EPTPublic Profile for Licmyobelisk
General Profile:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Licmyobelisk's Public Profile:
On January 06 2011 19:15 Liquid`Drone wrote:
you are the wall..
let's look at it this way, as I can clearly see that you're disheartened by this thread
you're at 400 1v1 games now
can you be at 600 in 5 days? 800 in 10 days? 1600 in 1 month? that's the kind of dedication you will need; 40 games every single day. on top of those 40 games per day, you need some degree of natural ability or understanding. (if you were watching GSL now, you'd see one of the players say that he practices for 10 hours per day. this is the norm, nothing unique about it. ) considering that lots of players practice that much; what separates them? natural ability/rts experience.. I've only played about 400 1v1 games in sc2 - I'm 3000 diamond. this is because 14-12 years ago, I was playing warcraft 2. before that I played dune 2 and warcraft 1. after that, from 1998 until 2010, I played brood war. 15 years of rts experience isn't something you're going to overcome easily..
basically, I think being a successful progamer will be impossible for you to achieve during the next two years. if you play 10 hours per day for the next two years, you might be getting somewhere, but do you really think this is easier than going to school? it's way, way harder. try playing 10 hours per day for the next two weeks, see if you're able to do it. (I mean constantly gaming 1v1- not sitting in front of your computer for 10 hours and playing 1 game every hour.) if you're not able to do that for two weeks (and frankly, I think you won't be - we're talking at least 5-600 games in 2 weeks here), then you certainly cannot do it for 2 years.
you are the wall..
let's look at it this way, as I can clearly see that you're disheartened by this thread
you're at 400 1v1 games now
can you be at 600 in 5 days? 800 in 10 days? 1600 in 1 month? that's the kind of dedication you will need; 40 games every single day. on top of those 40 games per day, you need some degree of natural ability or understanding. (if you were watching GSL now, you'd see one of the players say that he practices for 10 hours per day. this is the norm, nothing unique about it. ) considering that lots of players practice that much; what separates them? natural ability/rts experience.. I've only played about 400 1v1 games in sc2 - I'm 3000 diamond. this is because 14-12 years ago, I was playing warcraft 2. before that I played dune 2 and warcraft 1. after that, from 1998 until 2010, I played brood war. 15 years of rts experience isn't something you're going to overcome easily..
basically, I think being a successful progamer will be impossible for you to achieve during the next two years. if you play 10 hours per day for the next two years, you might be getting somewhere, but do you really think this is easier than going to school? it's way, way harder. try playing 10 hours per day for the next two weeks, see if you're able to do it. (I mean constantly gaming 1v1- not sitting in front of your computer for 10 hours and playing 1 game every hour.) if you're not able to do that for two weeks (and frankly, I think you won't be - we're talking at least 5-600 games in 2 weeks here), then you certainly cannot do it for 2 years.
On January 06 2011 20:01 Liquid`Drone wrote:
additionally, you seemed a little confused about the term "natural ability" before, or "talent". what is meant by natural ability is essentially a combination of three or so terms ;
dedication
intelligence
speed
dedication refers to your ability to practice sufficiently. this is often omitted or disregarded when people talk about talent or natural ability as people essentially consider practicing like a madman the opposite of being talented - but not everyone is capable of practicing like a madman. nonetheless, it's probably the most important skillset you can have to become good.
intelligence, in a game like sc2, deals with two aspects; how quickly you grasp the various concepts of the game, and how your decisionmaking is. to some degree intelligence and experience are very similar - in sc2 you will normally have encountered anything you see on a multitude of occasions and thus you can make decisions based on previous encounters rather than through quick thinking, but being intelligent may enable you to counter something you haven't seen before, or to come up with a counter faster, or to come up with new strategies. in a game like sc2, being highly intelligent is not really that important to become good because there are so many tools around to help you improve if you just put enough time in, but imagine if there were no vods, no daily day9, no replays and no strategy guides, and people individually had to understand the various concepts of the game. it'd be the most important trait to have. nonetheless, at the highest level, everyone is pretty smart or smarter than pretty smart.
speed; to perform every action required for optimal play, you gotta be fast. no way around it.. while you do become faster through playing, some people have a hard time ever getting above 150 apm no matter how hard they try(not how hard they spam), while others find 250 relaxing.
additionally, you seemed a little confused about the term "natural ability" before, or "talent". what is meant by natural ability is essentially a combination of three or so terms ;
dedication
intelligence
speed
dedication refers to your ability to practice sufficiently. this is often omitted or disregarded when people talk about talent or natural ability as people essentially consider practicing like a madman the opposite of being talented - but not everyone is capable of practicing like a madman. nonetheless, it's probably the most important skillset you can have to become good.
