|
Obviously whatever is fun to you is what you should be doing. That being said, adapting builds is how you become better. You might start with a build, then find out that if your opponent opens gas you need to make an adjustment to keep safe. After playing a build 20-50 times, watching replays and learning the triggers to set you on a deviation from the original you'll have a solid build. The reason people take pro player builds is that to a certain extent they've already done alot of the fine tuning, although you wont necessarily understand the reason yourself till you play with it. But it will take much less time to plug the holes in a well known pro level build then one you make up yourself.
Now if you want to get creative thats fine, but just remember that it takes alot of work to make a new build. It isnt as simple as theorycrafting a couple units and a timing together, it will take quite a few games to learn what its good vs what it will die against and how to scout such that you pick up the information you need that will be relevant to your build. That being said, i have crafted my own builds, that are not based on pro level plays. I'm a creative? I don't feel like it cause i've practiced all my builds at least 50 times to plug the holes.
Quite simply if you want to be creative and your not top level, your doing it for fun and you will not improve as fast as a tested build.
|
There are a whole lot of ignorant replies to this, and i don't have enough time to address them all.
First of all, the post was not to address what build orders people were following. You can follow whatever build order you feel like doing. If you prefer to repeat the same 4-gate no brain build every single game, go right ahead. No sweat off my back. It's completely up to you. What i was TRYING to get accross, but obviously to no avail, is that don't assume that the 4-gate is going to work all the time. Don't think it is the greatest thing on the fucking earth. Don't be afraid to try new things. Maybe instead of one assimilator 4-gate try a two assimilator 4-gate. I don't fucking care. Just don't be afraid to embrace your imagination.
Second, if you read a post designed to help motivate and encourage people (lower level players) to enjoy the game they're playing and not to get too stressed and caught up with winning/losing, why the fuck would you bash it if you don't agree with it? Now, i know i'm beating a dead horse by scolding the internet, but come on, people. If you're a master's player, why the fuck do you give a shit what bronze players are doing, anyways? It's fucking unbelievable the outcry this has gotten. I'm horrified at how ignorant this community can be.
Have at 'er!
|
You know if Ray Lewis plays linebacker different than I want him to, and I'm the defensive coordinator I ask him about it. If its a high school kid I tell him to play it like he is told and stick to fundamentals. Honestly your creativity at below high high masters just getting lucky when you win because your playing players that don't have the overall knowledge to react to any situation like a professional player.
Yah its awesome to learn cool new small tricks, but your not going to change the matchups at lower levels.
|
On January 13 2012 18:51 Priestt wrote:
There are a whole lot of ignorant replies to this, and i don't have enough time to address them all.
First of all, the post was not to address what build orders people were following. You can follow whatever build order you feel like doing. If you prefer to repeat the same 4-gate no brain build every single game, go right ahead. No sweat off my back. It's completely up to you. What i was TRYING to get accross, but obviously to no avail, is that don't assume that the 4-gate is going to work all the time. Don't think it is the greatest thing on the fucking earth. Don't be afraid to try new things. Maybe instead of one assimilator 4-gate try a two assimilator 4-gate. I don't fucking care. Just don't be afraid to embrace your imagination.
Second, if you read a post designed to help motivate and encourage people (lower level players) to enjoy the game they're playing and not to get too stressed and caught up with winning/losing, why the fuck would you bash it if you don't agree with it? Now, i know i'm beating a dead horse by scolding the internet, but come on, people. If you're a master's player, why the fuck do you give a shit what bronze players are doing, anyways? It's fucking unbelievable the outcry this has gotten. I'm horrified at how ignorant this community can be.
Have at 'er!
The amount of indignation is over the top lol. Pretty sure just about everyone said that if you're going to make builds for the fun of it, then go ahead.
I also think most of those posters thought that you implied that your making your own builds is actually time-efficient in terms of improvement. Pretty sure that's the point that most ppl who have a bone to pick have been picking, not that it's wrong to make your own builds for the fun and enjoyment of it, because obviously there's nothing wrong with that.
|
I'm assuming that was semi-addressed at me, so:
I'm not bashing anyone, go ahead and be "creative" if you want. There's nothing wrong with coming up with your own builds, it's a fucking game and at the end of the day we're all playing for fun. You can win a lot of games by coming up with a nifty build all on your own, and if you do, more power to you. You just probably won't advance very far if you come up with something that works at low level and try to apply it as you rank up, because the game changes completely the higher and higher you get. If you really want to improve rapidly, copying pro strategies/builds is the way to go, but if you want to win a lot of games at your current level, it definitely works well to come up with your own build. You can play to your own strengths and come up with something that you can do well, and that's a great way to approach the game, if a bit short-sighted. Just don't expect it to propel you to GM.
|
Only read the title, but...
