|
I stopped playing right before the 6 minute mark in both test games, so i did some extrapolating in the results above. Posting with results at 5:50 instead
+ Show Spoiler +
It still seems as though both builds are more or less equal (at least when only looking at minerals mined).
|
I checked some of the replays and it looked nice. My criticism of one I saw would be the 4gate. The protoss just seemed to be throw his units away. However I'm excited about this and will be trying it out on ladder after a few practices against the computer.
Really thanks OP. I watched your original thread with interest and am glad to see you persevered through a lot of trolling and flaming to come up this.
|
On December 04 2010 01:28 noWei wrote:
I checked some of the replays and it looked nice. My criticism of one I saw would be the 4gate. The protoss just seemed to be throw his units away. However I'm excited about this and will be trying it out on ladder after a few practices against the computer.
Really thanks OP. I watched your original thread with interest and am glad to see you persevered through a lot of trolling and flaming to come up this.
Thank you. I am persevering with this because I really believe it is the safest, most flexible economic build possible, and can change the Zerg race. Also, for every person trolling the thread, I get 5 posts or PM's thanking me for the work.
On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile.
I apologize if I was too dismissive about your testing. I've been testing these builds for 5 days straight and have had to counter an endless stream of criticisms and claims, many of them unjustified. I've provided replays by request, repeated tests by request, extended the data sample times by request, changed the comparative criteria by request, and on and on...
You said you didn't disagree with the previous posters data, and the differences were very small (less than 50 minerals), and you still admit your build is behind in drones. Did I get this right? If you think the difference is 100+ minerals then I will test them, otherwise I think it is not very relevant to the thread.
|
On December 04 2010 01:42 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:28 noWei wrote:
I checked some of the replays and it looked nice. My criticism of one I saw would be the 4gate. The protoss just seemed to be throw his units away. However I'm excited about this and will be trying it out on ladder after a few practices against the computer.
Really thanks OP. I watched your original thread with interest and am glad to see you persevered through a lot of trolling and flaming to come up this. Thank you. I am persevering with this because I really believe it is the safest, most flexible economic build possible, and can change the Zerg race. Also, for every person trolling the thread, I get 5 posts or PM's thanking me for the work. Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile. I apologize if I was too dismissive about your testing. I've been testing these builds for 5 days straight and have had to counter an endless stream of criticisms and claims, many of them unjustified. I've provided replays by request, repeated tests by request, extended the data sample times by request, changed the comparative criteria by request, and on and on... You said you didn't disagree with the previous posters data, and the differences were very small (less than 50 minerals), and you still admit your build is behind in drones. Did I get this right? If you think the difference is 100+ minerals then I will test them, otherwise I think it is not very relevant to the thread.
I haven't actually looked at the replay of the 11 pool of the other person yet. I only checked the 13 pool so far. It's not perfect, but it's close. He does make an extra drone before the first queen which slows down the queen. I actually sit on 3 larva for a very short period to get the queen out quicker. I'm about to watch the 11 pool replay though.
I was just saying that the numbers seemed like they were in the realm of possibility. I'll have to see.
Besides that, all trials I have done, including your replay, have put the 13 pool ahead by 100 minerals. I'll get back to you after I've watched the replay.
Also, sorry if I seem like I'm gunning for your build. I actually think the build is pretty cool. I'm not sure if it really is the best, but I definitely don't think it's a bad build. I was just getting really annoyed that it seemed like no one was even glancing at what I was finding with regards to build comparisons.
|
On December 04 2010 01:51 jacobman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:42 jdseemoreglass wrote:On December 04 2010 01:28 noWei wrote:
I checked some of the replays and it looked nice. My criticism of one I saw would be the 4gate. The protoss just seemed to be throw his units away. However I'm excited about this and will be trying it out on ladder after a few practices against the computer.
