There are many Terrans in Plat/Dia/Masterleague and alot TvZ goes on… Why they don´t stuck in Gold? Your Gameskill is simply not ready for higher Leage then Gold/low plat…
1 Like
And there’s no shame in that as Platinum and above only contain the top 20-percentile of the entire player base.
There are, point of fact things you must simply do to move from an amateur level to a more professional or elite level, period. Some people are good at Chess, some people are amazing at Chess. Some people were amazing at chess and are just pretty darn good day to day. Why is this? Chess is extremely strategic, more so than Starcraft: although it is surprisingly close. Go is another such game. Chess and Go are widely regarded as Extremely difficult games to perform masterfully at, pretty much at all points in relevant history and all over the globe. Don’t sweat it if you aren’t the best, even out of a handful of competent players: however if you want to improve, if where you will find enjoyment is at higher levels of play, then if you wish to get there you must improve in a variety of ways elsewise, learn to enjoy the game at the level you desire/reside. I veer towards doing what I must do to play with those whom I wish to play against. In 2023 that means grinding the ladder until I get the shiny. That is the face of the situation. Online Clan culture (not the bad kind) has been obliterated by a generation of Facebook and the like and now forums are either dead or dominated by just a few people rendering there utility a mere shadow of what it once was. That means players that wish to improve have to deal with the new system, in addition to searching out information, laddering, finding competent ol-friends to game against and of course putting Real Life First.
Are you going to beat some kid with an adderall prescription, a personality disorder and the enabling parents or a government sponsored E-Sports player (KESPA)? Probably not. Might you become proficient enough to take a map or two? Possibly or be placed in the same league as them for a time? Sure, why not.
The point I’m trying to make, is the game is, counter to what people say, difficult to master and execute and the steps needed to do so, are simply the steps. It’s a bit like arguing why 1+1=2. We take it axiomatically. Axiomatic dissolution of SCII isn’t really needed since that just devolves into wankery regarding how imbalanced an Asymmetric game is.
Switch races. I did. I find the intense challenge of playing T really cool. Always have since BW
1 Like
Its not about balance. It’s about having fun playing the game.
It’s not fun to play Terran unless you have GM pro levels of competence, and even then, is it really fun?
Listen to the top Terran players and they will tell you it’s not a fun experience but for them it’s work, so they make it works to get paid.
Nobody is paying me to play Terrain. Now I just play Protoss.
1 Like
And I don’t see how playing protoss helped you. What is fun? You can do any crap in plat and get away with it even right know. What kind of balance for low level are you talking about then?
I just said it has nothing to do with balance.
Well, without the balance, there would be overpowered strategies. With overpowered strategies, there would be people who will abuse them. These people will always win, therefor forcing everyone to play that specific build, or they will lose. So without balance, you will not have fun, because you will always lose… oh wait…
You do can resist that. Just like COD does. It has a random spray, so that even if you have a good AIM, a bad player can still kill you. For somebody, it is fun. But knowing that you won, because of the random and not because you are better, is not the feeling I want for myself.
False assumption.
For a lot of people.
For some people it’s fun doing nothing but cannon rushes all the way up into GM. Doesn’t mean that they always win and if not it’s suddenly not a fun experience.
Fun game play != always winning.
1 Like
There are only winning and losing strategies.
I am not even surprised that you want to win, because of random luck and not because of the strategy in the strategy game… Well, they use cannon rush, because it is effective strategy.
I’m not sure if this argument will convince you but once i beat 345 APM zerg with my scrub 120 APM in a game that lasted 5 minutes. He went ling bane all-in, i successfully defended that with bunker and hellion and he quit the game. Now ask youself the question. Why was his APM 345 ? What was he doing during those 5 mins ? Mindlessly bashing keyboard ? Did he really need so many clicks just to do ling bane all-in ?
This is the truth and perfect counter-proof to your theory "Higher APM - more skill (better player). Zerg does not have highest mechanics requirement. Zerg has simply highest INFLATED APM of all three races by queueing units from dozens of larva (APM literally exceeds values of 1k) plus constantly bashing hatchery keys to check if you have larva available. Go play terran - you will have perfect reference - terran has lower APM than zerg but has to manage 5 times more things than zerg.
3 Likes
APM counts for every unit you have given action to. If you control 20 marines and zerg controls 40 zerglings, you have the same army supply, but zergs APM is twice as high. He ignores anything, what is against his agenda, such as EPM.
2 Likes
That would have some interesting repercussions.
Let’s say that two players play Terran, and specifically something like a mech Tank/Hellion/Viking comp (they don’t have to be in the exact same game, that is irrelevant).
The first player clumps all of his/her units on F2, and he sieges/unsieges all of his/her Tanks in one command whenever he needs to initiate combat or advance.
The second player individually spreads all of his Tanks, controls his Hellions/Vikings separately, and leap-frogs the Tanks forward to advance whenever he is close to an enemy army or base where getting caught unsieged can be a problem.
That second player is doing more work, but his/her APM may actually be lower than the first player because he isn’t moving as many units at once.
If APM were spammed, it wouldn’t have a strong correlation with win-rate. The correlation with win-rate is proof that APM spam does not exist to any meaningful degree.
Saying that the mere potential for APM spam is enough to disprove all APM trends is like saying all math theorems are wrong because you can scribble anything on a piece of paper. Just because mathematicians could scribble nonsense does not mean that they do. Do you think nonsensical scribbles are what allow engineers to build skyscrapers? Perhaps it’s magic! Their theorems are correct because the predictions of those theorems have a very high correlation with the observed data. The correlation between APM and win-rate is proof that APM, as a theory of skill, is correct in the same sense that calculus can predict if a building will fall over or not.
This kind of ridiculous nonsense that borders on math-denial is exactly why I don’t post on these forums anymore, and, in the rare occasion that I do, I don’t waste any time reading anything here. These arguments are completely devoid of anything resembling logic.
What is wrong with simply admitting, the obvious and irrefutable truth, that APM and skill are strongly linked? Explain it to me. Why do you hate logic and evidence so much?
Well, I have average apm of 250 and 4500 mmr. KingCobra has average apm of 150 and 6100 apm. Guru, zerg player with 6500 mmr had 180-200 apm. No one will admit it, because it is wrong. Especially for people, who know, how the game calculates the apm. If the game did count 1 apm for each action, you could at least have an argument, but that is not the case, as the number of action is being tied to the number of units it is given to, thefore the player with higher number of units will have higher apm, which would always be zerg, as only zerg has 0,5 supply units.
Once upon a time, an airplane crashed. The laws of physics are wrong because they can’t perfectly predict what every single airplane will do!
Unfortunately for you, the laws of physics do not make any exceptions, because if you find a planet, whose gravity does not match the gravity law, it will not be the law anymore. The planes always fall, because some people ignore the instructions.
But with your implication skills, you can imply literally anything and make something right out of it, because the rules of discrete math lets you do that, the problem is that the statement as whole makes no sense at the end.
APM is being counted for action AND every unit it is given to, that means the APM always depends on the number of units in the army. The player like Hero, who spams gateway units only would have higher APM, than protoss player who has a lot of t3 units, just because of the number and not because of the skill.
Even a simple test in Unit Tester with 10 units and 100 units given A-click can easily prove that the APM would be different for the same action.
1 Like
They absolutely do because you can’t perfectly account for every single variable, meaning there are exceptions and the predictions only correlate with the truth. Math denial in 2023. Is this real life? Pinch me.
Unfortunately, I did not study physics, to make any further discussion outside my school knowledge. As far as I know, there is no planet or star, which is an exception to the gravity law.
There is no math denial. There is the fact denial. And it is coming not from me. Or better to say, intentional ignore of some variables in order to change the outcome of the statement. Or if being even more precise:
Intentional ignore of the unit number multiplier for every action, which result in incorrect outcome of the calculation. Is that language better?
1 Like
Clearly. 12345678906666
Ahahahah, is that it? Is that the best argument you could bring?