|
[G] Seizing Every Edge: Zerg Economy Management
Hello Ladies and Gentlemen of Team Liquid!
I sincerely appreciate that you've taken the time to view my newest guide on Zerg Economics. Everyone knows that solid economy management makes a considerable difference in SC2, but it is still a subject that is only briefly touched in guides and tutorials. It's probably because drone saturation isn't always as interesting as innovative new build orders and play styles, but that doesn't diminish its importance.
Now obviously I'm not saying that it's more important to check your third base's mineral saturation than manage a game-deciding battle. What I'm saying is that economy management is an improvable skill: I strongly believe that if you take the time to understand and practice it, you become faster and more effective. Furthermore, it will improve other areas of your game play: mouse precision, boxing, hand speed, multitasking. Whether you play a 1-base all-in style or refuse to leave the creep until you're maxed with broodlords, you will benefit from reaching and maintaining optimal mineral saturation. That's why I'm so excited to present an economy-focused guide with three goals:
1) Add structure to players' economy by introducing the concept of optimal mineral saturation: 16 Drones per base, 2 Drones per patch.
2) Suggest methods of reaching optimal mineral saturation as early as possible, and maintaining it throughout the game.
3) Offer tips and drills to help players quickly point out their own mistakes and fix them.
An Introduction: Calculations
+ Show Spoiler +"Double-mining drones harvest at peak efficiency (42-42.5 minerals/minute)"Stream Video: An Introduction to Zerg Economy ManagementStream Video: An Economic Walkthrough of ZvT, ZvP, ZvZCalculations: 16 Drones mining 2 per patch return ~670 minerals/minute, roughly 42 minerals/minute per drone. 20 Drones mining 2 per patch on closer patches and 3 per patch on further patches return ~750 minerals/minute, roughly 37.5 minerals/minute per drone. 20 Drones mining 2 per patch on 2 bases (16 Drones at main, 4 drones at natural) return ~850 minerals/minute, roughly 42 minerals per drone. You lose nearly 5 minerals per minute per drone when you go over 2-drones per patch, meaning you lose approximately 80-100 minerals per minute if you have 20 drones mining with four triple-mining patches when they could be mining more efficiently at an expansion. This is why it's so important to make sure you're double mining at all your patches, because if you're sitting with 16 drones but some of your closer patches are single mining while your far-back patches triple mine, you're losing mining efficiency. In other words, you can more than double the effectiveness of a drone/probe/scv by transferring it to a new expansion instead of leaving it at a base with 16+ miners.
Zerg Economics Part 1: Counting Drones
+ Show Spoiler +"Over/undersaturating bases is a cardinal sin for Zerg players."Since we generally aim to stay one base ahead, Zerg players must pay closer attention to saturation. Protoss or Terran players may oversaturate their natural expansion so that they can transfer workers to their third base, but since Zergs tend to take their third much earlier, there is usually no reason to oversaturate a mineral field. The picture below depicts optimal mineral saturation: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ovDd1.jpg) 8 Mineral Patches x 2 Drones per Patch = 16 Drones In other words, to optimally saturate a mineral field you need 16 Drones (2 full rows). It is also absolutely essential that the drones double-mine each patch, a topic explored in more detail in the stream videos and drills. To keep track of the number of drones mining at each base, I personally recommend using the "BOX TECHNIQUE" to count only the drones harvesting minerals. To use the "BOX TECHNIQUE", simply make a rectangular box between your main hatchery and your minerals, then count all the drones. While you could double-click or control-click to count drones, I prefer the box style to avoid factoring in the drones mining gas. Also, it improves the speed and precision of your boxing, which is a helpful skill in micro engagements. That being said, there's nothing wrong with double-clicking the drones and factoring out the drones that mine gas (minus 2 drones per geyser). Stream Video: Quick Tip - the "BOX TECHNIQUE"Example A) - Current Drones: 7. We need 9 more drones to optimally saturate this base. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sNtGZ.jpg) Example B) - Current Drones: 10. We need 6 more drones to optimally saturate this base. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/91PfB.jpg) Example C) - Current Drones: 14. We need 2 more drones to optimally saturate this base. Fortunately, we have two building and rallied already ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1G72R.jpg) Example D) - Current Drones: 16. Bliss! ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nhX3B.jpg)
Zerg Economics Part 2: Maintaining Optimal Saturation
+ Show Spoiler +"There is no sense devoting all this effort and time perfecting our mineral saturation if it's disrupted every time we create a structure or fill a gas geyser." We just discussed the importance of reaching optimal mineral saturation (16 drones/mineral field), and now we need to figure out how to keep it. Here are some general guidelines. If you must take drones off mining to fill gas or build a structure, choose drones that are... 1) just dropping off minerals. 2) nearer to the gas geyser/where you're placing the building. 3) mining from those mineral patches that are furthest from your hatchery. To avoid taking drones off of a base with optimal saturation... 1) construct new drones and rally the eggs into the geyser. 2) take three drones off mining, but rally three new drone eggs to the patches you took from. 3) take drones from a base that doesn't have full saturation. Stream Tutorial: Maintaining Optimal Mineral Saturation
Zerg Economics Part 3: Tips and Drills
+ Show Spoiler +
Feedback Poll:
+ Show Spoiler +As always, I welcome and appreciate positive feedback as well as criticism. Please comment and let me know the things I'm doing right so I can continue doing them, as well as some things I did wrong so I can fix them in the future. Poll: Do you find this guide helpful?5 - Excellent guide, relevant and concise information, interesting style. (139) 50% 4 - Solid guide, good analysis, pretty helpful. (60) 22% 3 - Average guide, could be improved but probably will help some people. (37) 13% 1 - There is nothing to be learned from you, Tang. You're ruining eSports. (32) 11% 2 - Some helpful material, overall not very informative. (11) 4% 279 total votes Your vote: Do you find this guide helpful? (Vote): 5 - Excellent guide, relevant and concise information, interesting style.
(Vote): 4 - Solid guide, good analysis, pretty helpful.
(Vote): 3 - Average guide, could be improved but probably will help some people.
(Vote): 2 - Some helpful material, overall not very informative.
(Vote): 1 - There is nothing to be learned from you, Tang. You're ruining eSports.
- Tang
Courtesy of www.TangStarcraft.com
|
It would really mean a lot to me if you all would upvote this post on reddit:
Reddit Link
Thanks!
|
Example 1 of zerg econ pt. 1: 7+11=18
|
On July 13 2012 05:52 ValeHavoc wrote:
Example 1 of zerg econ pt. 1: 7+11=18
Oops! Thanks very much, updated.
|
Useful guide but I have to disagree about ALWAYS using box instead of double click. Imho when there are no drones transfering on the screen faster method is to ctrl click (or double click) drones , you want to see 16 +2 for each gas that you mine at the base (so you wanna see 20 drones if you have 2 gas mining).
|
On July 13 2012 06:11 syriuszonito wrote:
Useful guide but I have to disagree about ALWAYS using box instead of double click. Imho when there are no drones transfering on the screen faster method is to ctrl click (or double click) drones , you want to see 16 +2 for each gas that you mine at the base (so you wanna see 20 drones if you have 2 gas mining).
Thanks for the feedback, I see where you're coming from. If you prefer to double click your workers, you can. However, I think boxing is one of the most important skills in SC2 (not just being able to make a box, but making a box the size/shape you need quickly). I always recommend using the box technique in the early stages, because even if it's not 100% necessary, it trains a skill that applies in micro engagements.
|
One issue with the guide in my opinion, is that double clicking to check saturation can be fine, you just add two more drones to the total needed to account for the two drones with gas on the way back to your hatchery.
|
On July 13 2012 06:25 EnE wrote:
One issue with the guide in my opinion, is that double clicking to check saturation can be fine, you just add two more drones to the total needed to account for the two drones with gas on the way back to your hatchery.
I think you guys are right, and I've updated the paragraph on boxing vs double-clicking. While I still prefer the box technique, there's nothing wrong at all with double-clicking or control-clicking - in some ways, it is actually faster/easier because you can avoid accidently boxing your gas-drones, your queen, or any units that spawn.
|
Ive been talking a bit t with tang and he has very good points and give good feedback and hes a nice guy. He have taught me alot about sc2, and its really showing in my gameplay after his help.
another great guide, !
|
the title is kinda missleading since alot of this can be used by all races, great advice for the players that don't know all this already, i however think you should write that people in the lower leagues should not focus on this at all, cause its kinda silly wasting time practicing stuff like this when its your general gameplay that has huge flaws.
|
I don't think your example of "fully saturate" with 16 drones is conveying your point. A FULLY saturated base is 30 drones on minerals. I don't care if your mining rate with the third drone is 5 minerals per minute less than the first two. You are still mining faster and you haven't reached saturation until further drones do not add to your mining rate (I gotta assume equilibrium here, not drones still hunting for 2-drone patch). Similar to the sciences, where the saturation point means absolutely nothing more can be absorbed or added, as in the case with adding salt to water, where further salt past saturation point starts a pile of salt at the bottom.
Consider revising your terms for (particularly) the screenshots. You're talking about mining efficiency, but somebody else might talk about per-base mining efficiency. You are literally decreasing your mining rate per base when you stop droning at 16 drones per base because you are below base saturation. The argument becomes why this is desirable (200 supply cap, map-based ease of taking third), but not the confusion with terms you're introducing here.
So please, separate drone mining efficiency from base mining saturation.
EDIT: Optimal drone saturation versus "fully saturate this base," I think is the clearer point to consider. You define the optimal drone saturation because that is the topic you are discussing, then switch pace to assert that 16 drones fully saturate a base.
+ Show Spoiler +Example A) - Current Drones: 7. We need 9 more drones to fully saturate this base. Example B) - Current Drones: 10. We need 6 more drones to fully saturate this base. Example C) - Current Drones: 14. We need 2 more drones to fully saturate this base. Fortunately, we have two building and rallied already Really, it is merely to optimally saturate the base, having previously defined optimally as mining efficiency per drone and not mining efficiency per base
|
On July 13 2012 06:33 BoggieMan wrote:
the title is kinda missleading since alot of this can be used by all races, great advice for the players that don't know all this already, i however think you should write that people in the lower leagues should not focus on this at all, cause its kinda silly wasting time practicing stuff like this when its your general gameplay that has huge flaws.
