|
United States4883 Posts
In my other recent blog (How To Plan A Strategy), I spent a lot of time explaining the use of a strategy in ladder games. A lot of people were asking questions like, "Should I just blindly follow my plan no matter what my opponent does?" or "What happens if my opponent goes mech instead of bio?" and a lot of other questions regarding how to implement their strategy after devising it. This is when I started really thinking deeply about playing to improve vs. playing to win and learning when and how to use each mindset.
Playing To Win
There is a popular book written by David Sirlin called Playing to Win: Becoming the Champion. You have probably heard Day9 recommend this book several times, I highly recommend it too. In this book, Sirlin lays out the basics of learning to win: doing everything within the legal boundaries of the game to win, whether or not you look "cheap" or "cheesy".
In light of recent events, I think that's something to think about seriously. After the WCS Global Finals, a lot of people were asking the question: "Did WCS do its job? Is sOs really the best SC2 player?" and a lot of people would say "no". It's quite clear that Jaedong is a superior player mechanically and perhaps even strategically, but sOs's continual cannon rushes kept screwing up Jaedong's game plan and forcing him into unfamiliar territory. sOs abused certain terrain on maps (most notably on Derelict Watcher) to make sure he was ALWAYS able to cannon the natural; while some might call this "cheap" or "incredibly cheesy", sOs sees it as a way to disrupt his opponent's plan and force him into an unfamiliar situation. Interestingly, this relates to a quote I came across on Sirlin's site from an article on the Anand-Carlson chess games (which are still ongoing as of now):
So Anand encountered a "mild surprise" in the opening moves that left him "flying blind" (meaning the board was in a position with which he had not previously studied) and because of that he decided to not keep pursuing the game. He just engineered a draw.
Most real people are "flying blind" after the first couple moves of the game, and it's the challenge of trying to solve a puzzle against a live opponent (who is also flying blind) that makes the game so fun. At the highest levels, Grandmasters go very deep into the game in positions they have studied exhaustively, and then the moment they feel uncomfortable they search for the emergency brake, and consider themselves happy to escape with half a point.
Sirlin's book is about becoming THE BEST, not just a good player. Even in the title, he suggests this by using the phrase "Becoming THE Champion". Singular. The point here is that "playing to win" means specifically going above and beyond what is "expected" and play the game to its most extreme limits in order to win. If a well-executed 6pool wins the game, you should do it. If a broken 5-rax reaper strategy wins the game, you should do it. If doing an unstoppable cannon rush wins the game, you should do it. In order to becoming THE champion, you should actively seek out the strongest tools available to you. In the finals of WCS, sOs used this concept to his advantage continually put Jaedong on tilt until he had succeeded in winning outside of the game.
There are several thousand things I could explain more about playing to win. However, it would just be a be a regurgitation of the book. So go read it!
Playing To Improve
Originally I had planned to use the phrase "playing to practice", but I think the term "improve" points out the true goal of practice. When you're "playing to practice", your ultimate goal is to improve, not to practice. So many people throughout several different disciplines don't understand this and instead spend hours upon hours practicing without results. There's the pianist who practices scales, arpeggios, 5-finger exercises, and a handful of etudes for 4 hours every day and yet still makes very little progress into actually improving as a musician. The same thing can happen to a Starcraft player: he spends hours and hours and hours playing games on ladder, practicing his macro and micro and trying to play faster, but finds himself stagnating in platinum. Why?
Many people are unaware of what it means to practice or how to practice. They think that simply spending a lot of time on something will yield results. This is true to some degree. It will at first, but the returns diminish as your skill level gets higher; after a certain point, focusing on "doing good" is not as productive as focusing on improving.
Everyone needs to read this post by vaderseven:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=433514¤tpage=4#73
This post is perhaps the most important post in the entire thread about applying a strategy to practice. It implies that in order to improve your game plan and actually get better, first you need a huge number of losses. Like White-Ra is famous for saying: "More GG, more skill".
In order to understand this completely, you really need to change your whole mindset. For most people, Battle.Net is a place to challenge others to a duel of skill and see who comes out victorious. They see it as a way to show off their skill and climb the ladder. They are obsessed with "getting to the next league" or "getting number 1 on ladder". Take all of those thoughts and throw them out the window (defenestration). The purpose of ladder is a testing ground for your game plans. They are there exclusively to help you IMPROVE. Your goal on ladder should be Not Playing To Win. Once you get "winning" out of the picture and focus on "improving", your progress will move along a lot faster and you will actually find yourself playing better and better and automatically rising through the ranks.
But like I stated before, it comes with taking a huge number of losses first. Consider offracing for a moment. When a player offraces, he has almost no knowledge of that race - no build orders, no reliable unit compositions, no clue of specific timings, no real idea of how to macro or micro correctly. He is starting to learn literally (and I mean that figuratively) from the ground up. When you pick another race to play, you're almost always going to start out with a bunch of losses. You might even drop down a league. But in time, you'll start to improve and get back to the point where you are with your other race. On a smaller scale, exactly this sort of thing should happen when you choose a style or new game plan within your own race. Pick a style such as CC first into hellion/banshee into 4M in TvZ and force yourself to stay within the confines of that strategy. When you play the same way every game, you find opportunities to figure out where you're weakest and how to improve your current strategy outside of just "playing better".
