|
Hey TL, I just did some quick analysis of APM by race for a couple of different datasets.
I used sc2gears to get APM info (so the APM will be much higher than what is shown in game, especially after patch 1.4) and then used a one way ANOVA in SPSS to analyze the differences between groups.
The first dataset was my last 209 opponents over the last month and a half in high masters (I'm currently 950+). Here are the results:
Protoss: 129
Terran: 158
Zerg: 185
I used Tukey's HSD to determine that all three groups differ significantly from each other (p <.01, in all cases). This means that Terran APM is statistically significantly higher than Protoss APM and Zerg APM is statistically significantly higher than Terran.
The next dataset is the 236 replays in the MLG Raleigh replay pack just recently released. Here are those results:
Protoss: 168
Terran: 201
Zerg: 221
Terran and Zerg do not differ significantly. However, both Terran and Zerg APM are significantly higher than Protoss APM.
I thought this was neat because it lends support to the idea that Protoss is the easiest race (mechanically). I know many people already believe this, but many Protoss players out there are in denial. These results, of course, aren't the final word on the issue, but they are piece of objective, empirical evidence in support of the "Protoss mechanics are EZPZ" hypothesis 
P.S. I'd love to do an analysis of Korean data, but I need a big replay pack of a Korean pro (100+ replays). Or, if anyone wants to take the time to just download 100+ korean replays off a replay website and send them to me as a zip, that would work too.
EDIT: Big thanks to prom1se for sending me 104 korean replays (not sure where he got them, still waiting to hear back) but without further ado, here are the results:
Protoss: 246
Terran: 265
Zerg: 290
Terran and Zerg again do not differ significantly. However, in this dataset, Terran and Protoss do not differ significantly. Only Zerg and Protoss differ significantly. Damn those Koreans are fast!
Edit: Changed my argument from Protoss is the easiest race to Protoss is the easiest race (mechanically) 
|
It's interesting data, but I'd still say there's a reasonable gap between T and Z.
|
Great research. I do agree and generally believe that Zerg requires the highest level of actions to execute at a high level. However, being a Zerg myself, I must strongly disagree with your statement of Protoss being easy because they take the least amount of APM to execute at a high level. Despite their APM being low, their strategical execution far supercedes Zerg strategies at a similar ELO level, due to Zerg being a reactive race, which just counters the strategy implemented by Protoss.
This isn't a thread relating specifically to that topic, so I'll just say that it's interesting data, and I would like to see more behind the numbers if possible; i.e, how many of those actions were spam? What would the numbers be in patch 1.4 (I saw what you stated above), now that APM has been changed? Would Zerg still necessarily be THAT much more ahead of Protoss in 1.4?
Edit: As a side note, Sjow's average APM is around 60 I believe, and he clearly dominates any non-Korean (and Koreans too, as we have seen in Code A). It's not an indicator of skill, and never will be.
|
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now.
|
zerg apm is also infalted as hell because of holding down a keywhen spending larva
|
Just because protoss requires less apm doesn't mean it is easier. It is the least mechanically challenging but obviously it isn't super easy other wise protoss wouldn't be down on its luck right now (don't forget back from about September to early December protoss wasn't doing so hot).
|
protoss op
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On September 24 2011 13:00 LolitsPing wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now.
Warp prisms, DTs, Blink Stalkers, phoenix
|
On September 24 2011 13:02 Nothingtosay wrote:
Just because protoss requires less apm doesn't mean it is easier.
This.
It needs to be understood. Moreover, <1000 reps aren't enough to judge the whole race.
|
The data in the post is great, however the attitude isn't. This data hardly justifies that P is the easiest race, and your post tries to effectively say P players are just bad when in reality this couldn't be farther from the truth.
Then again, maybe I'm just in denial and all P players are bad right?
|
Hmm yeah holding down a key to make 40 zerglings gives like 500 apm, so i think this is pretty meaningless right now, but after the new blizzard change to apm the results should look much different. This just tells me that terran and zerg spend more time spamming than anything. underdog race protoss fighting~!~!
|
On September 24 2011 12:59 KimJongChill wrote:
It's interesting data, but I'd still say there's a reasonable gap between T and Z.
You can call it reasonable, but you can't call it statistically significant. The p value was 0.19 (needs to be less than 0.05 for significance).
|
On September 24 2011 13:03 Moldwood wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:00 LolitsPing wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now. Warp prisms, DTs, Blink Stalkers, phoenix
Don't forget the forcefields and positioning as well as HTs
|
I think table tennis is much more difficult than golf because it has more Actions Per Minute.
|
When you want to make 30 roaches you just hold down the R key and the commands click in what...3 seconds?
Clicking 30 stalkers around a pylon field would take significantly longer.
|
I don't think this is thread worthy. But your mlg info is skewed because the top talent there (koreans) were heavily representing terran and zerg.
Also zerg gets inflated apm from holding down keys to build as well as spam clicking zerglings around which is hardly difficult. Terran stutter step micro increases apm as well. Protoss does not stutter step nearly as fast as terran and FF casting doesn't spike apm in the same way although I would say.
I play protoss and my apm goes up when i offrace terran or zerg. I am way worse at terran and zerg.
AM =/= equal skill. Nor does it make protoss the easiest because you don't spam click zerglings/mutas or stutter step marines. Even blinking stalkers is a lower apm exercise than stutter stepping.
|
On September 24 2011 12:55 Cambam wrote:EZPZ
For the love of fuck artosis, did you really have to start people saying this?
|
Northern Ireland24323 Posts
Protoss bread and butter units are warped from gates to particular positions. The race doesn't have to constantly re-rally things which I feel inflates the average APM of the other races
|
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far
|
On September 24 2011 13:03 Moldwood wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:00 LolitsPing wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now. Warp prisms, DTs, Blink Stalkers, phoenix
these "harass" unit requires the toss pretty much all in early game...toss tech tree isnt as easy to switch as other race...
|
I love when interesting data, part ingenuity and part hard work, is ruined by silly subjective statements.
I'd even be more interested in breaking down the MLG pack into pieces, like Open Bracket, Pool Play, Champ Bracket.
|
On September 24 2011 13:05 pii555 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:03 Moldwood wrote:On September 24 2011 13:00 LolitsPing wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now. Warp prisms, DTs, Blink Stalkers, phoenix Don't forget the forcefields and positioning as well as HTs
None of this matters because both races have equally if not more micro intensive units (marines in many cases, mutas etc).
