EPTThe Power of the Mule. - Page 19
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Buhlbaid
Spain32 Posts
| ||
|
Pking
Sweden142 Posts
On September 18 2010 18:59 Iamyournoob wrote: i think it was mentioned before, but what in my eyes the problem with mules is, that the one race with the most cost-effective units can easily catch up in terms of macro. I think zerg or toss should outmacro terran to win games, but this is pretty hard to do since terran's macro is so strong due to MULES. (i actually think that PvT is not such a big issue,i believe it to be rather balanced...) I played a game some time ago (I am plat btw) against a mid-diamond terran who tried to rush me with mass marines/marauders, me starring as P. I could barely hold it off until I finally got an edge and won. The funny thing was that the Terran cut his worker production at 17 (!!!!) scvs (I had around 30 at that time since he killed some of my probes). He was diamond league, still his macro was so sloppy and he was able to make bio like a maniac. why?? thanks to MULEs. Those are actually moments when I think that the benefit for MULES go too far if they can really make up for such bad macro. You won so clearly his 17-scv one-base all-in did'nt work against even a lower tier player, so how is that a case for that bad macro works? He went for a rush, you had a hard time (of course he is rushing) managed to hold it off and beat him in the long run because of a superior economy, nothing odd about that at all. | ||
|
cerebralz
United States443 Posts
Switch to terran vs. all where their harassment units are tier 1 or 1.5 basically when no one has adequate defense. 5 drone or probe kills is devastating to the opponent forcing them to extremely delay their timings. This fact almost ensures that the terran can certainly survive the early game not only in a game sense, but in a mind game sense, because harassment is just not efficient. All my zvt games go to a long macro game and when i win, it's because i had superior macro/unit composition. Even when i do harass with say, mutas, and succeed, the terran can scare you away with his ranged units and defense, and survive with mules until he can replenish his econ. I can remember a bunch of games where i destroyed almost all the terran's workers, but because of MULEs and being able to wall off, coupled with the fact that i skimped on econ for harass, they ended up winning the game overall. Even a small cooldown on the MULE would be very good way to balance the ability. Make the terran remember timings just like the rest of us, even if it's just 10 seconds. Either that or make all the macro abilities spammable. (of course that's not gonna happen) | ||
|
tacrats
476 Posts
Using them early game results in a crapload of extra minerals. For each mule you call down, you can build an scv and a barracks. Thats pretty significant, considering marine/marauders are so cheap but so effective. Especially early game when you dont need to pump units because you have a wall off, you can just make a crapload of production buildings to your hearts content thanks to the mule income spike. Using them early game results in a second gas geyser really quick if needed to tech as scvs can be taken off minerals since the mules already give significant income. Late game, well, this has already been discussed. the mule is not comparable to the other macro mechanics especially in the early game. MULE results in almost instant income, and a significant amount at that. I hear people in this thread saying "o but zerg can make 7 drones at once!!!", but they dont seem to understand that requires minerals to make effective use of the larva, and during the early game there is none of that going on. There is no immediate benefit of spawn larva in terms of income, unlike the mule. You have to have minerals available and you have to choose to make the drones which isnt always the best choice. MULE does nothing for the game except for allowing such a strong 1 base play. The surge in minerals is all terran needs to get the extra production buildings down, and the pumping of marine/marauder can be done very easily since those units are so light on gas. There really is no reason to expand. Compare that to zerg that needs to get a second hatchery saturated with a queen just to not fall behind a terran in income. Its really not balanced and the mule should be nerfed either with a lower gather rate or a cooldown. A cooldown will fix the late game, but the early game will still be tilted in the terrans favor, like almost everything seems to be in this game. Id like the mechanics to be as different as possible for each race, but if you were to put the same mechanics on different races you would notice why MULE is too strong. | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On September 18 2010 19:25 cerebralz wrote: I would like to add that worker harass vs. terran is much more inefficient than against zerg or protoss. Harassing units for zerg and protoss come out much later, when the terran (who has the best defense) can defend it. If you aren't able to do massive damage, say more than 5 workers, the terran simply MULE's and carrys on without a hitch. Switch to terran vs. all where their harassment units are tier 1 or 1.5 basically when no one has adequate defense. 