From b8ee041153f1215286546d2dda4719b2017ec045 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steven Cheong Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 18:33:11 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Add first transcript: micro-mezzo-macro competitive games framework --- gaming/micro-mezzo-macro-competitive-games.md | 246 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 246 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gaming/micro-mezzo-macro-competitive-games.md diff --git a/gaming/micro-mezzo-macro-competitive-games.md b/gaming/micro-mezzo-macro-competitive-games.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..be72f5c --- /dev/null +++ b/gaming/micro-mezzo-macro-competitive-games.md @@ -0,0 +1,246 @@ +--- +title: "Once you see this, You'll see Competitive Games Differently" +url: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgHvdCcmQ4o +channel: unknown (yt-dlp metadata unavailable at time of transcription) +duration: "14:01" +transcribed_at: 2026-08-11 +transcription_tool: whisper-cli (whisper.cpp) via MacWhisper ggml-medium model +category: gaming +tags: + - game-theory + - competitive-games + - micro-mezzo-macro + - framework + - CS2 + - Apex + - Overwatch + - Rocket-League +summary: > + Introduces a three-axis framework for understanding competitive games: Micro + (execution/aim/muscle-memory), Mezzo (mind-games/probability/reading people), + and Macro (systems/routing/optimal strategy). The clearest way to identify + which axis dominates a game is the "cheat test" — what single cheat would + most break it? Most big competitive games sit in all three, but in different + ratios. Applies the framework to CS2, Overwatch, Apex, and Rocket League with + input from domain experts. Closes with the insight that players have natural + leans toward one axis, and the games that frustrate you are probably demanding + the axis you haven't developed. +--- + +# Once you see this, You'll see Competitive Games Differently + +**YouTube:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgHvdCcmQ4o +**Duration:** 14:01 +**Transcribed:** 2026-08-11 via whisper-cli (MacWhisper ggml-medium model) + +--- + +## Transcript + +You know what's kind of weird? +When someone asks what kind of games do you like, most people struggle to answer. +You say "tactical shooters", and they respond "oh, so you must like Counter-Strike, Valorant, +and Rainbow Six Siege", and you say "eh, actually only Counter-Strike". +You say "strategy games", and someone recommends you Civilization when you wanted something +more like Hearthstone. +Game genres are kind of broken. +But I think there's a better way to think about this, and it's a much simpler way to +look at games. +And once you see it, you'll see games much more differently. +But let's start somewhere everyone can agree. +Every game has something that separates the good players from the bad ones. +Sometimes it's pure skill, your reflexes, your aim, your timing. +Sometimes it's information, knowing things the other person doesn't. +Sometimes it's something harder to name. +The mental side, reading people, managing randomness, and adapting on the fly. +These aren't just different skills, they are fundamentally different kinds of gameplay, +and most games mix them together in different amounts. +So let me give you three words. +Micro, Mezzo, Macro. +Now here's where it gets interesting, and a little uncomfortable. +What if I told you the clearest way to understand what a game is actually testing, is to think +about how you'd cheat in it. +If you wanted to completely break a game, to make it trivially easy, what cheat would +you use? +The answer to that question tells you more about a game than any genre label ever could. +So let's put this to the test. +What is micro? +Micro is the execution layer, it's your aim, your timing, your movement, your muscle memory. +An example of a micro cheat looks like an aimbot, perfect inputs every single time. +If a game can be broken by perfect execution, that's a micro game. +osu!, Geometry Dash, Aim Trainers, and Tetris are a few examples. +You can cheat in osu! with perfect cursor tracking, you can cheat in Geometry Dash with +perfect jumps. +These are execution cheats, and you can feel the microness when you play them. +Mezzo is the probability layer, the place where mind games exist. +You're reacting to the unpredictable nature of people, not mechanics. +A mezzo cheat looks like stream sniping, knowing someone's habits before they show them, reading +cooldowns, seeing things you shouldn't see yet. +The best example for the purest mezzo game is Rock Paper Scissors. +There's zero execution skill, it's entirely mental, and probability. +Among Us also runs on mezzo, so does Liar's Bar. +Even the stock market is built around this layer. +If you wanted to cheat in Among Us, you'd stream snipe to know who the imposter is. +If you wanted to cheat in stocks, you'd insider trade. +Notice