EPTyou should take her under your wing. at least practice 1v1/2v2 with her and point out big issues with her play (like not enough workers, teching too fast when she gets an early expo, etc)
then you'll be the nice guy, be the hero, and get the girl.
Treating people whose skill is unrefined - Page 2
| Blogs > TheDeli |
|
LaSt)ChAnCe
United States2179 Posts
you should take her under your wing. at least practice 1v1/2v2 with her and point out big issues with her play (like not enough workers, teching too fast when she gets an early expo, etc) then you'll be the nice guy, be the hero, and get the girl. | ||
|
Vlare
748 Posts
This is not saying they are bad, even though they are, this is suggesting that this is a focal point in what they should work on. I help people who are inferior players all the time, so I think you just get unlucky running into douchebags on the internet. | ||
|
SCbiff
110 Posts
The other side to this topic is that there are a lot of people who are bad at the game, and refuse to deal with that. Rather than accept their suckage, they prefer to blame it on cheese, race imbalance, bad luck, etc. It is irritating to listen to, which is part of the reason I think good players just dismiss lower players. | ||
|
Vlare
748 Posts
On May 24 2011 06:52 SCbiff wrote: Most of this phenomenon comes from the mistaken impression that you must be good at something yourself to have insight into being good. Which is ridiculous, of course. To demonstrate, I give you coaches. Most of them play(ed) the sport they teach, and some even very well, but a lot of coaches were never really anything special. What they do have is the ability to break down the fundamentals of the game (talking about good coaches here, obviously), and teach that to others. These two abilities (being a good player, and know what it takes to be a good player) are NOT THE SAME. Yes, often people will have both, but it's not necessarily true, or even often. The other side to this topic is that there are a lot of people who are bad at the game, and refuse to deal with that. Rather than accept their suckage, they prefer to blame it on cheese, race imbalance, bad luck, etc. It is irritating to listen to, which is part of the reason I think good players just dismiss lower players. The other reason good players dismiss lower level players is that, even with soso mechanics and low apm, if you play smart based on your "knowledge and understanding of key rts fundamentals" you will make it to masters. There is a reason people are low ranked, and the reason is they suck at rts. | ||
|
TheDeli
France110 Posts
Hawk & Deathly Rat: As far as not having an opinion on the TL boards, I don't know. Everyone is entitled an opinion, be it flawed or decent. What could be done is to have a subsection to the Strategy section called "Approved discussions/whatever" that'd be singled out from the rest of "false assumptions" that can stem from lack of knowledge about the game. However, I've seen people (mostly not on the TL boards) who go all (for example): "You're bronze, stfu" when the problem doesn't even pertain to StarCraft: the game but to StarCraft: the community. Anyone in their right frame of mind would keep out of discussions that are really dicey and just take the posts under consideration - that's where the need for "big brothers" resides (hopefully they'll be pros). @ Chef, part 2: Not having an ego is something. Being directly offended is something else. Less disdain towards lack of skill (and more acceptance of it) is needed (I was talking about the right to fail). Last)Chance: ._. gg on picking on the detail "she"? I should have edited that since that sort of stuff is none of my business :D I have prospects of my own. Vlare's first post in here: They're more frequent than it seems ._. And agreed on the rest, especially on the red part of this post.There is a difference between "you suck" and "This is what you suck at". I quite often tell people "this is what you suck at" or "your x y z sucked". This is not saying they are bad, even though they are, this is suggesting that this is a focal point in what they should work on. I help people who are inferior players all the time, so I think you just get unlucky running into douchebags on the internet. SCBiff's post: @ Bolded part: How true. On SC2, only the first ones' input is taken under account.Most of this phenomenon comes from the mistaken impression that you must be good at something yourself to have insight into being good. Which is ridiculous, of course. To demonstrate, I give you coaches. Most of them play(ed) the sport they teach, and some even very well, but a lot of coaches were never really anything special. What they do have is the ability to break down the fundamentals of the game (talking about good coaches here, obviously), and teach that to others. These two abilities (being a good player, and know what it takes to be a good player) are NOT THE SAME. Yes, often people will have both, but it's not necessarily true, or even often. The other side to this topic is that there are a lot of people who are bad at the game, and refuse to deal with that. Rather than accept their suckage, they prefer to blame it on cheese, race imbalance, bad luck, etc. It is irritating to listen to, which is part of the reason I think good players just dismiss lower players. As for those who are bad with the game and refuse to deal with it, the issue is not in the game but elsewhere. Frustration, not knowing how to deal with things, being left strengthless after trying your best yet still failing is something that needs more pep talk than tactical play. That's where coaches in sports stand out from the rest, they keep you going. @ Vlare: Your 2nd post made me reverse-engineer myself there, because I re-felt the offense. Saying "they suck at RTS" when it's a new concept for them is a bit... extreme (borderline disdainful of failure - newbieness). I'd rather say "they suck at doing this, that and that..." rather than just dropping the hammer of disdain (or so it seems). Two sentences that have the same crux have a different impact, but the surefire way to get someone to improve is specifying where the lacks are. Not everyone knows what the fundamentals of SC2 are (and I do think I don't know them all - then again knowledge isn't everything, action is in there and that's where I'm personally lacking). There's this phenomenon where you have a clear vision of yourself in a future having all these reflexes, winning because you know of this and that and stuff. That's the drive. If you go all "You suck at RTS" the impact might be felt on the ego but it's mostly felt on that vision ("why are you aspiring to be so good when you suck - I mean, look at them, they're telling you so"). Not everyone is headstrong and that's where a pep talk and guidance comes in. Of course, you could just not bother even getting in there and just let them vent. At least, there'll be no impact on their ambition, if there's any. Now, of course, the internet is made of this and that and some people can just be borderline impossible to talk to. Not everyone is, but they exist. | ||
| ||