The reason for the difference in APM IMO is that toss is a "sit back macro up to deathball then attack", and contrary to many beliefs does have a lot of all in strategies. Whereas Terran must harass to get ahead, and zerg of course you need to hit your injects spread creep all while macroing up. The larva mechanic of course increases the apm a fair amount. Not saying one is easier than the other in general but it definitely takes less APM to play toss.
|
On September 24 2011 13:05 izgodlee wrote:
This just tells me that terran and zerg spend more time spamming than anything. underdog race protoss fighting~!~!
Well (quasi)random sampling should help us avoid this. Having ~80 different players for each race should give us around an equal number of spammers and non-spammers for each race.
|
Because all toss needs is to use the F key.
..
..
Jokes aside, it's because the mechanics of terran and zerg require more actions. More units for zerg, more production structures for terran, more control needed overall for both races. Protoss gets W for warping in while microing revolves around correct positioning of units and abilities/spells (blink, storm, etc) rather than move/attack/move/attack.
Just look at terran. Try to micro and macro at the same time.
Zerg, well it's obvious since there are so many units to make and to control.
|
China6327 Posts
for a generally average player while playing the 3 races, zerg is supposed to be most apm-dependent though.
|
Protoss has the easiest macro in terms of the clicks needed to control it, yes. This doesn't make it the easiest race overall.
|
On September 24 2011 13:08 Ubertron wrote:
Protoss bread and butter units are warped from gates to particular positions. The race doesn't have to constantly re-rally things which I feel inflates the average APM of the other races
Which makes it easier, LOL. Bad argument ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
On September 24 2011 13:10 scph wrote:
Because all toss needs is to use the F key.
..
..
Jokes aside, it's because the mechanics of terran and zerg require more actions. More units for zerg, more production structures for terran, more control needed overall for both races. Protoss gets W for warping in while microing revolves around correct positioning of units and abilities/spells (blink, storm, etc) rather than move/attack/move/attack.
Just look at terran. Try to micro and macro at the same time.
Zerg, well it's obvious since there are so many units to make and to control.
I play protoss as my main and have a much easier time microing and macroing as terran. being able to que up more than one unit to be made especially in the heat of battle is way easier than having to hit every warp in perfectly.
And don't tell me pros don't que up units in their rax during battles because they do, just grab a replay off of sc2rep and check it.
|
Ahem, playing zerg will always push your apm up, because when spamming units by holding down hotkeys every unit you make gets counted as one action.
Similarly, terrans generally make a lot more units unless they are going mech (which is also just hotkey repetition). Terrans also use stim a lot which is again just a hotkey press.
On the other hand, protoss generally makes much less units and except forcefields only starts using spells/abilites in the midgame. Also, they often use only 2 production buildings with a robo producing collossi requiring very little apm to continually produce from. Couple that with the fact that you have to change your camera location for every warpin and that's alot of the explaination right there..
Pretty menaingless data really.
|
On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far
APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture.
Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races.
|
I feel sad as a zerg player 
|
On September 24 2011 13:14 Snorkle wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:10 scph wrote:
Because all toss needs is to use the F key.
..
..
Jokes aside, it's because the mechanics of terran and zerg require more actions. More units for zerg, more production structures for terran, more control needed overall for both races. Protoss gets W for warping in while microing revolves around correct positioning of units and abilities/spells (blink, storm, etc) rather than move/attack/move/attack.
Just look at terran. Try to micro and macro at the same time.
Zerg, well it's obvious since there are so many units to make and to control. I play protoss as my main and have a much easier time microing and macroing as terran. being able to que up more than one unit to be made especially in the heat of battle is way easier than having to hit every warp in perfectly. And don't tell me pros don't que up units in their rax during battles because they do, just grab a replay off of sc2rep and check it.
Lol yeah, try to kite a protoss deathball and macro at the same time, remember. If you're not kiting you're dying, if you're kiting and not macroing you're also dying. In huge 200 vs 200 battles, you really have to get in the superior position to make up for the lack of micro just to macro to rebuild your army
|
We've known forever that protoss is the least mechanically demanding race. On the other hand, mechanics is one skill-set of many required.
|
On September 24 2011 13:14 Demonace34 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture. Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races.
well the new apm system should not count spamming anymore, and you should see that terran and zerg apm is still far superior to protoss.
|
On September 24 2011 13:17 Avril_Lavigne wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:14 Demonace34 wrote:On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture. Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races. well the new apm system should not count spamming anymore, and you should see that terran and zerg apm is still far superior to protoss.
When holding down z for a few seconds gives you about 20-30 actions in a 2 second period and making the same food of zealots around a pylon takes longer and actually require the users concentration. You really have to start questioning the worth and the effort behind zerg's apm.
|
On September 24 2011 13:17 Avril_Lavigne wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:14 Demonace34 wrote:On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture. Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races. well the new apm system should not count spamming anymore, and you should see that terran and zerg apm is still far superior to protoss.
The new apm still allows for APM spikes when zerg holds down a key for larva. I also said that having to inject all the time also inflates it. Even with strenuous blink micro APM doesn't spike high. You can still spam right click your workers to places for more apm also.
|
On September 24 2011 13:19 yandere991 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:17 Avril_Lavigne wrote:On September 24 2011 13:14 Demonace34 wrote:On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture. Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races. well the new apm system should not count spamming anymore, and you should see that terran and zerg apm is still far superior to protoss. When holding down z for a few seconds gives you about 20-30 actions in a 2 second period and making the same food of zealots around a pylon takes longer and actually require the users concentration. You really have to start questioning the worth and the effort behind zerg's apm.
it's not that hard to hold down Z and spam click tbh. and it doesn't take "concentration"
|
On September 24 2011 13:02 Omer wrote:
zerg apm is also infalted as hell because of holding down a keywhen spending larva This is true. I did this analysis some time before with MLG/NASL replay packs, and the results were again Z>T>P as APM, with Protoss trailing far behind.