Really thanks OP. I watched your original thread with interest and am glad to see you persevered through a lot of trolling and flaming to come up this. Thank you. I am persevering with this because I really believe it is the safest, most flexible economic build possible, and can change the Zerg race. Also, for every person trolling the thread, I get 5 posts or PM's thanking me for the work. On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile. I apologize if I was too dismissive about your testing. I've been testing these builds for 5 days straight and have had to counter an endless stream of criticisms and claims, many of them unjustified. I've provided replays by request, repeated tests by request, extended the data sample times by request, changed the comparative criteria by request, and on and on... You said you didn't disagree with the previous posters data, and the differences were very small (less than 50 minerals), and you still admit your build is behind in drones. Did I get this right? If you think the difference is 100+ minerals then I will test them, otherwise I think it is not very relevant to the thread. I haven't actually looked at the replay of the 11 pool of the other person yet. I only checked the 13 pool so far. It's not perfect, but it's close. He does make an extra drone before the first queen which slows down the queen. I actually sit on 3 larva for a very short period to get the queen out quicker. I'm about to watch the 11 pool replay though. I was just saying that the numbers seemed like they were in the realm of possibility. I'll have to see. Besides that, all trials I have done, including your replay, have put the 13 pool ahead by 100 minerals. I'll get back to you after I've watched the replay. Also, sorry if I seem like I'm gunning for your build. I actually think the build is pretty cool. I'm not sure if it really is the best, but I definitely don't think it's a bad build. I was just getting really annoyed that it seemed like no one was even glancing at what I was finding with regards to build comparisons.
I can't seem to find the exact pool-first build order you would like me to test. Please be as specific as possible, including maynarding etc.
|
The thing is all this testing for this build is quite unneccesary as anyone can easily conclude a 11 pool is economically worse then a 13/14 pool by simply thinking.
A 14 pool is the fastest pool without cutting drones / larvae time. As a result it IS the most efficient build up till the point the first queens arrive. A 11 pool IS behind for quite some time untill the earlier injects from the queen pay off with more drones.... However anyone who has tested it properly will realize that a 11 pool + non-stop droning + expanding is not feasible in a real game as you NEED scouting and some lings in a real game. As a result 11 pool builds will not catch up to 13/14 pool builds because you simply don't have the money to spend all your larvae if you are getting lings and as a result 13/14 pool is most times just better (as more larvae due to earlier queens is the ONLY economical advantage a 11 pool has over a 14 pool).
Every 'test' so far not including gas, scouting, lings or whatever so far is 100% useless. The game is not about blind macro builds, if it was every terran would be 15ccing or protoss 17 nexusing. You need builds with a good combination of economy and early units as your standard build, which is always the build where you make non-stop drones/scv's/probes without cutting anything for your first production building. As a result 14 pool, 13 gate and 12 barracks are the 3 most standard builds in the game... Because they are the most economical IF you need a few early units as well....
11 pool is only good for tricking your opponent into things, for the rest it's really just worse then other builds.
|
On December 04 2010 01:56 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:51 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:42 jdseemoreglass wrote:On December 04 2010 01:28 noWei wrote:
I checked some of the replays and it looked nice. My criticism of one I saw would be the 4gate. The protoss just seemed to be throw his units away. However I'm excited about this and will be trying it out on ladder after a few practices against the computer.
Really thanks OP. I watched your original thread with interest and am glad to see you persevered through a lot of trolling and flaming to come up this. Thank you. I am persevering with this because I really believe it is the safest, most flexible economic build possible, and can change the Zerg race. Also, for every person trolling the thread, I get 5 posts or PM's thanking me for the work. On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile. I apologize if I was too dismissive about your testing. I've been testing these builds for 5 days straight and have had to counter an endless stream of criticisms and claims, many of them unjustified. I've provided replays by request, repeated tests by request, extended the data sample times by request, changed the comparative criteria by request, and on and on... You said you didn't disagree with the previous posters data, and the differences were very small (less than 50 minerals), and you still admit your build is behind in drones. Did I get this right? If you think the difference is 100+ minerals then I will test them, otherwise I think it is not very relevant to the thread. I haven't actually looked at the replay of the 11 pool of the other person yet. I only checked the 13 pool so far. It's not perfect, but it's close. He does make an extra drone before the first queen which slows down the queen. I actually sit on 3 larva for a very short period to get the queen out quicker. I'm about to watch the 11 pool replay though. I was just saying that the numbers seemed like they were in the realm of possibility. I'll have to see. Besides that, all trials I have done, including your replay, have put the 13 pool ahead by 100 minerals. I'll get back to you after I've watched the replay. Also, sorry if I seem like I'm gunning for your build. I actually think the build is pretty cool. I'm not sure if it really is the best, but I definitely don't think it's a bad build. I was just getting really annoyed that it seemed like no one was even glancing at what I was finding with regards to build comparisons. I can't seem to find the exact pool-first build order you would like me to test. Please be as specific as possible, including maynarding etc.
Sorry that is my mistake. I didn't bother putting the exact build orders because I posted so many builds at once, and I had the replay on there.
