|
I would say there are more openings in starcraft then there are in chess (not less). The reason being, its not about WHAT you make in starcraft, but WHEN you make it, and that adds a ton of options.
I would also say that there are styles in starcraft like their are in chess. Agressive kyrix style zerg, is TOTALY diffrent then passive defensive idra style zerg.
As a chess player I always try to avoid trading pieces with people that arnt as good as me. The reason is simple, more pieces on the board, is a more complicated position. And I am more confidant that I can see farther ahead in a complicated position then they can. As such I only trade down if there is an advantage for doing so (even positionally).
Pawn advantages are great if you can get them, but a good player will NEVER let you get one without a price. You need to be thinking about those checkmates all the time! Longest I have ever had was a mate in 16, but always be thinking about how you can threaten.
And to those that say you cant 6pool in chess, thats what a Fool's Mate and Scholar's Mate are (and yes I get those against new players all the time).
|
On February 05 2011 09:55 ShangMing wrote:Chess is thousands of years old,
Try a couple hundred.
actually chess is around 1500-2000 years old originating from ancient China and India
|
Day[9] = Mark Dvoretsky
Both were very very good players during their active careers but never made it quite to the absolute top. Both ended their active careers to teach the game. Both are arguably the best teachers in the game today.
from wiki:
However, for personal reasons he opted not to remain an active player and instead followed his urge to become a chess trainer. This was something he had tried out and enjoyed while studying at Moscow University and he quickly gained a reputation for transforming serious, hard-working 2200 (Elo) players into grandmasters. Similarly, it was said that established grandmasters could become champions under his tutelage and his student register began to read like a 'who's who' of chess greats. Kasparov, Anand, Topalov, Bareev, Lautier and Van Wely were just a few of the players who benefited from his coaching. Four of his students went on to become Junior World Champions.
.............................................................
One could argue that Day[9] doesn't really do 1-1 coaching, but I'm sure if he would, "he could transform serious, hard-working diamond players into high masters", and who knows, maybe even GSL winners.
|
On February 05 2011 10:51 Klosetmonkey wrote:actually chess is around 1500-2000 years old originating from ancient China and India
That's like saying Starcraft has been around for 17 years because it was derived from Warcraft 2, which was derived from Warcraft 1 (1994) and so on and so forth until the beginning of time... It's not the same game. When we talk about "chess" we're obviously talking about modern chess.
|
No, chess is about 1000-1200 years old. A game much like chess existed before, but had very different rules.
The modern rules of chess emerged like in the 1500 century.
If you need a source just look it up on the internetz.
|
On February 05 2011 11:26 mappiechampion wrote:
A game much like chess existed before, but had very different rules. .
Exactly.. And yes, I can use Wikipedia too.
|
Even if they're both strategy games, Chess is a solved game, and a game of perfect information.
Starcraft is neither.
|
Chess is very far away from being mathematically solved.
|
Interesting. And who would Veselin Topalov be? ;]
|
Blitzer
Australia243 Posts
SC2 hasn't been around long enough to make comparisons to famous chess players. There is no sc2 player that deserves to be compared to Kasparov at this moment. Kasparov was at the top of the chess world for decades, nobody in the korean or foreign scene has dominated enough or for a long enough period to make a comparison worthwhile and it will be a long time before they get the chance to. Personally i wouldn't be surprised if about half of the current 'top' s class players drift away by the end of the year.
As for chess comparisons to sc in general, yeah its an ok comparison in terms of strategic and tactical nous required for both games. But sc being real time changes everything. Also chess is far more figured out and has more fixed and concrete limitations as to the ways pieces can move which really changes everything. Chess is a great game though, I was playing it a lot early last year although i've recently got sick of it and haven't really played much in the last half year.
|
I have to argue with Idra as Kasparov as well. I think Idra could be more likened to Fischer for his extreme study of the game along with his moody nature.
|
On February 05 2011 09:35 nihoh wrote:
Lame... Comparing Kasparov to Idra... Idra would be some Down Syndrome, Aspergers kid who's memorised 1000 Chess openings and hence 'knows" the game. (Which is equivalent to the way he approaches SC2).
I find that really offensive.
|
Alexander Alekhine would be qxc. Both have/had aggressive playstyles. If we were to go through BW and SCII for chess players, Flash is Karpov, and iloveoov is Tigran Petrosian. Cant think of a good Kasparov in terms of playstyle.. Probably sAviOr.
There is no Bobby Fischer. Never will be, not in chess and not in Starcraft. He was insanely dominant, crushing a Russian chess team that was made up of a great deal of the best GMs of all time; Spassky, Karpov, Petrosian and Tal. When he beat Spassky (number 2 player in the world, ELO wise) in 71, his rating SANK. Who can you think of who has been that good?
Anywyas, chess is a solved game based solely on the memorization of openings. Even higher level play is based on memorization of openings and games played with similar scenarios.
|
On February 05 2011 12:00 Blitzer wrote:
SC2 hasn't been around long enough to make comparisons to famous chess players. There is no sc2 player that deserves to be compared to Kasparov at this moment. Kasparov was at the top of the chess world for decades, nobody in the korean or foreign scene has dominated enough or for a long enough period to make a comparison worthwhile and it will be a long time before they get the chance to.
I agree with this.
Another interesting question is: Can there ever be a Mikhail Tal of SC2? Tal is mostly remembered for his extremely aggressive style involving many (often times unsound) sacrifices. In SC2 that would probably compare to cheesy all ins, that if dealt with properly will lose the game, but if catching the opponent off guard will win it on the spot.
Tal however was praised for this sort of ultra aggro style (and rightfully so), because it produces many - from a chessplayers' point of view - beautiful games. All in cheeses are very rarely, if ever, considered beautiful and players tend not to be praised for them at all.
Maybe players like Liquid.TLO or Root.Kiwikaki could stand up to the Tal comparison just because they use creative styles that not a lot of other people use?.
|
On February 05 2011 11:31 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 05 2011 11:26 mappiechampion wrote:
A game much like chess existed before, but had very different rules. . Exactly.. And yes, I can use Wikipedia too.
No you can't, because actually, even with modern rules it has existed for more than 500 years. In fact the Ruy Lopez has existed for 500 years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_lopez
When you contradict someone in an subject unfamiliar to you be prepared to eat your words.
|
Cheesy chess play is completely null and void after a certain skill threshold, probably around 1300-1400 rating. Probably less. After that, all players play the game "properly".
In starcraft you can get away with doing a very cheesy opening at all levels of play.
Comparing an RTS with a fog of war to a turn based completely visible board is kind of fruitless, tbh.
The fog is really the limiting factor in comparing the two games. If you were to play chess in the dark while only occasionally being able to glance at the opponents openings / pieces, then chess becomes very chaotic and would resemble SC much more.
|
On February 05 2011 13:00 junemermaid wrote:
Cheesy chess play is completely null and void after a certain skill threshold, probably around 1300-1400 rating. Probably less. After that, all players play the game "properly".
Depends on how you define cheesy. If you mean stuff like Fool's Mate for example, then yes, I agree with you. Probably no 1200+ player will fall for that. However gambits such as the Smith-Morra in the sicilian or even hyper aggro two pawn gambits like the Danish Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 cxb2 5.Bxb2), while basically never seen in master play, can be very effective up to the, say, 2200 level. I'm a ~1600 scrub and have beaten 1800-1900 players with it online.
|
Enjoyed your post though I agree some of the comparisons are shaky.
And yeah! Go Pack! 
|
comparing drewbie to kramnik made me cringe.
in general you do have a point though.
|
Edit: Nevermind, just saw my point got posted before.
Anyway, interesting comparisons, although I don't think any SC2 foreigner is dominant enough to compare them to Carlsen/Kasparov. I think Naniwa is more like the Hikaru Nakamura of SC2, somewhat cocky and bad-mannered so none of the other professionals want to admit to how talented he is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
