|
On September 21 2011 08:10 sechkie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:08 Ares[Effort] wrote:On September 21 2011 07:55 sechkie wrote:
Actually in the Alicia vs Select game in the GSL, alicia's apm was hovering around 150ish average apm (does spike up to 200+) and Select's apm was constantly above 300 (sometimes up to 500+).
It just shows that you don't need an insanely high apm to play a competent game as many ppl consider Alicia a top tier protoss. I don't think that's the point, it's not like you will play slower if it 'says' your apm is lower.
I just think its ridiculous they want to implant this bullshit instead of more important features. I guess it's to please the casuals, when will they please the people who play this game more then twice a week What I was trying to say is to respond to someone above who was talking about no one below 200 apm or so being a gsl pro. Basically just saying that Alicia who is considered a top tier protoss player can do everything that he needs to effectively, (albeit with trouble defending gosu harrass, but that was mistakes, not lack of apm)
alicia was massively overhyped and i think it's pretty clear from his results (losing to a foreigner 0-2 in code a? get owned by tod in open bracket mlg?) that he is not a "top tier" protoss.
lol i just played a custom and now i have 74 "apm," whereas i had about 200 actions per blizzardminute before. that is really amusing.
|
Ares[Effort]
DEMACIA6550 Posts
On September 21 2011 08:10 sechkie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:08 Ares[Effort] wrote:On September 21 2011 07:55 sechkie wrote:
Actually in the Alicia vs Select game in the GSL, alicia's apm was hovering around 150ish average apm (does spike up to 200+) and Select's apm was constantly above 300 (sometimes up to 500+).
It just shows that you don't need an insanely high apm to play a competent game as many ppl consider Alicia a top tier protoss. I don't think that's the point, it's not like you will play slower if it 'says' your apm is lower.
I just think its ridiculous they want to implant this bullshit instead of more important features. I guess it's to please the casuals, when will they please the people who play this game more then twice a week What I was trying to say is to respond to someone above who was talking about no one below 200 apm or so being a gsl pro. Basically just saying that Alicia who is considered a top tier protoss player can do everything that he needs to effectively, (albeit with trouble defending gosu harrass, but that was mistakes, not lack of apm)
ah I see
|
my mind is going between: what the hell is blizzard trying to do here and who the hell cares?
|
On August 28 2011 16:31 Klyberess wrote:
So now the "Actions" only mean some of the actions, and the "Minute" isn't even real minutes.
.
I guess the "Per" still applies.
This is gold.
Honestly though, why would Blizzard go out of their way to implement such a change?
|
Erm, while I'm not really bothered by it, I kinda liked seeing my APM gradually increase. Usually in games that I lose I have low APM, which lets me know I'm missing injects, creep spread, not being active enough around the map... without having to actually see each individual mistake.
But meh, w/e.
|
Pre 1.4 in game apm: 150-185 apm
After 1.4: 130-160 apm, not much of a difference, my average apm difference before and after is like 20.
It didn't make much of a difference to me b/c I don't usually spam much @ the start
|
I'll quote myself from another thread.
It will have more objective meaning. Clicking actually takes screen time during which you can't really do anything else. That's why you don't see anyone clicking 50 times to move an SCV. IMO, If someone does the same quality macro/micro with less control group spamming, then it's not illogical to value that more.
For example:
- player A does manage constant SCV production from 3 CCs and it takes her/him avg. 10 cycling through the CCs
- player B does manage constant SCV production from 3 CCs and it takes her/him avg. 5 cycling through the CCs
- player C does manage constant SCV production from 3 CCs and she/he doesn't need to cycle around because s/he is simply so well trained to the point that s/he never forgets it without even looking at CCs.
What you get is 3 SCV production every 20 secs, and those are the "Actions" that are measured. How you get there will differ per individual, and I think it's not too absurd to assume, at pro level, if you can do the same/more with less, you're probably a better player. And if you're player C, you may be able to produce marines, marauders, tanks, etc. and better engage in the battle (i.e. more "actions") while player A is busy cycling through CCs to produce SCVs. So if player C does more things while player A cycles around her/his CC, they are counted as "actions" toward the APM.