how none of these cheats involve executing anything better, they involve knowing something +you shouldn't. +Intro is the systems layer, it's your routing, your resource management, and your win condition. +You can think of it like the mathematically correct way of winning the game. +A macro cheat looks like a chess engine, economy automation, or you can imagine like a perfect +coach telling you exactly what to do. +Pure macro games are almost mathematical puzzles. +Think Factorio, PolyBridge, Connect4, Tic Tac Toe. +Once you find the optimal solution, the game is solved. +But here's where it gets really interesting. +Most games aren't just one of these, they're combinations of them, and the combination +tells you everything about what kind of game it is. +So let's look at Micro plus Macro. +These tend to be single player precision games. +You need to know the optimal solution and execute it fast. +Think Rubik's Cube Speedrunning, Mario 64, Jump King, and Getting Over It. +If you were to have a perfect micro cheat in Alderaan Ring, you'd have perfect dodges. +But if you were to have a perfect macro cheat, you'd use the mathematically optimal build. +But there's one weird multiplayer outlier here, 8 Ball Pool. +There's a mathematically optimal shot, and then there's the skill of actually hitting +it. +But even though it is player versus player, the room for mind games doesn't really exist. +And I think it's a rare exception. +Next let's look at Micro plus Mezzo. +This is PvP skill expression games. +These tend to be your fighting games, Street Fighter, Tekken, Smash Bros, Brawlhalla. +Your skill matters, and reading your opponent matters. +But also you have some other examples like Mario Kart, like the micro of driving, and +the mezzo of random items and unpredictable opponents. +We even see some unique games like Tetris 99. +The original Tetris is pure micro. +But Tetris 99 also involves mezzo, because now you're managing who to send garbage to. +You also have physics based PvP, like Fall Guys and Gang Beasts. +Which also fits into Micro plus Mezzo. +The next one is Mezzo plus Macro. +These are the mind and math games. +Using Karthstone, TFT, Pokemon VGC, and Battleship. +Now chess is theoretically a pure macro game, but at the human level, there's a massive +mezzo component. +You're optimizing for your specific opponent's habits. +That's why studying opponent matters in high level chess. +And then there are some weird outliers. +Bellatro is a single player game, but it's also mezzo-macro because the RNG of the card +combines with the math of maximizing your hand. +You're not executing anything difficult, but you have to pick and choose your cards +wisely, and play to their biggest strength. +Phasmophobia is also a weird game that fits into mezzo-macro. +It's a co-op game, but it fits here because you're deducing a ghost using evidence, which +is macro, while the ghost's behavior has RNG, mezzo. +Although I suspect non-PvP mezzo-macro games slowly converge towards pure macro over time. +Once players fully map the RNG, it stops feeling uncertain and becomes a speedrun problem. +And then there's the middle, all three overlapping. +This is where the biggest competitive games live. +League of Legends, Dota 2, CS2, Valorant, Overwatch, Marvel Rivals, Rocket League, Apex, +Rainbow Six, World of Warcraft. +But here's the thing, they're not all the same balance. +And the cheat test tells you how exactly they differ. +So let's use Counter-Strike as an example. +Can aimbots win a game of CS completely alone? +Almost certainly yes. +If you never miss, most duels are over before they start. +That makes micro extremely high in CS2. +But what about x-ray, seeing through walls? +Pros have done experiments with one player with x-ray versus five without x-ray. +The five still usually win, but the x-ray player takes rounds they have no business +taking. +This makes mezzo very high in CS2 too. +Which means macro, the strategic layer, is relatively the lowest. +CS isn't about long-term economy optimization the way MOBAs are. +The rounds are short and the execution is everything. +But let's try this test with Overwatch. +And right away we see a unique case, because the answer actually depends on your role. +But since it varies so heavily by character and roles, I decided to ask someone who knows +about Overwatch way better than I do. +So if you compare all three like maxed out versions of the perfect version of it, like +a cheat version of it, which one would have like the highest win rate and how would the +distribution be? +I would just say support is more macro heavy, DPS is more micro heavy, and then tank is +more mezzo heavy. +Also the way that it works is you have offense, defense and control. +Control refers to like map control, offense refers to offensive options, defense refers +to defensive options. +And a character's mixture or like kind of design links to this concept of offense, defense +and