|
On July 26 2010 07:22 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 07:21 iEchoic wrote:
Of course not, I'm just saying that people get mislead when they see people saying they can play SC2 10 hours a day and go to college and get good grades. This may not be possible based on their degree.
I think we agree now.
Well, yes. But its not a given that you can't manage an education along with 10-12 hours of SC2 per day. For some people, perhaps they will even choose their degree to enable that (hint: pick philosophy). My point was that the idiot I initially quoted was vastly overgeneralizing on at least the two points I quoted (and really, on every point).
Now that we've gotten that out of the way:
Some people who have commitments like a difficult degree or a job are deterred from competing at SC2 because they cannot match the time commitments of those who do not have these real-life timesinks. Some of the people turned away may be very naturally talented. Do you think this hurts SC2's level of competition?
|
On July 26 2010 07:05 vindKtiv wrote:
I agree. For every one player who makes it, maybe four failed and crashed their life horribly. It just isn't something worth gambling for, not even if you know it is what you really, really want.
Honestly, if you want to be the next Flash, then you should be going 12+ hours a day.
I dont believe practicing that much will help at all. I barely played SC 1, but I played alot of games growing up. I had no problems reaching platinum/diamond after a few games while people I know would use many months. So first of all natural talent is most important.
Pro's dont play soccer 12 hours a day for a reason. Dont think chess players would play all day either. The brain can only improve so much per day or something like that. Remeber that regular breaks are important. Enough sleep helps alot and exercise is good for you to stay concentrated.
Last of all: Dont forget school/friends etc.. When you get tired of SC 2, then it is good to have somthing else.
|
You are going about this the wrong way.
Every player is different and even then many players will peak out at their own leisure. Everyone has limits.
Sure, mass gaming helps, but that doesn't mean everyone who does will become a top player. There is no finite answer. There are many of us out there that are good and play for hours, but that doesn't mean we'll continue to grow or even reach the success of many of these guys. It takes a lot of commitment, hard work and efficient use of training time, i.e. good practice partners. Once again, the idea of you looking for some kind of ridiculous number of hours per day to play to become a top player tells me you are going about this the wrong way. Perhaps you should come up with some sort of structure and then you'll get a good idea of how many hours a day it will take you to get good. Even then, like I said before some guys will never improve beyond a certain point. In some cases, you would have to go back to the drawing board and relearn everything to even think about going beyond that certain point.
There is mass gaming for the sake of mass gaming and then there is using your practice time efficiently while mass gaming.
|
Let me say that practice isn't even half the battle. Coming into sc2 i could not play more then an hour or more a day... and sometimes would only play 2-3 games a day. Yet during the end of phase 2. I could still beat top players and take maps in north america. It's not all about practice and execution. At the moment there are so many strategies and things you can take advantage of. I was still a top diamond player with atleast a 70% win ratio without much practice. My friend whom I taught was also very good.
Having a good mindset is all you need. As long as you enjoy playing ALOT and dont get bored easily. You already have a leg up on every talented prick there is : )
Don't get into 1 strategy syndrome. Look at the weaknesses and strengths of the strategies you do. Constantly think about what if i do this and that and this. and what u can get away with due to proper scouting.
If you ever want to copy a strategy from a pro. Take the unit composition and the opening. Not the mid game and the late game. Those two periods are very subjective and usually get affected by scouting. You cant take it at face value.
|
On July 26 2010 07:34 StarStruck wrote:
You are going about this the wrong way.
Every player is different and even then many players will peak out at their own leisure. Everyone has limits.
Sure, mass gaming helps, but that doesn't mean everyone who does will become a top player. There is no finite answer. There are many of us out there that are good and play for hours, but that doesn't mean we'll continue to grow or even reach the success of many of these guys. It takes a lot of commitment, hard work and efficient use of training time, i.e. good practice partners. Once again, the idea of you looking for some kind of ridiculous number of hours per day to play to become a top player tells me you are going about this the wrong way. Perhaps you should come up with some sort of structure and then you'll get a good idea of how many hours a day it will take you to get good. Even then, like I said before some guys will never improve beyond a certain point. In some cases, you would have to go back to the drawing board and relearn everything to even think about going beyond that certain point.
There is mass gaming for the sake of mass gaming and then there is using your practice time efficiently while mass gaming.
No, there isn't any such thing as a point where a person can no longer improve.. Theres only so much you can do in an RTS. and there is also human error. Complete noobs beat pros. It happens. figuring out why is just another learning process you go through.
|
You should create a poll.
I think I'll play 4 hours a day on average or maybe more. I'm not sure.
|
On July 26 2010 07:25 iEchoic wrote:
Now that we've gotten that out of the way:
Some people who have commitments like a difficult degree or a job are deterred from competing at SC2 because they cannot match the time commitments of those who do not have these real-life timesinks. Some of the people turned away may be very naturally talented. Do you think this hurts SC2's level of competition?
