|
On October 28 2012 20:41 Surili wrote:
Someone posted this before, but never did all the research. I could tell from some time ago that especially entombed was really badly done for gases, and have been adding 4 to the far gases in most games, but nice to see someone do the maths.
The research was done, its just that the maps of the time were steppes, kulas, metal, etc.
I guess no-ones bothered to check every gyser on the modern map-pool before...
|
Best Strategy post in a fucking long time. Gratz sir! This is how TL should still be.
|
Holy shit so much work. You're awesome (and insane)!
|
Very nice and comprehensive post.
That said, when including so much content, I think many people would appreciate an abridged version that gets to the point instead of talking about entombed valley or how mining works.
Essentially all one had to do was say:
"As many of you know/suspect, Vespene geysers have varying efficiency depending on the distance/angle to the main base. I ran the numbers, and these are the efficiency values for corresponding gas geyser layouts:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CuuFD.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0VlsL.png)
Some maps have big issues with the gas positioning such as entombed valley.
To Blizzard: this is a source of imbalance; please fix it.
To everyone else: build your maps right and build your geysers right.
"
Simple as that. The write-up of so many paragraphs and extra/unnecessary images are certainly still useful for some people, but it's really a bit overkill and unnecessary for the most part I'd say.
|
|
|
Great job! :D
Thanks for the information!
|
Thanks for the information =D
Good job
|
On October 28 2012 16:03 Grubby wrote:
Ok!
Quickly, Grubby read it. Now Nuke the thread, so that hes the only one knowing about it!
On a more serious note: 5/5 nice readabilty, thanks for putting in all this work. Would read again =)
|
Austria24417 Posts
This is great, awesome work & thanks for sharing! Gonna try to remember which gas to take from now on!
|
NonY was doing it, before it was cool.
|
Awesome, will print all the maps and post them on my wall.
|
Nice post but suprised people didnt know this already.
|
You have too much time, sir! 
Still an awesome post! 10/10, well played!
|
I'v known this since broad war but its nice to see someone go into depth about it, for instance you should generally go with the more symmetrical looking geyser instead of the the maybe closer one, also it seems that condemned ridge has more problems then I originally thought, I'd really like to veto it if it was not a tournament map.
|
Excellent work, sir. I saved all the map pictures for reference. I've been working on a SC2 research project of my own, and this has motivated me to spend more time working on it.
|
I've always been so annoyed when playing, I knew some of the gases were less efficient but I could never tell which xD Thanks for useful information!
|
O boy so much work into this..
Too bad the most interesting thing wasn't researched: how efficient is mining with 2 compared to 3 on the close spawns.
With many builds for protoss I use 2 geysers 2 each, or 1 geyser with two just to have that slightly neater build order. I was always under the impression that 2 on a close geyser mine like 75% as much as the full 3 on a close geyser and almost any map has at least one of these close geysers.
Just assuming fourway symmetry (which seems to hold up anyway given the map you produced) this should be a quick check imo for the closest spawns. I think it must also be not too hard to calcuate the travel time based on the euclidian distance and just derive this result theoretically. Ie gas speed = 4 / (mining time + travel time) where mining time is a constant (2.7 in game secs or so) and travel time slightly varies upon distance which is probably directly proportional to the actual distance given by Pythagoras. Of course you have a threshold where you can't mine faster if the travel time is less than twice the mining time as that results in the worker waiting.
|
Nice work. I'm sure that many players already have a basic understanding of this (even if they don't fully grasp all the intricacies of the asymmetries you present), but it is nice to see the exact quantitative effects. I really enjoyed seeing how deeply you went into the problem. By presenting your findings so beautifully, I think you will succeed in making this mainstream knowledge.
|
On October 28 2012 21:57 Markwerf wrote:
Too bad the most interesting thing wasn't researched: how efficient is mining with 2 compared to 3 on the close spawns.
With many builds for protoss I use 2 geysers 2 each, or 1 geyser with two just to have that slightly neater build order. I was always under the impression that 2 on a close geyser mine like 75% as much as the full 3 on a close geyser and almost any map has at least one of these close geysers.
This was touched on under the Miscellaneous section.
|
So basically, if I understand correctly and making sure:
On some maps, it is advisable to put 4 workers in each gas, instead of the normal 3, because some maps, the geysers are far away, so 4 is necessary?
And there is no micro involved, it is simply adding 1 more worker to the gas, correct?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
