EPTSQ Leaderboard by Region - Page 16
| Forum Index > News |
|
Romulox
United States125 Posts
| ||
]343[
United States10328 Posts
 | ||
|
JeffVader
United States79 Posts
I'm not trying to take away from this excellent analysis by the way . | ||
|
Inf-badguy
Canada171 Posts
| ||
|
xlumpy
United States43 Posts
| ||
|
Majesty
Iceland33 Posts
| ||
|
tgun
434 Posts
On October 30 2011 12:32 JeffVader wrote: Wouldn't Terran's SQ naturally be higher simply because they can queue units up in their production facilities? I'm not trying to take away from this excellent analysis by the way .If you're aiming to purely increase your SQ then yes; however, since everyone in Ladder games (at least at the top level) isn't queing things up or spending just for the sake of spending, it shouldn't be a factor. | ||
|
insufficient
Germany33 Posts
| ||
|
tgun
434 Posts
On October 30 2011 16:26 insufficient wrote: Tell that goody...? Outliers happen; take the SQ as you take the BMI in regards to health; a good blanket overview of skill, however, not precise nor accurate in all cases. | ||
|
BradenKuntz
Canada59 Posts
There have been several comments regarding the Protoss need to float minerals for large warp-ins, as well as the Zerg's need to float fund in order to produce large numbers of mutas or infestors at once, which would of course affect SQ. As you said several times, SQ is not the be all-end all, but I agree with others in that it may be more telling if the players analyzed were from the same race, thus eliminating any fluctuations in the data due to different race mechanics. Other than that, I love what you're doing, and you have nothing but my utmost respect for this study, and for all your work. Can't wait to see more data from different regions!! | ||
Waxangel
United States33388 Posts
On October 30 2011 15:59 tgun wrote: If you're aiming to purely increase your SQ then yes; however, since everyone in Ladder games (at least at the top level) isn't queing things up or spending just for the sake of spending, it shouldn't be a factor. Hopefully, one of whatthefat's future projects will be looking at SQ by race. I don't think it will tell us definitively what races are 'better' for spending money, but it might give us some insights into spending patterns. | ||
|
StrifeCro
United States69 Posts
protoss has warp gates which when macroed the resources have to accumulate up in cycles for them to warp in. warp gates also have no queue. like 6 gate would generally be banking up 750 resources pretty normally even with perfect macro. zerg cannot queue up any units but larva do spawn constantly although there is also the inject cycles which at perfect macro encourage banking minerals again for those cycles. terran can just queue up in all buildings which means that they can always keep money low even when macroing poorly and macroing perfectly still has no penalty for queueing up when the production numbers meet the income levels so money would theoretically stay much lower than other two races. | ||
|
tgun
434 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:33 StrifeCro wrote: its definitely biased against protoss and probably zerg as well. protoss has warp gates which when macroed the resources have to accumulate up in cycles for them to warp in. warp gates also have no queue. like 6 gate would generally be banking up 750 resources pretty normally even with perfect macro. zerg cannot queue up any units but larva do spawn constantly although there is also the inject cycles which at perfect macro encourage banking minerals again for those cycles. terran can just queue up in all buildings which means that they can always keep money low even when macroing poorly and macroing perfectly still has no penalty for queueing up when the production numbers meet the income levels so money would theoretically stay much lower than other two races. Ideally, something like this would be done within constraints, say, only analysing a races SQ against each-other, and only taking into account games over a specific length, as it's much easier to keep a high SQ in short (<8:00) games. | ||
|
Pippi
Sweden540 Posts
 ) | ||
|
SlaverR
Germany87 Posts
| ||
|
Demonaz
United Kingdom1219 Posts
I always though DeMuslim had impeccable macro when I watched him stream, low money all the time no matter what. Now its been proven. | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3805 Posts
Also: "Top 3 control bitches" made me crack up | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3805 Posts
On October 30 2011 18:33 StrifeCro wrote: + Show Spoiler + its definitely biased against protoss and probably zerg as well. protoss has warp gates which when macroed the resources have to accumulate up in cycles for them to warp in. warp gates also have no queue. like 6 gate would generally be banking up 750 resources pretty normally even with perfect macro. zerg cannot queue up any units but larva do spawn constantly although there is also the inject cycles which at perfect macro encourage banking minerals again for those cycles. terran can just queue up in all buildings which means that they can always keep money low even when macroing poorly and macroing perfectly still has no penalty for queueing up when the production numbers meet the income levels so money would theoretically stay much lower than other two races. I was thinking this exactly, which is why SQ is probably only viable in the top of the ladder and at tournaments where doing that (pulling a GoOdy and queing up 5 thors) isn't gonna get you far, the "racial" bias also shows why HuK and MC could win even though they have lower SQ's. Because a perfectly macroing toss need to float minerals in cycles. Which is why you ideally can't asses the skills of different races using the same metric because the mechanics are way different. | ||
|
aderum
Sweden1459 Posts
I like what Pokebunny said on the first page, that protoss is the only race where its good not to build units out of your gateways sometime. But anyways, OP, you are a genius | ||
|
Myrddraal
Australia937 Posts
| ||
| ||
