EPT[G] [D] Zerg Mineral Saturation - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Rosvall
Sweden122 Posts
| ||
|
whatthefat
United States918 Posts
One quibbling comment: Lalush's analysis showed that going from 24 to 30+ workers does actually give a small increase in income (it's only about 3%). | ||
|
Bishnu Ghost
34 Posts
| ||
|
R0YAL
United States1768 Posts
 Great writeup! | ||
|
St0chastic
United States103 Posts
| ||
|
Arn
Sweden118 Posts
So: 0-16: Each worker adds 100% optimal income (~45 income/minute) 16-24: Each worker adds ~50% optimal income (~22.5 income/minute) >24: Each worker adds 0% optimal income. So, in short: Prio #1 is to saturate bases with >16 workers each, and if you need to further improve mineral income without expanding, 24 mineral workers per base is max. Compare the cost of an expansion: 350 minerals & 1 larvae, to the cost and income of workers. Let's say you have 32 workers on two bases. You can either expand or build 7 workers for your 350 minerals (building workers costs more larvae, of course). Each worker will increase your income by 22.5ipm. Your additional hatchery, given that you are at OPTIMAL (16) saturation will net you exactly 0 income. But what happens when you add more workers, and where is the point where it is better to expand than to increase saturation? Case A, expanding: A = 45*x-350 Case B, saturating: B = 22.5*x Where is A = B?Where 45*x-350=22.5*x, thus 22.5x=350, thus x = 350/22.5, thus 15.555 (...). So, in other words, it coincidentally happens to be so that saturating is always more mineralefficient until you oversaturate, which might be good to keep in mind. However, the larvae cost is not accounted for, so it is gamewise unrealistic. You'd have to balance the equation up somehow, valuing larvae in minerals, but I won't attempt to do that. As a rule of thumb: Mineralwise, the largest economic boost per worker is achieved between 0-16 workers per base, and mineralwise, the net gain is larger from saturating than getting an extra base. There're alot of factors to factor in though: Larvae access, defendability, gas, future saturation, etc. etc. If you keep the numbers 16 and 24 in mind you'll have come a long way by the way. Extra note: If someone likes Google Translate (or speaks swedish), I wrote a guide about mineral saturation on our Team Property forums [G & D] Mineral Saturation etc.. If there's interest, I can translate it and update it. It has pictures and gametested facts, such as node-differentiation incomewise. | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
| ||
|
Cyrik
Germany50 Posts
| ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On May 05 2011 07:02 Cyrik wrote: monsieur, if the protoss keeps his sentrys away from the front you see less then you "should" see, which should trigger "something fishy" in your brain. well what does a zerg do when he doesnt know what the protoss is doing on one base? he sends an overlord in there. now that overlord will most likely be attacked by those "missing" sentrys, which gives you the information you need ( at least some of the time;)) Or just one sentry, keep the rest away. Overlords are slow as shit  But I see your point, I suppose. | ||
|
Deadeight
United Kingdom1629 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/7360/sdronelevels.jpg) It's the different levels of sturation sheth was talking about: On May 05 2011 01:08 Sheth wrote: 12-16 saturation < 16-20 saturation < 24 saturation 8-12 saturation on 2 bases< 12-16 saturation on 2 bases < 16-20 saturation on 2 bases < 24 saturation on 2 bases < 14-16 saturation on 3 bases and so forth… HOWEVER we now come to a new rule. You DO NOT want to get 3 levels of saturation ahead of your opponent. Versus a competent opponent you will LOSE. (This considers you are playing someone of equal level and you haven’t killed his army 10 times and are about to win the game. 12-16 saturation implies that you have 12-16 drones mining on 8 blue mineral patches.. and so on) Just something I put together quickly, so sorry for the low quality. Just did it quickly, printed it out small and stuck it on my wall. I'm one of those people with all sorts of stuff stuck to the wall by my PC, but I'm anal enough about it that it had to stay in the SC2 theme of colours. Stuck up there it quickly sinks in and won't need to look at it anymore in a short time. Feel free to use it however you want anyone. | ||
|
isospeedrix
United States215 Posts
| ||
|
grnat
Australia60 Posts
| ||
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
That's phenomenal, thanks so much! (Also the rest is pretty solid too). | ||
|
Devastate
United States25 Posts
| ||
|
michaelhasanalias
Korea (South)1231 Posts
