|
I love Starcraft.
This is why I'm here.
Yet, many people ask me why I love it since the game is over a decade old now and the graphics are really terrible.
The fact is I've always loved Strategy games. I've played chess and Go for many years and I still watch some tournaments of these (and since I'm in Tokyo right now, I've also played some).
But if I want to write about it today, is because I think a good understanding of Starcraft can help people to actually understand how management is about.
I'm definitely not a Economics phD (yet) and even if I'm too young to really talk about how to manage a real company, since I study Business, I can see some very obvious links between the game and the theory we learn at school. And I believe, people are much more willing to play a game than reading a boring book (yeah, let's admit it's boring for me).
Remember, this article is not a Starcraft tutorial and definitely not a Economics lesson. It is just a way for me to make you guys understand globally why Starcraft is so fun to play, so hard to master and why players have never stopped improving for a decade.
If this article can help some of you to understand better both economics and the game, well, it's all good for me.
And if you have fun reading it, well, it's perfect.
So, guys, here we are !
(Because I'm not here to write about how to play Starcraft, I'm going to give very basic example with the race Terran -there are 3 different races-, which is very similar to Human so it's easier for you guys to understand)
The first thing to understand is that Starcraft is a RTS. Which means real time strategy game. And the key words here are : strategy and real time. I really want you to get this right now because everything I'm gonna tell won't be true without these two notions.
Today, let's focus on Strategy.
Strategy means that Starcraft is about purpose/objective, information/understanding, preparation/plan. In brief, it means that when you play Starcraft, you always know what you wanna do, you understand the rules and the environment and knowing this, you prepare a plan to do it.
Strategy is also divided in in many parts. In Starcraft, there are basically two parts : micro management and macro management.
Micro is everything related to the management of the units and macro is about the use of the resources.
In comparison, it can be said that chess is more micro-oriented since every units the player has have different functions and the winning is about how to combine these different characteristics. But another example is Go, which is more macro-oriented since every stones the player has are the same and the winning is about how to use these stones in order to build defensive or offensive areas.
In this article, I'm only going to focus in the Macro since Starcraft is more macro-oriented (and it doesn't mean that micro is useless).
Resources, Costs and production.
There are 2 different kinds of resource in Starcraft : Mineral and Gaz. Mineral is limited.
If we want to make an analogy, we can basically consider mineral as money and gaz as oil.
Minerals are essential to build buildings and produce units. Whatever the player wants to make, it requires mineral.
But, some buildings and units also require gaz.
Another resource is the Supply, which can basically be considered as food.
The player have to build Supply Depots to have Supply. Each unit costs a certain amount of supply and if there is not enough Supply available, the unit can't be made.
Now, let's see a basic example of how production works in Starcraft and why it requires management skills.
In this game, every players start with a command center, 4 SCV and 50 minerals. Basically the command center produces SCV, gives 10 Supply and is also the place where resources are stocked. SCV is the unit that gathers the minerals and gaz. It is also the unit that builds the buildings such as the Supply Depots.
Now, let's focus on the mineral only :
*each commander center requires 400 minerals to be built.
*each command center also gives 10 supply.
*each Supply Depot requires 100 minerals
*each Supply Depot gives 8 supply.
*each time the SCV go to the mineral it collects 8 minerals.
*each SCV requires 50 minerals and 1 supply to be produced.
So basically : more SCV implies more minerals and more supply. More minerals lead to more supply and more SCV etc. you got it ?
This very basic example already shows a very key notion both in economy and in Starcraft : the costs VS the production. And when I say costs, I'm really talking about every costs such as fix, marginal, average, opportunity, transaction, total costs.
Let me give you some example of these costs :
1- Fix, Marginal, average costs :
Let's assume that I want to collect more minerals.
I need to build a depot (100 minerals) and produce units (50 minerals). If i've produced 7 SCV, it means that :
-I have a total cost of 100+50x7 = 450 minerals
-I have a 100 minerals fix cost for the depot because without the depot, I can't have more SCV
-The average cost of the SCV is 450/7 = 64,286 minerals
Now, I produce another SCV :
-My total cost is : 500 minerals
-My marginal cost is : 500-450 = 50 minerals
-My average cost is : 500/8 = 62,5 minerals
Now I produce another SCV : because one Supply Depot only gives 8 supply, I need to build another one :
-total cost : 500+100+50 = 650 minerals
-marginal cost of the 9th SCV : 650-500 = 150 minerals
-average cost of a SCV : 650/9 = 72,2 minerals
So : the average cost declines when the marginal cost is inferior to the average cost.
Now, you understand why it is so important to optimize a production.
2-Opportunity and transaction costs :
Let's assume that I want to produce a Marine to defend my base.
*each marine costs 50 minerals and requires 1 sypply
*marines are produced in Barracks and each barrack costs 150 minerals
If I have 1 marine, it means that I have to build a barrack first. So I have 150 minerals of transaction cost and because I invests in barrack, I don't have enough money to invest in more SCV so I can't collect more minerals.
If we only consider the marine V the SCV, it means that if I go for a marine and not the SCV, I have to pay 50 minerals for the actual production and also the total amount of minerals that a SCV could collect during a game !
So if there is no attack, my marine doesn't cost just 50 minerals but thousands and even more minerals !
If you have understood these examples, congratulations, because you have understood the very core of Starcraft and management in general.
Now you understand why choices are absolutely key.
I also want you to read the paragraph about strategy again and you will maybe notice that every example I've given here follows this basic order :
1-What do I want ?
If I don't clearly know what I want, I can't do anything. And if the first step is bad, it can lead to a very very terrible conclusion. In one of my examples, I wanted a marine to protect my base because if I don't, and someone attack me, it will ruin my economy. And my ultimate goal is to have money to build and produce.
But how do I know someone is going attack me ?
2-What is my environment and what are the rules ?
This is the answer to question 1. I need information. I have to know if it is useful or not to have a marine instead of a SCV. I also have to understand the rules because if I don't know that a marine requires a Barrack first, I won't be able to prepare my plan.
3-What can I do to reach my goal ?
And yeah, finally, I prepare my plan, based on the 2 first lines. I know what I need, I have the information and I prepare a plan : I optimize.
So next time you play Starcraft or manage something, remember that it is all about these 3 lines.
Oh god, that was long. Hope you survived reading this. I still got so many things to write but I guess I have to sleep now (0522 am).
PS : sorry guys for the Typo but it's pretty hard for a french to write english with a Japanese keyboad :D
PPS : do not hesitate to tell me if I made mistakes writing this. (and yeah, SC fans are not ALL computer-science geeks :D)
edit :
better :
supply = labor
minerals = capital
gas = output from fixed assets
(thx caller for this input)
And sorry about the mistake on SCVs
  
|
|
|
|
|
Posts 2669>Posts 8
so, I guess, Yes.
|
|
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On August 25 2009 05:27 phoner wrote:
no
Two letter posts won't get you anywhere on TL.
As for the OP, I do agree to a certain extent. In the field of economics, it's all about optimizing and maximizing profit at minimal costs. For example, the optimum number of workers at a base with x number of mineral patches can be calculated with data. Other aspects of the game can also be quantified, such as the number of production facilities that are producing a combo of x and y units. However, there are too many other extraneous factors that are to be considered in Starcraft, such as micro, strategy, and decision making for this to make much of a difference.
Is it really worth the hassle? That I believe is the real question.
|
I already was wondering why he explains what an RTS is, on TL.
Then he started talking about gaz", and finally, this one made me stop reading:
On August 25 2009 05:23 MK wrote:
In this game, every players start with a command center, 5 SCV and 50 minerals.
|
Starcraft is a great game in many ways. I believe that it helps to take quick decisions and develop strategical thinking.
The question is, how much time do you need to spend in starcraft to develop such abilities? is this method worth it?
|
lol if you say so. more like econ 001 if anything.
|
The things is, I believe, almost everyone who played SC in the beginning, never wondered if there is any link between Economics and the game. We play, because it's fun, right ?
But look at TLnet for example, look at these threads about strategy and metagaming : many people, I guess, spend more time reading and thinking about the theory than really playing the game.
This is funny because in business schools, students get usually bored when it comes to Economics. So if we can put some fun in these courses, maybe people will like it.
I mean, when I attend to an Economics class, I always try to see the links and the patterns. And it's pretty fun sometimes.
I believe what makes the community of SC/BW and especially TLnet a great community is people are willing to search, to ask, to try, to understand. And since, like you said, it's about optimizing, it's a great way to learn while having fun 
|
On August 25 2009 05:37 spinesheath wrote:I already was wondering why he explains what an RTS is, on TL. Then he started talking about gaz", and finally, this one made me stop reading: Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 05:23 MK wrote:
In this game, every players start with a command center, 5 SCV and 50 minerals.
|
the problem with starcraft is that you can neither issue debt nor equity
hence, it is not a good example of business schools.
Also, instead of food, you should make it such that:
supply = labor
minerals = capital
gas = output from fixed assets
Gas is used only when you have enough minerals to develop enough gas refineries to produce gas
Fixed assets require capital in order to produce stuff, and gas is needed in order to be able to produce shit.
|
nice post
very entertaining and informative
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On August 25 2009 05:34 Roffles wrote:Two letter posts won't get you anywhere on TL.As for the OP, I do agree to a certain extent. In the field of economics, it's all about optimizing and maximizing profit at minimal costs. For example, the optimum number of workers at a base with x number of mineral patches can be calculated with data. Other aspects of the game can also be quantified, such as the number of production facilities that are producing a combo of x and y units. However, there are too many other extraneous factors that are to be considered in Starcraft, such as micro, strategy, and decision making for this to make much of a difference. Is it really worth the hassle? That I believe is the real question.
too bad deal with it
|
i don't think this guy has ever taken an intermediate econ course or went to B-school
|
United States24704 Posts
I disagree with your claim that strategy in starcraft is broken into micro and macro. However, if you mean that most elements of strategy in sc revolve around either micro or macro, then I guess I can't argue.
It's tricky to do this kind of a post, but a good way to revise and plan for the future is to mainly talk about how sc is different and better from everything else in linking to whatever economics theories you are talking about.
|
You can totally make your racks while building scv. !_! Every line is a lol pretty much, i support the no guy with my whopping 3ksomething post count.
edit: can make marine and scv too.
|
I think most of these analogies are going a bit too far...
|
seems very basic lol, though i have never done economics. All of those examples of starcraft economics can be represented by a better and more well known real world example as well. So i don't really see the point in this.
Also, you made a lot of factual mistakes on the game.
|
Well, your specifics may be off a bit, but the concepts are definitely solid. Some of the criticism is a little unneeded, I think, so here's a more general example than SCV vs. Marine:
Consider 9pool versus 12hatch. In a 9pool build, you sacrifice the economy boost you would have gotten from the fast expand in order to get zerglings for defense/aggression/whatever, and the same is true for 12hatch. You sacrifice early zerglings for a better economy. A 4pool is simply a more extreme version of the 9pool, where you get your zerglings out as fast as possible but sacrifice having a stable economy in the early game.
|
On August 25 2009 05:23 MK wrote:
... Mineral and Gaz. They are both limited.
...
And sorry about the mistake on SCVs
Gas is actually unlimited.
Don't be sorry just fix it please.
|
Eh, I remember a few semesters ago I had Business Management and my teacher was incredibly crazy
he kept talking about the Batman videogame for Sega Genesis and how there was money and villains
never really understood him t_t
on-topic: I don't know if it's enough to be class worthy, but it definitly be a good parallel to show how to calculate true cost etc.
|
No.
Even though I love Starcraft, it shouldn't be used to teach Business because there are way more effective ways other than playing the game. In addition, Starcraft only teaches the basics of business; if you are studying about Business you need WAY more.
|
certainly there's a link between econ and starcraft, but it's hard to directly relate it to real life.
in SC, surpluses are bad. in real life, they are good.
and you need an army to survive in sc, so even though producing a marine will cost 1000s of min over time, without that one marine (or an army in general), you could die (lose), so life > money. and in the game, you can only produce one unit at a time, so with all that money from the scvs, you can get both marine and scv
|
a lot of basic economic concepts like the more workers you have the greater marginal cost they have is actually not true in starcraft since each worker simply adds a linear amount that doesn't decrease. in some cases your later workers actually have less marginal cost than before because as you get closer to 3 workers/patch they wander less.
|
Korea (South)11584 Posts
i dont know i made this graph to make this thread look more business related
|
On August 25 2009 08:45 29 fps wrote:
certainly there's a link between econ and starcraft, but it's hard to directly relate it to real life.
in SC, surpluses are bad. in real life, they are good.
actually that's not really true. most businesses try to minimize the cash they have lieing around. cash is better invested at 10% interest/year or w/e than sitting in your wallet. unless you have a huge business like walmart or w/e that actually needs large amounts of cash lieing around because they have a huge cash outflow into inventories etc.
|
Korea (South)11584 Posts
On August 25 2009 08:52 lazz wrote:
a lot of basic economic concepts like the more workers you have the greater marginal cost they have is actually not true in starcraft since each worker simply adds a linear amount that doesn't decrease. in some cases your later workers actually have less marginal cost than before because as you get closer to 3 workers/patch they wander less.
they may not have a marginal cost, but they have an opportunity cost. The cost of $50 minerals for a SCV as opposed to a marine. The scv will bring you money and riches, while the marine will bring you fame and glory for winning the war!
|
On August 25 2009 08:55 CaucasianAsian wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 08:52 lazz wrote:
a lot of basic economic concepts like the more workers you have the greater marginal cost they have is actually not true in starcraft since each worker simply adds a linear amount that doesn't decrease. in some cases your later workers actually have less marginal cost than before because as you get closer to 3 workers/patch they wander less. they may not have a marginal cost, but they have an opportunity cost. The cost of $50 minerals for a SCV as opposed to a marine. The scv will bring you money and riches, while the marine will bring you fame and glory for winning the war!
i understand and agree with what you're saying, but what does it have to do with what I said?
most of SC is about defending with the minimum about and charging up a huge eco, especially terran
|
Korea (South)11584 Posts
well to relate to what you were saying, the more SCV's you have, the worse the mining becomes. More than 3 per patch is over-saturation and will decrease the amount of minerals you take in. and it will decrease the rate of which they improve after 1 peon per mineral patch. So there is a marginal cost.
|
i dont think most students would stay engaged with a class solely focused on starcraft economics.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On August 25 2009 08:53 CaucasianAsian wrote:i dont know i made this graph to make this thread look more business related
Those functions shouldn't be linear at all!!
|
Yep, Starcraft is closely linked with economics and especially opportunity cost.
|
Seems like OP meant Starcraft should be taught in economics classes, not in business school. On the economics side, there certainly is a lot of application there; but if you're teaching something to students, you generally want to have examples that people can understand/relate to (ie. the real business world). On the business school side, it'd be rather pointless because business school is 90% about networking, not learning anything useful. It's rather hard to network over an actual game of starcraft.
|
The fact that SC is in real time makes this game even more closed to what we can learn in microecomics. Players are taking decisions in the same time regarding what the other is doing or what we thing he is doing (let's do some Nash ?).
The need of information is also key because in SC, the information is almost always imperfect.
A SC player has to optimize his resource with all these elements in mind and this is why, I think, a good understanding of SC can help to understand some basic concepts of management and microeconomics.
|
On August 25 2009 08:54 lazz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2009 08:45 29 fps wrote:
certainly there's a link between econ and starcraft, but it's hard to directly relate it to real life.
in SC, surpluses are bad. in real life, they are good.
actually that's not really true. most businesses try to minimize the cash they have lieing around. cash is better invested at 10% interest/year or w/e than sitting in your wallet. unless you have a huge business like walmart or w/e that actually needs large amounts of cash lieing around because they have a huge cash outflow into inventories etc.
Yes.
In theory, surplus isn't good.
In a perfect world, companies should have no surplus.
Seems like OP meant Starcraft should be taught in economics classes, not in business school. On the economics side, there certainly is a lot of application there; but if you're teaching something to students, you generally want to have examples that people can understand/relate to (ie. the real business world). On the business school side, it'd be rather pointless because business school is 90% about networking, not learning anything useful. It's rather hard to network over an actual game of starcraft.
.
ok, you win.
|
MK I'm sorry, but the only game that could realistically be taught in an University setting would be EVE Online's economy. It is the closest thing you can come to in a game setting that resembles a free-market.
|
On August 25 2009 16:04 Aegraen wrote:
MK I'm sorry, but the only game that could realistically be taught in an University setting would be EVE Online's economy. It is the closest thing you can come to in a game setting that resembles a free-market.
Yes. I've been told about this game but never played.
Maybe I'll give a try.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.liquidpoker.net/user_pictures/b586b.roflwtf.jpg)
