|
On December 12 2012 17:27 Defenestrator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 16:03 Rickyvalle21 wrote:
The difference between a low master and a high master is about just as big as bronze to diamond. A low master literally has no chance vs a high master. With that being said if it took you 1 year to get from bronze to master then it will probably take you another year to get from master to gm. I don't think this is true at all. A diamond player can beat a bronze or even silver (possibly gold) player only using their mouse. I seriously doubt any non-pro could beat a low masters like that, and even then it would be very challenging. I think there's a difference in all areas, but the main difference is in unit control and multitask.
I see Dragon beating a high diamond player on the eu server (which means master level on NA) using only the mouse and without wearing glasses (so one-handed and blind) :D
|
I think the main difference could be that some GM players are used to play on their level and thats all. Some GM are really good, but not everyone.
|
Well, in the first seasons, when i played only terran and i got to high masters, i got the chance to play gm's as well on the ladder, not only in online cups. Mostly it ended badly, as i only had a few builds, and when something went wrong, i didn't have the same improvisation skills as them. Sure, i beat some as well, but keep in mind that back then many got to GM by only doing 4-gates or 3 rax rushes, so that didn't say much about true SKILL. With the map pool we have now allins and cheeses are a lot harder to pull off, so yeah, those who are GM's now are really good players.
You can see a sence of finesse in their play, making every unit count, and coming up with unique builds that everyone else then copies  Not missing a worker beat, avoiding supply block all the time, and making the best use of early game units will put a GM more and more ahead vs a master player the more the game goes. You know the saying the more the game takes, the better player will win. Also, keep in mind, in order to maintain this skill level, you need to play at least a few hours every day...
|
I would say that low masters is about the same in skill level as a top Diamond, but the same can not be said for high masters/low GM... think about it in percentages of players -> masters is top 2% of players.. but there are A LOT of players on each server... GM is the top 200 players out of all the players.
This SHOULD tell you that they are basically better at everything than the normal masters players, with the exception of some really "toptop" masters players who aren't in GM because they simply can't fit into it.
Although, if you need a specific answer to the MAIN reason they are better, I would definitely say: decision making in all stages of the game -> what build, how to react to what, when to attack, what units to make.. etc...
|
depends on the race
protoss - much, much crisper timings, slightly better at engaging
zerg - better mechanics, more specifically for map awareness (higher apm to scout more, better injects)
terran - micro, unit cost efficiency
source: I'm gm
|
On December 12 2012 15:19 iEchoic wrote:
Starcraft is 95% mechanics - you can figure it out from that.
The game is too well-understood now to strategically overcome your opponent despite mechanical deficiencies. Improving on this game is as simple as following the metagame and improving your mechanical skill via massing games using solid builds.
I would say my ladder experience mostly contradicts this statement, while at the same time, this is the reason why I have never broken that barrier between top masters and GM.
I am quite honestly, pretty bad at SC2 mechanically, but I am very good at making up builds that abuse the current metagame.
Most people below GM generally get why a build is good and think they understand everything about it, but they don't know all the ins and outs of it.
For example: I have been doing a proxy hatch vs Nexus first FFE for like a year and people still don't get that it's a BO win. They think they fucked up their micro or something when all they had to do was cancel the nexus.
Most GM players could see and understand this, and while they may lose THAT game, they wouldn't lose the next.
Most masters players would talk shit to me about how bad I am at SC2 while they continually lose over and over because nexus first is how you play.
|
For example: I have been doing a proxy hatch vs Nexus first FFE for like a year and people still don't get that it's a BO win. They think they fucked up their micro or something when all they had to do was cancel the nexus.
Funny to see that others are doing the same as I am. I've refined the build, and am now placing it directly on the protoss natural at the same timing as a standard 15 hatch at my natural. Its brilliant to see the tons of different responses... Most of them ending up in a massive lead for me. Anyway, onto the point:
In my, somewhat limited experience, GM players are not neccesarily of another world. Its not that they don't get thrown off of their gameplan. Its not that they don't make mistakes. Its not that their decision making or micro is so much better. In my experience, what GM players do better than mostly everyone else is to compose themselves when something goes awry. Also, having had a few sessions with GM players, what interests me most is their ability to read a players playstyle. I am not talking about reading a build, I am talking about reading what an opponents mindset is.
