EPTIn Broodwar a scouted allin was nearly bound to fail and I agree, the skill gap was bigger, because it was more mechanically demanding so it allowed for more mistakes and slips in micro/macro.
Reached GM for the first time - Page 2
| Blogs > playa |
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
In Broodwar a scouted allin was nearly bound to fail and I agree, the skill gap was bigger, because it was more mechanically demanding so it allowed for more mistakes and slips in micro/macro. | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
If I'm a macro player, I'll be a lot more comfortable playing that kind of game than someone that forces me into a micro game. For instance, I don't play with healthbars always on. So, if someone just proxy 2 gates and goes fast stalkers, it doesn't really matter if I know it's coming, I'm going to be uneasy because it feels like a double whammy. I either have to get "cute" and try to circumvent having to outmicro him, or I need to try to outmicro him with kind of an inherent disadvantage, on top of being the lesser player at micro to begin with. But, overall, the mothership core helps you play macro oriented games more often than not. You can be the best 4 gater in the world, but if my strategy beats it, it just doesn't matter a whole lot. And, unless the player is basing his build/strategy around what you're doing, you're going to end up winning your fare share of games against people that might be considered better. As a toss player, if you can't deal with mutas or swarm hosts, it doesn't really matter who you're playing. All-in players are particularly strong when a game is new. Not only do players not have all of the right answers/timings to defend all-ins, but once you make a mistake, the opponent is at your front door and will end the game. There's less margin for error, obviously. These players get viewed as being good, as if they're permanently good, but to me... it just highlights that it's more about strategy than "skill" a lot of times. If I know how to stop an all-in, I don't care what his/her rank is. | ||
|
llIH
Norway2142 Posts
 | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
Sjow beat Life at Dreamhack. No one in their right mind thinks Sjow is as good as Life at sc2; he just had a good set of games against a bad set of games from Life, got sort of lucky, and won. You've clearly devoted to a lot of your life from the past year to this game, I'd say you may as well at least try to get paid for it. Try to go pro and actually make some money at it. There are people doing it successfully. Or maybe that's not the point of this blog. I honestly can't tell. | ||
|
woreyour
582 Posts
On July 11 2013 09:38 Esoterikk wrote: I feel the same way which is why I play Dota 2 instead lately, I think Blizzard is still missing the mark on keeping the middle level competitive (which Wc3 did well and BW had amazing customs to keep them playing). Hopefully it gets better in LotV but I have no reason to believe it will, they don't really seem to understand why Sc2 isn't very fun. yay thank goodness im not the only one feeling the same way though I still love SC2 dearly.. :D Dota2 is now officially released and I am feeling it would out shine Sc2 if this would be continue.. even with dota's graphics I can still play it with no pressure. I just hope Sc2 reaches the same balance and excitement as the previous blizzard games. I am really sad about D3's run though, I was really expecting a lot from it.. | ||
|
bebe01
Korea (South)512 Posts
 | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
For those that didn't see the previous blog/frustration rant, laddering in SC 2 has been pretty hard for me. In BW, I had a practice account for each matchup. I found out I simply preferred focusing on one mu at a time, be it the mu I felt I needed to improve the most or just the mu I felt like playing at the time. In SC 2, I've had the same feeling, which leaves me to not being able to play many games in a row before I start insta leaving and only playing 1 mu at a time. In a sense, perhaps that helps me, though. You have to be able to think long term and not worry about using the build/strat that is going to give you the best shot at winning the current game. If you're at 45% win rate in a mu, it doesn't matter much if you give yourself a 45% chance to win your game; you need to improve it, as that's not acceptable. To do that, that means finding something else. You have to be ok with going from 45% to maybe 10%, in hopes you can end up at, say, 60+% in the long run. It's like investing versus going for instant gratification. Playing against diamond level zergs is > than devoting practice time to a lesser priority. If you've done something before, you can do it again. Getting the points/mmr back isn't a problem. And if you already know you're going to win a mu before it starts, there's not much to gain from that time. I'm surprised more people don't opt to practice 1 mu at a time. | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
| ||
|
Lokk
Canada635 Posts
| ||
|
Abstinence
United States328 Posts
On July 12 2013 05:31 CecilSunkure wrote: Dang, you sound like a whiny asshole. Waste of blog space. I'd suggest you try focusing on your own attitude instead of blaming your surroundings for your situation. word. if jaedong has the "same mmr as the people you're beating" aren't you saying that you're at the same level? You're quite delusional to think that everyone in NA is also around the same level. You say you beat the best in NA but you're just underestimating the skill gap. | ||
|
quebecman77
Canada133 Posts
i got gm too in sc2 , under 1k game playing very casualy but zerg was op before exp so that realy less something im proud , did not even tell more that 5 people and stoped sc2 because the game was to easy and boring . after that you either need go pro , or waste your time , being gm mean nothing and you are wasting your life and money . i was B+ iccup server and very high gamei ( very more old ) most people in sc2 are terrible , i know many pro gamer who i was 4x better that them in broodwar and they are top sc2 player now... but at the same time very good broodwar player did very bad in sc2... but i alway find strange that people who got ZERO TALENT in broodwar are now top sc2 player.... broodwar was more a brain game with tactic , and sc2 a fps rts where you need to be fast ,react in under 2 sec , the first one a better rts. | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
On July 12 2013 07:45 Abstinence wrote: word. if jaedong has the "same mmr as the people you're beating" aren't you saying that you're at the same level? You're quite delusional to think that everyone in NA is also around the same level. You say you beat the best in NA but you're just underestimating the skill gap. Anyone that makes a fuss about a skill gap in SC 2 has not played any high level players in BW. This is child's play. What are they going to do, out macro me hard in SC 2? Maybe I should get a new keyboard if so. It must not be working. Get real. We're talking about small edges that are trumped by decision making and strategies. With all of the hard counter units in this game, unit compositions are more important than this "skill" gap. In BW, few American players were that much better than anyone else, yet for some reason it's different in SC 2? Obviously, there's going to be even less of a difference now. The most talented American, Day[9], doesn't even play. Suppy? I was in the final 4 with him in the last WCG qualifier for BW. Huk? I used to be on a team with him in BW. These guys have been pros forever and have way more SC 2 games than me, yet I'd still get matched up with them. It makes no sense to act like there's some huge hurdle to overcome in terms of a skill gap. If you guys haven't noticed, the MMR system kinda places you with equally skilled players. Ofc, I'm rarely going to be amazed by a skill gap if it's a ladder match. I don't know why people make such a deal about gaps in SC 2. Like in WoL, I heard a masters player should never lose to a diamond player or w/e. I lost to diamond players just the same to masters ones, when I was in masters. If you have holes in your play, you can get exposed by anyone. If you have the answers to strategies, you can beat just about any non Korean. Too much hyperbole. If there were such a skill gap in NA, the top NA players would be winning tournaments against Koreans. Let me know when the last time that happened was. And to the guy that got GM in under 1k games with Zerg... tell me you're still playing. That's freaking ridiculous. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
| ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
On July 12 2013 10:45 HardlyNever wrote: It still seems like you are trying to say you are on equal footing with a lot of mid-tier pros. Then prove it. Go into the WCS AM (or w/e region) qualifier next season. After you get shit-stomped in the early rounds, maybe then you'll understand that ranking on ladder (especially AM ladder) has almost zero relevance to how good you, in a professional sense. Playing WCS AM is a waste of time. I'd rather just ladder. I played the first one, and in the first round I got a previous GSL Korean... Unless you're obligated to play in WCS NA, due to being on a team, I don't believe players should bother playing. It's killing the NA scene and only a a few players, if that, even have a shot of qualifying. If you don't have a realistic shot of qualifying and Blizzard is pissing on you, then maybe you should stop saying "hey, I'll be there tomorrow for you to piss on me." Guess what, it's never going to stop. Blizzard is throwing a ball and we're dogs chasing it. I'd rather not be their amusement. I'm horrible and have no apm. But if Future is a mid tier pro, then yeah, I'm better. I don't know what your arbitrary distinctions are, but if the NA isn't winning anything, I couldn't care less whether I was on equal footing or not. In the grand scheme of things, I still would be far from good enough, and I may as well be a diamond player. Bad is bad; I'll let you worry about what tier of bad. The only difference between ladder and tournaments is you need to have more builds prepared. Don't get me wrong, it's very important, but if you're in a team, you practice for that kind of thing. A bronze player doesn't become a gold player in a tournament, and a rank w/e GM doesn't suddenly play like a number 1 GM just because it's "tournament time." Ladder rank doesn't mean much for players that aren't going to win anything in NA. You're right about that. First and foremost, it's "personality" and marketability. If you beat top NA players, even if having a winning record, it doesn't matter because it wasn't in a tournament. If you win in a tournament... no one cares because "all NA players are bad." Yet, here we are, discussing how much of a skill gap there is in NA. Does anyone even know who the best player is in NA? I don't. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But in my experiences, I just don't care what non Korean I'm playing against. I find myself winning against certain strategies and losing against certain strategies. That seems to be pretty f'ing consistent. Maybe the good players always use the strategies I'm bad against and vice versa. Maybe that's it. | ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
On July 11 2013 16:51 playa wrote: Sups. I remember running into you on iccup, and you told me I should play SC 2 and why. Fast forward a few years, and to my knowledge, you retired/quit. Did you come back or are you going to? That build was imbalanced on maps where a dt could get to their natural pretty quick. Arbiters were too strong, especially fast ones. Can't afford recall defense (100 turrets) 12 mins into a game, yet can't push against fast stasis. If it's any solace, I never felt good about the wins. I knew it was dirty and the mu wasn't that balanced. As for getting in the games, the first couple of months I played, I was actually working a job where I was traveling around the US, in a hotel 4 days out of the week. I could only play a few days out of the week, when at home. I kinda feel like I have anxiety... so I never really had ladder anxiety: everything is relative, and when people aren't watching you do something and no one even knows who you are, it's pretty easy to hit the find match button. Perfectionism + relaxation = games. If you're a gamer, you find ways to play games. yeah I remember I always lost to that build. Then I saw G5 wreck it with some troll wraith build but I don't think we ever played again. And yeah I quit sc2, I started getting bored and playing less and in turn started getting bad. hots was fun for a bit but after a couple months of the beta I was pretty much through. hardly game at all anymore lol | ||
|
SniXSniPe
United States1938 Posts
Not putting you down (or not intentionally trying to), you would probably be GM in WoL. | ||
|
playa
United States1284 Posts
On July 12 2013 13:05 LuckyFool wrote: yeah I remember I always lost to that build. Then I saw G5 wreck it with some troll wraith build but I don't think we ever played again. And yeah I quit sc2, I started getting bored and playing less and in turn started getting bad. hots was fun for a bit but after a couple months of the beta I was pretty much through. hardly game at all anymore lol Haha. I don't know if I remember that One of those repressed memories perhaps. Since every Terran opened with fast CC, I pretty much just tried to counter that and shrugged if 1 guy out of 100 did something weird enough to beat it. Sad to hear that you quit, not that there appears to be much to play for atm. A big reason for why I did choose to play SC 2 was because of the previous WCS's. Good things can't last forever I guess, but jesus this is brutal. I find myself enjoying HotS quite a bit. I don't know if it's because people aren't playing their race correctly or not, but this game actually seems a lot more balanced to me than BW ever did. T vs P was so stressful and playing it at a decent level was far harder than anything you could do in SC 2. I like a challenge but... it was giving me all I could stomach, for sure. I also don't miss sending workers to mine. Plus, you'd hear stories about how bad the old school BW players were. It's kinda nice to actually play in a period where a game isn't figured out and you can actually get ahead. It's neat to see players like Nony, who only seemed to copy others in BW, doing their own thing in SC 2. Creativity is rewarded more. I hope you give it another shot. HotS is a lot better than WoL, to me, but I don't play Terran.. Any Terran player that has beat day[9] is nothing short of a hero in my book. To snixsnipe: I wasn't feeling very confident in WoL. Everyone has a different personality/style they're comfortable with, and I just felt like WoL was a "caveman game." Me angry, me attack. That's all I saw/heard. As someone that doesn't do all-ins, who isn't the best micro player, and is in love with teching fast, it was kind of a nightmare for me. I was going to have to either start all-in'ing people, or I was going to have to start making sentries in the early game... HotS pretty much buffed my style and nerfed the things I was weakest against. I got real lucky and don't really have an excuse for being bad. Perhaps HotS helped you out to some degree. I tried playing a few T vs Z games in WoL... and I don't know if I've ever seen anything that was that imbalanced before. I was beating master players in t vs p, yet I couldn't even beat plat Zerg players, even though it wasn't that different, style wise from BW T vs Z. I think that mu is a complete 180 now. | ||
| ||
