|
Canada7170 Posts
Nothing in the op is meant to hurt foreigners or worse players. The facts are just being stated. You can still have fun while you suck at the game in a broader sense.
Anyways, I agree completely. Although I have not witnessed this for myself, it makes a lot of sense. Like any other game of strategy, superior mechanics and basics win out more often than not. In chess or other board games, both sides have access to the same moves and mechanics. What sets sc apart is that there is often a gap in mechanics. When mechanics are equal, superior strategy will win. I can go into a game of sc and have a gameplan to follow, but superior mechanics will always completely dominate me.
We're not ridiculing people, as far as I can see. We are just making comments about common misconceptions.
And regarding new standard build orders being invented, a lot of that, imho, is based on maps. If progamers play the same map too often, the style of play often becomes stale and predictable (python comes to my mind). This is why new maps are always being cycled. It's kind of like a TCG, or MMO, in some cases. Things are constantly restricted/nerfed, and players have to adapt to the new circumstances. Adaptation is key at the beginning of a format or map's lifetime, but after a while superior mechanics come back. Some maps compliment a player's natural style. This is why we sometimes see players go through rises and slumps.
Just my two cents.
|
On September 17 2008 02:42 ForVengeance wrote:
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.
I think this sums it up! this is the best way to describe why we aren't as good as those guys...
|
On September 14 2008 20:04 NergalSC wrote:
I have to disagree. Every player at high level (no matter foreigner or korean) have pretty good mechanics. Draco, Dreiven - they can keep they minerals down, have right unit combination and so on. But Bisu or Best basically do right decisions. If you look at the game of C+ player and B+ player - their mechanics are pretty equal. Ok maybe little difference but not that influencing game. And then B+ player totally rapes C+, wtf? B+ does right decisions, have better tactics. I am always against saying that SC is only making more units and controlling them better. If this would be right - I could be top player because I can force myself to macro at very good level, and generally play mechanics at top level. But this factor that makes MIStrZZZ 999999999999x better than me is that he have better tactics - he uses his units more effectively, attacking at right moment. He predict enemys situation better, he gets his advantage step by step to the point he can just rape me. Look at the sAviOr vs Dreiven from latest WWI and then watch Mondragon vs Dreiven at TSL. sAviOr did his lair when he had like 180 gas: that mean his mechanics are not so godlike. He was bothered controlling zerglings and forgot to make lair. Look at iloveoov and sAviOr - their APM is like 250! Ah and one more thing about game between Maestro and Dreiven: Zerg basically did PERFECT decision. Every action in StarCraft gives you advantages and disadvantages. For example: I do Nexus First build in PvT. Advantage is great economy. Disadvantages: I am vulnerable to rushes, lack of early aggresion from my side. And good player use disadvantage of enemy build (for example going 2 factories to break or does a lot quicker expand than normal [using lack of enemys aggresion]). This example is reaaaaally basic but shows whole problem. In high level game decision made by players are so advanced, they think a lot and winner is player who has better tactics.
Artosis I respect you as player and commentator (I like you analysis on game - actually only commentator who analyses tactics and decision making in game he commentate) but in this aspect I have to disagree. Sorry.
APO PANTOZ KAKODAIMONOZ Mood:
thunk United States. September 14 2008 20:11. Posts 1606 PM Profile Blog Quote
On September 14 2008 19:42 PobTheCad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 14 2008 19:32 thunk wrote:
I'm interested to see how this will turn out. Korea is a big country filled with a bunch of kids who all possess all sorts of playstyles and I'm sure some of them will be very talented at SC2. Of course, the same could be said of the foreigners, with a much bigger player base, but less practice time and the lack of a valid career path.
you talk as if pro starcraft is a valid career path?
come on dude....think
It's about as valid as becoming a profession athlete in the United States. Being a Korean and trying to go Pro in Korean Starcraft. There are very few foreign kids who even got to play in the Korean big leagues.
This space would much more elucidating and profound if I could remember Tasteless quotes.
KlaCkoN Sweden. September 14 2008 20:27. Posts 176 PM Profile Blog Quote
I agree with NergalSC actually.
If you watch games of pros their mechanics (especially macro) are not that much better, if at all better than top foreigners.
Constantly better decisions + better map awarness are what puts them ahead every game.
But I agree with artosis saying that koreans can play faster with equal apm due to knowing what to do in advance all the time.
dongfeng September 14 2008 20:28. Posts 19 PM Profile Quote
i think the point is that progamers are able to take a build and play it so many times so they are able to adapt optimally to any situation
NergalSC Poland. September 14 2008 20:30. Posts 85 PM Profile Blog Quote
So I have decided to show examples:
Mondragon vs Dreiven
Dreiven have one moment when his macro is pretty sloppy, he loses few Zealots for nothing, do not manage to do any bigger harras early on. So why the hell he wins game? He know what Zerg can have. He knew that Mondragon invested a lot in mutas, then he was supposed to do lurkers and a lot of sunkens. His saturation of drones suffered from it. Dreiven remained on two bases for longer time. Slowly built his advantage. He knew when he have to camp and when he have to attack. Generally decision making of Dreiven was better = he won game. Mondragon is also smart player. When I looked at his few replays, he was not that far ahead in mechanics. Sometimes his macro was pretty sloppy but his tactics are stronger than most people on damned Earth - he wins.
sAviOr vs Dreiven
sAviOr know what Dreivens advantages and disadvantages are. First game - Andromeda. He knew that attack from front is not good idea. He need hydras to fight reavers but cannot use them to attack directly. Then he does great switch to mutalisks. Does a lot of harras everywhere, while getting drops. He load a lot of hydras to the oerlords and place them in Dreiven main. Polish player have to order some of his reavers to go back to main. Okaaay so at this point sAviOr attacks from the front. GG. So sAviOr showed better strategy thinking. I believe that if sAviOr would play against Best and he would do same build like Dreiven, Best could predict sAviOr options better and prepare for them while using his advantages. OK so lets proceed to the next game. Dreiven played his famous Zealot+Archon combo. sAviOr used maximum of his units - that was ridiculous: he sniped templars, he ran lings to Dreivens base in perfect moment so he have seen what is Dreiven up to. And then he just outplayed him. Not because he have milion APM and never miss overlord. He was basically smarter in this game.
Lets compare two players from foreigner community. First guy is IdrA. Second White-Ra. IdrA is macro player. He concentrates his game on mechanics mostly, his scouting is not so good, he can't predict enemy that well like for example NonY. And other guy - White-Ra. His macro is not so good. He have problems at keeping his money down in many games. His biggest advantage is his strategy. He is one of smartest players. I have to admit that White-Ra wins most games. I respect IdrA of course but White-Ra usually wins games vs IdrA. This is example that great mechanics < strong strategy.
I do not see big difference in mechanics between Draco and for example Kal. But Draco loses to JF in TSL final while Kal wins over JF pretty easily. High level games might look basic - by the book so this is illusion that they play using mechanics only. But this is ONLY illusion.
There is one point when I can agree with you, Artosis. I think that 80% of Terran skill is mechanics. Terran is race that is hard mechanically but simple strategically. But when playing Zerg or Protoss you need more in-game thinking than pure mechanics. Thanx for listening. :D
NergalSc I totally agree with you
Korean pros have WAAY better thinking and timing etc in sc, just uncomparable to foreigners
|
On September 17 2008 08:58 Phoned wrote:TUntil 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.
Not true. Tall and beautiful people are the ones who come out on top. I suppose if you're tall, beautiful, and hard working you've got the world tied around your finger.
|
On September 17 2008 11:16 Durak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2008 08:58 Phoned wrote:TUntil 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. Not true. Tall and beautiful people are the ones who come out on top. I suppose if you're tall, beautiful, and hard working you've got the world tied around your finger.
not true. those with rich parents most often come out on top.
that or your dad's a mason.
|
On September 17 2008 08:58 Phoned wrote:
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? =/
You put it much better than I ever could.
I guess why people eceptionally do not like to hear the above bold words is because they probably only came to dedicate so much time of their life to a game in the first place because they were not motivated in investing in hard work in the real life. :-)
|
Yup, I knew playing 100+ straight TvZ games on Bluestorm was the right idea.
