|
On June 26 2011 22:59 Hypemeup wrote:Show nested quote +How can people still be spouting this crap when the post itself makes a strong link between the winners and high apm. Yep, Thorzain being 7th slowest player at DH sure does back up that, its not like he won something big lately. Show nested quote +
Of note: the player with the higher APM won the game 58.46% of the time. If one player's APM was at least 50 greater than the other's, that player won 65.7% of the time (from MLG columbus).
So APM does mean something at least. At average the person with 50 or more APM than his opponent wins twice as much.
What a good samplepool you got there, surely we can conclude something from that.
It's a better sample than what you have (which is nothing). Please come up with a better sample to prove your point.
|
France12909 Posts
On June 26 2011 23:03 schmeebs wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2011 22:59 Hypemeup wrote:How can people still be spouting this crap when the post itself makes a strong link between the winners and high apm. Yep, Thorzain being 7th slowest player at DH sure does back up that, its not like he won something big lately.
Of note: the player with the higher APM won the game 58.46% of the time. If one player's APM was at least 50 greater than the other's, that player won 65.7% of the time (from MLG columbus).
So APM does mean something at least. At average the person with 50 or more APM than his opponent wins twice as much.
What a good samplepool you got there, surely we can conclude something from that. Thorzain spikes a lot in his apm though, i've seen him do a lot of marinesplits and such against banes/seige tank lines that take quite fast hands to do, I think the real answer is a lot of very good players don't spam and their average apm is shown to be lower.
Yeah about Thorzain it's probably that he is fast when he need to, and don't spam to maintain his "highest apm" like other players do.
|
On June 26 2011 21:15 Megaliskuu wrote:Its kinda sad that people can be top players with 130 apm though  .
that being said the lack of game mechanics compared to sc1 gives the players longer longevity, theres a reason why nestea is owning everyone at 30 : D
so i guess its good in that regard = ]
|
Obviously there is a correlation between apm and winning games. The more interesting question would be: is high apm is a "symptom" of good play or a requirement for it?
I found that for me, having low apm (relative to my average) is mostly a sign of being clueless what to do during a game. In games where I always know what to do and thus have something to direct my attention/apm to I'm significantly faster. So I like to think of high apm as a symptom.
|
never knew sjow other pros are under 100 apm...
|
On June 26 2011 21:15 Megaliskuu wrote:Its kinda sad that people can be top players with 130 apm though .
That's not sad, that goes to the strength of the game, quite trying to put anti-sc2 comments into this.
|
Isn't there a way to measure Eapm in sc2 yet? These numbers are pretty useless without it.
|
On June 26 2011 21:16 Kira__ wrote:
wait... someone had lower apm than goody?
Shoulda watched goody vs. elfi.
Awful game. one 5 gate fail, and two proxy
|
On June 26 2011 23:14 Aberu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2011 21:15 Megaliskuu wrote:Its kinda sad that people can be top players with 130 apm though . That's not sad, that goes to the strength of the game, quite trying to put anti-sc2 comments into this.
I doubt people like this will last tbh. The people that have really high APM like MMA, MC, HuK have it not because you need 300 APM to macro in SC2 but because they're constantly active on the map with observers, scouts, great unit control and multi-pronged attacks. If you look at people like SjoW he has no idea what's going on outside his base and he falls apart when people attack him everywhere.
|
Merz clearly has the biggest penis out of all listed.
|
A high APM could mean anything. It can mean that a player is very fast at executing multiple tasks, or it could just mean that a player is spamming. (I average 90 APM but when I want to spam I can have 350 SC2 average on a 1 hour game)
However a low APM means that you are not doing all the actions you would want to do.
