|
On March 08 2012 18:51 GIhi wrote:
I've played Call of Duty at a fairly high level, didn't do bad in arena on WoW either.
SC2 was my first RTS. It took me quite some reading and watching to understand how the game worked, but nonetheless I slowly advanced from bottom bronze to upper bronze and after a month or so I got to silver, next season I got to gold where I am now. I don't play a lot but I think a good mentality is the most important thing while laddering. Also TRY to be fast, TRY to use ur keybinds like a crazy nestea mofo, TRY to scout and react.
If u have been playing for that long u must know a lot of tactics, and u must know how to react to it.
U can get to platinum by 6pooling with shit micro but that's not starcraft is it?
Play like u should, improve like u should, and TRY!
or to GM
|
Good to see you're enjoying yourself at the what level you play in. Whether you're a GM pro or bronze just got the game yesterday it doesn't matter as long as you're enjoying yourself. I played BW a bit when I was a kid and it had been fairly new, but i never played at the level I play SC2 or even knew people did haha. What helped me get out of bronze is having a set game plan, always tried to keep my money coming in while building units, and learning what to look for to stop obvious builds. TBH.. the scouting I think is one of the biggest things people don't focus on early. If you can determine at a decent level what your oppenent is going to do you can play to that.
|
I don't think that we've reached this point yet, but I think it's worth mentioning that there always has to be bronze players. If everyone gets promoted that would destroy the ladder system. This isn't to say everyone can't get promoted, but there has to be some percentage of players who won't.
|
On March 21 2012 07:11 Ambiplat wrote:
I don't think that we've reached this point yet, but I think it's worth mentioning that there always has to be bronze players. If everyone gets promoted that would destroy the ladder system. This isn't to say everyone can't get promoted, but there has to be some percentage of players who won't.
Do you mean that the line between Bronze and Silver moves or people won't get promoted just to keep a population on Bronze?
I would think that IF there are no new players coming into the system then eventually Bronze would empty (assuming the Bronze players are learning the game).
|
For Bronze level players who don't understand why they can't get out of Bronze, there's probably a good deal of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
At every level, including pros, one should always see areas to improve. There seems to be 2 major reasons why someone who is Bronze, stays in Bronze despite playing 10+ games a day.
1) They are already at their physical limit for how fast they can press buttons, move the mouse, click buttons, direct stuff. My SO has an APM of about 35 and she physically cannot do stuff faster. With that said, she's high Gold so maybe that's where the Gold threshold is.
2) They are already at their mental limit. I have a friend who is exhausted mentally after 1 game because there are too many things to think about and he gets overwhelmed. He is in Gold and does not have the mental fortitude to play more than 3 games at a time. Some people are not quick decision-makers. Some people cannot plan more than 1-2 steps ahead and therefore cannot think past the mid-game. Some people just are not analytical enough to figure out what they're doing wrong and even when told, cannot extrapolate concepts beyond the exact situation that they are given (this is obvious given the hundreds of (H) threads of Diamond and below players not being able to figure out why they lost).
|
On March 21 2012 04:21 TacticalBadger wrote:
I've just watched a gold-level NA zerg and holy sh*t this guy was BAD. He was happily floating 6k minerals at 110 food and I don't believe I've seen a single inject in 5 minutes time. He actually won. If that's how gold looks on NA, then I'd hate to see the bronze.
I'm starting to think that the problem might have less to do with bronze and more with the american server...
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark.
|
On March 21 2012 04:25 Josh_rakoons wrote:
Masters on NA is actually pretty close to platinum/low diamond on EU and KR, some of the decisions and micro on that server is abysmal...
Can someone please provide replays of a platinum player in EU taking multiple games of a masters player in NA. I'm not debating whether EU is better than NA or not - as I've never played on EU - but I find it incredulously hard to believe that if I'm plat on EU, I'm suddenly equivalent to masters on NA. Maybe high diamond(EU) == low masters (NA), but plat, seriously? And even then, how is it possible that the general European population is better than the general NA population. Its possible that at the very top, European pros are better than NA pros, but can someone explain why just the random plat player in Europe is much better than a random plat player in America.
|
On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark.
