EPTPushing The Limits of Zerg Economy Builds - Page 8
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
IzieBoy
United States865 Posts
| ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 13:06 Skrag wrote: I'm absolutely positive they can't, and did *extensive* testing during the beta on it. Mineral patches that are "close" to the hatchery can only be mined by 2 workers at a time. Patches that are further away can be mined by 3. If you ever see any workers bouncing around from patch to patch, those workers are not contributing to your economy at all. Xel'Naga has 4 close patches, where most maps only have 2, so the maximum number of workers in the mains is 20. (4 patches that can support 2 workers, 4 that can support 3) In that base, 24 workers will mine at almost exactly the same rate as 20. I didn't test this on XelNaga specifically (because it didn't actually exist at the time), I tested on Lost Temple, which has two "close" patches in the main, and 30 workers mined at almost the exact same rate as 22. There is a *very* small improvement, because the timing on the close patches is not 100% perfect, and there's a very small gap that can be improved upon if there are enough extra workers bouncing around, but the benefit is really really really small, and definitely not worth the extra worker. Also, even though the base *can* support 20 miners, the last worker or two that the patches can support will often take so long to settle in that they're not worth building unless you're intentionally oversaturating to expand, and even then, it's going to be better to have them distance mine at the expansion than to interfere with the routines at the main. I haven't figured out which patches on the expansions are too close to support 3 workers, so I don't know what the max number of drones at the expansion is, but more than 20 at the main is definitely too many. Interesting. I didn't know that. I'm not going to change it though. I want to keep the builds consistent. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 13:14 IzieBoy wrote: wow cool so 14 hatch 15 pool might be the winning ticket for 4v4s It might be. Don't get too attached to one build yet. Check back in like a week and we'll likely have more builds for comparison. Right now the number of hatch first builds tested is kind of weak. | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
Why is the seconds lost for transferring workers in the build order 19 seconds for 13p15h and 21 seconds for the other builds? | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 15:01 Drae wrote: Simple question. Why is the seconds lost for transferring workers in the build order 19 seconds for 13p15h and 21 seconds for the other builds? First of all, just for clarification, that note is only meant for the BO tester that I listed. I'm currently only using that to help with overlord timings and finding new builds. That is not used in any way for the AI testing. I included in this time the time lost when you brought the drone to make the hatchery. Since there was no easy way to input this in the BO tester that I knew of. I found it to take about 15 seconds to get to the expansion location. Minus the 3 seconds already included in the building delay brings it to 12. If you divide that between two transfered drones that is 6 extra per drone to make up for the drone that went to make the hatch. 15+6 = 21. With 3 drones transfered 12/3 = 4 and 15+4=19 | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
On December 11 2010 15:14 jacobman wrote: First of all, just for clarification, that note is only meant for the BO tester that I listed. I'm currently only using that to help with overlord timings and finding new builds. That is not used in any way for the AI testing. I included in this time the time lost when you brought the drone to make the hatchery. Since there was no easy way to input this in the BO tester that I knew of. I found it to take about 15 seconds to get to the expansion location. Minus the 3 seconds already included in the building delay brings it to 12. If you divide that between two transfered drones that is 6 extra per drone to make up for the drone that went to make the hatch. 15+6 = 21. With 3 drones transfered 12/3 = 4 and 15+4=19 The problem with this method is that you are accounting for lost income from the hatchery drones transfer time much later in the build order than actually would occur. Based on the syntax info page for that BO tester, I think a better way to account for time lost for travel time for the expansion would be the scout then proxy command. Then just use the transfer command as normal. BO tester script then looks like this; # Startup Build Delay = 3 Seconds 10 Extractor trick 11 Overlord 11 Spawning Pool 16 Queen then constant Spawn Larvae @150 minerals scout (15 seconds) @300 minerals proxy Hatchery, then transfer 2 Drones (15 seconds) 17 Overlord 18 Overlord 21 Queen then constant spawn larvae 28 Overlord 36 Overlord The same can be used for any of the builds you listed. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 18:43 Drae wrote: The problem with this method is that you are accounting for lost income from the hatchery drones transfer time much later in the build order than actually would occur. Based on the syntax info page for that BO tester, I think a better way to account for time lost for travel time for the expansion would be the scout then proxy command. Then just use the transfer command as normal. BO tester script then looks like this; # Startup Build Delay = 3 Seconds 10 Extractor trick 11 Overlord 11 Spawning Pool 16 Queen then constant Spawn Larvae @150 minerals scout (15 seconds) @300 minerals proxy Hatchery, then transfer 2 Drones (15 seconds) 17 Overlord 18 Overlord 21 Queen then constant spawn larvae 28 Overlord 36 Overlord The same can be used for any of the builds you listed. That does sound like it would be better. Thanks for the idea. I'll use that from now on. I'll probably go back and change the old BO when I get the chance. This doesn't change my final results at all, since those weren't reliant on the BO tester, but your idea will make me a little more confident that I've found a good build on the BO tester when I do. Have any build orders that you think would stack up with the 14/14 or 14/15 builds? I'm really curious if those actually are the builds with the greatest economic potential. | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
