|
On August 26 2011 22:43 gillon wrote:
Retarded change, blizzard is saying that useful actions aren't actually useful. The spam is not just spam. It gives overview over production.
They are not patching APMs because tapping is useless. Before the patch any noob could reach 400 apm easily, making it a completely useless skill parameter. Now the noob spammer will get his own 40 apm and the pro his 200 or whatever. Better losing a little accuracy and finally having a valuable parameter imho.
|
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss.
bad players spam to show off their apm, good players spam to warm up.
why the hell does blizzard care about what it implies?
apm should NEVER be used to rank players for fuck sakes (it seems few people here do)
|
On August 27 2011 02:29 floor exercise wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 02:17 Grumbels wrote:I could agree to this change if they would differentiate between selecting a control group and centering your screen on it. If you do: 44, 55, 66 to check on your queens I would call that three different actions, but I fear the new way of measuring will count it as one. For those who say that Blizzard has fake APM now: spamming controlgroup hotkeys was the biggest contributor to mindless spamming, so if you would take that away from the real APM count then yes, maybe you get some real actions, but those might just be a small portion of your effective APM so it should still be a fairly accurate way to measure speed. On August 27 2011 02:07 floor exercise wrote:On August 27 2011 01:53 cydial wrote:
Definetly a good change.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard people reference their apm instead of their macro or micro in regards to their skill.
Then when I see a replay of them playing I notice how much lower the other player's apm is and yet he is macroing more and winning engagement after engagement. So? APM is still worthless on its own, now it's whoever issues the most move commands which has no reflection on in game success or failure. It will never be a number that reflects skill. Anyone who gets caught up into thinking it does is an idiot, before or after this patch. That's what people who try to tinker with APM need to get into their heads. It is literally just a number. By changing what counts as actions you aren't making this number more or less accurate, because it doesn't actually reflect anything but how many actions you are performing. Well, I guess it makes it less accurate because now it won't even do that reliably. In fact, more people will now think it matters than before. So really all these sorts of things do (and trying to change the way APM is derived is nothing new in the SC world) is put more emphasis on this number that never really meant anything to begin with If it's just a meaningless number then Blizzard should remove it from the game. Then it's just a funny little statistic with no real relation to the game's outcome and therefore not useful for spectators. Don't you think a sport that habitually goes: "WoW! Look at that speed, you folks at home couldn't do it." is a bit silly when the speed doesn't translate to useful ability? Fortunately it somewhat does, but then why shouldn't you try and filter the raw values for a more useful eAPM number? Someone implied maybe Goody's and Merz's apm won't be so far apart now anymore, but isn't that a good thing since it makes APM more reflective of their actual skill? You're missing the point where you're not making it more useful. You're just arbitrarily cutting things out because you decide they aren't useful. Before apm was ever even calculated from bw replays Koreans played at 300 apm. The underlining principle you should take away from APM is that playing an RTS where every second counts as fast as you can is generally a good idea. That's all APM reflects as a number. When you take things out of it you aren't making it a better number as a result. Why is selecting things multiple times more or less significant than giving redundant move commands? Or right clicking an scv to a mineral multiple times before it gets there. There's no one alive who can accurately judge what action is absolutely necessary and what action is unnecessary, so why bother trying to draw a line anywhere? Removing the APM tab is fine I guess, the only function it serves to give us a glimpse of how fast a player is playing without seeing their perspective as opposed to "how effectively they are playing" which is just a stupid thing to try to quantify
I think it's silly to act like we could never ever find a good way to measure someone's playing speed, that's just anti-intellectual. APM doesn't do this as it measures clicking speed, not playing speed. They sort of correlate, but spamming distorts the value so much it's not very useful if you would want to rank players. A good way of measuring should produce values where e.g. 2x the amount means 2x more actions and for the current APM calculations that's just not the case as an equally likely explanation could be one person spams, the other doesn't.
I should add I'm not in favor of the change as it still won't be a very good measure for effective APM. It's sort of cool to be able to see which players can click at insane speeds, but I think it'd be neater to have Blizzard produce two values: all actions filtered for redundancy and the current APM, but it would require of them to create some fairly sophisticated ways to filter actions and I'm not sure they're willing to put in the time for such a thing.
|
On August 27 2011 03:26 jinorazi wrote:
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss.
How could this cater to the mass? Everybody´s APM will be reduced. I t will actually make the spammers feel bad lol.
|
On August 27 2011 03:28 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:26 jinorazi wrote:
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss. How could this cater to the mass? Everybody´s APM will be reduced. I t will actually make the spammers feel bad lol.
because some people think low apm = bad.
therefore, some players spam their way to increase apm.
its to make those people with low apm feel better. and i'm sure the mass majority of players have low apm.
|
why are people so butthurt about their apm. its not a sign of skill or progress, good micro macro and multitasking are
On August 27 2011 03:31 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:28 windsupernova wrote:On August 27 2011 03:26 jinorazi wrote:
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss. How could this cater to the mass? Everybody´s APM will be reduced. I t will actually make the spammers feel bad lol. because some people think low apm = bad. therefore, some players spam their way to increase apm. its to make those people with low apm feel better. and i'm sure the mass majority of players have low apm.
White ra is way better than merz but has 2-2.5 times less apm. and no merzs multitasking isnt better neither is his micro or speed
|
I'm glad blizzard is looking into this issue since this the most talked about controversial topic plaguing SC2 today.
|
On August 27 2011 03:28 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:26 jinorazi wrote:
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss. How could this cater to the mass? Everybody´s APM will be reduced. I t will actually make the spammers feel bad lol.
Like I mentioned earlier in the thread:
Remember when Blizzard got rid of loss off the record for low league players?
They are doing the same thing with the APM. They are trying to generalize a lot of SC2 elements that would make low league players more motivated to play the game.
Think about it:
From Blizzard perspective , there are more lower league players than master/GM players. and they get more $$ from lower league players due to higher # of players- So they are trying to hide any skill presentation that would intimidate low level players from playing SC2.
Who do you think is going to feel better about it when no one has super high APM? Answer is: Low league players.
|
On August 27 2011 03:21 Kambing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:16 TheRealPaciFist wrote:
How about
224455224455
?
I trust that's either 12 or 6 actions, rather than just 1 See the OP. On live that's 12 actions. On the PTR, that's 1. At the start of the game on the PTR, your APM will probably be 0 after your initial split because you won't be able to do any meaningful actions (unless you drone stack).
22 actually changes your screen, which means you're actually doing something, not just spamming. The OP isn't clear on this case
|
On August 27 2011 03:31 isleyofthenorth wrote:why are people so butthurt about their apm. its not a sign of skill or progress, good micro macro and multitasking are Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:31 jinorazi wrote:On August 27 2011 03:28 windsupernova wrote:On August 27 2011 03:26 jinorazi wrote:
i wonder the logic behind this change. i'm all for every action = action.
this just seems more of catering to the mass populous just like removing loss. How could this cater to the mass? Everybody´s APM will be reduced. I t will actually make the spammers feel bad lol. because some people think low apm = bad. therefore, some players spam their way to increase apm. its to make those people with low apm feel better. and i'm sure the mass majority of players have low apm. White ra is way better than merz but has 2-2.5 times less apm. and no merzs multitasking isnt better neither is his micro or speed
indeed. as i've said, apm does not equal skill or limitation to one's ability to carry their task.
|
Redefining a key term that has been used as a statistic for over 10 years is... pointless. It's like the NBA all of a sudden saying that FG's now count only as 2-point shots. If they want to get a more accurate measurement of a different statistic, create a different name all together. Bad change - it just does not make sense.
No, it's more like the baseball committee or whatever it's called deciding homeruns hit by starplayers while playing in high school games don't count towards their total score anymore. Sure, technically they're homeruns, but come on.
|
As a spammer in the early game I don't really like it 
Also tabbing is an import part of macro since it guarantees flawless production.
|
Its a redundant change, all it will do is bring down the pro's apm to a level closer to casual players. Making players in bronze through diamond feel like their 70apm isn't too bad compared to the now 150apm of a grandmaster player.
|
On August 27 2011 03:35 BadgerBadger8264 wrote:Show nested quote +Redefining a key term that has been used as a statistic for over 10 years is... pointless. It's like the NBA all of a sudden saying that FG's now count only as 2-point shots. If they want to get a more accurate measurement of a different statistic, create a different name all together. Bad change - it just does not make sense. No, it's more like the baseball committee or whatever it's called deciding homeruns hit by starplayers while playing in high school games don't count towards their total score anymore.
I don't understand this analogy. Why only star players? Why high school games?
|
I say it's good. Finally people will know what their real APM is, and stop acting like they're the best zerg because they spam their way to 200 APM in the first 8 minutes of a game. 34345345345345345345345345345345345345 really shows skill.
And we'll finally see protoss only takes 60 apm, down from 100!!!! lol
But in all seriousness, I enjoy it. People will be humbled at first, but that's good.
|
Why would they do this instead of just adding another tab called "effective apm"
|
I'm more interested in knowing the effective APM of the player versus the raw APM.
Therefore I think their goal of trying to display the effective APM is a good one. I understand that they may not have it down 100% (cycling is still useful and thus effective, even if it's redundant) and yes it will be harder to compare your past APM to the new one (let alone comparing to BW APM). But those issues are for me less important than knowing the effective APM.
I also find it funny at how many people seem to be so butthurt about this change.
|
On August 27 2011 03:11 Dharmok wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 03:04 TheRPGAddict wrote:On August 26 2011 22:43 gillon wrote:
Retarded change, blizzard is saying that useful actions aren't actually useful. The spam is not just spam. It gives overview over production. This, the tapping "spam" is actually a necessity and it factors into one's skill and gameplay and thus should be counted. I completely agree as well. Tapping is necessary, without you will never be able to macro efficiently. If in addition to APM they want to introduce an eAPM statistic, I'm all for that. Both are interesting facts to measure your grasp of the game and to analyse your improvement from replay to replay.
disagree utterly. tapping your control groups should not count as an action
|
On August 27 2011 03:36 headbus wrote:
Its a redundant change, all it will do is bring down the pro's apm to a level closer to casual players. Making players in bronze through diamond feel like their 70apm isn't too bad compared to the now 150apm of a grandmaster player.
my 250 apm dont do anything close to those of a gm player because im a diamond scrub. never thought i was any faster than other players just because i spam more
:E omg double post
|
Should just change it to BAPBM to avoid further confusion.
blizzard actions per blizzard minutes
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