Strategy and mechanics go hand and hand. It has been that way for every sports. Without the mechanics (aka fundamentals), executing certain strategies would either too difficult or impossible. Korea has always been ahead on mechanics since that's what they often practice even during the Grrr era.
In the fighting game, Street Fighter, it is the same with Japan dominating in mechanics. Foreigners lose on mechanics before they even get to the strategy part. Despite the lack of arcade, the excuses is a lack of competition, but that's only a partial truth. Mechanics can be practice solo and often time people are too lazy to do it. What use to feel like casual fun, now feels like work. In SF3 3rd Strike, foreigners often complain about how less skillful parries are, but why does Japan dominate despite parries? A SF3 match can be a short 2-3 minute yet I watch through 40 minutes of Japanese tournament footage where instead of parries doing big damage, it was punished.
|
Strategy and mechanics in SF ?
oO
I don't think it is a good comparison.
|
Russian Federation4333 Posts
For progaming careers to survive and flourish players need good mechanics.
For progaming to survive as a spectator sport players need style and strategy.
Starcraft needs either a new superstar or heroes who will sacrifice their consistence and success to please the crowd.  Casy was one such hero.
|
I think the problem with that tyranid is that the players who's mechanics are the best can use 'standard' play so much more effectively that anything else lessens there odds of winning. I could be wrong but I can't imagine jaedong completely switching to a 9pool super aggressive julyzerg style unless he had no other option ... why would he standard macro gets him more wins.
|
u need mechanics to set strategy in motion...
mechanics importance grows exponentialy the more complex ur strategy is...
its lame to expect anyone to perform any strategy anytime...
The discussion can be compared to real life sports or science.
Why a 10 year old genius boy cant beat an average 70 y/o Physicist?
The older one experienced many things the boy is yet to see, he knows how things work due years of practice, the viability of the boy's creativity is limited to the "mechanics"...
other example is that, its easy to know how to correct the worlds problems, global warm,violence,drugs...
but it is easy to do?
|
Russian Federation4333 Posts
On September 17 2008 21:05 AttackZerg wrote:
I think the problem with that tyranid is that the players who's mechanics are the best can use 'standard' play so much more effectively that anything else lessens there odds of winning. I could be wrong but I can't imagine jaedong completely switching to a 9pool super aggressive julyzerg style unless he had no other option ... why would he standard macro gets him more wins.
That was actually my point. Pros rely on mechanics because they have the best chance of winning through safe play. And that is why progaming is so bland at the moment compared to say 2006.
|
On September 17 2008 11:16 Durak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2008 08:58 Phoned wrote:TUntil 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. Not true. Tall and beautiful people are the ones who come out on top. I suppose if you're tall, beautiful, and hard working you've got the world tied around your finger.
There is also something which is called the brain, if you ever heard about it.
|
On September 17 2008 21:50 TheTyranid wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2008 21:05 AttackZerg wrote:
I think the problem with that tyranid is that the players who's mechanics are the best can use 'standard' play so much more effectively that anything else lessens there odds of winning. I could be wrong but I can't imagine jaedong completely switching to a 9pool super aggressive julyzerg style unless he had no other option ... why would he standard macro gets him more wins. That was actually my point. Pros rely on mechanics because they have the best chance of winning through safe play. And that is why progaming is so bland at the moment compared to say 2006.
i dont think RELY is the right word...
|
On September 17 2008 20:30 Boblion wrote:
Strategy and mechanics in SF ?
oO
I don't think it is a good comparison.
How is it not a good comparison? You disagree that you need a high level of mechanics in order to compete at a top level of SF? It's an arcade game, using a joystick that pivots, and 6 buttons for moves. Each player has a WIDE variety of general moves, and of course big combos. I guarantee that you could play street fighter daily for hours, until the end of the year, and still not hold a candle to a top player who has very good mechanics.
It is NOT easy to pivot a 360degree joystick while hitting the right buttons at the exact right time. That needs a high level of mechanics, an insanely high level at that.
So, I don't understand why you would say they are a bad comparison. Yes, they are different, but at the core they are exactly the same. Hand speed / co-ordination, and split second timing.
