I read the OP but not all the posts (mostly cuz i didnt want to rage) so sorry if this has been posted.
Chrono boost in my experience (watching income tabs in my games as protoss) gives an economic boost that is very hard to quantify outside the very early game. While it is true that toss just boosts probes early when moving into a macro game which gives them close to equal econ up to the 5 or 6 minute mark, there comes a point for toss where the practical use of chrono shifts almost entirely to unit and upgrade production. This stage of the game lasts a LONG time for toss, often until the 15 ish minute mark. While i will freely admit that terran uses more scans as the game goes on, it is always the case in my games that throughout the game the vast majority of energy is spent on mules. I beleive it is this difference that makes their relative benefits hard to quantify. If others have noticed a different trend than this, feel free to say so but know that I have watched a number of pros using chrono the same way I do so I dont stand alone.
It has been proven in another thread several months ago (i'm too lazy to search for it, sorry) that a protoss using all of his CBs on probes is roughly equivalent to a terran using all his energy on mules in terms of income (actually the protoss was a tiny bit ahead but it was so miniscule i'll call it even). This was taking into account that mules can harvest on an occupied patch and also that scv's can't mine while building. Now, of course a protoss will sometimes use a CB on something else, maybe a warpgate or the forge. However, so will the terran, as he will use a scan or two or even a supply drop.
In a real world (actually it's not real world it's starcraft but you get what i mean) situation, protoss and terran will be roughly equivalent in terms of income, assuming they both expo at the same time. You can easily check this by comparing your income graph after a match with your opponents if you know you expod around the same time.
The argument that terran can stay longer on one base than protoss because of mules is kind of strange as well. While in essence it's true, by the time your main is fully saturated as terran, it's almost mined out anyway so you need to expand one way or another.
There is one advantage of mules that does play a role in balance terms and that is that they don't cost supply. That means that a 200/200 terran army usually has about 10-15 supply more in army units than a 200/200 protoss army (at equal income).
um mules also harvest on saturated minerals, meaning those 4 probes mean nothing on a mineral line of 25 probes because they dont get anymore time but 25 scvs plus 1 mule = 29 scvs : D
So umm I did read the OP and I'm thinking the same as I think with every about every comparison thread. Why? Why makes this comparison? If you are want to value races against each other you cant point out 2 random things and compare them against each other and conclude what you want about balance or whatever the point may be.
It's like comparing tier 3 units to determine the better lategame race and conclude that zerg is UP since carriers and battlecruisers beats the living shit out of ultras and broodlords, based on the fact that neither of the zerg units can attack air.
Any racial advantage or disadvantage must be taken into the huge unsolvable equation that determines balances and more importantly must be put into context, so I gotta ask once what the bloody deuce is the point of this thread?
On January 25 2011 00:44 Lurk wrote: It has been proven in another thread several months ago (i'm too lazy to search for it, sorry) that a protoss using all of his CBs on probes is roughly equivalent to a terran using all his energy on mules in terms of income (actually the protoss was a tiny bit ahead but it was so miniscule i'll call it even). This was taking into account that mules can harvest on an occupied patch and also that scv's can't mine while building. Now, of course a protoss will sometimes use a CB on something else, maybe a warpgate or the forge. However, so will the terran, as he will use a scan or two or even a supply drop.
In a real world (actually it's not real world it's starcraft but you get what i mean) situation, protoss and terran will be roughly equivalent in terms of income, assuming they both expo at the same time. You can easily check this by comparing your income graph after a match with your opponents if you know you expod around the same time.
The argument that terran can stay longer on one base than protoss because of mules is kind of strange as well. While in essence it's true, by the time your main is fully saturated as terran, it's almost mined out anyway so you need to expand one way or another.
There is one advantage of mules that does play a role in balance terms and that is that they don't cost supply. That means that a 200/200 terran army usually has about 10-15 supply more in army units than a 200/200 protoss army (at equal income).
