|
it's like saying you lose 5k minerals when you have to chose to use the minereal hack or the vision hack, and you can only choose one, and you pick the later.
Plus it's 270 if it's placed on a good mineral field, isnt misplaced initially (happens to pros) can continue mining without being pulled away or killed.
And ultimately your base runs out much quicker.
But yeah all the eco guys explain it scinetificly, so go listen to them
|
It costs you 270 minerals the next minute.
And who cares?
|
Scans cost 50 energy, not 270 minerals. Your not really costing minerals as you are slowing down the collection of 270 minerals in one minute.
|
Technically the only way to be given free minerals is from the depot drops, since that's essentially 100 free minerals that isn't simply transferring the minerals in your inventory(patches). Otherwise you get a present vs future value of the minerals gained from mules.
|
Some of your post logic is a little flawed. Saying that a mule is worth more than 270m because you can use the 270m to set up your economy more quickly is not accurate. If i give you 270m free and clear and you then use those minerals to make SCV's (which you should almost never stop making in the first place) that doesnt mean I gave you more than 270m it means i gave you 270m and you invested it in your economy.
Similarly, if you use the moeny to make 5 more marines which causes you to win a battle which allows you to win the game. It wasn't worth more than 5 marines. It was worth 5 marines.
|
Mules don't cost 270 minerals, they cost 170 minerals because you could have used that energy to call down a supply depot.
|
On December 01 2010 04:38 Barca wrote: Mules don't cost 270 minerals, they cost 170 minerals because you could have used that energy to call down a supply depot.
Huh??
At its best, the energy will give you 270 minerals (the mule). Yeah, you could also take the 100 mineral option, but that does not change the fact that the mule is worth 270...
|
On December 01 2010 04:38 Barca wrote: Mules don't cost 270 minerals, they cost 170 minerals because you could have used that energy to call down a supply depot.
lol... are you serious?
a supply drop costs ~170 minerals over 90 seconds because you could have built a depot and called a mule instead...
|
On December 01 2010 04:53 hoovehand wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 04:38 Barca wrote: Mules don't cost 270 minerals, they cost 170 minerals because you could have used that energy to call down a supply depot. lol... are you serious? a supply drop costs ~170 minerals over 90 seconds because you could have built a depot and called a mule instead... You forgot to calculate the lost mining time of the SCV that has to build the depot, and the potentially detrimental effects of having to wait for the supply increase instead of getting it instantly.
|
Think about this senario: If the MULE was on cooldown (didn't use energy) and Scans would automatically deduct 270 minerals from your savings in 90 seconds, what difference would it be from now? Answer: nothing.
The Mule costs you 270 over the next 90 seconds. It doesn't cost 270 minerals RIGHT NOW. Money now is worth more than money later, but the mule gets some of it sooner and some of it later.
The fact that Mules mine out your base quicker means nothing unless you assume that you are unable to mine from another base when one runs out.
|
A MULE has the opportunity cost of an extra 160-180 mins per minute for about 65 in game seconds. That is all.
|
RTS games are all about choices. discussions like this one are usually not helpful because the question is posed in a way that suggests that the benefits of an action do not change over time given the circumstances.
usually whether or not a choice is beneficial depends on what is happening at that point in the game.
there is not a static answer to the comparative value of a mule, a scan, and an insta-depot. the comparative value of each will change over the time of each specific game played based on the actions of the opponent.
something's value is based on its current demand. the value of either a mule, an insta-depot, or a scan is changing each second during a game.
a beneficial discussion would rather be about how to learn to understand when the demand for an instant-depot, a scan, or a mule is most beneficial given the specifics of the current game to make the most of the 50 energy cost.
|
I like this post^^ You cannot compare differences of kind (supply, information, minerals), especially with generally applicable rules in such a circumstantial game.
Why do people act like there is some "fact of the matter" as to whether it's one way or the other?
By scanning or calling down a supply you are cutting economy insofar as you are relinquishing the potential 270 minerals over the next 90 seconds.
OR
By scanning or calling down a supply, you are not effecting your economy because you are relinquishing a free gift of 270 minerals over 90 seconds which is otherwise not a default part of your economy.
