|
Another good post from you Cecil. As a recently promoted Gold Player, I have actually found this sort of advice and focus to be quite useful. Though yes it is rather vague and can be frustrating, I basically use it as a priority list (something Day9 has mentioned in several dailies). I keep reinforcing the idea that SCV production is my #1 Priority, then #2 is Supply, #3 Production etc.
This might not be all that useful still, but what you can then do is find a specific goal (watch a VOD of the same build etc and make marks for certain times) then compare your progress to that goal. Oh they had max supply and 70 workers by X:XX time? I had only 50 workers and 170 supply or w/e by that time. Then you can find the times in the build that you stopped producing, make a note of it, and hopefully next time you'll remember. Also hearing this from an experienced player and coach like Cecil reinforces the focus and gives me a drive that I frequently lose.
I actually got to Gold pretty much purely on macro (and not even that great macro either). I am only now realizing that sending max MMM (with mainly marines) doesn't really work against a Protoss Deathball (what are vikings? :o). The reason I'm just now realizing that is that I usually had a decent lead over my opponents, and with a few drops they would fall apart. So why did I go MMM even though I knew how bad it was against the composition? Because I was comfortable macroing with it, I knew timing for setting down more Rax and didn't have to think about it. I'm having to adjust that a bit now, but the macro has still allowed me to win several games I shouldn't have. Just by focusing on "probes and pylons." Anyhow, thanks for the post.
TL;DR: Yes "Probes and Pylons" seems vague, but when applied intelligently it can be quite useful.
|
For many people, macro is one of those things that falls under the Dunning-Kruger effect. The problem is making people aware of how important macro is and then giving them the proper training and exercises so that they can measure their progress. Usually the people that are resistant to that kind of advice don't know how a game feels when you do have good macro or they don't know how to concretely improve that aspect of their play.
|
I totally agree with OP, solid macro (worker and when to add building to effectively spend money) is what lay good ground works for better play. You ask what should you make? ==> You will learn how to counter what with what through trail and error, and experiences. Replays and people helping you. Therefore make worker and spend your money, seriously.
|
On April 06 2012 11:16 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I hate this form of advice. In theory, it sounds good, because "Macro is the largest issue". But it's the worst form of teaching imaginable, because you're instilling the worst habits into lower league players.
Lower league players do not have a problem macroing. Now, I know a ton of people are going to jump down my throat and tell me about the bronze players who can't get above 12 workers and still bank thousands of resources. But that's because they completely ignore the root of the problem, and jump straight to the "Probes and Pylons".
The problem is not Macro. It's Multitasking. It's not that lower league players are bad at Macro, it's that as you increase the tasks they perform, the more actions and conscious decisions that are taken away from Macro.
Telling players to focus on "Probes and Pylons" only exasperates the problem, because you're telling them to focus, rather than improving their ability to spread out actions.
This is like saying practicing technique on a musical instrument is bad because it inhibits your ability to apply your technique whilst also thinking about staying in tune, staying in time, having musicality, playing the right notes and rhythm, etc. And yet, all around the world, it is widely considered to be extremely important to practice your technique individually.
The idea is to commit one action to muscle memory so that when you go to apply that action in a grander scheme your brain and muscles are so coordinated they do it without thinking, automatically. Piano players learn pieces one hand at a time and then stick them together. Drummers learn one rhythm at a time and stick them together. This is the best way to learn, and it applies to Starcraft as well.
|
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games.
|
On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games.
I don't believe I was saying you'd win every match. The point was that the most important things are overlooked.
|
On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games.
the difference being that if you don't have mechanics you won't have units even if you watch the minimap and hold watchtowers.
|
On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games.
These sorts of things, unit positioning and engagements, and basic micro, are extremely important, no doubt. You don't want to walk your marine army into banelings for example, but the threat of doing this shouldn't stop you from developing and using your economy, which is an ability that really separates the players across the leagues, and what I think is the point of the article.
|
On April 06 2012 11:16 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I hate this form of advice. In theory, it sounds good, because "Macro is the largest issue". But it's the worst form of teaching imaginable, because you're instilling the worst habits into lower league players.
Lower league players do not have a problem macroing. Now, I know a ton of people are going to jump down my throat and tell me about the bronze players who can't get above 12 workers and still bank thousands of resources. But that's because they completely ignore the root of the problem, and jump straight to the "Probes and Pylons".
