|
On September 24 2009 04:59 Chill wrote:
Yes.
Your first priority is making workers. Your second priority is making units and infrastructure (depots, barracks, gateways, pylons, overlords, hatcheries, etc).
For example, I play a lot of people at C- on ICCup who have really nice probe harass. Except I know they are missing probes left and right because of it. That isn't a good trade off. It's similar to the guy who spends a minute getting that last hit on the overlord being defending by a hydralisk. While he was flying in and out he probably missed 5 workers and a round of production. That's dumb. Make worker and unit production your priorities.
Hi Chill. So with all that macro, does being able to secure expansions also play a key? Since you'll need the resources to expand and not just macro alone.
|
Personally I've found the skill-gap from D+ to C- to be pretty harsh. I'm not sure what the guy a few pots above me was talking about (edit ok now a lot of posts above me): you lose 50 points for a D+/D+ loss and 75 for a C-/C- loss (going MOTW stats here.) You win 130 in each case (I think--I've never actually won a C-/C-). Therefore, you must win 27.7(repeating of course)% of your games to maintain D+ and ~36.6% of your games to maintain C-.
I also think one of the biggest issues around playing at the D/D+ level is the fact that a really large portion of the people you play against are smurfs so the whole "just build more units" strategy doesn't feel particularly satisfying even if it might technically "work." I mean, I go home after work tonight and play a bunch of ZvT on Destination and just blindly 3 hatch no scout and assume MM as I work towards mutas I'm going to lose at least a third of the games to someone of higher rank practicing his vulture runbys. I may do slightly better against the "true D+" Terrans as I will be better at macro since I'm just not going to worry about scouting/responding to nonstandard play but it feels really bad to put up no fight at all against the wraith/vulture/proxy/sair dt/etc. Also smurf protoss will storm the crap out of your massive army with bad unit composition so you stop just doing stuff like massing hydra because it's no fun to get completely owned.
This mental state probably ends up costing me some games since there are no doubt games I could win with mass units that I lose because I have been trained that doing that doesn't work (by all the smurfs--and it's not like I'm taking games off them anyway) but I'm not sure if I would be playing "better" for it.
|
On September 24 2009 04:59 Chill wrote:
Yes.
Your first priority is making workers. Your second priority is making units and infrastructure (depots, barracks, gateways, pylons, overlords, hatcheries, etc).
For example, I play a lot of people at C- on ICCup who have really nice probe harass. Except I know they are missing probes left and right because of it. That isn't a good trade off. It's similar to the guy who spends a minute getting that last hit on the overlord being defending by a hydralisk. While he was flying in and out he probably missed 5 workers and a round of production. That's dumb. Make worker and unit production your priorities.
Oh man, this reminds me of a Protoss I played a while ago. It turned out his entire gameplan was pretty much probe harassment. He went around and did cute stuff; he first stole my gas, then placed a (failed, lol) manner pylon, and then he ran around and harassed my SCV's building shit. I did a very bad (got supply blocked etc) improvised MnM + Tank push build (first time I ever had my gas stolen, so I didn't think about faster CC + Bunker), and when I pushed out he had like 3-4 Zealots outside my main. Wtf? Was that his follow up to gas steal? I proceeded to push all the way to his main without encountering any more units until I noticed something blurry; two DT's. Since I had a really fast Acad and therefore Comsat already, it was a piece of cake to deal with. Then he left the game without gg. Wtf? I figured that he would be way ahead due to my really failed BO. So I watched the replay, and it turned out he cut probe production pretty much after his first pylon and focused almost entirely on harassing with his probe. Such a bad game.
|
Apm thread in disguise lol
|
On September 24 2009 04:19 Chill wrote:
The skill gap from D+ to C- involves making a lot of workers and making a lot of units. That's it. Until around C you should just focus on making a lot of units.
To clarify:
Gamesense? No.
Timing? No.
Unit composition? No.
Unit control? No.
Making a lot of shit (not even necessarily the best shit for a situation)? Yes.
It might work as P but no way as Z or T lol
|
On September 24 2009 05:27 iD.NicKy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2009 04:19 Chill wrote:
The skill gap from D+ to C- involves making a lot of workers and making a lot of units. That's it. Until around C you should just focus on making a lot of units.
To clarify:
Gamesense? No.
Timing? No.
Unit composition? No.
Unit control? No.
Making a lot of shit (not even necessarily the best shit for a situation)? Yes. It might work as P but no way as Z or T lol
Yeah. You'll never kill off a Zerg with Lurkers if you have extremely fail MnM micro, for instance, despite having way superior macro. I talk from experience. 
|
Considering 80% of the players from D to C+ will attempt to cheese, just play safe and macro, easy wins up to B-. Then its like 95% cheese from B- to B+ but alot more difficult to stop 
Basically, your knowledge and experience to the game(you said u played 2 years right?) should be more then sufficient to counter or predict what your opponent is going to do. And if ur apm is really 250 like you say then i find it hard to beleive you cant reach C-, unless its spam like every1 else has been saying.
|
Calgary26003 Posts
On September 24 2009 05:27 iD.NicKy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2009 04:19 Chill wrote:
The skill gap from D+ to C- involves making a lot of workers and making a lot of units. That's it. Until around C you should just focus on making a lot of units.
