On September 17 2011 03:21 AA.spoon wrote: Lol, Idra has a really low score. I took a long game between myself and orly. I have 93,1 and orly 91,8. I am pretty sure our macro is average (for a gm eu player). I guess I should take a large sample instead of one game.
This is actually true. As soon as more peoples scores get submitted, I guess the myth of Idra being a macro monster will be dismissed.
That was just one game, i can simply get a game where my opponent left right away and give me 150 SQ.
I took a sample of 12 games, the last games I played in tournaments (in advanced rounds). I have 86.5 average. So idra's result is absolutely not impressing. Weirdly enough, the game with the lowest score 79.1, was a very short game in which I did a 4 gate + prism against a 1-1-1. I macroed very well in that game. It seems your formula isn't well adapted for short games.
Yea i took my latest 7 games and i got a score of 89.522. And even got a game with 97.997 SQ score O.o (this was a 15min game). My macro isnt THAT good, i often have quite a few minerals stacked up after battles and such, but these numbers seem really high compared to the different leagues. I'm certainly nowhere near the macro of IdrA so i dont really understand...
Try using 20 consecutive games, and calculate the standard error (standard deviation divided by the square root of the number of games). Maybe you are better at spending than you think! Also, as I noted in the Summary and FAQ, I would expect SQ to be higher in tournament than ladder games. IdrA may well have been streaming, or not paying full attention during some of those games. I expect he (and other pros) would score higher if the games were tournament games.
Also, a reminder to all: don't use games with an average income (resource collection rate) less than 600. The exponential relationship totally breaks down around that point. If you have a lot of short games that are close to that boundary (600-700), it may affect the accuracy of the SQ measurement.
I noticed that Protoss players built fewer workers AND had higher unspent resources. I know it's possible that Toss players are simply bad in general, but if not... this seems potentially problematic as game styles develop. If Protoss players are indeed struggling on the ladder and in tournaments... this seems like it might be part of that problem.
Frankly, I think it may have something to do with increasing the build-time on gateway units in an early patch and then only reducing the build-time recently on the sentry. I feel the early Gateway build-time nerf/patch was unnecessary then and it remains so at this time. Another possible issue is that the Warpgate research time has twice been increased dramatically. It's not wonder to me then that early Rax pressure and the 1-1-1 build is so effective.
I just started playing again after not playing for about 8 months.
My placement matches SQ went like this: 28.8, 28.65, 29.29, 29.91. Pretty suck ass, placed in sliver league even though I lost all the games.
So then the last game I played I told myself to not focus on winning, but to simply focus primarily on constant worker production, and let infrastructure & army creation be a secondary, and micro be tertiary. My SQ jumped to 47.5.
So yeah, focusing on macro is the name of the game for us lower leagues.
I do wonder though, since Terran and Zerg (If they have larva) can just queue up bunch of units to keep their money low, where protoss will have to pool up minerals for them to use their warp gates. So, you guys can keep queuing units to keep yourselves under say 200 minerals, where toss will have to pool up to say 800 minerals to warp in 6 stalkers every cooldown. I suppose a top level toss could have all his warpgates staggered so they could do the same thing. But generally if you are going to use your warpgates to reinforce, you dont want to be warping in 1 stalker every 5 seconds, you'd rather warp in 6 at once, making it so you have to pool your money up.
Would this be a main reason why protoss players would have a much lower SQ?
So i decided to fill out the excel spreadsheet and see where I stand. I see I have a long way to go! mid/high level diamond protoss NA ladder http://i.imgur.com/EtuNg.png
This is a bit ridiculous lol. Someone takes this WAYYY too far. I dont need a research paper and a team of scientists to tell me that my Diamond league macro is bad. I can just watch the replay and stare at my money compared to the production tab.
Wow, so glad I checked TL before work today. This is awesome analysis for us statistics nerds, and is definitely the most compelling evidence I've seen for the common belief that practicing macro/multitasking/econ management is the most important way for the average player to improve. I'd love to see a regression analysis of all the stats that Blizzard lets us see for other players to determine which stats have the strongest correlation with winning in each division, or just a best fit comparison like this one for some other oft-cited stats like APM.
On September 17 2011 04:06 NihiloZero wrote: I noticed that Protoss players built fewer workers AND had higher unspent resources. I know it's possible that Toss players are simply bad in general, but if not... this seems potentially problematic as game styles develop. If Protoss players are indeed struggling on the ladder and in tournaments... this seems like it might be part of that problem.
Frankly, I think it may have something to do with increasing the build-time on gateway units in an early patch and then only reducing the build-time recently on the sentry. I feel the early Gateway build-time nerf/patch was unnecessary then and it remains so at this time. Another possible issue is that the Warpgate research time has twice been increased dramatically. It's not wonder to me then that early Rax pressure and the 1-1-1 build is so effective.
Any thoughts on these issues?
edit: link
The difference is negligible and protoss players tend to bank more resources for their more expensive and longer production cycles? It's also true that zerg can also bank a ton of resources and spend it all instantly, but I don't think that occurs that often.
Wow, this is both a great tool and a great assessment of macro.
Apparently my average SQ is around 70-80, despite the fact that I'm in gold league. I think its probably because the SQ isn't flawless or something. I always thought I had terrible macro but manage to pull a win because I have a better grasp of the game and compositions, but I guess manually making workers beats queuing them up all the time, despite how less income I get.
EPT
mate, excellent read!