Yeah, I was focused primarily on Zerg but you're definitely correct that Protoss/Terran players can use some of the information. While I completely understand your point of view, I'm going to respectfully disagree that it's silly to practice this at lower levels. It doesn't need to be the chief concern of a bronze level player, but it doesn't mean it hurts to be aware of it. I actually think that the drills might be very helpful for a newer player who still needs to improve those important fundamentals/mechanics: mouse precision, handspeed/apm, boxing. You're right that it's not even close to being as important as things like expanding, keeping larva/resources low, etc.
|
On July 13 2012 06:39 Danglars wrote:I don't think your example of "fully saturate" with 16 drones is conveying your point. A FULLY saturated base is 30 drones on minerals. I don't care if your mining rate with the third drone is 5 minerals per minute less than the first two. You are still mining faster and you haven't reached saturation until further drones do not add to your mining rate (I gotta assume equilibrium here, not drones still hunting for 2-drone patch). Similar to the sciences, where the saturation point means absolutely nothing more can be absorbed or added, as in the case with adding salt to water, where further salt past saturation point starts a pile of salt at the bottom. Consider revising your terms for (particularly) the screenshots. You're talking about mining efficiency, but somebody else might talk about per-base mining efficiency. You are literally decreasing your mining rate per base when you stop droning at 16 drones per base because you are below base saturation. The argument becomes why this is desirable (200 supply cap, map-based ease of taking third), but not the confusion with terms you're introducing here. So please, separate drone mining efficiency from base mining saturation. EDIT: Optimal drone saturation versus "fully saturate this base," I think is the clearer point to consider. You define the optimal drone saturation because that is the topic you are discussing, then switch pace to assert that 16 drones fully saturate a base. + Show Spoiler +Example A) - Current Drones: 7. We need 9 more drones to fully saturate this base. Example B) - Current Drones: 10. We need 6 more drones to fully saturate this base. Example C) - Current Drones: 14. We need 2 more drones to fully saturate this base. Fortunately, we have two building and rallied already Really, it is merely to optimally saturate the base, having previously defined optimally as mining efficiency per drone and not mining efficiency per base
I agree about the term "fully saturated base", updated to "optimally saturated base". Thanks!
|
I LOVE this type of stuff. I've been obsessed with avoiding triple mining+single mining drones with 16 per base. I also learned new things like the ideal drones to put on gas and some fancy drills to get even better where I feel I can improve. Great guide, 10/10 for what I look for ^^
Edit: another thing I do when Im not under pressure (ZvP vs forge) is always build overlords at the hatch with full saturation since drone transfer is about 5-10 minerals and overlords tend to not matter where they come out at.
Also I like to stagger when I make multiple gases since I know I cant perfectly add 9 drones to 3 gases efficiently I wait ~4 seconds between each planning ahead to be able to place them in gas more efficiently.
|
|
|
On July 13 2012 06:47 TheGreenMachine wrote:
I LOVE this type of stuff. I've been obsessed with avoiding triple mining+single mining drones with 16 per base. I also learned new things like the ideal drones to put on gas and some fancy drills to get even better where I feel I can improve. Great guide, 10/10 for what I look for ^^
Haha me too!! Glad I'm not the only economy-nerd out there 
|
This is a good post, thanks Tang. 
|
On July 13 2012 07:05 zoohairZ wrote:This is a good post, thanks Tang.
Thanks zoohairZ hopefully see you at NASL?
|
On July 13 2012 07:09 TangSC wrote:Thanks zoohairZ hopefully see you at NASL?
Yup i'll be there :D
|
Neat little guide
It would be nice to have the gas income rate in the calculations section as well, makes it more complete
|
|
|
Nice guide.
After reading this, I wonder how broodwar pros check their worker numbers. When 12 is the maximum number of workers you can select at a time, do they select twice and add or just look at the mineral line?
|
You lose mining time when transferring drones. There's also the fact that you need drones to build buildings, so you can just pick drones from the base that's the most oversaturated, which prevents lost mining time due to transferring. I don't think you're taking these two factors into consideration in your hunt for "optimality."
|
|
|
On July 13 2012 08:54 quarkral wrote:
You lose mining time when transferring drones. There's also the fact that you need drones to build buildings, so you can just pick drones from the base that's the most oversaturated, which prevents lost mining time due to transferring. I don't think you're taking these two factors into consideration in your hunt for "optimality."
You're right about losing mining time when you transfer drones, though I do think it's best to transfer drones over 16. I do make a few suggestions about how to maintain optimal saturation when constructing buildings, such as choosing drones from a base that is over-saturated or constructing new drones and rallying.
|
On July 13 2012 06:39 Danglars wrote:
I don't care if your mining rate with the third drone is 5 minerals per minute less than the first two.
It's not 5 minerals less per minute for the new drone, it's 5 minerals per minute for all drones. The statistic is a bit misleading. So taking OP's numbers - if 16 drones mine 670 minerals and 20 drones mine 750, this means that the four last drones only contributed 17 minerals per minute - which means that each of the first 16 drones is almost three times more useful than the 17th one upwards.
Or put another way - while the first 16 drones collect back their cost in roughly 70 seconds, the 17th drone upwards takes a whopping 3 minutes to do the same thing. It's a pretty safe bet that you'd have more useful things to invest in if that's your window.
I think there's a pretty good reason for calling anything past 16 drones oversaturated.
|
On July 13 2012 08:57 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 08:54 quarkral wrote:
You lose mining time when transferring drones. There's also the fact that you need drones to build buildings, so you can just pick drones from the base that's the most oversaturated, which prevents lost mining time due to transferring. I don't think you're taking these two factors into consideration in your hunt for "optimality." You're right about losing mining time when you transfer drones, though I do think it's best to transfer drones over 16. I do make a few suggestions about how to maintain optimal saturation when constructing buildings, such as choosing drones from a base that is over-saturated or constructing new drones and rallying.
My point is that deliberately oversaturating certain bases (in most cases, your main) preemptively in preparation for constructing buildings there may be better.
The suggestions you gave only apply afterwards.
|
On July 13 2012 09:23 quarkral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 08:57 TangSC wrote:On July 13 2012 08:54 quarkral wrote:
You lose mining time when transferring drones. There's also the fact that you need drones to build buildings, so you can just pick drones from the base that's the most oversaturated, which prevents lost mining time due to transferring. I don't think you're taking these two factors into consideration in your hunt for "optimality." You're right about losing mining time when you transfer drones, though I do think it's best to transfer drones over 16. I do make a few suggestions about how to maintain optimal saturation when constructing buildings, such as choosing drones from a base that is over-saturated or constructing new drones and rallying. My point is that deliberately oversaturating certain bases (in most cases, your main) preemptively in preparation for constructing buildings there may be better. The suggestions you gave only apply afterwards.
If you know you're going to build 2 structures in the main early on, I suppose you could oversaturate the base by 2 drones so that you don't have to transfer from natural. It would depend how long they're triple mining in the main for.
|
For the sake of lower level players such as myself, I can only imagine that achieving and maintaining an optimal saturation are the only aspects of any practical use, as the biggest problem for many lower level players isn't so much having not enough minerals as too much of them. Though you could obviously further optimize things by preventing bouncing drones, building drones from the larva closer to the actual undersaturated base or doubling up the closer patches earlier... unless it achieves a consistent result that is necessary for your build, I can only see it resulting in me floating 1500 minerals in the midgame instead of 1000, which doesn't actually help me win games.
I can't see managing the finer points of economy being any practical use of APM for anyone below high masters. Am I wrong in this?
THAT SAID I'm glad you bother to make such guides, man! Very well laid out and informative, and no-one can be hurt by accurate information! :D
|
On July 13 2012 09:30 Staboteur wrote:
I can't see managing the finer points of economy being any practical use of APM for anyone below high masters. Am I wrong in this?
If you mean in the mid-late game, then you're right - of course a bronze/silver level player should be focusing on their macro/engagements 100%. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't practice refinement in the early stages! It's also something I think Platinum/Diamond players can keep an eye on in the midgame if their macro is in check and they feel comfortable doing so.
|
Would've been great to demonstrate the 4-base max-out thing with the use of camera hotkeys, especially in a tutorial focusing on improving your mechanics combining the training of economy management in addition to efficient movements around the map would've been better I think.
|
On July 13 2012 09:36 Hanako wrote:
Would've been great to demonstrate the 4-base max-out thing with the use of camera hotkeys, especially in a tutorial focusing on improving your mechanics combining the training of economy management in addition to efficient movements around the map would've been ebtter I think.
I actually don't use camera hotkeys very much, I understand their appeal but tried them and didn't like it. I do hotkey my queens to 5-9, so I can go to each hatchery quickly.
|
On July 13 2012 06:33 BoggieMan wrote:
the title is kinda missleading since alot of this can be used by all races, great advice for the players that don't know all this already.
I may actually do Terran/Protoss versions sometime down the road.
|
Fantastic guide. It's guides like these that inspire me to practice, which I appreciate.
|
Yeah, I would definitely put this as all races guide, almost all of it is applicable to p and t.
|
Tang, this guide is awesome. Thanks so much for this.
Someone recently showed me your "the big bust" guide, and it's helped my ZvT a lot. I'm gold pushing for plat; this is helpful. Thanks! :D
edit: It occurred to me that my entire life I was under the presumption that 3 workers per mineral patch was the ideal number. I feel like my entire life has been a lie.
edit edit: Oh I get it now after reading comments. 16 drones, 2 per patch, is where you hit the wall of diminishing returns. Yeah, you will make more money with 3 on each patch, but you're better off with 16 on one base and 16 on the other, than 24 on one(2 per patch) and 12 on the other(the rest). Or whatever. Maximum of 16 per base until you have greater than 16x the number of bases you have. AH. This makes sense. You still make more money, up to saturation, but between 16-24 the return per drone is much less. Aha.
Thanks Tang.
|
|
|
This is a bit off-topic, but it's still related to zerg economy:
You know what I find annoying? The quite large discrepancy that exists between economy in some maps (with same mineral field counts). I don't know if this happens with other races aside from zerg (I would think it does, maybe not to the same degree), but I've noticed around a 5-7 second difference on different maps when building an overlord and pool.
