EPTThe Difference between Koreans and Foreigners - Page 14
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
BruceLee6783
United States196 Posts
| ||
|
IdrA
United States11541 Posts
| ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
I've practiced like this ever since this thread was posted as much as I can and I've gotten a lot lot better. Sure, I'm still D.... but that's just because 1) I don't have talent, and 2) I don't play enough. But I feel and see improvement. Thanks Artosis! The importance of stable play and the importance of stable play existing is an amazing thing. Tricks aren't deep gameplay or good strategy by themselves. Stable solid play is where depth is. Gotta thank Artosis for being one of the two people to put me on the path of finding this out. | ||
Chill
Calgary25992 Posts
On March 05 2009 01:33 BruceLee6783 wrote: Relative to the skill levels of other older players, people like Tsunami have already proven that superior strategy and tactics can win over textbook styles and godlike mechanics. Tsunami once told me that people saw his win against AranG as a fluke, that AranG wasn't trying, since Tsunami wasn't a famous player in Korea and wasn't worth trying for. Tsunami also told me that they played a large series of games on various maps, and that Tsunami actually won about half of those games. He told me that him and his buddy 1st~Goblin had studied the game enough to where they could compare it to chess. Completely mapped out. I question that, seeing as how modern day strategy is much different from how players played back then. But I CAN tell you this: If mechanics were everything, he surely would have lost much easier to players like AranG and FroZ, who were much faster players. I can tell you this: In chess' infancy, tricky gambit-players like Morphy were effective. Not anymore. You can draw similar conclusions about infant Brood War. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 01:36 IdrA wrote: nobody had godlike mechanics and the textbook styles were horribly flawed at the time tsunami was playing Well... it seems that people with awesome mechanics lose (badly) to people who play good mind games, theses days. To be at the top, you need awesome mechanics, plus awesome strategic skills. There is not a "mind over mechanics" or "mechanics over mid stuff". You need both. I can tell you this: In chess' infancy, tricky gambit-players like Morphy were effective. Not anymore. You can draw similar conclusions about infant Brood War. Chill, if you really want to compare with chess, weird and original opening like Alekhin defense: 1. e4 Cf6 2. e5 Cd5. have been developped very late (1972, Bobby Fischer vs Spassy at Reykjavik), and are still used from time to time. Now, you talk about Murphy. What about the Karpov variante of the spanish opening, which start with Murphy's variante? 1. e4 e5 2. Cf3 Cc6 3. Fb5 a6 4. Fa4 Cf6 5. o-o Fe7 6. Te1 b5 7. Fb3 d6 8. c3 o-o 9. h3 Cd7 Nobody who know chess would say that the game is less alive, less quickly evolving than before. It requires probably more imagination and unpredictability than a century ago. | ||
|
Chill
Calgary25992 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 02:52 Chill wrote: I disagree with your first statement. Solid mechanics beats solid tactics 9 times out of 10 in StarCraft. Probably. Solid mechanics plus solid tactics make a really competitive player. Only mechanics don't, imo. If you wanna be realllllllllllly good, as Artosis say, you better be more than a starcraft robot. Oh, I remembered about Murphy so I edited my last post :p | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 04 2009 13:09 s.ilk wrote: This isn't a korean people thing its a korea thing. Koreans know how to practice things. It's not just starcraft, or even just video games its everything. Did you see the badminton olympics? Koreans won it. Do you know why korean musicians tend to be very good? Because the ones who can't practice for 4 or more hours stop playing. Being very good and very well practiced at something is a cultural value in Korea. Taekwondo -> a lot of practice -> koreans kick ass at it. For the rest of the western world at least a black belt in a martial art is either BS or the person is seen as a wierdo or an outcast. For someone like a progamer its something more than that. In Korea video gaming is not disdained or seen as somehow devoid of cultural value its a new art and a well respected hobby even sponsored by organizations like IT companies (SKT) and banks (Shinhan). Getting those sponsorships in America (which wouldn't happen because there aren't any real tournaments at the local or national level) would be like getting sponsored by IBM and Citigoup (although maybe anymore you'd be sponsoring them). Think about the liklihood of that. Sorry for the book by the way. But I think this is sort of interesting. Video games promote things like quickness of thought, guile, practice, and multitasking. All things that would help in the real world more than the things that sports (not that I have anything against them I'm a better fencer and basketball player than I am a starcraft player) promote physicality, aggressive personality, captainship. I think the first list in today's world is more viable than the second list. Who knows. Just venting to be honest. You are wrong in your analogy with musicians because: 1- Koreans are good because they practice 10 hours a day but so do the chinese and japanese. How do you explain that only koreans dominate starcraft? 2- Koreans are good technically but mostly don't understand shit about what they are playing and therefore are bad musicians. You would tell me that it's subjective, but that's what 99% of people I know think. 3- Russians, Ukrainians and stuff are wayyyy better than koreans. | ||
