which requires more strategy: starcraft or chess?

were as starcraft does have bits of strategy... chess has alot more,

where if you have massive amounts of units you can win in SC... but if you have 3 pieces, and your opponent has 8 pieces, you can still win in chess.

chess is a breakdown of character and intuition.. much more strategic than any RTS game i have played. and i have played a good bit of them

but thats not to take away the strategy of RTS games, including starcraft.. they all have strategy in their own right. but chess takes a bit more imo.

Chess is mostly two things: memorization of situations and logic. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a "strategy" game. It's more of a "logic" puzzle. The fact that you have an opponent is sort of incidental, although obviously the quality of said opponent affects how good your decisions have to be. If it wasn't for that astronomical mathematical complexity of looking too many moves ahead, there would be a move that is guaranteed to be right regardless of what your opponent might do in chess, whereas that isn't really true of Starcraft or any other game with imperfect information or a random element to it.

If you had two theoretical opponents with unlimited capacity for calculation and memory, then I would think that the outcome of chess would always be the same: Either the first to move always wins, second to move always wins, or it's always a stalemate. Chess becomes a game of limited information only because it is mathematically impossible within a reasonable time frame and memory space to consider every possible situation a certain number of moves ahead. Starcraft is a game of truly limited information where you do not always know what your opponent is doing (unless you're a cheating SOB). Therefore, I would say that Starcraft is more "strategic."

(Lest someone should think I'm picking Starcraft because I'm good at it, I have to say that I kind of suck at it actually.)

Chess is mostly two things: memorization of situations and logic. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a "strategy" game. It's more of a "logic" puzzle. The fact that you have an opponent is sort of incidental, although obviously the quality of said opponent affects how good your decisions have to be. If it wasn't for that astronomical mathematical complexity of looking too many moves ahead, there would be a move that is guaranteed to be right regardless of what your opponent might do in chess, whereas that isn't really true of Starcraft or any other game with imperfect information or a random element to it.

If you had two theoretical opponents with unlimited capacity for calculation and memory, then I would think that the outcome of chess would always be the same: Either the first to move always wins, second to move always wins, or it's always a stalemate. Chess becomes a game of limited information only because it is mathematically impossible within a reasonable time frame and memory space to consider every possible situation a certain number of moves ahead. Starcraft is a game of truly limited information where you do not always know what your opponent is doing (unless you're a cheating SOB). Therefore, I would say that Starcraft is more "strategic."

(Lest someone should think I'm picking Starcraft because I'm good at it, I have to say that I kind of suck at it actually.)

SpaceMoose

i somewhat agree.

chess does take strategy no doubt... but you are not entirely incorrect calling it a logic puzzle. cause it is a game in logic, but also strategy,

but in SC i disagree with one thing.

you can win by a standard set of moves with chess i give you that... but you can do the same thing in SC, so that point is kinda void..

but you do make valid points.

though i still say chess takes the cake.

i somewhat agree.

chess does take strategy no doubt... but you are not entirely incorrect calling it a logic puzzle. cause it is a game in logic, but also strategy,

but in SC i disagree with one thing.

you can win by a standard set of moves with chess i give you that... but you can do the same thing in SC, so that point is kinda void..

but you do make valid points.

though i still say chess takes the cake.

Lach0121

I'm not really going to argue about it though, as it's really a matter of opinion about what exactly is meant by strategic in this case. I just wanted to further elaborate on my view.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

i somewhat agree.

chess does take strategy no doubt... but you are not entirely incorrect calling it a logic puzzle. cause it is a game in logic, but also strategy,

but in SC i disagree with one thing.

you can win by a standard set of moves with chess i give you that... but you can do the same thing in SC, so that point is kinda void..

but you do make valid points.

though i still say chess takes the cake.

SpaceMoose

I'm not really going to argue about it though, as it's really a matter of opinion about what exactly is meant by strategic in this case. I just wanted to further elaborate on my view.

no i agree on this as well. and it really does boil down to perception of "strategy"...

but the only thing that really differenciates between teh two is... chess is turn-based, and SC is real time...

now if you were going to make a more fair comparison it would be a TBS(turn based strategy) vs chess...

now i love SC and chess. both are great... but in my opinion.. i think chess will help your brain develop a little more on the logic side than it would strategy side, and SC would more on the entertainment side, and slight strategy side.

now im not argueing either, cause i think you make some valid points.

i was just elaborating on how i see it.

chess is all about math, thats why supercomputers can beat humans everytime, their is always a best move to make, humans cant always see this and only the best can make a strategy for 5 moves ahead of time.. im sure starcraft is the exact same way, theirs probly a best strategy, and for whatever your enemy does theirs a best way to counter it. and your speed of reaction and micromanagement will win the game for you.nimatoad2000

There's a slight technicality about something I said that has been bothering me. If you are in the position in chess where there is perfect play that will win no matter what the opponent does, then obviously there is a move that is always correct regardless of the opponent. However, if you are on the other side, then there arguably is no perfect strategy (if the only thing that matters is if the game ends in a win / draw, or loss), and in that case you would want to choose a move based on what you think an opponent who is not playing perfectly might do. I know probably nobody cares, but that technicality was driving me nuts after I thought about it, so I had to correct it.SpaceMoose

understandable my man lol.

i agree...

i love chess absolutely love it.. though im tired of playing computers...

i like to watch the expressions of someone while i play them... i like to try to think of what they are thinking, based upon their body-tells. and whatnot, sort of like poker, but not really...

hard to do that on SC, if you do that on SC, then you will lose, cause your taking your eyes of the "much needed to be constantly watched" screen lol.

There are more strategies in chess only because there are more time to plan them. SC and chess are completely different, one is real time the other is turn-based. Imagine playing chess with a 0.1 second turn to make it "feel" more like an RTS, there wouldn't be many strategies left would there?

Or imagine playing SC as turn-based: I move my marine then you move your zergling then I move my tank etc...then SC would be a much more complex strategy game because there simply are way more possibilities.

life.McCain_da_G

Agree

[QUOTE="McCain_da_G"]life.ravage19

Agree

What about Starcraft themed chess?Treflis

hmm lol

Love requires more strategy than Both.kieranb2000

[QUOTE="kieranb2000"]Love requires more strategy than Both.arijit_2404

the act of love itself does not..

the filtering of BS that people give you, and crap you would go thru, does.

[QUOTE="McCain_da_G"]life.ravage19

Agree

I been playing SC for 10 years and i can say there are countless outcomes and strategies to every game( it is not about the same BO over and over), right now the game has reached a certain lvl of perfection that every little mistake makes a huuuuuuge difference. U watch the pro players play and its just amazing how they think or do the stuff they do while they play at the speeds they play, its just really intimidating. With all that said i do think Chess requires a higher level of intelligence.TanKLoveR

this i agree with somewhat, but take all of what you said, and watch some pro's play chess. and you will get the same intimidating results.

just remember professional chess, is timed.

It's starcraft, easily.

Here's why.

You can't write a computer program to beat the best players in the world at starcraft, but you can at chess (because it's MUCH simpler). Chess is essentially a game with 6 basic rules (what each piece can do). Starcraft can't be reduced to 6 basic rules.

Those saying starcraft is nothing but memorizing build orders, etc couldn't be more wrong. If ANY of that crap were true then starcraft would have died out years ago.

Another thing people are conveniently forgetting is that each side in chess is identical whereas there are three completely unique races in starcraft.

It's starcraft, easily.

Here's why.

You can't write a computer program to beat the best players in the world at starcraft, but you can at chess. Chess is essentially a game with 6 basic rules (what each piece can do). Starcraft can't be reduced to 6 basic rules.

Those saying starcraft is nothing but memorizing build orders, etc couldn't be more wrong. If ANY of that crap were true then starcraft would have died out years ago.

mudman91878

im not saying one is more strategic than the other, now that my mind has been opened to the subject a little more..

one is no more strategic than the other, both have a finite understanding about them.. neither truly has "endless" outcomes.

also since i am starting to get a little aggrivated i will state the following.

what we come here to the forums is to get social authentication... so sad that most "truth" is based upon this understanding.

for people confuse social authentication for truth. they figure the more people they can get to agree with them, it makes their statement true. lol.

for people can make valid points saying chess is way more strategic, just as people can make valid points saying starcraft is more strategic.

funny that is something that no one has posted yet.

sorry if i offended anyone just now with my post above,

its just people get so caught up in something they dont really realize what is going on. or people tend to look at things from a biased closed perception.

both people on teh chess and SC side make valid points.

im just getting tired and cranky. so please do excuse me.

[QUOTE="mudman91878"]

It's starcraft, easily.

Here's why.

You can't write a computer program to beat the best players in the world at starcraft, but you can at chess. Chess is essentially a game with 6 basic rules (what each piece can do). Starcraft can't be reduced to 6 basic rules.

Those saying starcraft is nothing but memorizing build orders, etc couldn't be more wrong. If ANY of that crap were true then starcraft would have died out years ago.

Lach0121

im not saying one is more strategic than the other, now that my mind has been opened to the subject a little more..

one is no more strategic than the other, both have a finite understanding about them.. neither truly has "endless" outcomes.

also since i am starting to get a little aggrivated i will state the following.

what we come here to the forums is to get social authentication... so sad that most "truth" is based upon this understanding.

for people confuse social authentication for truth. they figure the more people they can get to agree with them, it makes their statement true. lol.

for people can make valid points saying chess is way more strategic, just as people can make valid points saying starcraft is more strategic.

funny that is something that no one has posted yet.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"][QUOTE="mudman91878"]

It's starcraft, easily.

Here's why.

You can't write a computer program to beat the best players in the world at starcraft, but you can at chess. Chess is essentially a game with 6 basic rules (what each piece can do). Starcraft can't be reduced to 6 basic rules.

Those saying starcraft is nothing but memorizing build orders, etc couldn't be more wrong. If ANY of that crap were true then starcraft would have died out years ago.

jjtiebuckle

im not saying one is more strategic than the other, now that my mind has been opened to the subject a little more..

one is no more strategic than the other, both have a finite understanding about them.. neither truly has "endless" outcomes.

also since i am starting to get a little aggrivated i will state the following.

what we come here to the forums is to get social authentication... so sad that most "truth" is based upon this understanding.

for people confuse social authentication for truth. they figure the more people they can get to agree with them, it makes their statement true. lol.

for people can make valid points saying chess is way more strategic, just as people can make valid points saying starcraft is more strategic.

funny that is something that no one has posted yet.

it may or may not be in your lol "books" but it is a term in which technically (having someone else validating their point) is social authentication (having your point/opinion/or view socially validated), and sadly this is how most truths are measured.

the more people agree with you... the more right you are... no matter how rediculous the (content in which you are having validated) is

You can't compare them to each other because first off, Chess is not a video game while Starcraft is. Secondly, Chess is a TBS game while Starcraft is RTS. And even more reasons why you can't compare them. But if you insist I'd surely say Chess.

Chess is mostly two things: memorization of situations and logic. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it a "strategy" game. It's more of a "logic" puzzle. The fact that you have an opponent is sort of incidental, although obviously the quality of said opponent affects how good your decisions have to be. If it wasn't for that astronomical mathematical complexity of looking too many moves ahead, there would be a move that is guaranteed to be right regardless of what your opponent might do in chess, whereas that isn't really true of Starcraft or any other game with imperfect information or a random element to it.

If you had two theoretical opponents with unlimited capacity for calculation and memory, then I would think that the outcome of chess would always be the same: Either the first to move always wins, second to move always wins, or it's always a stalemate. Chess becomes a game of limited information only because it is mathematically impossible within a reasonable time frame and memory space to consider every possible situation a certain number of moves ahead. Starcraft is a game of truly limited information where you do not always know what your opponent is doing (unless you're a cheating SOB). Therefore, I would say that Starcraft is more "strategic."

(Lest someone should think I'm picking Starcraft because I'm good at it, I have to say that I kind of suck at it actually.)

SpaceMoose

so you just said that chess is like many other turn based strategy games. and starcraft is a REAL TIME one.Kh1ndjal

Chess isn't like a turn based strategy game either as - for starters - there are still unknown pieces of information in most TBS computer games. Additionally, there is the factor of there typically being multiple opponents. If everyone decides they are going to gang up on you in a typical TBS game then your strategy is probably irrelevant as far as winning goes, so that's a whole different animal from both of them.

A lucky pawn rush won't win the game for you in chess.-notdie-

[QUOTE="-notdie-"]A lucky pawn rush won't win the game for you in chess.capthavic

[QUOTE="-notdie-"]A lucky pawn rush won't win the game for you in chess.capthavic

For the billionth time, if ANYTHING you said were true, Starcraft would have died out years ago. To say there's no strategy in Starcraft is the equivalent of admitting to everyone you've hardly, if ever, even played the game.