|
On January 03 2015 05:54 playa wrote:
Does anyone know the phoenix vs phoenix breakdown?
You go for the +1 Weapons. This is the best choice against 0/0/0 Phoenixes, but even if the opponent upgrades any of the upgrades, the weapon upgrade is still the best.
Now if the opponent knows this, they will choose +1 Weapons as well. Against 1/0/0 Phoenixes, your best upgrade is +2 Weapons. If opponent already has +2 attack, then +2 attack and +1 armor are equally good. If they already have 1/1/0, the situation is the same. So best is to go +2 Weapons I think, as this is always the best choice. (Note: if opponent went for +1 Armor first, for some reason, then you may consider +1 Armor after +1 Weapons. This is better against 0/1/0 than +2 Weapons, later will be equally good as +2 attack against 1/1/0, but will be inferior to it against 0/2/0.)
Let's just suppose both players have +2 Attack. Then +1 Armor is the best against 2/0/0, later +1 Armor or +3 Weapons equally good against 2/1/0 and against 3/0/0, but +3 Weapons is the best against 2/0/1.
Here there are already a lot of possibilities, so you can choose whichever you wish. Keep in mind, though, that lower upgrade tiers are always cheaper and shorter, so that can always be a deciding factor.
In short, I think the best sequence is +1 Weapons -> +2 Weapons -> whatever you feel like upgrading, but +1 Armor is the cheapest.
It just makes things more complicated that Shield upgrades can be researched concurrently with Air upgrades, so I guess if the great phoenix wars ensue, just chrono the Forge for those as well.
|
On January 03 2015 06:30 Sholip wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2015 05:54 playa wrote:
Does anyone know the phoenix vs phoenix breakdown? You go for the +1 Weapons. This is the best choice against 0/0/0 Phoenixes, but even if the opponent upgrades any of the upgrades, the weapon upgrade is still the best. Now if the opponent knows this, they will choose +1 Weapons as well. Against 1/0/0 Phoenixes, your best upgrade is +2 Weapons. If opponent already has +2 attack, then +2 attack and +1 armor are equally good. If they already have 1/1/0, the situation is the same. So best is to go +2 Weapons I think, as this is always the best choice. (Note: if opponent went for +1 Armor first, for some reason, then you may consider +1 Armor after +1 Weapons. This is better against 0/1/0 than +2 Weapons, later will be equally good as +2 attack against 1/1/0, but will be inferior to it against 0/2/0.) Let's just suppose both players have +2 Attack. Then +1 Armor is the best against 2/0/0, later +1 Armor or +3 Weapons equally good against 2/1/0 and against 3/0/0, but +3 Weapons is the best against 2/0/1. Here there are already a lot of possibilities, so you can choose whichever you wish. Keep in mind, though, that lower upgrade tiers are always cheaper and shorter, so that can always be a deciding factor. In short, I think the best sequence is +1 Weapons -> +2 Weapons -> whatever you feel like upgrading, but +1 Armor is the cheapest. It just makes things more complicated that Shield upgrades can be researched concurrently with Air upgrades, so I guess if the great phoenix wars ensue, just chrono the Forge for those as well.
Wow, thanks a lot.
|
Actually I would like to add, that for muta vs muta getting 1/1 after the first carapace upgrade is better than 0/2 even though it's less effective, because the one extra Muta does make a bigger difference.
|
excellent as usual!
+1 attack offers more opportunity even if other upgrades seems/are more useful. Killing base/building or overloards faster etc.
In other thread from you, about stim, the mobility is the biggest reason/strength, not the fight with it.
|
Awesome work! Just a quick question: is the attack range of the units taken into account? For example when a marine fights a zergling, the marine will already have gotten a few shots off before the zergling can start attacking, meaning the unit with more range might benefit more from attack upgrades (so it gets as much damage done as possible before the other gets close enough to fight back) while the unit with less range might benefit more from armor upgrades (so it survives long enough to get close enough to fight back).
Is this already included in the equations or is this a factor I have to consider on top of these results myself?
|
United Kingdom20318 Posts
On January 02 2015 11:48 worosei wrote:
curiously, does getting a shield upgrade, ever turn out to be the best upgrade?
(im presuming archon... or theoretically blink stalkers)
A big part of the value of shield upgrades is that they are the only upgrade to apply to buildings, so they are extremely effective particularly for use on cannons against ling/muta (shield upgrades on a small blob of cannons has the same effect as armor upgrades in muta vs muta; very powerful - and vs lings, lings do very little damage so reducing the damage done by 2 or 3 is a huge percentage of their total damage per hit)
Is this already included in the equations or is this a factor I have to consider on top of these results myself?
