|
edit: woops in my title i meant pro-gamers and masters.. is there anyway to change it?
Earlier this week I was playing on my friends bronze account just for fun while I was waiting for him to finish schoolwork and it occurred to me that if you have any idea on how to play the game at all it is near impossible to lose, especially if you go with the standard "safe" expand builds.
Combining this with the GomTV variety show where masters and diamond players just get destroyed by handicapped pros, it made me wonder, is the level of understanding and/or mechanics of the pro-gamers so high that the average masters player has a near 0% chance of winning?
Is the gap from masters to bronze as big as pro-gamer to masters?
of course the really high masters get matched with pro-gamers all the time so i'm going to say masters rank 50-100, because when i was low masters, I felt like I was so terrible that I could never touch a pro.
What do you guys think?
 
|
I'd say its like comparing a Gohan super saiyan 2 vs a goku super saiyan 3. No what im saying?
|
Yeah, that stood out to me big time when MKP beat the Master's zerg player with mittens on... wow. Or when he held that 4 gate with only his mouse hand against a diamond player.... it opened my eyes to just how much higher of a thought process the pros have compared to everyone else, they just understand the game so much better that it's ridiculous. It could very well be the difference from a bronze to a masters.
|
Masters to Progamer if you want to account High Masters is not as big, no.
|
A master player will have a higher chance of beating a pro than the bronze has of beating a master since the master player can at least execute certain allins reasonably ok. It's hard to compare the differences otherwise, but yes, there's an enormous difference between masters players and pros.
|
There is a massive difference between masters and masters, when I'm playing well I dont drop games often to anyone about 100 points below me on the ladder ^^
|
GM and masters doesn't have a gap at all at high masters, however, low masters and high masters can have an enormous gap (mmr wise).
|
As a high master myself who plays regularly against Grandmaster players I have to say, the difference is often just 1 or 2 mistakes. Very often I am playing well, but screw up once in either my army control or macro, and get punished immediately. That's the difference between high master/gm in my experience. I can play like a boss all game long, completely even game, and then I siege my tanks too late or miss a macro cycle and i'm done for.
|
Well not all Grandmaster players are progamers (especially outside of Korea server). The difference between non-progamer GM and progamers is pretty huge.
|
The difference within the masters division itself is huge.... xD Even bigger vs top pros and top ladder heroes.
|
I would say the gap between low master and high master is much wider than high master to grandmaster. The gap between bronze and masters, imo, is not as wide as one would believe. I feel that until you get to masters, it's all about mastering the fundamentals. The moment you start getting the hang of the fundamentals(after some good ol' hard work) you will be skyrocketing.
|
Great and interesting post. I imgaine its the same as Low Bronze and High Silver. One just has that much better decision making and fundamentals imo.
|
its very very hard if not impossible to bridge the gap from masters to pro gamers.
There is a certain level of natural ability required, and some people just dont have it. Id bet that almost anyone could make it in high masters, maybe even GM with the way the shitty system is atm if they just played full time and had some help like coaching or just help off a friend or whatever.
But not everyone could go to an MLG or enter GSL and got toe to toe with the really good pro gamers not matter how much training or time they put into it
|
On March 07 2012 05:16 ThatGuy89 wrote:
its very very hard if not impossible to bridge the gap from masters to pro gamers.
There is a certain level of natural ability required, and some people just dont have it. Id bet that almost anyone could make it in high masters, maybe even GM with the way the shitty system is atm if they just played full time and had some help like coaching or just help off a friend or whatever.
But not everyone could go to an MLG or enter GSL and got toe to toe with the really good pro gamers not matter how much training or time they put into it
I have to slightly agree here. you can become a pro on hard work alone though without natural ability, although the best of the best are all natural talent and it all comes easy to them. you can force yourself to learn and be very good and become a pro but the very best will always be guided by natural talent and luck. as it is in any area in life. hard work can only get you so far but mostly people are born with it.
|
MKP beat a master on NA. Pretty sure a Korean Master would have a better skill level.
|
The difference between high masters and gm is playing time.
|
Master league, at least on NA, is nothing. I consider myself a casual gamer, and devote less than 15 hours a week (usually less) to actually playing starcraft. I watch maybe 10 hours of Starcraft a week (maybe a little more, depending). I've been in the top league in NA (diamond, then master), since mid beta. This isn't to brag, but simply to emphasize that being a master league player is nothing in this game (again, at least on NA). There seems to be this misconception floating around that master league players are actually good. They aren't. Most are casual players. You see a few that are mass gamers but somehow didn't make it into GM (maybe its the 200 player limit) that have a ridiculous number of games played (like 300+ this season). I can't really explain what they are. I guess they just suck and need a lot more time. The majority are just casual players that have probably played a lot of Blizzard RTSs, so picking this one up wasn't hard (that is the case for me at least).