The build order for the one in question is
+ Show Spoiler +9 ovie
13 pool
15 hatch
14 queen
17 overlord
21 queen (move the first queen to expansion right after this larva inject and then larva inject whenever a queen has 25 energy)
23 meynard 3 drones to expansion and rally both bases to expansion (rally main back to the main when the expansion has 16 drones on it)
23 overlord
31 overlord
43 overlord (wing overlords from there. This last one might even be early. I can't remember if I figured the timing for this overlord out perfectly or not.)
|
Even though I'm not saying a thing here, bere sure both jacobman and jd that I read this thread every 3 hours or so because of you 2. jd's build seem really good, but it has to be fully tested.
Criticism is good if it is supported by facts.
If I had access to SC2 (working on my thesis makes me a TL reader only instead of a sc2 player, sad but true) I'd be the first to test both builds.
So, go on guys!
|
On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile.
I just tested your 13/15 replay against an adaptation of the 11/18 (11/15). I figured that your build was ahead by ~100 minerals because you got your hatch at 15, before queen.
Using this build (adapted from 11/18)
10 - extractor trick
11 - ovie
11 - pool
15 - hatch
15 - queen
17 - ovie
I use the 11-overpool, but go for hatch at 15 in order to mimic your build. Since both builds converge on a 15-hatch, the period following it is irrelevant (assuming all else equal). On my first try, spawning south Xel'Naga, here were my results:
11/15
Pool: 1:32
Hatch: 2:39
13/15 (from Jacob's replay)
Pool: 1:46
Hatch: 2:37
The 11 pool comes out 14 seconds faster, and the hatch being delayed by 2 seconds was simply the difference in 1 drone mining wave (you can check the replays yourself). So the 11-overpool, regardless of getting a hatch at 15, or 18, is at worst equivalent in economy but with an earlier pool. Please, let me know if you see some glaring flaw in my logic.
Also, if you go to 6:00 min mark, you'll find I'm behind by 95 minerals. However, if you take a look at my maynarding of workers, I think you'll see why I don't think this is a reasonable sample to draw any conclusion from. Since this build and the 13/15 converge on a 15-hatch, I don't think further comparison is necessary since the difference could only be less than a hatch larva cycle (one build or the other rebuilds their 15th drone <15 seconds early).
![[image loading]](http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/repimgs/repimg-33-171049.jpg)
|
i dont think you can play this vs all races. vs an all in ling att, the fe will die, most likely the main as well. but vs t and p it seems solid. im suprised the 11pool is econ wise effective though. ill check it out...
|
On December 03 2010 23:00 Slayer91 wrote:
The OP tried to tell me that 11 pool is ahead in minerals over a 15 hatch 15 pool up to 4:30.
No.
The OP tried to tell you that in a specific game, which he posted a replay for, he was ahead of a 15hatch build. And he was. Watch the replay. He was ahead on resources, drones, and tech, because the 15hatch player early scouted (which AFAIK is pretty much required when going hatch first), and saved 3 larvae to build lings as soon as his pool finished, which is not at all unreasonable for a hatch-first build to do after when scouting an 11 pool.
|
On December 04 2010 01:28 Pehrfect wrote:I stopped playing right before the 6 minute mark in both test games, so i did some extrapolating in the results above. Posting with results at 5:50 instead + Show Spoiler +It still seems as though both builds are more or less equal (at least when only looking at minerals mined).
I looked at the replays. Thanks a lot for doing that. It's always helpful to have more data. It does appear that in your replays the builds are basically at a stalemate economically. Unfortunately neither was executed perfectly. No big deal though. That's really hard to do. It does however show how important it is for people to test builds themselves. If you can't do the build perfectly you may lose or gain more minerals through variation than the actual build.
I compared your posts to mine and I was about 200 minerals ahead you at the 5:50, 5:55, and 5:57 marks when we both went 13 pool 15 hatch. It's obvious that there is a bit of variance possible in your tests. Like I said before though, it's great to test it for yourself 
|
I've been doing variations of this for a long time, I never have liked going hatch first.
I usually get a set or 3 of lings early, though, and hatch somewhere around 20-22 otherwise they can scout your base forever.
|
On December 03 2010 23:45 Roban wrote:
For everyone who says the OP must be wrong because you delay drones:
Keep in mind that you also get the 9th, 10th and 11th drone FASTER.
So by your logic this build must be economically ahead of 15h14p builds that delay those very drones.
