|
On December 30 2011 02:34 Itsmedudeman wrote:
This seems so silly to me. No matter how dumbed down sc2 is to sc1, mechanical skills always comes before strategy.
Keep in mind that something like BW has been studied for quite a bit longer than SC2. While it may be true that (barring some ridiculous, miracle discovery regarding strategy) BW would be all about mechanics because most of the strategy stuff has already been explored, something like SC2, which is relatively new, still has room for growth in the strategy department. I'm interested to see if people will be able to break the current barriers of strategy. Of course mechanics are important, but we'll be the judge of that later 
Good luck in your journey. You'll definitely need to be caught up-to-speed on the mechanics of RTS games, which will take quite a bit of work.
|
Chess huh... interesting, shogi & go player here haha :-) (& a bw player since '98).
Anyways, don't forget it's still a different thing than chess but.. at some points your chess experience will make things easier for you, you'll see/figure out what I mean by that 
|
On December 30 2011 02:52 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2011 02:34 Itsmedudeman wrote:
This seems so silly to me. No matter how dumbed down sc2 is to sc1, mechanical skills always comes before strategy. That's why I said the practice at practice: the experience in studying and practicing will be more useful than what exact background you came from. If you have the determination to study and practice until you become the best, you can do it in other things as well. But yeah, I doubt if it was chess or any other activity that is mentally oriented there would be much difference.
Yeah, but then factor in the fact that everyone has been going at it a lot more rigorously for years and years. 2-4 hours won't cut it as long as I'm assuming correctly in thinking that this is about reaching a level higher than simply masters or high masters (in which case it holds no meaning unless you reach masters in about a month's time imo). Having the skillsets and work ethic/talent to reach a very high level of competition certainly means something, but it doesn't sound like he's applying it here in sc2.
|
Hej welcome to TL,
As a lot of people said, the willing to practice and the ability to understand your mistakes (and correct them) are the main things that you can translate from chess to SC2.
As we use to say : Good luck and have fun (and as long as the fun is there, practicing should not be a problem).
2 to 4 hours a day is enough to reach top masters, and maybe grandmasters on NA if you are somewhat talented and learn very fast. I think your main challenge to get to those levels will be to get your mechanics on par, and there is only one way : practice ! More games!
Also people complaining about this blog being a shameless plug, well...this is a blog, really people why being so mean towards a new member that had the decency of posting this in the blog section rather than the SC2 General like most newcomers would do T____T
|
gl
I think the only parallel between Chess and StarCraft is going to be dedication and commitment to learning the game. SC2 may be a bit more like Chess than BW, but Go is way more useful for both. Chess almost doesn't have a concept of territory (not really, not in the same way). Unit positioning? Seeing gaps in defences? Maybe.
I don't really know what your Chess rank means. You should explain it in layman's terms. Ok, you are the best at your age... But how are you compared to a Grand Master? That is the only term most people know about Chess, to be honest. Grand Master = good and makes money. Everyone else... Can kick my ass, but who cares?
I also think your goals are a little high. You are deciding that you will be able to get to the highest level, and maybe you will, but maybe you should see if this game even retains your interest for that long. Maybe you should try to be humble and let other people decide their expectations of you It's indeed interesting to see a successful chess player try a video game, but right now your op has no content, not even a video of you playing the game. It is just the promise on content, which on the internet, is empty. Let us know when you have content, and not a moment sooner.
Regardless, it's not something unforgivable. Just make sure the next time you post we able able to see you play. Commentate about what similarities you're finding between the games. If it looks like you have a very average style and mediocre skill, then this will have been a lot of build up for nothing. "Platinum" sounds like a valuable metal, but as an SC2 rank it is pretty boring. I want to see someone with 20 apm beating people thru pure strategy. That's what I expect of you.
|
This is interesting to me -- I have wondered if chess talent would translate. I believe that it will very well. The converse holds true for me at least -- I am terribad at chess and starcraft (this is a joke -- obviously this is meaningless).
Although the games are very different, I believe the ability to analyze losses and strengthen weaknesses that comes from competitive chess will make for your rapid advancement.
Honestly, I think anyone who is a top contender in ANY activity has a leg up on us more casual types.