So the gap between a master league player and pro is massive. Pros are good. Pros have amazingly solid mechanics (even mid tier pros) compared to the average master league player. Their builds are executed better. They have way better timing and scouting.
Basically what I see are a lot of players that can do 1 single thing on a pro level sometimes. I'd put myself in this category as well. Maybe they have a particular build they are good at, and sometimes they really nail it. Maybe they have good stalker micro, and sometimes they do especially well with it in a game. It is about consistency as well.
|
i think the gap between bronze and masters is about the same as masters to pro. only difference in those gaps is that while a bronze would never beat a masters in a million games a masters could def take games off a pro just because of how powerful cheese is in sc2. you can execute and mask a perfect double-reactor helion all-in at like platinum level and pros lose games to that all the time. same goes for other cheeses.
|
On March 07 2012 04:49 Rygasm wrote:
I would say the gap between low master and high master is much wider than high master to grandmaster. The gap between bronze and masters, imo, is not as wide as one would believe. I feel that until you get to masters, it's all about mastering the fundamentals. The moment you start getting the hang of the fundamentals(after some good ol' hard work) you will be skyrocketing.
This
I play low-middish masters players and then I just hit that wall where I suddenly can't even compete even slightly. That's when I know I've hit the difference between lows and highs in master league. It's a really noticeable difference
|
The difference between masters and a top pro player, I'd say is much greater than that between bronze and masters.
|
On March 07 2012 03:42 cmen15 wrote:
I'd say its like comparing a Gohan super saiyan 2 vs a goku super saiyan 3. No what im saying?
more like gohan pre super saiyan to goku super saiyan 4
|
your Country52797 Posts
The gap between pro and low masters is equal to the gap between bronze and low masters.
The gap between pro and high masters is equal to the gap between high bronze and mid-gold, as the higher player wins about 90% of both.
That's my point of view though, I could easily be wrong.
|
Really it's like apples and oranges
|
In order to get to GM on na, you have to wade through an immense number of maphackers. They seem to collect just below GM. So many people with prophetic, godlike gamesense that allows them to glance through the fog of war and discern my buildings, but they can't actually DO things with their units other than flop around helplessly. About 1 in 4 games will be somebody blatently looking through the fog of war and clicking on my buildings.
|
Gap from bronze to masters: ]x[
Gap from masters to pro: ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[
|
I really think people are overrating how good/impressive sc2 progamers are. This isn't broodwar people... and currently I don't see any progamers who are that amazing. This might change as time goes on, but then again HoTS will once again mix things up and make the whole "figuring the game out" start from nearly square one.
The gap from bronze to high masters is way bigger than high masters to pro imo. However, as you get better and better it becomes more difficult to improve so that gap is very difficult to close. If you look at the way people play, it unquestionable that masters and pro-gamers have much more in common than bronze players and masters players.
|
On March 07 2012 03:37 Brandish wrote:
Is the gap from masters to bronze as big as pro-gamer to masters?
Much larger. Master's is like 100 IQ average intelligence. Bronze is like if my dog tried to play starcraft.
On March 07 2012 16:41 Jonoman92 wrote:
The gap from bronze to high masters is way bigger than high masters to pro imo. However, as you get better and better it becomes more difficult to improve so that gap is very difficult to close. If you look at the way people play, it unquestionable that masters and pro-gamers have much more in common than bronze players and masters players.
This about sums it up. Master's players have basic awareness of the metagame and how to execute most tasks fluidly. Progamers have deeper knowledge of the metagame, more flawless execution, and refined mechanics/multitasking. Bronze players barely know what every unit does and more than half of them are capable of losing to worker rushes.
|
Well around 85-90% of GM aren't pros (atleast on NA). So don't get into the mindset of thinking that everyone in GM are full time pros. Pros are better than most others in GM.
Secondly, High Master-Low GM are very similar. I play Low-Mid GM's every day and they are no different from high masters for the most part. You really start to see the skill gap widen at top 60 GM or so. Thats when the level of players is actually pretty damn high, atleast compared to high master.
If you're talking about you're average, Low Master, they will get stomped routinely by low-mid gm's, just as they get routinely stomped by High Masters for the most part.
But also, it's not really what league you're in, but rather what your MMR is. I've faced a few bad low GM's who play like their Mid Master.
