Start with 4 or 6 Workers?

We all know that we start with 6 workers now, which previously was 4.
Starting with 4 workers had its own set of dynamics with and and broad gameplay wa always at present since players had the choice of rushing as fast as possible or closing off their base to access mid tech while constantly being attacked by these rushes.

4 Workers
Those critical moments were you had to build new workers and set them to mine could change the game very much, if you misplaced a few workers you'd effectivly mess up your rush since the opponent would get those few more minerals than you, and in Sc any small value, from 50 minerals to 1 Zergling to change the game.
In my opinion, 4 workers was perfect and the slightly slower mineral intake time allowed you to think of which strategy you was going to use.
6 Workers
Having 6 workers obviously speeds up the game and possibly imbalances a few races, since Protoss and Terran could que but the Zerg have to wait for their Larva to spawn, which simply means they could be slowed down by this.
Now you'd think increasing their Larva spawn time would fix it but I don't think it will.
It will make them very strong later game since they'll have multiple Hatcheries meaning they could very well overwhelm the other races.

Maybe starting with 5 workers would add new dynamics and balances any imbalances 6 workers created?

 

I still feel like 4 workers are a bit better. I think the more workers, the fewer builds. And 6 workers could be better for Zerg, because they have 3 larva to start out with. But really, I like 4 better, because IMO it results in a lot more possibilities of good builds, especially for Zerg.

 

I'll copy paste my post from the previous board.
----------------
I dont understand what you guys are saying , why would starting with 6 workers do any different then starting with 4. Everyone will have the same numbers of workes and minerals. Everyone is starting by building 6-7 workers anyway.

I don't know if you guys saw some SC games but everyone starts building workers when a game starts, and they usualy build more than 1, at least 2, before starting to build and scout. (OMG he has 6 workerz nowz Hackz!)

Blizzard did a really good job in reducing the game starting time. The ONLY difference there is with 6 workes instead of 4, is that the Overlord will have less time to scout for the ennemy base before they get marines to shoot it down. Thing is that players tends to use drones to scout anyway it's fasta.
---------------

And I don't know how it can possibly change the game balance since Queu or Larva works the same at the begining of the game, you can't Queu 2 units with 50 minerals and you can't morph 2 larvae with 50 minerals. The games will start faster and all other mechanics that was working well in SC1 as not changed.... and that's about it.

 

Bare in mind that you mine 6 minerals per load not 8 now.

 

TheWorker : Really? Shame on me for not knowing that base fact.

Do they mine faster? Most probably another balance modification.

 

I think they mine at the same speed as they did in sc1.

 

With that 6 instead of 8 resulting in:
36 minerals against 32 we dont really see a difference in the output of resources. But we see a difference when we look at supply, wich will result (if the mine speed is the same), in a larger number of workers/armies. I dont see a need for this.
I dont understand why Blizzard does this, are they fearing a SC 1.5? The gameplay SHOULD be the same, after all this is 2, not a new game!
(is it just me or do Blizzard have an ability to increase workers in their games? WC2: 1-2, SC1: 4, WC3: 5)

 

The yields are 8 for regular and 12 for special, but I'd be happy to accept 6 if you provided your source.

I'm far from being good at the game and I barely know any strategies, but to my knowledge, there is no sensible strategy that involves fewer workers than 6 (it being the 6-pool). So considering that, the increase in the number of workers players start with has no other effect besides speeding up early game, which, considering pro players' APM values, can be boring. On my skill level, early game is actually the stage I'm most comfortable and confident with, but that's another story

However, unusual strategies that your opponent is not prepared for can work surprisingly well, and so the 6 workers actually limit the freedom of choice between strategies. Not to mention the added difficulty of worker splits.

I say make it a server side option between 4, 5, and 6.

 

I guess 5, but I wouldn't mind if there were 4 or 6 of them. It doesn't make a big difference...

 

@ Worker , where did you hear that mineral output is 6? I've never seen that.

Anyway, there was tremendous difference with 6 workers, but it's definitely for the better.

Early Zerg rushes are now quicker, but then again, so are your opponent's defenses. The issue is not that any of the races are unbalanced because of the addition of two workers. The problem lies in automining and MBS. Not because they're unfair, but because there is a possibility that they will favor one race, in particular the Protoss.

The addition of two extra workers at the start does not favor any particular race. The Zerg still have the very early game advantage because of their ability to produce multiple drones at once, which is still offset by the sacrificing of drones for building production.

In short, the same dynamics are in place and are not affected by the change in starting workers.

What we should really be discussing is the possibility of MBS and automining favoring the Protoss.

 

I have to disagree. Zerg now gets 6 drones and 3 larvas. In SC, by the time you have 6 drones you only have 1 or 2 larva. That is a clear advantage that can save quite a few seconds, which is a huge advantage in competitive play (but I don't need to tell you that )

 

I think this is possibly one of those issues that won't be figured out until the game has been played for months. This is quite possibly a beta issue that we'll just have to figure out by experience because kuvasz is right that at 6 drones you've usually only got the capacity to build 1-2 more.

With 3 larva you can jump to 9 before the other two races hit 8....

There's no way to determine the balance issues without actually playing the damn thing. LOL!

 

The pace of the game will be faster instead of a game that lasts very long...its somewhat make me sleepy

 

... the pace of the tech and the game are overall much faster, but that doesn't mean long drawn out conflicts aren't present.

We had a 3v3 game last 35 minutes....

 

I agree with Jon. While it is possible to rush Zealots faster, it is also easier to build Marines and Bunkers to defend against them. For the Zerg, while they are limited by the rate they can produce Zerglings, they do have the ability to build a Queen (which does not require larva) at the same time they start being able to build Zerglings. A Zealot rush against a skilled Zerg player would have to overcome several Zerglings, the Queen, and the Swarm Clutches she is dropping before it can even begin to touch the economy. It wouldn't be an easy task.

 

I thought that a Queen was built from a Larva.

 

Its not imbalanced. Blizzard said the money u get per worker was lowered so it still has balance as far as i can see.

 

The Queen is unlocked by the Spawnign Pool, but built directly from a Hatchery/Lair/Hive. (but even if it were spawned from larva, it would be a two-Zergling difference)

i2new: where was it stated that the income per load was reduced?

 

If that speeds up the early-game, then it is better to have more workers in the beginning.
I've always hated that period when you just build workers. This way, you can immediately go in action and produce some units/buildings.

 

I think it was one of the reports of the teams that went out to blizzard HQ to play the game and talk the the developers i think if i remeber. If not they might of be refurring to the different types og minirals and i must of read it wrong due to lazyness and very fast skimming.