Hazza54321 wrote:I always feel like a skillful player when 90w spawns in base
Oh ye that happens a lot
Hazza54321 wrote:I always feel like a skillful player when 90w spawns in base
Mitoe wrote:If this game had 100,000 active players, things like this would be far more important than they are right now. I don't really understand how you can say that nothing matters except your build order, and that the build order remains static most of the time. The fact that people think that mechanics are worthless, age 1 is worthless, and all of these other aspects of the game are worthless, really shows how a small community like this simply cannot challenge each other enough to improve the level of play to the point that these things are relevant in every game as they should be.
Garja wrote:None said that. Your swapping around the phrase doesn't work. Mitoe is correct with his statement.
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
[Armag] diarouga wrote:The fact that people think that strategy, adaptation and mind game aren't the most important things in the game, really shows how a small community like this simply cannot challenge each other enough to improve the level of play to the point that these things are relevant in every game as they should be.
WickedCossack wrote:[Armag] diarouga wrote:The fact that people think that strategy, adaptation and mind game aren't the most important things in the game, really shows how a small community like this simply cannot challenge each other enough to improve the level of play to the point that these things are relevant in every game as they should be.
In RTS it's the opposite that is true.
I always find it amusing throughout the years reading some top players emphasizing how important strategy is leaving mechanics as an irrelevance.
Two reasons for why players do that:
i) It's way cooler to win through strategy, since it makes you smart! Must have very big brain. Must let everyone know how big my brain is.
OR
ii) The limiting factor in their games is actually the strategy. They can already do everything they want in the game with their apm so losses are only down to strategy. In which case it makes players that claim strategy is the most important the least strategically smart players.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's point i).
1) Most of the time, I could get more units than my opponent because of precise build orders. And that is really relevant, in some high level games I won because I got a batch of units or a shipment 15sec sooner than my opponent.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:regardless of one's micro, if you have a better unit composition you're just going to win with attack move.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:I can understand though that some players are good simply because of their mechanics, but that is not true for me.
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
[Armag] diarouga/ wrote:WickedCossack wrote:[Armag] diarouga wrote:The fact that people think that strategy, adaptation and mind game aren't the most important things in the game, really shows how a small community like this simply cannot challenge each other enough to improve the level of play to the point that these things are relevant in every game as they should be.
In RTS it's the opposite that is true.
I always find it amusing throughout the years reading some top players emphasizing how important strategy is leaving mechanics as an irrelevance.
Two reasons for why players do that:
i) It's way cooler to win through strategy, since it makes you smart! Must have very big brain. Must let everyone know how big my brain is.
OR
ii) The limiting factor in their games is actually the strategy. They can already do everything they want in the game with their apm so losses are only down to strategy. In which case it makes players that claim strategy is the most important the least strategically smart players.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's point i).
I actually find it amusing that the players who think that strat is less important (ie you and Mitoe) simply try to make fun of the guys who think the opposite because they have no arguments.
Of course if you can't control your units AT ALL, and you lose 2 falcs for free, you're going to lose the game. However, when someone has decent enough mechanics (taking a good positioning and knowing how to attack move properly nothing crazy, anyone can do that with 100-120 APM), then strategies do make the difference, and a bigger difference than cute micro.
The reason why I think that strategy is more important is actually none of these two i), but the fact that I've always won my games because
1) Most of the time, I could get more units than my opponent because of precise build orders. And that is really relevant, in some high level games I won because I got a batch of units or a shipment 15sec sooner than my opponent.
2) Of my unit composition being often better. Of course that is not true vs top tier players because they also get the right unit composition, but regardless of one's micro, if you have a better unit composition you're just going to win with attack move.
3) Because I've always won my games against other top players because of better knowledge of a MU, while my micro is a lot worse.
So yea, personally I'd say that the difference between pr30rouga and me at my peak was mostly my game knowledge and the precision of my strats.
Furthermore, whenever I lose a game, I try to understand why, and 90% of the time my conclusion is that my timing or my strat was wrong.
I can understand though that some players are good simply because of their mechanics, but that is not true for me.
breeze wrote: they cant even guess how much f***ing piece of stupid retarded they look they are trying to give lesson to people who are over pr35 and know the best mu. im pretty sure that we need a page that only pr30+ post and then we could have a nice discussins.
princeofcarthage wrote:One thing I can say with absolute surety is that atleast in aoe 3 majority of player think strategy is/should be irrelevant, you should have fixed build orders and whoever does it more perfectly should instantly win. Players simply refuse to adapt to situation. This definitely prevails very much at high level in comparison to low level.
Yea this is absolutely right. If you just needed a cookie cutter build to be good than anyone could become pro from reading a single guide. There would be no reason to even play if there wasn't adaption cause otherwise each mu between two players would always end exactly the same.Garja wrote:princeofcarthage wrote:One thing I can say with absolute surety is that atleast in aoe 3 majority of player think strategy is/should be irrelevant, you should have fixed build orders and whoever does it more perfectly should instantly win. Players simply refuse to adapt to situation. This definitely prevails very much at high level in comparison to low level.
This absolutely false. At high levels players adapt to everything. In fact the mistake, when it is not just pure lack of game knowledge, is over-reaction.
It is the brainless mid player who relies mostly on copying what the best players do that will have roubles adapting to unknown situations.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?
Which streams do you wish to see listed?