This is common knowledge, but i dont think anyone ever did a test before with an autoclicker.

we got the 30% from beta because we knew blizzard game second is 30% shorter than a real second.

nekuodah

England2409 Posts

March 23 2011 21:37 GMT

#25

im pretty sure he ment apm in sc2 is measured at a speed faster than an actual minute thus the apm shown in sc2 is lower than the equivalent in sc:bw

sharky246

1197 Posts

March 23 2011 21:42 GMT

#26

On March 24 2011 06:20 Beef Noodles wrote:
So if my apm is 140... that means its really 200? Cool. I'll take it

Its the other way around

solistus

United States172 Posts

March 23 2011 21:43 GMT

#27

The game time thing was known before, but obviously some people didn't know based on replies, now we have 'proof' to cite on the issue. The tests on connection speed and graphics settings were interesting. I'd like to see those same tests with your 300apm button to see if there's any difference at all for a realistic APM.

Beef Noodles

United States937 Posts

March 23 2011 21:47 GMT

#28

On March 24 2011 06:42 frodoguy wrote:

Show nested quote +

Its the other way around

Wait what? Now I'm confused. Is the amp indicator in replays higher or lower than it is supposed to be?

chenchen

United States1136 Posts

March 23 2011 21:49 GMT

#29

On March 24 2011 06:47 Beef Noodles wrote:

Show nested quote +

Wait what? Now I'm confused. Is the amp indicator in replays higher or lower than it is supposed to be?

If your SC2 apm is 140, that's 140 over roughly 40 seconds, so your real apm (as in per minute) is actually 200.

Rkie

United States1278 Posts

March 23 2011 21:49 GMT

#30

the only thing that i never understood about all of this isnt why APM is adjusted, but rather why is the fastest setting not normal seconds? I realize this was not the case in BW, but was it only made this way in SC2 to be nostalgic? The standard playing speed is going to be the fastest speed, so why not make that the "normal"? I guess you could make the speeds below that ratios like normal (what is fastest) is 1, the next fastest is .8 and so on.

On March 24 2011 06:49 chenchen wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

On March 24 2011 06:47 Beef Noodles wrote:

Show nested quote +

Wait what? Now I'm confused. Is the amp indicator in replays higher or lower than it is supposed to be?

If your SC2 apm is 140, that's 140 over roughly 40 seconds, so your real apm (as in per minute) is actually 200.

You told him he was wrong, then corrected him by saying the exact same thing just so you know.

Sanasante

United States321 Posts

March 23 2011 21:53 GMT

#31

Common knowledge refers to the fact that we all know "Real Time APM" and "Starcraft 2 APM" are different.

What he explains here, through his experiment, is where this discrepancy comes from.

decemvre

Romania639 Posts

March 23 2011 21:53 GMT

#32

good thread; i hope blizzard takes notice and fixes this. I agree it is extreemly frustrating.

UberThing

Great Britain410 Posts

March 23 2011 21:56 GMT

#33

I thought I was just a bit slow

garlicface

Canada4196 Posts

March 23 2011 21:58 GMT

#34

I've never seen the explanation before, so this was a great read. Very detailed and organized too.

p4NDemik

United States13896 Posts

March 23 2011 21:59 GMT

#35

I think we'd all like to see APM be calculated in real time, but honestly this is not something I'm going to get up in arms about at all. Whatever constitutes a "high" apm is entirely relative, having less to do with the actual number and more to do with how it stacks against other peoples' APM. If measurements are artificially a little low I'm not going to complain just to satiate people's desire to measure something that is largely extraneous to actual skill anyways.

The only time this is really annoying is when we are trying to compare APMs of SC2 players with APMs of players from different games (BW/WC3/etc), and there is little practical use for that.

So yeah it would be nice but I'd rather have Blizzard focus on getting us the most important features. Such as replay watching with friends over Bnet and the like.

Mastermind

Canada7096 Posts

March 23 2011 22:02 GMT

#36

On March 24 2011 06:03 Veratule wrote:

Show nested quote +

I actually didn't know if it was common or not. Either way I think Blizz should fix it.

Ya, this has been common knowledge since beta, and has always annoyed me. Blizz doesnt seem to care at all.

kasumimi

Greece460 Posts

March 23 2011 22:03 GMT

#37

I think fixing the build time indicators should be more important

Releasing patch notes and say "xxx time increased by x seconds" calculated in different speed that the actual speed we play the game at is just wrong.

Sinensis

United States2513 Posts

March 23 2011 22:04 GMT

#38

On March 24 2011 06:07 FLuE wrote:
1 - Everyone knows this already.

2 - It doesn't really matter. I mean unless you are just trying to feel super good about yourself and your 80 APM is actually 110 or whatever, we are usually comparing APM's with players being measured by the same system.

So what we know - Anything 150-200 is high. Anything about 200 is really high(at least in my opinion).

If you compare 2 players and one has an APM of 150 and the other 200, the one with 200 is doing more APM. If it is actually 200 and 250 in real time it doesn't change the fact that the player at 200 is doing more and that is really all you need to know.

So does it really matter if it is exact real time or not? As long as the point of comparison is the same we get everything we need. This to me is a non-issue and something everyone already knows and is brought up often when talking about SC2 APM. Just don't compare 3rd party APM counters from BW(real time) with SC2(game time) APM because you are then comparing 2 different measurements at that point, again something we all know which is why people don't do it.

1. Lets keep the problem because everyone knows about it. If everyone knows it's broken it's exactly like it's not.

2. It doesn't really matter. Things like comparing your APM over time correctly between two games shouldn't be done anyway and as long as the game is taking measurements incorrectly ALL the time, it's almost like it's correct some of the time!

rebuffering

Canada2436 Posts

March 23 2011 22:05 GMT

#39

nice read. thx for the post! funny Ive actually looked into my apm less as time goes on. i think everyone's apm will get somewhat faster in the coming months, but i love numbers so a quick peak at sc2 gears once inna while can put some perspective in your play. thx again!

McCain

United States187 Posts

March 23 2011 22:08 GMT

#40

What people may not be aware of is that the in-game clock feature is also calculated incorrectly. A 25 minute game according to the in-game clock is actually a 18 minute game in real life.