|
I notice the Phoenix harrassment tends to choose to pick up MULEs from Terrans, instead of SCVs.
While this more immediately harms the economy, after several minutes, it would usually have been better to kill SCVs
Just testing in game,
135 minerals take about 3 minute, 270 takes 6 minutes give or take a few seconds, so 45min/minute.
The Mule of course does do 270 in 90 seconds, so 180/minute.
I've often heard people say 'A mule is like 6 SCVs!' because it carries 30 minerals vs 5. but it's interesting to see that this is not true. 1 Mule = 4 SCVs
So, back to my original point.
Say you Swoop in with 4 Phoenix, You stumble upon 4 mules and 4 SCVs at a new expo. Assume the Mules are on average at 50%
If you did nothing, in 90 seconds, they'd have: 810 minerals In 3 minutes, they'd have: 1080 in 6 minutes: 1620 in 10 minutes: 2340 in 15 minutes: 3240
So that's if you just flew by
Now, If you killed the 4 Mules: In 90 seconds: 270 3 minutes: 540 6 minutes: 1080 10 minutes: 1800 15 minutes: 2700
If you killed the 4 SCVs in 90 seconds: 540 in 3 minutes: 540 6 minutes: 540 10 minutes: 540 15 minutes: 540
Now count in the fact that the SCVs cost you 50 minerals each...
Basically my conclusion here is unless you imminently need their econ hurt immediately, you are better off choosing the SCVs first. If the game goes one 10 minutes past your harrassment, one SCV is worth 500 minerals more than the single MULE
Thoughts?
|
I usually hit the SCVs. I don't have any substantial evidence to back this up, however, I feel that the permanent resource is a better target than the one that will just disappear in a minute.
However, like I said, I have no actual backing on this point.... Just my gut feeling...
As well, the lower income from the missing SCV is even more of a hit when they decide to stop mining to build things...
|
It's better to hit the mules if they have full saturation. Otherwise, it's debatable I guess. I'd rather hit the mules earlygame because minerals are more valuable early on.
|
Without addressing your math, consider a saturated mineral line where the marginal benefit of one additional scv is less than when you only have 4 scvs. A mule is worth a lot more since it can oversaturate.
|
It's alot of theory/mathcrafting, but you may have a solid point. Whenever I'm harassing, I generally go with SCVs earlier on and MULEs later on. Replacing an SCV early on is a lot more irritating than having to re-plop a MULE. I'm not really sure one way or the other though...
By a similar train of logic, perhaps MULEs should be targetted first because SCVs are being constantly produced until mid/late game, and SCVs later on because they are more annoying to produce (since they will start cutting into supply if unit production takes the place of the dead SCVs... if that makes sense).
From a psychological perspective, if you specifically target MULEs at a higher priority than SCVs, the Terran might respond by saving energy for more scans, which could give him a scouting advantage as opposed to a potential mineral advantage.
An interesting question, I'd like to see other responses.
|
On February 16 2011 14:18 Kitetsu wrote: It's alot of theory/mathcrafting, but you may have a solid point. Whenever I'm harassing, I generally go with SCVs earlier on and MULEs later on. Replacing an SCV early on is a lot more irritating than having to re-plop a MULE. I'm not really sure one way or the other though...
By a similar train of logic, perhaps MULEs should be targetted first because SCVs are being constantly produced until mid/late game, and SCVs later on because they are more annoying to produce (since they will start cutting into supply if unit production takes the place of the dead SCVs... if that makes sense).
From a psychological perspective, if you specifically target MULEs at a higher priority than SCVs, the Terran might respond by saving energy for more scans, which could give him a scouting advantage as opposed to a potential mineral advantage.
An interesting question, I'd like to see other responses.
I think I'd do the opposite of what you do, for the reasons that you stated. It really does get hard (for most people) to keep worker production in mind in the mid/late game, and if he finds himself without minerals between mule calldown cycles, that could hurt him badly. I also think that the mule makes more of a difference in the early game.
|
On February 16 2011 14:18 Kitetsu wrote: From a psychological perspective, if you specifically target MULEs at a higher priority than SCVs, the Terran might respond by saving energy for more scans, which could give him a scouting advantage as opposed to a potential mineral advantage.
If you target the scv's rather than mules, Terran will likely try to compensate for this by using even more mules to catch up. Which means they will have less scans.
|
If it's early game (1 base), then i'll usually go for MULEs, as the boosted income could pay for a terran player's (future) command center or tech, but when it goes to 2 base, i just nail the SCVs, as there's usually a quicker mule energy buildup that can be used instantly, but SCVs require constant attention from the player.
