Quote:Take SC for example. There is an initial period where expansion is completely unnecessary. Your production rate is not dependent on the number of resource nodes you control, but the number of workers you have mining them, and at the early stages of the game you can easily achieve an optimal production rate without having to expand at all. Depending on the map and the density of resources, you may even be able to maintain this rate for quite some time before you actually *need* to invest in an expansion. In maps like Big Game Hunters for example, you can maintain optimal resource production for an incredibly long time. Expansion is a complete non-issue.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here... the map Big Game Hunters is one of the few maps that has nearly unlimited resources at the main base, so that kind of goes against what you are trying to say. On other (normal) maps, it's very, very rare to find a game where both players haven't expanded at the 10-minute mark.

You mentioned that mining speed is dependent on the number of workers mining. That is true, but it gets to a point where the returns diminish quite quickly. In other words, 24 workers at 1 mineral node (the optimal number for a standard 8-9 mineral node) mines much slower than 24 miners split between 2 mineral nodes.

Maps like Big Game Hunters and Fastest Possible Map are the only maps that have unlimited/nearly unlimited resources, and those are the only maps where you never have to expand.

[Edited by - Daniel Miller on March 30, 2007 11:42:21 AM]

Quote:Original post by Sandman
Take SC for example. There is an initial period where expansion is completely unnecessary. Your production rate is not dependent on the number of resource nodes you control, but the number of workers you have mining them, and at the early stages of the game you can easily achieve an optimal production rate without having to expand at all. Depending on the map and the density of resources, you may even be able to maintain this rate for quite some time before you actually *need* to invest in an expansion. In maps like Big Game Hunters for example, you can maintain optimal resource production for an incredibly long time. Expansion is a complete non-issue.

Certainly I find that I have to force myself to go on the offensive in SC - it seems far too tempting to sit in my base for the first ten minutes and build a mass of troops and maybe the odd turret. In DoW on the other hand, playing aggressively right off the bat comes completely naturally.

On most maps of the korean pro-gaming leagues the most common build orders for terran, protoss and zerg are supply depot -> expansion at 14 workers, pylon -> expansion at 14 workers (possibly with a forge and 1-2 cannons if the player sees a rush coming) and overlord -> expansion at 12 workers. The build orders of course vary with match-ups, the players, the maps and fast expansion builds also aren't the only builds that are used. BUT these fast expansions actually slow the game down, spending resources on expansions and workers means that there are less units for the first few minutes and the combination of static defense, shorter paths to the front, workers for defense and terrain is very often enough to deter anyone from attacking.

And yes, I prefer active (workers etc) and depleting resources over passive, limitless resources, because I feel this adds dynamic to a game.

Quote:Limited resources means that if you waste resources on defenses, it can't be used to then attack your opponent later.

This is true only if you build base defences. However, a good defense will require standard units too. Once you include standard units in you defensive lines, then this situation does not occur.

Also, if you can kill more enemies (per cost) than it takes to build a base defence, then you win in the balance.

For example if you had a turret that cost 90 points to build, but it could kill roughly 100 points worth of enemy units, then in balance buying the turret is a better use of your resources in a defensive battle (especially if you can back it up with a few long range units).

Yes, you can't use the cost of the turrets in an offence later, but it can destroy any incoming offence that the enemy makes against you, or if the enemy is defending it is worse for you.

Quote:It also forces players to move out of their bases faster unless they want their resources to dry up.

I am not saying that a map can not be designed to create a situation where the encouragement is reversed. But that it favours one strategy over the other.

If the number of resource nodes (and the amount of resources they offer) is too far out of balance, between what is in your base and what is available on the map, then it can effect the balance between the types of strategy. If there is not much resource available in ytour base as compared to what is on offer outside it, then of course you will need to expand, but then it is better to expand slowly and limit it to enough resource nodes to maintain your respective levels of resources (even if you have less than your opponent still).

Even in a limited resource game, at one point a player will have to make an attack on the enemy simply because that is a necessary part of winning the game.

However, this will only occur in the later game as it can be more costly to strike for a resource node than it is to defend with the ones you already have.

Yes, once the resources have dried up, you do need to strike out. But resources drying up does not occur in the early stages of the game. It is an End game consideration (or at best a late mid game one).

So until your resource start drying up, you are nor really in the end game and can therefore afford to play defensively.

Quote:Maps like Big Game Hunters and Fastest Possible Map are the only maps that have unlimited/nearly unlimited resources, and those are the only maps where you never have to expand.

Yes, this is because of the imbalance I mentioned. Because all the other resources are limited, it is not worth expanding into them. If all the other resources were likewise unlimited, then you would find players expanding into them rapidly.

The fact that only these 2 maps break what I have been saying and that they are specifically designed to keep the player in the base (unlimited in the base and limited elsewhere) means that it is not really worth expanding. These are the exception and have been deliberately crafted to do so.

Remember I only said "Encourage" not "Dictates". Exceptions are accepted.

Quote:You mentioned that mining speed is dependent on the number of workers mining. That is true, but it gets to a point where the returns diminish quite quickly. In other words, 24 workers at 1 mineral node (the optimal number for a standard 8-9 mineral node) mines much slower than 24 miners split between 2 mineral nodes.

Yes. I hadn't got around to saying it, but passive and active resource also have an effect on the effective strategies.

Active resource tend to have a "diminishing returns" effect on them because you can only have a limited number of units gathering at any one time and this encourages expansion.

Expansion is different to Aggressive. Aggressive play is where you strike at locations already held by the enemy. Expansionists can do that, but they can also only go after unclaimed resource nodes.

So you can be defensive and expansionist. You would just not attack enemy held nodes, and spend more time setting up defences of your on nodes.

An Aggressive expansionists will not only claim neutral nodes, they will crush and claim enemy nodes too.

Have a look at the Necrons in DoW. They don't have much use for the Strategic points. Once they have claimed 5 points they don't need to claim any more.