EPTOn November 28 2008 00:47 axel wrote:
u need high apm to reach high ranks especially as terran , read again my exemple there are several critiqal situations, for every matchup i guess , where you really need to be very fast and the way you will deal theses situations can decide who will win/ lose on a long run.
u need high apm to reach high ranks especially as terran , read again my exemple there are several critiqal situations, for every matchup i guess , where you really need to be very fast and the way you will deal theses situations can decide who will win/ lose on a long run.
I almost quit reading your OP because of the awful writing. What I gather is that you confuse bad decision making with not having enough apm. You should post the replay you were talking about so that ppl can gauge whether you are correct on your theory or not.
I know a guy who reached C level as terran with only 110 apm and did so without dodging or playing low level players whom he could easily beat.
On November 27 2008 21:42 distant_voice wrote:
people have been trying to figure out how to measure apm more effectively, that's why you see a lot of people who talk about eapm, which doesn't really solve the problem.
what you describe is multitasking. having decent apm has something to do with it, but a number alone doesn't make a valid statement about how good you are at it.
in the end apm doesn't really say anything about the quality of your game, it's all about the results you get, and that can be pretty nicely measured by your iccup rank because it takes a lot of games into account and is much more valid than "I beat [good player], I'm as good as him."
people have been trying to figure out how to measure apm more effectively, that's why you see a lot of people who talk about eapm, which doesn't really solve the problem.
what you describe is multitasking. having decent apm has something to do with it, but a number alone doesn't make a valid statement about how good you are at it.
in the end apm doesn't really say anything about the quality of your game, it's all about the results you get, and that can be pretty nicely measured by your iccup rank because it takes a lot of games into account and is much more valid than "I beat [good player], I'm as good as him."
EAPM does not solve the problem because the formula used to measure it is flawed. From what I understand about how it is measured, is that actions that are "doubles" and random selecting are dropped. What is left is the "EAPM".
I realised some time ago that effective multitasking revolves around properly allocating your actions by prioritising them. This epiphany came to me after I showed a B level friend an FPVOD I recorded of myself playing. His comments were not really helpful except for one thing he told me "sometimes you spam your scvs instead of macroing". I later started understanding exactly how much this meant when I saw how progamers played in their FPVODs (Xellos really good example).
What this means is that you avoid doing actions that are not needed at any given time replacing them with actions that are needed. For example, you do not move around or select your main force while you are not being attacked or attacking or setting up an attack, this is the time for base management. Sounds like common sense, right? Because it is.
However, ppl do not always play by common sense and it is not always clear what "sensible" is at certain moments so ppl play with instinct.
My point is that merely dropping duplicate actions from the total apm and calling it Effective APM is only a small part of getting the true EAPM.
Starcraft is also a game of incomplete information -- as a player, never know all the variables of the match you are playing (unless you are using maphack, perhaps) so writing a program that would put itself in each player's shoes, analyse his situation during each minute and decide on what the optimal action is would be extremely difficult, I am guessing.
What are the chances of someone writing an AI that would analyse replay files?
If you're serious about faking being good though, you'll manage to manipulate your rank too (by dodging koreans or only 4-pooling for example).
This comes to mind . . .