Like I said in my last article, it's important to have a game plan going into the game. With a game plan and pre-determined thoughts and responses, you end up with a much clearer view of the game before it even starts. This is focused practice. Focused practice will allow you to improve at a much faster pace than simply loading up a game and "trying to play better". For instance, I do a rotating group of "focus areas" for mechanics within my practice every day which I mention in this blog post. Focused practice means accelerated improvement, which should be your ultimate goal on ladder.
Conclusion
When considering if your mindset in a game, you really need to look at the situation. Most of us get caught up in laddering and trying to win that we forget how to improve. Others, unfortunately, have the issue of practicing hard but avoiding techniques and tactics they consider "cheap" or "unfair" and end up suffering (Idra is a great example). The most important thing is choosing the right mindset for the right time and opening yourself up to the possibilities of the game.
When laddering, literally (and I mean this figuratively) your only thought should be improving, not about winning or losing. If your thoughts are on improving, you will actually improve and level up naturally. When you're in a tournament situation or playing a series with a friend (or in grudge match), your goal is ultimately to win. You shouldn't avoid doing cheeses or "unfair" tactics, but you should definitely use what you've learned from practicing to play a good game. In the end, knowing when and how to practice is ultimately a key component of learning how to play to win. When you learn to discern between these two mindsets and use them together correctly, you will a) improve rapidly, and b) play at your absolute best whenever necessary.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I apologize, this thread is not coming through the way I intended it to. This was merely an exposition of the difference between "playing to win" and "playing to improve" and has nothing to do with how people should play the game. Play for whatever reason you want, I don't care how anyone plays. When someone asks me "I don't know how to improve, what should I do?", I can specifically state "playing to improve" means this kind of mindset and you should do these things to improve your play. If you just want to play for fun and mass hellions for shits and giggles, DO IT! I don't care, I don't even think it's not a learning experience. But when someone asks for help in the forums on how to improve, I'm not going to say "macro better" or "just play a bunch of ladder games, have fun, and you'll get better" because those results are going to take a long time to come to fruition. Most people would prefer to hear some solid advice on how to improve their gameplay IMMEDIATELY, which is where methodology comes in. Following specific methods and general practice habits will lead to rapid improvement, which is GREAT for those interested in it. Again, if you're not interested in rapid improvement, do whatever the hell you want! It's a game!
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I was debating if I should post this directly here and detract money from David Sirlin, but I think it's important enough to post and Sirlin gives it out for free anyway. Here is the Free Online Version of Playing To Win. If you enjoy his book or anything you read on the site, I strongly encourage you to donate to the site or buy a physical copy of "Playing To Win".
And again, older Day9 podcasts that are amazing: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Day(9)_Podcasts
_
|
I play to have fun with zero intention of improving. People take the game way too seriously, and then end up raging when they lose or even just seriously frustrated. I'd say "moderately frustrated" is the worst I get, and it subsides incredibly quickly, regardless of the manner I lose.
|
On November 15 2013 14:34 FabledIntegral wrote:
I play to have fun with zero intention of improving. People take the game way too seriously, and then end up raging when they lose or even just seriously frustrated. I'd say "moderately frustrated" is the worst I get, and it subsides incredibly quickly, regardless of the manner I lose.
I think that rage has less to do with how seriously you take the game and more to do with how invested you are in your expectations. You can be very serious and never be frustrated (e.g. white-ra) so long as you don't emotionally invest in an outcome you don't have control over.
|
On November 15 2013 14:34 FabledIntegral wrote:
I play to have fun with zero intention of improving. People take the game way too seriously, and then end up raging when they lose or even just seriously frustrated. I'd say "moderately frustrated" is the worst I get, and it subsides incredibly quickly, regardless of the manner I lose.
I'll never be a professional gamer, I have neither the natural talent nor the drive. Yet feeling myself progress and improve (in all things, not exclusive to starcraft) is as enjoyable to me as winning is. Getting better is my fun, or a large part of it, and I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. It's an important thing to keep in mind.
|
Great article Sc2John! After the "stagnating in platinum" line I feel like your writing this article was a direct message to me haha.
One thing I've struggled with is: I used the "playing to improve" approach you suggest where you play the same style every game no matter what; the lower leagues this plan worked out wonderfully. But now I'm at a place where I feel like I can't effectively use the same or similar style in every game on the ladder anymore. As Protoss, do you just use that philosophy per matchup? I feel like I have hit a brick wall because I feel like I have to play 3 distinctly different styles in all three matchups so I improve at 1/3rd the rate I want to (or less if I can't get Zerg or whatever one day on the ladder).
In your opinion, what is the best way to "play to improve" as Protoss? I guess I'm just lost as to whether I should focus on specific parts of my play (matchup specific timings and micro stuff) or generalize and work on it all (the things that are applicable in all three matchups). I mostly just use the ladder for "play to win" times but that's not helping me improve as much as its helping me make diamond.
|
On November 15 2013 14:34 FabledIntegral wrote:
I play to have fun with zero intention of improving. People take the game way too seriously, and then end up raging when they lose or even just seriously frustrated. I'd say "moderately frustrated" is the worst I get, and it subsides incredibly quickly, regardless of the manner I lose.
