|
On December 30 2012 08:04 ymir233 wrote:
Can someone explain to me how there is a gap between mechanics and strategy that can't be conceptually connected somehow in an RTS?
As tautological as it may sound, the distinction between a turn-based and a real-time strategy game is that time flows continuously in an RTS, separate from the actions of each player. It would be absurd to simply push a strategy called "make lings" on a Zerg player because it doesn't explain the context, but more importantly, it doesn't explain the timeline - when to do what. The people arguing "more strategy, less mechanics" don't understand that unique strategy in an RTS is dependent on the existence, limits, and differences in mechanics in players. Why do you think phrases like "tight builds" or "this build is ok if the opponent sucks" or "I don't know what the opponent is doing because his timings are weird" exist?
Furthermore, general strategy (that is, beyond the bare-bones timing stuff) is also almost always focused on attacking at a point where the results of the mechanics the opponent has used is weaker than what you've done so far OR attacking at a time where his mechanics will be unequipped to deal with what you're doing. Would anybody even think about doing multiple -pronged drops if just enough ling/bane/infestors were dispatched to each base in time to defend against the drops? Of course not.
I don't necessarily think I support a game that is more mechanically focused, per se, but I would like to point out that we can't just 'magically' have strategy over mechanics. They are inextricably linked.
That is very true.
But, at least for me the concept "more strategy than mechanics" means:
On a line that scales from Chess (hardly any mechanics, a lot of strategy) to Guitar Hero (your strategy is how you hold your hand and where you look with your eyes, from there on it's pure mechanics), I want my RTS closer to Chess than to Guitar Hero. Not saying that I don't like mechanics, I play guitar (the real one  ) and complex mechanics are a lot of fun in their own. But I imagine mechanics being somewhat of a "singleplayer"-thing, whilst with strategy I already have to include what my opponent is doing.
|
Both are needed at all levels of play, However usually good APM and mechanics are used to execute a complex strategy, so having good apm and mechanics without good strategy can sometimes be useless. Though easy standard strategies allow people without exceptional strategies to do good with their mechanics, on the other hand if you combine it with exceptional strategy, you can become an unbeatable player.
|
Chess itself is more similar to Guitar Hero than you might think - at the highest level it is mostly about intensive learning and training your mind to be able to stretch and iterate over as many combinations as possible, and in the end a computer always wins. It's really a game about good memory and mental agility (or processing power). There's almost no improvisation, creativity and freeform decision making going on that decides the outcome except at very low level. Chess is definitely not an example of a "pure" strategy game, if not for its tradition and theme it's questionable whether it even is a strategy game.
Pure strategy games are almost always a very casual experience - such as Civ series or Paradox games. Strategic depth simply isn't enough of a feature to make for a good competitive game in and of itself. A good competitive game needs to be able to conclusively "measure" the opponents and determine which one of them (or which team) is better at a specific skillset - whether implied or explicitly stated - than the other, and ranked accordingly. In most competitive disciplines, strategy is more of a side-feature that can be used to gain an advantage over the opponent, but the outcome of the match is almost always determined by skill.
|
atm apm/multitask doesnt win u alot of game cuz there are too little partsof the game were u can pull ahead by using high apm.
its much more about timings in early-mid game and about the unitmix in lategame, what is mostly about decicing making.
i hope in hots they bring in alot more aspects to get ahead just by having more apm than ur opp.
|
Why can't we just have it all? All of those elements make for interesting gameplay...
|
I know this sounds stupid but, you don't have to be intelligent to be considered a genius in SC2. It honestly depends on how you're playing and weather or not it can benefit from either or (having high apm or being strategic).
|
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted.
|
On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted.
mechanics never were related to how fast your hands could move. your hands only move as fast as your mind. the brain is the limitation to apm. even i could just sit here mashing buttons at 700 apm.
|
On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted.
Gumiho had a massive advantage over Vortix? Polt over Goswser? Ryung over Scarlett? Symbol over Snute? MKP over Stephano? MMA over Xlord? Yoda over Huk?
|
Both are important. I think you can be the best SC2 player ever with just "good" mechanic. Mvp doesn't have outstanding mechanic but his strength lies in his planning,strategies,decision making. That's what defines RTS for me. Oh and mechanic is not somthing you can just carry over from BW to SC2 too. You practice spefic game to be mechanically good at it. Mechanic is muscle memory. It works differently in each game. Bisu is pretty bad in SC2 compare to his fellow progamers and don't say something like "because it's SC2 that made him bad,the game just doesn't let him use his skill." It's not that the game doesn't let him use his skill. He just doesn't have that much of skill in SC2 whether it's mechanic or anything.
|
On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted.
