EPT[G] [D] Zerg Mineral Saturation - Page 9
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
SYNC_qx
Germany197 Posts
| ||
|
Shucks!
United States118 Posts
I can't wait for people to complain "wall-of-text, tl;dr," because I really don't want zergs to have a better idea of what I'm doing = ) | ||
|
Spaceboy
United Kingdom220 Posts
| ||
|
BombaySensei
United States282 Posts
42-43 min/min x 1.4 x 0.75 = 44.1-45.1 (5% increase) So when Sheth writes: "Its 36 mining on 1 2/5 bases. So let’s do a little bit of math here. 36 x 1 2/5 is 36 + (3.6x4) 14.4 so its 50.4 workers." Lets say the terran has the gold fully saturated (18 scv and... 4 mules? 5? 36 worker equivalents here would be 4.5 mules average, which i don't think the terran can constantly mine from that many mules in most cases). If you compare that to a fully saturated blue with same number of mules, though: 24 scv + 4.5x4 = 42 (so taking the gold is a 20% boost at this level of mule mining (4.5)) With only 2 mule average though, it becomes [18 + (2x4)]x1.4 = 36.4 worker equivalent on the gold, vs [24 + (2x4)] = 32 on the fully saturated blue, or a 14% increase. With only one mule, the worker equivalents are 30.8/28 for gold/blue (10% increase exactly). So, to summarize that, fully saturated gold vs. blue with: 0 mule: 5% boost vs. blue base (so this is the level that Z and P would mine at on a gold) 1 mule: +10% 2 mule: +14% 4.5 mule: +20% I think most terran will be able to average 2+ mules mining from a gold, which is usually a third base or even later. So, if you are not terran, even if you take your own gold base, you will be behind on mineral income, by around 10%, maybe more depending on exactly how many mules the terran is mining off of. For P and Z, with gold bases generally being harder to defend, is the 5% increase really worth it? Yes a gold takes less workers to saturate, but mid-game to late-game, unless you've lost a lot of workers, you should be able to saturate a blue base anyway. As Sheth said, gold isn't all that enticing for protoss anyway, because of how gas thirsty they are. I suppose it's fine for zerg, if it can be defended, although zergs are pretty gas-loving themselves. But it seems like gold base benefits terran more, not only because they can mine the gold faster than Z/P, but also because their armies are so mineral intensive. | ||
|
keeperton
United States233 Posts
Sorry if there's any ambiguity, I got annoyed with Excel slowing my laptop down so much and kind of just gave up. The x-axis is number of workers and the y-axis is minerals mined in a minute. I did this on Steppes of War's expansion location and the gold was done on the same map's gold expansion. ![[image loading]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b365/keeper21_/Screenshot2011-05-07at111658PM.png) ![[image loading]](http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b365/keeper21_/Screenshot2011-05-07at111913PM.png) I used a logarithmic trendline because I figured there's an upper limit where eventually the number of workers no longer matters, but I didn't really feel it was necessary to figure out the number. | ||
|
CakeOrI)eath
United States327 Posts
On May 05 2011 03:11 kawaiiryuko wrote: Sheth, Thanks for the great post! Does your strategy change for Terrans if your calculations assume fewer gold mineral patches (AFAIK, most gold bases have 6 mineral patches, not 8)? How does that adjust your drone-count for bases? I usually stick to mining 3 bases (approximately 66 drones) vs. any 2-base play. I'm having a slightly hard time reading your scale but I think you mean something like: If your opponent has: Then you should have: 12-16 (1 base) 16-24 (1 base) 16-20 (1 base) 24 (1 base) or 8-12 (2 base) 24 (1 base) 8-16 (2 base) 8-12 (2 base) 12-20 (2 base) 12-16 (2 base) 16-24 (2 base) or 8-12 (3 base) 24 (2 base) 8-16 (3 base) and so on. Is that accurate? (I like tables. :D) Here is my interpretation of a table for this: ![[image loading]](http://i383.photobucket.com/albums/oo275/simi2/ShethsSaturationLevels.jpg?t=1304850116) Hopefully that's not too hard to read. | ||
|
shinarit
Hungary900 Posts
Loled at this. Also, nice write, didnt find error yet, but im noob, so whatever. Will try to look out for these  | ||
|
jazzbassmatt
United States566 Posts
On May 08 2011 19:32 CakeOrI)eath wrote: Here is my interpretation of a table for this: Hopefully that's not too hard to read. That table makes a lot more visual sense! | ||
|
Ender79
United States8 Posts
Between your safe, solid play, your instructive posts, your MrBitters appearances, and your exceedingly professional manners (which I *very* highly value), you are my new favorite zerg pro! | ||
|
lorestarcraft
United States1049 Posts
I work in a library and I have to deal with this constantly, is SO FRUSTRATING!!! As a protoss I can attest as to what Sheth is saying here. Much of my deception when I play vs. zerg has to do with sentries, whether I show them are not, and denying scouting. If the zerg makes the wrong decision they are usually toast. | ||
|
hugman
Sweden4644 Posts
Such a long sentence.. hard to read Did you forget a "<" between "24 saturation" and "8-12 saturation"? | ||
|
CakeOrI)eath
United States327 Posts
On May 09 2011 07:47 hugman wrote: "2-16 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…" Such a long sentence.. hard to read Did you forget a "<" between "24 saturation" and "8-12 saturation"? No, he didn't forget a "<". What that means is that 1base with 24 drones is equal to 2bases with 8-12 drones each. 8-12 + 8-12 is 16-24 but since they are more spread out they will mine a little bit faster than they would off 1 base so its on a similar income level with one base 20-24 drones. | ||
|
AT_Tack
Germany435 Posts
Edit: Another thing that struck my mind while reading through some replies: how the fuck am i to count / estimate the opponents workers? while scouting i get like 1 second to look at his mineral lines before my scout dies. I know i cant box his workers to count them so i only can anticipate. So only thing i can work with in a game is: vespene geysers low saturation or high saturation | ||
|
ZedraC
South Africa109 Posts
Maybe it is since I am a low level player, and mostly play vs people also low level, who are not too concerned about timings, worker counts and "how many sentries" he needs to do "X", but rather basic macro macro macro. A move. Win/Lose. Bleh. So the reason for me posting here is purely to "bookmark" this for myself for a later stage when i may start to understand this and grasp it better. I need to walk first before running. If one day I understand it better I will edit the post saying how it helped me if it ever does. | ||
|
willidynamit
United States2 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
why not attempt saturation based on larva production rate of 6 larva every 40seconds (2 hatch spawn'd + queen inject)? | ||
|
lowsian
Malaysia10 Posts
| ||
|
Kaminoan
Chile25 Posts
| ||
|
theMiNUS
United States333 Posts
| ||
|
nanoscorp
United States1237 Posts
I ask, because it feels like some players cut their expo timings really close. I've seen T especially, oversaturating 1 or 2 bases, dropping to 0 income for a minute, then getting back in a game with a CC that isn't scouted immediately. I think pros understand the need to keep expanding, and keep tabs on their opponent's econ, but would it help to *know* that an opponent is going to lose half his income in a 2-3 minute window based on initial scouting and expo timing? 2x(12-16) vs 24+2 OCs worth of MULEs is close in terms of mineral income, but the 2 base player has significantly longer before patches start getting mined out. | ||
| ||
