On March 04 2011 14:47 ZarMulix wrote: I probably shouldn't have but I actually get offended when I see what people think lower league players can and cannot do. Before even going into this, almost no one who hasn't recently been in a lower league has any credibility to speak about this because when's the last time they laddered in bronze, silver, gold, etc? I assume most people speak with no experience on the matter and it doesn't make sense logically either. It has been established that people in lower leauges have mainly two problems: macro and build order execution.
Since everyone on battlenet 2.0 has internet, EVERYONE playing starcraft has the ability to access sources such as TL, other strategy forums, replays of pro players, advice givers like Day[9], etc. I assume the vast majority of people who access this information is made up of people who are looking to improve and they spend most of this time researching rather than playing, which is what they would be doing if they knew how to improve (example: professional gamers).
I just recently got promoted to gold league and am playing mostly platinum players. However, I play barely once a week (maybe 3-4 games every a week on average) when I can, and spend most of my time overcoming my rustiness. I know what a build order is (in fact I know many, maybe too many), I use hotkeys, macro while microing battles, play reactively (see: zerg) and have my own distinctive play style in development. So has every player I've played from bronze to platinum and I really have no idea why people cite "a friend they introduced to the game" as a player of the average skill level of the league they're in.
The lower leagues have their share of people who don't know what they're doing, but most people I played were people who knew exactly what they were doing, but keep playing other people who also know what they're doing and therefore don't clobber the opposition. I find it curious that most people that I played in silver had 100+ apm while I noticed a dramatic drop when playing gold and platinum players (take it for what it's worth, yes there are those 400apm spammers who can barely 4gate- I played one).
The biggest problem accounting for lack of ability to win I see from lower league players is a two fold problem. One aspect is perceived knowledge and the other is lack of practice. Honestly how many of the lower league players who complain about losing have actually played more than (making up some number) 400 games? Lower league players are bombarded with ideas and strategies from the venues that they were introduced to the game in (professionals) and have simply not played enough to know first hand how these strategies come into play. That doesn't mean a lower league player doesn't understand how things work, why things work, or can't offer insight into the game (see:human with average intelligence). I do feel that discussions about already refined strategies should respect the thoughts of those who have more experience with it more. However remember that a lower league player may very well be more intelligent than you are and simply does not spend as much time playing Starcraft (humanitarian efforts, research, con artistry).
So basically I'm just pleading for everyone to have a little more respect for lower leaguers who attempt to be part of a community. If they're here it's because they actually care to increase their knowledge and understanding of the game and I'm not a fan of the dismissal and elitism that I see sometimes. Do you play more? Certainly. Are you better at Starcraft than me? I certainly hope so or else all that effort and time was put to waste. Does that mean my opinion isn't valid because I'm not of the same ranking? That has to be decided based on more information.
The problem is that while lower league playes CAN offer insight as to what works at their level, they can't offer insight as to what works at the highest level of play, which is the level of play that much of TL is concerned with. They simply do not have a good enough understanding of the game to offer any valuable ideas. Whatever they can point out that does happen to be useful can be pointed out by a high level player just as easily.
You totally forget, that lower league players may watch more tournament games etc and thus have good amount of knowledge.
And intelligence plays big role here too.
However, in my personal experience, if you understand the game at a diamond or higher level, you will play at that level. I have never encountered a silver or gold player who I felt knew a considerable amount about the game.
It takes alot of games to get promoted and if mechanics are very subpar, it is hard to advance.
It doesn't take a lot of games if you're winning. It shouldn't take more than 15-20 games to move into a higher league on the ladder if you're actually good enough to be promoted. If you're splitting games 50/50 down in bronze-plat, you're missing something in your game, and it's not just mechanics. The APM required to make it to masters is nothing more than a measurement of the things you're remembering to do. So you either understand what needs to be done, do it, and advance. Or, you don't understand the game as well as you think you do, fall behind because you can't remember to carry out what needs to be done, and lose. If you can't remember when to build things, and what to build, how can you POSSIBLY argue that you'd have a deep enough understanding to provide insightful contributions to strategy discussion?
