After making the last thread, I came up with a new idea that I feel belongs to a new thread.
So under "Anti-Cheese Mode," a very mild restriction in build order will be enforced just to avoid very extreme cheese.
For example, no spawning pool until supply 9, no barrack until 9, no gate until 9. Nothing too restrictive. Everything will be tactically the same, except very extreme cheese will be ruled out. The idea is to at least allow the player to scout and counter in the very beginning when using a standard bo.
I'm not arguing against cheese tactics. But an option to have this mode would be nice. For example, I might want to look for games where I want to work on my mid game management. If I'm out of luck, I might meet several players who cheese me right away. This inconvenience could be avoided with this option.
If I were to tell a friend, "I could beat you as long as you don't 4 pool rush me," there would be a way to enforce this.
Poll: Thoughts? (Vote): This option is reasonable (Vote): No need for it
[edit] with this restriction, though, everyone will have to do the same thing until they get about 9 workers. As someone pointed out, it'll be more convenient to just start a game with more workers. Probably better to do this under ums. I know that the topic about spawn worker number has already been mentioned. So I guess I found the answer.
Sounds like you're trying to find ways to make SC2 more, excuse my french "pussy-fied". If you don't like to get cheesed learn how to scout and beat it.
Dunno whats with all these threads suggesting handicaps all of a sudden.
Yeah, learning SC means learning to defend cheese. There's no two ways about it. Playing in no cheese mode is just an excuse to learn bad habits. Anyone worried about it should play against a practice partner who, in general, doesn't cheese them.
why not just implement a doodad outside of both players natural such as destructible rocks with like 2000 hp? so it gives a good amount of time to get ready?
On December 16 2009 17:00 BeastofManjura wrote: why not just implement a doodad outside of both players natural such as destructible rocks with like 2000 hp? so it gives a good amount of time to get ready?
fuck, i accidentally hit the wrong answer in the poll, ignore the second yes vote
this is a really terrible idea, no competitive game should have restrictions on it, unless it is to prevent something gamebreaking (I.E. infinite loops in fighting games)
Variety is what keeps SC fresh and interesting. I think anti-cheese mode and other such options would be very popular, but they'd also lead to a lot of people getting bored with the game quickly.
On December 16 2009 17:12 ItsBigfoot wrote: fuck, i accidentally hit the wrong answer in the poll, ignore the second yes vote
this is a really terrible idea, no competitive game should have restrictions on it, unless it is to prevent something gamebreaking (I.E. infinite loops in fighting games)
I laughed pretty hard when I saw this thread, I like cheese, even if I'm on the receiving end. Defeating cheese and then going on to win is a great feeling, why not learn how to defend it. You're going to have to at some point. I don't think this is a good idea (neither was the No Rush idea).
As I said in your other thread, this isn't inherently a bad idea, and some might like it. The problem is that it's such a niche thing, and so easy for UMS maker to implement that there's zero need for it to be boxed with the game. It wastes development time on more useful things.
Let map makers deal with tiny things like this. Leave the Blizzard team to deal with things that actually have a real impact on how the game works.
On December 16 2009 17:23 TheYango wrote: As I said in your other thread, this isn't inherently a bad idea, and some might like it. The problem is that it's such a niche thing, and so easy for UMS maker to implement that there's zero need for it to be boxed with the game. It wastes development time on more useful things.
Let map makers deal with tiny things like this. Leave the Blizzard team to deal with things that actually have a real impact on how the game works.
i'm still stuck in starcraft way of thinking. i don't have much idea of how extensive the mapmaking tool is going to be for sc2.
and in conjunction with the new battle.net platform, i don't know how widely this new map will be used.
if an idea like this were to be applied in starcraft, ums like this will not be popular, much like the thread, especially if it won't effect one's record. users will rather face the chance of facing a cheeser on a regular platform than look for less popular version of melee in a different setting.
On December 16 2009 17:35 DN2perfectionGM wrote: and in conjunction with the new battle.net platform, i don't know how widely this new map will be.
That's the thing. If it's a popular concept, people will play the map (like BGH and fastest). If it isn't, it won't get played. There's not really a problem with people who don't want to play no-rush games not playing no-rush.
On December 16 2009 17:35 DN2perfectionGM wrote: if an idea like this were to be applied in starcraft, ums like this will not be popular, much like the thread, especially if it won't effect one's record. users will rather face the chance of facing a cheeser on a regular platform than look for less popular version of melee in a different setting.
That's given B.net's current platform. With better ways to instrument leagues and such, it should be more conducive to semi-competitive play in UMS games.
I think having the option to cheese when they feel angry at bm's is why this game is so awesome... if you dont know how to stop cheese then you are still a low player and need to practice more...
I am not a cheeser but when I am fucking angry I love to try to rush my opponents to throw them totally off, is always fun.