Edit: grammar
|
Considering it's very difficult to estimate how far the MULE is through it's life cycle unless you actually saw it drop, it's a pretty dangerous decision to make. I'd honestly go for the SCV's simply because once the MULE expires, you're causing a lasting effect on their income, whereas their economy is still optimal (assuming saturation) if you kill the MULE.
|
*ninjaed*
Also worth noting is that unless you see the mule drop you dont know how long it has left in its life. It has a lower value as a target the longer its on the field, because there is no point killing it if it about to die anyway.
SCV are guaranteed damage however
|
You have to make the same choices harassing with mutas, I usually go for SCVs building, SCVs on gas, then mining SCVs, mules last. The harass is about being as annoying as possible, so sniping a mule is only good if its the first one out and you make the T think "wow, that sucks, I could have just delayed my OC for x seconds"
|
I think it also depends on the time remaining on the mule. A mule that has just been dropped and hasn't returned a mineral yet is worth more than one that's on its last trip. It also affects build order timings like 3 rax.
|
It's situational. If you have a timing attack planned shortly after the harassment I would think the MULEs would be better targets. Also, if you just saw a mule go down and hasnt even mined yet, that might be a better target, even more so if he has 30 mins in his hand and hasn't returned any at all. If you're playing a more long game harassment to expand I would think the SCVs would be better targets, again better if they have 5 mins in hand. And ofc there are a number of other factors to consider when grabbing units. If he has no money at all and 1 scv and 1 mule. grab the SCV me thinks
|
I think killing money now is better then killing money latter, why? because you can use the money that they get from mules, to make SCVs or CCs to get more money latter. So if you kill 4 mules just as they land thats like killing 1080 minerals, or enough to produce a second cc and 13 more scvs! More money now means they can USE that extra money to get more money latter.
Clearly killing mules 1 second before it dies is worthless though, so it depends on how far along the mule is. But I would say about 60-70% of the time, its better to kill the mule.
Also latter on in the game, I would say its more important to kill mules because mules cost no food. Making him make more scvs (to have the same econ) means less of an army. Also latter on scvs are usualy maxed out any way so killing some of them might do 0 damage to the econ.
|
If you think about it, you shouldn't target any units at all, you need to target units that have resources in their hands =D That way you can capitalize on the loss of resources.
|
I target the SCVs in gas personally, trying to force them to go for a more mineral heavy build. There's always the chance they'll forget to resaturate it, and mules can't help their gas income.
MMM is mineral heavy, colossi + phoenix beats it pretty well, so it's kinda like a phoenix opening in PvZ (force units you can kill with your tech switch)
In a purely minerals situation, I'd probably pick the SCVs, as with poor timing (or forgetting to check the OCs energy) I could be wasting gravitrons.
|
i was watching i replay of a pro gamer, wish i could remember who but it was a while ago and i watch to many replays but he was using phoenix to harass and he was targeting the scv's over the mules- if my memory holds me right the terran was on 1 base doing a mainly bio build. ( i suppose different situations may call for a different answer).
|
Even if they had resources in their hands, kill 4 guys and it's like...20 minerals?
Sure, you might as well if all else is equal, but I don't think the 5 or 30 minerals they're holding is enough to make you decide on SCV vs Mule.
Has anyone done any testing on this, or kind of numerical thinking on it? I agree with a few of the situational comments, and certain situation is a factor...but I'm sure I'm not the first to think of this or test it out.
|
This has already been debated to death and the general rule of thumb is 50% left on their timer.
You are neglecting/undervaluing time-value of money. That 135-270 minerals could mean a faster expo by 15-30 seconds which snowballs from there.
|
On February 16 2011 15:00 EnderSword wrote: Even if they had resources in their hands, kill 4 guys and it's like...20 minerals?
That's 20 minerals they will never get back! Same thing as stealing minerals with your scouting worker at the start of the map.
|
I'm not neglecting the time value of money, (I'm actually doing a Finance MBA so its at the front of my mind)
But, that's why I'm asking, has anyone quantified that value? Like an expo 30 seconds faster doesn't seem like it would actually make you back the money from 4 SCVs...you'd need it probably, 68 seconds faster (4 scv build times) right?
There's a lot of intuitive stuff here, but anyone who has actual econ benefits from the faster minerals calculated out for instance?
I'm not strongly taking the 'SCV first' side, but that seems where it points if you expect a longer game.
|
Technically if the game will go on long enough that an SCV will harvest more than the MULE will in the amount of time it has remaining, it would be better to target an SCV.
At least I think so, could be I'm ignoring some variable.
|
There is at least one case where targeting a mule is always perfered, and that is when he is on 1-2 mining bases and fully saturated or oversaturated (assuming you cant kill enough to make him less then full saturation). Then its a case of strictly making him get resources slower.
Also if the mule has 1 or 0 trips left before it blows up, then clearly you should be targeting scvs.
So, in the end it depends?
|
Do the minerals mined after killing 4 SCV's take into account mules that are active as well? Because if you compared killing 4 mules from a batch of SCV's to killing SCV's from a group of SCV's only, it would make a difference?
I generally go with any mules that are relatively high on lifetime left and the workers on gas. Those seem to be the most vital. However, if the game has reached the point where the terran player can drop 4 mules, it shouldnt really matter if you kill a mule or SCV, as long as you keep up the harass because you can assume at that point, the Terran economy is already rolling.
|
Mules earlygame, SCV's lategame.
|
Well, no, in the example I gave, it doesn't make a difference. Whether there's 4 more SCVs mining or not, unless its enough to go beyond saturation.
Should make a difference if you're killing 4 from a group of 8, or 4 from a group of 16, it's still only the SCV compared to the mule that matters.
The idea is just to compare all benefits gained from one versus the other. Basically what's the benefit of 135 NOW vs 45/min perpetually? (or 270 if you just saw the Mule Land)
A few are saying Mule early game, SCV late...wondering why? The math alone would suggest the exact opposite, the closer you are to the game end, the more you should target Mules imo. But one SCV killed in like minute 5, has missed out on like 1000 minerals by minute 25
|
On February 16 2011 16:00 EnderSword wrote: Well, no, in the example I gave, it doesn't make a difference. Whether there's 4 more SCVs mining or not, unless its enough to go beyond saturation.
Should make a difference if you're killing 4 from a group of 8, or 4 from a group of 16, it's still only the SCV compared to the mule that matters.
The idea is just to compare all benefits gained from one versus the other. Basically what's the benefit of 135 NOW vs 45/min perpetually? (or 270 if you just saw the Mule Land)
A few are saying Mule early game, SCV late...wondering why? The math alone would suggest the exact opposite, the closer you are to the game end, the more you should target Mules imo. But one SCV killed in like minute 5, has missed out on like 1000 minerals by minute 25
Mules are a resource that is shared with Scans. By taking out a mule early game you deny the Terran player that burst of minerals that he might have needed to construct or build more forces. Not to mention mules are the only eco boost the Terran has. Protoss can always chronoboost more Probes and you can't do anything about it. Zerg can infect.
Terran has to decide between a scan and a mule believe me nothing demoralises a Terran player more then having his fresh mule abducted by space aliens on a drunken driveby. The theorycraft might suggest that SCV's are the better target but really think about the psychological factor here : You have 50 energy, you can use it to scout the enemy base and see what's up or you can get a big boost for those marines / structures. You pick the mule to get more marines since you are going bio only to have it driveby'd 2 returns later.
Tell me, would a Terran player feel more pissed about losing some SCV's (this happens all the time) or would he get more pissed about losing a very important economical linchpin that cost him a scan?
|
He'd be more pissed off by a MULE, But is that always good?
If it means he scans more, and catches you going DT, or he gets frustrated and pushes when oyu didn't want him to etc...
I personally find the most effective harassment is small stuff that they don't bother to address, and they just end up 6-8 workers down all game.
|
It depends on what you want to achieve with the harass.
Reasons to go for mules: -base is oversaturated, so the scv brings no income anyway -you want to slow down the terran for the next minute, as the immediate effect is bigger -you want to bait another mule drop so that no scan is available
Reasons to go for scvs: -long term effect is much bigger, a mule dies anyway -base is not oversaturated
In the end, in general it is more efficient to go for scvs, but there are scenarios where mules are preferred targets.
|
Um. This isn't rocket science.
Always hit the MULES. Because you always want to immediately damage their economy.
Yes, you kill an scv, and you potentially killed off an infinite amount of minerals.... so what. Are you planning on playing for an infinite amount of time? =/
Seriously. I'm pretty stupid, and even I can figure this out...
Side bonus, they usually re-MULE after you pick off MULES, so it leaves their OC's with less energy for scans. hehehe.
|
I think you got this a little wrong. 1 mule gets 270 minerals in 90 sec. 4 Mules get 4 times as much, not just 270. I think you need to look over your numbers once more
Also simple economics. Money now is worth more than money later.
|
On February 16 2011 17:41 mytent wrote: Um. This isn't rocket science.
Always hit the MULES. Because you always want to immediately damage their economy.
Why do you always want to hurt their economy Immediately?
It doesn't matter if you don't play an infinite amount of time when it becomes beneficial after 3 minutes...that's a little shy of infinite
It's not rocket science if you refuse to actually give it any thought. But it has a lot of nuance to it once you consider the different scenarios
|
On February 16 2011 17:47 Neivler wrote:I think you got this a little wrong. 1 mule gets 270 minerals in 90 sec. 4 Mules get 4 times as much, not just 270. I think you need to look over your numbers once more
where is this done wrong?
|
think of it this way, with good mule useage there will ALWAYS be 1 mule per OC period, unless they saved energy for a scan or somthing but even then they can still ALWAYS have 1 mule up and running per CC during their energy regen time. so if i take the mule out that means they have to wait for their energy to regen in order to cast another mule.. and SCV may only cost 50 minerals, kill 4 of my SCV's its ok because i have a mule giving me the same resources... as those 4 , also i don't plan to stop SCV production just because you killed a few, choosing the mule makes it so they mine minerals slower which means they are forced to produce units at a slower pace... so i wonder why kill 4 scv's if i can force them to use their energy to drop another mule(this removes options like scans/supply depot drop) because i killed the last one they dropped. well honestly there isnt any reason to kill anything but the mules if u have 3 seconds to do dmg or lose units, kill the mule it is going to give more minerals in less time than the SCV's thus making their build slower. also if u have a choice between 1 mule and killing off 4-5 GAS workers imho i would just kill the gas workers as many many players DO NOT re saturate for a long time( from my reps about 5-45 seconds **game time**)
the non-Logical choice would choose mules due to the fact you SLOW their mineral gain which slows units/buildings being built.
The Logical choice would choose mineral gathering workers. Long term damage(only useful if the game lasts for a long period)(20+ mins)
The smart choice- Targeting gas mining workers. not only does this kill their workers but slows production of ALL units that require gas.
Mules only mine minerals so you have to smash 4 or more workers that mine minerals in a single harassment attack to make it worth not killing the mule. killing the gas workers causes them to use actions to replace the workers; actions that could be spent building units or controlling your army(pros normally don't forget this so don't expect this to be your savior vs one)
|
Whatever you can kill the most of with the least risk to your own units. This is a really good place where your own judgment can come into play.
|
well....if u do kil l mules...because the mine shit so fast, isnt it more logical? they mine mins FASTER which means in that space of 10mins terran would have an extra rax or so bekuz of that temporary increase of mineral income...
|
It's better to hit scv's imo because the mule you kill might have only had 3 seconds left till it timed out in which case the damage you have done to their economy is zero.
|
MULEs are actually considerably harder to kill than SCVs. It's not just the 15 extra hitpoints - you usually have to walk further to get to them, and you don't benefit at all from injuring them and coming back later. And it's pretty clear that SCVs are worth more in terms of long-run minerals mined.
Only time you'd want to target MULEs is when they're oversaturated or when you want to mess with their timings. And even then, only if you're pretty sure it isn't about to time out by itself.
|
Ok, lets look at this mathematically.
You do not know at which point of a mules lifetime it is, unless you saw it drop, or you have insane knowledge of the timings of terran. So lets assume you do not know it, which means that on average, you kill 50% of a mule if you kill this mule instead of an scv. This would be 135 minerals over the next 45 seconds.
Assuming the base at this point only has two SCVs on each mineral patch, one scv will collect about 30 minerals over these 45 seconds. So 45 seconds after this action, the terran has either lost 100 minerals, or a worker. A worker costs only 50 minerals, however, worker production is also limited by the amount of CCs you have. It will take the worker another 1:15 to collect those 50 missing minerals, or 2:30 to collect the whole 100 minerals if we are only interested in how much minerals the terran has to spend on an army.
You could use those extra minerals to expand earlier. Assuming you would want to build a CC exactly 45 seconds after the harrass, and you accumulated money to do so at a rate of about 100 mpm, since you would also need to produce units throughout this time, this could ideally delay the next CC by another minute. Which obviously would be worth it, however this is also the very unlikely best possible option.
If the terran has a better saturation than 2* mineral patches, but is still constantly producing workers, the effects of killing workers instead of mules become drastically less. Assuming the third worker on a patch produces 20 mpm, 45 seconds after the harrassment, it would have collected 15 minerals, meaning that the mule is 120 minerals more of a loss at that point in time. To collect the 70 additional minerals to the costs of the worker, this worker would need 3:30, at which point both harrasses would have been equally effective. At any point before that, killing the mule was more beneficial. As for the total minerals to be spend on army, it would take this pure worker a full 6 minutes to accumulate those 120 minerals, and only thereafter it would have been better to have killed this worker instead of the mule.
If we are that late in the game that the terran is not constantly producing workers anymore, killing a worker effectively costs the terran 50 minerals + what that worker mines in 17 seconds, which could be anything from 5-15 minerals depending on saturation and the position of the worker between mineral patch and OC when you kill it. However, even with 65 minerals lost it would still have been smarter to target the Mule, which costs him 135 minerals.
If you decide to target SCVs instead of Mules, you should always take those that are mining gas instead of those that are mining minerals. Even with instantaneous transfer of different workers into the gas, this costs the terran some gas, and most terran builds are gas-limited. Furthermore, the better your enemy is, the more likely it is that they will mine the exact amount of gas at the exact time they need it to do what they want to do, so by reducing their gas-income, you directly delay whatever they are doing. Also, it takes away some of your opponent attention by having to put workers back into the gas, and there is also a slight possibility of your enemy not noticing that a worker on gas is missing, which would be the best possible result.
As a conclusion, i would target worker over mules if the base we are talking about is at 2*patches or lower saturation, but always focus the ones on gas. If the base is on higher saturation, or the terran has reached his limit of scvs in the game, i would always target mules, or maybe single scvs on gas in the hope that he does not notice it it gone.
It should also be noted that a Mule has more HP than an scv, and takes longer to kill as a result, at least if you have a low phoenix count.
|
On February 16 2011 17:48 EnderSword wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2011 17:41 mytent wrote: Um. This isn't rocket science.
Always hit the MULES. Because you always want to immediately damage their economy. Why do you always want to hurt their economy Immediately?
Because you just spent a bunch of resources getting a unit to harass, then used a bunch of energy on those harass units to render their effectiveness in real combat even less.
You want to keep him pinned down with those phoenixes, the best way to do that is to delay his army creation/turrent creation as long as possible, both so you can harass more efficiently and have enough time to turn that harass into a significant long-term lead, rather than a minor annoyance that leaves you at a disadvantage when he pushes out. You can't boil down complex systems down into a simple dollar sign that easily.
|
Go for SCVs, then when they drop mules, go for those. You can see the MULEs being dropped even in the fog of war.
|
i rather target scv's then mules because scv's cost mins unlike mules which only cost 50 energy but never less target scv's instead of mules since scv's can fight back and mules can't
|
always kill mules by shift clicking, they are worth wayyyy more than scv's
|
Maybe ask a pro which they prefer to target.
Or ask yourself, if I were Terran, which would I try saving the most.
Itll be mule for sure.
And immediate, maximized damage is what you aim for in any attack. Because you don't know how long the game is going to go for. He might take a third, so you see an opportunity to move out win your two base death ball. You might be going for a macro game... Btt maybe he wants to end it now with a 3 rax stim push.
All I'm saying is that no one has the foresight to know whether a game will go for another 15 minutes or another 5 minutes.
So you play to win as soon as possible. Even if as soon as possible is only possible by the time you're taking your third.
The point is you don't know. So you always try to maximize the immediate damage you can deal to the other player. In this case that means the mule
|
Basically depends on saturation and if you just saw it called down, if the guy is down on minerals.
If you just saw a massive calldown you know the guy needs minerals NOW and if he doesn't get them NOW he's in shit, so take those mules and then attack.
On average though, definitely SCV's, going for mules in general because they 'provide more income' is just garbled mathematics, mules die on their own, SCV's down. If you kill a mule you're removed a fixed amount of income, let's say 180 in 30 seconds, if you kill an SCV you've taken an infinite amount of income.
Terrans, in early game, also don't 'replace' SCV's, you should always keep producing SCV's so they always produce them anyway and in a constant pace, terran has no control over the pace in which they produce them, zerg and protoss have control over the rate in which they produce harvesters and thus can 'replace' them by stepping up production by allocating more larvae and chronoboost to them.
Of course, I always enjoy to be a pest and lift SCV's that are making buildings, I've had games where that guy had 3 unfinished supply depots in his base and didn't notice because I snatched the SCV's from there. That's 300 minerals simply gone, beats a mule every day.
The logic of saying 'but an SCV costs minerals!' is also debatable, yeah, it costs minerals, but when you snatch it it has already lived for a while and mined for a while so it already fulfilled some of its purpose.
The point a lot of these arguments don't take into consideration is inflation in SC2, there is simply inflation going on, technically a worker costs only 50 and gives you infinite money back, but there is inflation, and money now, is always better than money later. In fact, I would argue that using your first mule to call down supply might in the end be an advantage, because 100 money directly in early game might prove better than 280 money over time.
|
An important consideration though is that you are very often making SCVS, so if we consider losing only ONE scv then that same SCV will be replaced quite quickly (and the oppritunity lost from mining will be minimal at a saturated base).
So in terms of low numbers harras, grab the mule, then grab some SCVS.
|
If I see the MULE get called down it gets top priority. If I see it with an armful of minerals on the way back to the OC it gets priority. I figure blowing up those 50 minerals is worth more than killing an SCV, even if the MULE won't get the chance to mine again. Other than that I go for scv's.
|
It's situational, but I usually go for mules. Most pros I've seen go for mules as well (in regards to phoenix harass, i.e. around the mid game).
The logic is first of all as many have pointed out, the time value of money, i.e. minerals early > minerals late, and killing a mule has a more immediate economical impact. Second of all, in most situations they be at least partially saturated on their bases, so there is dimishing returns for SCVs, but mules do not suffer from this.
Also I believe killing mules when they are bring minerals back has more of an effect than people think. 30 minerals (42 w/ gold patches!) in their hand means 30 minerals that was mined but they received no benefit from. That's 30 minerals they are never getting back in addition to lost mining time from the killed mule.
|
As a terran:
Generally Pick off the MULES Watching a MULE I just called down get picked off makes me cry, especially on a saturated base
If I'm going heavy factory or starport play or it's late game, pick the guys out of gas.
If you pick 'em out of gas when theres something else going on, it's really easy to forget about it, and wind up with 500 minerals 40 gas
|
I think if you just want to hurt your enemy, SCVs would be the best bet, as they continue to cost minerals long after your units leave. However, if the harass has a specific purpose, make sure you keep that in mind. If you want to use it to cover an expansion, then go for the MULES, as it cuts down on his production, and therefore his ability to counterattack, right NOW. If you are trying to stop an expansion that should logically happen, you might want to go for the MULES as the current patches are already oversaturated and SCVs won't affect income for some time. If he has just expanded, snipe SCVs as he won't be at full saturation for some time yet.
Also, as was already noted, always go for SCVs on gas (and probes and drones on gas, too). It will cut into gas until they start to replace it, and then it will cut into minerals.
|
On February 16 2011 14:07 EnderSword wrote: SCV: 45min/minute. Mule: 270min in 90 seconds, so 180/minute.
We can restate that the Mule is of unknown time duration left, so perhaps call it 60 of 90 seconds (2/3rds duration) to weight this a little unfairly in favor of killing mules.
So in 60 seconds, the SCV gathers 45 minerals. It doesn't die, so that's +50 minerals. The Mule gathers 180 minerals, then dies.
So if you expect the game to go on for only 60 seconds which is unlikely given that you're harassing, then you should kill the Mule.
If you pull it out to that all important 3 minute mark, the SCV has mined 135 minerals and didn't die for another +50 minerals, so that means the SCV was worth 185 minerals whereas the Mule was worth 180.
To cut it short, you should target the SCV unless you expect to end the game in the next 2 minutes.
|
It is not necessarily about ending the game, since the enemy having 3 less marines at a given time might be more of an advantage then some possible later weakness. So, it is more like "If you expect anything important to happen in the next 2-5 minutes"
Also, saturation is very important in this topic. As i explained before.
|
On February 17 2011 05:55 Trump wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2011 14:07 EnderSword wrote: SCV: 45min/minute. Mule: 270min in 90 seconds, so 180/minute. We can restate that the Mule is of unknown time duration left, so perhaps call it 60 of 90 seconds (2/3rds duration) to weight this a little unfairly in favor of killing mules. So in 60 seconds, the SCV gathers 45 minerals. It doesn't die, so that's +50 minerals. The Mule gathers 180 minerals, then dies. So if you expect the game to go on for only 60 seconds which is unlikely given that you're harassing, then you should kill the Mule. If you pull it out to that all important 3 minute mark, the SCV has mined 135 minerals and didn't die for another +50 minerals, so that means the SCV was worth 185 minerals whereas the Mule was worth 180. To cut it short, you should target the SCV unless you expect to end the game in the next 2 minutes.
This doesn't sound quite right to me
On a fully saturated base (assuming 16 scv's) you are getting 720 minerals per minute (16*45)
With one MULE on top of that you get 900 minerals per minute (16*45+180)
If you kill one SCV it takes 17 seconds to replace so if you kill the SCV at the start of the minute their minerals at the end of the minute would look like:
(15*45=675)-50+(45*0.716r=32.25)+180=837.25 minerals
If you kill the MULE: 810±90 depending on which point of its life time it's at
TL;DR on average, ON AVERAGE!, killing the MULE will deprive him of more minerals during a one minute period
|
There's a Huge issue with the concept of 'Replacing' the SCV
You almost never 'Replace' an SCV except in the late game.
Almost anything up to 20 minutes, you're constantly building SCVs, so losing an SCV at any time is a straight up loss, you never 'replace' it, because you were going to keep building them anyway.
If you had 16 and you lost one, the next isn't a replacement...he was building anyway. It's simply that you have 16 still when you would have had 17.
You replace a Eng bay, a supply depot or an Armory you lost ...you don't 'replace' SCVs in the same way
|
Mules don't get you more minerals. Just faster minerals.
|
<TLDR summary> MULE v. SCV optimizations depend on the length of time until full saturation of all bases is reached because at full saturation income reaches a ceiling. This depends on estimates about how many bases one can hold effectively, discounted by how long they're held. </tldr>
Many people have suggested that saturation matters, so I ran some numbers. In doing, I thought more about how we could quantify the benefit of each option and compare.
The original example sets up a baseline case, and then the two alternatives. This is good, but it doesn't map to a real game. By not creating additional SCVs, the OP doesn't experience an income ceiling due to saturation. I believe the most critical figure in determining which is a better choice is the time until saturation is reached, which determines how long income is suppressed compared to a baseline after a SCV/MULE kill.
While minerals collected will lag by a set amount until the base is mined out, income levels will plateau at the same level as soon as full saturation on all operating bases is reached. How long it takes to return and the net income loss should allow the player to decide which is better in the given game.
Assume the optimal baseline case. A player will have constant SCV production until they've reached saturation. EnderSword has mentioned this above. That means there's no slack to add an extra SCV to the production cycle (unlike Zerg and Toss, as someone mentioned). If we had a map with infinite resource locations then we'd never reach saturation. In this situation, +1 more SCV is always better, even over MULEs. However in practice, the saturation point is reached quickly. It actually scales as well, with the saturation time decreasing in proportion to the number of bases (because the CCs grow but saturation point remains the same).
From game start, one base reaches saturation's at about 7 minutes [(30 - 6) * 17]. At two bases the production doubles. Saturating a second base from scratch can be accomplished in 4:15 [(17 / 60) * (30 / 2)].
When we lose an SCV, we've fallen behind the baseline in terms of minerals collected by a measurable amount. That amount is equal to:
replacement cost of lost SCV + time until saturation * average of the marginal collection rate for each new SCV until saturation
In other words, if you can estimate your opponent's time until saturation, you can estimate the extent to which he lags the baseline. Similarly, income is suppressed by the marginal value of the SCV/MULE lost (this is just a function of saturation). The income remains suppressed relative to the baseline until saturation is reached.
The big if in this equation is the "time until saturation" number.
In contrast, a MULE kill at 50% puts the player behind 135 in absolute terms, and suppresses income by 90 minerals per minute for 90 seconds, all irrespective of saturation levels.
So saturation determines not only the degree of absolute minerals lost (or behind the optimal case, technically) but also the income rate reduction and its duration.
Here are some examples with numbers: A) One base, 25 SCVs on minerals. Lose 1 SCV (24 now). Amount lost = 50 + 0 seconds * 0 = 50. B) One base, 23 SCVs on minerals. Lose 1 SCV (22 now). Amount lost = 50 + 34 seconds * 32 = 68. C) One base, 23 SCVs on minerals, 1 MULE. Lose 1 MULE (50%). Amount lost = 135. D) One base, 16 SCVs on minerals. Lose 1 SCV (15 now). Amount lost = 50 + (9 * 17 seconds) * Average_of(45,32,32,32,32,32,32,32,32) = 135.2.
In example A, income (per minute average) doesn't drop at all, and extra costs only drop by the 50 used to replace the SCV. In example D, income rate doesn't reach baseline levels for over 2:30, although on average it is only depressed by about 33 per minute.
I realize this omits some factors that may sometimes be relevant, such as preemptive over-saturation (this can be accounted for though), and supply issues and cost, higher HP on a MULE. There may be psychological issues too, and maybe hitting gas is better. If your opponent gets supply locked frequently or forgets SCVs, this will also increase the time to saturation, increasing the cost of losing an SCV. Most important, MULEs quickly extinguish a base, which is relevant in practical terms. Certainly in practice you would need to apply probabilities to these, and discount the full saturation calculations accordingly. Lastly, people may forget to replenish SCVs or may not have optimal saturation which could amplify the effect of SCV killing (although this would be reflected in the time til full saturation number).
While there may be reasons to prefer targeting SCVs, we should be clear about what those are, and what affects that decision. I believe it's time until full saturation, but if I've made mistakes here please let me know (first post too so be nice). Thanks.
|
On February 17 2011 11:17 MacroKing wrote: Mules don't get you more minerals. Just faster minerals.
Well, so do additional SCVs above your starting 6. One could also argue that faster minerals are indeed more minerals, since you have them when you would not have them otherwise, meaning that at many points in time, you have, in fact, more. You simply cannot talk about economy and completely ignore time as a factor, it just does not work.
|
When they're undersaturated it's better to hit the MULEs. If they're undersaturated, generally it means they need the eco hit if he's lost SCVs or he just needs the eco hit for stuff ASAP. Messes up timings and units if you kill MULEs, especially when short on SCVs.
|
well i think it's much better to kill a full-life mule, but you have no idea how much time is left on that mule... it'd be stupid to kill it if it only had 1 more mining trip left on it.
|
MULEs temporarily boost income, SCVs are the backbone of the income.
Killing an SCV is permanent damage while killing a MULE is just temporary as he can get his energy back for free.
Killing MULEs is too much of a gamble imo, just focus on killing SCVs.
|
Alright so here is the definite answer based upon my opinion =D If you cannot kill more than enough SCV's to cause him to be undersaturated, it is better to kill a MULE, if you are killing SCV's and he is super saturated then it was pointless kills not unless he expands. I'd say 1 Mule is greater than 1 SCV, so make sure to just kill like 10 things and include the MULE. Also if you come back every 30 seconds to do harass you can easily kill an income quickly. Even with turrets up you can kill a couple with a fly by. If he leaves guys in his back just pull away and attack his front, once he pulls away attack his mineral line rinse repeat win.
|
I target mules first, especially if I see them called down just before I attack.
As zerg I r jelly of mools.
|
I like to first pick of SCV's on gas, then mules, then mining SCV's.
|
When you pick off a MULE it makes the Terran player cringe.
|
Here are my personal guidelines for killing workers. I feel this is a practical application backed by most of the mathcraft found earlier in this thread.
If it's relatively early game I'll... a) Kill MULEs if I'm looking to end the game early. b) Kill SCVs if I want a long macro game.
If it's later on... a) Kill MULEs if the base is >=saturated. b) Kill SCVs if it's some fledgling expansion.
When it doubt, kill MULEs. It hurts the Terran's feelings.=D
*SCVs on gas are prioritized in all situations
|
An SCV is not worth infinite minerals. It is worth exactly 50 minerals + the amount of minerals it would've mined between the point you kill it and the point you reach saturation.
Say you are on one base, and you have 24 SCVs on Minerals, 6 on Gas. If you kill an SCV, it is worth 50 minerals + the amount of minerals it would've mined in the build time of one SCV (assuming that you were not producing SCVs at the time of it being killed). Once you have finished building this SCV, you are back at saturation and would receive no additional income from that killed SCV.
Ergo, by the same logic, if the base is very undersaturated, an SCV is more worthwhile to kill, but as the base tends toward saturation, there will become a point where a Mule is more worthwhile to kill.
This logic only applies in the scenario that you're analysing their economy in the long run, but if you're looking to do short run damage (i.e. kill a mule and then hit a timing where they have 200 less minerals than they otherwise would've), then killing the Mule is almost always better.
|
i for myself came to the conclusion that targeting scvs is way better for more than one reason, at first if you kill a mule they will call another one a minute later and its like you have never been there but if you kill scvs actually they have to replace them a scv costs 50 minerals + 50 to replace the old one + lost miningtime. If you kill a mule the terran doesnt lose any minerals because all a mule can do is mine minerals faster - you do not gain any minerals by using mules.
I think different if the terran is either heavily over saturated with scvs or if it is in the very early game and you just saw a mule called down so id try to snipe it with my reaper or w/e unit i have at that time.
|
I'd say it mostly depends on the type of the game. If you see it going to the mid/late game, just go and kill some scvs(cause it's long-term harm) and if you think he's going to do 2 base all-in, you should kill mules.
|
Get the mules, it throws their timing pushes off.
|
Fairly certain its usually better to hit SCVs unless its early game.. (around first through 3rd mule drop).. SCV's cause more long time issues.. for instance using more mules.. and having one less scv to build buildings with // scout etc. It puts them farther behind for sure.
|
I'm of the opinion it's better to it SCVs in every circumstance - unless the Terran player (I play Terran) is doing some sort of all in.
The proper way - I believe - to think about this, is that an Orbital Command produces enough energy to mule once every 90 seconds. Or in other words, the Orbital command is like having 4 extra SCVs.
Killing a mule - is simply 'stopping' those 4 scvs from mining for the Terran player for 90-x seconds, where "x" is how long it's already been mining for. (For now I'm going to ignore any theory on what psychological decision you are causing the player to make with their future orbital energy).
Whereas killing an SCV does 50 minerals of REAL dmg, 17 seconds of CC production time, and removes the mining benefit of that single SCV "Permanently". Killing an SCV will do more dmg unless you are 100% the game will end in the next 270 seconds (and that is assuming the mule was FRESH when you killed it).
Is there something wrong with the logic I'm using here? -- From the Terran perspective (myself as a player) losing a mule bothers me much less than losing an SCV because I do not have to re-build, and generally, being the best 'defensive' race in the game in MOST circumstances I can choose to play a slower game should I desire, so the BOOST of minerals is less important to me than the overall 'efficiency' of my economy - rebuilding SCVs which I previously lost is an inefficient use of minerals.
|
Hyrule18762 Posts
If you pick up and kill a loaded MULE you remove 30 minerals from the game. Each loaded SCV is only 5. I don't see how it's a hard decision.
|
On February 18 2011 01:46 tofucake wrote: If you pick up and kill a loaded MULE you remove 30 minerals from the game. Each loaded SCV is only 5. I don't see how it's a hard decision.
Nope, the MULE is worth 0 minerals (90 seconds time however of energy), whereas the SCV is worth 50 minerals - by destroying the SCV you remove 55 minerals from the game (assuming it's loaded).
|
If I saw a mule drop down I'd go for it first definitely, otherwise though I think SCVs are a better target (Terran have so few already ^^).
On February 16 2011 14:51 Kornholi0 wrote: If you think about it, you shouldn't target any units at all, you need to target units that have resources in their hands =D That way you can capitalize on the loss of resources. I just looked at your sig.
Please stop posting every single game you play. GR is not meant to be used like that lol
|
|
|
|