusion."

It depends. The depending factors are based upon time and saturation points. If you extend the length of the build then clearly one would conclude that 43 drones is superior to 40, however this is all relative to saturation point. There are 8 mineral nodes typically per expansion. At 16 drones per the expansion the minerals are saturated. At 24 drones the minerals are fully saturated. The difference in income between 16 and 24 gives serious diminishing returns.

These trials must then also account for the number of drones per expansion to make sure that the trials were conducted properly. If they were not aka one expansion had more drones than the other the trials will result in incomparable results.

The difficulty also lies in possible transfer (Maynarding) time between expansions.

Conclusion: You can value the drone at its fair value (50 minerals) and include opportunity cost (the amount of minerals possibly mined in the time to produce the drone), however you are missing a few things.

- Time it takes to produce the difference in drones. If one build has 40 and another has 43 then the difference needs to include the larva spawn times. One drone may mine for 30 seconds the second drone can mine for 15 and the third has just spawned and has not provided any addition income.

-Diminishing returns from the difference in workers. Because of the high saturation points (Past 36) there are serious diminishing returns per drone of minerals mined. These must be accounted for.

-Location and travel distance of drone. If the new drone produced has to move from the main to the expansion due to the main being fully saturated then this cost of travel time must be included along with the diminishing returns from that expansion.

-Map. Not all maps have the same travel distance from the main to the expansion. Therefore all trials must be conduced on the same map.

Drenova

United States2 Posts

November 30 2010 03:06 GMT

#127

For Lomilar's method, you don't have to do the same Overlord timings as the 7RR, you can probably postpone that 18 Overlord safely to 25 for more Drones faster.

Dakaru

Netherlands59 Posts

November 30 2010 03:13 GMT

#128

I did another try in which I have to admit I did rally a few drones to individual patches at the start, I'll try again tomorrow without and provide a replay then too (it's late over here im off to bed)

results:
Drones: 42 + 24/17 = 43.41
Overlords: 6
Resources Mined: 4200 + 545 = 4745
Queen Energy: 21 + 25 = 46
Remaining Larva: 0

+ Show Spoiler +

9 overlord
14 pool
16 hatch
15 queen
17 overlord
22 queen
24 overlord
32 overlord
35 overlord

ps: the main difference with phrency's build is 22 queen instead of 20 and 24 overlord instead of 20

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 30 2010 03:22 GMT

#129

On November 28 2010 19:13 mikell wrote:
.... obviously the best opening economy is 15/16/17/18 hatch. 14/15/16/17 pool.

as i said in the third post.

note after reading other threads, the only real difference between hatch first and pool first is flexibility. earlier queens make up for the difference in larvae production.

seriously.

why are you spending any time at all discussing this?

economic openers lose to cheese. there are certain maps where you must play a certain way to obtain a 'safe' opener, unless you have completely perfect scouting you can discard all of these builds as inconclusive as there is no scientific way to take into account when and where you are being attacked, unless you are maphacking.

protoss and terran react with early agression when you fast expand.

i gaurentee something will make you react to that agression before 6 minutes.

thus your entire experiment is pointless.

larvae WILL be spent on something other than drones before 6 minutes, drones can be spent on spine crawlers, overlords may even be lost and you may end up supply capped.

please, just stop. your 'number crunching' and 'comparing minerals mined' is in my eyes useless compared to the MUCH MORE USEFUL work put into EVOLUTION CHAMBER as you literally say to it "I WANT THIS AT THIS TIME" and it will tell you how to do it. optimally. if you want 44 drones at 6 minutes it will do it for you. if you want a hatchery at 16 as a checkpoint, it will do it for you. if you want zerglings at 6 minutes as well, it'll tell you when the optimal time is to build those zerglings without being supply capped.

it is also obvious that there will be certain points where it is more economically beneficial to extractor trick and build that overlord 1 larvae later. just stop your bickering. half of these posts are by the OP. and i really don't think that such a question needs any thought beyond "hmm shakuras plateau, i think i want an economic build, i'll just build my hatchery at 16. "

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 03:30 GMT

#130

On November 30 2010 12:22 mikell wrote:i really don't think that such a question needs any thought beyond "hmm shakuras plateau, i think i want an economic build, i'll just build my hatchery at 16. "

Is 16 really better than 14? That's a question that needs answered, rather than just assumed.

What if I want the most larvae out of my opening rather than the most minerals? The right way to do that needs to be answered, rather than just assumed. The conventional wisdom on this question is way off-base anyways.

While I agree that this thread is doing things poorly, this sort of theorycrafting really is useful when done right.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 03:31 GMT

#131

I'm sure we'll discuss all that complicated stuff, like making zerglings, later, likely in another thread. For now, it would be nice to have some facts to frame the forthcoming discussion around.

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 03:32 GMT

#132

Trying so hard not to flame your ass right now..

On a brighter note, I just used 10 overpool 18 hatch against a terran, quad extractors at once and went mass burrow roaches.. holy shit, I never knew they were so powerful.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 03:34 GMT

#133

On November 30 2010 12:22 mikell wrote:

Show nested quote +

What this thread is NOT for: Theorycrafting, claims without specific builds or replays, results from "optimizers" or testers, any strategy discussion including a build's safety, creep spread, hatch blocking, etc... We are only trying to deduce how to maximize economy to build a foundation for further discussion.

I'm quite impressed you managed to include every one of them in there!

2) If you read the OP you would see one of the "economic openers" you refer to is an overpool build. Do overpools easily lose to cheese?

3) The builds that have so far been submitted by the "optimizers" such as evolution chamber are all behind. Are you going to trust a theory even if the results in practice have suggested it is wrong? The scientific method requires the TESTING of hypothesis, not blind faith.

To be honest, posts like this baffle me. I always heard TL had the reputation of being very strict in regard to posting standards, but I see so much of this trolling and posts completely disregarding the OP...
If you honestly think this is a waste of time, then why are you wasting your time by posting here?

SoftSoap

United States170 Posts

November 30 2010 03:39 GMT

#134

On November 30 2010 12:32 B34ST wrote:
Trying so hard not to flame your ass right now..

On a brighter note, I just used 10 overpool 18 hatch against a terran, quad extractors at once and went mass burrow roaches.. holy shit, I never knew they were so powerful.

Obviously that terran wasn't so good if he didn't have a counter against mass roaches.

obsid

United States389 Posts

November 30 2010 03:40 GMT

#135

Amazing, thats all I can say. As a fairly good diamond level zerg, I have played consistantly with a good 14 hatch, and I know the timings very well, when to pull drones to defend, when to macro and when you build units. This build actualy may out place my normal build in econ, with a freaking 11 pool! Almost unheard of, given how an early pool is usualy assumed to be a agressive all-in opening.

evanthebouncy!

United States12796 Posts

November 30 2010 03:43 GMT

#136

nice thread!

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 30 2010 03:45 GMT

#137

On November 30 2010 12:34 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

I'm quite impressed you managed to include every one of them in there!

i am disregarding your op, and disregarding this entire thread, as holds the fact that in the game called starcraft 2, your economic theorycrafting is useless, as the game called starcraft 2 requires more than just macroing up. the game is fast paced, if you have ever played it, which i'm sure you have, i guarentee that playing reactively is a lot better than playing blind up until 6 minutes. if you are testing for builds that work up until 6 minutes and leave you with no units except for queens, that are easily destroyed by any builds to counter a fast expand, then feel free to continue testing this stuff. as it is worthless. also take note that despite the amount of views this thread has gotten, nobody will read it.

no mean to personally attack you at all here, but your 'scientific method' and 'experiments' are not correcting, dismissing, or confirming anything. in zvt you will play defensively unless rushing. this does not involve macroing to your hearts content until 6 minutes without any zerglings/spinecrawlers/vigorous scouting. zvp can be the same, although the mid game is harder. i guarentee you will not beat a 4 gate with any economic build without a lot of zerglings or spine crawlers in production before 6 minutes. zvz is only an economic game if both play economically. everyone should know that in a zvz you will not make many drones unless you are feeling very arrogant.

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 03:50 GMT

#138

The lomilar build would be more efficient at 11 overlord (with extractor trick), 11 pool. You don't need the earlier overlord at 10 supply, as you have plenty of extra larvae when the pool goes down, so this gives the drone a few seconds more of mining.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 03:56 GMT

#139

On November 30 2010 12:50 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
The lomilar build would be more efficient at 11 overlord (with extractor trick), 11 pool. You don't need the earlier overlord at 10 supply, as you have plenty of extra larvae when the pool goes down, so this gives the drone a few seconds more of mining.

Ok thanks, I didn't realize I forgot the change the 10 to an 11. The replay and results are the same.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 03:57 GMT

#140

On November 30 2010 12:45 mikell wrote:no mean to personally attack you at all here, but your 'scientific method' and 'experiments' are not correcting, dismissing, or confirming anything. in zvt you will play defensively unless rushing. this does not involve macroing to your hearts content until 6 minutes without any zerglings/spinecrawlers/vigorous scouting.

Did you ever stop to think that the results of such tests could be relevant to a real game? If 16 hatch 15 pool mines 150 more minerals relative to 11 overpool 18 hatch when making all Drones up to 6 minutes... one would also expect it to have mined 150 more minerals at 6 minutes if you make 2 Spine Crawlers, 12 Zerglings, and mine gas from one Extractor.

It's good to know the price of choosing the overpool build instead of the hatch first build. (or whichever other build you want to use)

It would also be nice to know the benefits to unit count, but the OP is not counting that. (but it is less relevant to openings where production capacity exceeds income)

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 03:58 GMT

#141

On November 30 2010 12:45 mikell wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 30 2010 12:34 jdseemoreglass wrote:

On November 30 2010 12:22 mikell wrote:

On November 28 2010 19:13 mikell wrote:
.... obviously the best opening economy is 15/16/17/18 hatch. 14/15/16/17 pool.

I'm quite impressed you managed to include every one of them in there!

Lol, you're just mad that you made an unintelligent remark and got flamed for it. The point of this thread is not to come up with the "best build" as that is impossible since there is no best build for all situations, but rather what build would you do if you are expecting a long macro game, and know you won't be attacked for an extended period of time (I've seen toss FE builds which don't attack until 10 minutes). What is the most economical build assuming you can focus entirely on economy? Blindly assuming that hatch before pool is "better just because everybody knows it is" is absurd, as if it really is better, then there ought to be evidence that indicates such is the case, which is what this thread is accomplishing.

reprise

Canada316 Posts

November 30 2010 03:59 GMT

#142

On November 30 2010 12:45 mikell wrote:
i am disregarding your op, and disregarding this entire thread, as holds the fact that in the game called starcraft 2, your economic theorycrafting is useless,

How is it fact that theorycrafting is useless? Please prove so.

On November 30 2010 12:45 mikell wrote: also take note that despite the amount of views this thread has gotten, nobody will read it.

Funny, I always thought view count had a direct correlation with amount of reads.

On November 30 2010 12:45 mikell wrote:
no mean to personally attack you at all here, but your 'scientific method' and 'experiments' are not correcting, dismissing, or confirming anything.

Actually, it is confirming something: the most economic build possible.

Does it have real world application? Maybe, maybe not.
Does it hurt to test something that may not have a definitive answer? Apparently to you, they're just wasting their time.

The rest of your nonsensical banter, I'll simply disregard it because not only isn't it annoying to read (Is your shift key broken?), but you feel like you can blindly put an argument and not read a rebuttal which you quoted (or even the original post for that matter).

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 30 2010 04:00 GMT

#143

On November 30 2010 12:57 Hurkyl wrote:
If 16 hatch 15 pool mines 150 more minerals relative to 11 overpool 18 hatch when making all Drones up to 6 minutes... one would also expect it to have mined 150 more minerals at 6 minutes if you make 2 Spine Crawlers, 12 Zerglings, and mine gas from one Extractor.

no, no you wouldn't.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 04:04 GMT

#144

On November 30 2010 13:00 mikell wrote:

Show nested quote +

no, no you wouldn't.

And why not?

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 04:05 GMT

#145

Honestly.. 10 overpool 18 hatchery using spine crawlers to defend into mass burrow roaches is sooo dammnn powerful! holy shit..

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 04:06 GMT

#146

On November 30 2010 12:56 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

sigh....

sigh? 11 (extractor trick) overlord is more efficient for an 11 pool, period, what's your beef?

obsid

United States389 Posts

November 30 2010 04:07 GMT

#147

The 16 hatch build isnt that intresting, its mostly what I know having played this game and tried various variations from 10 hatch - 20 hatch. Much more intresting is how close the 11 pool is to the 16 hatch build. The addition of the extra larva allows you to spend the extra minerals (that would have been spent on the hatch) early on and quickly saturate 2 bases rather then just 1. Very intresting.

Clearly if your going 11 pool you can always switch to quick lings if you need to.

The 11pool build is so intresting, I am wondering what peoples opionins are on a good transition out of it? Probably want to get 2-4 lings early to scout with. Im thinking a good late roach attack would be good, you can drop the roach warren using only minerals, drop 2 extracters, and then pump a lot of roaches very quickly. But when to start that transition? 30 food? 40?

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 04:07 GMT

#148

On November 30 2010 13:06 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:

Show nested quote +

sigh? 11 extractor trick overlord is more efficient for an 11 pool, period, what's your beef?

I'm sorry, I thought you hadn't read the updated OP. Actually I just forgot to update the overlord timing.

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 30 2010 04:08 GMT

#149

On November 30 2010 13:04 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

And why not?

different timings ensue. you would make 2 spine crawlers, 12 zerglings, and begin mining gas from extractors at different times. how is that not logical?

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 04:11 GMT

#150

On November 30 2010 13:08 mikell wrote:

Show nested quote +

different timings ensue that you would make 2 spine crawlers, 12 zerglings, and begin mining gas from extractors at different times. how is that not logical?

If I'm going for a particular opening, and just considering whether to start with overpool or hatchery, why would I do things at different times? Just because I make an early pool doesn't mean I have to rush with 12 Zerglings....

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 04:13 GMT

#151

Also, instead of making double overlords at 17,18, make your second queen sooner, and your second overlord later. The earlier overlord does you no good, (as a 23 overlord finishes in time without supply blocking) the earlier queen will give you more energy to either lay down a creep tumor, or have the queen ready to do a larva inject at the natural hatch as soon as it finishes.

mikell

Australia352 Posts

November 30 2010 04:17 GMT

#152

On November 30 2010 13:11 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

again, you do not understand.

you see, you will not have 6 spare larvae on each build to make 12 zerglings at the very last second. which would be the 'most efficient' way however in either case you will have more or less drones at certain periods of time.

nobody is going to make 12 zerglings at once.

if you make zerglings as you feel it is most optimal to do so, say, for scouting purposes, and you make your spine crawlers as you see an impending attack, the amount of drones you will have mining will be different for a 16 hatch 15 pool or the overpool build. although you have the same drones around 6 minutes, you will not have the exact same larvae, or the exact same amount of drones mining at any given point in time. go into evolution chamber and prove this to yourself with the checkpoints of an overpool and a 16 hatch 15 pool and see if you end up with the same amount of minerals.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 04:20 GMT

#153

On November 30 2010 13:17 mikell wrote:

Show nested quote +

Guys, please, this is not the place for this discussion.

TehForce

1072 Posts

November 30 2010 04:21 GMT

#154

wow 11 pool 18 hatch is better than 14 hatch 1X pool? never would have thought of that

#edit: great thread, thanks for your work

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 04:58 GMT

#155

Y'know, if mineral harvesting is really all you're interested in, then why bother with all this trouble trying to find a way to evaluate the worth of a drone? Just have all builds make 48 drones and mine for a bit. Cutting it off at 7:00 or 7:30 is probably long enough to have 48 drones and enough time for things to settle down.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 05:00 GMT

#156

I've played around with 13 pool, 16 hatch some more, and can't do better than the OP.

A point to consider in its defense are that it ends on 6 minutes with a fair number of drones just starting (literally at 0/17), and it suffers much less from mineral oversaturation and the supply block at 18 when you get gas at about 200 minerals while saving for the hatch. That turns the build into a 13 pool, 16 gas, 15 hatch build. You can transfer drones into the completed extractor just as you have enough to start the queen.

Still, this was one of (if not the) build suggestion by EvolutionChamber. I'm curious as to what is causing the discrepency. It is not agreeing with real game testing, and this may be important for improving that program's accuracy.

pwadoc

271 Posts

November 30 2010 05:18 GMT

#157

On November 30 2010 13:17 mikell wrote:
if you make zerglings as you feel it is most optimal to do so, say, for scouting purposes, and you make your spine crawlers as you see an impending attack, the amount of drones you will have mining will be different for a 16 hatch 15 pool or the overpool build. although you have the same drones around 6 minutes, you will not have the exact same larvae, or the exact same amount of drones mining at any given point in time. go into evolution chamber and prove this to yourself with the checkpoints of an overpool and a 16 hatch 15 pool and see if you end up with the same amount of minerals.

Why exactly does it bother you so much that the OP is carrying out this experiment?

rackdude

United States882 Posts

November 30 2010 05:26 GMT

#158

13 Pool 16 Hatch seems really solid. The best part is that if you scout the 6 pool you can actually make lings RIGHT on time. A little drone micro and you won't lose any since they will pop at just the right time. Yeah, that will delay your expansion, but you can just push and win now.

Though the 11 pool looks interesting.

Shikyo

Finland33997 Posts

November 30 2010 05:37 GMT

#159

Right, why Xelnaga when EU has no YABOT for it? Am I supposed to start-restart until I get the bottom spawn? sighity sigh. Giving the build soon

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 05:51 GMT

#160

Been using the 11 pool 18 hatch for the last 8 games, I lost 2 to Terran all-in SCVs..

Try it, you have to.

Scrimpton

United Kingdom465 Posts

November 30 2010 05:53 GMT

#161

I must admit from what i see of the 11 overpool 18 hatch build, i'm very impressed.

I'd always imagined that the "standard" openers Z uses weren't actually as "greedy" or econ focused as people (including me) believed. The addition of a much earlier pool makes Z so much more flexible and safe early game too, or leads into an insane econ.

Whilst hatch first builds seem more intuitively econ focused, and despite that fact that "all the pros do it" I had always hoped somebody would actually just do the maths lol.
I'm far too lazy and uneducated for it, but I'm glad somebody is going for it

Enyalus

United States135 Posts

November 30 2010 06:17 GMT

#162

jdseemoreglass: with regard to how you should weigh the 'more drones but less minerals mined' or 'less drones but more minerals mined' - speaking from what I would believe is a practical standpoint, I would value the higher drone count more. After all, you *are* going to be making structures with your drones. Extractors. Possibly a roach warren. Mining the gas from those extractors. If your build already gives you less drones, then I would imagine that when you need to sacrifice drones in order to make those structures, you're losing more minerals than the build with the higher drone count and thus being economically suboptimal when compared with the high drone count build.

What do you think? I haven't actually done the testing, but it seems to follow intuitively.

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 06:21 GMT

#163

I agree with Enyalus.. more drones = more buildings = less money spent on drones = more money to spent on other things, such as drones.

obsid

United States389 Posts

November 30 2010 06:40 GMT

#164

@B34ST

I dont quite agree. I think its rare that your ONLY going to be making drones, so some of your larva is going to be spent on lings/roaches. In that case, I would say having more minerals is more important, as then you got more to place structures/build lings, while still keeping up a good drone count. Having more drones (and less total minerals mined), means you will need to cut drones to get enough minerals to build something like a roach warren. Of corse the counter argument is you might have to cut larva to get lings/roaches out in the more mined build, but in that case I would think you would just get an extra queen earlier for more larva.

Still its probably close enough these two are practicly tied.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 06:50 GMT

#165

On November 29 2010 05:26 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

The spawn larvae cycle is actually *more* important than the current drone count. For example, at 6 minutes, your "winning" build at 43 drones has the benefit of finishing drones off 2 recent queen spawns, while the "inferior" builds that I've tried, and the 16h/15p replay, only have the benefit of 1. Shift the recording time 20 seconds or so, and suddenly things would look different.

The only reason 11Overpool is even ahead at that point in time is because of the earlier first queen. Hatch-first builds make up for that by having extra larvae sooner from the hatch, and by having a slightly faster second queen. Ignoring the cycle means your measurements are flat out incorrect, because the two builds will flip-flop in drone count, with whichever one most recently finished a queen spawn being ahead. If hatch-first is ahead more often than it's behind, or ahead by more when it is ahead, that tips the balance in its favor both in larva count *and* resource count.