NO No need for that. You start with more workers which might have an easier time defending, and if the developers from Blizzard are smart they made workers fire faster(relative to BW) so early rushes will most likely be hard to pull off anyway.
I don't see any reason at all to do this. It is important to lean to deal with cheese, even no, especially in the lower ranks. The multiplayer training should teach you to scout and hold off very early aggression.
you don't learn how to stop cheese and be done with that. you learn what could stop it, when you learn the balance between aggression and economic advantage.
the early game, as designed in starcraft, has gamble aspect to it. it's understandable to prefer to remove this early gamble in order to prevent chance to dictate the game. and that's a reason.
i'm not proposing that this should be integrated to the platform and blizzard should develop this. but the sentiment is real and is based on reason.
Please please stop adding and trying to add stuff like every other fail RTS has. Seriously, Play empire earth or something if you want anti rush rule and stuff. I think Dawn of war has it to... It even has 1000 expansions for you to buy.
It's obviously a bad idea in my opinion. I've a lot of fun defending against early agression and cheese. Maybe it's just a few builds which disappear for each race, but at the end, too many combinations will be useless, like playing safe. Who cares about playing safe with those rules ?
With the mass number of noobs that are going to buy the game that don't usually play brood war, and even some that do play brood war that don't like cheese... every single game will be on anti-cheese mode; it'll be impossible to find a real game
Terrible idea nonetheless... if you want your friend to not cheese just tell him to not cheese. If he still cheeses he's not a very good friend.
@ -orb- : AMM = no more 'looking for a game' by your own. You won't be able to choose the map or the matchup in SC2 (a system which rewards good players).
On December 16 2009 21:38 Lobbo wrote: Please please stop adding and trying to add stuff like every other fail RTS has. Seriously, Play empire earth or something if you want anti rush rule and stuff. I think Dawn of war has it to... It even has 1000 expansions for you to buy.
...Oh for the fuck of zerg queen sake. Why I am, after all these years, still surprised about ignorant and retarded comments. Yes, for my own good, I am pretty much retarded anyway, by expecting signs of basic level of human intelligence. This is BUSINESS, do you have slightest clue what does that mean? It is about paying bills AND making money...and THAT is achieved by reaching MAXIMUM number of compromises, covering largest amount of human population=potentional buyers...not to make several nerds or some "Lobbo" xD happy. If this feature-like anything else, is demanded by major degree, so be it.
Blizzard now have perfect opportunity, its like fucking big black hole in the market. Balanced and competitive RTS is really missing, but its one way in. Speaking hypotheticaly-starcraft 2 being fail=no ticky tack cash for wacraft 4=no ticky ticky tack tack cash for WoW=GG Blizzard, no re.
And by the way omnipotent and almighty god emperor Lobbo, Dawn of war really never had any limitation for cheese, actually it was always possibly most agressive RTS all around, where you had to face rushes and serious early pressure much more sooner before your gate was built in sc. Alas it never played for "competitive" RTS, there was way too much randomness in it-it was brutal, there were finishing moves, it had a rich background...simply it was fun and that "million" expansions speak of something...
You people should really stop using the term "cheese". It causes physical pain to read this. If you really want to talk about what you want to talk about then please please please PLEASE with cream on top just refer to early attacks as "rush", not "cheese".
And if my opinion was not stated clearly enough...Blizzard know a thing or two about the balance. Yes there were fails, but failure brings experience. Theyre playing this the safe way and every valuable RTS brings highest number of possible macro approaches-and to every one of them, there should be clear counter. More possibilities=harder to balance. Yeah bring the cheese on, but with that as well counter to oppose it.
...and if someone makes the mod? Hey why not? When it makes someone happy...
edit.
zatic-My cooling is online and just as fine as ever...
On December 16 2009 16:55 rel wrote: Sounds like you're trying to find ways to make SC2 more, excuse my french "pussy-fied". If you don't like to get cheesed learn how to scout and beat it.
Dunno whats with all these threads suggesting handicaps all of a sudden.
I dont support the handicap myself, but it is frustrating. On my only day on iccup I dealt with cheese attempts on more than half my games. It made it frustrating only because if they failed they would leave. Then, if I got to a game that went "standard" then I would have a difficult cause id be microing like crazy and unsure of myself in the late game.
i like it, what about a button you click in ur screen and then it queue a pre-selected unit from all ur buildings and make them rally attack move to a pre-selected place the shortest possible way in a pre-selected formation?
I think there is a lot to be learned from getting cheesed/rushed. In fact, I'd say its one of the times that I improved the most early on. Simply being in pressure situation where you are not already at a large disadvantage is a good experience for new players.
Plus, if you have any sort of long term view on your play (as in not only caring about win-loss for only the game you are playing right this second, but rather improving as a player and winning more overall), then getting cheesed has very few downsides. If you lose to cheese, then you learn a valuable lesson about what to watch out for in the future, and if you win, you get a great sense of satisfaction, knowing that some player didn't think that he'd be good enough to beat you standard.