Xel'naga caverns gives the fastest economy I've seen (be it top position or bottom — although top is maybe 1 second less), while many other maps are significantly slower such as daybreak — even if the minerals are mined optimally.
I find this to be most annoying as a zerg, since many builds early on require strict timings, and 7 seconds (or more if you also don't mine optimally) can really make significant holes in builds such as losing larvas. The best example I can think of is 11 overpool build, where the difference in economy can be between losing most of a larva and virtually no fraction of a larva.
|
Thank you for your great wealth of information Tang. I am interested on you viewpoint toward which is the best queen inject method. I use the backspace method, though i switch the base camera hotkey to spacebar, and it has worked wonders for me. Do some of the korean bawss' like Nestea use something like individual queens on 5,6 and 7 because it has strategic advantage or maybe stuck in BW ways?
Thanks again for your time.
|
excellent guide, every zerg must know this
|
United Kingdom20295 Posts
On July 13 2012 13:44 Xapti wrote:
This is a bit off-topic, but it's still related to zerg economy:
You know what I find annoying? The quite large discrepancy that exists between economy in some maps (with same mineral field counts). I don't know if this happens with other races aside from zerg (I would think it does, maybe not to the same degree), but I've noticed around a 5-7 second difference on different maps when building an overlord and pool.
Xel'naga caverns gives the fastest economy I've seen (be it top position or bottom — although top is maybe 1 second less), while many other maps are significantly slower such as daybreak — even if the minerals are mined optimally.
I find this to be most annoying as a zerg, since many builds early on require strict timings, and 7 seconds (or more if you also don't mine optimally) can really make significant holes in builds such as losing larvas. The best example I can think of is 11 overpool build, where the difference in economy can be between losing most of a larva and virtually no fraction of a larva.
It is extremely annoying for protoss too, especially as all of the robot zergs stuck in diamond (there are many of them, seems to be the majority) mostly got there from blindly following timings, like X minute gas, roach warren, evo chamber, etc, and when any aggressive timing can be delayed by mineral counts and the enemy is following predetermined time stamps without scouting, it is notably harder to do damage
|
On July 13 2012 09:01 Maytsh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 06:39 Danglars wrote:
I don't care if your mining rate with the third drone is 5 minerals per minute less than the first two. It's not 5 minerals less per minute for the new drone, it's 5 minerals per minute for all drones. The statistic is a bit misleading. So taking OP's numbers - if 16 drones mine 670 minerals and 20 drones mine 750, this means that the four last drones only contributed 17 minerals per minute - which means that each of the first 16 drones is almost three times more useful than the 17th one upwards. Or put another way - while the first 16 drones collect back their cost in roughly 70 seconds, the 17th drone upwards takes a whopping 3 minutes to do the same thing. It's a pretty safe bet that you'd have more useful things to invest in if that's your window. I think there's a pretty good reason for calling anything past 16 drones oversaturated.
If you read the context, I was correcting improper use of the word fully saturated for 16 drones on minerals for the screenshot. I was not suggesting that the difference does not have a big contribution on a zerg's income management (It does) or the wisdom of under-saturating bases in favor of drone optimal mining efficiency (It is a very wise decision PRECISELY for the cost of drones in supply, cost, and opportunity cost for the drone's minerals).
The OP has changed the misleading titles on the screenshots so it's all resolved. There was no misunderstanding as to what he said, and the reality of the situation he describes. This is not the first thread on the topic nor will it be the last. My learning came from Piousflea's research as well as that found on LiquiPedia.
There is change from 24 minerals per minute to 39 minerals per minute going from the first/second worker to third worker, amountint to a ~38% penalty for the third. He will earn his money spent back (not considering supply in overlords) at ~125 seconds compared to ~77 seconds according to my calculations. Not as overstated as you suggest at 3 minutes but substantial enough to give credence to what OP says. I both agree with his conclusions and suggest higher level zerg players to consider their 3base saturation levels when defending Protoss aggression.
|
Nice guide. if basic. thanks again Tang.
Actually, a real comprehensive guide to SC2 economics would be a real boon to the community.
Its not just the amount of workers, but the flow speed and volume of all 3 races in different siituations that needs further examination.
e.g. how does larve injects + droning compare with muling, compare with chronoboost? I imagine P would have the smoothest exponential graph, Z with the fastest and largest, and T with the biggest spikes.
The way income comes in definitely affects the unit choice output / ratio and perhaps can better teach us what units we should build and when.
|
if ur in the lower leagues stick to a full page of drones to measure saturation (3 rows on bottom=24) and use the crtl click method, believe me, if you are playing a game and get to the 10-15 mins, check again, you have about a full line missing. why? youre making buildings, spine and spores.
Just get to a full page, less to think about, easy to quickly glance at, no need to bother boxing as most of the time you may get ovies in there queens and stray units, its too much micro for you to be dealing with. control click, add 2 if you know u have the 6 on gas, hell even click the gass and check 3 are on it. I read too much into this when i was getting out of bronze and silver, a simple replay check i hadnt made enough drones in the first place.
Tang is the man to listen to though, i just think these pros overestimate the ability of us lowbies, yes we can do it but its more distracting for us, we just cant do it accurately.
Perfect saturation i think should only be thought of past plat as then you have to start to know the game past solid mechanics. Its just what ive found over the years. you need to make your game more simple.
ive seen too many lowbie streams where they do the box, forget to deselect and move all of their units OFF the lines . . yeah . . . boxing=goodtactic, you just lost 20 secs of mining, forgot to put the 4 back on gas, created more of an issue for yourself, missing injects, not looking at minimap . . it spirals out of control.... GG.
EZMODE= Cntrl click workers, see full page. Move on. Really.
|
On July 13 2012 06:33 BoggieMan wrote:
the title is kinda missleading since alot of this can be used by all races, great advice for the players that don't know all this already, i however think you should write that people in the lower leagues should not focus on this at all, cause its kinda silly wasting time practicing stuff like this when its your general gameplay that has huge flaws.
I couldn't disagree with you more. The problem with newer player's general gameplay is that their mechanics are weak, they typically under or over-drone to a severe degree, and they have little to no understanding of how to build up and manage their economy.
This is practically the ONLY thing new players should be focusing on because it's an excellent starting point to learn how to play. Knowing how to check worker saturation and knowing what ideal saturation even is is practically a ticket out of Bronze league.
On July 13 2012 09:30 Staboteur wrote:
For the sake of lower level players such as myself, I can only imagine that achieving and maintaining an optimal saturation are the only aspects of any practical use, as the biggest problem for many lower level players isn't so much having not enough minerals as too much of them. Though you could obviously further optimize things by preventing bouncing drones, building drones from the larva closer to the actual undersaturated base or doubling up the closer patches earlier... unless it achieves a consistent result that is necessary for your build, I can only see it resulting in me floating 1500 minerals in the midgame instead of 1000, which doesn't actually help me win games.
If you EVER see yourself with 1000 minerals, and you aren't saving up for a round of 10 mutas when your spire pops or something, put down a hatchery. Always. If you can't spend your money, you need to be producing more units, and that means you need more production structures. It's 1000 minerals that aren't doing anything for you. Take a drone and go expand, or throw down a macro hatch close to your base. Even if you don't feel particularly safe expanding, just do it. If you lose the hatch because you couldn't defend, you haven't really lost anything, because typically you wouldn't be spending those minerals anyway.
On July 13 2012 09:30 Staboteur wrote:
I can't see managing the finer points of economy being any practical use of APM for anyone below high masters. Am I wrong in this?
League isn't really the relevant factor here. If you have the extra APM to spare, then it's just another little thing you can do to give yourself an advantage. Honestly though, a lot of the things the OP mentioned aren't huge APM timesinks. Checking saturation, pulling drones to make a building from the side closest to where the building will be, and grabbing drones from the far mineral patches rather than close ones are all pretty much one-action tasks.
|
Very good guide. I think I've reached the point, though, that the absolute best thing that I could do right now is get a better computer. My computer is so slow I'm unable to do so many things like maintain more than two or three bases, use significant army sizes, or really do anything in the late game at all. I play at an average of 8 frames per second, lower if I'm in a battle.
Irrelevant complaining aside, though, great guide~
|
Is worker efficiency always the best kind of efficiency to go for?
Seems to me you have a choice between "per-worker" efficiency (16 workers on minerals) and total income per minute efficiency (build workers until there's no more gain to income per minute).
Both have pros and cons, so is limiting mineral harvesters to 16 per base always the best?
|
I recommend not using boxing to count saturation, too much shit around the hatchery which might be boxed, or too high risk to miss a drone or two. Instead, just hold control and click on a drone. 16+4 (6 for gas but only 4 visible at a time since 1 is always inside the gayser) and you're perfect.
|
Impressive and super guide Tang
Well Done.
|
Usefull guide,
this should be pretty helpfull for some of us, although you could go a little deeper, i would have loved a section about building drones over 16 17 ingame seconds (~20 to compensate for traveltime) before you need them for structures and gas (~5:10 2 drones for extractors - 5:40 6 drones for gas - 6min full gas saturation).
|
On July 13 2012 13:56 BriMikon wrote:
Thank you for your great wealth of information Tang. I am interested on you viewpoint toward which is the best queen inject method. I use the backspace method, though i switch the base camera hotkey to spacebar, and it has worked wonders for me. Do some of the korean bawss' like Nestea use something like individual queens on 5,6 and 7 because it has strategic advantage or maybe stuck in BW ways?
Thanks again for your time.
Well because I don't use camera hotkeys very often, I prefer to hotkey my queens as 5-6-7 etc. I like it for three reasons:
1) I've been doing it since beta, and it's become habitual. I don't have to think about it, I have it timed in my head.
2) I can easily go between my main, natural, and third by clicking 55, 66, 77.
3) I can quickly select a queen if I need to micro her.
I really think it's just best to do the method that you're most comfortable with, each has its own advantages.
|
On July 13 2012 22:43 Gajarell wrote:
Usefull guide,
this should be pretty helpfull for some of us, although you could go a little deeper, i would have loved a section about building drones over 16 17 ingame seconds (~20 to compensate for traveltime) before you need them for structures and gas (~5:10 2 drones for extractors - 5:40 6 drones for gas - 6min full gas saturation).