intelligence, in a game like sc2, deals with two aspects; how quickly you grasp the various concepts of the game, and how your decisionmaking is. to some degree intelligence and experience are very similar - in sc2 you will normally have encountered anything you see on a multitude of occasions and thus you can make decisions based on previous encounters rather than through quick thinking, but being intelligent may enable you to counter something you haven't seen before, or to come up with a counter faster, or to come up with new strategies. in a game like sc2, being highly intelligent is not really that important to become good because there are so many tools around to help you improve if you just put enough time in, but imagine if there were no vods, no daily day9, no replays and no strategy guides, and people individually had to understand the various concepts of the game. it'd be the most important trait to have. nonetheless, at the highest level, everyone is pretty smart or smarter than pretty smart.
speed; to perform every action required for optimal play, you gotta be fast. no way around it.. while you do become faster through playing, some people have a hard time ever getting above 150 apm no matter how hard they try(not how hard they spam), while others find 250 relaxing.
On May 10 2010 09:55 TLOBrian wrote:
List that makes a player BM.
1.Generally a sore loser.
2.Blames unit imbalances majority of losses.
3.Constantly demeans other players in and out of game.
4.Does not GG.
5.Does not return Good Luck, Have Fun, or demeans/insults a player when he offers it.
6.Complains about every little thing that goes wrong.
I don't think I've ever wished my opponent good luck prior to a game. When I play, I play to win. I hope every opponent I ever have is cursed with fucking terrible luck. I hope they're stuck playing underneath a stepladder with a black cat in attendance after breaking a mirror!
Also, I only say gg when I feel like I truly, thoroughly got my ass kicked by a player who is my superior. But that's never actually happened.
Love,
DJEtterStyle
P.S. Fuck you.
Last
List that makes a player BM.
1.Generally a sore loser.
2.Blames unit imbalances majority of losses.
3.Constantly demeans other players in and out of game.
4.Does not GG.
5.Does not return Good Luck, Have Fun, or demeans/insults a player when he offers it.
6.Complains about every little thing that goes wrong.
I don't think I've ever wished my opponent good luck prior to a game. When I play, I play to win. I hope every opponent I ever have is cursed with fucking terrible luck. I hope they're stuck playing underneath a stepladder with a black cat in attendance after breaking a mirror!
Also, I only say gg when I feel like I truly, thoroughly got my ass kicked by a player who is my superior. But that's never actually happened.
Love,
DJEtterStyle
P.S. Fuck you.
Last
On August 08 2010 21:13 Rekrul wrote:
btw, funny story
artosis had been playing sc2 beta hardcore for weeks on end, grrr had only a few games under his belt
grrr had a party at his house w/ tasteless and artosis and some peeps
grrr played a game of sc2 vs artosis and easily raped him
artosis not knowing grrr so well, instead of nerd raging (cuz he too scared to do it in that kinda situation especially cuz it's IRL) just quietly left the party w/out saying anything
btw, funny story
artosis had been playing sc2 beta hardcore for weeks on end, grrr had only a few games under his belt
grrr had a party at his house w/ tasteless and artosis and some peeps
grrr played a game of sc2 vs artosis and easily raped him
artosis not knowing grrr so well, instead of nerd raging (cuz he too scared to do it in that kinda situation especially cuz it's IRL) just quietly left the party w/out saying anything
Most top players don't compete on the ladder. They use it for practice.
If my opponent is doing X, and I know of counter Y, and I'm curious if this other idea Z would also work but I'm not sure, then I can either practice another iteration of Y or I can try out Z and see what happens. Some players prefer to practice Y over and over, others prefer to keep trying out those Z's, and have Y to fall back on for important matches.
Trying out Z = lots of losses vs inferior players until you figure out how to do it well (if it even works).
If you had some really good player play 30 games on NA where they try as hard as they can to win them all, you can expect 75%+ win percentages.
If my opponent is doing X, and I know of counter Y, and I'm curious if this other idea Z would also work but I'm not sure, then I can either practice another iteration of Y or I can try out Z and see what happens. Some players prefer to practice Y over and over, others prefer to keep trying out those Z's, and have Y to fall back on for important matches.
Trying out Z = lots of losses vs inferior players until you figure out how to do it well (if it even works).
If you had some really good player play 30 games on NA where they try as hard as they can to win them all, you can expect 75%+ win percentages.
