|
On May 22 2013 05:29 MaestroSC wrote:
i dont understand....
isnt this like arguing Terrans who use their mules are better than terrans who never use mules?
or
"We conducted an experiment and collected data to test whether or not using Chrono boost from your nexus, will increase your chances of success as protoss"
??
If u read the conclusion it presents some interesting ideas and concepts to further understand the depths of the hive mind & zerg strats.
|
Awesome results. Does confirm my gut feelings that I'm focusing too much on hitting my injects, and not enough on the other things I'm missing on.
It's funny to see so many people interpret this study completely wrongly. The study isn't intended to say that silvers are as good as Masters. Obviously, the people on Masters are much much better, and they can macro much better as well. The entire point of the analysis, is that hitting your injects is not a major differentiating factor. All the other things people mentioned, like taking more bases, building macro-hatches, spreading creep, not being supply blocked, keeping your resources low ... these are equally/more differentiating factors, and these are the things people may want to focus equally/more on.
|
On May 22 2013 05:40 whacks wrote:
Awesome results. Does confirm my gut feelings that I'm focusing too much on hitting my injects, and not enough on the other things I'm missing on.
It's funny to see so many people interpret this study completely wrongly. The study isn't intended to say that silvers are as good as Masters. Obviously, the people on Masters are much much better, and they can macro much better as well. The entire point of the analysis, is that hitting your injects is not a major differentiating factor. All the other things people mentioned, like taking more bases, building macro-hatches, spreading creep, not being supply blocked, keeping your resources low ... these are equally/more differentiating factors, and these are the things people may want to focus equally/more on.
The type of games in master vs silver is so different that comparing inject rates is meaningless, so you can't tell whether injecting is or isn't important.
|
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%.
|
So is it just one 44k sample, and assumed to be normally distributed? Or multiple samples out of a 44k population and running the tests for each random sample you take? The raw data is rather confusingly labeled/unlabeled.
Also, while inject % is an important skill, whether or not it affects the game is highly dependent on other factors. Sure early game there may be an issue of being larva blocked, but in the mid and late game the far more important factor is whether or not those larva are actually contributing something. Injecting larva doesn't contribute to winning the game if those larva end up doing nothing for whatever reason (supply blocked/no resources/etc). The only time unspent larva contributes is if you are building up a larva bank in the late game for a quick remax. Even if you are saving the larva for a muta swell timing, those larva don't do anything in that time, you are trading their inefficiency for the possibilty that the mutas will do more damage later to make up for it.
Perfect inject efficency probably isn't something that will happen even at the pro level. It may look like there is some inefficiency going on, but there's a chance that there were more important things to do than having a few extra larva; for example, if one had to use a transfuse to not lose the game right then, the inject efficiency would be moot as injecting at that time would not contribute to winning the game, or even be the cause of a loss. There may be times when one decides to drop a creep tumour instead of injecting, waits for a time to sync up all his injects to the same timing, or uses queens for transfuse in a defense or pull with the army.
Also, where exactly are the technical notes mentioned that explain how you calculated race macro score? I can't seem to find where that is mentioned again. Was that just supposed to be the inject % calculation?
|
On May 22 2013 05:46 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 05:40 whacks wrote:
Awesome results. Does confirm my gut feelings that I'm focusing too much on hitting my injects, and not enough on the other things I'm missing on.
It's funny to see so many people interpret this study completely wrongly. The study isn't intended to say that silvers are as good as Masters. Obviously, the people on Masters are much much better, and they can macro much better as well. The entire point of the analysis, is that hitting your injects is not a major differentiating factor. All the other things people mentioned, like taking more bases, building macro-hatches, spreading creep, not being supply blocked, keeping your resources low ... these are equally/more differentiating factors, and these are the things people may want to focus equally/more on. The type of games in master vs silver is so different that comparing inject rates is meaningless, so you can't tell whether injecting is or isn't important.
oh thank you for putting it that simple. This thread gave me headaches because people produce flaws faster than its possible to set them straight..
|
Interesting. I wonder, can you do the same graph for Mule calldowns and protoss injects to see if it also follows the same trend? I suspect it does.
|
On May 22 2013 03:57 Ahelvin wrote:
What about the harass factor? Queens are often subjected to harass (in fact, they are pretty much the n°1 priority for any player dropping/harassing), and one may expect that the better the opponent, the harder it is to consistently inject without having your queens killed or fighting with your army.
What do you think?
I think correlation is not causation
As you are arguing indirectly good sir
|
On May 22 2013 05:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%.
I would consider that their conclusion would indicate you could spend less time focusing on your injects and get better results focusing on other aspects of the game.