Just 2 weeks ago some highlighting system was implemented by TL forum to overstep this problem. Maybe a voting system will be better or atleast TL should try that option beacause in this way some good post can be skipped in the 10 pages strategy threads.
I think that comparing your skill level in sc2 to other people in sc2 is better that comparing your skill in sc2 to your skill in sc1 which is a diffrent game entirely.
If your in diamond, your theoreticaly better than 80% of all active sc2 playersin your region
If your in masters, your theoreticaly better than 98% of all active sc2 players in your region
I know there are a few holes in this way of reasoning, but its generaly correct.
On March 04 2011 14:47 ZarMulix wrote: I probably shouldn't have but I actually get offended when I see what people think lower league players can and cannot do. Before even going into this, almost no one who hasn't recently been in a lower league has any credibility to speak about this because when's the last time they laddered in bronze, silver, gold, etc? I assume most people speak with no experience on the matter and it doesn't make sense logically either. It has been established that people in lower leauges have mainly two problems: macro and build order execution.
Since everyone on battlenet 2.0 has internet, EVERYONE playing starcraft has the ability to access sources such as TL, other strategy forums, replays of pro players, advice givers like Day[9], etc. I assume the vast majority of people who access this information is made up of people who are looking to improve and they spend most of this time researching rather than playing, which is what they would be doing if they knew how to improve (example: professional gamers).
I just recently got promoted to gold league and am playing mostly platinum players. However, I play barely once a week (maybe 3-4 games every a week on average) when I can, and spend most of my time overcoming my rustiness. I know what a build order is (in fact I know many, maybe too many), I use hotkeys, macro while microing battles, play reactively (see: zerg) and have my own distinctive play style in development. So has every player I've played from bronze to platinum and I really have no idea why people cite "a friend they introduced to the game" as a player of the average skill level of the league they're in.
The lower leagues have their share of people who don't know what they're doing, but most people I played were people who knew exactly what they were doing, but keep playing other people who also know what they're doing and therefore don't clobber the opposition. I find it curious that most people that I played in silver had 100+ apm while I noticed a dramatic drop when playing gold and platinum players (take it for what it's worth, yes there are those 400apm spammers who can barely 4gate- I played one).
The biggest problem accounting for lack of ability to win I see from lower league players is a two fold problem. One aspect is perceived knowledge and the other is lack of practice. Honestly how many of the lower league players who complain about losing have actually played more than (making up some number) 400 games? Lower league players are bombarded with ideas and strategies from the venues that they were introduced to the game in (professionals) and have simply not played enough to know first hand how these strategies come into play. That doesn't mean a lower league player doesn't understand how things work, why things work, or can't offer insight into the game (see:human with average intelligence). I do feel that discussions about already refined strategies should respect the thoughts of those who have more experience with it more. However remember that a lower league player may very well be more intelligent than you are and simply does not spend as much time playing Starcraft (humanitarian efforts, research, con artistry).
So basically I'm just pleading for everyone to have a little more respect for lower leaguers who attempt to be part of a community. If they're here it's because they actually care to increase their knowledge and understanding of the game and I'm not a fan of the dismissal and elitism that I see sometimes. Do you play more? Certainly. Are you better at Starcraft than me? I certainly hope so or else all that effort and time was put to waste. Does that mean my opinion isn't valid because I'm not of the same ranking? That has to be decided based on more information.
The problem is that while lower league playes CAN offer insight as to what works at their level, they can't offer insight as to what works at the highest level of play, which is the level of play that much of TL is concerned with. They simply do not have a good enough understanding of the game to offer any valuable ideas. Whatever they can point out that does happen to be useful can be pointed out by a high level player just as easily.
You totally forget, that lower league players may watch more tournament games etc and thus have good amount of knowledge.
And intelligence plays big role here too.
However, in my personal experience, if you understand the game at a diamond or higher level, you will play at that level. I have never encountered a silver or gold player who I felt knew a considerable amount about the game.
It takes alot of games to get promoted and if mechanics are very subpar, it is hard to advance.
I call bullshit. My friend made diamond with 30 APM and a little common sense. He never played any RTS before, nor watched any replays of pros. He is however an intelligence analyst. He took the time to think about the game and how stuff interacts and understands WHY some stuff happens. Once you understand the relationship between things in the game it is near impossible to be at a low level.
30 APM is one action every 2 seconds folks. My friend is watching more then playing, but by making the right action he is in diamond league. His macro is technically shitty too because instead of constantly building units he builds 50 gateways and only warps in an army when you attack him.
Yeah, exactly. This stuff isn't incredibly uncommon. If you're in gold, silver, or bronze, you're missing at least one crucial thing about the game, probably many crucial things. You don't need a ton of games, even. Just go review your replays, don't overthink what you did wrong, and figure out what the biggest, most crippling flaw in your gameplay is. For the next few games concentrate on that to the exemption of everything else and ride your sweet, sweet promotions to plat at the minimum.
On March 04 2011 14:47 ZarMulix wrote: I probably shouldn't have but I actually get offended when I see what people think lower league players can and cannot do. Before even going into this, almost no one who hasn't recently been in a lower league has any credibility to speak about this because when's the last time they laddered in bronze, silver, gold, etc? I assume most people speak with no experience on the matter and it doesn't make sense logically either. It has been established that people in lower leauges have mainly two problems: macro and build order execution.
Since everyone on battlenet 2.0 has internet, EVERYONE playing starcraft has the ability to access sources such as TL, other strategy forums, replays of pro players, advice givers like Day[9], etc. I assume the vast majority of people who access this information is made up of people who are looking to improve and they spend most of this time researching rather than playing, which is what they would be doing if they knew how to improve (example: professional gamers).
I just recently got promoted to gold league and am playing mostly platinum players. However, I play barely once a week (maybe 3-4 games every a week on average) when I can, and spend most of my time overcoming my rustiness. I know what a build order is (in fact I know many, maybe too many), I use hotkeys, macro while microing battles, play reactively (see: zerg) and have my own distinctive play style in development. So has every player I've played from bronze to platinum and I really have no idea why people cite "a friend they introduced to the game" as a player of the average skill level of the league they're in.
The lower leagues have their share of people who don't know what they're doing, but most people I played were people who knew exactly what they were doing, but keep playing other people who also know what they're doing and therefore don't clobber the opposition. I find it curious that most people that I played in silver had 100+ apm while I noticed a dramatic drop when playing gold and platinum players (take it for what it's worth, yes there are those 400apm spammers who can barely 4gate- I played one).
The biggest problem accounting for lack of ability to win I see from lower league players is a two fold problem. One aspect is perceived knowledge and the other is lack of practice. Honestly how many of the lower league players who complain about losing have actually played more than (making up some number) 400 games? Lower league players are bombarded with ideas and strategies from the venues that they were introduced to the game in (professionals) and have simply not played enough to know first hand how these strategies come into play. That doesn't mean a lower league player doesn't understand how things work, why things work, or can't offer insight into the game (see:human with average intelligence). I do feel that discussions about already refined strategies should respect the thoughts of those who have more experience with it more. However remember that a lower league player may very well be more intelligent than you are and simply does not spend as much time playing Starcraft (humanitarian efforts, research, con artistry).
So basically I'm just pleading for everyone to have a little more respect for lower leaguers who attempt to be part of a community. If they're here it's because they actually care to increase their knowledge and understanding of the game and I'm not a fan of the dismissal and elitism that I see sometimes. Do you play more? Certainly. Are you better at Starcraft than me? I certainly hope so or else all that effort and time was put to waste. Does that mean my opinion isn't valid because I'm not of the same ranking? That has to be decided based on more information.