5 drone or probe kills is devastating to the opponent forcing them to extremely delay their timings. This fact almost ensures that the terran can certainly survive the early game not only in a game sense, but in a mind game sense, because harassment is just not efficient. All my zvt games go to a long macro game and when i win, it's because i had superior macro/unit composition. Even when i do harass with say, mutas, and succeed, the terran can scare you away with his ranged units and defense, and survive with mules until he can replenish his econ. I can remember a bunch of games where i destroyed almost all the terran's workers, but because of MULEs and being able to wall off, coupled with the fact that i skimped on econ for harass, they ended up winning the game overall. Even a small cooldown on the MULE would be very good way to balance the ability. Make the terran remember timings just like the rest of us, even if it's just 10 seconds. Either that or make all the macro abilities spammable. (of course that's not gonna happen) No. You can't just say "I can't harras T workers, because he will mule" Stop considering mules like some kind of magic trick that is always ready and always has enough energy to be used. Consider mule like what it is: a free +3 scv to minerals/base as long as no scan is used. (because mule duration = 50 energy regen duration = cost of mule) So killing a scv is woth the same as killing any other race's workers. If a T has more than one mule at one time, stop saying it's imba or whatever. If he has more than one mule it's because he didn't mule before and of course that will cost him something (weaker army) | ||
|
Darpa
Canada4413 Posts
| ||
|
tacrats
476 Posts
On September 18 2010 23:04 MrCon wrote: If he has more than one mule it's because he didn't mule before and of course that will cost him something (weaker army) not really. there comes a point where your scv count more or less meets your mineral needs to mules would only add excess. so it doesnt necessarily mean weaker army. | ||
|
Grummler
Germany743 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + yes, i am kidding | ||
|
Uhh Negative
United States1090 Posts
On September 18 2010 23:04 MrCon wrote: No. You can't just say "I can't harras T workers, because he will mule" Stop considering mules like some kind of magic trick that is always ready and always has enough energy to be used. Consider mule like what it is: a free +3 scv to minerals/base as long as no scan is used. (because mule duration = 50 energy regen duration = cost of mule) So killing a scv is woth the same as killing any other race's workers. If a T has more than one mule at one time, stop saying it's imba or whatever. If he has more than one mule it's because he didn't mule before and of course that will cost him something (weaker army) Terran shouldn't be able to have more than 1 MULE at a time per OC. If zerg misses an injection you think they can just inject 5 times in a row? Not to mention MULEs are stronger than injection anyway. | ||
|
Karkadinn
United States132 Posts
On September 19 2010 01:27 Uhh Negative wrote: Terran shouldn't be able to have more than 1 MULE at a time per OC. If zerg misses an injection you think they can just inject 5 times in a row? Not to mention MULEs are stronger than injection anyway. I think it would be more enjoyable for everyone if injections were made more streamlined, rather than making MULEs as annoying as injections. If you're going to shoehorn in a clunky base management mechanic, you might as well at least make it something that doesn't need an egg timer. | ||
|
KingAce
United States471 Posts
However mid to late game, mules become an excessive easy access eco advantage for terran. Because Protoss and Zerg have to stop making probes/drones. But terran can just mule up at anytime even when he has the same worker count as his opponent lets say 40 scvs to 40 probes or drones. At this point with mules he's still out mining both races. And he can afford to lose a couple of his workers, so harassing him is inefficient, terran can sacrifice he's workers in battles. And the other thing is mules are instant. Chrono boosting probes and larva inject takes more micro and more time to produce results. Protoss units take way longer to make without chrono boost and larva inject is used for many other units, and drones turn into buildings as well. You don't just us CB and LInject for workers there other things to prioritize. And mules don't take up supply to block the size of your army like probes or drones. And terran has reactors too, lets not forget that. Also their armies are more durable and do the most damage. And you don't need to scan as much early game, you can float a factory over to your opponents base or build a raven; to save your orbital c energy. Use an scv or reaper to scout. Lets not forget everything else terran has to keep an eye on his opponent. Sensor tower, turrets. And you can always mineral dump for an extra cc for an orbital c or planetary fortress since you have so many minerals in the bank. I guess I will repeat what I have said, chrono boosting probes should be removed. Larva inject for extra drones should be removed. So that mules are also removed from the game. These econ boost are a terrible mechanic IMO. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On September 18 2010 23:30 tacrats wrote: not really. there comes a point where your scv count more or less meets your mineral needs to mules would only add excess. so it doesnt necessarily mean weaker army. That's still minerals they gave up which could have translated into a faster expansion or tighter defense. You can't just say "past a point, minerals aren't worth anything", because that means that as a mechanic MULEs also become worthless at that point (whereas Chrono Boost and Spawn Larva translate into other advantages). On September 19 2010 01:27 Uhh Negative wrote: Terran shouldn't be able to have more than 1 MULE at a time per OC. If zerg misses an injection you think they can just inject 5 times in a row? Not to mention MULEs are stronger than injection anyway. Strictly speaking, MULE's *aren't* necessarily stronger than Spawn Larva. The value of MULE: Costs you 150 minerals and 2 SCVs' build time to get you the mining of 3-5 SCVs (depending on where you put the MULE and how saturated you are). The value of the Spawn Larva: Costs you 150 minerals and 2 supply to get you the larva production of more than 1 in-base hatchery AND 1 drone (because a Queen costs you neither larva nor drones to make, while the hatchery would cost you a drone). So the question boils down to whether 1-3 SCVs (the net gain, since if you didn't make an OC you'd still have made 2 SCVs in that time) is a more significant gain that 1 drone + 1 hatchery. Not an easy comparison to make, but I would think it comes out in favor of the drone + hatchery. The problem is, again, the MULE almost always gets full value because you can spam out the MULEs you missed, while if you miss Spawn Larva cycles, that's diminishing value from the hatchery you saved yourself from making. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Unentschieden
Germany1471 Posts
On September 19 2010 03:20 TheYango wrote: That's still minerals they gave up which could have translated into a faster expansion or tighter defense. You can't just say "past a point, minerals aren't worth anything", because that means that as a mechanic MULEs also become worthless at that point (whereas Chrono Boost and Spawn Larva translate into other advantages). Strictly speaking, MULE's *aren't* necessarily stronger than Spawn Larva. The value of MULE: Costs you 150 minerals and 2 SCVs' build time to get you the mining of 3-5 SCVs (depending on where you put the MULE and how saturated you are). The value of the Spawn Larva: Costs you 150 minerals and 2 supply to get you the larva production of more than 1 in-base hatchery AND 1 drone (because a Queen costs you neither larva nor drones to make, while the hatchery would cost you a drone). So the question boils down to whether 1-3 SCVs (the net gain, since if you didn't make an OC you'd still have made 2 SCVs in that time) is a more significant gain that 1 drone + 1 hatchery. Not an easy comparison to make, but I would think it comes out in favor of the drone + hatchery. The problem is, again, the MULE almost always gets full value because you can spam out the MULEs you missed, while if you miss Spawn Larva cycles, that's diminishing value from the hatchery you saved yourself from. I´d like to point out that Macro isn´t like Blizzards latest custom map, an effort to get minerals. Macro is the process from resource patch -> mining process -> resource "bank" -> production process -> unit/building -> positioning of these in the "grand" sense. Mules are great for the Mining Process but NOTHING else. It´s a fundamental basic which everyone will yell at new players for that stored resources don´t do anything for you. Terrans are the best at hogging minerals but the worst at converting them. No mass larvae storing and eventual conversion. No "frontloaded"(first the unit then the CD) production via Warp-in. No speeding up via Chronoboost. | ||
|
Zack1900
United States211 Posts
Nerf the mineral heavy units. Terran now needs the mules to make enough mineral heavy units making the scan/mule choice fall to the mule more often Nerf the gas heavy units. With gas being the limiting resource I need to be very careful how I spend it. Making a few of the wrong gas heavy units will leave my mineral heavy units without the support they need to overwhelm the opponent. (gasp this on is happening siege tank nerf) Buff Z's and P's ability to kill those mineral heavy units. Now spending 50 energy on a scan to help me decide how to spend my gas is more important than what I could use those 270 minerals for right now. Improve alternatives. With a +10 supply +2 armor drop or a 1.5 times size scan it would be more tempting to not mule. Who knows in the next expansion Terran might get the ability to drop a premade structure from orbit for cost + energy that sets up in half the time. I know I would have a hard time muleing if I could do that. (that last one is a bit out there) Nerf the mule's ability as a miner, or number that can be fielded at once. Self explanatory. Notice that out of all of those the most boring one dimensional one is to nerf the mule its self. I vote for any of the other options (especially the improved supply drop) over a boring, simple, one dimensional mule nerf. | ||
