|
As someone who just got promoted to diamond today, I thought I should just come and back up what all the masters in here are saying. When we say that "strategy isn't important bronze-platinum", we're not saying use a terrible strategy and win with pure mechanics. We're saying that you should just have a simple game plan + a basic knowledge of unit compositions and use good mechanics to overpower your opponent.
I have a very simple game plan that I do in every game that I rarely stray from (unless I'm trying to have fun/playing in front of friends).
ZvP - 12 min max roach, deny Protoss third. Add in hydras and corruptors as needed. Tech up to broodlords if I can't just push into his natural.
ZvT - Ling/baneling to defend against early pushes. Get ~15 mutas to harass/kill drops. Deny/harass third as long as possible. Add in broodlords for final push once I'm maxed.
ZvZ - Defensive banelings while droning on 2 bases. Get roaches out ~40 food and try to take a third. Max on roach and slowly replace roaches with infestors as game goes on. If he's going mutas, just push into his natural/main and kill as much as I can while getting hydras.
I have a basic plan for each match-up, and I don't just blindly make units that are obviously countered by my opponents army, but I don't put tons of effort into strategy when I know that I'll get supply blocked three times while executing it. Sticking to a basic build that you can execute by memory, so that you can focus on your mechanics is really the best way to improve. If you really don't care that much about getting better and you just want to have fun, then by all means, try and use strategies to out-think your opponent if that's what you want to do. But when you post on TL asking why your super pro new build lost, don't get offended when we say that it's because you stopped making workers at 40 and were floating 3k resources.
|
"Strategy means 'a global plan to reach a long-term goal,' and is taken from a Greek word that means "army leadership".
Tactics, on the other hand, means a short term plan or behavior and comes from a Greek word that means "science of arrangement" (of an army).
One uses tactics (little tricks) in a strategy (long-term plan)." That is all.
|
jEcho got his new account to Master league today by massing lings in every matchup.
Destiny got his smurf to Plat+ by massing queens.
Gonna go ahead and say that no, strategy doesn't seem to be very important.
|
And if it still eludes you. Strategy, why? Tactics, how?
|
Overall strategy and game tactics are important on every level, but the mechanical gap between a bronze player and a grandmaster is so inconceivably vast that the later would never lose to the former. It isn't a matter of percentages or luck, there is simply no way he should be able to lose in any circumstance whatsoever.
6-pools are a good illustration, they're incredibly simple to do, require, at their most simplistic, the construction of no workers, only one building, and then calls for the player to spam the first melee unit he's capable of producing.
6-pools can be very effective at all levels of play, I recall DRG winning a high-level tournament game with one not too long back. I can say that in high masters they take games off opponents all the time. A lot of players, especially when complaining about cheese, comment on how anyone can do these simple strategies and become a diamond / master / grand-master player.
It's just not true, mechanics define whether a 6-pool falls to bronze level play or takes games off professionals. JulyZerg 6-pools all of the time on ladder, and I see him win most of those games. Tactics or strategy will never cover up for poor mechanics, they'll give you an edge against players will similar mechanics, but one never makes up for the other.
|
I've currently been demoted to plat. I macro pretty well: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12864737
I play against my cousin who is in gold. His macro has become very good. His builds are better than mine when I offrace. But I still roll him because he is not aggressive enough.
IMO aggression is the only skill of note from gold-GM. Your macro and micro will naturally become better as you try and be more aggressive, because being aggressive takes a lot of attention to detail and APM; understanding the map, the capabilities of your army and your enemy, knowing what your momentary advantage is and how to best take advantage of it.
|
im diamond and I can honestly say that at the beginning of a new ladder season, there is no strategy. its either baneling bust, 3 gate robo, or 1-1-1
|
On April 11 2012 14:11 GoldenH wrote:I've currently been demoted to plat. I macro pretty well: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12864737I play against my cousin who is in gold. His macro has become very good. His builds are better than mine when I offrace. But I still roll him because he is not aggressive enough. IMO aggression is the only skill of note from gold-GM. Your macro and micro will naturally become better as you try and be more aggressive, because being aggressive takes a lot of attention to detail and APM; understanding the map, the capabilities of your army and your enemy, knowing what your momentary advantage is and how to best take advantage of it.
I wouldn't use calculations to determine whether you macro well, I'd grab a professional replay, look at X supply by Y minute, and compare that to what you get every game.
There is an enormous difference between a low masters player going 3-hatch before gas and a professional doing the same.
Army control doesn't really matter when you have 20 less supply by the 8 minute mark.
|
On April 08 2012 21:33 madhyene wrote:
You don't need strategy in the lower leagues.
Just rush in bronze and silver, learn to two-base in gold, learn to macro in plat...
lol, You can pretty much rush in any league. For instance if I ever face anyone who is in the range of bronze to platinum, I mass reaper that person or thor rush or proxy planetary and I still win 99% the games.
Just basic mechanics should get you pretty high.
|
Northern Ireland23696 Posts
Going to heed some of the posts of these thread, genuinely interested to see how a very stripped down, 100% focus on macro style would do on ladder.
|
I think strategy and macro are link together.
