I wonder if this applies to a game of Chess or Go? What would be meta for that?
To get good, go after the metagame
241–250 of 307 posts
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#242There is also the ultimate version of the metagame i.e. your personal human condition. Blindly pursuing your career or chasing money without understanding the finite duration of your own physical existence, the scale of the universe, where you want to be in terms of life goals and family.
This is the meta I'm struggling to learn at the moment. I constantly gripe that people making similar salaries in my organization don't produce nearly as much as I do...but they seem happy and I'm constantly stressed out. Which begs the question...who's winning?
Not you. But this isn't a competition for salary. If you think your work and skills aren't valued correctly, you should look for another job. It is not that important that others have high salary that they (maybe) don't deserve, what is important is that you get the salary you think you deserve (important from your point of vue). Of course, whatever you get in the end also depend on what the business is willing to pay to have you.
If you feel stressed, you may be giving too much of yourself. If you are giving more then you like to, to compensate for your teammate, you might need to find teammates that are up to your level, that carr as much as you, an a business that care as much as you too.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#243Getting good in almost all games is based on understanding and mastering the fundamentals to the extent that you can make consistently correct (or at least a high degree of 'correctness') decisions based on them. This is true for all esports titles, and probably all games in general. Mastering the fundamentals will make you 'good' to a level that very few people ever reach. It's not until you reach a level where ever…
I've noticed this to be true for table tennis and other sports too. When I play against a less experienced player, it's quite frustrating to notice that most of the points I score are clear mistakes on their part, rather than any kind of skilled moves on my part.
Whenever I play poker with friends this is my experience too. I don't do anything really fancy at all, I basically just follow very simple guidelines anyone can look up on the Internet. I just wait for good cards, permit worse cards the further down I am in the betting chain, raise or fold instead of calling most of the time, and I bet agressively when I have really good cards to get the most value. I win because my opponents have no idea of what they’re doing, and even if you would point out an obvious misplay they wouldn’t even agree.
Most people who play casually have some romantic ideas about poker from spy movies, where it's about bluffing. Bluffing only works if people actually believe you have good cards, people won't believe you have good cards if you play with mediocre or bad cards every hand.
I am by no means good enough to beat a person who is good at the game that could profile my playing style, do the mental math faster than me and who can tell the difference between whether or not I have analysis paralysis or bluffing.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
This probably says something interesting about have design—but I'm not sure what exactly! One thought is that there are some games where the metagame becomes important at earlier skill levels. Magic the Gathering comes to mind: fundamental skills are certainly important, but understanding the format—even in formats where you don't need a pre-built deck—is important even at a middling skill level, well short of any co…
The truth is, (and this applies to games like MTG, Hearthstone, Poker, etc.) piloting the deck you have correctly matters more than people really like admitting. If you copy a 'known-good' strategy, you can crush with it at every level except the very top of the game. This applies even if your known good strategy is off-meta. The main issue at the middle level is that people don't push to the next level of thinking,…
This is illustrated with the deck Affinity. It sweeps beginner players consistently even if the pilot keeps making mistakes but once you meet tougher opposition all of the options the deck presents become overwhelming and you know that you need to maximize the value of every play to beat a good opponent, especially if they have boarded in counters for your deck.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you recall these rules? I'm rather curious about them.
There are zillions of them, but it's normally some combination of: 1) Initially develop your pieces in the center rather than threaten or capture the opponent's pieces (this avoids most traps where opponents pull you out of position). 2) Castle by move 8-10 3) Don't leave your king where it can be checked 4) Don't hang pieces Executing these, however, is the problem. Number 4, in particular, is just something that re…
Yeah, these were some of them. I think 'put your horseys in the middle' was another specific one. Well, not worded that way of course.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#246Software development is a really funny example of this. The meta changes constantly and as a result "the technology is changing all the time". The thing is that the underlying principles and rules have barely changed in the last few decades. This is why I've never understood people that are enthusiastic about new programming languages and frameworks (among other things). It is just exploring the potential of a differ…
It seems to me that ever-changing tech is the meta of software development.
