Blatantly false. You can achieve neither of those things without the information needed to do so. This isn’t rocket science kid. Information is the most important aspect of the game bar none.
What happens when all information is known?
Is this just the end of your ability to talk about the game kid?
What mature person seeks to derive self worth from a nerdy boomer game forum?
It’s only fun if you’re arguing with someone as impotent as batz, apparently.
Ah, you gonna try for GM again then? Maybe you don’t know yourself as well as you think you do.
1 Like
@OP:
I will directly answer your question. Why do people think that balance is more important than good design? The reason is that A LOT of people who play this game are VERY competitive. This makes them focus A LOT on winning, rather than on having fun. Because they they are so INTENSLY focused on winning, they are willing to ENDURE a lot of suffering in order to come on top. When there is no good balance, then the game is not about skill and the WHOLE POINT of a proper competition is DEMOLISHED. If you are a more casual gamer then you will tend to care a lot more about fun and MUCH less about balance. If you are a freak obsessed to get to 6k MMR, then you will just want to WIN at all costs. Notice all those people who train some sports VERY hard in order to get better. They go through pain, injuries and a lot of hardships, because they want to win so much. That’s the attitude which makes people cherish balance much more than FUN. Think about the Rocky movies. People who are at the top of this game have a Rocky attitude. They are willing to BLEED in order to win.
If it quacks like a duck it’s a duck. You can list your accomplishments A to Z, you could post a screenshot of a PhD certificate, you could have a Nobel prize; none of these things have any relevance to the topic at hand. If you can’t understand the absolute basics of the game, e.g. that information is the most important aspect of the game bar none, then your opinion on the game is far too ignorant to even consider reading your posts. You can claim to be Albert Eintstein for all I care but if you can’t understand the simplest aspects of a super simple video game, it’s obvious you are lying (about everything).
Like I said, if you disagree about information being so important, then post a video of yourself winning a game of SC2 with your monitor and headphones turned off. Go ahead. Win a game with 0 information and prove your point that “efficiency” is the most important aspect of the game. Until you do this I literally don’t care that you even exist. The fact that you can’t see that efficiency is dependent on information, like every other aspect of the game, is truly mind boggling. The fact that you can’t make that super simple connection while ranting about being a genius who grew up in a “family of academics” is mind blowing levels of sheer delusion. There is no way you can be efficient if you don’t have information about the game state to decide what actions are the most efficient actions. This is not rocket science. It’s a video game and a super simple one at that, Mr. “Financial Expert.”
https://i.imgur.com/0lVtvpJ.png
FYI this isn’t anything even remotely resembling an intellectual conversation. I am trying to get you to admit a very basic fact about the game and you are rambling about being a genius, “bro,” while denying that very basic fact. This is legit one of the least intellectually stimulating conversations I have had in a long time, and that’s saying something considering the people who typically post on these forums. ClownWings and CrusaderQuack are probably jotting down notes at this very moment to up their s-posting game.
The idea that someone would claim to be having an intellectual discussion as they actively commit blatant fact denial is such an absurd combination that could only exist on these forums which foster some of the most severe bias on the internet (and likely indicative of mental health issues). You just can’t make claims like that kid they are so logically inconsistent on an absolutely fundamental level.
Denying facts isn’t intellectualism; it’s solipsism.
That’s because you haven’t gone on the same intellectual pilgrimage as battlenet’s very own Tai Lopez. He surrounded himself with mentors and read a 1,000 books while you were still arguing on battlenet. He has reached a level of enlightenment you would only dream of. That’s okay though because he’s going to release a course that will help you crush nerds in debates on the internet. I think it’s called 69 steps to Battlenet or something.
1 Like
Guys like me owe a great debt of gratitude to people like that. Who on Earth could possibly help us predict what the normies will do next, which stocks they will buy etc, except for someone like that who tells them what to do? The clickbaiters of the internet posing up there as GODs, shoveling money into our pockets.
Have you noticed Jordan Peterson’s new climate science propaganda shift? Oh boy it’s clever. He’s a smart man and very manipulative. Get ready for the green stocks to start hitting the floor soon. He’s using a two pronged attack of A) there are bigger problems and B) the science is very complicated, not at all settled and we aren’t even sure how right we are which is a perfect message to his fan base given that reverberates with his prior lectures. It’s exactly how I would’ve attacked it lmao. The argument isn’t structured to be debated, it’s structured to have as little substance as possible so it can’t be debated while instilling doubt in the viewers.
How are the green clowns going to even approach an argument that doesn’t make any hard claims? The hardest claim he makes is that climate science is complex, implying there is great potential for error. So if they explain in detail that there aren’t errors, it is too complicated and people will distrust it. If they explain it simply, there will be errors he can attack. Talk about a masterpiece in manipulation. In the debates he can deliberately drive up the complexity of the conversation to make his point and it also increases the likelihood they make an error in the debate, not necessarily in the science, allowing him to pounce and attribute the error to the science.
If you are debating the facts, you’re already one step behind your opponent. You have to get out ahead of the facts and establish your narrative as being superior and then you use that perception to color the facts in your favor at every step along the way for the entire debate. Aka, “Climate science can’t be trusted but I sure can wink wink.”
It reminds me of con men honestly. Oh no, don’t trust your banker, man. He doesn’t want you to cash out on something like this because he will lose money. Just go take 10 grand out and give it to me, I’ll invest it for you! We will BE RICH MAN! 
1 Like
No clown, information is just a component (very important at that) that helps the player make decisions about positioning, compositions and result in battles that have a positive trade-ratio.
What one does with the information is what matters at the end, not the “information” per se.
It’s the same tripe of the type APM=skill (what one is able to do with APM is an order of magnitude more important than absolute mindless APM that passes for …skill).
Think (i know that it is hard for you) of that moron that boasted that he saw the 3 Stargates build Phoenixes, the double Cybers go in Chrono overdrive and the moron…starts to build …Mutas.
Yea he had information and …f-up his game.
2 Likes
Yeh because all these indies have crazy good balanced multiplayer games with 3 completely asymmetrical races…
2 Likes
Also funny mentioning these games and creativity, Valheim is a survival sandbox, totally an undiscovered genre, Minecraft (also survival game) was inspired by another similar game, and Subnautica (yet another survival game) reminds me a lot of Subculture, an old pc game about deep sea and submarines doing quests and stuff.
1 Like
Correction, information is THE BASIS that is REQUIRED to make decisions about positioning, compositions and result in battles that have a positive trade-ratio. It is the most important aspect of the game, PERIOD.
This post reeks of a man who hasn’t passed 6th grade. People win SC2 games because they make their opponent f up their army pos and kill their last mining base. Watch any sc2 from the last 3 years bud
Probably kills you inside that the once 14 year old a U T i s t legend schooled you in a debate but you gotta accept reality
2 Likes
That’s sophistry. It’s the same as saying that for playing SC2 good vision and hearing are the most important things in the game.
Information is not a mean in itself but something that is required to make timely decisions (about composition, placement, place where you will give battle to the enemy, place where you will ambush the enemy etc).
You can have all the information in the world but because you are a low-IQ and noob you will draw the wrong conclusions and do the wrong thing (or the right thing in the wrong place and time).
There are people that do not even understand what they are observing. Information is an expensive luxury to them.
2 Likes
Imagine being so immensely dense that, after denouncing information as the primary mode of the game, you describe an information related loss as proof. I am an Albert Einstein amongst chimpanzees. How do you know what position his army was in? How do you know it was the right or wrong position? All of this is information kiddo. To decide if you are in the correct position, to decide how to make your opponent move into the wrong position, all these are decisions based upon information. Information is the most valuable resource in the game, and if you deny that you legit have brain damage.
Reality check, Valheim has sold 7 million copies and Subnautica has sold 6 million. Minecraft sold 33 million. Wings of Liberty sold 6 million. Heart of the Swarm sold 1 million. Legacy of the Void sold 1 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_games
In simplest possible terms, some basement indie projects with somewhere in the ballpark of 1/1000th the budget, name reputation etc, out-sold Legacy of the Void by a factor of 6x and 7x and 33x respectively. To say Blizzard bungled SC2 is a drastic understatement. They had name reputation, an established franchise and an absolutely monstrous budget.
1 Like
Ngl I died laughing reading “Albert Einstein amongst chimpanzees”. Deada*s funny af, before I respond I will counter with my own verbose ego self validation, envision the scene in Attack of the Clones where Yoda and Count Dooku are pointlessly throwing rocks at each other but instead of a force battle it’s a battle of who can write who is more intelligent better:
Who be it before me who would presume to challenge I on intellectual matters? From the age of 0.000001 seconds I was endowed with intellectual and spiritual powers beyond that of the primitive creatures known as hoo sapien sapiens. It is futile for any prospecting intellectual to cogently present a breach of logic on my part. I have collapsed all dualities and played the part of all possible beings across all possible continuums of space and time. I am what there is, beyond identification, and never the product of its own knowledge. I am the knower and the known. The ghost in the machine. I am COSMIC INTELLIGENCE*
Anyways you fail to perceive a game where information has been known and the decisions within the bubble of information are more important.
Let me break this down to you:
Let’s form an intellectual duality in our minds of the known and unknown, the yin and yang of knowledge. One cannot have knowing without unknowing and vice versa.
When SC is properly played all strategies are optimized around decreasing the bubble of unknown thus rendering a larger bubble of known. This is where we agree 100%. SC IS an information economy, up until the point where the information inside bubble of known supersedes the possible information in bubble unknown.
The point kiddo is making is extremely simple. Once bubble known supersedes bubble unknown the factors determining victory are optimized unit conduction rendering superior efficiency.
There is a time in the game where your abstract schema of SC breaks down. It’s plainly obvious to see. It doesn’t take intellectual super powers to realize that when both actors in an engagement are of near equal footing and know how to gather information, actions taking place within bubble known supersede actions to diminish bubble unknown. You claim that all superior efficiency and positioning are because of information. There is nothing else to this other than being wrong.
Take early game ZVT when the first engagement of reapers and zerglings takes place. You can have the information that the reaper is coming, but if it’s Clem controlling that reaper and you can’t outmicro him you will lose your zerglings and drones. Doesn’t matter how much information you have. What matters is efficiently using your units.
An analogy that can be helpful is the distinction between a theoretical physicist and an engineer when attempting to go to mars.
There are things we do not understand about fundamental physics, aka the merger between space-time and quantum mechanics, however these ginormous unknowns are of no consequence relative to getting a rocket to mars.
What is important when getting a rocket to mars is optimizing efficiency WITHIN THE REALM OF WHAT YOU KNOW.
As soon as Newton formulated basic mechanical physics, optimization within that schema of physics was what allowed us to finally advance to space flight. AKA bubble unknown had been decreased sufficiently that working within bubble known was more important to achieving the specified end.
I hope to the lord and savior of the universe that I do not have to extrapolate this to SC2 specifically for you to understand the point I’m making.
2 Likes
That scenario never occurs. You are always spending resources to acquire information. Information decides the outcome of tens of thousands of resources so spending great sums of resources to get little tidbits of information is the norm. In the early game, losing an oracle is terrible. In the late game, losing it happens all the time because you absolutely must know where the enemy army is.
1 Like
Sorry but not only did you lose this dick measuring contest but you lost all subsequent ones. This is the most awful thing I’ve ever seen said here and I strongly advise you to make a new account before posting here again.
I saw you commented but didn’t bother to read it. I happened to see the last paragraph, though. You know, before it was deleted. Unfortunately for you I am actually familiar with the studies surrounding that particular topic. It’s rather important to know these things because it makes you immune to certain types of psychological attacks. The data reported in such studies show strongly positively skewed data. This indicates it’s a sensitive topic for most people and they tend to exaggerate their performance. That’s not at all surprising since it is essentially a self-evaluation. According to the data I would perform higher than 65% of people, meaning without any analysis to account for the skewed data I can still say with 65% confidence to outperform any random person (for example, you). Taking into account the bias, I rise to nicely above 80%. There is a 4 in 5 probability I would outperform you on that particular test. Your actions in this thread lead me to believe you are the kind of person who would exaggerate, given that’s what you’ve been doing this entire thread. I would thereby subtract the mean exaggeration from the total data set from any performance measurement you reported. I think that’s a fair estimation considering you clearly like to exaggerate quite a bit in fact I would say you exaggerate more than most people. Taking that into account we can shift the mean estimation from 50% to 35%. To put this into perspective we will use the binomial theorem to calculate the probability that you outperform me given the fact that you tend to exaggerate with p=0.8 and p=0.35 respectively. The probability is then:
s2 = 1 * 0.35 * (1 − 0.35) = 0.2275.
Z = (0.8-0.35)/0.2275 = 1.99 : O=0.2275,U=0.35
P(x>=Z) = 2.396%
So there is a roughly 97%+ chance I would win this bet if I took it. I am going to call your bluff.
EDIT: calculator errors.
When playing such a game with a partner, it’s best to find a match of someone with a similar performance rating to keep things fair. Too high and you limit your potential pool of teammates and too low and you will be a disappointment to most of your potential teammates ergo limiting your pool of potential teammates. The absolute performance measurements aren’t of particular value since there is risk at both tails of the distribution. On one hand, performing too low can lead to disappointment, but performing too high can be rather uncomfortable team dynamic. Being a bit above average is where the money is at, because you are high enough to distinguish yourself but not so high as to limit your options. Unfortunately for me, I am quite a bit above average so my options for teammates is a bit limited. Anyone with a substantially lower performance rating would find it rather unfair / imbalanced to game with me. If I were average, I would have a much larger pool of compatible teammates.
1 Like