Being a High Master usually means you understand how the game works, you understand the mechanics, the builds, you can excute strategies decently. The difference of your typical GM is that they not only understand mechanics, and builds, but they know how to execute their strategies pretty well, atleast compared to Masters.
Low Master > GM gap is giant, Mid Master > GM is pretty big, and High Master > GM isn't that large.
But High Master > Pro is pretty damn large as well.
|
The difference between masters and a top pro player, I'd say is much greater than that between bronze and masters.
Completely untrue. I'm mid-high masters, I've beaten pros like QxG Darkcell on ladder when I go on a winstreak (he was on a losing streak, so our MMR's met and I beat him in a macro game.). My apm is higher than most pros, and my multi tasking is almost there. I've played several others in tournaments as well (FXOcrane recently) where I can hold my own. They're strong suits are their in game crysis management, and in game decision making.
Compare that to me versus a bronze player, where I literally will win 99% of the time (no questions asked). On a new account, I will go ~22-3 vs diamond and below players until I hit masters MMR. The bronze player may have 20 old-sc2 apm, whereas I would have 180+. the difference is very, very large.
Point being, people don't realize that the pro's are not untouchable. (edit: yes they will crush a non-pro most of the time, but the difference is much less than that of a master player to a bronze player.)
On March 07 2012 17:20 Toppp wrote:
Low Master > GM gap is giant, Mid Master > GM is pretty big, and High Master > GM isn't that large.
.
There's a few types of master players. There are the low master players, who got into master league doing 1 build (all in). The lowish-mid players who branched out a bid, and so on. A ~year ago I was that low master player, though nowadays I'm breaching into high masters MMR. The main difference is that I started playing ONLY to improve, so i started to understand the game (as I wasn't just doing a 2 base blink stalker all in vs zerg etc ;p).
But I don't play that much (stopped playing for a few months here, and a few there, etc). And I think that massing games is required to get into "high masters", to experience every possible situation with your standard builds and from there never lose to worse opponents (which you can only learn from trial and error, ie massing ladder games or practice games).
As a lot of pros (notable IdrA) have said, it comes down to practicing, a lot.
|
On March 07 2012 18:55 AegiS_ wrote:Show nested quote +The difference between masters and a top pro player, I'd say is much greater than that between bronze and masters.
Completely untrue. I'm mid-high masters, I've beaten pros like QxG Darkcell on ladder when I go on a winstreak (he was on a losing streak, so our MMR's met and I beat him in a macro game.). My apm is higher than most pros, and my multi tasking is almost there. I've played several others in tournaments as well (FXOcrane recently) where I can hold my own. They're strong suits are their in game crysis management, and in game decision making. Compare that to me versus a bronze player, where I literally will win 99% of the time (no questions asked). On a new account, I will go ~22-3 vs diamond and below players until I hit masters MMR. The bronze player may have 20 old-sc2 apm, whereas I would have 180+. the difference is very, very large. Point being, people don't realize that the pro's are not untouchable.
Not to upset you or anything, but QxGdarkcell isn't a pro. He doesn't play full time nor is he even GM.
You would get stomped routinely by full time pros if you're mid-high masters on NA.
|
On March 07 2012 18:59 Toppp wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 18:55 AegiS_ wrote:The difference between masters and a top pro player, I'd say is much greater than that between bronze and masters.
Completely untrue. I'm mid-high masters, I've beaten pros like QxG Darkcell on ladder when I go on a winstreak (he was on a losing streak, so our MMR's met and I beat him in a macro game.). My apm is higher than most pros, and my multi tasking is almost there. I've played several others in tournaments as well (FXOcrane recently) where I can hold my own. They're strong suits are their in game crysis management, and in game decision making. Compare that to me versus a bronze player, where I literally will win 99% of the time (no questions asked). On a new account, I will go ~22-3 vs diamond and below players until I hit masters MMR. The bronze player may have 20 old-sc2 apm, whereas I would have 180+. the difference is very, very large. Point being, people don't realize that the pro's are not untouchable. Not to upset you or anything, but QxGdarkcell isn't a pro. He doesn't play full time nor is he even GM. You would get stomped routinely by full time pros if you're mid-high masters on NA.
played him in december or so, and he was GM NA the season right before that. he's on quantic O_o. not my overarching point nor do I give that win too much credit as he was on tilt.
regardless, I've played a lot of pro's and I don't get "stomped". I should emphasize my mmr/skill level is more on the high end of masters.
|
On March 07 2012 19:09 AegiS_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 18:59 Toppp wrote:On March 07 2012 18:55 AegiS_ wrote:The difference between masters and a top pro player, I'd say is much greater than that between bronze and masters.
