|
Hi everyone once again! 
As some of you have requested,
On February 05 2016 07:16 Jer99 wrote:
is it even worth it to float? you start with so many workers now that you hit max saturation much earlier, where's Sholip, we need some numbers :D here is my analysis on the viability of Gangnam Terran (or, floating to the gold base with the initial CC), actualized to Legacy of the Void.
The question was, is it still viable to open Gangnam Terran with the economy changes, which is an especially burning question now that Blizzard intends to change the natural base on Prion Terraces to gold.
Well, here is the answer in pdf format, or as pictures in the spoiler tag below. I recommend that you read the HotS version first, if you haven't already, as this analysis focuses on the differences between the two games, so understanding may be harder without knowing ideas behind the original analysis.
Thorough analysis:
+ Show Spoiler +
TL;DR: It is still very viable to do the Gangnam Terran build in LotV, albeit a bit less powerful. You can still get a considerable advantage before the gold base runs out.
If you do it on Prion Terraces, where the natural is a gold base, the only thing you should be afraid is very early rushes specifically designed to punish this build; otherwise you should be safe and you can even reinvest your mineral surplus into more economy to play a stable midgame from an economic advantage.
My previous projects:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Great and well timed, as always.
|
Canada8157 Posts
Once again, excellent work! Thanks for this Sholip!
|
Why is it called gangnam terran? Does Gangnam have some special meaning akin to gold?
|
On February 06 2016 07:01 AkashSky wrote:
Why is it called gangnam terran? Does Gangnam have some special meaning akin to gold?
Gangnam is a district of Seoul renowned for its wealth. Read more about Gangnam Terran here.
|
Great work! And so neatly presented too!
Also curious of the origin of "Gangnam Terran" although I've heard it for years
|
Canada8157 Posts
I think the joke is that gangnam is a rich part of seoul separated by a river, and by floating your command center to the gold on habitation station you are analogously crossing the river to the gold base which is the rich part of town, gangnam
|
On February 06 2016 07:14 Jer99 wrote:
I think the joke is that gangnam is a rich part of seoul separated by a river, and by floating your command center to the gold on habitation station you are analogously crossing the river to the gold base which is the rich part of town, gangnam This is right. Gangnam is a concentration of the wealthy in Korea (mostly), with Seoul already being known for its wealth compared to the other 7 metropolitan cities.
|
Good work. I could fear that besides having to defend rushes, the opponent can also take his gold base faster and perhaps with more workers. I am not sure floating to gold base will be a good idea realistically.
|
|
|
Sholip does it again
|
Does someone know how many rax(without add-ons) can a full saturated gold base support?
|
|
|
Btw, aside from the 12 workers, the other big difference with HoTS is the timing of the spawning pool.
In a hatch gaz pool build, lings are out at 2'20. ON prion, with the floating time of 27 seconds, your first rax ends between 1'55 and 2'00, so you'll prolly have time to wall off with a bunker and be safe.
In pool -> hatch build lings are out at 2'00(?) and maybe your could be in troubles
+ Show Spoiler +
(first overlord scouts at 2'20 I think, so scouting shouldn't be an important factor...)
|
On February 07 2016 23:57 wjat wrote:
7? Sholip help ! :p
Well, assuming my income numbers are correct:
With 15 workers on the gold, you have about 18.8 minerals/s income.
A Marine costs 50 and builds in 18 s.
Every 10 Marine, you build a Supply depot (100 minerals). 10 Marines come out in 180/X seconds, where X is the number of Raxes.
So you are spending: X * 50 minerals / 18 s + 100 minerals / (180 s / X) = X * (50/18 + 100/180) minerals/s.
This should equal your income, so:
X = 18.8 / (50/18 + 100/180) = 5.64.
So in theory, you can support more than 5 but fewer than 6 Barracks, so you should build 6. (Or 7, if you macro poorly  .)
Of course if you also want to build Marauders, it's a bit more complicated, but you can still calculate it similarly.
|
|
|
Pakistan77 Posts
sholip you are awesome
|
|
|
Are there any pro game examples of this being done?
|
On February 16 2016 08:33 Jealous wrote:
Are there any pro game examples of this being done?
Not yet that I know of (in LotV, of course).
|
On February 16 2016 22:45 Sholip wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2016 08:33 Jealous wrote:
Are there any pro game examples of this being done? Not yet that I know of (in LotV, of course).