Drone 9 comes at exactly the same time for every zerg build known to man, since I don't think anybody is using 8OL. You only get 10 and 11 faster. 10 is slightly faster, 11 is quite a bit faster, but there's a very significant delay on drones 12-14. When I did 9OL vs extractor trick testing, 9OL was behind for a very small period of time due to drones 10 and 11 being slower, but drones 12-14 are enough faster that it pulls ahead very quickly. And in that comparison, there was no pool on 11, which delays drones 12-14 a *lot* more.
The OP has started to go a little bit off the deep end IMO in trying to claim that the 11pool isn't behind early because of those drone delays. It is, and that's very easy to prove. It's the first inject that pulls it ahead.
|
On December 04 2010 02:17 jacobman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:28 Pehrfect wrote:I stopped playing right before the 6 minute mark in both test games, so i did some extrapolating in the results above. Posting with results at 5:50 instead + Show Spoiler +It still seems as though both builds are more or less equal (at least when only looking at minerals mined). I looked at the replays. Thanks a lot for doing that. It's always helpful to have more data. It does appear that in your replays the builds are basically at a stalemate economically. Unfortunately neither was executed perfectly. No big deal though. That's really hard to do. It does however show how important it is for people to test builds themselves. If you can't do the build perfectly you may lose or gain more minerals through variation than the actual build. I compared your posts to mine and I was about 200 minerals ahead you at the 5:50, 5:55, and 5:57 marks when we both went 13 pool 15 hatch. It's obvious that there is a bit of variance possible in your tests. Like I said before though, it's great to test it for yourself
Indeed, I'm assuming this is because the main base is oversaturated for quite some time, and I should have maynarded more drones. This is the case for both builds though, so I guess the effect is marginal since I end up with about the same amount of drones in both builds.
Btw I redid the 13 pool test and didn't get a drone before the second queen this time. Turns out I ended up with 20 minerals less at 5:50 
|
I love this opener, staying on 1 base and not rushing to a 14 hatch makes everyone so wary of me - they cant blindly execute a random build order because they fear my early aggression, which in turns lets me win on econ.
The major problem I have with zerg is getting to the 45-50 supply stage without caving to an early attack, and that psychological edge of staying 1 base for a bit longer helps so much.
I still need to work on gas timings - but its pretty great so far.
|
On December 04 2010 02:14 Obsolescence wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 01:16 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:13 Ryhn wrote:
Why so hostile Jacob?
I understand you're tired, but there's no need to get snarky with me. I read the first few pages, then skimmed to the end of the thread because I was excited.
We have too many conflicting results, so we need more data. I'm not ready to claim either build to be conclusively 'more right' for an early pool - my nudge to you was a request for further testing, I did not mean to offend. It's okay, I was just a little annoyed at the moment because I spent a lot of time testing this and people seemed to just pretend I wasn't presenting any possible contradictory data. Sorry if I was hostile. I just tested your 13/15 replay against an adaptation of the 11/18 (11/15). I figured that your build was ahead by ~100 minerals because you got your hatch at 15, before queen. Using this build (adapted from 11/18) 10 - extractor trick 11 - ovie 11 - pool 15 - hatch 15 - queen 17 - ovie I use the 11-overpool, but go for hatch at 15 in order to mimic your build. Since both builds converge on a 15-hatch, the period following it is irrelevant (assuming all else equal). On my first try, spawning south Xel'Naga, here were my results: 11/15 Pool: 1:32 Hatch: 2:39 13/15 (from Jacob's replay) Pool: 1:46 Hatch: 2:37 The 11 pool comes out 14 seconds faster, and the hatch being delayed by 2 seconds was simply the difference in 1 drone mining wave (you can check the replays yourself). So the 11-overpool, regardless of getting a hatch at 15, or 18, is at worst equivalent in economy but with an earlier pool. Please, let me know if you see some glaring flaw in my logic. Also, if you go to 6:00 min mark, you'll find I'm behind by 95 minerals. However, if you take a look at my maynarding of workers, I think you'll see why I don't think this is a reasonable sample to draw any conclusion from. Since this build and the 13/15 converge on a 15-hatch, I don't think further comparison is necessary since the difference could only be less than a hatch larva cycle (one build or the other rebuilds their 15th drone <15 seconds early).
Okay, I looked at the replay. Interesting idea to kind of combine the two. I'm a little bit confused by what you're trying to say though. I'm not sure about your logic on how you got to an 11-overpool with a hatch at 15 or 18 is at worst equivalent in economy. I don't see how that follows from anything posted.
