Macro vs Micro?

[Muz]

What is the difference between the two? Is there any effective method in which of these two is more useful?

[Cel]

Macro = manage the game as a whole: controlling resources and long term objectives like your economy and your global strategies and options throughout the game (build orders, timings, knowing when to attack and when to play defensively or what area of the map to prioritize at any given time in the game etc).

Micro = managing your units at a more individual level, constructing your base managing the space that is right in front of you tile by tile, and controlling them units. Basically having good reflexes and knowledge of what units can do.

Warcraft 2 really is quite balanced of both side of the spectrum if you have good reflexes chances are you are already be good at the micro part of the game and be pretty fast I would recommend spending more time on the macro, planning and adapting your strategies controlling the directions the game can take.

If however you are a pretty slow player chances are you are focusing on the macro part of the game a little bit too much (build orders etc) and can improve trying to spend a bit more time controlling the units you have.

Unlike many modern real time games having good reflexes and being fast in warcraft 2 will not be enough to make you a strong player, war2 is much more balanced in that regard you need both skills it will reward a smart player for making the good decisions too.
The strongest players in war2 are not the fastest ones

The best way to improve still is to maximize the fun you get out of every game win or loose though 

[tk[as]]

A couple examples of micro:

9v9 grunt battle. your view finder is watching the battle looking for the grunt(Grunt A) that appears to be taking the most damage. Your ability to micro would be not only identifying that grunt(A), but pulling him away from the battle 1-2 spaces while another grunt(Grunt B) takes the damage, and then bringing your damaged grunt(A) back into the battle before grunt(B) dies... and more advanced micro would be being able to identify the same process and repeat the same process multiple times with multiple different grunts in the same 9v9 grunt battle.

Lots of micro goes into tower wars as well.. placing towers/peons in specific locations.. allowing them to take damage/repair at specific times in an attempt to survive/win battles without actually allowing buildings/units to die (even though they might take damage).

Cat wars require a lot of micro to win the cat war... you can't just let them sit there in one spot or they die (because the other person had better micro)


There are players who Typically focus on micro more than macro (Dugs and Paperboy come to mind) .. Others tend to focus on Macro more (Goal is to get so many bases, collect so many resources, and get so big that even if the other player has superior micro they just can't compete because lack of resources) like SPB, Medivh, and Sparkz.

There is definitely a balance between the two like cel said.. There is a place and time to macro, and a place and time to micro.. being able to identify when to focus on which(micro or macro), and then executing it will give u an edge.

[Cel]

Another way to put it would be:

Macro is about controlling the paste of the game as a whole basically, When and where fight happen and why they have to happen in that way for you to win.
Identifying the winning conditions, creating new ones and taking them opportunities when they appear.

A good macro player will not always just get as many bases as possible but rather will understand when to do it and when not to do it.

It is all about being good at identifying the strengths and weaknesses of every situations globally and always choose accordingly the best strategy to adopt.

The best strategy can be to go for multiple halls in maps like HSC when playing 1v1 but it can also adapting and realizing your opponent is right next to you and changing your plans and adapting your build for a more early engagement a good macro player will control his timings and power spikes.


In short:
Macro: managing the game as a whole.
Micro: managing the game entities individually.


You can compensate one by the other:
If you are bad at micro but are better and macro you basically will tend to create conditions for you to have enough units and resources that you can afford to waste more of them.
If you are bad at macro you will tend to spend more time on making sure that even when you do not control the paste of the game your superior usage of the little resources you have allow you to win even if you had less resources and units overall than your opponent.

Some players indeed tend to perform better on one of the other and you can often tell by looking and the end screens:

If you look at Braviet you will sometimes see he manages to win games with half the resources and units of his opponents with a very positive kill/death ratio that shows how good he is with his uc that shows he has good micro skills.
Some other player like spb- will most often win because they manage to get that much more resources and map control but will tend to have a less amazing kill/death ratio that often reveals how much control they had over the map and objectives throughout the game.

Now that said it is not black and white, it takes both skills to be in these players league, Braviet has over the top micro but he also has amazing macro there is a reason why he is one of my favourite players to watch.

Szwagier is a completely balanced player and masters both sides of the coin pretty much flawlessly good luck idenfying his weak/strong spot lol.

Spb- tends to be known for favoring macro but he also has very good micro when he wants to.