I'm still having trouble with guys that don't use hotkeys 1 through 0. The guy's macro wasn't all that great but I keep seeing myself not expoing effectively and making units. My train rate wasn't all that good. I was expanding, but we had quite a few head-on collisions so it was slowed down a bit. Most of the time I had just as many vultures as tanks. There should be at least double the vultures and with good microing. I've only played Othello but I've still not dropped on cliffs above expos where it would have been a very effective blow.
I've got a plan for the next game I play. I will use at least 4-6 vultures to harass and plant mines the entire game and maintain good macro. If I can learn to have good macro while harassing, I believe my speed will get better. This kind of thing can't be learned playing a computer either (Edit: on second thought, maybe it can) Now don't get me wrong, I've been trying to use vultures in my games but not enough. Not the ENTIRE game. And that's what I need to do.
Just as the hotkey trainer showed me to do, switch back and forward from units to base very quickly, that is the key to my future victories. I will learn the skill.
Mar 13, 2009
Mar 11, 2009
Macro Noobing
Many people don't do as well as they do when they practice, they more than likely blank out on ladder or more serious games. That is basically what happened to me in this game. His DT drop made me panic a bit and I think I was spooked for the rest of the game. I didn't scout until it was WAY too late, and had too many minerals in my bank. It felt odd, he didn't seem to care about me killing off his main in such a way. That kind of thing would definitely set some alarms in my brain if it were a friend.
On BWChart, I see he didn't hotkey his buildings... only his units... and his train rate was ZERO for at least 10 minutes of the game. His APM 118, mine 119 (last 5 minutes our apm went down). I was so wanting him to attack me head on but he never did it. Players on iCCup do so many unexpected things. My game will get better. Hopefully the next one won't BMs me by prolonging the game unnecessarily.
I've looked at FPVOD's of pro players again and I can better understand how I should play. It's a good thing to harass with vultures and not to focus on my army too much. Simple. Conditioning myself to not take it too seriously and believe I have a chance is what is on my mind. The only reason lots of these people on D beat me is because they've played more games than me. It has nothing to do with one's intelligence or reflexes, everyone should remember that.
On BWChart, I see he didn't hotkey his buildings... only his units... and his train rate was ZERO for at least 10 minutes of the game. His APM 118, mine 119 (last 5 minutes our apm went down). I was so wanting him to attack me head on but he never did it. Players on iCCup do so many unexpected things. My game will get better. Hopefully the next one won't BMs me by prolonging the game unnecessarily.
I've looked at FPVOD's of pro players again and I can better understand how I should play. It's a good thing to harass with vultures and not to focus on my army too much. Simple. Conditioning myself to not take it too seriously and believe I have a chance is what is on my mind. The only reason lots of these people on D beat me is because they've played more games than me. It has nothing to do with one's intelligence or reflexes, everyone should remember that.
Mar 10, 2009
Testing... testing
I've been doing a little bit of experimenting :-)
Here is my POV with Diesel.
:-) My apm was 99.... Guess I was confident/lazy. I tried this same strat on iCCup and it failed twice.
I hope to have higher quality next time. You may have to change your settings on youtube so you see the highest quality. The default is low quality.
Here is my POV with Diesel.
:-) My apm was 99.... Guess I was confident/lazy. I tried this same strat on iCCup and it failed twice.
I hope to have higher quality next time. You may have to change your settings on youtube so you see the highest quality. The default is low quality.
Mar 7, 2009
Micro is the First Thing to go
I've been told that without warming up or practicing the micro skill is the first thing to go. So true... so true... After my last match with Fafner, I've not played for almost three weeks. I've not even practiced my macro, or warmed up before playing a familiar face. Over the course of this week, I became uncomfortable with my macro, and that led to terrible micro - but surprisingly not to many losses (another terran had me).
I played Stryxis of whom is about even with me in skill, both of us could make a slight change in our tactics and easily win. Two out of 4 games I've played stryxis were supposed to be losses. I'm sure he believes he'd definitely beat me in our next playing session after viewing a replay- he had me beat. All this time I had no interest in getting better than I am now, but I will not let Stryxis outdo me. I won't let myself get too out of shape.
150 apm is what many consider to be 'good enough'. I wonder if that should be my goal until sc 2. I believe I can make it to 150 against the computer; apm doesn't drop dramatically when facing a real opponent. My current average apm is 110. Even if I only play three guys until sc 2, I'm satisfied with that. I like to use previous games to see where their weaknesses are and hit it hard. It brings joy to my world. One thing holds true even now, my resource gathering and macro is better than theirs. Yet, I've got plenty of space to grow on.
Back to practice I go...
I played Stryxis of whom is about even with me in skill, both of us could make a slight change in our tactics and easily win. Two out of 4 games I've played stryxis were supposed to be losses. I'm sure he believes he'd definitely beat me in our next playing session after viewing a replay- he had me beat. All this time I had no interest in getting better than I am now, but I will not let Stryxis outdo me. I won't let myself get too out of shape.
150 apm is what many consider to be 'good enough'. I wonder if that should be my goal until sc 2. I believe I can make it to 150 against the computer; apm doesn't drop dramatically when facing a real opponent. My current average apm is 110. Even if I only play three guys until sc 2, I'm satisfied with that. I like to use previous games to see where their weaknesses are and hit it hard. It brings joy to my world. One thing holds true even now, my resource gathering and macro is better than theirs. Yet, I've got plenty of space to grow on.
Back to practice I go...
Feb 22, 2009
Pics of the Month
Feb 6, 2009
How Humiliating!