The problem is not Macro. It's Multitasking. It's not that lower league players are bad at Macro, it's that as you increase the tasks they perform, the more actions and conscious decisions that are taken away from Macro.
Telling players to focus on "Probes and Pylons" only exasperates the problem, because you're telling them to focus, rather than improving their ability to spread out actions.
Wait... Wait.... Your seriously trying to argue that people in lower leagues don't have problems with macroing? Are you kidding? Your correct in that they ALSO lack multitasking. But you are sooo wrong about telling them not to focus on this. Rather it is the first and foremost thing they SHOULD worry about. And it in itself IMPLIES multitasking. If you are constantly building workers, dont get supply blocked, and are constantly producing. Guess what. Your multitasking isn't lacking either. Your basically telling the OP you think his advice is bad because it doesn't help low level players learn to multitask. And that's totally incorrect. It 100% DOES help them multitask. As the OP isn't suggesting "only build workers and don't get supply blocked and do nothing else." the OP is suggesting that above all else this is the problem is lower leagues and that you need to make sure you do those things if you want to get better. Multitasking comes along with it, I don't know how you can't see that.
|
proof in concept has already been done with mass queens / scvs etc
|
What about multitasking; specifically for Protoss, dealing with mutalisks and drops? (I'm not saying that macro isn't an issue, but about how much effort should be put towards learning to respond to harass (micro multitasking) as well?)
|
Canada13386 Posts
On April 06 2012 12:45 Shadowforce17 wrote:
What about multitasking; specifically for Protoss, dealing with mutalisks and drops? (I'm not saying that macro isn't an issue, but how much effort be put towards learning to respond to harass (micro multitasking) as well?)
In Bronze, silver and gold, a hell of a lot less than making probes and pylons. If you have way more economy than him, then losing 10 probes while you warp in 10 stalkers to deal with 8 mutas means you can still win in the long run 
Make some cannons, leave a couple stalkers behind you should be able to roll the opponent over with a better economy so long as they don't get 60 mutalisks and base trade 
|
On April 06 2012 12:45 Shadowforce17 wrote:
What about multitasking; specifically for Protoss, dealing with mutalisks and drops? (I'm not saying that macro isn't an issue, but about how much effort should be put towards learning to respond to harass (micro multitasking) as well?)
Well you definitely need to be able to deal with these things just like any other scenario. You're not really only making probes and pylons, that's just the most important thing to figure out first. So once you figure out your probes and pylons, then you can figure out how to get your Stalkers in the right spot to fight Mutas.
|
Nice stuff!
I think the problem, is a lot of people don't realize their macro flaws. A lot of people will play 'macro oriented' defensive style, like expand a lot, find themselves always defending timings (usually zerg players), so they just automatically assume they have good macro.
People just never have a critical eye to their own macro. I'm a mid-masters Zerg, and I know I macro 'better' than most people I play on ladder, through analyzing the games. But I never really noticed that MY macro was complete shit. It took playing with some GMs that they said "holy shit you have the worst macro ever, you just never make workers". I was like lolwut? I never get supply blocked. But even though I never get supply blocked, in the first 8 minutes, I CONSTANTLY have idle larva. You should never have idle larva ever in the early game. They should be drones (or units) immediately. But when watching my replays, I didn't know I had idle larva (this is also in part due to pre-patch, larva wasn't displayed on units tab).
Benchmarking is also really useful. I used to always say "toss is bullshit, they just get so many stalkers and just own you no matter what, nothing you can do, toss just makes more stalkers". But then I realized I was 20 supply down than most pros at the 8:00 mark, and that I basically went all-in, without ever attacking. I was just sac'cing my econ that much. I had lost the game irreparably by the 8:00 mark, that no matter what, there was no way for me to win. So when toss arrived with 30 stalkers at 12:00, I was always like "wtf there is no way I can have enough units to fight that, so imba", instead of "shit, I macro'd horribly in the first 8 minutes of the game and now toss can build up a huge army that I can't trade with, and eventually it way too big to deal with and I die".
I'm a mid-masters zerg who macro's 'fairly well' for my level. But I didn't realize that I just constantly fucking suck at macro. So yea, if you are below masters, then your macro is going to be atrocious. The key is realizing what you are fucking up. A lot of lower level players, will, say, never get supply blocked - but that's because they are making 5 overlords at 50 supply. That's just as bad as getting supply blocked. I think it's pretty consistent that anyone in platinum, or below, and the overwhelming majority of diamond players, get supply blocked every single time after 9 supply.
|
On April 06 2012 11:20 memcpy wrote:
But what if the problem really is that they are trying to multitask rather than focus on macro? I bet I could get above 50% winrate by sitting on 1 base solely focusing on unit production and nothing else. The only thing i would pay attention to is the game timer for when to move out and of course moving units in my base to defend attacks. No multitasking required.
