| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
ManOfScience
United States12 Posts
On April 03 2011 02:32 zatic wrote: 9 Start theorycrafting and discussing changes to the game I presume the difference between experimental strategy and theorycrafting here would be the inclusion of replays of the strategy, rather than empty discussion without any examples of its application? | ||
|
Punic
United States152 Posts
Thank you for your hard work, pun | ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
On April 04 2011 10:58 ManOfScience wrote: I presume the difference between experimental strategy and theorycrafting here would be the inclusion of replays of the strategy, rather than empty discussion without any examples of its application? Ya, generally if you have replays to back up what you are talking about you should be safe. | ||
|
N3rV[Green]
United States1935 Posts
Those alone will make a significant improvement in the post quality here. So many people just barge in with their first line as "well I didn't watch the replay but....." in a thread where the OP has clearly outlined that watching the replay before posting is critical to your understanding. Be very, very drunk my friend. The banlist will be a good read. | ||
|
ZeroTalent
United States297 Posts
On April 03 2011 08:25 Aequos wrote: Out of curiosity, what determines the quality of the advice given in borderline cases? For example, if someone had suggested 1 gate FE in PvT back at the release of SC2, people would have called him crazy, and his advice would have seemed useless. However, now it's a build that at least is available as an option in PvT as it can hold off most bio plays. Likewise, people wouldn't have dared face a Zerg in a macro game back in the early days following the release, but now it is the standard for playing PvZ. Is the usefulness of the advice determined only by the current available strategies? This sort of falls under point [9] as well, as it could relate to theorycrafting. I agree with a lot of this; coming up with good strategies involves lots of stumbling in the dark. I look forward to digging up threads closed by overeager mods who know The Right Way To Play SC2 only to find that two months later the "wrong" advice turns out to be genius. EDIT: Okay, looking at the OP on something bigger than the phone it sounds like anyone who can back up what they have to say is probably in the clear. Still will be on the hunt for geniuses unappreciated in their time, mostly for fun though. Someone suggested making tanks in TvP? Hahah, what a n00b, P can just make immortals & chargelots and win! Banned! oh wait Jinro beat oGsMc with mech play? Uhhh ... these are not the droids you're looking for. Move along ... Drinking Gatorade before you go the bed is a great way to avoid a hangover. That's all I've got on that subject. | ||
|
Guppers
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
BoneGrinder
United States40 Posts
| ||
|
Comeh
United States18919 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Chill/theproblemwiththestratforum.jpg) Good luck. | ||
|
Teton
France1656 Posts
| ||
|
gnurk
Norway50 Posts
| ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10382 Posts
| ||
|
cha0
Canada518 Posts
On April 04 2011 14:23 Guppers wrote: what if I don't have something strategically relevant to add to a post but it's REALLY funny and/or witty, I mean involuntary knee slapping funny. Please save it for SC2 General or Blogs. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On April 04 2011 05:17 Deja Thoris wrote: I'm a lower level player (gold) and I'd love to see strats aimed towards lower levels too. I know the majority are aimed at high level and I'd love to see that change a bit. This is something I was on the fence about for a while: is there really such a thing as a 'high level' or 'low level' strategy? Some people say scouting and timings won't work against an opponent who isn't playing at masters level; other people say that won't matter because if a strategy can beat masters level play it will beat a more imperfectly executed build in silver/gold. Then the first people say 'Sure, it'll win if you have masters-level execution yourself, but if you don't (and you don't, because you're in silver/gold), it might instead lead to a loss. To which the reply is "Then you should be working on your execution, so all is well with the world." I'm now leaning towards the 'stick to top strategies and just work on execution' camp myself, just because it removes variables. If I lose doing something that works in Master league, at least I know I can watch the replay and see what I did to screw it up. EDIT: Case in point, I once created a thread discussing the potential merits of a ramp hatch on Jungle Basin. The problem was, although I could make some statements about economy and larvae compared to a 14 hatch, and some substantial timing differences in terms of defending the ramp with spinecrawlers, my lack of experience meant I could only make the most tentative, limited statements about the build's overall utility. I have to accept that if I want to make meaningful contributions I need to put in the time and effort to improve first. | ||
|
gnurk
Norway50 Posts
| ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On April 04 2011 19:51 gnurk wrote: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=208938 Hehe - yeah; I thought that was a pretty low-hanging fruit too  "well , solution is simple , make Vikings just "a little" more than rubbish vs Mutalisks" "A reasonable buff to turrets/thors or a valkyrish unit could do the trick..." "Hey, does anyone else hear that? A kind of roaring, whistling sensation like something approaching very fast; very, very fast. I wonder if it will be friends with me?" | ||
|
ZeroTalent
United States297 Posts
On April 04 2011 18:11 Umpteen wrote: This is something I was on the fence about for a while: is there really such a thing as a 'high level' or 'low level' strategy? Speaking as someone who had a 30% win rate in bronze for his first 50 games and is now high platinum with a 65% win rate over my last 50 games, you have to learn how to deal with a different set of things in at the low levels. You see more cheese and more turtling; usually the turtlers are trying to tech to mass BCs/Void Rays or mothership/colossus/carriers or whatnot. "Just macro a giant bioball/mass stalkers/whatever" isn't enough; you have to learn a thing or two about unit composition and army control to win these games in less than 45 minutes. | ||
|
Alejandrisha
United States6566 Posts
| ||
|
Sworn
Canada920 Posts
| ||
|
Dismantlethethroat
114 Posts
| ||
|
supersoft
Germany3729 Posts
On April 05 2011 02:21 Dismantlethethroat wrote: So you want 1 person to write a 10 page essay on how to counter mech play from T as Z? If everyone posts small words of advice, it will be better than 20 guys each posting a page long essay. No. Because if 100 idiots post the same thing over and over that come to their minds first. It's never as good as if someone takes some time and posts a well thought out statement with examples and explanations. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games summit1g11314 Liquid`RaSZi4302 JimRising  818PiGStarcraft565 Day[9].tv381 C9.Mang0341 Maynarde169 Livibee111 Mew2King32 amsayoshi27 |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs EffOrt
OSC
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
GSL
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