I have seen the Thread, but that just stated: look when protoos Chronoboosts all the time they have a lead eco wise. This is meant to see why the lead can be there.
On January 24 2011 22:04 Deckkie wrote: edit: A lot of usefull information has come acros the discussion. There where some very standard things I didnt take into consideration, like CC cant produce scv's while morfing into an OC. But this is the great thing about sience. there can always be a new, better theorie that will replace the old one (thanks to Popper).So someone please take in consideration everything that has been said, run some test and come with a new more sufisticated thread. At the end we will know the details and everybody will have gained a little knowledge (but as all knowlegde, important) about the world that is called SC2.
Hey guys,
In lots of streams where there are casters, the casters will talk about the Terran having little less scv's but that its pretty even with the mules. I am sure everybody will have heard this in millions of casts. The probolem is that they dont really talk about the precise differences in numbers. That is why I made this easy breakdown, with this everybody who is interesed will know presciely when someone is ahead or not (taking in account the mules)
Everyhing is ingame time.
A Mule costs 50 energy to call down. Collecting 50 energy takes 1 min and 50 seconds (1.15 real time). Every Mule collects 270 minerals. This mean that every 1.50 min Terran can collect 270 minerals with his Mule.
4 harvesters collect in 250 minerals in 1.50 min. This means that protoss needs to have approximately 4 harvesters more than the Terran to be on even footing.
Protoss can Chronoboost every 25 energy. Every Chronoboost gives 50% time reduction for 20 seconds. A probe takes 17 seconds to build. So with one Chronoboost a Protoss can make 2 harvesters. Giving them a lead of 1 harvester comapred to the Terran player. This means that Protoss needs to spend 4 times 25 energy (100 energy) on Chronoboosting his harvesters.
On January 24 2011 23:17 freetgy wrote: Chronoboost makes buildtime faster by 50% not 100% so the buildtime is not cut in half but 2/3 (if you constantly chronoboost)
so 1 Chronoboost on probes gives you a buildtime reduction of 10s meaning if you build 2 Probes: which usually take 2*17=34s it know takes 24s, so the advantage is 10s more mining time by each chronoboost. (taking into account if both players build constant workers)
In a normal opening for Protoss (13 gate 13 gas), he will have collected 100 enegry on his Nexus and the needed 200 minerals for probes to Chronoboost 4 extra probes at the 3.15 min mark.
With A normal opening from Terran (12 rax, 13 gas, 15 Orbital Command), the Terran will have his first Mule at presicely 3.15 min.
Now we have concluded that at the 3.15 mark both the Terran and the Protoss are about even (Terran has his Mule, Protoss has 4 extra probes). The Terran collects 20 minerals more every 1.50 min (everytime he can drop a mule) than the Protoss. The Protoss also needed to pay 200 minerals for his probes + their food costs (lets say 40 min) while the Terran only needed to pay 150 for his orbital command. The Terran is a little bit in the lead, but the Protoss can still Chronoboost out more probes or spend it on other things, while the Terran needs to drop his Mule everytime to stay on even footing.
(obviously the Protoss will need to chronoboost 4 more probes out everytime the Terran makes a new base to stay on even footing)
Conclusion From now on you will know when playing or watching a stream that Protoss needs to be ahead by 4 harvesters for every Orbital Command the Terran has.
Early game both the Terran and the Protoss are on approximately even footing with the ability for the Protoss to get a little bit ahead (income wise) if he chooses to chronoboost more probes than the first 4.
The more Orbital Commands the Terran gets out, the more he will get ahead (army wise) because he will need less workers overal.
Hope you could follow it a little and that I have helped some of you with this little insight
Re-edit: "Mules can harvest together with scv's" This isnt what the original post is about and there is not any explicit knowledge about this subject, but a lot of people want to argue about the fact that Mules can mine together with scv's. I have talked with some all-round Terran players about this subject and will put our opinions in the threat (or is it Thread? :p)
First thing to take in to consideration that this has all to do with the late game. Not early game because if u want to do an 1 base all in or two base all in you will probably not fully saturate your bases anyway.
You need to see your Mules as a core mining unit, not a unit that gives you extra minerals that you wouldnt get (wouldnt need) in a normal game.
You need to think about how many workers you want to make. Most players will have two running basis at a time, this will give a need of 60 workers. (by the time you get your third your first will be mined out etc.) You will have around 3 bases when u get to the 60 harvesters. This means that Terran can make 48 scv's (3 mules are comparable to 12 workers = 12 food), then stop, and have 2 basis at a time running.
Most Terran however will make the full 60 scv's and ues the OC's for scans instead of Mules, or they will take a 4th/5th base sooner and Mule that base instead of using scv's.
An argument to this is that instead of muling from a 4th or 5th base you can just mule from the two running bases. Obviously its a matter of what u like best, but the two running bases will dry up much sooner making you still need to get a 4th/5th base running sooner then your opponent.
So in our opinion being bale to mule and harvest with scv's from one base wont really give you an advantage. The advantage may in the fact that you can have a larger army while mining the same as the opponent or have the same army but mine faster than the opponent in late game.
By the way, Long distance = 8 x 30 per mule ( Will carry a 9th cargo but will die before it returns ) and Short Distance = 9 x 30 per mule // Blue minerals )
it's ~4.0±0.30 workers ( depends on distance to minerals )
Mules last 67.5±0.50 seconds ( 90 if under "Normal" ) at the fastest setting max saturation = 30 workers on a Blue mineral base ( 8 x 3 on minerals and 2 x 3 on gas )
Upon the mule die: 12000 (8 batches of mineral x 1500, 16 batches if that player FE) - (mineral left in batch 1 + min left in batch 2 + .....) = Total minerals harvested until the mules die.
If you use that fomula and track down the first 3 mules, you'll see that Terran's income is always lower than Protoss's EVEN WHEN Terran use mules. If for some reason Terran uses the scan, he will 100% be behind economically.
Of course the advantage of mules is it can harvest the same batch with the scvs, but unless the Terran is being contained or commits to 1,2 base play, he rarely use mules on saturated bases but save energy for scan.
This basically. Someone analyzed about 10+ top level TvP's and the terran was ALWAYS BEHIND IN ECONOMY IN EVERY SINGLE GAME. Luckily our units are more cost effective until there are collosus or storm, that's why every terran wants to end it quick. Also you need to scan and when you drop 8 mules on a gold patch because you are bad. You won't have the production facility's to back it up. So missing a mule is just like missing a larva inject.
1 gate/core FE against a 1 rax FE(wich isn't safe at all whilste 1 gate/core is) 1 gate/core is WAYYYYYYYYYY ahead in eco. It's not even funny how fast a protoss can saturate a base.
1 gate/core is safer than 1 rax FE AND ahead in eco? I am calling bullshit on this until I see some replays or something.
I tested on Nada's replay vs SKS in All-star tournament, it's Lost Temple map if I recall. Nada went FE, and yes, even until the third mules died, Terran was still behind economically. You can search the replay and check it out yourself.
Or you can just pick any top TvP replays in sc2rep.com and test.
On January 25 2011 00:59 Chibalicious wrote: So umm I did read the OP and I'm thinking the same as I think with every about every comparison thread. Why? Why makes this comparison? If you are want to value races against each other you cant point out 2 random things and compare them against each other and conclude what you want about balance or whatever the point may be.
It's like comparing tier 3 units to determine the better lategame race and conclude that zerg is UP since carriers and battlecruisers beats the living shit out of ultras and broodlords, based on the fact that neither of the zerg units can attack air.
Any racial advantage or disadvantage must be taken into the huge unsolvable equation that determines balances and more importantly must be put into context, so I gotta ask once what the bloody deuce is the point of this thread?