Basically this new APM measurement doesn't care how you get things done, but it counts the number of things you get done in the same time period. It's definitely more objective way of measuring APM, and it will be much more useful/meaningful than current way of measuring.
|
On September 21 2011 07:50 iAmJeffReY wrote:
Hahaha can't wait to see all these zergs apm drop from 220 to 110. Loving it.
Honestly I don't think Zerg's APM will be affected that much. I'm more curious about Terran v Protoss when it comes to "real" actions because Terran unit production is queuing and Protoss is warping.
|
Same as previous poster i was 190-230 pre patch
now im 130-160 post patch.
|
so if i was 80 before im going to guess like 40? WOOT what a total baller im going to test this out im super hyped
|
On September 21 2011 09:14 DreamChaser wrote:
so if i was 80 before im going to guess like 40? WOOT what a total baller im going to test this out im super hyped
Yup. Unlike the previous APM which was nearly meaningless, you can actually suspect your skill is improving as your APM goes up with this new (and more objective) APM. Since it measures how many actions you're achieving in the game. (not how many times you tab your keyboard)
|
If you click a lot the game will think that you are doing a lot of useful actions when in fact spam clicking is probably one of the most useless spam strategies. I don't know why people are so happy about this, being able to move a scout to going to back to your base to produce units is one of the most important skills to have but it is just considered to be worthless compared to clicking a zergling to move to the same place 80 times
|
On September 21 2011 09:22 Supert0fu wrote:
If you click a lot the game will think that you are doing a lot of useful actions when in fact spam clicking is probably one of the most useless spam strategies. I don't know why people are so happy about this, being able to move a scout to going to back to your base to produce units is one of the most important skills to have but it is just considered to be worthless compared to clicking a zergling to move to the same place 80 times
What you said is exactly why you do not see spam clicking in the games (since it's useless). If there are click spams, they will have meanings. (like when you're trying to deny a zerg expansion with a probe, etc.)
|
Actually i dont juge players on their apm, so i dont care about this change. ^^
|
To me it's a horribly stupid change, blizzard did not create the universal term APM so therefore they should not have the ability to change it. But either way it will affect only the smallest proportion of people and will generally be ignored, especially if programs such as sc2gears can calculate it based on the actual definition.
|
My APM will be lowered? 
|
On September 21 2011 08:53 Flonomenalz wrote:
Erm, while I'm not really bothered by it, I kinda liked seeing my APM gradually increase. Usually in games that I lose I have low APM, which lets me know I'm missing injects, creep spread, not being active enough around the map... without having to actually see each individual mistake.
But meh, w/e.
What you've mentioned are all counted in the new APM, I believe.
|
On September 21 2011 09:22 Supert0fu wrote:
If you click a lot the game will think that you are doing a lot of useful actions when in fact spam clicking is probably one of the most useless spam strategies. I don't know why people are so happy about this, being able to move a scout to going to back to your base to produce units is one of the most important skills to have but it is just considered to be worthless compared to clicking a zergling to move to the same place 80 times
This is my problem with it. So now a major part of macro, the "tapping" aspect isn't useful APM? Since when is Blizzard the one to judge something like that?
I feel like when someone in Master or GM league has the same APM as someone in silver something is wrong.
Spam clicking is stupid/pointless/useless, whereas hotkey spam actually has some meaning.
Edit: went from 150-160 APM to about 70 now -_- how dare I tap so much I guess.
|
lol @ the people who whine about the significant drop in their apm.
first off, the change doesn't stop you from what you're best at, tapping.
second,if most of your apm is from tapping, that does tell you that you're not as fast as you think you are.
spam clicking might be useless too, but honestly who cares. just treat apm counter as a tool to help you become better. and stop spamming so much and actually do something useful to keep your apm high.
|
someone was interested, so i'll post my own.
midmaster protoss
prepatch: 120
postpatch: 100ish (smaller sample, so give or take)
I think this is good that I have a small drop? I think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