I do however agree that the replay isn't quite a reasonable sample to draw conclusions from. You definitely didn't have a good maynard, but this replay only reached 4469 at the 6:00 mark. This is a 160 mineral difference compared to the 13 pool I did, which mined 4630 by that time. I'm not sure if that whole difference can be accounted for by the maynarding. It seems unlikely, and unless I'm missing something It defintely still leaves the possibility that the 13 pool is 100 minerals ahead.
|
Zerg is all reactionary and has no solid build order. I mean you're not going to follow the BO dogmatically and build drones when your opponent proxies or 6 pools you.
|
On December 04 2010 02:25 Pehrfect wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2010 02:17 jacobman wrote:On December 04 2010 01:28 Pehrfect wrote:I stopped playing right before the 6 minute mark in both test games, so i did some extrapolating in the results above. Posting with results at 5:50 instead + Show Spoiler +It still seems as though both builds are more or less equal (at least when only looking at minerals mined). I looked at the replays. Thanks a lot for doing that. It's always helpful to have more data. It does appear that in your replays the builds are basically at a stalemate economically. Unfortunately neither was executed perfectly. No big deal though. That's really hard to do. It does however show how important it is for people to test builds themselves. If you can't do the build perfectly you may lose or gain more minerals through variation than the actual build. I compared your posts to mine and I was about 200 minerals ahead you at the 5:50, 5:55, and 5:57 marks when we both went 13 pool 15 hatch. It's obvious that there is a bit of variance possible in your tests. Like I said before though, it's great to test it for yourself Indeed, I'm assuming this is because the main base is oversaturated for quite some time, and I should have maynarded more drones. This is the case for both builds though, so I guess the effect is marginal since I end up with about the same amount of drones in both builds. Btw I redid the 13 pool test and didn't get a drone before the second queen this time. Turns out I ended up with 20 minerals less at 5:50
Haha, I had those same issues when I first started to try testing some builds. I had to start being really alert to make everything at the exact moment it was supposed to be made and quit if I messed up the build. I started getting pretty consistent results after that.
Funny that you mention the drones too. It always seemed like no matter how bad I messed up I still pretty much had the same number drones at any given time. It was the one thing I could depend on
|
On December 03 2010 09:55 Skrag wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 06:53 kcdc wrote:On December 03 2010 06:04 Skrag wrote:
This is where I agree with you. The tests were pure 6 minute drone races, and 11pool beat everything except for 14hatch. But you can't just claim this makes the 11pool worthless, without showing examples of how and where it fails. The original post is a foundation, not a build. You're claiming that it would be worse at actual builds, but haven't even attempted to provide any proof. Sorry, but the onus is on you. The OP showed that 11pool can be superior economically to any other pool-first build.
So pick a build, something that you would typically do with a 14pool/16hatch, and I'll be more than happy to run detailed in-game tests, because although I'm intrigued about the possibilities here, I also would like to see how it holds up in real in-game situations where you're doing more than just building workers. That would help a ton with this duscussion. Just do something reasonably safe with a 14 pool 16 hatch with an extractor trick before OL to keep the comparison as close as possible. Send a drone to scout after your OL finishes. Get a pair of zerglings and an extractor after your queen, research zergling speed at 100 gas, and make some zerglings and a spine crawler when your hatch finishes. Pull drones off gas after 100 for speed. Then note what your defense is at each point in time and your total resources mined. Try to match that level of defense off of an 11 pool and compare the total resources mined. Certain things might not match up--the 11 pool won't have the creep as early for a spine crawler at the nat, so you might want to start it in your main and move it down or compensate with more zerglings. Try to get zergling speed at about the same time in both cases as being 30 seconds late on both speed and your spine crawler is a huge deal in the game. Any chance you have or can dig up a replay of something you'd like me to try to reproduce as closely as possible? Or want me to just wing it based on what you've said here?
Do whatever strikes your fancy. I'd just like to see a direct comparison between a realistic 11 overpool opening and a realistic 14 pool (with extractor trick) opening. They're similar builds--both are safe against cheese, and they both get drones 1-11 at the exact same time. 14 pool/16 hatch gets drones 12-17 (17 drone becomes a hatch) earlier and a hatch earlier. 11 overpool gets drones 18 and 19 earlier (19th drone becomes a hatch), and gets a queen earlier. In the early going, 14 pool will mine slightly more minerals. The 11 pool will be able to catch up in minerals mined in the mid-20's food because the extra larvae enables more drone production, but if you're pressured, you're not going to be able to crank out those drones anyway. Anyway, this has been my experience with 11 pool. If you run realistic tests and get different results, I'll reconsider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