A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious.
|
On March 21 2012 08:00 mahi29 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 04:25 Josh_rakoons wrote:
Masters on NA is actually pretty close to platinum/low diamond on EU and KR, some of the decisions and micro on that server is abysmal... Can someone please provide replays of a platinum player in EU taking multiple games of a masters player in NA. I'm not debating whether EU is better than NA or not - as I've never played on EU - but I find it incredulously hard to believe that if I'm plat on EU, I'm suddenly equivalent to masters on NA. Maybe high diamond(EU) == low masters (NA), but plat, seriously? And even then, how is it possible that the general European population is better than the general NA population. Its possible that at the very top, European pros are better than NA pros, but can someone explain why just the random plat player in Europe is much better than a random plat player in America.
It would only be logical that one servers x league is better than another servers x league. Leagues simple show where people are compared to other players. On a server with only Korean pros and whitera, whitera would be bronze. EU has a stronger non console gaming scene.
|
On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious.
You had 100+ APM and you were in bronze?!?! How exactly? I mean, if TL is to be believed, if you make workers and just pump units you can be atleast gold if not plat. So I ask, what were you using 100+ APM if you weren't making workers/units more or less constantly. And lets not use APM as a measure of skill - Axslav has 70-90 APM and is better than 99% of TL - most who probably have a higher APM than him.
Edit: I hope my first paragraph doesn't come off as an ad hominem attack - I'm just extremely suprised that you had over 100+ APM in bronze and were not spamming.
|
On March 21 2012 10:11 Eppa! wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:00 mahi29 wrote:On March 21 2012 04:25 Josh_rakoons wrote:
Masters on NA is actually pretty close to platinum/low diamond on EU and KR, some of the decisions and micro on that server is abysmal... Can someone please provide replays of a platinum player in EU taking multiple games of a masters player in NA. I'm not debating whether EU is better than NA or not - as I've never played on EU - but I find it incredulously hard to believe that if I'm plat on EU, I'm suddenly equivalent to masters on NA. Maybe high diamond(EU) == low masters (NA), but plat, seriously? And even then, how is it possible that the general European population is better than the general NA population. Its possible that at the very top, European pros are better than NA pros, but can someone explain why just the random plat player in Europe is much better than a random plat player in America. It would only be logical that one servers x league is better than another servers x league. Leagues simple show where people are compared to other players. On a server with only Korean pros and whitera, whitera would be bronze. EU has a stronger non console gaming scene.
I guess, but can the difference really be as wide as EU Plat = NA Masters? It seems so wide. I mean, the general consensus is that EU is harder - just I didn't think it was so much more difficult.
|
On March 21 2012 14:26 mahi29 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious. You had 100+ APM and you were in bronze?!?! How exactly? I mean, if TL is to be believed, if you make workers and just pump units you can be atleast gold if not plat. So I ask, what were you using 100+ APM if you weren't making workers/units more or less constantly. And lets not use APM as a measure of skill - Axslav has 70-90 APM and is better than 99% of TL - most who probably have a higher APM than him. Edit: I hope my first paragraph doesn't come off as an ad hominem attack - I'm just extremely suprised that you had over 100+ APM in bronze and were not spamming.
Are we talking Blizzard APM, real APM or their new effective APM (what SC2 measured apm as before the last patch)?
|
On March 21 2012 14:31 Le BucheRON wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 14:26 mahi29 wrote:On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious. You had 100+ APM and you were in bronze?!?! How exactly? I mean, if TL is to be believed, if you make workers and just pump units you can be atleast gold if not plat. So I ask, what were you using 100+ APM if you weren't making workers/units more or less constantly. And lets not use APM as a measure of skill - Axslav has 70-90 APM and is better than 99% of TL - most who probably have a higher APM than him. Edit: I hope my first paragraph doesn't come off as an ad hominem attack - I'm just extremely suprised that you had over 100+ APM in bronze and were not spamming. Are we talking Blizzard APM, real APM or their new effective APM (what SC2 measured apm as before the last patch)?