I actually really like these suggestions.
|
On July 13 2012 14:39 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 13:44 Xapti wrote:
This is a bit off-topic, but it's still related to zerg economy:
You know what I find annoying? The quite large discrepancy that exists between economy in some maps (with same mineral field counts). I don't know if this happens with other races aside from zerg (I would think it does, maybe not to the same degree), but I've noticed around a 5-7 second difference on different maps when building an overlord and pool.
Xel'naga caverns gives the fastest economy I've seen (be it top position or bottom — although top is maybe 1 second less), while many other maps are significantly slower such as daybreak — even if the minerals are mined optimally.
I find this to be most annoying as a zerg, since many builds early on require strict timings, and 7 seconds (or more if you also don't mine optimally) can really make significant holes in builds such as losing larvas. The best example I can think of is 11 overpool build, where the difference in economy can be between losing most of a larva and virtually no fraction of a larva. It is extremely annoying for protoss too, especially as all of the robot zergs stuck in diamond (there are many of them, seems to be the majority) mostly got there from blindly following timings, like X minute gas, roach warren, evo chamber, etc, and when any aggressive timing can be delayed by mineral counts and the enemy is following predetermined time stamps without scouting, it is notably harder to do damage
Sorry, but you just don't know what you're talking about. If there's any robot players in diamond, they're almost all protoss. 60% of the time if you ask a protoss player "Hey, how do I hold what you did this game" they say " I dunno" because they just don't have any understanding of the game. If you ask the same question to the zerg player, 90% of the time he'll have an answer like, "get earlier blink and make cannons until your archons are out" or something. Just my personal experience.
You can't win with zerg by blindly following ANY timings. What does attacking with roach at 12 min work against? Protoss taking a 3rd and not being prepared for it. That's the only thing. Zerg needs to have the correct reaction for EVERYTHING ELSE. Even if they hold your all in, they still need to play it out really well, if you just turtle correctly and get out a mothership deathball (on a map like daybreak, where a zerg attack is impossible.) then you can still win with 3 base vs 8 base.
|
On July 13 2012 23:18 EnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 14:39 Cyro wrote:On July 13 2012 13:44 Xapti wrote:
This is a bit off-topic, but it's still related to zerg economy:
You know what I find annoying? The quite large discrepancy that exists between economy in some maps (with same mineral field counts). I don't know if this happens with other races aside from zerg (I would think it does, maybe not to the same degree), but I've noticed around a 5-7 second difference on different maps when building an overlord and pool.
Xel'naga caverns gives the fastest economy I've seen (be it top position or bottom — although top is maybe 1 second less), while many other maps are significantly slower such as daybreak — even if the minerals are mined optimally.
I find this to be most annoying as a zerg, since many builds early on require strict timings, and 7 seconds (or more if you also don't mine optimally) can really make significant holes in builds such as losing larvas. The best example I can think of is 11 overpool build, where the difference in economy can be between losing most of a larva and virtually no fraction of a larva. It is extremely annoying for protoss too, especially as all of the robot zergs stuck in diamond (there are many of them, seems to be the majority) mostly got there from blindly following timings, like X minute gas, roach warren, evo chamber, etc, and when any aggressive timing can be delayed by mineral counts and the enemy is following predetermined time stamps without scouting, it is notably harder to do damage Sorry, but you just don't know what you're talking about.
I don't mean to preach, but telling people they don't know what they're talking about will not convince them to listen to your counter-argument (regardless of who is right or wrong).
|
On July 13 2012 14:39 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 13:44 Xapti wrote:
This is a bit off-topic, but it's still related to zerg economy:
You know what I find annoying? The quite large discrepancy that exists between economy in some maps (with same mineral field counts). I don't know if this happens with other races aside from zerg (I would think it does, maybe not to the same degree), but I've noticed around a 5-7 second difference on different maps when building an overlord and pool.
Xel'naga caverns gives the fastest economy I've seen (be it top position or bottom — although top is maybe 1 second less), while many other maps are significantly slower such as daybreak — even if the minerals are mined optimally.
I find this to be most annoying as a zerg, since many builds early on require strict timings, and 7 seconds (or more if you also don't mine optimally) can really make significant holes in builds such as losing larvas. The best example I can think of is 11 overpool build, where the difference in economy can be between losing most of a larva and virtually no fraction of a larva. It is extremely annoying for protoss too, especially as all of the robot zergs stuck in diamond (there are many of them, seems to be the majority) mostly got there from blindly following timings, like X minute gas, roach warren, evo chamber, etc, and when any aggressive timing can be delayed by mineral counts and the enemy is following predetermined time stamps without scouting, it is notably harder to do damage
To be fair, there are quite a few builds designed to counter the blind-roach aggression in the midgame. The +1/+1 immortal/sentry/stalker push is a good example, I remember mana 2-0'd Stephano with this build. There's also ways of putting on pressure with things like a 1Zealot/1Stalker "poke" into a 4gate zealot warp-in to throw Zerg off their timings and force them to produce units before reaching full 3base saturation, which makes it harder for them to shut down protoss's third. Some players use Stargates pretty successfully to pressure before robo/third.
|
On July 13 2012 23:18 EnE wrote:
You can't win with zerg by blindly following ANY timings. What does attacking with roach at 12 min work against? Protoss taking a 3rd and not being prepared for it. That's the only thing. Zerg needs to have the correct reaction for EVERYTHING ELSE. Even if they hold your all in, they still need to play it out really well, if you just turtle correctly and get out a mothership deathball (on a map like daybreak, where a zerg attack is impossible.) then you can still win with 3 base vs 8 base.
I'm not sure I agree with this. If you follow the build order steps / timings of the Stephano-Style 12min maxout and execute it well, it can be quite difficult for Protoss either to win with a 2base all-in or secure their third. There were a few months where Protoss players were left scratching their heads against this style of play, it seemed almost impossible. I do agree that you need to do some scouting (most importantly the timings of Protoss expansion geysers), but for the most part the style revolves around getting the correct upgrades and reaching that full 3-base saturation by around 8/8:30, so you can move out by 10:30/11:00 with +1 missle, roach speed, and 150~ supply roaches.
|
I really disagree with the notion of 'optimal mineral saturation'.
You stop at (16+16+16)+(3+3+3)= 57 drones on 3 base (including gas) and you will find yourself starved in all 3 match-ups.
Yes, you want to make sure your bases are always even on workers, at all times, but I don't think the idea of optimal saturation has any practical impact on the game. You want to strive for 70+ drones...
|
On July 14 2012 00:41 Belial88 wrote:
I really disagree with the notion of 'optimal mineral saturation'.
You stop at (16+16+16)+(3+3+3)= 57 drones on 3 base (including gas) and you will find yourself starved in all 3 match-ups.
Yes, you want to make sure your bases are always even on workers, at all times, but I don't think the idea of optimal saturation has any practical impact on the game. You want to strive for 70+ drones...
While you are correct in your latter statement, in your first statement you assume that you stop at 3 bases. Tang is explaining optimal saturation per worker, not optimal saturation on X amount of bases. Of course having 70+ workers on 3 bases is better than having 57 drones on 3 bases. At the same time, having 70+ workers scattered over 4 bases is better than having 70+ workers on 3 bases.
Really great guide Tang! Thank you for sharing this. It would also be interesting to see some kind of evidence for which worker transfer (manyard) technique is the best, while you are still on this topic.
|
Very informative guide Tang, Economy Management is a very important thing to focus on when trying to improve your overall gameplay. Great read as always ^_^
|
On July 14 2012 00:41 Belial88 wrote:
I really disagree with the notion of 'optimal mineral saturation'.
You stop at (16+16+16)+(3+3+3)= 57 drones on 3 base (including gas) and you will find yourself starved in all 3 match-ups.
Yes, you want to make sure your bases are always even on workers, at all times, but I don't think the idea of optimal saturation has any practical impact on the game. You want to strive for 70+ drones...
Actually it's 66 drones for 3 bases with all the gas:
(16x3) + (6x3) = 66
Having more drones than that is inefficient, as you'll end up with triple mining patches or drones just bouncing around. 70+ is beneficial on 4base.
|
|
|
regarding your "which drones to use when building stuff"...
another idea would probably be to build excess drones on a base when you know you will build something SOON, and then take those drones that are wandering about in that base?
|
On July 13 2012 05:31 TangSC wrote:
To avoid taking drones off of a base with optimal saturation...
1) construct new drones and rally the eggs into the geyser.
2) take three drones off mining, but rally three new drone eggs to the patches you took from.
3) take drones from a base that doesn't have full saturation.
Overall, I like the guide. However, the part quoted above strikes me as odd. Maybe I'm wrong, but especially option 2 sounds like a recommendation to build ad hoc-drones in order to avoid deviating from "optimal saturation".
As the calculations in the OP show, 4 "oversaturated" drones need to mine 2min 30sec just to break even with their direct cost (i.e. not even accounting for the cost of 1/2 of an overlord). However, lesser benefits are still benefits, and even if a drone has mined just 5 minerals before it gets used to morph a structure, that's still 5 minerals that go into my bank. If I build drones ad hoc, i.e. as currently needed to reach or maintain the most efficient saturation, the drones I use to morph structures (or their replacement drones), mine gas, etc. will effectively not have mined anything prior to their designated use.
Hence, if you're looking at a base that has unused vespin geysirs, or if you're planning to build any structures during the game, it's better to build a surplus of drones now rather than to "restock" efficient saturation later. In other words, the earlier you build a drone, the more useful it will be - regardless of its anticipated use.
Of course, there is a point of actual oversaturation, i.e. a moment of saturation where additional drones don't add any benefit at all - obviously at this point, additional drones are just dead supply. However, before that, it seems more sensible to me to build enough drones for mineral patches, geysirs, and anticipated structures whenever your opponent lets you get away with it, as early as possible, even at the "risk" of triple-mining a mineral patch for some time.
|
On July 13 2012 05:32 TangSC wrote:It would really mean a lot to me if you all would upvote this post on reddit: Reddit LinkThanks!
Really...?
|
On July 14 2012 09:09 Poffel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 05:31 TangSC wrote:
To avoid taking drones off of a base with optimal saturation...
