|
Ill try to keep this as brief as I can!
I'm in gold, and I play lots of 1v1 custom games. The range of players there is vast, However diamond players come along the most I would say. I always end up falling short of course, but when I play a platinum player I can win sometimes easily. So, my question is how far apart would you think gold and platinum players are, and how far apart do you think diamond players and platinum players are. Bonus points for things you did in your play or things you realized that made a difference to increase how well you played.
I'll start by saying after I learned that putting 2 probes in my nexus's queue (1 building 1 waiting to be built) opens a window of time to throw down a building.
This is in general because I don't your 100 food build order, and I don't your I am just the best probe rusher in the world. General tips/trick/revelations that made you better, and an answer to how far apart these leagues are.
|
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.
|
there is usually an overlap between leagues, sometimes high gold beat low to mid plat, high plat beat low diamond from what ive seen on ladder at least.
|
the only difference is better macro
|
On November 28 2010 09:29 Blademage wrote:
there is usually an overlap between leagues, sometimes high gold beat low to mid plat, high plat beat low diamond from what ive seen on ladder at least.
Yeah, good point. But then how far ahead is a diamond player from a platinum player? because if I play like a platinum player should I really be getting owned by diamond. im not complaining about getting owned by them, thats what should happen undoubtedly. Perhaps gold is just a huge ways behind diamond, which again is ok. But i just dont know...
|
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.
|
I can barely tell the difference between mid-high platinum and low diamond when I play them. Same for gold/low platinum. High diamond usually (but not always) stand out.
I feel the typical gold/low platinum player usually has an idea of what they should be doing but lacks experience and finesse in their play. Macro is usually very poor and games usually are cheese or turtle oriented. A high platinum/low diamond player usually has more sense of what they're doing but have poor macro and decision making.
The keys to getting better are:
1) Use your hotkeys all the time. From the beginning of the match you can easily make use of 3 hotkeys (scout, main, builder). Try to eliminate side scrolling/clicking the minimap as much as possible
2) Always make workers
3) Always make supply
4) Spend your money in any way possible. Once you find SOME way to spend your money you can worry about spending your money on the right things. If you can't spend that 400 minerals, expand
5) Worry about micro after you get your macro down. Then practice watching battles while using hotkeys to macro. Then practice doing both simultaneously. Remember, there are too many things to do in the game to keep up with every single one. You need to focus on the most important ones. Making more units/making those units better should be a prime focus.
Some mistakes I commonly see from players of lower caliber:
- No scouting
- Scouting without good reason
- Making units and not using them
- Not enough expanding
- Not enough worker production
- Not spending money
- Supply blocks
- Poor engagement positioning
- Poor macro mechanics (chrono, larva/creep, mule)
- No upgrades
- Getting active upgrades they don't use for a long time (i.e. stim when they don't push with it till 3:00 later)
- Poor hotkey usage/inefficient key clicks
A lot of it actually seems to usually be due to the fact that they are so preoccupied microing.
|
When I get high or drunk I 1v1 CG vs anyone, and if someone is gold/plat I'm always offering help if they ask. Bronze and silver are so set in their ways, or advice falls upon deaf ears....err eyes.
I do a lot of fun CGs where I just hammer out the first 7 minutes of my build then do some more wacky things to enjoy the game.
Many a time I've played a guy, walked him, then he asks for a re, so I play him to full capacity so they can get at least a little idea in skill gap. Afterwards, I offer basic advice and cite TL for them to come soak it all in
|
I find it varies a lot and there's no common difference between the leagues. I'm 2.1k and I recently played a T on ladder who completely outplayed me early game on Scrap Station, killing like 25 drones with banshee and hellion drops. I was debating whether or not I should just gg but decided to play it out. From the moment he took his natural, he literally played like a silver player. It was absolutely ridiculous, he was SO bad. There are a lot of players in low diamond and still some in mid/high that got to their rank simply by being good at 1 base play, but fall apart completely when they have to play a longer game.
|
Depends on what race you play maybe? For toss, difference between gold/plat is macro + expansion timing. Diamond/plat was good force-fielding.