I'll just respond to that... sc2 is not that open to creativity other then subtle deviations in builds and trickery play, hence why sc2 is not that good of a rts game... it's just the only rts game out there.
|
The ignorant posters are part of a cold undead zombie community that worships perfection and MVP.
We assume that playing bad is bad and playing good is good.
We do not care about feelings. We care about winning and being correct.
Gotta hold posts to that standard otherwise we will come out of our holes and criticize en mass.
|
On January 13 2012 17:35 Let it Raine wrote:
standard logic is: if pros dont do it, then it sucks.
but that just isnt true. pro zergs still 14 gas 14 pool in zvp, and that sucks.
hey tell us what is better! i dont know 
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
On January 13 2012 18:43 Priestt wrote:Show nested quote +
Umm, no. This attitude is stupid. Sorry.
If you're below Masters you should ABSOLUTELY NOT be trying to come up with your own ideas.
It's like martial arts. You don't sign up for a fucking martial arts class, walk up to the instructor on the first day and be all like, "hey man, these kata are like sooo limiting people's creativity man, I have lots of new ideas about how not to get stabbed in a street fight, they toootally work when I practice them against my 7 year old sister!"
You shut the fuck up and repeat the kata (what has been discovered to work through massive amounts of trial and error derived from the collective experience of hundreds of people way more badass than you will ever be) 1000 times a day for years. Then, once you have your black belt, you can BEGIN to experiment with some variations - because by then you actually have some real understanding of the fundamental mechanics.
This is exactly the type of thinking that is detrimental to the community. To believe that you can only begin to use the right side of your brain once you have hit masters is OUTRAGEOUS. I am shocked and appalled that you even believe that. Oh, and your karate analogy is bullshit. How many different forms of kung fu are there? Can you tell me that? Each one of them has their own form of fighting and defense. Just because the katas in shito ryu are different than in shotokan, doesn't make either one wrong.
nope..
what you said is bullshit..
his point is, if you are below masters, you obviously don't understand the game well enough or aren't mechanically sound enough to make your own *creative* little builds.
that is, you have to know the game well enough to make better use of creativity.
Of course you can still use the right side of your brain before that, but are the build orders you come up with gonna be as efficient or effective than what pros have spent countless hours perfecting? Obviously not.
As for the karate analogy, it's not bullshit. There are tons of schools of martial arts, but they aren't just made up by some random creative kid who knew next to nothing about fighting. A good portion of them evolved from other known schools of martial arts. And that's the parallel. You don't just come up with some creative bs out of nowhere.
You start from the beaten path, and as you gain more experience and knowledge with whatever you are doing, you deviate from that accordingly. And you simply shouldn't follow everything a pro says to the word. SC2 is a dynamic game, things are different in every match. You can't just follow every detail of a certain build all the time.
You have to decide what the most efficient counter or action to do all the time, and this is exactly where creativity gets limited. What's the most efficient counter to mass roaches for protoss early on? Immortals. If that's not possible, you go to the next best thing, and so on. That's what SC2 is all about, efficiency and viability. You could tech to phoenix or w/e for creativity, sure, but is it as efficient and viable? Those are the questions you have to ask yourself all the time.
|
On January 13 2012 18:48 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2012 18:44 Authweight wrote:
I think there's a lot of truth in the OP. It is very easy to mimic a pro's build without understanding why it works. Ultimately you can try and copy the pro's play, but that doesn't really teach you how to play, it just teaches you how to execute a one-dimesional build. The only way you will understand why the pro's do things a certain way is by trying it other ways to see what happens. If you don't try other things, then your game knowledge will be shallow and unable to deal with out of the ordinary situations.
Game knowledge is a big part of winning any game, just as important as mechanics. If all you do is hammer out specific, linear builds, then you will lose to people with the same mechanics who actually understand the game. No, what you do is watch a lot of replays of pros doing the build you're doing, and see how they react to various things from their opponent. If you blindly try to copy a pro replay past a certain point, yeah, you're a stupid copycat who has no idea what they're actually doing, but nobody is saying to do that. When people say "imitate the pros" they mean that you should carefully observe their reactions to various builds and adjust your play accordingly, rather than just go "mma drops at 10:30 in this game therefore i will always drop at 10:30 always."
I feel like watching replays, while useful, will not garner as much improvement as actually playing the game. Getting general ideas and timings from replays is great, but if you spend tons of time watching replays then your mechanics will suffer compared to the person who learned by doing. Besides, I think there's a really important value of game knowledge as its own thing, and experience and experimentation are the things that will give you deep game knowledge. Watching replays and streams will help this a little bit, but active learning and experimentation have a very important place in the learning process as well.
