Sunday, December 12, 2010

Here's to the next 500.

I just got my 500th 1v1 league win! My opponent must have sensed the momentous occasion and saw fit to bestow his distinguished congratulations. Here's the entire chat log:
00:00:04 - BillyBanana: gl hf

00:08:22 - [name removed]: i think every single faggot ive played today has 4 gate
00:08:26 - [name removed]: good job youre so good
Thank you, sir! Unfortunately I am not quite as good as you suspected, for I had managed to make only three Gateways. I am nonetheless gratified to have earned your accolades.

In all seriousness, I'm glad to say that I'm back in the swing of things. Since Thanksgiving, I haven't been practicing nearly as much as before. I was feeling frustrated about losing to the same things I always have, and I started to feel nervous about laddering. Thoughts of giving up on SC2 started creeping into my head. But those thoughts have not prevailed. I know this road all too well, having let Go become a terrifying specter. This time, I am determined not to give up or to let my emotions turn into thoughts (a phrase borrowed from Day[9], which is to say letting "I am frustrated and sad that I keep losing" turn into "I am bad at this game and should stop trying.") One of the most powerful thought tricks I have found to help me persevere is to imagine how good I could possibly get in one, two, five, ten years. If I let go of every misgiving and just think matter-of-factly about the level of skill I am capable of achieving, my mind boggles. I could become one of the best players in the world, a true master. Now that's an exciting thought.

Ironically, a recent viewing of Day[9] Daily #208 "Live Coaching with DJ Wheat" seemed to actually hurt my play for the day after I saw it. In the video, Day[9] coaches Wheat to play slowly and focus on macro above all else. At one point he even tells Wheat to completely ignore a battle just to make sure he was 100% on top of Larva injections and such. Hint: This is an extreme approach! I think Day[9] knows that's extreme, but his audience was lower league players who pay too much attention to pretty explosions and not enough to macro. In other words, I'm past that point. I honestly don't remember the last time I got behind in macro because of some distraction. Wow, that really is true. I'm just now realizing that as I type. I guess it goes to show that it pays to reflect on how you've improved. Anyway, the other reason that that Daily didn't jive well with me was the slow play aspect. I think he was trying to counter the panic that pervades the emotions of so many RTS players. That certainly applies to me, but in trying to calm down I became detached from the game, which decreased my response time and removed my instinctual rhythms, making my macro worse instead of better. Ultimately the main reason I panic and worry during a game is because I don't have a good enough understanding of the game to know how well I'm doing and how to reasonably maximize my chances of winning. So the answer for me is to become acutely aware and involved with the game but remain detached from the result. Of course I cannot always know what optimal play is, but if I "stay conscious" and make deliberate choices based on best guesses, then it should be a simple matter to do a post-game analysis of the effectiveness of those choices.

Recently I've been thinking a lot about the early game, which is a very fascinating and critical part of the game that is so easy to overlook. For example, there is virtually nothing to lose but plenty to gain in sending your first Zealot over to a Terran's base across a small or medium rush distance. Maybe you'll kill a Marine or an SCV building a Bunker at the top of the ramp. If they've walled off, at least you'll get some scouting info. Worst case scenario, you simply have to retreat. It's not like they're going to have Stim or a Marauder with Concussive Shells. Your Zealot is 100% safe! What a revelation. I am seeing the power of knowing timings. And the veil of mystery begins to lift ever so slightly.

p.s. Another interesting area to look at timings is the Zerg fast-expand. They are utterly vulnerable for a while, lulling you into a sense of safety, and then BOOM they've got two Spine Crawlers up and you're being surrounded by twenty speedlings. I'm thinking about posting a little PvZ analysis of that build soon. It's about time I get some real strategy content in this blog.

---

Games played: 960
League/points: Diamond/2310

Saturday, December 4, 2010

PTR and the Wolf

Like a surprise wild animal attack, Blizzard has shot forth with the release of the new Public Test Region, along with a trial of the big new patch that will be applied to the regular servers at the end of the month. I only won two of my placement matches and got placed into Bronze, so it will be funny to see how quickly I can get promoted to Diamond. I'm SallyBoBally.331.

Overall I love the new patch, but there are a couple things that make me frown. Here's what hit me the most:

Features
  •  Battle.net Chat Channels have been added
Cool. Finally, we have the first step in making the new Battle.net feel connected. Now you can hit a button and actually see other people. But they've got a ways to go. They need to integrate the chat with the custom game finder to make it easy to look for a game you want to join. I played Diablo 2 quite a bit back in the day, and that system worked well. You got randomly placed in a room with a certain max number of people, and all the games going on in that room were listed so that you could see a description along with the name, class and level of everyone in it. As has been said many times, it's truly bizarre that the new Battle.net doesn't even include the basic features that have been in many Blizzard games before.

