Treasures

[Garja]

I always feel like a skillful player when 90w spawns in base

Oh ye that happens a lot

[[Armag] diarouga]

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.

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.

[Garja]

None said that. Your swapping around the phrase doesn't work. Mitoe is correct with his statement.

[[Armag] diarouga]

None said that. Your swapping around the phrase doesn't work. Mitoe is correct with his statement.

Well I did: strategy, adaptation and mind games are the most important things in the game.
Some aspects of mechanics are just here to make a small difference between two players of equal skill.

[Kaiserklein]

You can do a shit bo while outmicroing and win. Some stuff like microing the 2 falcs properly (which a vast majority of the players don't) can be game winning regardless of the strat

[WickedCossack]

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).

[[Armag] diarouga]

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.

[Mitoe]

I've never said that strategy is less important. I believe in the thread about the best way to improve at one I point I said that they're of roughly equal importance, but it's more important to improve your mechanics than your strategy early on.

Mechanics can help you improve your strategy, whereas strategy cannot improve your mechanics by itself.

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.

This is a mechanical skill, not simply a strategic one. To pull off any build "precisely" you will need some skill. Being well macroed and spending your resources is impossible if you haven't put any time into it.

The simple truth is that many games are lost because a player is floating 600 resources for 3 more hussar at an important moment, even though he had the resources for a house he simply didn't have the APM to recognize that he needed to place it. You cannot be a good player without first mastering the fundamental mechanics of micro and macro.

[princeofcarthage]

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.

[Kaiserklein]

regardless of one's micro, if you have a better unit composition you're just going to win with attack move.

That's just really not true. If you have skirm goon against musk cav and you don't micro you're just going to get crushed. If you don't micro against china deathball you most likely lose. If you don't use the extra skirm range against abus or don't snipe abus with tc fire you can lose.
There's a lot of examples of situations where you just can't win against someone decent by just z moving your stuff.

I can understand though that some players are good simply because of their mechanics, but that is not true for me.

But how is it possible to be good simply because of mechanics, since you said they're almost irrelevant compared to strats?

[Garja]

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.

Can you please learn to read before posting? None said that strategy is irrelevant or even less relevant.
It's not that you have to make it personal just because you have the urge to seek attention.

[lordraphael]

Dia vs Garja grudge match ????!!!

[Garja]

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.

[Mitoe]

Okay, let's not resort to mudslinging guys

We have differing opinions, that's fine. Let's not start attacking each other's person.

[deleted_user]

If you don't proxy raid I have no respect for you -- nuff said.

[gibson]

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.

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.

[deleted_user0]

i'd actually say the most important is neither micro nor macro but something that's kinda a part of both but it's neither, decision making. Players that are good but not top illustrate this very well. They often have a few things they do just as well or even better than top players, yet they lose more games. Why? Because they make the wrong decisions when it matters. They poke when they shouldn't. They siege something when they shouldn't. Or don't siege when they should. They go raid at the wrong moment. Or they raid with too much army and then get their vulnerable units caught by a player who understands that his cav cant be in two places at the same time. They stick to their BO while they should adapt and send another card. Or they fold under the pressure and change up their plans while they could've gotten away with just doing their bo. etc