When done right, new tools and frameworks make us more productive and enable us to do more in less time. Because time to market is a crucial component of startup success, picking the right tools can give you that edge.
As for the underlying principles of software development, that's the "fundamentals" that everybody is talking about in this thread. OF COURSE you need to master them. But once you do, the meta really is chasing new tech. The problem is that folks with no knowledge of fundamentals are constantly chasing the new thing - i.e. attempting to play the meta prematurely.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#247Getting good in almost all games is based on understanding and mastering the fundamentals to the extent that you can make consistently correct (or at least a high degree of 'correctness') decisions based on them. This is true for all esports titles, and probably all games in general. Mastering the fundamentals will make you 'good' to a level that very few people ever reach. It's not until you reach a level where ever…
It doesn't have to be _everyone_ - I've played many an online FPS where I really appreciated that _one_ player for the meta battle going on between us whilst the rest of the game unfolded around us.
I really play games for those moments where you communicate with a player/players _on the other team_ through the meta. And then you dance around the strategies trying to set/catch each other offguard.
And you _know_ when you're playing against someone that gets it. And you can tell certain players apart, or classify their level of meta-ability by they way they're playing.
Sometimes in chess, you're embroiled in a really intense battle in one area of the board, but the game is developing on some other level and is primed for a swift turn, and knowing your opponent is aware of that same notion is really beautiful.
A great, quick and easy card/boardgame for revealing this kind of meta (but it's kinda one dimensional when you "get it") is "The Mind".
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/244992/mind
It's great for giving people a taste of the thrill of meta.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#248Getting good in almost all games is based on understanding and mastering the fundamentals to the extent that you can make consistently correct (or at least a high degree of 'correctness') decisions based on them. This is true for all esports titles, and probably all games in general. Mastering the fundamentals will make you 'good' to a level that very few people ever reach. It's not until you reach a level where ever…
It doesn't have to be _everyone_ - I've played many an online FPS where I really appreciated that _one_ player for the meta battle going on between us whilst the rest of the game unfolded around us. I really play games for those moments where you communicate with a player/players _on the other team_ through the meta. And then you dance around the strategies trying to set/catch each other offguard. And you _know_ when…
The thing is in common esport titles this will only ever really happen at relatively high levels (top ~0.1%) of play. Or at least, that's where it would actually matter. Below that, games are usually just decided by who is better at fundamentals. It doesn't matter how great your smoke setup is in CS:GO if I can just wait or flash my way through and insta headshot everyone because I'm just better at movement/aim. And the same is even more true when you compare pre-set strategies with rigid holding positions to people who instinctively know when they have to get counter-frags when a teammate dies and how push in a way that doesn't allow these set strategies. (The same is true to almost the same degree in LoL/DotA/SCII).
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you played against grandmasters your fundamentals were likely extremely good relative to most players
> If you played against grandmasters your fundamentals were likely extremely good relative to most players Relative to most players, no doubt. To be fair though, even someone in diamond is "extremely good relative to most players". I was a mid+ NA grandmaster zerg, and took games off players like EG demuslim. And even at the level I was at, fundamentals were the most important thing. And even at the level I was at, I…
Good meta helps you capitalize on failures in the execution of fundamentals, and can greatly improve the chance of securing a win.
Re: To get good, go after the metagame
#250Playing a game immediately after learning the rules is my favorite challenge - especially when the other players are all new too. At this stage, tactics are mostly about keeping all the rules in your head and thinking hard before each move. But strategy is really interesting. Everyone is guessing blindly, and you can often win by guessing slightly less blindly. I have two meta-strategies: (1) Game phases While learni…
Interestingly I played splendor for the first time against some experienced players a couple of weeks ago, and after they explained the rules and how the best strategy is to slowly build up resources, I googled ‘how do you win at splendor’ and everyone said to try and grab the most expensive cards first. So I did that, then they said it was beginners luck after I won. Then I won two more times, and they said ‘wow you…
This strategy is only viable if nobody is blocking you from the tier 2 and especially tier 3 cards either by reserving what you're obviously going for, or shorting the supply of a colour you clearly need - But it works great otherwise.
Splendor has clever subtle player interaction here which I think is a real strong part of its design.