EPTUC Berkeley Starcraft Class - Page 15
| Forum Index > BW General |
motbob
United States12546 Posts
| ||
GTR
51712 Posts
On February 06 2009 14:46 Rekrul wrote: can someone just link me to all the bullshit he wrote so i can end his life completely? thx just show up to the next lecture yelling IS SIRLIN HERE | ||
|
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
His first post is his blog, and all the blue comments in the comment boxes are some stupid crap he vomited out of his mouth. Before comments appear though he can choose if he wants to delete them, so he can just be a fag and delete all your posts -_-;; | ||
|
Unentschieden
Germany1471 Posts
On February 04 2009 21:54 maybenexttime wrote: From what I've seen, all Sirlin's arguments regarding StarCraft come down to: 1) Execution in SF is just a formality (debatable), ergo execution in SC is just a formality too. 2) Execution in SC is mindless, there's no skill involved. 3) Time is not a resource, being faster should not be an advantage in a Real Time Strategy game. 4) Players with worse mechanics are not able to overcome those with better mechanics in StarCraft; better "strategist" should always win vs. worse "strategist" regardless of mechanics. Not only is his first point completely flawed, but he also completely fails to realize the variety of mental aspects associated with what we call 'mechanics' or 'execution' - aspects such as attention/time management (which allows the players to choose what playstyle they prefer: micro-focused, macro-focused or an all-around one), rhythm (and skills such as knowing how to throw one's opponent out of rhythm), (mental) multi-tasking, etc. Time is very much a resource in any competitive RTS game - it adds another dimension to the game - you have to outplay the opponent in one more area, develop your skills (a huge range of skillsets). If two games are equally deep in terms of "strategy" but one of them has the "execution" layer on top of that, then it's the deeper game, that has more competitive play potential. It means that depending on one's (and his opponent's) level of execution different strategies are available while others are not. Sirlin fails to realize that those who excell at StarCraft at any level are most of the time players who have good execution ALONGSIDE good "strategy." If an RTS game has an unimportant execution layer, it gets solved quickly - a good example is Sins of a Solar Empire. Last but not least, the better "strategist" can beat the lesser one despite worse mechanics in SC - but that doesn't mean he should neglect mechanics. Being more efficient SHOULD be an advantage. /rant Sirlin actually replyed to this very post: I just read more of that thread. Personal attacks, personal attacks, and personal attacks. Also some lies about kongai, and more lies about me deleting posts. Does not reflect well on that site. Stick to substantive arguments. Maybe the worst post of all is maybenexttime on this page: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=86501¤tpage=12 Every single think he said is a straw man argument. 1) Execution in SF is just a formality (debatable), ergo execution in SC is just a formality too. (Wrong cause and effect. Execution is a barrier to strategy generally. SF is only one example. SC is another.) 2) Execution in SC is mindless, there's no skill involved. (Never said this. What I said is that SC's interface has clicks that don't contribute to strategy. Blizzard reduced many of these clicksin War3, but of course that game has lots of problems other than that so it looks bad to even bring up, I know. In any case, I did not say what he said I said.) 3) Time is not a resource, being faster should not be an advantage in a Real Time Strategy game. (Never said. Obviously time is a resource, I've said that probably 10 times in this very thread.) 4) Players with worse mechanics are not able to overcome those with better mechanics in StarCraft; better "strategist" should always win vs. worse "strategist" regardless of mechanics. (Way oversimplified to the point of not being what I said at all.) Next there's "Sirlin fails to realize that those who excell at StarCraft at any level are most of the time players who have good execution ALONGSIDE good "strategy."" I don't fail to realize that at all. It's plainly obvious that execution + strategy = ability to win. How much does each component contribute is the question. I think less execution (dear straw man arguers: not none) with a better interface would make the skill tests make more sense for the "strategy" genre. Very disappointing to see a starcraft website willfully misunderstand a discussion about the game, and then manufacture fake arguments I never said so they can be shot down. | ||
|
joyeaux
United States169 Posts
On February 06 2009 14:46 Rekrul wrote: can someone just link me to all the bullshit he wrote so i can end his life completely? thx http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2009/1/30/uc-berkeley-starcraft-class-week-1.html own this guy, Rekrul | ||
Ver
United States2186 Posts
I think Sirlin might also find it interesting that 2 out of the 4 greatest SC players have had some of the lowest APM's in progaming and did not have particularly great mechanics to support their play(iloveoov and Savior). Their strategy and intelligence was just that much better than everyone elses. To be frank, iloveoov's mechanics were straight up mediocre for the most dominating player in history. But that was irrelevant because his deep insights completely flipped the understanding we had about the game, and he was second to none in psychological understanding. But even for people like Bisu or Jaedong who can boast of 400 apm, they do that well because they have the strategy to make use of that extra apm; it's far harder than it sounds to create situations where they can actually make full use of that APM advantage (i,e Sair/dt PvZ, Bisu's recent game vs Flash on Destination). I doubt this will be resolved to anyone's satisfaction though and certainly not through the methods we are attempting to do so (blatant attacks arguing argue back blah blah); it just seems a head butting situation. May as well lay the facts out there and let them find the answer themselves, if they choose to, and let this be. | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7701 Posts
| ||
Rekrul
Korea (South)17174 Posts
Dear Sirlin, I know you like fighting games. Fighting games are kinda cool. But be careful when commenting about a genre you have no idea about. The very fact that you could even suggest that lessening the physical tasks required to play optimally (APM/mechanics etc etc) would raise the strategy level of the game is ridiculous. First of all why are you even talking about genres? Starcraft is not part of a 'real time strategy' or 'strategy' genre. Starcraft is starcraft and nothing can compare to it because it is unique in the fact that its the only game ever invented to not only require such intense physical skills (APM/mechanics) but an even deeper sense of knowledge of strategy and even further the ability to apply that knowledge in the right situations. Starcraft is Starcraft and to classify it with any other 'strategy' game is a joke. Warcraft 3 is a joke. Command and Conquer is a joke. Age of Empires is a joke. Etc Etc. And don't try to brush me off thinking I'm just another overzealous Starcraft fan. I'm not. I've played all those games and talked to countless pros that have played those games on a top competitive level and guess what they all say: "yeah my game sucks SC is way better." THEY ADMIT IT! In all your idiocy you are kinda right on a certain level when you say 'lessening the mechanics will make it more of a strategical game.' This will be very true. But only true at the very beginning or maybe the first 6 months-yearish. As with all new strategy games players will continuously come up with all sorts of new strategies that they can use to outsmart and outwit their opponents. If Starcraft2 is made how you want it to be a lot of geniuses that would have otherwise failed because they have no dextrous skills will be owning it up with their brilliant strategies. This will only last a year. After a while everyone will know the optimal strategies and your brilliant creators of strategies will now be average joe schmoes. Now you could try to argue that with non-stop new maps to use new strategies on the brilliant players will always have their edge. But I'm going to tell you right now your argument would be null and void. When you play starcraft you have many limitations based on what matchup you're playing and the type of map it is. Even if you keep drastically changing maps the general limitations will always remain the same and players will have to do similarish-type opening builds and the game simply won't be fun. It will only be interesting for the first year or so due to strategies still being discovered + constant balance changes by Blizzard forcing people to adapt. Starcraft in all its complexity is a vey simple game. Every unit and/or unit combination crushes certain combinations and can be crushed by other certain combinations (other than late tech monster tech combos obviously). If everything is so easy to do (you don't have to macro like crazy and fly around everywhere making sure to take care of everything) and everyone knows which units in which amounts at what times are best against certain races and situations (due to replays expediting the learning curve for everyone) what will games be decided by? Perhaps by imbalance, perhaps by luck, perhaps by brutal small mistakes that can't be made up for. Is that fun? No. The first year will be fun, yes, after that no one will give a fuck about the game anymore and it certainly won't be a good spectator sport. The reason why the strategies in starcraft are so complex are because of the multitude of unique situations that come up due to differences in players' mechanical ability as well as strategical ability. This is true on all levels of play from complete newbie to top-tier pros. Two newbs play eachother one of them has better mechanics and can pump more units and expand faster but the other guy is more strategically advanced so he makes the right units at the right times...vwalla we have a good game. I mean listen to yourself. You are ranting that if you dumb down the APM/mechanics requirements it will be a better strategy game. Okay LOL suuuure man... In that case the player with a better strategical grasp / more experience will always win. There will be no way for the lesser player to win right? Thats why Starcraft is interesting....some guy that watches a lot of replays and studies the game a lot but is really slow can get raped by some idiot with high APM and good macro. This is what drives players to improve their strategies AND mechanics. Also...as much strategy as there is in Starcraft...a high % of the strategies are straight up GAMBLING/RISK build orders. Do you even realize this? Because starcraft is such a fast paced game and relies on players making split second executive decisions players are able to take huge risks to try and win. STRATEGY in starcraft is a non stop series of calculated risks taken by players and will only work when taking place in a high paced mechanics oriented game. Often times its not a STRATEGY at all, it's just one player doing an all-in build hoping to get lucky lol (or he thinks he can predict his opponents build). What the fuck is a strategy to you anyways? Go Corsair DT against zerg to kill the overlord and expand safely? LOL is that a strategy? WOW WHAT A SICK STRATEGY!!!! SO BRILLIANT. No. The strategy is to use your insane high APM to execute the build with perfect timing so that you can harass overlords and wiggle that little fucker into zerg's main. Ooops he had it blocked! Oh well I have an expansion up and running now time to frantically figure out what he's doing so I can quickly pump out the precise strategically correct unit combination that will allow me to come behind from this small deficit and seal my next expansion all the while sick microing my shuttle with dt/ht in it to harass to get my edge back. <-- If all your probes go directly to minerals and you can select infinite units on whatever keys and mass macro from all your gates would this be hard? No. Should it be hard. Yes. The very fact that SC requires sick mechanics and strategy is why we have progamers and starcraft on TV. It is only when a player is completely stressed by all the tasks he must complete by clicking everywhere to pull off the strategies he intends on doing that we can see who has real talent and who doesn't. Thats why PRO sc is so fun to watch as well...these guys are so fast and clean that they can execute brilliant new strategies and unreal timing attacks with raw perfection all the time due to their insane mechanics. This is why even the best of the best rarely break a win % higher than 70%. We would never see this if they all could just easily macro by pressing two keys. There wouldn't be a difference between Mumyung and Jaedong. Games will either be one sided because one player is smarter and more strategically advanced or games will be even and decided by some simple mistake rather than decided by some brilliant combo two sided attack. And that, would be a huge problem. I mean...are you even aware of the fact that Savior has a low APM compared to other pro-gamers? His revolutionary defiler use and muta control alone parted the sea of progamers as he earned himself the title of Bonjwa. Do you even play Starcraft? Do you even know who Park-Jung-Suk is? WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU? LOL. We are Starcraft players. Every game we play we are simply rolling the dice with our strategies based on limited information, but we know that the faster and more efficiently we play with our good execution the higher our chances get. Sometimes the dominos fall perfectly and we win. Sometimes AVGJOE27 on USWest is actually a smurfing Korean monster pro and he picks up our dominos and eats them then laughs at us. Sometimes we practice countless hours for months straight only to forget zealot speed at the WCG Grand Finals and lose the most important game of our lives. Even though we thought we were the best one there we fall short of our dreams and expectations. Do we blame the game? Fuck no. Do we whine about how it's not fair because the other guy was too fast? Fuck no. We are Starcraft players. We take it like men and only blame no one but ourselves. If we, the foreign players that have gotten butt-raped by Koreans because of their superior APMs countless times in competitions where it counts don't cry about how it's not fair for people with superior mechanics to have such an edge, then what gives a bone headed fighting game nerd like you the right to do so? Just do everyone a favor and shut the fuck up. I can't believe I just wasted my time writing all this obvious common sense shit. I mean fuck it man...Make starcraft easier to play? LOL THEY SHOULD MAKE IT HARDER TO PLAY. This isn't the Special Cyber Olympics. THIS IS STAAAAAAAAAAARCRAFT. | ||
|
PanoRaMa
United States5070 Posts
I mean...are you even aware of the fact that Savior has a low APM compared to other pro-gamers? His revolutionary defiler use and muta control alone parted the sea of progamers as he earned himself the title of Bonjwa. Do you even play Starcraft? Do you even know who Park-Jung-Suk is? WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU? LOL. hahahahah awesome And yeah I've played war3 at a high US level, and I've admitted countless times that SC is the better game, and it's not even close. NOTHING compares to SC  | ||
|
Hydrolisko
Vanuatu1659 Posts
| ||
LosingID8
CA10835 Posts
On February 06 2009 18:44 Hydrolisko wrote: wut's Alan Feng's aka? look at who started this thread... | ||
|
LosingID8
CA10835 Posts
| ||
|
Ganfei
Taiwan1439 Posts
It's not like you have to be some gosumaster 500 APM insane player to make your superior strategies work. There is simply a baseline. Look at people like Testie. Look at people like Kwark, with 100 APM. Superior strategy, timing, understanding of the game, experience, etc, do play a massive role in SC. Do you really think 130 APM is too much for you to manage? You'll only lose with superior strategies to a better-mechanically player if that player is just MILES above you mechanically. Of course a 300 APM D player will beat a 50 APM D- player. If it's even remotely close, then your superior strategy works. High APM rewards you at HIGH levels of play versus other players of comparable strategical knowledge, not ALL the time. If you execute a DT rush with perfect timing PvP, no amount of APM is going to save him. SC is so complex because it's about finding a balance of these things - is it better to control your remaining 5 MM or to go and macro your 12 rax (even a slow mouse clicker will only take 2 seconds to macro 12 rax, I don't really think that macroing even as it is is a huge mechanic problem). Only at the highest levels when you have to combine micro and macro simultaneously does this become a problem at all. Anyways, as has been said countless times, it's pointless for some jackass who knows absolutely nothing about the competitive SC scene and probably wouldn't pass D- to be talking about SC at any level of play. Someone who hasn't invested significant time into this game and followed to pro scene, seen VODs, seen FPVODs, etc, isn't going to be plausibly knowledgeable whatsoever. For him to suggest that he can actually IMPROVE the greatest "RTS" of all time is laughable. I was going to make more arguments but even as I was writing what I wrote here I can already tell what arguments will be used against what I'm saying and I just don't feel like arguing about it. He clearly wants everyone at the top level to be even regardless of mechanical ability, which is stupid. In SC you can get up to A+ even with 120 APM, like Testie was in his prime, but you can't get to progamer level, and that's what makes SC so good. | ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
week 2 is up anyways, Sirlin already said in his book or whatever about player styles that he was the type of player who doesn't have good mechanics or dexterity, as other players do, and he never really won any tournaments (although he does make it to the top ranks often). He makes up for this with his good timing, and strategy which is to find the simplest safest way to win and abuse it to hell. (Honda's ichio throw in SF:ST) for example. Source: http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/the-obsessed.html And here is the ultimate response to Sirlin's ideas for sc2. How about this Sirlin, Why not make a single button for every single move that a character does in SF? Command moves, special moves, UOH, Throws, Taunts, Dashes, Specials, etc. And why stop there, why not make a single button that does the basic combos that everyone already knows anyways? Imagine how even more imbalanced akuma would be if his entire move set (probably the most out of all characters in any game) were 1 button. You would literally have over 30 hotkeys here. Now give single presses for Dash Demon, Kara Demon, BnB, etc. It's ridiculous. You know how fucking pro I would be if all I had to do was memorize a bunch of hotkeys and timings? And I suck, I just started playing last year. You forget that half the game is actual physical skill and hand/eye coordination. You learn this, it gets embedded in your brain, players of all sports/games 'get in the zone' and often times it's so trained into them that they don't even have to think, their body takes over. Physical skill whether you like it or not is important in video games. Without this, the game is just chess. We don't need 'Chess 2'. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
Feng said; "Sometimes a dragoon will miss on it's attack, Anyone who finds out how to make a dragoon miss an SCV at least 50% of the time will automatically pass the class". | ||
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
"Your idea sucks and I'm going to PM Nimue so he gives you an F." | ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
 Yosh seems to lack a bit of self-confidence, but i guess it is just a matter of time Oh and die Sirlin and <3 Rek, i completly agree with you. This retardo should play civ, chess or make his own game ( "with no stupid interface" ) but starcraft is a sport and it has physical requirements. I don't think it is the best strategy game ever because there are so many different kinds ( turn based, etc .. ) and it is just a matter of personal taste however it is probably the best RTS ever made. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
| ||
| ||