SCII isn't "absorbing" those mechanics. It is already AT the ceiling, so there is no use for them. Pros are not doing more with their units because there is not a good ROI for all the APM investment.
It all comes down to the economic system. The baseline is simple. Thus the game feels too simple. In general because of all the automation actions return less and less and less meaning it is simply not worth it to be fast. Complexity of attack is limited by the simplicity of defense...
The core is difficult to express. Others can say it more eloquently than I can. The issue is that individual actions are so simplistic, and due to automation action cycles so much easier to execute, that complex APM intensive tactics will never be the norm.
Bisu AND Flash are definitely great because of their mechanics...They are both extremely precise which is why they feel "slower" than someone like Jaedong, whose screen seems so hectic due to his style. It is not just about speed, it how players utilize their speed and incorporate it into their style.
|
On December 30 2012 09:44 decado90 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted. Gumiho had a massive advantage over Vortix? Polt over Goswser? Ryung over Scarlett? Symbol over Snute? MKP over Stephano? MMA over Xlord? Yoda over Huk?
I believe the notion that foreigners must have inferior mechanics may not be as true as many think. Just cuz a korean has much higher APM might not mean his useful APM is much higher than the foreigner. So far theres no real reliable way to measure useful APM, its all just opinions.
So if you view your statements with the mindset that the mechanic levels of the foreigners were not that much less than the koreans, then that means the koreans didnt have truly cut and dry "superior mechanics" so they did not have the "massive advantage" i talked about which comes from having "superior mechanics". IMO most of the korean dominance is from superior strategy. As for the TvZ games you listed, I feel thats a matchup that highly needs fixing due to extreme strategy limitations in many areas
|
On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted.
SC2 has vastly diminishing returns on effectiveness of mechanics compared to BW or WC3, period. People who have been arguing that a change raises the skill floor but doesn't affect the skill ceiling are ignorant imho, you can't change one without changing the other. In BW the difference between good macro and bad macro is insane to the extent that top tier foreigners couldn't beat top tier Koreans when they did retarded builds like mass firebats (basically the equivalent of mass reapers in sc2). In Warcraft 3 the difference in micro ability between top tier pros and mid tier pros let them win games with next to no units from huge disadvantages because the few units they did make were simply that cost efficient (idk a SC2 equivalent, maybe making 8 Blink Stalkers beat 20-30+ roaches?). In SC2 those kinds of things don't exist, because 12 roaches will always beat 8 Blink Stalkers with decent control, and it isn't nearly as hard to macro so the vast majority of experienced RTS players can do a '12 min roach max out' with maybe a days worth of practice.
|
Sigh i guess i should rephrase myself. When i said what made bisu/flash great wasnt their mechanics, what i MEANT was I believe at that high level virtually all of the peers of bisu/flash did have similar power when it came to mechanics, so at that ULTRA HIGH LEVEL it was truly strategy and the mechanics of the mind that made champions and victors, not the mechanics of the hands (as they were all roughly equally powerful in that regard)
|
On December 30 2012 09:52 Pursuit_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted. SC2 has vastly diminishing returns on effectiveness of mechanics compared to BW or WC3, period. People who have been arguing that a change raises the skill floor but doesn't affect the skill ceiling are ignorant imho, you can't change one without changing the other. In BW the difference between good macro and bad macro is insane to the extent that top tier foreigners couldn't beat top tier Koreans when they did retarded builds like mass firebats (basically the equivalent of mass reapers in sc2). In Warcraft 3 the difference in micro ability between top tier pros and mid tier pros let them win games with next to no units from huge disadvantages because the few units they did make were simply that cost efficient (idk a SC2 equivalent, maybe making 8 Blink Stalkers beat 20-30+ roaches?). In SC2 those kinds of things don't exist, because 12 roaches will always beat 8 Blink Stalkers with decent control, and it isn't nearly as hard to macro so the vast majority of experienced RTS players can do a '12 min roach max out' with maybe a days worth of practice.
From my experience, WC3 is much less mechanically demanding than SC2 mechanically. Even Grubby said this. The pace of it is so slow and that's what made it micro war game. To this day I have never seen SC2 pro that can keep up and does everything perfectly.
|
For the vast majority of us APM is a complete waste of time. Im 38 years old and my APM is usually 45-50 and yet I made it into SEA Grandmaster and am about to crack NA Master. Im beating guys with APMs in the 200s - why? Superior strategy and meta gameplan.
|
On December 30 2012 09:47 Qwyn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted. SCII isn't "absorbing" those mechanics. It is already AT the ceiling, so there is no use for them. Pros are not doing more with their units because there is not a good ROI for all the APM investment.