Also, I'm fairly sure 14hatch/14pool is better than 16hatch/15pool. It seemed to be in my testing, but I wasn't able to totally match the times and resource counts showed in your replays.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 06:54 GMT

#166

On November 30 2010 15:17 Enyalus wrote:
jdseemoreglass: with regard to how you should weigh the 'more drones but less minerals mined' or 'less drones but more minerals mined' - speaking from what I would believe is a practical standpoint, I would value the higher drone count more. After all, you *are* going to be making structures with your drones. Extractors. Possibly a roach warren. Mining the gas from those extractors. If your build already gives you less drones, then I would imagine that when you need to sacrifice drones in order to make those structures, you're losing more minerals than the build with the higher drone count and thus being economically suboptimal when compared with the high drone count build.

What do you think? I haven't actually done the testing, but it seems to follow intuitively.

You still have to make all those structures if you have the higher drone count.

It takes time before the higher Drone count makes up for the smaller initial mineral count, and this advantage vanishes entirely if your opening doesn't have enough income to continue using Larvae at full capacity.

The main advantage to a higher Larvae count, I think, is for builds that switch over to making combat units for a while, because it lets you get the same army with more Drones (or a bigger army if you prefer).

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 06:55 GMT

#167

You mean except for the fact that those genetic algorithms fail to give the correct answers for anybody who's not 100% perfect with their timing, whose workers gain minerals in chunks of 5 instead of at a constant rate, and whose workers actually have to move to create buildings?

Oh wait. That's pretty much everybody in the world.

Optimizers can give you a head start, or give you ideas, or even give you the foundation of a build, but they cannot actually tell you the fastest way to get to a particular point, because they're not based on the reality of a person playing the game, or even the reality of the game itself. They take shortcuts so that the problem can actually be solved in a reasonable amount of time, and without rewriting and perfecting starcraft's game simulation engine.

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

November 30 2010 06:59 GMT

#168

With regards to your dilemma in the most recent build, the answer is simple: most minerals wins.

More drones is great, but you clearly defined "winning" as "most minerals mined" with other things have very little extra weight.

The fastest way to 2-base saturation and the fastest way to 2-base 2/3 saturation are likely to be different.... just as the most economical build from the 5 minute mark is likely to be different from this.

If you want to be extra cool, graph the total resources collected as a function of time with all of these builds, and then for any given time, you'll have the optimal build.

What's the purpose of a pretty graph?

Whenever you end up building beyond just a pool, you'll know which opener is the most economical for you. If you want to make a warren, push at 5 minutes, etc etc etc ... You'll know what opener will help you to transition into the rest of the opening while maintaining the most econ until that switch happens.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 07:02 GMT

#169

On November 30 2010 15:55 Skrag wrote:

Show nested quote +

Two corrections:

I think you're talking about "simulators" not "optimizers". Something that takes a build order and reports timings, resources, and so forth is a simulator. An optimizer is something that tries to produce the best build order according to some criterion. I imagine the confusion has arisen because optimizer needs to have access, and people are more familiar with the optimizer.

Secondly, if such accuracy is desired, it is not all that difficult to make a good simulation that takes into account things like the positioning of mineral patches, transit time of peons for mining and building, imperfect peon splitting in the first second, and so forth. I imagine the only reason the existing simulators do not do this is because the authors judged the extra accuracy was not worth the programming and modeling effort.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 07:08 GMT

#170

Skrag,

The overpool means that you get a whole larva spawn for free, albeit on one base, because it advances that queen to 16 without having to wait for a hatch's minerals, instead of doing the queen at 18/ish after hatch. It also utilizes the queen build portion of the hatchery, which is, nonintuitively, a production facility.

Hatch before pool still doesn't get you a queen early, though it does get you about 3 larva (which is why the builds are so close)

Also, queen pops 4 larva in 40 seconds (+5 for re-energy) vs the hatch which only spawns 3 in 45 seconds. And costs half as much.

Also, because you start your second queen at 21 (most hatch-ish builds start around then too), the overpool is roughly on the same larva spawn timing as later builds.

(Note: I know supply numbers are not equal to time, but you get the idea).

Jd,

Adding an extractor trick was a good call. Seems obvious now. 11 drones then overpool > 10 drones then overpool. Probably don't waste any larva spawning time either.

I wonder if double trick overpool is teh ultimate!

Also, as to your question, larva are just as important to the economy as are minerals. A drone at the minerals is worth two in the bank.

Going to go see if I can re-modify the build. :-)

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:10 GMT

#171

Here is how I would compare the 2 builds.

Take a first approximation that both builds at 6:00 are now able to make drones at the same rate, then the net drone difference remains fixed for the rest of the game.

At 6:00 minutes...

Lomilar is ahead by 2.58 drones, and by approximation will remain 2.58 drones ahead. (This is actually pretty fair, Lomilar is ahead on queen energy) However Lomilar is behind by 155 minerals.

So its 155 minerals vs 2.58 drones.

As long as Lomilar stays 2.58 drones ahead, he should catch up on the mineral metric, in ~1.5 minutes.

Ultimately this is a flaw in your claim here:

The time will be stopped precisely at 6 minutes for data to be assessed. Note that this time is not biased, as ALL data will be assessed in making a determination.

Based on this approximation, I would predict by 7.5-8 minutes Lomilar would have the most minerals mined, and thus the more economic opener.

The actual test would then be to actually do this, have fun someone

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 30 2010 07:15 GMT

#172

So, 11 pool 18 hatch.. impressive!

On November 29 2010 06:27 Lomilar wrote:
Edit: The retarded thing is, this is almost the 7RR opening, making drones/expansion instead of double-OL and roach warren around 18. Tricky!

Which makes it even more awesome because you can both be super economical and cheesy

This thread may become gamechanging

30to1

105 Posts

November 30 2010 07:16 GMT

#173

Tie Breaking:

Honestly, I think that taking a silly reductive approach "drone is worth x minerals * time" is a sort of silly reductionist approach to the problem you've spent all this time being empirical about.

The real answer is this:

Instead of having a single finish line at 6 minutes, what you should do is have 3 finish lines at 5, 6, and 7. The build that performs best across multiple time periods should be the winner (as in real game, it would allow for the most flexibility while still maxing out economy).

I would just compare raw minerals mined at each time point, absolutely nothing else (if needed add a 7:30 finish line, where no more drones are built after 7 - only mining is occurring in order to allow last minute drones to demonstrate value).

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 07:21 GMT

#174

On November 30 2010 16:02 Hurkyl wrote:
I think you're talking about "simulators" not "optimizers". Something that takes a build order and reports timings, resources, and so forth is a simulator. An optimizer is something that tries to produce the best build order according to some criterion. I imagine the confusion has arisen because optimizer needs to have access, and people are more familiar with the optimizer.

I'm perfectly aware of the difference between simulators and optimizers.

My point was that for an optimizer to give correct results, it would have to have an accurate simulation embedded into it. (You are aware that an optimizer does actually have to simulate the build somehow in order to compare modifications, right?)

Secondly, if such accuracy is desired, it is not all that difficult to make a good simulation that takes into account things like the positioning of mineral patches, transit time of peons for mining and building, imperfect peon splitting in the first second, and so forth. I imagine the only reason the existing simulators do not do this is because the authors judged the extra accuracy was not worth the programming and modeling effort.

The current batch of optimizers give answers that are flat out *wrong*, and provably so, because they don't take reality into account, and quite frequently will even give out timings that simply don't work out due to the simplified (necessarily so, I'll admit, because accurately reproducing the game simulation would be an absolutely ridiculous amount of work) nature of their internal simulations.

Like I said, they can be good starting points, but actual in-game testing is required, and I jumped into this part of the conversation purely because somebody had the audacity to claim that you really shouldn't rely on in-game testing, because players are fallible, and the optimizers are supposedly not.

Except that they are, in fact, quite fallible. Extremely so. Not to the point that they're useless, but certainly to the point that in-game testing is *required* to verify the results of the optimizers, meaning that discouraging people from in-game testing in favor of these genetic algorithms is flat out retarded.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 07:24 GMT

#175

On November 30 2010 16:10 tehV wrote:So its 155 minerals vs 2.58 drones.

As long as Lomilar stays 2.58 drones ahead, he should catch up on the mineral metric, in ~1.5 minutes.

You are assuming infinitely many mineral patches. At 6:00 both builds are nearly totally saturated, the next few Drones will barely increase the mining rate. After 48 drones, remaining 2.58 drones ahead is a total waste of 129 minerals. (Also, the "Drones" line in the opening post is not a good estimate of how many Drones ahead each build will be, on average)

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:30 GMT

#176

On November 30 2010 16:16 30to1 wrote:

The real answer is this:

Instead of having a single finish line at 6 minutes, what you should do is have 3 finish lines at 5, 6, and 7. The build that performs best across multiple time periods should be the winner (as in real game, it would allow for the most flexibility while still maxing out economy).
I would just compare raw minerals mined at each time point, absolutely nothing else

I find your finish lines completely arbitrary that, why not finish lines at 1, 2, 3, and/or 4 also? The OP wants the best economic opener, not the best economic opener that is also the best at 5,6,and7 minutes.

And stopping around 7 minutes is obviously to short as Lomilar's drone advantage wont show up till closer to 8 minutes.

His 6 minute mark is obviously just a simplification to help test the best economic opener. If you wanted to remove this time limit nonsense, all you need to do is redefine the problem as the best economic opener is the one that fully mines out a specific map the fastest. Have fun doing that manually.

Going to 6 minutes, noting the drone differences, etc.. and extrapolating from there is probably 'good' enough.

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:33 GMT

#177

On November 30 2010 16:24 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

We don't need to assume infinitely many mineral patches, but zergs like to get a 3rd base right? Do zergs stop naturally in game at 48 drones?

Lomilar's drones will be an economic advantage, I don't see how you get around that.

Almania

145 Posts

November 30 2010 07:34 GMT

#178

Is anyone actually considering Douillos's build when Lomilar's gets you a pool in little over half the time, two extra drones with a third on the way, and all for just 150 minerals less?

It looks like I'm going 11 overpool every game from this point on

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 07:35 GMT

#179

On November 30 2010 16:30 tehV wrote:

Show nested quote +

If you limit yourself to mining out two bases, you don't have to do anything with "drone differences". At 7:00 or 7:30 or so, all builds considered will have 48 Drones, which (I believe) gives the maximum mining rate. So you just have note how many minerals are mined at that point in time.

Well, I guess this approach ignores the effects of when the mineral patches vanish. (but so does what you suggest). It could be accounted for, though, if anyone really cared.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 07:37 GMT

#180

On November 30 2010 16:08 Lomilar wrote:
Skrag,

The overpool means that you get a whole larva spawn for free, albeit on one base, because it advances that queen to 16 without having to wait for a hatch's minerals, instead of doing the queen at 18/ish after hatch. It also utilizes the queen build portion of the hatchery, which is, nonintuitively, a production facility.

Here's the thing though. Until that first spawn finishes, the hatch-first build is *always* ahead, by a number of workers that depends on when the hatch and pool specifically went down. Being ahead early is better than being ahead later, unless it's a *lot* ahead later. But once the hatch-first builds start their spawn cycles, the pool-first builds are typically doing catch-up from the early lead, and maybe spending a small amount of time during the cycle being ahead, and as I mentioned, the lead flip-flops based on whoever has most recently finished a larvae spawn, which is why the actual time of measurement matters so much, because whoever most recently spawned is *always* in the lead. To be fair, it takes quite a bit of work to calculate the effects of the spawn time rotation, but it can't simply be ignored.

Also, 18hatch is quite probably late enough that the hatch-first second queen beats the 18 hatch queen by a significant amount, increasing the amount of time during the spawn cycle that hatch-first is ahead.

Disclaimer: I've tested 14pool first and 16pool first builds vs various flavors of 15hatch, but I haven't specifically tested 11overpool/18hatch vs 14hatch/14pool, which would probably be the most reasonable comparison. The super-fast pool might be enough to keep overpool in a larva lead, but it's clearly at the cost of the mineral lead.

I wonder if double trick overpool is teh ultimate!

It's not. 12 pool off a 9OL start comes faster (slightly) than a 12overpool, and the 9OL start is more economic. The only reason you should ever double-trick is to build a pool or hatch exactly on 12, before building an overlord, but that wastes a *lot* of larvae spawn time.

Also, 10overpool is never the best option. It sacrifices too much spawn time to be useful as an economic start, and as a fast pool start, you'd be much better off 11 or 12 pooling off extractor tricks, building the pool before the overlord.

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:42 GMT

#181

On November 30 2010 16:35 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

Well now this is a debate over how to define the best economic opener. I'd argue that it should be the fastest to mine out your 'half' of the map. Yours seems to be, first to mine out your main and natural.

I think I'd grant that Lomilar's build reaches the 2-base saturation point later, thus wont mine out those bases as fast. But would probably win the more than 2 base 'race'.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 07:43 GMT

#182

On November 30 2010 16:33 tehV wrote:

Show nested quote +

AFAIK, Zergs with two fully saturated bases wait until they actually have a third base before building the Drones for it.

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:45 GMT

#183

On November 30 2010 16:43 Hurkyl wrote:

Show nested quote +

AFAIK, Zergs with two fully saturated bases wait until they actually have a third base before building the Drones for it.

That could be true, but that wouldn't be economic play. I only meant to imply there is more than 2 bases, thus you can't ignore his drone advantage. At least when limited to the economic question.

Scrimpton

United Kingdom465 Posts

November 30 2010 07:47 GMT

#184

Afaik the Flexibility and safeness of having an 11pool as default whilst still being incredibly economic is being so horribly overlooked here.

For an 11pool build being even close to a 14/15/16 pool build in terms of economy is amazing. Getting that pool over a minute faster is also of very high value

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 07:47 GMT

#185

On a slight tangent, I admit it would be nice to have an optimized triple hatch build prepared for dealing with 15 Nexus openings on Shakuras Plateau.

Melancholia

United States717 Posts

November 30 2010 07:47 GMT

#186

Why is 14 Hatch/15 Pool being disregarded as a potential leader? Until we've clarified what exactly constitutes winning I would think that the total resource leader should be kept in contention.

Melancholia

United States717 Posts

November 30 2010 07:50 GMT

#187

On November 30 2010 16:47 Scrimpton wrote:
Afaik the Flexibility and safeness of having an 11pool as default whilst still being incredibly economic is being so horribly overlooked here.

For an 11pool build being even close to a 14/15/16 pool build in terms of economy is amazing. Getting that pool over a minute faster is also of very high value

It's being overlooked because that isn't the point of the thread. We are looking solely at the economy, not at the other aspects of the game. While I agree that it is rather amazing, it doesn't matter when looking only at the resources.

tehV

28 Posts

November 30 2010 07:52 GMT

#188

On November 30 2010 16:47 Hurkyl wrote:
On a slight tangent, I admit it would be nice to have an optimized triple hatch build prepared for dealing with 15 Nexus openings on Shakuras Plateau.

This actually might be the way to go.

Define the economic openers based on # of bases, instead of by time.

For example, I hear zergs complain about Jungle Basin and getting a 3rd on that map. So knowing which opener is the best for economic 2-base play. And for your suggestion on SP, would give us the build that gets the best economic opener assuming 3-base play.

I don't play zerg, but I imagine breaking it down this way is useful, even the best 1 base play for a map like steppes might be useful.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 07:53 GMT

#189

On November 30 2010 16:47 Melancholia wrote:
Why is 14 Hatch/15 Pool being disregarded as a potential leader? Until we've clarified what exactly constitutes winning I would think that the total resource leader should be kept in contention.

I believe 14 hatch/14 pool beats 14h/15p, 15h/14p, 15h/15p, and 16h/15p by a *slight* margin, likely due to faster queens. They all seem to be pretty damn close. I only tested the various builds a couple times though, and might not have them perfectly down anyway, so take that with a grain of salt, and test it yourself if you really care. The only result that matters is yours anyway.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 07:57 GMT

#190

Everyone is bringing up some pretty interesting points... I think my next step is to extend the sampling time to various points to see if perhaps I underestimated the length of time required to overcome the initial investment of the second hatchery. However, my suspicion is that this will merely delay the same problem of more drones vs more minerals. No way of knowing of course until it is tested. I will begin with this tomorrow afternoon.

I have also been thinking a lot about the notion of "opportunity cost" in relation to drones. A drone could easily also be a roach, or a roach warren. The flexibility of choice that a larva gives the user could perhaps be worth something that I can't quantify. Of course, the same argument could be made for minerals... but the idea is that a single larva has the option of using differing AMOUNTS of minerals in very different ways.

I am hoping people really start stretching the limits of what is possible with these submissions. I have been interested in seeing very early hatches or very late pools tested. What about comparing the effects of a 13/13 build to a 17/17 build? Also, I think we can still squeeze some efficiency out of the 11overpool. Let's keep up the good content.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 08:05 GMT

#191

We can't define overall economy by such a simple metric. For example, I saw one build using an optimizer that led all the others in resources mined... but it left us supply blocked with only 4 overlords. I think the additional 2 drones more than makes up for the 55 fewer minerals in either case.

Melancholia

United States717 Posts

November 30 2010 08:08 GMT

#192

On November 30 2010 17:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

I'd agree that we shouldn't use such a simple metric, but at the moment we don't appear to have any metric, and until that point it's premature to put ANY builds in the "Current Leader" category.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 08:14 GMT

#193

On November 30 2010 17:08 Melancholia wrote:

Show nested quote +

I'd agree that we shouldn't use such a simple metric, but at the moment we don't appear to have any metric, and until that point it's premature to put ANY builds in the "Current Leader" category.

The two most weighted metrics as stated in the OP are drones and resources mined. The trouble is equating the value of the two in a relative way. That is why I am trying to compute the value of an additional drone in minerals, because without this mathematical comparison it is merely a subjective assessment.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 08:25 GMT

#194

On November 30 2010 17:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

Rather than what you can measure, what, precisely, is it you want to measure? Maybe if you can answer that, the way to proceed would be more clear.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 08:26 GMT

#195

Okay. I have taken this build to the next level of silliness:

Double extractor trick @ 10 & 110 minerals
12 Overpool
16 OL (no really)
18 Queen
Send drone to hatch at 190 minerals
18 Hatch
21 Queen (should start right as previous queen finishes and you have minerals)
23 Overlord (should finish right as eggs pop)
29 Overlord
Maynard 8 drones at 30 (this should be when hatch pops)
Overlord at 37

This build ends up feeling a lot different.

Here is what I ended up with at 6 minutes:

38 drones
2 drones at 17/17 seconds (essentially 40 drones)
1 drone 9/17 seconds
1 drone 5/17 seconds
4 drones 3/17 seconds (that is for a total of 8 drones in production)
Queens at 5 & 24 energy, spawn larvas at 5/40 and 19/40
6 overlords
293 minerals
50/52 supply

<edit>
Total larva: 38+8+6+2=54

I noticed that the number of larva this build makes is offset from the single extractor trick, which gets 43+2+6+2=53 larva and both vomits at 20/40 seconds. So... that's not significant.
</edit>

Thing (just one) to work out: You almost start the queen immediately after the previous one. Which one should go to the expo?

The Keanu Reeves things about this build.
This build completely avoids ever having 3 larva on your hatchery, except when eggs pop.
This build never gets supply blocked, except for the extractor trick.
~~Moar minerals.~~

Scrimpton

United Kingdom465 Posts

November 30 2010 08:47 GMT

#196

Lominar. I just dont know how to think any more.

What is an earth

johngalt90

United States357 Posts

November 30 2010 08:47 GMT

#197

think the most accurate would be to show a resource graph; total larvae produced; and hatches and queen count. all this is really telling me is what builds get you a certain econ at time X. i dont know which is most economical. the graph seems to be suggesting that 11 pool is the highest but that certainly wouldnt get you a very good econ for the next couple minutes and then you have to consider how much larvae u need at what times.

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

November 30 2010 09:05 GMT

#198

jdseemoreglass:

I'm not sure how you get consistent results between builds, but what I did was save a game where I droned until 9, then re-loaded that same game for each different build I wanted to test so that any differences in initial split-time/response-time did not exist. I also put the game on normal speed so I could macro/micro perfectly.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 09:07 GMT

#199

I think the trickoverpool fast expand... Hey, its all the builds in one!

Anyway, I think it is generally stronger economy wise and military wise early on (earlier pool, earlier lings, earlier queen), but it doesn't get as many drones up at the second base as quickly, and that is where it is losing minerals compared to the 15 hatch build.

I've named it. The TOP-FE build. It even sounds pretentious! Yeah!

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 09:07 GMT

#200

On November 30 2010 17:26 Lomilar wrote:
Okay. I have taken this build to the next level of silliness:

Here is what I ended up with at 6 minutes:

38 drones
2 drones at 17/17 seconds (essentially 40 drones)
1 drone 9/17 seconds
1 drone 5/17 seconds
4 drones 3/17 seconds (that is for a total of 8 drones in production)
Queens at 5 & 24 energy, spawn larvas at 5/40 and 19/40
6 overlords
293 minerals
50/52 supply

That's pretty significantly behind everything I tried, by at least a couple hundred minerals, and slightly behind on larvae as well. 14h/14p has been my best so far, with 40 drones, 30/17 total on 6 drones in production, and just over 600 minerals.

Looks like you probably just were slow on a spawn somewhere for the larva count, though, with one queen having 24 energy but it's spawn only being half-done.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 09:09 GMT

#201

The second queen pops out right after the first queen does her second spit, and the second queen has to rush down to the second hatch and gets there decently after it pops. That's why I was having the queen timing question.

Watch the replay, it just feels weird. Maybe if that problem was fixed, it would catch up.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 09:21 GMT

#202

I just thought of something else, so I will chain post.

A larva pop from a queen resets the spawn larva timer on the hatchery.

So... say you have 0 larva, and are at 11/15 seconds on the invisible larva timer. When the spawn larva pops, you go to 1 larva, 2 larva, 3 larva (spawn larva timer turns off), 4 larva... then you spend them back to 0, and your larva timer is back at 0/15.

Holy crap. That is kinda... not huge, but 1 larva per spawn larva big.

That means that with epic hand speed, you can potentially save your half built larva, by spending them as they pop off one at a time and never letting the larva count get to 3.

No wonder spawn larva is 4 larva. If it was 3 larva, it would not be as good as a hatchery, because it would reset the spawn larva timer without giving you that extra larva in the invisible build queue.

I wonder if this is actually accurate. It sounds plausible.

That would mean that watching your larva spawn and spending them down can net you an extra part of a larva.

It would also mean that at super slow speed doing these precise builds, there is a chance of losing a larva, making it much much harder to test.

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 30 2010 09:27 GMT

#203

im liking this thread more and more.

Incredible work by OP & Gratz to Lomilar for your build, i really want to try it in zvz! (mine was somewhat logical, i didnt really need to think that much :p )

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 30 2010 09:32 GMT

#204

On November 30 2010 16:47 Hurkyl wrote:
On a slight tangent, I admit it would be nice to have an optimized triple hatch build prepared for dealing with 15 Nexus openings on Shakuras Plateau.

OFF TOPIC:

Use 16hatch / 15 pool

Just get no gas after the 2 queens and put down your 3rd hatch when you have no larva left and 300 minerals (produce only drones and overlord when your 2 under supply cap). It actually goes ridiculously fast. But really the idea is no gas, and drone pumping till your at 300 mins.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 09:36 GMT

#205

On November 30 2010 18:21 Lomilar wrote:
I just thought of something else, so I will chain post.

A larva pop from a queen resets the spawn larva timer on the hatchery.

Have you tested this in game? My casual observation suggests that it merely pauses the timer, but I haven't really tried to test it directly.

Cambam

United States360 Posts

November 30 2010 09:39 GMT

#206

Awesome thread guys, I love to see stuff being tested objectively.

However, I would love to see some TLer more creative than me figure out a way to factor in things like worker/ebay/pylon blocks, as well as cannon rushes and 2 rax marines+scvs. One thing I thought of is maybe someone could make BO tester map that has a probe come over and build a pylon at a certain time. Then this map could be distributed on this thread and everyone could compare results of different builds against it. It'd be tough though because the timing is map dependent...

But that's where many heads are better than one. My goal is to find two builds: the absolute most economical build (for when I know I'm not going to be attacked for a while [e.g. 15 nexus]), and then the absolute most economical build while still being safe from early aggression (from 2 marines to 4 gate allin). Pretty ambitious, but let's work towards it!

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 09:48 GMT

#207

On November 30 2010 18:21 Lomilar wrote:
I just thought of something else, so I will chain post.

A larva pop from a queen resets the spawn larva timer on the hatchery.

Are you absolutely 100% sure about this?

I never managed to figure out anything conclusive, but I did some testing that seemed to indicate that larvae spawned from the queen might *pause* the timer without resetting it.

Sounds weird, and eventually I gave up trying to figure out what was going on, but that seemed like the most likely explanation for what I was seeing.

That would mean that watching your larva spawn and spending them down can net you an extra part of a larva.

I *believe* this is true, and that if you spend the first couple larva as they're coming in, you can avoid any negative effect on the hatchery's normal larva spawn. It's pretty hard to do reliably and consistently, though, especially since you need to be spitting a new round at about the same time.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 09:51 GMT

#208

Okay, so... Here are my timings that I took.

A larva takes 15 seconds to spawn. Check.

3:11 I spend 3/3 larva
3:13 I spew forth larva upon thine hatchery
3:26 a larva spawns, I spend him.
3:41 a larva spawns. This one is a girl. I spend her.
3:53, larva pops. I spend them as they fall (in super slow mo)
3:57, a larva spawns. Mystery? Are you a second late? Why larva! Why!

Second act!

4:10, I spew forth.
4:12, a larva spawns. Eggified.
4:27, a larva spawned. It is no more.
4:42, a larva spawned. Drone.
4:50, the larva pop. I wait for 3 to drop, then spend them all, perhaps even before the 4th one.
4:59, a larva spawned. Did it not stop the timer? Why 17 seconds?

It is 2am. The mystery continues.

<edit> Huh. Pause. At what point does it resume, and what point does it say hey, you, no more larva for 15 seconds. Does, in fact, spawning larva somehow hold a hatchery in stasis? Pausing the previous larva, as if the larva pylon became unpowered? </edit>

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 09:54 GMT

#209

Ah, that looks like what I thought I observed.

Also, note this hypothesis is consistent with ordinary Hatchery operation -- when the third Larvae pops, the timer is reset to 15 seconds and pauses. When you spend one, the timer starts ticking again, down from 15.

I suspect you can't avoid a one second delay, since I think the Hatchery icon immediately shows the number 4, but you can't actually start selecting the larvae until they land.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 09:58 GMT

#210

So, in fact, they did it right. Dang, no insane 300 apm tricks. How disappointing.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 10:00 GMT

#211

On November 30 2010 18:54 Hurkyl wrote:
I suspect you can't avoid a one second delay, since I think the Hatchery icon immediately shows the number 4, but you can't actually start selecting the larvae until they land.

This appears to be true if you're looking at multiple hatcheries in a single group, but if you have the hatchery selected alone, you'll see the number go up incrementally, and you can start using larvae as soon as the number goes up.

And like I said, my (very inconclusive) testing seemed to indicate that you could avoid any delay if you were *very* quick about using the first two larvae, and the hatchery itself didn't spawn one of its own at a bad time.

Also, Lomilar, I *really* wouldn't worry about a 1 second timing difference unless that difference showed up consistently over a number of tests. Unless you're working on a custom map that's printing out exact timings (I think the highest resolution you can get is 1/256th of a second), using the game timer with a resolution of 1 second means that your margin of error is pretty big.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 10:05 GMT

#212

btw, aren't you all glad we're finally putting and end to the zerg opening economy debate, once and for all?

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 30 2010 10:09 GMT

#213

I've been doing the Lomilar build and it works really well. Also, the fast pool has the additional effect of making the opponent scared of an all-in and might make them build military units instead of workers.

edit: Lominar -> Lomilar

Regarding OPs question of worker worth to minerals, I'd say we all agree on that 1 drone is worth more than 50 minerals. There is larva cost and spawning time, also the ability to make a building and attack, defend, which 50 minerals do not have! (lol)
Set 1 drone = 75 minerals and see what happens?

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 10:12 GMT

#214

I just want zergs in the GSL to stop going 14 hatch. Makes 4 marines and a hellion look like 'a good timing push'.

And I heart overpool. I want to see aggressive zergs.

Douillos

France3195 Posts

November 30 2010 10:13 GMT

#215

On November 30 2010 18:39 Cambam wrote:

My goal is to find two builds: the absolute most economical build (for when I know I'm not going to be attacked for a while [e.g. 15 nexus]), and then the absolute most economical build while still being safe from early aggression (from 2 marines to 4 gate allin). Pretty ambitious, but let's work towards it!

Check OP spoilers: you have the 2 builds already...

puissance

97 Posts

November 30 2010 10:47 GMT

#216

I relly like this thread - great job!
Concerning both leading builds, when would you put down your gas? I guess it is pretty variable, depending on the followup you are aiming for. My general rule is that I want my gas very close before or after I put down the pool if I want to go for speedlings and in case of Roaches I want to put it down after my hatch (or pool if I go hatch first).
Some input would be appreciated

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

November 30 2010 10:50 GMT

#217

On November 30 2010 19:47 puissance wrote:
I relly like this thread - great job!
Concerning both leading builds, when would you put down your gas? I guess it is pretty variable, depending on the followup you are aiming for. My general rule is that I want my gas very close before or after I put down the pool if I want to go for speedlings and in case of Roaches I want to put it down after my hatch (or pool if I go hatch first).
Some input would be appreciated

In a real game I generally put my gas after the 18 hatch, if I play against protoss or a hellion terran I do 11 pool then extractor

[F_]aths

Germany3947 Posts

November 30 2010 11:21 GMT

#218

I am glad that jdseemoreglass took the time to test some builds for Zerg. I often wondered if I should get pool or hatch first. jdseemoreglass's efforts with the input of some users now provide two really good BOs which can be used as a starting point to refine the BO for a specific match-up. But to do it with reason, one needs to understand how Zerg economy works. I now understand my loved swarm race a little bit better.

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

November 30 2010 12:35 GMT

#219

On November 30 2010 19:05 Skrag wrote:
btw, aren't you all glad we're finally putting and end to the zerg opening economy debate, once and for all?

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.

k43r

Poland112 Posts

November 30 2010 13:16 GMT

#220

We should also test how does these builds correlate with having gas. I mean, when is the earliest time to get extractor+saturate+take drones after for example 100 gas for zergling speed.

And when is the earliest time when you can make zergling speed not cutting drones.
Or function when do you cut drones - how many minerals you loose - time of finishing speed.
Or when you cna build economicly Roach Den, and graph how many minerals you loose if you build it safe.

<mind blown>

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 13:52 GMT

#221

Regarding gas timings..

I played 2-3 games vs protoss, doing this build.

As soon as both mineral lines were satured I got quad gas (for roaches) or double gas (for ling/bane).

If roaches, I went Lair, Roach warren.

If Zerglings I went Metabolic Boost, Banelings next.

In most of the games, if not all I had burrow, roach speed and burrowing claws WHEN they attacked.. as well as 30 odd roaches.

Same with the ling speed and banelings, and I always get burrow now.

If any one is interested, I have about 7-8 replays of me using this build, a few loses and a few wins.

Using it for both ling attacks and roach attacks.

I can upload them into a replay pack if you'd like.

Edit: 1500 Diamond.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 14:00 GMT

#222

On November 30 2010 15:50 Skrag wrote:
The spawn larvae cycle is actually *more* important than the current drone count. For example, at 6 minutes, your "winning" build at 43 drones has the benefit of finishing drones off 2 recent queen spawns, while the "inferior" builds that I've tried, and the 16h/15p replay, only have the benefit of 1. Shift the recording time 20 seconds or so, and suddenly things would look different.

The 13 pool/16 hatch build has thie same problem; its 'drone count' is very rapidly increasing at the end, but have all only just started.

However....

Many of these builds are production capped before 6 minutes. Hence the large mineral stockpile
toward the end. Given that, the total drone count seems a little irrelevent anyway.

Right now I'm leaning towards generating 'income curves'. If we can generate curves showing income as a function of time for each build, we'd have a much clearer picture of when each build is behind/ahead of another. It also would allow comparison with any models to be much easier.

Obviously this is a lot more work though.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

November 30 2010 14:09 GMT

#223

I was so intrigued by Lomilar's build, that I had to try it out myself. I deviated a tiny bit, but not much... I think I followed it up to about 30 supply, so it was after I got my expansion. I've tried this build 3 times so far and won two games, and the game I lost was simply because I threw away a huge lead in one battle... felt like an idiot. Anyways, I am extremely impressed with this build so far. I would have never expected it to do so well economy wise.

Here is a replay of me executing the build. 1800+ Diamond
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/110784-1v1-terran-zerg-steppes-of-war

I really like this build so far. Like I said, I followed the build pretty well, and I scouted a very early 2 racks... I was able to drone hard and still pump lings in time to fend off the attack. I then had a far superior economy, tech switched to mutas, and eventually won the game. It was a far from perfect mid-late game, but I think that replay shows the strengths of this build early on. let me know what you guys think, what could have been done better, etc...

Keilah

731 Posts

November 30 2010 14:13 GMT

#224

On November 28 2010 19:03 jdseemoreglass wrote:
However, now I face a slight dilemma that I am seeking consensus on. Douillos' build is ahead in regards to total minerals mined, but Lomilar's build is ahead in regards to drone count. In order to decide the leading build, we must come up with a method of comparing the relative worth of drones to minerals.

I have been thinking of valuing a drone as it's original cost + the number of minerals it could mine within the 17 seconds it requires to produce one. However, this may be a flawed method. Please give me input regarding this issue so we can reach a conclusion.

I think that once you have it narrowed down to 1 or 2 builds, you need to add in the extra touches, such as when to scout, when to add a gas, how much gas to harvest, when to build 1 set of zerglings (i mean really, you ALWAYS want at least 1 set), and possibly rallying appropriately to increase mining time.

When you start doing those things, you start to reduce the impact of oversaturation, thus giving the 'more drones' build a lead over the 'more minerals mined' build. It also more closely approximates a real game.

If it really is super-close and the choice is more drones vs more minerals, then I say DON'T decide which one is better. Just say that these are the two most economical builds, and leave it to the player to decide in the moment.

B34ST

United Kingdom150 Posts

November 30 2010 14:19 GMT

#225

[url blocked]

gondolin

France332 Posts

November 30 2010 14:19 GMT

#226

On November 30 2010 17:26 Lomilar wrote:
Okay. I have taken this build to the next level of silliness:

Double extractor trick @ 10 & 110 minerals
12 Overpool
16 OL (no really)
18 Queen
Send drone to hatch at 190 minerals
18 Hatch
21 Queen (should start right as previous queen finishes and you have minerals)
23 Overlord (should finish right as eggs pop)
29 Overlord
Maynard 8 drones at 30 (this should be when hatch pops)
Overlord at 37

I had studied a 12 overpool build like that:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=131345

But:
- 9 OL 12 pool is better than 12 overpool
- With this build you get a lot of larva (early), and you need to have enough economy to convert them, so you need to build only drones at the beginning. So I feel it is a bit less flexible.
- Because of the different spawn larva cycles, it is hard to decide what the best build is.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 15:16 GMT

#227

A thought: to try and mitigate the effect of larvae inject on our 6-minute readings, perhaps we should value them with the following method.

A drones takes 17+40 seconds to produce.

a) A drone X time into production should be valued as (40+X)/57 worth of a drone.
b) Unpopped larvae due to injection, a time T into the larvae injection process, should be valued as
as T/57 worth of a drone for earch larva.

Edit: It's very important we do this actually, or any drones at 0/17 simply vanish from the output, and the larvae also vanish. This could give a false impression when reporting the results.

Dakaru

Netherlands59 Posts

November 30 2010 16:50 GMT

#228

+ Show Spoiler +

9 overlord
14 pool (finishes @ 2:56)
16 hatch (finishes @ 4:20)
16 queen
18 overlord
18 extractor trick
22 queen
24 overlord
32 overlord
35 overlord

Drones: 42 + 15/17 = 42.88
Minerals Mined: 4000 + 664 = 4664
Queen Energy: 16 + 24 = 40
Remaining Larva: 0 (4 about to pop 1 second later from inject though)

(no sending to individual patches this time)

Notes: I made my second queen a few seconds too late and I oversaturated my main

Skrag

United States643 Posts

November 30 2010 17:13 GMT

#229

On December 01 2010 00:16 Dragar wrote:
A thought: to try and mitigate the effect of larvae inject on our 6-minute readings, perhaps we should value them with the following method.

You can take them into account just by looking at the replays, its just a huge pain in the ass. You have to record hatchery larvae spawn times and queen larvae spawn times, and figure out which build is ahead when in order to compare them directly.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 17:29 GMT

#230

I'm trying to make it less of a pain in the ass.

We do have queen energy written down, but it isn't being looked at currently.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 17:38 GMT

#231

slith

Germany165 Posts

November 30 2010 17:51 GMT

#232

If you really want to take this serious, add scouting Drones (that eventually die), initial pair of lings, Lair-Tech (in time for cloak attacks?) and/or Metabolic Boost, and vulnerability to Overlord sniping. And of course test every build against every possible typical harassment or the biggest possible attack at the finish mark from T, P and Z. Also take into consideration the ability to harass a fast expanding enemy.

My bet is on 11 Overpool, ~18 Hatch. But 14 Ex, 14 Pool 21 Hatch might come close. A 1-Hatch-Muta revive after this test would be really fun

Another build you might want to look at if you consider early game options:

+ Show Spoiler +

10 Extractor Trick
11 Overlord
11 Spawning Pool
12 Extractor > put 2 on gas
15 Queen
17 put 1 on gas
18 Metabolic Boost
18 put 3 on minerals
18 Spawn Larvae
18 Hatchery > transfer 3 (10s)
18 Overlord
18 Extractor Trick
23 Spawn Larvae
23 Queen
25 put 1 on gas
25 Overlord
25 put 2 on gas
32 Spawn Larvae
34 Lair

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 17:58 GMT

#233

On December 01 2010 02:51 slith wrote:
If you really want to take this serious, add scouting Drones (that eventually die), initial pair of lings, Lair-Tech (in time for cloak attacks?) and/or Metabolic Boost, and vulnerability to Overlord sniping. And of course test every build against every possible typical harassment or the biggest possible attack at the finish mark from T, P and Z. Also take into consideration the ability to harass a fast expanding enemy.

My bet is on 11 Overpool, 18 Hatch. But 14 Ex, 14 Pool 21 Hatch might come close.

Don't you realize this would add so many variables that it would make the gathered data convoluted and meaningless? In essence, you are asking to find the "best" zerg build, and that can't be done. There are subjective values to tech, scouting, etc. that cannot be measured in any meaningful way.

slith

Germany165 Posts

November 30 2010 18:02 GMT

#234

Sure, it does.

Just saying that testing economics only doesn't account for that nasty Terran opponent with his 1/1/1 or 3/0/0 who really wants to stop you from mining so hard.

And if you test economics, at least add gas to it at a reasonable time.. so we got all resources covered.

Not to say I don't like your dedication for this, really helps a lot in finding a good build. But finding the best build should be the goal.

Cyber_Cheese

Australia3615 Posts

November 30 2010 18:14 GMT

#235

I wonder how similar T and P best ecos will turn out
T gets mules, so an early rax might be superior for orbitals, but at what food
toss i can see as more linear w/ 15 nex since chrono doesnt need gateways

dtz

5834 Posts

November 30 2010 18:30 GMT

#236

oo wow this is actually impressive and unexpected.

good to know that an overpool build is actually very economical as well.

thanks for carrying this on as well despite cynics who says hatch hatch hatch first is obviously the best build without testing anything.

Also, there is no way builds like 15 nexus will be viable anymore if zergs open pool first. This might revolutionize the game.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

November 30 2010 18:33 GMT

#237

One build I want to try is some combination of double extractor trick hatchoverpool, or overpoolhatch, or pooloverhatch.

Hatchoverpool makes the most sense to me. That way you can then drone immediately after, and double-queen when the pool finishes.

Sanasante

United States321 Posts

November 30 2010 19:29 GMT

#238

I like how my informative thread got buried in garbage flaming posts.

In order to determine the best builds we must conduct another trial. Take your 3-4 best 6 minute builds and extend the trial time out by another 30 seconds. This should give you some very interesting results.