And remember, there's nothing wrong with losing, especially when you're trying new things. Some of the replies I've seen in this thread act almost as though there's something morally wrong with doing a bad build. I advocate deliberately doing builds you know are bad, so you understand why they're bad. We all know carriers are bad. But the process of forcing yourself to use carriers can teach you a lot about how the game works, and might even tell you if there are occasional circumstances in which carriers are ok. If carriers can be used in GSL games, then there's certainly no reason not to try them out in ladder matches.
|
On January 13 2012 18:57 Technique wrote:
Only read the title, but...
I'll just respond to that... sc2 is not that open to creativity other then subtle deviations in builds and trickery play, hence why sc2 is not that good of a rts game... it's just the only rts game out there.
There's quite a lot of room for creativity. Problem is that if you use the same maps for a year, then obviously the room for early game creativity drops off. Anything too often worn becomes dull after all.
Also the really creative builds tend to be really mechanically demanding haha, such little room for error. They are really beautiful to watch when they work, but can just as easily not work and thus maybe not suitable for tourney play. For example ForGG's game 1 vs Leenock. Crazy build, but it was quite obvious even his mechanics weren't up to the task to follow through in the late midgame.
|
On January 13 2012 18:51 Priestt wrote:
There are a whole lot of ignorant replies to this, and i don't have enough time to address them all.
First of all, the post was not to address what build orders people were following. You can follow whatever build order you feel like doing. If you prefer to repeat the same 4-gate no brain build every single game, go right ahead. No sweat off my back. It's completely up to you. What i was TRYING to get accross, but obviously to no avail, is that don't assume that the 4-gate is going to work all the time. Don't think it is the greatest thing on the fucking earth. Don't be afraid to try new things. Maybe instead of one assimilator 4-gate try a two assimilator 4-gate. I don't fucking care. Just don't be afraid to embrace your imagination.
Second, if you read a post designed to help motivate and encourage people (lower level players) to enjoy the game they're playing and not to get too stressed and caught up with winning/losing, why the fuck would you bash it if you don't agree with it? Now, i know i'm beating a dead horse by scolding the internet, but come on, people. If you're a master's player, why the fuck do you give a shit what bronze players are doing, anyways? It's fucking unbelievable the outcry this has gotten. I'm horrified at how ignorant this community can be.
Have at 'er!
If you want to screw around and have fun, then go right ahead, no one's stopping you.
What everyone is saying that your promotion of "creativity" in order to win is completely wrong. Is it fine to try 2-gas 4-gate? Sure, go ahead. If you are playing to win and want to get to a high level, then no. Play it standard, play it safe. Getting up to high masters and having the mechanics and game knowledge to do the weird add-on timings or weird tech-up route is what allows you to be creative. Coming up with terrible builds and making them work only at platinum is what makes them so bad. Maybe the reason you're stuck at Plat is because you can't get over the mindset that you're somehow on level footing with people that play this game for eight hours a day, refining builds. You're not. Get good first, then make stuff later.
Finally, I'm just gonna say I feel like your idea of "creative" is slightly off. Not everything is as revolutionary is the Bisu build was, or the transition somewhere along the line from crazy baneling busts to calculated drone play. The pros do show their creativity: just in smaller ways.
|
On January 13 2012 18:19 rauk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2012 18:15 Priestt wrote:
Just because my macro isn't perfect doesn't mean it's not a viable strategy. actually that's exactly what it means. if you're playing subpar players, your build works because they're bad, not because your build is viable when both players are good.
And what does that matter to him, exactly?
If a player at level X can beat other players at level X with a certain strat, then how exactly is the strategy invalid? It works at the level it was intended for. Once you start hitting players that are good enough to hold your attack, you take a second look at it and figure out if you can improve it somehow or need a bigger change in style - you know, actually strategizing instead of just copying playstyles off liquipedia.
You could maybe make an argument about a longer learning process by having to learn 'bad' strats, then relearn 'good' ones later on (as your level rises), but I think the effect is fairly minor. Learning a new build or playstyle is peanuts compared to the learning process associated with the general SC2 skills: awareness, macro, game sense and execution. Those are typically the ones that are going to dictate your general skill level.
|
On January 13 2012 19:03 Authweight wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2012 18:48 corpuscle wrote:On January 13 2012 18:44 Authweight wrote:
I think there's a lot of truth in the OP. It is very easy to mimic a pro's build without understanding why it works. Ultimately you can try and copy the pro's play, but that doesn't really teach you how to play, it just teaches you how to execute a one-dimesional build. The only way you will understand why the pro's do things a certain way is by trying it other ways to see what happens. If you don't try other things, then your game knowledge will be shallow and unable to deal with out of the ordinary situations.