In conclusion, I believe you are wrong for stating that.
|
On September 17 2008 11:16 liquid_team wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2008 20:04 NergalSC wrote:
I have to disagree. Every player at high level (no matter foreigner or korean) have pretty good mechanics. Draco, Dreiven - they can keep they minerals down, have right unit combination and so on. But Bisu or Best basically do right decisions. If you look at the game of C+ player and B+ player - their mechanics are pretty equal. Ok maybe little difference but not that influencing game. And then B+ player totally rapes C+, wtf? B+ does right decisions, have better tactics. I am always against saying that SC is only making more units and controlling them better. If this would be right - I could be top player because I can force myself to macro at very good level, and generally play mechanics at top level. But this factor that makes MIStrZZZ 999999999999x better than me is that he have better tactics - he uses his units more effectively, attacking at right moment. He predict enemys situation better, he gets his advantage step by step to the point he can just rape me. Look at the sAviOr vs Dreiven from latest WWI and then watch Mondragon vs Dreiven at TSL. sAviOr did his lair when he had like 180 gas: that mean his mechanics are not so godlike. He was bothered controlling zerglings and forgot to make lair. Look at iloveoov and sAviOr - their APM is like 250! Ah and one more thing about game between Maestro and Dreiven: Zerg basically did PERFECT decision. Every action in StarCraft gives you advantages and disadvantages. For example: I do Nexus First build in PvT. Advantage is great economy. Disadvantages: I am vulnerable to rushes, lack of early aggresion from my side. And good player use disadvantage of enemy build (for example going 2 factories to break or does a lot quicker expand than normal [using lack of enemys aggresion]). This example is reaaaaally basic but shows whole problem. In high level game decision made by players are so advanced, they think a lot and winner is player who has better tactics.
Artosis I respect you as player and commentator (I like you analysis on game - actually only commentator who analyses tactics and decision making in game he commentate) but in this aspect I have to disagree. Sorry.
APO PANTOZ KAKODAIMONOZ Mood:
thunk United States. September 14 2008 20:11. Posts 1606 PM Profile Blog Quote
On September 14 2008 19:42 PobTheCad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 14 2008 19:32 thunk wrote:
I'm interested to see how this will turn out. Korea is a big country filled with a bunch of kids who all possess all sorts of playstyles and I'm sure some of them will be very talented at SC2. Of course, the same could be said of the foreigners, with a much bigger player base, but less practice time and the lack of a valid career path.
you talk as if pro starcraft is a valid career path?
come on dude....think
It's about as valid as becoming a profession athlete in the United States. Being a Korean and trying to go Pro in Korean Starcraft. There are very few foreign kids who even got to play in the Korean big leagues.
This space would much more elucidating and profound if I could remember Tasteless quotes.
KlaCkoN Sweden. September 14 2008 20:27. Posts 176 PM Profile Blog Quote
I agree with NergalSC actually.
If you watch games of pros their mechanics (especially macro) are not that much better, if at all better than top foreigners.
Constantly better decisions + better map awarness are what puts them ahead every game.
But I agree with artosis saying that koreans can play faster with equal apm due to knowing what to do in advance all the time.
dongfeng September 14 2008 20:28. Posts 19 PM Profile Quote
i think the point is that progamers are able to take a build and play it so many times so they are able to adapt optimally to any situation
NergalSC Poland. September 14 2008 20:30. Posts 85 PM Profile Blog Quote
So I have decided to show examples:
Mondragon vs Dreiven
Dreiven have one moment when his macro is pretty sloppy, he loses few Zealots for nothing, do not manage to do any bigger harras early on. So why the hell he wins game? He know what Zerg can have. He knew that Mondragon invested a lot in mutas, then he was supposed to do lurkers and a lot of sunkens. His saturation of drones suffered from it. Dreiven remained on two bases for longer time. Slowly built his advantage. He knew when he have to camp and when he have to attack. Generally decision making of Dreiven was better = he won game. Mondragon is also smart player. When I looked at his few replays, he was not that far ahead in mechanics. Sometimes his macro was pretty sloppy but his tactics are stronger than most people on damned Earth - he wins.
sAviOr vs Dreiven
sAviOr know what Dreivens advantages and disadvantages are. First game - Andromeda. He knew that attack from front is not good idea. He need hydras to fight reavers but cannot use them to attack directly. Then he does great switch to mutalisks. Does a lot of harras everywhere, while getting drops. He load a lot of hydras to the oerlords and place them in Dreiven main. Polish player have to order some of his reavers to go back to main. Okaaay so at this point sAviOr attacks from the front. GG. So sAviOr showed better strategy thinking. I believe that if sAviOr would play against Best and he would do same build like Dreiven, Best could predict sAviOr options better and prepare for them while using his advantages. OK so lets proceed to the next game. Dreiven played his famous Zealot+Archon combo. sAviOr used maximum of his units - that was ridiculous: he sniped templars, he ran lings to Dreivens base in perfect moment so he have seen what is Dreiven up to. And then he just outplayed him. Not because he have milion APM and never miss overlord. He was basically smarter in this game.
Lets compare two players from foreigner community. First guy is IdrA. Second White-Ra. IdrA is macro player. He concentrates his game on mechanics mostly, his scouting is not so good, he can't predict enemy that well like for example NonY. And other guy - White-Ra. His macro is not so good. He have problems at keeping his money down in many games. His biggest advantage is his strategy. He is one of smartest players. I have to admit that White-Ra wins most games. I respect IdrA of course but White-Ra usually wins games vs IdrA. This is example that great mechanics < strong strategy.
I do not see big difference in mechanics between Draco and for example Kal. But Draco loses to JF in TSL final while Kal wins over JF pretty easily. High level games might look basic - by the book so this is illusion that they play using mechanics only. But this is ONLY illusion.
There is one point when I can agree with you, Artosis. I think that 80% of Terran skill is mechanics. Terran is race that is hard mechanically but simple strategically. But when playing Zerg or Protoss you need more in-game thinking than pure mechanics. Thanx for listening. :D NergalSc I totally agree with you Korean pros have WAAY better thinking and timing etc in sc, just uncomparable to foreigners
the op explains why their thinking is so much better
because ITS ALL THEIR THINKING ABOUT!
they dont have to even consider where to place their turrets, when to add facts, when to get upgrades, etc etc because it is all ingrained in their play after so much dedicated practice
while foreigners are trying to nail their expo timings, korean pros are thinking about harassing and scouting, and still nail their expo timings to a T
|
Great thread, it's like learning how to dribble better before attempting a crossover.
|
Not exactly the greatest analogy but it seems to me like how in order to play many sports, the foundation of practice is both conditioning and fundamentals. You ever grow up playing a sport like hockey? What does most of practice entail? Skating lines, sprint drills, endurance, stick-handling, passing, etc. It's only once those things are at a level that you can start worrying about things like when and how to forecheck, neutral zone traps, dump and chase, etc.
How can you argue that the fundamentals (especially in practice sessions) aren't the most important?
|
Yo not to sound like and idiot, but I am thinking that I practice enough to where i should be good at this game, well better then I am... I think maybe i am practicing the wrong bo's, is there like somewher where all the stanrd BO;s of MUS are listed in a manner such as artosis listed in the OP? Beacuse then it would be like now i KNOW what to do...just have to prefect doing it right?
|
I think the major difference between foreigners and koreans is...First off obviously there is more koreans playing then foreigners. Im guessing up to 10x more koreans play starcraft than foreigners. The foreigner scene needs more role models here in U.S.A to motivate more americans. That is the main reason. We are all human beings and just like Koreans if U.S.A developed a big enough network with starcraft as korea has done over the years. We will advance in the game dramatically. Instead of scientist studying how to cure cancer they would be studying...how to defeat a 14 nexus(LOLZ!). Lets be thankful we put our country to good use. Sadly, starcraft is not the most popular game here in america. For us to almost alienate koreans for being so good at starcraft is retarded. Some people do this in other things also. For example sports sometimes "black people are only ones good at this sport blah blah" The majority of black people play that sport is the reason. Why? Because they dont have as many role models for other careers, like the variety of role models white people have. Another example would be the skill difference of somone who snow boards in chicago compared the skill of somone who only snowboards when they visit chicago. The one whos around it all the time will be the better one. Obviously you can break these theories down into more complex situations but in all its still the same Also, im not being racist im just supporting examples of ethnicity goal comparisons in relation to starcraft and the reasoning of such dramatic skill differences in foreigners and koreans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