I suspect that the builds will get even closer to the same number of minerals mined. If this is the case then you need to shorten your experiment and retest at 5 minutes 30 seconds. Then compare the results again.

The scientific method is all about testings and retesting

Sanasante

United States321 Posts

November 30 2010 19:38 GMT

#239

On December 01 2010 02:38 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Suppose you have 1 larva and 50 minerals. Which would you prefer more of? Certainly you would prefer more minerals, as that would increase the utility or benefit derived from a single larva. Adding additional larvae would be worth nothing, since you do not have the resources to make use of them.
Now suppose you have 1 larva and 500 minerals. In this case, you would clearly prefer more larvae, since additional minerals would not be of much use given the larva constraint.

Therefore, the more valuable resource depends upon what is currently the greater constraint the player faces. So which is the greater constraint?

-jdseemoreglass

That is not true at all. 1 Larva is worth a lot more to the build than 50 minerals. You are not factoring in the opportunity cost of the Larva. The larva can be morphed into a drone. The drone can provide additional minerals over time. This can actually be calculated using Present Value of all future economic benefit. This calculation will be completely dependent on Saturation point as well. The point is that if the 50 minerals is not currently invested then it is not providing any benefit. Therefore you can calculate the value of 50 minerals by again taking the Present Value of the Future Value. The future value would then be considered by the time in which you would take to spend the 50 minerals.

The first present value equation however would need to be calculated like a perpetuities or an annuity that lasts forever.

If your looking for the most accurate results you will need to use Financial Concepts.

bobcat

United States488 Posts

November 30 2010 19:50 GMT

#240

sigh..... you try to make a scientific thread and the first people to touch it are always these.

+ Show Spoiler +

+ Show Spoiler +

On November 28 2010 19:28 the p00n wrote:

Show nested quote +

dis is starcraft 2, bro

And of course, one of these.

+ Show Spoiler +

On November 29 2010 04:24 Guerrilla705 wrote:

Show nested quote +

And by the way

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_laws

Science makes laws all the time starting with this exact same method.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 20:10 GMT

#241

Best thing to do is just move on and do the work, get the data, figure it out. People use science because it gets results, not because there was a huge debate about whether or not it was the right way to go about finding things out and everyone was persuaded it was.

crappen

Norway1546 Posts

November 30 2010 20:12 GMT

#242

On November 30 2010 23:09 roadrunner343 wrote:
I was so intrigued by Lomilar's build, that I had to try it out myself. I deviated a tiny bit, but not much... I think I followed it up to about 30 supply, so it was after I got my expansion. I've tried this build 3 times so far and won two games, and the game I lost was simply because I threw away a huge lead in one battle... felt like an idiot. Anyways, I am extremely impressed with this build so far. I would have never expected it to do so well economy wise.

Here is a replay of me executing the build. 1800+ Diamond
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/110784-1v1-terran-zerg-steppes-of-war

I really like this build so far. Like I said, I followed the build pretty well, and I scouted a very early 2 racks... I was able to drone hard and still pump lings in time to fend off the attack. I then had a far superior economy, tech switched to mutas, and eventually won the game. It was a far from perfect mid-late game, but I think that replay shows the strengths of this build early on. let me know what you guys think, what could have been done better, etc...

Lol, that replay was funny. Even though you had 3 times the army, 4 times the income, you did not attack with your superior ground army (did not even have tanks) :D He actually had to come to your base, and get picked off by 4 spines while your army chilled in the back, probably laughed their asses off.

ipwnN00bz

United States42 Posts

November 30 2010 20:26 GMT

#243

What I would really like to know is what build orders provide higher army values than other build orders at different times. Since the goal of your economy is to eventually turn income into army and the goal of an army is to eventually attack that seems like a much more practical evaluation metric. Sure army value isn't the best indicator of who will win but I think we can all agree that it is a less complicated first step than individual unit comparisons. It is also more practical than wondering what build order will make the most money if no one attacks each other for he first 10 minutes of a game.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

November 30 2010 20:34 GMT

#244

On December 01 2010 00:16 Dragar wrote:
A thought: to try and mitigate the effect of larvae inject on our 6-minute readings, perhaps we should value them with the following method.

A drones takes 17+40 seconds to produce.

a) A drone X time into production should be valued as (40+X)/57 worth of a drone.
b) Unpopped larvae due to injection, a time T into the larvae injection process, should be valued as
as T/57 worth of a drone for earch larva.

Edit: It's very important we do this actually, or any drones at 0/17 simply vanish from the output, and the larvae also vanish. This could give a false impression when reporting the results.

Actually, I think valuing the drone egg as a full drone at 0/17, and counting the position X/40 in the Spawn Larvae cycle as being worth 4 * X / 40 drones is better.

Assuming we are only building Drones, and only using Spawn Larvae larvae, if you plot score vs time over the course of the 40 second cycle:

When scoring out of 57, the plot will rise sharply at a slope of 8/57 for the first 17 seconds of the cycle, and at a slope of 4/57 for the remaining 23 seconds.
When scoring out of 40, the plot will be a straight line with a slope of 4/40

I'm fairly convinced a straight line is better.

(8/57 comes from the fact that 4 Drones from the previous cycle are in their eggs)

The other advantage to counting it out of 40 is that it's easy to add in the position of the Hatchery's normal larvae production -- again an egg counts as a full Drone, and position in the cycle is scored out of 15.

If you count an Overlord egg the same as a Drone egg (i.e. you're counting larvae), then it's easy accommodate overlord production into the score.

I really have the impression that most in this thread don't really care about production at all, though (at least for the purpose of this thread) -- just how quickly you are harvesting minerals.

BnK

United States538 Posts

November 30 2010 20:41 GMT

#245

On December 01 2010 05:12 crappen wrote:

Show nested quote +

this terran dont know how to 2 rax

raded

United States21 Posts

November 30 2010 20:47 GMT

#246

There is no single BO that will yield a "best economy" because there's a variable out of your control - the opponent. If you try to 10 hatch or even 14 hatch against any early push, you're going to lose.

If I scout hatch before pool, I'm going to roll over him with roaches.

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

November 30 2010 20:54 GMT

#247

On December 01 2010 05:34 Hurkyl wrote:

When scoring out of 57, the plot will rise sharply at a slope of 8/57 for the first 17 seconds of the cycle, and at a slope of 4/57 for the remaining 23 seconds.
When scoring out of 40, the plot will be a straight line with a slope of 4/40

I'm fairly convinced a straight line is better.

Ah, agreed. I haven't thought too hard about the numbers, but I see what you mean - while the drones are in their eggs, the drone per second is increasing far faster until they hatch. A linear fit would be better.

I just feel we're neglecting certain crucial aspects by only considering minerals mined, and counting the drones wrong. It's all very well having mined more, but if your cost of mining more was having your production lag behind your income (as evidenced by drone counts being higher for mined-less builds), that's clearly not optimal. I think 13p/16h actually comes out with a much higher drone count than hatch first builds when examined this way, which makes sense - it gets production off the ground much faster.

Malpractice.248

United States734 Posts

November 30 2010 21:48 GMT

#248

Okay so i see that 11/10 ext before OL = better than 9 OL?
I thought people tested this before and found out that 9 OL was better than extractor tricks?
Or is this simply for PURE economy...?
What about going 10/10 OL, then 11/10 during OL building?

Phrencys

Canada270 Posts

November 30 2010 22:04 GMT

#249

FWIW I know OP discards optimizers data but I'm not a 200apm zerg so that's all the data I can provide, so if someone wanna test this feel free otherwise just don't bother.

10 Overlord
10 Spawning Pool
16 Queen > Spawn Larvae[auto]
18 Hatchery > transfer 7 (10 sec)
17 Overlord
19 Queen
21 Overlord
28 Overlord
36 Overlord
-----
10 overpool seems to be ahead of 11overpool my a significant margin for some reason.

dezholling

United States7 Posts

November 30 2010 22:06 GMT

#250

On December 01 2010 06:48 Malpractice.248 wrote:
Okay so i see that 11/10 ext before OL = better than 9 OL?
I thought people tested this before and found out that 9 OL was better than extractor tricks?
Or is this simply for PURE economy...?
What about going 10/10 OL, then 11/10 during OL building?

9 overlord is *slightly* better than extractor trick, but only when you are planning to build a pool / hatch at 13+. When you build the pool on 11, the logic behind 9 overlord being better is no longer valid. You WILL get a much later 11 pool (and therefore delay the first queen) if you do 9 overlord compared to extractor trick.

As to the build, I like it a lot. Personally, I have modified it to be a 12 overpool (double extractor trick) because of real game build order considerations. In a real game, I need to send out a scout drone, build a pair of zerglings after pool pops, and (desirably) kick out scouts with lings before starting 2nd hatch. With these considerations, I find it more advantageous economically to get a 12 overpool, because it allows me to build a 3rd overlord on 15 before the pool finishes while still having minerals for the queen. Not only does this give me the supply I need to make a pair of zerglings, but it also means I am more prepared for a rush since I immediately have extra supply when the pool finishes.

ChiknAdobo

United States208 Posts

November 30 2010 22:43 GMT

#251

Hey dezholling, what's your exact build? And when do you get gas, speed, lair and all that good stuff? Also if anyone has any replays of holding off early pressure like the terran all-in or something like that, that would be good to see. If the early pool build can't hold off early pressure then it wouldn't really make it too much better than a hatch first build. Thanks!

dezholling

United States7 Posts

November 30 2010 23:02 GMT

#252

I have not tried this in a real game yet as I haven't played 1v1s for a few days. I have only really theorycrafted and run this build in the Build Order Tester over and over. I find getting gas right after then 2nd hatch is good (that's when minerals start accumulating), but this is around 19 or 20 supply, so it might be too late for a real game. However, though this is a much later gas than the standard 14 gas, 14 pool build for quick speedlings, it is slightly earlier than zergs usually get gas when they go 15 hatch, 15 pool. I'm looking forward to my free time in 2 days when I'll have the time to sit down and try it out at ~1800 diamond ladder. I just hope I spawn zerg (I play random).

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

November 30 2010 23:19 GMT

#253

Results from multiple sampling times, as well as a graph, have been posted to the OP. Enjoy.

Sanrensei

Laos4 Posts

November 30 2010 23:22 GMT

#254

Hi, 1,7K Diamond

I wanted to try the "Lomilar" build (11 pool, 18 hatch) with some minor differences:

- a set of glings as soon as the pool is done
- extractor with 3 drones at 14 (they stay in, I don't pull them away after 100 gas or other)
- metabolic boost as soon as I get 100 gas
- a third queen in order to deal with aerian harass
- a roach warren
- a spine crawler
- teching at 6:00

And honestly I was well-surprised because at 6:00 we can have nearly 38 drones, 2 zerglings, 3 queens, metabolic boost done and some minerals. So even in real game with real constraints, I feel this build pretty solid.

icezar

Germany240 Posts

December 01 2010 00:20 GMT

#255

On December 01 2010 07:04 Phrencys wrote:
FWIW I know OP discards optimizers data but I'm not a 200apm zerg so that's all the data I can provide, so if someone wanna test this feel free otherwise just don't bother.

The results are:
Minerals 4050+380
drones 43 + 3/17

Not good.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 00:23 GMT

#256

I discard optimizer results and data, but not optimizer builds. I am willing to test any build, no matter how you came across it.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

December 01 2010 00:54 GMT

#257

How are you showing 10 overpool ahead of 11 overpool? Because I know from testing that 11 overpool is better than 10 overpool for pretty much every single situation. 10 overpool is just bad, because it wastes so much larva spawn time.

nihoh

Australia978 Posts

December 01 2010 00:58 GMT

#258

Can you try

Extractor trick to 12

Expansion at 12

OL at 11

Spawning pool at 14

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 01 2010 01:17 GMT

#259

On December 01 2010 05:41 BnK wrote:

Show nested quote +

this terran dont know how to 2 rax

Well I'm glad you guys at least got a kick out of the build. I never claimed he was the greatest terran, though like I said, it was a 1800 diamond game.

And yes, I was laughing along with my army when he chose to attack. Why waste my army when the spines would take care of the hellions (There were a lot of them). I know I could have ended the game much sooner, but I was really in no threat of losing, so I was just massing. Anyways, that was not the point of that replay anyways. Please ignore the very poor mid-late game play on my part =)

The point was, I think it is a very stable build economy wise, and you are able to get the lings out when needed due to the very early spawning pool. Of course you have to modify the build a little build by getting lings when you absolutely need them, but other than that, I like it so far. I'll upload more replays eventually of the Lomilar build if anyone would like them.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 02:18 GMT

#260

On December 01 2010 09:58 nihoh wrote:
Can you try

Extractor trick to 12

Expansion at 12

OL at 11

Spawning pool at 14

This build sounded interesting, but the results weren't so great.

Drones: 39 + 3/17
Resources: 3900 + 540 = 4440

ChiknAdobo

United States208 Posts

December 01 2010 02:32 GMT

#261

Sanrensei, that sounds like a solid build. Have you tried it out in any 1v1s yet? I think that extra queen would be great for spreading creep too because with the later hatch your creep spread is slowed down a little bit. If you have all the exact timings hammered out that would be great to see as well.

friscosav

United States71 Posts

December 01 2010 02:32 GMT

#262

I think what we should take away from this is that maybe if you're sensing a lot of pressure, or are on a map that rewards it, an 11 pool doesn't put you economically behind. I agree that trying to find the "BEST EVERY ECONOMIC OPENING +7% MINERAL MINING" is a big waste of time, but now at least i know that I can 11 pool if i have to (or feel like it), and not be too far behind.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 02:51 GMT

#263

After doing repeated tests and analyzing many replays, I am starting to think the X Hatch, X+1 Pool will naturally have a stronger foundation, due to the pool and queen being timed equally to completion. Also, I think an earlier hatch than 16 will allow us to optimally begin maynarding drones without experiencing any diminishing mining returns while on one base.

I will try to perfect the 14 Hatch 15 Pool build order and post my results soon. If my theory is correct, this will likely replace the 16 Hatch 15 Pool build as the leader in resources mined.

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

December 01 2010 02:59 GMT

#264

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 November 30 2010 21:35 mlbrandow wrote:

Show nested quote +

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

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 03:18 GMT

#265

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.

Show nested quote +

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?

Ender9

United States21 Posts

December 01 2010 03:38 GMT

#266

Please do upload more reps roadrunner

schmang

Canada4 Posts

December 01 2010 03:41 GMT

#267

I really appreciate what you've done here, and the scientific method used. I have a request though >.>

Could the graphs for mining begin at like 1:00 rather than 4:30, I have been trying the 11 pool opening and I really like it, however after watching a replay I think that 14gas/14pool and similar 14X builds may have a better economy in in the first 2-3minutes. I consider the early minutes to actually be of some importance, since this is when your whole build order can get kind of screwed up by aggression etc.

Thebigcheeze

United States1 Post

December 01 2010 04:00 GMT

#268

What else could be useful is performing the same test but using 'bad' economic builds.

Builds such as a 10 pool before overlord, or some variation of an 8 pool, just to get a feeling for how much better these 'economic' builds are compared to these 'high early pressure' builds.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 01 2010 04:10 GMT

#269

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

Will do. I am at work right now (I work night shift) but when I get home in the morning, I will play the lomilar build exclusively, so I'll try to upload at least a few in the morning. Hopefully I get some decent games and not all humiliating defeats =)

imbecile

563 Posts

December 01 2010 04:23 GMT

#270

Interesting as a framework, but not really for practical use. Because no build can do without a scouting drone and without gas and without any defence or creep spread until the 6:00 mark.

I play random, which gives me a little leeway early. My goto build is:

9lord
10drone scout
14hatch
16pool
18lord
18gas
17drone
maynarding 7 drones right before
at this point pool and hatch and overlord finish at the same time and you have enough to immediately make
2 queens
22 drone
23 drone
extractor finishes: 3 on gas

After that it's all scouting dependent, if I scouted cheese earlier, I of course adapt earlier.

What I like about this build is, when done right, you never have 3 larva at the same time until queens start injecting. Which means you don't lose any larva generation time.

Sanasante

United States321 Posts

December 01 2010 04:27 GMT

#271

On December 01 2010 12:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 30 2010 21:35 mlbrandow wrote:

On November 30 2010 19:05 Skrag wrote:
btw, aren't you all glad we're finally putting and end to the zerg opening economy debate, once and for all?

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

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.

It is possible to remove the time constraint completely however. The first build to reach 32 workers (Not including drones used for buildings) for mineral only saturation. 44 Workers for Mineral and Gas Saturation.

In terms of a real game. Your looking for the build that gets you to 44 workers (Not including 1 for hatch, 1 for pool, 4 for gas nodes or 6 total additional for a grand total of 50 drones however you start with 6 so this is negated).

For more of a practical sense the build that gets you to have produced 45-46 workers the fastest would be considered the most economical build period, disregarding getting a 3rd base.

michaelhasanalias

Korea (South)1231 Posts

December 01 2010 04:29 GMT

#272

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?

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.

onmach

United States1241 Posts

December 01 2010 04:30 GMT

#273

This is really good info. Thanks for doing this. Ignore the stupid people trying to poke holes in this. I would never have guessed that an 11 pool could potentially be a contender. I'm going to experiment with variants of this opening to see what works best for me.

Pwere

Canada1556 Posts

December 01 2010 05:21 GMT

#274

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.

Zergneedsfood

United States10671 Posts

December 01 2010 05:44 GMT

#275

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.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 05:46 GMT

#276

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.

I am flaming these posts because people refuse to read the other posts, and refuse to pay attention to detail.

Sansante, read the post. We have data pre 6:30. He wants data pre 4:30. Many of the builds do not even complete their hatchery by the 4:30 mark.

Brandow, I know for a fact I posted that graph BEFORE your post requesting different timings.
Then you say "There is NO most economical build for all times less than 6 minutes because there is no build that nets you most minerals for all times before 6 minutes," when clearly, there IS a build which is the leader in minerals mined at every point in time from 4:30 to 7:00.

Please don't start trolling about pre 4:30 either. There is no chance I am going to start analyzing the economy of a build that just sacrificed time, drones, and resources on a hatchery that hasn't even completed yet.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 05:53 GMT

#277

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.

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.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 01 2010 06:06 GMT

#278

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.

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.

Pwere

Canada1556 Posts

December 01 2010 06:16 GMT

#279

On December 01 2010 15:06 roadrunner343 wrote:

Show nested quote +

My bad, I found the thread, and it was an 11overpool all along.

Carry on; I'm a believer too.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

December 01 2010 06:26 GMT

#280

On December 01 2010 14:53 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

You're still using your original drone score, aren't you? It has flaws that you refuse to listen to. Those flaws are made even more evident from your chart of time vs Drones -- three builds that ostensibly are making things at the exact same rate keep flip-flopping back and forth between which has the highest score.

It's a good thing to ignore uninformed criticism. It is a bad thing to ignore informed criticism.

NATO

United States459 Posts

December 01 2010 06:43 GMT

#281

On the other hand, this is pretty worthless as you will die to any early aggression. A minor sacrifice, and you can be in position to deal with anything:

15 extractor
14 pool
17 ov
17 hatch
16 speed
17 queen
22 roach warren
23 lair
ov
extractor
22 queen
drone til 44 drones.

You can replace roach warren with baneling nest if needed, or skip it altogether if you don't need it. In any case, this gets you fast speed (which gets you map control early on), followed by pretty fast lair, with little sacrifice to economy. This is the strongest (safe) mutalisk opening, because you have two fully saturated bases, and can double expand with the extra minerals once the mutas pop.

obsid

United States389 Posts

December 01 2010 07:03 GMT

#282

14 hatch, 15 pool comes out the winner. Not too suprizing given thats what like all the pros do (and me!

). Still the 11 pool 18 hatch is very intresting. Definatly will be using that build on steps/DQ, where having that earlier pool can give you a lot more flexability that you need on those maps.

Mainland

Canada551 Posts

December 01 2010 07:21 GMT

#283

On December 01 2010 13:23 imbecile wrote:
Interesting as a framework, but not really for practical use. Because no build can do without a scouting drone and without gas and without any defence or creep spread until the 6:00 mark.

