EPTOn April 19 2010 06:19 hyst.eric.al wrote:
dont try this in TvZ, kids, unless you want your opponent to get 40-kill lurkers
dont try this in TvZ, kids, unless you want your opponent to get 40-kill lurkers
Go mech, get 200/200 3/3, a-move, win! :D
Attack-Move Macro (chill's suggestion) - Page 2
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
buhhy
United States1113 Posts
Go mech, get 200/200 3/3, a-move, win! :D | ||
|
IndecisivePenguin
United States771 Posts
On April 19 2010 05:42 Wings wrote: As a terran... (and therefore once a noob terran) I can easily tell you that a big terran army vs big (other) army is virtually worthless without micro. If you don't siege your tanks properly, plant your mines, stim your marines, pull M&M back from lurkers, you're GUARANTEED to epic fail against both zerg & toss. I'd say that this strategy is perfect for noob Protoss (or for any freaking protoss, it's natural for them), and very good for noob Zerg (good for ling/ultra or a good combination of units), and pretty doomed for Terran. Only if you had a strong sense of Mech can this strategy actually get you anywhere... but noob Terran & Mech don't go well together at all. Of course, some might say that that's not the point; the point is to teach macro, and to get a habit of getting constant production. This is somewhat true... except you won't be winning anything, and you'll be developing a potentially bad habit of not keeping track of your very fragile terran units. Pumping units like Oov is only worth it when you've got the battle micro to keep them alive. Having said that, if you're not terran, this is a fantastic strat for you. I don't believe you will develop a bad habit of not keeping track of units if you never win with this strat alone. After developing your macro for a while and it becomes more natural, you will then use those skills and combine them with learning to micro your units properly. The point is just to get in the habit of macroing quickly and efficiently. | ||
|
Likkzi
Poland72 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/2514/oov.jpg) ^^This man agrees with OP.^^ And I believe  fOrGG does too.But seriously, WTF, one of the worst Broodwar ideas I ever heard about. + Show Spoiler + What about positioning? Invisible enemy badasses (PROT-ASS) that will rape your army and you won't even notice them? What if your enemy (ZERGGGRR) can macro faster than you, since he can happily spam Drones if he is not being harassed? Or enemy Tanks (TEARRR-RUN) on cliff, causing your Goons' retardation when they are being outranged? This is just ridiculous! | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
but it's solid practice. | ||
|
Navi
5286 Posts
 I wish I had started off with this, cause I would always just stare at big battles when I had already laid mines etc. and just watch the protoss go boom :S and then go 2000+ minerals lol | ||
|
pyrogenetix
China5098 Posts
new players tend to focus way too much on micro and trying to look like the pros they see in vods. there is a lot of macro work that goes on you don't see that backs it all up. until you get good macro your game will always be weak, so yea this is a good idea to understand the impact STRONG MACRO has on your game. edit: after you have your macro down you can work on the other aspects. I am in no way saying that macro is everything, of course there is army positioning, holding certain points on a map and things like that but newbie players usually SEVERELY lack in the macro department. That's why this is a good exercise. | ||
|
erektion
Canada62 Posts
| ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
My roommate is a much better gamer than I am and he has vastly superior micro but it won't often matter because I just make too much stuff and expand too much. Chill's advice is great for noob players like me, and for players just starting at SC it reinforces the almost unbelievable importance of macro in this game. | ||
|
GogoKodo
Canada1785 Posts
On April 19 2010 07:29 erektion wrote: but what about something as important as muta harass? you cant just LOSE all your mutalisks, that would go against the entire idea of harassing which is a crucial component of zvt You are missing the point, along with a whole bunch of other people in the thread. This is a learning tool, or a drill. Imagine I tell you that you need to get better at dribbling to play basketball so I tell you do a bunch of running/dribbling drills. Are you going to come back at me with "But what about grabbing rebounds and shooting free throws. Those are vital parts of basketball"? Well I hope you don't, because if you did then you would be missing the point there like you are missing the point here. When you want to learn to macro, then you should try to learn macro. Whether this particular way of practise is actually good is a topic for debate but people bringing up "lol you'll lose to 2 lurkers" are arguing about it in the wrong way. | ||
|
Ian Ian Ian
915 Posts
It's not supposed to.. | ||
|
skippy2591
United States46 Posts
never said this strat waz a solid, "will never lose" strat. All i'm saying is that this strategy is a nice starter strategy, or review strategy that is bound to assist new/ (or in my case) newbish players in focusing on macro as oppose to starring down dying units. I am not saying that this strategy is one that everyone in the world should be using cuz it's just so awsome and un-beatable that ur units will just demolish ur enemie's units. I am saying (and hopeful for the last time) that i'm am reporting back to chill my so far positive results, and hopefully introducing the idea to others in the community that would find this helpful or interesting to try out. I do question why pplz keep saying that this sucks so bad with terrin v nneything. The intent of this tread wazn't to discuss the specifics, but rather introduce the potential benefits that this strategy could build within a player. ultimately, this strategy is trying to reinforce the idea of macro, and other points are welcome, but still, i question why pplz are so determined on saying that this fails for some race in some specific circumstance Ps: lol at Navi, i know the feeling :S | ||