On December 11 2010 18:48 jacobman wrote: That does sound like it would be better. Thanks for the idea. I'll use that from now on. I'll probably go back and change the old BO when I get the chance. This doesn't change my final results at all, since those weren't reliant on the BO tester, but your idea will make me a little more confident that I've found a good build on the BO tester when I do. This news probably wont make you more confident  I just reviewed the output from the script and its bugged for multiple queens; http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=159994¤tpage=12#225 Its probably not a great script to using to base your analysis on. Is there a link to the AI that Skragg is using? I am sure its on one of the four or so threads, but I cant find it. On December 11 2010 18:48 jacobman wrote: Have any build orders that you think would stack up with the 14/14 or 14/15 builds? I'm really curious if those actually are the builds with the greatest economic potential. First thing I am going to do is post an optimized version of the 11p18h build. The one that is being used is off by a fair bit. The 18OL should be a 20 OL. Ill post a proper build once I can get a replay of it in a ladder 1v1. Ill look at the other builds if I can find the time. | ||
|
Bobgrimly
New Zealand250 Posts
Unless I suck at reading graphs... Not talking about the top pros... 200 mins will probably make a difference if they can defend the early hatch. But for the other 99% of us pool first won't really make a huge difference. | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
AI testing was the best idea we could come up with for testing the builds, so each build has been run by AI in the REAL GAME. The results for that are the one's that are posted. Each build was run 5 times too to get an average which better represents the build. If you have any improvements to the builds I already have listed or if you have a new build, I would love to hear them. If you give me a detailed build order I'll actually test it right away. Also, there is no link to the AI that Skragg is using. However, I did post example replays of my AI running each build. If you watch those, it should download the map and you can see the script that I'm using there. I have to warn you though, my coding is really really really unorganized and inefficient. I was just trying to get the job done, and I did not worry about making the code pretty. Also, there are some artifacts in the code from things I tried that did not work, which do not affect the game-play. | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
On December 11 2010 18:56 Drae wrote: This news probably wont make you more confident I just reviewed the output from the script and its bugged for multiple queens; http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=159994¤tpage=12#225 Ignore that, its actually a bug in the completion time for the second queen, not the first larvae spit from the second queen. The second queen is listed as having a 60second production time, when it should be 50. That means that the second queens first larvae spit is on time at 50 secs. So the bug has no impact on the output. On December 11 2010 19:06 jacobman wrote: Haha, I'm using AI too Drae. I don't when the last time you checked this thread was, but we actually changed directions from a day or two ago. None of the analysis is based on the build order tester. That's only a tool to help perhaps steer us towards other builds to try. AI testing was the best idea we could come up with for testing the builds, so each build has been run by AI in the REAL GAME. The results for that are the one's that are posted. Each build was run 5 times too to get an average which better represents the build. If you have any improvements to the builds I already have listed or if you have a new build, I would love to hear them. If you give me a detailed build order I'll actually test it right away. Also, there is no link to the AI that Skragg is using. However, I did post example replays of my AI running each build. If you watch those, it should download the map and you can see the script that I'm using there. I have to warn you though, my coding is really really really unorganized and inefficient. I was just trying to get the job done, and I did not worry about making the code pretty. Also, there are some artifacts in the code from things I tried that did not work, which do not affect the game-play. Fair enough, I'll just post the build orders when I have one optimized and let you test it  | ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:01 Bobgrimly wrote: not a great player but just looking at the graphs it would seem that the difference is up to 200 mins at the 6:20 mark. I know that can make a difference but with the flexibility of earlier pools it makes sense to go pool first especially with all the terrans rushing. And so although the arguements for and against might rage on what at least this information purely shows, is that no matter what bo you go you won't really suffer in the early game enough economically to justify saying hatch first is a must for eco games. Unless I suck at reading graphs... Not talking about the top pros... 200 mins will probably make a difference if they can defend the early hatch. But for the other 99% of us pool first won't really make a huge difference. Haha, you don't suck at reading graphs. I understand where you're coming from. I'm trying not make up peoples mind on which build they want to use. That's why I break down the analysis into pool first and hatch first. Although the good players can defend hatch first on many maps, many other people just aren't skilled enough to do this and will have more fun with other builds, even if other builds will work better if played best. For many people I just want this thread to be informative and perhaps help them decide which build works best for them. For the really good players it helps pinpoint the builds that will give them that essential tiny boost to their game if they figure out how to defend it. | ||
