|
Nice stats, thanks.
It's funny how if you look at the production hotkeys, you can pretty much see a figure similar to a human hand, lol.
Don't forget guys: Don't confuse correlation with causation. (changing your options and typing GG after a game won't make you better)
I personally like alerts, but I hate that they are clickable. Blizzard needs to freaking fix this and maybe people will use alerts more. They added many new options in HotS, but none of which are unclickable alerts! I really don't understand; they have unclickable menus, unclickable control groups, but no unclickable alerts...
|
Last graph has Diamond before Platinum. Might want to look into that
|
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve with that research? Yeah yeah, sc2 requires set of abilities to develop but so what? What are the possible application of your research results from studying sc2 players? How can you benefit different areas of life with the results?
Also I am pretty sure that this kind of studies have been done multiple times by large group of scientists with great amount of resources trying to study expertise acquisition in different areas like playing musical instrument or playing icehockey. They have already a lot of material about how humans improve themselves optimally.
Edit:
There is problem that makes it hard to apply any results of this research to anything really. Since you are just analyzing replays, and have little to zero acces to players themselves meaning there is giant lack of extensive interviews of players and clinical studies by different hospitals that is absolutely neccesary to fully understand this field of research.
|
Looks like Whitera was right all along..."more gg more skill" has now been empirically verified.
|
|
|
Very Interesting! And there ya go, proof that more gg=more skill.
|
Oh god, the GG stat is hilarious.
|
On March 06 2013 15:38 Mongolbonjwa wrote:
What exactly are you guys trying to achieve with that research? Yeah yeah, sc2 requires set of abilities to develop but so what? What are the possible application of your research results from studying sc2 players? How can you benefit different areas of life with the results?
How does expert performance vary throughout a practice session? Which practice schedules lead to the most performance gains? How does age influence reaction times in _complex_ cognitive motor tasks? How does expert performance changes with small changes to the task (e.g., balance patches, expansions)? If you want to do a neurophysiological study of multitasking, what skill level players do you need to recruit? Are some cognitive motor skills necessary to learn before others become important (e.g., A-moving via the minimap is a crazy technique, unless you are already looking at the minimap a lot), and what is the optimal training order? When in the skill spectrum is it optimal to learn hotkeys (expert digital artists have Photoshop hotkeys, for example)? And so on...
One final point: The whole history of science is proof that amazing progress can be made by understanding our world, even if we don't know the applications at the time. The invention of the laser was purely a basic science project, with no obvious practical benefits. Without it though, we have no optical media, no laser eye-surgery.
Also I am pretty sure that this kind of studies have been done multiple times by large group of scientists with great amount of resources trying to study expertise acquisition in different areas like playing musical instrument or playing icehockey. They have already a lot of material about how humans improve themselves optimally.
We are a large group of scientists: http://cslab-sfu.ca
Most other research carefully measures performance on simple tasks in the lab, or uses an expert vs. novice approach, which tests only two points on the skill continuum, leaving thousands of hours of skill development unmeasured.
The 7 virtues of studying RTS game replays are these:
1. A rich dynamic task environment.
2. Highly motivated participants.
3. Noninvasive and direct measures of domain performance.
4. Accurate measures of motor performance and attentional allocation.
5. Large datasets.
6. Numerous variables.
7. Many levels of expertise.
No other approach has more than 4 of these. Yes there is lots of research on expertise: The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, an 800 page summary of research in this area, sits on my desk. Nevertheless, there are large gaps in our knowledge, and many of those gaps can be filled by studying RTS replays across skill development.
There is problem that makes it hard to apply any results of this research to anything really. Since you are just analyzing replays, and have little to zero acces to players themselves meaning there is giant lack of extensive interviews of players and clinical studies by different hospitals that is absolutely neccesary to fully understand this field of research.
We do not claim that our approach obviates any other research method. Quite the contrary, our method works well in conjunction with brain imaging work and other contrastive approaches. But replays have exactly the kind of information that is lacking in other studies: precise cognitive motor performance measures across time. No player can tell you this information, and no fMRI will show this information.
Think about it this way. Our first study ended up with data from 3,360 players. If a human coach teaches unique 72 players a year, it would take over 40 years to teach that many players. Even then, the human coach will forget lots of players over that time period. Our dataset, not only remembers every player, it remembers every single screen move, and every single mouse click that every player has performed. We're not saying it will tell you everything, but surely you can see how it would be useful.
|
I am willing to bet that Spending Skill is a more useful variable than APM for most leagues.
|
|
|
gg for masters... so depressing. haha. Interesting stuff, thanks a bunch!
|
Bisutopia19234 Posts
Great article. Confirms mostly what I've observed over the years.
|
On March 06 2013 10:39 CrushDog5 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 05:25 crbox wrote:
wow incredible post. So much research, very interesting. I use 7 for my evo chambers too, didn't know it was the most common. Also in the "gg chart" you inverted platinium and diamond
edit: funny how masters has the lowest gg ratio. Doesn't surprise me, I used to get bm'd way more back in the days in master league. I assumed better players would know how to play a manner game. Guess not O.o
Master players or better players are more inclined to believe they didn make a mistake in the game and blame it more on the opponent so rage .
|
On March 07 2013 03:58 danl9rm wrote:
So, GM = good mannered?
I think it mostly has to do with the fact that most GM's(provided legitimately gained) don't really have any reason to trash talk because they've already proved their skill in getting there. Masters encompasses people who are good at the game, but are missing something in their play. I think it's because at this point it's really frustrating to figure out what is missing that causes losses.
A silver player who gets supply blocked every 2nd or 3rd depot, misses half his worker timings etc. isn't going to be as frustrated because they have so many mistakes that they have many obvious points to fix, albeit it's probably not a priority to fix them.
|
More GG more skill. I don't have a lot of skill.
|
The gg chart is shockingly accurate to what my personal experience has been. I don't remember exactly how often I gg'ed from bronze up, but I know as I approached and got into diamond my gg's started to increase quite a bit. Now that I got into masters, people do lots of all-ins and I've been gg'ing quite a bit less, though I'm trying to make a conscious effort to do it more often.
It's also interesting to see the flyer marker (I just recently put that to always after being in Masters for a few months), and that not many people seem to do anything about the alerts (which I never really took the time to see how they work exactly).
|
I would be really interested in more specifics on settings. Like, what specific sound settings do players use? I believe there is a file with all of that information so you could collect that file from people and automate the data analysis.
|
The frequency of hotkey use figure makes me depressed.
|
This is all such specific information that a lot of people probably don' t really bother to consciously think some of it. Either way, it's awesome to read such rich information, detailing a game I both enjoy watching and playing. Especially when there's a potential scientific gain possible!
|
On March 07 2013 04:35 JaKaTaK wrote:
I would be really interested in more specifics on settings. Like, what specific sound settings do players use? I believe there is a file with all of that information so you could collect that file from people and automate the data analysis.
Interesting idea. Where is that file?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