On a related note, I wish they would improve the social experience at the end of each game. You shouldn't get kicked out of the game's chat when you quit to the score screen. It's strange to suddenly get left out in the cold after the game, unable to talk to your opponent(s) unless you send them a PM. They could even make it so that when you surrender a game, you just become a spectator. There's really no reason why "resign" and "leave" need to be married as they are.
  • The game will end in a tie for all remaining players if no players have income, production, or destroyed any structures for three consecutive minutes.
Yay! I approve. This does cut down on some of the rare, hilarious lateral-thinking endgame scenarios that can occur (such as this one, which I originally watched via the replay file, which will always be one of my most memorable Starcraft experiences), but at least people will no longer have to be screwed over by Terrans who float away after a base trade, for which I constantly see QQ threads on r/starcraft and tl.net. And on the plus side, we may get to see a new breed of hilarious endgame replays where people just manage to build or destroy something before the three minutes are up.
  • In-game help is now available in Battle.net.
Lolz, I always wondered why this wasn't there before. Maybe I'll actually use it occasionally, instead of always alt-tabbing to Liquipedia.
  • When selecting a Vespene Geyser, the number of current harvesters will be displayed in the info panel.
Awww, they really care about us.
  • Customizable Hotkey Support has been added.
Haaaaaalelujah! Finally. No more scrambling for the right side of the keyboard (Immortals, anyone?), and no more useless keys like F2-F4, ` and CapsLock. And they save your hotkey settings on their servers, so it will always be there when you log into your account from any computer. The only tiny little worry I have is what if one day in the future I go to a tournament, and I have to play on a special official account instead of my own? Will there be some way for me to use my hotkey setup? Maybe not, but for now I think I'm just going to change everything as I please, and if that day looks to become a reality, I'll just have to change back and get re-adjusted. One step at a time here. I'm not winning any GSLs yet.
  • A new Master League has been added.
Huzzah. This will be fun to try to get into. Once I do, it will be nice to be able to just say "I'm in Master League" instead of having to say "mid-high Diamond" or "2200 Diamond" or what have you. That said, there will still certainly be a large spread of skill just in the Master League, even if it only has a few thousand people. I wonder how long it will take for people to start saying how Master Leaguers suck.

Balance
  • -- Hallucination research time decreased from 110 to 80.
    -- Observer cost decreased from 50/100 to 25/75.
    -- Phoenix build time decreased from 45 to 35.
Heyoooo. Thank you, sir! Lickety lick, mmm delicious. These all speak to what I consider to be the main flaw in the design of Protoss, their scouting/detection abilities. Protoss is the only race that doesn't automatically get detection. Zerg automatically has access to Overseers after Lair, and Terran automatically has access to scans, but if Protoss wants an Observer, they have to go down a specific tech path (Robotics Facility). Now I am a serious proponent of races having particular deficiencies that make them feel different and lend a specific challenge. But it's not worth it to sacrifice variety of play. Currently it's usually awkward for Protosses to open with Stargate tech instead of Robo. What if a cloaked Banshee suddenly comes coasting into your mineral line? Etc. So I'm glad they're making it quicker to scout with either hallucinated or real Phoenixes. Making the Observer cheaper doesn't really solve anything (but I'll take it!), because as I said, the problem arises when you don't have the Robo Facility in the first place. Maybe it will become more standard to scout with early fake Phoenixes if you're not planning on going Robo, thus allowing you to get an early scout on any Starports with Tech Labs, etc. On that note, why not just make Hallucination cost 50/50 or even 25/25? The 100 Sentry energy is a steep enough cost as is. Alternatively, I like what I've seen many suggest, which is to make Observers be built from the Nexus or the Cybernetics Core, unlocked by any tier-2 tech (Robo, Stargate or Twilight). For now I'll have to try hallucinating Phoenixes more often, which I've never done.
  • Void Ray now deals 20% more damage to massive targets. Flux Vanes speed upgrade removed.
Ah ha. I smell yet another plea for Stargates. A new Colossus counter, perhaps? We'll see. As for Flux Vanes... uh... I don't get what the problem was, but whatever. Fleet Beacon is now officially the Carrier Den.
  • Repairing SCVs now assume the same threat priority as the unit they’re repairing.
This patch loves me. Repair-Thors are going to be dramatically worse now. The old way never really made any sense anyway.
  • Fungal Growth no longer affects air units.
Whaaaat? My initial reaction is this is the biggest balance change in the patch. I really feel bad for Zergs and their poor little Infestors. As if Zerg wasn't linear enough, now it's going to be even more impossible to forego Mutalisks for any length of time. I sincerely hope this change doesn't make it through.

Pure Comedy
  • Protoss structures can no longer be powered without a power source if constructed while powered by a Warp Prism under the effects of Neural Parasite.
  • Mass Recall can no longer target larva or eggs.
  • Fixed an issue where a Medivac would be able to continue healing a unit that was stuck in a Graviton Beam if the Medivac had started healing the unit before it was picked up by the Graviton Beam.
  • Fixed an issue with the Ultralisk being unable to attack a row of sensor towers.
Phew!

---

Games played: 920
League/points: Diamond/2153 (+31 bonus pool)

Monday, November 1, 2010

the cycle

I can't let this become a bad thing. I can't let Starcraft 2 become an obligation, a source of stress. First it happened with Magic, then with Go, and it may happen with Starcraft. It starts out fun and with plenty of winning. I improve every day, and my skill rating shoots up week after week. Then I start to play more and more, and my rating finally begins to level off. As my opponents become more skilled, fewer and fewer of my mistakes slip through unpunished. I start to feel an obligation to play well, and that turns into something more like a fear of failure. Every time a game starts, I can feel my heart pounding out of my chest. If I can't do well, then what has all my time playing been for? Am I just no good? Am I not as smart as I thought I was? Sure I seem to pick up on things faster than average, but what about delving deep and swimming with the big boys? As all these thoughts pass through my mind, I begin to cling to my rating, creeping up ever so slowly. If I lose several games and it goes down, I'm devastated. If I win, I'm afraid to play more for fear of losing it. Eventually even the thought of playing makes me nervous.

With Magic (that's Magic: The Gathering, the trading card game) it was the worst, because I was actually paying money to participate in every tournament, on- or offline. If I won, then the prize would make my net loss negligible (or sometimes even give a net gain). But a loss meant I had to face my financial irresponsibility head on. I imagine that's how amateur poker players feel. And I was, essentially, gambling. Come to think of it, considering you can easily sell the virtual prize packs on eBay for a consistent monetary value, Wizards of the Coast (the company that makes Magic, among other games including Dungeons and Dragons) really is treading a fine, fine legal line.

Then I discovered Go and KGS (in July of last year), and switching games was the easiest decision I'd ever made. After all, KGS was totally and completely free! I felt like such a sucker for having handed over all those hundreds of dollars to WotC over the years. It's such a shame, because Magic really is a deep, interesting game. Maybe someday when I have riches pouring out of my ears, I'll dabble in Magic again. I certainly plan on returning to Go, which I still consider to be easily the greatest game I've ever played and probably ever will play. I love the way the stones flow across the board with complete logic but complete freedom. My mind tends to conceive of everything in terms of shape and texture, and the gameplay of Go is communicated by nothing but that. There is no symbolism as in Chess: you don't need to know that the piece shaped like this moves diagonally and the piece shaped like that moves in an L-shape. All the pieces are simple circles, and none of them have special properties. The shapes you see on the board are the game. Pure elegance. And when the game became stressful, I would try to return to that state of mind. I would go into a game trying to forget all the rules I had learned or made for myself, just letting myself freely drop the stones wherever my heart desired. And that helped. But ultimately I just couldn't tear myself away from the responsibility of winning, away from the devilish allure of that cursed strength graph!

And so it goes, and so it goes. Now, with Starcraft 2, my rating has stopped shooting up (except for the artificial shooting up that comes from Blizzard's insidious bonus point system, which is obviously there to give every idiot the impression that they're improving but which Blizzard creepily claims to be in place so you can catch up after being away from the game, ignoring the fact that if there were no bonus points, there would be nothing to catch up to--but that's a rant for another day). It does still go up very slowly, and I try not to watch it. Part of the problem is that it takes a lot of mental energy to play the game as I should, having concrete goals in mind, evaluating what I did right and wrong each game, and most importantly keeping an alert and adaptive state of mind during the game instead of letting the multitasking numb me into a trance. When I have it in me to give it that attention, things are great. But sometimes I just want to relax and play a few games, and that's when I start caring too much about winning or losing. I guess that's why modern single-player games are so focused on letting the player make steady progress without much effort. When all you want to do is relax, you just want that steady stream of positive reinforcement.

In writing this out, I've given myself the idea to take preparatory measures the next time I get into a really good state of mind. I'll decide what I want to focus on over not just the next few games but over the next hundred, and I'll take copious notes. The next day, even if my brain is feeling tired, hopefully I'll be able to refer back and know what to work on, even if I don't get any new ideas.

Also, maybe I should go back and watch some Husky casts to rekindle my childlike appreciation for game pieces shooting at each other.

Games played: 632
League/Points: Diamond/1527

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Choosing Prodoss

So, picking up from my last post, I stopped four-gating a while ago. I wanted more variety, so I went back to playing Random. I stopped relying on what had been easy win builds and just started doing whatever. And losing. A lot. I couldn't spend all my money, often because of a shortage of either minerals or gas. I realized I'm just not experienced enough to fly by the seat of my pants, because I haven't developed a feel for how to sustain whatever crazy build pops into my head. And I really wasn't learning anything or getting better. I guess I'm kind of stubborn about wanting to be a jack-of-all-trades. It's the same reason I never look up build orders online. Instead of following the instructions of those who have tested these things extensively, I wanted to get to the point where I would just naturally do efficient builds, based on an understanding of the game. But that's just too extreme. I should treat build orders like I treated joseki in Go (I'll eventually create or link to glossaries for my two games some time, but a joseki is sort of like a Chess opening). I used them as a study tool, trying to understand why each move was made rather than simply memorizing them. Similarly, I can study particular build orders (especially via replays of top players) and copy them to the extent that I understand them. After all, build orders only ever cover the first few minutes of the game, so it would be impossible to rely on them completely.

Speaking of BOs, this is an interesting thread on TL about someone who claims to have built a program that can tell you the fastest way to get to any set of Zerg units. There are the obligatory know-it-alls saying that it's crap because it doesn't take everything into account, but I think it could be a valuable tool to point toward better strategies.

So anyway, I've decided to stop playing Random so that I can focus on refining a small number of builds with only one race. In choosing a race, I ruled out Terran because I didn't want to put up with people saying that my race is OP and that's the only reason I ever win, blah blah blah. But then I was torn between Zerg and Protoss. On the one hand, I love how Zerg is fundamentally different from the other two races and how it gives you more flexibility in terms of expanding and tech switching. But I decided to go with Protoss just because I love using forcefields, blink Stalkers, Observers (who needs hax) and Void Rays. I've been opening almost every time with 3 Gateways and 1 Robotics Facility, but I haven't bothered to refine it to the same pattern each time, especially in deciding when to get the Robo. So establishing that exactly will be my next step. Another exciting thing I've been doing in quickmatch is working on late game macro. Earlier I made the decision to always stay on only two bases because I knew I couldn't handle the multitasking involved with keeping any more than that. But I can handle it now, and it's really fun. I can already see that if I get fully comfortable with that, it'll easily add at least 200 points to my rating.

Speaking of points, I haven't improved since after my 4-gate winning streak from last time. You get 1 bonus point added to your pool every two hours, and if you take that into account, my rating has actually gone down slightly since my last post. That's a little discouraging, but I want to be dedicated to this pursuit. I want to see just how good I can get at this game, no matter how long it takes me.

On another note, WTF?! They shut down Nexus Word Wars because the word "dyke" was in it?! That's a perfectly benign word (it means "dam", people) unless you specifically use it in an offensive way. I'm pretty sure I played that game about 50 times. There's something about this sort of typing game that I just love, probably the frantic pace and the thrill of having your fingers flying every second as you try to make intelligent decisions (probably why I like sc2 itself).

--

And finally, I made this post to reddit.com/r/starcraft, and I have to say I was surprised by the negative reaction (right now, 21 up votes, 24 down votes). I've been frustrated for a while about casters mispronouncing words, because (1) I'm always frustrated by people misusing English, and (2) I don't want to believe that video games, even at the highest level and most cerebral, are exclusively the realm of twenty-something basement dwellers. I've seen many posts on Reddit about individual words, including zealot (many people seem to finally grasp the first syllable but not the second), centrifugal, and barracks. Day[9] also recently jokingly bragged (I think it was during his sc2 release party) about knowing how to pronounce all the difficult words in the game, including chitinous, which is one I didn't know. And after hearing one or two people pronounce the word Templar (I thought it sounded like pulsar) as "tem-pler", I looked it up and found to my delight that I was wrong and those one or two people were right (although in both games, it is pronounced the "wrong" way). So I got curious as to whether there existed a "Starcraft glossary" to help with pronunciation and in some cases definition. I couldn't find any, so I had my idea for my first Reddit post. I've always been fascinated by languages and understanding the correct way of speaking and writing them (fun fact: I speak fluent French). And I love to find out about misconceptions, particularly when it's my own. Turns out not everyone likes to be corrected. Perhaps pronunciation is tricky because it's the least concrete of language skills since there are so many minor variations from person to person. There were some positive comments, but the general message was, "Don't tell me I'm wrong! This is how I'm used to it! Language can't be pinned down to what you find in a dictionary! Your pronunciations sound dumb, anyway." I wasn't sure how to feel in response. There was a part of me that just wanted to be angry and hoity-toity about people getting upset about me writing down what was in the dictionary. But in general, I don't like to be elitist. If so many people thought I should shut up, there had to be some sort of validity in that. I'm still struggling with coming to a conclusion, but here are my main ideas:

(1) I simply cannot allow myself to hold to a belief that others should use correct language if it is only for the sake of correctness. I get annoyed when people complain about there being too much foul language on TV, and my justification is that there is no inherent evil in it other than that which you create by the arbitrary rule that certain words shouldn't be used. It would be hypocritical of me to treat grammar/spelling/pronunciation/usage mistakes any other way. Just because I like to be right doesn't mean you have to.

(2) There are many good reasons, however, to be correct. The most important is that it facilitates communication. A great practical example of this comes up when you try to communicate with a non-native speaker of English. A mistake here or there might not hinder understanding since the context makes up for it. But if you combine too many mistakes into one sentence, you may start to have some real trouble. But that points to perhaps the core issue: it's not about speaking correctly according to the dictionary, it's about speaking according to what the listener is used to. In other words, we should make an effort to conform to the standard expectations of our community.

(3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of sub-communities developing their own variation from the wider standard? Perhaps it may instill regional pride, but it may also contribute to stereotypes from without. Consider, for example, the southern U.S. accent and all its effects.

(4) To what extent does social context play a role? Is there an obligation to have the ability to speak correctly even if we don't exercise it in informal contexts? Is pronunciation fundamentally different from the other language skills in this regard, since people tend to be comfortable with only one pronunciation per word?

So I'm going to try to relax about pronunciation, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to stop shuddering every time Artosis sits at a microphone in front of the biggest global Starcraft tournament of all time and says "zell-awt".

Games played: 514
League/Points: Diamond/1176

Saturday, September 25, 2010

4 Warp Gate is kinda good

Yup, it's true what they say. I just got done with 18 games in three hours, winning 16 of them. I used nothing but 4 Warp Gate. One loss was to 8pool on Delta Quadrant, and the other was to a fast-expanding Terran on Lost Temple who managed to defend his expo with SCVs repairing bunkers. Kudos to that Terran player. But I'm not sure what I could have done against the Zerg. I happened to scout their location last, so by the time I knew what was going on it was probably too late. I guess I'll have to start sending a second scout against Zerg.

Anyway, 4 Warp Gate is stupidly amazing. (Here's an example replay.) I think I'll try adapting it to include taking my natural expansion. Sometimes it can be difficult to break my opponent's defenses, but then I can usually contain them in their main base. And once my second base is up and running while they're still on one base, it's only a matter of time before I can overrun them with pure numbers.

Games played: 395
League/Points: Diamond/1039

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Greetings, Prophet. The great work begins! The Messenger has arrived.

This is where the real work begins and I start deciding how dedicated I truly want to be. After almost 400 games, I've finally stopped coasting. I don't just automatically win most of my games anymore. I can't just expand when I feel like it. Harassment isn't guaranteed to be profitable. Sloppy wall-ins get broken down, and sloppy macro gets outdone. And most importantly, just because I have a big army doesn't mean it's going to be a good idea to attack move into the opponent's main. Here's a good example of me losing to brazenness (ZvZ on Delta Quadrant).

It's time to start thinking a little more and polishing my game up a little more. I think I'll focus on just one race for a while, probably Protoss, my weakest of the three. Perhaps I'll start with the typical 4 Warp Gate push and see where that takes me. I like the idea of starting by using only one strategy. Eventually, you perfect it, and then you can look at the games you're still losing to see where that strategy's weaknesses really are, at which point you modify it as little as possible to accommodate encountering a similar problem in future games. As you continue to modify it over time, you'll in theory eventually end up playing a fully versatile, many-faceted game that may or may not even incorporate the original strategy.