I also play to have fun. However, a big part of the fun in this game for me is seeing myself improving through my mechanics, strategy and all the little details regardless if I won or lost that game. I take this game seriously but also have fun doing it. Sure, I get frustrated occasionally. I find that always saying GG WP even if you lost to a cannon/bunker rush or 6 pool helps immensely to subside the frustration. At least for me. Rage quitting just compounds my frustration.
|
I liked Vaderseven's post, but how do I apply it if I don't play all that often? Vaderseven points out as an example, NINETEEN games vs. two-base muta, an uncommon strategy, all of which he analysed afterwards. How many games would he have had to play to get that sample size? If a full 10% of Zergs 2-base muta him, that's 190 games. In reality, it's probably more like double that. It would take me months to get a sample size of nineteen games against a very uncommon strategy, and only then do you get to make your adjustments.
Vaderseven's post seems to be aimed at high-ranking players who are willing to put in 10-15 games per day at a minimum. What should a sub-Masters player who plays like, 3-5 games a day do?
|
On November 15 2013 15:44 Salivanth wrote:
I liked Vaderseven's post, but how do I apply it if I don't play all that often? Vaderseven points out as an example, NINETEEN games vs. two-base muta, an uncommon strategy, all of which he analysed afterwards. How many games would he have had to play to get that sample size? If a full 10% of Zergs 2-base muta him, that's 190 games. In reality, it's probably more like double that. It would take me months to get a sample size of nineteen games against a very uncommon strategy, and only then do you get to make your adjustments.
Vaderseven's post seems to be aimed at high-ranking players who are willing to put in 10-15 games per day at a minimum. What should a sub-Masters player who plays like, 3-5 games a day do?
I would work out logical adjustments in the same way that you have constructed your gameplan, and try them when you get into such a situation based on the set of basic reads and reactions you have constructed.
I think the most important thing is to just TRY things - write out a big list of reactions you can test based on reads you make in game - try them in game and then adjust them out of game based on results.
If you get into a situation where he is going two base muta- don't be flying around in the dark. Establish the things you want to look for before and do you ever get in the game. Delayed third, lair timing, gas units? How will I poke with my hellions to get information? At what time will I scan?
If I identify two base muta how will I react? If I decide these things outside of the game, then in the game, even though I face the strategy very rarely, I will have a much stronger, more clear reaction than if I just wait for the opponent to two-base muta me and react on the fly. Just establish a plan beforehand.
If it turns out that you reacted poorly - that your aggressive timing did not work, that you missed an opportunity to be aggressive and gave him too large a window to drone - that you underestimated the amount of turrets you would need or put them in poor locations - if your army movement was poor and gave him a window to strike and take momentum, - if all these actions were OFF, then that is fine. You make those adjustments out of game, so that the next time you face a two base muta strategy you have an even clearer and stronger set of reactions and can maneuver back to your plan as quickly as possible.
|
On November 15 2013 15:11 Kommatiazo wrote:
Great article Sc2John! After the "stagnating in platinum" line I feel like your writing this article was a direct message to me haha.
One thing I've struggled with is: I used the "playing to improve" approach you suggest where you play the same style every game no matter what; the lower leagues this plan worked out wonderfully. But now I'm at a place where I feel like I can't effectively use the same or similar style in every game on the ladder anymore. As Protoss, do you just use that philosophy per matchup? I feel like I have hit a brick wall because I feel like I have to play 3 distinctly different styles in all three matchups so I improve at 1/3rd the rate I want to (or less if I can't get Zerg or whatever one day on the ladder).
In your opinion, what is the best way to "play to improve" as Protoss? I guess I'm just lost as to whether I should focus on specific parts of my play (matchup specific timings and micro stuff) or generalize and work on it all (the things that are applicable in all three matchups). I mostly just use the ladder for "play to win" times but that's not helping me improve as much as its helping me make diamond.
Are you asking whether or not you should have a different style or plan for each match up? In general that is expected xO.
As much as midgames tend to converge, your plans will probably be different against different races! Just compartmentalize your plans and focus each matchup separately.
Mindset wise it really helps to have some sort of mental trigger to help you adjust to different match-ups, different focuses, and different plans. Just to help you get into the right state of consciousness.
It is important to separate mechanics from gameplans. You can improve on your mechanics in all 3 matchups regardless of gameplan or "build." The benefit of having one defined build per MU is that you can compartmentalize it and focus on improving your mechanics, and adjust your build and correct execution mistakes out of game!
It really, really helps if you just take five minutes to write things out. Write out a basic plan for each matchup and really, REALLY think logically through your steps and have an idea of what you want to do in each stage of the game. Make the plan your OWN, not something that has been regurgitated, and do things YOU want to do. Take from the pros, and use the resources they have passed on to you - pro players generally have strong gameplans. But just take some time to really, really question and awaken your mind and inquisitve nature - exhaust this outlet outside of the game. So that way, when you get in the game, you are focused on your execution.
|
If you have a rage problem, like me, I suggest you put parental control to disable chat so that you can play and avoid being bm or frustrated at others bm and you play better and focus more on improving.
|
On November 15 2013 15:44 Salivanth wrote:
I liked Vaderseven's post, but how do I apply it if I don't play all that often? Vaderseven points out as an example, NINETEEN games vs. two-base muta, an uncommon strategy, all of which he analysed afterwards. How many games would he have had to play to get that sample size? If a full 10% of Zergs 2-base muta him, that's 190 games. In reality, it's probably more like double that. It would take me months to get a sample size of nineteen games against a very uncommon strategy, and only then do you get to make your adjustments.
Vaderseven's post seems to be aimed at high-ranking players who are willing to put in 10-15 games per day at a minimum. What should a sub-Masters player who plays like, 3-5 games a day do?
Well, it's not like in the other 171 games the zergs didn't do anything, is it? 
Yes, for the uncommon strats, it'll take longer to accumulate enough replays to analyse. But in the meantime you will accumulate enough replays of the more common strats to make a start on analysing them.
|
Italy12246 Posts
A few thoughts:
1) First and foremost, we play for FUN. I've said this a million times. This isn't necessarily "ingame" fun either; you could do things outside of ladder/practice that will make the game more enjoyable. Join a team and play customs with them, hang out in ts or a skype call, play clan wars and tournaments. All these things make the game a lot more enjoyable, and make hard/focused pratice much easier.
2) Playing exclusively to "improve" can be really frustrating. Keeping a healthy mindset is really important, and i actually think that if you can't, you probably should quit playing "competitively" (as in, trying to be the best player you can be at sc2).
3) When you play to "improve" you should also set specific goals. Assuming you want to be a complete player, it's helpful to focus on specific areas at the time.
Just saying "well im playing to improve so losing is ok" is not enough. What you should think instead is "i want to improve my forcefields for a bit. So, for the next 20 pvz's i will soultrain him and for the next 20 pvt's i will do immortal busts" (ofc this is just an example which is totally not related to my love for immortal allins).
You really get to improve when you focus on specific things in your play, be it stalker micro, minimap awareness, multitasking, probe production, blink micro, chronoboost usage...just saying "play to improve" is not enough.
This means you will likely lose a lot more than you would by just driling a single build over and over again over the course of a season, which is why a healthy mindset is so very important. You could even mix up the two approaches, and do a bit of one and a bit of the other.
|
Hah, before I even finished the article I went and ordered a copy of Playing To Win! THEN I saw the "free" link at the bottom. -_-
This was a great article... I feel much better about laddering and improving already! Thanks!
|
United States4883 Posts
On November 15 2013 14:34 FabledIntegral wrote:
I play to have fun with zero intention of improving. People take the game way too seriously, and then end up raging when they lose or even just seriously frustrated. I'd say "moderately frustrated" is the worst I get, and it subsides incredibly quickly, regardless of the manner I lose.
I think everyone who plays SC2 plays it because it's fun. For me, personally, I get the most enjoyment out of improving some skill. Nothing brings me more enjoyment than the feeling of getting better at something; once I hit the "skill ceiling", things just aren't really fun for me anymore.
Except immortal all-ins. And blink all-ins. And proxy 2-gates. Oh my, protoss is a fun race
On November 15 2013 15:11 Kommatiazo wrote:
Great article Sc2John! After the "stagnating in platinum" line I feel like your writing this article was a direct message to me haha.
One thing I've struggled with is: I used the "playing to improve" approach you suggest where you play the same style every game no matter what; the lower leagues this plan worked out wonderfully. But now I'm at a place where I feel like I can't effectively use the same or similar style in every game on the ladder anymore. As Protoss, do you just use that philosophy per matchup? I feel like I have hit a brick wall because I feel like I have to play 3 distinctly different styles in all three matchups so I improve at 1/3rd the rate I want to (or less if I can't get Zerg or whatever one day on the ladder).
In your opinion, what is the best way to "play to improve" as Protoss? I guess I'm just lost as to whether I should focus on specific parts of my play (matchup specific timings and micro stuff) or generalize and work on it all (the things that are applicable in all three matchups). I mostly just use the ladder for "play to win" times but that's not helping me improve as much as its helping me make diamond.
I think it's important to focus on one matchup at a time. About every week, I shift my focus to a different matchup and focus on tightening up my build order and coming up with solutions to unique problems, etc. Something I think helps A LOT is learning an all-in in one or two of your matchups; it makes playing a lot less stressful and works out different skills (for instance, right now I'm doing nothing but soul train in PvZ).
I suggest you look at this post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=433514¤tpage=5#89
This is an (rough) example of a fully developed game plan. When you look at something like this, realize that there's A TON that goes into developing a full late-game focused plan. There's always SOMETHING you can improve on, even outside of mechanics. In a way, it also makes it clearer how much easier a cheese or a timing attack can be to think through and execute.
On November 15 2013 15:44 Salivanth wrote:
I liked Vaderseven's post, but how do I apply it if I don't play all that often? Vaderseven points out as an example, NINETEEN games vs. two-base muta, an uncommon strategy, all of which he analysed afterwards. How many games would he have had to play to get that sample size? If a full 10% of Zergs 2-base muta him, that's 190 games. In reality, it's probably more like double that. It would take me months to get a sample size of nineteen games against a very uncommon strategy, and only then do you get to make your adjustments.
Vaderseven's post seems to be aimed at high-ranking players who are willing to put in 10-15 games per day at a minimum. What should a sub-Masters player who plays like, 3-5 games a day do?
If you're only playing 3-5 games a day, there's still plenty to get from those games. I've gotten into a habit of saving all my replays and renaming them based on what I saw, etc. If you aren't playing that seriously, just a quick run-through of your games after playing is a good idea. Like seriously, if you play 5 games every day then sit down and watch at least half of them and make adjustments to your game plan, you'll improve exponentially compared to just playing and walking away from the game.
Again, I strongly emphasize having a WRITTEN game plan so that you can always consult it when you lose and make adjustments to it later. You can ask "Did I deviate from my game plan at all? Why?" or "Did my opponent do something unique that requires a unique response?", etc.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
|
While I ackknolwedge the fact, that the "mindset" is important for improving and winning, I think there is another barrier, which is hard to overcome in SC2 and this is the complexity of the game. You have to build units, you have to move your units around, you have to look for your opponent, you have to think about what you build and when you want to attack and you have to control your units in the battle. This compexity is hard to understand if you try to do everything at once. In order to learn a game, you have to break it down into simple packages and focus on them one by one. This includes learning the theories and then going for practice.
"Just play a lot of games" is the most common term used in forums to tell someone, how he can get better. However this is a double edged sword. Of course you can use ladder to improve your play, but you need to be able to focus on the things you want to improve and ignore all the other things, which can happen during a real game. The risk is, that your opponent can play much better than you or is using some weird strategies, which can throw you off your game and it becomes hard to measure "progress". How do you define, that you have improved when playing ladder games? By how much you are winning?
In order to learn something you need to set goals and create a plan to achieve your goal:
For example the classic statement "macro better", is not a goal. However if you say to yourself, I want to be able to always reach 50 scvs at 10 minutes, you are more specific and you have a clear indicator, when you have reached your goal.
What I want to say is, "keep it simple" and go step by step instead of trying to jump about a river :D
|
Another brilliant write-up! You are on fire lately SC2John. I really appreciate it - like kommatiazo said, I felt that this article was written to me! Especially after my questions in your earlier guide to planning a strategy.
I'm sure I will be back with questions but I wanted to say thanks first and foremost.
|
Very nice post, appreciate all the quality posts you're making SC2John / Vaderseven / everyone else that makes this forum a success.
|
when people start to realise this is a game and only a handful of people are going to make any kind of income off it the better. as vibe said on his stream, there are a lot of Gm players or people who hgave been in gm but only the top 50 id say are any good . .therefore . .you better be on the top 50
|
"Play for fun/It's just a game" type arguments really annoy me. If somebody is passionate about something you are basically demeaning it by saying that. As long as somebody doesn't have an ego about playing and is respectful then just leave it at that.
As for more on topic you should always play to win in a competitive setting (Qualifier/Tournament/etc). Regarding ladder, something I used to tell students I gave lessons to was if you think somebody is better than you, play to 'win' (ie. do whatever you think will give you the absolute best chance of winning), once you have beaten them, then play to improve.
|
On November 16 2013 12:20 Agh wrote:
"Play for fun/It's just a game" type arguments really annoy me. If somebody is passionate about something you are basically demeaning it by saying that. As long as somebody doesn't have an ego about playing and is respectful then just leave it at that.
As for more on topic you should always play to win in a competitive setting (Qualifier/Tournament/etc). Regarding ladder, something I used to tell students I gave lessons to was if you think somebody is better than you, play to 'win' (ie. do whatever you think will give you the absolute best chance of winning), once you have beaten them, then play to improve.
It's in response to statements in the article such as "When laddering, literally (and I mean this figuratively) your only thought should be improving, not about winning or losing."
The responses are completely valid, because the entire point of the article is "this is how you should view the game."
|
On November 16 2013 13:56 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2013 12:20 Agh wrote:
"Play for fun/It's just a game" type arguments really annoy me. If somebody is passionate about something you are basically demeaning it by saying that. As long as somebody doesn't have an ego about playing and is respectful then just leave it at that.
As for more on topic you should always play to win in a competitive setting (Qualifier/Tournament/etc). Regarding ladder, something I used to tell students I gave lessons to was if you think somebody is better than you, play to 'win' (ie. do whatever you think will give you the absolute best chance of winning), once you have beaten them, then play to improve. It's in response to statements in the article such as "When laddering, literally (and I mean this figuratively) your only thought should be improving, not about winning or losing." The responses are completely valid, because the entire point of the article is "this is how you should view the game."
Given this is in a "SC2 strategy" forum, I don't think the idea of "this is how you should approach the game if you want to improve" taking precedence is unwarranted.
If you just want to play to have fun, then by all means do so. But then... why are you in a SC2 strategy forum, taking issue with those who wish to improve?
And, as mentioned, improving != not having fun for all people.
|
On November 16 2013 16:23 B-rye88 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2013 13:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 16 2013 12:20 Agh wrote:
"Play for fun/It's just a game" type arguments really annoy me. If somebody is passionate about something you are basically demeaning it by saying that. As long as somebody doesn't have an ego about playing and is respectful then just leave it at that.
As for more on topic you should always play to win in a competitive setting (Qualifier/Tournament/etc). Regarding ladder, something I used to tell students I gave lessons to was if you think somebody is better than you, play to 'win' (ie. do whatever you think will give you the absolute best chance of winning), once you have beaten them, then play to improve. It's in response to statements in the article such as "When laddering, literally (and I mean this figuratively) your only thought should be improving, not about winning or losing." The responses are completely valid, because the entire point of the article is "this is how you should view the game." Given this is in a "SC2 strategy" forum, I don't think the idea of "this is how you should approach the game if you want to improve" taking precedence is unwarranted. If you just want to play to have fun, then by all means do so. But then... why are you in a SC2 strategy forum, taking issue with those who wish to improve? And, as mentioned, improving != not having fun for all people.
I'd say your comment is fairly irrelevant. People who just play for shits and giggles still like to view strategies. In fact, they are probably the people most likely to. Why? Because they play as many different playstyles as possible without any care for mastering any one in particular. I play random to get the most out of the matchups. On top of that, I try to use a different strategy every few months to avoid making the game stale. On top of that, I alternate each season telling my race (get more macro style games) vs not telling my race (get more allin style games) just to vary the game up further.
I have no issue with people who want to improve. However, to think the SC2 Strategy section only caters to those who want to improve is silly. At the same time, sending the message to those who want to improve that the only thing they should be doing is acting like a mechanical robot is silly. People take this game far too serious, and it's annoying to have to read "YOU F* &#ING C#(KSUCKER" all the time. Which lately, has been over 50% of the time. Because people rage after taking the game so seriously.
I'd say there's a fairly significant correlation between those who rage and take this game very seriously.
|
United States4883 Posts
On November 17 2013 02:56 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2013 16:23 B-rye88 wrote:On November 16 2013 13:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 16 2013 12:20 Agh wrote:
"Play for fun/It's just a game" type arguments really annoy me. If somebody is passionate about something you are basically demeaning it by saying that. As long as somebody doesn't have an ego about playing and is respectful then just leave it at that.
As for more on topic you should always play to win in a competitive setting (Qualifier/Tournament/etc). Regarding ladder, something I used to tell students I gave lessons to was if you think somebody is better than you, play to 'win' (ie. do whatever you think will give you the absolute best chance of winning), once you have beaten them, then play to improve. It's in response to statements in the article such as "When laddering, literally (and I mean this figuratively) your only thought should be improving, not about winning or losing." The responses are completely valid, because the entire point of the article is "this is how you should view the game." Given this is in a "SC2 strategy" forum, I don't think the idea of "this is how you should approach the game if you want to improve" taking precedence is unwarranted. If you just want to play to have fun, then by all means do so. But then... why are you in a SC2 strategy forum, taking issue with those who wish to improve? And, as mentioned, improving != not having fun for all people. I'd say your comment is fairly irrelevant. People who just play for shits and giggles still like to view strategies. In fact, they are probably the people most likely to. Why? Because they play as many different playstyles as possible without any care for mastering any one in particular. I play random to get the most out of the matchups. On top of that, I try to use a different strategy every few months to avoid making the game stale. On top of that, I alternate each season telling my race (get more macro style games) vs not telling my race (get more allin style games) just to vary the game up further. I have no issue with people who want to improve. However, to think the SC2 Strategy section only caters to those who want to improve is silly. At the same time, sending the message to those who want to improve that the only thing they should be doing is acting like a mechanical robot is silly. People take this game far too serious, and it's annoying to have to read "YOU F* &#ING C#(KSUCKER" all the time. Which lately, has been over 50% of the time. Because people rage after taking the game so seriously. I'd say there's a fairly significant correlation between those who rage and take this game very seriously.
I honestly think this whole argument is irrelevant. As I said before, I think everyone who plays SC2 does so because they actually think it's fun to some degree. My post here was not to say that everyone should either be in a) a mindset to win or b) a mindset to improve and those are the only choices; I was explaining the difference between the two and how people often get them confused.
If your goal is to improve, you should be focused on improving. However, if your goal is to just play the game because you enjoy it and hopefully get better, that's fine. I've spent a lot of time "practicing" in several fields, and I understand the difference between someone who really wants to improve no matter what vs. someone who enjoys playing but doesn't have any serious aspirations. I know which practice techniques work and which don't. I don't insist that everyone improves my way, but I guarantee that anyone who follows the guidelines I lay out WILL get better. Manners are a completely different topic altogether and have nothing to do with a practice mindset vs. a "playing for fun" mindset (although, they're probably more closely related to people who have the improper mindset of taking ladder seriously and "playing to win" in a training ground).
So, all in all, if I've offended anyone or made someone think that I've said "DONT ENJOY THE GAME PLAY LIKE A ROBOT", I apologize. Like Teo said, first and foremost, this is a game played for enjoyment. This is just an exposition of the difference between "playing to win" vs. "playing to improve", as the title suggests.
|
Papua New Guinea1059 Posts
|
I think the right conclusion you should have (you, OP) is to reflect on what you believe is important to play for, and to do just that. Not necessarily "play to improve", "play for fun" and whatnot. Pick your own reason and don't get mad if the rest doesn't come with it (for example, don't get mad if you don't win if you play mainly for funsies).
You can very well play to piss off people on ladder, that's fine by me, as long as it's fine by you :D
|
These concepts of playing to improve are starting to finally sink in for me. I am now paying much, much more attention to my thought process before, during, and after each game. The problem is that poor lines of thinking have become habitual and old habits die hard e.g I lost in a TvT the other night when I truly thought I was ahead and should have won the game... Subsequently I go on to queue for my next match thinking this thought "Dammit guy was probably high diamond that was such bullshit..." .
Now, because I have been practicing 'mindfulness' a concept I learned at university, I caught this line of thinking and realized how bad and irresponsible it was to be ignorant of the previous loss. So I jumped out of queue and sat there for a few minutes just going over the game in my head before looking at the replay. "Surely I was ahead, I'm pretty sure I threw that game away somehow..."
So I found out I really did outplay that guy in the early game for a significant economic lead however he sieged up outside the cliffs near my main and out of view of my natural and elevatored units up. My loss occurred because I made a very bad attempt to break the siege, lost my army and eventually lost the game. I also failed to scout and have map control so I could prevent this siege from even getting there.
So two errors occured, everything else was on point: a tactical error breaking a siege and failing to scout and have map presence. Now if I did that I would have substantiated my lead into a 3 base push for the win.
|
I dont understand this mentality of playing for fun, and not caring about outcome of games or playing for just personal improvement. Thats not why i watch sports nor do i play tennis/football etc. I love competition and thats why i love playing this game. Winning isnt the point, ability to compete with someone of similar skill level or better is what is fun. Bottom of bronze or top 5 gm, that woulnd change.
|
In that post where I mention 15+ games vs a style and in reply to that post about those that play less:
Simply look back at games and styles that you have encountered enough to have a good data set vs. Maybe instead of two base muta in TvZ that becomes 3 hatch double evolution chamber bling ling into 3 base 4 hatch muta ling bling. Take time to adjust you play when you have enough data to do intelligently and rely on mechanical precision till you have the needed data to make smart adjustments.
Just don't get caught practicing fear based freestyle reactions. Practice logical game plans and adjust them in the presence of large amounts of data instead of small single examples or on the fly.
|
Yeah I agree with Terran1234 that having "fun" with SC for me is about attempting to win the game. I've played many team games and the matches that I remember from the past most vividly are the ones where my team was trying to really win and that's what made them so fun to play/ponder over. Its like when you go into a ladder match and your opponent is obviously drunk etc. and you can just tell that there not really trying at all to win, makes it not quite so fun for me when that happens. The competitive side of the game is what is fun in my opinion, but my version of fun doesn't overrule any other persons idea so...it is what it is. lol
|
hi im in bronze 5 and my favorite champ is annie. whenever i play i play to improve because improving is the way pros play and pros earn money while playing so if i was a pro id earn money and play instead of just playing
hope i could help
sry for my bad english...
User was banned for this post.
|
On November 17 2013 11:56 crispydunks wrote:
hi im in bronze 5 and my favorite champ is annie. whenever i play i play to improve because improving is the way pros play and pros earn money while playing so if i was a pro id earn money and play instead of just playing
hope i could help
sry for my bad english...
this acc wil be shortlived i fear 
|
On November 17 2013 11:57 crispydunks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2013 11:56 crispydunks wrote:
hi im in bronze 5 and my favorite champ is annie. whenever i play i play to improve because improving is the way pros play and pros earn money while playing so if i was a pro id earn money and play instead of just playing
hope i could help
sry for my bad english... this acc wil be shortlived i fear
yolo
|
Needed this thanks a lot
|
playing to win lets you naturally improve, at least if you mix it up
|
ranked = play to win
unranked = play to improve
"having fun is the most important part - winning happens to be more fun"
|
I think people should play however they want to. So long as it's within the rules of the game, what's the problem?
But I disagree with the statement that "It's quite clear that Jaedong is a superior player mechanically and perhaps even strategically". No doubt they're on a similar level, but it's not at all clear that Jeadong is superior, in fact I would argue s0s is superior in both respects. Just because a player uses a "cheesy" build successfully, doesn't mean he has bad mechanics.
|
Canada8157 Posts
On November 20 2013 08:33 BuddhaMonk wrote:
I think people should play however they want to. So long as it's within the rules of the game, what's the problem?
But I disagree with the statement that "It's quite clear that Jaedong is a superior player mechanically and perhaps even strategically". No doubt they're on a similar level, but it's not at all clear that Jeadong is superior, in fact I would argue s0s is superior in both respects. Just because a player uses a "cheesy" build successfully, doesn't mean he has bad mechanics.
I do think that JD is the better player mechanically, but sOs was better strategically. Of course doing cheesy builds doesn't correlate with your mechanics, those are separate things. In the end sOs was able to throw JD off enough that mechanics didn't matter.
|
United States4883 Posts
On November 20 2013 08:33 BuddhaMonk wrote:
I think people should play however they want to. So long as it's within the rules of the game, what's the problem?
But I disagree with the statement that "It's quite clear that Jaedong is a superior player mechanically and perhaps even strategically". No doubt they're on a similar level, but it's not at all clear that Jeadong is superior, in fact I would argue s0s is superior in both respects. Just because a player uses a "cheesy" build successfully, doesn't mean he has bad mechanics.
I apologize, this thread is not coming through the way I intended it to. This was merely an exposition of the difference between "playing to win" and "playing to improve" and has nothing to do with how people should play the game. Play for whatever reason you want, I don't care how anyone plays. When someone asks me "I don't know how to improve, what should I do?", I can specifically state "playing to improve" means this kind of mindset and you should do these things to improve your play. If you just want to play for fun and mass hellions for shits and giggles, DO IT! I don't care, I don't even think it's not a learning experience. But when someone asks for help in the forums on how to improve, I'm not going to say "macro better" or "just play a bunch of ladder games and you'll get better" because those results are going to take a long time to come to fruition. Most people would prefer to hear some solid advice on how to improve their gameplay IMMEDIATELY, which is where methodology comes in. Following specific methods and general practice habits will lead to rapid improvement, which is GREAT for those interested in it. Again, if you're not interested in rapid improvement, do whatever the hell you want! It's a game!
As far as Jaedong being mechanically superior:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Jaedong
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/SHy
Jaedong is by far mechanically superior to sOs. I'm not arguing that sOs has bad mechanics (as a kespa player, he has way stronger mechanics than a lot of SC2 heroes like PartinG, Naniwa, or Creator), just that Jaedong is definitely better. And in no way at all is this linked to his "cheese-esque sOs style". sOs won that series using brilliant strategies and mind games to throw Jaedong off; it also happened that he played quite well that day as well.
|
Holy shitballs I completely forgot how dominant JvZ was in BW, with the exception of the VERY end of BW where he became "marginally above average" compared to other top pros.
2006: 11-4
2007: 15-5
2008: 21-4
2009: 52-18
2010: 42-13
141 - 44. 76.2%. Insane. I always remembered him as being just as dominant JvP. Maybe I'm thinking Savior vs P before Bisu crushed him the second time at 54 -18 75%. 109 - 47 is still sick at 69.9% to be fair...
|
On November 20 2013 10:25 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2013 08:33 BuddhaMonk wrote:
I think people should play however they want to. So long as it's within the rules of the game, what's the problem?
But I disagree with the statement that "It's quite clear that Jaedong is a superior player mechanically and perhaps even strategically". No doubt they're on a similar level, but it's not at all clear that Jeadong is superior, in fact I would argue s0s is superior in both respects. Just because a player uses a "cheesy" build successfully, doesn't mean he has bad mechanics. I apologize, this thread is not coming through the way I intended it to. This was merely an exposition of the difference between "playing to win" and "playing to improve" and has nothing to do with how people should play the game. Play for whatever reason you want, I don't care how anyone plays. When someone asks me "I don't know how to improve, what should I do?", I can specifically state "playing to improve" means this kind of mindset and you should do these things to improve your play. If you just want to play for fun and mass hellions for shits and giggles, DO IT! I don't care, I don't even think it's not a learning experience. But when someone asks for help in the forums on how to improve, I'm not going to say "macro better" or "just play a bunch of ladder games and you'll get better" because those results are going to take a long time to come to fruition. Most people would prefer to hear some solid advice on how to improve their gameplay IMMEDIATELY, which is where methodology comes in. Following specific methods and general practice habits will lead to rapid improvement, which is GREAT for those interested in it. Again, if you're not interested in rapid improvement, do whatever the hell you want! It's a game!As far as Jaedong being mechanically superior: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Jaedonghttp://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/SHyJaedong is by far mechanically superior to sOs. I'm not arguing that sOs has bad mechanics (as a kespa player, he has way stronger mechanics than a lot of SC2 heroes like PartinG, Naniwa, or Creator), just that Jaedong is definitely better. And in no way at all is this linked to his "cheese-esque sOs style". sOs won that series using brilliant strategies and mind games to throw Jaedong off; it also happened that he played quite well that day as well.
Fair enough! Nice reply, and yes.. I was going off on a tangent, that was not the point of your post.
|
I look at myself about half a year ago. I had just switched over from SC:BW and my play was horrible. It was borderline bad. I watched many games but I just didn't really understand a lot of it. So I practiced with my friend, a gold-leaguer. I went on a 10-loss streak just to learn how to fend off rushes and do proper wall ins. I then went on a 20-loss streak just to learn how to be aggressive. Then I went on a 50-loss streak just to learn how to get into the mid game. Now I'm currently at a 10-20-loss streak just learning how to close a game. Considering I've probably only won 3 games out of all these losses. I'm still proud that I managed to get somewhere. I'm currently in my sophomore year of high school and I'm currently trying to get good enough that I can join a college team once I'm in college.
I think the most important part of my practice is taking it in steps accepting my losses. I'm currently also working on trying to fend off cannon rushes. How fun.
|
United States4883 Posts
On November 21 2013 15:20 Anonimoose wrote:
I look at myself about half a year ago. I had just switched over from SC:BW and my play was horrible. It was borderline bad. I watched many games but I just didn't really understand a lot of it. So I practiced with my friend, a gold-leaguer. I went on a 10-loss streak just to learn how to fend off rushes and do proper wall ins. I then went on a 20-loss streak just to learn how to be aggressive. Then I went on a 50-loss streak just to learn how to get into the mid game. Now I'm currently at a 10-20-loss streak just learning how to close a game. Considering I've probably only won 3 games out of all these losses. I'm still proud that I managed to get somewhere. I'm currently in my sophomore year of high school and I'm currently trying to get good enough that I can join a college team once I'm in college.
I think the most important part of my practice is taking it in steps accepting my losses. I'm currently also working on trying to fend off cannon rushes. How fun.
Exactly. When you're trying to improve, the most important thing is to not take losses seriously but rather say things like "I felt like there was no way I could attack him at any point in the game, he seemed to defend everything" and then look at the replay and realize there were plenty of opportunities that were just missed. You want to focus on creating a game plan and sticking to one thing until you know it perfectly.
Of course, it's nice to win every once and a while too . If you ever get to a point where you're not enjoying playing, I always suggest playing team games, customs, and offracing for fun until you feel confident enough to go back to practicing.
|
This is a great read! The reason why I absolutely love the SC2 community is that I think we have a relatively large percentage of people that play to improve, as opposed to playing to win. Where else do you find a forum filled with people that enjoy doing the maths behind a game, posting graphs, charts and psychological analyses? I don't think [insert random game] does that nearly as well as TL and SC2. Threads like this, day9 dailies, the excellent strategy writeups by the TL staff make a lot of us that are interested in improvement coming back to this game in particular. As tastosis would say: it is the manliest esport out there.
|
This is an amazing contribution that anybody serious about improving should read.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
