Minerals for Gas? Poll

i like the idea, but i think they need to do some serious balencing to it. sure both players have to do it, but it just adds time to the game, and then your stuck waiting for it.

i wish it to be different. like have the 3000-4000 gas in the vespene geysers.

-Zerks

 

I know the feeling. When I found out the beta that Blizzard had announced was for the World of Warcraft expansion I was really dissapointed. I wanted it to be SC2 so bad.

 

I don't like the idea just because it is a crappy payoff, i'd rather be able to switch between paying minerals for gas then also be able to pay gas for minerals. I love those games. every game i play i end up loving that feature. that would ad more dynamic (better than just minerals for gas). And if you are ganna add that feature you might as well have it both ways. don't you agree?

 

People.

Imagine if in WC3 you could sell your lumber (In SC2-terms minerals) in exchange for gold (In this case vespine gas).

What would you do then? Well, you would simply make your units collect lumber.

Why?
Because the amount of workers on a goldmine (gas) is limited!
So you can basically abuse the system!
Workers on gas is "limited" and should stay that way.

Allowing gas to be bought by minerals is just stupid.

EDIT: I can't believe that 25 % of you guys think this would be a good idea!

 

I personally liked the original way in Sc1 made things less complicated and simpler is usually better.

 

Or, you can buy it from depleted geyser only...

 

I just don't like the idea, it's pretty lame. You "buy" a geyser. In what way does that seem real and fair?

 

It didn't seem that there was this new strategy in the first battle report.


You buy gas maybe in recolting it deeper underground. So you need mineral to forge ...

 

I'd rather have something like this:
Level 1 Refinery: 100 Minerals, harvests 6 Vespene, 2 when depleted
Level 2 Refinery: +100 Minerals, harvests 8 Vespene, 3 when depleted, requires Tier 2 unlocked
Level 3 Refinery: +100 Minerals, harvests 10 Vespene, 4 when depleted, requires Tier 3 unlocked
There would be a 20 second upgrade time. Note that the extra 2 or 4 Vespene is not taken from the actual supply, but is permanent. Terrans may NOT salvage their Refineries.

I think such would be a more reasonable exchange.

 

See that just makes things way more complicated i liked the original because it was so much simpler.

 

I just want gas to be old way. Just get a new expo with gas if you run out....

 

Agreed. I liked geysers the way they were, not with all this stuff where it turns off or needs minerals to be dumped into it.

 

I don't think anyone likes this new geyser idea that blizzard is adding.

 

Well, the pole speaks for itself.

Honestly i don't know why they had to change it. And making it automatically deduct minerals is horrible, i might need those minerals.

 

Im sure this is just one of those crazy alpha build things their just trying out to see how it effects the game but I can bet they will either go in a different direction or just make it the same as in Starcraft.

 

Although i voted for no, this change in the gameplay mechanic i think is based on the change of the game itself. I looked at the SCII demos and its so different now, so perhaps it might be a good idea.

 

wasn't there something in age of empires where you could like trade food for gold and stuff?

 

Yes, you could trade resources for gold and vice versa at a market (which is a much more sensible idea than this...)

 

Age of mythology was a better game in my opinion.

Once again simpler is normally better.

 

Whoever was quoted in the original post doesn't understand simple mathematics.

BOTH you and your opponent have to make the decision of whether or not to pay 100 minerals to regenerate the vespene gas. The OP's quote-writer is assuming that the opposing force is beyond this decision and will never run out of gas. This isn't the case. I don't know the hard counters for how much gas/minerals you get per worker cycle, so I'm just going to fit them in the simplest ratios possible to demonstrate a point.

Active vespene = 2 gas per cycle
Active minerals = 2 minerals per cycle
Inactive vespene = 1 gas per cycle

Now both players have their own choices to make about build orders, so it's very unlikely their resource counts would be dead even at any point past the beginning. But to demonstrate my point in the easiest way possible, we're going to assume that both players have 1 unit on gas and 1 on minerals; this is a 2 and 2, or more simply put, a 1:1 ratio on workers. We should assume that the ratio stays at 1:1 regardless of how many workers are built by both teams - as both teams are doing identical builds. So, given that there is no worker advantage on either team, again, workers stay at 1 - minerals, 1 - gas, throughout the game. Re-activating a vespene geyser costs 10 minerals.

