3 ms·

I break the tiers down into 3 categories. 1) Literacy. Can you move and shoot in the FPS? Know how pieces move in chess? Basics of the how to play. You must ma

I break the tiers down into 3 categories. 1) Literacy. Can you move and shoot in the FPS? Know how pieces move in chess? Basics of the how to play. You must master these and make them reflexive to move forward. 2) Fundamentals. The emergent gameplay that arises from those basic rules. But importantly these are all contained within the game. I usually break these up into Tactics and Strategy. Tactics are the moment-to-moment events. Strategy are longer-term goals that help guide you towards victory, and understanding how overlapping or even conflicting strategies can work in synergy and in trade-offs. For example, in chess tactics are things like recognizing forks and skewers. Strategy involves "controlling the center" or "develop your pieces to good squares." In MOBAs, last hitting, skill combos, space control are the tactics. Strategy can involve knowing when to push, when to group to gank vs split push, or farm vs gank decisions. Interestingly some game types have more tactics/strategy components. Twitch FPS games tend to be almost all tactics with a bit of strategy (gun X better in situation Y). Starcraft rewards strategy more heavily (do better macro!). These are, as you mention, skills that will apply to the vast majority of games because they are baked into the rules of the game. 3) The Meta. Once you are near the Fundamentals skill cap, you can use information outside of the game to get an edge against similar opponents. I'm about to play player X, and they usually like to do Y, so I should prepare a counter strategy Z. A lot of players seem to really like character A because of these advantages, perhaps I should learn A and how to counter the most common tactics using my character's skillset. Note knowing the Meta also helps prune what information (Fundamentals) you need to learn and maintain. If no one plays character Foo, then you (probably) don't need to understand their kit as intimately. But then someone could use it as an off-meta pick to surprise you! So you should be at least familiar enough to refute it just in case.

hamilyon2 7y ago
As people noted elsewhere in thread, metagame in starcraft is pretty important, when skill level is equal (which is often on ladder). When skill level differs even a little bit, metagame becomes non-deciding factor.
- someguyorother 7y ago
  Is meta opponent modeling? Then it would make sense that it becomes non-deciding when skill level differs - chess engines don't bother with it at all and just aim to destroy the opponent through sheer strength of play.
  - Spellman 7y ago
    By my definition it's meta to do opponent modeling since you are using information outside of the game mechanics. And you're right, for games with high efficiency and public knowledge you can often just grind through optimal play. However, for games with hidden information, you can play theoretical optimally, but you can also gain an additional edge if you can properly model your opponent. I'm thinking like in Poker. There's mathematically correct play, but because you play against folks who don't play mathematically correct you could get an extra edge by properly modeling the faults of your opponent you can exploit!
  - munchbunny 7y ago
    Playing the meta definitely requires opponent modeling, but I don't think it's exclusively opponent modeling. In the example of Splendor, I think meta is best explained as the interaction between emergent strategies. An AI may not need to think of it as a meta as is the case in chess, but an AI may still be playing strategies that match elements of the metagame. I think European style board games are great examples. Euro board games are often designed in a way where there are 3-6 different "currencies" in the game that are vaguely interchangeable in terms of progress towards the victory conditions, but these currencies have situational tradeoffs. It's usually a safe bet to play a T-shaped strategy where you focus on a few currencies but dabble in the rest enough to influence the game conditions to favor you. Scoring mechanisms often explicitly reward being T-shaped and gameplay mechanics often explicitly favor T-shaped strategies, so regardless of whether the AI is explicitly trying to play a meta strategy, it's probably going to look like a meta strategy because the meta is T-shaped.
- Spellman 7y ago
  The trick is a ladder is often rating your fundamentals + meta abilities. Where meta is a boost on top of your fundamentals. So, yeah, if you know around the Gold ranking the meta seems to bias towards folks playing Terran using a Reaper at time X, then the meta knowledge gives a quick and easy boost since you're prepared. But that's a temporary boost. In Plat or Diamond the meta is often different due to the increase in skill floor from improved fundamentals. This is why folks often say just MACRO BETTER instead of chasing optimizing meta strats. Better long-term reward.

hamilyon2 7y ago

As people noted elsewhere in thread, metagame in starcraft is pretty important, when skill level is equal (which is often on ladder). When skill level differs even a little bit, metagame becomes non-deciding factor.

someguyorother 7y ago
Is meta opponent modeling? Then it would make sense that it becomes non-deciding when skill level differs - chess engines don't bother with it at all and just aim to destroy the opponent through sheer strength of play.
- Spellman 7y ago
  By my definition it's meta to do opponent modeling since you are using information outside of the game mechanics. And you're right, for games with high efficiency and public knowledge you can often just grind through optimal play. However, for games with hidden information, you can play theoretical optimally, but you can also gain an additional edge if you can properly model your opponent. I'm thinking like in Poker. There's mathematically correct play, but because you play against folks who don't play mathematically correct you could get an extra edge by properly modeling the faults of your opponent you can exploit!
- munchbunny 7y ago
  Playing the meta definitely requires opponent modeling, but I don't think it's exclusively opponent modeling. In the example of Splendor, I think meta is best explained as the interaction between emergent strategies. An AI may not need to think of it as a meta as is the case in chess, but an AI may still be playing strategies that match elements of the metagame. I think European style board games are great examples. Euro board games are often designed in a way where there are 3-6 different "currencies" in the game that are vaguely interchangeable in terms of progress towards the victory conditions, but these currencies have situational tradeoffs. It's usually a safe bet to play a T-shaped strategy where you focus on a few currencies but dabble in the rest enough to influence the game conditions to favor you. Scoring mechanisms often explicitly reward being T-shaped and gameplay mechanics often explicitly favor T-shaped strategies, so regardless of whether the AI is explicitly trying to play a meta strategy, it's probably going to look like a meta strategy because the meta is T-shaped.
Spellman 7y ago
The trick is a ladder is often rating your fundamentals + meta abilities. Where meta is a boost on top of your fundamentals. So, yeah, if you know around the Gold ranking the meta seems to bias towards folks playing Terran using a Reaper at time X, then the meta knowledge gives a quick and easy boost since you're prepared. But that's a temporary boost. In Plat or Diamond the meta is often different due to the increase in skill floor from improved fundamentals. This is why folks often say just MACRO BETTER instead of chasing optimizing meta strats. Better long-term reward.