Game knowledge is a big part of winning any game, just as important as mechanics. If all you do is hammer out specific, linear builds, then you will lose to people with the same mechanics who actually understand the game. No, what you do is watch a lot of replays of pros doing the build you're doing, and see how they react to various things from their opponent. If you blindly try to copy a pro replay past a certain point, yeah, you're a stupid copycat who has no idea what they're actually doing, but nobody is saying to do that. When people say "imitate the pros" they mean that you should carefully observe their reactions to various builds and adjust your play accordingly, rather than just go "mma drops at 10:30 in this game therefore i will always drop at 10:30 always." I feel like watching replays, while useful, will not garner as much improvement as actually playing the game. Getting general ideas and timings from replays is great, but if you spend tons of time watching replays then your mechanics will suffer compared to the person who learned by doing. Besides, I think there's a really important value of game knowledge as its own thing, and experience and experimentation are the things that will give you deep game knowledge. Watching replays and streams will help this a little bit, but active learning and experimentation have a very important place in the learning process as well. And remember, there's nothing wrong with losing, especially when you're trying new things. Some of the replies I've seen in this thread act almost as though there's something morally wrong with doing a bad build. I advocate deliberately doing builds you know are bad, so you understand why they're bad. We all know carriers are bad. But the process of forcing yourself to use carriers can teach you a lot about how the game works, and might even tell you if there are occasional circumstances in which carriers are ok. If carriers can be used in GSL games, then there's certainly no reason not to try them out in ladder matches.
Hmm it is possible somewhat to improve your mechanics even when you don't play that much. I don't actually practice very much, but I actually do simulate my play quite a lot (for example when trying to fall asleep). It reinforces reflex reactions, so that I think and discover outside the game, then try to put those discoveries into reflex. Your hands are defintely fast enough to outpace your mind in most cases, because your mind isn't 100% set. So, as long as you keep your mind active, and your hands are not clumsy, you really can improve your mechanics. Just gotta simulate the visual input and simulate the thought processes/actions.
p.s. Carriers are damn great in the right composition and time.
|
On January 13 2012 19:03 Authweight wrote:
I feel like watching replays, while useful, will not garner as much improvement as actually playing the game. Getting general ideas and timings from replays is great, but if you spend tons of time watching replays then your mechanics will suffer compared to the person who learned by doing. Besides, I think there's a really important value of game knowledge as its own thing, and experience and experimentation are the things that will give you deep game knowledge. Watching replays and streams will help this a little bit, but active learning and experimentation have a very important place in the learning process as well.
And remember, there's nothing wrong with losing, especially when you're trying new things. Some of the replies I've seen in this thread act almost as though there's something morally wrong with doing a bad build. I advocate deliberately doing builds you know are bad, so you understand why they're bad. We all know carriers are bad. But the process of forcing yourself to use carriers can teach you a lot about how the game works, and might even tell you if there are occasional circumstances in which carriers are ok. If carriers can be used in GSL games, then there's certainly no reason not to try them out in ladder matches.
Losing with a good build will teach you a lot more than losing with a bad build, because if you lose with a build you know is bad, you just learned that something that's bad is bad, whereas if you lose with a good build, you can find flaws in your execution that explain why you lost
also I don't know how you turned "watch a ton of replays" into "watch replays instead of practicing," obviously playing the game will help more than watching what the pros do, but there's a balance.
edit:
Hmm it is possible somewhat to improve your mechanics even when you don't play that much. I don't actually practice very much, but I actually do simulate my play quite a lot (for example when trying to fall asleep). It reinforces reflex reactions, so that I think and discover outside the game, then try to put those discoveries into reflex. Your hands are defintely fast enough to outpace your mind in most cases, because your mind isn't 100% set. So, as long as you keep your mind active, and your hands are not clumsy, you really can improve your mechanics. Just gotta simulate the visual input and simulate the thought processes/actions.
Seriously? Muscle memory is called muscle memory for a reason. Your brain comes up with certain routines for your muscles through practice (and only through practice), and it eventually becomes second nature to you because your hands "do it without you thinking." For example, if you notice a drop killing your probes, and you think "oh shit he's dropping, okay, what do I do, oh, grab my army and pull my probes, got it!" you already lost 10 probes for no reason because the guy who's gotten dropped 10 billion times has already pulled his probes, sent a part of his army over, and warped in 4 stalkers before he even knew what was happening.