Games played: 372
League/Points: Diamond/806

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

O_O

I'm finally feeling better, so I've been playing a little more. First impressions of Diamond League: Oh my god, people actually know how to make units! Like, as many as I do! Am I going to have to employ... strategy?

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Starcraft a-slow-slow

Haven't been playing much recently due to being seven kinds of sick. Just now I tried some games and ended up winning 3 and losing 6. I kept making ridiculous macro mistakes, immediately falling behind like I did in the initial weeks. I guess my mind isn't as sharp right now. I'll get some rest and come back when I feel better.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

I made it!


Seriously, though, I'm terrible.

Games played: 337
League/Points: Diamond/838

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Lessons in the Fundamentals of Starcraft

There is a famous book about Go called Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go, written by Toshiro Kageyama, a top professional player. Instead of using lots of variation diagrams, individual joseki analysis, etc., the book takes a small number of simple examples and uses them as a platform from which to speak about how you should think about the game. I remember a line in there somewhere about how the way to improve at go is to start by studying the fundamentals vigilantly, building a solid foundation for your game, and then, when you begin to progress to the higher stages, to study the fundamentals again. Kageyama seems obsessed by this idea in his writing, as though frustrated that more people don't understand and appreciate it.

So does Day[9]. Just look at some of his recent Dailies, especially #177 "Simple Winning Techniques", which I am now halfway through watching. His basic idea is that people become too concerned with intricately countering the opponent's strategy and/or unit composition and lose sight of the fact that you can just win by getting a huge army and rolling all over them. And it makes perfect sense. Sure, you can beat those Colossi by getting Vikings, but you can also beat them with more and more Marine-Marauder. You will lose more army value in the fight, but that's value that would have been spent on the tech anyway. I'm speaking in broad theoretical terms, of course. Continuing the Colossus/Viking example, it seems the main differences between the two approaches are... 1. You only have to pay for tech once, but you have to pay for army size repeatedly. If the game goes longer (that's an important "if"), you will still have access to Vikings as you build and rebuild your army. But every time you rebuild with huge numbers of MM, you have to pay again for that bulk. So teching to a counter could be seen as an investment just like expanding. 2. Specialized units are just that--specialized. After your Vikings take care of all the Colossi, what are they going to do? If you end up using them a lot in ground assault mode, you basically just have a bunch of slow, overpriced infantry that can't stim. Since you cannot exactly predict what units your opponent will get, this phenomenon is essentially guaranteed to occur every time; the only question is to what extent.

It's ironic that Day[9] has started harping on this subject recently, because it's exactly the stage where I find myself. I am still just hideously awful at micro and harassment--both using it and countering it. It's because I instinctively interpret macro (for better or worse) as the initial requirement that you must master to at least 90% or so before you can even begin to play the real game. If I let a Queen get to 50+ energy because I'm forgetting to inject, and then my opponent shows up at my base and kills my whole army, then as far as I'm concerned, that fight didn't really happen. It was totally invalid, imaginary. I've heard of some Go teachers who despise being asked questions about how move 50 could have been improved in a game where move 40 was some fundamental error. "It's a meaningless question anyway! That position is impossible." To these people, playing a game is like doing math. Who cares what the square root of x equals if x was obtained by dividing by zero? Logic says that if you assume a falsehood, you can prove anything. I will now prove that I am a god. Let us assume that pigs fly. Clearly, since pigs don't fly, it is true that if pigs fly, then I am a god. But I have assumed that they do. Therefore, I am a god. Now let us show that that wave of Stalkers my opponent is sending to my base is going to utterly annihilate me. First, let us assume the absurdity that I, for no particular reason other than forgetfulness, did not inject larvae. Clearly, if I do not inject larvae, then my economy and army will be inferior. Thus, as we now see from the mass carnage on screen, I lose the game. Well, so what? The situation was impossible anyway. Let us not, oh please for the love of Aiur, let us not begin postulating some new strategy to deal with a similar wave of Stalkers in a future game. The fact that I made a series of dumb macro mistakes and then got killed tells me hardly anything at all about whether my build/strategy was any good. Would you think that Hellion harass was bad because you got distracted and accidentally ran your Hellions straight into a ball of Roaches? That, to me, seems just as silly of a conclusion. But here's the difference between those two things: Hellion harass is something you try from time to time, and macro-management is something that you have to do every damn game. So how can I know if, uh, getting units and attacking with them is any good until my macro is reasonably close to ideal?

I've now played over 300 games with this attitude, and I still see myself as a total macro noob. (Oh, but did I mention I'm back in Platinum, rank 2 in my division, my most played race is now listed as Zerg, and I usually play Random? Yes, things are a-changin'.) I recently played a game (here's the replay) as Protoss where I totally blew my own mind by managing to maintain four bases and then using my massive income to overrun my 3-base Zerg opponent. Being able to easily and continuously produce off of ten Warpgates, two Stargates and a Robotics Facility gave me a childlike glee like what I felt when I played my first 1v1 on 7/27 and wreaked havoc with a fleet of Battlecruisers. It made me think back to when just the idea of expanding to my natural was a lot to handle, and it reminded me of how much of a way I still have to go before I gain the skill to actually go around the map and do what I want to do. Strategy is all fine and good, but I'm still working on moving my pieces across the board.

Here are my main macro points to work on:
1. Understand the progression of your income, and anticipate the immediate future. Don't wait to get to 1000 minerals before you realize you need to build more production buildings. Understand that as you get more workers and expand, you will need to have things in place to be able to spend the added income. Always know approximately how many workers are at each base and how many are collecting gas.
2. Don't panic. The speed of the game can make it feel like you'll never have the time to build enough stuff to spend all your money, while making sure you've got three workers on each gas and minerals aren't over- or under-saturated, etc. But that's just not true. Really, how much does it take to start spending your money? Maybe building, say, four more production buildings and adding them to your hotkey groups? Is that really so complicated?
3. Similar to #2, don't get sidetracked by less important but more practiced activities. If you are gas blocked, stop figuring out how many Overlords to make and start making Extractors and putting three Drones on each. Especially in a panicked state, it is easy to fall back on the most ingrained habits. But if the habits are ingrained, that means you're already doing them well and don't need to devote as much attention to them! It's a vicious circle. By definition, you have to put more effort into things that are more difficult.
4. Don't stop producing workers! No really, don't stop! Ever! I mean it! Keep making them! Do you have a lot now? Oh, that's cool. Keep making them!

Some other points:
1. The enemy is not the units attacking you. The enemy is the guy clicking on those units and telling them to attack you. And that guy is just as limited as you are. Gaining an understanding of what that guy is doing and why is fundamental to understanding the progression of a game. As you play, imagine casting your own game as a spectator with full vision of the map. If you don't know enough to be able to do that, scout! (Or, as Day[9] suggests, just reason out his limitations.)
2. Chokepoints are death chambers. The DPS of a Roach that can't get close enough to the enemy to attack is 0. It is perfectly normal to have two comparable armies on either side of a choke in a standoff situation. That's why it's so difficult to attack the opponent's main.
3. Don't get chained to army hotkeys. Box off units and issue orders appropriate to that chunk. In particular, don't repeatedly press 3a-click (I use 3 for my main army) on the same spot. That's like trying to make Mario jump higher by squeezing the A button as hard as you can. A waste of energy.
4. Have fun! Remember how awesome this game is and what an opportunity it is to be a part of such a large, active community.

Games played: 317
League/Points: Platinum/887

p.s. Fun fact: Glancing at the analysis in Sc2gears (highly recommended app, by the way), I see that since September 1 when I started using the program, Random has landed me on Terran 16 times, and I won 15 of those games. XD

Monday, August 30, 2010

"That's your plan?!"

So I got demoted to Gold. I think I raked in two separate 10-loss streaks playing as Zerg. I was probably making it hard on myself because I was fast-expanding every game. That's what IdrA does, so I figured I'd follow his lead. It turns out that in order to play like one of the best Zergs in the world, you have to be sort of... umm... good. I would just get overrun every game. I made very little besides drones in the beginning, because I felt a need to get at least 32 drones on minerals (two per patch) rather quickly to take advantage of having two bases. Then, if I survived, I would start seeing enormous amounts of money pour in and be unable to spend it for lack of larvae.

The most frustrating thing was that I felt like my army would just melt before any sort of resistance from the opponent. It turns out that can happen when all you have is Zerglings and Hydralisks! I had figured Hydras were a good unit to rely on since they hit both ground and air. I remember getting crap-tons of them to beat the campaign in SC1. The problem in SC2 is that they are very fragile--only 80 HP, which is probably the lowest of any tier-two unit in the game. (In fact, even though Hydras cost 25/50 more than Roaches [25/25 more, actually --ed.], they have the same rating for what I call the total damage output, or TDO, which you get by multiplying the damage per second by the HP, giving a rough comparative indication of how much damage they will deal in a fight.) I was used to Terran, where you can just get a big Marine-Marauder ball and successfully attack-move into any army of roughly equal area on screen. (No, I don't think Terran is OP [overpowered], but I do think it's the easiest to play at a low level.) I should have saved some of those replays. Just imagine a giant horde of Lings and Hydras running into a wall of Zealot/Stalker/Colossus or Marine/Marauder/Thor and crumbling apart like so many thrown clumps of dry dirt.

At some point my humor with the situation started to subside, and I wanted to find some way of doing better. So I downloaded some replays of Diamond Zerg players just to see what they did. And I noticed that they all seemed to be using a little thing called Roaches. And then they did something peculiar with them: they attacked. How novel! And by attacking, they forced the opponent to produce units to defend. That's the big lesson I drew. Instead of being worried about being attacked by air, just make your own early attack by ground, and then the opponent won't have the luxury of being able to build up a large air force. Attacking is also a great way to get your opponent to lay his cards on the table by revealing his defenses. (I might make a post later about the way my psychological fear of the unknown poisons my decision making and what I'm doing to overcome it.) So now I am happily making a Roach army from one base (at least to start), and I'm winning regularly again. I still have a tough time with Zerg macro, especially keeping up with larva injections (inarguably the most unforgiving macro mechanic of the three races). But I'm working on it. Once I get back up to Platinum and start winning again too much, I'll switch to Protoss.

Wednesday, August 4, 2010

What is Starcraft?

Starcraft is like playing a game of Stratego using only your toes while you attempt to juggle a set of flaming clubs and gargle ginger ale to the tune of "Oh, Susanna". Every time you sing a note out of tune, you lose a turn, and if you drop a club, it lands on the board and burns up several of your pieces. After several minutes, if the game is still going, someone starts throwing water balloons at you, and someone else starts yelling random numbers into your ear. The only thing comforting you is the knowledge that the exact same thing is happening to your opponent, wherever he may be.

Seriously, though. Playing Starcraft reminds me of all those wacky multi-tasking flash games like this one. It can be stressful, but if you're in the right mindset, it's a blast. And when you manage to really pull things off, you feel like a god.

There is one key difference between Starcraft and those flash games, though--the strategy of Starcraft is deep. I am new to the game, so I can only peek down the rabbit hole, but it's a loooong way down and I can't see the bottom if there is one. When should you expand? When should you go for higher tech? When and how should you scout? What is the best counter for your opponent's strategy, provided you've scouted it? When are upgrades worth the cost? How valuable is time as a resource? When should you harass, and how can you evaluate how much damage the harassment needs to do to be worth it? When, if ever, does cheese become your best chance of winning? Which race is the best? How should you arrange your hotkeys? How should you arrange your buildings? Is APM important? How aggressive or defensive should you be? And on and on and on and on...

The distractions in the Stratego metaphor represent macro (short for macro-management), which is basically all the things you know you have to do but are constantly forgetting, like making sure you're constantly producing units and keeping your money low and building supply providers (e.g. ADDITIONAL PYLONS) early enough so that you don't max out. The thing is, even if you're good enough to remember to do all those things, that leaves very little time to make strategic decisions. So as Day[9] attested in his superb Starcraft autobiography, the game strongly rewards the ability to be immediately decisive. You might not be doing the right thing, but if you waffle, then you're definitely not doing the right thing. I hope Starcraft can be a vehicle for me to teach myself to apply that philosophy to my life.

Starcraft (along with RTS's in general) teaches you not to become enamored with your own actions. I always used to be terrible at RTS's (I've had Age of Empires II for a long time, but every time I tried to get into it, I failed terribly and felt that there was just something fundamental about the game that I wasn't grasping) because I had the natural tendency to narrowly focus on each of my actions. When I made a worker go and build a building, I wanted to watch my little person walk over and watch him build my little building and watch my little progress bar fill up as the construction animation moved through the different stages of built-ness, up to the final moments as I anticipated the satisfying "bloo-doo-oop" signifying completion. I feel that this tendency must be very widespread since all casual management games that I've played prey eagerly upon it.

But no! We Starcraft players have no time to watch units move to their destination nor buildings be built, and we care not for sound effects but for their informational value. We are concerned with wonderful, glorious strategy, and it is happening right now, in real time!

A newbie's Go/Starcraft blog

This is going to be a blog dedicated to my progress in the games of Go and Starcraft.