That really doesn't mean Zerg is more difficult and Protoss is easier. It's about the way actions are registered. If "szzzzzzzzzzzzzz" counted as one action, and stimming 40 marines counted as one action, picture would be different. (I'm zerg)
|
On September 24 2011 13:22 Avril_Lavigne wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:19 yandere991 wrote:On September 24 2011 13:17 Avril_Lavigne wrote:On September 24 2011 13:14 Demonace34 wrote:On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far APM is also due to spamming. Due to holding down keys to make units out of larva and having to inject every 40 seconds. I know you just want to blindly say that all terran and zerg players are better because they harass and that you hate a deathball, but if you step bake you might actually see the bigger picture. Either way, from my person experience as playing zerg my APM was around 160-170 on average. Now that I switched to protoss, it is down ~145. I don't think this is telling of anything or warrants a thread about why Protoss players suck. Just difference between races. well the new apm system should not count spamming anymore, and you should see that terran and zerg apm is still far superior to protoss. When holding down z for a few seconds gives you about 20-30 actions in a 2 second period and making the same food of zealots around a pylon takes longer and actually require the users concentration. You really have to start questioning the worth and the effort behind zerg's apm. it's not that hard to hold down Z and spam click tbh. and it doesn't take "concentration"
Your screen has to be on the place where your pylon field is and your cursor has to be where you want your units to spawn. Yes it is easy but making the same food of zerglings is infinitely easier.
|
On September 24 2011 13:08 Avril_Lavigne wrote:
APM is usually spent on multitasking ability, that's why terran and zerg normally have the highest and protoss the least. Protoss should start to learn how to multitask and innovate strategies that actually take skill rather than turtling and building up a deathball, it just won't get them very far
Ok here's my innovation for the day.
Build 2 gateways halfway across the map and deny a 15hatch/kill the zerg if he micro's poorly with my cheap mineral only ranged unit.
Expand off 1 rax without any risk because I can just float my command center down once I feel safe and hardly be behind.
Spend the first 8 minutes of a game building whatever units I feel like from 1 rax, 1 fact, 1 starport. A click on a protoss natural and call them bad when they lose to it.
Justify the inflated Korean representation of my race with claims that we're better multitaskers and such and therefor have higher skill.
Tell other races that they should innovate more and stop playing the same way every game.
Excuse my troll, but there is a reason you don't see top protoss "innovating". Because if they did, they wouldn't be a top protoss. Beyond small warp prism commitments and possibly blink stalker/dt which are both big investments protoss can't harass without a high risk.
Oh and btw, parking your army infront of the zerg 2nd/3rd at 150 food isn't innovation.
|
These numbers do not prove anything except that APM measuring means nothing.
I play all three races at reasonably similar levels. When I play zerg, my APM is measured higher. Does that mean I am better at it? FUCK NO! It doesn't even mean I am working harder. Honestly I think zerg and terran "train" marine and zerglings add a lot of inflation to the APM count.
"Protoss EZPZ" is retarded. All this "mechanics" and shit is just bullcrap.
|
MLG apm
Notice the APM of the best protoss of the time.
![[image loading]](http://wordpress.tools.majorleaguegaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/players.jpg)
|
Someone close this thread it's making me rage.
|
Well......aren't Protoss units in general higher supply than the other two races. So macro wise it would technically require less actions to reach max supply. So......yeah Protoss needs less APM macro wise. What's the big deal?? If you want it to go up make all gateway units 1 supply.
EDIT: So strange no one is bringing this up. Instead all talking about deathballs and turtle style. For Zerg/Terran to get two supply of units at the most basic level would take 2 actions. For Protoss it takes 1 action. Mystery solved.
|
protoss just sits back until they have a deathball, multi-tasking is irrelevant
|
On September 24 2011 13:27 SafeAsCheese wrote:MLG apm Notice the APM of the best protoss of the time.
Pretty much identical to the other races yes.
|
On September 24 2011 13:28 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:27 SafeAsCheese wrote:MLG apm Notice the APM of the best protoss of the time. Pretty much identical to the other races yes.
Pretty much shows that only protoss playing over 200 APM actually win anything and that it actually is quite important.
|
There's a difference between most easiest and most mechanically demanding. There's really nothing to do but build units when playing Protoss sadly.
|
On September 24 2011 13:29 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:28 Medrea wrote:On September 24 2011 13:27 SafeAsCheese wrote:MLG apm Notice the APM of the best protoss of the time. Pretty much identical to the other races yes. Pretty much shows that only protoss playing over 200 APM actually win anything and that it actually is quite important.
Yeah alright, I guess I can maybe do that. Man there are a lot of silver league remarks in this thread.
EDIT: Reading through the thread, holy shit do threads like this bring out the double digit posters.
|
A highly active style of Protoss isn't viable, this is pretty expected. Reaver drops in HotS please :D
|
The protoss APM reflects the general playstyle of protosses more than their lack of skill...
If you'd see heavy harass from P every game you'd have different numbers, but most tend to play a deathball style with a DT thrown in here and there.
Just watch Hero multitask his warpprism&phoenixes and you'll see 250apm ^^
|
They might be easier in the APM aspect regarding how much APM you need in order to play at the pro level, but doesn't mean Protoss is easier of course
Anyways, the results are just as I suspected. Thanks for gathering the data.
|
z is higher because of making 100 lings in 2 seconds if 50 apm.
more unit = more apm.
|
Saying protoss is easier because of some math and looking at apm is ridiculous. We don't que units like zerg and terran do therefore contributing to the majority of the difference. Solved.
|
Is this some kind of stealth protoss hate post ? Latter part of the OP sounds a lot like it, some harsh words.
I think the main reason protoss is the lowest apm is because their units are slow, cumbersome and clumsy. Zerg apm is inflated with the 5sd5sd, creep tumor spreading, injecting and especially ling micro early game.
Protoss has no real map presence early game, so they don't really start with any apm at all. You don't run your zealots around checking stuff out and such, and terran units are very microable. The most active protoss unit is probably the pheonix and it doesn't really see much use compared to zergs and terrans fast units ( mutalisks, speedlings, marines, hellions, banshees etc. ).
Protoss is the slow race, dead set race which relies on timing attacks and only has certain windows to even be able to move around the map without being surrounded by lings or cleaned up by a bio ball.
|
On September 24 2011 13:32 shakenbake wrote:
z is higher because of making 100 lings in 2 seconds if 50 apm.
more unit = more apm.
Yes pretty much this. Train marine and train zergling spells inflate APM by a lot. As does any sort of unit queue mechanic.
|
On September 24 2011 13:09 DiuLaSing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:03 Moldwood wrote:On September 24 2011 13:00 LolitsPing wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to learn at the lower level. The problem with Protoss is the lack of strategies that go with it due to a lack of a harassment unit. In the lower levels, ur gonna see a lot of protosses but in the pro level, u will see a lack. That's why there are so little Protosses in the GSL right now. Warp prisms, DTs, Blink Stalkers, phoenix these "harass" unit requires the toss pretty much all in early game...toss tech tree isnt as easy to switch as other race...
Tell me 200/0 is harder to pull than 300/300 for Z drop or 300/200 for Z nydus (network + worm) >.>
On September 24 2011 13:34 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:32 shakenbake wrote:
z is higher because of making 100 lings in 2 seconds if 50 apm.
more unit = more apm.
Yes pretty much this. Train marine and train zergling spells inflate APM by a lot. As does any sort of unit queue mechanic.
I'm pretty sure holding the button down only counts as 1action now... and nobody is going to zzzzzzzzzzzz 50 pairs of lings.
|
I think we've known since early beta that protoss requires less apm. It was the same way in broodwar. Protoss was undeniably easier to play in broodwar. The running gag in BW was that the C level zergs could always just switch to protoss and make it up to C+/B- really quickly. Protoss is easier to play at all but the highest levels just because its easier to get everything done that needs to be done as far as multitasking/mechanics, and that's what holding most people back until they reach higher levels. When you get to Kor GM league/Code B or whatever, obviously this doesn't matter very much.
|
Yup because APM is a non-spammable/skew-able accurate representation of skill and represents %100 of the skill required to play. The game only consists of mechanics and no strategy. Strategy doesn't exist in this RTS game therefore Protoss is the easiest race.
There also aren't any examples of Protosses that have APM above 200. They just simply don't exist.
...
Wow whoever wrote the opening post is astonishingly narrow minded. Obviously there's fucking trends in this game but you can't tunnel vision this hard.
|
OK looks like 3 out of 4 posters in this thread aren't being silly and saying "protoss ez" and actually spot the subtle protoss whine in the OP.
I guess I am ok with this, carry on.
|
On September 24 2011 13:04 ExO_ wrote:
The data in the post is great, however the attitude isn't. This data hardly justifies that P is the easiest race, and your post tries to effectively say P players are just bad when in reality this couldn't be farther from the truth.
Then again, maybe I'm just in denial and all P players are bad right?
...If i say yes do I get warned? 
|
I don't think these numbers are significant on anything. I personally play terran at high masters level (1,1k~ points) and has played only terran as main since release (I didn't play beta). Still I get higher APM as zerg, simply because there are much more easy doable mechanics that shows in the apm tab for zerg. For example spreading creap, spreeding lings to check bases, and keeping injects makes the macro game of a zerg much more apm heavy, but I still wouldn't say it's harder. Because as a zerg (going for macro) you don't really need to care about doing your builds perfectly, or different timings, your only concern is those mechanics and scouting your opponent.
I would guess it's because of a similar reason protoss apm is lower than both terran and zerg, there is simply less things to spend apm on at the times where apm isn't really that neccesarry (ie when both players are macroing).
The only thing to use these statistics for, in my opinion, is if you have really limited apm as in handspeed, then chosing protoss might be a good pick. Tho I believe most players aren't really limited because of their handspeed when talking about apm, but limited by their "brain/eye/things to do" speed.
|
A lot of people keep claiming that Larva Inject and Creep Spreading "inflate APM".
...
Yes, they certainly do and this is the basis for my argument. Sure, I agree that building 30 eggs of zerglings and spam clicking ling or muta micro isn't skillful APM, but can't we agree that having to inject every 40 seconds and having to spread creep tumors is skillful APM?
|
On September 24 2011 13:37 Cambam wrote:
A lot of people keep claiming that Larva Inject and Creep Spreading "inflate APM".
...
Yes, they certainly do and this is the basis for my argument. Sure, I agree that building 30 eggs of zerglings and spam clicking ling or muta micro isn't skillful APM, but can't we agree that having to inject every 40 seconds and having to spread creep tumors is skillful APM?
That is APM that is accounted and budgeted for in Terran protoss races as well. The only differences between races is that basic terran and zerg units are 1 supply while basic protoss units are 2 supply. This OP basically spots that, then goes on a completely irrelevant tangent.
|
On September 24 2011 13:37 Cambam wrote:
A lot of people keep claiming that Larva Inject and Creep Spreading "inflate APM".
...
Yes, they certainly do and this is the basis for my argument. Sure, I agree that building 30 eggs of zerglings and spam clicking ling or muta micro isn't skillful APM, but can't we agree that having to inject every 40 seconds and having to spread creep tumors is skillful APM?
No I switched to Zerg because I like their mechanics. It's not that hard actually...
Zerg is about as easy as Protoss for me. Obviously this is subjective though.
|
On September 24 2011 13:34 synapse wrote:
I'm pretty sure holding the button down only counts as 1action now... You are wrong. Hold Z, get 300+ APM instantly, just tested in 1.4.
Main reason for Z>T>P is the number of units actually. Z - lots of units, T - middle, P - fewest units, but strong. Select an army and move it around a bit, and (in current patch 1.4) you will get exactly Z>T>P for APM for armies of equal cost, because of the number of units in each army.
APM will always be quite meaningless measure, because in the average actions the most weight comes from moving an army. Which is just one click. You click once, 120 lings move, you get 120 actions. (that's still how it is in 1.4) That overrides by far your macro. So basically people with high APM issue a lot of move commands and attack commands with large armies. They don't really click/press 300+ times in a minute, at all.
|
its intresting that most terrans have like 150+ apm in masters... im a high masters terran and I generally have around 120 apm, although that could be because I don't spam in the beggining...
|
Funny that the least APM race is also the race with the least current success.
I'm not saying its at all related in any way, I just think its a funny coincidence.
|
On September 24 2011 12:55 Cambam wrote:
I thought this was neat because it lends support to the idea that Protoss is the easiest race. I know many people already believe this, but many Protoss players out there are in denial.
Great research until you put that crap out there. Was that really needed? In denial, really? You are being totally disrespectful. Just because you are hiding behind some scientific data does not mean you have to be a jerk about it. Because the replays you used, the APM was lower for the Protoss, does that mean it is the easiest race?
You obviously used a good amount of statistical tools however that does not excuse you from drawing a conclusion out of the air. All that you found is that in some replays the APM is separated by race. What does that mean? I don't know. It might mean what you said, it might not.
|
Well, a part of this is that Z and T both have 1 food units, but that alone should only account for 10-15 apm at best. I'm not sure where the rest of the difference comes in.
