|
I'm in gold but I have been playing custom games mostly and haven't laddered in a few weeks. If I look back now just before I was stopped laddering, I was definetly a gold player, my overall game sense was subpar. I often got supply blocked, forgot to expand or had really bad timing, and my micro and positioning with my army was terrible.
It's been a few weeks and about 200 custom games later with analysing replays and I've come to realise those faults in my play. I finally understand how positioning and expansion timing factor into the game and having improved on those I feel as I'm definetly at least top platinum material now. I also think knowledge of the other races is key also, for example, I know that if I pressure a zerg early he will get roaches, so if I go 1 zealot 1 stalker into robo opening, I'll have an advantage because my stalker and zealot will apply pressure forcing roaches and my immortals will shred through those roaches. Obviously this isn't the case all the time but it's knowledge like that which will improve your league ranking.
I tried laddering yesterday too. The quality of the players seemed to have decreased andI'm finding the games too easy when before I was struggling in gold.
|
Recently I went on a 13 game losing streak and started playing a bunch of plat players. for the most part, they weren't bad, and I even lost like two or three, but then soon after I went on a 12 game winning streak and the people in ~1700 diamond truly weren't too much better. basically, it seems like some people get stuck in plat even though theyre a lot
better, and some get into diamond even though they don't deserve it...
|
On November 28 2010 10:19 Orome wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2010 09:59 b_unnies wrote:On November 28 2010 09:49 Orome wrote:On November 28 2010 09:46 b_unnies wrote:On November 28 2010 09:43 Orome wrote:On November 28 2010 09:41 b_unnies wrote:On November 28 2010 09:35 OriginalBeast wrote:On November 28 2010 09:32 b_unnies wrote:
the only difference is better macro :| macro is important but the complexities of starcraft entail more than just macro. Of course there are other important areas, but they don't matter below diamond. Problem with all players below diamond is they spent too much time on non-macro related things. Not true from my custom games experience. A lot of players below diamond have as good macro as low diamond players, but lack good builds, game understanding or other things. Good builds are part of macro. Honestly, saying that players below diamond have as good a macro as low diamond isnt really saying much because i would probably say half of all diamond players dont have good macro I don't see how good builds are part of macro. You can keep your money low just fine with a terrible build that doesn't make sense. And of course a lot of diamond players don't have good macro, but we're talking about whether or not they're better at it than platinum players. Macro is a lot more complex than keeping your money low. How fast you're getting something, how fast you're getting a certain amount of units, how often you're expanding, your probe count etc. A player could have 10 gates off 1 base, that's not a good build but he's keeping his money low. Still doesn't mean he has good macro. You're saying that lots of low diamond has as good macro as lots of players who are below diamond. You can't generalize low diamond as all of diamond, which is why the number one biggest difference between random plat and random diamond player is macro. Only if you start comparing diamond players of higher levels does other areas become a bigger difference That's not what I mean by bad builds, the kind of bad I'm talking about has nothing to do with macro. Gold/Platinum players will often go for builds that just make no sense. One example would be a pure marauder stim rush against Z. Their macro can be perfectly fine doing it and they can get a lot of marauders out, but the build makes no sense because pure marauder get torn apart by speedlings. This has nothing to do with macro unless you want to include what units you're getting in macro and that's just wrong. Anyway, we're discussing semantics now and this is getting pretty pointless. I agree with you that macro's one of the differences between platinum and diamond players, but it's by no means the only one.
I definitely think that army composition is part of good macro, knowing when to build what units etc.
But honestly though, if you compare an average diamond player to an average plat player, then of course that average diamond player will be better than that average plat player in every single aspects of the game. I don't think that telling a plat to l2p to get to diamond would be helpful advice. But if we're talking about whats the biggest difference seperating a plat from getting into diamond, then it's definitely macro.
Seriously, all i did to get into diamond was just macro up to 200 pop and attack moving into their base without applying any sort of pressure at all. (Only took 30~ games or so to get from silver to diamond). Sure micro definitely helps but I didn't starting microing my troops during battles until 1k diamond, and didnt even start incorporating high temps into my army until 1.4k. Then there are even more subtle things like worker scouting to guess what build they're doing (fast 2nd refinery or 2nd rax etc) until 1.7k. They all matter of course at higher levels but they don't really matter at plat level when you're trying to reach diamond.
Of course I'm not saying that T should just do mass marauder stim against Z to reach diamond, but all they need to do is get 200 pop MMM and attack move into Z to get to diamond(which is why I think army composition is part of macro)
|
On November 28 2010 09:32 b_unnies wrote:
the only difference is better macro
Yeah, I think this is true. I'm in diamond and sometimes play against plat in custom games. I often get a 15-20 lead in supply 8 minutes into the game even though we never attacked each other.
|
The difference between gold and platinum and low diamond on SEA appears to be how well you can execute all-ins
|
I honestly don't think bronze to platinum is a very accurate ranking to be honest.. I've played some awesome Silver players, but I've owned some platinum's quite easily and I'm in Bronze.. I think the skill level is all over the place until you hit diamond.. Then it's a little more general.
|
On November 28 2010 10:41 rsol wrote:
The difference between gold and platinum and low diamond on SEA appears to be how well you can execute all-ins
LOL. Pretty much.
|
On November 28 2010 10:48 FataLe wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2010 10:41 rsol wrote:
The difference between gold and platinum and low diamond on SEA appears to be how well you can execute all-ins LOL. Pretty much.
Yah I got 6 pooled twice by the same guy in ZvZ. Free wins  .
|
I think just knowing the game and how to play standard is a big part of it. For example, you may see a gold level player build like six gateways off one base or use non-optimal build orders. Also lack of scouting and/or reactive play.
|
Well I haven't made it to diamond yet, but I've recently made it to plat and I've noticed tons more cheese then I did from bronze to silver to gold. I know about scouting for cheese and how to stop it when you spot it but i never ever had to do it until i got to platinum, now i see it at least every 5 games . I've lost to various cheeses a lot thanks to not really having to deal with it before so I know my next step is bettering my cheese defense.
|
On November 28 2010 10:47 .Theory wrote:
I honestly don't think bronze to platinum is a very accurate ranking to be honest.. I've played some awesome Silver players, but I've owned some platinum's quite easily and I'm in Bronze.. I think the skill level is all over the place until you hit diamond.. Then it's a little more general.
I wouldn't be so sure. I'm bronze and I beat diamond (without cheesing) consistently now. I should add, however, that I haven't laddered 1v1 much since I started focusing on improving, so I might be better than I am ranked (or diamond might not mean anything).
|
As a small anecdote, I made it into diamond after about 25 games. I don't really have time to play any more and I've only actually played about 40-50 1v1 match-ups. I'm sure there's plenty of people like me who when they have a nice break from work and want to get back into SC 2 might drop down in rank. This is a tough question to answer, because not every player is consistent and trying to get better. As the skill levels of people in general increase, players like me will typically fall behind.
|
i don't ladder much, in plat, have been doign some ladder and get matched up against 1700 diamonds and win more then 50% of the time. i do a lot more customs and beat the 1500+ diamonds half of the time who actually stay, i get mad when like 1k diamonds leave vs me.
|
there is a big difference! gap of skill level!
|
On November 28 2010 09:27 Raiden X wrote:
Alot of Diamonds on Ladder are guys who got into Diamond early in release and then stopped laddering. Check out their match history and see all the customs. Most of them are scared of losing rank. Which in my opinion is stupid.
This, Almost anyone who's below 1K at the moment doesn't ladder anymore period.
|
Gold players usually have very poor macro and that is what sets them back.
Platinum players have poor macro with the knowledge of a gold player.
Players in low diamond have mediocre macro with slightly better game sense and they know how to execute a build order decently
Players in mid-diamond have decent macro and game sense with average multitasking skills and the knowledge of a few builds but they lack good decision making and the ability to play under pressure and adapt (i fall in between mid-high diamond so i roughly know what players here lack from my own mistakes)
Players in high diamond have everything a mid-diamond player has except with better micro, knowledge and decision making.
|
Hmm, I'm a diamond player now, and I came up from bronze (which is a tough learning curve, lol) but I would say that from bronze to gold is basically learning to deal with cheese. Gold to plat is basically better mechanics and plat to diamond is maybe variance of build orders/solidity of play overall.
|
I would say efficient build orders. For example, today I fought a Terran who went supply, barracks, barracks, supply, barracks and ended up trying to execute a cloak banshee attack as his first form of agression.
Next, expanding. Low level players don't have a good sense of when to expand or when they are safe to expand. Moreover, expanding behind a push is a common technique not utilized by skilled players.
|
I worked my way from silver to diamond in about 300 games. I was D+ in bw and had 150+ apm from the beginning. Working my way up through ladder my macro always outpaced the opposition but I'd die often to all sorts of early game all-ins. I have no doubt solid macro helped me work my way up but I think good scouting and forming good responses early game is just as essential, since macro makes very little difference in the first 10 minutes where most games are won or lost. I'm 1800 diamond now, and most people I still play still average 60-80 apm. I'm not saying apm is everything, but I doubt that allows for much finesse lategame while maintaining macro. Most people still rely way to much on early game pushes at my level ( at least terrans). as for vz and vp I still don't have a feel for how to play mid to lategame (gamesense). I suspect that's the key to getting into high diamond.
|
The most common mistake gold/plat/low diamond level players make is stop worker production which is the same as surrendering in a long term game.
Constantly produce workers throughout the entire game (stop at 90 -_-) and low diamond is no problem as long as you spend the resources and gas on units/upgrades and not stock pile them!! Also, I guess you'll need at least 70~ apm or so.
Mid diamond requires good unit choice, macro, and 'ok' micro.
High diamond I have no idea cause i'm not one but I guess everything has to be refined!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