You have a rather appropriate user name. Obviously, the timing of the extractor or scouting drone or zerglings and the order we build them in will effect the build's economic fitness. But as long as the order and timing of whatever buildings or units we add to these skeleton builds stay the same, they are only delaying the next drone or overlord or queen or hatchery. So their economic efficiency without scouting drones or creep spread would translate into the same relative efficiency with it.

For example, if we were to compare 2 builds for the purpose of economic efficiency that included say, 4 zerglings, we wouldn't want to compare builds with 4 zerglings at 4:00, to other builds with 4 zerglings at 5:00. It would be trivial to prove that the best (in terms of economy) build with zerglings at 5:00 would be better than the best build with lings at 4:00. Since a scouting drones, zerglings, spine crawlers, creep tumors always slow down the economy by a constant (creep tumors could help if you're transferring a queen, but that's a really special case that's reasonable to ignore to reduce complexity), it's fine to ignore them and then just add them in uniformly to all the builds that we have tested.

The extractor is a different story, because it's actually an investment in the economy, so would be interesting to see how adding that in effects the economy. One thing about adding an extractor is that it complicates the research by a lot because we will need to qualify how much vespene gas is valued versus drones, queens, and minerals. However we weight the value of gas will change the number of drones we want to put on gas, and the time we want to build the extractors. This adds a lot of complexity to our model, and as we add more options to these test builds, the number of possible builds grows geometrically. Since we are using people and man hours to test these builds, it's reasonable to limit them to just drones, queens, overlords, and hatcheries. If we were to use an AI to test these builds, then it would be feasible to add in more components. But it would still be reasonable to start out with these 4 components from a efficiency standpoint.

Klamity

United States994 Posts

December 01 2010 07:29 GMT

#284

11 pool, eh?

Perhaps I will toy around with this in ZvZ. Seems like it would be a great answer to 6 pooling shenanigans.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

December 01 2010 07:32 GMT

#285

On December 01 2010 16:21 Mainland wrote:

Show nested quote +

You have a rather appropriate user name. Obviously, the timing of the extractor or scouting drone or zerglings and the order we build them in will effect the build's economic fitness. But as long as the order and timing of whatever buildings or units we add to these skeleton builds stay the same, they are only delaying the next drone or overlord or queen or hatchery. So their economic efficiency without scouting drones or creep spread would translate into the same relative efficiency with it.

For example, if we were to compare 2 builds for the purpose of economic efficiency that included say, 4 zerglings, we wouldn't want to compare builds with 4 zerglings at 4:00, to other builds with 4 zerglings at 5:00. It would be trivial to prove that the best (in terms of economy) build with zerglings at 5:00 would be better than the best build with lings at 4:00. Since a scouting drones, zerglings, spine crawlers, creep tumors always slow down the economy by a constant, it's fine to ignore them and then just add them in uniformly to all the builds that we have tested.

The extractor is a different story, because it's actually an investment in the economy, so would be interesting to see how adding that in effects the economy. One thing about adding an extractor is that it complicates the research by a lot because we will need to qualify how much vespene gas is valued versus drones, queens, and minerals. However we weight the value of gas will change the number of drones we want to put on gas, and the time we want to build the extractors. This adds a lot of complexity to our model, and as we add more options to these test builds, the number of possible builds grows geometrically. Since we are using people and man hours to test these builds, it's reasonable to limit them to just drones, queens, overlords, and hatcheries. If we were to use an AI to test these builds, then it would be feasible to add in more components. But it would still be reasonable to start out with these 4 components from a efficiency standpoint.

This is tempered by the fact we cannot build early units using late minerals.

One particularly severe flaw is the fact that many openings simply will not be able to afford constant production from 2 Hatches + 2 Queens by the time it's available. I believe this fact favors Hatchery first builds.

Another oversight is that middle pool FE builds walk a very thin line on being able to afford everything -- sending your 10th Drone to scout, I am quite sure, would far more seriously impact a middle pool build than it would a hatch first build.

Hurkyl

304 Posts

December 01 2010 07:35 GMT

#286

On December 01 2010 16:29 Klamity wrote:
11 pool, eh?

Perhaps I will toy around with this in ZvZ. Seems like it would be a great answer to 6 pooling shenanigans.

I do believe 11 pool that starts putting pressure on the opponent with the first zerglings to be an excellent ZvZ opening. Of course, this strays pretty far from the topic of the thread.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 07:36 GMT

#287

On December 01 2010 16:29 Klamity wrote:
11 pool, eh?

Perhaps I will toy around with this in ZvZ. Seems like it would be a great answer to 6 pooling shenanigans.

I really love this build. It prevents your opponent from playing hatch first. It auto-wins all 6 pool rushes. Most importantly, I think people will overreact when they scout it. They may think "ok so he has to commit to attacking or he is behind in economy." From there you simply continue producing drones and fly past your opponent who has over-adjusted toward perceived early aggression and stopped playing pure macro.

I will definitely start testing this on the high-diamond ladder. I will let you guys know how it holds up and maybe provide some replays.

Cheerio

Ukraine3178 Posts

December 01 2010 07:47 GMT

#288

On December 01 2010 16:36 jdseemoreglass wrote:

I will definitely start testing this on the high-diamond ladder. I will let you guys know how it holds up and maybe provide some replays.

I already do since beta. Never wanted to change to 14 pool. Works just great.

I just dont understand why on the graph 11 pool gets so much behind on drone count at later stages. Both queens must be already up, why being behind on production? A mistake is possible.

ThomasHobbes

United States197 Posts

December 01 2010 07:49 GMT

#289

I've been toying with an 11 overpool opening in 2000+ diamond. It seems to work well with the enormous versatility it offers.

vsportsguy

United States118 Posts

December 01 2010 08:00 GMT

#290

Here's what I took away from this: 14 Hatch 15 Pool is the preferred economic opener if one can defend early aggression with it. 14 Pool 16 Hatch is a fantastic substitute to 14 Hatch 15 Pool if your hatch is blocked. 11 Pool 18 Hatch is the most flexible, easiest to defend/apply early pressure with, and overall the safest build for less experienced players.

Assuming a standard FE opener from the zerg player, I don't understand why anybody would want to use anything other than these three builds (assuming no other builds are posted).

Any build where the player makes both a pool and hatchery after 13 and before 18 (16 Hatch 15 Pool, 15 Hatch, 14 Pool, 15 Hatch, 16 Pool, ect) will not be far off. Any player below 2.4k will not win/lose games due to this minimal difference. However, if you know 14 Hatch 15 Pool is slightly more economical than the others, why not use it...

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

December 01 2010 08:22 GMT

#291

Gonna 11 pool on small maps forever for sure

Let it Raine

Canada1245 Posts

December 01 2010 08:24 GMT

#292

how does 11 pool work, dang

pooling that early has to some kind of huge consequence, right? whats the catch to this build >_>

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

December 01 2010 08:33 GMT

#293

On December 01 2010 17:24 Let it Raine wrote:
how does 11 pool work, dang

pooling that early has to some kind of huge consequence, right? whats the catch to this build >_>

Almost nothing, it's so counterintuitive but still so awesome. Mind = blown, for sure

Let it Raine

Canada1245 Posts

December 01 2010 08:51 GMT

#294

Yeah seriously, mine too. Lol.

I'm gonna test this out in some games I guess. BBL!

Metaspace

Austria670 Posts

December 01 2010 12:08 GMT

#295

I used the 11 pool build yesterday in a few games.

I am platinum only, but the early pool puts quite some pressure on the opponent, while you still get a very decent eco going when not making 10-12 lings as threatened with first batch of bonus larvae.

Shikyo

Finland33997 Posts

December 01 2010 12:20 GMT

#296

So... what's the difference between single extractor trick 11pool and double extractor trick 12pool? s the 11pool really that much better?

edit: also try making 6 lings with both 11pool and 14h 15p. It might be that the early advantage of 11pool means more because you'll have more drones in comparison and so on... I'm not sure. Might be useful for a real-life scenario.

Enyalus

United States135 Posts

December 01 2010 12:42 GMT

#297

On December 01 2010 21:20 Shikyo wrote:
So... what's the difference between single extractor trick 11pool and double extractor trick 12pool? s the 11pool really that much better?

The difference was talked about in this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=133917

IIRC, it had something to do with minerals lost on canceling both extractors making the build only break about even with the 11pool build, and more difficult to pull off perfectly.

SeksUHell

France1 Post

December 01 2010 14:01 GMT

#298

Hey ! Thanks for the topic !

9 ov
16 Hatch
15 pool
17 ov
18 queen
21 queen
23 ov
31 ov
35 ov

is quite good for a macro game...

Grend

1600 Posts

December 01 2010 14:12 GMT

#299

I like doing the 11 pool 18 hatch as people get confused by it. Also fun if toss puts down a pylon at nat, because you have plenty of time to take it down

imbecile

563 Posts

December 01 2010 14:13 GMT

#300

On December 01 2010 16:21 Mainland wrote:
But as long as the order and timing of whatever buildings or units we add to these skeleton builds stay the same, they are only delaying the next drone or overlord or queen or hatchery.

That's the catch. If you remove a drone from mining, you delay timings, and at some point you won't have enough minerals to make use of a larva. Every second you have 3 larva lying idle is lost production time, akin to not building anything from your cc or nexus.

Anyway, did a quick and dirty test as described without scouting on caverns:

4:30 2985m 22.75d 56g
5:00 3400m 26.d5 116g
5:30 3885m 30.5d 172g
6:00 4460m 41.5d 232g

pool and hatch finish @3:44 and the two queens pop accordingly a@4:35
gas is planted @3:16, which is the same time I'd fit gas into the current leading 11pool build

So, how do the 11pool an my build compare? @6:00 I have 200 minerals and 2 drones less, but I also have 232gas. I'd say if gas is fit into the 11pool the numbers would be pretty much the same, unless it screws up some timings later, which might as well be, but needs to be tested.

So what matters then is the order you get things. Early pool is great, having your first queen @3:30 is too, against cheeses. But that is nothing that can't be addressed by scouting and adapting. I get my 2nd queen 20s earlier though, which s good for blocking ramps if need be. And it also means I can immediately start a 3rd and then lair a few seconds later.
Earlier hatch also means better creep spread, just as earlier second queen (I vomit at the nat and plant a tumor at the main to connect the bases).

So, I'm gonna stand by my initial statement: it's good to have a framework to compare against, and I think it's good that I can now. But once you adapt those pure economy builds to be usable in real games, there is little difference anymore, and your build choice depends on what you like better personally.

Phrencys

Canada270 Posts

December 01 2010 14:44 GMT

#301

If anything, this thread shows that almost any opening can be an "economics" build. The differences are so meaningless that it becomes purely a matter of preference/safety/practicability.

The initial debate was driven by the "hatch first cheese" thread and zerg claiming that hatch first and pool first don't even compete in the same leagues as far as economics goes. This has been proven false. I'm not going to buy it even if IdrA says that the extra 50mineral you get from a hatch first opening over 6minutes is the determining factor to say who ggs/ragequits first.

The only argument that remains is safety: early pool gives you more flexibility to stop really quick cheese, early hatch gives you a better opportunity at having a chance to lay down spines in time to stop a later bunker+scv rush at your nat. It comes down to determining which build is safer, on which map, against which strategy!

Dakaru

Netherlands59 Posts

December 01 2010 16:34 GMT

#302

jdseemoreglass could you please take another look at 14 pool 16 hatch? after seeing your new graphs I went ahead and played on until 7 min too and this is from my first try (so might be some small mistakes) I did NOT send my drones to individual mineral patches, just hatch waypoints.

BO:
+ Show Spoiler +

9 overlord
14 pool
16 hatch
16 queen (inject and send to natural)
18 overlord
extractor trick
22 queen
24 overlord
32 overlord
35 overlord
44 overlord
50 overlord

Results:
+ Show Spoiler +

Drones:
- 4:30 -- 5:00 -- 5:30 -- 6:00 -- 6:30 -- 7:00
21.29 - 28.53 - 35.76 - 41.7 - 52.59 - 61.88

Resources:
4:30 -- 5:00 -- 5:30 -- 6:00 -- 6:30 -- 7:00
3029 - 3469 - 4049 - 4709 - 5454 - 6269

basically it's behind all other BO's at 4:30, but at 5:00 it's ahead in drones and stays ahead with the exception of 6:00's 11 pool.

at 5:00 it's ahead of 11 pool in resources and at 6:00 it overtakes 16 hatch 15 pool and is in the end only SLIGHTLY behind 14 hatch 15 pool in resources which is so minimal it can be luckbased...

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 16:49 GMT

#303

On December 02 2010 01:34 Dakaru wrote:
jdseemoreglass could you please take another look at 14 pool 16 hatch? after seeing your new graphs I went ahead and played on until 7 min too and this is from my first try (so might be some small mistakes) I did NOT send my drones to individual mineral patches, just hatch waypoints.

BO:
+ Show Spoiler +

9 overlord
14 pool
16 hatch
16 queen (inject and send to natural)
18 overlord
extractor trick
22 queen
24 overlord
32 overlord
35 overlord
44 overlord
50 overlord

Results:
+ Show Spoiler +

Drones:
- 4:30 -- 5:00 -- 5:30 -- 6:00 -- 6:30 -- 7:00
21.29 - 28.53 - 35.76 - 41.7 - 52.59 - 61.88

Resources:
4:30 -- 5:00 -- 5:30 -- 6:00 -- 6:30 -- 7:00
3029 - 3469 - 4049 - 4709 - 5454 - 6269

One problem I have with this build is that you skipped the final overlord which all other builds produced. This leaves you supply capped at 68/68 at the end of the replay with no overlord in sight. This can account for an increase in at least a drone.

I find it unlikely this build will surpass the others, but I will certainly test it again and post the new results later today.

Dakaru

Netherlands59 Posts

December 01 2010 16:58 GMT

#304

yeah I forgot that but really it matters only 1 drone because everything is saturated already and the limiting factor is the larva... also I had 2 larva spawns remaining at 7 min mark because I was supply capped so that would increase my drone count slightly too
either way even with a whole drone less the build is still ahead in drones of all the others by nearly another drone

Dragar

United Kingdom971 Posts

December 01 2010 17:25 GMT

#305

jdseemoreglass, I really think you should include the corrected partial drone counting once queens have appeared. See earlier posts by myself and Hyrkul. If you disagree we'd obviously appreciate the reasoning.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 17:46 GMT

#306

On December 02 2010 02:25 Dragar wrote:
jdseemoreglass, I really think you should include the corrected partial drone counting once queens have appeared. See earlier posts by myself and Hyrkul. If you disagree we'd obviously appreciate the reasoning.

No one disputes that different builds will have queen spawn larvae at different times. The point is that all the builds will necessarily produce them at the same RATE beyond a certain time. Showing the data over time provides a visual representation of where each build is in the spawn larvae cycle, but the discrepancy overall in the drone count will not change in the long run, only in short time frames.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

December 01 2010 17:52 GMT

#307

Try 14hatch/14pool. It does get larvae-blocked for a short time while waiting for minerals for the pool, but might make that up later with faster queens. If there's enough of a larva advantage, it might be worth a slight reduction in total mining.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 17:56 GMT

#308

I played two games today on diamond ladder (2200+) using the 11pool and won each of them easily.

The first game illustrates how flexible this build is in reverting to an all-in attack. I scout my opponent opening hatch first, so that is exactly what I go for. Going hatch first or 14 pool would prevent this sort of pressure, and would potentially negate what is for me an easy victory.

Erectum

France194 Posts

December 01 2010 18:27 GMT

#309

Thx for the rep, the 4 gat is reaped so badly

ubershmekel

25 Posts

December 01 2010 18:40 GMT

#310

I've been running evo chamber for 9 hours on a quad core and it couldn't find a build that gives 46 drones at the 6 minute mark. Builds that give 45 drones at the 6 minute mark are easy to produce. The program stagnated on

10 OL
Etrick
11 pool
16 queen
18 hatch
18 OL
20 OL
20 queen

All I really wanted to say is that the builds listed here may be the best possible builds and they are likely limited by this "45 drone ceiling" at the 6 minute mark. I'll publish a graph soon to help understand how the time limit influences this experiment.

Phrencys

Canada270 Posts

December 01 2010 19:57 GMT

#311

On December 02 2010 03:40 ubershmekel wrote:
I've been running evo chamber for 9 hours on a quad core and it couldn't find a build that gives 46 drones at the 6 minute mark. Builds that give 45 drones at the 6 minute mark are easy to produce. The program stagnated on

10 OL
Etrick
11 pool
16 queen
18 hatch
18 OL
20 OL
20 queen

All I really wanted to say is that the builds listed here may be the best possible builds and they are likely limited by this "45 drone ceiling" at the 6 minute mark. I'll publish a graph soon to help understand how the time limit influences this experiment.

Has anyone tried silly openings like double expand yet?

9 Overlord
16 Hatchery #2
15 Spawning Pool
17 Overlord
18 Hatchery #3
20 Queen
24 Queen
26 Overlord
28 Queen
30 Overlord
36 Overlord
40 Overlord

To minimize travel time:
- transfer 1 drone and rally main hatch to hatch#2 until both have 16 then rally both to hatch#3
- hatch#3 not rallied

If there's one build that allows you to make more than 45 drones at 6:00, it should be something like this.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

December 01 2010 19:59 GMT

#312

Ok, so my testing does seem to indicate that 14hatch/14pool does have a larva advantage of around 2-3 over 14h/15p, which I think would put it as the clear larva leader overall, and that larva advantage comes at the cost of a very small resource loss when compared to 14h/15, somewhere around 30-40 minerals worth.

The actual order is pretty much identical to the posted order for 14h/15p, and in some cases the overlord timings line up much more nicely anyway. For example, the overlord on 17 feels pretty early, and I *think* you could get away with waiting til 18 to build the overlord with 14h/15p, getting an earlier drone, but OL on 17 is necessary for 14h/14p.

I'm measuring things differently than the OP though (I still don't understand where the "resources mined" number is coming from, and I'm also taking the queen spawn larvae progress into account for drones), so having me post numbers isn't going to be particularly useful.

Eladimir

Canada11 Posts

December 01 2010 20:48 GMT

#313

Personally I'm loving the 11 overpool 18 hatch build, played some games with it last nite and it worked out well. Always wanted a pool that early but assumed I was at a massive eco disadvantage. Even if its slightly behind the other front runners I'll take it.

Scrimpton

United Kingdom465 Posts

December 01 2010 20:56 GMT

#314

agree with eladmir.

whilst there may be the other build that's slightly higher on econ, there's really no price tag on how much safer the 11pool is, and how much more variable you can be with it.
I've been loving it :D.

In the end it will just be a case of looking at the highest econ builds, and working down the list untill you find a sensible game viable one. So far thats the 11overpool :D

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 01 2010 21:14 GMT

#315

On December 02 2010 05:56 Scrimpton wrote:
agree with eladmir.

whilst there may be the other build that's slightly higher on econ, there's really no price tag on how much safer the 11pool is, and how much more variable you can be with it.
I've been loving it :D.

In the end it will just be a case of looking at the highest econ builds, and working down the list untill you find a sensible game viable one. So far thats the 11overpool :D

I agree with everyone on this. In fact, I think I may start a new thread on the potential new zerg standard in all match-ups. I really can't see any reason or justification for doing any other build yet, but more testing in-game is clearly needed.

One thing that should be analyzed is the "current resources" of this build compared to the other. I suspect this build may be more fragile to variations in unit production with regard to delaying the ordering.

Talkerst

124 Posts

December 01 2010 21:46 GMT

#316

If you are talking theoretical maximum (from evo chamber) I got 48 drones in under 6 minutes using

10 Extractor Trick
11 Overlord
11 Hatchery
12 Spawning Pool
14 Overlord
15 Queen, then Constant Spawn Larvae
17 Queen, then Constant Spawn Larvae
19 Overlord
27 Extractor Trick
29 Overlord
34 Extractor Trick
36 Extractor Trick
38 Overlord
51 Drone

Though I did use the GUI version as it runs much faster - my understanding is there shouldn't be a time diff between the two. Not sure on how many minerals you'd have at this point but it would probably be close to the others. However, I don't think evo chamber takes into account travel times and such so no one would actually be able to realize this directly. Not very useful but it does pass the 46 drone limit you were talking about.