I don't believe P players are fundamentally slower at top levels, so this must be a mid-masters discrepancy.
|
On September 24 2011 13:48 Sadistx wrote:
Well, a part of this is that Z and T both have 1 food units, but that alone should only account for 10-15 apm at best. I'm not sure where the rest of the difference comes in.
I don't believe P players are fundamentally slower at top levels, so this must be a mid-masters discrepancy.
Queue is largely the rest. Training gateway units pulls away from any activity that involves mouse spamming, for a longer period of time anyway.
|
I think people are missing a vital point. Spamming with protoss is very very BAD. Protoss require precision in their placements of force fields, storms, blink micro, if your just spamming it all over the place you get wasted force fields/storm, blinking to early in micro wars(verse roaches typically) To me lower APM for protoss is a must
|
On September 24 2011 13:37 Cambam wrote:
A lot of people keep claiming that Larva Inject and Creep Spreading "inflate APM".
...
Yes, they certainly do and this is the basis for my argument. Sure, I agree that building 30 eggs of zerglings and spam clicking ling or muta micro isn't skillful APM, but can't we agree that having to inject every 40 seconds and having to spread creep tumors is skillful APM?
Well, I'd disagree because when i decide to randomly pick zerg in a team game my apm is at least 30-40 higher (muta harass, injecting/creep etc) than when I 1v1 as protoss. If I can do that when i rarely play zerg at all, I consider that part of 'mindless' apm ie mechanics that I dont have to think about. When I offrace as zerg I dont magically become more skillful.
|
On September 24 2011 13:48 Sadistx wrote:
Well, a part of this is that Z and T both have 1 food units, but that alone should only account for 10-15 apm at best. I'm not sure where the rest of the difference comes in.
I don't believe P players are fundamentally slower at top levels, so this must be a mid-masters discrepancy.
Also, if chronoboost only takes 1 action and each creep tumor takes multiple each time that adds up. Spreading overlords around the map adds up.
Terran stutter steps all the time along with have 1 supply units that cost less. Medivacs are a staple of the Terran army which makes drops standard in every game played against P. P has 1 transport unit that gets made in 1/10 games maximun (maybe more after the patch). That unit also cuts into the robo production time for colossus and observers and immortals.
|
On September 24 2011 13:36 TeaGreen wrote:
Yup because APM is a non-spammable/skew-able accurate representation of skill and represents %100 of the skill required to play. The game only consists of mechanics and no strategy. Strategy doesn't exist in this RTS game therefore Protoss is the easiest race.
There also aren't any examples of Protosses that have APM above 200. They just simply don't exist.
...
Wow whoever wrote the opening post is astonishingly narrow minded. Obviously there's fucking trends in this game but you can't tunnel vision this hard.
Well, at the lowest levels I would say just adding meaningful APM and doing more things faster would probably yield huge increases in overall skill, but the effect becomes smaller as you're more competent.
|
On September 24 2011 13:53 zoltanium wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:37 Cambam wrote:
A lot of people keep claiming that Larva Inject and Creep Spreading "inflate APM".
...
Yes, they certainly do and this is the basis for my argument. Sure, I agree that building 30 eggs of zerglings and spam clicking ling or muta micro isn't skillful APM, but can't we agree that having to inject every 40 seconds and having to spread creep tumors is skillful APM? Well, I'd disagree because when i decide to randomly pick zerg in a team game my apm is at least 30-40 higher (muta harass, injecting/creep etc) than when I 1v1 as protoss. If I can do that when i rarely play zerg at all, I consider that part of 'mindless' apm ie mechanics that I dont have to think about. When I offrace as zerg I dont magically become more skillful.
Players of all races really like to cling to that "My race requires more APM" nonsense though.
|
If Protoss was indeed the easiest race, why don't all Pros switch to Protoss then?
The way you describe it they should be able to win every matchup then!
You are comparing the amount of apm to actual skill?
I know a few War3-pros who started with apm spamming just because they would copy it from the pros but wouldn't actually make em better alone in the longterm.
Protoss ain't easy at all. I agree with you that Zerg requires a ton of macro-abilities and is indeed hard to manuever correctly but that is balanced due to the fact that you just need to push a couple of buttons to remax your whole army. Protoss on the other hand? Not in the slightest.
Toss lacks of a proper early/harassing unit and usually when I play I always try not to make a mistake early on just due to the fact that in the early game, either Zerg or Terran will always have way more units. Toss can only shiver at that time. But Sentries ftw.
Furthermore you could also say that undead was the easiest race in WC3 just because they warped in buildings aswell. Anyway, every Zerg i know who tried Protoss for a couple of weeks at least, has admited that Toss ain't easy at all (even tough they thought this beforehand), see reasons above.
Cheers
|
Northern Ireland24323 Posts
On September 24 2011 13:13 Cambam wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:08 Ubertron wrote:
Protoss bread and butter units are warped from gates to particular positions. The race doesn't have to constantly re-rally things which I feel inflates the average APM of the other races
Which makes it easier, LOL. Bad argument ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No it doesn't make the race easier, just accounts for the other races having higher APM on average than Toss. Warping in is a separate, DIFFERENT mechanic from the production of other races, and as a minor penalty you have to take your camera off your army while you're warping in (unless of course you have a handy nearby pylon or WP.
Bad argument ¯\_(ツ)_/¯[
|
Well I can't say I'm suprised by these results. Zerg requires more apm while protoss requires more..being careful with position I guess. Trying to be constructive here...
|
the main difference of APM between protoss and the other races is that protoss doesnt require larva handling or add on swapping. Their actions are less but the actual apm during a fight rises higher in most cases. This is espacially true when you see blink stalker micro. I think the overall doesnt mean much. In a game, my apm can jump from 30 to about 200 in 1 second when i start an engagement as i blink micro (I am still failing a bit at it but learning). So the overall APM i get is lower than what people expects but they get killed nonetheless.
APM has by no mean any relations to how hard a race is to play. People could argue that a 1-1-1 build is much easier to pull than its defense in PvT and then relate it to APM and you would end up in the same place.
Because protoss can devoid themselves to less intensive APM means we often initiate the fight when the "ball" is ready but its by no mean a way to judge b y a simple statistics.
|
I agree with a lot of the points people are making in this thread, so calm down with the hate please
I agree building lings and marines and microing lings and marines and mutas probably inflates APM.
I agree that APM doesn't equal skill. I never said that Protosses are bad at the game because they have low APM.
All I'm saying is that to me, it seems like while Zerg is scouting around for proxy pylons with lings and injecting larva at multiple bases every 40 seconds and spreading creep and spreading overlords and making drones and units and taking extra bases and making extra macro hatcheries, Protoss is sitting in his base making probes, the occasional building, warping in units every 40 seconds, and chronoboosting (when he remembers).
To me, this seems like Zerg has to do more than Protoss. Is it too bold to say that Zerg is mechanically harder than Protoss?
|
On September 24 2011 14:00 StatX wrote:
the main difference of APM between protoss and the other races is that protoss doesnt require larva handling or add on swapping.
Larve injecting and add-on swapping have protoss component(s). Namely Chrono boosting and the pylon radius mechanic. They are unrelated, but the idea of equality is there.
|
On September 24 2011 14:02 Cambam wrote:
To me, this seems like Zerg has to do more than Protoss. Is it too bold to say that Zerg is mechanically harder than Protoss?
Yes. It is. Because it is incorrect.
|
When spraying an area with IT gets "rewarded" the same by the APM tab as good blink micro I sometimes want to throttle said tab.
|
Protoss is indeed the easiest race.... but not the strongest race..... p can do more with the same low apm but can do less with the same high apm than t n z.... i wonder if people understand what am i talking about....
|
On September 24 2011 14:02 Cambam wrote:I agree with a lot of the points people are making in this thread, so calm down with the hate please I agree building lings and marines and microing lings and marines and mutas probably inflates APM. I agree that APM doesn't equal skill. I never said that Protosses are bad at the game because they have low APM. All I'm saying is that to me, it seems like while Zerg is scouting around for proxy pylons with lings and injecting larva at multiple bases every 40 seconds and spreading creep and spreading overlords and making drones and units and taking extra bases and making extra macro hatcheries, Protoss is sitting in his base making probes, the occasional building, warping in units every 40 seconds, and chronoboosting (when he remembers). To me, this seems like Zerg has to do more than Protoss. Is it too bold to say that Zerg is mechanically harder than Protoss?
I wonder.. who actually forced you to play Zerg.
Care about your own race if you choose it because you like to play it do that.
I went from T to P because Protoss just looks way more awesome
but supposedly i would be on an equal skill level by now if i had started with zerg
from the beginning aswell.
E: And no, it ain't to bold because it's true. But while you spread your creep freely it gives you a decent advantage throughout the whole game. And if you let the protoss camp/turtle up all the way through until 200/200 and complain afterwards that would be your own fault.
|
Northern Ireland24323 Posts
Protoss don't have superfast, 25 mineral, .5 supply units that they can run around the place to scout for things, it's not something that as a race they can viably do. Their strength generally comes from their tech and strong unit comps that work well together.
Protoss is meant to play differently from Zerg, I genuinely don't think it's any easier or more difficult.
|
The 2nd to last paragraph in the original post is atrocious, it has absolutely no place in your topic. It might not necessarily be wrong, but it's certainly not correct or a properly collected "empirical evidence."
|
On September 24 2011 13:57 Ju!cy wrote:
If Protoss was indeed the easiest race, why don't all Pros switch to Protoss then?
Cheers
There's a difference between being easiest to play and being strongest.
|
Maybe it's because protoss APM is more concentrated. If a race is considered easy, then it should dominate. Protoss has always been considered easy even in BW, yet it's the race that struggles the most at the highest levels.
Which leads people to say Protoss has the least skilled players. Yet the high APM Zerg and Terran have is mostly centered around their macro(building stuff and larva injects). When it comes down to micro-ing armies I say Protoss requires more actions.
|
On September 24 2011 13:14 lazyo wrote:
Ahem, playing zerg will always push your apm up, because when spamming units by holding down hotkeys every unit you make gets counted as one action.
Similarly, terrans generally make a lot more units unless they are going mech (which is also just hotkey repetition). Terrans also use stim a lot which is again just a hotkey press.
On the other hand, protoss generally makes much less units and except forcefields only starts using spells/abilites in the midgame. Also, they often use only 2 production buildings with a robo producing collossi requiring very little apm to continually produce from. Couple that with the fact that you have to change your camera location for every warpin and that's alot of the explaination right there..
Pretty menaingless data really.
Thank you. You saved me from rofling over the OPs analysis. He gave us some really sound data (great work, OP) then jumped to a conclusion. Before we infer the ease of playing a race based off of required APM, I think we need more discussion like that from lazyo.
A zerg going ling-infestor simply makes more units when playing against a toss. The push 'z' many more times than a toss needs to push any button to make a unit. Does this make Zerg harder to play? As a former random player, I felt no difficulty spamming 32 lings at the same time.
tl'dr Thank you for your research, but why the need for sensationalism in your analysis? Ease of play requires us to look, not only at speed, but at care of our units. Given the high expense and non-spammability of toss units, a lot of the skill required to play the race, imo, comes from eking out the most value from your units. Speed helps with this, but brains (positioning/knowing when to retreat) help as well.
|
With the current meta-game multitasking I feel reward Terrans and Zergs alot more than Protoss. Terrans harass alot more, so drop ships, helions, and what not are moving all over the map. Zergs always have something to do, larva inject, creep spread, overloard spreading, and what not. Not many protoss's, on ladder at least, do as many tasks.
I haven't played alot on ladder this past week so I'm not sure how the new patch effects this...whether or not hellions are still used alot and if warp prisms are being used at all.
|
On September 24 2011 13:04 darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:02 Nothingtosay wrote:
Just because protoss requires less apm doesn't mean it is easier. This. It needs to be understood. Moreover, <1000 reps aren't enough to judge the whole race.
If you knew about statistics you would know that his sample size was actually pretty acceptable... It does represent very well all the razes there are.
|
this is a personal observation but,
it's odd but i do play protoss like how i tend to play zerg, when flipping through control groups of hatcheries to check inject progress.
it would be similar in how i flip nexus groups to watch chronoboost as i don't ever really like having above 25-50 en.
however, protoss has been my race of choice. i play random but notice small details about the races i play and the level of comfort i have for each. it is more interesting to me because i use the same sort of hotkeys across the board.
i feel that i'm most confident with terran,
fastest with zerg,
slowest with protoss, being what i perceive to be my worst race.
it is hard for me to understand when to make a specific group of units, and the lack of foresight or planning causes me to be slower in general.
there are a lot of other things i notice, but i have a good feeling of how my apm for each race and matchup has solidified,
250~350 as terran, 290~380 as zerg, 200~330 as protoss
and now with the patch, i don't really feel as though much has changed about that over the few games i played.
overall, its been a very odd feeling, and playing random has affected how i play as each race option. protoss is still difficult for me to read and to play as. it can be difficult to react and to play from behind.... yet some of the goody protoss builds are so simple to execute.... 2 gate/3gate robo, 4 gate w/gasses
|
mmm i play all races until i got another portrait. My apm with zerg in non combat situation is higher by around 50% then toss, while my terran apm is around 20% higher then my toss apm. I wouldn't give alot on standard apm. Since personally i consider zerg the easiest race in a non combat situation. (though the most apm taking)
Injection and tumor mechanics, distract the apm a zerg get for those and they will be below the terra, even if you take away scan and mules. Also terran and zerg produce more 1 food units, (so in short 2 clicks where toss does 1).
