Recent Posts

Quote from: guguizg on 31 Oct, 2021 03:029. How many armor upgrades do you need to survive on the high ground for each attack level?Assuming 3 defenders linked to yard and 8 defenders healing wall (1 healer for each wall/depo), no scv repair.Terran needs this wall level to counter zerg attack (I am using roach/rav for now):Zerg Attack:   Terran Wall level:     4         0     (lvl 0 walls will hold lvl 4 attack zerg, etc.)     5         1     8         2     11         3     14         4     17         5     20         6By now, Zerg should definitely have infused. So instead of roach rav, I am now using 2 infused and 8 rav.Zerg Attack:   Terran Wall level:     20         8     21         9     23         10     25         11     27         12At this point, Zerg should definitely have toras. So instead of infused rav, I am now using 2 tora 8 rav.     27         24     31         25     32         30I found this interesting that lvl 26 attack will kill lvl 23 walls but lvl 30 attack wont kill lvl 24 walls (+4 attack lvls) while lvl 32 attack will kill lvl 25-29 walls (+1 attack).34 attack is all that is needed to kill lvl 30 wall high ground bunker, although you will kill it very slowly.Translation to a real game, even if someone is 1 gas bunkering from the start with anti-tora walls, if you get toras out with 32 attack before they have 30 wall ups, you shouldnt need an omega to kill them. Attack is of course very expensive at this point (in the 5k-7k range).Additionally, if you see a bunker/turtle player has 15-20 wall ups, toras with 25ish attack will kill that bunker quite quickly.From a terran standpoint, one would probably want to invest in marines and marine upgrades at some point instead of putting all resources into gas/wall ups in order to kill infused/toras.

Comparing solo zerg vs duo zergThis is a hot topic. There is no discussion that if the zerg has perfect micro (I know it's impossible), it's objectively better to have a solo zerg compared to a duo zerg. The way to go around that as duo zerg is eco sharing - one zerg sends all their minerals to the other so they complete a full supply and then it goes the other way around, pretty much simulating a solo zerg experience. Altough that is better for the economy, it takes up a lot of APM and coordenation which is a great cost, but how better is it?Using my simulation code, I made a duo zerg variant. Considering that the zerg does what is best for the team (supportive), and not only for himself (individualistic), the results show that in the long run being solo/sharing eco perfectly can be 18% more efficient. It's important to note that results on the early game are a little different, ranging from around 10-15%. I plan to improve on the what-to-build algorithm, and if I do, I'll remake this post, as it might impact the results, for now, these are Heuristic results. Here is the graph to visualize the difference:The y axis is the result of the division of the solo zerg income by the duo zerg income and x is time in secondshttps://imgur.com/rHEhMxhIn case you want to understand more about what I ment by individualistic, here it goes. When it's 2 zergs, adding a extractor will only benefit you, but adding a spawner will benefit both you and your teammate. If you don't consider the positive externality of building a spawner (increases your teammate economy), both zergs get way more extractors than it's optimal to. Here are the results for a individualistic zerg.https://imgur.com/zSue9Fr

This is what happens:Starting supply cost X income* at 10 minutes X income* at 20 minutes900 2630 13800800 2860 16000700 3044 18736600 3310 22675500 3663 27217400 4021 33664300 4552 42280200 5252 52480100 6105 67888*considers a 'perfect economy' build, doesn't spend minerals in anything that is not optimal economically. The code used is attached

The new code is done. It seems to be working perfectly and came up with a similar enough build to Turbo's with reasonable results if tested in game. If any of you want to use it by yourselfs, it's in python and it's commented so I assume it's not that hard to operate if you know python.As it already is, it can be used to test different eco settings, such as what happens to the economy if you change the supply cost. I will improve on it and make it do smarter choices (i hope), as it currently is Heuristic.Future goals:- implement duo zerg economy (so we can finally determine how much sharing eco matters)- calculate a few statistics to extract a few insights, such as moving average growth- use previous statistics to come up with a better choosing algorithm     -alternatively use a solver algorithm that tests every single possibility and gives out the best one- automate or simplify the graph making- enable a build input and analyser - start considering army expenses and not only pure economyIf you want to try it and have any questions, feel free to msg me.

