Stating your division

[Chynkinese]

From my browsing I've found that many times people offer strategies (some good, some bad) that are usually relevant to a certain division of play. It would be nice to implement into the forum the players' division (and rank?). If not, maybe we can start stating our division or putting it in our sigs when participating in strategy discussions.

[DemolitionSquid]

So we can be elitist and ignore the opinion of anyone under platinum like Team Liquid?

Brilliant.

[ArcherofAiur]

So we can be elitist and ignore the opinion of anyone under platinum like Team Liquid?

Brilliant.

Everyone should get an equal say in how best to play no matter how wrong they are. Personally I think PvZ is imbalanced since the enemy always kills me before i can fast tech to broodlords.

[DemolitionSquid]

I also think PvZ is imbalanced because I can kill them before they get Brood Lords.

The point, which you tried to make fun of but failed miserably at (as usual) because of your eltism, is that people at the lower levels can still have valuable insight into the game even if their technical skill isn't up to par with the pros. If PvZ at the lower levels had a 90% win rate for the P, its as legitimate an issue as if Z had a 90% win rate vs P in platinum. Somewhere, there's a problem that must be rectified.

[TWD]

It's not necessary. If you are posting on this board you have the capacity to filter out what is good advice and what isn't for yourself. You really don't need to know how good the person is to determine if the strategy might work for you.
________
ShyMama cam

[MajinX]

It's not necessary. If you are posting on this board you have the capacity to filter out what is good advice and what isn't for yourself. You really don't need to know how good the person is to determine if the strategy might work for you.

the point the OP is trying to make is wat strategies work at wat lvl, for example a silver player trying a platinums advice might fail him completely as he lacks the micro and macro management to get there in time. While a high lvl silver's advice can help the silver player alot more. IMO i think the OPs idea is a great idea.

[protoswarrior]

Er, advice from anyone is free and only the person's judgment can tell the usefulness of it or not. Regardless of skill level, ideas/strats provided are not to be underestimated, but once they're tried out, they can be "allowed" / "disallowed" for a certain level of play. BUT, until then, it's all fair game.

Just saying.

PS:

My opinion?

Back up your shit with replays, if you're giving out a strat/build. Even if poorly executed, the idea is still there, and if it is interesting enough a higher skilled player can try it and provide a more accurate picture wrt the strat's viability.

[ChAoS]

Uhh, blizzard doesn't value the opinion of anyone under plat very much either... Look for it, they have stated that it is the plat league that is balancing this game. Plat isn't even that good..

I think bliz needs a league (not invite only) above plat that you cannot get placed into. The bottom of plat and the top are like 2 completely different leagues.

[ChAoS]

the point the OP is trying to make is wat strategies work at wat lvl, for example a silver player trying a platinums advice might fail him completely as he lacks the micro and macro management to get there in time. While a high lvl silver's advice can help the silver player alot more. IMO i think the OPs idea is a great idea.

You couldn't be any more wrong. If i told some newbie to kill 1 lurker with 1 marine, he might have a bit of trouble. But sc2 is as easy as ripping off a plat's build order. Sc2 is easy.

You see some things that could benefit your game may not make you good right away, might even make you play shittier for a bit. For instance in korea you are forced to perfect your hotkey usage, this is called mechanics. When somone says that guy is a very mechanical player, they mean he just hotkeys everything like a mofo and does pure macro. There isn't much skill or intelligence put into being a mechanical player, it's just practice practice practice.

If you are smart enough to rip off a strategy from a high level gamer like most people that think they are good do, you must practice it over and over to perfect it. Starcraft is all about perfection, even more so now that sc2 is easy as pie to play. The gap between good gamers and newbs is a lot smaller then in bw but it's still pretty big.

[dejai]

I disagree, an opener may be standard but that does not dictate the game. It is like a gambit in chess. You try not to fail in the first 5 minutes of the game and the tech path is extremely linear in early game. Supply Depot or Barracks hmm. Starcraft 2 is all about the mid game where you react to what your opponent is doing it is not about just perfecting a single build and not being able to change. That is what separates a platnium player from a copper player being able to effectively react to what your opponent is doing built upon a solid foundation of macro game mechanics. I mean supply depot at 10 racks at 11 then you have scouted the enemy and you can modify your build from there. A good example and I can provide a replay was when my opponent (protoss) went Forge fast expand and I went with my first racks rush to tech lab to get some marauders (standard play) when I noticed the FE I went straight into reapers and build a bunker out of view of his nexus then I microed my reapers and took it down. I then used the advantage to macro a marine ball off 3 rack and pushed through his back door to win. Sticking to a static game plan would have lost me that game, but instead thinking on my feet gave me the upper hand.