|
On April 26 2011 08:27 Pwnographics wrote:
Masters is done by MMR and not timing laddering.
It's small things like fending off all-ins or better scouting. If masters players played diamond players the win rate would be like 60:40. But if masters players played gold it'd be like 95:5 whereas diamond would be around 75:25.
In other words, they're just more solid.
Idk Diamond to plat is like 95/5 for me and gold is a joke. But my masters is like 40:60.
Its really hard to say what the difference is between top diamond and low masters. It seems like solid build orders has a lot to do with it.
|
As someone flirting with the border (still sadly on the Diamond side  ), I think the biggest thing I find is the multi-tasking. Mostly when I lose it is to terrans who drop all over and do a much better job controlling everything than me. ZvZ is such a rock/paper/scissors opening build order at all levels nothing much can be taken from it. ZvP is just smarter movement, pushes, harassment and again, keeping up the macro (not too hard), but doing more tp mess with the opponent as well.
|
On April 26 2011 10:00 Maetl wrote:
Average is not median.
Mean and median are both types of averages, though most people speak of "average" to refer to the "mean."
Skill cannot be measured absolutely -- it's relative, dependent entirely on likelihood of beating another specific player. Speaking of the mean skill level is meaningless.
However, the median player probably has about a 50/50 chance of beating a randomly selected other player without regard to skill level -- so it's fair to call that person the average.
|
The answer is basic decision making and macro. You should never hit 1k mins until 3 base/180 food, and even then it should be because you're saving supply for gas units. The ability to read your opponent is just as crucial - if you scout on 12 and your opponent is close positions with no barracks, you should expect double proxy rax instantly. If a protoss player is missing a second pylon at 17-18 food, check your hatch for a cannon rush. These sorts of 'reads' can be made all game long, and make the real difference. Gas, expo, tech timings... if you can make solid decisions based on what you scout, you'll hit masters soon enough.
|
As a Master league Zerg, I notice most Diamond players (playing Custom 1v1s, not ladder ~_~) choose to go with unsafe builds that, when scouted, are obvious that they are outside of their bounds of stable play and can be then capitalized on. For instance, they may try to expand too early, tech too hard, not be aggressive when it is needed etc. The step into masters begin when you can evaluate your build and your opponent's build and make good decisions based on the data that you have, or estimates based on the data you don't have.
|
From my experience, Master players are able to do more harass while maintaining good macro, whereas diamond revolves around big battle.
Once I start doing more harassing, as well as learning how to defend them, I begin to consistently win against Masters.
|
High level diamond players aren't that far off from low masters players, most of it is just the little things.
Also late game macro, high diamond players tend to fall apart while low masters players will notice a surplus of money and spend it while the high diamond players will just seem lost trying to spend it (like not getting enough production buildings).
|
I'd say that the masters are more "refined" for lack of a better word. I play a lot of customs and obs some games, and I feel like I watch a master and I can tell that everything they do is deliberate and timed specifically to take an advantage over their opponent, while diamond players may struggle to keep up with what is going on/what they are trying to execute.
And I do think the ladder is rather gradual, as I have taken a respectable percentage of my games against diamond players despite kinda sucking. I don't think that it is anywhere near diamond having a 95% win rate vs. platinum, unless we're talking top 8 diamond vs. bottom 20 platinum.
|
The difference is a lot of subtle little things. Those sensor towers you wouldn't think of placing, those smooth transitions you don't expect, smoothish macro, better multitask/crisis control.
if it helps, I went 41-20 this season to get promoted to masters, and I was a Master's player last season that went on tilt.
|
There's not a big difference between top diamond and low masters. But theres a huge difference between mid masters and top masters.
|
The difference is mainly multitasking and crispness of macro in the presence of fights/drops/scouting. Most diamond players miss workers at many points in a game, queue units when they shouldn't, and just in general play more sloppy when there's multitasking to be done.
|
there's a huge difference between low masters and high masters. Low masters is pretty much in the same range of skill compared to a diamond players imo.
|
On April 26 2011 08:25 Mailing wrote:
Time laddering.
A lot of top masters/grandmasters simply ladder grind thousands of games over time, but they are not necessarily better than everyone else. Same applies to an extent in diamond masters. Some people just don't ladder enough to get the promotion to masters/points needed to advance.
Wrong. It's about the MMR, not points. You can ladder 20 games a day if you want, but if you can't consistently beat other players with high MMR, you're not getting out of diamond.
On April 26 2011 13:31 nitdkim wrote:
there's a huge difference between low masters and high masters. Low masters is pretty much in the same range of skill compared to a diamond players imo.
Points don't really mean much. It just shows how much you ladder.
|
TBH, I'm a diamond player and I know what I need to work on, macro and decision making, but 8/10 its my decision making that costs me games.
|
On April 26 2011 09:22 clusen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 08:50 kaisr wrote:
nope, if you are good enough you can definitely get into masters in <20 games. If you are bad enough, you can be bronze with 10000 games.
there is obviously overlap between top diamond and bottom masters, its just a continuum, and everyone is different so you can't just point to one aspect of the game and say something like masters players have better macro or better micro or whatever. Is it possible in under 20 games? Took me 44 on a new account TT Was high diamond the season before tho, so I'm still happy. And as someone who was high diamond/is masters now I can only second your other statement: it's not just one single thing, I personally just focussed on improving my mechanics, which does not mean that improved mechanics get you into masters, it was just what I had to improve because my mechanics were really bad imo.
Yeah I played a Grandmasters from SEA and he was on a blitz to make GM here and I checked his profile, he made top masters in like 25 or so games I believe. Just rolled everyone he played.
Diamond is really big. Low diamond players get stomped on by high diamond players, who are even with a lot of masters players. So it all depends where in Diamond/masters you are.
|
On April 26 2011 08:30 awu25 wrote:
I would say their general decision making is way better than diamond players
I have to agree with this.
There are multiple ways to improve your decision making : be it experience (playing) or analyzing (streams/leagues). Personally, I think both are good and to a certain extent, necessary.
I got into masters with a relative low win count (32 with Random), but what I can say, is that I watched a lot of GSL (builds!) and used to play Random in late beta, the later which definitely helped me with timings.
|
Difference? Masters players are much more rude, less talkative and most likely haters.
In terms of skill? Consistency and having a decent decision making.
|
I believe most masters players just play more...and have been since the beta. They are better at everything because they have played so much more then the average player and are on teamliquid finding new strategies and constantly wanting to get better, it's the same as anything...practice makes perfect right? So every game is a test of your knowledge and execution and the better you are the higher grade mmr you get. If your an S class student then you play in Gsl, masters isn't even A class.
|
Yes, as you said, the difference is stable macro play, and some "mastered" mechanics, be certain of what course of action to take aganist every (or almost every) threat.
Once you reach that level of mechanics and macro, you eventually get promoted.
|
I was high diamond last season, mid masters now as protoss. I think a big difference is crisp timings.. especially in PvP. For example, if I'm going korean 4 gate and I get a 10 gate, 14 cyber and my opponent doesn't have good timings and goes 13 gate 18 cyber, they pretty much auto lose. This is a big thing that contributed to me getting promoted.
Masters zergs tend to have newer play styles. Diamond zergs often go roach / hydra / corruptor bceause it's easy to do, but Master zergs will do stuff like infestor / ultra/ ling / bane or roach ling infestor baneling. Crazy stuff like that that require a BIT more micro to pull off but overall a lot better.
Awareness. If i try to go speshul tactics (3 gate expo into carrier) they will sniff it out and attack at a correct time. If I try to tech, upgrade, and expand, a masters terran will see it and be hyper aggresive.
3rd base timing. I'm finding master terrans love to take a quick third base, which I think is really smart because as terran in TvP you should be up 1 base so u can mass your cheap units more effectively. Diamond terran will sit on the same bases as me, lose to my colossus / ht army and complain at the end of the game about protoss.
And finally multi tasking.. I've had master zergs hit my 3rd on metal with 3/4 of his army, then doom drop my main with the other 1/4. If i send to much to my main to deal w/ it, i will lose my 3rd.. which is pretty much game if the zerg is on 4 base by then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