If you're referring to 100+ APM - I have no idea. I quoted TacticalBadger on that. For Axslav's - I remember in either the first or second IPL - they would show their stats before each game and his was somewhere between 70-90. So I'm assuming Blizzard APM before Blizzard started not counting repetitions. But not sure
|
On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious.
I'm broke into diamond with 20-30 through the midgame, only rising to micro stuff like scouts, posture, drop, etc. This is as terran as well. Even now my APM steadies around 30 until I start being more aggressive with my units (build and MU dependant) and only rises to around 80. I am not disabled in any way, it is just how many keystrokes I make to play this game.
The amount of "idling" that can happen in the game is sort of odd. Obviously with more actions you can do stuff faster, but with good base management and money spending it doesn't take too much zest to win matches.
|
On March 21 2012 14:52 TG Manny wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious. I'm broke into diamond with 20-30 through the midgame, only rising to micro stuff like scouts, posture, drop, etc. This is as terran as well. Even now my APM steadies around 30 until I start being more aggressive with my units (build and MU dependant) and only rises to around 80. I am not disabled in any way, it is just how many keystrokes I make to play this game. The amount of "idling" that can happen in the game is sort of odd. Obviously with more actions you can do stuff faster, but with good base management and money spending it doesn't take too much zest to win matches. what are you mondragon? Excuses
|
On March 21 2012 14:30 mahi29 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 10:11 Eppa! wrote:On March 21 2012 08:00 mahi29 wrote:On March 21 2012 04:25 Josh_rakoons wrote:
Masters on NA is actually pretty close to platinum/low diamond on EU and KR, some of the decisions and micro on that server is abysmal... Can someone please provide replays of a platinum player in EU taking multiple games of a masters player in NA. I'm not debating whether EU is better than NA or not - as I've never played on EU - but I find it incredulously hard to believe that if I'm plat on EU, I'm suddenly equivalent to masters on NA. Maybe high diamond(EU) == low masters (NA), but plat, seriously? And even then, how is it possible that the general European population is better than the general NA population. Its possible that at the very top, European pros are better than NA pros, but can someone explain why just the random plat player in Europe is much better than a random plat player in America. It would only be logical that one servers x league is better than another servers x league. Leagues simple show where people are compared to other players. On a server with only Korean pros and whitera, whitera would be bronze. EU has a stronger non console gaming scene. I guess, but can the difference really be as wide as EU Plat = NA Masters? It seems so wide. I mean, the general consensus is that EU is harder - just I didn't think it was so much more difficult.
Lol. No, he's full of shit. Im masters on NA and high diamond on EU. Probably Masters but I don't play very much (as in like 20 games per season when I get on that account). I even played some EU GM in a tourney one time and he was streaming. After the game I got on his stream and he was talking and saying I was smurfing and that there was no way I was actually diamond. So the difference is not that big, although I will agree there is a slight difference.
|
On March 21 2012 04:21 TacticalBadger wrote:
I've just watched a gold-level NA zerg and holy sh*t this guy was BAD. He was happily floating 6k minerals at 110 food and I don't believe I've seen a single inject in 5 minutes time. He actually won. If that's how gold looks on NA, then I'd hate to see the bronze.
I'm starting to think that the problem might have less to do with bronze and more with the american server...
You are assuming something based on nearly no evidence. I can show you games in which I beat a platinum player with an APM of 50 and a SQ below 40! It's because I'm not consistent. Sometimes I'm so thrown of by something that I take the whole game to recover. This game can be hectic and sometimes I'm so pumped that it paralyzes me. A gold player can definitely take a game from me in those moments (I am currently in Platinum). However, then you only take me worse moments, on average I perform a lot better. I'm consistent in beating EU-platinum, with a 55% winratio.
Anyone that can do that, is in platinum, not in gold, not in bronze.
I came back in the last week of season 5. I lost all my 3/5 placement matches and got placed in Silver. (MMR reset for not being active for over a season). It took me 24 games to be promoted to gold, around 50 more games to be back in platinum.
