That is the case usually. You have to spend minerals to acquire minerals. That IS NOT the case with the mule. Mules are free minerals. You spend nothing but energy. Fact denial isn’t an argument.
1 Like
So you’re telling me if I drop 20 mules on a map with no minerals, I will be able to produce 20x225 minerals worth of units? I didn’t realise minerals could be gained without mining anything!
Because if they can’t do that, then mules are not free minerals.
Fact denial isn’t an argument. You keep saying that, but you keep denying the basic facts.
4 Likes
There are 1000 minerals on the map. How many minerals does it cost to make a mule? 0 minerals.
There are 100,000 minerals on the map. How many minerals does it cost to make a mule? 0 minerals.
There are 0 minerals on the map. How many minerals does it cost to make a mule? 0 minerals.
MULES cost zero minerals, period.
1 Like
Alright, get GM without ever casting a single inject. Go on.
Been there, done that.
Again, we aren’t arguing whether the mule is free, we are arguing whether the minerals mined by a mule are free. Stop moving the goal-posts.
Unless mules somehow are able to generate income on a map that has no resources, mules do not, cannot and never will give free minerals, regardless of what the mule itself costs. Case closed, end of discussion.
1 Like
Yes. You are. If you claim terran can’t get minerals for free, then you are claiming mules aren’t free.
To quote you:
“Read, think, then post.”
You can throw my quotes back at me as much as you like, but all it does is make you look like a petulant child who isn’t getting their way and knows they are in the wrong.
Literally read the lines you quoted.
3 Likes
Minerals are a finite resource. This is what allows them to be worth something, and why energy is not a resource and is monetarily worthless. How these minerals are obtained does not matter and is completely irrelevant. The point is the minerals themselves are not free, regardless of whether the unit mining them is free or not.
1 Like
I read and fully understood what you wrote. You said minerals cost minerals because they are finite:
I refuted that thoroughly:
You then changed your claim to say that you aren’t talking about mules:
And I thoroughly refuted that point as well:
Now you are ignoring my points and throwing a temper tantrum like a child, as you accuse me of being a petulant child even though I am the one holding your hand and explaining blatant and obvious truths to you with extreme patience.
FACT: Mules cost 0 minerals.
FACT: Mules give terran 220 minerals.
FACT: Terran gets 220 mules every mule drop for the cost of 0 minerals.
FACT: Terran gets 220 minerals for free.
Nothing you can say can change this fact except: A) making the mule not mine minerals, or B) making the mule cost minerals to cast. Those are the ONLY things that can change this relationship. How many minerals are on the map have ZERO relevance to how many minerals it costs to cast a mule.
1 Like
If you want to call infested terrans free units then mules are free workers. If you hate the “design” like you claim to then you should mules as well. But obviously you’re a bunch of trolls so…
4 Likes
The problem is that they seem to be unwilling (or unable) to abstract from one scenario to the other. I’m not saying they are mentally challenged, but severely mentally challenged individuals make for a good example because they can struggle a lot with abstraction. A severely challenged individual may be able to learn a kitchen - where the pots and pans are, where the stove is, etc. However, if you move even one thing in that room it will break their understanding of the room because it’s like a completely new room to them. They can’t separate the differences and focus on the similarities. That’s what abstraction is all about.
The people here are obviously struggling with that. They can’t see that Orbital → free mule → minerals = free units. They can see that Infestor → free infested terrans = free units. You change one itty bitty thing in the scenario, and it’s like a brand new scenario to them. “BUT MINERALS ARE FINITE!”. Yes, but that doesn’t change the relationship here. It’s a completely irrelevant difference. They are struggling to separate the relevant differences from the irrelevant ones. There are no differences that are relevant to this comparison. The mule is free. The mule gives free resources. The free resources purchase free units. It’s the same process of converting energy into units but with 1 extra step in the middle.
1 Like
Show me a replay where a terran kills anything with MULES and you can directly compare the units like that.
4 Likes
New game design feature: zerg gets 100,000 minerals with each inject. Kelthar’s conclusion: “the free zerglings shredded a mineral line, but they weren’t free because it wasn’t the queen that killed those workers.”
If you get units for nothing but an energy cost, it’s free units.
If you get minerals for nothing but an energy cost, it’s free units.
There is no difference in cost. Both scenarios are energy being converted into free units.
3 Likes
Nah. In your scenario, the minerals are being generated out of thin air. In the real world, the terran still has to mine their minerals from a finite source. Over the course of a game, the MULE does not affect the potential maximum number of units a terran can train, nor does it increase the amount of resources in their protected territory. Against infested terrans or locusts, its literally impossible to trade efficiently, because no resources were spent in their creation. With MULEs, you can still trade efficiently because the terran has spent some of their finite resources on those marines.
1 Like
Nope. The minerals are subtracted from the map. This affects the cost of those minerals in no way shape or form. The cost still remains at 0. There could be 0 minerals on the map. There could be 1000 minerals on the map. There could be any number of X minerals on the map, but the cost to acquire them was still 0. The number of resources acquired has ZERO relevance to the cost to acquire them.
2 Likes
Ok, then you’ve broken the comparison. You can trade efficiently against marines, MULEs or not. You cannot trade efficiently against locusts, ever.
1 Like
How does the efficiency in battles change the cost to produce the unit? Marines cannot trade efficiently, therefore mules cost minerals to make? What? That is complete nonsense. The only thing relevant to the cost to produce a unit is the cost to produce a unit.
1 Like
Perhaps if you made some minimal amount of effort to understand the actual complaints and statements being made, you wouldn’t have to ask these questions.
1 Like
The only thing relevant to the cost of a unit is the cost of the unit. If the cost was 0, then it was free.