To clarify:
Gamesense? No.
Timing? No.
Unit composition? No.
Unit control? No.
Making a lot of shit (not even necessarily the best shit for a situation)? Yes. It might work as P but no way as Z or T lol
Why not?
|
Maybe try playing with 1 hand? That should force you to concentrate more on build order and strategy then anything else, atleast thats what it does for me. Ive won quite a few C/C+ games with 1 handed 120 apm with build order + strategy alone.
Idk, ive notice other players with high apm stuck at D+/C- level and its usually the lack of build orders and strategy. They tend to beleive the faster they are the quicker their macro will be. From midgame to lategame thats true but early game to midgame, its all build order. You need to get ur buildorders down and let ur macro and apm build up naturally, dont force it.
|
Calgary26003 Posts
On September 24 2009 06:03 LonGGone wrote:
Maybe try playing with 1 hand?
Do not do this.
|
On September 24 2009 00:05 jhNz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2009 23:36 Tropics wrote:On September 23 2009 23:08 jhNz wrote:On September 23 2009 21:37 JMave wrote:On September 23 2009 21:13 Dfgj wrote:
Third game thoughts:
You cut probes pretty early. Make your pylons earlier and keep probe/goon production up.
Your build isn't very good. You made an extremely early robo, but by 7~ minutes you had 1 reaver/shuttle and about 7 goons, with under 60 supply. You can have 10g/2z and 2 reavers in a shuttle pushing out at 8 minutes. Given that you weren't really maximizing 2 gates, a third was unnecessary.
Overall: refine your BO and macro as much as possible.
I adapted this build from Bisu in the IEF tournament game 3. I always saw him go this build so I followed him. Isn't the build correct? Or am I wrong? in my opinion copying build orders from pros is the wrong way to become any better. it's like learning a song by heart to play it on the piano without knowing the instrument. you can learn which keys you have to push in a which order that the you hear the song. the song might sound good but as soon someone comes over and says "hey play a different song" you're screwed. because you learned to play the song and not to play the instrument. start learning the instrument instead. this applies to broodwar as well. if you only copy a bo you might snatch some wins with it. but as soon as something goes a different way than the bo is useful for, you lose. i haven't watched the rep though. this is just a reply to this quote. What are you trying to say with this post? Don't use a build order and just wing it based on feel? This is absolutely dreadful advice. One of the easiest ways to see and feel real improvement in your game is to find a solid build order that goes all the way up until your first push or so and working on that. Starcraft is a solved game and there is a reason the standard builds are the standard. Learn them well because they develop your understanding of the game and are adaptable to nearly every situation you'll encounter. i don't want to say that BOs are bad and you're completely right with your post i just say that it is wrong to copy builds without thinking about them. you have to understand why you are doing certain elements of a build. why am i producing this zealot at this specific time, what is the purpose of it? a lot of players - especially new ones - just read the BO, do exactly what it says but they have no idea why they're doing it. and this leads to what i'm saying in the last sentence of my post. if the opponent plays something non-standard they lose because they know the bo without understanding it really. i agree with you though. it is important to have a good build. but at some point the bo itself wont win you games (i'm not talking about zvz or pvp ^^)
I understand what your'e saying but I disagree with your conclusion.
By trying to carbon copy a build order, the player will immediately find himself in D+/C- situations and start to understand the game at a competitive level. For example, protoss fast expands and the zerg only makes a few zerglings and then powers drones while expanding. The build order says to make more zerglings at a certain supply. The player doesn't know why, but does it anyway. Suddenly three zealots show up to poke around and he realizes what the zerglings are there for. Or he makes a spire for scourge and then starts getting hydra tech. Suddenly a corsair shows up and he realizes what the four scourge are for.
Starcraft isn't that hard to figure out (on a basic level), since many years of study have already gone into finding the most effective and versatile openings. If you handicap yourself by trying to invent your own ways of playing, all you're doing is lengthening your learning curve.
|
Calgary26003 Posts
I think a more likely outcome is the person continues to make those zerglings whether they are necessary or not. If the person plays more freely and dies to the 3 zealots a few times, hes more likely to adapt back and forth.
|
|
|
On September 24 2009 05:52 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2009 05:27 iD.NicKy wrote:On September 24 2009 04:19 Chill wrote:
The skill gap from D+ to C- involves making a lot of workers and making a lot of units. That's it. Until around C you should just focus on making a lot of units.
To clarify:
Gamesense? No.
Timing? No.
Unit composition? No.
Unit control? No.
Making a lot of shit (not even necessarily the best shit for a situation)? Yes. It might work as P but no way as Z or T lol Why not?