But it was supposed to be even more viable in HotS if I understood the data correctly? If so, is it simply too much of an "if you rusg, I auto - lose" for progamer to try?
|
On February 17 2016 01:11 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2016 22:45 Sholip wrote:On February 16 2016 08:33 Jealous wrote:
Are there any pro game examples of this being done? Not yet that I know of (in LotV, of course). But it was supposed to be even more viable in HotS if I understood the data correctly? If so, is it simply too much of an "if you rusg, I auto - lose" for progamer to try?
Yes, it was more viable in HotS, and it did see use as well, when the map pool allowed for it. But the reason it's not popular in LotV may just be the rush issue, or maybe people just haven't figured it out yet.
|
On February 17 2016 02:07 Sholip wrote:Show nested quote +On February 17 2016 01:11 Jealous wrote:On February 16 2016 22:45 Sholip wrote:On February 16 2016 08:33 Jealous wrote:
Are there any pro game examples of this being done? Not yet that I know of (in LotV, of course). But it was supposed to be even more viable in HotS if I understood the data correctly? If so, is it simply too much of an "if you rusg, I auto - lose" for progamer to try? Yes, it was more viable in HotS, and it did see use as well, when the map pool allowed for it. But the reason it's not popular in LotV may just be the rush issue, or maybe people just haven't figured it out yet.
Are there any VODs that you could link me to? I am curious to see this play in action. Part of the reason is that this was attempted by Boxer vs. Yellow on Blade Storm if I'm not mistaken, so there is even BW precedent for it (despite him losing the game).
|
Canada8157 Posts
|
|
|
On February 17 2016 01:11 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2016 22:45 Sholip wrote:On February 16 2016 08:33 Jealous wrote:
Are there any pro game examples of this being done? Not yet that I know of (in LotV, of course). But it was supposed to be even more viable in HotS if I understood the data correctly? If so, is it simply too much of an "if you rusg, I auto - lose" for progamer to try?
If the map pool allows it yes. Habitation station was one where it was possible, but this is the first time it has been possible to your natural. For 2v2 maps this is not really new, and there you have seen many player floating to gold on ladder.
Personally I am planning to try it vs toss. Against zerg maybe, but I am afraid of early roach/ravager play. In TvT for now I consider it suicidal, unless your opponent does not scout. If I scout this I guess I throw down two extra rax, to do reactive three rax reapers. Jump into his original main, and now resources gather speed really does not matter: I got the highground next to which you are mining.
|
Thank you for all your helpful responses!
|
Hey there, I have another question:
Is it better to saturate your Gold base immediatly (if so for which race etc.) or saturate it while you build more scvs (rally workers there)? I am speaking from a terran perspektive so I guess reaper expand or the normal protoss expands could be examplatory. Thanks for the insight
|
|
|
On February 19 2016 01:07 forsakeNXE wrote:Hey there, I have another question: Is it better to saturate your Gold base immediatly (if so for which race etc.) or saturate it while you build more scvs (rally workers there)? I am speaking from a terran perspektive so I guess reaper expand or the normal protoss expands could be examplatory. Thanks for the insight
Without thinking too much about it, I think the best way is to transfer so many workers immediately that the number of workers needed for saturation on the gold and the main be the same. For example, you have 18/16 in the main by the time the gold finishes. Then you move 7 to the gold and leave 11 in the main. This way, as you are 5 away from saturation on both bases, you can just continue producing workers at both bases and you can rally them to the respective mineral lines.
This method comes just out of instinct, maybe not the best possible one. However, it seems intuitively corrrect to transfer some workers immediately, but not all of them, because then you would lose mining time transfering them AND transfering additional workers created at the gold back to your blue base.
|
So as your CC at the gold is finished (as with every map and reaper expand) you will have 16/16 workers.
I still would love some math on this (especially on oversaturation on the gold how bad is it in comparision to the normal ones?) just to make sure but I like your approach and will use that for now, thanks!
|
Canada8157 Posts
i think you could make a whole new thread if you decide to work the maths behind how many workers you should transfer
|
So it is worth it? Wouldn't have guessed that! thanks.
Less of a gain and more time before you catch up than in hots ofc, but then I think the natural is closer than the closest gold ever was in hots... Can you compare how big deficit you have to work through in the natural in lotv, compared to the most popular gangnam map in hots?
|
Sholip's topics make me proud of Hungary, math with starcraft is so nice to read about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u7JwxES.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ex1x7ej.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VmxdiVx.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/hvfNuIN.jpg)
