| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
Not my usual style - a bit more academic so non-starcraft people can understand wtf is going on - also using the openBW replay viewer so the game doesn't crumble under 35k worth of APM. AI vs AI Human vs AI! The full set of these games can be found here: (thankfully not casted by me) | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
Individual matches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yP45k5gStk whoop | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
This was three months ago, whose counting! The reason for the bump - a good old fashioned NHFFA with a choice selection of idiots. | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
I feel like such a villain, bumping this old thread. | ||
|
Amanebak
Czech Republic528 Posts
Your NHFFA vidreps are the best. Please, do more of them. And thanks for the bump. I am gonna watch it now. | ||
|
LUCKY_NOOB
Bulgaria1430 Posts
Preview: ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/pL2ettP.png) | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
On October 13 2020 05:27 LUCKY_NOOB wrote: Who's Amanebak? I didn't even bribe him to say that! Preview: ... I have made a mistake. And yes ... NHFFAs will be recorded, perhaps even in this decade. | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
| ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
I did an NHFFA again .. yaay. | ||
|
QuadroX
386 Posts
| ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
On October 26 2020 21:48 QuadroX wrote: Nice! Keep them going! Hope to see some more 1x1 games from totally new players (800-900 MMR maybe). Pure strategic way to play BW is so fun to watch when nobody has mechanics or builds. I'll be casting some RSL games, I am currently infiltrating their ranks, gaining their trust, and then I will strike - crushing their little souls for the sake of momentary amusement. | ||
|
QuadroX
386 Posts
On October 27 2020 03:47 Greth wrote: I'll be casting some RSL games, I am currently infiltrating their ranks, gaining their trust, and then I will strike - crushing their little souls for the sake of momentary amusement. Nice! Group stage preferably, ro16 and further they turn into macro machines. | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
| ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
| ||
|
QuadroX
386 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10141 Posts
As most of you know, many basic scientific experiments rely on having one constant and one variable. In this case, your build order is the constant and the opponent's build choice is the variable. As you win/lose against all the random shit that lower level players do, you can get a feel for what your build is successful at, what it is bad at, etc. Then from there you can adjust accordingly based on scouting information. "Last time I wanted to do 2 Hatch muta and I saw 1 base 4 gateway Protoss, I got crushed! Maybe I should focus on surviving the inevitable attack and focus on defense instead of trying to hit the Muta timing..." To be fair, Greth admitted that he isn't a high-level player, and neither am I, so I may be off on this. But 3 Hatch Hydra is totally viable against 1 base play. It has been used as a way to bust FFE, yes, but that is because 1. Nearly all Toss go FFE and 2. It is easier to execute than it is to recognize and react appropriately to (like in 4 pool vs rax fe). However, just because that is its most visible use since 2007, doesn't mean that it isn't viable against a wide variety of openers. So, starting 3 Hatch Hydra blind (or with the intention of doing so) and then trying it against the random shit done at low ranks, you build your understanding of all of its build interactions while simultaneously using it as a vehicle for understanding other units, micro, macro, etc. There is nothing inherently wrong with starting each game with a simple build order in mind. A much better example, in my opinion, would have been mid/late-game oriented builds. For example, 5 Fac. This build is designed to punish a Protoss' 3rd base timing. However, if Protoss doesn't take a 3rd base, then it makes little sense to do, all else being equal. It can still win against mechanically inferior players who don't react well, and this could lead to the misconception that 5 Fac just reks everything. But as soon as you crawl over the ~midpoint of ladder, blind 5 Fac just gets crushed if it is not hitting the appropriate timing. Thus, I agree that entering a random TvP against a random opponent and thinking "I'm going 5 Fac!" is a demonstration of a clear gap in understanding. What you should be thinking instead is "I will open Siege Expand with a wall, then I'll do a 5 Fac if they take a fast 3rd, and if they don't I will aim to take my 3rd and find out their Arbiter timing." However, note that the Siege Expand - the BASE build order - is still constant. Yes, it is advantaged vs some openings and disadvantaged vs others, but on paper it doesn't just get RPS'd into unviability. Thus, it is a good opening to start with and learn from - not 5 Fac. TL;DR: It is important to distinguish mid/lategame build orders from openings and furthermore understand that a consistent opening provides a constant in a hellscape of variability (low ranks), and thus likely a better platform for learning than just doing whatever bone head idea comes to mind. However, having fun is paramount, and whatever that means for you, glhf. | ||
|
QuadroX
386 Posts
Imho for a person that just who finished campaign without being good in SC2/WC3 or any other RTS-like game before following specific build order (supply numbers, exact builds, etc.) and hoping to win with it despite all ladder craziness could be worse that just having some kind of a general macro-oriented game plan in mind and try different things to see if they work or not or how they line-up together. Better things for the new player would be: * Get comfortable with keyboard and mouse (control groups, hotkeys, mouse movement and clicks, how unit and their spells work) * Focus on spending your minerals and gas always (do not prioritize unit micro over it) * Focus on not getting supply blocked * Get better eco than your opponent (try to punish greedy players, try to defend aggressive players, key word "try" you will see if that works or not after the game) I might be crazy but I do believe that having no specific (!) plan and no build in mind for some time is a good thing. Let noobs explore like a child explores things. Let them rely on their innate abilities, natural survival and attacking instincts. This will allow them to learn naturally: * Importance of scouting, why you need to scout, what to scout for * How more units always almost always beats less units and how economy works (need to have more money than your opponent) * Get comfortable with the game engine, keyboard and mouse mechanics With certain build you can put them in a box where they will be afraid to steer away from the build, make mistakes and learn, always in a constant stress and anxiety because nobody can execute their build properly. Things are always late, not on time, game is lost before even started. This is so much harder. RTS game should be enjoyable. I miss those times when people just build lots of static defense and went whatever tech they thought was cool. This was fun, this was the essence of RTS experience back then. The next step will be to pick a solid build and try to polish it, but that's AFTER you understand why it's good or bad, what it designed to counter, what are the strengths and weaknesses. e.g. In the above mentioned game Zerg went 3 hatch vs 1 nexus. This is greedy AF, especially on close respawns. Protoss could either go fast tech into corsair DT and kill all overlords, or shuttle-reaver play, or secret 4 gate zealot bust. All those 1-base builds will crush 3 bases. No way Zerg at this level could have defended 3 base against it and not went a bit too greedy. The "good build thing" is to go 3 base, but more rational thing would be to scout if there's Protoss expansion and if there is you (as Zerg) have to be +1 base so 3 base is suddenly fine (and hydra bust expansion plan is fine), if you don't see P expansion then can just stay on 2 base and go muta for example (2 gas vs 1 gas). P.S. Playing FFA Hunters, BGH, Fastest, 2v2v2, 2v2, 3v3 especially teach those core game aspects, they are so underestimated. | ||
|
Jealous
10141 Posts
On November 10 2020 01:45 QuadroX wrote: Just to expand a little bit what I mean. I am 1300 MMR scrub, don't take it seriously. I know it is a hard and controversial topic. While the noob opinion is of course welcome, the hard fact is that you haven't advanced past the midpoint of the bellcurve of skill, so I am not sure how much weight can be given to testimony about getting better/improving/winning games when you can only see one side of the coin. Players above 1500 MMR have seen both sides of the coin and how to flip it - being total noob, improving, then being average or above average. So yes, "don't take it seriously," but I believe that should apply to your own estimation of your words - recognizing that perhaps you don't have a broad perspective on the matter. Imho for a person that just who finished campaign without being good in SC2/WC3 or any other RTS-like game before following specific build order (supply numbers, exact builds, etc.) and hoping to win with it despite all ladder craziness could be worse that just having some kind of a general macro-oriented game plan in mind and try different things to see if they work or not or how they line-up together. Better things for the new player would be: * Get comfortable with keyboard and mouse (control groups, hotkeys, mouse movement and clicks, how unit and their spells work) * Focus on spending your minerals and gas always (do not prioritize unit micro over it) * Focus on not getting supply blocked * Get better eco than your opponent (try to punish greedy players, try to defend aggressive players, key word "try" you will see if that works or not after the game) This goes without saying - but these are things you can also do WHILE trying a build order. In fact, there are mini "timings" which you discover on your own while playing the same build order over and over - like, when to pull a Probe off minerals to build 8 Pylon at natural. Those are things that you won't get if you just build Pylon at whatever timing - 7, 8, 9, who cares, right? I am not pushing for the acceptance of some insane near-100 supply build order, just that people should go 8 Pylon 10 Gate 11 Gas 13 Cyber, for example. The explanation for WHY that is good is quite simple - it is efficient. No big convoluted theories, no mind-exploding ground-breaking deep rooted knowledge necessary. I might be crazy but I do believe that having no specific (!) plan and no build in mind for some time is a good thing. Let noobs explore like a child explores things. Let them rely on their innate abilities, natural survival and attacking instincts. This will allow them to learn naturally: * Importance of scouting, why you need to scout, what to scout for * How more units always almost always beats less units and how economy works (need to have more money than your opponent) * Get comfortable with the game engine, keyboard and mouse mechanics Again, none of these things are in any way easier, learned quicker, or displayed better because you are not following a build order. What is the logical explanation for why a build order doesn't show the importance of scouting, or having more units than the enemy? Makes no sense to me. With certain build you can put them in a box where they will be afraid to steer away from the build, make mistakes and learn, always in a