|
The idea of focused practice has been mentioned by authorities such as Day[9], and I believe this a step in the right direction.
You are hitting the note in the most complex play, if anyone is able to cleanly explain how to best become a better gamer it's Day[9].
I think the chopping up of a complex play into smaller pieces was exactly approached by Day[9] in his newbie tuesday 'How to Steal a Build' and 'Refining a Build'.
Stealing a build
Refining a stolen build
Now while this was aimed at letting bronze players mimick a professional (like Naniwa) there is much to be learned about just perfecting a build you have invented and makes you feel succesful.
I advise people to watch these dailies (in order) if they want to know what was meant by 'chopping up a complex play into smaller understandable pieces.
|
There is one big flow in your theory: In Starcraft, you need to adapt your strategy based on what you scout whereas in Piano, you need to play the exact same thing under any given condition. Forming macro cycles in a build will result in slips of macro when you need to adapt, which will make your gameplay flawed even in best condition. You need to consider strategical part and mechanics part of the game seperately and practice should be different for those two things. Then you need to combine them and form your gameplay.
|
On October 08 2011 14:29 qxc wrote:
If you're working on executing something properly at full speed I agree with this. When I used to play guitar hero that was how I would learn new songs. The difference between music and starcraft is that music punishes you for being 'too fast' or off beat as it were. A song has a given tempo that needs to be met to play the song correctly. Starcraft has tempo built into it with all the macro/micro. There's a correct timing to producing additional units, stutter stepping, etc... The idea with my post was a way to possibly increase the number of actions we can perform by pushing our body harder. It's not a way to perfect timings and mechanics but rather a theory on how we might make the body faster.
Additionally, let's say theoretically we're doing 'everything' perfectly at the current game speed. A possible way to increase speed may be to train at a higher speed than normal.
Additionally there are mental aspects that are completely ignored in your post. Consider the mental stress/tension of playing at an increased speed. If you can remain calm and continue to make good decisions at a more frantic pace, perhaps when you return to normal speed you will have a mental advantage.
The main points you've made are substantiated through experience (both mine, yours, and many others) while the points I made are theory.
You won't know what it really will end up doing until you try it despite any amount of theory crafting.
Thanks for taking the time to reply qxc! As you said, its important to note the difference between Theory and practice.
However, I believe the theory itself to be largely impractical given your conditions of "perfect" play. As I mentioned in your thread, I don't think this practice method can be remotely useful for anyone other than Flash/Jaedong.
That being said, it would be interesting to explore such a method after one achieves perfect mechanics, though I think we are a long way off from that.
|
On October 08 2011 17:47 Djagulingu wrote:
There is one big flaw (fixed?) in your theory: In Starcraft, you need to adapt your strategy based on what you scout whereas in Piano, you need to play the exact same thing under any given condition. Forming macro cycles in a build will result in slips of macro when you need to adapt, which will make your gameplay flawed even in best condition. You need to consider strategical part and mechanics part of the game seperately and practice should be different for those two things. Then you need to combine them and form your gameplay.
As I mentioned in some previous responses, I think that we tend to focus on irrelevant differences between the two disciplines. The act of learning a new skill is fundamentally the same, regardless of how different they may be.
In the case of Starcraft and Piano, despite the strategic/emotional differences, there is no reason that learning the mechanics themselves should be any different from each other. I emphasize this mechanical learning - mastering the basics of the game in a closed environment instead of "trial by fire" in real games.
|
On October 08 2011 17:21 RyLai wrote:Here's the difference between practicing like it was music and as if it was a RTS, rhythm and multitasking.
It's VERY simple given the proper ques to simply macro perfectly, and tweak a build to be as efficient as possible (if your build analysis is good enough). Now, how would you do if someone attacked you at a random timing and you're forced to micro your ass off? Your production stops completely, and you're working with whatever you already have. How do you alleviate this? First, work on your macro to get the basics down so that you don't float 1k minerals or gas, and simply keep playing. Put yourself in these micro-intensive situations and force yourself to keep macro in the back of your head. If you watch NaDa play, he always checks his production between micro actions (it's rather amazing actually). In that case, you COULD get into a rhythm, but it's far more complex than anything you do in music because you have to include the mouse and mouse precision based on what micro is retired.
Improving macro is elementary. Simply ALWAYS make workers, never get supply blocked, don't que up units or workers, and spend your money as you get it. Once you get a solid build order, it becomes even simpler as you remember the simple timing ques that come with it. The issue is maintaining this rhythm as you're fighting for your life against an all in you weren't prepared for.
All you can really learn is to perform macro sequences (ex - move screen to SCV(s), box/select SCV(s), press b, press s, click location for Supply Depot; press 5, press s to make SCV) as quickly as possible. After that, there's the issue of chaining these mini sequences together as quickly as possible to eliminate the lag time between actions to allow yourself as much time as possible to do anything else you might have to do.
It is largely irrelevant to focus on small differences between the disciplines. Learning a skill is fundamentally the same, regardless of how different the skills may be. I could make the comparison between a sport and Starcraft, and my methodology would still hold true.
There's no reason ever to slow the game down to simply work on macro. The game isn't nearly fast enough that a person (even a beginner) couldn't do everything that they needed to in order to macro properly (not with MBS at least).
And focusing on doing NOTHING but macro mechanics (Larvae Injects, Chrono Boost, and MULE) to do them perfect has little to no value except maybe to impress the general timings in the back of your head, but even that is useless. If you check through your hotkeys often enough (or fast enough), you lose maybe 2 seconds at most per cycle. How often are you able to just sit there and wait for your macro mechanics in a real game? Never. That's why we cycle through our production buildings to see when they are available.
I couldn't disagree with you more here! Solid basic foundations are required to excel in any activity! Does one get better at basketball by playing many games? Of course not! One gets better by practicing basic dribbling and shooting over and over again.
The same analogy holds true for Starcraft. Our goal in learning macro skills is to practice basics until they become second nature. It is not enough to simply execute them - we don't even want to think about them! If we don't have to think about their execution in game, we'll have more time to reply to crisis management.
If you just think of the mechanics behind the game, the only way to improve is really in your mindset... The physical mechanics behind it are easy to master simply with blank practice (I use 4v4s to practice macro and builds), but the tough part is having the ability to focus on the right things at the right times - multitasking (also why I choose 4v4 since there are 4 people that can harass me with the most retarded shit ever). If you can get harassed, and still have smooth macro while microing your units around, that's when you know you have REALLY refined mechanics. And that ONLY comes through playing the game a lot.
If I harass you with a Cloaked Banshee, DTs, or Mutas, will you sit there, focus solely on your macro and think "well I can easily macro that stuff back up, so I'll box whatever units I have in the area and A-move to the Mutas"? Will you take your units, and do your best to clean up and/or fend off the enemy while also doing your best to keep your workers alive? Or will you do things properly and macro while retreating your workers and sending your army in and microing it to get rid of the enemy harassment?
As stated above, harass in general becomes a lot easier to deal with if your mechanical basics won't break down under pressure. Isolated practice is a great way to achieve this.
So yeah... Just play more games, but have a direction/goal you're aiming for with the games you play. It's beyond dumb to play games simply to "play to get better". You NEED a direction as you ALWAYS do in order to get better at anything. Like, if I wanted to get better at a repetition sport like tennis (somewhat comparable to SC), I can't just go out and hit thousands of balls. It would help, no doubt, but it doesn't fundamentally improve my shots any more than improving my timing. If I want my shot to actually get better, I need a goal like to hit deeper (closer to the baseline), closer to the sidelines, or with more spin. And with tennis as with SC, you need a PROPER goal to aim for. Hitting the ball harder/faster is the same as aiming to have 300-400 APM. It's meaningless if you can't do anything with it (control it). If you keep playing more, ball speed/APM comes naturally as you get better. And a lot comes down to simply how you think, which can only be worked on by going out there and just doing it.
Your tennis analogy supports my argument! We go out onto the tennis court and practice our stroke. Then we go out and practice where to hit our stroke. Then we go and practice how to hit our stroke. That is what I'm proposing - to isolate important mechanics (tennis shots) in practice as opposed to in games.
You seem to be mistaking my proposal. I'm simply proposing that people break down learning mechanics into subsets. These subsets can be as complex and detailed as you want, but the act of breaking them down and mastering them is fundamental to the learning process.
|
On October 08 2011 17:47 Djagulingu wrote:
There is one big flow in your theory: In Starcraft, you need to adapt your strategy based on what you scout whereas in Piano, you need to play the exact same thing under any given condition. Forming macro cycles in a build will result in slips of macro when you need to adapt, which will make your gameplay flawed even in best condition. You need to consider strategical part and mechanics part of the game seperately and practice should be different for those two things. Then you need to combine them and form your gameplay.
I am a musician studying at university, I don't agree with you and think that the analogy continues even further.
A professional musician over his life, will play A LOT of musical pieces, that can vary a lot in styles and there's is always a great deal of interpretation, much more than raw technique. You need to know how to play very slow without slowing down as well as blazingly fast, play very emotionnaly or brutaly, and that transfers to starcraft players. Practice of a match-up is beneficial to the other because you always macro the same way, it's your unit composition that changes. Strategic decisions can be compared to interpretation and control over the keyboard as it is what makes professionals a lot better than amateur.
Pieces of music can be 10 times better if well interpreted or 10 times Worse if not well interpreted. And you can't compare team games to the work of a string quartet.
Also, the same music piece is never played the same way twice, ever because there is ALWAYS a better way to play it. However, I don't think it ever happened that someone did a New interpretation of an old piece that made it popular, it would be a little silly.
|
I disagree with you. You've modeled your own version of SC2 training based on piano when you have no evidence that it actually works.
There is already a PROVEN working model for success in SC2 - at that is the korean pro-gaming houses. Although I don't know 100% what they do, it almost invariably involves mass gaming. Many of the successful pro-gamers for instance, practice until they hurt their wrists. Another aspect of korean pro-gaming houses is the coaching aspect and the sharing of strategies. However, all of this still comes in the "mass-gaming" backbone.
Although, you've raised some good points about practice in a specific technique, similarly to piano (e.g. scales, appegios). The equivalent in SC2 could be something like stutter-step, queen-injects, etc.
|
On October 09 2011 00:55 Azzur wrote:
I disagree with you. You've modeled your own version of SC2 training based on piano when you have no evidence that it actually works.
There is already a PROVEN working model for success in SC2 - at that is the korean pro-gaming houses. Although I don't know 100% what they do, it almost invariably involves mass gaming. Many of the successful pro-gamers for instance, practice until they hurt their wrists. Another aspect of korean pro-gaming houses is the coaching aspect and the sharing of strategies. However, all of this still comes in the "mass-gaming" backbone.
Although, you've raised some good points about practice in a specific technique, similarly to piano (e.g. scales, appegios). The equivalent in SC2 could be something like stutter-step, queen-injects, etc.
You state that you disagree with my post, but then agree me with me in your last paragraph. Practicing specific techniques is exactly what I'm proposing here. Breaking down your mechanics into sub-sets is a great way to approach new builds and mechanics.
As for the "Korean Training Model," I argue that it is effective but not optimal. You seem to believe that because it works, it is the best possible model. Koreans mass game for 10 hours a day. I argue that the same could be done in less time if other methods were applied.
Also, the Korean practice model draws more from my post than you think. If you read anything about the recent Red Bull Lan, you'll notice that the Korean players often isolated specific strategic elements in practice. I simply propose the logical extension of this into mechanics themselves.
|
On October 08 2011 05:54 Hapahauli wrote:
By understanding how a musician approaches a new piece, we can better understand how we can learn to approach learning Starcraft mechanics. For example, when a professional musician approaches a new piece of music, these are the steps usually taken:
1) Break up the piece into smaller, simpler sections.
2) Practice each section slowly with an emphasis on proper technique and efficiency.
3) Put all the smaller sections together at a slow tempo.
4) Gradually bring the piece up to proper speed.
5) Polish the finished product. My piano teacher often tells me to play slower, but more refined. He also pays attention which finger I use to play any note, because using wrong fingers makes it harder to get good at the piece.
I myself noticed that playing music has little or nothing to do with natural talent, it is actually just practice. Mechanical practice over and over.
On October 08 2011 05:54 Hapahauli wrote:
Now we're getting somewhere. The idea of focused practice has been mentioned by authorities such as Day[9], and I believe this a step in the right direction. However, I think this doesn't go far enough. I think he is right with his advise to focus on just one aspect at a time. Too often I try to improve many things at once. If I focus on just one thing, I can improve it very fast at that thing.
Overall I am amazed how many things piano learning and Starcraft improving have in common. When I got a bit better at the piano, may be when I finally can play at least one of the easier Bach pieces, I write a posting about how the piano helped me in improving my approach to Starcraft.
|
I think people are missing the point that this helps your technique more than it helps your actually decision making and builds.
|
Coming from a background in music (playing drums since 10 years), phyiscal activities such as dancing and martial arts (~5 years) and coaching things like speaking in front of 100+ audiances, tradional softskills etc. I'd like to add a few cents to this whole discussion.
Some posts here showed a pretty weak understanding of how learning and/or practicing in general works. =P
1) "The goal of music is to play at a set tempo while the goal of Starcraft is to play as fast as possible"
False. Every single physical activity (from martial arts and boxing to swimming, from running all the way to speaking in front of people, playing music and starcraft) has a rhythm.
Ryhthm is everywhere. At the lowest stages of a strong martial arts training you practice every step at once, you practice the timing of your actions. Boxers don't hit as fast as they can, they first memorize the correct technique of how to hit - which will then slowly be practised more till it becomes muscle-memory.
Starcraft is in fact a very rhythmic game. If you try to execute everything as fast as you can, you will end up learning mistakes. You will memorize wrong behavior. It is VERY easy to hit a punching bag quickly for a beginner - however if he works on hitting it quickly he will never achieve the speed of e.g. a WT practicioner who practiced chain hits starting with a very slow speed and perfect technique.
Steps like Check Minerals / Gas -> Check supply -> build workers -> build units -> build buildings scout -> move units -> Check Minerals / Gas -> etc. are a ryhthm.
Someone who checks Minerals/Gas, then builds workers, then scouts, then builds units then checks his minerals/gas, then builds buildings would be the example of an inefficient rhythm.
To achieve maximum speed in a game like starcraft you have to develop the most effective pattern to spend your time. - You learn such a pattern by consciously (!!) going through it step by step, again and again until it becomes second nature.
The simple fact that there is no "common knowledge" on how to "correctly" do stuff like this, or even how to simple as **** things like 1a2a3a4a (e.g. 1a3a2a4a is slightly faster because of less finger movement involved. Is it a tiny amount of time? Yes. Do people use it? No. Apparently small edges like this aren't needed.) shows us that Starcraft (and e-sports in general) are not developed enough yet to have working standards in certain aspects. - This is also why I would take habits "professionals" show us in their practice with a grain of salt.
tl;dr: Ryhthm > speed. Speed is the result of a well-practiced rhythm, not the starting point.
2) "Practice in a low-stress environment will fail you in a high-stress environment"
Wrong. Practice in a low-stress environment gives you all the skills needed to succeed in a high-stress environment.
Let's take public speaking for an example. If I want to teach someone who's rather shy but suddenly in a public position how to speak in front of 300 people I would not (costs aside) put him infront of 1000 people and let him "just speak" there. He would simply crack down under pressure and will have more stage-fright than before.
Instead, I'd take him to a group of people with a similar interest (same fears and thoughtprocesses) and let him speak in front of those 10 people. Then we would work on his way of speaking and then, once I'm fine with him, we'd record the thing and show him the video. Taddaaa, his skill and self-confidence is increased and he'll be way more comfortable in front of e.g. 100 people than before.
Another example would be the martial artist who practices first under a very controlled environment, once he got the basics down people will do stress-exercises with him - then he'll be ready for "real" self-defense.
Oh, wait, stress-exercise? - Yup, you read correctly. The ability to do well under pressure is a skill on its own. (Dingdingding!)
If you do great in 1n1's and on the ladder, you won't automatically beat the same people in a tournament setting (hi Infernal <3). Practicing how you do under pressure and high-stress is a skill that has to be learned individually (or by failing enough tournaments), how to do that would be too much for this short thingy though.
3) "But.. but... Koreans massgame, too!"
No. Not that way. You're comparing apples and oranges. (Or rice and potatoes, huehue)
Person A massgames in a controlled environment. He has someone watching him who ensures that he follows set patterns (see #1) which they worked out together beforehand. If there are certain weaknesses in his build, timing or micro you grab another dude from your team who has a similar issue and then let them clash heads until they can do the thing they sucked at better than before.
Person B plays 30 games per day.
Person A is your average Korean Progamer, Person B is the average western dude who asked "How should I improve my game?" and got the answer "Go play mass games!"
Whatever skill you're working on in life, simply doing it over and over again without a real plan or reflection will lead to failure. (Yes, that's something I learned in both Starcraft and picking up women. =D)
4) "But..but... you don't practice decision making that way!"
Strong decisionmaking is, once again, a result, not a point to start off.
Let's say you played 1-2 laddergames, you weren't happy with those games at all. Your build should work in theory our ryhthm sucked, your timing sucked and you made horribly decisions.
Let's say you...
...refined your build and stole it directly from a top korean pro of your choice.
...worked on your larvae injections/macro/mules/whatever till they are FUCKING BOSS.
...stutterstepped on micro maps till you could beat everyone with 2 marines in 2011.
NOW IS THE POINT TO ACTIVELY WORK ON YOUR DECISION MAKING.
Would you have won games earlier with a better decisionmaking? Yes.
Would you have (attention plz!!) won games where you had correct decision making, but shitty mechanics? No.
There is no fucking point in a great plan if you can't execute it. Unless you're a coach. Then you get that privilege.
-------------------------------------------------
After this wall of text I'd like to add that I fully endorse the OP, I feel that a discussion like this is long overdue. Way too many "young" activities rely on people claming that "just doing a lot of it" is the holy grail - while that statement is pretty far from the truth.
Feel free to shout out any questions concerning the points I made, I'll keep checking this thread for a while. =)
Edit: What I meant by "working standards" in #1, refers to things like there is no "commonly accepted" way of which finger should hit which hotkey in which order for maximum efficiency. A thing like this would be not acceptable at all when it comes to typing or playing the piano. --> starcraft and e-sports aren't refined yet.
|
On October 09 2011 01:10 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 00:55 Azzur wrote:
I disagree with you. You've modeled your own version of SC2 training based on piano when you have no evidence that it actually works.
There is already a PROVEN working model for success in SC2 - at that is the korean pro-gaming houses. Although I don't know 100% what they do, it almost invariably involves mass gaming. Many of the successful pro-gamers for instance, practice until they hurt their wrists. Another aspect of korean pro-gaming houses is the coaching aspect and the sharing of strategies. However, all of this still comes in the "mass-gaming" backbone.
Although, you've raised some good points about practice in a specific technique, similarly to piano (e.g. scales, appegios). The equivalent in SC2 could be something like stutter-step, queen-injects, etc. You state that you disagree with my post, but then agree me with me in your last paragraph. Practicing specific techniques is exactly what I'm proposing here. Breaking down your mechanics into sub-sets is a great way to approach new builds and mechanics. As for the "Korean Training Model," I argue that it is effective but not optimal. You seem to believe that because it works, it is the best possible model. Koreans mass game for 10 hours a day. I argue that the same could be done in less time if other methods were applied. Also, the Korean practice model draws more from my post than you think. If you read anything about the recent Red Bull Lan, you'll notice that the Korean players often isolated specific strategic elements in practice. I simply propose the logical extension of this into mechanics themselves.
In my previous post, the last paragraph was the only thing I agreed with - and I'm also pretty sure that the koreans would do specific practice as well.
As for the premise of your entire post - you've come up with a theory and have linked it with another discipline (piano) with all the analogies - but have no evidence that it actually works. Maybe if you can convince some pro-team to adopt your method and to show good results then you can argue that your method is good.
In the end of the day, the "korean training model" has proven success. It works and it has created the best pro-gamers in both BW and in SC2. I'm skeptical that you can call it "effective but not optimal" when there has been no evidence that an alternative works.
The korean model doesn't draw much from your post. The only thing that they share is that they probably spend a small amount of time honing a specific technique (e.g. stutterstep). But otherwise, it is based on hard work mass gaming followed by coaching and discussion of strategies. But it the mass gaming that forms the bulk of the practice.
|
On October 08 2011 17:14 Syrupjuice wrote:Yoshi Kirishima wrote: Show nested quote +I did read it. It doesn't matter if music goes faster than SC2 (and how do you gauge that, how many APM/notes you hit?), again that's not the point or I'm missing something. The point is that any piece of music has its limit at 100% speed; any faster is too fast. Your performance does not sound better the faster you play it (not necessarily). However, in SC2, the faster you are, the better you are. I do not necessarily agree with that last statement. Yes, there is evidence to support that claim, but there is also evidence that says you don't have to exceptionally fast at SC2 to perform well. This may just be the state of the game. Only time will tell I suppose. To address the rest of your response, what if we compare SC2 to a Celtic jig, the kind that starts off slowly and builds in speed and then ends when the musicians can no longer physically keep up with the song. There is no max or min tempo, yet it is still music, no? The term, 'Music,' seems to be putting an imagined limit to the maximum speed that is acceptable to play at. Many people are putting limits on music but none on Starcraft. I believe this is limiting the amount of valuable discussion we could be having.
Please reconsider your disagreement. If you are faster, you are better. That does not mean the same thing as "if you are better, you are faster". There is no disadvantage in being faster.
I am not familiar with such music. Though since it exists, then I believe most people like me are unaware of that style, and probably are talking about music -- like you say -- with limits. The limit of a tempo. If we are talking about Celtic jigs then I guess the priorities for practice are different eh? Though they would still, I imagine, prioritize correctness vs missing notes and playing it faster. Though it would be closer to SC2 I guess.
|
@Azzur - Thanks for taking the time to reply! I still disagree with your opinions, but it's great to have an intelligent debate in a thread.
Now on to my counter-argument...
On October 09 2011 02:23 Azzur wrote:
...
As for the premise of your entire post - you've come up with a theory and have linked it with another discipline (piano) with all the analogies - but have no evidence that it actually works. Maybe if you can convince some pro-team to adopt your method and to show good results then you can argue that your method is good.
You seem to be confusing burden of proof. I've offered my analogy, and you've done nothing to argue against it other than saying "there's no evidence it actually works."
In addition, there is plenty of evidence that my suggestions actually work. The act of learning a new skill is fundamentally the same in Music, Sports, Starcraft, etc. However, the learning process is well established to be something along the lines of what I suggest in every field except for Starcraft!
So a question to you - exactly how is learning Starcraft different from learning music, sports, and the like?
In the end of the day, the "korean training model" has proven success. It works and it has created the best pro-gamers in both BW and in SC2. I'm skeptical that you can call it "effective but not optimal" when there has been no evidence that an alternative works.
This is the traditionalist/mythical attitude that I'm trying to dispel. You suggest that something is best based on tradition alone without considering well established alternatives in other fields.
The korean model doesn't draw much from your post. The only thing that they share is that they probably spend a small amount of time honing a specific technique (e.g. stutterstep). But otherwise, it is based on hard work mass gaming followed by coaching and discussion of strategies. But it the mass gaming that forms the bulk of the practice.
I think we agree more on this than you think. I make no claims on the percentage of practice time. I simply make claims on how we should learn something new. We seem to agree that Korean training uses elements of specific technique training in areas of Starcraft. I'm just suggesting that using them in mechanics is the logical extension. For all I know, they could very well be doing exactly this.
More importantly, it is not simply mass gaming, but directed mass gaming that forms the core of the Korean practice model. This is perfectly in line with the theory in my OP.
|
On October 09 2011 02:43 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 17:14 Syrupjuice wrote:Yoshi Kirishima wrote: I did read it. It doesn't matter if music goes faster than SC2 (and how do you gauge that, how many APM/notes you hit?), again that's not the point or I'm missing something. The point is that any piece of music has its limit at 100% speed; any faster is too fast. Your performance does not sound better the faster you play it (not necessarily). However, in SC2, the faster you are, the better you are. I do not necessarily agree with that last statement. Yes, there is evidence to support that claim, but there is also evidence that says you don't have to exceptionally fast at SC2 to perform well. This may just be the state of the game. Only time will tell I suppose. To address the rest of your response, what if we compare SC2 to a Celtic jig, the kind that starts off slowly and builds in speed and then ends when the musicians can no longer physically keep up with the song. There is no max or min tempo, yet it is still music, no? The term, 'Music,' seems to be putting an imagined limit to the maximum speed that is acceptable to play at. Many people are putting limits on music but none on Starcraft. I believe this is limiting the amount of valuable discussion we could be having. Please reconsider your disagreement. If you are faster, you are better. That does not mean the same thing as "if you are better, you are faster". There is no disadvantage in being faster. I am not familiar with such music. Though since it exists, then I believe most people like me are unaware of that style, and probably are talking about music -- like you say -- with limits. The limit of a tempo. If we are talking about Celtic jigs then I guess the priorities for practice are different eh? Though they would still, I imagine, prioritize correctness vs missing notes and playing it faster. Though it would be closer to SC2 I guess.
I think you're missing his point. The discussion about speed limits is irrelevant to the discussion. They don't change the fundamental similarities of learning a new skill, whether that skill be Starcraft, Music, or Sports.
|
did i read this wrong or was the OP saying a better way to practice is to play less and play slower?
|
On October 09 2011 04:09 Zerker wrote:
did i read this wrong or was the OP saying a better way to practice is to play less and play slower?
That's quite the oversimplification.
I'm suggesting that if you play slower and in a controlled environment, you can learn better macro mechanics in less time than mass gaming.
|
Although I'm not by any means a good player (and I'm not proof of the OP's ideas being true) I have practiced with the methods he suggests and have found myself doing much better keeping up with creep spread and queen injects, even in games when I'm under constant pressure.
Once again I think a lot of people are missing the point of the ideas in this thread - the OP, like everyone else here knows that decision making is a huge, perhaps the most important aspect of winning in SC2, and that these training techniques won't improve that. The point of doing training exercises is to make basic mechanic and macro concepts second-nature, so that we don't have to distract ourselves thinking about when to build more SCVs, do a round of injects, etc, when that drop in our natural or the DTs in our main need our attention.
While just about anyone, from low league players to the pros, could benefit somewhat from doing such exercises, eventually these people won't need to do this kind of basic exercise technique as much as their mechanics are already near perfect; this is where mass gaming comes in, IMO.
|
On October 08 2011 16:53 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 16:21 Soulish wrote:On October 08 2011 15:08 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:On October 08 2011 15:01 Soulish wrote:On October 08 2011 09:06 Exarl25 wrote:On October 08 2011 09:03 Bortlett wrote:On October 08 2011 08:53 Exarl25 wrote:
You say they have the exact same mechanical skill-set, but they don't. They may be similar but far from identical, there are important differences. The point has already been brought up but in Starcraft there is no such thing as too fast. The goal of QXC's method is to push yourself beyond your normal limits, play as fast as you possibly can. This makes no sense in the context of a musical instrument, you play at the speed the music is meant to be played, there is no sense in and no need in going faster than that. You hit the notes that are meant to be hit and those notes only, in Starcraft 2 there are almost an unlimited number of notes to be hit and the goal is merely to hit as many as you can. This is why increasing your speed is so important.
This isn't true at all. Musicians do speed drills all the time with scales and such. But music only goes so fast. There are never more notes to hit like there are moves to make in a game of Starcraft. uhm music goes faster than sc2, I'm pretty good at both (decent at sc2) That's not the point. In sc2 you can never be fast enough to play perfect. However in piano, you can. There is the difference of playing perfectly (piano) vs playing as fast as you can (SC2). if you read what I quoted you'll understand I did read it. It doesn't matter if music goes faster than SC2 (and how do you gauge that, how many APM/notes you hit?), again that's not the point or I'm missing something. The point is that any piece of music has its limit at 100% speed; any faster is too fast. Your performance does not sound better the faster you play it (not necessarily). However, in SC2, the faster you are, the better you
wait what. i was comparing piano to sc2 based on how fast each is played at. in this regard piano beats sc2 hands doen because the actions are memorized. you, however, are comparing the fact that piano playing sounds bad when you play it fast to the fact the sc2 there is no limit. well guess what idgaf if piano playing sounds bad you still play it faster than sc2... thats like saying an elephant is weaker than an ant because an ant can carry 50x its own body weight while the elehant cannot. too bad the elephant is still stronger than the ant.
|
On October 08 2011 05:54 Hapahauli wrote:OP's Note: While I make explicit references and criticisms of certain TL posts, it is not my intention to be insulting or "call someone out." I simply want to start a discussion on practice methods in Starcraft.I: IntroductionRecently, qxc posted a blog on Starcraft Training DBZ Style, which was spotlighted on the TL front page. For those of you who haven't read it, qxc theorizes about a form of speed-training - increasing the speed of the game in a UMS map to improve one's mechanics. As someone who has an extensive background in piano and music education, I'm very surprised to see a professional player take this attitude towards practicing Starcraft ( my original response), and I wanted to start a discussion on practice myths and methods in Starcraft 2. I've always considered mechanical skills on a musical instrument and a computer keyboard to be fundamentally similar, yet qxc's post goes against a lot of standards in music education. Technical skill in music and Starcraft both rely on having good muscle memory, yet the conventional wisdom of practicing music and Starcraft couldn't be more different. Some of these differences will be revealed below. II: Practice in MusicBy understanding how a musician approaches a new piece, we can better understand how we can learn to approach learning Starcraft mechanics. For example, when a professional musician approaches a new piece of music, these are the steps usually taken: 1) Break up the piece into smaller, simpler sections. 2) Practice each section slowly with an emphasis on proper technique and efficiency. 3) Put all the smaller sections together at a slow tempo. 4) Gradually bring the piece up to proper speed. 5) Polish the finished product. While variations my exist amongst different musicians, the core concepts remain. There is an emphasis on slow, mechanical mastery before all else. You will rarely see a good musician start learning a piece by beginning to play it at full speed. Yet many posts, including qxc's blog, emphasize the exact opposite. That somehow, playing full-speed games, or even artificially faster games, will improve your Starcraft skill. III: Practice Myths in StarcraftA quick TL search for a typical "help me improve" post reveals much about the conventional wisdom of Starcraft practice. [H]Improving my macroShow nested quote +If macro is what you want to focus on, you want to focus on playing more games. This is the most common advice I see, and to me, is also the most shocking. A lot of TL'ers think that by playing more games, you will eventually get better at the game. While there is some truth to it, I argue that this is nowhere near efficient. Telling one of my beginner piano students to practice a piece by playing it at full speed multiple times would be horrible advice. They would barely be able to coordinate themselves properly, and if by some miracle they learn the piece, they would undoubtedly play it sloppily. Yet this is exactly the advice I see being given to Starcraft beginners over and over again. Show nested quote +Something that helps me a lot with my macro is just to go 1v1 against the AI Another bit of advice that surprises me. It still suggests that a beginner should repeatedly play games at full speed. Not only this, but it suggests that we play games against an unrealistic opponent. A computer is not a human, so what is the sense in playing against builds you will never see? Now we're getting somewhere. The idea of focused practice has been mentioned by authorities such as Day[9], and I believe this a step in the right direction. However, I think this doesn't go far enough. IV: Practice PropositionsMy ideal practice method would draw as many influences from music education as possible. As an example, what if we approached a new build-order in the same way that musicians approached new music? 1) Break down the build into "phases." For example, a beginning (up until you establish your main production structures), a middle (macroing out of your base production structures), and an end (your late-game plan and tech tree). 2) Establish your "macro cycles" for each phase. Hash out exactly what buttons you will be pressing in your typical macro cycle for each phase. 3) Practice this slowly until you are comfortable with the mechanics. 4) Gradually speed it up. 5) Polish against real human opponents. In addition, just like a musician devotes a significant amount of practice time to mechanics/technique (scales, arpeggios, and the like), why not devote a bit of your time to practicing macro mechanics as a Starcraft player? For example, perhaps a Zerg player should devote ten minutes of their time at the beginning of every session to practice larvae-inject mechanics. V: Questions and DiscussionSo TeamLiquid, how do you practice Starcraft? I'd be especially interested in hearing the opinions of some high ranked/professional players. Do you think there is any "practice wisdom" to be gained from music education? VI: Some Interesting DiscussionQXC's ResponseDestiny's ResponseGhol's Response (Muay Thai and Sub-sets)r.Evo's Response (Addressing Counter-Arguments)
As a professional trumpet player for many years, I'm quite surprised to see this claim Perhaps it's because you play the piano, and not a wind instrument. It simply doesn't do much good to play your scales at one speed only. Yes, you want to rehearse a piece at the proper speed, but when practicing your mechanics, sometimes the only way to raise your skill is to play it as fast as possible without error.
Despite this, it never makes sense to play something "faster" if it causes you to make mistakes or take shortcuts. This is where I find a flaw in qxc's post, and agree with you on your point. I think you are confusing technique with preparation, though when drawing analogies with music. I can't tell you how impressed I am when I meet a Trombone player who can play Donna Lee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