On April 06 2012 11:24 Badfatpanda wrote:This is great advice, because truly this is the only thing you should be focusing on in your play, warp in units in 1 space, rally to 1 space, check it every so often and a move. You'll win games, I'm being 100% serious. When I was playing zerg on a bronze friends account I got promoted to gold before I stopped winning games by just making drones spores and spines (and a queen per hatch, no more  , and no attacking untis, AT ALL) Seriously, if you get these mechanics down, you win games! Hope this helps
And these responses are basically proof in concept of what I was saying. You're teaching players to stare at their base, build up an army, and A-move at the opponent. Does it win you games? Of course it does, because Bronze to Gold, and even Platinum, is filled with players whose standard of play is worse than you on auto-pilot. You're also still going to lose a lot of games, because a lot of stuff will throw wrenches into your stare-at-base-macro. Doesn't matter though, because you'll still move up in Leagues and ranks.
And then you reach Diamond, or maybe even plateau at Plat, and what you thought was "good macro" is essentially just doing the extreme opposite of watching your entire army the whole time. It had better results, because Macro is more important, but you still have the same terrible habits. You still can't harass effectively, because you never learned to Macro in between Micro. You never learned to control an army while constantly remaxing it.
If all you want to do is reach a half-decent League, then sure, "Probe and Pylon" away. But if you want to go higher than that, eventually you're going to have to learn good habits, and that means being able to Macro without looking at your base, putting down buildings without meticulously placing them, remembering your production timings while being distracted. And it's a lot easier to learn the good habits as a blank slate, instead of trying to rewrite the stare-at-the-base mentality.
On April 06 2012 11:54 GGPope wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 11:16 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I hate this form of advice. In theory, it sounds good, because "Macro is the largest issue". But it's the worst form of teaching imaginable, because you're instilling the worst habits into lower league players.
Lower league players do not have a problem macroing. Now, I know a ton of people are going to jump down my throat and tell me about the bronze players who can't get above 12 workers and still bank thousands of resources. But that's because they completely ignore the root of the problem, and jump straight to the "Probes and Pylons".
The problem is not Macro. It's Multitasking. It's not that lower league players are bad at Macro, it's that as you increase the tasks they perform, the more actions and conscious decisions that are taken away from Macro.
Telling players to focus on "Probes and Pylons" only exasperates the problem, because you're telling them to focus, rather than improving their ability to spread out actions. This is like saying practicing technique on a musical instrument is bad because it inhibits your ability to apply your technique whilst also thinking about staying in tune, staying in time, having musicality, playing the right notes and rhythm, etc. And yet, all around the world, it is widely considered to be extremely important to practice your technique individually. The idea is to commit one action to muscle memory so that when you go to apply that action in a grander scheme your brain and muscles are so coordinated they do it without thinking, automatically. Piano players learn pieces one hand at a time and then stick them together. Drummers learn one rhythm at a time and stick them together. This is the best way to learn, and it applies to Starcraft as well.
Terrible, terrible example. The absolute most basic level of playing an instrument is practising chords. You move out of that phase within a month or two, tops. Then you spend the rest of your time playing songs that gradually increase in difficulty, and possibly practising music theory that will give you a much better understanding of what you're playing.
To put the "Probes and Pylons" mentality into music, you're telling people "If you want to play a song, all you have to do is get your chords down pat and hit them at the right rhythm". But anyone who knows anything about music will tell you there's a lot more to playing music then just hitting the notes correctly. You'll get better than the average Joe, but that's only because the average Joe is bad.