control. +Tanks tend to depend on more control, supports more defense, DPS more offense. +And if you actually like dissect each individual hero, they will have different like varying +levels or varying focuses on offense, defense or control. +So I'm thinking about it like this, right? +If you were to give each role one cheat, you would give aimbot to DPS and for tank you +would give the ability to see enemy cooldowns as a perfect cheat, right? +And for supports you would have a coach or an engine, perfect coach. +That's perfect, that's exactly perfect. +And also, especially in Overwatch, because it's 5v5, because you only have one tank. +Like if you can win every duel as a tank, that's kind of like a free win for your team. +But what about Apex? +Apex sits remarkably balanced across all three. +If you think about which player is most likely to win, a guy with perfect aimbot, a guy with +perfect wallhacks or a guy with perfect ring knowledge, all three actually has a pretty +good chance of winning the game. +If you have aimbot, you can easily kill anyone rotating, but any close range fight will tend +to go either way. +But with perfect wallhacks, you can use your needs and abilities to take a team down, but +you'll still lose to someone with good ring positioning. +But even with perfect ring information, you could still easily die to someone who wants +to contest that position. +Let's test this in a really unique game. +Rocket League +I asked pro Rocket League coach Luke on his answer to this thought experiment, and this +was his response. +Basically, perfect micro or perfect mechanics in Rocket League would be defined as taking +the ball from point A to point B as quickly and as efficiently as possible. +Like how in a first person shooter, aimbot moves the crosshair to the target as quickly +and as efficiently as possible. +For Rocket League, smarts cannot make up for the fact that a more mechanical person can +just take the ball to the open net far more than someone with less mechanics. +This makes Rocket League heavily micro dominant. +But after micro being the most dominant, he put macro second and mezzo last. +This is because even if perfect mezzo allows you to hear enemy comms or see enemy boost, +doesn't change the fact that all information in Rocket League is able to be known at all +times. +And for how fast paced the game is at the highest level, listening to a perfect coach +verbatim would be better over hearing enemy comms or seeing enemy boost. +Also, the closest thing to perfect micro in Rocket League is the AI bots. +I came across footage of three semi-pro players versing three of the best Rocket League AI. +And the three AI bots were able to win comfortably. +So here's what this framework actually gives you. +It helps classify games, but it also helps understand yourself as a player. +I noticed something when I looked at which games I genuinely enjoy. +I gravitate toward games in the middle, the full micro-mezzo-macro cluster, and toward +pure micro and pure macro, but I don't really enjoy micro-macro games. +Speedrunning doesn't scratch the right itch for me. +And when I looked at why, it mapped exactly. +In Apex, I'd argue I aim pretty well and have respectable movement. +I'd say I also have a solid understanding of rotations and ring positioning, but I tend +to tunnel vision in close quarter fights, specifically when we're in the same building. +So I tend to miss mezzo-reads when the pressure is high. +And this exactly explains the gap in my game. +Because here's the real insight. +Every player has a natural lean. +Some people are micro-players, they grind mechanics obsessively, and they want the skill +gap to feel fair. +Some people are mezzo-players, they love reading people, and they thrive in the chaos of PvP +randomness. +We even see a common cluster of people who play Among Us, GTA Artee, luck-based games +like gambling, along with many other party games. +And then we also see that some players are macro-players, they love efficiency, they +draw routes on maps, they think about the game between games more than during it. +And most of us are a mix, but not an equal mix. +The games that frustrate you the most, they're probably demanding something your brain doesn't +naturally give. +The games you keep coming back to, they're probably rewarding the part of you that already +runs at full power. +Genre labels never told you any of this. +Action RPG doesn't tell you whether you'll be grinding execution, reading opponents, +or solving systems. +It just tells you there's a sword and a level bar. +And maybe more importantly, you can stop blaming yourself when a game doesn't click. +Because maybe the games are testing things you haven't built yet. +In my case it's the underdevelopment of mezzo. +And that's the three dimensions of games, micro, mezzo, macro. +Every game lives somewhere inside them. +And now that you know where to look, you'll never see a game the same way again.