EPTThey often loose to cheese and get annoyed about it, but a B level player can swarm the yellow/red ranks even without his superior mechanics.
WoW vs SC part 2 - Page 3
| Blogs > Phyre |
|
minus_human
4784 Posts
They often loose to cheese and get annoyed about it, but a B level player can swarm the yellow/red ranks even without his superior mechanics. | ||
|
barth
Ireland1272 Posts
| ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
Pretty much every S class progamer currently understands the game, timings and builds well enough. There are small differences in gameplay or preference but those differences are so tiny that it's usually not worth discussing them. They aren't necessarily indicative of a better or worse understanding of the game. For example Jaedong seems to prefer and excel at micro since his strong ZvZ performances suggest that, but his macro is still a straight 10. Bisu seems to prefer and excel at multitasking (drop/harass, macro + attack at the same time) in PvZ, but Zerg can't really do all that stuff in that matchup anyway so it's kind of stupid to say "omg Bisu so great multitask" when Z can't show off similar things because Z drops occur rarely and are costly (whereas P drops are very very common) and Z doesn't have corsairs constantly scouting and attacking overlords in addition to his main army. Well, things like that... They all play well enough, the winner seems to be just the one with the strongest nerves, the best daily form, the most luck and the least mistakes made. It's not really about playing better anymore. When it's JD vs. Bisu, for example, there is no "better". It's all about being able to endure the pressure, not give in, and not make a game-deciding mistake due to a slip of attention or similar stupid things. Either player has an equal chance to win in each game. They both know the matchup inside-out, and have incredible mechanics/multitasking. And yes, a B level player might win vs. lower ranks without superior mechanics. But that's the only exception - because bottom rank SC is total crap not just in regards to mechanics but also to general understanding of BOs and timing. A higher ranked player however does not have that weakness (at least he knows the most important basics). A top ranked player without mechanics will not win vs. a slightly lower one (not bottom rank). Meaning that strong mechanics are required for being skilled, and thus a huge, no, the MAJOR part of how skilled you are. Which was pretty much my point. Without mechanics, you'll never reach the top ranks (although you are able to at least ascend from the bottom rank, I'll admit that. Especially when using Protoss, heh). Oh, and B rank is still pretty pathetic skill-wise, in the grand scheme of things. Notable skill only starts at the very top foreign level, but even they are severely lacking in late game performance (macro (at that stage mostly about keeping min count below 1k, which takes a huge amount of APM (a shame)), large army control which also takes much more APM than it should... all the heavy multitasking stuff). Only progamers manage to do that decently, yet even they make mistakes constantly. Just less dramatic ones. And their reaction when a drop comes in (even in lategame) is impressive, while top foreigners suck hard at that - but it's no wonder why, there's way too much going on. Insufficient multitasking resulting in extreme losses. And even progamers suck at coordinating large groups of lings in late game - bad flanks, many lings still standing behind, huge amounts of lings dying because retreating them all is too slow, etc... but that's perfectly understandable, since the horrible UI doesn't allow you to do this well, no matter your name or rank. The. game. is. too. hard. And that's NOT a good thing when the game is your enemy too, not just your opponent. It just makes everyone play much worse than he could, and often results in some rather stupid lategame mistakes where it was clear that the player was too overwhelmed by what's all going on (you know, those "noooo how could he let that happen" or "he should have done X right now! Why didn't he!" situations... which can of course be game-deciding). But enough of these discussions now. Waste of time. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On June 25 2009 00:45 0xDEADBEEF wrote: As many others here posted, many of us have been in the top of the ladder in wow. We do have a clue of how to get there. And I assure. Most classes/match-ups don't need more than knowing how to press 4 buttons in the right order. With a 1.5sec time span between each button. And as you can easy find around. Some get to the very top of the ladder with even less than that. Just google/youtube things like "wow arena clicker backpedal" things like that. And you will find not only one, but hundreds and hundreds of videos of very top top players first person view. Who play clicking each button instead of using hotkeys. Who have brainfarts and stop thinking/acting for whole seconds when surprised (called "backpedal" because they press "back" when thinking what to do)Oh, one more thing about WoW... I doubt it's such a skillless game. There's a lot to take care of, a lot of abilities to use, a lot of things to consider. Plus it's relatively fast action. That would be very similar to clicking instead of using hotkeys in starcraft. It delays you that much. Could you get D+ clicking in starcraft? Well, some people get top ratings being that bad at wow. 90% of the strategy in a wow arena means. Knowing who to attack first, and who to cast CC spells on. You to lock on that target, till it's dead. That's it. That's the plan, period. And the means to achieve that, is like I said before. Knowing how to press 4 buttons in the right order with a 1.5sec time span between them. The other 10% of the matchups are those you need to coordinate target swaps on ventrilo. | ||
|
minus_human
4784 Posts
| ||
|
minus_human
4784 Posts
| ||
|
0xDEADBEEF
Germany1235 Posts
Amusing. @VIB: Yeah, maybe. I don't know about WoW, just wanted to throw in some things one should consider, but it may very well be that it's competitive play is indeed as bad as you describe it. | ||
| ||
