- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
Eej posted:
Can't wait for the indomitable ISU-152 tank destroyer keeping with all the broken allied crap from coh 1.
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 00:50
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2024 22:05
|
|
- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
Kraustofski posted:
Not ready to let go of my bofors and 17 pounder gun emplacements... I just like playing defensive Allied doctrine for some reason. Summoning Priests and Churchills to the field rocks and whatever the hell those cute little tanks are called that move fast as lightning... I'd miss those guys. Just get like 10 if those and its a game ender for some terrible players.
it's you. you're the terrible player.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 06:25
|
|
- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
What the gently caress who thought that would be a good idea.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2012 17:10
|
|
- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
I got the "sorry! no more keys but we'll let you know if more are available!" message. Is that the "denial" message or are they just not giving out any more keys?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 21:58
|
|
- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
First, let me address the way in which you were sort of right:
It's true that part of the reason for macro (which in SC2 lingo refers to everything having to do with base building, resource management, unit production, and research) is to increase the skill ceiling by making having a high APM a more important trait. The reason I said sort of here is that APM in competitive SC2 is essentially like another resource that you draw on, but it's not like in-game minerals or gas, or real-life resources like money. APM is more like bandwidth: you have to constantly spend it, or it's simply lost; you don't get to save bandwidth for later.
A good way of thinking of APM is that it's the physical representation of attention. Good players can pay attention to more things at once, and more efficiently, both because of raw click speed and accuracy, and because of faster visual perception (because they've been playing the game so long, not because they have superhero vision) and low-level tactical thinking. This effectively means that good players have more attention to spend.
But even pros have limited amounts of attention. They can't perfectly micro their hellion drop vs base defenses AND have perfect efficiency with their macro simultaneously. So, they have to choose. This is the interesting part of APM/attention: what do you choose to pay attention to, when you only have so much to spend? If you pay more attention to your harass but let your economy go to crap, you could win the battle but lose the war. It's not uncommon to see this in professional games, where a player will be handling a battle really well, then all of a sudden they seem really sloppy, and you realize that no, they didn't have an aneurysm, they just went back home to macro. Striking a balance here is difficult, and an important part of becoming a better player.
The other, very broad part of the importance of macro is that it sets the stage for the battles. The timings you choose for your economy, research, unit production, etc. all affect which and how many units you will have, with what abilities, and the context they will be fighting in. Chose a greedier build than your opponent? Now he pretty much has to punish you, and soon, otherwise his economy will fall behind, and that means a smaller army later on. Focused on making more new units now at the expense of teching? Better use that army advantage now to push or harass your opponent, or expand, or else he'll end up with a better army composition that can crush you. Heck, I've lost games because of my poor building placement, and won games because of good building placement, even though building placement is obviously one of the most mundane parts of macro.
I'm glad you're back on your Risperidol, Poontangarang. Might want to up the dose just a tinny bit though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 01:32
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2024 22:05
|
|
- Loveline
- Dec 30, 2005
-
|
So did they really just make CoH 2: The Scheldt, The game. Because that's what it sounds like.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 18:41
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 00:50