|
Chill
Calgary25992 Posts
 | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
I still remember how silly were the games against top european players like sven or others, where he would get his ass handed, usually in a very humiliating fashion. Tsunami builded up a legend surronding himself with his website. A legend that would go as far as Useast low tier 13 years old nubs, that were reading his strategy guide. | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 03:13 Chill wrote: I'm talking about Morphy, not Murphy. Maybe that's who you're talking about too, not sure. Anyways it was just a tangential point lol sorry, I always have a problem at spelling name. Actually, I have always been thinking it was Murphy... Yeps, we talk both about Paul Morphy, ninnteenth century player. I know it was not a big point, but I find sad that people consider that everything becomes flat and mechanical... in chess or in starcraft. Isn't for example the Fantasy build the most beautifull, original and elegant strategy ever? | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7465 Posts
On March 05 2009 03:23 Boonbag wrote: I kind of loled at the tsunami thing. I still remember how silly were the games against top european players like sven or others, where he would get his ass handed, usually in a very humiliating fashion. Tsunami builded up a legend surronding himself with his website. A legend that would go as far as Useast low tier 13 years old nubs, that were reading his strategy guide. Actually tsnunami was a pretty sick gamer at the time. At one point I had 1.3k of his replays. He had 20 games matches back in 1.08/1.09 with alot of good players. I recently redownloaded one of his replays against arang. 1 hour and 7 minute game. Pure camp bastard zerg. 227 apm vs 97 that game. Yeah complete joke | ||
|
Creationism
China505 Posts
the idea of practicing mechanics does not mean that you simply become a robot that does the same build every game for next two years with no concern for the other player. it is simply so that there is a steamline flow in your game. you really think that the difference between you and the lowest teir programer is that they have better STRATEGIES than you? | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36390 Posts
On March 05 2009 02:56 Biff The Understudy wrote: Probably. Solid mechanics plus solid tactics make a really competitive player. Only mechanics don't, imo. If you wanna be realllllllllllly good, as Artosis say, you better be more than a starcraft robot. I don't think anyone is arguing that anyone should just be a robot, and nobody is arguing that "only mechanics make a really competitive player." This happens a lot, someone writes (truthfully) that mechanics are often more important than strategy or tactics, and then someone comes in and says "but you can't just be a mechanical robot!" when nobody even argued that in the first place. Of course if you take anything to the extreme its bad. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 05:15 Creationism wrote: how can anyone really argue this? the idea of practicing mechanics does not mean that you simply become a robot that does the same build every game for next two years with no concern for the other player. it is simply so that there is a steamline flow in your game. you really think that the difference between you and the lowest teir programer is that they have better STRATEGIES than you? Sure not. I always have this comparison with musicians as I'm a musician myself. To be a good musician, you need a good technic, means practicing a shitload etc etc... 99% of your efforts go to gaining "good mechanics" as we would say in SC world. Then, when you have your technic set up, you use it to do some music. Because that's what you are here for. What people go to listen is the music, not the technic. A technical player is a bad one. To go back to Starcraft, I think mechanics are just a medium. You need good mechanics to use your others qualities: strategy, game sense, intelligence, creativity. That's theses quality which will make you good or bad. Obviously, if you don't have sufficient mechanics to exploit them, they are wortheless. I remember July saying that a BO5 was mostly about mind game. I believe that if there is not a big skill gap between two players, the game is mostly about mind, strategy, and intelligence. As an example, Idra vs F91 seemed completely unbalanced, altough I don't think F91 is a much better player than Idra in terms of mechanics. Don't flame me people, I'm sure we all agree! I don't think anyone is arguing that anyone should just be a robot, and nobody is arguing that "only mechanics make a really competitive player." I'd like to agree with that but I've read so many times the contrary... | ||
|
ramen247
United States1256 Posts
On March 05 2009 03:07 Biff The Understudy wrote: You are wrong in your analogy with musicians because: 1- Koreans are good because they practice 10 hours a day but so do the chinese and japanese. How do you explain that only koreans dominate starcraft? 2- Koreans are good technically but mostly don't understand shit about what they are playing and therefore are bad musicians. You would tell me that it's subjective, but that's what 99% of people I know think. 3- Russians, Ukrainians and stuff are wayyyy better than koreans. how the heck do you know most dont understand wat they are playing? that is pure bs and i believe you should get killed for saying something like that. of course korea musicians know what they are doing. of course korean musicians can improvise. do you think they are handicapped or something in that area? stfu. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 08:35 ramen247 wrote: how the heck do you know most dont understand wat they are playing? that is pure bs and i believe you should get killed for saying something like that. of course korea musicians know what they are doing. of course korean musicians can improvise. do you think they are handicapped or something in that area? stfu. Instead of insulting me, consider the fact that if I decided to become a japanese musician, I wouldn't be very good, even if I could acquire a very impressive technic. People who play the best Elgar are English, people who play the best Tchaikovsky are Russians, people who play the best Debussy are French. Why? Because they have lived and grown up were the music have been written, and they know instinctvely what it's talking about, in which cultural context, and which emotion it carries. You can't play amazingly Debussy if you don't know Paris and the French countriside, cuz Debussy describes something you can find there only. Now, you can play decently Debussy even without knowing France, but because your country has a very similar culture and you know a lot about french culture (you have read the litterature, you know the history, you've met plenty of French, and therefore, you have a precise idea of what Debussy talk about in his music). Now, you were born in Seoul, which is a place amazingly far and with an amazingly different culture than Europe or States, with other rules, an other history, other aesthetic canons, etc etc etc, and practiced ten hours a day since you are 8, you can become the most amazing technician, you don't know what you are talking about. You haven't grown up in the cultural context matching with the music you play, it's impossible to be perfectly convincing as an artist. There is a stereotype of the asian musician which is someone who plays perfectly and exactly like a robot. Obviously it's not always the case, but there is a good reason why this stereotype exist. Hope it's not too offensive, hu? Now, there is amazing asian musicians, but most of them have been educated in Europe or States (Yo-yo Ma etc...) Again, do you think a european guy could match asian musician if he was trying to play there music? Come on... You can't, as a westerner, even appreciate asian traditional music, cause you don't have the cultural and musical references. There is absolutely nothing racist in what I'm saying. I just think culture is something specific to a place. And that being an artist is much more than playing well an instrument or being inspired. An artist exist in a context. | ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
On March 05 2009 03:26 Biff The Understudy wrote: Isn't for example the Fantasy build the most beautifull, original and elegant strategy ever? But it's not like he tried it a few times and said "This build is perfect." No, he probably practiced it for 10 hours a day against every opening. Strategy alone does not win games. Mechanics alone do not win games. You need at least a good combination of both to succeed. And about all this musician stuff and Asian cultures. Don't all the crappy white bands go to Japan to make money when they fail here? Is it because Japan doesn't produce good musicians or is it because, not trying to be racist here, I heard this once, that they are kind of obsessed with white people? I heard the measure to how good looking you are is how white you look. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7971 Posts
On March 05 2009 18:29 rushz0rz wrote: But it's not like he tried it a few times and said "This build is perfect." No, he probably practiced it for 10 hours a day against every opening. Strategy alone does not win games. Mechanics alone do not win games. You need at least a good combination of both to succeed. We agree perfectly. That's why, sadly, it's more efficient to do always the same builds when you don't have ten hours a day to practice... and that's why foreigner will always suck in terms of both level and entertainement compared to top koreans. | ||
| ||
