xragnarok645x
[10] Knight
Strategy: "Do whatever it takes to win."
This is in a nutshell though, lols. :D
This is in a nutshell though, lols. :D
Hate Speech: A Formal Introduction
- Thread starter Dr. Hates
- Start date
CrazyYoshimitsu
[10] Knight
Do I know the matchup? Do I need to hit the lab again?
Should I listen to haters and lovers? How do I set a defensive pace?
Should I switch characters? Do tiers really matter?
When should I press the issue?
Should I listen to haters and lovers? How do I set a defensive pace?
Should I switch characters? Do tiers really matter?
When should I press the issue?
Tanegashima
[09] Warrior
Great post Hates. It really got me thinking. I'm more of a casual player but interested in getting better and know I still have a ways to go. When I get stressed I am prone to do irrational crap like just throw in a Cervy 11k and hope for the best. But I think I am more like a lot of people here and can't act predominantly by instint and need to be more analytical.
Ooofmatic
World Warrior
To me 'feeling it' is not like some mystical gift, it's experience.
The more experience the player has the better he understands how the game works and the easier it is for the player's brain to absorb the multitude of details that are going on at any given moment.
With enough experience the player doesn't always need to be thinking about the frame data and game mechanics to tell what he should be doing. He just.. dare I say it? Feels it. Or more specifically, the game is so ingrained in his head that his subconscious mind can just tell if a move is unsafe and where the openings are and when and how to punish, without even feeling like he's thinking about it. And since he's not actively thinking about it, it gives his mind the time to focus on the mind games and adaptation, rather than frames and gameplay mechanics.
Like for example, I just got into MK a few months ago, but I don't have a full grasp of the fighting engine, frames, and mechanics. I still have to actively think not just about the mind games and how I should adapt, but also about the mechanics and what I should be doing and when. In SC it just comes naturally. I rarely need to actively think about the latter, and can focus much more on what my opponent is thinking.
This is my interpretation of what "feeling it" means. And I base it off my experience with SC which began exactly 12 years and 3 days ago (when SC1 came out for DC: 9/9/99).
The more experience the player has the better he understands how the game works and the easier it is for the player's brain to absorb the multitude of details that are going on at any given moment.
With enough experience the player doesn't always need to be thinking about the frame data and game mechanics to tell what he should be doing. He just.. dare I say it? Feels it. Or more specifically, the game is so ingrained in his head that his subconscious mind can just tell if a move is unsafe and where the openings are and when and how to punish, without even feeling like he's thinking about it. And since he's not actively thinking about it, it gives his mind the time to focus on the mind games and adaptation, rather than frames and gameplay mechanics.
Like for example, I just got into MK a few months ago, but I don't have a full grasp of the fighting engine, frames, and mechanics. I still have to actively think not just about the mind games and how I should adapt, but also about the mechanics and what I should be doing and when. In SC it just comes naturally. I rarely need to actively think about the latter, and can focus much more on what my opponent is thinking.
This is my interpretation of what "feeling it" means. And I base it off my experience with SC which began exactly 12 years and 3 days ago (when SC1 came out for DC: 9/9/99).
Dr. Hates
Jerk.
KingAce: I'm a fan of the PLAY2CRUSH mentality, generally speaking. Do you think there's a way that your questions, particularly with regard to "cut[ting] down [the opponent's] thinking," could be systematized/further articulated?
Noface: Walking away when you're on autopilot strikes me as a good idea. That tends to be what I do, too, because it's important to be mindful of the potential to develop bad habits. We end up training ourselves while we train our opponents, and not always in a good way.
Signia: That's pretty detailed. Have you given any thought to how a person could go through that progression of "feeling things out" more quickly and efficiently? I've been known, in tournaments, no less, to trade rounds or even games for information on my opponent. It's a viable tactic, but I think we should all work toward minimizing risk.
Tanegashima: Glad you're interested in stepping your game up--learning good skills for self-evaluation will help you make up the experience gap a lot faster than someone flying blind, as it were.
Mr. Oooooofmatic/everybody: Read what OOF posted. I believe that the equation of "feel" and vast libraries of experience is spot on. That isn't the whole story, of course, because if it were, time played would be almost the sole determining factor in who wins and who loses. The purpose of the Fundamental Rule isn't to replace the lightning quick, quasi-conscious decision making process that characterizes high level play, but rather to develop a model that strengthens the fundamental principles behind that process while shortcutting people to it.
What I mean is this: expert level performance across all fields of human endeavor tends to involve less active cognition on the part of the expert performer than on the part of someone who's just learning because they've internalized best practices. The old myth about chess masters seeing 87t5497486 moves ahead is just that--a myth. More rigorous laboratory settings have revealed that master and grandmaster chess players don't tend to see that many more possibilities than novices. The difference, however, is that the chess master will see better possibilities because he has a near-automatic grasp of best practices. Overtly analyzing what you're doing while you practice is the equivalent of, say, going through a difficult piece of music at a slower tempo in order to make sure you get the notes right. The more we practice the habits of intelligent decision making, the more likely we are to revert to those habits under the pressure of tournament play.
Noface: Walking away when you're on autopilot strikes me as a good idea. That tends to be what I do, too, because it's important to be mindful of the potential to develop bad habits. We end up training ourselves while we train our opponents, and not always in a good way.
Signia: That's pretty detailed. Have you given any thought to how a person could go through that progression of "feeling things out" more quickly and efficiently? I've been known, in tournaments, no less, to trade rounds or even games for information on my opponent. It's a viable tactic, but I think we should all work toward minimizing risk.
Tanegashima: Glad you're interested in stepping your game up--learning good skills for self-evaluation will help you make up the experience gap a lot faster than someone flying blind, as it were.
Mr. Oooooofmatic/everybody: Read what OOF posted. I believe that the equation of "feel" and vast libraries of experience is spot on. That isn't the whole story, of course, because if it were, time played would be almost the sole determining factor in who wins and who loses. The purpose of the Fundamental Rule isn't to replace the lightning quick, quasi-conscious decision making process that characterizes high level play, but rather to develop a model that strengthens the fundamental principles behind that process while shortcutting people to it.
What I mean is this: expert level performance across all fields of human endeavor tends to involve less active cognition on the part of the expert performer than on the part of someone who's just learning because they've internalized best practices. The old myth about chess masters seeing 87t5497486 moves ahead is just that--a myth. More rigorous laboratory settings have revealed that master and grandmaster chess players don't tend to see that many more possibilities than novices. The difference, however, is that the chess master will see better possibilities because he has a near-automatic grasp of best practices. Overtly analyzing what you're doing while you practice is the equivalent of, say, going through a difficult piece of music at a slower tempo in order to make sure you get the notes right. The more we practice the habits of intelligent decision making, the more likely we are to revert to those habits under the pressure of tournament play.