|
As with many strategy games, a lot of the thinking can be done for you, but the game is designed to ultimately become a battle of the wits. Once combatants' mechanics are perfected, a game of Starcraft is a clash of mental tenacity, agility, and perspicacity.
As many have said, though, for the vast majority of players with non-perfect mechanics, brilliance is not a prerequisite to ladder success.
To Sanasante: While NaDa did wield a famous 400 apm and cutting edge mechanics, I think his unquestionable game understanding, in-game quick thinking, and innovation in actually leveraging his mechanics-oriented style warrant him a place among any list of brilliant BW players. His role in pioneering mechanically demanding strategies has left an indelible mark on BW's history.
|
You don't have to be smart to play SC2, just look at BigT.
In order to do well you have to be smart though.
|
You don't have to be smart to be top shape, but it will definetly help.
Actually many korean media featured about how progamer's brain is different from others, and they did have some special features, like better prediction and judgement calling.
|
To be answered we gotta consider the semantic question what does it mean to be smart. To answer that we gotta tackle the metaphysical and epistemic issues surrounding intelligence(smartness) and/or knowledge.
Long story short: the question is too vague to lead to a coherent discussion of possible answers.
This said, my 2 cents is that you don't *have* to be smart but it is certainly a huge asset: something akin smartness is to pro starcraft like tallness is to pro basketball.
|
You have to be smart enough to learn how to learn.
|
All good players are starcraft smart (at least iffy smart irl), but all smart people irl are not all good at this game.
|
Naniwa dropped out of school to play games, so no.
|
"Once combatants' mechanics are perfected"
This is never truly the case. Show me a player that has perfect micro/macro/multitask. On the ground level players may seem to have a perfect ability in one or more of these categories however in general practice this never truly be the case.
While macro and multitasking abilities can technically be completely mastered, micro cannot. There are too many variables and too many positions in which a player can prepare for.
An intelligent or "Smart" player only true key advantage is that he has an ability to think quickly on his feet and react in the best manner he can. Following my train of logic earlier while macro/multitasking abilities can be "technically perfect" or at least by our judge of standard damn close, the more intelligent player can think ahead to create a situation that might be favorable for himself/herself.
While in practice and over time these various seemingly random situations depart bits of information which we remember. Through repetition we can react mentally faster but it does not change the fact it is impossible to experience all the possible situations a player can find himself in. It is due to our ability to simplify these situations into responses that we come up with strategies that say "If my opponent does this... then I must do this".
If you want to take this a step further then you can understand why players become tunnel visioned into play styles.
|
On September 21 2010 09:43 mOnion wrote:
No. Example?
Gositerran.
I see what you did there.
Edit: Oh just kidding. I thought you said, "go see terran."
|
I think at the beginning of any game, when players mechanics aren't very strong relative to what they will be in a few years, players who are smarter and more tactically inclined will always dominate. In Brood War, players like Grrrr... and Boxer dominated early because they were innovative. In the past few years,all levels of Brood War have been dominated by boring Macrobots, except for the very highest level, Like FlaSh and Jaedong right now. Those two can beat everyone else just by better mechanics, but when they play each other, that's where innovation happens.
|
On September 21 2010 09:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
Machine.
|
On September 21 2010 11:19 Karliath wrote:I see what you did there. Edit: Oh just kidding. I thought you said, "go see terran."
lol u sc2 kids are cute ^_^
|
On September 21 2010 11:27 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 11:19 Karliath wrote:On September 21 2010 09:43 mOnion wrote:
No. Example?
Gositerran. I see what you did there. Edit: Oh just kidding. I thought you said, "go see terran." lol u sc2 kids are cute ^_^
Does he even play sc2 -.-
|
On September 21 2010 11:28 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 11:27 mOnion wrote:On September 21 2010 11:19 Karliath wrote:On September 21 2010 09:43 mOnion wrote:
No. Example?
Gositerran. I see what you did there. Edit: Oh just kidding. I thought you said, "go see terran." lol u sc2 kids are cute ^_^ Does he even play sc2 -.-
idunno i just guess x.x
|
I'm sorry but to all those who say you need to be intelligent to play the game, I counter by saying you're playing it wrong. There has already been studies in Korea where it shows that casual SC:BW players use logic when making decisions. But the logic is usually pretty simple (for example, my opponent is massing marines? I'll get banelings). Pros on the other hand, do not have time to think. They rely on instincts that have been ingrained in their mind from years of practice.
|
no you absolutely do not have to be smart to play starcraft, even at the professional level. with SC2 how it is now it is rewarding smart players because people don't know what to do in situations and nothing is really standard yet. Once the game is more figured out it will not require any real intelligence to play at even the very highest levels. Is it an advantage? Of course. But it is far from necessary, the game, once it is more solved, is mostly a mechanics challenge.
On the other hand there are different types of intelligence. If you mean critical thinking and problem solving skills which is how most people would interpret the question I would say no like above. However discipline is considered a type of intelligence, handling pressure, multitasking, etc. These are traits that fall under some definitions of intelligence and are very much required.
|
You have to smart and fast. You can't be one without the other and be really good. You have to memorize builds, react properly, have game sense, and make quick decisions and do this really fast
|
It is a matter of what stage you are at.
Take MMA and boxing.
Fitness and constant repetition will make you excellent at executing techniques. Yet, when you get at the upper tier of competition, you will face other excellent fitness and hard work competitors. At this point, two finely tuned athletes require more than just technique execution to defeat the other. They need strategy, tactics, and timing in their decision making. At this point, the smartest competitor will win.
So constant repetition will allow you to master the basics. You will go very far with that type of "hard-work" and strong worth ethic mentality, leaving many in the way. At the top, everybody will have this and it will not be enough. It is thus that once you have perfected the mechanical part, you will be able to enter the elite group of strategists and tacticians of this game.
|
On September 21 2010 11:29 mOnion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 11:28 Tabbris wrote:On September 21 2010 11:27 mOnion wrote:On September 21 2010 11:19 Karliath wrote:On September 21 2010 09:43 mOnion wrote:
No. Example?
Gositerran. I see what you did there. Edit: Oh just kidding. I thought you said, "go see terran." lol u sc2 kids are cute ^_^ Does he even play sc2 -.- idunno i just guess x.x
hehe yes I do.
|
Depends how you define "smart." Everyone's view on it is different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
