EPTthat if someone just owned me in under 10 minutes i'm obviously not good enough to face them in a macro game so its a GG no hard feelings
How to get to masters, the metagame and you. - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
QuackPocketDuck
410 Posts
that if someone just owned me in under 10 minutes i'm obviously not good enough to face them in a macro game so its a GG no hard feelings | ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
1. You play too greedy. 2. You don't execute your build very well. If the first, then you are playing just as cheesy as the one who is cheesing. If the second(which is IMO generally the biggest problem) then you obviously only have yourself to blame for losing. Every player got their strenght and weakness. Your weakness might be bad micro and/or scouting and decision making in the early game.. This players strenght is obviously his ability to make a very nicely disigned build while his weakness is his late game and mechanics. Still he is masters and master is and will always be masters. | ||
|
Cortza
South Africa328 Posts
On January 30 2013 16:49 Hezzina wrote: I agree and disagree, I agree as shown above that winning through very aggressive builds does not mean that you are a better player, however I disagree because if someone is able to win an entire high level tournament (including bo3 and bo5) without going into a single macro game isn't that person still the superior player? Only if his cheese was scouted in time, then yes. Otherwise no. | ||
|
Zaphid
Czech Republic1860 Posts
Win is a win, if that's all you care about, be my guest, but you will have to learn other stuff if you want to keep progressing and then your rating will drop like a rock. | ||
|
SHODAN
United Kingdom1144 Posts
| ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
On January 30 2013 16:47 AngryPenguin wrote: this is why this game have a lot of problems, people with a platinum skill level break into masters. Damn right. You can abuse the meta game all you want, you're not actually a better player. Once the meta game shifts and things get harder to abuse, you'll just fall back down to copper league like you deserve. Instead of following this guys' advice and blindly playing against the metagame to pick up free wins, learn to scout and multitask. You figure out what your opponent is doing, metagame or not, you learn what is effective against it, and you make sure you have better overall macro and unit control. Then, you take a clean win or you improve while you lose. I'll agree that in a tournament setting, a win is a win. There is a purpose to cheesing and mindgames. On the ladder, cheating the metagame isn't a mind game, it's an all or nothing tactic that takes no skill whatsoever. It's just to pick up a free win. On ladder a win means nothing, the point is to improve at the game so you can consistently win. 'Masters' is a meaningless title, much like grandmasters. For example, many cannon rush to GM, and while potentially hilarious, I would never respect such an individual and claim he is a skilled Starcraft 2 player. So if you just want to be masters so you can stroke your e-peen in front of you friends, whatever, abuse the metagame all you want (but I still think you're a sad individual). If you actually want to improve at the game, ACKNOWLEDGE the metagame and be quick to indentify when a player is playing standard, and use that knowledge to get ahead by cutting some corners like a faster third or skipping detection in favor of an extra upgrade. Little things. Not like, OH PROTOSS IS DOING THAT LATE WALL AND IS GOING TO MOVE OUT WITH HIS ZEALOT, SLOW LING ALL IN!!!!!!!! Or take any opportunity you can to do a roach all in like OP is suggesting. | ||
|
JazVM
Germany1196 Posts
What I also wanna say is that I am totally in love with the game and therefore trying my best to understand it more. I see becoming a masters player as a reward for that. I dont give a shit about the icon but once I achieved master via ultimate macro play I will be very proud of myself because I know that only very few people (percentagewise compared to total amount of sc2 players) are as good as myself/have an eually good understanding combined with game mechanics. | ||
|
THM
Bulgaria1131 Posts
"Being in masters doesn't mean you are a masters player." No! Only being Grandmaster means you are a master player hahaha :D Whether you are a master player depends on nothing else but that little icon in your profile. If it's the star - you're a master player. If it's not, you're not. | ||
|
sunglasseson
United States145 Posts
its been done. i actually bet a friend who complained about terran on ladder that you could get masters as terran meta game all-ining people with 30 apm and guess what, it worked because ladder cheese is highly potent. there are a slew of terrans that 1 1 1'd all the protoss (easily the most popular ladder race) straight to masters or 2 rax scv allin the other 2 matchups etc etc. the thing im wondering is why zerg, the most consistent race hands down on ladder, needs to cheese? zerg cheese is HIGHLY scoutable and while u can get into masters cheesing with ANY race, why would you want to? macro is more fun because winning isnt fun unless you win the RIGHT way. people who derive joy from only winning, aka ppl such as yourself, baffle me since the point of sc2 is rendered pointless by your playstyle. i look down on that mentality as do other good players and true fans of the game | ||
|
Black[CAT]
Malaysia2589 Posts
On January 30 2013 17:27 Hezzina wrote: What is wrong with using "Cheesy builds" I have never quite understood why all the hate against them, I understand that they are easier to execute but they are also easy to stop when properly scouted... A good "cheese" needs to have misdirection, deceit and a follow up, as well as a very strong read on the meta, I believe that it can be looked at as just a different skill set than normal macro players use. Yup, you worded much better than I could have. I think people(foreigners) likes to blame things on cheese when it's just an aggressive strat. If you can't hold cheese, you're not better than the 'cheeser'. | ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
| ||
|
Zeon0
Austria2995 Posts
btw: does the Geiko build still work in masters? it should, cause people are playing even greedier. Geiko build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517 | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
I am playing to rarely though to really comment on how to easily beat the current strategies, as I might be outdated already. But usually I fake some early aggression or hide it really well and scout my opponent reaction. Ends up in usual them dieing (eco cheeser/ early game cheeser) or getting behind in macro (standard player). Some time ago I thought if I want to learn something, I better should not kill my opponent in the early game. But it just put me behind because they were greedy beyond sanity and thats not a good way to play either. They should atleast scout if they cut that many corners. Master is full of one trick ponies one way or the other, so it is pretty helpful to see what sort of pony they are right from the start. Still dreaming of the day when I will face players that will fall for the hiding workers trick, Master Level seems not enough for it to be reliable (1 of 3 players showed a reaction in my tests) sadly. | ||
|
Veriol
Czech Republic502 Posts
Also unorthodox/cheesy/whatever play you get high chance of BO losses unlike with standart play wich again is bad for tournaments. But if you dont care about these then this is the absolutely best way of playing. As it puts you into sutiation where you are comfortable and you opponent isnt. | ||
|
Baum
Germany1010 Posts
Now there is nothing wrong with doing that and there is no denying of you having perfected this all in to master level but it only means exactly that. If a player can execute various strategies on this level and knows how to counter your all in you will maybe be able to take one game off of him but then he will just defend your strategy every time and you are actually losing because of the meta game going on between you two. Meta gaming is not very useful on the ladder because it mostly relies on your opponent doing something specific like getting a fast third or ignoring the possibility of all in X completely. All ins are very successful on the ladder because you only play your opponent once and so you always have the element of surprise on your side not because the meta game favors them. All the "greedy" openings you "abused" actually have the ability to defend an all in like this if executed correctly so it's just a lack of execution on your opponent's side that makes your build successful. | ||
|
Xapti
Canada2473 Posts
In Starcraft 2, getting to masters (or diamond if you're terrible) is easy if you follow the meta. That bother's me to no end. While it was slightly the case in brood war, it was so much less-so: it wasn't really that significant until you got to the highest of levels, and more importantly, it took many many years to really even develop solid effective meta game builds. The game feels so simple, lame, predictable, and boring, when the same opening build is done all the time because it is the most effective. There's no need for improvisation or thinking for oneself, or multitasking, other other things that makes the game challenging and entertaining. The only thing it leaves, is a bit of touch-up work on mechanics (APM, hotkeys if it's terrible), and scouting (which is significant, but so easy to do with some practice) The OP is just flat out wrong that 7RR will kill a terran FE. Sure it CAN kill it a terran FE, but they need to not scout it. When a terran sends their SCV at x time, it's not hard to deduce baneling or roach play, and react accordingly (more bunkers and/or wall, and prep repair); that doesn't take skill, it just takes memorization. There's a difference between meta, and pro-level reactionary corner-cutting meta. Running corner-cutting builds like not scouting or not getting a bunker always when fast expanding is setting up for failure, but when you learn to run the meta properly, then the wins pile up from all the people running cheese. | ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
where is the point saying "your not xy because you ..." if you are xy you ARE xy ... so if your in master your a master player, you can ba a shitty master player deserving to be in bronce but you ARE a master player ... stupid discussion xD if you in soccer league 1 your a league 1 player, even if you hardly play you injured and bad, you are a 1st leageue player | ||
|
Penecks
United States600 Posts
| ||
|
mizU
United States12125 Posts
| ||
|
Henk
Netherlands578 Posts
| ||
| ||
