EPTEverything goes downhill from there.
How can i know if i reached my peak? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
riotjune
United States3392 Posts
Everything goes downhill from there. | ||
|
Riner1212
United States337 Posts
| ||
|
alpenrahm
Germany628 Posts
Just try to remember 3 of the games you played a week ago. In detail. recall what happened, why it happened and what your conclusions were. Can´t do it? well then all the games you played that week were esentially useless to you. Except for a bit of muscle memory maybe. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
- had the intrinsic motivation to grind and play through situations i would normally not put effort into. - constantly chasing an arbitrary number of around 90% winrate, despite it meaning that i would have to overperform some of the current professionals on average. to me, that was motivating in its own way because i very much respect the play of the professionals, yet i will never have the will to become one. the play is what matters to me. - not needing to prove something to anyone. this is my own little skill that i baby and harness. so when i hear that you are playing upwards 10 games each day, obviously trying very hard to reach your goal, i feel it. there are a lot of things we can each improve. i see serral's play, his first person decisions in real-time and compare them versus my own and versus other players who i observe; even i can notice that serrals play has many ways to improve even from that point onwards. will i ever reach that point? absolutely not, but it is exciting in a way and i wonder if human physical limits could have reached its peak. but seeing the decisions and execution, i know very well that it can get even better in ways that most people haven't thought of. the best player we've seen has a lot more room to grow. serral knows this himself i'm very sure, which might be behind the nature of his interview responses (despite winning better than any other player). you can do it too. don't focus on the matchups of your personal specific strategy or the overall analysis of the results. for me i felt insulted if i lost to strats or game states where i should not lose, and you know the feeling the same. well that is the fuel and you tell yourself offhandedly (maybe not meaning it the most, but to give yourself the resolve instead) that you will never lose to it again. and i think even subconsciously you'll look for ways to remove the possibility of losing to those same things again. next time you do analysis, you'll look for points that you need to scout--start being more objective about it. you'll have a refractory period where you need to fundamentally change something you've been used to. then you remove the idea or the focus on whether or not you feel better through the change; don't look for excuses or justification for what you did. you know objectively that what you did is right going forward, so you focus on improving on it. i think that is one of the main ways of getting something out of replays. it's maintaining a clear mind and making the necessary mental notes that you will act on. and as someone says, you can work on that one thing, even from outside of the game, and know that you improve on it as you play--bit by bit as you whittle away at the goal. and if you are not the type to have a more machine approach and require a bit of extrinsic motivation for other things in life, then maybe look at it this way: create a bit of a feedback that exposes you to your mistakes and the consequences of your actions (or inaction). watch your very worst replays of the day with someone you don't normally watch with. anyone can comment on the game without having the skill to play it the same way. they can tell you things that are valid from a very basic level, and that's really all it is. it is valid criticism. so keep your head up and keep trying. don't focus on the feelings outside of when you are losing and focus instead on reaching smaller milestones to get to your goal. but when it is hurting, trudge through and improve your mentality about it as well. this time losing to turtle protoss is tilting you, you wonder if you play the rest of the games or not. you do. you play the rest of the games and you look forward to playing the same person or the same strategy again, because you know you will crush it somehow some way. and even if you don't get to that goal, you get a little closer. trying your very best and further is what you can take away from all this practicing, and the experience you had with this game and any other game you'll play. after all is done and settled, knowing you could have done better is only human, and it is also no-brainer to me that you are not at your peak until you feel that particular way. | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
On December 31 2018 21:34 sertman wrote: adhd executive functioning impairment is for long term oriented goals and things that they dont derive pleasure from, there is in fact a thing called hyper attention that those with adhd have. Which is what it sounds like, hyper attention put towards something, usually a hobby they enjoy. So, if it is the case that someone with adhd is entertained and engrossed in what they're doing and are getting immediate benefits, their attention will not wander. A game if anything is the best case scenario for someone with adhd to pay attention throughout.That is an admirable view and I hope you keep it, but it flies in the face of neuropsychology. For example, people with ADHD have dysfunctional prefrontal cortexes and as hard as they try they probably will not be able to sustain the attention necessary to compete after a certain MMR. The point I'm making here is that everyone is on an executive functioning spectrum. I can play 10k games and be 4k MMR and you can play 10k games and be 6k MMR even if we both practice and analyze together. Talent exists, everyone's brains are different and some people will peak before others. Some of the top chess players can play blindfolded when they are 6/7 years old (Judit Polgar could play blindfolded by 4 years old). That is not teachable. Someone like Stephano has to work hard, but he can get drunk and high and show up and still compete with the best. *your actual point beyond that is ofc true just being nitpicky. | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
