[G] ~8% faster gas mining - Page 13
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
Kakaru2
198 Posts
| ||
Mongolbonjwa
Finland376 Posts
And why is that image made to look like that? Why those all are not at the same distance from the base? | ||
SorrowShine
698 Posts
| ||
osiris17
United States165 Posts
| ||
Keilkan
Denmark67 Posts
I always figured one of the gas geysers were further away than the other. What I had not figured out was that the difference would vary depending on spawn locations. Thats a very neat find. Props! | ||
nachtkap
Germany195 Posts
While there is always a possibility for more refined writing your wasn't lacking in anyway I could discern. | ||
Ettick
United States2434 Posts
| ||
imPermanenCe
Netherlands595 Posts
| ||
WightyCity
Canada887 Posts
| ||
ArchDC
Malaysia1996 Posts
| ||
burbon
Poland41 Posts
| ||
myRZeth
Germany1047 Posts
i sadly don t have no idea how to fix it | ||
warblob004
United States198 Posts
| ||
MaV_gGSC
Canada1345 Posts
| ||
Eeeegor
Australia809 Posts
| ||
Tewks44
United States2032 Posts
| ||
Orek
1665 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![]() ![]() On October 30 2012 05:41 Jaeger wrote: I didn't know about it until I read:+ Show Spoiler +A nice update. Not sure if Orek saw the original work on this subject or not. The Gas Issue, second edition On October 28 2012 22:18 butter wrote: Wow, I thought for sure mapmakers had fixed this issue in their maps by now since the analysis was published in 2010. Just added the link in the OP under Other Sources section. On October 30 2012 07:09 ThreeHeartRun wrote: Makes sense. That could be it.+ Show Spoiler + Great post. I think I may have an idea on why the footprint is not symmetrical. Since the 3D model of the refinery/assimilator/extractor does not take up the entire 3x3 grid, having the larger collision footprint would cause a graphical issue where drones coming from the south side would "enter" the geyser and disappear before reaching the 3D model. Rather than spending the time to redesign the 3 models, the footprint was probably just changed in order to fix the issue. I can see designers seeing the gas mining change as being negligible, then taking the easy route to fix a graphical glitch(which would be noticed by many more people than a gas mining imbalance). On October 31 2012 06:43 serum321 wrote: Unless you are dying 70yo or something, it's not too late.Should I feel bad the op put more time and research into gas mining in sc2 than I have in anything my entire life? On October 31 2012 16:54 Mongolbonjwa wrote: 1st question: depends. E<F for some, F<E for others if you read the table.Why F takes longer to mine out than E while F is closer to CC/Nexus/Hatchery? And why is that image made to look like that? Why those all are not at the same distance from the base? 2nd question: image is based on grids, but in reality, buildings don't occupy the whole 5X5 or 3X3 grids. They use smaller footprints if you check with the Map Editor. Accurately estimating which of E and F is closer takes some math and editor knowledge. 3rd question: exactly. I want to know the reason as well. On November 01 2012 00:06 osiris17 wrote: It's possible I think. Good thing about mineral is that close patches are mined 10~15% faster anyways so that worker pairing skill can negate the problem to some extent.I wonder if mineral patches have a similar positional problem to the gas. 8 percent difference in minerals mined? :D On November 02 2012 00:30 burbon wrote: Because one player mining gas 1-2% faster entire game is not cool. Mapmakers can just avoid some gas locations, though.Good post but why fixing it? its cool to have such a little glitches in game. | ||
rafaliusz
Poland482 Posts
| ||
myRZeth
Germany1047 Posts
On November 03 2012 21:16 rafaliusz wrote: This isn't anything new, I remember reading pretty much same thing 2 years ago. Suprised this thread gets so much attention. i m pretty sure there wasn t a post about that 2 years ago | ||
WackaAlpaca
Canada208 Posts
It's good people like you who will make sure this game doesn't die. Thank you. | ||
| ||