|
Mexico2170 Posts
How much do you think luck influences a random (arbitrary) ladder game?
Luck is part of life, and thus it has an effect on everything, including ladder games. We have seen how even people like Artosis mention that cheese is very strong in BO1 due to this reason. However we also know that the better you are the more you can reduce the impact of luck in a game (if you have better map control, you can be more prepared for an atack and not be caught out of position, for example).
However it's undeniable that somethings circumstantial things can have a big impact on a game, even if through skill you prepare for it. A perfect example is if you are scouting for a proxy, and miss it by an inch. You did everything right, you scouted, and no ammount of skill would have changed that outcome.
There's also the theory that if the matchamaking is doing it's job correctly and putting you against people of a similar skill level, the result of the match in theory should be random (both players have 50% chance of winning, aka the the result will be random). And if it's random you could say it was luck to win or lose that specific game. So, in a way you could say every ladder game, if the sistem is perfect, should be decided by luck, wouldn't you think?
So I want to know about the player's perception. What percent of games do you believe are decided on luck?
Poll: What percentace of games are decided on luck?0-10% (62) 53% 11-20% (24) 21% 21-30% (11) 9% 31-40% (9) 8% 41-50% (2) 2% 51-60% (1) 1% 61-70% (0) 0% 71-80% (0) 0% 81-90% (2) 2% 91-100% (6) 5% 117 total votes Your vote: What percentace of games are decided on luck? (Vote): 0-10%
(Vote): 11-20%
(Vote): 21-30%
(Vote): 31-40%
(Vote): 41-50%
(Vote): 51-60%
(Vote): 61-70%
(Vote): 71-80%
(Vote): 81-90%
(Vote): 91-100%
|
I think it's super hard to even define what "luck" is in SC2 and what isn't.
If a Widow Mine hits 15 of my Banelings it isn't lucky from my opponent, I just micro'd poorly.
If I scout a hidden dark-shrine because I feel like there's something fishy I just had a good feeling.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
I'd say luck is either things outside of your control, or things that were on you control and you prepared for it, but due to circumstance it went sideways. A few examples:
Scouting a drop with your own drop. Completely circumstantial.
Sending a worker to scout for proxies and missing the enemy worker or the actual proxy by an inch. You scouted. You did everything right. You cannot scout the whole map. No ammount of skill would have made you scout it.
Scouting last in a 4 player map vs a player who scouted first and is rushing you.
Build order wins like opening CC first vs 12 pool.
Weird pathing or other bugs. For example I lost a game about amonth ago where I knew the enemy was making a 1 base nydus, preapred for it, literally saw it the moment they planted it and inmediately sent my probes and army but it was placed in a weird place in the map and the probes kind of glitched and went all on one side and got stuck. I inmediately moved them manually but that extra seccond was enough for the nydus to finish and for me to lose. I say that's luck because i literally did everything right, and yet due to a situation outside of my control, as it was impossible to predict the probes would behave in that way, I lost.
There's also the "outside" stuff. Like your internet going out, your computer freezing for a frame just when an engage starts, enemy having to leave the game, etc.
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
There are other problems introduced of course but more 3/4 player maps might make the ladder less aggravating in this regard.
There are tons of players who are just bad at the game who will execute blind cheeses all the time and they guarantee they’ll hit because they know your spawn.
Is it luck if I miss a proxy spot in a game? Or is it bad scouting?
Playing vs random, which I think is silly given how different openers are I think introduces a bit much variance. Openers can be so radically different and all. Probably less of a deal now than in WoL, where a non-FFE build sucked ass against Zerg for many periods, but obviously a FFE sucks against Toss and Terran.
Ultimately I’m ok sucking up the occasional stupid loss, it’s still stupid, it’s no big deal but I’d rather it was less of a thing.
|
Just food for thoughts, I don't think build order wins are luck based. Its two definite decisions leading to a result, its not like the openers were randomly selected, If you play a build you know counters the standard meta build and you win a lot of games because of it, is it luck? Obviously its not actual in game starcraft 2 skills but I wouldn't call it luck either, similar to how lag isn't luck its bad internet.
I think overlord vision range can lead to some early game lucky sightings, or some widow mine hits were neither player micros. I think in starcraft 2 very very few things are luck based, sure there are a lot of "none macro/micro skill factors" but not necessarily luck as in the kind were you flip a coin and see how it goes without any prior knowledge or outside influence.
Like your proxy example is most defintely not luck, the proxier puts a building to hide it maybe factoring in current meta proxy locations and you search for it knowing were they are usually put. If you find it or not is not a coin toss, its a result of conscious decisions between you are your opponent. Its an example of something that appears to be only luck but in fact is so´much more, not saying its a good thing or a fun thing.
|
Overall, like 10% or less, but specifically within your MMR range, definitely at least 20% or so. Against someone in your MMR range, a build order loss SHOULD equal a loss. That's not always how it turns out, but hypothetically if your opponent really is your equal it should be curtains.
|
I think there's another type of "luck" that happens almost every game for players below, say, GM, which is the way your skill-set matches up against your opponent. Every player has strengths and weaknesses, and sometimes you only face opponents whose strengths perfectly align with your weaknesses or vice versa. Maybe your macro TvZ is really strong but your early defence is weak and you hit 5 roach all-ins in a row. Maybe you've been practising your void ray all-in defence and then all of the Protosses you face are playing Nexus first twilight builds. Or the opposite: you've been practising holding your 4th base against tank pushes in ZvT, and all of the Terrans you face do exactly that.
On the one hand it's not "luck", in the sense that you have total control over the things that are causing you to lose. But on the other hand, it's a major reason why sometimes you log in and lose 9 out of 10 games, and other days you log in and win 12 in a row. Same player, playing equally as well, just luck of the draw in terms of who they get matched up with.
|
On October 05 2021 05:51 [Phantom] wrote:
I'd say luck is either things outside of your control, or things that were on you control and you prepared for it, but due to circumstance it went sideways. A few examples:
Sending a worker to scout for proxies and missing the enemy worker or the actual proxy by an inch. You scouted. You did everything right. You cannot scout the whole map. No ammount of skill would have made you scout it.
Thats not quite true higher skill could help you scout more thoroughly by staying more on top of actively controlling where the worker scouts as you still execute your build order properly. Even if you can't scout the whole map you could increase your chances of finding it.