|
Likkzi
Poland72 Posts
On April 19 2010 07:45 Ian Ian Ian wrote: I think the point of this is not to win, it's for practice and to get better. But it won't make you better! OK, learn to macro this way. And then try to mix it with normal battle issues (harass, defending pressure, positioning, micro, scouting, reactions...). You will almost be forced to learn how to macro from the beginning. The circumstances of standard gameplay are so different from 'Attack-Move' macro games, that it's gonna make your previous practice worthless. (Sorry, maybe not worthless but dubious at least). I'm not saying you can sometimes give up macro and be happy with it. I'm saying you have to learn what is less important in current situation, and thus, what can be postponed a little? Sure, newbies need to work on macro first. But when the alternative is, for example, control 8 Vultures to smash 20 Probes or produce one round of units without 10-15 seconds delay, 'macro choice' isn't obvious anymore. EDIT: This idea might be valid when played on UMS map with enemy doing nothing (no AI script). Just use the clock, make trigger that game ends once you hit 200/200 and then try to reach it within shortest span of time. You will get quite specific information how fast can you gather money and spend it. | ||
520
United States2822 Posts
On April 19 2010 08:05 Likkzi wrote: But it won't make you better! OK, learn to macro this way. And then try to mix it with normal battle issues (harass, defending pressure, positioning, micro, scouting, reactions...). You will almost be forced to learn how to macro from the beginning. The circumstances of standard gameplay are so different from 'Attack-Move' macro games, that it's gonna make your previous practice worthless. (Sorry, maybe not worthless but dubious at least). I'm not saying you can sometimes give up macro and be happy with it. I'm saying you have to learn what is less important in current situation, and thus, what can be postponed a little? Sure, newbies need to work on macro first. But when the alternative is, for example, control 8 Vultures to smash 20 Probes or produce one round of units without 10-15 seconds delay, 'macro choice' isn't obvious anymore. Yes it is. I would 100% of the time get 10-15 seconds of faster building time on another round of units than do stupid patrol micro with Vultures vs. Probes. You'll see progamers make the same decision every time as well. | ||
|
Likkzi
Poland72 Posts
On April 19 2010 08:12 scintilliaSD wrote: Yes it is. I would 100% of the time get 10-15 seconds of faster building time on another round of units than do stupid patrol micro with Vultures vs. Probes. You'll see progamers make the same decision every time as well. So you are basically saying that you would always prioritize your own macro even when the alternative is to severly hurt your opponent's macro? Because the only thing I am 100% sure about my SC play is that I make SCV for 50 minerals I get in the beginning ^_^ | ||
|
obesechicken13
United States10467 Posts
Maybe all you need to get b- is macro. | ||
|
onewingedmoogle
Canada434 Posts
| ||
|
Likkzi
Poland72 Posts
I also remember some Day[9]'s lecture about Flash's TvZ, when he pointed out that Terran was very agressive, and by exchanging Marines for Mutalisks (decent micro!) he could keep macroing on lower number of Depots, thus saving some money. But trading troops =! throwing away troops, and newbies most often do the former.In any case, this is way more complicated than it seems to be at first glance. | ||
|
skippy2591
United States46 Posts
On April 19 2010 08:40 Likkzi wrote: To support my point some more: usually, good micro/scouting/harass saves you units you would lose if you were paying more attention to macro at the cost of things I mentioned before. I also remember some Day[9]'s lecture about Flash's TvZ, when he pointed out that Terran was very agressive, and by exchanging Marines for Mutalisks (decent micro!) he could keep macroing on lower number of Depots, thus saving some money. But trading troops =! throwing away troops, and newbies most often do the former.In any case, this is way more complicated than it seems to be at first glance. ok, dude, we get ur point, but the question is, do you get ours? | ||
|
Likkzi
Poland72 Posts
On April 19 2010 09:04 skippy2591 wrote: ok, dude, we get ur point, but the question is, do you get ours? Hm, your point was that it's better to macro/select-units/attack-move/macro... than to watch the ensuing battle without doing anything. I agree with that: doing something useful >>> not doing anything, but you know, there are lots of useful things you can do that can't be called 'macro'. | ||
|
2WeaK
Canada550 Posts
The issue that Chill is seeing in lower level players (I'm guilty of this) is that they look at the battles, win/lose a battle and the game is over because there's nothing to back them up. By ignoring micro, you just force the timings into your head, so that they become automatic. Then, once that's in your brain, you can start microing and you'll keep in mind "oh, unit X is about to pop out" and you'll run to your base and macro then be right back in the midst of a battle to micro. However, its a lot harder to learn to micro and then learn to macro, as it is a lot easier to tunnel vision while you're microing, thus missing all the sound queues. | ||
| ||