Take the macro out and i guess the toss will be higher in apm then the other 2 races. (zerg probably the lowest, but thats only due to the current playstyle zerg prefers.)
the toss is the easiest race is a myth carried over from bw. The apm analysis is not surprising considering how the races are build and has no say in the matter, that a toss players have it easier. My in battle apm for toss is by far the highest, while zerg isn't close to it. Does that mean zerg is the easiest race to play since it basically means zerg is a click? (my zerg opponents are even worse then me when it comes to in battle apm, you don't even notice that they are in battle)
I wouldn't think so, the races are designed to be different, so while zerg macro take more apm, their battle takes less. Basically that way it is quiet easy to make the races feel different and you notice that it was done this way quiet easy.
|
On September 24 2011 13:26 Medrea wrote:
These numbers do not prove anything except that APM measuring means nothing.
I play all three races at reasonably similar levels. When I play zerg, my APM is measured higher. Does that mean I am better at it? FUCK NO! It doesn't even mean I am working harder. Honestly I think zerg and terran "train" marine and zerglings add a lot of inflation to the APM count.
"Protoss EZPZ" is retarded. All this "mechanics" and shit is just bullcrap.
As a former random player, "Amen, brother."
|
think about hwo many more units zerg has compared to protoss, u make lings u move 4 lings (2 supply) is 4 movements. u move 1 zealot (2 supply) is 1 action. Zerg just gets more apm cause they have more stuff, mechanically they all haev their differences in races. Terran imo has the most to do and the most to gain from high apm (stutter, split); (ghosts emp and snipe correctly, then will just rape the fight). Zerg has to spread creep and inject larvae every 40 seconds sure. Protoss has to use their chronoboost. Zerg is probably slightly harder to keep up with, but is it something that is "mechanically more difficult?" I wouldn't quite agree seeing that it's really not that hard. I only play zerg once in a while, and I do haev trouble late game keeping up, but I'm sure if you are used to it it's something that you can do easily.
What did I just say in this long block? Every race has their own mechanics where if looked at, doesn't necessarily seem easier for any one race.
|
On September 24 2011 12:55 Cambam wrote:I thought this was neat because it lends support to the idea that Protoss is the easiest race. I know many people already believe this, but many Protoss players out there are in denial. These results, of course, aren't the final word on the issue, but they are piece of objective, empirical evidence in support of the "Protoss is EZPZ" hypothesis
Way to take some interesting statistics and then totally throw all credibility out the window and turn this into a joke thread. I know you're probably joking/being sarcastic, hence the winking face, but stuff like this still should just remain excluded. It's not needed and is just plain juvenile.
On September 24 2011 13:08 Snorkle wrote:
I don't think this is thread worthy. But your mlg info is skewed because the top talent there (koreans) were heavily representing terran and zerg.
I'd have to agree with this, I'm tired of seeing all these "statistics" threads using incredibly limited data to draw conclusions as to how each race operates. 200 ladder games is such a small amount of data that it's essentially meaningless, and the MLG data, as you mentioned, is skewed because of the players that were present.
|
On September 24 2011 13:33 absalom86 wrote:
Is this some kind of stealth protoss hate post ? Latter part of the OP sounds a lot like it, some harsh words.
I think the main reason protoss is the lowest apm is because their units are slow, cumbersome and clumsy. Zerg apm is inflated with the 5sd5sd, creep tumor spreading, injecting and especially ling micro early game.
Protoss has no real map presence early game, so they don't really start with any apm at all. You don't run your zealots around checking stuff out and such, and terran units are very microable. The most active protoss unit is probably the pheonix and it doesn't really see much use compared to zergs and terrans fast units ( mutalisks, speedlings, marines, hellions, banshees etc. ).
Protoss is the slow race, dead set race which relies on timing attacks and only has certain windows to even be able to move around the map without being surrounded by lings or cleaned up by a bio ball.
Good point. We're doomed to "hold position" micro for our first zealot as the lings bounce back and forth.
|
Protoss may be the easiest to learn but it's the hardest to master.
|
Thank you for an interesting numerical analysis, but your interpretation of the data is rather flawed. Without determining the types of actions, your analysis is limited purely to an analysis of APM itself. Are all actions equal? Probably not. Moreover, APM is not the only aspect determining difficulty in playing a race. There are many other factors, including how difficult it is to read the game, form strategies, make decisions, etc.
|
I really dont understand all these people coming in here saying "select larva make zerglings inflates APM". First of all you do that like every 40 seconds max and it lasts for liek 2 seconds tops. How will that inflate APM to this level? Second of all, how is making a bunch of zerglings any different from making a bunch of marines for bio? Sure for protoss it takes half the APM to make the same supply for zerglings, but does it really make a 60 APM difference every game? Lastly, who says the zerg is making zerglings all the time? Roach/Infestor? Roach/Hydra? Theres many games where zerglings arent spammed at all.
I think people are just fishing for excuses
|
Microing 1 Zealot = 1 APM
Microing 2 Marine = 2 APM
Microing 4 Zerglings = 4 APM
50 energy of Mule = 1 APM
50 energy of Chronoboost = 1 APM
50 energy of inject = 2 APM
I'm tired of people epeening about apm. It depends upon your unit composition more than anything else. When I go bio, my APM shoots up because I'm always stutterstepping large globs of units. But when I'm going mech I move huge supply units across the map without stutter, so my apm drops significantly.