Anyway definitely luck only dictates the outcome of 0-10% of games without a doubt. Its not even really questionable... a skilled enough player is just gonna crush everyone luck never allows a gold league player to defeat a master player, there's no possible way luck can swing a game that hard. However this actually made me realize how much luck determines the outcome depends how equally matched the players are so the question isn't really answerable. The more equally matched the players are the more likely luck will shift the outcome of the game.
|
On October 05 2021 03:28 [Phantom] wrote:
There's also the theory that if the matchamaking is doing it's job correctly and putting you against people of a similar skill level, the result of the match in theory should be random (both players have 50% chance of winning, aka the the result will be random). And if it's random you could say it was luck to win or lose that specific game. So, in a way you could say every ladder game, if the sistem is perfect, should be decided by luck, wouldn't you think?
Very not sure that this is the way to look at statistics. Statistics usually doesn't predict an individual event, it only works if you go the distance.
Also, 50% chance doesn't necessarily mean randomness (and a random outcome may not have 50% probability, just think of rolling exactly 6 on a common die). It just means that on average, the different factors--both luck and skill--combine to produce 50% success.
In case of ladder, the 50% should be across all opponents you may match with. If I queue into a cannon rusher I may well lose 10 in a row against them (at which point we'll no longer match but ignore that for a moment); then they go back into the ladder pool and run into someone who doesn't panic pull all their workers, and lose that MMR they took off me. On the other hand, I might happen to be good against the race/strat that third person plays, win some of my points off them, and we're all three back where we started.
Wait, why am I trying to explain rock-paper-scissors?.. I'm sure you get my point already.
|
Between equal players I'd say that luck does matter in smaller things that define some things in games and sometimes are game ending information. None of these things are RNG or anything like that, but it's just a matter of "were you watching this at X time" or an army movement that is made at a bad timing. These are technically cases of who made the bigger mistake/more mistakes, but with equal players its just a matter of "who does it happen to this time". It can all be negated with getting better but in singular games there is some effect.
Between unequal players it doesnt really matter because the better player is better and with their skill advantage should be able to win most of the time.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
IMO on the ladder, especially for the majority, luck is the big factor. You don't know who you play as you don't play these people often(unlike the top few), you don't know if they're just bad or doing something crazy, you can lose to being unlucky(guessed wrong all in). Or win because you scouted in the lucky direction (or your opponent was stupid and placed the proxy spire on the way everybody sends a hallucinated phoenix  ). In the end it's all about what we define as luck =)
|
If you ignore the "luck" in matching someone appropriate to your level, I would say it varies on your preferred build, but that variance itself is rather small. Then again at some point managing the incidence of "luck" is also part of skill especially in terms of happening to scout the right information can be counted as part of skill. An individual game can seemingly be won or lost by luck at certain moments but over the course of many games, a player who is conistently "luckier" than another player is more skilled at managing that incidence of what appears to be "luck".
|
On October 05 2021 03:28 [Phantom] wrote:
However it's undeniable that somethings circumstantial things can have a big impact on a game, even if through skill you prepare for it. A perfect example is if you are scouting for a proxy, and miss it by an inch. You did everything right, you scouted, and no ammount of skill would have changed that outcome.
I think this is a really clear example of something which is not luck in my mind - if you know the likely locations of proxies, you can scout for them, and if you "miss it by an inch" then either you've not scouted the right place or the opponent has made the decision (consciously or not) to put it in a different place from where it would usually go. If you scouted beyond the optimal locations, you would have found it, so the opponent has strategically outplayed you by putting it somewhere else (whereas if you didn't scout at all, you'd have taken the strategic advantage in that exchange because the opponent puts the proxy in a suboptimal spot).
Either way, there wasn't any luck or dice roll there, it was about the decisions players made and strategic expectations about where that proxy would be.
|
On October 05 2021 04:58 watchlulu wrote:
I think it's super hard to even define what "luck" is in SC2 and what isn't.
If a Widow Mine hits 15 of my Banelings it isn't lucky from my opponent, I just micro'd poorly.
If I scout a hidden dark-shrine because I feel like there's something fishy I just had a good feeling.
Your widow mine example: what if suddenly someone called you by phone? Despite not answering, ring sound distracted you enough for widow mine to hit 15 of your banelings.
Scouting proxy: sometimes you just know there's proxy without having "a good feeling", e.g. you see too few units or you see gas 1st and no barracks.
Or, if we make this is a 1vs1 bronze example. What if one opponent masses voids, while the other one masses hydralisks without either player scouting the other. Is the hydralisk guy more skilled? No, I'd say in this case it's pure luck/coincidence.
So what's luck then? In my opinion, there is a lot of luck in sc2, just like a lot of games, more so in fast paced games where a split-second decision could be key. What makes the difference is high level players tend to recognise signs better and work to reduce risk (thus reducing "luck factors"), which is the case when they scout properly and react properly. So you leave less to chance (luck). Also, their practice helps them get familiar with certain playstyles so they can react better & faster, so not leaving it to luck (random unit combo vs something).
|
On October 06 2021 02:55 deacon.frost wrote:IMO on the ladder, especially for the majority, luck is the big factor. You don't know who you play as you don't play these people often(unlike the top few), you don't know if they're just bad or doing something crazy, you can lose to being unlucky(guessed wrong all in). Or win because you scouted in the lucky direction (or your opponent was stupid and placed the proxy spire on the way everybody sends a hallucinated phoenix ). In the end it's all about what we define as luck =)
The huge problem with your argument is the claim that "luck is THE big factor." It can be a big factor sometimes, but in general? No. Skill is really effective at neutralizing/minimizing effects of luck which is why I said above that it depends how closely matched the players are. The more similarly skilled the players are the more impact luck is gonna have on the results... But when a player is much better than another luck is rarely gonna help the inferior player win. And if the skill gap is too large luck will literally never allow the other player to win.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
On October 06 2021 19:13 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2021 03:28 [Phantom] wrote:
However it's undeniable that somethings circumstantial things can have a big impact on a game, even if through skill you prepare for it. A perfect example is if you are scouting for a proxy, and miss it by an inch. You did everything right, you scouted, and no ammount of skill would have changed that outcome.
I think this is a really clear example of something which is not luck in my mind - if you know the likely locations of proxies, you can scout for them, and if you "miss it by an inch" then either you've not scouted the right place or the opponent has made the decision (consciously or not) to put it in a different place from where it would usually go. If you scouted beyond the optimal locations, you would have found it, so the opponent has strategically outplayed you by putting it somewhere else (whereas if you didn't scout at all, you'd have taken the strategic advantage in that exchange because the opponent puts the proxy in a suboptimal spot). Either way, there wasn't any luck or dice roll there, it was about the decisions players made and strategic expectations about where that proxy would be.
But the thing is you can't scout all the map. Well, you can but it would take a long time. So if you decide to scout all the possible positions on the right and the proxy was left you could be in trouble.So you scout by going to different parts of the map where the proxy likely could be. But it would be possible to scout and miss it. There have been many GSL games where a worker gets literally within an inch of a dark shrine, or barracks, but miss it barely. Like literally if the worker had been half a square to the right it would have been within vision. The (pro) player knew the Proxy was a possibility, he was even skilled and knowleable enough to know that was one ofthe likely areas where it could be, he scouted there and missed it by an inch. I don't think that's a conscious decition or something he could have controlled.
There are also many all ins that look similar but are difficult to scout or the scout is negated. Then you are playing blind. though I guess negating the scout could be seen as skillful, but at certain points a scout might not literally be available so you need to make educated guesses, which could turn out to be wrong. After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information.
|
On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information.
But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome.
Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual.
Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance.
|
On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance.
May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right?
|
On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance.
Proxy and finding proxy is determined by player's decisions, but those decisions are made mostly based on luck because there's limited time and information. You won't have enough time to cover all of the suspected spot, so luck is a big factor to determine whether it is found in time.
Same can be said to rock, paper, scissor, result is based on player's decision, but the decision is mostly based on luck, because there's not enough information to rationalized it.
|
On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right?
That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on.
I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder.
|
On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right?
+ Show Spoiler +You forgot to mention that there might be no prize in the 1st place
|
On October 08 2021 11:53 Alpharius wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. Proxy and finding proxy is determined by player's decisions, but those decisions are made mostly based on luck because there's limited time and information. You won't have enough time to cover all of the suspected spot, so luck is a big factor to determine whether it is found in time. Same can be said to rock, paper, scissor, result is based on player's decision, but the decision is mostly based on luck, because there's not enough information to rationalized it.
Rock/Paper/Scissors is less random than you think because they way our brains choose between the 3 is very far from random. There are a whole bunch of strategies revolving around our tendencies to not pick the same 3x in a row, for example.
About proxies, finding it should be a massive disadvantage for the proxy player, but missing it should not be an auto-loss for the scouting player, especially if they smell something is up by checking the main.
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder.
To degrees, I don’t think people mind high-level mindgames because there is that element of gambit and counter-gambit, especially in a prep scenario like Code S or formerly in Proleague
Likewise playing peepmode with your regular buddies, you know tendencies and trying to break type to get an edge or predict someone else doing the same is quite a fun element.
Ladder, up until the very highest MMRs is a rotating list of unknown opponents, you’ve quite limited information outside of what’s standard in any given meta. The fun mindgame aspects don’t really come into play without knowing anything about the player.
Not the biggest deal in the world, whether one considers it luck or some combination of other factors, can be a little frustrating but hey. I remember getting 6 pooled on Frost by some bloke, looked at his build history and he just did it every game and if it was a 4 player map he gambled on the start location.
A perfectly legitimate but rather silly use of one’s time IMO but hey.
Playing Protoss v Random back in Wings day was rough, was it luck? When expanding was death against Protoss, but staying on one base vs Zerg was a slightly slower death and your initial pylon placements were critical, navigating that opener phase was either gambling or doing some kind of bad catch-all opener.
I can’t speak for everyone, I don’t think most’s concept of luck is complete random chance, it can encompass acting theoretically correctly under some framework of information and getting a bad outcome. Or by afflicted but misfortune of some kind that one had no realistic way to scrape the information together to avoid.
Imperfect information and gambits are a big part of what makes RTS compelling, there are probably ways to mitigate some frustrations though. WoL and HoTS had a longer early game/scouting phase before LotV compacted it plus more non-2 player maps.
|
On October 05 2021 04:58 watchlulu wrote:
I think it's super hard to even define what "luck" is in SC2 and what isn't.
If a Widow Mine hits 15 of my Banelings it isn't lucky from my opponent, I just micro'd poorly.
If I scout a hidden dark-shrine because I feel like there's something fishy I just had a good feeling.
i disagree with that. it is humanly impossible to play a perfect sc2 game with 0 mistakes. everybody makes mistakes every game, thats just how it is. even maru slips up or mismicros countless times every single game. thats just due to human limitations and sc2s almost infinite skill ceiling. so it is indeed luck for the opponent if those slip ups that will inevitably occur do happen in more impactful situations. i could 'use' my slipup for not watching 2 scouting lings and losing them, but if i do use it for losing 20 mutas to 3 widow mines instead, then my opponent got lucky.
thats at least how i see it.
|
I think luck is present in every game and it's almost entirely due to the fog of war resulting in imperfect information. The decisions you make are all calculated guesses based on past experiences about the opponent's potential strategies and positioning. And since it's all a series of guesses, there's luck involved in terms of whether you guessed right more times than you guessed wrong.
As you get better, the luck factor is diminished because you're better at both gathering and interpreting scouting information. Your guesses are right much more often than they're wrong, but so are your opponent's guesses for the same reason. Luck becomes less of a factor than skill, but the luck is still there.
It should also be noted that while luck is a factor in every game, it can be overcome by superior skill. If you do get unlucky and can't get the information you need (it's impossible to scout every inch of the map and an opponent can often-times deny an early scout, forcing you to guess what they're doing), you can get blindsided by getting hit with cheese or a disadvantaged build order because you guessed wrong. But you can still win if your mechanical skill and knowledge of how to overcome said disadvantage outclasses your opponent.
The only way to remove luck entirely is to remove the fog of war (and no, I'm not advocating for that). In terms of the poll question about what percentage of games are decided on luck, I have no idea how to answer that. I think the percentage gets a lot lower as the rank gets higher though.
|
When you play vs luck, there is no chance
|
On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder.
Please explain it to us then what you think luck means, because you are making no sense so far.
|
On October 10 2021 06:18 IMSupervisor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder. Please explain it to us then what you think luck means, because you are making no sense so far.
Stop being rude - I think luck means literally the dictionary definition of luck: "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions", and since all of the above is about your own actions, it shouldn't be considered luck.
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
On October 10 2021 07:28 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2021 06:18 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder. Please explain it to us then what you think luck means, because you are making no sense so far. Stop being rude - I think luck means literally the dictionary definition of luck: "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions", and since all of the above is about your own actions, it shouldn't be considered luck.
Your definition of luck seems, at odds with the dictionary definition.
Yours seems to be ‘well if you made a choice then the consequences of said choice aren’t explicable by luck, because you had other potential choices you could consciously make’.
Which isn’t the dictionary definition, nor I imagine the general conception of luck by most other people’s standards posting in this thread.