Exactly.
If anyone needs an easy proof of this, look up any of Nony, Idra or Sen's games from Brood War, then look at how they play in SC2, then tell me they're investing the same amount of physical effort into them. It's not even close.
It's most apparent in foreigners that were prominent in BW, but even if you look at many of the Kespa guys you're going to notice a lot of mistakes that you wouldn't expect a professional player to be making so consistently (supply blocks, not watching his army, not watching the minimap, not watching the drops etc).
One could say it's because they haven't played enough to get an intuitive grasp of the game to the point where their minds and hands automate a lot of the stuff, but I'd argue that some level of decline in awareness and general skill is fairly obvious in most players that were active and around the same level in both games. And it's not because the sequel is more demanding, it's because people intuitively start phasing out less important things over time.
|
A good rts is fueled by mechanics, and is driven by strategy.
in mathematical terms 80% mechanics(macro/micro) and 20% strategy.
|
strategy is irrelevant, especially at lower levels. on my bronze account i used to do compositions determined by dice roll and roll people with stuff like reaper/ghost/BC, just cause they didn't know what they were doing...
|
On December 30 2012 09:55 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2012 09:52 Pursuit_ wrote:On December 30 2012 09:36 bankobauss wrote:
IMO, "bw>sc2" threads about mechanics are kinda stupid because as weve seen Sc2 already is capable of absorbing 100% of the best top pro's mechanics/APM and still its not close to the ceiling. This means the pros with superior mechanics will always have massive advantages over people with inferior mechanics
im starting to think more and more that what made bisu/flash so great wasnt even their mechanics in BW, it was strategy and their mechanics of their mind not mechanics of their hands. which is why bisu in SC2 isnt completely dominating everyone with his mechanics like some thought, IMO thats because the truth is bisu was never really dominating people with his mechanics in BW it was something else entirely. It was about the mind, not the hands, all his peers had equally powerful hands.
So now in SC2 bisu is at the same equal level playing field with his competition when it comes to mechanics, but when it comes to strategy bisu has not cracked the code yet (and maybe he never will. maybe SC2 just has less strategic depth than BW) and bisu doesnt have the strategy advantage over his peers that he once had in BW so thats why bisu isnt completely destroying as predicted. SC2 has vastly diminishing returns on effectiveness of mechanics compared to BW or WC3, period. People who have been arguing that a change raises the skill floor but doesn't affect the skill ceiling are ignorant imho, you can't change one without changing the other. In BW the difference between good macro and bad macro is insane to the extent that top tier foreigners couldn't beat top tier Koreans when they did retarded builds like mass firebats (basically the equivalent of mass reapers in sc2). In Warcraft 3 the difference in micro ability between top tier pros and mid tier pros let them win games with next to no units from huge disadvantages because the few units they did make were simply that cost efficient (idk a SC2 equivalent, maybe making 8 Blink Stalkers beat 20-30+ roaches?). In SC2 those kinds of things don't exist, because 12 roaches will always beat 8 Blink Stalkers with decent control, and it isn't nearly as hard to macro so the vast majority of experienced RTS players can do a '12 min roach max out' with maybe a days worth of practice. From my experience, WC3 is much less mechanically demanding than SC2 mechanically. Even Grubby said this. The pace of it is so slow and that's what made it micro war game. To this day I have never seen SC2 pro that can keep up and does everything perfectly.
That's the point-- you don't need to.
As aforementioned, even diamond players can do a 12 min roach max. And going from the diamond mechanics that let you max at 12 mins, to Stephano mechanics that get you there at 11:30 simply isn't a very big return rate for the apm investment.
The biggest evidence of this can be seen with protoss. Near perfect macro takes around 100 epm. Some of the slowest pro players play Protoss, and an insanely fast protoss player really doesn't gain that big of an advantage over a slow one like Elfi, Grubby, or hasuobs. PvP is by far the worst matchup in the game in regards to the favored, aka mechanically superior, player's winrate-- look at playhem statistics to support this.
People talk about the Korean-foreign gap closing, but Koreans don't dominate (they are dominating now of course but not nearly like in BW) but the truth is foreigners are only able to compete with Koreans because of how the game is made. Very little reward for perfect macro or micro. Scarlett turtling to 62 infestors gives a much higher rate of return for much less skill than the insane multitasking and unit control Gumiho showed vs Life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
