User Tag List

First 12

Results 11 to 12 of 12

  1. #11
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    Creeping before, and only THEN attacking, would be theoretically the same as attacking right from the start. This situation is made different, if one of the persons has superior ability to benefit from creeping. I don't know why it is so, but I seem to have that skill. So I choose tactic according to my skills and avoid tactics that are bad for me.
    I'm not sure I agree. Consider that the two strategies may not have the same dynamics.

    Your strategy would work better at the macro level - a systemic growth with the requirement not to have a fall-through. It's a low deviation strategy.

    Their strategy would work better at the micro level - a single point of failure allows them an overwhelming advantage.

    (If you play magic, the analogy I use is Blue control vs threat management, where if blue can counter any threat, they are virtually untouchable, whereas a single threat can destroy them).

    This leads me to believe that the strategies are asymetrical, in which one plays differently and has a different risk profile than the other.

    But one point: these do work at the extreme noob level. Just taking a tactic that is not overly silly will beat the people who indeed do take overly silly tactics. Like that.. don't make mass wisps, make other units instead, like archer.
    I think this emphasises my point above - your strategy is good... if you are good at it. However, the skill level and risk level doesn't scale the same. One mistake by you against a rusher can end the game - if you are good enough to prevent breakthrough, etc and still out resource/level/etc the enemy the majority of the times, then your strategy would be dominant (but this would leave the optimal strategy with those without your skillset to rush... and yes, I agree, that would be likely )

    The inferior player has nothing to lose by rushing. The skilled player loses very little, if they are playing someone of equal skill... but that assumes that you could play a rush as skillfully as the creep approach, which is unlikely.

    But I still think that this approach still oversimplifies the person's contribution in the team; I think it's a communication that disregards other people's talents from the start. It is some freaking TJ trait! ETJ?
    I think this is natural. You also have a preference, one that I don't think many people can emulate. So it seems there are multiple factors. In the abscence of a developped strategy, rushing is optimal because it takes the least amount of skill and is the most likely to cause the "one error = lose" threat. However, and as a result, those that are unable to deal with the "one error" problem also rush as a counter because they don't have your skillset.

    This is probably a relative skill level problem and at the pro level the rush is probably done to prevent your creep tatic (presuming the skill level there is high enough to avoid the one-error problem to start with) as much as anything else.

    Just as a reminder, the bias was not about the preferred strategy, but about thinking that one's strategy produces wins over others, whereas the strategy is so usual as to actually produce 50:50 wins unless if it is refined.
    True, but the question is if they are truly biased or measuring their own abilities. I think the bias here would be more conditioning - you get punished for not rushing, therefore training you to rush in the next game. Every "error" that produces a loss for you against a rusher encourages that mindset.

  2. #12
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    This leads me to believe that the strategies are asymmetrical, in which one plays differently and has a different risk profile than the other.
    So it would seem. (edit: not perhaps in the military sense asymmetrical. I a not so familiarized to the term in that sense.)

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    One mistake by you against a rusher can end the game - if you are good enough to prevent breakthrough, etc and still out resource/level/etc the enemy the majority of the times, then your strategy would be dominant (but this would leave the optimal strategy with those without your skillset to rush... and yes, I agree, that would be likely )
    Yeah, I think that there's something to be learned from what people tend to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    This is probably a relative skill level problem and at the pro level the rush is probably done to prevent your creep tatic (presuming the skill level there is high enough to avoid the one-error problem to start with) as much as anything else.
    The rush utilizes the advantage in asymmetrical information. The rush is performed at a time known by the attacker, unknown to the other. So the attacker can optimize his things. Sometimes it becomes a decision problem for me, when I know that I can't be forced to be in my base, because I lose creeping, but if the other player pushes on me too hard, I can't leave it. This leaves the possibility for the other person to maintain the threat on me the most time, whereas he creeps more time than me, and steadily advances. Some people do this to me and I admire their skill.


    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    True, but the question is if they are truly biased or measuring their own abilities. I think the bias here would be more conditioning - you get punished for not rushing, therefore training you to rush in the next game. Every "error" that produces a loss for you against a rusher encourages that mindset.
    There it is, that might be it. I used to play rush in another game where I learned it to work better. I think there was a turning point in my skill development when I once played with malfunctioning system and learned not to trust the ability to execute fine movements. This conditioning stayed after I fixed my hardware.

Similar Threads

  1. [SJ] SJs - How productive are you? What are some of the methods you use to be productive?
    By /DG/ in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-06-2015, 11:38 AM
  2. The hangover thread (a place to be miserable)
    By prplchknz in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-28-2011, 11:56 AM
  3. Replies: 142
    Last Post: 08-21-2011, 05:54 PM
  4. Introverts that appear to be highly extroverted?
    By ReadingRainbows in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 04:00 PM
  5. we used to be friends...
    By nonsequitur in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 01-13-2009, 01:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO