|
After reading Cecil's Underused Tactics Thread I decided to challenge his claim:
I propose that: Down in any league that is not Masters, you can win most of your games by ensuring that there are no flaws in the process of getting your income and spending your income.
Cecil's opinion is the same as many masters league players. Over and over again they look down at on us lowly diamond or below players and snidely tell us that if we just "macro right and scout a little" we could be decent like them. Many of us stuck in our "lower" leagues feel like that isn't true; we do the best with our macro that we can, but it seems like there are an awful lot of reasons why win and lose our games - macro not withstanding. It is especially frustrating to listen this when you feel like you already macro above your league already.
It is certainly not true that ALL one has to do is make a lot of worker and spend all their resources to climb high on the battlenet ladder; after all it doesn't matter how many units you make if you just move command them into your opponents army. However, it might be possible that with a lot of good macro and just a little bit of finesse and common sense, a person can catapult themselves to that prestigious "master league". It is this ideal that I want to test. I am going to surrender myself completely to the ultimate macro approach. This blog will record my goals and progress, trials and tribulations, ideals and observations as I attempt to climb the ladder by purely improving my macro-management performance. Using build orders only focused for the late game I will attempt to bludgeon my opponents with pure economic dominance. No dropping, no harassment, no fancy timings or focused aggression; just good upgrades and units compositions coupled with overwhelming numbers. Can it be done? Follow me as I attempt to find out.
THEORY
Day9 has said more than once in a daily (and I am paraphrasing here):
"You cannot discuss strategy until you have good macro. If your macro is better then your opponent's, then you can make almost anything and win because you have more stuff. It is only when both players have good macro that strategy actually comes into play".
I have noticed before in my own games that build orders that seem deceptively weak and fragile are actually really powerful if executed correctly. It is often true that very small things can make or break a strategy; such as missing an upgrade or getting supply blocked at a critical time. It makes sense then that if you don't make those mistakes you will win more games.
It is unreasonable to think that if all you do is make units and a-move you can make it into the masters league. You have to do at least some micro management, in addition to react at least a little to whatever your opponent is doing, ect. It is also obvious though that if you have good micro, and timings, and scouting, and harassment in addition to macro you are going to make it far. If you are good at everything you are just good at starcraft II. The theory is, that even if you have deficiencies in other areas of your play, you can more than make up for it with good macro.
METHOD
I am currently a low diamond league terran player. I have pretty ok mechanics, macro, micro, and other skills. Before starting this challenge, I played primarily macro focused with the occasional cheese and regular timing attacks.
I have smurphed my way all the way down to bronze with zero points. To do this right, I must start from the very bottom and work my way to the top. This way players in every league can get an idea of what is possible for them with a pure macro approach.
The build orders, listed below, will all be late game focused. The theory is that essentially all you need to do to get to masters league is good macro. In order to remove as many variables as possible, I won't be dropping and I won't be pushing until 180 supply. I will do light pressure and poking, but always at planned times and I won't attempt to do anything that can't be easily mimicked by most players.
TvT
+ Show Spoiler +
1 rax expand
one bunker
double gas
factory
starport
reactors on each
transition to seige tanks, bf hellions, and vikings. Turtle mech style
Up until this point, I had always played marine tank in this matchup. I will be spending a lot of time refining and perfecting this build order as I go along. The idea is a reactor starport/factory opening for defense and then transitioning into heavy seige tanks. This part will be updated as I refine the build.
TvP
+ Show Spoiler +
12 barracks
16 cc
bunker
2x barracks
two refineries
1 tech lab on barracks, research stem
factory
refinery
2x ebay
starport
refinery
+1 +1
poke at ~10 minutes with combat shields, stem, and 1/1
take a third base
add three barracks and ghost academy, second starport, get more reactors and tech labs as can be afforded.
Work up to 8 barracks, ideal composition is 4-6 ghosts, vikings as needed, 3 medivacs, the rest marine mauraders with ~70 scvs
This is a little bit different than my normal TvP, will be refined as needed.
TvZ
+ Show Spoiler +
12 barracks
13 refinery
factory
reactor on barracks
cc
switch reactor with factory
tech lab on barracks
research stem
4x hellions, lift factory and add tech lab
build barracks on reactor
add third barracks
2nd refinery
OC
tanks and seige mode
combat shields after stem
poke with 3 tanks, stem, combat shields (play safe, turn around instead of risking aggression)
2 ebays
3 cc
3x barracks
starport
factory
armory
Will be refined and updated as needed.
GOALS
In order to judge how successful I am in using "good macro" I will measure myself against these goals.
*Not be supply blocked ever the entire game. Ideally by the end of the challenge I want to be able to do this in at least 50% of my games.
*Keep minerals below ~700 and gas below ~500 until maxed out. Ideally in 60% of games.
*Constant worker production on all command centers, orbital commands, and planetary fortresses until optimal worker number. Ideally in 70% of games.
* Have no more than one unit building and one unit queued on any production building until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
*Maintain constant progress of core upgrades without significant pauses or delays in research. Ideally in 70% of games.
The challenge will be deemed a "success" if I can reach my macro goals and subsequently make it into master's league.
There is an idea of "acceptable loses". Timings and strategies that uniquely counter these builds will not be much considered. The goal is to win most of my games with macro to progress on the ladder, some losses will occur. Losses that are the result of poorly dealing with cheese and timings, improper unit control, or simply being out played will not be considered "failures" if macro goals are achieved (unless I really fuck up somehow).
JOURNAL
+ Show Spoiler +
Here I will record my thoughts, observations and progress as I go.
Update 4/17/2012
I have been playing a lot of starcraft, but so far there hasn't been much to report. I knew it would take a while to rank up out of bronze, but I am very surprised by exactly how long it has taken. I have strung together 70 wins so far (with only one loss in the bunch) and I am still in the bronze division. I expect I will rank up fairly soon, because currently the ladder is putting me up against gold players and even the rare platinum player. Still, it took my 50 wins in a row in order to even face my first silver player on the ladder.
My experience so far playing in this league hasn't been all that surprising. It not really fair to say that their macro is weak, because overall their entire understanding of the game is weak. The bronze metagame (god that feels weird to say) has players making really odd build order decision. Terran will get two barracks right away no matter what. The most popular tvt style is a bio push with stem after about 9 minutes. Protoss, oddly enough, often open up with a fast two gate and then try and bust down the front with pure zealot. Builder orders that kind of hurt my brain to see, like a zerg getting a pool at about 14 supply, and no gas, and then not expanding and instead making about 30 slow zerglings.
Having spent so much time in the league, I think I am forced to admit that within bronze league there exists yet another league of players. High bronze players nearing promotion do play a little better, and make decisions that at least make some sense. In the low bronze division I faced a variety of oddities and strangeness. I went for a one barracks expand on talderim alters, and found 10 minutes into the game a protoss was attempting to wall me in with cannons out side of my natural. I didn't notice this, not having any reason to expect such a strategy, until I saw a probe trying to build a cannon right underneath my bunker. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could not be at least in the top 25 of their bronze division, because every other game someone would leave in the first five seconds of the match. I played not one, but two different terran players who would play normally for the first 10 minutes of the game, and then would literally do nothing for the remainder, sitting behind a wall of depots and a handful of marines and seige tanks just waiting for the other player to eventually breach their defenses.
For the questions of the blog, “can you make it out of bronze with pure macro”, that answer to this is a resounding yes. You can literally 1A with a max army, stopping only to defend weak attempts at aggression, both effectively and easily well into silver league. Many bronze players never expand no matter how late the game goes. I can count the number of times a player got a third base on one hand. The problem with most bronze league players, nearest I can see, is that they don't have any kind of plan. If they practiced a build order and followed it I think they would be hard pressed not to get out of bronze league that way. There is no shame in bronze league, I started out there myself. Its a place for people who are new to the game, and to RTS in general. Players in bronze league don't really understand what strategy is within the context of a game like starcraft II. Bronze is the place where you begin to learn it. However, if you are stuck in bronze league its because you haven't really even begun to play the game correctly. Nearly everything they do is improper or a mistake, and if anyone of these errors were fixed they would probably be in silver league.
REPLAYS
+ Show Spoiler +
Replays will be organized in packs by league. Wins will be lumped together in one folder.
Losses will be named according to this convention.
-Beginning with 'STAR' if at least 3 of 5 economic goals are met
-Following with t,p, or z depending on race played
-Following that the map played
-A .txt file with the same name will be included for each loss. In it will be some notes and ideas about why I lost and what I think about the game.
Data for my win/loss rates overall and for each matchup will be included as I progress in leagues.
Bronze:
[not yet included]
Silver:
[not yet included]
Gold:
[not yet included]
Platinum:
[not yet included]
Diamond:
[not yet included]
Masters:
[not yet included]
|
i think your macro goals are too weak too accurately test the claim. "no flaws in the process of getting your income and spending your income" sounds a lot more difficult than what you have proposed as your macro goals
|
On April 11 2012 03:05 thrawn2112 wrote:
i think your macro goals are too weak too accurately test the claim. "no flaws in the process of getting your income and spending your income" sounds a lot more difficult than what you have proposed as your macro goals
Flaweless macro performance is unrealistic. The claim is that if you macro really well you will do well on the ladder, not that it is necessary to macro flawlessly to progress at all. If you watch masters level players play they don't often meet those standards themselves. With realistic goals in mind, real progress can be measured.
(Thanks for taking interest  )
|
i understand your reasoning but i dont see the point at all of going all the way down to bronze, i could understand dropping one or maybe two leagues but going all the way down to bronze just seems pointless
|
There are some people in silver and bronze who struggle to progress. Watching my macro smash people could give them ideas about ways they could improve and how they could apply what I am doing to their games. I was going to just start in my diamond league, but when I brought up the idea in another thread they told me I should start from bronze.
|
I actually really wanted to do this as well but I just don't know how to do this as a zerg 
Good luck dude. I am sure it will vastly improve your game
|
Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me:
On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made")
If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all.
|
On April 11 2012 03:22 mothergoose729 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 03:05 thrawn2112 wrote:
i think your macro goals are too weak too accurately test the claim. "no flaws in the process of getting your income and spending your income" sounds a lot more difficult than what you have proposed as your macro goals Flaweless macro performance is unrealistic. (Thanks for taking interest )
yeah, at least with the current skill level of sc2... but i still think that your goals are set a little too low to have the dseired outcome.
but regardless of the outcome i'm sure you will improve faster than you normally improve, which is the whole point of cecil's post lol
|
On April 11 2012 03:40 Leyra wrote:Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me: Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made") If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all.
The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism.
|
I'm cheering you on hardcore. I've been wanting to do something similar myself, to prove to not only myself but to others that macro IS the most important aspect and that macro alone WILL get you into a higher league, as long as you use viable gameplans and can react in a very basic manner to what your opponent is doing.
This season I will try my best to focus 90% of my effort on my macro and see if I can improve it. I hope you will post a lot of replays so even if you "fail", people can see in your replays whether or not it really wasn't macro issues at all.
While I believe macro focus alone can get you to at least high diamond, it's important to know that even with flawless macro, you won't win every game. As long as you're macroing well consistently, you should get at least 60% or higher win rate, and this is the conclusion it seems you have come to as well.
|
On April 11 2012 03:42 mothergoose729 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 03:40 Leyra wrote:Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me: On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made") If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all. The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism.
i think the ideal would be have one unit and another qued only after the current unit is at least half done
i dont really get why people say a diamonder should start in bronze league, i think gold at the absolute lowest would be better since its obvious your macro is plenty to completely dominate them and its very rude to the low leaguers to do so
plus i remember reading a post from blizz a while ago saying that they were going to cracking down on smurfs so hopefully this experiment doesnt get you banned
|
Thanks Tobberoth. I agree, my goal isn't to win every single game, my goal is to keep winning more than half .
|
On April 11 2012 03:52 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 03:42 mothergoose729 wrote:On April 11 2012 03:40 Leyra wrote:Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me: On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made") If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all. The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism. i think the ideal would be have one unit and another qued only after the current unit is at least half done i dont really get why people say a diamonder should start in bronze league, i think gold at the absolute lowest would be better since its obvious your macro is plenty to completely dominate them and its very rude to the low leaguers to do so plus i remember reading a post from blizz a while ago saying that they were going to cracking down on smurfs so hopefully this experiment doesnt get you banned
Don't be so sure. There has been a lot of threads lately where some bronzies and even higher leagues claim that at high bronze, there's almost no difference to gold. This kind of project should show the differences VERY clearly.