|
AcOrP
Bulgaria148 Posts
| ||
|
jacobman
217 Posts
On December 11 2010 19:46 AcOrP wrote: I don't think this is good way to develop solid build orders. Yes it is always good to know what advantages and disadvantages each build order give you. But for hatch 1st builds what happen when you hatch get denied by manner pylon or bunker ? That is more important to me than how much minerals and larva you have @ 6:20. Becouse pool 1st builds will always give you better results in such cases. So we need to find the Best economy build considering all the factors. If you don't like hatch first builds, then don't use them. Currently I'm not saying much of anything about the competative dynamics of the builds. I haven't received a single replay on any of the builds, which is what I was going to base such analysis on. If you are right about hatch first builds, then I have a multitude of pool first builds with different economic potentials for you to try. Your criticism, while possible, isn't really constructive. You give no direction to head in. At least with the current testing there is some information being delivered. In addition to this, when you find the top builds, without interference, you can then branch off into different scenarios to figure out what effect certain challenges have and how those might be tackled. The kind of information we're gathering right now gives you a good base to branch off from. Really, when it comes down to it, the more information the better. People can make different assumptions based off of what I'm posting, but having this information is still better than not having it. | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
On December 11 2010 18:56 Drae wrote: Is there a link to the AI that Skragg is using? I am sure its on one of the four or so threads, but I cant find it. No. The AI is just a bunch of triggers added to the official Xel'Naga Caverns map. I could post the map somewhere, but I wanted to add a few more builds to it before doing so, and even then, unless you're comfortable using the map editor, you won't be able to switch between builds and run it, which required a trigger change. It's a very simple change, but it does require using the map editor. I'm going to try to post a replay though, to see if other people can watch it without actually having the map, which seems to work for jacobman's version. Maybe enough data is stored in the replay that you don't actually have to have all the trigger logic and whatnot. | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
| ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
* Early hatch (=more larvae) makes up somewhat for the larvae loss while waiting at 11 * Scout block of hatch not that easy, because its very early * Hatch finished round 3.20 => harder to bunker rush, because of creeps spread * earlier pool, earlier queen => more larvae * economically not that weak, feels like a true hatch first :-) 10 Extractor Trick into Drone 11 Overlord 11 Hatchery 13 Spawning Pool 16 Queen, then constant Spawn Larvae 18 Overlord 23 Overlord 24 Queen, then constant Spawn Larvae 26 Overlord | ||
|
Skrag
United States643 Posts
Building your second queen at 24supply is going to put you even further behind just about everything else in larvae as well. Unless you can produce a replay that can compete economically with any of the other builds tested, it doesn't even seem worth the time to add the AI for it. | ||
|
Drae
70 Posts
Build Order + Show Spoiler + # Startup Build Delay = 3 Seconds 10 Extractor trick 11 Overlord 11 Spawning Pool 16 Queen then constant Spawn Larvae @150 minerals scout (15 seconds) @300 minerals proxy Hatchery, then transfer 8 Drones (15 seconds) 17 Overlord 20 Overlord 20 Queen then constant spawn larvae 28 Overlord 36 Overlord 52 Cancel Drone BO Calc Output Replay of build vs AI There are two errors in the replay. I Maynard 7 drones instead of 8, and make a 35OL instead of 36. The main differences between this build and the previous one; 1: 20 OL instead of 18 OL. 18OL was finishing well in advance of the Larvae pop from the Queens first Larvae Spit and was unnecessarily early and delaying 19 drone. 2: Maynarding 8 drones instead of 2. This is a significant difference between the 11p18h and the 14h15p builds. 11p18h has 24 drones when the hatchery finishes, compared to the 18 that 14h15p has. Maynarding for the 11p18h is therefore much more effective than it is for the 14h15p. I'll look at the other builds you mentioned and post up any results if they look decent. | ||
|
Cambam
United States360 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 10 Extractor Trick 11 Overlord 12 Spawning Pool 14 Queen 16 Hatchery 16 Overlord 18 Queen 21 Overlord 29 Overlord 40 Overlord Also, I'd like to see the results for 16 pool 15 hatch. Very economical, while being a little safer because pool finishes around 3:10. Though the hatch is susceptible to getting blocked . Don't really have a refined build for it.Hmm...while trying to find a refined build for it, EvolutionChamber came up with this build: + Show Spoiler + 9 Overlord 16 SpawningPool 15 Hatchery 15 Overlord 15 Hatchery 15 Queen 22 Queen 26 Overlord 28 Overlord 38 Overlord It'd be interesting to see how a 3 hatch build compares to all these 2 hatch builds. The extra larva would be nice if you're planning on making a lot of lings or roaches (larva intensive units) after you get your econ going. | ||
| ||
