Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Forum index  > Off topic   >

I (think that I) figured why I am bad

12 posts, 432 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort

USrankCliver5
12 months ago
(edited 12 months ago)
I think the problem is that I use too many micro-heavy factories (jumpbots, cloakbots, rovers, striders, hovers, airplanes) instead of macro-oriented factories (tanks, amphbots, ships, shieldbots). Perhaps my key to success is to use one "spec-ops" factory that is micro-intensive, and one frontline factory for pumping out map control! Maybe that is the golden strategy for maximum enjoyment!
+0 / -0

DErankkatastrophe
12 months ago
I don`t think you are that bad. Nor do I think tanks for example are less micro-intensive...
I would say if you really want to get better, play small teams, 1v1 or alone against bots (on a challenging difficulty ofc.)
What got me a lot of mileage was being forced to do everything on my own in solo-mode.
Otherwise maybe try to narrow down your factory-selection and try to get those really under control. In clusterfucks, micro is king, macro does not help you much because you lack the income.
+4 / -0

USrankCliver5
12 months ago
Thank you for the tip, Katastrophe!

On the update note, I tried mixing up micro-oriented factories with macro-oriented factories. The result was FUN!
The "experiment" was a success.
+0 / -0
DErankBrackman
12 months ago
I watched a 1v1 that you won. I think your unit choice and micro are ok. What you really need is more mex expansion, army and raiding, less defense.
+0 / -0
FRrankmalric
12 months ago
Bad at what though? I find 1v1 different than (larger) team games. While there are many common things (expansion, raiding, etc.) I feel that lots of time in teams to win you have to find what nobody in your team does yet (push a front, economy, some defense, scouting, etc) and do it yourself, and be ready to change again and again (people sometimes resume doing one thing they neglected). In 1v1 you have to realize what you are not doing enough yourself (plus have better APM), which I think its a different exercise...
+2 / -0

DErankkatastrophe
12 months ago
I think 1v1 teaches you to see the game as a whole, which makes it easier to see what your team is missing in big team-games. It also requires way more and way more constant attention, which you can take over to teams yet again.
+4 / -0
USrankGanenge
12 months ago
Playing those 1v1s yesterday I found it easy to pressure your flanks.

When I'm not playing RTS games I'm playing Advanced Wars By Web where the Meta is to have a "strong" side and a "weak" side.

Usually my weak side just has enough units and turrets to delay the opponent. I kept finding my weak side making progress since you only built defences against my strong side. You should probably place a few LLTs and more importantly radar even in places I'm not active.

Also why so many factory changes?
+2 / -0
FRrankmalric
12 months ago
quote:
I think 1v1 teaches you to see the game as a whole, which makes it easier to see what your team is missing in big team-games. It also requires way more and way more constant attention, which you can take over to teams yet again.
On the other hand, many 1v1 games miss some escalation(s) required in larger team games. Also I learned a lot just by seeing how better players play. One could spec 1v1 as well. but in team games you can have a glimpse into other people style and play at the same time.

If you have lots of time, a very good way to progress is to re-watch battle that you lost. I always find so obvious the mistakes I make when I watch the replay, especially the wrong assumptions about economy/troop placement/opportunities. But as I don't have that much time I prefer just to fool around in team games.

+0 / -0

ZArankAstran
12 months ago
If you want to become better at lobpot you have to intimately understand unit interactions and which units are OP against which. You have to understand what the losing strategies are and avoid those. For example, I feel my grasp of the game is pretty good but I am magnetically attracted to commander morph which is simply a sub standard lobster strat. You want to avoid those if you want to get "better".
+0 / -0
CArankThe_Amazing_Pencil
12 months ago
Tanks are very micro-heavy I would argue. Unlike cloak bots you can't just attack move a blob of tanks, you have to make sure the ogres stay right behind the minotaurs and the emissaries stay back. Tremor is a set and forget, until you start paying attention to friendly fire just how expensive they are to lose. Setting retreat points also helps with some of the thinking, but then you have to setup and protect a repair station close to the battle.
+0 / -0
USranksomekid
12 months ago
USrankCliver5

You are a team player and I enjoy having you on my side. Frankly I can count on you more than I can count on certain Blue players to do their job.

Obviously there is skill to work on but everyone here is rooting for you.
+1 / -0

DErankkatastrophe
12 months ago
FRrankmalric I agree that teams is very different to 1v1, but so is small teams for example. I find the lobpot really bad for improving because you lack reliable feedback. It is often extremely hard to say what impact one specifically has in a pot-game.
+1 / -0