Do We Want the Game Harder? - Page 17

On January 24 2012 05:54 MooseyFate wrote:



I see what you are saying about new players taking games off of the top players, but that should happen in this game as it is not nearly as "figured out" as BW. No one has seen every strategy yet.
Each new GSL season, some player with a previously underused strategy/style does fairly well by exploiting weaknesses in the current metagame. Once the more experienced players play a couple games against them, their success slows down and eventually they stop winning games.

Top Terran players like MMA and MVP are more likely to lose to a well executed P or Z build than to another T build because they don't know the ins and outs of the opponent's race as well as they know their own. Going after the #1 Terran player with the same forces/builds he already knows like the back of his hand is very difficult. Coming at him from a completely foreign (zing!) perspective makes it easier to get in cheap shots and throw them off their game.
Every player should lose games, even the top players, and a lot of these are losses because of build orders/strategies as much as from mistakes and mis-clicks. The latter will happen less with MMA and MVP, but it still happens.

On topic: I think the game has the right amount of difficulty as it stands. It reminds me of the Capcom fighting games, with sort of an inverted bell curve of ability. When you first pick up the game, you can quickly find simple strats that are relatively easy to execute (1a armies are comparable to button mashing in fighters. Sometimes you just get lucky.)
As you start to learn more about the game and metagame, you slightly alter your build into something more complex, losing some of your concentration because it is now split on managing 3 bases and playing for the long haul, not just 1 base-all-in. I know when I did this in ladder, I started losing a lot more than when I was just 7 RR or 6 Pool.
But, eventually being able to execute more and more complex strategies while holding off the easier to execute attacks from my opponent helped me to climb back up on the bell curve.

At one end you have guys that 6 pooled into Masters. On the other you have guys like MMA/MVP. At some point, the 6-pooler will get lucky and pull off his more easily executed strategy against a much better player and take the better player by surprise. I see nothing wrong with this as it keeps all players 'honest' and makes for better tournaments because some unknown underdog can take at least a couple games off of the Best of the Best. Does this mean the game is "easy"? No. Just like in Chess, some guy with a limited knowledge can be doing things that make so little sense to the Chess Master, confusing them and possibly causing them to make silly mistakes.
It's the human element of competitive games, and it's what makes it entertaining to watch for a lot of people.