I heard an example of macroing mnm and trying to kill a zerg who has lurkers. Well if you macro heavy you have a lot of vessels. Problem solved. Though for ZvP I'm not sure because couldn't a toss just rape any combo with storms unless you go lurk/ling into ultra/ling?
|
On September 24 2009 06:36 Chill wrote:
I think a more likely outcome is the person continues to make those zerglings whether they are necessary or not. If the person plays more freely and dies to the 3 zealots a few times, hes more likely to adapt back and forth.
Yeah, you're probably right. I don't have as much experience with other people learning the game as you probably do, although I would expect most people to figure these things out eventually when they get the build order down well enough to hold their own and either start experimenting with it or trying new ones.
I think the greater evil is that when newer players play freely, they tend to play very inefficiently... how many times have you seen D players make two gateways and then only use one of them because they're teching up?
|
You guys have any tips on securing expos on destination or any map in general for PvZ? I'm having a great time trying to get those expos.. which are the things that always cost me the game.
|
On September 24 2009 06:39 zergnewb wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2009 05:52 Chill wrote:On September 24 2009 05:27 iD.NicKy wrote:On September 24 2009 04:19 Chill wrote:
The skill gap from D+ to C- involves making a lot of workers and making a lot of units. That's it. Until around C you should just focus on making a lot of units.
To clarify:
Gamesense? No.
Timing? No.
Unit composition? No.
Unit control? No.
Making a lot of shit (not even necessarily the best shit for a situation)? Yes. It might work as P but no way as Z or T lol Why not? I heard an example of macroing mnm and trying to kill a zerg who has lurkers. Well if you macro heavy you have a lot of vessels. Problem solved. Though for ZvP I'm not sure because couldn't a toss just rape any combo with storms unless you go lurk/ling into ultra/ling?
Most low level toss can't storm very well. Either way, if your macro is much better than his they won't matter anyway.
|
Regarding the winning percentages; wouldn't you be D if you won 50% of your games against D players, D+ if you won 50% against D+ players...etc. etc?
The thing is; with a 50% winning percentage, inflation is created. Someone can get to...ie C- simply by mass gaming at the D+ level, providing they win 50% of their games against D+ players and at least 35% against C- players. However, this doesn't mean that they're actually C-.
I've been told to allow 200 games to breach the gap to D+. Any thoughts?
Personally, I think this is pretty stupid. If you need 200 games to breach D+, then you are obviously not at a D+ level. You will have something like a 30% win rate against D players, which means that when you actually get up to the D+ level, you will get rolled like crazy.
I don't discourage mass-gaming, the more that you practice, the better you'll be. However, the part that really pisses me off is when people tell me they're C- with like, a 100-300 record, since that was reached through mass gaming through the D+ ranks.
|
On September 24 2009 06:44 Neverborn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2009 06:36 Chill wrote:
I think a more likely outcome is the person continues to make those zerglings whether they are necessary or not. If the person plays more freely and dies to the 3 zealots a few times, hes more likely to adapt back and forth. Yeah, you're probably right. I don't have as much experience with other people learning the game as you probably do, although I would expect most people to figure these things out eventually when they get the build order down well enough to hold their own and either start experimenting with it or trying new ones. I think the greater evil is that when newer players play freely, they tend to play very inefficiently... how many times have you seen D players make two gateways and then only use one of them because they're teching up?
That may be the result of someone following a 2gate build order and then not knowing what to do from there.
It's important to know that in BO execution at progamer level, the game is MAPPED out. What that means is, the BO has a series of branches that can deviate based on scouting information and enemy BO. Proper adaptation comes from losing to a certain build enough times and learning the timing windows for when an opponent is weak during a certain matchup, at a certain point in the build.
One player once told me to know build orders up to about 20 supply and then fluctuate from there. That's the stance I personally agree with for lower level players like myself. For me, there's no point in memorizing builds up to 120 supply when I don't even know the timing windows for when I am vulnerable, what builds can destroy me, and how the map and spawn points can affect the efficacy and timings of the build.
Though I think, above all else, the best way to improve at Starcraft at ALL levels is this:
1) Play the game
2) Watch your own replays, especially when you lose
3) Show the replay to someone who is significantly better than you (or at least as good as you) and try to figure out what you did wrong.
I think, ultimately, that's why Koreans are better than non Koreans. They have such a solid network, and when you put a bunch of dedicated gamers in the same room, playing the same game for 8+ hours a day, these players can give advice to one another and learn from each others' strengths and weaknesses.
We simply do not have that level of communication between players internationally. Even though we have clans like EG and ToT, the clan members all live very far from each other and they can't talk to each other directly and REALLY THOROUGHLY discuss their games in fine detail, the way that I imagine progamers do it.
|
On September 24 2009 09:35 ArcticxWolf wrote:
The thing is; with a 50% winning percentage, inflation is created. Someone can get to...ie C- simply by mass gaming at the D+ level, providing they win 50% of their games against D+ players and at least 35% against C- players. However, this doesn't mean that they're actually C-.
what, so just because some guy has balls and doesn't give a shit about his record he's not C-? sorry, but if someone's rank is C- then their rank is C-. infact I'd favor someone with a shitty record over someone with a positive record simply because i know that they play straight up and they don't smurf/have ego problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
