Do you think players tha play certain races share common traits?

[REF]

I believe there is some sort of connection . Although people change and do freely all the time. I've always gone back to Terran.

I enjoy Terran because I love being under fire and preparing to defend. Nothing satisfies me more than punishing a zerg after a muta harass which utterly fails due to well played turrets and marines.

The patience of tank pushing , and setting up seige outside someone's base is pretty sweet too.

I believe it all has to do with the fact terran starts really weak and exponetionally gets stronger as the game goes on.

Now, maybe that's related to me because I've always played defense in any sport (hockey, american football, soccer/football) and I've always enjoyed really good strong defense in pretty much any situation. I would consider myself logical and rather consistant.

Maybe there's a connection??

[GnaReffotsirk]

But Drac, if something indicates what that person's personality is, you form an idea of a person's personality and thus risk falling into the most obvious trait humans have, which is to categorize things.

Not set in stone yes, but the same reason why I tried to get the idea out there that no one can ever "truly know" someone until one meets them face to face and "experience" them for such a long time that one can form a basis of that person's personality and his tendencies.

It's like in psych that questions reveal what could be your personality, and in a way, the opening post asked the question, in some way, if it is possible that the choices we make could be, as in the choices we make in answering psych eval tests, tell something about our personality.

I don't believe this, since there has been no established ideas yet around the races in SC2, and even so, I tend to disagree with such things.

So, when Blasterion asks the question, I responded with the likes of, "no, you cannot tell someone's personality by what race he/she has chosen". And this I attribute to the fact that anyone can just choose a race just because he/she chose to just choose this race to play and master, regardless of anything that choice might connote, and without regard of his/her level of desire or distress in making and sticking/disregarding that choice.

I say, "attraction to a certain association(s) given to/accepted for a certain unit" might be somewhat indicative to one's personality, but that in itself is a thick layer of paint.

I believe there is some sort of connection . Although people change and do freely all the time. I've always gone back to Terran.

I enjoy Terran because I love being under fire and preparing to defend. Nothing satisfies me more than punishing a zerg after a muta harass which utterly fails due to well played turrets and marines.

The patience of tank pushing , and setting up seige outside someone's base is pretty sweet too.

I believe it all has to do with the fact terran starts really weak and exponetionally gets stronger as the game goes on.

Now, maybe that's related to me because I've always played defense in any sport (hockey, american football, soccer/football) and I've always enjoyed really good strong defense in pretty much any situation. I would consider myself logical and rather consistant.

Maybe there's a connection??

A multitude of personality may enjoy watching a football game, or a team playing in a certain way. Now, if a part of that multitude agrees to like the tactics displayed and executed in those games, the failure of, success of, etc said tactics, or that they like tactics and things around that, then we could say yeah, these people like to think and solve problems in a methodical way.

But then again, that doesn't tell you of their individual personality, or hint at even a vague idea of their personality. You can tell only one thing, "they like the tactics in the games they play; they like tactics" but that's it. You need more data regarding that to scrape out the nuances of the notion and then arrive at a vague conclusion of said statement in quote (which is, "they like tactics").

All I can tell about you, as an example, is what you claim about you in your post. That that is what you claim you "think" you are, and so with respect, I believe you, but still respect you enough to believe that a few seconds after you clicked the post button, you might have changed your mind or have seen something else about yourself that makes the claim you made for yourself, let's say, not applicable.

So, if I see a terran player who likes siege tanks and the ramifications of it, then he/she's a guy who likes that in that and that's it for that matter.

I think it would be a mistake or sort of over-stepping should I allow myself to go beyond, and no one thing tells about another thing in one person absolutely, or indicatively. Yes, we can take the route of habits and tendencies, but the margin of error is great.

I propose that we call a terran player a terran player, a zerg player a zerg player, etc. If someone likes the protoss warp-gate mechanics, then he/she is a person who likes warp-gate mechanics, etc.

But then again, will that person like warp-gate mechanics on Zerg?

[B~E]

I wonder if there's a connexion between sexual orientation, religious affiliation, nationality, IQ score, and starcraft races.

Tell me SClegacy.

[GnaReffotsirk]

Your choices can be influenced by your cultural background, orientations, etc. If so, this is due to the affects you have associated with externals. No one is absolutely free from influence, but we can keep an open mind.

To answer your question directly, yes, there is a connection only if you think there is.

But if you had asked, "I wonder if there's a connexion between sexual orientation, religious affiliation, nationality, IQ score, and starcraft race preference?" then if the answer was a yes or even no, we need to ask further, how so?

[DemolitionSquid]

I wonder if there's a connexion between sexual orientation, religious affiliation, nationality, IQ score, and starcraft races.

Tell me SClegacy.

Are you implying all Jews play Terran because of MULES?