I think that the point of the thread was to not to say that MULE ARE OP! or CHRONOBOST IS OP! but simply to indicate that the fare about the same. He merely wanted to bust the myth that surounds this topic.
Thee most important concept with mules is that they represent a big compromise. Terran scouting in the midgame is based heavily around scans so of course, you lose mules every time you scan (it's important to think of each orbital command as containing one continuous mule that can be substituted for a scan or a supply depot or can be temporarily put in "time out" if they are killed). Mules are certainly important in the early game so that you can keep up with protoss or zerg in mineral income, but eventually the main purpose of the orbital command becomes scans and you lose that added income. In the late game is where mules really start to break things, though, because once you are on several bases, the income from mules once again becomes more important as supply from workers becomes more precious. So mules are a really dynamic thing, but in the early an mid game they don't provide you with anything more than you are due (that is, don't put you ahead.) Just for the record, I tested muling in different builds vs different builds as protoss with chronoboost. While it may not be optimal as protoss to always chronoboost probes, if you chronoboost consistently until the point that the mule comes out, your income will be roughly the same as Terran. If you chrono boost past that point, you will get ahead, especially if Terran does not consistently use mules (in favor of scans or whatever).
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Why can't he allow to only use it on mules? Maybe you need a few scans, but most of them will be on mules.
Ideally you want to use mules as much as possible, but there are so many things that you need to scan. Tech, army comp, denying observers. You can't just sit the whole game and only use Mules.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: You are saying that it is the protoss' fault for letting someone snipe the building, but when terran loses the mule it's not their fault? Why?
Yes it is the Terran's fault if the Protoss kills the Mule. But it's much easier to kill a mule than to snipe a Protoss structure. My argument here is that Chrono boost isn't really "wasted" if the structure is sniped because it costs only 25 energy, and the chrono can be used elsewhere too. But a Mule can be only used on mineral patches and it's 50 energy, so it may be considered "wasted" 50 energy.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Sometimes revealing nothing= something. If you don't see double gas at the expansion of zerg, it means mutas will be delayed or not coming at all. And after all, I think terran will be using energy more on eco than protoss, because they will chrono out upgrades/units too.
I'm saying that if you scan to see Protss' tech and miss (in other words scan at the wrong area), it's wasted energy putting the Terran behind because those 270 potential minerals or information are lost. And don't bring zerg here, I'm not talking about zerg. Yes Terran will be using his energy mostly on mules cuz that's the only option he has, whereas a protoss will start using his ability to speed up warp gate cd, upgrades, etc because he will eventually reach 70~80 workers and can't keep chrono boosting some more workers without hurting himself.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Your last paragraph makes no sense. Mule is the best macro mechanic for eco, without a doubt. Larva and cb can be used on something else, which kinda makes up for it.
The last paragraph is based on OP's assumption that Protoss needs to be 4 workers ahead per OC. So assuming both have 80 workers and Terran has 6 OCs, for whatever reason, that means Toss needs to be at 104 workers atleast. I think protoss will be hurting himself if that's the case. Therefore the exaggeration of 50 OCs was brought to say that I don't agree with OP's conclusion.
Also, don't randomly lol-bash somebody next time if you don't understand their opinion or don't agree.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Why can't he allow to only use it on mules? Maybe you need a few scans, but most of them will be on mules.
Ideally you want to use mules as much as possible, but there are so many things that you need to scan. Tech, army comp, denying observers. You can't just sit the whole game and only use Mules.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: You are saying that it is the protoss' fault for letting someone snipe the building, but when terran loses the mule it's not their fault? Why?
Yes it is the Terran's fault if the Protoss kills the Mule. But it's much easier to kill a mule than to snipe a Protoss structure. My argument here is that Chrono boost isn't really "wasted" if the structure is sniped because it costs only 25 energy, and the chrono can be used elsewhere too. But a Mule can be only used on mineral patches and it's 50 energy, so it may be considered "wasted" 50 energy.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Sometimes revealing nothing= something. If you don't see double gas at the expansion of zerg, it means mutas will be delayed or not coming at all. And after all, I think terran will be using energy more on eco than protoss, because they will chrono out upgrades/units too.
