what is your style of play?

[SlickR]

How do you play the game? Are you a macro, micro or mixed player.

Also post what you think is the most effective way to play.

[Peanutbutter]

Since I'm to the beta, i try to micro and macro as efficiently as i can.

But I'm sure, that once i get the hang of it, I'll be more of a macro/offensive kind of guy

[SlickR]

I'll start off and say I'm a macro player, though often times I like to mix it up.
Overall though I want to make an economic advantage over my opponent and overwhelm him in the mid to late game.

I also don't bother to micro my army too much and would rather just A move my army with just spreading it if I need to and get back to macroing.

[TheRabidDeer]

Probably mostly macro, though some games I do switch it up to a micro oriented play.

[GRUNT]

Wow, so many polls lately .

But yeah - Macro for me . For one, I play Zerg, and I feel that Zerg are a race which really rewards mechanical play. Also, I get quite a bit of delay when I play, so my units are fairly unresponsive, which makes micro quite difficult for me to do. That's another reason why I tend to rely on a macro advantage to win games .

[arthas]

Micro for me....Maybe cuz i've played to much DoTa and WC3....

[Crazy_Jonny]

I would say I'm mixed, but my crap computer is making me more of a macro player at the moment. Your latency needs to be perfect to micro.
I think I've always been more of a macro player though. I tend to build up really big forces when given the opportunity, and enjoy dragging out battles. To play effectively though I think you need to have a good mix. Aggression in SC2 is key. Thats why I'm not that good.

[Gifted]

I'm definately a micro player, but I've been working on my macro lately.

[protoswarrior]

I'm definately a micro player, but I've been working on my macro lately.

Same here

I used to be heavily micro-oriented, but my macro has been improving lately ... so much so that I have upgraded leagues

The most effective way to play is I believe: 80% macro - 20% micro.

Reason being that with 80% macro, you rarely lose unless you're up against a much much higher tech unit like Broodlords, Carriers or BCs. But then, it's your fault for not getting the right counter. However, if you scout correctly and build the right kind of army, you don't need micro as much as macro. You just position portions of your army, throw down a couple of spells, then return to main / warp-in pylon field, and make more units.
And expo every time you're in an advantage.

[TheRumpeltier]

Since I'm not in the beta yet, I can just refer to BW, but I do think that it applies to both, sc 1 and 2 as well as to wc3, at least somewhat.

Micro is very important during the early game, while macro gets more and more important during late game!
As long as you just control a few units it is important to get the most out of them, but later on, when bigger armys clash, it is more about having the right counter units. It is still important to be casting, if the counter units you've chosen work only this way, like high templers' Psy Storm against masses of weak Zerg units. So whether micro or macro is more important also depends on the units currently in play.

Since I am a batter macro player than a micro one, it often happens to me that I am being out-microed early on and not even able to reach the late game.
Which pisses me off really bad by the way; every time it happens!

In general I still think everybody has to find out for himself which way works best for him.