On May 05 2011 06:53 Arn wrote: Given equal distance to all mineral patches, + Show Spoiler + every worker up to 16 adds 100% efficiency up to 16 mineral workers. At >16 workers, glitching may occur, but it will balance out especially on far patches. The real result is that although glitching occurs, each worker does however generate a net boost in income - although only on average 50% as much as each additional worker beyond the 0th. The roof is at 24. So: 0-16: Each worker adds 100% optimal income (~45 income/minute) 16-24: Each worker adds ~50% optimal income (~22.5 income/minute) >24: Each worker adds 0% optimal income. So, in short: Prio #1 is to saturate bases with >16 workers each, and if you need to further improve mineral income without expanding, 24 mineral workers per base is max. Compare the cost of an expansion: 350 minerals & 1 larvae, to the cost and income of workers. Let's say you have 32 workers on two bases. You can either expand or build 7 workers for your 350 minerals (building workers costs more larvae, of course). Each worker will increase your income by 22.5ipm. Your additional hatchery, given that you are at OPTIMAL (16) saturation will net you exactly 0 income. But what happens when you add more workers, and where is the point where it is better to expand than to increase saturation? Case A, expanding: A = 45*x-350 Case B, saturating: B = 22.5*x Where is A = B?Where 45*x-350=22.5*x, thus 22.5x=350, thus x = 350/22.5, thus 15.555 (...). So, in other words, it coincidentally happens to be so that saturating is always more mineralefficient until you oversaturate, which might be good to keep in mind. However, the larvae cost is not accounted for, so it is gamewise unrealistic. You'd have to balance the equation up somehow, valuing larvae in minerals, but I won't attempt to do that. As a rule of thumb: Mineralwise, the largest economic boost per worker is achieved between 0-16 workers per base, and mineralwise, the net gain is larger from saturating than getting an extra base. There're alot of factors to factor in though: Larvae access, defendability, gas, future saturation, etc. etc. If you keep the numbers 16 and 24 in mind you'll have come a long way by the way. Extra note: If someone likes Google Translate (or speaks swedish), I wrote a guide about mineral saturation on our Team Property forums [G & D] Mineral Saturation etc.. If there's interest, I can translate it and update it. It has pictures and gametested facts, such as node-differentiation incomewise. Need to stop you right there. We don't play this game in a vacuum, and there's a hefty dropoff between workers 17-20 and workers 21-24. Far patch 3rds mine roughly double would close patch 3rds mine. 45/minute is not an approximation, but the maximum that close patch workers can mine. Far patch workers mine at 39, and this averages (on most maps) to about 42-43. Simple arithmetic shows that your mining numbers are very off-base, as maximum 1-base saturation is 816 (102 per patch). Your maximum saturation would give: 112.5 per patch and 900 minerals/minute. | ||
|
fant0m
964 Posts
I loved your stream this Tuesday, it kept me going during maintenance. Climb that EU ladder! | ||
|
Chutoro
New Zealand95 Posts
Counting workers when scouting seems to be a skill that comes with practice, since you can't control/box select them the way you can your own workers. I doubt anyone actually goes through and counts them individually. I'm getting better at working it out at a glance though. As far as I can tell it seems to go something like this: - Workers moving back and forth in one direction only = one worker per patch maximum (so 0-8 workers). You can easily count them in this situation. - Workers moving in both directions and crossing in the middle = two workers per patch. This means 9-16 workers - more workers crossing over means the upper end of that range, only a few means the lower end. - Workers going round behind the minerals or switching between mineral patches = more than two workers per patch. This means 17-24 workers - the more that are doing this, the closer to saturation. Maybe some images or short animated clips would help to illustrate this. | ||
|
[Atomic]Peace
United States451 Posts
| ||
|
AzureD
United States320 Posts
I mean just going from enemy has 12 and you have 14 is about a big a jump in saturation tier as him being 16 and you being 20. Him having 12 and you having 13 is about a big as difference as him being 20 and you being 24. Another point I would like to make though is how many far patches you have compared to close patches. 2 drones can mine a close patch at near perfect efficiency while 3 is required to have a far patch mining constantly with that 3rd worker mining at about half the efficiency since it has to wait. You usually do not have more than 3 far patches and one cut off point you could look at is having 2 per close patch and 3 per far patch although that 3 per patch is not so good but better than 3 per all patches. When I play Zerg I tend to go for a standard of 16 max per 8 mineral base only producing extra drones once I am producing another hatchery. The rest of the time I am making units, buildings or upgrades. Of course I over produce beyond 16 as well to take into account that I will be making buildings which cost a drone. So for me being on 2 base means 48 drones max mining constantly with a little more for making buildings. 3 base means 72 max and with 4 base I stop at 80 mostly just taking gas and transferring most drones from my main if it is not already mined out. Mostly though 3 base with 72 drones means perfect efficiency and if you can get to that point before your enemy then I think you are quite ahead. I almost never like to saturate all the way up to 24 unless I am about to expand with Zerg specifically. Also when taking my third I sometimes start making the drones when my hatch is 75% complete and rally drone production to the 3rd because I do not want to do a transfer later. When they hatch and get there it will be complete at around that exact moment. | ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
| ||
| ||
