Macro and Micro?

[Sevion]

I disagree on generalizing it that much...

400 Zerglings will never beat 100 Roaches.

Bigger is not always better. You have to be smart about army composition, too.

 

[Bloodcount]

Elder.... let's me begin with

>you can have as high APM you want, but unless you actually USE that APM, its no good, its just spamming.

APM does NOT stand for spamming. The real APM isn't measured and is your REAL actions per minute. The higher apm, the better the player, that IS a fact. The real APM, like I said above DOESN'T get measured by the SCII built in system.


>In the lower levels (like bronze and etc) you should focus more on macro, because in the end, you will win if you have a BIGGER army.

Wrong again. If u have 100 marines you can loose to 8 banelings if you don't micro.

>Microing well starts to matter more in platinum and diamond leagues, focus on macro and then look at micro.

No, microing matters at all levels. I played on a frined's acc for 2-3 games (he is in silver) and I made a 5 front attack and thore him appart (wasn't even funny, but meh) using micro.

Micro always matters and is always good to have.

Elder, FYI there are silver players who have outmicroed me and 3400+ diamonds who a-move. League has nothing to do with the importance of micro and macro.

>I don't know how good I'll do, but I'm fairly confident I can hold off your foxer rushes

A micro intensive build doesn't mean a rush. I can go stalker sentry collosus and it is still something that requires good micro to pull off ;] : D

>You have to be smart about army composition, too.

That I completely agree with.

 

[Narks]

I disagree on generalizing it that much...

400 Zerglings will never beat 100 Roaches.

Bigger is not always better. You have to be smart about army composition, too.

they are the same size... 400 lings = 100 roaches = 200 supply

 

[Sevion]

I wasn't talking about supply. I was talking about numbers... I do realize that they take up the same supply. It might have been the reasons for choosing those numbers.

 

[Slapshot136]

I wasn't talking about supply. I was talking about numbers... I do realize that they take up the same supply. It might have been the reasons for choosing those numbers.

it still dosen't add up - testing X roaches vs 2x lings results in the lings winning unless roaches have armor upgrades (and lings don't have weapon upgrades), but that is with 2x, at 4x zerglings win hands down

now of course if you micro those roaches (burrow/unborrow for example), then they would have a better chance, or by fighting on a ramp/etc. where the lings can't surround

 

[BANANAMAN]

I'm pretty sure I wrote a thread discussing apm already..

 

[Sevion]

That is based off the assumption that you focus fire each unit down. Which means the roaches lose a ton of DPS.....

If you just A-Move against the Zerglings you should win.

That is also assuming you're on a huge flat open area with no cliffs at all. No such map exists. A-Move each army and the Roaches win hands down.

Each Roach can take down 2-3 Zerglings minimum before dying.

 

[Vestras]

I think you guys are generalizing too much. Saying Macro > Micro is in most ways correct, but whether macro is more important than micro is very race dependent. For example, a race such as Zerg where you can have houndreds of units streaming to your opponent, control of those units is rather unimportant as the units will most likely die anyway and will be replaced. However, for a race like Protoss, where you won't have many units ever, and each unit deals a lot of damage, control of these units is very, very important for success. 3 colossi can take out 6 colossi if the 3 colossi are positioned correctly and the 6 colossi are clumped up.

Saying that micro is unimportant in lower levels and macro is all is also quite untrue. Neither of them are the most important; Bronze League, Silver League, etc. have bigger problems than injecting and using chrono boost constantly; they struggle with army composition and early rushes or pushes.

 

[s3rius]

The real APM isn't measured and is your REAL actions per minute. The higher apm, the better the player, that IS a fact. The real APM, like I said above DOESN'T get measured by the SCII built in system.

Actions per minute, as the name already says, is the amount of actions you perform per minute. Whether the action is meaningless or not doesn't matter. It's simply all actions.
What you mean is usually called Effective APM.
If you don't trust me there's a small article about it here.

Sc2 measures your real APM, but not your effective APM.
And even if you have more effective APM than your enemy doesn't mean you're worse. APM can only bring you so far. Good decision making, strategy and tactics are much more important. A player's APM usually rises once they start doing more and more stuff, but just saying EAPM determines the better players is a bit short-sighted.

And the reason why macro is generally more important than micro (in lower leagues) is the lowbies usually totally fuck up their macro play, sit around on 1000s of minerals and don't think of spending them well.

You can micro all you want, the guy with a 3000mins army advantage will generally always win. Even if it's marines vs banelings.

Also tight execution and good macro open up the opportunity to do early-mid game pushes which are very hard to stop for someone who's just not macroing well.
Things like the 3-rax push, cloacked banshees, 4-gate, etc etc.
A well executed 4-gate is relatively hard to stop. Especially if you're sitting on a pile of minerals.

 

[YourFace]

If you can't micro, you can't do any WhiteRa stuff, and you won't have as much fun.(Plus you won't be very good).
I agree with Sevion too. 100 Thors can beat 500+ phoenixes really easily, or 400 void rays.