constant stress and anxiety because nobody can execute their build properly. Things are always late, not on time, game is lost before even started. This is so much harder. RTS game should be enjoyable. I miss those times when people just build lots of static defense and went whatever tech they thought was cool. This was fun, this was the essence of RTS experience back then. This was the essence for noobs, and it still is. Those things have not changed. It's just harder to find noobs of that level, just as much as it is harder to be ignorant of what good StarCraft/RTS play is. The next step will be to pick a solid build and try to polish it, but that's AFTER you understand why it's good or bad, what it designed to counter, what are the strengths and weaknesses. Understanding can't come from purely theoretical approaches in this game. This is why you have your WaterSerpentM and other "gosu theorists who just aren't fast enough" and why they are laughed at. The reality is that you can think you understand the game, but your understanding is limited by your level of play and what you are exposed to. Sure, there may be some players who watch a ton of VODs, read the forums/watch streams of high level players, tutorials, etc. and they will know more than their skill would normally permit. But, if you can't execute it, that understanding is pointless. Why not develop that understanding side-by-side with developing the build order? As I explained above, trial-and-error makes so much more sense in the framework of a specific build/opener than it does when you're just plopping down buildings and units randomly. The perfect example of this is super low-level Zergs. They open with like, Extractor, Spawning Pool, 2 Sunk. They are so bad that they can't grasp the concept of 1 building = 1 less drone, that Extractor before Spawning Pool makes no sense whatsoever, etc. Giving them a basic 9 Pool build order, with or without explanation, will already dramatically improve their position in the game and give them a better foundation for future learning than the mishmash build order they are pursuing. Are they really having fun, getting crushed a few minutes later rather than earlier, because they made static d but are behind from the first 30 seconds of the game? I am not suggesting that people adhere to a build order 100% of the game regardless of intel. I am asserting that for a noob with poor critical thinking skills about the game as a byproduct of their noobness, it is better to have some direction/foundation than none whatsoever. Left in a vacuum, that noob will be making extractor before spawning pool for the rest of his career. On November 10 2020 01:45 QuadroX wrote: e.g. In the above mentioned game Zerg went 3 hatch vs 1 nexus. This is greedy AF, especially on close respawns. Protoss could either go fast tech into corsair DT and kill all overlords, or shuttle-reaver play, or secret 4 gate zealot bust. All those 1-base builds will crush 3 bases. No way Zerg at this level could have defended 3 base against it and not went a bit too greedy. The "good build thing" is to go 3 base, but more rational thing would be to scout if there's Protoss expansion and if there is you (as Zerg) have to be +1 base so 3 base is suddenly fine (and hydra bust expansion plan is fine), if you don't see P expansion then can just stay on 2 base and go muta for example (2 gas vs 1 gas). That argument seems good on paper but the reality is that you are assuming that the 1 base Protoss player is competent at 1 base play. I am quite certain that if you take a Protoss player of equal level to that Zerg, as much as it would be HARDER for the Zerg to hold on against 1 base play than it clearly was in this game, it is nowhere near as clear-cut as you make it seem (that the 1 base play will "crush" the 3 base). P.S. Playing FFA Hunters, BGH, Fastest, 2v2v2, 2v2, 3v3 especially teach those core game aspects, they are so underestimated. Those are fun ways to get into the game, for sure, but very few people actively improve in any respectable time frame when their success is reliant on other people and thus the cause-and-effect of their decisions is so heavily muddled by outside influences. It's also somewhat irrelevant, since we are responding to a video about 1v1 and build orders, but still. 1v1 gives you a direct cause-and-effect of your decisions - there are no excuses like "my team sucked" or "I got 2v1'd" and that's a hard and bitter pill to swallow for gamers who can't tolerate losing - especially when that experience is stretched over a 10+ minute game. However, this is also the cleanest and most concrete way of working on your understanding, mechanics, and gameplay as a whole - bar none. | ||
|
QuadroX
386 Posts
What is the logical explanation for why a build order doesn't show the importance of scouting, or having more units than the enemy? Here the point was that having a fixed build order you can just do things regardless of scouting because "that's how it's done properly". Even if your build order says send 12th worker to scout you don't know what to scout for (unless told specifically). While without fixed build order if you don't scout for certain things you just insta die. Therefore scouting becomes essential and you learn it naturally. Not going to argue anymore and dig myself even deeper. Treat this as "how noobs can see this matter in their own crazy way". | ||
|
Greth
Belgium318 Posts
Other than that - this is the best TvT you will ever see. It has layers never witnessed before in BW. | ||
| ||
|
|
Online Event
BSL 2v2 ProLeague S3
Esports World Cup
ByuN vs Astrea
Lambo vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs TBD
Solar vs Zoun
SHIN vs Reynor
Maru vs TriGGeR
herO vs Lancer
Cure vs ShoWTimE
Esports World Cup
Esports World Cup
Esports World Cup
CranKy Ducklings
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
|
|
|
EPT