| ||
|
XenoX101
Australia729 Posts
Mathematically speaking, if you compare how much you've progressed over the past year with an approximation of how your training has been over the past year (number of hours per week, number of breaks from SC2, health and dedication to the game etc.), you can probably extrapolate that over the coming year. The beauty of SC2 is there is virtually no ceiling, unless you are IMMvp, Innovation or Serral you will always have significant opportunities for improvement. It's just up to you whether you want to see yourself improve at your current learning pace. Coaching and finding training partners can help, as can resources online, so that learning rate isn't fixed. But the key point is there is no arbitrary peak that anyone can reach, since the game is far too complex for that (much like other complex games and activities). | ||
|
Wrathsc2
United States2025 Posts
| ||
|
loft
United States344 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10671 Posts
On December 31 2018 18:51 The_Red_Viper wrote: I think you will know if you reached your peak the moment you make your 7th thread on tl which gets closed lol | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1015 Posts
On December 31 2018 21:34 sertman wrote: Some of the top chess players can play blindfolded when they are 6/7 years old (Judit Polgar could play blindfolded by 4 years old). That is not teachable. Someone like Stephano has to work hard, but he can get drunk and high and show up and still compete with the best. Your general point is right, but I have to quibble the Polgar example. They were trained from a very young age, hence the exceptional early results. What better supports your argument is that none became a World Champion, despite arguably the ideal chess focused childhood: suggesting there was some level of talent or character that could not be taught. | ||
|
La1
United Kingdom659 Posts
Total peak skill is the accumulation of practice/drive and talent. Anybody can practice a lot and you will get to a high skill level with the right level and type of practice, practice in sc2 can mean recognising builds and knowing exactly what to do and muscle memory/multi-tasking Talent or more specifically genetic ability is unteachable. Your genetically coded reaction speed based on your hand to eye co-ordination. How fast your muscle memory is (some people will never be able to operate at 400apm and that's genetics). The make up of your brain and how you think and deal with things. Football is a good example of this, the best players in the planet have the genetic ability (body / brain etc) and they have the drive and determination to practice to reach their peak. Players like Ronaldo etc... However some players still have the talent, Matt Le'tisser, Berbatov but never had the and genetics to be on the Ronaldo level. Others have never put in the practice, Ronaldinho for example always would rather have fun and thus never really hit his total peak ability. Obviously all of these players were successful but Ronaldo could be argued as the most prolific player ever.. and that's the difference. You may be 5k with say a total peak of 6k however do you have everything required to be on Serrals level? That's why in sport you have these "best ever types" because in all the different skills needed for any game/sport "the best ever" has a top level of all of these different skills. It's the same in SC2. Otherwise it would just be whoever plays any game the most which is simply not the case. On a positive note a lot of the skills you will learn in this game will translate to many other tasks so your peak life skill will have increased in whatever else you dabble in  | ||
|
WeddingEpisode
United States356 Posts
| ||
|
HelpMeGetBetter
United States764 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
i don't think you have a skill ceiling as a player, you may want to review your beliefs about the game, methods, playstyle etc and make some break, take time out and come back fresh try new things etc if you reach something that seems like a wall for you you would keep improving at a slower pace but imo you'd keep improving, so long as you don't just keep repeating the same stuff, so try new things and rethink all your beliefs about the game | ||
|
Kaz1
35 Posts
Play those 10-15 games vs any GM you can. After a month, have them assess your change in play. They are a better judge than you in a lot of ways. They can tell if they had to put more effort into holding an all-in, or if your attempt to hold one was better, etc, where you just feel like crap either way. Can you even define why you lose to a few specific builds? Is it mechanics (not likely), is it decision making, do you underestimate they mobility so that they get where you don't think they should be (aka improper late game scouting). Do you just get on tilt when you see them? Have you thrown everything, and the kitchen sink at them, and so are just basically befuddled at how to really crack that nut? Most of this is left hidden from your post. The furthest that you should ever analyze in a replay is to the point where the game was lost. After that, it is worse than useless. You focus on all the wrong things. Define where the state was unwinnable. How did it get to that point, etc etc. Did it? Done. Move on. Adjust. Rinse. Repeat. Talent will only get you so far. Hard work will only get you so far. Hard work and talent get you further. Assistance from someone agreeably better than you can help, but will not always do so because you are simply not wired the same. You will see different choices, no matter how often the situation arises, even knowing what you are 'supposed to see' doesn't mean you will...ever. And it has zero to do with talent. | ||
|
Kaewins
Bulgaria138 Posts
I remember a streamer by the name of MsSpyte. A forever masters zerg player. She played quite consistently, but never reached GM. Then she joined ROOT and got coached by GM level players. Soon after she reached GM, then eventually dropped back to masters, but I think it was more of a personal motivation thing. Not that she couldn't sustain it, but what it took to sustain it. However she made it to GM and she was really happy with herself. So honestly I think it's hard to tell when our peak is. | ||
| ||
