EPTAlso, were my overlord timings in the OP actually early for the 13 pool? I thought I had nailed them the best you could possibly do in that replay.
[D] The new Zerg standard for all match-ups? - Page 23
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
jacobman
217 Posts
Also, were my overlord timings in the OP actually early for the 13 pool? I thought I had nailed them the best you could possibly do in that replay. | ||
|
Cheshyr
United States78 Posts
I made a few attempts at 11 pool 15 hatch variations, but they weren't nearly as clean as the 11 pool 18 hatch. It was quite a bit easier to fit gas into the 11/18 for me. I'm interesting in seeing how the 11/15 works out for other people. We need a summary again. 11 pool / 18 hatch: 11 pool / 15 hatch: 13 pool / 15 hatch: | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
Anyway, here are the results, along with 2 replays so you can look them up yourself and don't have to take my word for it. I know I will get posts claiming an inject or something is .275 seconds delayed, but hopefully we can discard such stupidity. ![[image loading]](http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/repimgs/repimg-33-171100.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/repimgs/repimg-33-171101.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Kxjl6.png) This data confirms what I have been saying all along. This build is simply better economically. At no point am I behind, unless you count the meaningless 6 minerals before the 3 minute mark. If you are an honest and reasonable person, I would appreciate it if you would go back and correct any posts claiming this build is behind economically to pool-first, so that others don't read this thread and make assumptions that your stated facts are actually facts and not claims, and therefore reach unfair conclusions regarding this build. But I suspect I will instead get a barrage of complaints regarding the test or methods or build chosen or what have you, because pointless arguments on the internet never end. I requested build orders to test, and jacobman was the only one who provided. Therefore don't complain if you want to see 14 Pool or anything else compared, because I won't do it. Have a nice day. | ||
|
Obsolescence
United States270 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:18 Cheshyr wrote: I've lost track. Are we now thinking that 13 pool 15 hatch is preferred? I made a few attempts at 11 pool 15 hatch variations, but they weren't nearly as clean as the 11 pool 18 hatch. It was quite a bit easier to fit gas into the 11/18 for me. I'm interesting in seeing how the 11/15 works out for other people. We need a summary again. 11 pool / 18 hatch: 11 pool / 15 hatch: 13 pool / 15 hatch: From what I've read: 11/15 and 13/15 are all but identical in terms of economy, except that 11/15 gets the pool ~14 seconds faster. Assuming this is not refuted it points to the idea that 11/18 is at least as economical as 13/18. I believe the main concern at present is how 11/18 compares to 14/16 or some of the more standard 14-16/14-18 builds. The 11 pools have 6 seconds of larva waste. The 13 pool has ~2-3 seconds of larva waste. The 14+ pool has no larva waste. | ||
|
DemiAlbedo
Canada69 Posts
With your evidence and replays I have started trying to adapt for an 11/18 opening. | ||
|
Obsolescence
United States270 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:30 jdseemoreglass wrote: This data confirms what I have been saying all along. This build is simply better economically. At no point am I behind, unless you count the meaningless 6 minerals before the 3 minute mark. If you are an honest and reasonable person, I would appreciate it if you would go back and correct any posts claiming this build is behind economically to pool-first, so that others don't read this thread and make assumptions that your stated facts are actually facts and not claims, and therefore reach unfair conclusions regarding this build. But I suspect I will instead get a barrage of complaints regarding the test or methods or build chosen or what have you, because pointless arguments on the internet never end. I requested build orders to test, and jacobman was the only one who provided. Therefore don't complain if you want to see 14 Pool or anything else compared, because I won't do it. Have a nice day. Great post! Thank you for the hard work you put into this analysis. Please, don't get too down, developing something like this is a journey not a destination so to speak. There will almost surely be more work to be done or more tests to run no matter how many have been run before. This may put to rest the issue of 13/15 vs 11/18, but perhaps there are other factors to consider. Regardless of whether or not this is the new standard, you've obviously stumbled upon a viable build of tangible value, which is not something that many on this forum can claim. | ||
|
Cheshyr
United States78 Posts
Thanks for the hard work. My only complaint is that I had to work, and didn't have time to put together a build for you to compare with the two above. I'm working on a way to build gas into it, and i'll post it once I feel it's competent, but I think that's just icing on what you've already done. For better or worse, you challenged the status quo and sparked enough interest to start a rather large fight. Hang in there, come back in a couple days, and let's see where the dust has settled. Great job. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:30 jdseemoreglass wrote: Ok, I finally broke down and tested these builds thoroughly. I did them exactly as my post and exactly as jacobman's post said to do them. I took them at every 30 second interval from :30 to 6:00... I used the replay bar the get EXACTLY at the beginning of the second so there could be no disputes about fractions of a second. They are in the same position on the same map. I played them both on slow speed with precise timing. Is there anything missing? Have I covered all my bases? Of course not. Trolls are experts at splitting hairs... Anyway, here are the results, along with 2 replays so you can look them up yourself and don't have to take my word for it. I know I will get posts claiming an inject or something is .275 seconds delayed, but hopefully we can discard such stupidity. ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/aZRIs.png) This data confirms what I have been saying all along. This build is simply better economically. At no point am I behind, unless you count the meaningless 6 minerals before the 3 minute mark. If you are an honest and reasonable person, I would appreciate it if you would go back and correct any posts claiming this build is behind economically to pool-first, so that others don't read this thread and make assumptions that your stated facts are actually facts and not claims, and therefore reach unfair conclusions regarding this build. But I suspect I will instead get a barrage of complaints regarding the test or methods or build chosen or what have you, because pointless arguments on the internet never end. I requested build orders to test, and jacobman was the only one who provided. Therefore don't complain if you want to see 14 Pool or anything else compared, because I won't do it. Have a nice day. This is exactly what I was hoping for. I think you did a good job with the 11 pool 18 hatch build this time around. The 13 pool 15 hatch is a little slower than the one that I posted right before that, but that's okay because you improved the 11 pool 18 hatch enough that it's on par with pretty much any of the replays I could do, at most 20 minerals behind. The real kicker though is that you managed to scrounge up a ton more drones in your new replay, which is really good and in my opinion more than makes up for any 20 or 30 mineral difference, so with your new replay the 11/18 does look better than 13/15 due to the extra larva. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
| ||
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
| ||
|
Obsolescence
United States270 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:55 IzieBoy wrote: I don't understand the graphs; all I can tell is that 11p/18h is similar to 13p/15h and from that I would definitely do 11p/18h. Having that pool out earlier is better for transition and response. Are you sure there is more you should be understanding from the graphs? | ||
|
Cheshyr
United States78 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:55 IzieBoy wrote: I don't understand the graphs; all I can tell is that 11p/18h is similar to 13p/15h and from that I would definitely do 11p/18h. Having that pool out earlier is better for transition and response. Sounds like you understand them just fine. :-) | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
On December 04 2010 03:36 kcdc wrote: I just did the tests. People keep arguing with you because you're missing something important. 11 overpool 18 hatch gets drones 12-17 later than 14 pool 16 hatch. That manifests itself in minerals mined. This sounded a little off to me, so I went and recorded finish times of the first 19 drones. As I thought, there are a few in the middle that 11pool produces faster. Specifically the 15th and 16th drones. No big deal though. It gets those drones faster, but not much faster, and they only manage to do a very small amount of catchup from already being behind. Taking the difference between the number of drones each build had in specific time ranges, you can figure out how many worker seconds ahead or behind they are. Drones mine about about .7 minerals per second, so mutliplying workerseconds by 0.7 gives you approximately how many minerals ahead or behind they are. Starting at 53 seconds in, until 1:35, 11pool is about 35 workerseconds ahead on average. From then until 2:45, 14pool is about 50 workerseconds (or 35-ish minerals) ahead, from 2:45-3:25, 14pool is about 80 workerseconds ahead (57 minerals), and from that point until the 19th drone finishes at pretty close to the 4 minute mark, 14pool is ahead 115 workerseconds (80 minerals). So yeah, not quite 100 minerals, but close enough. Your tests are good, but they're not showing critical early data. Your earliest data point is 4:30 when the extra drones from the 11 overpool larva injection are already kicking in. If you go back to 2:30, you'll see another story. 11 overpool sacrificies ~100 early minerals compared to a 14 pool to get an earlier queen. That might be a good trade (if you turn the extra larvae from the earlier queen into drones, you'll make those 100 minerals back), but it's not as clear-cut as you're presenting it. There is a real trade-off. But, that timeframe covers the first 4 minutes, and during that time, there's really not that much that you can be doing differently without delaying the hatch, so starting data points at 4:30 seems pretty reasonable to me. Yeah, it's good to know that 11pool is behind 80-ish minerals in the third minute, but there's not really much a 14pool could be doing with the extra minerals, so it doesn't really matter all that much. Both builds have enough money to spend their larvae, and have the same ability to add gas at comparable times without crippling the economy. And if 11pool does pull ahead during the 4th minute, which is where you're going to actually be implementing most of the guts of your opening, then I don't really think 80 minerals that you can't do much differently with anyway is a bad tradeoff for extra minerals later. EDIT: I wasn't paying attention to the queen inject while I was recording larva finish times, but it turns out that the first larva inject completes at just over 4 minutes, so the 11pool will start pulling ahead very quickly after the 19th drone, if you are able to make drones with those larvae. | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
On December 04 2010 07:17 jacobman wrote: @ Skrag Also, were my overlord timings in the OP actually early for the 13 pool? I thought I had nailed them the best you could possibly do in that replay. No clue. I didn't even try to figure out optimal overlord timings for anything other than the 11pool, and for that one 20ol is better than 18ol, and 30ol is better than 28ol. I'm not 100% sure 30 is the *best* timing for that OL, and I didn't even bother with the one on 36, but the earlier ones make a fairly big difference, because those 2 shifts represents 4 drones coming out 15 seconds faster than they would have otherwise, which can make as much as a 40-50 mineral difference. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