|
On November 28 2010 09:35 OriginalBeast wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
If I'd have to say one difference though, I think the difference between platinum/low diamond and mid/high diamond players is that the former have no sense of aggression without going all-in. They usually either do some 1 base allin, or they try to go for the macro game and turtle up without putting any pressure on me as Z. I've only recently started playing players that can actually keep their aggression up while expanding behind them.
|
judging if a player is good or not cant really be done straight off what league he is in, you can easily get low diamond off doing nothing but cheese and all-ins. People just have this idea that if they are diamond they are good, but you are better off getting there learning how play the game.
|
On November 28 2010 09:41 b_unnies wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
On November 28 2010 09:37 iAmJeffReY wrote:
When I get high or drunk I 1v1 CG vs anyone, and if someone is gold/plat I'm always offering help if they ask. Bronze and silver are so set in their ways, or advice falls upon deaf ears....err eyes.
I do a lot of fun CGs where I just hammer out the first 7 minutes of my build then do some more wacky things to enjoy the game.
Many a time I've played a guy, walked him, then he asks for a re, so I play him to full capacity so they can get at least a little idea in skill gap. Afterwards, I offer basic advice and cite TL for them to come soak it all in
I agree, Bronze and Silver league players need time to improve. The second thing you said maybe a factor sometimes you just have to mass archons in a custom game, or drop landed vikings, ect; just for funzies 
|
On November 28 2010 09:33 OriginalBeast wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2010 09:29 Blademage wrote:
there is usually an overlap between leagues, sometimes high gold beat low to mid plat, high plat beat low diamond from what ive seen on ladder at least. Yeah, good point. But then how far ahead is a diamond player from a platinum player? because if I play like a platinum player should I really be getting owned by diamond. im not complaining about getting owned by them, thats what should happen undoubtedly. Perhaps gold is just a huge ways behind diamond, which again is ok. But i just dont know...
If you want to know, stop customing and ladder more. Then you will be put in the league where you belong. Then you will know and you can continue customing.
|
On November 28 2010 09:35 OriginalBeast wrote:Show nested quote +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.
While true, the difference between gold/plat/diamond is usually a macro issue. You can usually just get up to platinum with decent macro. The difference between levels of diamond are more to do with the complex things.
|
On November 28 2010 09:43 uSnAmplified wrote:
judging if a player is good or not cant really be done straight off what league he is in, you can easily get low diamond off doing nothing but cheese and all-ins. People just have this idea that if they are diamond they are good, but you are better off getting there learning how play the game.
True, but in only works one way. Being in diamond doesn't mean you're good, but not being in diamond does mean you're not good.
|
On November 28 2010 09:43 Orome wrote:Show nested quote +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
|
On November 28 2010 09:44 WeeKeong wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2010 09:33 OriginalBeast wrote:On November 28 2010 09:29 Blademage wrote:
there is usually an overlap between leagues, sometimes high gold beat low to mid plat, high plat beat low diamond from what ive seen on ladder at least. Yeah, good point. But then how far ahead is a diamond player from a platinum player? because if I play like a platinum player should I really be getting owned by diamond. im not complaining about getting owned by them, thats what should happen undoubtedly. Perhaps gold is just a huge ways behind diamond, which again is ok. But i just dont know... If you want to know, stop customing and ladder more. Then you will be put in the league where you belong. Then you will know and you can continue customing.
I ladder ALL the time. I try to have a good mix, I definately have more 1v1 ladder games than custom games for sure. reguardless, not a topic about ladder; but with ladder rating in mind.
|
On November 28 2010 09:46 b_unnies wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
I'd have to agree with b_unnies and Orome. (I am a zerg player about 1760 diamond)
First and foremost it is better macro. ("building pylons and building probes" in the words of day9)
- not getting supply caped and constantly producing off of every production structure ALL GAME.
and secondly it is that game sense of putting pressure and "poking" and stuff to apply pressure without necessarily going all-in. The mid-high diamonds seem to understand the concept of getting small advantages wherever possible from simply forcing your opponent to make more defensive units/structures instead of more and more drones.
(sorry if I missed some other good points. I just skimmed the thread and wanted to give my 2 cents)
|
On November 28 2010 09:52 ZergCushion wrote:
The mid-high diamonds seem to understand the concept of getting small advantages wherever possible from simply forcing your opponent to make more defensive units/structures instead of more and more drones.