|
Karkadinn
United States132 Posts
On September 19 2010 06:03 Unentschieden wrote: I´d like to point out that Macro isn´t like Blizzards latest custom map, an effort to get minerals. Macro is the process from resource patch -> mining process -> resource "bank" -> production process -> unit/building -> positioning of these in the "grand" sense. Mules are great for the Mining Process but NOTHING else. It´s a fundamental basic which everyone will yell at new players for that stored resources don´t do anything for you. Terrans are the best at hogging minerals but the worst at converting them. No mass larvae storing and eventual conversion. No "frontloaded"(first the unit then the CD) production via Warp-in. No speeding up via Chronoboost. Personally I think the disadvantage to Terran production is overblown when taken in conjunction with the rest of the game environment. How easy is it to put pressure on Terran while they're converting their minerals? How often is being able to convert large amounts of stockpiled money at once a practical advantage? | ||
|
Mensab
United States27 Posts
On September 19 2010 08:00 Karkadinn wrote: Personally I think the disadvantage to Terran production is overblown when taken in conjunction with the rest of the game environment. How easy is it to put pressure on Terran while they're converting their minerals? How often is being able to convert large amounts of stockpiled money at once a practical advantage? At the later stages of the game, being able to convert all of that income into something other than the Avg Unspent Resources bar is a pretty big part of the game. T as a whole is the most limited in its ability to produce units, with only Marines, Hellions, Vikings and Medivacs being units that can be produced two at a time, using an addon that prevent other often more important units from being built, regardless of tech structures/tech level. It's probably this a few other reasons why I find complaints about the Mule to be laughable, zerg has problems but its definately not in the macro department. People whining about the ability to have a 3 free scvs every 50 seconds, compared to the ability to power production (which in turn powers that same races economy and army) makes me really wonder about the quality of these boards these days. Nevermind that this thread has reached a hilarious number of pages. People comparing that to their inability to stack spawn larva - Are you serious? No really, people seriously think their tragic inability have 16+larva per hive incoming every spawn larva cycle, (cause Queen production sure ain't capped), compared to the ability to make the Avg Unspent Resources Bar soar -and thats if the player eschews a decent portion of their macro, or is in a do or die 1/1000 situation like the OP posted, (where for some reason being into lategame with an opponent who has 12 probes in gas, and some other probes distributed oddly and having however many OCs intact serves as a perfect example of your typical game). are the same? | ||
|
Karkadinn
United States132 Posts
On September 19 2010 09:09 Mensab wrote: At the later stages of the game, being able to convert all of that income into something other than the Avg Unspent Resources bar is a pretty big part of the game. (Going to split up the quote to answer points one at a time for sake of streamlining.) The post I was quoting acknowledged that leaving large amounts of money deliberately banked is a bad idea. Sure, Zerg can rebuild a decimated army fast, or blow up banelings to make room quick for something else. But how is that an actual advantage compared to having an army that is capable of surviving that first fight to begin with? On September 19 2010 09:09 Mensab wrote: T as a whole is the most limited in its ability to produce units, with only Marines, Hellions, Vikings and Medivacs being units that can be produced two at a time, using an addon that prevent other often more important units from being built, regardless of tech structures/tech level. ...which doesn't matter, because they can take as much time building their units as they need behind their walls. On September 19 2010 09:09 Mensab wrote: It's probably this a few other reasons why I find complaints about the Mule to be laughable, zerg has problems but its definately not in the macro department. Which is why the race with the worst base defenses is the most dependent on a fast expansion to match the one-base income of a race with the best base defenses. Heh. On September 19 2010 09:09 Mensab wrote: People whining about the ability to have a 3 free scvs every 50 seconds, compared to the ability to power production (which in turn powers that same races economy and army) makes me really wonder about the quality of these boards these days. Well, if you want to bring armies into it... let's put two food-capped armies, one Zerg, and one Terran, against each other. Guess which one will win? The one that doesn't have to spend food on its macro. On September 19 2010 09:09 Mensab wrote: People comparing that to their inability to stack spawn larva - Are you serious? The rest of your post was a HORRIBLE run-on sentence, I'm not going to try to pick that apart. But the inability to stack spawn larva isn't a balance issue, it's an 'interface clunkiness/ease of use/quality of life' issue. The fact that you need to hit it exactly at the right second every single time, or else you'll be behind, forever, is simply ridiculous. Even the best players can't do it perfectly all game. It's just mindless yet incredibly punishing busywork with no thought involved, and as such, serves as an excellent example of uncharacteristically poor game design from Blizzard. | ||
|
Mato
Australia412 Posts
On September 17 2010 15:54 kojinshugi wrote: Different races are different. For fuck's sake, Starcraft is a game of ASYMMETRY. Zerg morph workers into buildings. Terran workers stand there and build. Toss workers just start the warp in and go on their merry way. Toss can wall off completely just fine, because warp gates let them spawn units anywhere on the map with pylon power. Not that you need to wall off completely in the first place, since you can use very strong melee units (something that Terran doesn't have) to block any early ling or zealot pressure in the gaps. Mid-game, you have force fields. Zerg can't wall off at all because all their units are spawned at their town hall. In turn, zerg gets Creep, which gives them a really massive home ground advantage. Races also differ in their production methods. Zerg are highly reactionary and can produce 20 mutalisks just as easily as 20 roaches, all from the same larvae. Protoss mech and air have build times but their varied infantry and casters are all spawned instantly anywhere on the map via warp gates, in whatever combination required. Terran are the least reactionary, due to every one of their units having a build time. This is why they are also the most defensive and turtle-oriented, and why zerg are least defensive - zerg can reinforce entire armies in one production cycle while terran needs to spend multiple production cycles to pump out the same number of units. Protoss is somewhere in between, since they can always warp in units to defend or reinforce. For vision and mobility, zerg are by far ahead of every other race by design. Their food buildings are flying units that can be spread around the map for vision. Creep removes fog of war at zero mineral cost (only queen energy) and greatly boosts unit speed. When zerg has map control, they don't use fortified positions but rather control territory with the thread of multi-pronged, fast reactions to anyone entering. Protoss are again a middle ground, in that they can use relatively small, mobile forces to control territory and reinforce them through pylons placed in key locations. Protoss vision is nearly a map hack until the enemy has detection. Terran has by far the poorest vision of the map, and map control is achieved by entrenched positions and chokepoints. Which is why they're good at turtling. This is what makes the game good. This is why Starcraft was a revolutionary RTS. If you're pining for an RTS where all races can do the same crap, only with different graphics, then please delete your SC2 folder now. Great post. | ||
|
Westy
England808 Posts
The mule is exactly equivalent to 6 scv's mining, but it also goes beyond that because its equivalent to 6 scv's mining and is it does not matter how saturated the mineral line is, it will always mine its maximum. But what bugs me the most is how flexible the terran is. For Protoss and zerg, what happens if you have 40 of your workes taken out? You have to GG. Zerg either has a choice of producing works over units, in which case the other race can just push and win, or producing units over workers, in which case there eco will be aweful and they will also lose pretty soon. Same for protoss. Although protoss can chrono boost out scv's, the chrono is not constant and its still a very very long time until you have a decent eco going again. By which time the other race should already have pushed and over ran you. Now what happens when you destroy a terrans economy? MULE and the problem is sorted. Well ok, it's not sorted, but it puts them in a far better position than if Z or P had been in it. And the supply drop. Let's say you'r protoss, and you forget a pylon, or your a zerg and you forget an over lord, thats a long time you have to go before you can actually produce units again. What happens if your terran? You just press X click on a supply depo and carry on macroing. No time lost at all. Or, what if a protoss forget detection and the other race goes for cloaked units? Well thats pretty much GG. Same for zerg. What happens if a terran forgets turrets or a raven and gets a DT in there base? Its ok, they had their detection before you even had a unit. And if its on cool down? Well its not long enough for a DT to kill all your buildings or even make a decent dent in your army before you can scan again. To me, it just seems like terran is the "Idiot proof" race. Now im not saying all terrans are idiots, most top terrans deserve the majority of their wins. However unlike the other races its much more tolerable to mistakes. | ||
| ||
