Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To get good, go after the metagame

commoncog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 307 posts

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#231

Post by empath75 »

_pastel wrote: post #174

Playing 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 just must be good at games’, and I said no, I’m good at googling.

That’s my whole IT career in a nutshell.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#232

Post by lalaithion »

_pastel wrote: post #174

Playing 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…

This is why I like dominion so much; you can play with random sets of cards, and watching the meta develop over ~an hour as you play the game is really fascinating. Sometimes someone will see a combo which is really powerful, and other times we get caught up in something useless before realizing.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#233

Post by davmar »

Proziam wrote: post #220
wongarsu wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but applying this isn't always easy: When discussing meta and strategy, it's usually discussed in the context of high level esport play. But the optimal strategy often drastically changes with skill level. For example in a shooter when everyone has bad aim and bad teamwork/communication you need a different strategy then in high level esport in the same game where everyone is great at aiming and lives in the…

The optimal strategy for winning the game you're in is the most-winning strategy that your skill level allows you to execute. The optimal strategy for the game itself requires you to develop your skills to allow you to execute it. One of the problems when you discuss strategy and meta is that most people blur the lines between the two. If you plan something based on opposition research (like at the pro esports level…

I love watching esports but I don't have time to play them. I found your comments really insightful and would love to hear more.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#234

Post by dntbnmpls »

scott_s wrote: post #144

A saying I have related to this is "Rules make sports." The skills and strategies that matter in a sport develop around the rules. Change the rules and you change the sport. The judo example the author presented is actually one of my go-to examples as well. Not only did disallowing grabbing the legs take out an entire suite of offensive options, it took out defensive options in judo. In judo, the main way to win is t…

> "Rules make sports."

The Houston Astros: It's news to me.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#235

Post by magicsmoke »

gowld wrote: post #221
rasz wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its pure bullshido https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-KX99T5r3A

So? It's a sport. Are basketball, boxing, and wrestling and bullshido because they'd lose in an MMA fight?

TMA aren't just sports, they call themselves martial arts. Emphasis on martial, relating to war. You would expect something calling itself a martial art be useful in a fight, but MMA is much more effective in self defense than TMA because they focus on actual combat in the ring instead of showy but unproven katas.

TBF, MMA has rules that don't apply to bar fights, and knowing how to use a firearm fits closer a martial art that would let you survive on a modern battlefield. Or practicing squad tactics on an airsoft field. Perhaps TMA weapons training would qualify as a martial art in the days before firearms when armies fought with sword and spear, but it shouldn't continue calling itself anything to do with martial in this day and age. Historical dance or reenactment maybe, along the lines of renaissance fair and civil war battle reenactors.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#236

Post by james_s_tayler »

fenomas wrote: post #82
richk449 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it’s all semantics. What you are calling meta has been called strategy for thousands of years. No big deal - words change. I’ll get used to it.

The article's usage seems to drift around somewhat, but in esports I follow "meta" refers specifically to the consensus about which strategies are good or bad, not to strategies themselves or to anything someone does in a given game. E.g. saying "foo is meta right now" means most players consider foo to be stronger than the alternatives, and if a player uses a strategy other than foo one might say they were playing o…

You're literally trying to game the game.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#237

Post by hvasilev »

Software 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 different meta. It doesn't necessarily make you a better programmer and probably your time is spent better elsewhere.

I personally believe this is also the reason why in the last few decades we are seeing less and less 'good' new programmers. Turns out it is quite counter intuitive for a new player to understand why they should spent their time on underlying principles and not on constantly chasing the shinny.

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#238

Post by __blockcipher__ »

X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #203
csallen wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good point. I played semi-high level StarCraft for a while (high masters, low grandmasters), and strategic decisions based on the metagame certainly won and lost me many games. That said, the GP has a point, too. I probably would've been better served working on my mechanics and fundamentals if I wanted to advance to the next level.

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 could see the fundamental errors that I or my opponents would make.

Certainly though, when facing off a player of a similar skill, knowing the meta can be really helpful. Even more important is knowing that specific player's playstyle.

When you practice with a certain partner consistently, you start doing things that you would never do against an unknown player, to exploit quirks of their playstyle. The best players had incredible game sense and thus were really good at doing this. (My favorite player for a long time was Stephano, who absolutely excelled at this)

--

I'm not sure I had an actual point I was making :P

Re: To get good, go after the metagame

#239

Post by __blockcipher__ »

Proziam wrote: post #220
wongarsu wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but applying this isn't always easy: When discussing meta and strategy, it's usually discussed in the context of high level esport play. But the optimal strategy often drastically changes with skill level. For example in a shooter when everyone has bad aim and bad teamwork/communication you need a different strategy then in high level esport in the same game where everyone is great at aiming and lives in the…

The optimal strategy for winning the game you're in is the most-winning strategy that your skill level allows you to execute. The optimal strategy for the game itself requires you to develop your skills to allow you to execute it. One of the problems when you discuss strategy and meta is that most people blur the lines between the two. If you plan something based on opposition research (like at the pro esports level…

> Ultimately, the strategic evolutions of iterated games is a ridiculously deep and nuanced topic, making it difficult to really get into the meat and potatoes in forums. Maybe I should make a blog post or something, but I don't know how interesting it would be.

I'm interested, and if you do end up doing so, I would love to give you feedback on it before publishing it, if you want.

I played SC2 at a "semi-professional level" (read: good enough to take games/series off of pros, but not good enough to make a living).

I find a lot of truth in what you said, and agree that the nuance in strategic evolution of iterated games is super fascinating.

I was a young teenager when I played SC2 "seriously", and now that I'm in my early 20's, it really struck me how much more of an advanced mind for strategy I have now. Back in the day, I was a very mechanical player, but also had some really innovative play at times, particular with respect to a "macro aggressive" style (aggressive, but not just going for all-ins).

For a short while I received some coaching from my team's coach, and it was incredible how even just an hour of casual coaching drastically improved my understanding of concepts like map control. And mind you, my coach as an actual player was like plat-diamond level (by a pro's standards, total garbage basically), and I always found it fascinating how the best players don't make the best coaches and vice versa.

Post reply on HN