Sunny wrote:
Nearly rofled here. Just imagine: projectile "randomness" is a pseudo-random sequence, starting with a certain seed.
Makes me think about Counter Strike, where people compensated pseudo-random recoil spray with mouse movements and even aim bots, doing this were developed
Nearly rofled here. Just imagine: projectile "randomness" is a pseudo-random sequence, starting with a certain seed.
Makes me think about Counter Strike, where people compensated pseudo-random recoil spray with mouse movements and even aim bots, doing this were developed
Indeed. At a high enough level, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of similar tools being developed, likely in the form of UI mods, to assist with determining the likely result of projectile randomness during engagements.
Sunny wrote:
When I'm speaking about gambing, try to imagine 2 of your optimal player's match, one will probably lose. He will still play perfect. Played many games, their stats will be dead even, assuming they gamble optimally. You can go comm one of flanks on many maps, and desicion depends on expectation of what your opponent will do too. This is far from being not complicated
In a hypothetical case of two perfect players, whomever wins would eventually be decided by whichever player had a faction advantage. Presently, we simply do not know the true balance of many lategame units - at best, we have approximations and guesses based on heavily biased opinions and imperfect knowledge - and therefore, it is highly likely that games would be decided by units that were discovered to not be perfectly balanced.
If both players were the same faction, then whomever wins would, necessarily, be the player who made fewer mistakes. It would just likely take longer to discover who the better player was.
rootbeer23 wrote:
so your definition of perfect is that it wins you the game?
there is no such thing as a perfect choice.
example: upgrade a mass extractor. whether that was a good choice will be decided in the minutes after you made the choice and depends on the actions of your opponent.
since you cannot know beforehand which of the actions in your priority list will turn out to be effective, you need luck to play a perfect game.
You can indeed know which of your actions will be most effective. Just as you know that it's more efficient to surround your T2 mex with storages before teching to T3, you know that certain openings are more efficient and leave you less open to risk than others.
In this example, you would only tech than mex if you knew that your opponent could not take advantage of it. You can easily find this out by scouting.
In pretty much any high level game, the players who consistently win tournaments are typically those who play conservatively, and leave themselves open to as little risk as possible. This is no exception, especially due to how cheap and efficient it is to scout at every stage of the game.
Statistics: Posted by uberge3k — 21 Feb 2013, 20:14
]]>