Study on APM?

Well unless you are playing like in GM level, you can do just fine with around 70 APM.


APM is not a measure of skill... When you look at SC pros spamming clicks like crazy , it's not because they are actually doing something with them, most of the clicks are overall just empty hits that do nothing, but it keeps them warmed up so in the case that they do need to micro something, they can do it faster than other people.

I have a hard time beliving you wont miss scvs or marine cycles if you are not constantly tapping your production which will lead to 100+ apm easily... and you simply cant afford to miss production cycles if you ever want to get into masters.

I have a hard time beliving you wont miss scvs or marine cycles if you are not constantly tapping your production which will lead to 100+ apm easily... and you simply cant afford to miss production cycles if you ever want to get into masters.

Truth here low end Diamonds average 150ish good ones average 180

as others have said apm definitely is not as important a statistic in coh2 than it is in starcraft, mainly because the game is just slower, and less about timings.

however, i think there is a correlation between having decent apm, and being able to manage all the engagements on the map. a lot of people fall back on blobbing, and just attack moving with their blob cause thats easier, but you can still improve your apm by individually ordering squads into cover, or micromanaging multiple skirmishes that are happening across the map.

having map awareness also generally increases apm since your clicking aroudn everywhere to make sure everything is going well, instead of just looking at one screen.

There is a lot of different opinions on thread which is great. I think I will do study on APM on various matches types and ranks in next few weeks. Should be interesting to see what comes up. I will look into the replay analyser and see what is possible to extract and come back with some data and a methodology.

Apm doesnt mean much in this game.

Exactly. Fortunately! This ain't Starcraft where the craziest clicker wins. This game involves brains and cold blood also.

When you are able to multitask every engagement through the map, put everyunit on cover and focus fire the important units, ground fire with several AT units to either overcome smoke or range of the unit due to scatter, dodge everysingle grenade and lots of more etc...

"...then you have my permission to say APM doesn't matter" :bane:

But the beauty of this game is that you can overcome an APM gap by making good choices overall.

There's a streamer who looks like he really struggles to use computers. Even the way he moves the map around makes me cringe. But he's amongst the better players just because he makes excellent decisions every now and then. I really like that about this game.

APM stat doesn't seem valuable to me, because there is no way to filter out the irrelevant from the relevant actions. On an in-game counter you could buff that number by clicking the same damned thing 20 times. There is no way to properly measure this for usefulness, especially in the context of this thread.

APM matters in this game, just it's not the sole determinant. The quality of the decisions behind those actions matter just as much. I find myself thinking faster than I can physically act. I see streamers acting faster than they can think ( you can tell this, because they draw a box around their units 5 times, better streamers are often talking as well, taking a chunk out of their concentration).

Exactly. Fortunately! This ain't Starcraft where the craziest clicker wins. This game involves brains and cold blood also.

Starcraft requires more brains and cold blood than this game, in addition to requiring more APM.

Starcraft requires more brains and cold blood than this game, in addition to requiring more APM.

I think that's a little unfair to say considering how small the competitive player base is. Who knows how high the skill cap really goes?

Starcraft requires more brains and cold blood than this game, in addition to requiring more APM.

I don't think that's true. In both Coh games while you perform an action you must have in mind much more things that you have in SC2: cover, weapons effectiveness at different ranges, type of weapon, terrain and buildings structure, etc, etc.
In addition: Sc2 has no features as facing guns, retreat units, RNG, flanking, the fact that some units are totally uneffective towards other units, the countering system is much, much more complex relying in most cases on combined arms and so on.

I hope you don't mean this and you are not playing COH2 like SC2... are you?!

Right, so time to set this thread forward:

It does not matter what RTS you are playing, APM is an impact characteristic of game play, However there is no direct correlation between APM and balance unless the discrepancy between two factions is extreme and commonly viewed. Back in the days when Replay analyzer worked, I did a short study on my own about APM to better improve my game play. I down loaded many replays and looked at all of my own. What I saw was the better players tend to have a higher APM (that is pretty normal) but they were not too much higher than average or above average players.

I was on my way to the top 100 over the summer when I had more time. I played against many up the upper tier players, on auto match and in the tournaments I participated in. I was killed by any of the top 20, but their APM's were all over the place. One thing I did notice was the general range was around 80-100 average apm with notable exception being Cataclaw, who averaged 160. These top players vs each other all the time and the matches are still close, and they win or lose. You can see that the apm is not terribly high (this is gold apm in starcraft II) but having a higher apm does not drastically lend advantage.

The reason for this is that while APM is important to an RTS, it is only one of the few determining characteristics of game play. Each trait adds another dimension in determining quality of the player, but some are weighted more than others and not all RTS's have the same.

For example: In Starcraft II APM has a much bigger impact because of the income system, as well as the way units react. In coh2 units do not chase unless told to meaning you can leave units in a place without locking them in a hold position, and they will still participate in the game. This means while babysitting your units is important, you do not have to always micro them constantly (a good example is an hmg, it will participate perfectly fine after positioned). As for the income system, because coh2 is not mining based there is no worker micro or worker harassment, meaning there is technically less to worry about and does have a rather large APM impact.

Now on to other things; Coh2 does not prioritize APM as a direct game impact. What I mean by Prioritize is that you cannot win a coh2 game on apm. In Statecraft II the lower level players are just learning builds, unit comps, and building their apm. The best plan in the world will not see you to victory if your opponent doubles your apm and just simply out tasks you. In coh2 that is not the case. add all the APM you want, walking into an ambush due to the true line of sight and you'll still loose. This is not to say that APM does not matter, surely it dictates multi tasking and grenade dodging as well as other factors. But where SC II you can look up a build on the internet and roll some one just by having 200 apm due to the cook book nature of SCII, in coh2 you'll die to a better positioned army and unit comp because game sense and positioning is weighted far more in quality of players.

my point is that while apm is important, there are other traits of this game that matter more in determining victory, and though it is important from what I saw there was not a drastic difference between axis and allies in APM. It was actually pretty random.

Right, so time to set this thread forward:

It does not matter what RTS you are playing, APM is an impact characteristic of game play, However there is no direct correlation between APM and balance unless the discrepancy between two factions is extreme and commonly viewed. Back in the days when Replay analyzer worked, I did a short study on my own about APM to better improve my game play. I down loaded many replays and looked at all of my own. What I saw was the better players tend to have a higher APM (that is pretty normal) but they were not too much higher than average or above average players.



Now on to other things; Coh2 does not prioritize APM as a direct game impact. What I mean by Prioritize is that you cannot win a coh2 game on apm. In Statecraft II the lower level players are just learning builds, unit comps, and building their apm. The best plan in the world will not see you to victory if your opponent doubles your apm and just simply out tasks you. In coh2 that is not the case. add all the APM you want, walking into an ambush due to the true line of sight and you'll still loose. This is not to say that APM does not matter, surely it dictates multi tasking and grenade dodging as well as other factors. But where SC II you can look up a build on the internet and roll some one just by having 200 apm due to the cook book nature of SCII, in coh2 you'll die to a better positioned army and unit comp because game sense and positioning is weighted far more in quality of players.

my point is that while apm is important, there are other traits of this game that matter more in determining victory, and though it is important from what I saw there was not a drastic difference between axis and allies in APM. It was actually pretty random.

'Nough said.

70 if your in silver.. or playing protoss lol..

I have had 80apm as terran in top diamond. Apm is not necessary but map control and makro. And good split