Completely untrue. I'm mid-high masters, I've beaten pros like QxG Darkcell on ladder when I go on a winstreak (he was on a losing streak, so our MMR's met and I beat him in a macro game.). My apm is higher than most pros, and my multi tasking is almost there. I've played several others in tournaments as well (FXOcrane recently) where I can hold my own. They're strong suits are their in game crysis management, and in game decision making. Compare that to me versus a bronze player, where I literally will win 99% of the time (no questions asked). On a new account, I will go ~22-3 vs diamond and below players until I hit masters MMR. The bronze player may have 20 old-sc2 apm, whereas I would have 180+. the difference is very, very large. Point being, people don't realize that the pro's are not untouchable. Not to upset you or anything, but QxGdarkcell isn't a pro. He doesn't play full time nor is he even GM. You would get stomped routinely by full time pros if you're mid-high masters on NA. played him in december or so, and he was GM NA the season right before that. he's on quantic O_o. not my overarching point nor do I give that win too much credit as he was on tilt. regardless, I've played a lot of pro's and I don't get "stomped". I should emphasize my mmr/skill level is more on the high end of masters.
Cmon u gotta admit your ego is a bit inflated since u haven't hit top high masters yet.
|
Gap between D and C on iccup ]xxxxxxx[
Gap between C and Grandmasters on sc2 ]x[
Gap between progamer and grandmasters ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[
Gap between C and bw progamer ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...*10[
I like this notation
|
as someone who plays and beats"pro" players on ladder with some frequency I can tell you the difference between them and a high masters player like myself is really marginal. watching pro korean streamers only reinforces my belief that anyone can be pro if they set their mind to it.
|
On March 08 2012 01:56 TylerThaCreator wrote:
as someone who plays and beats"pro" players on ladder with some frequency I can tell you the difference between them and a high masters player like myself is really marginal. watching pro korean streamers only reinforces my belief that anyone can be pro if they set their mind to it.
I don't your opinion matters since you're a centaur.
jk hehe
I think we should all keep in mind that there are varying degrees of "pro". We have some lackluster pros, performing poorly on a regular basis and then some pros who have obtained some sort of achievements. I dare say that there may be even some pros who only call themselves pro because they at the bare minimum, fit the definition of a pro player.
With that in mind I would like to think that the gap between Top tier High Masters player to someone like MVP, is ridiculously huge.
|
On March 08 2012 01:56 TylerThaCreator wrote:
as someone who plays and beats"pro" players on ladder with some frequency I can tell you the difference between them and a high masters player like myself is really marginal. watching pro korean streamers only reinforces my belief that anyone can be pro if they set their mind to it.
so you're saying that Mvp is not gigantically better than you, but just by a whole lot? i doubt it.
|
On March 08 2012 00:35 BrTarolg wrote:
Gap between D and C on iccup ]xxxxxxx[
Gap between C and Grandmasters on sc2 ]x[
Gap between progamer and grandmasters ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[
Gap between C and bw progamer ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...*10[
I like this notation
lol I agree with the bw for sure, it took me forever to hit c- and as a sc2 player I hit a wall at low masters
I'm so bad..
|
On March 08 2012 02:20 [N3O]r3d33m3r wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2012 01:56 TylerThaCreator wrote:
as someone who plays and beats"pro" players on ladder with some frequency I can tell you the difference between them and a high masters player like myself is really marginal. watching pro korean streamers only reinforces my belief that anyone can be pro if they set their mind to it. so you're saying that Mvp is not gigantically better than you, but just by a whole lot? i doubt it.
sc2 has broken the mechanical barrier between koreans and foreigners. I probably would be lucky to take even a game off of a player of mvps caliber but a pro foreigner has a much better chance beating a korean in sc2 than in bw.
|
On March 07 2012 08:47 HardlyNever wrote:
Basically what I see are a lot of players that can do 1 single thing on a pro level sometimes. I'd put myself in this category as well. Maybe they have a particular build they are good at, and sometimes they really nail it. Maybe they have good stalker micro, and sometimes they do especially well with it in a game. It is about consistency as well.
I floated around top masters on NA for a period of time last year and this is probably the most accurate description of how I felt about myself and the skill level of most of the players I faced on ladder. I had a few go-to builds I used for each match-up, and for all of them I had more or less "pro-level" timings. Like, I would watch a replay of myself and a replay of a pro executing the same build, and things would more or less line up 10-15 minutes into the game. This, plus decent micro, was enough to get me to high masters on NA.
