DjinnOfSorrow wrote: Maybe that points more to my inefficient use of all the hotkeys since only a handful are set from the old days.
Edit: this was pointed at my mouse cursor is never in the middle lol
Yeah usually you want to do everything you can with hotkeys since its more effective this way. If you dont, then your mouse is less in the center of the screen and the more inefficient your actions will be.
DjinnOfSorrow wrote: Stay alert, no need to over click but useful in some cases(especially lag)
Be careful though. Overclicking may be detrimental to you, specially during fights as what will happen is that youâll cancel attack animations and maybe make your units walk due to commanding an attack to a unit that will be dead when the game resolves your action
WickedCossack wrote:On top of what's already been said another benefit is that it can be an effective strategy to help build up your APM over time.
While it doesn't start as effective APM, spam can get you more comfortable playing at a higher APM which in turn leads to a higher effective APM.
Agreed I should probably try to focus on being a bit more aggressive with my actions per minute but like was said earlier in some cases it can cause vils to repath, which I will have to play with. I'm not quite catatonic but I knock out my first 10-20 orders then its waiting for about 20-30 seconds before I am clicking away again. But at what point do you pass effective click rate? But I think the keeping it up for later game explanation covers it the best.
DjinnOfSorrow wrote:Yes I have noticed that and have to adjust for it, I was curious if it helped the oddball stumbling that can occur in larger groups of cav.
You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
Yea, that's what I've always said. Decision making is much more important than mechanics.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
Yea, that's what I've always said. Decision making is much more important than mechanics.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
So when to push in, unit composition, scouting hunts/vils and tc shipments,and at times what civ to play and which build order to go with all outweigh the micro side.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
So when to push in, unit composition, scouting hunts/vils and tc shipments,and at times what civ to play and which build order to go with all outweigh the micro side.
Easiest way to learn and master these things is to play with much higher level players than yourself to understand these things, ask for their opinions what things you did bad and their opinion on how you should've done better, the more games you will play the faster will you understand it.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
So when to push in, unit composition, scouting hunts/vils and tc shipments,and at times what civ to play and which build order to go with all outweigh the micro side.
Easiest way to learn and master these things is to play with much higher level players than yourself to understand these things, ask for their opinions what things you did bad and their opinion on how you should've done better, the more games you will play the faster will you understand it.
So something else I was thinking about is the critical mass approach. I have used it a few times just ignoring army composition completely with some success and my understanding is it works well against China. I know its seen as a bit lame but is that approach viable at higher levels?
I found my own strategic deficiency being due to a lack of never looking at the game from the perspective of my opponent and imagining how it is to be him (in fact, I do the same mistake when playing chess too). When it finally clicked and I begun doing that, it all became so obvious. I used to just be permanently afraid, thinking for myself "What if he pops 5 mamelukes right now?" or "What if he is aging right now?"âwhile it is obvious that it is not possible for him to pop mamelukes or age up right now, if I only spend a few seconds thinking about it. Very often you don't know what your opponent is doing, but you know that he's not gathering on that hunt or mining on that mine, so he cannot have a better economy than you. I always found myself being scared of fantasized armies of mahouts, urumi, sepoy, redcoats, and gurkha, even though it would only take two seconds of reasoning to realize that it is not possible for him to have that kind of army. It is more about ensuring that he is not doing something, rather than knowing what exactly he is up to.
Let's look at an example from one of my own games: You are France doing a standard musketeer semi-FF against your German opponent but you haven't seen a single military unit from your German opponentânot even a single Uhlan. He might be going straight to fortress, or he might be going for a colonial timing, however you notice that he never built a trading post. What happens if he was going to fortress but you prepared for a colonial timing by massing musks and adding hussars? Considering that he never built a TP, his fortress will be rather weak and you are in a very good position with your huge army. What happens if he was massing in colonial and you continued with your semi-FF, expecting a weak fortress Germany? You'd most likely have lost the game on the spot. So you don't need to know what he is doing, but rather making sure that he is not massing in colonial, or if you cannot make sure (i.e. you find no information despite scouting the the best of your ability)âas was the case in my gameâyou should prepare for it blindly.