It quite obviously does - it cuts the population of players who are truly competing for the #1 spot, thus cutting the potential for innovation and evolution within that population.
That said, its a cost that must be borne. Any game that is sufficiently engaging so as to draw in a competitive population is going to have skills that require practice, and a game with a low skill cap (in which lower time commitments are at less of a disadvantage) will rapidly frustrate the most serious competitors.
You can either have a good competitive game, which fucks over people who dont have the time to compete in it, or you can have a bad competitive game, which lets people compete with less time commitment but pisses everyone off.
|
On July 26 2010 07:12 Two wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 07:10 iEchoic wrote:On July 26 2010 07:10 Two wrote:On July 26 2010 07:06 Sabresandiego wrote:On July 26 2010 07:01 Two wrote:On July 26 2010 06:45 Sabresandiego wrote:
You cant convince nerds to stop gaming 8 hours a day just like you cant convince fat people to stop eating all day (trust me I have tried). The bottom line is this: Excessive Gaming has the following negative effects on most people.
-Low productivity
-Poor Social Life
-Poor Health
-Ugly from lack of exercize and sun
-No girlfriend
-No self esteem
-No job, bad grades
However if you dont value any of the above things than feel free to game all day long every day. Its the same with fat people. If they would rather eat whatever they want and eat all the time, rather than look good and have good health it is the choice they made. When they are in the hospital with heart disease 20 years later, they can only blame themselves. As for the gamer, when you are 40-50 and broke with no wife or gf and no longer a progamer you have only yourself to thank. I'm pretty sure this is all wrong. I'm 19 and have been playing Blizzard games since 98. I do play competatively and it hasn't changed my life in any way, if anything it's made my life better. If you let the game become your reality, it might change you. I have a girlfriend, I get straight A's in my Univeristy classes, I'm tan, I have an above average ripped body. All of what you said I have to disagree on. I plan on playing starcraft 4-6 hours a day of solid competative play. -High productivity -Active social life (Starcraft community and real life) -Great Health (Eating right, Working out, Staying away from parties [NOT KILLING MY LIVER]) -Sexy from lots of exercize and sun ;D -Awesome girlfriend -High self esteem -Good job, Good grades Now what you posted might of been describing you, but not most of us here imo. Try not being a jerk, it's not nice =] What you just said to me is that you don't play in excess, and are therefore not a victim of the problems I listed for people who DO play in excess. Try playing the game 12 hours a day 6-7 days a week instead of the 4-6 you do and you will see how real my list truly is. 12 hours a day is for a pro gamer... someone who's life is dedicated to the game, not your average TeamLiquid member. Quoting the original post: "...To be a top of the line SC2 Pro Gamer ...." Quoting the original post: "How many SC2 hours/day is the most efficient?"
The topic is called "How many SC2 hours/day is the most efficient?" and the poster said, "To be a top of the line SC2 Pro Gamer, I'm on the fence what number is the "sweet spot" for me, or people in general." That means the poster wants to know how many hours he should practice per day to become a SC2 pro-gamer. So, your measly 4-6 hours of practice per day is invalid to this topic. Also, it's too early to say how many hours someone needs to become a SC2 pro-gamer since this game is not even out! Moreover, people in general do not have right ideas on how to become a SC2 pro-gamer yet.
|
I think 5 hours a day is more than enough at, if you spend it all actively trying to get better, and you don't fall into any progressional trapholes as you're improving.
|
On July 25 2010 15:15 balistix wrote:
i remember day9 saying how when he practiced for some tournament in 2007, he woke up at 10 am and played until 3 am everyday and took breaks for lunch and dinner and stuff, and that's what i plan to do more or less
Sounds like a nice life...
But back to the original poster... Everyone will be different. If you don't have the skill set that you need to become a real pro then you will of course more time and then it comes down to work ethic compared to skill... kinda like idrA
I don't think you can really put a set time on how many hours you should play as then this game of Starcraft is becoming more then just a game and that becomes unhealthy.
|
I say.. play as much as you can.. I wasn't a SC/WC player and have improved what I would consider really fast just by being exposed to so many different things by just playing a lot.... Its impossible to lose to the same thing over and over again if your at least trying to figure out why you lost in the first place.. Pretty much every hour during phase 2 of the beta it was obvious to me that I was better than I was the previous hour.. even while the beta is down I am better than I was from watching replays and trying to understand why people do what they do in the situations they are in..
|
On July 26 2010 07:45 kzn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 07:25 iEchoic wrote:
Now that we've gotten that out of the way:
Some people who have commitments like a difficult degree or a job are deterred from competing at SC2 because they cannot match the time commitments of those who do not have these real-life timesinks. Some of the people turned away may be very naturally talented. Do you think this hurts SC2's level of competition? You can either have a good competitive game, which fucks over people who dont have the time to compete in it, or you can have a bad competitive game, which lets people compete with less time commitment but pisses everyone off.
edit: not necessarily to you, but to anyone who wants to read a big wall of text:
I think it's possible to have a low-time-commitment game that still has a high skill cap. For instance, think about an IQ test. Now, an IQ test isn't competitive, but you could make it so by just comparing the numbers people get and determining a winner. Just bear with me for a second.
You can't really 'practice' for an IQ test. A smart person is going to beat an average-intelligence person even if they practice 12 hours a day. It's a mental process, and mental processes don't develop the same way physical ones do (by repetition & practice). However, an IQ test still has a huge skill gap.
What if, theoretically, SC2 didn't take any mechanics? What if all the units just did whatever your mind wanted them to? Let's say we're 30 years in the future and we have a brain-computer interface. Similar to dribbling a ball - when you dribble, you don't think about pushing the ball up and down. Your brain devises a strategy and dribbling automatically happens. If you wanted reaper harass to happen while in another battle, you'd decide so and it would happen subconsciously.
This is pretty similar to a competitive IQ test (although not directly testing IQ). By taking out the repetitive, muscle-memory mechanics, we've greatly reduced the amount of time needed to compete and have created a competitive game that has a high skill ceiling but a lower amount of practice required.
Before someone responds "this is stupid, we don't have brain-computer interfaces and you're just bullshitting about unrealistic garbage", we're already approaching games like this. RTS games are beginning to reduce mechanics and improve unit AI. SC1 -> SC2 is a step down this path. SC2 -> SC3 will be a step further.
I played an RTS a while back with very, very simple mechanics. APM wasn't really a big deal, and you could do about 60 APM and have enough actions to do everything you need to. However, there was still a large skill gap. Why? Because the entire defining thing between players became strategy. It was an entirely strategic game. It became similar to Chess or a competitive IQ test.
This is why I'm one of the few people on here who think that making micro easier and reducing reliance on APM is actually a good thing. We're going to be seeing games like this turn into strategic battles of wit instead of representations of mechanical practice.
//I can't wait for SC2 to come out so I can play the game instead of philosophizing on TL
|
On July 26 2010 07:52 Narayan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 15:15 balistix wrote:
i remember day9 saying how when he practiced for some tournament in 2007, he woke up at 10 am and played until 3 am everyday and took breaks for lunch and dinner and stuff, and that's what i plan to do more or less Sounds like a nice life... But back to the original poster... Everyone will be different. If you don't have the skill set that you need to become a real pro then you will of course more time and then it comes down to work ethic compared to skill... kinda like idrA I don't think you can really put a set time on how many hours you should play as then this game of Starcraft is becoming more then just a game and that becomes unhealthy.
When someone becomes a real pro at a game like StarCraft, then to that person, StarCraft is more than just a game; it becomes a full-time job with uncertain financial income in the future. And number of hours of practice has nothing to do with a game becoming more than just a game; becoming a pro at a game does matter with a game becoming more than just a game.
|
On July 26 2010 07:58 iEchoic wrote:
This is why I'm one of the few people on here who think that making micro easier and reducing reliance on APM is actually a good thing. We're going to be seeing games like this turn into strategic battles of wit instead of representations of mechanical practice.
//I can't wait for SC2 to come out so I can play the game instead of philosophizing on TL
I agree completely. I wrote a massive wall of text on the continuum between execution skills and strategy skills in competitive games.
At the end of the day its a matter of opinion. Some people prefer to have a game where micro is hugely important (and thus, by corollary, strategy is less important) and others prefer the opposite. There is no real answer to which is "better".
|
making micro easier and reducing reliance on APM is actually a good thing. We're going to be seeing games like this turn into strategic battles of wit instead of representations of mechanical practice.
Too bad observing mechanical dominance is easier then observing mental dominance and this negative dichotomy impacts the watchability and thus the design emphasis and decision making.
|
On July 26 2010 07:59 ProHellZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 07:52 Narayan wrote:On July 25 2010 15:15 balistix wrote:
i remember day9 saying how when he practiced for some tournament in 2007, he woke up at 10 am and played until 3 am everyday and took breaks for lunch and dinner and stuff, and that's what i plan to do more or less Sounds like a nice life... But back to the original poster... Everyone will be different. If you don't have the skill set that you need to become a real pro then you will of course more time and then it comes down to work ethic compared to skill... kinda like idrA I don't think you can really put a set time on how many hours you should play as then this game of Starcraft is becoming more then just a game and that becomes unhealthy. When someone becomes a real pro at a game like StarCraft, then to that person, StarCraft is more than just a game; it becomes a full-time job with uncertain financial income in the future.
Becoming good enough to make a living off of SC or any game for that matter is pretty much slim to none. But if you are willing to throw that much time towards a game in hopes of meeting your goal I say kudos to you sir! But in a few years when find yourself no farther a head then you did before you started out I hope you take it better then I would.
Just think if you spent 6-8 hours (additional or new) on school or some sort of learnings to further yourself instead of a video game, how much farther in life you would go.
Don't get me wrong I'm a huge SC2 fan and I will spend a fair amount of hours on this game as well but priorities are priorities and I would honestly re-think your train of thought.
|
One thing about IQ scores is that you actually can improve them with practice. Many people think that the mind is unlike the body in that it cannot improve with practice but that is actually not true. Let me give you an example to help understand what I am saying.
Lets say a puny 5' 5" 110lb male wants to be a body builder. His current physical state may be due to genetics, environment (lack of nutrition and exercise), or a combination of both. His response to a change in nutrition and exercise may be very good or poor depending on several factors such as genetics. It is possible that no matter how hard he tries, he will not be able to be a competetive body builder. Its even possible that no matter how hard he tries he still looks puny just because his genetics are so bad. However, the change in lifestyle with good nutrition and exercise will still improve his body over what it was to start with.
Now lets look at a person with a 75 IQ. His current mental state may be due to genetics, environment (lack of nutrition and mentally stimulating environment), or a combination of both. His response to a change in nutrition and mental exercise may be good or poor depending on several factors such as genetics. It is possible that no matter how hard he tries, his IQ will remain lower than he likes due to factors such as genetics. However, his improved nutrition and mental exercises will improve his IQ scores over what they were baseline.
Both mental IQ and physical ability are elastic in that they can change. Generally your mental abilities are far less elastic than your physical abilities, but this does not mean they are inelastic.
|
Huk isn't a good player right now. He win's games, but like everybody else winning games, he's doing it through intelligent all ins and intelligent decision making, neither of which are rewarded by practice.
Personally I think two 4 hr shifts or three 3 hour shifts, with breaks for food and rest, is probably optimal and lets you have a life outside of SC assuming you don't have any other serious commitments.
Tedium isn't an issue, you need to play a game a lot to get better.
|
On July 26 2010 08:13 Sabresandiego wrote:
One thing about IQ scores is that you actually can improve them with practice. Many people think that the mind is unlike the body in that it cannot improve with practice but that is actually not true. Let me give you an example to help understand what I am saying.
Lets say a puny 5' 5" 110lb male wants to be a body builder. His current physical state may be due to genetics, environment (lack of nutrition and exercise), or a combination of both. His response to a change in nutrition and exercise may be very good or poor depending on several factors such as genetics. It is possible that no matter how hard he tries, he will not be able to be a competetive body builder. Its even possible that no matter how hard he tries he still looks puny just because his genetics are so bad. However, the change in lifestyle with good nutrition and exercise will still improve his body over what it was to start with.
Now lets look at a person with a 75 IQ. His current mental state may be due to genetics, environment (lack of nutrition and mentally stimulating environment), or a combination of both. His response to a change in nutrition and mental exercise may be good or poor depending on several factors such as genetics. It is possible that no matter how hard he tries, his IQ will remain lower than he likes due to factors such as genetics. However, his improved nutrition and mental exercises will improve his IQ scores over what they were baseline.
You're right, 'you cannot improve IQ with practice' was a simplification. For the purpose of my argument though, it's true. Most scientists and neurologists believe that IQ is limited by genetic factors and can only be improved within constraints. This is different than practicing things like perfectly microing reapers or quickly building marines and going back to combat, though. Nearly any human being, even monkeys, can be trained to master simple mechanical tasks given enough practice time. IQ cannot be perfected (or even greatly improved) with mass practice.
Most average gamers could get to high diamond playing 12 hours a day, at least. Average-intelligence people can not get 160 IQ by practicing 12 hours a day. So, there is a key difference.
|
On July 26 2010 08:13 Sabresandiego wrote:
Now lets look at a person with a 75 IQ. His current mental state may be due to genetics, environment (lack of nutrition and mentally stimulating environment), or a combination of both. His response to a change in nutrition and mental exercise may be good or poor depending on several factors such as genetics. It is possible that no matter how hard he tries, his IQ will remain lower than he likes due to factors such as genetics. However, his improved nutrition and mental exercises will improve his IQ scores over what they were baseline.
This is only true if the person in question is young. There is no evidence that you can improve your true IQ with practice once you're older than like 18.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