If your goal is solely to move up leagues, or if your goal is just to plunk out a song so there are no glaring mistakes, then there is no problem foregoing everything but the absolute basics. But if you want to be more than a 50% Diamond player who macros and A-moves, or more than a musician who does more than mechanically hit the notes to a metronome, then the earlier you learn the intricacies, the less bad habits you'll have to contend with in the future.
|
i agree wholeheartedly with this post
better macro = better player
i'm a high masters na player (~1250-1350pts currently (50bp bump for the 2nd #))
i can't micro for my life yet since i push the games so long i will typically be able to overrun my opponent with more/better stuff in the end of the game
to make up for my micro deficiencies (well my blink/ff/storm/etc micro is alright it's mostly a positioning problem where i'll lose battles i should never ever lose) i just macro better just having a better income and spending it better can do wonders especially if you play a defensive/economic style like i do (<3 20+gate speedprism harass lategame when i trade armies )
|
On April 06 2012 10:24 lorkac wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 10:14 honed wrote:On April 06 2012 09:46 TheNessman wrote:
100% completely disagree and i have studied low level play for months of my life this is so silly. strongly disagreeing without explaining why doesnt really make sense He obviously disagrees with building Probes and Pylons. The real question to ask him is how he wins games on ladder with only 10 supply?
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=271453
edit: because apparently your posts need to be a fuckton long for people to give you any respect at all, i'll explain myself.
Why did this guy win so much? My guess is its because every single time the game started, HE HAD A PLAN. He had a plan and he EXECUTED IT to the best of his ability. and that ability to plan , and to think , gave him the ability to play and win starcraft. he did not build any probes or pylons. he is better than most bronze players. i would argue that trying to get "lower level players to macro better" is like teaching a person basketball by telling him to sit and look at how you're supposed to shoot, all day. Just let him shoot and once he figures out ANYTHING you can go from there.
|
On April 06 2012 12:10 CecilSunkure wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games. I don't believe I was saying you'd win every match. The point was that the most important things are overlooked.
I would argue YOU"RE The one overlooking things.
if you build 200/200 of probes and pylons, i would beat you every time.
sorry if i come off as mean i am just in a really bad mood right now and gmarshal keeps warning me and it pisses me off
everything that i have ever posted has been 100% my opinion only and i'm sorry if i'm offending anyone with what i'm saying.
i really really just don't like it when people look at low level players and go "oh just do this 1 thing and everything will be fine" NOTHING IS EVER THAT SIMPLE BTW . again, i'm sorry for yelling, i'm sorry for swearing, i'll leave. but for the record i like playing against lower level people because it is more fun sometimes.
edit: I cannot BELIEVE you are highlighted in blue --_-- i'm sorry but this thread is dumb.
|
On April 06 2012 13:45 TheNessman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 12:10 CecilSunkure wrote:On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games. I don't believe I was saying you'd win every match. The point was that the most important things are overlooked. I would argue YOU"RE The one overlooking things. if you build 200/200 of probes and pylons, i would beat you every time. sorry if i come off as mean i am just in a really bad mood right now and gmarshal keeps warning me and it pisses me off everything that i have ever posted has been 100% my opinion only and i'm sorry if i'm offending anyone with what i'm saying.
I'm sure you would beat me every time. Luckily I didn't tell anyone to only make probes and pylons till 200 supply.
|
On April 06 2012 13:47 CecilSunkure wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 13:45 TheNessman wrote:On April 06 2012 12:10 CecilSunkure wrote:On April 06 2012 12:01 UmiNotsuki wrote:
I find myself disagreeing with the totality of your statement. There are other important factors. I've peaked as mid-master as Zerg and recently started playing Random on EU, at around a platinum level.
For an example, I reference a TvT I played today. I macro'd the entire game like a boss and had a significantly larger army for much of the game. I had an economic lead, and my upgrades were on par. I lost because I made a stupid decision and lost a ton of units to tank splash! He attacked and because I wasn't holding my watchtower he got into a really good position and I proceded to stim into his army. That's a stupid call, obviously. So stupid, in fact, that it overwhelms "probes and pylons" even without a poor composition or strategy.
You might as well put "watch the minimap, hold watchtowers" as important as well because they, too, can win or lose games. I don't believe I was saying you'd win every match. The point was that the most important things are overlooked. I would argue YOU"RE The one overlooking things. if you build 200/200 of probes and pylons, i would beat you every time. sorry if i come off as mean i am just in a really bad mood right now and gmarshal keeps warning me and it pisses me off everything that i have ever posted has been 100% my opinion only and i'm sorry if i'm offending anyone with what i'm saying. I'm sure you would beat me every time. Luckily I didn't tell anyone to only make probes and pylons till 200 supply.
yeah so you are obviously right in everything you say, because you included the phrase "oh and just don't be dumb btw"
you realize you are talking to people who don't build orbitals
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
