|
Question: How can I get better at 1v1 without getting multiple practice partners, paying for professional help, reading guides, and watching replays?
Answer: Mix your 1v1 laddering with 2v2RT laddering.
What?! Heresy many of you may cry. 2v2 Random has been for a long time considered to be under 1v1 in terms of skill. Ignore any discussion of skills of 2v2 players compared to 1v1 players for this discussion.
So how do you use 2v2 to improve your 1v1 game? For starters, you improve your micro. Play SC will improve your SC micro. This one is fairly obvious. If you want to improve your micro before laddering 1v1 again, 2v2RT is an easy option.
But the benefits don't end there. 2v2 is a great way to practice your 1v1 build. For example, lets say you're a P player trying to get a solid breadth of builds to use in 1v1. Let's say you want to add a quick DT rush into your arsenal but aren't comfortable with the timings and the mechanics of the build. 2v2 is the perfect place to practice your timings and usage of the DT build.
Let's say this P player in question wants to switch races to T. A good way to learn the hotkeys, timings, and mechanics is to play in a lower stress environment. I played T until I wanted to switch to Z. 1v1 is a rough way to learn the ropes but in 2v2 it was a lot easier for me to learn about droning and all the hotkeys.
The absolute biggest benefit of 2v2RT for improving your 1v1 game in my opinion is how you can learn how your build works in very uncomfortable and strange situations.
For example lets say this P player is really trying to refine his 4 warpgate push (Funny, I know, like you need to practice a 4wg build). He moves out with his proxy and a nice set of sentries, zealots and stalkers against his Z and T opponents. All the sudden he is accosted by a MM force with Ling support! In a normal 1v1 game, that is a composition that would simply be impossible, but in 2v2, anything is possible. The P player then needs to think, how do I use my FFs? Isolate the lings from the MM so I can deal with them before the MM? Cut the whole army in half to just try to deal with half of each? FF them off and run like hell? Then the choices have to be made of what unit should attack what unit. It makes sense in a 1v1, but in a 2v2 with weird unit compositions you have to think a lot more and be far more tactical with your units in order to prosper.
Coming back to our P player, regardless of what he does, he becomes a better player. Next time he comes across an MM force in 1v1 with his gateway army he'll have a much better understanding, after all there are no lings to think about this time! Therefor exposing your 1v1 builds to the crazy world of 2v2RT makes your flex your strategic (as well as micro) muscles and think in new and exciting ways.
Coming to the end of this wall of text are a few other benefits of 2v2. When 1v1 gets frustrating, 2v2 is a good way to blow off steam and do something different. Its also a good way to get exposure to the races you don't always play.
Don't forget that the sweetest portraits are for team league games only!
About me: My character names is EpSiLoN and I'm a 2000pt 1v1 Zerg and a 1900pt 2v2 Random player.
|
I say 4v4 random games are the best training ground. Why? Because you can fast expand with every race 95% safely on 15 supply and take your third and fourth very fast. If you can keep your money low on 4 bases and are constantly making workers, you don't have to think about your macro in your 1v1 matches as much and are able to spend more time doing micro intensive stuff. For me it really helped and I'm very confident in 1v1 now to go for 3+ bases late game as terran, although all people say terran sucks late game. Really, extremely refined build orders don't matter at all if you are laddering, at least if you are not top 50 in your region. A basic, solid opening is fine for 2,3k+, even if there are mistakes in it, as long as you are confident in your macro and micro skills.
edit:
And I love teamgames, but the one thing I wouldn't try to learn from teamgames are timings and build orders. Really, teamgames screw up all your timings, you can't use the same timings as in 1v1  They just don't work there, because you get 9-pooled 80% of the time and there is a general theme of aggressiveness.
|
Timings, not so much, build orders, I agree.
I do the same thing, sometimes 3v3, sometimes 4v4 (So I can isolate a player and test a harass for example). It's how I perfected my hellion harassment (When I had two hellions with over 50 kills between them, I transferred it to 1v1) It's how I learned banshee micro. In short, I agree.
I also use some of these games to practice my macro, avoid getting supply blocked, etc.
|
The best way to get good at 1v1 is to pick a goal, work on it until you achieve it, repeat.
|
I agree to a certain degree. This will help your mechanics, however at a certain point you will hit a point where your mechanics are winning you all of your games- but you have no idea why. Basically, you do X build order, build a bunch of units and kill your opponent in whatever manner. Then you will reach a point, probably around "mid-diamond" (~1500 now a days) where this will no longer be suffiecent to win.
At this level you will realize that you have no idea what the hell you are doing. That is the point in which you watch replays, and analyze games/strategies. This is one way of getting good at the game, get solid mechanics, then work on understanding later. So yes, this is a way of getting to mid-diamond- maybe not the best way, but a perfectly fine way. However, from that point onwards you need to actually learn about the game.
|
To a certain point, yes, playing a team evnironment can be less stressful and allow you to work on mechanics.
I would further suggest you do it with a practice partner. Who plays the race of your weakest MU. You can gleen some, not much, but some timing information from watching replays of your team games.
Doing RT 2v2 may be a blow to your ego, as your random team member may either be bad or accost your play.
|
A notebook which you write into after every game/session is greater then anything else.
2v2 just seems like a massive time sink.
|
I must dissent- you will not learn correct timings in 2v2 because of the greater variety of openings afforded 2 players.
