EPTI am waiting nakedly. ♥
Do you macro like a pro? - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Asday
United Kingdom388 Posts
I am waiting nakedly. ♥ | ||
|
GabrielB
Brazil594 Posts
| ||
|
s.a.y
Croatia3840 Posts
| ||
|
Proof.
535 Posts
On September 17 2011 02:50 Demonhunter04 wrote: Great post, but you did not account for if a player maxes out quickly and then wins without losing significant portions of it, which would cause average unspent resources to skyrocket, and you also did not account for workers lost - losing workers is a big reason why players in higher leagues would need to make more. Yup, I don't think your first point was accounted for, but the second point was (probably a bit subtle). "Note that while this is a measure of the number of workers constructed by the end of a game (rather than an actual measure of workers at any stage of a game) it shows the expected profile for worker production across a game." Those players that made 160 workers are probably those who had to remake from losing a crapton of workers. | ||
|
xai_death
Netherlands65 Posts
| ||
|
Misanthrope
United States924 Posts
| ||
|
yellowmoe
Canada59 Posts
| ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
On September 17 2011 02:45 Wuster wrote: I was wondering about this as well. My first thought was it must be counting Mules, but by the time the first mule is out, Protoss should have a worker lead unless they're chrono-ing tech/units. The divergence appears to start at the 5-6 minute mark. It's possible for Terran to start the FE by then, but is it possible for the Terran to actually build from it to explain the difference? I know PvP is also the matchup with the latest expansion timing, so that could be dragging down Protoss as well? Also, I wonder if this is being skewed by 4-gate, since you stop at 20 or so probes which is really early. Other than the 11/11, Terran openings/all-ins don't involve cutting workers do they (they super delay the expansion or pull workers to junk your economy)? I was surprised that terran did not create more workers than zerg. My reasoning is that P and Z tend to cut a lot of workers in mirror matches, while terran does not. | ||
|
Namu
United States826 Posts
| ||
|
spiksel
Netherlands97 Posts
| ||
|
Montana[TK]
1624 Posts
 you don't even have to know computer programming to do it (even though it is helpful) ... but i guess that advice comes late | ||
|
slmw
Finland233 Posts
On September 17 2011 02:53 Asday wrote: So how long until SQ is implemented into SC2Gears? I am waiting nakedly. ♥ Afaik it is not possible, since AUR and RCR are not shown in the replay file. You would need to emulate the whole game to calculate these numbers, which is not possible without actually watching the replay. | ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
| ||
|
fuzzayy
United States99 Posts
| ||
|
hagga
Sweden219 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9341 Posts
On September 17 2011 02:19 Hider wrote: I actually think Majors macro is better. Major has better macro than idra, and would prob be in the low 90's. DRG has better macro than Idra (a lot better actually) and would be prob be close to 100. Im gonna quote my self. Took the last 10 games of major. His average SQ was 96. In some games he had over 110. His macro is really insane as I expected. Idras image as a macro isn't really deserved. | ||
|
fenner
United Kingdom163 Posts
| ||
|
Huragius
Lithuania1506 Posts
On September 17 2011 03:02 Hider wrote: Im gonna quote my self. Took the last 10 games of major. His average SQ was 96. In some games he had over 110. His macro is really insane as I expected. Idras image as a macro isn't really deserved. I really doubt that DRG or Major has better SQ than MVP. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10645 Posts
| ||
|
affinity
United States266 Posts
| ||
| ||
