Koreans aren't the best at Starcraft because they somehow magically have more hours in a day than us, or all sit at home unemployed more often than us. This is completely unfounded and simply attempting to defend those who fall short and need to lay the blame somewhere else than "maybe I'm just not good enough" and find a scapegoat in the mentality of, "well, if I played as much as he did I'd beat him." Sure, someone who just picked up a game is going to lose more often than not, but I've seen amazing players pick up Warband and join the elite 1% of the community in less than a week, and I've seen players playing since beta that play at least 30 hours a week and they're still absolutely terrible.
There'll always be players on the fringe. That's for sure, and the reasons for it are often complex to the point of being almost inscrutable. I don't think Koreans live on a different planet than us with longer days, or that they're physiologically better equipped to play video games, but that they're part of a different gaming culture. I was wrong to use them as an example, as it's such an anecdotal case, but I think there's a good point to be salvaged here. Korean players in many western games, from RTS to MMOs, are often better. Not all, but enough that there's a common reputation for skill and extreme precision associated with them. There's obviously something that sets them apart, and it seems absurd to me to attribute this to some sort of inherent quality of a large ethno-cultural group.
What you're talking about in your second paragraph is simply knowledge. You're highlighting people being glorified number crunchers as the acme of talent and skill that should be tested, as opposed to players being given an even footing and seeing who is able to squeeze the most efficiency and results from the same exact thing the other player is given
It is knowledge, yes, but it's more intuitive than you make it seem. I find it better described as "tactical skill." I know to generally run away from axemen but I also trust myself to fight them if they seem to be moving in a certain way. If they're moving like Leman Russ I gtfo as fast as I can, but if they're moving less fluidly and more predictably than him then can often stand and fight. I know what I can do with my particular weapons, and what axes can do against my particular armour, and sometimes I can discern something identifiable in the variable that is my opponent's skill. I don't think this is the pinnacle of Warband expertise, nor should it be considered as such, but it's a unique quality of cRPG combat apart from combat skill. In Native combat, especially when using the exact same gear and stats as an opponent, it's mostly about standing and fighting till death or victory. There isn't the same tactical evaluation of personal or interpersonal style and armament as there is in cRPG - and I find that a loss.
which is the true difference of what makes a player good.
And this is where we differ. I think there's more to cRPG than grinding and combat skill. There's judgement, and tactical deception. HarmlessPeasant can beat me as a peasant even if I'm in Goretooth's gear, but I can beat many other skilled players with my hammer. It's not just because my hammer is awesome, though it is, it's because I'm familiar with the eccentricities of the hammer and they're not. Were I fighting in Native this balancing between known vs unknown quantities would be lost. In these tactical decisions I see another kind of skill that isn't present in Native. So yes, it is about what you know, but I think it's unfair to say it's just about what you know and not how you use it to your advantage.
P.S. I talked to some of the tournament organizers recently and I think they've decided to host the matches in cRPG servers.
Poll