On a side note: Is this topic really any different from the other one?
On December 17 2009 00:38 Manit0u wrote: Cheese is a perfectly viable strategy.
Edit:
@ -orb- : AMM = no more 'looking for a game' by your own. You won't be able to choose the map or the matchup in SC2 (a system which rewards good players).
that's only when you play on the actual ladder
it's not like every single game will be amm, then you wouldn't be able to play 2v2s and ums and stuff
A decent implication would be something like "cannot build outside your natural until 2nd minute" and the mapmakers will always need to specify what the natural is. However, it's way too complicated and yeah hence this idea is bad. Although I think my idea is far better if it wasn't so hard to actually implement.
On December 17 2009 07:33 Sadistx wrote: Threads like these are why SC 2 beta needs to come very very soon. People need another form of entertainment aside from making terrible threads.
On December 17 2009 00:38 Manit0u wrote: Cheese is a perfectly viable strategy.
Edit:
@ -orb- : AMM = no more 'looking for a game' by your own. You won't be able to choose the map or the matchup in SC2 (a system which rewards good players).
that's only when you play on the actual ladder
it's not like every single game will be amm, then you wouldn't be able to play 2v2s and ums and stuff
I think Manit0u was just clarifying what AMM means, and how this new system helps to support good players, as oppose to average players who are just good at a specific map/matchup.
From the Blizzcon b.net footage you can see that they actually do have ranked AMM 2vs2 etc aswell. You get a 'party rank', so if you play 2vs2 with 3 different friends you will have seperate rankings for each party. This helps to support play with good players as well as friends who are pretty crap.
You are correct tho, that AMM is not the only way to play. (These are assumpions based on Blizzard info) You can; - quick match - anywhere from 1vs1 to 4vs4 - AMM - In 1vs1 the ladder is used - quick match - other play modes including FFA - Not AMM - Create lobby - Any game mode - Not AMM - Choose your own map - Join game - Join a created lobby
On December 17 2009 01:22 zatic wrote: You people should really stop using the term "cheese". It causes physical pain to read this. If you really want to talk about what you want to talk about then please please please PLEASE with cream on top just refer to early attacks as "rush", not "cheese".
On December 17 2009 09:47 dhe95 wrote: who says 6 pool is cheese? 6 pool 6 ovvie 6 lings go delay and possible take out that FE while droning up. it's like a more extreme 2 gate
who says 8 rax is cheese? maybe this terran player wants that earlier rine to do some pressure.
proxy gate? what if he's gonna forge next and build cannons there for map control (k, this one is impossible)
4 hatch before gas? what if he scouted u going mech. a good z could possibly pull this off
4 pool? jaedong's 1st few lings did nothing vs fantasy. and yet he later on won that game.
exactly I mean who's to say what's cheese and what's not.. Starcraft has a risk reward system much like that of poker.. it's not to say early aggression isn't fair... if it fails you're at a huge disadvantage.. Larger maps are a type of anti cheese in and of themselves.. but interesting idea OP
No one liked your "no rush" idea what makes you think that this one would be any different at all? The beauty of this game and all RTS games is that you can do whatever you want with the units given to you. You have no constraints as far as rules go, destroy your opponent any way you can as you best see fit. If you want to "cheese" every game that will only get you so far, if the match making system is good then eventually people you play will be easily able to stop you. It will sort itself out. Having restrictions on gameplay makes it boring, even for new players. The newbies will end up in dota/custom games/fastest map anyway, this will just aid in the process rather then help it.
What is your next suggestion going to be, "No humiliation mode." Where nukes, units similar to Scouts, and pylon hearts get disabled if you have a significant lead?
I don't care if there are features I'm not forced to use but this won't be used much and there are more important things for blizzard to address, this is pointless.
Sorry, but this thread has no direction and is quickly deteriorating. Time for a quick rant.
Please, kids, just don’t use the term “cheese” if you don’t know what you are talking about. And better, even if you do know, still don’t use it. It’s the most misunderstood term around here. While there is no clear definition on what is cheese, most will agree that it entails a strategy that relies heavily on deception and not being scouted or recognized correctly. But even that is not universally agreed on.
A very early attack on the other hand is called a rush, not cheese. It does not primarily rely on deception and not being scouted, but on getting a military advantage extremely early.
Both are not mutually exclusive, yet are not the same. Many rush builds are way more effective, or even only effective if not being scouted, however their main strength are the early units, not deception. On the other hand, there are “cheesy” strategies that involve no rushing at all. You can call a 14cc cheese just as you can a 5pool.
With no clear and generally agreed on definition of “cheese”, it’s better to just not use it. For every situation you want to describe there exists more fitting terminology anyway. Calling every rush cheese is certainly wrong at least.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://sclegacy.com/features/blizzcon08/unitrenders/PlanetaryFortress.jpg)