1) construct new drones and rally the eggs into the geyser.
2) take three drones off mining, but rally three new drone eggs to the patches you took from.
3) take drones from a base that doesn't have full saturation. Hence, if you're looking at a base that has unused vespin geysirs, or if you're planning to build any structures during the game, it's better to build a surplus of drones now rather than to "restock" efficient saturation later. In other words, the earlier you build a drone, the more useful it will be - regardless of its anticipated use. Of course, there is a point of actual oversaturation, i.e. a moment of saturation where additional drones don't add any benefit at all - obviously at this point, additional drones are just dead supply. However, before that, it seems more sensible to me to build enough drones for mineral patches, geysirs, and anticipated structures whenever your opponent lets you get away with it, as early as possible, even at the "risk" of triple-mining a mineral patch for some time.
Absolutely true, as long as after you build those extra structures and get back to 16-drone saturation, you double-check for single/triple mining patches again. My thought process is "once I reach 16 drones mining minerals per base, I never touch that mineral field" and it helps me keep track, though it is technically better to triple-mine a patch and gain that slight extra income.
|
On July 13 2012 06:33 BoggieMan wrote:
the title is kinda missleading since alot of this can be used by all races, great advice for the players that don't know all this already, i however think you should write that people in the lower leagues should not focus on this at all, cause its kinda silly wasting time practicing stuff like this when its your general gameplay that has huge flaws.
This is like the MOST important thing to learn to get out of the lower leagues. If you can mine effiecent in the lower leagues it really doesn't matter what else you're doing, you'll win most of your games by just having more stuff.
|
On July 14 2012 04:05 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2012 00:41 Belial88 wrote:
I really disagree with the notion of 'optimal mineral saturation'.
You stop at (16+16+16)+(3+3+3)= 57 drones on 3 base (including gas) and you will find yourself starved in all 3 match-ups.
Yes, you want to make sure your bases are always even on workers, at all times, but I don't think the idea of optimal saturation has any practical impact on the game. You want to strive for 70+ drones...
Actually it's 66 drones for 3 bases with all the gas: (16x3) + (6x3) = 66 Having more drones than that is inefficient, as you'll end up with triple mining patches or drones just bouncing around. 70+ is beneficial on 4base.
You can have up to 24 workers with increasing returns (albeit marginally diminishing returns after 16, its still more income per additional worker up to 24). With 6 for gas, that's 30 drones per base. That's a little high, so instead of 90 drones on 3 base, people usually aim for about 70-75 on 3 base. Obviously, spreading 70-75 on 4 bases is better, but I would recommend that Zergs aim to drone up to about 72 drones on 3 bases, probably before taking a fourth too.
There are many times going up to 100 drones is very beneficial for zerg as well - in any match-up, if you want to start throwing down mass spines, Zerg has the ability to make 100 drones, and then make 30 spines essentially for free (the only cost is about 1-2 minutes of slight vulnerability if the opponent pushes, but that's why this is best done when you know the opponent isn't about to push, but will have a deathpush eventually, or to mass spines to deal with drops, or before the 200/200 supply cap is an issue and it doesn't matter if you have 100 supply tied up in drones, ie ZvP vs toss just taking his third, stephano does this a lot).
It may be 'inefficient', but what you are asking for is just less income. Zerg really needs at least 70+ drones to really operate into mid to later game. Stopping at 66 drones just is too short. I believe the SQ thread talked about how masters+ players were going 70+ drones, and you were seeing pros go up to 90 often in their games.
It's not like T/P where going past 80 drones really hurts, for Zerg you just make 100 drones, then turn them all into mass spines if it's a problem, and all 3 races really want 70-75 drones.
I get what you are saying, but I think this only really applies to maynarding drones or rallying workers, where you don't want to oversaturate one base over another before you have 70+ drones on 3 base. If you stop at less than 70 drones in a macro game, you are really going to shoot yourself into the foot. I get the whole efficiency thing, but I don't think there's any practical use of it besides maynarding/rallying/keeping workers even on each base.
|
On July 14 2012 16:20 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2012 04:05 TangSC wrote:On July 14 2012 00:41 Belial88 wrote:
I really disagree with the notion of 'optimal mineral saturation'.
You stop at (16+16+16)+(3+3+3)= 57 drones on 3 base (including gas) and you will find yourself starved in all 3 match-ups.
Yes, you want to make sure your bases are always even on workers, at all times, but I don't think the idea of optimal saturation has any practical impact on the game. You want to strive for 70+ drones...
Actually it's 66 drones for 3 bases with all the gas: (16x3) + (6x3) = 66 Having more drones than that is inefficient, as you'll end up with triple mining patches or drones just bouncing around. 70+ is beneficial on 4base. I get what you are saying, but I think this only really applies to maynarding drones or rallying workers, where you don't want to oversaturate one base over another before you have 70+ drones on 3 base. If you stop at less than 70 drones in a macro game, you are really going to shoot yourself into the foot. I get the whole efficiency thing, but I don't think there's any practical use of it besides maynarding/rallying/keeping workers even on each base.
I see what you mean, but I think it depends on what your goal is for the late game. On 3 bases + macro h atch I'd aim for exactly 66 drones then start unit production with the goal of being aggressive, I'd only produce more drones when the 4th is almost done. An optimal 3-base economy with all the gas is sufficient to max out very early with high tech, though I do generally add 16 more drones when taking a 4th. (8 to take and saturate the gas, 8 for minerals, then transfer 8 from main so I have 16 drones optimally saturating the 4th).
I do agree with you that it's completely reasonable to oversaturate the 4th or 3rd if you intend to mass spine in the late game. It's my personal preference not to make spinecrawlers, and instead try to play an aggressive infestor/ling/ultralisk or broodlord/roach/ling style off 3-4 base:
http://drop.sc/221846 (zvt)
http://drop.sc/221847 (zvp)
|
On July 14 2012 21:18 TangSC wrote:I see what you mean, but I think it depends on what your goal is for the late game. On 3 bases + macro h atch I'd aim for exactly 66 drones then start unit production with the goal of being aggressive, I'd only produce more drones when the 4th is almost done. An optimal 3-base economy with all the gas is sufficient to max out very early with high tech, though I do generally add 16 more drones when taking a 4th. (8 to take and saturate the gas, 8 for minerals, then transfer 8 from main so I have 16 drones optimally saturating the 4th). I do agree with you that it's completely reasonable to oversaturate the 4th or 3rd if you intend to mass spine in the late game. It's my personal preference to try to hit aggressive infestor/ling/ultralisk or broodlord/roach/ling timing attacks off 3-4 base: http://drop.sc/221846 (zvt) http://drop.sc/221847 (zvp)
Please don't take this the wrong way, but I don't understand what these replays are supposed to tell us, so I'd appreciate if you could give me some hints what to look out for in these replays. Right now, as far as I'm concerned, neither game showcases what you're writing about particularly well, since apart from your main base, I don't see much of this "optimal" saturation (for example, in the first game you have 29 workers at your natural (including geysirs) for most of the game, and less than 16 drones mining minerals at your later expansions). I also wouldn't call defending until 200/200 a "timing attack", and you don't get to that point off a 3-base economy with under 70 drones in either game.
In other words, what I've taken from these replays so far is that "optimal saturation" is a "do-as-I-say" recommendation rather than a "do-as-I-do". But maybe I'm overlooking important stuff - in which case I'd welcome some advice on what to look out for in those replays -, or maybe these two cases were chosen poorly - in which case you might want to replace those replays with others that are better suited for the task.
|
ive changed my mind with this, i originally posted that if ur in gold(maybe a bit lower really. Big up the gold league tryers!) league like me i wouldnt bother as it creates too many things to think about when all this does it just maximises efficiency a little bit. I gave it a go a for a couple of hours doing the drills and working it into my play and what i found was i can get 6 more drones at my 8 minute bench mark than i originally could. My worries are that ill be focussing too much on the base now and not on the mini map ... sigh this game! Good guide.
|
So does anyone know what causes drones which are paired on a mineral patch to occasionally unpair? It's rather annoying, right when I finish setting up paired drones on the two closest mineral patches, one of them just randomly wanders off after a few trips.
|
Another great guide Tang. love all of them
As a fellow zerg (gold league) Ive found myself getting into the habit of 2 full lines + 2 drones per base even when moving droned to my expo and 3rd.. is that seemingly correct or is it better for 2 full lines instead.
in saying that once i make something i always remake that drone.
My question is even with 70 drones at 3 bases say for eg.. when moving out to the 4th.. do u just transfer over or is it better to make a new full line of drones (8) then transfer from the main??
Thanks Nimble
|
Nice one , the problem is that everyone knows this already , if not , learns from stream
|
On July 14 2012 23:06 Poffel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2012 21:18 TangSC wrote:I see what you mean, but I think it depends on what your goal is for the late game. On 3 bases + macro h atch I'd aim for exactly 66 drones then start unit production with the goal of being aggressive, I'd only produce more drones when the 4th is almost done. An optimal 3-base economy with all the gas is sufficient to max out very early with high tech, though I do generally add 16 more drones when taking a 4th. (8 to take and saturate the gas, 8 for minerals, then transfer 8 from main so I have 16 drones optimally saturating the 4th). I do agree with you that it's completely reasonable to oversaturate the 4th or 3rd if you intend to mass spine in the late game. It's my personal preference to try to hit aggressive infestor/ling/ultralisk or broodlord/roach/ling timing attacks off 3-4 base: http://drop.sc/221846 (zvt) http://drop.sc/221847 (zvp) Please don't take this the wrong way, but I don't understand what these replays are supposed to tell us, so I'd appreciate if you could give me some hints what to look out for in these replays. Right now, as far as I'm concerned, neither game showcases what you're writing about particularly well, since apart from your main base, I don't see much of this "optimal" saturation (for example, in the first game you have 29 workers at your natural (including geysirs) for most of the game, and less than 16 drones mining minerals at your later expansions). I also wouldn't call defending until 200/200 a "timing attack", and you don't get to that point off a 3-base economy with under 70 drones in either game. In other words, what I've taken from these replays so far is that "optimal saturation" is a "do-as-I-say" recommendation rather than a "do-as-I-do". But maybe I'm overlooking important stuff - in which case I'd welcome some advice on what to look out for in those replays -, or maybe these two cases were chosen poorly - in which case you might want to replace those replays with others that are better suited for the task.
