Is Scan really free or does it cost 270 minerals? - Page 12
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
Bergys
Sweden337 Posts
| ||
Jeffbelittle
United States468 Posts
When you scan, its physical cost is 50 energy. However: the opportunity potential of the 50 energy is 8 supply, 270 minerals over 90 seconds, or a scan. Now considering it at face value you're not losing 270 minerals over 90 seconds by scanning nor 8 supply. You simply just aren't gaining it. However: if we are talking about the opportunity cost, then yes: it exists. However, it's ridiclious to find because both a scan and 8 supply instantly being created aren't quantifiable values to measure the true loss between them and 270 minerals over 90 seconds. I think it's safe to say; however, that it's not a detriment for a Terran to use a scan in the mid to late game rather than a mule. My reasoning for such is this: the information gained by scanning a person's base will more than likely allow you to build cost effective units to counter your opponent and thus make up, and even gain, resources over your opponent over the matter. | ||
dabom88
United States3483 Posts
| ||
AcOrP
Bulgaria148 Posts
| ||
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
If you only have 1 Orbital and you've mined out all but one patch which has 270 minerals, then you can't really say that. In most "normal" situations, I would look at it as "if I scan right now, I'll have about 270 less minerals in 90 seconds than I would otherwise". No more, no less. I really don't want to think about this too much, but if you have full saturation then it's probably less since you'll have scvs just sitting around. I think a lot of people are thinking about it like it's 270 instant minerals, which it's not, but it's still 270 minerals. Just know that scans are not free and you'll be fine. | ||
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
So it rather takes some planning... can I afford to have those 270 minerals less half a minute into the future? Or will that be a crucial point of time to build something? Might it possibly be better to invest those 270 to start building an expansion "for only 130 minerals" so to say, instead of scanning now? Or, would it better to build three turrets (almost for free even though it of course takes mining time) to prevent against air or cloak attacks, instead of scanning for the enemies tech? | ||
Neo.NEt
United States785 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:57 dabom88 wrote: You shouldn't really factor in opportunity cost when you talk about Mules vs. Scan. If you say scans cost 270 minerals, then Zerg buildings must cost Infinite minerals because that Drone could have mined a lot of minerals. The Zerg situation is a lot more complicated for so many reasons. First of all, games don't last forever and there are only so many mineral patches, so you can't say they cost "infinite minerals". There is a high cost associated with them though... and there should be. If you build a random spore crawler for no reason, that drone could have mined 40 minerals every minute for the rest of the game (let's assume you keep <17 drones at every base on minerals). That seems like a huge amount, you might even be thinking "that can't be true, the other races don't have that!". It's balanced because if zerg didn't lose drones when they built something, they would have twice as many workers as the other races and they'd never lose.... Drones cost 50 + cost of the building + (40 minerals/minute they could have mined optimally) + (20 minerals/minute if there were more than 16 drones on minerals at that base) Don't take that equation above to be exact, I'm just pulling it off the top of my head. Yeah your roach warren might "cost" you 500 minerals by the time the game ends, but what's the cost of never building a roach warren so you can get an extra 40 minerals a minute for the rest of the game? Probably the game. | ||
Leviwtf
174 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:57 dabom88 wrote: You shouldn't really factor in opportunity cost when you talk about Mules vs. Scan. If you say scans cost 270 minerals, then Zerg buildings must cost Infinite minerals because that Drone could have mined a lot of minerals. This has been covered multiple times, can people please stop posting the same thing over and over. On December 03 2010 00:36 AcOrP wrote: I agree scan cost minerals. I do not agree the number bein 270 tho. Yes the mule can get you 270 minerals but you can have this with scvs... If you have full satturation or over satturated will mule be so effective ? If you send few scvs on attack how much will the mule help you and how much the scan ? A mule mines 270 minerals over 90 seconds regardless of saturation, this has also been covered. These are both answered in the very first post... | ||
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:57 dabom88 wrote: You shouldn't really factor in opportunity cost when you talk about Mules vs. Scan. If you say scans cost 270 minerals, then Zerg buildings must cost Infinite minerals because that Drone could have mined a lot of minerals. Wrong. A mule will bring a fix amount of 270 minerals given that it survives within a certain time limit (20seconds it is I think). A drone gives a variable amount of minerals, depending on game length and how long the drone will survive and of course mines way slower. However, the Mule effect diminishes once it makes other workers beeing unemployed, for example if all your mine patches are gone - than this will subsequently eat up the benefit which the mules once gave; However, having minerals earlier is better than having them later in the long run - if you fight with 5 marines vs 7 marines and afterwards build five more marines, you will lose many more minerals than if you fight 10 marines vs 7 marines (with five additional marines due to a mule). | ||
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
Let's say that the probability of your winning at a point in time is p. Then, the value v of some resource r is v = dp / dr or something like that :-) | ||