TL;DR
Don't judge a player on one game. Get a replay pack, see how they perform on average. Understanding what they do better that puts them in a higher league than you is what helps you increase your skill.
I'd be happy to share you a replay pack of my last 50 games if you want proof.
|
On March 21 2012 14:52 TG Manny wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious. I'm broke into diamond with 20-30 through the midgame, only rising to micro stuff like scouts, posture, drop, etc. This is as terran as well. Even now my APM steadies around 30 until I start being more aggressive with my units (build and MU dependant) and only rises to around 80. I am not disabled in any way, it is just how many keystrokes I make to play this game. The amount of "idling" that can happen in the game is sort of odd. Obviously with more actions you can do stuff faster, but with good base management and money spending it doesn't take too much zest to win matches.
I also had a friend who is in a similar position, where because he refuses to spam at all, he has unbelievably low apm. When i was in diamond i used to average (on old blizzard apm) around 45, and then after starting to spam more, it rose to around 110~ where it is now over a period of a few months, and i my spamming is the number one thing in my opinion that helped me make the leap from diamond to masters, because i used to be proud of my low apm for being efficient, but actually it was holding me back.
I think anyone who puts some effort into improving with the right teachers can become gold quite quickly, and i have a realistic view of what gold is, because i have lots of friends on skype who are at that level, and we used to play koths sometimes where they take it in turn trying to beat me, (and one in maybe 10 games they do, after working together to figure out flaws in my builds).
The fact is that i think one of the biggest areas that are overlooked in lower leagues is inconsistency of players, sometimes they play comparatively well, and sometimes they don't. People look at players like TLO and say he can be inconsistent, well think how much that must be multiplied with a much smaller degree of practice. Sure, sometimes they float 6000 minerals, or don't build nearly enough workers etc, but sometimes they play much better than that.
|
On March 21 2012 10:03 TacticalBadger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 07:54 mahi29 wrote:
This is pretty irritating to hear this sort of statement so constantly. People picking one replay/game and suddenly classifying 1/5 of the SC2 playing population by that game. Yes, there are some horrific gold players who I've wondered how they got into gold and then there are some gold players who are not completely horrible [relatively ofc]. I've played some gold players who are can macro well enough to not float minerals and hit their injects pretty well for atleast the first 7-10 minutes and its irritating to hear these statements generalizing an entire league when the division in it is pretty stark. A guy above you wrote that his girlfriend/wife is in high gold with 35 APM. I'm not sure if it's even possible to have 35 APM in this game, unless you don't touch the keyboard at all and I can't even imagine, how a person with 35 APM can be in gold. EU silvers typically have between 90 and 120 APM. I've had 100+ APM in high bronze. You don't get a 100 APM in a 30 minute game by accident and "fake" APM is very obvious.
You really don't need that much APM to get through the basic steps of a game. On 2 base (which is where a lot of lower league games end), making workers takes 3 actions every 17 seconds (for T and P, no chronoboost). Producing out of 6 production buildings takes 7-8 actions every ~30 seconds (depending on unit build time / WG cooldown). Add building of supply structures and the occasional upgrade and you can have perfect macro on 2 base with about 35-40 APM (Blizzard APM, in real time it'll be 30% higher or so). Obviously, people in bronze (or any other league below GM / high masters) will not have close to perfect macro, but the example holds nonetheless.
|
On March 08 2012 17:53 Adamgm wrote:
So, thought I might try here.. any bronze players who consider themselves relatively hardcore and still have pretty great games in bronze?
The secondary for writing this is that I spent a long time rather frustrated that I was still in bronze, and I wasn't enjoying myself. Perhaps someone else is in this situation... a switch to being OK with your level of play might do what it did for me, and bring more enjoyment to your play time!
If you're good enough, you don't stay bronze. If you stay at bronze, it means that you're not good. When I started SC2, I was in silver and a regular practice partner of mine was in bronze but he was a lot better than anything I've ever seen on the ladder. He eventually got promoted to diamond (back when masters didn't exist) whereas I stayed in silver. This means that I'm not good enough to get promoted and he is actually diamond level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