When we were talking, I called my opponent on doing an upgraded Marine-Medivac opening into Marine-Tank. 'Beware of drops.' That was literally what I thought about. The units, the immediate possibilities. What I didn't consider was my opponents mindset. What my buddy was thinking was; "I need to place my buildings slightly different since this area is where he's going to be dropping me at the 11 min mark. Meanwhile a tankpush is going to start while he attempts to pull me out of position. Burrowed banelings here, creepspread at this mark will be VITAL to shutting down his plans."
So while we looked at the replay, and tried to enter the Terrans mindset, it suddenly made a whole lot of sense. Static D + a few lings to shut down the drops. No vision of the majority of the army. Creep past the spots where we would like to siege up. While I may have done the exact same things, I wouldn't have considered the game ''right now'' from my opponents side. I think that is one of they key differences. In how great detail are you capable of viewing the game from the opposing side?
|
France12775 Posts
Its pointless to compare mid or lower master to GM so I guess you talk about top and high+ master players.
It depends on the race, but for every one I guess massing more games while trying to improve is what separates regular top master (the one who is struggling to go into gm, not an ancient gm that didnt play enough or something).
Basically being that bit better at everything which comes with practice.
For terran in particular pre patch mindset is key : good angryness management because of the difficulty, unfairness and poor balance of the race.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On December 12 2012 15:19 iEchoic wrote:
Starcraft is 95% mechanics - you can figure it out from that.
The game is too well-understood now to strategically overcome your opponent despite mechanical deficiencies. Improving on this game is as simple as following the metagame and improving your mechanical skill via massing games using solid builds.
Sums it up all too well.
Just keep looking at things to improve on (there's still a LOT) and mass games. That's how I got to GM.
Oh, and 1 build for each match-up is still sufficient to get into GM. At least outside KR.
|
On December 12 2012 20:08 CCalms wrote:
depends on the race
protoss - much, much crisper timings, slightly better at engaging
zerg - better mechanics, more specifically for map awareness (higher apm to scout more, better injects)
terran - micro, unit cost efficiency
source: I'm gm
Thank you! I'm very curious. I'm just mid master, but would love to be GM one day.
What does it take to make it from mid master to GM? A ton of practice?
|
A ton of practice AND talent imho
I think everyone (with a normal IQ) can be master but for gm you should have some talent...
|
United Kingdom20284 Posts
On December 12 2012 17:27 Defenestrator wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 16:03 Rickyvalle21 wrote:
The difference between a low master and a high master is about just as big as bronze to diamond. A low master literally has no chance vs a high master. With that being said if it took you 1 year to get from bronze to master then it will probably take you another year to get from master to gm. I don't think this is true at all. A diamond player can beat a bronze or even silver (possibly gold) player only using their mouse. I seriously doubt any non-pro could beat a low masters like that, and even then it would be very challenging. I think there's a difference in all areas, but the main difference is in unit control and multitask.
Lastshadow did it to a mid master NA zerg.. In post-patch TvZ.
|
On December 12 2012 20:08 CCalms wrote:
depends on the race
protoss - much, much crisper timings, slightly better at engaging
zerg - better mechanics, more specifically for map awareness (higher apm to scout more, better injects)
terran - micro, unit cost efficiency
source: I'm gm
I like this answer, sums it up very nicely, at least for what I can see watching pros.
|
the ability to perform a 6 pool
|
On December 12 2012 22:18 Bad_Habit wrote:
the ability to perform a 6 pool
Are you the only player to ever make GM with pure 6 pool? It's awesome that you were able to succeed with micro in this macro centric game.
|
The journey from completely new player to master is a lot shorter than the journey from newly promoted master to GM, IMO. So you have a long road ahead, but good luck!
|
It must be the same for every league and the next. I've been stuck in Plat for 2.5 years... So the barrier from Plat to Diamond to me is just as massive as Masters to GM. I wouldn't forget to factor in your own skill ceiling.
|
On December 12 2012 22:55 Salient wrote:Are you the only player to ever make GM with pure 6 pool? It's awesome that you were able to succeed with micro in this macro centric game.
still think im the only one to ever perform this.
edited the rest out. just nonsense
|
You don't need some innate "talent" to make it into the higher leagues, all you need is dedication and the ability to learn through practice. For every musical prodigy there is another musician who mastered their instrument through thousands of hours of practice. You can do the same thing. You just need to learn HOW to practice in such a way that you are meaningfully improving your play or you will not progress.
|
gms aren't some kind of special snowflake, they still make huge mistakes sometimes, just less frequently than people in masters and below
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