I think this just assumes that both units are in range and attacking, which would artificially lower the value of attack upgrades on units that have a range advantage
|
I wonder why don't toss go for the shield upgrades? Even the pros usually leave it till the mid-late game...then only they upgrade shields..hmm..
|
On January 03 2015 17:49 skylinefan wrote:
I wonder why don't toss go for the shield upgrades? Even the pros usually leave it till the mid-late game...then only they upgrade shields..hmm..
I think it's just more expensive, and earlier into the game that's very hard to afford.
|
Upon trying to read the PDF:
Google Drive
We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service.
 Care to reupload somewhere else?
|
On January 03 2015 09:54 Koektrommel wrote:
Awesome work! Just a quick question: is the attack range of the units taken into account? For example when a marine fights a zergling, the marine will already have gotten a few shots off before the zergling can start attacking, meaning the unit with more range might benefit more from attack upgrades (so it gets as much damage done as possible before the other gets close enough to fight back) while the unit with less range might benefit more from armor upgrades (so it survives long enough to get close enough to fight back).
Is this already included in the equations or is this a factor I have to consider on top of these results myself?
This factor is not included, so the attack upgrade may be a bit better in the early game for ranged units like Marines then it seems here. Once Charge/Zergling speed + Creep comes into play, though, this effect becomes marginal I think.
On January 03 2015 18:34 Perfi wrote:Upon trying to read the PDF: Show nested quote +Google Drive
We're sorry. You can't access this item because it is in violation of our Terms of Service. Care to reupload somewhere else?
I reuploaded it to Drive, but it acts weird so there still may be some error, I don't know why . What's in the pdf is exactly what is in the spoiler tags, though, so you don't miss out on anything.
|
Really awesome work. I skimmed over it at first but I forced myself to go back and actually try to understand it a bit. Really cool way to round things out into comparable numbers! I was actually suprised that the formula suggests +1 armor over weapons for marines versus zealots.
Quick question, did marines have combat shields in the examples you provided? I also wonder if you could simulate constant medivac healing by seeing how many ticks of healing it will accomplish before the unit dies and add that(times amount healed) to the total health. Or I guess in the terms of your formula, just see how many attacks it takes to kill a unit being healed by a full energy medivac.
|
On January 04 2015 03:33 feardragon wrote:
Really awesome work. I skimmed over it at first but I forced myself to go back and actually try to understand it a bit. Really cool way to round things out into comparable numbers! I was actually suprised that the formula suggests +1 armor over weapons for marines versus zealots.
Quick question, did marines have combat shields in the examples you provided? I also wonder if you could simulate constant medivac healing by seeing how many ticks of healing it will accomplish before the unit dies and add that(times amount healed) to the total health. Or I guess in the terms of your formula, just see how many attacks it takes to kill a unit being healed by a full energy medivac.
In case of Marines vs. Zealots, it might change things that Marines can fire one or two shots before Zealots can attack, so +1 Weapons might be more effective than what the formula suggests.
As for Combat Shields, no, Zealots in the example had no upgrades. However, the formula will say +1 Armor still with Combat Shields against Zealots.
With Medivacs, the problem is that one unit will have its health modified from two sources, the enemy attacks and the healing. You can't say how many attacks it takes to kill a unit healed by a Medivac, because it depends on how many units attack it, as the Medivac's healing is time-based. If one unit attacks a Marine, the Medivac may heal it constantly, so the Marine does not die to any number of attacks. If 20 units attack the Marine, the unit kills in one shot, and poor Medivac suddenly has no unit to heal.
The advantage of my formula is that you can express how many units one unit kills over a period of time, and it can work with critical upgrades very well. If there are two or more sources of health modifications, the only way to go, in my opinion, is to work with DPS (and healing per second) values, as you can't exactly tell how many attacks a unit takes to kill another.
|
Great to still see some community content inkling out, despite the consistently dwindling population. Cool stuff, Great job!
|
For the case of mutalisks vs. mutalisks, I seem to remember someone calculating that when zerglings are added to the battle, the second upgrade is more efficient as an attack upgrade, even though this is less efficient for the straight air battle...
|
Another great post Sholip.
