EPT[D]Mules Vs. Chronoboost: An Objective Analysis - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
gundream
United States229 Posts
| ||
|
Archaic
United States4024 Posts
| ||
|
SC.Shifty
Canada135 Posts
and i know, its been said about a million times but its so true late game, mules are just so effective to cost nothing but energy. and the more expos terran has the worse it gets, allowing the terran to skimper out on alot of workers, and using the 5-6 mules every cd. this creates a huge difference in army compared to harvesters | ||
|
TibblesEvilCat
United Kingdom766 Posts
i like what this guy said above me, in late game, i can have a 200/200 army and still be getting ecomany :D, there hasne't been any pro games showing this just as yet | ||
|
Drathmar
United States160 Posts
If you watched the Terrans did fluctuate more (dropping to 300 but sometimes up to like 800) but still it was almost as good as 31 probes (or, since blue is 5/7 as good as a rich...) 21.14 probes, with 3 mules. I know he paused there and mentioned it just cause it was funny but its still kinda amazing how 3 mules on a gold are almost as good as 31 probes on a blue (or 21 probes on a gold). | ||
|
dave333
United States915 Posts
That said, mules are still wonderfully effective because they are by far the most forgiving macro mechanic. | ||
|
Drathmar
United States160 Posts
21 probes is like 11 chronoboosts + 8.5 seconds each and can't be done at any point with 1 or 2 bases EVER at once in succession. 3 mules is instant and can be made with 3 bases. I think mules should mine 20 minerals in 2x the time it takes svcs to harvest 10 (so 1 trip per svc 2 trips but only 2/3 as much minerals as now). | ||
|
Euronyme
Sweden3804 Posts
| ||
|
Legion.217
28 Posts
On October 07 2010 10:49 Euronyme wrote: mules are good because they dont cost any supply. if its a long macro game, the terran could just kill off all his SCVs and get an extra 60ish supply of units and let the mules keep him ahead of the toss in econ. Theoretically so could zerg if they had money in the bank and ALOT of larva, but eh.. rather risky. So, from what we have been discussing, i see a few very valid points: It is fairly feasible to use mules 9/10ths of the time, very rarely scanning. It is not feasible to chrono probes 9/10ths of the time, while forsaking research etc. There is a limit to what CB probes can accomplish without an expansion up, however mules bypass saturation. Protoss economy has a snowball effect, and while the evidence clearly shows that, in this very limited test, does come out on top (protoss is after all, the most expensive, technologically advanced race, it would make sense that they require more economy to maintain, and therefore are capable of more economy). I wonder what people would say to mules no longer bypassing saturation? This would certainly cut down on what terran can do with a 1 base all in turtle, no? Then, they, like protoss and zerg, would have to expand to reap the benefits of their OC, or else only use it to scan. Here's an interesting thought: If a mule is worth at least 270, making an extra OC in your main just for mules would be economically effective after the 3rd mule, breaking just about even after #2. 270 x3 = 810. OC costs 400+150 = 550. Differeince of 260. Granted this could hurt late game, since you will mine out your main incredibly fast (and obviously it is much more preferable to actually just expand and send all mules to the new mining location to get the highest sustained income for as long as possible) but still something to think about. If a mule is = to ~5 scv, then you could theoretically have a base that was like 40 saturation, rather than 30. That would allow for a 4th rax possibly, meaning 2 extra marines every build cycle. | ||
|
Legion.217
28 Posts
| ||
|
smoorn
Poland66 Posts
i do not understand this logic. the way i see it is that protoss is ahead by 410 minerals, but he invested 700 minerals more to hearvesters, so his army will be 300 minerals weaker than terrans army, and terran will have to build less supply depots than protoss will have to make pylons. | ||
|
storm44
1293 Posts
| ||
|
Iggyhopper
United States259 Posts
On October 07 2010 11:55 Legion.217 wrote: No.Theoretically so could zerg if they had money in the bank and ALOT of larva, but eh.. rather risky. In P and Z's case, you need workers for income. T is the exception. If you lose all your workers, you're still in the game if it's a cutthroat neck and neck tie. If P or Z loses all their workers, they're more easily toasted. | ||
|
mierin
United States4942 Posts
Lauren Graham: "..God why did I leave Gilmore Girls??" | ||
|
Baltor
United States171 Posts
| ||
|
Ack1027
United States7873 Posts
| ||
|
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
Nothing at all. | ||
|
Ichabod
United States1659 Posts
On October 07 2010 12:58 0mgVitaminE wrote: I wish that no one would post anymore about statistically comparing very very narrow concepts of multiplayer without taking into account the rest of the matchup. Comparing mules and chronoboost in an isolated environment makes no sense whatsoever. This is like concluding that the CC is better than the Nexus. What does it prove about multiplayer and balance between the matches? Nothing at all. Starcraft is a game reliant on many factors that eventually combine to you either winning or losing. Income is one of those factors, and a very large concept in the game. Some people are not content just playing the game, but want to build an understanding for the theory behind the game, the mechanics that can build up to a large army and good macro. Comparing MULES and Chronoboost isn't essential to understand the game at a basic level, but analyzing the differences between the races can be exciting while learning more and forming a better grasp of the mechanics of SC. Narrow concepts of the game can be the decider between a win or a loss, and as long as there are complicated videogames there will be analysis of the most minute details to find the best, most efficient way to play the game. | ||
|
Chronicle
161 Posts
All mule needs is some skill to using it, punish Terran the same way Z+P to the point where it is an equal macro mechanic and not a superior one. IE one or more of the following 1 - Limit mules to the CC they are from. 2 - Have mules NOT stack with SCV. Make them fight over mineral patches but give mules priority. 3 - Some form of cooldown to prevent stacking. | ||
|
Cirqueenflex
499 Posts
So with mules Terran might use that early ressource advantage to get another expo/2 This might result in both players reaching that 60 harvester point at about the same time if Terran can build each expansion a few workers faster and therefore can increase his economy faster | ||
| ||