Skrag

United States643 Posts

December 01 2010 21:47 GMT

#317

On December 02 2010 06:14 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

Despite the fact that it probably seems I'm fighting to have 14hatch still be considered the "best" build, I agree as well. I think it's totally awesome that 11overpool/18hatch is close enough economically to the best true economic builds that you can use it in all but the absolute safest of situations. I'll probably hatch-first on shakuras, jungle basin, and maybe metal (although even there it's nice to know that 14h/15p or 14h/14p are both better than 15h/14p which is what I've been doing), but everywhere else it's almost certainly going to be 11overpool for me from now on.

Randomaccount#77123

United States5003 Posts

December 01 2010 21:53 GMT

#318

--- Nuked ---

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 02 2010 00:07 GMT

#319

I added a thread regarding the 11 Overpool as the possible new standard opening, including several more replays.

Here is the link:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=173430

bmn

886 Posts

December 02 2010 02:02 GMT

#320

I counted each mineral node at the end of the 11 pool 18 hatch replay and came up with 20065. Subtracted from the 24000 minerals from 16 nodes at 2 bases, that comes out to 3935 minerals mined. Where does 4620 come from? Same for the 14 hatch 16 pool Dakaru posted. Why are the results off by 600-700 minerals if you have a replay.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 02 2010 02:06 GMT

#321

On December 02 2010 11:02 bmn wrote:
I counted each mineral node at the end of the 11 pool 18 hatch replay and came up with 20065. Subtracted from the 24000 minerals from 16 nodes at 2 bases, that comes out to 3935 minerals mined. Where does 4620 come from? Same for the 14 hatch 16 pool Dakaru posted. Why are the results off by 600-700 minerals if you have a replay.

This was already explained in a previous post...

We are using the replay tab "Resources Spent," and adding that to current minerals to find resources mined. The replay adds the starting units to minerals spent, which I believe is 700 additional minerals being recorded. This is the fastest way to gauge minerals mined, and doesn't change the mineral difference between builds, only the relative ratio difference. Since we aren't using such ratios, I felt it didn't matter.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 02 2010 02:51 GMT

#322

Hi,

I haven't actually used this in a game but I decided to try out build orders for this post. I found 16 hatch 15 pool to be most efficient.

The build order is as follows

9 ovie
16 hatch
15 pool
17 ovie
19 queen at the main
23 queen at the expansion
25 ovie
30 ovie
38 ovie

it hits 6:00 with 4800 minerals mined and 41.71 drones, which as far as I can tell from looking around is pretty good

NOTE: transfer three drones from the main when the expansion comes up and then rally all drones to the expansion. When 16 drones are either mining at the expansion or rallied to mine at the expansion move the main rally back to the main mineral line. Other than that pump drones as long as you can and that's the build.

Here is a replay

http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/111354-1v1-zerg-xelnaga-caverns

CarbonTwelve

Australia525 Posts

December 02 2010 05:28 GMT

#323

Watch the replays and check the spending tab at the end, then add the current minerals on top. This should equal the total minerals mined (plus 50 from what you start with).

Edit: Sorry, beaten by hours, could've sworn I'd refreshed to the latest...

Drenova

United States2 Posts

December 02 2010 05:45 GMT

#324

Why do you have to make two ovies in a row on Lomilar's build? Why not make a drone at 18? Forgive me if I've counted something backwards...

CarbonTwelve

Australia525 Posts

December 02 2010 05:55 GMT

#325

On December 02 2010 14:45 Drenova wrote:
Why do you have to make two ovies in a row on Lomilar's build? Why not make a drone at 18? Forgive me if I've counted something backwards...

I'm fairly sure it prevents being larvae capped. Can't make a drone at 18 until the 17 overlord finishes.

Btw, my build order app comes up with similar results for an 11 pool econ build.

jgreen46

Canada94 Posts

December 02 2010 20:46 GMT

#326

well that's retarded, for so long i say 14 hatch 15 pool is the way to go

ppl say "no go look at TL thread"
so i go look it says the other shit's better
but
now
look

AHHHHHHHHHHH!

Miragee

8469 Posts

December 02 2010 22:05 GMT

#327

2 Things:

1: Did you test 15 Hatch 14 Pool?

2: Is 11 Pool able to get 3 Queens in a row as quick as possible? I like to get 3 (4 with Hatch first) up to spread creep like crazy.^^ Maybe there are no minerals for in the time you need?

Jermstuddog

United States2231 Posts

December 02 2010 22:49 GMT

#328

I haven't had time to play around with the 11/18 build much, but is the OP BO the most refined?

Back in beta I used to do an extractor trick - pool - OV - extractor trick and it gave me roughly an extra 1/2 larva spawn time at the cost of roughly 10 additional minerals.

Were small variances like that looked at?

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 02 2010 23:54 GMT

#329

On December 03 2010 07:49 Jermstuddog wrote:
I haven't had time to play around with the 11/18 build much, but is the OP BO the most refined?

Back in beta I used to do an extractor trick - pool - OV - extractor trick and it gave me roughly an extra 1/2 larva spawn time at the cost of roughly 10 additional minerals.

Were small variances like that looked at?

You have to get an overlord before pool for this build to be economical. Everytime I tried pool first, it was among the worst of the builds in economy.

miamibadboi

United States27 Posts

December 03 2010 01:24 GMT

#330

sorry if this was already posted but did you try 14 hatch 16 pool?

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 02:02 GMT

#331

How come you didn't post the 16 Hatch 15 Pool build I sent you? It beats out the 11 pool by 150 minerals! It also beats out every other build you have put up so far. As a matter of fact it beats the supposed leader, 14 Pool 15 Hatch, while also maintaining the same pool time.

RoarMan

Canada745 Posts

December 03 2010 02:07 GMT

#332

Thanks for setting up this thread, finally some conclusive answers to our Zergie questions :D.

Really interesting to see an 11 pool build being 2nd in economy, looking forward to trying it out.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 02:09 GMT

#333

Also, what's the deal with the discrepancy between the 11 pool data you posted in the table and the 11 pool data in the video. In the video the minerals are at 4539 and in the chart it's at 4620. When I tried the build myself I got 4529, so the number from the video seems much more realistic, and it's a very big difference.

If I can only get 4530 from the 11 pool then the 16 hatch 15 pool is 250 minerals ahead, which is almost an extra hatch.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 02:16 GMT

#334

I checked to see what the minerals mined was in the 11 pool 18 hatch at the end of the second at 6:00 and it matched your data. That's what the difference is. Since I've taken all my data at the beginning of the second of 6:00 that puts the 16 hatch 15 pool 250 mineral ahead! That is not an inconsequential amount. That is almost enough for an extra hatchery, which is huge.

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 03 2010 02:24 GMT

#335

I'm sorry, I've been spending my time on a new thread regarding the 11pool build. I will get around to testing your build order and I will update soon.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 03:03 GMT

#336

I'm sorry, I've been spending my time on a new thread regarding the 11pool build. I will get around to testing your build order and I will update soon.

Hey, thanks. Here's another replay if it helps. I go to seven minutes this time and I also take special care not to put the first two drones on particular mineral patches, like the rules said.

http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/111768-1v1-zerg-xelnaga-caverns

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 03 2010 04:32 GMT

#337

Alright ladies and gentlemen, here is my first attempt at the Lomilar build. Please bear with me. I played this 5 games yesterday morning, and this is what I got. Some of the games are messy, yes, but this is just to show the strengths and weaknesses of the build. Also, most of the time, I had to modify the build to deal with early pressure. However, I was using the Lomilar build as my base. Feedback is appreciated.

ZvP - Dark Templars

You can see I would have crushed him even sooner with my economy had I been prepared for the DTs and not scrambling for an overseer. My own stupidity, but the build is solid.

ZvZ - Heavily Modified

In this game, I didn't follow the Lomilar much at all early on. This replay shows the builds weakness to early pressure, but it also shows how you can easily adapt to that pressure and get back on track.

ZvT - ?

Sorry, don't remember what happened in this game and don't have time watch right now. I won against a Terran player with the build though.

ZvT against 2000+ Diamond

This game shows the early pressure power when required. Utilized lings and speedlings and dealt early damage. A better player could have ended the game much sooner, as many mistakes were made and this game was far too long (40 minutes) Still, it shows that the build works for the end game as well.

ZvZ - Ling/Bling

Once again, modified the build to deal with early pressure and moved into banelings.

Let me know what you guys think. I know these replays stray from the specific build order, but that is necessary to deal with pressure most games.

Flopplop

5 Posts

December 03 2010 04:34 GMT

#338

can we please included one full saturated gas in these tests?

obsid

United States389 Posts

December 03 2010 04:39 GMT

#339

The big problem with adding one saturated gas is when to get that gas. Diffrent builds will need a gas at diffrent times, combined with diffrent people value gas diffrently based on what they plan to do latter means diffrent times for gas by diffrent people even for the same build. Also how do you value one build that gets more gas against another build that gets more minerals? Is gas 2x as good as minerals or 3x? or more/less?

Flopplop

5 Posts

December 03 2010 04:49 GMT

#340

set a specific time where you get the gas in every build? eg. The timing where 14 hatch 15 pool 16 gas occurs?

obsid

United States389 Posts

December 03 2010 04:55 GMT

#341

Thats a good timing for the gas, but also we should compare it against a 14gas/14pool into fast ling speed.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 05:49 GMT

#342

Thanks for the replays roadrunner.

The big problem I saw with most of the replays was that you didn't really need the pool out so early in most of them, thus negating the effect of the early pool. You could have done more economic builds in many of those since you didn't make lings until late.

The one replay I really like though was the second one against the zerg. The opponents lings did come pretty early and getting the queen slightly earlier did give you a few more lings when the attack came, which although you did manage to hold off the attack without those, they helped for a counter attack

obsid

United States389 Posts

December 03 2010 06:08 GMT

#343

@jacobman

I think the point of this build is to get the early pool and then NOT build lings (just use the pool for the early queen and get drones with the extra larva). So I would say that he DID need that pool out even though he didnt build any lings.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 03 2010 06:19 GMT

#344

Jacobman,

The primary point of the Lomilar build is the fact that it is the #2 economy build. The differences between the Lomilar and 15 Hatch, 14 pool (Or whatever the leader is) is so small it is unbelievable. It is remarkable that such an early pool is actually very economic.

You are correct though, I could have went for hatch first if I really wanted in some of those games. However, I was trying to get some replays for the lomilar build so I didn't want to do that =) It just goes to show how flexible it really is.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 06:46 GMT

#345

@ obsid

I know what the point of the early pool is in the build as far as making up for the late hatch. My real point was simply that the more economic hatch first builds could have been used without any question in most of the replays

@ roadrunner

I'm not sold on the difference between the viable hatch first builds and the lomilar build being so small. Based off of the replay in the thread and my own test of the lomilar build, it lags behind the 16 hatch 15 pool build by 250 minerals. That's almost an extra hatchery, which is not insignificant.

It's possible that the build is too slow to survive early pressure, but I seriously doubt it. My friend used to use the 14 hatch 14 pool build in 2000 diamond without any issues, and the 16 hatch 15 pool build is only three seconds slower at getting the pool up than the 14/14.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 03 2010 07:35 GMT

#346

250 minerals is important, yes. As you said though, I'm not exactly sure what the mining difference is, as there are a couple different reportings. Still, i would like to bet that if I did the lomilar build vs a 16 hatch first build, I could do enough damage to justify only 250 minerals of a difference (Maybe more, maybe less)

I'm not going to argue with you over which is the best for certain, because I don't know. I too tend to 14 pool 14 hatch fairly often, I like the feel of it, and that is at 1900 Diamond play, so I'm not saying it can't be done. However, what I am saying, is that the 11 pool build can still be very economic AND fend off extremely early pressure, something I have problems with when I utilize the hatch first.

orotoss

United States298 Posts

December 03 2010 07:43 GMT

#347

I have been trying out this build like this:

10 extractor trick
11 overlord
11 pool
16 gas (right before pool finishes)
15 queen + 2 lings
18 hatch
17 overlord

From there I just drone up and react to what my opponent is doing. You can easily go for speedling/baneling or roach if necessary.

Although this build may not be the best macro build, I love how versatile it is. The early pool is great in zvz if you scout an early pool or a fast expand. Since you are throwing a late hatch, you don't have to worry about T or P blocking your ramp and the lings always get out in time to kill the scouting worker. The early pool also gives you the ability to be aggressive on one base, if you see an opponent attempting to be greedy with their build.

My days of losing to proxy bunkers and cannon wall-ins are over.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 03 2010 09:47 GMT

#348

I just had to post this one more replay. I just had a match against an opponent named Pigge. He absolutely crushed my Lomilar build.

After the match, I checked his build order. What in the world did he destroy me with? You guessed it, the lomilar build. Pigge did an awesome job of showing how the build can be used for a lot of early pressure... and he crushed me. Grats to him. Looks like the 11 pool economy build is starting to catch on on the ladder!

Pigge

Sweden88 Posts

December 03 2010 10:10 GMT

#349

On December 03 2010 18:47 roadrunner343 wrote:
I just had to post this one more replay. I just had a match against an opponent named Pigge. He absolutely crushed my Lomilar build.

thanks for the compliment

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 10:25 GMT

#350

So when I saw this post where this build originated from I decided to do a bunch of leg work and test things for myself.

I took data at the beginning of the second of the 6:00 mark. It's very important that it's consistantly at the beginning of the second. Note that the amount for the 11 pool is taken from the only replay that the OP provided in the post where the build originated. He has a table that claims 4620, but I believe that he got that number by taking data at the end of the second. Unless I see a replay otherwise I have to believe 2530 is the correct number at the beginning of the second since I have gotten about that every time I have done the build. Here are the results for different build orders.

+ Show Spoiler +

11P/18H
+ Show Spoiler +

Mineral Mined: 4539
Pool Placed: 1:33
Hatch Placed: 3:00

16H/15P
+ Show Spoiler +

Mineral Mined: 4780
Pool Placed: 2:35
Hatch Placed: 2:15

14H/13P
+ Show Spoiler +

Mineral Mined: 4685
Pool Placed: 2:26
Hatch Placed: 2:05

14H/14P
+ Show Spoiler +

Mineral Mined: 4670
Pool Placed: 2:32
Hatch Placed: 2:05

15H/14P
+ Show Spoiler +

NOTE: I messed up slightly on this one, but the numbers are still better than 11 pool so it's relevant
Mineral Mined: 4665
Pool Placed: 2:30
Hatch Placed: 2:11

13P/15H
+ Show Spoiler +

Mineral Mined: 4630
Pool Placed: 1:46
Hatch Placed: 2:38

For anyone that thinks an 11 pool doesn't affect your economy, just take note that pretty much every hatch first build under sun performs better by at least 100 minerals, which is not that small.

Also, note that a 13P/15H also performs better. I don't know how many other builds perform better than the 11 pool but I thought that that was relevant because the pool time on that build was only 13 seconds slower than the 11 pool build, and the hatch was quicker than the 11 pool.

Here are all the replays mentioned for you to double check things and get a more precise idea of the build orders. I also included the replay that the OP gave in his post about the 11 pool build order for convenience. Some of the replays of the hatch first build I just winged the overlord timings, so don't follow those too closely. The only ones with planned overlord timings are the 16 Hatch 15 Pool and the 11 Pool 18 Hatch replays.

+ Show Spoiler +

16 Hatch 15 Pool
14 Hatch 13 Pool
14 Hatch 14 Pool
Botched 15 Hatch 14 Pool
13 Pool 15 Hatch
11 Pool 18 Hatch
11 Pool 18 Hatch replay from OP

Blurb

Denmark55 Posts

December 03 2010 10:29 GMT

#351

I recently told a Zerg friend of mine about this, but he claims that a 15hatch/17pool is better econ-wise. I gave it a run in Evochamber, and by 7 minutes it finishes with about 6260 minerals (not including starting hatch)
Could you give it some thorough testing?

The suggested build order is:

10 Overlord
10 ExtractorTrick
15 Hatchery
17 SpawningPool
16 Hatchery
15 Overlord
19 Queen
23 Queen
28 Overlord
28 Overlord
30 ExtractorTrick
31 Queen
36 Overlord
51 Overlord
53 Overlord
70 ExtractorTrick

jacobman

217 Posts

December 03 2010 10:37 GMT

#352

@ Blurb

I'll give it a try and see what happens. I can't remember if I've tried that build yet. I've tried a whole ton so it's possible.

EDIT: I was going to try it and then I noticed it was a double expand build. I'm almost certain it does better economically, so I don't really feel like testing it. Also, it doesn't even seem close to a feasible build, so I'm not too interested. The reason I listed the 16 Hatch before was because its pool time was almost identical to commonly used builds such as 14/14 or 15/14.

Grend

1600 Posts

December 03 2010 14:35 GMT

#353

15 hatch 17 pool sounds suicidal though. Granted it may be better economy wise, but you`ll be dead to any early pressure.

Blurb

Denmark55 Posts

December 03 2010 15:13 GMT

#354

On December 03 2010 19:37 jacobman wrote:
@ Blurb

I'll give it a try and see what happens. I can't remember if I've tried that build yet. I've tried a whole ton so it's possible.

EDIT: I was going to try it and then I noticed it was a double expand build. I'm almost certain it does better economically, so I don't really feel like testing it. Also, it doesn't even seem close to a feasible build, so I'm not too interested. The reason I listed the 16 Hatch before was because its pool time was almost identical to commonly used builds such as 14/14 or 15/14.

It's actually supposed to work off of one base only. Evochamber lists it as only one base (I guess that means one expansion), so one hatch will be inbase - minerals will go to waste otherwise. The builds I tried with three hatches worked perfectly fine with one inbase hatch.

On December 03 2010 23:35 Grend wrote:
15 hatch 17 pool sounds suicidal though. Granted it may be better economy wise, but you`ll be dead to any early pressure.

Can't argue on its usefulness in 1v1 or 2v2, as my friend is mostly using it in 3v3. With two players rushing, and one player going for a huge bunch of Mutas around the 8-min mark, we've been doing pretty well.

purecarnagge

719 Posts

December 03 2010 16:24 GMT

#355

its very obvious that these builds don't represent an actual defense to the terran scv all ins.

evilm0nkey

53 Posts

December 03 2010 17:44 GMT

#356

Hi guys,
thanks a lot for this thread, great to finally see an overview from the economic point of view.

I've been using a similar 11 pool for quite some time now, especially in 2vs2 / 3vs3 / 4vs4, knowing that its a great econ build, although i didnt know it was that good.

However, i've been playing it slightly different:

10 Extractor trick
11 Pool
10 Extractor trick
11 Overlord
@ Overlord finish: only 1 Drone, save larva

So basically i build the pool before second Overlord.
That way I will have 3 larva exactly by the time my pool finishes. I usually time my drone scout in order to be at the enemy's base right at that time, so I can decide to either produce 6 Zerglings or 3 Drones.

Im pretty sure this is worse than the 11 Ovi 11 Pool build in terms of economy if you pump only drones, but if you save larva for 6 lings (or just want to threaten early lings), Pool before Overlord is the winner as you wont need that Overlord so early and also your lings will be significantly earlier.
I know you are looking at builds only from the ecomomic point of view, but I think getting pool first makes this build much stronger without losing a lot of economy if you chose to skip lings, making it more versatile in a real game situation.

I would love to see a comparision. What do you guys think?

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 04 2010 00:21 GMT

#357

I would love to see a comparison between Ovie before and after the 11 pool. I would imagine the overlord before pool is much more economic, it feels to be that way, but I have no real data on it.

Cambam

United States360 Posts

December 04 2010 06:29 GMT

#358

Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I don't know how to search an individual thread. (Please feel free to let me know how).

What's the best response to getting your hatch blocked by a pylon or ebay in the 14 hatch 15 pool build? This just happened to me for the first time today and I did a 14 pool as soon as I saw the probe near my nat. I built 4 lings killed it and made a hatch ASAP (don't remember what food). My economy was horrible. So what's the best way to respond?

Also, what if he's just blocking it with a probe but doesn't throw down a pylon? Either he runs it away or you kill it.

Douillos

France3195 Posts

December 04 2010 06:37 GMT

#359

Really, the best opening IMO would be 16 pool 18 hatch. I's logical, knowing that 14pool 16 hatch is better than 11 overpoool.

But I still believe that the best opening and my new standard is the 11 overpool.

Lomilar

United States130 Posts

December 04 2010 07:10 GMT

#360

Also note, I found there is an issue with how the evo chamber spawns larva. It will be fixed in 0023, but on page 7 or so is where I figure out how it really works.