This means it takes 5 cycles for each player to get 10 minerals, and 5 cycles for 10 gas, right? Okay. Now - since both players are doing identical builds up to this point, they both run out of vespene gas at the exact same time. At this critical point, both players must decide whether or not they want to replenish their gas. The counters at the turning point were:

Player 1:
-10 minerals
-10 gas

Player 2:
-10 minerals
-10 gas

Player 2 decides to replenish the gas and Player 1 decides he doesn't want to sacrifice the minerals. It now looks like:

Player 1:
-10 minerals
-10 gas

Player 2:
-0 minerals
-10 gas

Now it seems like Player 2 is at a disadvantage, right? That depends on your perspective. Let's take another look 10 cycles later:

Player 1:
-30 minerals
-20 gas

Player 2:
-20 minerals
-30 gas

EH?! Look at that. General resources for both teams now add up to "50". Now let's assume an attacking unit costs 1 mineral. Between this and the next cycle, both players spend as much money as they can to mass the biggest force possible:

Player 1:
-0 minerals
-20 gas
-30 attacking units

Player 2:
-0 minerals
-30 gas
-20 attacking units

Now Player 1 is feeling gutsy because he's scouted Player 2's base and knows his army is 33.3% bigger. Player 2 decides to defend, gaining a 16.65% advantage, since reinforcing defenses is much easier then reinforcing an attack. At the end of a skirmish, 10 cycles later, Player 1 decides to retreat. The growth in the defensive reinforcing bonus for P2 is exponential, and he feels he may lose if he stays. The counters are:

Player 1:
-20 minerals
-30 gas
-10 attacking units

Player 2:
-20 minerals
-50 gas
-7 attacking units

It is at this point that both players gain access to an upgrade that increases the attacking potential of an attacking unit by 16.5%. However, it costs 50 gas. Player 2 sacrifices the 50 gas immediately; Player 1 finally decides to sacrifice the minerals to reactivate the vespene geyser. The counters are:

Player 1:
-10 minerals
-30 gas
-10 attacking units

Player 2:
-20 minerals
-0 gas
-7 attacking units

Now, just looking at the hard counters it may seem as if Player 2 is at a disadvantage. However, P2 now has the attacking unit upgrade, essentially making his 7 units into 8.5. If Player 1 were to attack now, he would be at a risk of losing all of his attacking units, given 8.5 + defensive reinforcement bonus of 16.5% means they would essentially be butting heads at 10 vs 10 attack-power wise. Now, 5 cycles later:

Player 1:
-20 minerals
-40 gas
-10 attacking units

Player 2:
-30 minerals
-10 gas
-7 attacking units

Player 2 trades all of his minerals for attacking units. Fearing a counter-attack, Player 1 does the same.

Player 1:
-0 minerals
-40 gas
-30 attacking units

Player 2:
-0 minerals
-10 gas
-37 attacking units

Player 2's army now outnumbers Player 1's. Player 2 moves in to counter-attack on Player 1. Player 1 gets a 16.5% defensive bonus, however Player 2 has units with a +16.5% attack rating, totally nullifying P1's defensive advantage. 37 vs. 30, it's an easy win for Player 2.

No advantage in the end? Please. This is obviously a very simple explanation of what will actually be a very complicated situation, but if a game is perfectly balanced it will give advantages only to players who strike at the correct time (plus micro ability).

Notice that if Player 2 had waited another 5 cycles, he would have likely failed in his counter-push on Player 1. And if Player 1 had continued his initial attack instead of calling his units back, he might have been able to win the game right there. The whole point of sacrificing minerals for gas is that - assuming gas will benefit you both later on - there is an obvious late-game advantage to just coughing up the minerals.

Also, my scenario assumes very big ratio counters, which just isn't realistic. In finer terms, Player 2 would have had an enormous late-game advantage. Let's say both players have 10 units, who each collect 10 minerals per cycle. (I know this isn't how much they mine in starcraft, it just makes for easier math.) After each cycle, a player has 100 minerals. With an active geyser, 100 gas; inactive, 50. Re-activating the geyser costs 100 minerals.

After 10 cycles, the geysers are depleted; P2 spends the 100 min's to reactivate and P1 doesn't. P1 (1000/1000), P2 (900/1000). We can ignore attacking units since in my scenario, attacking units are directly proportional to minerals. Basically, if you have more minerals, you have more attacking power. Now, 30 cycles later: P1 (4000/2500), P2 (3900/4000). The advantage there is obvious, and since the collective ratio of gas between the two players will always be 2:1, the one who spent the 100 minerals will be incredibly ahead in any production that requires gas - and as time goes on the 100 minerals becomes less and less significant to the point of becoming a single penny out of several hundred or even thousand dollars.