Live data from Hacker News

How to play with people who are better than you

wellcomecollection.org

71–80 of 190 posts

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#71
As an aside, if you play games competitively and you want to get better you should _always_ seek better players to play against. That's how you improve your game: you set the challenge just above your current level. The "just" part sorts itself out because players significantly more advanced will not find it very challenging to play against someone much weaker, so you 'll get fewer games against them anyway.

Another thing is to play people you don't know and find new playing partners often. That helps you avoid getting stuck in a rut.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#72
post #40

"With ‘fairness’ built in, everyone has an equal chance of winning without compromising their playing style." This must be a joke, right? What's the point of playing games? To feel good about oneself?!

It changes the benchmark, but you still have to be good enough for your level to win. You don't get the wins for free. It's still fun and it's still challenging (if implemented correctly).

It also allows the stronger player to improve.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#74

Playing with people who are better than you is easy. Just accept they're better than you and keep losing. Decide if you are comfortable with your current skill level or not. If you want to get better, train up. If you are happy with your skill level, then keep losing. That's fine, and I think its healthy to decide to place limits on your skill. Skill is an infinite treadmill: you can continuously get better at pretty…

>Decide if you are comfortable with your current skill level or not. If you want to get better, train up. If you are happy with your skill level, then keep losing. That's fine, and I think its healthy to decide to place limits on your skill.

If the difference in skill is too high you won't learn anything from playing with them. What's worse - you might ingrain bad habits that let you occasionally win(that happened to me with one fighting game)

>Skill is an infinite treadmill: you can continuously get better at pretty much any subject from now till the end of time. Deciding when to get off the treadmill is just as important as deciding to stay on.

Agreed, but the speed in which you progress varies case by case basis.

>My inability to defeat the greatest players of a subject does NOT make the game less appealing. Indeed, I often times seek out the challenge of stronger players, especially when I'm explicitly trying to get better at the game.

if opponents are better than you, but not overwhelmingly so ,it is indeed one of better ways to train. It is a matter of mindset - you are playing to deliberately "git gud", but not necessarily win.

>Losing constantly by playing vs players who are better than you provides a learning experience. You should find other players you can win against of course: you'll never learn to win if you keep losing. But losing teaches you what bad-habits you've formed from playing vs weaker players.

This depends on aforementioned difference in skill, too high is prohibitive to learning. The latter part depends on how good game is proving feedback. Some games are great at that(chess, soulsborne), other are horrible(all blizzard games come to mind, DotA, Go). It is very hard to improve in latter group of games without deliberately analysing your past games. For example in Go your mistake might be made really far back into the game, but you are seeing it's effect just now. In chess - it is way simpler to just walk back the history of moves in memory to find the mistake, or at least start spotting the wrong decisions.

>I think that's the key: losing all the time is unfun. But I can definitely take "losing for a whole week" or "losing for a whole month" in a row, especially if its for training. Finding players of lower skill, equal skill, and higher skill, is important.

Agreed, but there is one exception - games with randomness built into them - this includes matchmade team games. With randomness, losing when you are really ahead feels way more punishing, and in team games it is sometimes impossible to carry your team to win - even if you are literally the best player in the match by overwhelming margin.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#75
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before posting I tried word search in my tablet browser and missed it. I guess in the game of criticism I just.. lost.

But why would you even try going for criticism of an article before even reading it?

I speed read. I didn't see go. I went word search for go, didn't find it. But, a fair comment. Critique demands care.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#76
post #5
post #2

the author is focused on finite games, which are games that you play to win. but it's interesting to think about applying the same logic to infinite games, where the goal is to keep playing forever. For instance, capitalism is a game that most players assume we'll just keep playing. How do you deal with some players having an advantage? Currently, the advantage only compounds (literally, ie compound interest). What i…

I think you're basically describing egalitarianism, correct me if I'm wrong. I'd recommend Rawls as good philosophical material on the subject. Always been how I view the world personally and I think people underestimate how much of it could be compatible with free markets and a good deal of general and important freedoms. Of course that's a much longer debate. To get back to the point, what the author describing is…

There are also a variety of other perspectives worth reading; I found Tony Smith's Beyond Liberal Egalitarianism. Marx and Normative Social Theory in the Twenty-First Century (Brill, 2017) to be a great counter-point to both Rawls and Nozick.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#77
post #29

People who can't play games against people who are better than them are over-competitive and lazy! It's more fun when you play against skilled players, you learn more! I've never understood that personality trait, and I love losing at Dominion!

It really depends on a game and skills difference. It's one thing to lose against someone just putting in effort to win and making many better decisions. (like dominion) It's another when you lose because the opponent knows the game so well you can't do any meaningful actions. For example, playing your first few games against someone experienced in a fighting game like Smash is pretty pointless. You likely won't land a single hit and won't learn anything.

That's also my threshold for fun. The more you can artificially minmax the game, the less fun it is for me. I'm happy to play Scrabble, but if the opponent spent time learning the dictionary rather than expanding their vocabulary, I don't see the point.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#78

Playing with people who are better than you is easy. Just accept they're better than you and keep losing. Decide if you are comfortable with your current skill level or not. If you want to get better, train up. If you are happy with your skill level, then keep losing. That's fine, and I think its healthy to decide to place limits on your skill. Skill is an infinite treadmill: you can continuously get better at pretty…

The issue isn't you lose to Magnus Carlsen. The issue is that when you play chess, all you can play against are wanna-be grandmasters who drive the skill floor up to the point where you need to make a heroic effort just to be mediocre.

You have to understand, you are making the hardcore fallacy; you assume everyone will stick to the game no matter what and take whatever abuse or steps they need to git gud. It doesn't work that way; what happens over time is the better people raise the skill floor by driving weaker players out.

And increasingly the skill floor is getting ridiculous. Overwatch University on reddit recommends players post videos of matches for point by point analysis on how to get better, and half the posts are just frustration in dealing with the drudgery of playing so many matches to even climb.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#79

Playing with people who are better than you is easy. Just accept they're better than you and keep losing. Decide if you are comfortable with your current skill level or not. If you want to get better, train up. If you are happy with your skill level, then keep losing. That's fine, and I think its healthy to decide to place limits on your skill. Skill is an infinite treadmill: you can continuously get better at pretty…

> My inability to defeat the greatest players of a subject does NOT make the game less appealing Yes, it does. To them. Anyone who is driven to get better at a game will be bored with playing with or against clearly worse players very quickly.

It depends on the game. Eg. I'm fairly advanced in Brazilian jiu-jitsu (~10 years of practice, brown belt).

The typical approach that I also follow is that when I want to practice some technique I'm not well familiar with, I try it on white belts first, iron the obvious wrinkles out, and then I keep on going up the skill ladder until I'm able to execute it on my equals.

As I practice it against stronger and stronger opponents, I'm correcting increasingly subtle errors (that they're capable of using against me, while I could get away with them against weaker sparing partners).

It would be more difficult to try new stuff against someone of equal skill straight away, it makes much more sense to work your way up gradually.

It's obviously a physical, but still highly technical sport - and I imagine the same may hold true for many competitive activities.

Re: How to play with people who are better than you

#80

Playing with people who are better than you is easy. Just accept they're better than you and keep losing. Decide if you are comfortable with your current skill level or not. If you want to get better, train up. If you are happy with your skill level, then keep losing. That's fine, and I think its healthy to decide to place limits on your skill. Skill is an infinite treadmill: you can continuously get better at pretty…

Assuming you can keep getting better is a bit of a fallacy too. If that were the case everybody would be challenger!
Post reply on HN