[Muldeh]

You still don't get it man? Let me try to explain in a way you might understand...

You are saying the the cost due to scouting is 200 minerals because:
a) you build the overlord for scouting,
b) you build a replacement overlord for the scout overlord.

The part where you are wrong is either:
a) you actually built the first overlord for SUPPLY rather than scouting, then used it to scout and so the only cost due to scouting is the replacement overlord. OR
b) the first overlord was built purely for scouting, and therefore it is the only cost of scouting as the second overlord is built for supply.

You are gaining +8 supply and a scout either way. (The sacced overlord is +8 supply and later -8 supply.. giving a net of 0 supply, but it scouts, and the second overlord is +8 supply) You need to divide your costs between scouting and supply, not all to scouting, otherwise you are claiming to have gotten +8 supply for free.

PS: For anyone looking for a challenge, solve for me the cost of one larvae, and the cost of not scouting.
I expect the costs to change throughout the game and differ between match ups. So please, make some pretty graphs!

Quick Comments

ToRPandarine:

askin for graphs...ballsy..i like it :D

[Satu]

Originally Posted by Muldeh

You still don't get it man? Let me try to explain in a way you might understand...

The part where you are wrong is either:
a) you actually built the first overlord for SUPPLY rather than scouting, then used it to scout and so the only cost due to scouting is the replacement overlord. OR
b) the first overlord was built purely for scouting, and therefore it is the only cost of scouting as the second overlord is built for supply.

You are gaining +8 supply and a scout either way. (The sacced overlord is +8 supply and later -8 supply.. giving a net of 0 supply, but it scouts, and the second overlord is +8 supply) You need to divide your costs between scouting and supply, not all to scouting, otherwise you are claiming to have gotten +8 supply for free.

Technically cost due to scouting should include the cost of replacing what you've lost. Although technically you dont build two extra overlords in the game, only one due to scouting. If you can tell me how replacing losses is not a cost DUE to the scouting then I'll be ok with it. But what you've done is tell me why it isnt a cost to the initial scout, which isn't what I was talking about anyway. I really dont care if one overlord is for scouting and one is for supply, because that shouldn't be taken into consideration when figuring out cost due to scouting. Also, for some reason you're saying Im claiming to get the +8 supply for free even though I factor in the costs of the second overlord.

If you're right (If you can prove cost due to scouting doesnt include costs due to losing the overlord), then I can take away the second drone and second overlord from the maths and its only 100 minerals difference for a significant difference in effectiveness.

If you're wrong (If Im right on what costs due to scouting means), then I get to show a figure which looks more convincing.

Either way I win, and I realise how big of a problem it was to fight over such a small issue now.

Edit: Oh, and the part in your P.S. is pointless because you focus on scouting costs, not costs due to scouting, so you're telling people to look at the wrong figure and research that to further make my arguement look incorrect? Im kinda confused. Of course the scouting costs is 100 minerals, please dont try to mislead people.

Also just read Apth's post where he also talking about scouting costs

Originally Posted by Apth

This thread made my day.

The following is largely an excuse to type some more on my new 6Gv2.

Scenario One
You have 300 minerals.
You make an Overlord.
The Overlord doesn't die.
You have 300 minerals and 1 Overlord.

Scenario Two
You have 300 minerals.
You make an Overlord.
The Overlord dies.
You make another Overlord.
You have 200 minerals and 1 Overlord.

The difference between the Overlord dying and not dying is 100 minerals.

Yay math!

Yeah, you're right, although its not the figure Im talking about. I swear, thats happened like 50 times in this thread over time.

Quick Comments

TAminimat:

He's right your wrong