You can't have a good macro if you don't a strategy
|
On April 11 2012 14:22 Gyro_SC2 wrote:
I think strategy and macro are link together.
You can't have a good macro if you don't a strategy
Watch Destiny get to Platinum with mass queens, or Dragon(i think?) get to High Diamond with pure marine and then trying saying that you need strategy in order to macro. Until at least diamond, the most basic strategies can work if they're executed well enough.
|
On April 11 2012 14:11 GoldenH wrote:I've currently been demoted to plat. I macro pretty well: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12864737I play against my cousin who is in gold. His macro has become very good. His builds are better than mine when I offrace. But I still roll him because he is not aggressive enough. IMO aggression is the only skill of note from gold-GM. Your macro and micro will naturally become better as you try and be more aggressive, because being aggressive takes a lot of attention to detail and APM; understanding the map, the capabilities of your army and your enemy, knowing what your momentary advantage is and how to best take advantage of it.
that's kind of like saying "the only skill required is to be good at the game" since you're including everything in "aggression."
making units and a-moving them is the only real skill you need. my mouse broke and i played my diamond friend with touchpad for shits and giggles and won both the games we played.
|
On April 11 2012 14:25 ipwntbarney wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2012 14:22 Gyro_SC2 wrote:
I think strategy and macro are link together.
You can't have a good macro if you don't a strategy Watch Destiny get to Platinum with mass queens, or Dragon(i think?) get to High Diamond with pure marine and then trying saying that you need strategy in order to macro. Until at least diamond, the most basic strategies can work if they're executed well enough.
As I said, 6-pools work at every level of play, including games played by Code S Zergs.
Mechanics are everything, strategy and tactics are important in their own right, but they do not make up for mechanical short-comings.
|
On April 08 2012 19:51 Zheryn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 08 2012 19:06 Sianos wrote:
When a low level player ask for help, the common answer is just macro better. It´s not a real goal that you can aim for. Wouldn´t it be a good idea to ask about his strategy and give him tips on that? I mean the way you build you production/upgrades etc has a lot to do with your strategy. Strategy can't be applied in lower leagues, since people there can't execute them anyway. You can't tell a silver player "do a 3 tank push into taking a third" etc, cause he doesn't have the mechanics to do that. It's better to tell the silver player "get some barracks and a factory and attack when you have a bunch of units". The only "strategy" that is necessary in lower leagues is to have a brief knowledge about hard counters, like not mass hydras vs 7 colossus.
Yeah this is basically true. Even up to masters all you need to do is have way more stuff than your opponent and attack move his base. I've beaten diamond players going mass queen before, it's not that difficult just to outmacro and out multitask someone.
In any league below plat it's better to teach 1 base builds because the lower league player can focus on mechanics very slowly and improve them without throwing too much complexity into the mix like expanding and injecting multiple hatcheries/defending on multiple fronts.
Then when the player can manage to not excess 1000 minerals before the 6 minute mark, you can start being like "ok, lets work on expanding at this time and getting more production facilities".
|
On April 09 2012 00:38 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2012 00:25 aggu wrote:On April 09 2012 00:09 teamsolid wrote:On April 08 2012 23:27 aggu wrote:
Game 5. TvP 9:50 at my ramp with 2 immo, 3 sentry, 5 stalkers; I had bunkers but he forcefielded in some way so that my SCVs couldn't repair. His attack failed, then he attacks into my main with warp prism and to expo at the same time. I won for some reason.
And here's another problem. You can say: just macro better and you will have more units at 5:00, 6:00, 7:00. But the problem is, when a 1base rush or cheese is coming, I can't macro normally. It distracts me so much if I have to repair bunkers, have my troops all shooting or retreating, building new bunkers. So if you watch those games, you will find a ton of hilarious macro and micro problems---yes, but I can't do it if I have to fight cheese or rush at the same time.
Your anecdotes are in fact perfect examples of how just improving macro will get you out of bronze. How exactly were any of the above games you mentioned cheese? Like you stated, his "1-base rush" came at 9:50 with only 2 immo/3 sentry/5 stalkers. You could have made enough units to defend this push by the 6-7 min mark easily WHILE expoing if you had improved your macro. How exactly does an incoming rush 3 minutes later "distract you" from macroing the previous 6 minutes or the next 3 minutes? To the OP: I think strategy combined with macro is important once you hit diamond or above, but macro alone will easily get you from bronze to plat. At 6:00 I had: 2 x bunker, 11 marines, expo 75% done, supply 34. My BO is: 2 naked rax (12, 14), then produce constantly marines and SCVs, until I have money for expo. Make 3 x bunkers. At 9:48 when the attack comes I have: 18 marines, 33 SCVs, 2 marauders, 3 bunkers, factory (reactor building which I shift to starport later), stim 25% done, expo running, supply 61 What happens at 9.48 is that he forcefields so that I can't repair the bunkers. But I am left with one bunker which I repair with like 10+ SCVs, which he shoots and shoots, but then he retreats. My question: what are the "macro target" values I SHOULD BE at, given my BO, with which I can hold that without any bunkers or with any micro? Another way to ask: what is a BO that will hold any bronze 1base rush without any micro or without bunkers? what are the targets (units, supply, SCVs)? A constraint is that I like to expand around 5:00-6:00. I can surely test whatever you come up with! Here, I just played a quick sample game against easy AI to demonstrate a very safe build that will hold off pretty much ANY bronze rush while letting you comfortably expand in any of the 3 matchups (although it's probably more suited to TvZ/TvT). It's probably not the cleanest build possible, as I don't even play Terran. I'm a Zerg master's player. http://replayfu.com/r/bLP0BcIf you just follow the same build order I used: By the 7 min mark I had 2 tanks with siege mode already finished. 2 bunkers full of marines and orbital command already landed at my natural. If I had suspected an incoming rush at the 7 min mark, I could've easily transferred some SCVs as my orbital landed so as to have some SCVs to repair. That defense could easily defeat 2 imm/3 sentry/5 stalker with 0 micro besides SCV pull + bunker repair.