If you keep posting, I'll keep reading. Also, make your goals whatever you want. The old TL types definitely have a good point about the "I'm silver, next stop grandmaster" posts that inundate TL, but I think your competitive history gives you a good premise. Having more content will help you out though...
|
Good luck man, you should do well. It's a matter of learning the game well and applying all that you've learned in many different situations like chess. You should consider posting perhaps some chess videos as well. TL has a good amount of chess players or people interested in chess. People who are gonna watch you and are interested are going to most likely be people who play chess as well. Hope you do well and have fun 
|
One thing to note about starting to play sc2 that will save you a huge amount of time in the future: use custom hotkeys from the very start. One really needs to have their overall keyboard mechanics planned out or risk losing time relearning different keyboard strokes in the future. I can say with 100% certainty that the standard hotkey profiles available on battle.net are not perfectly suited for anyone.
Keyboard and mouse mechanics are the lowest level of personal style in sc2. Its crucial that the hotkey setup works harmoniously with one's style. And by style we're still referring to keyboard and mouse mechanics only. And perhaps instead of getting into such a rigid set of hotkeys and sticking solely to them, maybe one should think about having an amorphous hotkey setup. One could practice different styles with different hotkey setups. I'm actually quite sure some players will be doing so in the future, if they aren't already. Using modified hotkey setups for certain play styles could make some play styles more efficient in terms of keystrokes and easier to manage for the player.
I've been changing my hotkeys continuously since the beta. And I don't mean minor cosmetic changes either. But I've changed it so regularly that when I make a moderate change, I will only make a mistake 2 or 3 times before integrating it into my play. My hotkey setup works for multiple situations but I haven't mastered the basic level of control I want, so I haven't specialized hotkeys for specific situations yet. I do use different parts of my hotkeys in different ways in different match ups vs different units though. Its HARD to remember all the separate actions at first but you get used to it. I don't even play that much. One has to create something that feels good and natural to the hands, is easy to remember, efficient, and quick.
|
I hope you picked protoss because as a chess player I can see your tolerance level to extreme bullshit be lower then as non-chess players. I figure when you lose in chess it's because you fucked up. Not because some dude decided blink stalker all in and you couldn't scout it. Also, Starcraft is mainly a game of mechanics. The strategy part is really easy and basically comes down to. He has taken his gas at this time so you can cross off lists in your head what strategy is doing. Or you see this and this building so you can cross off this and this *Insert random BO*
|
On December 30 2011 08:10 Recognizable wrote:
I hope you picked protoss because as a chess player I can see your tolerance level to extreme bullshit be lower then as non-chess players. I figure when you lose in chess it's because you fucked up. Not because some dude decided blink stalker all in and you couldn't scout it. Also, Starcraft is mainly a game of mechanics. The strategy part is really easy and basically comes down to. He has taken his gas at this time so you can cross off lists in your head what strategy is doing. Or you see this and this building so you can cross off this and this *Insert random BO*
The strategy part is not really easy, I don't know what game you're playing. If you watch anyone who is truly good at this game you can see just how difficult the strategy aspect of this game can be
|
Good luck buddy! I have an ELO rating of about 2250, or used to, when I was playing actively. I don't think there are any noteworthy similarities between chess and SC2. Good luck!
|
On December 30 2011 03:59 Chef wrote:
I don't really know what your Chess rank means. You should explain it in layman's terms. Ok, you are the best at your age... But how are you compared to a Grand Master? That is the only term most people know about Chess, to be honest. Grand Master = good and makes money. Everyone else... Can kick my ass, but who cares?
Going by his FIDE record, his Elo rating is 2283. To give an idea of where that stands:
<1000 Complete beginner
1000-1500 Novice
1500-2000 Club level
2000-2200 Expert
2200-2400 Candidate Master
2400-2500 International Master
2500-2600 Grandmaster
2600-2700 Top 200
2700-2800 Top 50
2826 Current #1
In the Elo scheme, a difference of 400 points means the higher rated player is expected to lose about 1 game in 10. Keep in mind, getting above 2000 usually takes several years of work, but the skill differential from there to the world's best is enormous. In other words, he's pretty damn good (around #10,000 in the world).
|
Awesome, looking forward to the result of this experiment!
2 factors will be noted:
- How well chess training/skills translate into SC2 strategy mastery.
- How much mechanical skills disadvantage (you are starting quite late) you can negate with strategic superiority.
Also, I think you would, for lack of a better term, rape face in turn-based strategy games, but the real-time element in SC takes away importance from the brain to the hands and eyes. You will not be in any position to create AND execute new meta-game shifting builds anytime soon, so your play will still be largely limited to the current meta-game. You'll probably hit high masters or maybe even GM once you've had enough practice (assuming you have at least average mechanical skill ceiling), but that's where cheese mostly stops working and people simply win by being faster and more efficient, having better multitasking and micro. None of which have any real relevance to chess.
This is just my predication though, good luck. Lastly, the poster on the first page was right, this does seem a bit self-promotional asking for things without giving anything in return, especially being a completely new poster.
|
I was thinking, tactics in chess is somewhat analogous to mechanics in starcraft. Both are prerequisite to any serious strategy, both can be drilled with repetition. They involve the storing up of patterns, one in piece positioning and exchange sequences, the other in key/mouse position and sequences. But, as people have noted, it's the work ethic that will be interesting to follow, not any direct transfer of skills. Getting FM title in chess takes a lot more work and hours than Masters in SC2.
|
OP, how many hours a day did you train at chess to get where you are?
|
On December 30 2011 02:55 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2011 02:34 Itsmedudeman wrote:
This seems so silly to me. No matter how dumbed down sc2 is to sc1, mechanical skills always comes before strategy. Keep in mind that something like BW has been studied for quite a bit longer than SC2. While it may be true that (barring some ridiculous, miracle discovery regarding strategy) BW would be all about mechanics because most of the strategy stuff has already been explored.
I hate this misconception. New builds and strategies are constantly being applied in BW.
/offtopic
|
Oh wow!, I watch your games all the time in live chess, good luck in sc2! still rated 1400 D:, but i'll be up there someday!
|
On December 30 2011 14:44 Gann1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2011 02:55 Zeke50100 wrote:On December 30 2011 02:34 Itsmedudeman wrote:
This seems so silly to me. No matter how dumbed down sc2 is to sc1, mechanical skills always comes before strategy. Keep in mind that something like BW has been studied for quite a bit longer than SC2. While it may be true that (barring some ridiculous, miracle discovery regarding strategy) BW would be all about mechanics because most of the strategy stuff has already been explored. I hate this misconception. New builds and strategies are constantly being applied in BW. /offtopic
Yeah same, a lot of builds from even a year ago are really outdated...
|
Can you explain how you apply some strategy from chess to SC2? Most people in the SC2 community, including myself, do not understand the concept of strategy beyond really basic ideas like build orders, scouting, and unit compositions. I would be interested in seeing how a chess player views strategy.
|
On December 30 2011 10:00 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2011 08:10 Recognizable wrote:
I hope you picked protoss because as a chess player I can see your tolerance level to extreme bullshit be lower then as non-chess players. I figure when you lose in chess it's because you fucked up. Not because some dude decided blink stalker all in and you couldn't scout it. Also, Starcraft is mainly a game of mechanics. The strategy part is really easy and basically comes down to. He has taken his gas at this time so you can cross off lists in your head what strategy is doing. Or you see this and this building so you can cross off this and this *Insert random BO* The strategy part is not really easy, I don't know what game you're playing. If you watch anyone who is truly good at this game you can see just how difficult the strategy aspect of this game can be
How can you see how difficult the strategy part off the game is without being extremely good at the game yourself? I'd like to think myself as half decent enought to understand the strategy part and it's really not that complicated. You have your overall build and at each stage of the build you react a certain way to certain strategy's, these strategy's are scouted by scouting were the gas is allocated and scouting certain buildings. You aren't thinking ahead more then 3/4 steps. Ofcourse these decisions need to be made extremely fast whilst doing a ton of other stuff and this is what makes Starcraft fun. But isn't with chess the point you think like 10/20 steps ahead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
