Dispelling MULE myth #2: Income Screenshots

General Discussion
Prev 1 2 3 6 Next
Request sticky


i like how you missed the point completely


MULEs are not what is keeping you in Silver.


1) never said or even implied this.
2) i play random
3) mules are on of the most imbalanced mechanics in the game. especially regarding the synergy between mineral income and terran's array of mineral only units


MULEs are not what is keeping you in Silver.


1) never said or even implied this.
2) i play random
3) mules are on of the most imbalanced mechanics in the game. especially regarding the synergy between mineral income and terran's array of mineral only units
This individual won't be confused with the facts!



That's silly logic.

Just because you play way worse without a certain upgrade, unit, or ability doesn't mean something is "overpowered."

That's like saying "go play a few games and don't get queens. SEE? QUEENS OVERPOWERED!"


i like how you missed the point completely


What point did I miss?

You claimed that MULEs are "crazy overpowered," and the only "proof" you provided to back up that up was a completely illogical statement that does nothing to prove MULEs are OP. All I did was point that out.

If you're gonna claim something is OP, provide reasoning that actually makes sense.


MULEs are not what is keeping you in Silver.


1) never said or even implied this.
2) i play random
3) mules are on of the most imbalanced mechanics in the game. especially regarding the synergy between mineral income and terran's array of mineral only units


You said Orbitals are OP.
You offered no evidence.

I assumed you were claiming they were OP and causing Terran to win against you when you were clearly outplaying them.

Also, can you explain how we all missed your point? You said that MULEs are OP because without them Terran would suck. We offered the same logic to another unit and you said we missed the point.
you guys seem to be getting quite worked up over "mules OP" comment.
defensive much?

check out Leenock vs MMA if you want to see a recent pro game that shows balanced mules.
This is a good explanation of what goes on with the income tab when MULEs are in play.

However, it doesn't really disprove the "MULE is OP" arguements.

If we take this screenshot as an example, which was brought up in the other thread:

http://img1.imagilive.com/0212/wtf.jpg

Okay so that shows that terran has 9 workers and 1240 mineral income vs zerg which has 36 workers and 1060 income.

You can see the replay here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7tNGO5l4A&list=HL1328218334&feature=mh_lolz

If you watch the actual game, the terran has 4 MULEs in play at this point. So, that means that if this was on the upper end of the fluctuations, the value is off by 240. Fair enough...if we take that into account, the terran still has an income of 1000 vs the zerg's income of 1060. It's still practically even despite a 27 worker deficit.

Now, the thing is, if you watch the replay, this isn't actually at the upper end of the fluctuations. The income actually fluctuates upwards of 1300 for terran (if you skip to exactly 10:00 in the video you'll see this). This means that the value of 1240 in the screenshot is actually somewhere in the middle of the fluctuations, not at the upper end. So the 4 MULEs at the very least are allowing the terran to match the zerg's economy - despite being 27 workers behind.

This thread is a good resource for understanding the income tab, but it does not disprove that the MULE is OP. Even taking the fluctuations into account, there's no way a 9 scv terran should be matching the economy of a 36 drone zerg.
This is a good explanation of what goes on with the income tab when MULEs are in play.

However, it doesn't really disprove the "MULE is OP" arguements.

If we take this screenshot as an example, which was brought up in the other thread:

http://img1.imagilive.com/0212/wtf.jpg

Okay so that shows that terran has 9 workers and 1240 mineral income vs zerg which has 36 workers and 1060 income.

You can see the replay here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7tNGO5l4A&list=HL1328218334&feature=mh_lolz

If you watch the actual game, the terran has 4 MULEs in play at this point. So, that means that if this was on the upper end of the fluctuations, the value is off by 240. Fair enough...if we take that into account, the terran still has an income of 1000 vs the zerg's income of 1060. It's still practically even despite a 27 worker deficit.

Now, the thing is, if you watch the replay, this isn't actually at the upper end of the fluctuations. The income actually fluctuates upwards of 1300 for terran (if you skip to exactly 10:00 in the video you'll see this). This means that the value of 1240 in the screenshot is actually somewhere in the middle of the fluctuations, not at the upper end. So the 4 MULEs at the very least are allowing the terran to match the zerg's economy - despite being 27 workers behind.

This thread is a good resource for understanding the income tab, but it does not disprove that the MULE is OP. Even taking the fluctuations into account, there's no way a 9 scv terran should be matching the economy of a 36 drone zerg.


Let me get this straight:

Zerg goes 3 hatch before pool
Terran smashes Zerg 3rd while teching up
Zerg attempts to all in Terran while 25 workers behind
Zerg all in fails to kill Terran's 3/2 army; meanwhile Zerg is on 0/0 with ling bling
Zergling/Baneling army 0/0 gets killed by 3/2 Marine/Medivac ball

Sure the Zerg killed 50 workers, but he didn't kill the huge army, didnt kill infrastructure besides the 3 rax at the front, and didn't tech up.
you guys seem to be getting quite worked up over "mules OP" comment.
defensive much?

check out Leenock vs MMA if you want to see a recent pro game that shows balanced mules.


How about any of the games in which Terran kills 70 drones and the Zerg wins?
Let me get this straight:

Zerg goes 3 hatch before pool
Terran smashes Zerg 3rd while teching up
Zerg attempts to all in Terran while 25 workers behind
Zerg all in fails to kill Terran's 3/2 army; meanwhile Zerg is on 0/0 with ling bling
Zergling/Baneling army 0/0 gets killed by 3/2 Marine/Medivac ball

Sure the Zerg killed 50 workers, but he didn't kill the huge army, didnt kill infrastructure besides the 3 rax at the front, and didn't tech up.


What does that have to do with the economy? Who cares what size the terran's army is and what happened in an army engagement later in the game? We're talking about the differences in economy at this specific point when the MULEs were thrown down.

This is not about the ultimate result of the game. I'm not saying "See?!?! See?!?! The terran won with OP MULEs!". Quite obviously the zerg made mistakes that ultimately cost him the game. That's not what I'm saying. Disregard the result, I don't care who won (I didn't even watch the end of the game). Disregard the beginning too, it really doesn't matter what happened prior to the baneling bust.

What we're looking at is the MULEs effect on the economies. All that I'm focusing on is the two player's economies after that bling bust, when the terran had 9 workers and the zerg had 36.

Please try to stay focused on what we are discussing.
This is a good explanation of what goes on with the income tab when MULEs are in play.

However, it doesn't really disprove the "MULE is OP" arguements.

If we take this screenshot as an example, which was brought up in the other thread:

http://img1.imagilive.com/0212/wtf.jpg

Okay so that shows that terran has 9 workers and 1240 mineral income vs zerg which has 36 workers and 1060 income.

You can see the replay here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=So7tNGO5l4A&list=HL1328218334&feature=mh_lolz

If you watch the actual game, the terran has 4 MULEs in play at this point. So, that means that if this was on the upper end of the fluctuations, the value is off by 240. Fair enough...if we take that into account, the terran still has an income of 1000 vs the zerg's income of 1060. It's still practically even despite a 27 worker deficit.

Now, the thing is, if you watch the replay, this isn't actually at the upper end of the fluctuations. The income actually fluctuates upwards of 1300 for terran (if you skip to exactly 10:00 in the video you'll see this). This means that the value of 1240 in the screenshot is actually somewhere in the middle of the fluctuations, not at the upper end. So the 4 MULEs at the very least are allowing the terran to match the zerg's economy - despite being 27 workers behind.

This thread is a good resource for understanding the income tab, but it does not disprove that the MULE is OP. Even taking the fluctuations into account, there's no way a 9 scv terran should be matching the economy of a 36 drone zerg.

I don't know where you learned basic arithmetic, but if his max income displayed is 1300 and he has 4 MULEs, then his actual average income is:
1300 - 60 X 4 = 1060.
I don't think it's very hard to use the formula I posted, I think you will agree. It's just plain dishonest to post 1300 minerals per minute or 1240 for that matter as the income rate of the terran player. It would be just as dishonest if somebody posts that the terran income at the 14 min mark is 820 or 880 - but it would be just as precise as your 1240 or 1300 rate.

I agree that this thread does not prove that the MULE is not op. I again made no claims to wether the mule is OP or UP.

However, what I can tell you for sure is that such a replay does not prove that MULEs are overopwered.

Edit: I misread his response here - I thought he said that the zerg income can be averaged at around 1240 since it is in the middle -> my bad and my apologies.
Let me get this straight:

Zerg goes 3 hatch before pool
Terran smashes Zerg 3rd while teching up
Zerg attempts to all in Terran while 25 workers behind
Zerg all in fails to kill Terran's 3/2 army; meanwhile Zerg is on 0/0 with ling bling
Zergling/Baneling army 0/0 gets killed by 3/2 Marine/Medivac ball

Sure the Zerg killed 50 workers, but he didn't kill the huge army, didnt kill infrastructure besides the 3 rax at the front, and didn't tech up.


What does that have to do with the economy? Who cares what size the terran's army is and what happened in an army engagement later in the game? We're talking about the differences in economy at this specific point when the MULEs were thrown down.

This is not about the ultimate result of the game. I'm not saying "See?!?! See?!?! The terran won with OP MULEs!". Quite obviously the zerg made mistakes that ultimately cost him the game. That's not what I'm saying. Disregard the result, I don't care who won (I didn't even watch the end of the game). Disregard the beginning too, it really doesn't matter what happened prior to the baneling bust.

What we're looking at is the MULEs effect on the economies. All that I'm focusing on is the two player's economies after that bling bust, when the terran had 9 workers and the zerg had 36.

Please try to stay focused on what we are discussing.


A snapshot of economy at a single point is silly to say the least. Each MULE he had banked represented 270 minerals he didn't have to hold off the all in. I would venture as far to say that with those MULEs dropped sooner stopping the all in would have been significantly easier and he would not have lost as many SCVs.

Now, to discuss the economy of that game, Terran was ahead in workers the entire game. Because we understand basic calculus we can see that this means that the Terran has mined quite a bit more than the Zerg. Thus the Terran has more stuff, and even though he loses a lot of SCVs it takes a long long time for the Zerg to catch up in minerals mined.