You don't get better mechanics by lying in bed thinking, ever. That's not what mechanics is.
|
On January 13 2012 17:32 Priestt wrote:
- I'm a rank 1 platinum player desperately trying to improve.
This have got to be a bald faced lie.
All the stuff you are writing about 'detrimental to the community' and 'not letting it stop us from using our imagination' etc ... just proves that you are not here to improve and get better.
If you wanted to improve, you should focus on how to improve - there are several guides on this forum for that purpose.
If you want to be creative, do whatever you want. It doesn't matter. You will however be improving slower than if you copied some professionals.
The time to be creative is when you are knocking on the door to GM league. Because that's when you are actually starting to play against good players, and you can get actual feedback on your creativity on whether or not it's viable.
Playing platinum? I am sure that master players could win 9 / 10 matches in platinum just making one unit + economy (and queens for zerg) and upgrades. Marine, roaches, and stalkers. And declaring before the game starts what they would be doing ... so whatever stupid shit works in platinum, it's an absolute waste of time practicing it, because what you should be practicing, is the builds that will be viable in masters league and beyond. And that you simply can't test and figure out for yourself when you are not playing against those players.
... as for Huk not being creative ... no he is not TLO ... who is the better player again?
|
On January 13 2012 19:10 aebriol wrote:
... as for Huk not being creative ... no he is not TLO ... who is the better player again?
And even TLO admits it himself:
Roboteddy : Do you wish non-standard creative play were more usual and feasible? Do you think it would be possible to design an RTS that encourages it?
TLO : I think everything can be made possible in a complex enviromnent, the misconception is that you can make up for bad mechanics with creativity. If you want to be succesful your mechanics have to be on the highest level (something I want to achieve eventually).
|
On January 13 2012 19:03 Authweight wrote:
I feel like watching replays, while useful, will not garner as much improvement as actually playing the game. Getting general ideas and timings from replays is great, but if you spend tons of time watching replays then your mechanics will suffer compared to the person who learned by doing.
Fastest way I have ever improved, is when I do the following:
- Write down an exact timing guide for what NesTea or Idra or Stephano is doing in one specific matchup.
- Include workers, rally points, buildings, production, in game time. upgrade timings, drones on / off gas.
- Include starter worker micro (like doubling up on close mineral patches, and when they don't).
- Include scouting pattern, overlord scouting patterns, and timings.
- Practice against very easy AI until I can duplicate what they are doing for the first 5-6-7 minutes of the game (or until I see clear deviations, for example when big attacks start, etc).
It might not be very fun, it certainly isn't creative, but it's a certain way to improve your game an incredible amount in just 3-4 hours real time. Unless you are already above low masters.
I prefer doing it with NesTea, because he often have opening builds that can deviate at a later point in time - especially in ZvT. Watching his games against MvP at Blizzcon was quite illuminating.
|
On January 13 2012 19:08 corpuscle wrote:Show nested quote +Hmm it is possible somewhat to improve your mechanics even when you don't play that much. I don't actually practice very much, but I actually do simulate my play quite a lot (for example when trying to fall asleep). It reinforces reflex reactions, so that I think and discover outside the game, then try to put those discoveries into reflex. Your hands are defintely fast enough to outpace your mind in most cases, because your mind isn't 100% set. So, as long as you keep your mind active, and your hands are not clumsy, you really can improve your mechanics. Just gotta simulate the visual input and simulate the thought processes/actions. Seriously? Muscle memory is called muscle memory for a reason. Your brain comes up with certain routines for your muscles through practice (and only through practice), and it eventually becomes second nature to you because your hands "do it without you thinking." For example, if you notice a drop killing your probes, and you think "oh shit he's dropping, okay, what do I do, oh, grab my army and pull my probes, got it!" you already lost 10 probes for no reason because the guy who's gotten dropped 10 billion times has already pulled his probes, sent a part of his army over, and warped in 4 stalkers before he even knew what was happening. You don't get better mechanics by lying in bed thinking, ever. That's not what mechanics is.
I've done the basic mechanics enough times that I can develop newer ones and have them ingrained to a fairly decent extent without ever having practiced them much. In this sense I can improve even when I've been away from actively playing the game for a bit. Of course I have to play to actually smoothen it out.
I do a large number of runs of many different scenarios, to prepare myself mentally for how I should react, what sequence of basic mechanics, so that I iron down the path. Thus when I actually have to execute based on some trigger, I don't have to think about it, I've already determined the path I must take before the game began.
|
from personal experience
when i made builds before i was high level, my "game breaking" builds always had flaws that my opponents weren't exposing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