One guy there above said you first need a build, then concentrate on macro. Nobody can get our of bronze by perfectly macroing warp prisms (or can they?), yet you can surely do a mind-blowing macro on warp prisms and it's still amazing macro. That's why I can beat very hard AI and GTAI even if I am in bronze, I assume these AI have quite good macro and mechanism. Macro requires some intervention from human intelligence which you obtain by playing a ton. For the same reason, I am not convinced of the 'just macro better' if a master level player wins by massing and a-moving. It must be AI that wins like that to prove the theory.
In my post cited above, I had difficulties with 'macro better' theory because I was constantly 1base'd or cheesed by silver high bronze players, and it required a lot of micro to survive as I wanted to expo fast. It was frustrating, because 'macro better' did not seem to go anywhere. Teamsolid then provided me a good early expo build (see above) that perhaps could surivive rushes. Here's interesting thing what happened to me with that build and what it means that build and macro must be integrated. I looked at teamsolid's replay and tried to copy the build, but never got the benchmarks right. Something was wrong, even if I did it like 20 times against weak AI. Then I suddenly realized that you get supply by building a command center (don't you? I am so low level I didn't know that). But that meant I was always building an extra depot, and it ruined the efficiency of the whole build. Because production is exponential in SC2, small things like this snowball out of control, and suddenly the BO can't hold 1base rushes anymore.
I still have to find the time to try this build on ladder...
|
I think one of the issues here is that many players, especially lower league players like me, prefer to win with a clever strategy. If feels good to outsmart the opponent. Having good mechanics feels lame because those no-RL-kiddies which play all day long will beat you with mechanics while they don't apply any clever strategy at all. Or they just play standard, where is the fun in that?
Another issue probably are the countless guides and VODs which leave the impression that the right strategy will give one good chances to win. Those guides also lead to the impression that reading / watching guides improve the play.
Every time I embrace the macro and mechanic improvement advise, I improve my play, but too often I fell back to plan out clever strategies ... which gets crushed because he has more stuff.
But the issue with "macro better" or "work on your mechanics" is: "Okay, dude, you need to actually commit yourself to tiresome practice instead of enjoying the game."
|
Northern Ireland23696 Posts
On April 11 2012 17:06 [F_]aths wrote:
I think one of the issues here is that many players, especially lower league players like me, prefer to win with a clever strategy. If feels good to outsmart the opponent. Having good mechanics feels lame because those no-RL-kiddies which play all day long will beat you with mechanics while they don't apply any clever strategy at all. Or they just play standard, where is the fun in that?
Another issue probably are the countless guides and VODs which leave the impression that the right strategy will give one good chances to win. Those guides also lead to the impression that reading / watching guides improve the play.
Every time I embrace the macro and mechanic improvement advise, I improve my play, but too often I fell back to plan out clever strategies ... which gets crushed because he has more stuff.
But the issue with "macro better" or "work on your mechanics" is: "Okay, dude, you need to actually commit yourself to tiresome practice instead of enjoying the game."
Yeah exactly, I mean it depends on how you view the game and what aspirations you have. Some people are perfectly happy to play like you say, and do things that strike them as cool, others want to maximise their ability to play the game.
|
On April 11 2012 17:06 [F_]aths wrote:
I think one of the issues here is that many players, especially lower league players like me, prefer to win with a clever strategy. If feels good to outsmart the opponent. Having good mechanics feels lame because those no-RL-kiddies which play all day long will beat you with mechanics while they don't apply any clever strategy at all. Or they just play standard, where is the fun in that?
Another issue probably are the countless guides and VODs which leave the impression that the right strategy will give one good chances to win. Those guides also lead to the impression that reading / watching guides improve the play.
Every time I embrace the macro and mechanic improvement advise, I improve my play, but too often I fell back to plan out clever strategies ... which gets crushed because he has more stuff.
But the issue with "macro better" or "work on your mechanics" is: "Okay, dude, you need to actually commit yourself to tiresome practice instead of enjoying the game."
people who just want to enjoy the game instead of practicing shouldn't complain about not getting better.
|
As someone who has somewhat fail control as a mid to high diamond when playing constantly (which is not recently), if the strategies are sound, they can still win you games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