How can you say "disregard the result?" The result is everything. Everything in Starcraft is going toward the result. If you nerf the MULE you have to look at the effect it has on the result. If you say the MULE mines too much that is irrelevant if you don't prove that the amount it mines is a problem. Problem means it is altering the result. If Terran can mine 4000 minerals per second with MULEs, but cannot turn that into actual wins then there is no problem.
I don't know where you learned basic arithmetic, but if his max income displayed is 1300 and he has 4 MULEs, then his actual average income is:
1300 - 60 X 4 = 1060.
I don't think it's very hard to use the formula I posted, I think you will agree. It's just plain dishonest to post 1300 minerals per minute or 1240 for that matter as the income rate of the terran player. It would be just as dishonest if somebody posts that the terran income at the 14 min mark is 820 or 880 - but it would be just as precise as your 1240 or 1300 rate.

I agree that this thread does not prove that the MULE is not op. I again made no claims to wether the mule is OP or UP.

However, what I can tell you for sure is that such a replay does not prove that MULEs are overopwered.


What the hell are you talking about? Did you read my post properly? I don't think you did.

Here, I'll repeat it simply for you:

Screenshot shows 1240 vs 1060 income
Assuming that's at the top end of the MULE fluctuations, that's an income of 1000 vs 1060 - almost even despite a 27 worker difference

But that's not actually at the top end. The top end is 1300+

That means it's 1060 vs 1060 (assuming 1300 was the top end). Exactly even, despite a 27 worker difference.

There's nothing dishonest about what I posted. I used your formula and posted facts. I don't know how you could have interpreted it any other way unless you didn't read it properly.
02/02/2012 07:41 PMPosted by Dread
A snapshot of economy at a single point is silly to say the least. Each MULE he had banked represented 270 minerals he didn't have to hold off the all in.


Only one of them did actually. He was pretty on top of his MULEing. He had 3 OC's and only one of them had enough energy to drop a 2nd MULE after the attack. The remaining ones would have been pretty close to a normal MULE cycle anyway.

02/02/2012 07:41 PMPosted by Dread
Now, to discuss the economy of that game, Terran was ahead in workers the entire game. Because we understand basic calculus we can see that this means that the Terran has mined quite a bit more than the Zerg. Thus the Terran has more stuff, and even though he loses a lot of SCVs it takes a long long time for the Zerg to catch up in minerals mined.


We're not focusing on the economy for the whole game. I don't care what happened earlier in the game, I don't care what happened later. I don't care how many banked resources or the size of the army one player had. I don't care who won...I didn't even see the end of the game. It's irrelevant. We're looking at the comparative economies at this specific point in the game.


The large amount of resources and better decision making allows Illusion to win the game, not "OP MULEs."


Here you go again focusing on the result of the game. I thought I made it pretty clear that we're not talking about that.
If you don't think that overall economy or the result of a game matters then there is nothing to discuss. You are going to continue to look at that screenshot like you've found the Holy Grail regardless of what anyone says. I am going to say look at the overarching picture and how actual game balance is affected. We can go on for 24 pages if you like.

If you want to stare into your little tunnel then go ahead. Thank god, however, that the people who balance this game look at the big picture.
MULEs are still OP, especially with gold bases.
02/02/2012 08:01 PMPosted by SirToasty
MULEs are still OP, especially with gold bases.


He has spoken!
I don't know where you learned basic arithmetic, but if his max income displayed is 1300 and he has 4 MULEs, then his actual average income is:
1300 - 60 X 4 = 1060.
I don't think it's very hard to use the formula I posted, I think you will agree. It's just plain dishonest to post 1300 minerals per minute or 1240 for that matter as the income rate of the terran player. It would be just as dishonest if somebody posts that the terran income at the 14 min mark is 820 or 880 - but it would be just as precise as your 1240 or 1300 rate.

I agree that this thread does not prove that the MULE is not op. I again made no claims to wether the mule is OP or UP.

However, what I can tell you for sure is that such a replay does not prove that MULEs are overopwered.


What the hell are you talking about? Did you read my post properly? I don't think you did.

Here, I'll repeat it simply for you:

Screenshot shows 1240 vs 1060 income
Assuming that's at the top end of the MULE fluctuations, that's an income of 1000 vs 1060 - almost even despite a 27 worker difference

But that's not actually at the top end. The top end is 1300+

That means it's 1060 vs 1060 (assuming 1300 was the top end). Exactly even, despite a 27 worker difference.

There's nothing dishonest about what I posted. I used your formula and posted facts. I don't know how you could have interpreted it any other way unless you didn't read it properly.

I apologize to you good Sir, you're right about that, it seems I did not read the post properly.

You are wrong about something else though. It is not a 27 worker deficit. It is actually a 21 worker deficit. The zerg was at 32 workers with 3 on gas - 29 mining. Then he produces 8 extra workers, but those can't be added to the income rate - there is actually a lag of 8-10 seconds between producing a worker and its effective mining showing up on the income tab - due also to the 15 second income window.

So the worker difference is 29 - 8 = 21 workers.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum