EPTAPM measurements changes in 1.4.0 - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
3clipse
Canada2555 Posts
| ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
On August 27 2011 12:59 usethis2 wrote: Are you counting those "upset people"? I find it hilarious when someone asserts "everyone is complaining about ..." "geez so many of you are ... ", "Most people are ... ", when those "everyone" "most people" are a minority. I guess I misspoke. I don't really mean that so many people are upset, more than so many people seem to make a big deal about early game APM, regardless of if it's in a positive light or not, essentially drawing attention to it when it means literally nothing. | ||
|
Dzerzhinsky
Scotland327 Posts
At the moment it can't be considered anything more than a vanity stat since spamming completely overwhelms the actual actions that players are making. Given how much attention is given to the statistic (and will always be given to it) this is pretty detrimental. First because any sort of analysis done around it is fundamentally flawed. And second because it gives a false impression to players trying to learn the game and leads them to focus on improving the wrong things (I've lost count of the number of times I've heard Bronze-Gold players saying that they're concentrating on increasing their APM, which ultimately means spamming instead of having it increase naturally as their macro/micro improves). A lot of people are saying that it still won't show EAPM, but I'd much rather see a step forward made than no step at all. And on a personal note I'll be mildly curious to see how many of the people who are warming up their hands now switch their spamming to new ways that will be included in the APM tab. | ||
|
ejac
United States1195 Posts
On August 27 2011 15:32 Dzerzhinsky wrote: If this makes APM a slightly more useful statistic to look at then it can only be a good thing. No, it makes looking at apm statistic worthless. All this does is reward those who spam in ways approved by blizzard whether by accident or intentionally and punish those who don't. John doe could have 150 apm because 100 of that is spamming right click (approved by blizzard) while John Dane could have 50 apm because he is spamming 456 (not approved by blizzard). The only way to measure/compare apm is to let no spam count or let all spam count. | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
On August 27 2011 15:09 3clipse wrote: As long as 3rd party APM calculators like sc2gears aren't affected, I don't really care. Their ingame APM calculation is illegitimate anyways seeing as it doesn't measure in real seconds and can't be compared to other rts games or bw. They will be...or at least it doesn't register the "extra APM" from what I get (at least if you turn on the apm counter thing/overlay that sc2gears has, if it's still kept in replay, idk, I haven't tried that....) | ||
|
cascades
Singapore6122 Posts
| ||
|
tuho12345
4482 Posts
| ||
|
SwitchAUS
Australia106 Posts
| ||
|
eXeRicH
Germany89 Posts
What are they smokin at Blizzard Office? Remember when they randomly came up with removing the losses out of the profile for everyone below masters?! And now they are changing the way APM are displayed?! Why making it so unnecessary complicated Blizzard? Lacking ideas to improve the game reasonably? People are asking for replaysharing for example. No, they are wasting their time, thinking about useless things like this. Not appreciated. | ||
|
Filter
Canada620 Posts
Why can't they just leave it as is? especially because older patch replays will have the old system etc. | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
 | ||
|
Farseer9
United States20 Posts
But the poll pretty much sums up my feelings | ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
| ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
| ||
|
akalarry
United States1978 Posts
| ||
|
Eatme
Switzerland3919 Posts
I've been hoping that they would fix their broken game time and they use their office hours at making something even more wrong than the original blunder. Really confused why they put game time on normal if they didnt plan to use that for default speed anyway. EDIT:If you spend your game selecting a critter over and over it is still an action and should be counted. APM is not a measurement of skill or intelligence for that matter. | ||
|
Fadetowhite
Korea (South)302 Posts
On August 27 2011 17:09 Cyber_Cheese wrote: I want to see apm as an accurate figure, to get some idea of how many useful actions the pros are doing, and this is a step in the right direction what you want already exist its called Eapm (effective actions per minutes) however the thing that is discussed is blizzard changing the normal APM to Eapm while still calling it APM which tottaly butchers its meaning. This in turn will make it so its no way comparable to Broodwar APM with the weird minutes and with it only counting certain things as actions. | ||
|
sylverfyre
United States8298 Posts
On August 27 2011 16:03 ejac wrote: No, it makes looking at apm statistic worthless. All this does is reward those who spam in ways approved by blizzard whether by accident or intentionally and punish those who don't. John doe could have 150 apm because 100 of that is spamming right click (approved by blizzard) while John Dane could have 50 apm because he is spamming 456 (not approved by blizzard). The only way to measure/compare apm is to let no spam count or let all spam count. And spamming 456 checking on your production facilities isn't even wasted APM... | ||
|
Masayume
Netherlands208 Posts
Tapping is not ineffective but essential. Keeping a routine going is not spam, it makes it easier to nail your production rounds perfectly every single time. APM as it stands now, shows exactly what people are doing, and it is pretty easy to determine which actions are useless and which ones have meaning. If you aren't smart enough to understand that and just see APM as a useless number then sorry, but please educate yourself. This will be a ridiculous change that only makes it harder to determine what a player is doing in terms of actions and why. Of course there will be spammers that have 200 apm by just switching control groups for fun, but they are easy to spot and only kid themselves. And EAPM is not the correct word for what it will be in 1.4 if this would be released with it. What may be spam for person A, might be effective actions for player B. And for the people that get angry or annoyed by the "people spamming hitting 200 apm", are you kidding me? Does that actually piss you off? An ignorable stat for you if you know the person is just being silly and spamming for naught pisses you off? Perhaps you should channel your attention and focus into more important stuff. (perhaps Blizzard can implement a toggle for you guys so the APM display will only show your own APM if you cannot handle "spammers") Don't change what isn't broke. | ||
|
qwertzi
111 Posts
its funny how so many say its a good thing, and its even more funny that you think that swtiching control groups is spamming... but using 500 clicks for what could be one isnt.. wow! (i know bw sc2 comparisons are stupid and lame, but i simply have to here) in bw, controlgroup switching actually meant good multitasking. you prolly had 1-4 control groups for units 5-8 for buildings and 9-0 for nexuses (if u were protoss) and then for map positions u had the F-keys. you had to switch through all buildings to reproduce units. thats why mechanics actually mattered. in bw chart, could check what you used ur actions for, good players had large part of their actions on control groups and buildings.. not so good players did only click around like angry chickens. so what has changed? control groups are not as important as you have 1-2, building selection is not as important as you can have all of them on one hotkey. thats one reason why apm was not as important in sc2 than it was in bw, thats also the reason why sc2 apm were naturally lower (also wen translated into bw apm) than bw apm, you just had less actions. but because apm is like the size of your dick, and people were embarrassed with their low apm (although sc2 apm are also different from bw apm) they started clicking like monkeys on crack. okay the point that I am trying to make is this: i get that hotkey selection does not have to be counted as unique actions, because it is not as important as it was in bw where you constantly needed to go through all your control groups and buildings. but at the same time, why is useless clicking still counted as unique actions? i mean having the same unit (group) selected and clicking in the same 10pixel frame within 5 seconds for 10000k times should really not count 10000k actions. | ||
| ||
