[G]Cheese Builds - Page 10

On December 29 2009 07:04 RaptorX wrote:
yes and i just came to that understanding after reading the quotes that i posted and reading Kwark's thoughts on this.

I also believed a lot of BO's where "cheese" but if you get to understand the purpose of that aggression then it is not cheese anymore.

He didnt talk about armies because he was trying to make you understand why horror gating was not cheese, and his points are valid. About army size and expanding vs making units i think that is another type of topic.

I personally think this thread is going to fail not because the idea is bad but because people wont agree with us just because they dont simply get it. Everybody will continue thinking that proxy 2gate is "cheese" or that 8-rax is "gay" even though high ranked people will try to explain in detail some high level complicated abstract part of the game that they understand and thats why they are good players.

I think at the end of the day you will still put 2gate proxy, 4pool, 8-rax, BBS and others in the list of cheese even though we can really explain you how they are not all-in and therefor not "cheese" and then this topic would be useless because people already think those are "cheese builds".

My stand is that there is no "cheese" in BW.

A side question though... is there any B-higher player that complains about cheese and imbalance??

I really want to know that.

On December 29 2009 07:08 MuffinDude wrote:

No. You guys are sort of convincing me that it isn't a cheese. But I want to know what you are going to do with the army difference. With the army advantage, I would just contain -> expand -> better econ -> win game.

As I said many times, rank shouldn't really be put into this discussing. As Nal_ra probably understands the game better than majority of the progamers nowadays but will be lower than them on iccup ranking.

On December 29 2009 07:20 RaptorX wrote:
muffin... what if i tech to dts faster than you?
you are going for an expa so you are going to die if you dont have cannons + you dont have obs so you barely can go out of your base...

what if i go reavers instead? your contain will be for nothing or i can just go and harass...
ok what if I simply add more gateways? your "army superiority" will go to shit in a few minutes because I have better economy on 1 base while you thought it was ok to expand and dint make more units...

dude you dont understand the point of having 3 more probes... or even having an economical advantage.

On December 29 2009 07:15 KwarK wrote:

Nal_rA was a progamer for years. You don't play Starcraft. You aren't Nal_rA.

On December 29 2009 07:32 Ilikestarcraft wrote:
i think rank does mean better knowledge when its a d player arguing with a b player.

On December 29 2009 07:26 MuffinDude wrote:

Lmao. I do know that having 3 more probes doesn't mean that you'll get out dts faster than he get cannons or you'll get reavers before he gets dragoons.

I'm not nal_ra but i certainly do play the game or is this how all higher rank people view lower rank people, with ignorance and disrespect?

On December 29 2009 07:35 MuffinDude wrote:

Sure, but does that mean I'm arguing without a case? No.

On December 29 2009 07:35 RaptorX wrote:


The point of the dts is to keep you on your base because you dont have obs while i expand myself and build upon my advantage.

The point of reavers is to brake a "contain" because I dont know if you believe it or not but i would get goons before or at the same time as you are, but i have 3 more probes than you...

Well I think i have to stop arguing, you need more game experience to understand what kwark meant, and what I in my limited knowledge is trying to pass to you.

in short:
If you know how to play and at the same time have the ability to execute a proxy 2gate build correctly it is NOT an all-in build. If on the other hand you have the knowledge but not the apm or havent practice enough or you dont have the knowledge even though you have the apm then this build is seriously an all-in build.

I think you and I fit in the later category, we just got the information but we dont have enough experience with that build to make it work. And lots of people are in that stage. So yeah go ahead and put it as a "cheese" "not-working" "all-in" "gay" strategy that will lead to you not being able to pass C ranks on ICCup.

On December 29 2009 07:37 KwarK wrote:

You said you played 6 games a season. Everything you've said in this topic has been speculation. You've been arguing against experience with theorycraft and it has been evident to me over and over that you have no understanding of the matters.
What your D rank means is you should learn when to drop it.

On December 29 2009 07:40 MuffinDude wrote:

What I meant is you get DT to break out of contain, but I'll have an expo running much longer than you have.


Thats because I also play tons of non official games with my friends via lan and stuff. I just don't have the time to play ladder game sc normally.

On December 29 2009 07:40 MuffinDude wrote:

What I meant is you get DT to break out of contain, but I'll have an expo running much longer than you have. Then you just lost your 3 probe econ advantage. And I'm 18. Don't know why this has to do anything with this.


Thats because I also play tons of non official games with my friends via lan and stuff. I just don't have the time to play ladder game sc normally. Now why don't you stop acting all high and mighty with your B and answer this, in any of your games, did they get a contain on you and expand after they deflected this attack?

On December 29 2009 07:44 RaptorX wrote:


With this post you just showed that you dont have the minimum idea of what are you talking about.

If i play correctly the time between your expa and mine is not going to be more than 20-30 seconds dude and by that time i have not only surpassed your army but i am ahead on tech... I think thats what we call an advantage...

On December 29 2009 07:46 KwarK wrote:

For about 30 seconds. It depends on the flow. If you gas steal and run your last zealots out you can hold your ramp with them (3 at the top vs 2 at the top) and then force them out with your much faster dragoons. Alternatively you can make 3 gateways in your main and force them out with your more zealots. You're just not understanding how little it hurts you to lose a pylon and 2 gateways early.

On December 29 2009 07:47 MuffinDude wrote:

Dude wtf? You can't possibly tech to dts so fast. I mean if the timing is right, I should be putting down my nexus when your citadel is about halfway done. Thats about 30 seconds after I deflect your attack. Then you have to warp in your archives and then make dts from your gateways. Thats more than 20~30 seconds. While doing this, you probably won't have enough minerals to get zealots to bust out with just pure zealots.

On December 29 2009 07:54 MuffinDude wrote:
If you read my post, I specifically stated that stork would of had 2 more zealot if it wasn't on plasma.

On December 29 2009 07:57 RaptorX wrote:


ok lets see...

you deflected my attack, and you made few zealots while expanding. I just made enough zealots to not let you in my base and rushed to dts, i will kick you out of my nat mainly with the dts and expand.

The difference between your expa and mine is not going to be that much but i am ahead in tech.
prolly the seconds count was a mistake on my part cause i just did it on the top of my head but the point is that I still have an advantage...

I can switch to templars + storm very quickly and your numerical superiority is going to mean nothing... The point is I dont lose my advantage.

It is not a cheese build, period. People wont agree but it is not.





And you are answering yourself... thats why Kwark gets upset and you feel "talked down"...
dude you have to calm down and try to UNDERSTAND. He already explained those things to you the problem is that you want to be right, and you are jumping information. I guess thats it.

On December 29 2009 08:00 MuffinDude wrote:

Well you're clearly underestimating the +1 expo advantage. Its much bigger than a +3 probe advantage. With +1 expo advantage, I can have a bigger army while catching up to you in tech. In many pvp progames. The person who expands first usually has a huge advantage as long as he holds. The person who didn't expand usually have faster tech, which is basically the same situation here.

And how do you know that I'm not feeling "talked down" but just upset that kwark is constantly making references to my older posts when I'm asking something else now? I'm really upset that he is just completely ignoring me. I'm also annoyed that he is just going I'm higher rank than you, what I say counts. Yest what he says stands firmer than what I say, but does this mean he can completely ignore what I say?

On December 29 2009 08:08 RaptorX wrote:


first because you stated so, and second he "ignores" you because he already answered that question and is telling you to go and read HIS posts not yours...

so you just came to the conclusion that
1) The person who expands first usually has a huge advantage as long as he holds.

and

2) The person who didn't expand usually have faster tech, which is basically the same situation here.

Which is part of a normal game, which should already tell you that that particular BO is not cheese because you can arrive there, which is what Kwark explained and I understood and makes sense, which should make this particular topic over (where you put it on the cheese build list or not) but some how you still dont get it and try to keep going which annoyed Kwark and is starting to annoy me already.

On December 29 2009 08:17 MuffinDude wrote:

My point is that with this build, after deflecting the attack, you can expand and hold much easier than just standard opening with the army size, expo then try to hold. In normal pvp, you usually can't create a contain so early in the game, but you can here because you'll have a bigger army right from the get go and with this bigger army, I can hold my expo much easier against your higher tech army.

He also didn't answer me why there will be only 2 zealots to contain when best had 4 in that situation. There was nowhere in his post that said why this occurs.

But seriously? Does you getting it somehow makes topic over? You aren't god, what you think isn't what others think. We first argued about whether this build would get you an economic advantage, we came to a yes, then we talked about whether you can hold, and we came to a yes again, but I want to talk about the follow up of this build now, which he clearly is avoiding. My thoughts are if this is a viable build, why don't progamers use is more often? One time it was basically because it was on plasma, so its rather map specific build that stork used, but besides that, only bisu used this build. There must be a catch to this build that we are missing.