Can platinum players coach effectively? - Page 8
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Grokken
Sweden245 Posts
| ||
Ilintar
Poland794 Posts
* trying out suboptimal build orders to get a better feel of the game * playing risky strategies "for fun" while not having the manual skills to carry them out * playing too few games, thus not having a good feel of the proper timings * having insufficient manual skills (very low APM / very bad multitasking) * having gaps in the fundamental skills due to lack of playing time (forgetting to build supplies/pylons/overlords, forgetting to train probes/SCVs/call mules/spawn larvas) All of the above have little to no influence on whether said player can successfully coach, especially if he/she is aware of the abovementioned flaws in his/her game. I think a lot of people are overplaying the difference between platinum/diamond players and master players when it comes to metalevel skills such as understanding the game. From looking at good players in SC:BW, it's much more often the case of a single build / single strategy being trained to perfection, often employing the fact that few opposing players have the skill and understanding needed to exploit any flaws in a given dominant strategy. | ||
Geordie
United Kingdom653 Posts
And besides the point, I think anybody bronze-gold doesnt really need coaching and all they need is to get a lot of games under their belt as if your macro is decent you will crush everybody in the lower leagues. | ||
Zheryn
Sweden3653 Posts
| ||
eohs
United States677 Posts
| ||
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
| ||
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
Ilintar
Poland794 Posts
On August 07 2011 23:44 Inori wrote: That's all just excuse for people to feel like they're better than they are. I do all that, especially the lack of playing time (due to work I have month+ gaps in-between login times), I still manage to play even with mid masters people (and can take out a game or two from high masters/GM if I'm serious about it). Bottom line: if you're good "in theory" you should be easly able to hit masters. If you can't hit masters, then you shouldn't be coaching, sorry. How's that an excuse? I do remember the difference in my playing skill back in the SC:BW days, when I spent some time playing / honing my skills and focused on a single race I was able to hit B on PGT, when I fooled around, played sporadically and played random I barely got out of D+/C-. Nothing in my understanding of game theory had changed in between. I'm simply pointing out that motor skills and habit might play more of a role in your rank than you're willing to admit. I do agree there's a cutoff point below which you probably shouldn't coach, but I don't think that cutoff point is as high as some people here suggest (eg. grandmaster / high master). | ||
synapse
China13814 Posts
| ||
EggYsc2
620 Posts
You dont need to pay a pro $60/h to tell you to make drones =/ I find buying coaching outrageously ineffective. I got from bronze-masters by myself | ||
me_viet
Australia1350 Posts
| ||
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Basically, a platinum coach is a cheerleader and a secretary. I play in masters as protoss and get a good record, but there's no way in hell I could coach a Zerg or a Terran effectively even though I have watched countless hours of tournaments and first person streaming of every race. I couldn't coach a Protoss player either. I would be useless to pros, anyway. | ||
Ilintar
Poland794 Posts
On August 08 2011 00:45 Inori wrote: Did you actually read my post? That's an excuse because if you're good enough, you're good enough. In fact, main difference between plat and masters is the theory - build order knowledge, meta game trends, overall game sense, timings knowledge. Motor skills difference fully kicks in at like very high masters/GM level. Below that you can get even score against active players. If you're good "in theory", that is. ![]() I read your post, I just disagree on the assumptions, which I believe I even illustrated using an example, so let me explain. Let's assume for a moment that D+/C- on PGT corresponded to platinum level and B was mid-master (I think that's a pretty reasonable estimate). Then, what I'm trying to tell you that my level changed from mid-master to platinum without any noticeable change in my grasp of theory. I think your claim that the main difference between platinum and master is theory is incorrect - I would agree that the main difference between master and grandmaster is theory, but not lower. Also, a lot of the things which you list as "theory" (build order knowledge, timings) are not what I consider to be theory in general. By "theory" I mean general tactical/strategic skill, knowledge of hard/soft counters, specifics of matchup dynamics, strenghts and weaknesses of each race with respect to specific game styles and so on. Timings and build orders are more a question of skill than of theoretical knowledge. | ||
iYiYi
United States489 Posts
| ||
LisKelicious
Germany36 Posts
![]() | ||
Sated
England4983 Posts
| ||
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
Besides this whole coaching thing is stupid to begin with. | ||
blabber
United States4448 Posts
| ||
FezTheCaliph
United States492 Posts
| ||
| ||