EPTAlso, for terran, when is a planetary fortress a better thing to build over the comsat thing? Is it only late game, when your new expos are already saturated from the start?
SC2 Optimal worker saturation - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
lepape
Canada557 Posts
Also, for terran, when is a planetary fortress a better thing to build over the comsat thing? Is it only late game, when your new expos are already saturated from the start? | ||
|
xnub
Canada610 Posts
i Tho was somthing blizzard said right off the bat when they said creep would inc zerg speed | ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
On March 17 2010 04:37 TheBB wrote: I guess one of them was timed in-game for one minute, while the other was timed with the game clock in a replay. The reference to SC1 is hardly relevant, and I'm pretty sure the reason why Zerg require fewer workers is wrong. This results from using the hatchery to make both drones and army units. First off, to increase production capacity, you need to build hatcheries, which you might as well do at expansions, and if you expand more, you need fewer workers. Secondly, you will have fewer workers because you need the larvae for other units. how is it hardly relevant? you don't need to maynard workers because zerg can produce workers at a much higher rate than the other races due to having to make hatcheries at each expansion. yes there's also the issue of using larvae for attacking units, but that's obvious and i didn't feel like going into that. though perhaps it was necessary given the responses given in this thread... | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On February 25 2010 01:08 Volshok wrote: I don't have Terran. Both of these numbers were taken from posters on this board, but I didn't grab the names. Sorry to the OPs, I copy-pasted these for friends on another forum. I did the zerg one I didn't use a replay to tell me the resources like the toss was did I recorded my game in that game i started with 32 drones on a feild waited 2 mins for workers to get into optimum area then recording how many mins i got in a min took away drones waited 1 min as workers should already be on a pretty optimum patch then recorded 1 min repeated it again and again did 18 and 19 drones twice to see consistency. anyways about 18-19 drones is about optimum cost per get back which seems to be true about the toss so we can assume is the same for terran. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On March 17 2010 05:01 xnub wrote: Drones do not move faster on creep .... i Tho was somthing blizzard said right off the bat when they said creep would inc zerg speed They don't which probably to keep the ability to scout zerg possible early game else drones would rape scouting workers if they ever got on creep. | ||
|
Exteray
United States1094 Posts
On March 17 2010 05:08 da_head wrote: how is it hardly relevant? you don't need to maynard workers because zerg can produce workers at a much higher rate than the other races due to having to make hatcheries at each expansion. yes there's also the issue of using larvae for attacking units, but that's obvious and i didn't feel like going into that. though perhaps it was necessary given the responses given in this thread... It's hardly relevant because you said "lol drones don't move faster on creep...have u guys even played sc1?".. and in sc1, nothing moves faster on creep, while in sc2, most zerg untis move faster on creep. So whether drones move faster on creep in sc1 has nothing to do with whether drones move faster on creep in sc2. | ||
|
Wintermute
United States427 Posts
Until then, people should calm down. Looks to me like 3 workers per patch is the absolute saturation point and around 2 1/2 is sort of a sweet spot. For zerg I'd certainly try to maintain at 2 1/2 per patch, so as I need to pull drones off to make stuff, I am still in the sweet spot. For terran and protoss I'd say it depends how soon I expect to get up another expo. | ||
|
danieldrsa
Brazil523 Posts
However i did only test playing as toss You should take on acount the possibility of losing workers, so i think 4 or 5 more doesnt hurt so much | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
just put 2 drones on each mineral patch and start mining. then after about 10 seconds they will have a good rhythm and then u can exit after 5 seconds and load the replay to see avg recourses  ill go test the 3 races myself cause i have a hard time believing they mine differently edit: ah actually that didnt work so well, it didnt want to show me recourses since i had no opponent xd is it true drone mine faster than scv?? | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
| ||
|
HydroZ
United States34 Posts
