I've never understood Starcraft etiquette. I like to think I have a strategy gamer's mindset, having played strategy games, some competitively, my whole life, but the things that are considered polite or impolite just don't make any sense to me.
The salutation Apparently, it's well-mannered to start off your game wishing your opponent luck. I understand it's polite to greet your opponent. It makes sense that one might say "nice to meet you" or "nice seeing you again". If you want to acknowledge your opponent without typing so much, we have a word for that: "hi". But wishing them luck? Why would you do that?
Firstly, it doesn't really make sense, because the game mechanics are essentially deterministic. Build order losses exist, but they're not random, they're predetermined. Secondly, even if you interpret "luck" as the uncertainty regarding imperfect information, then you are wishing for your opponent to gain an advantage from that imperfect information. That is, you're saying "I hope you blind counter what I'm going to do". WTF?
The resignation The loser is supposed to resign the game by proclaiming that it was a good game. That seems completely self-congratulatory to me. Your opponent won, so there's no question that he played well; by proclaiming a good game you're saying "you win, but I played well enough to make it a good game". And what if you didn't play well? Most of my losses come from playing poorly. Why would I want to proclaim it was a good game in full knowledge of the fact that it wasn't a good game? If anything, I'd say "sorry for playing badly, that wasn't a good game".
Besides, explicit resignation isn't necessary when the interface already allows for resignation. For example, in Go, you resign a game by grabbing multiple stones and placing them in a pile on the board, a blatantly illegal non-move that signifies your desire to end the game in defeat. In a tournament, I'll often take that option if I don't wish to speak due to disappointment in my own performance. Similarly, Starcraft allows you to exit the game in defeat. Why is that option considered rude?
The victory claim It is considered rude for the winner to declare a good game before the loser does. This makes some sense, since resignation is the loser's prerogative. But following on from my point above, the sentiment expressed here seems to be a positive one - by saying "GG", the winner says "you've lost, but it was a good game", which I'd consider much more polite than "I've lost, but it was a good game". I understand how this would be unacceptable in a tournament, but in a casual rated game (ie. ladder), is it really so bad?
On the other hand, when the winner declares good game before it's fully decided, that's just bad judgement. When I'm on the receiving end of such a comment, I typically feel somewhat pleased. Using your opponent's overconfidence against him is a very useful strategy in imperfect-information games, and I'm more than happy to take that opportunity if he offers.
The victory dance An acceptably polite alternative to the victory claim, players often sacrifice their own resources in an attempt to demonstrate their victory. I don't see it much in my own games, but Korean professional players love to do this. But why would you want to? You just spent the last week preparing for this match, practicing your defence against all sorts of unexpected situations to maximise your advantage in the safest way possible. Why would you then go and throw it away, increasing your opponent's chances of coming back? It happens occasionally, and in an emotional moment, your judgement could be impaired. Why would you want to risk losing a game you had in the bag? If I were a coach, I'd smack my players on the head for doing this.
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player?
To nit-pick, everyone hates 'unlucky' loses, so by gl i normally mean 'don't lose because you accidentally misclicked and built a second infestation pit instead of a ultra cavern (fml i do that so much)
Also, 'victory dance' is a demonstration that you're so much better that you could beat them without all the extra money, I don't remember ever seeing a pro get it wrong and lose despite it. It's showmanship and entertainment.
Perhaps some lovely person could post the pylon heart vod? that was hilarious.
Obviously post-game rage at your opponent is silly, but i don't think people do it because they think logically and come to the conclusion that the correct response at this point is to type 'die of cancer'.
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
But... this is a game of clicking accurately and fast. If one of your clicks at a crucial time was inaccurate that does mean you played bad. Not necessarily that you or he is a better player, but not miss-clicking is one of the requirements of playing well. You should be angry at yourself for miss-clicking. Also, how much worse can he really be if you're being matched against him?
On May 12 2012 11:02 kerpal wrote: Also, 'victory dance' is a demonstration that you're so much better that you could beat them without all the extra money, I don't remember ever seeing a pro get it wrong and lose despite it. It's showmanship and entertainment.
There was a gsl game in which the players took turns dancing their way out of a victory.
On May 12 2012 11:02 kerpal wrote: Also, 'victory dance' is a demonstration that you're so much better that you could beat them without all the extra money, I don't remember ever seeing a pro get it wrong and lose despite it. It's showmanship and entertainment.
There was a gsl game in which the players took turns dancing their way out of a victory.
Hippocleides doesn't care.
MarineKing vs Bomber at the GSTL finals, the game after the drop incident. Bomber drops a mule in MarineKing's base and loses 5 minutes later.
On May 12 2012 11:02 kerpal wrote: Also, 'victory dance' is a demonstration that you're so much better that you could beat them without all the extra money, I don't remember ever seeing a pro get it wrong and lose despite it. It's showmanship and entertainment.
There was a gsl game in which the players took turns dancing their way out of a victory.
Hippocleides doesn't care.
MarineKing vs Bomber at the GSTL finals, the game after the drop incident. Bomber drops a mule in MarineKing's base and loses 5 minutes later.
haha. i missed those matches. That's pretty special.
this was the game i was thinking of. particularly apt that it involves FBH if we're going to refer to them as 'victory dances'
Offensive GG is usually seen a problem because it comes before the game ends and is easily interpreted at "I've won, but you're so bad you don't realize it yet."
Someone else made a comparison with fencing (i fence) referencing gl hf and gg as starcraft equivalents of the (mandatory) salute before and handshake after each bout. I think in fencing it goes along way towards preventing the aggression of the sport from spilling out of the confines of the bout, which is obviously more necessary when everyone is carrying swords!
I think everyone should force themselves to be manner, every game, no matter what. It helps me to have a better attitude to my loses to have the discipline to say gg when I lose. The first step towards improving is to take responsibility for you loses.
@OP: are you pointing out amusing discrepancies between what we say and what we mean, or are you suggesting it's stupid for us to say it? I assumed the first, but others seem to have taken your post as an attack on the status quo of etiquette.
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
-.- You're not 'better'. You made one mistake too many and lost. There's so many mistakes in a diamond game it's basically whoever can make the least wins. Better players do things faster with less errors and mis-clicks.
@ OP: you don't ladder enough if you can't understand post-game rage.
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
Wait so you lost because you made a SINGLE mistake? lol why aren't you GM or something then? Every player makes mistakes in every match, who wins and who loses is determined by the scale and frequency of those mistakes. And honestly, there are so many mistakes even in a masters game anyways
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
Rofl. This is exactly what's wrong with people on Ladder, and so mindblowing that prolly 25% of the time the dude rages about how bad the other player is, yet they're LOSING to the awful player, rofl.
On May 12 2012 11:34 Logo wrote: Offensive GG is usually seen a problem because it comes before the game ends and is easily interpreted at "I've won, but you're so bad you don't realize it yet."
Precisely.
You win when your opponent leaves the game, or he has no buildings left. It doesn't matter if you're 200 food against 20, you still haven't won if he still has buildings. Therefore, saying GG before you've won is rather presumptive, and you sound like you're telling your opponent to leave -- even though he hasn't lost yet.
Of course, some opponents might be just pointlessly delaying the game, and those players probably aren't worth your respect... but most of them aren't, and thus don't deserve to be told when to leave.
Like kerpal said, I view the "gl hf" and "gg" as more of handshakes than phrases. That being said, it IS pretty funny how the phrases are kinda backward in meaning - never really thought about it before this!
The post-game rage This one is the most inexplicable of all. I can understand being angry with yourself for losing. If I stretch my imagination to when I was 5 years old and couldn't control my temper, I can sort of understand being angry with your opponent for beating you. What I don't understand is why people universally seem to accuse their opponents of being bad players. How does it make any sense to accuse someone who just beat you of being bad? Doesn't that just make you an even worse player
I am a diamond Zerg and I lose sometimes and I say that the opponent is bad for a good reason. And its not falsely accused, but rather because I AM better, but I made a simple error or miss-click that cost me the game. It does add to the self-hate aspect when you lose to someone who you KNOW you're better than because of something so silly and unfortunate that doesn't make the other player "better".
If you lost because of a mis-click, you're actually still worse.
EPT