In my game, Kaiser was spamming doppelsoldners from a proxy rax I never found, and I just went to fortress after making 15 musks even though he had no TP and didn't even bother to try to raid meâtwo red flags that I ignored. As soon as I hit fortress he right clicked on my town center and the game was over.
Gendarme wrote:I found my own strategic deficiency being due to a lack of never looking at the game from the perspective of my opponent and imagining how it is to be him (in fact, I do the same mistake when playing chess too). When it finally clicked and I begun doing that, it all became so obvious. I used to just be permanently afraid, thinking for myself "What if he pops 5 mamelukes right now?" or "What if he is aging right now?"âwhile it is obvious that it is not possible for him to pop mamelukes or age up right now, if I only spend a few seconds thinking about it. Very often you don't know what your opponent is doing, but you know that he's not gathering on that hunt or mining on that mine, so he cannot have a better economy than you. I always found myself being scared of fantasized armies of mahouts, urumi, sepoy, redcoats, and gurkha, even though it would only take two seconds of reasoning to realize that it is not possible for him to have that kind of army. It is more about ensuring that he is not doing something, rather than knowing what exactly he is up to.
Let's look at an example from one of my own games: You are France doing a standard musketeer semi-FF against your German opponent but you haven't seen a single military unit from your German opponentânot even a single Uhlan. He might be going straight to fortress, or he might be going for a colonial timing, however you notice that he never built a trading post. What happens if he was going to fortress but you prepared for a colonial timing by massing musks and adding hussars? Considering that he never built a TP, his fortress will be rather weak and you are in a very good position with your huge army. What happens if he was massing in colonial and you continued with your semi-FF, expecting a weak fortress Germany? You'd most likely have lost the game on the spot. So you don't need to know what he is doing, but rather making sure that he is not massing in colonial, or if you cannot make sure (i.e. you find no information despite scouting the the best of your ability)âas was the case in my gameâyou should prepare for it blindly.
In my game, Kaiser was spamming doppelsoldners from a proxy rax I never found, and I just went to fortress after making 15 musks even though he had no TP and didn't even bother to try to raid meâtwo red flags that I ignored. As soon as I hit fortress he right clicked on my town center and the game was over.
Yes this is very similar to my past experiences but with musk/jans. I do try to play it like chess and thats probably why I have won some matches that just going off my screen or villager count you would think its gg for me but just the little details would point towards it being closer than you would think.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
So when to push in, unit composition, scouting hunts/vils and tc shipments,and at times what civ to play and which build order to go with all outweigh the micro side.
Easiest way to learn and master these things is to play with much higher level players than yourself to understand these things, ask for their opinions what things you did bad and their opinion on how you should've done better, the more games you will play the faster will you understand it.
So something else I was thinking about is the critical mass approach. I have used it a few times just ignoring army composition completely with some success and my understanding is it works well against China. I know its seen as a bit lame but is that approach viable at higher levels?
It is with some civs, such as China. This approach is called a timing, and it is totally viable, though you need to scout and adapt.
Googol wrote:You should focus on decision making before mechanics first, if you do make correct decisions most of the time, you will see yourself climbing up the ladder very easily
So when to push in, unit composition, scouting hunts/vils and tc shipments,and at times what civ to play and which build order to go with all outweigh the micro side.
Easiest way to learn and master these things is to play with much higher level players than yourself to understand these things, ask for their opinions what things you did bad and their opinion on how you should've done better, the more games you will play the faster will you understand it.
So something else I was thinking about is the critical mass approach. I have used it a few times just ignoring army composition completely with some success and my understanding is it works well against China. I know its seen as a bit lame but is that approach viable at higher levels?
It is with some civs, such as China. This approach is called a timing, and it is totally viable, though you need to scout and adapt.
I actually played it as a ruse. I made sure my opponent got to see my first age 2 shipment and massed for a timing push on my typical age 3 timing. Scouted to see if he showed any signs of prepping for a colonial. Each time they had deck checked and could see age 3 heavy cav agenda so towers and a few musk then started aging.
My army had their military buildings disabled before they could react and took down the tc and towers. At this point I would decide either to keep reinforcing or age up and start sending cav to hunt vils or stay colonial and keep swelling my numbers til gg