telfire
United States415 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:57 dabom88 wrote: You shouldn't really factor in opportunity cost when you talk about Mules vs. Scan. If you say scans cost 270 minerals, then Zerg buildings must cost Infinite minerals because that Drone could have mined a lot of minerals. Stop with this stupid, ill thought-out argument. You rebuild the drone. At most, it costs you what that Drone would have mined in the amount of time it takes you to saturate that mineral field. Also, regardless of what it costs in minerals, without buildings you cannot make any units to stay alive or do anything at all, so it's obviously worth it. | ||
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:24 Jeffbelittle wrote: My higher level math friends have pointed out to me that it depends on whether or not we considering "cost" as "opportunity cost", in that: are we considering it a "loss" of minerals if we choose to miss out on the opportunity of acquiring them by scanning. When you scan, its physical cost is 50 energy. However: the opportunity potential of the 50 energy is 8 supply, 270 minerals over 90 seconds, or a scan. Now considering it at face value you're not losing 270 minerals over 90 seconds by scanning nor 8 supply. You simply just aren't gaining it. However: if we are talking about the opportunity cost, then yes: it exists. However, it's ridiclious to find because both a scan and 8 supply instantly being created aren't quantifiable values to measure the true loss between them and 270 minerals over 90 seconds. I think it's safe to say; however, that it's not a detriment for a Terran to use a scan in the mid to late game rather than a mule. My reasoning for such is this: the information gained by scanning a person's base will more than likely allow you to build cost effective units to counter your opponent and thus make up, and even gain, resources over your opponent over the matter. i believe this is the best explanation and should /thread with that. all three options are equally valid, it all boils down to what you need at that particular time. worrying about 270 potential minerals then not scanning a critical unit like banshee can cost you the game. worrying about banshee and saving your energy for scan can hinder your economic advantage through mules. all are equally valid, you're not "losing" anything by picking one over the other. get what you need; thats the advantage you gain. using the wrong thing at the wrong time can cost you the game or put you at disadvantage. ever do a thor timing push then forget to build a supply? i'd drop a supply pod immediately than to build a supply depo/scan/mule. - or you can say "fck it, i'll delay it and do a stronger push" proceed to build a depo and drop a mule. simply put, scan does not cost "270 minerals" it costs 50 energy that is interchangeable with 8 supply, scan, mule. | ||
Seoro
2 Posts
| ||
andrewwiggin
Australia435 Posts
If a SCAN costs 270 minerals... then the first SCV you build costs 5 x number of return trips it makes to your CC. That makes for a VERY valuable scv lol. | ||
andrewwiggin
Australia435 Posts
LOL scan might actually be much less expensive too. If it saves you from losing say 500 minerals worth of units and buildings, then a scan MAKES you 500 - 270 = 230 minerals. Opportunity cost is the smartest and only way to think of starcraft. Remember though. Money today = worth more than money tomorrow.. err.. minerals tomorrow. =) | ||
indigoawareness
Slovakia273 Posts
| ||
Enigmoid
United States48 Posts
The question is, does getting a scout force you to give up a quick amount of minerals, or equivalent, and conversely can the other races get easy money by not scouting, using their macro mechanics? So, if you use a chrono boost on your observer instead of your probes, you get a faster observer and are maybe 1-2 probes behind. Not a big gain or loss. And if you use your larva-producing queen to make a creep tumor (which is sort of like a passive, defensive scout) you "lose" extra unit producing capability for 25 seconds, but don't gain a very good scout. You can also make an extra queen for 150 minerals, but you can ALSO make extra orbital commands (there's a MULE-based economy thread floating around). So there is a sort of trade-off between scouting and money/units with the other races, but it's not as pronounced as in the case of the Terran. Scans delay 270 minerals, but the other races don't get such a big benefit from sacrificing scouting, so you can't say you "lose" 270 minerals by scanning. | ||
positron.
634 Posts
| ||
Armsved
Denmark642 Posts
On December 02 2010 21:24 Jeffbelittle wrote: My higher level math friends have pointed out to me that it depends on whether or not we considering "cost" as "opportunity cost", in that: are we considering it a "loss" of minerals if we choose to miss out on the opportunity of acquiring them by scanning. When you scan, its physical cost is 50 energy. However: the opportunity potential of the 50 energy is 8 supply, 270 minerals over 90 seconds, or a scan. Now considering it at face value you're not losing 270 minerals over 90 seconds by scanning nor 8 supply. You simply just aren't gaining it. However: if we are talking about the opportunity cost, then yes: it exists. However, it's ridiclious to find because both a scan and 8 supply instantly being created aren't quantifiable values to measure the true loss between them and 270 minerals over 90 seconds. I think it's safe to say; however, that it's not a detriment for a Terran to use a scan in the mid to late game rather than a mule. My reasoning for such is this: the information gained by scanning a person's base will more than likely allow you to build cost effective units to counter your opponent and thus make up, and even gain, resources over your opponent over the matter. Yeah basicly anyone studying economy would say its a loss of 270 minerals. Opportunity cost is basicly equal to cost. Also scanning too much costs games unless you do it, as you stated, in the mid late game. Anything before that is huge. | ||
| ||