You’re saying ‘stop being rude’ while simultaneously saying any adverse result in someone’s gaming experience is entirely due to their deficiencies in picking randomness where it occurs.
Which isn’t luck, for some reason. People are rude for questioning your own personal definition of what luck is but saying everyone who has issues with what may or may not be issues with luck in the current state of the game is just bad isn’t rude.
Ok man go for it.
|
On October 10 2021 07:28 Yonnua wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2021 06:18 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder. Please explain it to us then what you think luck means, because you are making no sense so far. Stop being rude - I think luck means literally the dictionary definition of luck: "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions", and since all of the above is about your own actions, it shouldn't be considered luck.
I would agree with you if there was no fog of war or if the game wasn't real time. But, each action comes at the exclusion of all others so we don't get to make infinite actions to account for all possibilities, we have to pick and choose what kind of risk / reward we want to take on before the game starts. The cost of scouting also impacts on the outcome of the game and if you scout the map for proxies you'll be behind an opponent who went 3 quick bases and this is a decision you have to make blindly with nothing to go on. That to me means there is chance involved in the outcome, and therefor by definition, the outcome of the game to some degree includes elements of luck. OP is asking to what degree of the outcome is based on these compromised choices we make when we face people we don't know in a random ladder game.
|
I don't believe luck has any role in the game. There aren't things like critical strike in the game.
Are you lucky if you put a bunch of money into a penny stock that goes crazy? Or unlucky if you put your money in a big corporation that goes under do a world wide depression? In both cases, you choose to invest in companies who's success was out of your control.
It is all about risk management. All of us take risks, whether is scouting your opponent and then doing an all-in, or taking three bases after scouting. Or taking a hidden expansion.
Whether or not those pay off depends not on luck, but on your skill and that of your opponent. So much of Starcraft can feel like luck if you choose a playstyle that works based on the skill your opponent, as so many aggressive and economic builds do.
Even if you make a good read after scouting sometimes, there is always a chance the opponent may scout and adjust. It's all about skill, and that goes far beyond micro and macro.
|
On October 10 2021 11:23 BronzeKnee wrote:
I don't believe luck has any role in the game. There aren't things like critical strike in the game.
Are you lucky if you put a bunch of money into penny stock that goes crazy? Or unlucky if you put your money in a big corporation that goes under do a world wide depression? In both cases, you choose to invest in companies who's success was out of your control.
It is all about risk management. All of us take risks, whether is scouting your opponent and then doing an all-in, or taking three bases after scouting. Or taking a hidden expansion.
Whether or not those pay off depends not on luck, but on the skill of your opponent. So much of Starcraft can feel like luck if you choose a playstyle that works based on the skill your opponent, as so many aggressive and economic builds do.
Even if you make a good read after scouting sometimes, there is always a chance the opponent may scout and adjust.
What about spawn positions and Terran add-ons?
|
On October 10 2021 11:44 IMSupervisor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2021 11:23 BronzeKnee wrote:
I don't believe luck has any role in the game. There aren't things like critical strike in the game.
Are you lucky if you put a bunch of money into penny stock that goes crazy? Or unlucky if you put your money in a big corporation that goes under do a world wide depression? In both cases, you choose to invest in companies who's success was out of your control.
It is all about risk management. All of us take risks, whether is scouting your opponent and then doing an all-in, or taking three bases after scouting. Or taking a hidden expansion.
Whether or not those pay off depends not on luck, but on the skill of your opponent. So much of Starcraft can feel like luck if you choose a playstyle that works based on the skill your opponent, as so many aggressive and economic builds do.
Even if you make a good read after scouting sometimes, there is always a chance the opponent may scout and adjust. What about spawn positions and Terran add-ons?
What about stubbing your finger playing basketball before the game? What about your opponent's wireless mouse running out of batteries?
Things are going to happen to you in life, and they may be out of your control. But chance has nothing to do with batteries running out of your opponents mouse, it is something under the control of your opponent. That has nothing to do with luck, even though it may feel lucky to you. And if you consider things outside of your control going well to be lucky, then we have different definitions.
There are a lot of variables that can impact a game of Starcraft. I consider luck to be pure chance, like a roll of the dice or a 50% critical strike hitting or not.
When I spawn, I know which side my add-ons will be on, and I adjust my build because of that. My opponent should know too, and should adjust their build because of that also.
Or maybe they decide not to because they think I won't... it's all about risk management: Even if you make a good read after scouting sometimes, there is always a chance the opponent may scout and adjust. That isn't chance, it's all about skill, and that goes far beyond micro and macro.
|
This is kind of race dependent. I'm not whining or anything but from Zerg perspective, the "luck" factor is close to 0 just because they have exceptional scouting tools. Take serral for example, watch any of his replays, he basically plays with maphacks and one of the main factors contributing to his success. TvP and PvP have some slight randomness involved.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
On October 10 2021 11:23 BronzeKnee wrote:
I don't believe luck has any role in the game. There aren't things like critical strike in the game.
Are you lucky if you put a bunch of money into a penny stock that goes crazy? Or unlucky if you put your money in a big corporation that goes under do a world wide depression? In both cases, you choose to invest in companies who's success was out of your control.
It is all about risk management. All of us take risks, whether is scouting your opponent and then doing an all-in, or taking three bases after scouting. Or taking a hidden expansion.
Whether or not those pay off depends not on luck, but on your skill and that of your opponent. So much of Starcraft can feel like luck if you choose a playstyle that works based on the skill your opponent, as so many aggressive and economic builds do.
Even if you make a good read after scouting sometimes, there is always a chance the opponent may scout and adjust. It's all about skill, and that goes far beyond micro and macro.
While there are not stuff like critical or like 10% chance of missing an attack or anything like that....
You however said in all games there are risk, and If there are risk there are chances and if there are chances there is luck.
