|
Well, why did I title this post "SC3"? Because it is a take on SC2 from an SC1 perspective: What went right in the design? What problems did it cause?
Specifically, what I'm interested in, and the reason I mention consciousness in the way that I do, is that I want to take a look at the remarkably high variance in Brood War mechanics and how that formula, if you will, translated into the elegant "mathematical" game that is SC2. To borrow a metaphor from Doyle Brunson, Starcraft 2 is to Limit Hold 'em what Starcraft: Brood War is to No Limit Hold 'em. As famously commented in Brunson's Super System, "Limit is a more intelligent game."
But why is Limit a more intelligent game? Why is Starcraft 2 a more intelligent game than Brood War? The answer is intuition.
Strictly speaking, we could define intuition as a reliable way to obtain correct answers that cannot be obtained by deduction. In some ways we could refer to answers obtained by intuition as "super correct", better than 100%. Most people aren't happy with this because it doesn't seem scientific. How did you arrive at this correct answer (and are you sure it's correct? -- how do you know?). Because it is not always apparent how to reproduce the logic of intuition, intuitive claims are often dismissed. Thus people are comfortable with comments like, "Starcraft 2 is a more intelligent game."
Heh, but in the case of Starcraft: Brood War such critics of intuition are silenced. Why? Because the intuitive answers are indeed "super correct".
Vulture Patrol Micro
Building Walls
Mutalisk Micro
"Maynarding"
Mine Drags
Worker Pathing in Combat
.
.
.
Brood War has a number of super correct solutions that are so far superior to the alternatives that they irrefutably right. What's remarkable about these super correct solutions is that they are quite difficult or impossible to discover deductively. In terms of a bell curve, or probability grid, the chances of even a highly intelligent player discovering any one of these solutions by "thinking it through" is low. But this is not the only element contributing to the super correctness of the solutions. On the contrary, what's impressive about these solutions is not only are they difficult to think up, they're also super effective.
ZvZ is entirely characterized by Mutalisk Micro: Chinese Triangling and Overlord or Drone stacking.
ZvT only marginally less so.
ZvP (disgruntled muttering)
In Brood War, top level play of the Zerg race is 60% impossible without excellent Mutalisk Micro.
Unfortunately I don't have time to give an exhaustive treatment of all the super correct intuitive solutions in Brood War. I leave it to the connoisseur to consider the other races, elegance like Stork's Corsair/Reaver, Boxer's Dropship Micro, The Nexus EMP + Nuke, or Nal_rA.
Anyway, the reason I'm making this post is that I was reading an excellent book by Robert Anton Wilson titled Quantum Psychology, and in the chapter "Star Makers," Wilson gives a treatment of a 1965 discovery in physics called "Bell's Theorem." While I was reading, it occurred to me that I had finally found the crucial explanation for Starcraft 2. In short, Bell's Theorem says, "Some sort of non-local correlation exists between any two particles that once came in contact."
Interesting.
The example given in the book is of two men, one in Dublin and one in Honolulu. The law applies to them that whenever the man in Dublin dons green socks, the man in Honolulu dons red socks. It is observed that this correlation is in effect instantaneous. That is, when the man in Dublin dons green socks, the man in Honolulu is observed to instantaneously don red socks. Since signals travel at the speed of light or less they cannot cause an instantaneous response. Thus we have "information without transportation" or else "Correlation without connection".
What does this have to do with intuition? The argument is that these super correct solutions would not appear in Brood War with such reliability if there had not been some conscious intent. On the contrary, the game had to be designed with such equilibria intended to emerge at certain stages of accumulated theory. The interesting question is not simply how one intentionally designs such an exercise in synchronicity. The interesting question is how extreme unchecked volatility like the discovery of Mutalisk Micro could be introduced without completely destabilizing game balance. Nevertheless, it seems the Brood War design team managed this feat although the last patch aimed at game balance appears to have been 1.08 released in 2001.
So, what do you think happened to the Starcraft formula between Brood War and now? Do you believe the conjecture that non-local correlation was intentional in the design of Starcraft: Brood War? Does the theory of non-local correlation provide any insight on death balls and hard counters? Do you think the prevalence of super correct solutions in Starcraft 2 is greater or less than that of Brood War?
Discuss.
 
|
In general, I would say that Starcraft 2 seems to isolate entwined statistical phenomena very well. If we were to compare the Oracle opening in PvT to the Reaver Shuttle opening we see two very similar operations carried out very differently. It's tough to say which is the more interesting, although the Oracle is without a doubt the more calculated.
|
|
|
Hold on, let me read this again.
|
On August 19 2015 11:49 GGzerG wrote:
Hold on, let me read this again.
EDIT : wat
|
I honestly see love as being the foundation for non-local correlation. The man and the woman eggs and sperm come together in a shared destiny so the two people now share the same destiny through the third person.
I think Starcraft 2 is a man's attempt to "rationalize" or reason about love from the modern perspective. He can write 0, false and 1 true so much better than the early humans of Starcraft 1 but he doesn't believe in the magic of love.
He is like Children of Men. His life is perfect but he can't bring forth the mysterious magic of children. So his life is pointless. He needs the magic of love and the magic of children to bring forth the true essence of Starcraft.
|
You might actually get hired if you apply as a game designer at Blizzard.
|
On August 19 2015 20:12 LaLuSh wrote:
You might actually get hired if you apply as a game designer at Blizzard.
He would be very valuable if hired to answer interview questions when they want to be passive aggressive.
|
|
|
On August 19 2015 13:20 YokoKano wrote:
The man and the woman eggs and sperm come together in a shared destiny so the two people now share the same destiny through the third person.
Why do you think the parents share the same destiny is beyond me. I have a daughter and I for sure don't share a destiny with my wife.
|
What are you implying about longevity? Why doesn't your wife share destiny?
|
On August 19 2015 13:20 YokoKano wrote:
I honestly see love as being the foundation for non-local correlation. The man and the woman eggs and sperm come together in a shared destiny so the two people now share the same destiny through the third person.
I think Starcraft 2 is a man's attempt to "rationalize" or reason about love from the modern perspective. He can write 0, false and 1 true so much better than the early humans of Starcraft 1 but he doesn't believe in the magic of love.
He is like Children of Men. His life is perfect but he can't bring forth the mysterious magic of children. So his life is pointless. He needs the magic of love and the magic of children to bring forth the true essence of Starcraft.
Something you leave out is that StarCraft is a game based around war and death. When units die, they don't just slump over on the ground. They explode violently into pools of blood. I feel like there's an element of grittiness that was kind of lost on the polished feel of SC2.
|
On August 20 2015 07:00 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2015 13:20 YokoKano wrote:
I honestly see love as being the foundation for non-local correlation. The man and the woman eggs and sperm come together in a shared destiny so the two people now share the same destiny through the third person.
I think Starcraft 2 is a man's attempt to "rationalize" or reason about love from the modern perspective. He can write 0, false and 1 true so much better than the early humans of Starcraft 1 but he doesn't believe in the magic of love.
He is like Children of Men. His life is perfect but he can't bring forth the mysterious magic of children. So his life is pointless. He needs the magic of love and the magic of children to bring forth the true essence of Starcraft. Something you leave out is that StarCraft is a game based around war and death. When units die, they don't just slump over on the ground. They explode violently into pools of blood. I feel like there's an element of grittiness that was kind of lost on the polished feel of SC2.
sc2 all plasticine and no grunge
|
On August 20 2015 07:00 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2015 13:20 YokoKano wrote:
I honestly see love as being the foundation for non-local correlation. The man and the woman eggs and sperm come together in a shared destiny so the two people now share the same destiny through the third person.
I think Starcraft 2 is a man's attempt to "rationalize" or reason about love from the modern perspective. He can write 0, false and 1 true so much better than the early humans of Starcraft 1 but he doesn't believe in the magic of love.
He is like Children of Men. His life is perfect but he can't bring forth the mysterious magic of children. So his life is pointless. He needs the magic of love and the magic of children to bring forth the true essence of Starcraft. Something you leave out is that StarCraft is a game based around war and death. When units die, they don't just slump over on the ground. They explode violently into pools of blood. I feel like there's an element of grittiness that was kind of lost on the polished feel of SC2.
EXACTLY what I have been thinking about SC2 from the get go.
This and the debris buildings leave behind in BW after they have been destroyed.
Battlefields in SC2 look so clean and absolutely boring with everything vanishing instantly. In BW, when shit gets real, you can actually SEE it.
|
why do the chinese have their own triangles?
|
People identify the Chinese triangle with the Chinese because the technique was first ventured by the Chinese. It's a good technique. Not comparable to larva grouping (what later became Overlord grouping), but it's one I would seriously consider influential in the latter days of Brood War. I don't triangle for the same reason I don't magic box. Despite thousands of hours played I simply will not set aside the time to practice gimmicks because they detract from the spirit of the game. I mean what's really going on is strategy, plain and simple. There's nothing interesting about endless dexterity drills, and to be honest with you I think the developers should just patch inappropriate content.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
