EPTDps per cost - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Schmitec
Czech Republic2 Posts
| ||
|
Mereel
Germany895 Posts
| ||
|
Noxie
United States2227 Posts
With this information it gives you a little better look at how much you need vs other builds to be viable.. while the DPS is really just another thing to theory craft about. | ||
|
Simplification
United States33 Posts
| ||
|
NevilleS
Canada266 Posts
| ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
Sieged Tank = 16,67 IMO this looks just stupid, yeah there is splash but still. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On October 28 2010 00:58 HwangjaeTerran wrote: Tank = 14.42 Sieged Tank = 16,67 IMO this looks just stupid, yeah there is splash but still. It's a well-known fact that a small number of unsieged tanks beats a small equal number of sieged tanks. | ||
|
me_viet
Australia1350 Posts
On September 02 2010 08:09 ZlaSHeR wrote: Terran also has the lowest hp per food units, and has the slowest production time overall in a long macro game. Useless statistics are useless. sorry, off the top of my head i can't think of which T unit has the lowest HP. and Slowest production time. afaik. It's the Hydra with 80 hp for 2 food. Even the infestor has more hp at 90. ALSO afaik, the Thor is the fastest production of food at 60s for 6 food. So remind me which unit has the lowest hp for food for T? ty EDIT: typ | ||
|
Aquilix
United States45 Posts
On October 28 2010 00:58 HwangjaeTerran wrote: Tank = 14.42 Sieged Tank = 16,67 IMO this looks just stupid, yeah there is splash but still. The tank unsieged also attacks much faster, but has shorter range.... And nowadays it is weaker v unarmored while sieged This chart is pretty out of date... would love to see it updated :D | ||
|
HwangjaeTerran
Finland5967 Posts
On October 28 2010 01:04 Aquilix wrote: The tank unsieged also attacks much faster, but has shorter range.... And nowadays it is weaker v unarmored while sieged This chart is pretty out of date... would love to see it updated :D Yeah I wonder if it would be better to just kite with your army and tanks than sieging them. | ||
|
TERRANLOL
United States626 Posts
Sentries aren't actually mean to shoot at things so much as theyr'e meant for the spells, but the forcefields allow the zealot DPS to take full effect as well as to split armies in half, yet they're factored into the average like it doesn't make a different... Lol.. what about Psi storm dps? I could make a huge list of this stuff... | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
Also, you should get DPSxHP/Cost. DPSxHP is basically who wins in a 1v1 fight/ or the general "firepower" of the unit. If you army DPSxHP>his yours will typically win all other things equal. | ||
|
NJO
27 Posts
There are way to many factors in game that will alter dps statistics drastically, esp when u start to factor in overkill and positioning | ||
|
awesomoecalypse
United States2235 Posts
I think its safe to say all the "Voids are useless" QQing was overblown. They aren't an instawin if unscouted anymore, but they are still very, very dangerous | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
On October 28 2010 02:03 NJO wrote: dps in army battles really isnt a factor, its more of how many of X unit shots does it take to kill Y unit and in what amount of time. The term "critical mass" normally refers to a amount of units that once reached will normally start killing units instantly. EX: enough siege tanks that the entire radius of the splash is a kill zone, or enough colo that each time they fire 4 or more units always die. There are way to many factors in game that will alter dps statistics drastically, esp when u start to factor in overkill and positioning Of course its a factor. It's just not as accurate due to overkill. Its still a big factor, but splash and damage per volley does affect it, splash a lot more. | ||
|
HTX
Germany265 Posts
Can you add the correlation between HP/cost? Maybee you can add the HP-efficency [damage/s/HP] to your data ? One of them to get the rest would be awesome! | ||
|
Pepe-
Germany87 Posts
| ||
|
RoboBob
United States798 Posts
I think this is the part of the reason why low supply units (including workers) come across as so strong in your chart. 1 marine going from 50 minerals to 70 minerals is going to cut efficiency by 29%, but a muta going from 100/100 to 140/100, at 1 min = 1.5 gas, goes from 250 cost to 290 cost, which only cuts efficiency by 14% ... which helps narrow the actual single-target dps between them. Because terrans tend to have more low supply units compared to, say, Protoss, is a big part of the reason why terrans come out so strong in the overall race v race comparison imo. Plus their low supply units are weighted more; marines & mauraders get 2 entries each, and hellions get 3. I can kinda understand that Zerg should be lower vs p/t, because Zerg don't need to spend additional resources on production buildings, so their per unit costs are higher to compensate. Note that this adjustment does NOT tell you which units are best to make at max supply, it simply reveals the units true mineral cost. Oh, and another bug, for the stimmed units, you forgot to reduce to reduce the hp of the unit stimming. so stim marine needs -10 hp and stimmed maurauder needs -20 hp. it would be also nice to have marines both with and without combat shields. =) | ||
|
Pepe-
Germany87 Posts
Also its still a difference between losing 1 larvae, time to build depot or just walking to pylons position. Soon updating values for stimmed units. | ||
|
RoboBob
United States798 Posts
Alteratively, you could factor in speed as well, which serves the same purpose for melee and clumped units, by multipling dps by the sqrt of speed too. That might be a pain for Zerg units though. | ||
| ||
