Not very practical data since a large part of stimming is the mobility boost, plus it's not taking into account potential kiting. But I guess if you like maths it's fun?

Sholip

Hungary422 Posts

September 27 2014 20:45 GMT

#23

On September 28 2014 05:29 ROOTiaguz wrote:
Not very practical data since a large part of stimming is the mobility boost, plus it's not taking into account potential kiting. But I guess if you like maths it's fun?

But once an engagement is about to happen where you don't want to kite, you have the choice to activate Stim, or not, don't you. I guess you know it better, but I think it can be applied to some situations. And anyway, I like maths, so it is fun.

phantomfive

Korea (South)404 Posts

November 03 2014 22:39 GMT

#24

On September 28 2014 05:45 Sholip wrote:

Show nested quote +

Yeah, the way to use this information is to look for places where it is useful, not look for places where it isn't

DinoMight

United States3725 Posts

November 03 2014 22:44 GMT

#25

On November 04 2014 07:39 phantomfive wrote:

Show nested quote +

Yeah, the way to use this information is to look for places where it is useful, not look for places where it isn't

Agreed. Knowing this information will never heard anyone.

Although the second post in this thread is really funny

On September 28 2014 01:30 TheBloodyDwarf wrote:
Terrans you heard it. DONT STIM

Shuffleblade

Sweden1903 Posts

November 04 2014 11:58 GMT

#26

Don't know if this has already been said or if it has been taken into account but I'm thinking that the big reason that stim is "always" better is the range of marines and marauders.

Many times against both toss and zerg bio can attack in a bigger number faster. Vs Z that is because Z is mostly melee and vs P that is mostly because bio is much more compact that most protoss armies. Archons and stalkers for example really fatens the army up.

Not thinking mano a mano so to speak but army vs army I think stiming is basically always better.

Imagine marines fighting stalkers for example, the ball of marines stims and runs close to the P army. Not all of the stalkers will reach to shoot and those that do will many times overkill the closes marines. There are many reasons for why stimming is better.

propagare

Germany93 Posts

July 23 2016 22:33 GMT

#27

Could I may ask politely for an update for LotV?

Shuffleblade

Sweden1903 Posts

July 23 2016 23:10 GMT

#28

Ops edited =P

hellokitty[hk]

United States1309 Posts

July 23 2016 23:16 GMT

#29

On July 24 2016 07:33 propagare wrote:
Could I may ask politely for an update for LotV?

Keep holding that t.

Randomaccount#77123

United States5003 Posts

July 23 2016 23:53 GMT

#30

--- Nuked ---

imp42

398 Posts

July 24 2016 00:01 GMT

#31

On July 24 2016 07:33 propagare wrote:
Could I may ask politely for an update for LotV?

why would you want an update for LOTV? the calculations are purely theoretical and of no practical use.
The reason being the formula holding only for very large armies.

In the standard scenario encountered in a game you will find x<20 marines against 1 banshee or 2, not 10'000 marines against 100 banshees. Therefore, mechanisms come into play that are not considered in the calculation. E.g. stim might make the banshee get only 1 shot off instead of 2 which obviously makes a huge difference.

(the fact that increased movement speed, to close the distance to the banshee, is not considered has been pointed out by others already)

Cascade

Australia5405 Posts

July 24 2016 00:06 GMT

#32

Old thread, but let me comment anyway....

This calculation ignores:

1) difference in range. Stim allows you to shot down lings before they can close distance, making the lost HP less important. Also the fact that marines can close distance faster vs longer ranged units.

2) Healing. marines have medivacs over them in almost all situations where you have stim. Which obviously makes stimming much more valuable, as medivacs get more targets to heal earlier.

3) micro advantage: splits vs banes, stutter step in to get all your marines to shoot, hunt down units, everything.

Seeing how these three are huuuge effects, it is nothing short of ridiculous how you present the number with 5 digits accuracy, as if that's how precise your model is.

I mean... you pick a model that essentially doesn't describe any battle in sc2, and then it doesn't matter how much maths you do, your results will still be nonsensical. The calculations are cute, but please don't claim that they have any applications in a real game.

It's a reason other people don't bother with this kind of calculations. Because they don't give you anything of value. To be able to apply them to a real game, you need to take all the relevant factors into account, which is incredibly messy.

Charoisaur

Germany16007 Posts

July 24 2016 00:31 GMT

#33

there are definitely scenarios in which you don't want to stim especially during smaller skirmishes but when both main armies clash you should ALWAYS stim.

Xialos

Canada508 Posts

July 24 2016 02:17 GMT

#34

As a protoss, i'd recommend you to not research stimpack. It's not very good most of the time, just forget it (well I mean, you can use it against zergs, but just dont use it when you're against a toss, it would be considered bad manners).

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh