|
On September 16 2008 00:55 Ki_Do wrote:
Flash 4 port happened a few days ago BEER...
its completely amazing to do that against zerg...
starcraft is still awesome to watch, no one complains about that, if it werent it should be already dead when oov revolutioned
So? 9 out of 10 games he wouldn't do that and go standard instead, which is in accordance to what Artosis wrote.
|
Calgary25963 Posts
On September 16 2008 00:19 0xDEADBEEF wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2008 00:13 Chill wrote:
What are you talking about? New "standard" build orders get invented like every 3 months. Then you should read the first post again... :p
I really feel like you're missing the point. Just because something is the best build now doesn't mean it's the best build until the end of time.
|
Concering the discussion about ultra mechanics, losing the interest in the game (besides poker):
In my experience (e.g., Volleyball - I played competitively for 15 years) every sport that is performed over an extended period of time with sufficient determination (e.g., money) evolves such as that only a handful players will be able to reach the top; the large mass of amateur players will not even get past something which will develeop itself into a "basic mechanics" barrier (as seen from the viewpoint of the professionals/coaches).
This is the way of things, the probably hardest part is coming to realize that most of us will never make it even near the top. This is perhaps especially hard on us, as Starcraft is a mere game, and (and perhaps not few of us play because they do not compete so well in realer areas of life).
The way I found to cope with this (at least in Volleyball), distance yourself a bit of too competitive thoughts, find like-minded people, and ENJOY the game.
If you embrace that you play as a past-time (and not to prove yourself), then you will see that playing is about the FUN, not WINNING, or frantically improving.
In an environment like that, people will -back to Starcraft- again play funny strats such as Nuke rushes, mass scouts or whatever, simply because all involved will cherish this much more than a simple repetition of "the one BO I almost got perfect mechanics for".
In real life, I play table soccer now and then, and there is nothing more boring than a player, that knows a shot perfectly, and incessantly demonstrates this.
The guy that tries something different everytime, even when he fails 80% of the time, makes for a much more interesting partner/opponent.
Understand this, live this, and you will be one step closer to maturity :-)
And have more fun.
|
I'm probably pointing out the obvious, this is prob the most important thread in the strat forums now. Mechanics are necessary more than ever, just like artosis says, the game is mapped out so much, most openings are known, so you must have the mechanics to keep up in unit production or your strategy will not matter if you have no army to support your strategy.
I think the main idea is not to abuse 1 build over and over, but that foreigners in general need to mass practice the standard builds so that our mechanics are perfected to the point where we can then use the "tricky builds" to gain that initial advantage early game...but then follow through on our advantage with clean mechanics. So many times in foreigner vs progamer games or really just any game with one player vs a better mechanical player, the weaker mechanical player may gain some advantage through their build (perhaps DT gheyness?) but then 100% lose their advantage because they are not practiced enough in the basic mechanics to allow follow through on their macro to win the game. (if you want a clear example of this, look @ strelok vs Mind spirit VOD. Strelok played well and had a GREAT early game, and technically after the contain it should have been "auto-win," just from pure macro but Mind is an S class progamer with S CLASS MECHANICS/MACRO and was able to come back).
It's understandable why some people say SC going the way of mechanics is boring: they can't keep up, or do not like the idea that there are the talented players and those that work hard enough to master the mechanics of the game ALONG with the mental strategical part of the game.
Everyone can learn strategy, and be a genious, but can we execute? Metaspace, you're post talks about your previous passion for volleyball and losing interest for a variety of reasons, but then you went that route of "I'll just play for fun." As foreigner SC players looking to get into the korean scene, and professional e-sports period...we do not want to die and roll over like that imo. We have to WANT to master the basic mechanics of starcraft, not shy away from the notion that any of us are capable of getting that good. And people that start to claim the game is getting "boring" from mechanics being so important are the ones that collectively end up dissuading others from even trying to go down that road of mastering the mechanics and getting very good.
attackzerg's chess analogy, and boxer being analogous to paul morphy is completely on the dot. To be honest, we're all very lucky that starcraft ended up having so much depth that it is at the point where players strive to master the mechanical part of the game. It creates skill differentiation which is good, especially in a sport/e-sport.
If you look at games like cnc3/cnc3kaneswrath, they reached the epitome of mechanics and build order especially, 2WEEKS-1MONTH into the metagame. The "standard" and most efficient cnc3 build is known and mastered 1-2 weeks after any patch is released lol. Starcraft has taken 10 YEARS to get to the point of having "standard builds" and 10 YEARS to get to the point where we are even talking about mastering a mechanical part of a game...and it still has room for innovation in playstyles, especially since we get so many new maps.
this thread really should open up the eyes of a lot of people, especially those D- iccup n00bs who go fast DT every game and think they are improving -.- lol
|
On September 16 2008 01:50 Metaspace wrote:
Understand this, live this, and you will be one step closer to maturity :-)
And have more fun.
and not be as good, but i understand what you're saying
|
Artosis has good point. Compare Sea to UpMagic. Who`s better? Sea. Why? Because he is a macro player, very solid and straight up, go, check out some of his televised games. What he does? Nearly the same things over and over. And he is fucking good with those builds. And UpMagic, he is winning few games here and there with some cocky builds, fucking good cheeses, like vs Anytime @ Rev.Temple, etc. I not mean he is bad, he`s a progamer hell, but Sea is just so much better than him cause he has better basics, and because of that better than Up in nearly every aspects of the game.
|
This has already been mentioned here, still, Artosis is right and it makes the predicament of casual players quite grim and depressing. I have only played for 2 years (almost) and I am considering cutting down the amount of time I spend in SC b/c of this. Though it is good for high level play and e-sports, that is why it is so enjoyable to watch.
On September 15 2008 02:00 Hot_Bid wrote:
people are resistant to this idea because people hate it when they are just excluded from being good. apm and mechanics can be practiced but the perception is that for raw speed and multitask, there are physical limits, kind of like height and coordination in basketball. some people have it, some people don't. the truth is right there in front of you when your opponent is faster and better. whereas strategy seems to be this abstract concept that the everyman thinks he can learn and beat people with. there's something more egalitarian and attractive about strategy trumping speed (ie out-thinking an opponent who has better mechanics).
think of it like a real sport, there are a few exceptions but in basketball in general you need to jump high, be tall, and be coordinated/athletic, and then you can learn about footwork, jump shots, and where to move on defense. sure you can play basketball without the height/speed/jumping ability and even play it very well, but you won't be the best in the world. the same is for SC--you need a base level of handspeed and multitask that to an extent can be practiced (like speed and jump can be trained in basketball) but innately there are different ceilings and limits for everyone. You need these aspects to be elite before even thinking about strategy.
unfortunately this isn't reality. its NOT good when strategy is the biggest part of the game because for computer games, there are easily reachable limits to strategy. yes SC is still evolving but its mainly adjusting to maps and metagame, not the basics. there are few new revolutionary strategies on a basic level--nothing is going to change the "base" tactics of vultures and tanks vs protoss and mm vs zerg.
where players can differentiate themselves is mechanics, speed, etc. that's what makes a sport a sport and a game a game, when certain players are better and no matter what most of the people do, they won't get as good as the best. that's where high skill differentiation comes in. and its good for SC, not bad.
but to sum up, a lot of people hate it that mechanics > strategy because it basically kills any chance of being very good for a large portion of the community. there is always a general sentiment that whats inside (smarts, personality, etc) should matter more than innate outer qualities (physical ability, looks), because you can control one much more than the other. for many players and fans, they see the mechanics as physical, less controllable quality and strategy as "whats on the inside" so they feel its more genuine or fair to win by strategy than pure mechanics, because it means that anyone, even those that aren't fast like themselves, can be great. that's why people love the short players in the NBA, because its hope that anyone can be great at basketball regardless of height. this obviously just isn't true and the few short players are truly rare exceptions to a rule. its a hard reality to face for a lot of people, that they just can't be great.
With the risk of sounding pretentious, I will throw this musing out there:
I have thought a lot about this lately; it is interesting how the synthetic worlds (computer games, etc) humans build up reflect our real world so much. Why is that? Is it intentional or does it just happen as a result of it being man-made? Are humans following patterns on a sub-conscious level that they cannot, or do not want to, get out of?
Well, anyway, great post mang.
On September 15 2008 03:25 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +people are resistant to this idea because people hate it when they are just excluded from being good. apm and mechanics can be practiced but the perception is that for raw speed and multitask, there are physical limits, kind of like height and coordination in basketball. some people have it, some people don't. the truth is right there in front of you when your opponent is faster and better. whereas strategy seems to be this abstract concept that the everyman thinks he can learn and beat people with. there's something more egalitarian and attractive about strategy trumping speed (ie out-thinking an opponent who has better mechanics). i remember thinking that when i read that speed freaks article. "isnt that when you're supposed to think" as if he could have thought up some insane genius strategy to crush the people who knew what they were doing given a minute or two. it would be nice if people would take hot_bids posts to heart, the stuff hes talking about is the root cause of alot of the dumbass discussions about sc2.
Yeah, simply sticky his post in the SC2 forum and lock the whole thing. The End.
|
On September 15 2008 18:41 Wonders wrote:
I recall hearing sentiments by a few chess grandmasters that it's all becoming a giant game of memory. The entire course of a top level game is mapped out until turn 25 or so, when the new "innovation" comes in. Up until that point anything other than the strongest few moves will be punished straight away, because it's all been analyzed to death.
Perhaps another analogy with chess is that it's always been said that games between international masters are more exciting than grandmaster games, because many more positional sacrifices and such are made. Grandmasters see everything coming in advance so they never leave room for such tactics for the other player, and nothing "tricky" ever happens.
I think you guys all all missing the point of chess. I personally know several International Masters and FIDE Masters. They have told me that chess right now is divided up into two sections. Some openings (i.e. Sicilian Defense, Ruy Lopez) really are analyzed to the point of being ridiculously hard for players who play by feeling (like me) to beat. You just can't make the right move every time.
However, in the end, the person with greater strategical oversight and depth of thought along with a nice tactical ability will be able to win out over the person who memorizes positions because while the moves he makes might not be THE BEST moves, they still have a foundational understanding of the game that the other person lacks.
In addition, you have to remember that in chess, you can change the opening of the game into one that you might have neccesarily prepared better or that you might have thought out better. Superficially, it might appear similar to the special BOs that people prepare for matches in SC, but when you observe this in depth, the difference is that a lot of times in chess, there is no subjectively good move, it just depends on your temperament. If you want to defend, you can play passively, if you want to attack, you can gambit, etc. On the other hand, in SC for example, it is very difficult to play, for example, aggressive in PvT, and not be punished for it. Tanks and vultures with mines set up on a ramp is just too hard to push into. Thus, you play by the character of the races, not your own temperament.
Just my thoughts on this, might post an additional one later.
|
Wow... Artosis reports exactly what he's seen, and people disagree lol. This should really be a non-issue. People disagreeing with HB are exactly the kind of people he's describing.
|
Well for my stand-point I think everyone can be as good as the pro-gamers except for lack of funding (koreans has e-sport which pay their progamers to play that's why almost all of them wants to be at the big league, then China themselves are actually getting better because they have their own e-sport) and of course, I understand that all of us here has different talent levels. (Like Lebron James, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett whom are built for basketball, then there is Charles Barkley, criticize for his body built but with sheer determination he succeeded in becoming one of the most legendary ballers of all-time). All these athletes or progamers make
living out of their happy lives.
If only North America, Europeans or even us guys here in the APAC region has these type of funding and talent then we can defeat or at least match the talents those Koreans have.
Now to make a clear point, right now SC:BW is like this.
NBA = Koreans
Euroleague = China
No Leagues = Rest of the World.
I hope this somehow clear things out. If we just had some type of league which will fund us then there will be talented young people who are willing to throw away their books/studies and just play starcraft for them to have fun and get alot of money then we should be as good as them.
|
On September 16 2008 07:28 pandabearguy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2008 01:50 Metaspace wrote:
Understand this, live this, and you will be one step closer to maturity :-)
And have more fun.
and not be as good, but i understand what you're saying
Yes, but so what? After what avilo wrote I fear I did not make myself clear.
99,99% of us will never become "as good". As in any other competitive sport; because of not enough time, physical/talent reasons and so on.
No reason to quit the game though, like some oldtimers here said they did. Know, and accept your place, of course strive to get better, but don't put too much weight on it. Enjoy the game and your level. If the people you play with beat you everytime with the same build due to heavy mechanics training, do not quit. Instead, play with other people, that relish fun and creativity more then simple winning.
If YOU play with friends and are better mechanically, make the game more interesting and fun for both of you by experimenting to an extent that chances of winning are even.
(BTW I never quit Volleyball, just quit the leagues to find like-minded people to play in the mixture of fun and ambition I like).
|
|
|
On September 16 2008 01:50 Metaspace wrote:
Concering the discussion about ultra mechanics, losing the interest in the game (besides poker):
In my experience (e.g., Volleyball - I played competitively for 15 years) every sport that is performed over an extended period of time with sufficient determination (e.g., money) evolves such as that only a handful players will be able to reach the top; the large mass of amateur players will not even get past something which will develeop itself into a "basic mechanics" barrier (as seen from the viewpoint of the professionals/coaches).
This is the way of things, the probably hardest part is coming to realize that most of us will never make it even near the top. This is perhaps especially hard on us, as Starcraft is a mere game, and (and perhaps not few of us play because they do not compete so well in realer areas of life).
The way I found to cope with this (at least in Volleyball), distance yourself a bit of too competitive thoughts, find like-minded people, and ENJOY the game.
If you embrace that you play as a past-time (and not to prove yourself), then you will see that playing is about the FUN, not WINNING, or frantically improving.
In an environment like that, people will -back to Starcraft- again play funny strats such as Nuke rushes, mass scouts or whatever, simply because all involved will cherish this much more than a simple repetition of "the one BO I almost got perfect mechanics for".
In real life, I play table soccer now and then, and there is nothing more boring than a player, that knows a shot perfectly, and incessantly demonstrates this.
The guy that tries something different everytime, even when he fails 80% of the time, makes for a much more interesting partner/opponent.
Understand this, live this, and you will be one step closer to maturity :-)
And have more fun.
Disagree.
I'm trying since 3 month to learn how to play better, learning basic BOs and working on my apm and mechanics, and I can tell you: better you play, funnier the game is.
When you master the game at a certain level, then you start to do consistently original strategies.
A step even further to maturity is to understand that to have a lot of fun, you have to make a lot of efforts.
|
On September 16 2008 19:18 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Disagree.
I'm trying since 3 month to learn how to play better, learning basic BOs and working on my apm and mechanics, and I can tell you: better you play, funnier the game is.
When you master the game at a certain level, then you start to do consistently original strategies.
A step even further to maturity is to understand that to have a lot of fun, you have to make a lot of efforts.
I am talking about when you have reached your plateau. Not while you are still easily improving.
I.e. when only hardcore training for hours and hours per week will make you better, and then even only some.
|
Netherlands4511 Posts
On September 16 2008 09:09 meathook wrote:
This has already been mentioned here, still, Artosis is right and it makes the predicament of casual players quite grim and depressing. I have only played for 2 years (almost) and I am considering cutting down the amount of time I spend in SC b/c of this. Though it is good for high level play and e-sports, that is why it is so enjoyable to watch.
It should not be news to any of you that you will never be on the level of the korean progamers. I do believe you can compete in the foreign scene without having those superior mechanics, apm, etc whatever. So if that's your goal, no need to give up.
|
wow i didn't look at this thread for an entire day and its 4 pages longer o_O
|
Ah, there really is nothing like pointing out the flaws of others is there?
Its hard to understand why people would spend 5 paragraphs to prove that someone who plays for 5 hours a week will never be as good as someone who plays for a living. You know, i wonder why it upsets people so much that many Starcraft players arent at the level of professional players. Look through these last few pages, there are countless times where someone is saying "these players think they can get good but they cant" or "this proves that only certain people can be great at Starcraft". And thats just weird. Who cares? If a million dudes out there think they want to try to get good because its fun who really cares if they never will. Let them find that on their own. Why snuff out any hope for them to believe that they can do well? Maybe they wont even even get to C rank. WHO CARES. Worry about your own skill level. Worry about your own iccup rank. The OP is brilliant but to be honest im surprised it took this long for someone to point out that habituation is the cornerstone of this game. Habituation is the cornerstone of everything that takes skill. Sometimes you just gotta let people live in blissfull ignorance. If joe blow out there takes a look at SC and thinks "wow what a great game, i think i can try to win with strategy and outsmarting my opponent" that is natural and normal. No one looks at it and goes "wow cant wait to spend 14 hours a day practicing my drone splits". Why ridicule these people? Why mock the people who desire more strategic elements and less robotic elements? It seems like anytime anyone says "jeez i wish it wasnt so set in stone who will win" they are accused of wanting easier wins. Maybe its just that the game people think they are playing isnt really the game they are playing. The hardcore truths of SC are not evident to the average player. It is human instinct to want to try to be skilled though outsmarting an opponent. If it is misguided belief then oh well so what. Its strange how desiring more from something makes you inferior in this world of Starcraft. "God i wish there was less speed and more strategy"- STFU noob you just want free wins cause you think youre smarter than everyone so you should be granted free wins. "Man im kinda getting bored of cookie cutter games and i wish it was more like the Boxer-era playstyle"- STFU noob you cant be good at starcraft unless you are a 12 year old korean robot who has zero life outside practicing all his life away with a team and coaches.
All im saying is who cares let people suck. Let people think they can try to win. If they are living in a dream world well just let them. Id rather say to someone who thinks they can get good "go, i hope you do well, good luck" instead of "stfu noob you have no idea how to even get good". This whole site is nothing but STFU NOOB in a million varieties.
|
OK that is a little long of a read. Ill sum it up faster here;
Starcraft is an ingenious game. There is nothing like it and it could probably go on forever. But if i gotta be Idra just to win a few id rather be dead.
|
|
|
There's lots of people out there than want to just be "naturally exceptional." They believe that through their speed, talent, or smarts, that they have the special edge over the rest. There's tons of these people in StarCraft, and videogames in general, because its difficult to point out exactly what makes you a champion.
Well, Artosis' life has been revolving around this game in Korea and he's uncovered the mystery of what makes a champion. Intense, repetitive, organized practice. Over and over. Hard work.
The statement in bold is what 90% of this forum doesn't want to hear. Until now, no one wanted to accept the possibility that, just like everything else in life, those that put more time and effort are the ones who come out on top.
For some, this reveals that their dream of becoming a progamer is outside the realm of possibilty due to the limitations of time and resources. Oh well, there's always Poker! That's easy right?
Right? =/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