To be honest I'm a bit surprised that the difference between the races aren't more prounced.
|
On September 24 2011 14:26 Supamang wrote:
I really dont understand all these people coming in here saying "select larva make zerglings inflates APM". First of all you do that like every 40 seconds max and it lasts for liek 2 seconds tops. How will that inflate APM to this level? Second of all, how is making a bunch of zerglings any different from making a bunch of marines for bio? Sure for protoss it takes half the APM to make the same supply for zerglings, but does it really make a 60 APM difference every game? Lastly, who says the zerg is making zerglings all the time? Roach/Infestor? Roach/Hydra? Theres many games where zerglings arent spammed at all.
I think people are just fishing for excuses
There are other things as well. Such as placing buildings. Protoss continues to wall off things even after taking 3 bases. Placing buildings in specific spots is a low-apm move. No matter how good you are at it, your never going to be as fast as spam clicker.
Sending out overlords is one thing, but your not sending out every single overlord.
|
On September 24 2011 14:31 RoboBob wrote:
Microing 1 Zealot = 1 APM
Microing 2 Marine = 2 APM
Microing 4 Zerglings = 4 APM
50 energy of Mule = 1 APM
50 energy of Chronoboost = 1 APM
50 energy of inject = 2 APM
I'm tired of people epeening about apm. It depends upon your unit composition more than anything else. When I go bio, my APM shoots up because I'm always stutterstepping large globs of units. But when I'm going mech I move huge supply units across the map without stutter, so my apm drops significantly.
To be honest I'm a bit surprised that the difference between the races aren't more prounced.
If you send 1 control group of 20 units to an area, thats 1 action.
|
On September 24 2011 13:40 figq wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 13:34 synapse wrote:
I'm pretty sure holding the button down only counts as 1action now... You are wrong. Hold Z, get 300+ APM instantly, just tested in 1.4. Main reason for Z>T>P is the number of units actually. Z - lots of units, T - middle, P - fewest units, but strong. Select an army and move it around a bit, and (in current patch 1.4) you will get exactly Z>T>P for APM for armies of equal cost, because of the number of units in each army.
APM will always be quite meaningless measure, because in the average actions the most weight comes from moving an army. Which is just one click. You click once, 120 lings move, you get 120 actions. (that's still how it is in 1.4) That overrides by far your macro. So basically people with high APM issue a lot of move commands and attack commands with large armies. They don't really click/press 300+ times in a minute, at all.
Are you telling me that if i have 100 zerglings, box them all and right click one time every second, i will magically have 6000 apm.. with 200 zerglings i would have 12000 apm.. I think you need to redo your testing..
|
Say that to Korean Pros. I remember MC boost his APM over 400 in the real battle vs XiaoT. How many Zerg and Terran could micro like that in the battle when they don't have to micro every single unit in the army?
|
On September 24 2011 14:36 tuho12345 wrote:
Say that to Korean Pros. I remember MC boost his APM over 400 in the real battle vs XiaoT. How many Zerg and Terran could micro like that in the battle when they don't have to micro every single unit in the army?
Well I think that was 4gate versus 4gate. Those kinds of encounters are VERY long micro fests. ZvZ micro is the same, however there are reprieves in that matchup.
|
This thread was great until the 2nd to last paragraph
|
I thought this was neat because it lends support to the idea that Protoss is the easiest race. I know many people already believe this, but many Protoss players out there are in denial. These results, of course, aren't the final word on the issue, but they are piece of objective, empirical evidence in support of the "Protoss is EZPZ" hypothesis
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
you're serious too, fucking hilarious
When I play protoss, my APM is lower than when I play terran. This has NOTHING to do with the race being easier, and EVERYTHING to do with the macro mechanics. You select fewer things and use fewer actions for macro. That doesn't mean it's easier.
|
Yes, Protoss APM is lower. Mostly because there isn't really any easily incorporated harassment options in most games Protoss play, so there is nothing to spend APM on.
|
I like how they're "very close" at 20 APM different, but at 30 they're very far apart. Tabloid journalism IMO.
|
On September 24 2011 14:31 RoboBob wrote:
Microing 1 Zealot = 1 APM
Microing 2 Marine = 2 APM
Microing 4 Zerglings = 4 APM
50 energy of Mule = 1 APM
50 energy of Chronoboost = 1 APM
50 energy of inject = 2 APM
I'm tired of people epeening about apm. It depends upon your unit composition more than anything else. When I go bio, my APM shoots up because I'm always stutterstepping large globs of units. But when I'm going mech I move huge supply units across the map without stutter, so my apm drops significantly.
To be honest I'm a bit surprised that the difference between the races aren't more prounced.
First section doesnt make sense. I will sometimes have 50+ zerglings moving in one control group. If I click move them around by clicking them even 10 times in one minute, my APM should jump up to 500. I have never seen my APM jump up above 300, despite the fact that there are many times I have more than 50 units selected and I order them to move more than 10 times in a minute.
Second section doesnt make sense either. Select CC ---> Call down MULE = 2 APM. Select Nexus --> Chrono = 2 APM. Select Queen --> Inject = 2 APM. Even if it were true, you inject every 40 seconds. You really think that would make a 60 APM difference every game?
|
On September 24 2011 14:44 Petninja wrote:
I like how they're "very close" at 20 APM different, but at 30 they're very far apart. Tabloid journalism IMO.
well he supposedly used the p test statistic which takes into account the range of apm among others. And yes it is quite possibly that 20 apm could be similar and 30 could be "statistically significant"
|
On September 24 2011 14:31 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 14:26 Supamang wrote:
I really dont understand all these people coming in here saying "select larva make zerglings inflates APM". First of all you do that like every 40 seconds max and it lasts for liek 2 seconds tops. How will that inflate APM to this level? Second of all, how is making a bunch of zerglings any different from making a bunch of marines for bio? Sure for protoss it takes half the APM to make the same supply for zerglings, but does it really make a 60 APM difference every game? Lastly, who says the zerg is making zerglings all the time? Roach/Infestor? Roach/Hydra? Theres many games where zerglings arent spammed at all.
I think people are just fishing for excuses There are other things as well. Such as placing buildings. Protoss continues to wall off things even after taking 3 bases. Placing buildings in specific spots is a low-apm move. No matter how good you are at it, your never going to be as fast as spam clicker. Sending out overlords is one thing, but your not sending out every single overlord.
Yea, I agree there are things that require skill that dont require high APM and that Protoss requires a lot of these.
All I want to point out is that a lot of Protosses are coming in here feeling defensive (which is reasonable considering the tone of the OP), but they try to point out incorrect things to use as excuses.
|
mrmin123
Korea (South)2971 Posts
I can't see anything good coming out of this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