I think a couple of people here are saying that if you took may type of action it's not luck, but I don't see it that way. If you go to the park and walk around and a bird shits on you, for me that would be bad luck, but in your definition that wouldn't be luck because you decided to go out and walk, which is not really true.
|
On October 10 2021 07:48 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2021 07:28 Yonnua wrote:On October 10 2021 06:18 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 19:09 Yonnua wrote:On October 08 2021 10:05 IMSupervisor wrote:On October 08 2021 08:27 Yonnua wrote:On October 07 2021 02:48 [Phantom] wrote:
After all no starcraft 2 game is played in "perfect" information. But working with limited information is a measure of skill, not luck determining the outcome. Players aren't putting their buildings in random locations at the highest level, they're choosing where to put them, and many of the times in GSL that a player "just missed" scouting something, it was indeed a conscious decision to move the hidden building just back a bit from its usual location, or a conscious decision by the scouting player to not scout as far as usual. Even if that wasn't a conscious decision in every case, it still wasn't a factor of luck, because it was an action by the player that determined it, not random chance. May I interest you in a game of skill? I'll hide a small prize in your room and you have 20 seconds to find it. Because I had to take an action to place it and you have to take actions to choose where to look, it therefor involves no element of chance right? That's a pretty ridiculous analogy and I think you know it. If we played the game literally millions of times over the course of 11 years, then yes there would be a very clear set of strategies and counter-strategies to base it on. I think this thread just shows people have very little idea what 'luck' is and have bought their own excuses for when they don't win on ladder. Please explain it to us then what you think luck means, because you are making no sense so far. Stop being rude - I think luck means literally the dictionary definition of luck: "success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions", and since all of the above is about your own actions, it shouldn't be considered luck. Your definition of luck seems, at odds with the dictionary definition. Yours seems to be ‘well if you made a choice then the consequences of said choice aren’t explicable by luck, because you had other potential choices you could consciously make’. Which isn’t the dictionary definition, nor I imagine the general conception of luck by most other people’s standards posting in this thread. You’re saying ‘stop being rude’ while simultaneously saying any adverse result in someone’s gaming experience is entirely due to their deficiencies in picking randomness where it occurs. Which isn’t luck, for some reason. People are rude for questioning your own personal definition of what luck is but saying everyone who has issues with what may or may not be issues with luck in the current state of the game is just bad isn’t rude. Ok man go for it.
If you'd rather make personal attacks than read what I said, I think that speaks volumes about you, and obviously the "general conception" doesn't disagree with me, because the poll overwhelmingly says ladder games aren't decided by luck.
I was very clear it's not about just some random choice being made, it's about the strategic decisions being made, which most of the time these are above silver league - literally the definition above is saying that isn't luck, it couldn't be more explicit. If you aren't happy with the way that language defines the word, substitute your own definition, instead of just leaning on poor scouting and bad strategy automatically becoming luck because it didn't go the way you wanted.
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
I’m failing to see any kind of personal attack in my post, indeed you seem to have skipped out quite a lot of what I said. If so apologies, I don’t think there was any there perhaps other posters may disagree with me.
Assuming everyone who voted in the 0-10% category all consider the percentage of ladder games decided by luck as zero, then yes that’s the majority, although even then it’s not any overwhelmingly crushing.
Is losing to a blind 6 pool on a 4 player map unlucky or just bad play for not getting the scout? Or a failure to anticipate a silly 3 sided coinflip that is well, pretty bad game theory unless you’re playing an opponent who’s way better than you so a 33% spawn guess is better as a strategy than playing something less mental.
Doesn’t mean luck is the prevailing factor in ladder by any means, but unless one’s usage of the word is almost exclusively limited to actual rng, then I find it hard to see how it’s a realm entirely devoid of luck.
I don’t even actively play so no skin off my back who does what on ladder.
I do think it’s too viable to just exploit an informational disparity and do blind cheeses every game all the way up the ladder, whereupon you know where your opponent is an do the cheese, and they’re more in the dark trying to account for all sorts of opportunities.
Not a luck thing, IMO although can be extremely frustrating, and can feel similar to losing a game of chance even though it isn’t. I assume there’s a fair bit of conflation of the two amongst players.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely.
|
On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely.
Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2.
From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent.
Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game.
Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now.
Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree
|
Yeah if you're getting a build order loss while having to pick your own blind it's like basic gambling, luck based. Then there is all the rest that comes into play that is not just luck based. But having to pick a build order blind and getting advantage or disadvantage based on that is part of the luck factor, worst case is 50/50 types of gambles where you win or lose depending on whether opponent (already) did this or that. If you had opportunities to scout but didn't take them and didn't do anything with what could have been used to scout, then it's a mistake. If scouting involves a lot of risk because losing the scout can be critical, again luck comes into play depending on the info you could have already had or not about what's in the fog of war where the scout goes. etc
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree
We’re literally talking ladder, not the innate game sense of a player of the calibre of Taeja, who IMO is in the top 5 of best players to touch the game, but in most other people’s estimation at least 15-20
Like cool your ‘better decision’ is to blind cheese on a 2 player map where you know where I spawn, and if my scouting misses it you win.
Cool, let’s not pretend there aren’t players who just coinflip every single game on ladder, especially when spawning locations are already known.
Like it’s ridiculous every other response is some ‘git gud’ variant, but hey let’s not question the chops of people who just blind cheese every single game.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree
I never said SC2 was completely luck based though, I agree it isn't. I don't agree it's not a big factor though, specially in ladder games.
As you say skill has a big influence. Most influence even, but that doesn't mean the better player wins all the time. Even though I was focusing on ladder, you can see it in pro games too. Maru is way better than Armani, right? Yet he has dropped games to him.
Maru is way better than any player he will face on ladder that's not a pro right? And yet he doesn't have 100% Winrate on ladder either.
|
On October 12 2021 08:03 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree We’re literally talking ladder, not the innate game sense of a player of the calibre of Taeja, who IMO is in the top 5 of best players to touch the game, but in most other people’s estimation at least 15-20 Like cool your ‘better decision’ is to blind cheese on a 2 player map where you know where I spawn, and if my scouting misses it you win. Cool, let’s not pretend there aren’t players who just coinflip every single game on ladder, especially when spawning locations are already known. Like it’s ridiculous every other response is some ‘git gud’ variant, but hey let’s not question the chops of people who just blind cheese every single game.
Taeja is playing the same game we are, sc2 played by Taeja and sc2 played us doesn't have different luck factors. Thats like saying soccer in low level has tons of luck while soccer in high level has no luck. If one person is a god proves its not luck, it is skill. If it looks like luck but some people win consistently that is a very big hint that it isn't luck, they just see something you don't which is a skill.
It all depends how you define skill, is all aspects of starcraft 2 is equal in value than yes cheeser that wins are more skilled then you. But if you value macro/micro more than strategic decisions obviously you are probably more skilled in those avenues of the game.
In most sports there are risky plays, that will backfire hugely if the bet doesn't pay off. Does that mean all traditional sports are luck based? Because there are different ways/strategies to play games, some play like robots systematically and intellectually sound while others play wild and risky. No matter what the outcome blaming luck in any sport says more about your outlook than anything else.
On October 12 2021 13:38 [Phantom] wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree I never said SC2 was completely luck based though, I agree it isn't. I don't agree it's not a big factor though, specially in ladder games. As you say skill has a big influence. Most influence even, but that doesn't mean the better player wins all the time. Even though I was focusing on ladder, you can see it in pro games too. Maru is way better than Armani, right? Yet he has dropped games to him. Maru is way better than any player he will face on ladder that's not a pro right? And yet he doesn't have 100% Winrate on ladder either.
Well almost all pro-team/pro in any sport no matter how dominant have lost to an underdog, does that mean all traditional sports are luck based by a big factor? Losing to lesser players/teams happens all over the world all the time in literally every single sport, if you claim to be objective then you would need to agree that all sports are luck based.
Like many others have written managing risk is a skill, and that is true for all sports. Is this pass in soccer too risky for the possible outcome or is it worth it? All games have some kind of innate risk taking that is part of the game, that doesn't mean you can blame luck when you lose. Well if that guy didn't intercept my pass we would have won, this game is all luck
EDIT
I will add that these theoretical ladder games in a vacuum doesn't exist. When you choose your build you can factor in what league you are in, what the meta is and so on. If you choose to do a proxy void ray all in two weeks after uThermal posted a popular guide on how to counter that cheese when you lose you cant really blame your bad luck. If I go greedy CC first build and die to early aggression I can't blame bad luck. Just like in pro play there is always factor to consider when choosing your build, in some leagues its literally 60% cheeses on ladder, if you go greedy and lose its on you.
The question I want to ask you is what is your goal with your ladder play? If its winning every single game/reducing risk/crushing cheese then there are builds for you to choose that lets you be safe but you will be behind against economic openers. If your goal to is to climb the ladder and win 50+% of your games then choosing a bit risker openings knowing you might lose to cheese is an option. An option you choose willingly risking losses to some strategies, that is not your bad luck, you are risking loss against cheese to get ahead against players that are safe. When you get the short end of the stick you blame luck and yet when you win partly due to a build order advantage you call it skill?
Also it is easy to fall for the trap of seeing the result of games being luck, looking at Maru vs Armani on aligulac for example. There is 17% chance for Armani to win against Maru, maybe you think "wow if Armani wins he got lucky" but thats not how chance works, it only shows the likelihood for that to happen not indicating that its luck. Maru isn't equally skilled all the time, he might sleep bad, be emotionally vulnerable, just have a bad day and face Armani when he is on his game and at that point Armani winning can mean he is better than Maru that day. Pro gamers aren't robots, they aren't the same equally skilled players all the time, form varies a lot, that is not luck that is just life.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On October 12 2021 18:56 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 08:03 WombaT wrote:On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree We’re literally talking ladder, not the innate game sense of a player of the calibre of Taeja, who IMO is in the top 5 of best players to touch the game, but in most other people’s estimation at least 15-20 Like cool your ‘better decision’ is to blind cheese on a 2 player map where you know where I spawn, and if my scouting misses it you win. Cool, let’s not pretend there aren’t players who just coinflip every single game on ladder, especially when spawning locations are already known. Like it’s ridiculous every other response is some ‘git gud’ variant, but hey let’s not question the chops of people who just blind cheese every single game. Taeja is playing the same game we are, sc2 played by Taeja and sc2 played us doesn't have different luck factors. Thats like saying soccer in low level has tons of luck while soccer in high level has no luck. If one person is a god proves its not luck, it is skill. If it looks like luck but some people win consistently that is a very big hint that it isn't luck, they just see something you don't which is a skill. It all depends how you define skill, is all aspects of starcraft 2 is equal in value than yes cheeser that wins are more skilled then you. But if you value macro/micro more than strategic decisions obviously you are probably more skilled in those avenues of the game. In most sports there are risky plays, that will backfire hugely if the bet doesn't pay off. Does that mean all traditional sports are luck based? Because there are different ways/strategies to play games, some play like robots systematically and intellectually sound while others play wild and risky. No matter what the outcome blaming luck in any sport says more about your outlook than anything else. Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 13:38 [Phantom] wrote:On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree I never said SC2 was completely luck based though, I agree it isn't. I don't agree it's not a big factor though, specially in ladder games. As you say skill has a big influence. Most influence even, but that doesn't mean the better player wins all the time. Even though I was focusing on ladder, you can see it in pro games too. Maru is way better than Armani, right? Yet he has dropped games to him. Maru is way better than any player he will face on ladder that's not a pro right? And yet he doesn't have 100% Winrate on ladder either. Well almost all pro-team/pro in any sport no matter how dominant have lost to an underdog, does that mean all traditional sports are luck based by a big factor? Losing to lesser players/teams happens all over the world all the time in literally every single sport, if you claim to be objective then you would need to agree that all sports are luck based. Like many others have written managing risk is a skill, and that is true for all sports. Is this pass in soccer too risky for the possible outcome or is it worth it? All games have some kind of innate risk taking that is part of the game, that doesn't mean you can blame luck when you lose. Well if that guy didn't intercept my pass we would have won, this game is all luck EDIT I will add that these theoretical ladder games in a vacuum doesn't exist. When you choose your build you can factor in what league you are in, what the meta is and so on. If you choose to do a proxy void ray all in two weeks after uThermal posted a popular guide on how to counter that cheese when you lose you cant really blame your bad luck. If I go greedy CC first build and die to early aggression I can't blame bad luck. Just like in pro play there is always factor to consider when choosing your build, in some leagues its literally 60% cheeses on ladder, if you go greedy and lose its on you. The question I want to ask you is what is your goal with your ladder play? If its winning every single game/reducing risk/crushing cheese then there are builds for you to choose that lets you be safe but you will be behind against economic openers. If your goal to is to climb the ladder and win 50+% of your games then choosing a bit risker openings knowing you might lose to cheese is an option. An option you choose willingly risking losses to some strategies, that is not your bad luck, you are risking loss against cheese to get ahead against players that are safe. When you get the short end of the stick you blame luck and yet when you win partly due to a build order advantage you call it skill? Also it is easy to fall for the trap of seeing the result of games being luck, looking at Maru vs Armani on aligulac for example. There is 17% chance for Armani to win against Maru, maybe you think "wow if Armani wins he got lucky" but thats not how chance works, it only shows the likelihood for that to happen not indicating that its luck. Maru isn't equally skilled all the time, he might sleep bad, be emotionally vulnerable, just have a bad day and face Armani when he is on his game and at that point Armani winning can mean he is better than Maru that day. Pro gamers aren't robots, they aren't the same equally skilled players all the time, form varies a lot, that is not luck that is just life.
Uh, yeah, the level you play differs in the luck factor?