I won't dispute that 11 pool is only a bit behind 13 pool (which should be 14 pool) in the short run and gets ahead in the long run IF YOU CAN DRONE UP BLINDLY. However you can't.. I don't even get why you even bother to post data beyond the 4:00 min mark, its completely irrelevant as you are NEVER playing a game without lings up to that point anyway. The thing is you didn't scout with a drone or got lings at all. Sure in THAT case it's easy to catch up with the earlier queen inject. In realistic scenario's however you ARE behind in minerals mined early on (and more then the 6 minerals in my testing) and you will not catch up those roughly 50 minerals later because you can't drone up freely. The limiting factor to zerg play is in fact not larvae but minerals mined, which a proper build will be in front with. As for a decent build that is better economically: 9OL 14 pool 17 hatch 16 queen 18 OL 18 gas 17 pair of lings This build is about 30-50 minerals up to yours after just quick testing. Also note that your build is done with exact precision in your game, performing it slightly worse will have a much more notable inpact (because your idle hatchery time depends on it) whereas performing a build slightly suboptimal with a 14 pool hardly matters. The fact 11 pool takes off vs 14 pool after 3:30 is completely irrelevant once again, you won't convert all larvae into drones anyway most of the time. THe 11 pool build is only decent if you are sure you don't need to scout AND your opponent is likely to be thrown off by it, ie. does a suboptimal build against it because of it. It's just retarded that after 20 pages of complaints about proper testing methods you still do a crappy test (ie, no gas, no scouting etc.) and then complain about the trolls while you're just stupid for doing silly tests. The fact that 11 pool has a larvae waste while not being that significantly faster on the queen is more then enough evidence for a decent player to know it's a worse build economically. That you need days of testing and then even miss that conclusion is just extremely silly. | ||
|
mookku
Finland39 Posts
 ) or not and hence needs to prepare. If he still does not prepare, I can always decide to punish him if he's going for some high eco build or powering too much too early.Props to the OP, this really helped me stay alive in the early game and helped me get some decisions to make early on - before (hatch first builds) it used to be all defend until I overpower his attack, then build some economy and only THEN I got to make any decisions whether to attack and with what! | ||
|
Super_bricklayer
France104 Posts
I'm joining the "chill out" post here, and want to thank Jd too for his time and analysis. Yes it's theoriecraft, but i would never do this, and still, this BO seems to be the one i'll use more and more. | ||
|
BnK
United States538 Posts
On December 04 2010 08:16 Markwerf wrote: As for a decent build that is better economically: 9OL 14 pool 17 hatch 16 queen 18 OL 18 gas 17 pair of lings Test this is the other topic plz | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 04 2010 08:16 Markwerf wrote: Ugh @ jdseemoreglass. I won't dispute that 11 pool is only a bit behind 13 pool (which should be 14 pool) in the short run and gets ahead in the long run IF YOU CAN DRONE UP BLINDLY. However you can't.. I don't even get why you even bother to post data beyond the 4:00 min mark, its completely irrelevant as you are NEVER playing a game without lings up to that point anyway. The thing is you didn't scout with a drone or got lings at all. Sure in THAT case it's easy to catch up with the earlier queen inject. In realistic scenario's however you ARE behind in minerals mined early on (and more then the 6 minerals in my testing) and you will not catch up those roughly 50 minerals later because you can't drone up freely. The limiting factor to zerg play is in fact not larvae but minerals mined, which a proper build will be in front with. As for a decent build that is better economically: 9OL 14 pool 17 hatch 16 queen 18 OL 18 gas 17 pair of lings This build is about 30-50 minerals up to yours after just quick testing. Also note that your build is done with exact precision in your game, performing it slightly worse will have a much more notable inpact (because your idle hatchery time depends on it) whereas performing a build slightly suboptimal with a 14 pool hardly matters. The fact 11 pool takes off vs 14 pool after 3:30 is completely irrelevant once again, you won't convert all larvae into drones anyway most of the time. THe 11 pool build is only decent if you are sure you don't need to scout AND your opponent is likely to be thrown off by it, ie. does a suboptimal build against it because of it. It's just retarded that after 20 pages of complaints about proper testing methods you still do a crappy test (ie, no gas, no scouting etc.) and then complain about the trolls while you're just stupid for doing silly tests. The fact that 11 pool has a larvae waste while not being that significantly faster on the queen is more then enough evidence for a decent player to know it's a worse build economically. That you need days of testing and then even miss that conclusion is just extremely silly. I'm not getting involved in this one, but I will say that the 13 Pool was the first pool first build I really tried to get timings down for. This thread is mainly for builds with quick pool times, so I was looking for an alternative that also had quick pool times. I never really put any time into the 14 or 15 pool openings since the pool is set back more time wise. They probably are a tiny bit more economical, but if you want the earlier pool, that's not as important. This builds biggest advantage anyways seems to be extra larva, and depending on what you want to do, those can be important | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
Testing responsibilities belong to you. It's only fair that if you think a build order will work better in some manner, you supply a replay showing that it outperforms the replays that have been given for jd's build. If you can do that then it's back on jd to either give you a replay that performs even better or decide that the differences are still worth it. | ||
| ||