I'm saying that if you scan to see Protss' tech and miss (in other words scan at the wrong area), it's wasted energy putting the Terran behind because those 270 potential minerals or information are lost. And don't bring zerg here, I'm not talking about zerg. Yes Terran will be using his energy mostly on mules cuz that's the only option he has, whereas a protoss will start using his ability to speed up warp gate cd, upgrades, etc because he will eventually reach 70~80 workers and can't keep chrono boosting some more workers without hurting himself.
On January 25 2011 00:15 Brutus wrote: Your last paragraph makes no sense. Mule is the best macro mechanic for eco, without a doubt. Larva and cb can be used on something else, which kinda makes up for it.
The last paragraph is based on OP's assumption that Protoss needs to be 4 workers ahead per OC. So assuming both have 80 workers and Terran has 6 OCs, for whatever reason, that means Toss needs to be at 104 workers atleast. I think protoss will be hurting himself if that's the case. Therefore the exaggeration of 50 OCs was brought to say that I don't agree with OP's conclusion.
Also, don't randomly lol-bash somebody next time if you don't understand their opinion or don't agree.
There are different ways to scout then scans alone. I never said that you are not allowed to scan, but most of the time it will be mules. I am just saying that there will be more OC energy spend on eco than CB energy on eco.
It's true that sniping a mule is much easier than sniping a building. But it still stands that you should be able to defend your workers. You are not able to "kill" CB energy, but killing probes that are CB can be seen that way. I understand your point that your CB energy can also be used a lot safer by using it on a upgrade or unit producing structure.
Why not bring zerg? You use mules and CB too right in those matchups? And yes if you miss a scan you "lose" 270 minerals, but as I was just pointing out seeing nothing is information too. If you scan his third and see no expo, that's information too right? (did a protoss version just for you)
And about the second part, Mules are not the only option. We just discussed scans, which are vital throughout the game and keep their value just as mules. I think CB loses a lot more value late game, because the impact on unit producing is rather small and as you said CB probes isn't viable late game.
uhhh wtf? yeah 4 extra workers is fine if both players only make 8 workers for the whole game. the problem is mules allow you to get more than 800 mineral income per base which kind of makes the protoss expo requir almost same amount of workers that the terran has at BOTH BASES to be even and the protoss has to actually invest minerals in the probes. have you never a seen a replay where the protoss has 20-25 workers per base and the terran has ~16 and is down one base and they have equal income?? why does this thread exist
edit: not to mention a 200/200 army is more harvestor heavy for the protoss and after 4+ oc the t barely needs scvs to resupply losses
On January 24 2011 22:43 Sm3agol wrote: MULES are free. Chronoboost just makes your 50 mineral units come out faster. MULE >>>>> chronoboost in the pure economy department. I think it's balanced out by being able to chronoboost upgrades and such though, not crying imba. Just don't say chrono makes P economy equal to Ts, because that is pure bs.
If you're nog going to be reasonable in your arguments please don't post, it's crappy biased posting like this that gets me really annoyed (and subsequently banned).
I know you want to keep pretending MULEs are the most imbalanced thing in the world, but when you're even going to ignore the fact that an OC cost 150 minerals and 35 seconds of not building SCV's you're really coming across unreasonable. Start contributing and stop the irrational outcries of imbalance (yes, you ARE claiming imbalance; posts that contain some form of the words "not saying it's imba, but" are always poorly concealed balance complaints. You also call "bs" on OP's calculations on CB keeping Protoss economy equal or ahead to Terran's without any other argument than it being "bs").
@OP: Great to see that someone takes the time to test things like these so we can bust the popular MULE myths. It's bad enough that people think throwing down 8 MULEs at a time is beneficial.