The real question is how much APM do you NEED at minimum to keep up with your brain and decisions you take ? From OP's results and personal experience, I would say that 120-130 APM lets you play SC2 to the full of your potential, but that's just my opinion.
|
It would be interesting to see graphs of the APM over the duration of a game. Or maybe just the highest spikes of each player. I know that I only play around 80 - 90 APM over the duration of a game but spike well into the 200s when microing my army.
|
Merz must spam like hell with that much APM, surely that high must do you more harm than good unless if you're an AI.
|
On June 26 2011 23:06 meRz wrote:
My APM is not close to being 339/470 effective APM though. I've had a lot of people tell me I spam way too much and It's true, it's just so built into my "autopilot" i.e the way I'm used to play that whenever I try to stop the spam it gets awkward and I feel out of my element. For me the spam has always helpt me kept in "pace" of the game as in I'm always going at the same speed rather than starting out slow then gradually become faster. I still think spamming to a certain extent can be good for you to keep the pace up and your hands warm but I obviously overdo it.
I blame NaDa's early FPVod (vs SirSoni I believe) where they show his keyboard and he went at like 300+ apm. I was like 12 at the time and figured "hey that's how I'm going to play" and now it's just so natural to me that I don't think about it.
High APM shows potential obviously it's not something to feel ashamed about. Perhaps having a higher APM you should try to take advantage of low APM opponents with multi harass. As someone who always gets matched up against people with higher APM this is really effective against me.
|
United Arab Emirates1141 Posts
On June 26 2011 23:10 TT1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2011 21:15 Megaliskuu wrote:Its kinda sad that people can be top players with 130 apm though . that being said the lack of game mechanics compared to sc1 gives the players longer longevity, theres a reason why nestea is owning everyone at 30 : D so i guess its good in that regard = ] Well SCII will be a more tolerant game, our pros won't have to be 15-22 year old Korean beasts with insane reaction times and hand-speed
|
On June 26 2011 21:16 FinnGamer wrote:
Isn't Ingame APM 1,33333 times slower than Real apm? You used the factor 1,39, still gives a good overlook though
its 1.38 or 1.39
also: 130 apm in sc2 = 180 real apm (alot of the top foreigners in bw had around 200 apm so this is not really anything new)
heck, there were even terran progamers with around 200 apm (SEri[ScM] for instance)
SjoW doesnt really have 100apm - he has ~140 and if used efficiently enough you can be a good player with it. People need to realize ingame time in sc2 is faster than real time
meRz <3
|
On June 26 2011 23:18 Stiver wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2011 21:16 Kira__ wrote:
wait... someone had lower apm than goody? Shoulda watched goody vs. elfi. Awful game. one 5 gate fail, and two proxy
Elfi being guaranteed to not advance at that point might have had something to do with his strategy choices :p
|
nice list but merz made so many little mistakes with his high apm. I still remember the ghosts on terminus as he played grubby that started shotin at the destroyable devices and the ghosts got forcefielded cuz he just clicked 1000th times somewhere :DD
|
On June 26 2011 22:55 Paladia wrote:
Of note: the player with the higher APM won the game 58.46% of the time. If one player's APM was at least 50 greater than the other's, that player won 65.7% of the time (from MLG columbus).
So APM does mean something at least. At average the person with 50 or more APM than his opponent wins twice as much.
this is a logical fallacy
just because someone with higher apm won more does not mean their apm was responsible, directly or otherwise, for the win
|
On June 26 2011 23:33 JesusOurSaviour wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2011 23:10 TT1 wrote:On June 26 2011 21:15 Megaliskuu wrote:Its kinda sad that people can be top players with 130 apm though . that being said the lack of game mechanics compared to sc1 gives the players longer longevity, theres a reason why nestea is owning everyone at 30 : D so i guess its good in that regard = ] Well SCII will be a more tolerant game, our pros won't have to be 15-22 year old Korean beasts with insane reaction times and hand-speed
Yeah in some way, it lessens the gap so those with lower apm can compete with higher ones unlike in BW. Because in BW 100(or ~130) apm isnt going to cut it since you will get destroyed after a few minutes. In SC2, at least for now it's fine to have lower apm.
Also I think it was axslav or something that has one of the lowest apm as a pro player 60-70 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