|
On April 11 2012 03:53 Tobberoth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 03:52 Forikorder wrote:On April 11 2012 03:42 mothergoose729 wrote:On April 11 2012 03:40 Leyra wrote:Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me: On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made") If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all. The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism. i think the ideal would be have one unit and another qued only after the current unit is at least half done i dont really get why people say a diamonder should start in bronze league, i think gold at the absolute lowest would be better since its obvious your macro is plenty to completely dominate them and its very rude to the low leaguers to do so plus i remember reading a post from blizz a while ago saying that they were going to cracking down on smurfs so hopefully this experiment doesnt get you banned Don't be so sure. There has been a lot of threads lately where some bronzies and even higher leagues claim that at high bronze, there's almost no difference to gold. This kind of project should show the differences VERY clearly.
even if high bronzies are equal to goldies hes still going to completely dominate alot of noobies who are jsut trying to enjoy the game
if he starts in gold and works his way back to diamond on pure macro then obviously he can beat bronzes and silvers with pure macro as well
|
On April 11 2012 03:42 mothergoose729 wrote:
The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism.
Yeah I know what you meant, I just meant try not to queue at all! Maybe clip by 2-3 seconds "meaning start the next one when the previous one is like 3 seconds from finishing"
|
On April 11 2012 03:56 Forikorder wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 03:53 Tobberoth wrote:On April 11 2012 03:52 Forikorder wrote:On April 11 2012 03:42 mothergoose729 wrote:On April 11 2012 03:40 Leyra wrote:Cool idea. Being a higher player I've stated things similar to Cecil in the past. Personally I meant them in a general sense. Stereotypes aren't always fair, but they are always based in truth. That being said, the following of your goals bugged me: On April 11 2012 02:48 mothergoose729 wrote:
Keep queue on all buildings below 3 until maxed. Ideally in 60% of games.
Queuing for Terran is a huge deal, if you have 5rax, 1fac, 1port, and 2 OCs, you're wasting at minimum 550minerals if you have 1 extra unit queue'd at each of those. (assuming that's what you meant by "below 3", meaning "2 units queue'd, including the current one being made") If you're gonna set goals like this and try to refine, hold yourself to a higher standard, IMO, don't queue at all. The wording on that is confusing. What I meant is to never have more than one unit making and one units queued. I am going to fix that. That is valid criticism. i think the ideal would be have one unit and another qued only after the current unit is at least half done i dont really get why people say a diamonder should start in bronze league, i think gold at the absolute lowest would be better since its obvious your macro is plenty to completely dominate them and its very rude to the low leaguers to do so plus i remember reading a post from blizz a while ago saying that they were going to cracking down on smurfs so hopefully this experiment doesnt get you banned Don't be so sure. There has been a lot of threads lately where some bronzies and even higher leagues claim that at high bronze, there's almost no difference to gold. This kind of project should show the differences VERY clearly. even if high bronzies are equal to goldies hes still going to completely dominate alot of noobies who are jsut trying to enjoy the game if he starts in gold and works his way back to diamond on pure macro then obviously he can beat bronzes and silvers with pure macro as well
That's a good point, I agree. I can see the point in going for low bronze just for being a completionist though 
|
Exciting, I'm gonna subscribe and keep an eye on this.
|
As a player who made it into NA GM a while back and mid masters on korea (stopped playing since then), and as someone who has given advice and taught people the game, Macro alone does NOT get you into masters.
Alot of people have that thought process, but it is wrong.
you won't stay long in masters if you don't have non-terrible macro, but you definitely don't need even good macro to be masters.
A huge portion of why players lose is that they lack focus, and they don't think while they act. This is the fundamental flaw in the majority of players. The only players who truly lack this flaw are the top pros and even then they sometimes lose focus due to pressure or outside influences (jet lag, sickness, injury, depression).
If you find yourself mindlessly watching a battle and you aren't moving units around, you are making a mistake.
If you find yourself scrolling along the map to see the enemies base that you've looked at previously (IE, not with new scouting but with the fog) you are making a mistake.
If you just scouted the enemy army (overlord, observer, scan) and you can't remember what composition, the position, and the number of units present, you are making a mistake.
If you are engaging in battles that you are unsure if you will win or not, you are making a mistake, both players are confident in their ability to win a battle before engaging, unless they are the ones who were attacked.
If you aren't constantly looking at the minimap after every action, you are making a mistake.
though i agree that you can make pretty much any unit if you focus well and macro decently and win games. but you can't JUST macro and A move. i would agree mechanics alone gets you to grandmasters. mechanics being micro/macro and your ability to focus and constantly do the right things like remembering everything you see and constantly being aware.
Strategy only matters when you play people of equal or greater mechanical skill, regardless of that skill level. If my mechanics are vastly superior to yours, i do not need strategy to win, though you do.
|
On April 11 2012 03:49 Tobberoth wrote:
I'm cheering you on hardcore. I've been wanting to do something similar myself, to prove to not only myself but to others that macro IS the most important aspect and that macro alone WILL get you into a higher league, as long as you use viable gameplans and can react in a very basic manner to what your opponent is doing.
This season I will try my best to focus 90% of my effort on my macro and see if I can improve it. I hope you will post a lot of replays so even if you "fail", people can see in your replays whether or not it really wasn't macro issues at all.
While I believe macro focus alone can get you to at least high diamond, it's important to know that even with flawless macro, you won't win every game. As long as you're macroing well consistently, you should get at least 60% or higher win rate, and this is the conclusion it seems you have come to as well.
Yeah I want to echo this. You're not going to win every game cause you'll make micro mistakes, get cheesed, etc etc....
You can likely get to top diamond just going mass marines and out macroing people, but once you get to the boundary of masters people will start being more intelligent.
|
Update 4/17/2012
I have been playing a lot of starcraft, but so far there hasn't been much to report. I knew it would take a while to rank up out of bronze, but I am very surprised by exactly how long it has taken. I have strung together 70 wins so far (with only one loss in the bunch) and I am still in the bronze division. I expect I will rank up fairly soon, because currently the ladder is putting me up against gold players and even the rare platinum player. Still, it took my 50 wins in a row in order to even face my first silver player on the ladder.
My experience so far playing in this league hasn't been all that surprising. It not really fair to say that their macro is weak, because overall their entire understanding of the game is weak. The bronze metagame (god that feels weird to say) has players making really odd build order decision. Terran will get two barracks right away no matter what. The most popular tvt style is a bio push with stem after about 9 minutes. Protoss, oddly enough, often open up with a fast two gate and then try and bust down the front with pure zealot. Builder orders that kind of hurt my brain to see, like a zerg getting a pool at about 14 supply, and no gas, and then not expanding and instead making about 30 slow zerglings.
Having spent so much time in the league, I think I am forced to admit that within bronze league there exists yet another league of players. High bronze players nearing promotion do play a little better, and make decisions that at least make some sense. In the low bronze division I faced a variety of oddities and strangeness. I went for a one barracks expand on talderim alters, and found 10 minutes into the game a protoss was attempting to wall me in with cannons out side of my natural. I didn't notice this, not having any reason to expect such a strategy, until I saw a probe trying to build a cannon right underneath my bunker. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could not be at least in the top 25 of their bronze division, because every other game someone would leave in the first five seconds of the match. I played not one, but two different terran players who would play normally for the first 10 minutes of the game, and then would literally do nothing for the remainder, sitting behind a wall of depots and a handful of marines and seige tanks just waiting for the other player to eventually breach their defenses.
For the questions of the blog, “can you make it out of bronze with pure macro”, that answer to this is a resounding yes. You can literally 1A with a max army, stopping only to defend weak attempts at aggression, both effectively and easily well into silver league. Many bronze players never expand no matter how late the game goes. I can count the number of times a player got a third base on one hand. The problem with most bronze league players, nearest I can see, is that they don't have any kind of plan. If they practiced a build order and followed it I think they would be hard pressed not to get out of bronze league that way. There is no shame in bronze league, I started out there myself. Its a place for people who are new to the game, and to RTS in general. Players in bronze league don't really understand what strategy is within the context of a game like starcraft II. Bronze is the place where you begin to learn it. However, if you are stuck in bronze league its because you haven't really even begun to play the game correctly. Nearly everything they do is improper or a mistake, and if anyone of these errors were fixed they would probably be in silver league.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