Let's take the football. If I kick the ball I know where I want it to go but not every time it goes there. IF a pro kicks the ball, it goes there more often. With my poorer kicking technique I give more chaos into the game thus enforcing more luck - e.g. scoring from an impossible angle because my cross went into the goal.
The better you are the less luck can be included in your game. Have you like ever seen low level football vs a pro match?
When I want to score from a half I have to hope for a lucky kick, when a pro player wants to score from a half they will hit the goal. Because they know what they're doing while I'm just bad and as such rely on luck.
The only difference is that I accept my fate and when I try to score from an impossible position or in an impossible way at least I aknowledge I try to get a lucky score. While in SC2 everybody is a pro and everybody does their 2-1-1. 3 minutes later. With zerg units.
|
On October 12 2021 22:04 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2021 18:56 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 08:03 WombaT wrote:On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree We’re literally talking ladder, not the innate game sense of a player of the calibre of Taeja, who IMO is in the top 5 of best players to touch the game, but in most other people’s estimation at least 15-20 Like cool your ‘better decision’ is to blind cheese on a 2 player map where you know where I spawn, and if my scouting misses it you win. Cool, let’s not pretend there aren’t players who just coinflip every single game on ladder, especially when spawning locations are already known. Like it’s ridiculous every other response is some ‘git gud’ variant, but hey let’s not question the chops of people who just blind cheese every single game. Taeja is playing the same game we are, sc2 played by Taeja and sc2 played us doesn't have different luck factors. Thats like saying soccer in low level has tons of luck while soccer in high level has no luck. If one person is a god proves its not luck, it is skill. If it looks like luck but some people win consistently that is a very big hint that it isn't luck, they just see something you don't which is a skill. It all depends how you define skill, is all aspects of starcraft 2 is equal in value than yes cheeser that wins are more skilled then you. But if you value macro/micro more than strategic decisions obviously you are probably more skilled in those avenues of the game. In most sports there are risky plays, that will backfire hugely if the bet doesn't pay off. Does that mean all traditional sports are luck based? Because there are different ways/strategies to play games, some play like robots systematically and intellectually sound while others play wild and risky. No matter what the outcome blaming luck in any sport says more about your outlook than anything else. On October 12 2021 13:38 [Phantom] wrote:On October 12 2021 07:31 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 12 2021 05:22 [Phantom] wrote:
Honestly the takeway for me is there a lot of people here that believe that any person with hard work can be a famous billionare and if you aren't you haven't worked hard enough.
Because if they truly believe luck only influences 0-10 percent of such a complex game like starcraft, SPECIFICALLY in a Best of 1 scenario, agaisn't a random player on a random race on a random map on random external conditions, then they must apply that logic to the rest of their lifes, right?
Again, if you go outside and a bird shits on you, that's not luck according to them because you made the decition to go walk outside, you should get gud instead.
I think most people here think lucks means litterally RNG like the above person said, and that there must be defined chances (10% critical hit chance, 5%-20% critical hit damage, 3% chance of parrying etc), and while that is indeed luck, that's not at all the complete definition or spectrum. Like the poster above said what if it's a four player map and a build order win? There no explanation other than luck. And that doesn't mean your destiny is out of your control, or that you didn't make a concious decision to expand early and the enemy to rush, that did happen, but it doesn't mean luck was not involved, specially since you have no way of knowing what the enemy is doing. You tok a risk, and they did too, which has a certain ammount of chance of succeding and you could say that wether or not you got the "good chance" or the "bad" chance it was luck. And again you can micro or do this or that to alter the chance percentages, but not remove them completely. Its very interesting for me to come back to this thread to see so many argue my same point as me on how luck is a very small factor in sc2. From your perspective it might seem like a "blind" 6 pool, but its not random what build your opponent chooses its a planned strategy in a strategy game. As a comparison lets take basketball, I can dribble right or I can dribble left, if the opponent catches me I lose but if they go the wrong way I win is it luck? The strategy game starts before the match, by your defition me going CC first and losing would be bad luck, I would call that a bad strategy. If starcraft 2 was really filled with random luck factors then pro players wouldn't win consistently against lesser players. There is tons and tons of statistic that proves starcraft 2 is not luck based, if it was the pro scene and tournament results would be totally different, no player would be consistent. Your arguements about birds and IRL are blatant strawman arguements, no one here is saying that getting shit on by a bird is not bad luck. Are you fighting the bird in a one on one game about not getting shit on where you are strategically trying to outmaneouver eachother because if the answer is yes then you are in the wrong forum about the wrong game. Some people view everything that goes bad for them as bad luck, you got a disadvantage because of build orders, bad luck. You got flanked right when moving out with your army, bad luck, you were out of position when the drop came in bad luck, the enemy finished his upgrades before you bad luck. None of it is bad luck, he made better decisions than you, its just that you find that out now. Consider Taeja by what magic did he consistently magically make exactly the right moves to win without scouting? He is famous for his magical game sense that made him seem invincible, he read the flow of the game and the mind of his opponents like no other player has ever done and if you want to tell me that he just happend to be lucky 50 times in a row. Lets just agree to disagree I never said SC2 was completely luck based though, I agree it isn't. I don't agree it's not a big factor though, specially in ladder games. As you say skill has a big influence. Most influence even, but that doesn't mean the better player wins all the time. Even though I was focusing on ladder, you can see it in pro games too. Maru is way better than Armani, right? Yet he has dropped games to him. Maru is way better than any player he will face on ladder that's not a pro right? And yet he doesn't have 100% Winrate on ladder either. Well almost all pro-team/pro in any sport no matter how dominant have lost to an underdog, does that mean all traditional sports are luck based by a big factor? Losing to lesser players/teams happens all over the world all the time in literally every single sport, if you claim to be objective then you would need to agree that all sports are luck based. Like many others have written managing risk is a skill, and that is true for all sports. Is this pass in soccer too risky for the possible outcome or is it worth it? All games have some kind of innate risk taking that is part of the game, that doesn't mean you can blame luck when you lose. Well if that guy didn't intercept my pass we would have won, this game is all luck EDIT I will add that these theoretical ladder games in a vacuum doesn't exist. When you choose your build you can factor in what league you are in, what the meta is and so on. If you choose to do a proxy void ray all in two weeks after uThermal posted a popular guide on how to counter that cheese when you lose you cant really blame your bad luck. If I go greedy CC first build and die to early aggression I can't blame bad luck. Just like in pro play there is always factor to consider when choosing your build, in some leagues its literally 60% cheeses on ladder, if you go greedy and lose its on you. The question I want to ask you is what is your goal with your ladder play? If its winning every single game/reducing risk/crushing cheese then there are builds for you to choose that lets you be safe but you will be behind against economic openers. If your goal to is to climb the ladder and win 50+% of your games then choosing a bit risker openings knowing you might lose to cheese is an option. An option you choose willingly risking losses to some strategies, that is not your bad luck, you are risking loss against cheese to get ahead against players that are safe. When you get the short end of the stick you blame luck and yet when you win partly due to a build order advantage you call it skill? Also it is easy to fall for the trap of seeing the result of games being luck, looking at Maru vs Armani on aligulac for example. There is 17% chance for Armani to win against Maru, maybe you think "wow if Armani wins he got lucky" but thats not how chance works, it only shows the likelihood for that to happen not indicating that its luck. Maru isn't equally skilled all the time, he might sleep bad, be emotionally vulnerable, just have a bad day and face Armani when he is on his game and at that point Armani winning can mean he is better than Maru that day. Pro gamers aren't robots, they aren't the same equally skilled players all the time, form varies a lot, that is not luck that is just life. Uh, yeah, the level you play differs in the luck factor? Let's take the football. If I kick the ball I know where I want it to go but not every time it goes there. IF a pro kicks the ball, it goes there more often. With my poorer kicking technique I give more chaos into the game thus enforcing more luck - e.g. scoring from an impossible angle because my cross went into the goal. The better you are the less luck can be included in your game. Have you like ever seen low level football vs a pro match? When I want to score from a half I have to hope for a lucky kick, when a pro player wants to score from a half they will hit the goal. Because they know what they're doing while I'm just bad and as such rely on luck. The only difference is that I accept my fate and when I try to score from an impossible position or in an impossible way at least I aknowledge I try to get a lucky score. While in SC2 everybody is a pro and everybody does their 2-1-1. 3 minutes later. With zerg units.
