|
I've seen lots of people argue about what's cheese and what's not and I think there should be one dictionary-type definition that the SC community should agree on to settle this once and for all.
Here is my suggestion: Cheese Tactics are tactics that rely on luck to be effective, and if you're unlucky they would put you behind.
---
[ Examples ]
If you go by this definition, 4/5/6pool is definitely cheese. You're basically hoping P FEs and doesn't scout you until it's too late to send probes to defend his warping cannons. If he went 2gate you're royally fucked, 5-6 probes + zealot can handle your lings well enough and your macro is horribly behind, not to mention he'll have 3 zea quickly.
Early pool in ZvT is retarded, you're basically hoping T doesn't wall, and if he does you already lost.
The only map where you'd want to 4/5/6 pool ZvT is Colosseum, for obvious reason. But even then, take note that 5pool lings come 20 seconds earlier than 9pool.
5pool in ZvZ loses to every single thing Z can do - 9pool, overpool, 12pool, even 12hat, are all a direct counter to 5pool, so if you earlypool in ZvZ shame on you, you won't be getting wins against any player ranked higher than D+ like that (or hell anyone that knows how to micro and how to ZvZ).
BBS is cheese because you're relying on countering a certain opening build, so that he can't respond. If his build was one that gives him the units to counter yours and he's not a complete noob, time to type gg.
5/6probe Proxy gates is cheese because, once again, you're basically relying on your opponent to have bad building placement to deal with the units from those gates and scouting them too late. If his simcity is good and/or he scouted them early, you just wasted a high amount of earlygame minerals and you have to play from a handicapped position.
Proxy robo is not cheese, it's clever play, when you do it you already scouted your opponent and you know his movement patterns so you know where to place it correctly. It's not any more cheese than Z's entire macro - where drone production relies entirely on anticipating the opponent's next move based on information you already have.
Hidden factory/rax float in TvZ isn't cheese because while it relies on not being scouted to truly be effective, it doesn't put you behind if it's scouted, it just won't give you an advantage.
---
So what do you people think about this definition?
Cheese
- Relies on luck to be effective
- Puts you significantly behind if you were unlucky
  
|
You should add in that while all cheeses are all-ins, not all all-ins are cheeses.
Example: Hydra all-ins in ZvP
|
Some of them also rely heavily on micro, at least compared to other standard openings. Luck does play a large factor (scouting, opening builds, etc.) like you already said.
Are all-in plays always considered to be cheese as well?
Edit: Question answered by above post lolol
|
"I don't cheese" as a T player = I don't BBS? I think that's what I'm seeing here 
By that definition though... 1gate dt exp is not a cheese! Shit 
Edit: Imo all-in gets mixed up with cheese a lot
|
cheese is whatever the hell people says it is, because language is elastic. Thread fail. 1/5, would not read again.
|
You'll never get a solid definition.
|
Stop trying to define a term that means something different to every sc player out there.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On July 18 2009 16:15 Aqo[il] wrote:
I think there should be one dictionary-type definition that the SC community should agree on to settle this once and for all.
This would be really nice, but its never going to happen. SC is a game that is entirely circumstantial, and its fan are very dumb in general so these semantic arguments are going to happen for eternity.
|
im ok with cheese just being a build order executed below a certain supply threshold, for example zerg 6 pool is cheese, BBS is cheese, 7 pylon proxy gate is cheese etc)
however there are shitloads of cheesey builds in ZvP that can be executed off 2 base, like 2 hatch hydra all in or 2 hatch mutas 2 hatch lurker drop etc.
it's a loose term,i dont think people will ever agree on a rigid definition.
|
United States11390 Posts
12hat directly counters 5pool?
looooooool
|
the community can never agree to anything.
|
A strategy that relies on the element of surprise.
And no, it is not only about early rushes hidden tech on the map and proxies, 2 base carrier is also cheese and that is mid-to-late game. FE into 4 rax sunken break against 3 hatch is also cheese, any bio vs p, any 1 or 2 hatch lurker, 2 gas hive after 2 hatch muta, and i would also mention that any map particularity that you can exploit to get units in someone's main like temples on medusa is also cheese
|
that is a bad definition because technically "non cheese" builds rely on luck in that if they do a super econ build (14 cc) you will be behind, which by your definition makes them cheese (thus all builds are cheese)
|
Nobody can really agree to what "cheese" is, but at least is fun to show your own theory.
I've always heard that if you face a clearily superior player in a tournament, you should cheese to have a chance of winning, therefore i believe that cheese should be defined as an early agression that relies on surprise (since the opponent is more skilled) to try and end the game before the difference in skill becomes too relevant.
This way, something like 14 Nexus or two base Carriers would not be considered cheese, since they do not aim for early agression nor ending the game quickly.
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
