INTP's and how they play starcraft/rts

[Hadoblado]

I put this in the INTP section because I wanted this thread to focus on how an INTP goes about learning complex metagames, strategies and tactics. I play a lot of startcraft atm, this thread is inspired my thought on that game, but generalising experience from other areas is welcome.

I would like to know INTP stats, such as race, league, style, strengths, weaknesses and insights. Players who are not INTP are welcome, but plz state your (probable) personality type. I would also like to know any influences such as borrowed concepts or mindsets.

I was originally gonna make a poll but I wanted to know too many things, so I'll provide a template to keep things as orderly as possible.

MBTI:
Race:
League:
Time played:
Stylistic preferences:
Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Influences:
Watches pro replays:
Self assessment:
What limits you to the league you have been allocated:

I would like this to be a pretty deep analysis, but I would also like people who are not versed in the art of starcraft to be able to understand it, so keep the unnecessary lingo to a minimum. If anyone knows any good sites that will quickly overview any concepts for outsiders this would be appreciated.

Key for player leagues: http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/League_(StarCraft_II)

 

[Hadoblado]

MBTI: probable INTP, but there is room for doubt.

Race: Zerg, though I play terran and protoss at a mid-plat level.

League: high plat.

Time played: Since beta, I play a lot.

Stylistic preferences: Strictly macro play, if I can do anything to get a strict equivalent advantage I will do it.

Strengths: I have a strong conceptual understanding and a good eye for who is in the lead at any given time. I have good in game decision making and can almost always tell you exactly why I lost/won. I am also decent at distributing my limited attentional resources.

Weaknesses: Low apm (actions per minute), jerry riggin' macro style and uninspiring micro. I also have difficulty remembering exact timings and important thresholds.

Influences: Chess and mtg give a strong conceptual background to work with. In particular chess gives me an internal equivalency counter, end-game logic, and broad-stroke tactical and stategic knowledge. MTG (magic the gathering) gives a strong sense of in-game determinism (I understand that when an opponent makes a move it is not just an isolated incident, and can allow you to cross off other possible moves), threshold logic (when that one point of damage is game changing), and goal orientation (always having a way in which you hope to win).

Watches pro replays: yes, I highly recommend anything by psy, zai, and especially day[9].

Self assessment: I am strong when you leave me alone, weak when you get in my grill. Stylistically I am most similar to EGMidra, but obviously not so good. You will never see me cheese (a strategy that relies on your opponent not know what you are doing) unless I'm playing with friends. I am strongly non-committal with tech choices and attack timings, I will almost never try and end a game before I am full eco (optimal harvester count) unless my opponent over extends or I am denied a next step.

What limits you to the league you have been allocated: I am unable to standardise my reactions to builds, and often react weakly under pressure. I often lose to bunker rushes and all-in cheese play, such as when they use your 10 secs of zero detection to snipe your lair with DT's.

 

[Gentlemen]

MBTI: I've gotten both INTP and INTJ, but based on the descriptions I think INTP fits me better

Race: Zerg

League: Been top 10 gold forever, I think if I played more often I would do fine in plat

Time played: Since the game came out last summer

Stylistic preferences: Macro play, I never cheese and very rarely rush, I like to build myself up to several solid bases (throwing in some harass with baneling bombs or mutalisks) and then win with an overwhelmingly huge army. My favorite unit is the baneling and I almost always use them, and I typically finish the game by rolling over everything with upgraded ultras.

Strengths: Base management, reading my opponent (I find I can often guess what they are up to, which makes droning/unit decisions easier), good sense of timing and how game is progressing

Weaknesses: Easily get distracted when there's action going on such as guiding a scout or having units in combat, which causes me to forget about injects/making drones and units/etc. I have a lot of trouble microing several groups of units in real time (and often make the situation worse!).

Influences: I've always been very into strategy games, I find that chess has a lot of similarities in terms of being able to analyze openings/positions and determine what to do, as well as other RTS such as Age of Empires and SC1.

Watches pro replays: Yep, I watch Day[9] occasionally and enjoy watching replays of big name Zerg players like Idra

Self assessment: I have a good sense of what is going on in the game and a good deal of natural paranoia so I am rarely caught off guard by cheese or oblivious to what my enemy is doing, but in fast-paced situations I often lose my cool and fall behind. Due to this, and my poor micro, I need to focus on staying calm and not going OMG WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN every time my units get into combat, since I think both the zerg race and my personal style lend more to losing the battle but winning the war as long as you stay ahead in general. Oddly enough I do very well against most cheese and standard rush BO's because I have very mechanical reactions to each of them once I scout them coming

What limits you to the league you have been allocated: The reasons mentioned above mostly, I need to get better at staying focused when the fighting starts as well as managing units in combat (a good example is that I rarely use infestors, which are an excellent unit, because I either miss with fungal growth or don't do it fast enough, making A-move units easier for me to manage)

 

[Meer]

I play AOE 2. I'm always the Aztecs, because I like tobacco and stuff. Horses and gunpowder are annoying.

 

[Awaken]

...........You will never see me cheese (a strategy that relies on your opponent not know what you are doing) unless I'm playing with friends. .............

HAHA, I was about to call BS on this, but you qualified it well. I do remember a mass raven game

You know how I play, I play to win. I want to harrass from my initial scouting probe till the game is over. Otherwise, people can just sit behind their wall and plot. I do not like this. I want to see your army. I want to know what is coming with my fast stalkers. If I am playing for real, I can macro and micro and if you cant, you are forced into an all-in push because you are tired of microing against my harrass while trying to macro at the same time. If you do this, and lose the all-in, most likely there was a DT in your base or a warp prism waiting for you to be distracted. GAME OVER.

Diamond back when I played more, platinum now.

Weakness? I will blink toward tanks no matter what army is there. If they dont die, the game is over anyway. I have a great dislike for the terran race. I also know nothing of timings and dont really care to learn. I like to play depending on my scout. If I dont scout well enough and act accordingly, I deserve to lose. Also, I never know what my partner is doing. Too busy myself.

 

[Hadoblado]

Awaken you so nasty. It's funny how your friend will 10pool every single game, but you expect it and block with zealot every time. You'd think they'd change it up a little? I sorta encourage it tho, cos I'm like oh 10pool? Faaaast eexxxpapapaapapapaaaandd.

Does anyone reckon you could attribute non all-in play to INTP's? When I see someone on ladder do worker rushes or w/e, it confuses me as to why they play the game at all. Where is the satisfaction in a coinflip build even if you do win? Whenever I do something cheesy (to better know the enemy obv.) it is the worst feeling in the world sending all you units or buildings into a prepared player. Putting your fate in the hands of your opponents seems sorta weak and unsatisfying.

@Gentlemen
Yes you would do fine in plat, I'm pretty sure the best distinction between leagues is that you are assigned the league within which you can play fine vs the league above and below you. Could you handle playing vs diamonds? At the top of plat I beat golds about 80% and diamonds about 45%, but when I go vs masters I pretty much never win unless they failcheese.

@Awaken
Your stalker so frickin annoying, as Zerg I'm fine but as T I'm epic boned... maybe I should open marauder after a single reaper? Would that even be fast enough?

@Meer
Why Aztecs and not Mayens? 105hp monks?

 

[Causeless]

You guys makes me want to click my SC2 icon for once in ever. XD


I've been working on my LoL and TF2 skills of late.

 

[Hadoblado]

I don't even know what those acronyms mean... I'm sure they can't be as good as SCII tho

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

INTJ here. Play Zerg. Slowly harass and pick apart the enemy. Find a weakness and exploit.

 

[The Gopher]

Wow what's with the zergs? I don't play SC2 yet but when I played AoE3 I was German Yeah I like the under dog.... But when I do play strategy I play to tilt the other player. Psych them out. Like simply sending a smiley face when you scout them. It does wonders. But I haven't been able to play any games for a while. Just setting up a new computer now. Have played LoL and WC2 back in the day.

 

[hablahdoo]

Spacetimedilationbump to see if people still play

MBTI: INTP

Race: Protoss

League: Masters as of earlier this year, currently unranked

Time played: Entirely way too much

Stylistic preferences: I tend toward absurd strategies because it's more interesting that way.

Strengths: The simple things done all game long, reading my opponent.

Weaknesses: My strategy is too much based on reading my opponent and too little based on something certain and well planned.

Influences: "The Art Of Learning" by Josh Waitzkin is a great book derived from chess and martial arts that happens to apply to SC2. I've taken tips from a few Day[9] dailies, particularly 309.

Watches pro replays: Now and then.

Self assessment: I can keep my emotions under control which helps. Not only that but other people's sanity suffers when they play against me because I am emotionally abusive in Starcraft. I can't help it. There was a best of five I was playing with a master's Zerg. I could tell he was having a bad day and trying really hard. This meant one thing to me: I had the opportunity to do something absurd and get away with it. I got to two bases and made 12 gateways plus a warp prism, then waited for him to leave his base with his roach army. Right as he gets halfway across the map I warp in 12 zealots on top of his main base and start whacking it with swords. As his first base falls his army gets back to clean it up, and there's a new warp in except at his third base. He bounces back and forth until he rage quits. Now I feel like a bad person...
Well aside from that tangent I don't think there's anything special about me. There's nothing special about my improvement process either, I've just played a lot.

What limits you from being better: I think it's just the simple things I do all game long. These automatic things are the ones to focus on because they are the ones that stick. Additionally putting together an air tight plan would facilitate learning of said automatic things and of course improve win rate.

edit: This post makes me sound like a manipulative sociopath
edit: hablahdoo reads annoyingly similar to hadoblado

 

[The Gopher]

Well now that I play I might actually fill the form out

MBTI: INTP
Race:Zerg /Protoss
League:Umm.... maybe silver last really played back in season 2 so...
Time played:S2
Stylistic preferences:Used to be one base 4gate/7 barracks/ umm 10 pool?(used to random)

However after being told off from hado I changed that. As for stylistic... Heavy on defence and tech. Defence can be achived by offence however
Strengths: (lol)
Weaknesses: Panicing, macro and micro (in other words everything)
Influences: Just a few pro players.
Watches pro replays: Used too
Self assessment: I suck! But I enjoy it at times. Hate the ladder though.
What limits you to the league you have been allocated: Not playing the game probably.

 

[Coolydudey]

Haven't played Starcraft, but here's what I do with another similar rts I play a lot. I like to play in a team of three, capturing forward positions on the board and heavily fortifying them with defenses. From there I focus heavily on research (I have backup combat units), and long range indirect fire weapons to harass the enemy. My mortar/howitzer/.. Bombarding eats away at their buildings/units (quite quickly) and if they try to attack my positions they sustain heavy losses. My teammates use my research and the safety my positions provide to launch attacks on the enemy. All in all, I am the model turtle. It's because I can't be bothered to manage units!!

 

[hablahdoo]

Haven't played Starcraft, but here's what I do with another similar rts I play a lot. I like to play in a team of three, capturing forward positions on the board and heavily fortifying them with defenses. From there I focus heavily on research (I have backup combat units), and long range indirect fire weapons to harass the enemy. My mortar/howitzer/.. Bombarding eats away at their buildings/units (quite quickly) and if they try to attack my positions they sustain heavy losses. My teammates use my research and the safety my positions provide to launch attacks on the enemy. All in all, I am the model turtle. It's because I can't be bothered to manage units!!

Sounds like you would play Terran (siege tanks, bunkers, planetary fortresses and nukes!). Defensive play is doable in Starcraft, you just have to carefully watch the opponent to keep up in economy and make defenses as needed.

 

[Hadoblado]

Sounds like you would play Terran (siege tanks, bunkers, planetary fortresses and nukes!). Defensive play is doable in Starcraft, you just have to carefully watch the opponent to keep up in economy and make defenses as needed.

Or zerg. It's a different type of defensive play (focusing on mobility), but it's usable in more matchups.

@Gopher
You're actually pretty good for the time you've put in. I would say your strength is unit positioning and run-bys, and your weakness is macro and insufficient experience.

@hablahdoo
Yeah your name vexes me no end. I was here first

 

[hablahdoo]

Good point that Zerg might provide more opportunities in defense.

Upon reading my above post, it sounds like I'm making the atrocious suggestion of just making defenses because why not. Me reasoning strategy aloud:

Spoiler

Ultimately any game decision should be made to reach the event of destroying all of the opponent's stuff. This is the win condition and I think it's best to think in these terms. There must be a clear path reasoning to the win condition.

For Zerg defenses can be used in the following way. Spine crawlers can function to ensure continued production of mutalisks which go on to harass and destroy the enemy base if properly controlled. Win condition met.

Terran can do something similar. It's common to make planetary fortress defenses to serve the purpose of defending income at far reaching bases. If the income defended exceeds the initial cost of the planetary fortress it can be directly translated into troops which can destroy the enemy base, making it a good decision.

It's important to take note of the actual function of defenses because it's a common mistake for people to simply make them because they go pew pew. This is not a good reason.

 

[Hadoblado]

Thinking in win conditions is a thought pattern from MTG that is invaluable in all other goal oriented aspects of life.

Defensive structures are actually getting more and more common in the meta-game as people are maxing their armies and trying to spend their abundant minerals. This is particularly prevalent in zerg late-game where they are actually able to 'crawl' their defenses forward and use them for map control while replacing their mineral heavy roach/ling army with gas intensive units like broodlord infestor. Planetary fortresses are underused IMO as they are able to effectively tempo an entire army (that's not to say they aren't used, just that they are not used to their full potential ATM).

 

[Particle]

I'm more of a Supcom player myself. I primarily play UEF. I only enjoy playing vs AI since it puts more control in my hand. I'm also a mega turtle and absolutely get bored to death by micro.

 

[hablahdoo]

Thinking in win conditions is a thought pattern from MTG that is invaluable in all other goal oriented aspects of life.

Also kind of like poker EV!

Also it's as if the brain already learns through similar terms. When a thought feels good it is reinforced. Through that thoughts that coincide with winning become more prevalent, leading us to do the right things.

Defensive structures are actually getting more and more common in the meta-game as people are maxing their armies and trying to spend their abundant minerals. This is particularly prevalent in zerg late-game where they are actually able to 'crawl' their defenses forward and use them for map control while replacing their mineral heavy roach/ling army with gas intensive units like broodlord infestor. Planetary fortresses are underused IMO as they are able to effectively tempo an entire army (that's not to say they aren't used, just that they are not used to their full potential ATM).

This makes sense.

If you have some money you have the option to put it into economy, research, or military. Its likelihood of helping you win is differs between the options. Putting money into economy will strongly help you win later in the game. Putting money into research will help you win over a long period. Putting money into military will help you win during some abrupt moment when a fight happens.

Choosing a defensive military unit is often bad because that abrupt moment can happen far off in time, where economy would have had much greater use. But this is irrelevant when economy isn't an option. That usually happens toward later stages of the game at which point defenses make perfect sense.

I'm more of a Supcom player myself. I primarily play UEF. I only enjoy playing vs AI since it puts more control in my hand. I'm also a mega turtle and absolutely get bored to death by micro.

Supcom is awesome. Building bases and giant robots in that game feels like playing the Sims, it's just too entertaining in itself for me to care about winning. I've played so many silly supcom games...

 

[Particle]

Give me a handful of Bricks and I'll rule the world.

 

[kamari rised]

INTP
league of legends
I learn rather easily
I can be a beast in the game if I really tried, but that cost too much brain power just for a game, So i just play for fun and still whoop ass. I do watch pros live or on youtube.
League of legends championship has a purse of 5 milllion dollars this year.

I wanna go watch it, Heard they have more views than major league baseball.

 

[Turniphead]

Ti-Ne

Haven't played much RTS recently(unfortunately)... used to play lot's of Age of mythology/empires/warcraft 3. Never could get into the original starcraft.

I tend to just turtle until It seems like my military is strong enough to overpower the opponent in one big push. I suck at jumping around the map and micromanaging. The way I play games in general is not really that focused on winning. It's usually more about experimenting... so I will try really "stupid" things sometimes just to see what will happen. I guess I don't really have a learning method. Experiment and then gain experience and winning more often is a byproduct.