Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (56 users) | |
|
| Buddhist United States. June 03 2010 03:13. Posts 655 | Profile # |
Edited because people don't read past the OP.
I didn't see a thread on this, at least not with real data, so here it is:
Using QXC's build tester, I very carefully tested whether splitting actually makes a difference. I assumed it would make some small difference (as I think most people assume), but I was wrong. I tested 3 split methods. One method is to have no split, to simply send all 6 workers to mine one patch. One method is the half split, to send all 6 workers to one patch, then quickly select 3 and send them to a different patch. The final method tested is the one I use in real games, to quickly press f1 (select idle worker) and right click an individual mineral patch, to send each worker to its own patch. I also tested whether it matters if you build the first worker before or after sending the starting ones to gather.
I used Protoss in every trial, but the race should have no affect what so ever, because no supply buildings are produced.
The rally point was the same at all times for all trials. I made sure I restarted if I misclicked at all, so that each trial would be within an infinitesimally small margin of error. No chrono boost is used, because the way you split has no effect on your chrono boosts, and it would just add another margin of error.
The effectiveness of each split is measured by the number of minerals at the 1 minute and 2 minute marks.
+ Show Spoiler +
If the tables look identical, they should, because they are. That is no exaggeration, it's real data I carefully recorded from in-game tests.
Yes, 1 and 2 minutes aren't very far into the game, so maybe the difference could pan out later, but really, considering how precisely equal each method is, I don't think the split would ever have any affect on any game. If you aren't seeing even a single extra 5 mineral return after 2 minutes into the game, I don't think you'll ever get an advantage large enough to account for even a single unit at any point through a game.
Thoughts?
edit: Kletus ran some tests of his own:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 03 2010 07:34 Kletus wrote:Okay, a couple of things to note: i) Speed was slowest throughout the whole 1min timer; the timer I used was real-time supplied by the build order tester map VERSION 2.3. ii) This was timed to the second. By that I mean I stopped looking at the minerals once I saw 1:00 so if an scv was JUST about to put in minerals, he gets cut. iii) Race used was terran. iv) For F1 split, I started the split from 6th patch from the bottom. Then just clicked down each patch. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch. Also, I have noticed a pattern with the F1 selection AI and it can probably be done even more efficiently than just clicking down a line; will investigate this later. v) For half split, I split the scvs to the patches 2nd from the top and 2nd from the bottom. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch. vi) For no split, I simply took all my scvs and right-clicked the fifth patch from the bottom, which is the closest and most centered patch on the beta tester map. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch. These are my findings: Minerals @ 1min ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/Cletus/excelyo.jpg) The difference between half and none is truly negligible. The difference between F1 and the rest is maybe a couple of milliseconds, just enough for one scv to finish his trip.
So there is a difference 40 seconds in, but this difference does not increase over time. So essentially, you get those 5 minerals with a perfect f1 split milliseconds sooner than without, but there is no exponential increase, so you won't see that difference in the 1 min or 2 min results.
Also, some people have mentioned (and I've stated myself) that the map matters. Some maps have obviously split mineral patches that will benefit from worker splits, especially if patches are optimized on the edges and not the middle where you would click for a no-split.
Btw, this thread has nothing to do with BW, or whether or not this is a good thing, it's just about data. I don't think that "requiring" splitting was at all a bad thing for BW, and I also don't think it's at all necessary for SC2, it's something you'll only do once a game, and it just is what it is.Last edit: 2010-06-04 00:48:51 |
| | Puppy faces. :3, Ratiophile.org |
|
|
| G3nXsiS United States. June 03 2010 03:16. Posts 656 | Profile # |
| Hmm perhaps its just a .5 second difference but I guess to some people it matters. For me I would still stick with the half split, although this is indeed very interesting and I thank you for your efforts. |
| | Hope is the first step on the road to dissapointment |
|
|
 Arrian United States. June 03 2010 03:16. Posts 811 | Profile Blog # |
| if this is indeed true it's depressing |
| | sator arepo tenet opera rotas |  |
|
|
| Tone_ United Kingdom. June 03 2010 03:19. Posts 550 | Profile # |
| If the split is fast enough (maybe the key component) it must make a different. Just logically? |
| | Hasta La Victoria Siempre | 톤 | |
|
|
| zealing Canada. June 03 2010 03:19. Posts 806 | Profile Blog # |
if i que a scv, send all my scv's to one mineral (no micro) then the first scv will pop by the time i can que another, losing time. if i micro 2 of the scv's to go to seperate patches then i can que a 2nd scv just mila seconds before the first pops.
Does it really matter? well i donno, does winning matter? |
| | Think you got lag? It took Jesus 3 days to respawn. |
|
|
| woolly United States. June 03 2010 03:21. Posts 56 | Profile # |
| I suck at splitting anyways, I more often screw it up than get it right. Good riddance! |
|
|
| papaz Sweden. June 03 2010 03:22. Posts 3746 | Profile # |
i've always wondered about this and cool to see some numbers.
Dunno if the result surprised me but nice to see this on paper. |
| |
|
| Satallgeese United States. June 03 2010 03:23. Posts 239 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2010 03:16 Arrian wrote:
if this is indeed true it's depressing
I agree, this is kind of depressing, especially because I already spent three or four days practicing my splits... Well, I'm sticking to it then! If nothing, it at least keeps the hands warm. |
| | A good player practices until he gets it right. A great player practices until he can't get it wrong. |  |
|
|
| Buddhist United States. June 03 2010 03:24. Posts 655 | Profile # |
On June 03 2010 03:19 Tone_ wrote:
If the split is fast enough (maybe the key component) it must make a different. Just logically?
