3 ms·
I'm guessing your win rate estimations are super low. For a game with this much depth, the gap between the best players and optimal play is absolutely massive.
by Taek 6y ago
I'm guessing your win rate estimations are super low. For a game with this much depth, the gap between the best players and optimal play is absolutely massive.
For intuition around this, look at how much chess has evolved over the past 400 years. Look at the history for speedruns or the ABC challenge for super mario 64, or look at speedrun histories for other games like golden eye or super mario odessy.
Just based on the fact that this is a relatively obscure game with a lot of complex mechanics, I would estimate that with optimal play, the win rate should be over 99% for all characters. This probably requires the development of a large number of new techniques and play styles, and probably has many surprising optimizations that would seem ground-breaking today.
- jorbs_ 6y agothis game has a bunch of randomness which stops us from knowing where we're going to end up if we make decisions. it'd be like if super mario 64 had a bunch of jumps in it where there was a 1/10 chance you died on screen transition and you couldn't tell where you were meant to jump ahead of time. if you replay or check the seed ahead of time you can find out and stop dying to those things, but in practical play there's no obscure mechanic that stops you from dying because you only had the ability to prepare properly for two elite fights but ended up fighting the third, or because you were presented two options for synergistic scaling for the endgame fights but didn't get offered any more of the one you chose. they can all get above 50% and watcher can definitely get way higher than that, but 99% is unthinkable because not enough of the ways you can die are solvable with the information available in a run.