And yes, double expand build is awesome sauce. :-) I remember it honing in on that as well.

Endymion

United States3701 Posts

December 04 2010 07:17 GMT

#361

i still like 11 pool, i did the exact same thing as the OP today and I found that 14 hatch only popped out an extra ~2 drones by the 5minute mark, while it is significantly more risky and less adaptable than 11 pool.

Flopplop

5 Posts

December 04 2010 11:17 GMT

#362

why would you guys want to compare any build with 16 hatch 15 pool, its practically suicidal. The most eco build we compare it to should be 14 hatch, no later.

nihoh

Australia978 Posts

December 04 2010 11:34 GMT

#363

Lol so at the ned of the day 14 hatch 15 pool is still the best build.

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

December 04 2010 16:49 GMT

#364

On December 04 2010 20:34 nihoh wrote:
Lol so at the ned of the day 14 hatch 15 pool is still the best build.

Best? I'll 11 pool any day in zvz

Skrag

United States643 Posts

December 04 2010 18:53 GMT

#365

On December 04 2010 20:34 nihoh wrote:
Lol so at the ned of the day 14 hatch 15 pool is still the best build.

Personally, I think 14h/14p is slightly better. It pays a very small economy price to gain a larva advantage.

Blu3

United States126 Posts

December 04 2010 22:33 GMT

#366

I think the point was economy, which is NOT always best IN GAME.
So, if you think they are going to try something sneaky, sure, go for the 11 pool!! Common sense!
If you scout them and they are walling off, then do your 14 hatch, 15 pool, nuff said!

Anyways, good job overall!
Blu3

Cambam

United States360 Posts

December 05 2010 01:03 GMT

#367

On December 04 2010 15:29 Cambam wrote:
Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I don't know how to search an individual thread. (Please feel free to let me know how).

What's the best response to getting your hatch blocked by a pylon or ebay in the 14 hatch 15 pool build? This just happened to me for the first time today and I did a 14 pool as soon as I saw the probe near my nat. I built 4 lings killed it and made a hatch ASAP (don't remember what food). My economy was horrible. So what's the best way to respond?

Also, what if he's just blocking it with a probe but doesn't throw down a pylon? Either he runs it away or you kill it.

Anyone?

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 05 2010 02:58 GMT

#368

On December 05 2010 10:03 Cambam wrote:

Show nested quote +

Anyone?

Well you could try chasing the worker around with two workers, or just put down a pool and wait for lings... There is really nothing you can do to stop it.

I would personally recommend not trying to go hatch first. Even if you get it down no problem, you are likely going to die soon anyways if your opponent knows what he is doing... Pool first is more solid.

roadrunner343

148 Posts

December 05 2010 04:36 GMT

#369

I've agreed with most everything you have said so far, and I think this thread has done the Zerg community a lot of good. I've seen the Lomilar build several times online already.

However, I do not agree with your comments about hatch first. I absolutely recommend it if you think you can pool it off. On larger maps, it's basically a freebie against Terran or Protoss if you are scouting properly. Obviously if you see a 2/3 Rax rush or a 2 Gate, you need to start building lings. Again, if you scout, are on a large map, and know your opponent is not going to cheese, you should be safe. 14pool/14hatch has been my go to build for Terran and Protoss matchups on most maps (Other than Steppes and Xel Naga or against Zerg) at 18-1900ish Diamond.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 08:30 GMT

#370

On December 05 2010 10:03 Cambam wrote:

Show nested quote +

Anyone?

I'm pretty sure this thread is dead, in that the OP isn't being updated anymore. Most of the focus seems to be on 11 Pool 13 Pool build that you see, and a new post has been created for that. I'm not going to get involved here, but I'm certain the hatch first build listed here is not the most economic build there is, despite what the thread makes it seem like. Like I said, I think the poster stopped updating that long ago.

I did provide some replays with a build or two that beat that in an earlier post, but I will be the first person to say that replays are fallible evidence. I've found that if you're one second slow or if you're inefficient in any manner you may lose anywhere from 30-150 minerals in your final outcome, so even though my replay I posted did better than the replay given in the thread for the 14/15, I'm not going to claim that that particular build is better. I've been starting to use build order testers instead. You may call that "theory-craft", but I think it's more reliable.

The build I'm testing on the ladder right now to see if I can pull off holding it against early pressure is a 15 Pool 16 Hatch build, and it does perform better than the 14 Hatch build listed here. I have no clue if it's the best build there is but it has been the best I have found so far.

Here's the build order if anyone wants to try it out themselves/decide for themselves.

9 Overlord
15 Spawning Pool
16 Hatchery
15 Overlord
16 Queen
21 Queen
23 Overlord
33 Overlord
33 Overlord

NOTE: The double overlord at 33 is not a mistake. If done right two larvae injects will pop very soon after the first overlord in needed. Also this build order will get you to two fully saturated bases if you are lucky enough in a game to ever drone for that long uninterrupted. Obviously, when in a real game you will need more overlord cycles to reach this point since many more larvae will be put into some sort of army.

If you want me to prove that the build is better than 14/15, I'm not interested. You'll have to test it on your own if you're interested. I did that for myself, and that's all I care about. I figured I would share the build for people who prefer the more economical openings to try if they want to, since there is already plenty of discussion about the early pool openings, aka the 11 Pool build.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 09:21 GMT

#371

On December 04 2010 20:17 Flopplop wrote:
why would you guys want to compare any build with 16 hatch 15 pool, its practically suicidal. The most eco build we compare it to should be 14 hatch, no later.

The hatch isn't as important as you would think. The pool is more important. Many pro players will throw up a pool first and then kind of wait it out until scouting information comes in, at which point the hatches many times will go down as late as 18. Obviously many players have a fixed build order, but I've seen the scouting method used a lot too, with what seems like very late hatches.

Also the original idea of the post was to find the most economical build regardless of if it can work in game. From there you could figure out by trying it out what the most economical build was that you could actually pull off.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 09:26 GMT

#372

On December 04 2010 15:37 Douillos wrote:
Really, the best opening IMO would be 16 pool 18 hatch. I's logical, knowing that 14pool 16 hatch is better than 11 overpoool.

But I still believe that the best opening and my new standard is the 11 overpool.

This actually isn't true because you get the minerals to be able to place the pool before 16, so you don't have to sacrifice anything to make it earlier.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 09:32 GMT

#373

On December 03 2010 16:35 roadrunner343 wrote:
250 minerals is important, yes. As you said though, I'm not exactly sure what the mining difference is, as there are a couple different reportings. Still, i would like to bet that if I did the lomilar build vs a 16 hatch first build, I could do enough damage to justify only 250 minerals of a difference (Maybe more, maybe less)

I'm not going to argue with you over which is the best for certain, because I don't know. I too tend to 14 pool 14 hatch fairly often, I like the feel of it, and that is at 1900 Diamond play, so I'm not saying it can't be done. However, what I am saying, is that the 11 pool build can still be very economic AND fend off extremely early pressure, something I have problems with when I utilize the hatch first.

I totally agree with you that the 11 pool can be economic. It does lag behind but it doesn't bury your economy in any respect. I think the 11 pool build is very good and does have flexibility. Personally I like to try and figure out how to fend the most economic build possible, so the 11 pool isn't my style, even though it's still a very good build.

As far as economic judgment goes, despite the fact that I liked the original idea of this post, I'm now using build order testers. They don't have large fluctuations in results that making a replay does. When I get a result in a replay it could be 50 minerals slow, 100 minerals slow, or it could be perfect. I don't really know since very tiny differences in play seem to have sizable effects.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 15:00 GMT

#374

The reason is because the pool is actually only about 3 seconds delayed compared to a 14 Hatch 14 Pool build. You don't really know that just looking at the supply, which is what I'm assuming you did.

DuncanIdaho

United States465 Posts

December 05 2010 16:16 GMT

#375

So, I'm not sure if this has been addressed (as there are 19 pages of comments), but I see nothing in the OP about it. My issue is about when these builds would suggest to gas. It seems the econ issue is a matter of minerals only, not gas...

Given, from a stance of hatch vs pool 1st and when, do we 9olord/extractor trick, etc., I doubt the addition of an extractor in there will make any of the rank orders of best builds shift, assuming the extractor is placed in each BO optimally. For argument's sake of "what is economic", perhaps out of simplicity's sake, one gas run can be considered equivalent to one mineral run? Idk, gas is a strange topic, perhaps it could be argued that a strong econ is roughly 2/3 minerals and 1/3 gas, but at what early/mid/late points does this ratio change, who knows...

In any case, good thread, but an answer to when to gas and how hard is worth discussion.

~Duncan Idaho

Edit add-in: So I started thinking about the min:gas ratio. Early on, minerals are more important, with maybe an initial 100-150 gas and then back to mining.

However, I believe it would depend upon your unit composition plan, and for simplicity sake, I'll assume it's set in stone from the beginning, and I'll discuss a more fluid design after.

Ground: 2/3 min 1/3 gas

Banelings: 50(min)/25(gas) (25 min half ling, 25/25 bling morph)
Roaches: 75/25 (given, 3/4m to 1/4g, so perhaps if a more roach heavy hedging towards a 1/4 gas composition might be optimal)
Hydra: 100/50

Given, zerglings (25m), infestors (100/150), and ultralisks (300/200) break this mold even more, but in any case, I think the added gas cost of the infestors will be reduced by the lower gas cost of the lings and roaches, so I still feel 2/3m 1/3 gas is a nice econ composition to shoot for. If you're going ultras, perhaps getting a gas only expo will be sufficient (in addition to at least 2 fully saturated gas&min bases)

Air: minerals1/2(+a small amount) and gas1/2(- a small amount)

Good luck achieveing this with only 2 geysers and lots of mineral patches per base, but perhaps minerals are spent on the base enough to makeup for any disparity.

Mutas: 100/100
Corrupters: 150/100
Broodlords: 300/250

So that's some things to chew on, not that we can't have a mix of Ground&Air, we most certainly can, but one could use this heuristic as a way to hedge their econ in the thick of things, more 2/3:1/3 if more ground-preultra, more 1/2:1/2 if more air oriented, and somewhere in between for mixtures. Also, for roach only (which I discourage any one unit only builds), perhaps a more 3/4 to 1/4 economy, and for mass lings, only the minimum gas necessary for upgrades.

However, this brings us to the idea of fluidity. These min:gas ideas work optimally if you stick to the plan, however if say you're going all mutas and the terran has gone all anti-air, perhaps an ajustment is in order. I'd say, pick an initial plan, stick to it until you have to adjust, and then adjust per the above concepts. As for the current question, though, of when to gas, I think I may have stumbled upon the "general" answer, the question is, how much do you need, and how soon?

That changes everything, making a linear (or hell, maybe even quadratic or higher order) relationship between the extractor build order position and unit composition goals. Okay, so someone determine that equation!

Do it! Do it now!

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

December 05 2010 17:01 GMT

#376

On December 06 2010 01:16 DuncanIdaho wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Do it! Do it now!

This is why we can't include gas, because the relative value of gas to minerals is completely subjective, and there is no way you will get everyone to agree.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 05 2010 17:17 GMT

#377

On December 06 2010 02:01 jdseemoreglass wrote:

Show nested quote +

On December 06 2010 01:16 DuncanIdaho wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Do it! Do it now!

This is why we can't include gas, because the relative value of gas to minerals is completely subjective, and there is no way you will get everyone to agree.

You're totally right. I also think it's worth nothing that we're not really looking at minerals mined. We're looking at worker minutes that each build produces. We're doing this in a round about way, minerals, but if we were you put a certain emphasis on gas the build with the more worker minutes is still going to have the best economy. This will be true for any distribution of gas and minerals, unless the build you want to do gets gas REALLY early.

SpaceYeti

United States723 Posts

December 07 2010 15:02 GMT

#378

If you're going to really compare these, you need to collect multiple readings (20+) for each build and then run stats on the results for significance. Likelihood is that a lot of these do not differ significantly.

rockslave

Brazil318 Posts

December 09 2010 15:54 GMT

#379

Have you guys tried 15 hatch 17 pool? Yes it is very very risky but it can work when you scout stuff like 1 rax no gas.

vsportsguy

United States118 Posts

December 09 2010 19:55 GMT

#380

On December 10 2010 00:54 rockslave wrote:
Have you guys tried 15 hatch 17 pool? Yes it is very very risky but it can work when you scout stuff like 1 rax no gas.

Unfortunately many times this means they hid a second rax. If I see 1 rax no gas I start looking for a 2nd rax (its usually close to their base, they just don't want to give away 2 rax). Also I make sure any refineries are fully completed before I make any assumptions. I see a lot of terrans hide their second rax and fake a gas to make it look like a standard 12 rax 13 gas.

ibreakurface

United States664 Posts

December 15 2010 23:13 GMT

#381

Adaptability > a few extra minerals. IMO.

In my opinion, at a non-pro level at least, 100-200 minerals is less of an advantage than having a pool at 11. Allows a relatively safe expand at 18 and defense against early pressure.

Its similar to the double extractor trick debate, FD uses it because it allows flexibility although slightly less economical.

sixzeros

72 Posts

December 16 2010 06:42 GMT

#382

Something seemingly unconsidered is the following fun build...

If early aggression were no object....

10 lord + extractor trick
15 hatch
16 hatch (in base or on an obvious 3rd which you expect the enemy to attack)
18 pool
20 lord x2
21 queen
23 queen
25 queen
inject inject inject
drone like mad
transfer 1/2 your drones to expo
39 lord x2
drone drone drone...

Assuming moderate aggression..
And before everyone harks on about how it cant be practical and cant work.. okay it is risky, but lets just say, there are ways to survive if you are creative, and have allies to support you. This build can get you to 70 drones in 7 minutes. You will have the economy and drone count to be able to drop 15 crawlers if you need. With a creep spread those crawlers can advance and form the fallback line of an advancing push. At 5 minutes you can drop 5 emergency crawlers on your expo and send 3 queens to the front, if you skip an inject on one of them (you can afford to), you can transfuse a creep or a queen. This can hold a 6 minute push, and if you see it coming you can pump lings to support it.
Beyond this, especially if no early pressure, then you are typically 200 supply maxed when everyone else is struggling at less than 120, if you add another 3 hatches at around 7 to 8 minutes, and take a 3rd, then you can inject on 2 hatches per queen, waste 100 units at a time and rebuild them almost instantly.
In multiplayer games or FFA's it can lead into a totally dominant mid game, and best of all, this is a REALLY fun build to play around with in multi's.

DarKFoRcE

Germany1215 Posts

December 16 2010 11:30 GMT

#383

On December 16 2010 15:42 sixzeros wrote:
Something seemingly unconsidered is the following fun build...

If early aggression were no object....

10 lord + extractor trick
15 hatch
16 hatch (in base or on an obvious 3rd which you expect the enemy to attack)
18 pool
20 lord x2
21 queen
23 queen
25 queen
inject inject inject
drone like mad
transfer 1/2 your drones to expo
39 lord x2
drone drone drone...

Assuming moderate aggression..
And before everyone harks on about how it cant be practical and cant work.. okay it is risky, but lets just say, there are ways to survive if you are creative, and have allies to support you. This build can get you to 70 drones in 7 minutes. You will have the economy and drone count to be able to drop 15 crawlers if you need. With a creep spread those crawlers can advance and form the fallback line of an advancing push. At 5 minutes you can drop 5 emergency crawlers on your expo and send 3 queens to the front, if you skip an inject on one of them (you can afford to), you can transfuse a creep or a queen. This can hold a 6 minute push, and if you see it coming you can pump lings to support it.
Beyond this, especially if no early pressure, then you are typically 200 supply maxed when everyone else is struggling at less than 120, if you add another 3 hatches at around 7 to 8 minutes, and take a 3rd, then you can inject on 2 hatches per queen, waste 100 units at a time and rebuild them almost instantly.
In multiplayer games or FFA's it can lead into a totally dominant mid game, and best of all, this is a REALLY fun build to play around with in multi's.

you dont have enough minerals to use all the larvae you get from this build. im absolutely sure that this is not optimal, as you will not be able to either saturate a third base, or use the larvae of your third hatchery that early on.

ZerG~LegenD

Sweden1179 Posts

December 16 2010 12:28 GMT

#384

TLO has played 3 Hatch before Pool a few times on Metalopolis. Right now I only remember the details of his game against Dimaga, there he delayed his first Queen till around 8 minutes. However, by making a wall with his Hatches and Roach Warren he was able to make a very Larva efficient Roach defence and out-Drone Dimagas 2 Hatches and 2 Queens. Still, Dimaga could get away without any Roaches and was thus able to get a pretty significant upgrade advantage. All in all I think Dimaga got a slight advantage early on. The 3 Hatch build ain't all shit thought.

jacobman

217 Posts

December 16 2010 14:09 GMT

#385

On December 16 2010 20:30 DarKFoRcE wrote:

Show nested quote +

You're absolutely right about the larvae. I tested a few 3 hatch builds when I was trying to find good builds on my other thread. Some of the builds didn't even have enough money for their larvae for like close to five minutes. The others did, but they didn't have much extra money. If you were to put workers on to gas or try and tech at all, you would never be able to use all the larvae.

That being said, using your minerals to throw up a third hatch, maybe around 3-4 minutes in, is not a horrible idea if you're planning on going heavy ling play. Of course, if you can expand, that's better. Although 3-4 minutes seems slightly early for a second expand.

zhouzhou

Canada138 Posts

December 19 2010 08:57 GMT

#386

I've been using:
10 overlord
@75 minerals, extractor trick
15 hatch
15 pool

I believe this gets you the most drones the fastest without wasting larva spawn time.

nastyyy

United States262 Posts

December 30 2010 02:07 GMT

#387

On December 16 2010 21:28 ZerG~LegenD wrote:
TLO has played 3 Hatch before Pool a few times on Metalopolis. Right now I only remember the details of his game against Dimaga, there he delayed his first Queen till around 8 minutes. However, by making a wall with his Hatches and Roach Warren he was able to make a very Larva efficient Roach defence and out-Drone Dimagas 2 Hatches and 2 Queens. Still, Dimaga could get away without any Roaches and was thus able to get a pretty significant upgrade advantage. All in all I think Dimaga got a slight advantage early on. The 3 Hatch build ain't all shit thought.

When was this? I wanna see. link please.

Blunttrauma

United States3 Posts

December 30 2010 07:52 GMT

#388

Has anyone done the advantage of an inbase at 16? i feel like I come up short in the very first but it sets me up beatifully for the mid game. if theres some sort of rush or early all in i have a much smaller area to defend while having extra larva and i can saturate my nat almost instantly as it goes up.
and forgive me for this but I dont see an advantage at not spending ever larva as long as you dont keep injecting on the hatch if you cant keep it under 3 atleast. the extra larva from this build has saved my life on many occasions.

If anything is it worth in in ZvZ? cause absolutely NOBODY does it so i outporuce them nearly the entire game

Schnullerbacke13

Germany1199 Posts

December 30 2010 12:39 GMT

#389

On December 30 2010 16:52 Blunttrauma wrote:
Has anyone done the advantage of an inbase at 16? i feel like I come up short in the very first but it sets me up beatifully for the mid game. if theres some sort of rush or early all in i have a much smaller area to defend while having extra larva and i can saturate my nat almost instantly as it goes up.
and forgive me for this but I dont see an advantage at not spending ever larva as long as you dont keep injecting on the hatch if you cant keep it under 3 atleast. the extra larva from this build has saved my life on many occasions.

If anything is it worth in in ZvZ? cause absolutely NOBODY does it so i outporuce them nearly the entire game

I do this ZvZ. Mass Speedling :D. Against other races you're better off to put scnd hatch at nat

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

May 14 2011 06:27 GMT

#390

I remember this as a great thread which new people, or people that missed it, could profit from.
The 18 hatch is still a great build, and diversified the zerg openings even more, it being very complex to begin with. I'd like to see more pros use it.

I think we concluded the 11pool as a strange once, since it's very economic yet very safe. You do not need to make 15 hatch 14pool to get a good advantage.

Aerodynamic27

Canada115 Posts

May 14 2011 16:48 GMT

#391

Are there any differences between the 9 overlord and 10 overlord, extractor trick?
I find the 10 overlord, extractor trick to be more efficient in terms of timing as you can get 1 more drone earlier and it doesn't slow down any builds

Can anyone confirm or try it? I'm not sure which to use.

blackodd

Sweden451 Posts

May 16 2011 05:46 GMT

#392

On May 15 2011 01:48 Aerodynamic27 wrote:
Are there any differences between the 9 overlord and 10 overlord, extractor trick?
I find the 10 overlord, extractor trick to be more efficient in terms of timing as you can get 1 more drone earlier and it doesn't slow down any builds

Can anyone confirm or try it? I'm not sure which to use.

It's been proven many times that 9lord is the best choice, except when you do strange builds like 11pool 18 hatch, because of the timings with the queen etc

Beef Noodles

United States937 Posts

May 16 2011 06:01 GMT

#393

Can anyone explain to me why IdrA's ZvT almost ALWAYS goes:
15 hatch
15 pool
17 gas
16, or 17 overlord (I normally see 17)
double queen when pool finishes
take drones off gas at 100
get zergling speed ONLY IF he feels he might need it depending on what his first 2-4 zerglings see
drone, drone, drone

Has anyone tested the IdrA build? I would assume it is either the most economic safe build, or maybe he does it because 1 the timings work out great, and 2 it is pretty safe while still very greedy.

Please someone test it!

lorkac

United States2297 Posts

May 16 2011 07:59 GMT

#394

On May 16 2011 15:01 Beef Noodles wrote:
Can anyone explain to me why IdrA's ZvT almost ALWAYS goes:
15 hatch
15 pool
17 gas
16, or 17 overlord (I normally see 17)
double queen when pool finishes
take drones off gas at 100
get zergling speed ONLY IF he feels he might need it depending on what his first 2-4 zerglings see
drone, drone, drone

Has anyone tested the IdrA build? I would assume it is either the most economic safe build, or maybe he does it because 1 the timings work out great, and 2 it is pretty safe while still very greedy.

Please someone test it!

The three things a basic zerg build cares about are

A.) Creep
B.) Larva
C.) Metabolic Boost

The importance of creep is actually the option of Spine Crawlers to have a strong defense. The importance of Metabolic Boost is really about map control and is usually define by getting an early gas. Larva is actually inherently linked to the queen and heavy production. The more larva you have early on the more drones/army you can make early on.

How does this translate into the game?

A.) Early Hatch (For creep)
B.) Early Pool (For Queen)
C.) Early Gas (For Speed)

An early hatch is easier to defend against timing pushes because you get to plop down 1-2 spine crawlers. However, an early hatch is more susceptible to rushes (such as cannon/bunker) because the delayed Zerglings. In those moments what's needed is an early gas build to get speed lings early to gain map control. These early lings prevent early attacks and the speed prevents the opponent from pushing out early. Getting an early pool gives you a fast queen which allows you to get a massive economic boost. This translates into Hatch first, pool first and gas first builds.

Idra going Hatch=>Pool=>Gas tells me that he wants early creep for the option to build a spine (which is very larva efficient compared to Zerglings), he then grabs a pool before gas in order to get a faster queen which tells me he wants to start droning hard asap.

But that's just me theorycrafting.

rodounet

France2 Posts

May 16 2011 08:33 GMT

#395

I am curious to see how well Aquanda's build would perform here.

As seen in MrBitter's 12 weeks with the pros:
http://mrbitter.blip.tv/file/4801193/
(Replay Pack here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=197338 )

ETisME

12328 Posts

May 16 2011 08:57 GMT

#396

basically this build is safe from most early aggressive because you can now build the spine at the natural.
delayed ling speed is because although it is super useful, it is only useful when it is needed, delaying it gives you more minerals. Many people tend to rush the ling speed and with good micro, slow lings are just as effective because the extra minerals can get more drones->lings/spine if necessary
Again, taking drone off gas can give you more minerals income. He is delaying tech for a stronger economy.
double queen is always useful, for Idra, he tends to use them to inject larva earlier on, he doesn't spread creep as much as dimaga.

the double queen are good for blocking ramp as well.

NeonFox

2373 Posts

May 16 2011 09:01 GMT

#397

On May 16 2011 16:59 lorkac wrote:

Show nested quote +

You could also put it this way, a faster hatch gives you more larva, thus the delayed pool and queen won't hamper production, but 300 minerals on a hatchery is an investment for the future translating in less drones at the beginning, and you have to delay your gas to catch up on drone production.

imbecile

563 Posts

May 16 2011 13:12 GMT

#398

On May 16 2011 18:01 NeonFox wrote:
You could also put it this way, a faster hatch gives you more larva, thus the delayed pool and queen won't hamper production, but 300 minerals on a hatchery is an investment for the future translating in less drones at the beginning, and you have to delay your gas to catch up on drone production.

Actually the minerals spent on the hatch don't eat into your drone count. It is still the larva that limit your drone production ... I spend more time waiting on larva than on minerals. When I go 9 overlord 14 hatch 16pool the only drones beyond 10 that are waiting on minerals are the 14 and 15 after the hatch went down. Both those larva lie idle for about 5s. After that you never will have to wait for minerals but always on larva until the spawn larva kicks in. You can easy afford double queening and putting down spines for defense on top of that ... you still will be waiting for larva, not for minerals.

FeyFey

Germany10114 Posts

May 16 2011 13:37 GMT

#399

because a queen is a hatch itself you don't really have the need to build an early hatch. But since creep is like a wallin for the zerg you want it at the ramp, and if you even get a free expansions as well its just purrfect, its also pretty nice to have a hatch below the ramp, so you have production on both sides. You also get access to more close mineral patches and you can pull drones faster to your ramp. It has nothing to do with economy that you get the hatch first, it is about the defense it provides and since its not that risky to put it below the ramp, if there would be maps, with a far of natural in tournaments, like delta for example, you would probably see some hatches above the cliff or near the ramp and not at the natural, because it wouldn't provide any defense.
Atleast thats why i try to get an hatch up early, because the defense spot ist just so good and you need the creep spread so bunkers can't be build near.
If you want eco you go pool first of course for the queen, but in the end if you put drones on the close minerals at the natural you will end up almost even.

Schnullerbacke13

Germany1199 Posts

May 16 2011 16:42 GMT

#400

On May 16 2011 22:37 FeyFey wrote:
because a queen is a hatch itself you don't really have the need to build an early hatch. But since creep is like a wallin for the zerg you want it at the ramp, and if you even get a free expansions as well its just purrfect, its also pretty nice to have a hatch below the ramp, so you have production on both sides. You also get access to more close mineral patches and you can pull drones faster to your ramp. It has nothing to do with economy that you get the hatch first, it is about the defense it provides and since its not that risky to put it below the ramp, if there would be maps, with a far of natural in tournaments, like delta for example, you would probably see some hatches above the cliff or near the ramp and not at the natural, because it wouldn't provide any defense.
Atleast thats why i try to get an hatch up early, because the defense spot ist just so good and you need the creep spread so bunkers can't be build near.
If you want eco you go pool first of course for the queen, but in the end if you put drones on the close minerals at the natural you will end up almost even.

That's plain wrong. Hatch first is more economic than any pool first build (see OP ;-) ). a 14/15 hatch generates additional larvae 'round 3'40. There is no way a pool first+queen+inject is finished that early. Hatch first essentielly (besides some other advantages) is the fastest way to get additional larvae. 14h15p or 15h16p let finish hatch and pool simultanously, which makes sense, as ling production from one hatch hits your eco hard (except later in the game when the first inject is done). So there is no use having a pool if you do not have a hatch to support production except for some all in builds

jdseemoreglass

United States3773 Posts

May 16 2011 18:31 GMT

#401

I was surprised to see this thread bumped...

Just so you guys know, this thread is outdated now. I have much better results and data provided in this thread:

A Second Look at Zerg Openings

Hopefully this link will help to answer some of the newer questions that have been posted.

EDIT: I will also update the OP with this link.

NeonFox

2373 Posts

May 17 2011 13:06 GMT

#402

On May 16 2011 22:12 imbecile wrote:

Show nested quote +

I don't know I never go for a 14 hatch, I always put it down on 15, then the pool on 14-16 depending on spawn locations. I don't have larva problems with this, since the gas is down at 17 and minerals are spent on double queen, 4 lings and a spine, two in the case I go for a 16 pool. Maybe by delaying the gas and increasing the mineral income, or by going 14 hatch 16 pool you do fall short on larvae.

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 12 2012 04:27 GMT

#403

Bumping this.

People seem to argue with the results here that 14 hatch is better than 15 hatch. I guess because all the koreans go 15 hatch, but koreans also went extractor trick every game until only recently too (some still do). I'm all up for 15 hatch proven to be better, but this thread seems to conclude that 14h/15p is the best hatch first opener.

TheGreenMachine

United States730 Posts

February 12 2012 04:34 GMT

#404

On February 12 2012 13:27 Belial88 wrote:
Bumping this.

People seem to argue with the results here that 14 hatch is better than 15 hatch. I guess because all the koreans go 15 hatch, but koreans also went extractor trick every game until only recently too (some still do). I'm all up for 15 hatch proven to be better, but this thread seems to conclude that 14h/15p is the best hatch first opener.

I believe 14p15 hatch is best economy assuming you are only making drones, but to defend your drones zerg needs extra queens, spines, mining gas. All these extra things cost money so the 15 hatch 16 pool will get an extra 100 minerals when the pool finishes, maybe even more.

So you get money for these extra things AND the ability to use all larva for drones. If you chose these extra things with an earlier hatch/pool then you wouldn't have enough money to afford the larva leading to a worse economy.

Iksf

United Kingdom444 Posts

February 12 2012 07:01 GMT

#405

I do the quick 4 queen opening ZvT with a 14h works out like this
14 scout
14h
14p
17 overlord & pause drone production
4 lings + 2 queens
27 overlord
27 spine
26 queen, when overlord pops 28 queen and double overlord on 36 into whatever.

Schnullerbacke13

Germany1199 Posts

February 12 2012 09:44 GMT

#406

Because the tests take no gas, no worker scout + as mentioned above: there is no room for an extra spine/queen. Also note how close those builds are to each other.
The difference is not worth the discussion. Actually doing a proper split + drone pairing will have a higher impact than the difference between 14 or 15 hatch, so strategic issues/timings/personal preference is more important and will have a higher impact.
Same applies to 9/10 ovie discussion. A 9 ovie will be able to cover your expansion slightly earlier, the economical difference is neglibible.

Also note that comparing cumulated ressources mined does not give a realistic impression of the difference at 6'00. More important is to compare the drone count and the difference in ressourced mined compared to total income.
Example:

If one build A is 50 ressource better at 6'00 compared to build B and the income per minute is 1250 by 6'00, this means build A is ~2 ingame seconds better. 100 resource behind is ~4 to 5 in game seconds (which is significant but not game deciding).

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 12 2012 16:45 GMT

#407

I believe he showed that assuming identical followups, 14hatch15pool is always best. So if you make 2 lings when pool pops, or you take gas at 20, or you throw down a roach warren, whatever, 14hatch/15pool is always better.

What you are saying doesn't really make sense anyways. It doesn't really matter how much money you have when pool pops, you can always pool money, or whatever, and both 16h/15p and 14h/15p have about 350 minerals right when pool pops.

Because the tests take no gas, no worker scout + as mentioned above: there is no room for an extra spine/queen. Also note how close those builds are to each other.

In his testing he specifically mentioned that gas, worker scout, et cetera, doesn't change the order of the builds.

So if you are comparing 6p, 8p, 10p, 12p, and the order is in that same way it turns out, well, having a drone scout at 9, or gas at 15, doesn't change the order in which builds are better. I believe this was answered in the "Second Look...." thread.

Actually doing a proper split + drone pairing will have a higher impact than the difference between 14 or 15 hatch, so strategic issues/timings/personal preference is more important and will have a higher impact.

Accroding to the tests done here, no it won't. Drone split+Drone pairing is about 25 minerals extra, while 14 hatch is about 100 minerals ahead of 16 hatch. I think I saw somewhere that it's 50 minerals ahead of 15hatch as well.

But in the scheme of things, no, drone pairing, 14 hatch vs 16 hatch, don't matter. But we all drone pair because it's a 'free' advantage, just like 14 hatch is better for a 'free' advantage too. No reason not to do the most optimal build. We could always go back to 11 hatch 11 pool like Fruitdealer used to do in season one.

Same applies to 9/10 ovie discussion. A 9 ovie will be able to cover your expansion slightly earlier, the economical difference is neglibible.

The mineral difference was 'proven' to be about 10-20. The OP actually goes really indepth about overlord timing in "A Second Look...." thread. No, not a big deal, but why go 10 overlord at all. And, that was with a computer doing it I think, he said that a person doing it made it more like 15-25.

Also note that comparing cumulated ressources mined does not give a realistic impression of the difference at 6'00. More important is to compare the drone count and the difference in ressourced mined compared to total income.
Example:

If one build A is 50 ressource better at 6'00 compared to build B and the income per minute is 1250 by 6'00, this means build A is ~2 ingame seconds better. 100 resource behind is ~4 to 5 in game seconds (which is significant but not game deciding).

He does do that.... are you reading the graphs? Read the OP, he compares drone count and compares resources mined...

All it's doing is showing which build is better. If you make pure drones all game, or if you make pure lings, or take gas at 20, assuming identical follow ups, the 'rankings' of best builds is always the same.

Schnullerbacke13

Germany1199 Posts

February 12 2012 17:27 GMT

#408

On February 13 2012 01:45 Belial88 wrote:
I believe he showed that assuming identical followups, 14hatch15pool is always best. So if you make 2 lings when pool pops, or you take gas at 20, or you throw down a roach warren, whatever, 14hatch/15pool is always better.
What you are saying doesn't really make sense anyways. It doesn't really matter how much money you have when pool pops, you can always pool money, or whatever, and both 16h/15p and 14h/15p have about 350 minerals right when pool pops.

If the build is too tight in minerals, you cannot spend your larvae, so you lose hatchery larvae creation (3 larvae idle). This may happen with 14 hatch more easy. Obviously missing minerals (because of gas or scout) easily can delay a Queen or important tec

This does not make it the truth. In an optimal build you can barely spend your larvae in time = production and income are balanced. If larvae stockpiles, larvae creation stops. So in fact any deviation reducing mineral income (e.g. mining gas, scouting) can delay your build timings. That's the reason why in practice people prefer builds with a slight mineral overhead.

You make me tired sry .. as I mentioned in the previous post (you did not get it there, see below), absolute "mineral advantage" is meaningless. You always have to look at what time the mineral advantage is created. 50 mineral advantage at 3'00 is more than 100 minerals at 6'00. Better think in "time advantage" not "mineral advantage". Drone pairing gives a permanent mining income advantage which snowballs over time .. there was a thread some weeks ago.

Ofc I read the graphs. Try to understand what i wrote, its about the importance of the [bold]time[/bold] a mineral advantage exists.

To illustrate my point drastically:

if 2 players have an income of 2400 minerals per minute (late game) and one player has a cumulated resource advantage of 40 (from the initial build order), the other player will be even 1 in game second later.

if 2 player have an income of 400 and one player has a cumulated advantage of 40, the other player is 6 seconds behind, because that is the time he needs to reach the same amount of overall mined minerals.

So go and repeat the same build 4 times and check your timings and income in the replay. You'll notice that the deviation in time can easily make up some seconds (when > 3 minutes in the game). So the long term difference of 14 vs 15 hatch is lower than most masters players natural build deviation.

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 12 2012 17:52 GMT

#409

No it doesn't? It's about pool relative to hatchery timing, not the lone timing of the hatch. Both 16/15 and 14/15 get pool and hatch up at the same time. And a 10 drone scout just loses you about 50 minerals than if you don't drone scout when pool pops, which you can just wait a few seconds for, so it's not the biggest deal...

What you are saying just doesn't make sense. Your bashing 14 hatch, when it's proven to be better in the OP. You say things that are just accusations.

Why don't you just try the build out, I'm sure you'll be surprised that it's actually just like 16 hatch in how it feels and the timings.

All I was responding to was your statement of "hey gas is important, and this build isn't realistic because it doesn't take that into account".

A 14 hatch is ~100 minerals ahead of 16 hatch. If you get gas at 20, or make 4 lings, or whatever identical builds afterwards, it's still going to be ~100 minerals ahead.

You make me tired sry .. as I mentioned in the previous post (you did not get it there, see below), absolute "mineral advantage" is meaningless. You always have to look at what time the mineral advantage is created. 50 mineral advantage at 3'00 is more than 100 minerals at 6'00. Better think in "time advantage" not "mineral advantage". Drone pairing gives a permanent mining income advantage which snowballs over time .. there was a thread some weeks ago.

It's about Worker Count and Resources mined. These are the two most important factors to judge a build. A 50 mineral advantage at 3:00 doesn't really mean much for the long term - you could theoretically never put down the hatchery, just one base,and you'd have a 3:00 mineral advantage, but not at 6:00.

To compare builds, you make drones, and compare drone count and minerals mined at a point when the builds have stabilized. So at 6:00, every build is going to have constant drone production with injects, so no one is going to go up or down in ranking after 6:00.

This has already been figured out a long time ago man. 14 hatch/15 pool is best opener.

Feel free to prove him wrong. All you are saying is talk and goofy stuff about timings or larval production. Whatever, they did some pretty thorough testing here proving 14hatch/15pool is the best opener. Feel free to prove him wrong.

T.O.P.

Hong Kong4685 Posts

February 12 2012 18:12 GMT

#410

Belial, the testing conditions are not the same as the situation in game. In a real game, you need to do stuff like scout, send drones to kill bunkers, make spines, etc. You don't even have enough money at the start of the game to spend all your larva. So the advantage to 14 hatch, which is extra larva, doesn't provide an advantage in a real game because you can't use the advantage anyways.

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 12 2012 18:19 GMT

#411

The guy tested it by doing the build in a game and comparing drone counts and resources mined in certain points of the game.

I don't know why 14 hatch is better, but according to the testing done in this thread, it just is. The OP also explained (i believe in the second look thread) that, assuming identical drone scout timing or gas timing or unit production or tech, the ordering of how builds stack up is still the same.

So if you 10 drone scout, make a gas at 15, and pull 8 drones at 17 supply for 30 seconds to deal with a 2 rax, then the 14 hatch will still have the same ~100 mineral advantage over 16 hatch 5 minutes later.

T.O.P.

Hong Kong4685 Posts

February 12 2012 18:41 GMT

#412

On February 13 2012 03:19 Belial88 wrote:
The guy tested it by doing the build in a game and comparing drone counts and resources mined in certain points of the game.

I don't know why 14 hatch is better, but according to the testing done in this thread, it just is. The OP also explained (i believe in the second look thread) that, assuming identical drone scout timing or gas timing or unit production or tech, the ordering of how builds stack up is still the same.

So if you 10 drone scout, make a gas at 15, and pull 8 drones at 17 supply for 30 seconds to deal with a 2 rax, then the 14 hatch will still have the same ~100 mineral advantage over 16 hatch 5 minutes later.

If he's doing it in game, then how the hell can he compare the builds? He's not even keeping variables constant.

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 12 2012 19:18 GMT

#413

It's all in the OP, what the process was.

Schnullerbacke13

Germany1199 Posts

February 12 2012 19:23 GMT

#414

On February 13 2012 02:52 Belial88 wrote:
What you are saying just doesn't make sense. Your bashing 14 hatch, when it's proven to be better in the OP. You say things that are just accusations.

Why don't you just try the build out, I'm sure you'll be surprised that it's actually just like 16 hatch in how it feels and the timings.

I am not bashing it, i just tell you there are a lot of other things which are more important. It just does not make a notable difference economy wise. Personally i love my 11 before ovie pool, i never hatch first as it is not worth the risk imo (i experimented with a lot of different builds in the past and finally settled with 11 before ovie pool when playing ladder).
So lets stop to contaminate this excellent thread with noob talk

BTW 14 hatch is better in theory, because the hatch finishes earlier so you get ~one larvae more. The whole test scenario is unrealistic compared to a real game, so take the results with a grain of salt.

Another fact makes gas timing important:
If you take gas, your main does not get oversaturated that fast. One of the major reasons hatch first is so good in this test, is that you avoid oversaturation because of the fast hatch. However if you take gas, oversaturation is 4 drones later, so oversaturation does not come that fast as in the test scenario. When you look at the pro builds, you 'll notice that all the early pool-late expansion builds take an ~early gas to avoid oversaturation (e.g. nesteas 12 pool).

Normal

Please or register to reply.

Putting an end to the Zerg Opening Economy debate.

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming