Why you shouldnt be playing random on ladder. - Page 12

On August 24 2012 11:35 radscorpion9 wrote:
Honestly it seems like people are being way too harsh. I don't see him saying that you're a bad person for playing random and that you should change because he says so, he's just offering his opinion as to why playing random is bad from a specific perspective...if you disagree with it or explain alternate reasons then he'd probably be fine with it, unless you see him explicitly tell you "No only my reason matters, you're a noob for trying to have fun"...which has never happened

On August 24 2012 11:18 theBlues wrote:
I auto six pool vs random players, I have 2/3 of a chance of doing the correct move, either I win or lose fast, and I can go against a real player to get some real practice.

I play in tournaments and lans in my country and I cant see any benefits of playing against a random player or being one.

On August 24 2012 12:18 Blargh wrote:
Hmm, sort of silly. I do agree that it messes up the "standard" play of the game, but it's a strategy game, if you cannot learn strategies to outplay your opponent despite any disadvantage, then you shouldn't take it competitively. If you don't play competitively, you shouldn't care whether or not you are Grandmaster league or if you're bronze/win or lose. I play the game for the fun of doing fun strategies and dicking around. I'm masterleague, but I don't give two shits whether I lose the game either. I've played a lot of matches.

Even though it gives the random player an advantage, it also makes the game more interesting. I don't completely disagree with you, just only to an extent. I would probably reveal my race if I played random because I like challenges and strategy, not winning.

On August 24 2012 13:09 kill619 wrote:


But if your playing competitively you shouldn't really have to worry about playing at a disadvantage from the beginning of the game for no real reason.

I don't think anyone here is seriously arguing that random shouldn't be in the game or that it isn't fun to play random for the sake of getting to play all the races but it just doesn't seem fair to force someone else into a disadvantage because of a choice someone else made that you have no say in. If anything if one player wants to play random and have his race hidden, both players race should be hidden to each other. That way random players can have their "unique metagame" with out getting an automatic build order advantage vs someone who picks their race.

On August 24 2012 13:15 rd wrote:


You realize the difference in the lack of information vs the lack of practice your opponent has turns the game in a monumental advantage for yourself? Stop with the disadvantage bullshit already. If someone chooses to cheese you and force a metagame you don't want to play you also don't have control over that either. It's such a dumb basis to argue upon against random.

On August 24 2012 13:40 kill619 wrote:


If your laddering against a random player it's safe to assume that their near your skill level at least in most of the match ups in the game so why should their be any artificial advantage/disadvantage for either player, besides random players thinking it's "fun" to play people who aren't prepared for what race their playing? And what does is mean to "force a metagame you don't want to play" by cheesing? I don't think you know what metagame means. Example, 3 cc hellion banshee openers in tvz is very standard in the current metagame. Forcing a protoss player to not get to choose to ffe vs zerg because he doesn't know he's playing a zerg player, putting him at a disadvantage a random player who gets zerg and has the choice of doing their vs protoss build, isn't a metagame. It's creating a disadvantage through something that has nothing to do with either players skill.

On August 24 2012 13:40 kill619 wrote:


If your laddering against a random player it's safe to assume that their near your skill level at least in most of the match ups in the game so why should their be any artificial advantage/disadvantage for either player, besides random players thinking it's "fun" to play people who aren't prepared for what race their playing? And what does is mean to "force a metagame you don't want to play" by cheesing? I don't think you know what metagame means. Example, 3 cc hellion banshee openers in tvz is very standard in the current metagame. Forcing a protoss player to not get to choose to ffe vs zerg because he doesn't know he's playing a zerg player, putting him at a disadvantage a random player who gets zerg and has the choice of doing their vs protoss build, isn't a metagame. It's creating a disadvantage through something that has nothing to do with either players skill.

On August 24 2012 11:01 Divergence wrote:


You should re-read the OP. He wasn't calling Random a "scrub" tactic so your Sirlin article is irrelevant (although it is a good article and very relevant to many aspects of Starcraft).

He was pointing out that randoming causes non-standard situations to arise, making Random not a good way to learn the individual races (for the purpose of race-picking). Playing Random teaches you how to play Random; it doesn't teach you how to play each race in a race-pick situation. OP's attitude is slightly flawed though because he assumes that people play Random in order to learn each race. Some people just want to play Random as a race of it's own, in which case randoming is the best way to play for them.

"In other words, playing to win involves exploring. It involves trying several different approaches in a game to see which you are best at, which other players are best at, and which you think will end up being the most effective in the end.
....
I practiced pretty hard for a tournament in Super Turbo Street Fighter that occurred on August 9th-11th 2001. Before the tournament, I decided to play only Dhalsim and to practice him a lot against whoever I could. I also happen to actually like the game, and I’d sometimes mess around with my “fun characters” of Honda and Ryu, and occasionally with my “professional” character: Bison. Dhalsim was my focus, though.

When the actual tournament came around, I would have never guessed what it all came down to. My Dhalsim did well, and it came time for me to face a well-known Japanese player who plays T-Hawk. T-Hawk is known to be terrible, especially against Dhalsim, but this was a prime example of a player who could work magic with a “sucky” character. After one game, my Dhalsim was utterly destroyed, and I needed a change of plans. I figured that my “casual play” Honda would do well, since I could sit and do nothing the entire game and be safe from T-Hawk. If he ever got near, I could head-butt and knock him away, then sit and do nothing. (See my article on The Art of War: The Sheathed Sword.) Anyway, my performance, a true exhibition of stubbornness and boringness in tournament play, paid off. I defeated the Japanese player in an utterly ridiculous character matchup that no one would ever predict actually happening in a tournament. I went on to lose another ridiculous character matchup against a different Japanese player, but that’s another story.

The unlikely moral here is that playing to win is often counter-productive. Those who love the game and play to play will uncover the unusual nuances that might be important in a tournament. Those nuances might never be important, but the “play to play” player doesn’t care. It’s all for fun, and he’s happy to accumulate whatever knowledge he can. The “play to win” player might lock himself into perfecting certain tactics/strategies/character that will eventually be obsolete, as hard as that will be to believe at the moment. Meanwhile, the player who is able to take a step back and mess around will either discover new mountains to climb, or at least take a stab at climbing some other known mountains. The joke’s on you when his mountain turns out to be 10 times higher than yours."