Sorry Poffel, I should have been more clear. I was attempting to show that instead of massing spines in the late game and aiming for 5+ bases, I prefer to start attacking as soon as I have hive tech off 3-4 bases. I took another look at the replays and the saturation is pretty optimal in the ZvP, but I do oversaturate the natural in the ZvT by about 4-5 drones. Not the end of the world, but could certainly be improved by transferring the excess to the third.
I believe the ZvT/ZvP that I analyse in this stream video better show the attention to saturation:
http://www.twitch.tv/tangsc/b/324687905
|
Really impressive post, Good Job man!
|
|
|
Hi Tang, Great introductory guide, but i would like to suggest a different method of conceptualizing the difference that transferring superfluous drones makes.
The concept that up to 16 drones per base makes you roughly 42 minerals per minute is excellent, but how much money will the extra drones each make? (and not overall).
Well, 750 minerals per minute for 20 drones means that if 16 drones makes you 670 then the 4 additional drones have only made you 80 minerals...
Spread over the 4 remaining drones that means that drones above 16 (at least on close patches) make you 20 minerals each as opposed to the 42 that they normally make if not on a triple mining patch (i suspect that this number might be even lower than that, sopmewhere around 16-17)
So the point of all this is being able to say that you can more than double the effectiveness of a drone/probe/scv by transferring it to a new expansion instead of leaving it at a base with 16+ miners already
|
On July 18 2012 08:26 FlilFlam wrote:
So the point of all this is being able to say that you can more than double the effectiveness of a drone/probe/scv by transferring it to a new expansion instead of leaving it at a base with 16+ miners already
That's a good way of putting it, will update the OP.
|
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer??
|
On July 18 2012 23:36 X3GoldDot wrote:
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer??
No. 8 drones in each base is equivalent to 16 drones on 1 base. The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later).
|
On July 19 2012 00:18 JDub wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 23:36 X3GoldDot wrote:
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer?? No. 8 drones in each base is equivalent to 16 drones on 1 base. The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later).
Yeah honestly I don't think there's much validity to the argument that you want to split up drones at your main/natural so that you mine out later. Early economic advantages really do snowball throughout the game, and I think it's much more important to maximize mining early than it is to worry about mining out bases.
|
On July 21 2012 07:07 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 00:18 JDub wrote:On July 18 2012 23:36 X3GoldDot wrote:
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer?? No. 8 drones in each base is equivalent to 16 drones on 1 base. The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later). Yeah honestly I don't think there's much validity to the argument that you want to split up drones at your main/natural so that you mine out later. Early economic advantages really do snowball throughout the game, and I think it's much more important to maximize mining early than it is to worry about mining out bases.
It's far easier to just get each of your main base mineral patches double mined with a set of 16 miners and then just rally everything else to gas/new expansions. This way you can leave them there to do their thing forever with perfect maximum efficiency. You can also then saturate your next base more easily simply because it is 1 base to actively manage instead of 2. And of course, as tang said, the immediate mineral loss has too much opportunity cost associated with it to merit the benefit of a slightly longer lasting main base and a shorter lasting natural...
|
On July 19 2012 00:18 JDub wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 23:36 X3GoldDot wrote:
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer?? No. 8 drones in each base is equivalent to 16 drones on 1 base. The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural ( but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later). You're forgetting something fairly important: Every time you're rallying workers from your main to your natural, you're not gaining minerals in the time that they're travelling. So you're going to lose mining time regardless. When you transfer, you're simply losing it NOW instead of LATER.
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer.
|
Zerg economy depends not just on drone count but the bases we have, as our production scales with hatchery, injects and larva management. This article applies to other races as well, but not well enough for Zerg, as our production is based off larva and it contributes to our supply, army and drone.
Zerg players who cannot understand the Zerg mechanics will always have trouble. And those who are lucky will never seems to understand the early game play style most Zerg players have adopted.
|
On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer.
Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main.
|
On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. I don't recommend large transfers with any builds involving gas, because you won't be able to afford spending all of your larvae. Any gasless hatch-first build should be able to afford 2 queens + all larva even with a transfer of up to half of your drones, though.
And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have.
A perfect example of when you SHOULDN'T transfer is with a FE vs. a Z that throws down either no hatchery at all or has a delayed expand. Not only is defending your natural drones vs. a dedicated rush difficult, you need the immediate money you'd lose transferring to throw down a couple spines asap along with your queens. Vs. Terran though you should almost always transfer, and vs. any scouted hatch-first build against Zerg you should be transferring because unless you're rushing gas you should be able to afford all of your queen + larva expenditures even with the immediate money loss.
|
On July 22 2012 05:37 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have.
What I mean is once you reach 16 drones in the main and you're double-mining every patch, you can rally to the expansion and know that you NEVER need to touch the main minerals again unless he kills some of your workers. It makes it easier to maintain the optimal saturation.
|
On July 23 2012 03:02 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2012 05:37 RampancyTW wrote:On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have. What I mean is once you reach 16 drones in the main and you're double-mining every patch, you can rally to the expansion and know that you NEVER need to touch the main minerals again unless he kills some of your workers. It makes it easier to maintain the optimal saturation. This is a wildly different argument from your initial statement:
The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later).
It may well be "easier" to not transfer drones from the main, but transferring is often the economically optimal decision. Your initial argument that not transferring is better was both incorrect and misleading. It's okay to be wrong. You don't need to keep moving the goalposts. I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion, if you're going to be helping out lesser players with things like this.
|
On July 23 2012 04:21 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:02 TangSC wrote:On July 22 2012 05:37 RampancyTW wrote:On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have. What I mean is once you reach 16 drones in the main and you're double-mining every patch, you can rally to the expansion and know that you NEVER need to touch the main minerals again unless he kills some of your workers. It makes it easier to maintain the optimal saturation. This is a wildly different argument from your initial statement: Show nested quote +The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later). It may well be "easier" to not transfer drones from the main, but transferring is often the economically optimal decision. Your initial argument that not transferring is better was both incorrect and misleading. It's okay to be wrong. You don't need to keep moving the goalposts. I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion, if you're going to be helping out lesser players with things like this.
What an arrogant and ignorant thing to say. If you want to engage in a discussion, please do so with more respect in the future.
By securing 16-drone saturation and then rallying the hatchery to the expansion, you secure the maximum early economy because there is 0 lost mining time. If you transfer drones before 16-drone saturation, you lose efficient mining time that could be used in the main. From a purely-economical standpoint, the rally-method is better (and, as previously stated, easier for maintaining optimal mineral saturation).
|
On July 23 2012 04:39 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 04:21 RampancyTW wrote:On July 23 2012 03:02 TangSC wrote:On July 22 2012 05:37 RampancyTW wrote:On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have. What I mean is once you reach 16 drones in the main and you're double-mining every patch, you can rally to the expansion and know that you NEVER need to touch the main minerals again unless he kills some of your workers. It makes it easier to maintain the optimal saturation. This is a wildly different argument from your initial statement: The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural (but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later). It may well be "easier" to not transfer drones from the main, but transferring is often the economically optimal decision. Your initial argument that not transferring is better was both incorrect and misleading. It's okay to be wrong. You don't need to keep moving the goalposts. I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion, if you're going to be helping out lesser players with things like this. What an arrogant and ignorant thing to say. If you want to engage in a discussion, please do so with more respect in the future. By securing 16-drone saturation and then rallying the hatchery to the expansion, you secure the maximum early economy because there is 0 lost mining time. If you transfer drones before 16-drone saturation, you lose efficient mining time that could be used in the main. From a purely-economical standpoint, the rally-method is better (and, as previously stated, easier for maintaining optimal mineral saturation). On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 00:18 JDub wrote:On July 18 2012 23:36 X3GoldDot wrote:
for example if i have 16 drones in 1 base, is it good to transfer 8 to my natural, while leaving 8 in the main, this is something ive really never understood. 8 drones in each base is more minerals/minute than 16 drones in 1 base right? surely it would eventually overcome the mining time lost on transfer?? No. 8 drones in each base is equivalent to 16 drones on 1 base. The only reason you'd want to transfer when you have 16 in your main and your natural finishes is if you are going to need them to defend bunker pressure or, theoretically, if you are concerned about mining your main out faster than your natural ( but I don't think that could possibly justify the transfer since the minerals lost during the transfer wouldn't justify the slight difference in when your main and naturals mine out 15 minutes later). You're forgetting something fairly important: Every time you're rallying workers from your main to your natural, you're not gaining minerals in the time that they're travelling. So you're going to lose mining time regardless. When you transfer, you're simply losing it NOW instead of LATER. As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. On July 22 2012 05:37 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2012 02:34 TangSC wrote:On July 21 2012 09:03 RampancyTW wrote:
As long as you have enough minerals to use all your larvae/build everything you want as your hatch is popping, there is no economic reason not to transfer. And there is an advantage to not mining out your main as quickly. So if you can afford the transfer as your hatch pops, and can defend the drones that you're transferring, you should never NOT transfer. Well it's not just about having the minerals to use larva immediately when the hatchery is done. You could be securing a slight economic advantage by transferring after 16-drone saturation, which will allow you to immediately use additional larva instead of having to wait. Not only that, but if you reach that 16-drone saturation in the mine early, it's easy to keep track of how many workers you have, simply because you never need to add/remove drones from the main. I don't recommend large transfers with any builds involving gas, because you won't be able to afford spending all of your larvae. Any gasless hatch-first build should be able to afford 2 queens + all larva even with a transfer of up to half of your drones, though. And considering your queens and larvae will all be popping at almost identical times, and the limited supply involved at this stage of the game, you should have no trouble keeping track of how many workers you have. A perfect example of when you SHOULDN'T transfer is with a FE vs. a Z that throws down either no hatchery at all or has a delayed expand. Not only is defending your natural drones vs. a dedicated rush difficult, you need the immediate money you'd lose transferring to throw down a couple spines asap along with your queens. Vs. Terran though you should almost always transfer, and vs. any scouted hatch-first build against Zerg you should be transferring because unless you're rushing gas you should be able to afford all of your queen + larva expenditures even with the immediate money loss.
|
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason.
|
On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason.