Wow we have a different outlook on life.
There is always a chance you make a bad kick or a good kick no matter your skill level and they are good or bad because of your skill not because of luck. Obviously higher skilled players will make less bad shots. From your perspective everything in your life must be luck, the better you are at driving a car the less risk you get unlucky and crash into someone else. I mean its not like that is your fault or anything, totally just bad luck. Same with doing something well, practising a song on the guitar for weeks and when you finally make it you can exclude "shit I cant believe I actually did it thats so lucky!"...
I can see that some people view life like that, everything that has a variance of happening is luck but its very different from how I look at life
To be clear your example of kicking a ball has 0 luck variety in my opinion, it depends on how you kick it. Not on an outside factor like luck, if you kick it good or bad is 100% up to you, your control, your skill and so on. Thats why someone can get good at sports, because its not luck
|
You don't see the impact of luck when kicking a football or getting in a car accident? The mud on the boots affecting balance and weights, the imperfections of the football, as well as diffeernt wieghts of mud and grass, the different traction on the grass surface, because the field is a lviing lawn, the heartbeat of the player and the general bodily rhythm the wind and the differences in air in any given day that cannot be detected? Those are all factors that can affect a course of a ball kick that is not determined by skill. o luck it is not.
As for driving a car, surely you can't seriously beleive there isn't a large luck variance into getting into a car accident? Sure, if you are a better driver, you will be less likely to get into an accident, but many car accidents cannot be forseen and are purely luck based. People who beleive that they are great at driving cars and getting into an accidents are skill based therefore they are less likely to be in an accident are more likely to get into accidents afterall.
|
Luck definitely plays a part ingames especially bo1 like ladder. You can be very consistent on the adder this is shown from the very high winrates of the best players. But certain builds on certain matchups are straight up gambles that mainly rely on your opponent being unable to get a good read on what you are doing. Starcraft is a game of limited information it has some similarities with poker. If players play enough games the better one will usually come out on top but sometimes you do just get felt a bad hand, your build gets blind countered, your opponent his something and even though you scouted you were unlucky and did not see it. You had a bad read on what your opponent was doing because what you did get to scout was ambiguous. Luck does play a part in sc2. Builds like dt rushes are highly reliant on luck.
You could argue that a perfect player would scout perfectly to prevent luck from affecting thier games, but sc2 early game is designed in such a way that you can still miss key information even if you play as optimal as possible to find it.
|
Northern Ireland25085 Posts
On October 16 2021 13:26 washikie wrote:
Luck definitely plays a part ingames especially bo1 like ladder. You can be very consistent on the adder this is shown from the very high winrates of the best players. But certain builds on certain matchups are straight up gambles that mainly rely on your opponent being unable to get a good read on what you are doing. Starcraft is a game of limited information it has some similarities with poker. If players play enough games the better one will usually come out on top but sometimes you do just get felt a bad hand, your build gets blind countered, your opponent his something and even though you scouted you were unlucky and did not see it. You had a bad read on what your opponent was doing because what you did get to scout was ambiguous. Luck does play a part in sc2. Builds like dt rushes are highly reliant on luck.
You could argue that a perfect player would scout perfectly to prevent luck from affecting thier games, but sc2 early game is designed in such a way that you can still miss key information even if you play as optimal as possible to find it.
How crucial early blind decisions are and how long the information gathering period is and what information you can get and how you use it, as well as how effective middle of the road safe openers are all come into play. As well as how other skillsets come into play.
SC2, especially with Legacy’s eco ramp-up and maps almost exclusively being 2 player now you get a whole swathe of fiendish builds hitting pretty early, your initial worker scout may be too early to pick a build, and your initial unit poke with adept/reaper or early lings may be either too late or not be able to get in.
Without perfect info or a definitive scout it’s hard to make educated guesses because of the eco by elimination. In HoTS if you could say, sniff out Robo tech early you could rule out certain other techs, or if they had multiple trees they would have almost no units at that stage of the game and you could just kill them.
In Legacy if you see a Robo early doors they could still have a twilight and a shrine, or be rushing Templars
It’s still a great game but there is quite a lot of volatility, which I think was exacerbated in speeding up the eco, it’s harder to either directly scout (at certain impactful times) or rule out possibilities by a process of elimination.
BW has a slower build, cheese is of course a thing but the scouting phases can last quite some time. Plus it’s a really hard game execution wise. WC3 has actual genuine RNG in it but really elongated battles where better micro has more chance to shine.
Of the 3, the chance of an average mid GM equivalent beating a top pro player I’d wager is much higher in SC2 than the other two, for a variety of reasons.
Call it luck or volatility or whatever. I think one can both acknowledge it while also striving to improve their own skills and not using it as a crutch for losses.
|
Well what's happened to me is, sometimes I'm scouting thoroughly and I manage to miss one corner where there is a proxy building so yes I would say there is some semblance of luck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