There is no cognitive difference between these two views. Or in other words: there is no fact or set of facts about the game that make one true and the other false. The difference is sentiment, nothing more. The main opinion difference is a question of what constitutes the default terran economy while orbital commands are present.
Does a terran economy produce constant MULEs by default, and hence a scan "costs" a MULE? OR does the terran economy default at 0 MULEs throughout the game and hence MULEs are like a "free boost"? See the difference? Pessimism vs Optimism with respect to what is default in the terran economy. It's an insubstantial non-issue often employed in the common banter about MULE imbalance (by both sides).
|
I was being sarcastic... xD
It's the same logic as saying a scan costs 270 minerals since you could have MULE-ed instead.
This thread is nonsense. MULEs, scans, and supply drops all have their places, same as Larvae injection, creep tumor, and transfusion, and like how one must choose whether to chronoboost their Nexus to help speed up their economy, warpgates to help speed up their army production, and tech structures to help speed up upgrades.
|
As some people have already said and are totally correct... it doesn't cost any minerals, it's free, just requires the 50 energy from OC. BUT, you aren't mining as fast. Although you will mine those 270 minerals eventually if you mine your base out. So you'll still get the 270 minerals, just not as fast as the Mule would have got them for you.
That being said I still hate to scan... I'd rather build a Reaper and jump him into their base or send a Marine or spread things around the map (like Depots late game). I love my greedy economic ways Hate wasting a potential Mule.
|
A scan costs 300 minerals in income, but not 300 minerals.
Yes, you will get the minerals eventually. However, you will always get the minerals eventually. If you had one worker, and you mined an expansion for an hour, it would eventually run out. Mining with one worker is in no way viable, though. The goal is to get minerals faster than your opponent.
So yes, there is a cost for using only scans and no mules, and as a result, a cost for using each scan.
|
On December 01 2010 03:40 Ashera wrote: Scans cost 50 energy, not 270 minerals. Your not really costing minerals as you are slowing down the collection of 270 minerals in one minute.
Killing workers slows down the collection of minerals in the same way as using a scan instead of a mule. Only the workers might last to mine the next expansion.
If I kill 10 of your workers now, it means you will be able to afford 10 less marines a minute or two down the line. If I use a scan instead of a mule, the same thing will happen.
If I plan to push at 7 minutes, will I be able to have more marines if I used all scans, or all mules?
|
uhh..so 50 minerals on a marine is better invested into an scv which lasts pretty much all game and can mine thousands of minerals. Right?
Based on your theoretical terms, why doesn't everyone just mass workers?
What I'm saying is, there needs to be a balance in obtaining resources and spending it. That's what starcraft is. Deciding to use a scan or sending a mule down is the same thing. Spend the opportunity on intelligence, or on economy. It's the same thing with chronoboosting. Spend it on probe production or something else? Same thing with queen, spend it on inject so you can make more drones to mine, or on creep tumor or transfuse?
Different situations call for different decisions. A good player makes the better decision.
|
So for detection do we use turrets? Well their immobility and relative frailty makes that not viable.
Or a raven? Well besides the fact that's it's not viable early game, ravens are 100/200 and as gas is more often a limiting factor, this seems more expensive (though there is no direct conversion between the two so that's just my sense not scientific fact).
Overall scan ends up being much more viable as detection to save units/kill other units... That's what I think at least
|
there's nothing free about energy, the whole point of an RTS at least from a macro perspective is that you are making choices which imply costs. the true cost a mule however isn't completely fixed as you dont receive all ur minerals at once (its in small increments), but generally the mule is generally more powerful earlier in the game than later, and also very powerful to make up for the brief income loss when you are maynarding workers from base to base. the only argument i can see about energy being 'free' is that in the long run, energy becomes 'cheaper' since its more or less a renewable resource.
the opportunity cost is always the biggest alternative use of your money, so for a person in different situations it changes. if you are playing optimally and have perfect scouting information (or maybe you think you do), than the scan is wasted and the opportunity cost is 270 min, however if the player is walled up and you anticipate some sort of funny play a scan be more important to spot that cloaked banshee or vital tech structure so that you can counter it.
|
|
|
|