I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks.
|
On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason.
you sound like you are 15.
early economic advantages snowball more than later economic advantages.
transferring earlier rather than later loses you a lot more in the long run due to opportunity cost, which in sc, snowballs exponentially since that opportunity cost could be invested in economy, which then allows you to invest in more things that compound an advantageous position (army, eco, tech), which build up your position in the game and opens up better opportunities than you had before
|
On July 23 2012 06:57 nath wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. you sound like you are 15. early economic advantages snowball more than later economic advantages. transferring earlier rather than later loses you a lot more in the long run due to opportunity cost, which in sc, snowballs exponentially since that opportunity cost could be invested in economy, which then allows you to invest in more things that compound an advantageous position (army, eco, tech), which build up your position in the game and opens up better opportunities than you had before Which is why I recommend transferring only when you can afford to buy queens AND spend all your larvae. As in a gasless FE.
Unless you're throwing down immediate defenses, you won't be able to immediately spend your money anyways, due to lack of larvae. It's literally impossible for it to "snowball" because there are zero negative effects, along with the positive advantages of more mining time in your main and the ability to double up more close patches earlier.
|
On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts. Your preference due to ease/practicality/whatever is perfectly fine, but your preference to rally is different than saying rallying is objectively better in all situations. Which is what you were doing, and is all I was trying to clarify in the first place.
And don't take a high horse about personal attacks when you threw around "arrogant" and "ignorant" to start this off.
|
On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. your preference to rally is different than saying rallying is objectively better in all situations. Which is what you were doing, and is all I was trying to clarify in the first place.
I still maintain that rallying after 16 is (marginally) better in all situations (excluding when you must use drones to defend).
|
Not your best work Tang =/
Everyone who didn't already know about proper saturation only needed to hear the 16 drones on minerals per base part. And the only people who should really be devoting energy to maximizing economy by micro managing the optimal way to saturate gas geysers already know it.
Guide is a nice effort for sure, but overall I got the impression you were hard up for a new idea for a guide and were desperate to come up with something. I really feel like focusing on most of this stuff is going to be counterproductive for the vast majority of players who aren't tip top masters/GM which is kind of contradictory to the purpose of writing a guide in the first place.
Just my 2 cents worth of feedback!! <3
|
On July 23 2012 09:08 Joedaddy wrote:
Guide is a nice effort for sure, but overall I got the impression you were hard up for a new idea for a guide and were desperate to come up with.
It's a topic I've always been very interested in. I do think this information is valuable for all skill levels, especially the middle/higher leagues - even if players don't have the apm to practice perfection, little bits here and there do make a difference. Also, this guide will serve as a "base" for the next few guides, which will focus on reaching ideal 2-3 base economies and using that economy to maximize units at a particular time.
|
I never see pros like DRG/NesTea and other zergs rally always see them transfer drones to new expos right away.
pros always say transfer drones because its more ecom then a 16 drone minning base vs a free expo with 0 drones and u rallying them. for example in pvz drg soon as his natural is done, he transfers 4-5 drones right away, soon as his 3rd is done, he transfers 3-4 to from his natural to his 3rd, next round of larva drones should saturate all 3 bases with 16 drones, rather then having to rally them.
You wont find very many zerg in the GSL rallying drones, u always seem them transfer drones, if they take gas they transfer 3-4 right away, if gasless for example nes tea will just transfer like 9 drones to his natural over rallying...
|
On July 23 2012 11:56 silentdecay01 wrote:
I never see pros like DRG/NesTea and other zergs rally always see them transfer drones to new expos right away.
I see Stephano choose the rally method, usually. There's nothing inherently "wrong" with transferring drones, it just means you value equally saturating your bases over maximizing early income.
|
On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts.
I just think the earlier income is more beneficial, similar to double-mining the closer patches earlier on. Double-mining them may not let you use larva immediately, but it's a small edge.
|
On July 13 2012 06:30 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 06:25 EnE wrote:
One issue with the guide in my opinion, is that double clicking to check saturation can be fine, you just add two more drones to the total needed to account for the two drones with gas on the way back to your hatchery. I think you guys are right, and I've updated the paragraph on boxing vs double-clicking. While I still prefer the box technique, there's nothing wrong at all with double-clicking or control-clicking - in some ways, it is actually faster/easier because you can avoid accidently boxing your gas-drones, your queen, or any units that spawn.
I think its faster to box also queen and gas drones than boxing only mineraldrones. You just have to know that it's 2rows + 4 and queen when you do that.
|
On July 24 2012 23:21 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts. I just think the earlier income is more beneficial, similar to double-mining the closer patches earlier on. Double-mining them may not let you use larva immediately, but it's a small edge. Transferring allows you to double-mine close patches at the natural earlier. By the time the 2nd injects pop, there is zero difference between transferring and rallying, other than that your main will last slightly longer and you can mine a little more money from doubling up on the expo close patches sooner.
If you can spend your first injects without idling any larvae, there is no benefit to mining the earlier minerals as opposed to transferring. If you thrown down an early gas or anticipate the need to build spines before that first round of injects pops, I recommend against transferring, because you need the earlier money. There's a slight economic benefit to transferring otherwise, though.
|
On July 25 2012 00:17 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2012 23:21 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts. I just think the earlier income is more beneficial, similar to double-mining the closer patches earlier on. Double-mining them may not let you use larva immediately, but it's a small edge. Transferring allows you to double-mine close patches at the natural earlier. By the time the 2nd injects pop, there is zero difference between transferring and rallying, other than that your main will last slightly longer and you can mine a little more money from doubling up on the expo close patches sooner. If you can spend your first injects without idling any larvae, there is no benefit to mining the earlier minerals as opposed to transferring. If you thrown down an early gas or anticipate the need to build spines before that first round of injects pops, I recommend against transferring, because you need the earlier money. There's a slight economic benefit to transferring otherwise, though.
I wouldn't go as far as to say there is any economic benefit to transferring, unless you're considering a slower-mining main an economic advantage. I don't really think it is though...what you're doing if you're transferring is double-mining the closer patches and single-mining the far patches. That means the closer mining patches are still going to mine out very early. I think it's best to mine out all the patches in the main quickly, that way you can transfer to your 4th at once when you mine out the main instead of keeping 4-5 drones mining in the main.
Also, even if you don't "anticipate the need", there are builds that produce extra queens and spines early on. The extra minerals saved from not transferring allow you to build these spines/queens and still afford to use larva immediately.
|
I notice in your video where you demonstrate 4base saturation you move one drone from the natural to the main gas geyser, which I feel is a little excessive in terms of demanding that perfect efficiency. Taking a drone in the main and putting it in that gas, and just building a drone and rallying it to the patch with one worker should be fine (even if that larva comes from the natural). Mineral efficiency is nice but gas efficiency is more important.
Small thing. Probably doesn't matter much either way. But it kind of bugged me.
|
On July 26 2012 02:06 cresse wrote:
I notice in your video where you demonstrate 4base saturation you move one drone from the natural to the main gas geyser, which I feel is a little excessive in terms of demanding that perfect efficiency. Taking a drone in the main and putting it in that gas, and just building a drone and rallying it to the patch with one worker should be fine (even if that larva comes from the natural). Mineral efficiency is nice but gas efficiency is more important.
Small thing. Probably doesn't matter much either way. But it kind of bugged me.
I agree it's probably better to take from the main and just replace it, but I was just trying to emphasize the 16-drone, 2-per-patch as much as humanly possible. Gas efficiency is also very key, and in no way less important than mineral saturation.
|
I have one question for you tang, I hope this is good enough for warranting a bump tho.
But wouldn't it be much better income wise if you triple mined the far patches and double mined the close ones?
I mean wouldn't more income per base would be better as opposed to "optimal" saturation ?
|
On September 30 2012 02:32 TheOnlyRedViper wrote:
I have one question for you tang, I hope this is good enough for warranting a bump tho.
But wouldn't it be much better income wise if you triple mined the far patches and double mined the close ones?
I mean wouldn't more income per base would be better as opposed to "optimal" saturation ?
It largely depends: it's more efficient to double-mine patches, because it takes less time for the drone to pay for itself than if it's triple mining. However, a triple-mining patch does net you more income than a single-mining patch.
So if you're on two bases, there's no excuse to have 8 drones mining at one base and 24 mining at the other - it's much better to have 16-drone saturation at both. Also if you're expanding to a third or fourth base later in the game, it follows that you should aim to hit 16 saturation at each base rather than oversaturate / undersaturate bases. BUT if you have enough drones, it's important to recognize that there is some benefit to triple mining patches. An example of a time this may come into play is if you're stuck on two bases for a long time, then it may not be a bad idea to triple-mine some patches for a while to gain that extra income, then transfer later once you do take additional bases.
|
On July 25 2012 00:17 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2012 23:21 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts. I just think the earlier income is more beneficial, similar to double-mining the closer patches earlier on. Double-mining them may not let you use larva immediately, but it's a small edge. Transferring allows you to double-mine close patches at the natural earlier. By the time the 2nd injects pop, there is zero difference between transferring and rallying, other than that your main will last slightly longer and you can mine a little more money from doubling up on the expo close patches sooner. If you can spend your first injects without idling any larvae, there is no benefit to mining the earlier minerals as opposed to transferring. If you thrown down an early gas or anticipate the need to build spines before that first round of injects pops, I recommend against transferring, because you need the earlier money. There's a slight economic benefit to transferring otherwise, though.
In theory you would be able to double-mine on natural faster, however realistically I think you would not be able to use larva/inject/scout/look at minimap etc as good if you're going to try to babysit workers at 2 bases (which in turn would require sick APM since you have to put every drone that comes out from both hatches at the correct mineral patch or it might cause the others to move). I find it hard enough to put them correctly on one base when you have several drones coming out at the same time, like the 11th and 12th drone.
|
On October 22 2012 05:54 Zheryn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2012 00:17 RampancyTW wrote:On July 24 2012 23:21 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 07:46 RampancyTW wrote:On July 23 2012 06:51 TangSC wrote:On July 23 2012 05:55 RampancyTW wrote:
You will be losing mining time REGARDLESS of whether your transfer or rally, it's just a matter of when you lose it. In fact, being able to double up on more close mineral patches sooner would be an example of a direct economic benefit to transferring. There is also the (not negligible if your expansions are being contested) advantage of keeping minerals in your main for slightly longer.