I'm back.I think i know why the simulator's eco growth just plummets after a few minutes, leading to way slower eco groth. My suspicion is that it's because of the tickspeed of the simulation: 1 update/second. I assume as time goes on, a lot of things can happen in between a second and the next, meaning that it has to update more than once every second.I started working on a new and improved version of the simulator, using more advanced techniques i've learned in the last few monts. I'll keep you updated

Can you share a replay of that?

Wmaster if you still check this, can you please fix a late game issue where banelings become invincible.  I don't know how it happens but in the extreme late game, some banelings will not die when their health reaches zero.  Zerg can hold position those banelings in front of the terran base and endlessly drain terran energy.  Thanks.

No one in esports would call a game balanced if it required the players to be at different skill levels.  That's a fictional notion invented solely by apologists for wmaster.

Hello, I am Lionincage, used to play zerg hex some years ago, and as i just recently played a few games.I see the main issue (at least i have with this game is still not fixed. In a lobby of newbies, zerg can do whatever they want and go unpunished. In a lobby of good players, zerg cannot hope to contain 1 player for more than ~15 mins (leaving other 2 terrans almost untouched).I have read that the game is basically balanced upon having a mix of good and bad players, that eventually ends up giving both sides about 50% win chances. This way to handle numbers works for items, money investment, whatever doesn't have feeling. When you, a human being with emotions actually join to play a game and have fun, you expect the game to feed you back depending on how good you perform (even though, obviously, you can't do everything alone in a teamgame), and, in these team games, a player that would close perfection, would win about 90% of the time, probably a bit less in a game without any kind of ELO system. What is sure though, is that a player that played amazing, even despite losing, would feel like "i lost, but hell, what a game i had", and its allies and enemies would be like "he lost, but hell, this guy played real good". How many times did it happen to you?I'm not here with perfect answers and undiscussibly good solutions, but here are a few:-Remove uncertainty. While "star sense" is a skill, a player able to guess what his enemy is up to, needs some sort of hints or intel to figure out. in zerg hex, there is no such thing as fast 3CC or oracle into mass phoenix build. There are a few ways to be effective (especially for terran) while not necessarily being proactive.Maybe have major threats/teching announced to the enemies, and possibly both races to have some sort of "scan", such as overlords for instance.Also zerg fully built structures could be revealed to terran players, giving them some more moments to react to armor changes if they are watchful enough, and giving them intel on how aggressive zerg is going (building in front of hatcheries or behind greater spines tells something, right?). On the other hand, give zerg some well needed buff.-Zergs have very few viable options, and they don't get to choose which to go for, but they only adapt depending on how terrans build, despite being the attackers. The zergling upgrade is basically a one time buff (if wave is crashing on terrans, it will break them, if terran is holding it fine, it is useless). Tankling upgrade requires 200 tanklings to die just to refund the initial cost. Roaches upgrade is kind of fine, although i'm not a fan of spending money to reward offensiveness when spending money to be more offensive is necessary on first hand. "Rewards you for killing terran units, although zerg is more likely to kill units if they spend their money elsewhere". Hydralisks are weak, if not against reapers. Not sure about infestors. Talis behind a few walls leaves no change for zerg to break her owner. Both cheap cost and absurd damage.-balance the game based on players skill level. Implement an ELO system, so players get rating depending on how many and how hard games they win. ELO has its flaws, but even a basic rating would make it both more clear and useful for everyone.With this ELO rating, adjust zerg HP. If zerg team is favored, game reduces zerg melee HP. If terran team is favored, increase zerg HP. Obviously this adjustment mostly matters for melee, and zerg, since they are what determines how difficult the game is.There is more to it, but feels like i already wrote too much. Thoughts?

WMaster (hoping for good/fun discussions of zerg hex):"I've decided to do some more changes on Zerg Hex! (some would say much needed)Have a look around, or join the discussion for changes on the new forum:zerghex.createaforum.comMailing is still possible to zerghex@gmail.com but the forum is preferred."90% of posts on the forum: Slight discussion turn into arguing turn into insults turn into flaming. Classic.