I do think their conclusion is accurate-- not only are later tier units more larvae-efficient, but better players are more efficient with their units, and the fewer units you lose the fewer larva you need to replace them.
|
On May 22 2013 04:19 anatase wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 04:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Yeah, this seems complete rubbish. Injects are important, no matter what what your poor interpretation and technique of your data says.
Case in point, Masters will always have low energy queens, Silver will not. 30% Masters will have worse injects than the average Silvers? Don't kid yourself. Not even 1% of masters will have worse injects than the average silver, who would be still be Bronze league level under WoL. It just shows your methodolgy is flawed.
All in all, this is just a poorly disguised advert for your sc2 training method. I would not be that aggressive but clearly it's not only counter intuitive it also goes against any kind of observations. Reaching a point where some can say a Silver hits his injects more often or as often as a master does not make sense, unless all the silvers game you analysed were played by smurfing masters. I am very skeptic about these results
Im not that in silver yuo get a lot less harass.
ITs do your build ... deal with some half assed spazzy harass (which in silver involves units instead of using queens to save shit)
In higher leagues harass timing and scale requires more finesse = queens not actually in play to inject.
Also i am only talking about early game (ie 10 mins or less)
|
On May 22 2013 05:56 jpditri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 05:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%. I would consider that their conclusion would indicate you could spend less time focusing on your injects and get better results focusing on other aspects of the game. I do think their conclusion is accurate-- not only are later tier units more larvae-efficient, but better players are more efficient with their units, and the fewer units you lose the fewer larva you need to replace them.
My micro does suck, but I have a hard time with micro because my handspeed is low because of wrist issues. However, the less than 1 second required to inject does not impact my micro. I also refuse to believe that pro's would have such a low inject rate when they have such high APM.
|
On May 22 2013 05:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%.
SC2 is that awesome. There will be players who excel through a focus on macro, like you, who injects more. Then there will be those who excel with a focus on tech-timings, or unit-control, or multi-tasking.
Someone who excels in all of the above, i imagine would be in grandmaster league or pro level.
|
Very interesting, great read too. Thanks!
|
I applaud this article and its creators for sticking to their method, and trusting their numbers in finding their results. Thank you for not letting, "common sense" get in the way of your scientific method. Not believing something just because it doesn't seem right even though your data supports it is an easy trap to fall into, and is one that many in this thread have. If your disagree with their data find a problem with their methodology. Don't just say its bad because you can't accept that masters players can suck at something.
|
Cool study, but shouldn't be interpreted wrongly. Injects are STILL important, but so is unit control. Surprise, surprise.
|
On May 22 2013 05:59 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2013 05:56 jpditri wrote:On May 22 2013 05:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%. I would consider that their conclusion would indicate you could spend less time focusing on your injects and get better results focusing on other aspects of the game. I do think their conclusion is accurate-- not only are later tier units more larvae-efficient, but better players are more efficient with their units, and the fewer units you lose the fewer larva you need to replace them. My micro does suck, but I have a hard time with micro because my handspeed is low because of wrist issues. However, the less than 1 second required to inject does not impact my micro. I also refuse to believe that pro's would have such a low inject rate when they have such high APM.
This stat does not have GM league due to sample size. It is more representative of the overall ladder however. I don't think pros have such low inject rate. BUT, I recall watching plenty of Stephano games where he wasn't keeping near-perfect injects - and he still won (against a foreign protoss pro, but still pro level). He won through fantastic engagements and map control.
|
I would love to see a comparison between the data in this research compared to idle time from terran production
|
Really surprising! I would have never expected this. Never missing an inject is certainly better than constantly missing them, but it appears that hitting them throughout the lategame is less important than hitting them throughout the early game.
Thanks for all your work!
|
On May 22 2013 05:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I firmly believe that this study has data wrong. There is no way I hit injects THIS MUCH better than other players.
71.48% injects over 48 games
19.96 minutes average game time
The average masters player (the league I am in) is BELOW 60%.
If you read in the article the standard deviation for injects is quite large, you are about 11% over the average, or 1 standard deviation from the mean... not that ridiculous
Besides, i'm sure your % drops just as much as the other players as game length increases...
You can't just discredit a study because it doesn't feel right, lol. If you find some actual flaw in the data, then that would be something.
|
Yeah, as a lower league player, I don't think these numbers are too surprising, because they don't take into account the context of the situations. You can see it on the graph... that time period where the masters league players have higher inject percentage is the 7-12 minute mark where most of the rushes come in and keeping our injects up is waaay harder and way more important than other times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