Not to bash team games, as they are a lot of fun!
|
Basically the only information people are going to get out of this, is if you want to get better at SC2, play more SC2. Your better off practicing against a computer than trying to learn something productive in 4v4 other than how to get tier1 rushed 90% of the games.
I'm glad you covered that topic for us GlocKoma
|
On November 11 2010 04:18 Bommes wrote:I say 4v4 random games are the best training ground. Why? Because you can fast expand with every race 95% safely on 15 supply and take your third and fourth very fast. If you can keep your money low on 4 bases and are constantly making workers, you don't have to think about your macro in your 1v1 matches as much and are able to spend more time doing micro intensive stuff. For me it really helped and I'm very confident in 1v1 now to go for 3+ bases late game as terran, although all people say terran sucks late game. Really, extremely refined build orders don't matter at all if you are laddering, at least if you are not top 50 in your region. A basic, solid opening is fine for 2,3k+, even if there are mistakes in it, as long as you are confident in your macro and micro skills. edit: And I love teamgames, but the one thing I wouldn't try to learn from teamgames are timings and build orders. Really, teamgames screw up all your timings, you can't use the same timings as in 1v1 They just don't work there, because you get 9-pooled 80% of the time and there is a general theme of aggressiveness.
I support this also. After losing 9(!) games in a row, I played a ton of 4v4 games. It helped me learn how to manage economy and unit production much better. 4v4 is going to either be a coordinated cheese or a long macro game--so, in either case, you get a less stressful environment to learn the fundamentals of the game.
|
In general, playing the game more will make you better.
Playing team games(as long as you don't play the maps with shared bases), You definitely won't get any good timing pushes. It keeps(at least me) sharp and vigilante, because I have to keep watch of multiple positions, bases, armies, possible expos, drops, etc. At the same time it lets me engage what typically are numerically superior forces(be it 2 armies at once, or 1 army then the other appears shortly after). Pretty much helped me up my multitaslking, APMs and positioning
But you won't have any timings. But you can learn some general timings.
|
The easiest way to improve is to learn there is no easy way to improve. I don't understand the concept of "how little work can I put in to be good?".
|
Team Games are a great way of testing build orders / openers and how they work against insane pressure, hard tech or a combination of both.
|
On November 11 2010 05:02 Parra wrote:
Basically the only information people are going to get out of this, is if you want to get better at SC2, play more SC2. Your better off practicing against a computer than trying to learn something productive in 4v4 other than how to get tier1 rushed 90% of the games.
I'm glad you covered that topic for us GlocKoma
Sweet troll dude. You're so insightful with your comments! Thank you.
Also if you learn to read the OP, I said 2v2, not 4v4. If you 2v2 at a decently high level you get a lot less T1 rushing than you do in low-level 4v4? Thanks again!
|
if you want to get better at 1v1, look at what good 1v1 players do. 2v2? no. 4v4? no. lots of 1v1? yesss. oh and why can't you practice BO's and micro in 1v1 exactly? if you are afraid to experiment on ladder because you don't want to lose a few points, play custom games. there is a reason that people who play a ton of 2v2 are usually bad at 1v1, completely different game.
|
Playing 2v2 RT is sometimes frustrating enough that I want to just go back to laddering 1v1 and smash people without getting cussed at by a gold ally who doesn't understand that he needs to expand before the 25 minute mark. I like the OPs point though, and it addresses a problem I've noticed as a low diamond looking to improve 1v1. Namely, while you may need to improve all sorts of areas of your gameplay, practicing one thing doesn't necessarily help much. You can lose 1v1s for so many reasons: scouting, macro, micro, timing attacks, gimmicky tactics (aka "cheese"). There's a lot of stuff to work on if you're laddering for practice, but it feels like guys laddering for points are hammering one build into the ground sometimes. Sometimes you catch it and counter, other times you just go, "well, guess I needed an army before then..." Focused practice doesn't always pay off in the short term, and sometimes feels counterproductive. Greedy macro build vs early harvester-cutting all in?
A solution? Pick an arena that favors the specific area you'd like to work on. 2v2 RT is early game in my experience. "How quickly can we get 2 decent armies to the far watchtower?" I also like it for early->mid transitions. "OK, I 10-pooled, did some damage, but now need to go beyond zerglings off 1 hatch." FFA is a nice break, and a good spot to work on macro and creep spread. Controlling space and having monster production can really pay off. I like it for tech switches too: with players of all levels competing, you'll get to look at some crazy armies and go, "OK, how do I counter this efficiently?"
Once your mechanics are solid, I think areas other than 1v1 start to lose their utility as practice tools. Eventually you need the practice with *everything*, running though your checklist, and actually changing tactics and strategy in-game. Until then though, there's something to be said for playing other formats.
|
Whilst I certainly don't think 2v2's are the easiest way to improve your 1v1 game, I do think they can help quite significantly. First of all, they keep the game fresh, potentially re-igniting a waning interest in the game. They can offer new perspectives and unusual situations which you would find less commonly if you only played 1v1's. This might in turn inspire new builds or approaches. Anything that mixes things up the game can only be a good thing. How can it be bad?
Whilst I don't think it's the easiest or best way to improve your 1v1 game, I think the OP still has a pretty good point to make, and it's something that people might forget.
|
The easiest way to improve your 1v1 game, is to play 1v1.
|
having a plan helps, depending on matchups, maps, and spawn position
|
every team game i play i get cheesed/all-in timing pushed so i dont find it to be a very good way to learn anything :\
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