One of the greatest strengths of Starcraft multiplayer is perhaps it's greatest weakness - The humiliation involved in losing or being the worst player on a losing team. Everybody that plays starcraft regularly knows what it means to humiliate, everyone has that struggle as a noob. As difficult as it may be to believe, it doesn't matter if the game is a low money map, somewhat ridiculous money map (Ex. BGH) or ridiculous money map (Ex. Zero Clutter). I would go so far as to include ANY game (other than starcraft) that consists of multiple players, there's a good chance of being embarrassed or humiliated, it's just heightened in 1vs1's.
This humiliation varies from player to player but it exists nonetheless; it either drives one to get better or drop the game for a different, more noob enticing game (UMS). The regular ZeroClutter player may play 3v3 bgh and think it's ridiculously unfair, difficult and especially humiliating. A simple 5 zeolots or 10 lings would prove to be too much for them early start. It's all basically because of the poor macro control commonly known among the majority of the battle.net world. When one's macro isn't in good shape early game, even when making it 10 minutes into a game, one is already far behind from a decent player with good macro, and in the end is left to call out the worst teammate a 'fucking noob' and to 'throw away your fucking starcraft CD NOW', although the other obviously did better but was triple or double teamed while you did nothing - an all too common scenario. It's not very fun when you happen to be the first one out, but it feels great when you are the strength of your team. Even if you lose, you can blame your teammates that didn't do so well. It's wrong, I know, but it's all a part of the game. Everyone has an ego, even if you keep it all to yourself. In my zero clutter days, I would feel proud even in losing because I'd always have the most unit kills out of everyone.
One on ones are indeed interesting for a reason. Win or lose, it's all fair and square (most of the time). You lose because you didn't play well enough. I believe I'd like it more to replay a guy on even ground with me from time to time. That way it shows how I've gotten much better, out of their league (I feel smarter :-P).
Back in high school, I wrestled and played football. Losing in wrestling was always more humiliating than football obviously. A person's soul could be destroyed for losing, especially when their self worth is connected to winning or losing. Back then, I'd lose mostly due to lack of practice and will to find out moves on my own, sounds all too familiar (we had a shitty coach btw). If you don't like losing, but want to keep playing a game you enjoy, why not practice and try to get better? Why play something you have no will to get better when you have much more to learn? Who likes losing to sucky players? In wrestling (age 13), I felt an odd sense of happiness when I made a kid cry for losing. I bet that kind of thing happens in starcraft for many koreans. That thought makes me smile.
Starcraft and wrestling have both provided me with sweating and an increased heart rate (although more so in wrestling), and that's partly why I like starcraft, because I know guys are out there sweating and panicking. They don't want to be outdone. There was a progamer korean game I watched the other day and one of the players has eye twitches when something unexpected happens, it's quite amusing.
This humiliation varies from player to player but it exists nonetheless; it either drives one to get better or drop the game for a different, more noob enticing game (UMS). The regular ZeroClutter player may play 3v3 bgh and think it's ridiculously unfair, difficult and especially humiliating. A simple 5 zeolots or 10 lings would prove to be too much for them early start. It's all basically because of the poor macro control commonly known among the majority of the battle.net world. When one's macro isn't in good shape early game, even when making it 10 minutes into a game, one is already far behind from a decent player with good macro, and in the end is left to call out the worst teammate a 'fucking noob' and to 'throw away your fucking starcraft CD NOW', although the other obviously did better but was triple or double teamed while you did nothing - an all too common scenario. It's not very fun when you happen to be the first one out, but it feels great when you are the strength of your team. Even if you lose, you can blame your teammates that didn't do so well. It's wrong, I know, but it's all a part of the game. Everyone has an ego, even if you keep it all to yourself. In my zero clutter days, I would feel proud even in losing because I'd always have the most unit kills out of everyone.
One on ones are indeed interesting for a reason. Win or lose, it's all fair and square (most of the time). You lose because you didn't play well enough. I believe I'd like it more to replay a guy on even ground with me from time to time. That way it shows how I've gotten much better, out of their league (I feel smarter :-P).
Back in high school, I wrestled and played football. Losing in wrestling was always more humiliating than football obviously. A person's soul could be destroyed for losing, especially when their self worth is connected to winning or losing. Back then, I'd lose mostly due to lack of practice and will to find out moves on my own, sounds all too familiar (we had a shitty coach btw). If you don't like losing, but want to keep playing a game you enjoy, why not practice and try to get better? Why play something you have no will to get better when you have much more to learn? Who likes losing to sucky players? In wrestling (age 13), I felt an odd sense of happiness when I made a kid cry for losing. I bet that kind of thing happens in starcraft for many koreans. That thought makes me smile.
Starcraft and wrestling have both provided me with sweating and an increased heart rate (although more so in wrestling), and that's partly why I like starcraft, because I know guys are out there sweating and panicking. They don't want to be outdone. There was a progamer korean game I watched the other day and one of the players has eye twitches when something unexpected happens, it's quite amusing.
Feb 1, 2009
Pet Peeve
I've got a pet peeve. Usually buildings exit their units to the south of the buildings unless it's blocked off. This is a problem for me because depending on my positioning of the map, the marines, medics or firebats exit on the outside of the building blockade. In normal 1v1 matches a scout could result in you having more time to prepare by lifting your barracks. But on a 3v3 bgh match (this could happen on 2v2 low money maps) your unit placement can be crucial.
I would have stopped that silly attack by yellow if I were in a better position with my units together (see purple sending 9 zeolots my way). It would be great if one could control which direction out of a building a unit exits, maybe in the direction closest to a rally point.
I would have stopped that silly attack by yellow if I were in a better position with my units together (see purple sending 9 zeolots my way). It would be great if one could control which direction out of a building a unit exits, maybe in the direction closest to a rally point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