However, one might make the argument that Zerg should require less workers to reach saturation, given that they cannot produce both Drones and other units at the same time (while Protoss/Terran can produce Probes/SCV's at a constant rate). At the same time, holding Zerg to the same requirement for saturation seems to be consistent with their unit production system. Yes, you can't produce Drones constantly; but at the same time, you can produce other units 3, 4, 5 at a time, which the other races can't exactly do (at least not with one building). So the inability to constantly produce Drones is something Zerg gives up to be able to quickly produce any unit of their choice in large bundles. This would suggest that having unequal saturation numbers isn't fair (or the test was incorrect). | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On March 17 2010 06:59 HydroZ wrote: Although I haven't seen the test that claims these are the correct rates, it doesn't intuitively make sense to me why one race would require less workers for saturation. It would make sense to standardize the collection rates so that no race gets an unfair advantage. However, one might make the argument that Zerg should require less workers to reach saturation, given that they cannot produce both Drones and other units at the same time (while Protoss/Terran can produce Probes/SCV's at a constant rate). At the same time, holding Zerg to the same requirement for saturation seems to be consistent with their unit production system. Yes, you can't produce Drones constantly; but at the same time, you can produce other units 3, 4, 5 at a time, which the other races can't exactly do (at least not with one building). So the inability to constantly produce Drones is something Zerg gives up to be able to quickly produce any unit of their choice in large bundles. in sc1 drones were the slowest miners i believe but it didn't matter as zerg expoed the most. in sc2 from what i've tested zerg and toss are pretty much the same enough to just be the same. | ||
|
ProoM
Lithuania1741 Posts
On February 24 2010 23:30 SubtleArt wrote: How does the worker saturation / diminishing returns system work in starcraft 2? In BW it was basically just more workers > faster mining although the rate of increase gradually went down. How does it compare to Starcraft 2? I heard with better AI its a lot more complicated, and in some instances having more workers might lower income? I don't know much about this so I'll let the more knowledgeable post their opinions  Just a note, in BW SCVs mined faster than probes or drones ;]. Also, in BW perfect probe saturation was ~24. | ||
|
Khalleb
Canada1909 Posts
On March 17 2010 07:07 ProoM wrote: Just a note, in BW SCVs mined faster than probes or drones ;]. Also, in BW perfect probe saturation was ~24. the problem is this is the drone who mine faster and this is the zerg who expand the most so ya we have a problem here | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
2 per patch isn't saturation unless every patch happened to be close enough to the HQ (which doesn't exist as of now). 3 per patch is probably average (in regards to max saturation for each map). It doesn't matter if any more than 2 per patch has diminishing returns percentage-wise; it still brings you closer to optimal. | ||
|
MeruFM
United States167 Posts
The workers mine the same speed. 16 is optimal. 2 per patch. 24 is saturation. 3 per patch. Adding 8 more workers gives about 20% more mineral. So 16 workers can already get 80% of the minerals at an expansion. | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
On March 30 2010 09:54 MeruFM wrote: This thread has lots of misinformation. The workers mine the same speed. 16 is optimal. 2 per patch. 24 is saturation. 3 per patch. Adding 8 more workers gives about 20% more mineral. So 16 workers can already get 80% of the minerals at an expansion. Actually, Optimal can mean Saturation depending on the time period you observe the income for. For example, if you are comparing 1 base play into late-game with 16 workers to 1 base play into late-game with 24 workers, the 24 worker choice is optimal. I know this is an extreme example, but it's the easiest way of illustrating it ^_^ | ||
|
Tamerlane
Canada424 Posts
But the 24 = saturation of minerals is erroneous, some mineral spots (the closest to main obv) can be gathered at full time with only 2 workers on it. I'm fairly sure most maps have at least one spot for which this is the case, and a lot have 2 spots => that's why sometimes the real worker saturation comes at 22 workers... Although, I don't see how there could be a difference in income between 24 and 32 workers :o | ||
|
AndyJay
Australia833 Posts
Zerg 16 drones 925 17 drones 945 18 drones 990 -- 995 19 drones 1040 -- -1050 22 drones 1080 32 drones 1060 19-20 Drones is full saturation on 8 minerals The Zerg numbers are incorrect. Stop spreading misinformation. The actual Zerg numbers are very close, if not the same as the Protoss numbers. | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
The income from a saturated base is close to 800 minerals per minute(a replay timer minute to be exact). From my test it appears that optimal saturation is at 3 workers for every slightly distant mineral patch and 2 for every close one(so usually around 22, I tested just on the blistering sands left main). The close ones aren't actually mined with 100% efficiency, but if you add a third worker, it will just shuffle between patches every time it brings minerals back and barely improve mining efficiency(if at all). | ||
| ||
