EPTDo you macro like a pro? - Page 30
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
peekn
United States1152 Posts
| ||
|
CustomKal
Canada749 Posts
This almost reinforces the good macro will help you get better mentality for it will get you to those higher leagues, and it isn't until your macro is quite up their that decision making starts to make a difference (hence the difference between diamond and masters, decision making and reaction). Grandmasters to masters difference is also quite interesting, but that may be just because that shows all of masters which waters down the top of masters who are probably on par with grandmasters. | ||
|
ChineseWife
United States373 Posts
| ||
|
Rhaegar99
Australia1190 Posts
| ||
Kring
Portugal70 Posts
| ||
|
yawnoC
United States3704 Posts
| ||
|
TheUnderking
Canada202 Posts
I'm top of platinum, but my SQ is barely gold using my last 10 games | ||
|
Wolf
Korea (South)3290 Posts
| ||
|
xOff
United States247 Posts
 | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37103 Posts
| ||
|
Crypt
United States17 Posts
That is: lower skilled players stay in games longer after they've already lost. This goes beyond things like command center floating and building hiding, which I would believe happens more as the skill level is lower. The player in the position of winning stop or slows creation of workers and spending, since trying hard isn't as necessary any longer. This situation is much more common in lower league play and is not a determinant of their win/loss performance and should not be viewed as a skill-based cause of their league placement. Idra is the perfect example of the opposite extreme. There is very little "dead time" near the end of his games. If he's lost, he leaves immediately without slowing down macro rather than dragging out the game and lowering his macro/time "score." Result: The gaps between leagues in all presented graphs is exaggerated. | ||
|
LetoAtreides82
United States1188 Posts
On September 17 2011 03:58 GabrielB wrote: As some people have said, it seems hard to automate this from the replay file (the replay file doesn't seem to save that information). However, sc2ranks probably can get this done pretty easily, as it gathers its info from the match history. Yes I think SC2Ranks would be able to do this. | ||
|
LetoAtreides82
United States1188 Posts
On September 17 2011 03:42 xai_death wrote: Updated my tool at http://beijers.eu/share/sq.html so you can calculate average etc. It's almost like the Excel someone posted, but Excel takes such a long time to start  .Cool thanks | ||
|
fuzzy_panda
New Zealand1681 Posts
| ||
|
GMonster
686 Posts
 | ||
|
docvoc
United States5491 Posts
| ||
|
HostileEgo
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
Azzur
Australia6267 Posts
On September 17 2011 13:49 ChineseWife wrote: this seems to just tell you your score is higher if you have longer games, doesnt really tell you how good your macro is. I just did the SQ test for a longer game where i had sloppy macro and i got a higher score than most 10-12 minute games i played despite the ratio of unspent resources to average collection rate being lower In a longer game, there is a greater chance of being sloppy since it's not difficult to play like a pro in the early stages. | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6267 Posts
On September 17 2011 14:29 Crypt wrote: Sorry if this has already been posted, but there is an aspect that significantly exaggerates this data. That is: lower skilled players stay in games longer after they've already lost. This goes beyond things like command center floating and building hiding, which I would believe happens more as the skill level is lower. The player in the position of winning stop or slows creation of workers and spending, since trying hard isn't as necessary any longer. This situation is much more common in lower league play and is not a determinant of their win/loss performance and should not be viewed as a skill-based cause of their league placement. Idra is the perfect example of the opposite extreme. There is very little "dead time" near the end of his games. If he's lost, he leaves immediately without slowing down macro rather than dragging out the game and lowering his macro/time "score." Result: The gaps between leagues in all presented graphs is exaggerated. Nope, I don't buy this. I believe there are definite gaps between leagues. The empirical data supports what many higher level players know intuitively. | ||
|
MarKeD
Australia183 Posts
On September 17 2011 14:49 docvoc wrote: I understand that this looks very comprehensive, but where are the error bars? surely this work isn't infallible also i love that this has been done, but wouldn't it be much more useful to have done say, 300 people? 100 is not enough to get rid of systematic errors and such. Also what we see here is the top 100 best bronze players and so on correct? I understand that you used scatter plots and then inserted a trendline, but wouldn't it have been beneficial to take a myriad of level players, mid level to higher instead of just the 100 best? I would like to say that i'm very happy to see this caliber of math on a forum like this :D Ready more closely, only the grandmasters are the top 100, the other leagues are a randomly selected division. | ||
| ||