Your assertion that it is always better to rally instead of transfer is factually incorrect, and misleading. It may be your preference because it's easier, which is completely fine. But it is objectively inferior, albeit not by much, in some situations. Like I said, I just want you to be giving accurate information, or at least a balanced opinion.
Stop letting your ego get in the way of your reason. I simply disagree with your logic, and I believe the rally method is the more practical and economical choice. It has absolutely nothing to do with ego and there's no need to escalate this argument with personal attacks. Well, my logic has factual basis, and this is a specific thing that has nothing to do with belief and everything to do with facts. I just think the earlier income is more beneficial, similar to double-mining the closer patches earlier on. Double-mining them may not let you use larva immediately, but it's a small edge. Transferring allows you to double-mine close patches at the natural earlier. By the time the 2nd injects pop, there is zero difference between transferring and rallying, other than that your main will last slightly longer and you can mine a little more money from doubling up on the expo close patches sooner. If you can spend your first injects without idling any larvae, there is no benefit to mining the earlier minerals as opposed to transferring. If you thrown down an early gas or anticipate the need to build spines before that first round of injects pops, I recommend against transferring, because you need the earlier money. There's a slight economic benefit to transferring otherwise, though. In theory you would be able to double-mine on natural faster, however realistically I think you would not be able to use larva/inject/scout/look at minimap etc as good if you're going to try to babysit workers at 2 bases (which in turn would require sick APM since you have to put every drone that comes out from both hatches at the correct mineral patch or it might cause the others to move). I find it hard enough to put them correctly on one base when you have several drones coming out at the same time, like the 11th and 12th drone.
Now this brings up some interesting questions, like what skill level should you be before incorporating these types of drone-micro? Because if it's taking away from your injects and whatnot, then it's actually detrimental to focus too hard on saturation. I think all players should know the basic function of drone-mining as well as the basic statistics (which is why the drills are so helpful), but maybe not focus too hard on them in most games (especially 2+ bases).
|
Seems like HotS will make a lot of this information irrelevant (ie counting drones) but I still stand by the 16 worker/2 per patch instead of 24/24.
|
To check my saturation I have always control clicked my drones. It's extremely fast and as long as you don't have any extra rallied elsewhere on the screen you'll get a quick reading (compensate for one gas by subtracting 2, 2 gas will be two rows and 4).
I dunno out of all the options listed I have always preferred control clicking.
And I'm also for rallying drones over maynarding (really does not seem like it's worth it).
HotS makes a lot of this stuff irrelevant (it's all part of Blizzard's plan to make the game noob friendly  )...like pairing workers AND counting, lol. I'm fairly certain drone AI auto pairs perfectly for you now (which is what results in much higher income for most players)...
|
Nothing new, but this guide absolutely helps zergs in a lower league.
|
On January 22 2013 08:55 Qwyn wrote:HotS makes a lot of this stuff irrelevant (it's all part of Blizzard's plan to make the game noob friendly )...like pairing workers AND counting, lol. I'm fairly certain drone AI auto pairs perfectly for you now (which is what results in much higher income for most players)...
Haha yeah I know, I feel like an old man saying "In my day, we have to COUNT all the workers to know how many were mining." I have definitely noticed triple/single mining patches in HotS though.
|
United Kingdom20295 Posts
On January 22 2013 08:30 TangSC wrote:
Seems like HotS will make a lot of this information irrelevant (ie counting drones) but I still stand by the 16 worker/2 per patch instead of 24/24.
I think of them more as steps, you have to consider that if you have 16 workers and two bases, you'd get notably more income with them split 8/8 on the close patches rather than 16/0 two on each patch on the first base, and also adding a third worker to a patch, while giving you nothing at all on many close patches, actually works at almost 100% uptime on many of the far ones
In the end your income drop offs happen more like: Most income per worker at 2 per close patch, less income per worker when you start to use far patches, a tiny bit to quite a bit less when you add a third worker to far patches, and almost zero once you go from 20 to 24 workers because the rest were already close patches with 2 workers on them mining at what can often be 100% efficiency aside from the stupid mining AI that i wish you could disable in this game
Ty for the guide, btw, if i didnt already thank you, i read it when you posted it and was glad to see this kind of information being brought up
|
On January 22 2013 11:19 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On January 22 2013 08:55 Qwyn wrote:HotS makes a lot of this stuff irrelevant (it's all part of Blizzard's plan to make the game noob friendly )...like pairing workers AND counting, lol. I'm fairly certain drone AI auto pairs perfectly for you now (which is what results in much higher income for most players)... Haha yeah I know, I feel like an old man saying "In my day, we have to COUNT all the workers to know how many were mining." I have definitely noticed triple/single mining patches in HotS though.
Hmm, well I guess it doesn't pair them all perfectly then, if that's the case.
I do notice a significant burst of mineral income in the early/mid-game compared to WoL though. I wonder why?
|
I have to say that I really like the idea of getting the best out of your economy, even by doing tiny improvement like "use the closest larva to build a drone". As you said it becomes 2nd nature and you don't have to do any other stuff at that time anyway.
BUT I also have to criticize. It's really weird that you choose the closest larva to get small advantages but at the same time don't split your drones or start double mining the close patches from the very beginning on cause you like every patch to be mined.
Like this your choosing smaller advantages over larger. And when you're even focusing on the smallest advantages you should also go for the bigger ones. Otherwise what you're doing seems kinda foolish, coz its not like get the best economy possible but rather get the best economy when you like the style of getting it...
Keep up the great work though!
|
On January 22 2013 14:22 Benz0 wrote:
I have to say that I really like the idea of getting the best out of your economy, even by doing tiny improvement like "use the closest larva to build a drone". As you said it becomes 2nd nature and you don't have to do any other stuff at that time anyway.
BUT I also have to criticize. It's really weird that you choose the closest larva to get small advantages but at the same time don't split your drones or start double mining the close patches from the very beginning on cause you like every patch to be mined.
Like this your choosing smaller advantages over larger. And when you're even focusing on the smallest advantages you should also go for the bigger ones. Otherwise what you're doing seems kinda foolish, coz its not like get the best economy possible but rather get the best economy when you like the style of getting it...
Keep up the great work though!
I see what you're saying, but I do recommend splitting the drones at the beginning, and it's not that I think double-mining every patch with your initial 6 drones is bad - as far as I know it does yield a small economic advantage - but often when players try to double-mine before 1 drone is mining from each patch, the double-mining drones often "bounce" and you end up losing mining time. Many of the suggestions in the guide are based on techniques that I personally use, so naturally I am a bit biased in what I choose to include / not include, though I'll make a note your suggestion in the OP.
|
On July 13 2012 05:31 TangSC wrote:To keep track of the number of drones mining at each base, I personally recommend using the "BOX TECHNIQUE" to count only the drones harvesting minerals. To use the "BOX TECHNIQUE", simply make a rectangular box between your main hatchery and your minerals, then count all the drones. While you could double-click or control-click to count drones, I prefer the box style to avoid factoring in the drones mining gas. Also, it improves the speed and precision of your boxing, which is a helpful skill in micro engagements. That being said, there's nothing wrong with double-clicking the drones and factoring out the drones that mine gas (minus 2 drones per geyser). Courtesy of www.TangStarcraft.com
I always wondered why players took the time to box instead of control clicking a drone, particularly because it's easy to accidently include drones on gas or exclude drones on minerals. I suppose if you're "practicing boxing" that's a reason, but personally, I strive to use my APM in the most efficeint way possible.
If there are others out there like me, this may be a helpful tip to check for optimum saturation (including both gas).
1) Ctrl click a drone
2) Make sure you have two and a half rows of drones (20 drones in total)
16 on minerals, 4 on gas, and 2 are not counted because they're inside the gas geysers.
If you're only mining one gas, you should see 2 rows + 2 drones (18 drones total, with one drone in the geyser).
|
Thanks for the guide. I didn't learn anything new but could be helpful for new players. Perhaps you could've made your guide a more general one for all races because it is pretty easy to apply a large majority of the concepts within your guide to all of the other races.
|
|
|
Very informative and helpful. Thank you for this guide.
|
Hey Tang, great guide! Some questions:
1. Sometimes shortly after I finish sticking two Drones on a patch, one Drone bounces off anyway. What am I doing wrong?
2. I'm not yet fast enough to stick Drones to patches if 3 of them spawn at once. So I was asking myself: Does it help to select an egg and hold shift and press right click multiple times on a patch on which I want to stick the Drone? I tested it and sometimes it sticks and sometimes not, but I'm not sure if the stick-probability is higher than if I'm ont doing this^^
3. So if I have 16 Drones on the minerals, it's enough to look for single mining at just the closer mineral patches, because it's not possible to have single mining on the far away patches, right?
|
On May 24 2013 23:44 TaLuS wrote:
Hey Tang, great guide! Some questions:
1. Sometimes shortly after I finish sticking two Drones on a patch, one Drone bounces off anyway. What am I doing wrong?
2. I'm not yet fast enough to stick Drones to patches if 3 of them spawn at once. So I was asking myself: Does it help to select an egg and hold shift and press right click multiple times on a patch on which I want to stick the Drone? I tested it and sometimes it sticks and sometimes not, but I'm not sure if the stick-probability is higher than if I'm ont doing this^^
3. So if I have 16 Drones on the minerals, it's enough to look for single mining at just the closer mineral patches, because it's not possible to have single mining on the far away patches, right?
1) It means another patch isn't being mined yet. This happens at a lot at the start of the game, that's why when you see pros stack right at the outset, they keep selecting the drones that are returning to the patch so that they don't bounce.
2) I wouldn't recommend any shift-right-clicking mechanics for ensuring double-mining. I'd just keep practising the manual way.
3) When you're at 16 Drones, it's not enough to only look at the close-mining patches because you could have a triple mining and a single-mining far-away patch. If you look at all the far away patches when you're at 16, however, and they're all double mining, then you know you're golden because you cannot have a triple-mining close-patch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rndC2.jpg)
