|
A lot of forum posters bug me. This includes myself too, like when I read something I wrote in the past. Usually it's a "you can do this and it works" post, which I really should never write. This is because back in January something special happened after I had been playing since beta. I had a breakthrough in my Protoss play. Then in February, I had another breakthrough. Also, at the same time but a month later (March now), I had a breakthrough in my Protoss play. At irregular intervals I had breakthroughs, but the whole time I was posting on teamliquid. See where this is going? Only the stuff I write now makes sense, and everything else I wrote in the past is pretty much garbage or wrong, or garbagically wrong. That leads me to this question then: Who's to say the stuff I'm saying now isn't that, either?
Anyway, (general) things that bug me:
Statement: "I do this, but then again I play an odd style so..."
Reply: "Odd style" is another way to say "I'm bad," "I get away with things I shouldn't," or, probably the best reply in a lot of ways, "I do things in an inefficient manner but my other skills combined with flaws of the opponents keep me winning at my level."
Statement: "<Progamer X> is bad in a lot of ways, he's really just a joke playing a joke race."
Reply: "Since when did having no accomplishments of your own give you just cause to comment on another person's profession? Do you think your amateur knowledge of the game is still advanced enough to comment on a professional gamer's gameplay and decision making skills?"
Statement: "How do I improve? Don't tell me to macro better, I hate people telling me that. What does that crap even mean?"
Reply: "Macro better. Since no self-discovery can be made without putting forth genuine quality effort, it is assumed you are truthful about improving and that you will make the effort to research and critically think about the term macro and all it encompasses."
Later!
 
|
I play an odd style. But I see the idea being implemented more and more, usually with better execution lol.
|
I like the word garbagically
|
I play an odd style at times, a little like destiny I guess but I do other things that work really well for me.
Saw destiny lose to sheth earlier in practice sheth plays a joke race though and didn't deserve to win since destinys play was much more diverse and interesting.
Not sure why I'm not GM level like destiny dunno if anyone has any tips?
Also I basically agree with everything in this blog, though I usually choose to ignore it completely (I'll never have a high post count but doesn't bother me lol) :D
|
I hate people that say just because you aren't GM or pro level you aren't qualified to criticize or point out mistakes in pro players' play. If Idra wants to attack all his mutas into Sjow's 3-3 marines with medivac support, I don't need 150+ apm to tell you that was a bad idea.
|
The best way to avoid this is to never read the strategy forum ^_^
|
Something that bugs me is people who think you have to be a professional at something to critique the way others do it. Now you specified your example but I believe that the general concept is completely flawed. I don't play SC2 at the highest level but I can see flaws in professionals game play as can many others who are equal to or below me in skill level. For example I can see when a pro's micro is shit or their macro is severely lacking, this is why pro's in SC and other sports have coaches.
What I find annoying is when people try to offer solutions like they know better than the pros. Its really easy to say "oh he should have gone X" when you have vision of the opponent and have no mechanics to think about.
|
First statement I agree to a certain extent. For anyone not a pro level that's definitely the case. I always play pretty standard, I have flowcharts in my brain for reactions. (Better developed in PVZ than the other matchups)
Second depends on who's making it. I don't think people better than me are immune to criticism, but I also understand that my reasoning may be on a lower level. If someone's making that call based on the right reasons and intuition it seems fine. Although what you said seems a little hyperbolic.
The third point is absolutely true but I've always had a problem with people not saying what that means. Talking to people that are way better than I am revealed that to me. I was talking to Socke at one point and he said, "At your level, people are making so many macro mistakes that accurately gauging timings where it's safe to move out is impossible." (Somewhat paraphrased). Macro perception sort of has a relationship thing, because I think the same thing when I watch players lower than I. So it's pretty hard to gauge how you should macro better without someone telling you what to look for, so I think that question in there about "what does that even mean?" is valid. But it is the only way to improve.
|
I don't "play an odd style", I'm at the cutting edge of the metagame
In bronze
|
People will pick and choose the information they receive and use it however they want anyways. That's the point of the forum/thread/blog. You query something, like a search engine of random minds, you get results both bad and good, and then you decide what you want to consider for options. Now you may find that what you considered wasn't applicable or didn't produce the desired result (solve the problem) but that's ok. Now you learned from your mistake and you try something else.
|
I play my own style ^^ lol, depends on the game. I like to mess around (silver) if i can i go mass zergling against terran if i know i can get away with it and he doesn't pressure me and i have like 6 bases. But i do play seriously too, even though sticking to builds is challenging to me, as i sometimes lose focus (read often) and forget my spawning pool, or forget to put guys on gas, or upgrade overlord drops because I have extra money I am not spending, even if I am not intending to use ovie drops (which I should).
Edit: I should also add that I am well aware that I abuse the fact I can get away with things at my low level. I know how little silver level terrans scan before moving out, and so baneling land mines are amazing. I abuse the fact that not many terrans make vikings to snipe overlords and so i get away with sneakily positioned overlords for scouting. I abuse the fact that protoss players at my level are really bad at hiding their proxy pylons, and don't check watch towers, so i am aware that the gimmicks i get away with now won't work at higher levels, but hey, i am okay with abusing this for now while i focus on improving my injects (which are very good until i have more than 3 bases), my understanding of when 2 port cloaked banshees can hit and how to hold off a speedling all in. I'm okay with that for now. I know a time will come where i will have to learn the sneaky places to hide proxy stargates on all maps, and that I will have to be able to hold off actual revised and more standard terran pushes, but i will get there. At the moment it is all about learning to hold off cheese with (slightly) superior knowledge!
|
Tell Bisu he played an odd style for 5+ years 
|
On November 15 2011 09:11 Aletheia27 wrote:Tell Bisu he played an odd style for 5+ years
True, turned out he was legitimate. I should have said mid level masters or lower 
|
On November 15 2011 05:28 Mattchew wrote:
Something that bugs me is people who think you have to be a professional at something to critique the way others do it. Now you specified your example but I believe that the general concept is completely flawed. I don't play SC2 at the highest level but I can see flaws in professionals game play as can many others who are equal to or below me in skill level. For example I can see when a pro's micro is shit or their macro is severely lacking, this is why pro's in SC and other sports have coaches.
What I find annoying is when people try to offer solutions like they know better than the pros. Its really easy to say "oh he should have gone X" when you have vision of the opponent and have no mechanics to think about.
Completely valid, but are you sure you are seeing flaws in professional play? I would argue that what you are seeing is just the result of being human, where the attention of the player's attention cannot be proportioned to all areas that need attention in a given point of time. In some instances, the casters for the game are looking at things the player isn't, and I would wager that a lot of times the casters/viewers are able to see what the player can't because the player's attention is somewhere else.
Furthermore, even if the player knows about an idle probe of his (which could be intentional yet misinterpreted still) or that a building didn't get placed because of a blocking unit (things that are influenced externally), a limited amount of APM combined with on the fly prioritizing might look like a flaw but actually be the best course of action given the circumstances of the event!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