The problem is that while lower league playes CAN offer insight as to what works at their level, they can't offer insight as to what works at the highest level of play, which is the level of play that much of TL is concerned with. They simply do not have a good enough understanding of the game to offer any valuable ideas. Whatever they can point out that does happen to be useful can be pointed out by a high level player just as easily.
You totally forget, that lower league players may watch more tournament games etc and thus have good amount of knowledge.
And intelligence plays big role here too.
However, in my personal experience, if you understand the game at a diamond or higher level, you will play at that level. I have never encountered a silver or gold player who I felt knew a considerable amount about the game.
It takes alot of games to get promoted and if mechanics are very subpar, it is hard to advance.
It doesn't take a lot of games if you're winning. It shouldn't take more than 15-20 games to move into a higher league on the ladder if you're actually good enough to be promoted. If you're splitting games 50/50 down in bronze-plat, you're missing something in your game, and it's not just mechanics. The APM required to make it to masters is nothing more than a measurement of the things you're remembering to do. So you either understand what needs to be done, do it, and advance. Or, you don't understand the game as well as you think you do, fall behind because you can't remember to carry out what needs to be done, and lose. If you can't remember when to build things, and what to build, how can you POSSIBLY argue that you'd have a deep enough understanding to provide insightful contributions to strategy discussion?
APM is a tool not a measurement of skill. Protoss don't need as much APM, but they have to have good micro in order to not get dominated in battle. I started out with 30 apm in bronze and now am 90 apm in diamond (average). The problem is there is apm and there is effective apm. I rarely spam any buttons at all, while my friend with 120 apm, is constantly spamming everything, yet I beat him about 80% of the time.
A lot of problems is that from gold-diamond, players practice a single build and perfect it and use it to artificially inflate their rating. This happens in chess as well. A player may ONLY play Ruy Lopez or only play a specific variation on an opening and know the strengths and weaknesses while his opponent has to play without any prior knowledge.
My suggestion is 1. Find 1 build you really like in every matchup. 2. Practice that build against AI until you can do it perfectly 3. Play with it 50 times on ladder until you know it in and out. Learn it's strengths, it's weaknesses. Figure out the best time to scout, what builds it's good against, etc. Once you start getting good and on a huge winning streak, you will eventually get to a point where your opponents are simply better than you. This is when you start working on your mistakes. Watch every replay and find 1 big mistake and tell yourself, I will never make that mistake again. Maybe something like "I always forgot my 3rd pylon". So when you start the game think "3rd pylon" until you do it. This is the fastest way to get better at the game. Massing games is only good once you reach the top, until then, work on specific things.
Gold and below players don't understand a lot of very important things which is why no one listens to them. A lot of the understanding has to do with micro, positioning, unit control, timings, upgrades, etc, because at under gold level, the mechanics are the biggest problem. Even a gold player knows lings counter stalkers, but a gold player might not know that a group of stalker can kite lings effectively, since they can't do it.
As far as understanding is concerned, even some mid level masters (like myself) lack the level of understanding it takes to play at the highest level. Unfortunately I believe TL will not ever abolish the blind leading the blind so long as it maintains the friendly/open discussion environment. Which i think is okay (maybe even good?) for the community. It may not be good for the GAME per se, but as far as the community - it is great.
Referencing what qxc said, the TL admins could do it. Make an invite only thread, etc. but still allow the general public to read it. That way, the people who actually want to understand the game would be able to see it, and the people that just want to argue and tell professional players that they're wrong wouldn't be able to shit it up.
yeah but then you get the elitist complaints, and a secondary thread for the general public to discuss the topic, and a tertiary thread to discuss the results of the professional thread. People would still claim qxc and huk and whoever else are wrong, just in another thread....maybe that's why there's a blog section.
Wouldn't it be great if they made a locked blog section for pros to just rant about tactics they like (as opposed to their actual build orders they're working on and NEED in order to make their living)
I m a 3k master and I'm far from A or A- so I don't think high diamond are the equivalent of B on iCCup. There are always inflation with this laddering system, it sucks.
EPT