So basically, if you saw a good replay of mine, there wouldn't be much on the surface that you could use to differentiate my play from a pro's. But never once did I think I could actually be a pro, or compete with them on a consistent basis (and I felt the same way about most high masters on NA - I'm sure the Korean server would be different). I could take games off GMs and even a few mid-tier NA pros on teams, but I was severely lacking in many areas - creativity to come up with my own builds, decision-making in complicated/novel late-game situations, not falling apart in pressure sitautions, etc. Add to that the simple problem of stamina - I just didn't have the energy to "try" for more than 10-15 games a day, and when I played games past that limit the quality of my play deteriorated significantly. All this meant I eventually realized I never was going to break that high master's wall.
Anyway, those qualities - poise, creativity, stamina, decision-making - I feel are what separates people like me (essentially copy machines that are decent enough at executing set builds) and people who have what it takes to make it to the next level with hard work. And of course, they're the same qualities that are important to succeeding in a tournament setting, which is where pros make their careers.
|
|
|
On March 08 2012 00:35 BrTarolg wrote:
Gap between D and C on iccup ]xxxxxxx[
Gap between C and Grandmasters on sc2 ]x[
Gap between progamer and grandmasters ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx[
Gap between C and bw progamer ]xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...*10[
I like this notation
The gap between D and C on Iccup is a lot bigger than that. - -
In either case I don't like using numerical values to make a point.
|
On March 08 2012 07:18 DueleR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2012 08:47 HardlyNever wrote:
Basically what I see are a lot of players that can do 1 single thing on a pro level sometimes. I'd put myself in this category as well. Maybe they have a particular build they are good at, and sometimes they really nail it. Maybe they have good stalker micro, and sometimes they do especially well with it in a game. It is about consistency as well. I floated around top masters on NA for a period of time last year and this is probably the most accurate description of how I felt about myself and the skill level of most of the players I faced on ladder. I had a few go-to builds I used for each match-up, and for all of them I had more or less "pro-level" timings. Like, I would watch a replay of myself and a replay of a pro executing the same build, and things would more or less line up 10-15 minutes into the game. This, plus decent micro, was enough to get me to high masters on NA. So basically, if you saw a good replay of mine, there wouldn't be much on the surface that you could use to differentiate my play from a pro's. But never once did I think I could actually be a pro, or compete with them on a consistent basis (and I felt the same way about most high masters on NA - I'm sure the Korean server would be different). I could take games off GMs and even a few mid-tier NA pros on teams, but I was severely lacking in many areas - creativity to come up with my own builds, decision-making in complicated/novel late-game situations, not falling apart in pressure sitautions, etc. Add to that the simple problem of stamina - I just didn't have the energy to "try" for more than 10-15 games a day, and when I played games past that limit the quality of my play deteriorated significantly. All this meant I eventually realized I never was going to break that high master's wall. Anyway, those qualities - poise, creativity, stamina, decision-making - I feel are what separates people like me (essentially copy machines that are decent enough at executing set builds) and people who have what it takes to make it to the next level with hard work. And of course, they're the same qualities that are important to succeeding in a tournament setting, which is where pros make their careers.
Being a copy machine definitely puts you at the pro level - it isn't necessary (but definitely what sets one pro above another) to have your own builds. Decision making in lategame situations is something that comes with time for everyone, along with stamina and not getting nervous in pressure situations. Being a pro and being a high ladder player is not quite as far apart as you may think.
|
About tree fitty.
Seriously, you can't put an exact number on player skill.
|
Imo low - mid masters to high masters is a gap no one really understands. Low masters are bad, Truely. You can get to masters by 4gating or 6 pooling or doing some silly all in, but when you continue to climb the ladder you suddenly face players with the ability to hold off the builds and the players are never able to macro out of it, So to answer your question it's a dumb question... Pro's will 100% of the tim beat bad players, even if they can get GM. Their mechanics and mind set are on a higher level. I've executed a perfectly timed and micro'd 8gate vs TSLhyun and he absolutely crushed me, but when I do it to a mid teir GM player I crush them with it. The skill gap is huge, more so than any non-pro could understand.
|
You guys must think pros are some sort of omnipotent gods. Ask yourself this. What's more likely to happen? A bronze taking a game off of a mid masters? Or a mid master's taking a game off a pro? Watch western pros stream while playing on smurf accounts. They are still very capapble of losing to competent mid masters guys who know basic builds and can execute them well, whereas there is no chance in hell a mid masters player will ever lose to anyone sub platinum.
|
Simply, the differences are:
- 25-50 hours / week
- $$$
- swag
That's about it, I think.
|
rawr sauce mcquibbles! the gap is very hard to bridge between low-mid masters all the way up to High masters or gm.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