That reminds me, a lot of low level players don't see that. I play with a friend of mine who is silver/gold level a lot in team games and he seems to see the game as solely relying on one push all the time. And it doesn't help that he has no idea how to react to cannons despite being rushed by them 20+ games in a row.
|
oh yeah and Scouting! Getting creative with scouting and reacting accordingly was what finally launched me up out of gold and very quickly up through the diamond ranks.
|
The difference is macro. As the rank goes up, everything is tighter. You can see it when you play lower ranks. You're way ahead of them if they're going a sub-optimal banshee build, or baneling bust. You can feel that you're ridiculously safe against whatever they do because the timings are off. As you move up, those timings get shorter, and at the highest ranks, which haven't been reached yet, are perfect.
With intuition, you understand when you can do what you want, but you need the macro to be able to pull that move off. You'll see windows of opportunity where you can gain an advantage, like stalker harass. But then it's moving into the upper levels and micro.
Gold and below players understand counters, and how to get to the counters they want. Higher gold and platinum players understand, but do not macro fully.
|
A couple people have said that apply pressure without going all in is a key difference, and I'd like to point it out; definitely a juicy bit of knowledge there, because Im not the kind of protoss that likes to make a bunch of cannons turtle and hope for a macro game, however I do find myself having problems applying pressure, in particular to zerg with approximately 1 spine crawler
|
On November 28 2010 09:49 Orome wrote:Show nested quote +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
|
On November 28 2010 09:59 b_unnies wrote:Show nested quote +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
Macro means managing your base. I think knowing when to expand is a part of macro. The entire game is either micro or macro. Good macro means everything even related to macro. Knowing when to expand, knowing when to upgrade, keeping resources low, always be producing, only research what is needed. A good build order is just an optimal macro situation.
|
gold=aggressive folks that just 4gate or allin
plat=gold peoples trying to do something other than 4gate and all-in (they're prob less scary than gold players)
diamond=players that have good macro and understand the game at some level..
its prob been discussed 500 times though, i dont see why to make a thread about it -_-;
and honestly.. most good players dont ladder.. they have some kinda cult where they just sit there and obs eachother in 10player 1v1games all day -_-; kinda boring tbh lol
|
On November 28 2010 09:49 Orome wrote:Show nested quote +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.
keeping your money low isn't the definition of good macro, it is an effect of good macro
macro is most basically how much stuff you can make
spending all your money on supply depots or queuing up 5 units in each production building isn't good macro, even if it does keep your money low
OT: There is no one distinct difference in level, and its not like moving to diamond makes you suddenly better. It's a gradual progression that happens to be broken into chunks. Work on improving one aspect at a time (mechanics is generally the most important), and you will find yourself rise
|
OriginalBeast. I am by no means an expert. I am learning so much everyday as a zerg. But in response to your post...
If you go say 3 warp gate blink stalker on xel naga against a zerg fe and just dance back and forth picking off things when you have the advantage. I guarantee you that actually utilising those stalkers like that will result in the zerg not being able to saturate his natural even NEARLY as efficently as he would like because he will of course be making a ton of roaches. Meanwhile you are expanding yourself... and so the game progresses and assuming you are equally competent players you will bith be on an even footing for mid-late game.
If you are the superior player it is likely you will force errors that will win you the game
|
On November 28 2010 09:32 b_unnies wrote:
the only difference is better macro
This is true I would say the only main thing that sets these leagues apart is macro and very subtle changes in build orders.
I would say this trend is consistent up until mid-high diamond once players want to step into top diamond thats when fine tuning and great control really start coming into play aside from that more often then not having more shit wins you the game..
|
On November 28 2010 10:02 vica 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 Macro means managing your base. I think knowing when to expand is a part of macro. The entire game is either micro or macro. Good macro means everything even related to macro. Knowing when to expand, knowing when to upgrade, keeping resources low, always be producing, only research what is needed. A good build order is just an optimal macro situation.
Thanks for ending the debate on what macro is. I think the last sentence is good information, I let go of the theory of build orders a long time ago, I go for a general look to my base getting one thing after the other. I feel its the best way to play because as protoss a lot of what you have to do is make the units you have money for.
To explain my last sentence. Terran barracks for expamle, if you have a tech lab, generally you dont make marines; marauders or reapers is what your going to get, most likely in mid/ late game marauders but if your have a reactor marines are going to be made. So more direct unit choices are made. As I see it in protoss the units I make are a direct result of having too much gas/ minerals, or having a good mix of both.
|
gold -> plat is just macro
but plat -> diamond is better understanding of the game (when to expand, what builds counter what etc)
|
Here is my experience of gold, platinum and diamond leagues. I myself have played ~400 games total, started in silver league, advanced up to diamond league, stayed there for a while and then fell down to platinum after losing to zerg 20 times in 25 matches or so.
Anyway, GOLD:
-Gold players do not usually make stupid or weird mistakes
-APM/Micro/Macro is relatively decent, but not great
-Not really graps of tactics of weaknesses
PLATINUM:
-Good to great macro/micro skills
-Decent grasp of general tactics, unless they got here by perfecting and executing a single tactic for hundreds of games (like a cheese)
-No innovation, usually plays with "mainstream" tactics
DIAMOND:
-Great micro macro/micro skills
-Knows tactics
-Shows innovation
Now, not all diamond players are that great, but I have yet to meet one that is a complete run-over. Usually diamonds can also give a decent discussion on what I/he did wrong and so on. I've also seen some very extraordinary stuff from some low-mid diamonds I've fought (1400+). One zerg did some brilliant nydus worms when he couldn't get trough my ramp wall-off, for example. I've seen "hidden" expansions as 2nd bases instead of naturals, avoiding forcefields with burrow micro, zerg "300 food pushes", dropping siege tanks in most nasty/abusive places etc.
Of course not every diamond is great and not every gold is bad, but that's how I'd rate the difference.
|
On November 28 2010 09:59 b_unnies wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
On November 28 2010 10:15 lol12tree wrote:
gold -> plat is just macro
but plat -> diamond is better understanding of the game (when to expand, what builds counter what etc)
It's funny, because my macro is HORRIBLE usually compared to the people I end up playing (slight exaggeration, but it's certainly sub-par). However, the only reason I end up winning is because of when I time my pushes, my army composition, and positioning for battles.
I'm a platinum, and I've met gold player's who out macro the crap out of me, but I just win with better decision making. Same for diamond player's I've had matches with.
|
I do agree with b_unnies.
Between Gold, Plat and Diamond, most players are still working on better macro, and getting strategies that work.
Once you start hitting mid diamond, thats where the Micro really starts to come in.
|
I recently played on my friends acc and got him from 1.6k to 2k in plat, and i have to say everyone i played seemed pretty damn awful... ranging from 1k platinum players to 2k diamond players, none put up a fight. So imo, there isn't much of a dif between gold/plat or plat/diamond although the dif between gold/diamond is prolly pretty big. I'm a 2.4k random player myself and not to brag, but i was light years ahead of those players.
|
im plat but i feel i should be in diamond since im beating diamond players on 50:50 and like 90:10 vs plat players :\
|
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!!
|
Your hidden ELO rating doesnt change when you switch leagues so some of these lists are a bit justified. there are too many variables to measure skill level by leagues alone.
|
I can't tell the difference really between gold and low diamond. Watched a 400 diamond (obs) play the other day, and it was awful... he played a level ~1300 diamond who by no means was very good himself, yet had something liek 5 marines + 2 siege tanks + 1 medivac vs like 1 immortal, 9 stalkers, 7 zealots. They both went FE builds. It was just so onesided :S.
|
On November 28 2010 09:41 Orome wrote:
If I'd have to say one difference though, I think the difference between platinum/low diamond and mid/high diamond players is that the former have no sense of aggression without going all-in. They usually either do some 1 base allin, or they try to go for the macro game and turtle up without putting any pressure on me as Z. I've only recently started playing players that can actually keep their aggression up while expanding behind them.
Being a low-mid Platinum, he speaks the truth. I can Macro fine, and 1 base all-in fine, but I cannot be aggressive while I Macro.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
