There has been one thread in the strategy forum that has stirred up quite the debate. Of course, I am talking about [D] Why us lower level players hate "macro better". I've come to the conclusion that the debate should be addressed in the form of some level of forum regulation otherwise we won't get anywhere.
You see, a lot of replays posted on this website have one player winning simply because he macrod better than his opponent. Obviously, this leads to people saying the solution is the 'macro better' which can be frustrating. Conversely, I also see that when people post replays where macro was even on both sides higher level players still say 'macro better'. While true, it is vacuous advice as this could be applied to any level and the mistake made in game that decided the outcome was not macro.
As such, I'm going to try my best to enforce some standards around replays that are posted for advice. Similarly, I'm going to be warning/banning people who post 'macro better' to replays that need more than that (without any other content in their post, obviously).
To Those Seeking Advice:
Understand that the only way to make significant improvements in Starcraft is to macro better. This means spending minerals, having a fine tuned build, expanding at good timings and building workers. Just because I'm trying to crack down on 'macro better' as advice doesn't mean you can outright ignore it.
If you lost because of macro.... we will permit specific questions about macro. Do not ask for generic advice, ask for specific advice based off of replays.
Example: he was able to get an expansion up and he held an economic lead all game, what should I do in response to this after my opening from the replay?
Example: he was able to keep denying my expansion by doing XYZ, what should I have done to be able to expand?
If you didn't lose because of macro... provide some analysis of the game in question, and if possible pinpoint some areas you think were mistakes. We will view the replay and provide our thoughts on the game. The more specific you are with your questions the better chance you'll get something out of it.
If you claim that the game is an even macro game when it clearly isn't, you will be facing warnings/bans. So please, watch the damn replay before posting it.
The more effort you put into your post the more effort people will put in to help you - why would we bother helping people who put in no time to analyse or assess their own play?
To Those Giving Advice
Please don't respond simply by 'macro better' - if there is a help thread which does not meet the specifications I've set out above then report it or PM me.
Always view the replay.... this should go without saying, generic advice isn't useful. If a user has put in a lot of effort into a thread then please put in the same effort in your response. That way the whole community benefits and the strat forum looks better.
Try to answer the users questions or pinpoint their mistakes... while an entire overview of their play can be useful, first and foremost advice should address the biggest problems in the game. For instance, if there was an even engagement but the user mucked up his micro and that battle decided the game then that would be the problem that needs addressing - not that he was missing probes and being supply blocked - those are supplementary things which can be mentioned but should be able to identified by the user anyway. I know this seems odd, but this will provide better help for people than the generic stuff.
If you have any questions about the above please PM me or comment in this thread.
On October 12 2011 00:42 Zorkmid wrote: I think that "Macro better" is fine as long as specific aspects about how they COULD macro better are pointed out.
Saying "Macro Better" without qualifying it is basically like saying "you suck"
He's saying that it's fine to point out how they can improve their build and macro, as long as you actually answer the questions they ask in the OP, and I agree with him on that.
He's also saying that people need to put thought into their replays before posting to ask for help, and if they see macro mistakes that clearly caused a loss (the game was clearly not an even macro game) then they can't post anymore claiming that they lost because of something else, and they need to ask questions related to how they fell behind economically, which I also agree with.
At least I hope that's what you were saying Plexa =)
On October 12 2011 00:42 Zorkmid wrote: I think that "Macro better" is fine as long as specific aspects about how they COULD macro better are pointed out.
Saying "Macro Better" without qualifying it is basically like saying "you suck"
He's saying that it's fine to point out how they can improve their build and macro, as long as you actually answer the questions they ask in the OP, and I agree with him on that.
He's also saying that people need to put thought into their replays before posting to ask for help, and if they see macro mistakes that clearly caused a loss (the game was clearly not an even macro game) then they can't post anymore claiming that they lost because of something else, and they need to ask questions related to how they fell behind economically, which I also agree with.
At least I hope that's what you were saying Plexa =)
Precisely, both sides of the coin need to be putting in effort. And if you observe people slaking then report it so that it can be dealt with.
On October 12 2011 00:47 Lightspeaker wrote: Good idea for a policy. Should help keep the number of poor quality threads and posts to a minimum.
It's not just about that-- it's also about having these poor quality threads and posts become high quality threads and posts, rather than just go away. If someone wants to take advice, it's much better that they learn the guidelines and make a well-thought-out post than not post at all. And if someone wants to give advice, it's important that they do so in a way that will be helpful.
I'm glad this was posted. It's unfortunate that we live in a world where something like this would need to be specified, but it's fortunate that there is a Plexa in this world to specify it. This mirrors a lot of my thoughts.
Fundamentally, there isn't a difference between someone posting and saying "macro better" and someone posting and saying "play better"-- unsupported by specifics on how to do so, telling someone to improve their macro when they're asking for help is like telling a student that he needs to improve his grades when he's asking for study tips.
I thank you plexa for this I have seen so many posts of new players that want to improve, provide replays, give some semblance of why they lost, even go as far as asking what can they do differently and after checking the posters league a lot of people just say "oh you're in silver/bronze/gold all you have to do is macro better don't worry about anything else" yeah sure but HOW do I macro better ? I've had games where I'm up in supply, up in workers, up in bases yet I can't win; maybe because a bad engagement (attacking with ling/roach against stlaker/collosi in a choke or flying my mutas through a pack of marine/thor for example) and I don't post them here because people will just say "Oh macro better and since you're gold you can literally make whatever unit you want" and those types of posts really discourage new players such as myself to even play the game. Like Ligthspeaker said let's keep the poor quality threads and post to a minimum.
This is good stuff. I largely stopped watching people's replays due to most of them having little to no analysis as well as glaring macro holes. I hope people start posting better replays with better analysis and good questions and also people actually take the time to watch replays and give good, specific advice.
I'm really glad that this was posted. It should help alleviate a lot of the terrible advice people have been getting and it should help lower league players realize that while several things can go wrong, macroing better is always a good course of action to take.
On October 12 2011 01:43 imjorman wrote: I'm really glad that this was posted. It should help alleviate a lot of the terrible advice people have been getting and it should help lower league players realize that while several things can go wrong, macroing better is always a good course of action to take.
Great write up admin :D
I think you may have misunderstood the OP a little bit.
Good call. I see both sides of the arguement and agree that if slightly more effort was put in by both sides before posting it would raise the quality of the forum.
Is there a level at which we actually can just say macro better? Obviously as long as you are making workers, having enough production buildings and expanding at the right time you should get to X league.
I'm guessing this is more about saying "always create workers" to someone that has a [H] thread and is in bronze to help them out. If they say "we had equally bad macro so I'm looking for X strategy to counter their build" the people posting to help can still say you need to do XYZ before being able to worry about strategy portion. Then after that link them to general strategy on Liquipedia if they want to learn more units in relation to each other (in the respective match-ups).
I do agree that people should be more specific though and "macro better" isn't specific at all. Instead of just saying macro better we will just have to point out the amount of time their command centers are idle and how late they expanded or how much they were supply blocked...etc
That thread reminds me of the Karate Kid, except instead Ralph Machio tells Mr. Miyagi to fuck off and wax his own car, and then writes a blog about why he can't ask Ali out because he doesn't want to ruin their friendship.
On October 12 2011 04:26 Demonace34 wrote: Is there a level at which we actually can just say macro better? Obviously as long as you are making workers, having enough production buildings and expanding at the right time you should get to X league.
If its a straight up and down macro loss, then PM a mod/report it so we can close it. I really don't see any situation where 'macro better' without anything else is useful.
Because I saw this sort of 'Macro Better' advice I started a YouTube channel looking at replays of Bronze/Silver/Gold games, with the intent of pointing out the actual lapses in Macro and basic strategy that occur during a game.
I certainly think saying Macro Better is valid, but I'm trying to very specifically point out when people seem to have macro trouble, why they seem to have trouble and how to actually improve it.
I think this is really the way people should be addressing lower level games, not just saying 'you did this wrong' by trying to give people techniques for remembering to do it right, showing them physically how to do it, highlighting the importance of it etc...
I also tend to mix in basic strategy stuff, because I think there are instances where games are not lost due to Macro alone, or are lost to a high order of Macro, such as failing to tech up, or failing to expand in time.
I also believe one of the largest deciders in low level success is based on how aggressive someone is. I try and point out differences between Attacking for a purpose and being aggressive for no reason, as well as the difference between Defending to gain an advantage long-term vs. Just being too Passive and defending with no plan.
While Macroing better is certainly the main building block, there's also no point in someone getting to Diamond on Macro alone and then learning strategy for the first time.
This is a very true statement. People are very quick to bash the other player and not pay attention to their own mistakes. I feel like watching replays gives you 90% the awnsers you need. You may of found the problem but all you need is to find the solution
EPT
Should help keep the number of poor quality threads and posts to a minimum.