On January 25 2011 02:38 Alejandrisha wrote: uhhh wtf? yeah 4 extra workers is fine if both players only make 8 workers for the whole game. the problem is mules allow you to get more than 800 mineral income per base which kind of makes the protoss expo requir almost same amount of workers that the terran has at BOTH BASES to be even and the protoss has to actually invest minerals in the probes. have you never a seen a replay where the protoss has 20-25 workers per base and the terran has ~16 and is down one base and they have equal income?? why does this thread exist
This thread exists especially for people like you who want to cling on to the notion of MULEs being overpowered. OP delivers a completely rational and fair comparison of the MULE and chronoboost to show that MULEs aren't a source of imbalance in this MU. Lots of Protoss coming here to claim otherwise, but none have made any good arguments as to why MULEs would be a superior economical mechanic. That you spent minerals on probes is a moot point since Terran invest 150 minerals and 35 seconds of non-SCV production for an OC. Basically the main advantage MULEs give is that they stack on top of SCV's so you can get 4 SCV's worth of extra income on 1 base. That means Toss should take their expansion a bit sooner than Terran to prevent heavy oversaturation. On the flipside, Terran gets to throw down only 1 MULE every time whilst the benefits of CB keeps stacking. Scanning and sniping off MULEs will also negate the economic boost that MULEs give.
Whether you think it's a superior mechanic or not, I find the MULE rather uninteresting and devoid of tactical depth. When I play Toss I can fit CB usage into my playstyle, whereas when I play Terran it's just throwing down a MULE every 50 seconds (since scanning and supply drop are both inferior).
I don't think this is an issue that can be solved by theorycrafting. There are too many variables to consider like how many buildings the terran builds and when, when is gas taken and with how many scvs. When are the players expanding, etc. You're never gonna get to a point where you're considering a valid ingame scenario. But on the other hand it's not neccessary. Blizzard has done a fantastic job balancing these two macro mechanics.
It has been my experience that when i as a terran, play economically comparable to my opponent protoss (like noone cuts eco, both expo at the same time, no eco damage), that we both have the same income. If i watch the replay, i can see that the protoss is usually 4-5 workers ahead of me per base, which is about equal to the income of a mule (4.5-5.3 worker equivalents depending on saturation).
There really is no imbalance here (at least not income wise), for neither party. Other factors, of course, play a role. Mules cost no supply, a terran can stay a few extra seconds on one base, chronoboost can be used on important upgrades, mules can be discarded for scans, etc. These factors, however, do not change the fact that chronoboost and mules are economically almost equal.
i never said it was imbalanced. i just think it is a dumb mechanic that encourages 1 base play because you can squeeze out money much faster than a player who did not expand and against a player who does expand relatively fast, the terran gets equal or slightly less income while having invested significantly less resourses in harvestors.
On January 25 2011 03:34 Alejandrisha wrote: i never said it was imbalanced. i just think it is a dumb mechanic that encourages 1 base play because you can squeeze out money much faster than a player who did not expand and against a player who does expand relatively fast, the terran gets equal or slightly less income while having invested significantly less resourses in harvestors.
On January 25 2011 03:34 Alejandrisha wrote: i never said it was imbalanced. i just think it is a dumb mechanic that encourages 1 base play because you can squeeze out money much faster than a player who did not expand and against a player who does expand relatively fast, the terran gets equal or slightly less income while having invested significantly less resourses in harvestors.
Toss needs to be up 4 probes to get equal income as a MULE'ing Terran, that's 200 minerals. An OC costs 150 minerals plus 35 seconds of CC downtime, do you even read anything we post?
your whole idea of 4 probes is absolutely ridiculous. workers don't mine in a vacuum. maybe you are saying 4 probes mining if they are completely alone on a base? when you add the mineral income that 4 probes that are mining in a vacuum to a base that is already saturated, that is more than 4 probes, even infinitely more probes since there is a cap. I am reading everything you are typing but missing the logic, perhaps.
EPT
