EPTThanks for spotlighting this mods!
Do you macro like a pro? - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ArchDC
Malaysia1996 Posts
Thanks for spotlighting this mods! | ||
|
Scrimpton
United Kingdom465 Posts
| ||
|
trias_e
United States520 Posts
| ||
|
GabrielB
Brazil594 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
Nice work and easy to understand, thanks whatthefat | ||
|
xSixGeneralHan
United States528 Posts
| ||
|
FrostedMiniWeet
United States636 Posts
| ||
|
Theeakoz
United States1114 Posts
thanks. | ||
|
Jeffsekai
Canada12 Posts
| ||
|
-ForeverAlone-
274 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
KillerDucky
United States498 Posts
On September 17 2011 01:14 whatthefat wrote: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KNUVF.png) Histograms of Spending Quotient (SQ) for all leagues, as labeled. Players in higher leagues tend to score higher. Each histogram is constructed using a bin width of 8. SQ does quite a good job of separating the games of players from different leagues. But I wouldn't really say that it does a good job of separation. Especially given the primary thing people are going to immediately do with this: Calculate their own SQ, and then complain "OMG my SQ is higher than the average Master's league players SQ". On September 17 2011 02:52 Xaeldaren wrote: This doesn't seem right, since I'm a gold player and after inputting 20 games my average comes in at 71, which I presume is pretty good? It's right. Looking at the histogram, 71 is still well within the fat part for gold players. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9420 Posts
On September 17 2011 03:28 Grobyc wrote: Woah, the difference in workers produced between Grandmasters and Masters is actually a lot more than I expected. Nice work and easy to understand, thanks whatthefat I think there is a huge difference in skill between high masters and low masters. I think master league is like top 3k in each region. And while top 200 master league players prob averages close to 80, many of the low leauge master players probably scores somewhat similar to the diamond league. I would be surprised if there was such a difference in skill between high diamonds or low diamonds for instance. | ||
|
BobMcJohnson
France2916 Posts
On September 17 2011 03:18 Scoldin wrote: A truly awesome read. You mentioned LaLush's analysis so I went and read that... In retrospect I wonder what's changed to make the antithesis of this come true? I would say that the metagame evolved a lot + a few patches. Lalush's post was written at the time where Protoss were just maxing out on Colossi+Voidrays a moving across the map, and his statement at the time was pretty accurate. | ||
|
HyruleanTubist
United States189 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7IK2s.png) Which, based on the last chart in the OP, puts my macro on part with your average Masters level player? Pretty pleased. Very interesting stuff, I'd be interested in seeing others charts too, on all levels. | ||
|
whatthefat
United States918 Posts
I've now added an FAQ section to the bottom of the OP so that responses don't get lost in the thread. | ||
|
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
Because of that, keeping your unspent average close to zero is impossible. There is also the case of purposely banking your resources with a maxed army and increasing production/economy. You can sometimes see a protoss banking 5000+ resources because when he loses his army he will be able to warp in 50 zealots instantly. But I think in a TYPICAL game, it's a good measure. Also, as a side note, I'd like to see average unspent / average income ratios (spending quotient) as a good stat to put on stat tracking websites. Looking at either alone in a replay or end game scoreboard doesn't tell me much. If we can easily personally track our SQ it would be a good indicator that our macro is improving. Too bad Blizzard would never do this. I wonder if sites like SC2analysis or SC2buddy can implement this. Someone should poke them and direct them here. On September 17 2011 03:17 Sbrubbles wrote: Impossible to do without looking game-by-game. Also, having larvae purposely saved up is 95% of the times indistinguishable from bad macro. Waiting for mutas to pop is the only clear-cut case. Average unspent resources may not be a perfect indicator of macro proficiency, but it is the best one we've got. I think it's a good measure, because you are comparing spending efficiencies vs others who are probably doing the same thing. The comparison across leagues was very interesting. | ||
|
Jacopana
El Salvador210 Posts
| ||
|
Cortza
South Africa328 Posts
| ||
|
Sc1pio
United States823 Posts
| ||
| ||