I always wondered why terran prefer attack and protoss armor in tvp.
|
On January 04 2015 07:27 Hollandrock wrote:
For the case of mutalisks vs. mutalisks, I seem to remember someone calculating that when zerglings are added to the battle, the second upgrade is more efficient as an attack upgrade, even though this is less efficient for the straight air battle...
semi relevant but can anyone reputable confirm the popular notion that lings under mutas actually affect glaive splash? recently i saw a muta vs muta in an online korean cup i think and i noticed that health bars were on "damaged only" and lings were directly underneath yet i didnt see them take any damage. i would have thought that glaive bounce has attack priority like any other attack and would tend to bounce only onto mutas if enough are present. but i'm not arguing with anyone, just going off what i've seen. anyone tested this directly?
|
On January 03 2015 19:55 Sholip wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2015 09:54 Koektrommel wrote:
Awesome work! Just a quick question: is the attack range of the units taken into account? For example when a marine fights a zergling, the marine will already have gotten a few shots off before the zergling can start attacking, meaning the unit with more range might benefit more from attack upgrades (so it gets as much damage done as possible before the other gets close enough to fight back) while the unit with less range might benefit more from armor upgrades (so it survives long enough to get close enough to fight back).
Is this already included in the equations or is this a factor I have to consider on top of these results myself? This factor is not included, so the attack upgrade may be a bit better in the early game for ranged units like Marines then it seems here. Once Charge/Zergling speed + Creep comes into play, though, this effect becomes marginal I think.
I think the best argument in favor of marine +1 Attack has nothing to do with zerglings or mutas, it's banelings. Lings and mutas can't really damage massed marines, only banelings can. Armor has little effect on Banes as their damage is so high, so you'll mitigate far more damage by shooting banelings before they arrive.
|
On January 03 2015 17:49 skylinefan wrote:
I wonder why don't toss go for the shield upgrades? Even the pros usually leave it till the mid-late game...then only they upgrade shields..hmm..
Toss generally doesnt go for shield upgrades as
a) it can be destroyed by EMP; but more importantly;
b) units normally has more HP than shield, so the armour 'buffer' can occur more times in a fight than a 'shield' buffer will (eg with made-up numbers, a zealot's with no shield can take 4 hits before shield disappears vs 5 hits with +1 shield, a zealot with 0 armour can take 8 hits, but with +1 armour can take 10 hits - so the armour upgrades allows an extra hit before death that the shield doesnt).
i am curious when a shield upgrade is actually the preferred one (im guessing it'd be in situations where +3 armour is already upgraded)
|
On January 05 2015 14:24 worosei wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2015 17:49 skylinefan wrote:
I wonder why don't toss go for the shield upgrades? Even the pros usually leave it till the mid-late game...then only they upgrade shields..hmm.. Toss generally doesnt go for shield upgrades as a) it can be destroyed by EMP; but more importantly; b) units normally has more HP than shield, so the armour 'buffer' can occur more times in a fight than a 'shield' buffer will (eg with made-up numbers, a zealot's with no shield can take 4 hits before shield disappears vs 5 hits with +1 shield, a zealot with 0 armour can take 8 hits, but with +1 armour can take 10 hits - so the armour upgrades allows an extra hit before death that the shield doesnt). i am curious when a shield upgrade is actually the preferred one (im guessing it'd be in situations where +3 armour is already upgraded)
I have seen many pros go +shields with blink stalkers into archon/zealots. It wrecks unprepared terrans, but this hardly happens because pros are so good at reading tech and scouting.
I can't think of any other scenario for protoss to go for shields.
|
On January 05 2015 14:46 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2015 14:24 worosei wrote:On January 03 2015 17:49 skylinefan wrote:
I wonder why don't toss go for the shield upgrades? Even the pros usually leave it till the mid-late game...then only they upgrade shields..hmm.. Toss generally doesnt go for shield upgrades as a) it can be destroyed by EMP; but more importantly; b) units normally has more HP than shield, so the armour 'buffer' can occur more times in a fight than a 'shield' buffer will (eg with made-up numbers, a zealot's with no shield can take 4 hits before shield disappears vs 5 hits with +1 shield, a zealot with 0 armour can take 8 hits, but with +1 armour can take 10 hits - so the armour upgrades allows an extra hit before death that the shield doesnt). i am curious when a shield upgrade is actually the preferred one (im guessing it'd be in situations where +3 armour is already upgraded) I have seen many pros go +shields with blink stalkers into archon/zealots. It wrecks unprepared terrans, but this hardly happens because pros are so good at reading tech and scouting. I can't think of any other scenario for protoss to go for shields.
Wouldn't a planned ground into air transition use shield over armour?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