Logically I would assume it would make some difference, especially with the F1 split, since, if you did it inhumanly quickly, you could instantly send all of them at the same time, so there is no wasted time what so ever.
However, it seems that, even when you save a few milliseconds in the very beginning of the game, it doesn't really pan out into anything significant down the road.
I actually got into the very precise split testing in the above method because I was already testing splits in how quickly I can get a 13 gate up. Every single time, no matter how I split, (and interestingly, even if I did an 8 pylon instead of 9 pylon), my gateway would throw down at 1min 14sec. I did use a precise methodology for that as well, with my rally and the exact timing I would move the probe to prepare to build pylon/gate. But yeah, point is, it's a bit surprising, but it seems the split has no affect on the game. |
| | Puppy faces. :3, Ratiophile.org |
|
|
| CubEdIn Romania. June 03 2010 03:25. Posts 5128 | Profile Blog # |
| I was actually thinking about this a while ago, it seemed that trying to split them better sometimes made it worse (like miss-clicking and having them not mine for 1 second or so). It's sad though, I wish it would make a difference. |
| | Im not a n00b, I just play like one. | |
|
|
| Krowser Canada. June 03 2010 03:26. Posts 787 | Profile # |
This means I now have a few more seconds to appreciate the nice graphics of this game instead of spending more time destroying my mouse.
Sweet!! |
| | D3 and Pho, the way to go. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=340709 |
|
|
| Takkara United States. June 03 2010 03:27. Posts 1439 | Profile Blog # |
If a difference hasn't shown up after 1 min or 2 min it's probably not going to show up ever. If the numbers are identical at all data points, then they'll just be identical. I'm just surprised the numbers came out the same even though it's hard to get the same split each time.
If this is true though, then it's detrimental to do a split. There's the ever so small chance you mess up the split and miss clicking on the mineral line. The only purpose to do it would be to just get an early APM trial. |
| | Gee gee gee gee baby baby baby |  |
|
|
| Slow Motion United States. June 03 2010 03:29. Posts 4334 | Profile Blog # |
| Thanks for this data! I've been using the half split, but have noticed that it's as fast as when I don't split. Plus the greater chance for miss clicks when splitting makes splitting not very good. So many times I thought I clicked the minerals but actually got the ground next to it. |
| |
|
| mOnion United States. June 03 2010 03:29. Posts 4933 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2010 03:21 woolly wrote:
I suck at splitting anyways, I more often screw it up than get it right. Good riddance!
and another terrible player moves up in the ranks due to Blizzard's pathetic blessing.
Fantastic.
this is like the saddest thing ever. Last edit: 2010-06-03 03:29:35 |
| | ☆★☆ 7486!!! Join the Ban mOnion Anti-Trolling Initiative! - Caller | "on a scale of machine to 10, how bad is that Zerg?" - LZgamer | you are the new tl.net bonjwa monion, congrats - Rekrul | "Cheeseburgers dynamite lilacs" - Chill |  |
|
|
| Stagger Lee United States. June 03 2010 03:29. Posts 29 | Profile # |
| Awesome effort!! Thanks for this! |
|
|
| bITt.mAN Switzerland. June 03 2010 03:29. Posts 3397 | Profile Blog # |
| As a science major, I must examine your experimental method. How many trials of each method did you do? (Chooses to doubt and fight the results than accept them as they are depressing) |
| | BW4LYF . . . . . . PM me, I LOVE PMs. Yum Yum . . . . . Long live "NaDa's Body" . . . . . . Fantasy | Bisu/Best | Jaedong . . . . . Keep up Community, search "Call Me Maybe!" | |
|
|
| Kambo_Rambo Australia. June 03 2010 03:31. Posts 79 | Profile # |
| This is probably because the workers are automatically split into their mineral field. Back in BW a worker would just move onto the next mineral, check if its in use, if it is then move again, else, mine. |
| | You require more vespene minerals? |
|
|
| Backpack United States. June 03 2010 03:31. Posts 1760 | Profile Blog # |
On June 03 2010 03:29 mOnion wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 03 2010 03:21 woolly wrote:
I suck at splitting anyways, I more often screw it up than get it right. Good riddance!
and another terrible player moves up in the ranks due to Blizzard's pathetic blessing. Fantastic. this is like the saddest thing ever.
It is fantastic!
I love how more new players are finally getting to play the game! Good job blizzard  |
| | "You people need to just generally care a lot less about everything." -Zatic |  |
|
|
| woolly United States. June 03 2010 03:32. Posts 56 | Profile # |
On June 03 2010 03:19 zealing wrote:
Does it really matter? well i donno, does winning matter?
Your rhetorical question indicates that those precious early milliseconds make the difference in winning which infers that you must execute the rest of your game to flawless perfection.
I would argue that any millisecond advantage is going to be negligible considering how how thousands of other factors play out during the course of a game.
|
|
|
| gobrin Canada. June 03 2010 03:36. Posts 91 | Profile # |
| well, at least it still looks cool when you do a nice split. |
| |
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
![[image loading]](http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/7595/workersplit.png)
