Why You Shouldn't Cheese in Ladder - Page 10

On March 17 2010 12:28 Zeke50100 wrote:


Whoever wins is not the better player. Whoever wins played better.

HUGE difference.

Same with a foot race; whoever won played better. If someone "played it standard" and ran the normal track, they should be punished for playing too standard by those who will take the opportunity to crush them.

Who said the better player should win every time? I say, the one who plays better should win every time. A Copper League newbie at rank D- in ICCup may not be a great player, but if they beat Boxer, they played better. Likewise, let's say Boxer wins the next match; he played better.

Person who players better wins every game. Cheese is just one of those "plays."

Think football. If you do the same play every game, someone is going to surprise you eventually. If it gets to the point where EVERYBODY is doing it against you; well? Isn't that giant sign that says you should adjust?

On March 17 2010 13:00 ShaperofDreams wrote:
yes he did. if they play again maybe player b will play better.

On March 17 2010 00:52 CharlieMurphy wrote:

This is exactly correct. In poker, if you read any poker books at least, there is a sort of standard that you should bluff 1 in every 6 hands assuming all players are of decent/equal skill level and the table is not too loose or whatever. A bluff can be likened to a cheese.


I know we are getting a little off topic, so I reread the op and I'll reply directly.
Doing 'Cheese' is in fact a great way to get better at a game. Obviously if you are playing to win, you will use the most effective strategy to achieve those wins. If this happens to be a strategy that some guy or the general public doesn't like, fuck em. Their loss, your gain. (I'm obviously talking within the limits of the game, and I'm not condoning cheating or anything else illegitimate). If the 'cheese' is not imbalanced in any way then there are counters, you will become predictable and/or people will learn how to counter you. Then you will learn the counters to their counters, etc. like I already explained a few times on the previous page.

On March 17 2010 12:59 SubtleArt wrote:


So player A 4 pools and player B decides to 12 hatch...player A played better right?

On March 17 2010 13:04 JTPROG wrote:


rofl, now you just sound stupid =P

On March 17 2010 13:15 nayumi wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with cheese. It totally depends on what a player is looking for anyway.

If you're looking for just a win, by all means cheese if you have to. Though if you want to improve your overall SC skill, try not to rely on cheese so often. I mean says in a tournament you're up against a better player, and you have to win, yes cheese will help. But if you do that on Battle.net 100 out of 100 games and get, says 60 wins out of it, then even though it looks like a 60% winning rate, but it's actually a 60% luck rate. Because we all know that cheese is VERY luck-based. Strategically or not, it still relies a lot on luck to win a game. People call cheese ",strategic play", but not all of them are. It's a strategic play when you're confident that what you're doing was well prepared and thought through, and that it's exactly that the opponent least expected you to do. That's why progamer's cheese is generally different from amateur's one. Because progamers understand the game, they study the maps, they analyze their opponents, they have coaches and teammates to discuss and practice with. That's why it's a strategic play. Amateurs, on the other hand, usually proceed on a 5-pool while praying to God that they don't get scouted. And I personally don't find that any strategic at all, neither should any of you.

So in conclusion:
- to get better at SC, try to win without cheese.
- to win a game, do whatever it takes to achieve it, all is fair.

On March 17 2010 03:39 CharlieMurphy wrote:


Duh, to your first point. The game has evolved, like I said, where strategies are perfected to have that delicate adaptive balance between economic and rush defense.
Cheese isn't so much luck based as it is calculated risk based on the player's style or predicted strategy. Look at Luxury's stats for 4 and 5 pool 'cheese' versus pro gamers Luxury is 5-1
Wait, so you just said 'cheese' was inherently luck based, yet you go on to the next sentence to say "..or guess what you're doing", So guessing isn't luck based at all right? It's the same thing, a calculated risk. lol, obviously every strategy is going to be somewhat relying on the fact that they do not know what you are doing. If a player knew what the other player was doing 100% of the time then that is called a maphack. It doesn't make a difference if you are going for a early game timing attack, a rush, or a fake-double (any of which could be considered all-in against the absolute counter). Guess what happens when 2 programers have maphacks on? The game fucking breaks.
Dunno, what you're trying to point out about your jocking of Flash, but I assume you're trying to say that he is uncheesable? That is ridiculous. Granted, a veteran player has prepared contingency strategies to deal with 'cheese' in the event it happens, but that doesn't mean it's going to be enough 100% of the time.
You calling Jaedong a trash player? Because I was referring to the game on Holy World where he get's 4pooled.
Did you just say that 'Cheese' was bad for e-sports, or that sloppy panicked playing on defending 'cheese' is bad for esports? If it's the latter, then that just proves right there that 'cheese' is totally valid, people love to see how players are challenged under pressure.
And I agree with your last point. But your opinion that players who use a certain strategy to win because you don't deem it to your standards and calling it bad is absurd.

If you take a look at some of the info on that 4/5pool thread, you can see that 5pool's goal isn't even to win outright versus protoss, while 4pool versus terran is. Both can be considered 'cheese'.

As far as your inference of me I wouldn't expect anything less of you to call me bad and remove any credit where it is due. Oddly enough for me, I distinctly remember a chat where you said something along the lines of "US [toss] players don't even make fucking obs, and they wonder why I don't play them", because in that replay your buddy geoff didn't make a fucking obs and it cost him the game. Which btw, I consider that timing attack of zeal/immortal/sentry/etc to be a 'cheese', what the fuck do you have to say about that? And I would hardly call 12 or so lings with speed for early game map control, into mutalisk an all in ling cheese. To be honest I didn't even expect to rape him as bad as I did with just a dozen lings (I expected him to have at least some semblance of defense when he moved out, so I guess you can call that lucky that he was playing badly?) and I was hoping to do a decent amount of damage to put him back on the defensive so I could get my muta out, harass, and expand.
My game plan was NOT to win with nothing but lings like you whiners complained about.

PS- I dunno if you have a US beta account but I would really love to play you. I'll keep it manner if you can.

On March 17 2010 12:47 SubtleArt wrote:
So the TL;DR version is essentially cheesing doesn't make you better even though its fun. You really needed a thread to state something thats as obvious as this?

To all the people arguing otherwise: you're wrong sorry. What does cheesing really make you better at? Micro? Yes. Multitask? Yes. but I think everyone can agree macro is the much much much more important aspect of becoming a good player when it comes to starcraft. This is the post Oov era after a;; Besides, all the standard FE builds have evolved to counter all cheeses provided you scout well.

On March 17 2010 12:51 JTPROG wrote:
Wow. I'm getting the feeling that nobody even read the OP. Please stay on topic. Random discussion that even I may take part in within the thread does not necessarily relate 100% to my point in the OP.

I'll state the point once again.

If you want to become a better player, do not cheese. Cheese usually results in short, skill-less games where the game is over before any macro or micro is even needed.
I'm not saying not to cheese.
I'm not saying you shouldn't cheese.
I'm not saying cheese is completely skill-less, but it IS definitely not as intensive as a standard game.
In short, to get better, cheese sparingly and play standard heavily. It will increase your skills.
This post was made for people to get BETTER while practicing the LADDER. Read the TITLE.
And that is by working out all of your skills, which is best demonstrated in a standard game.
I hope this thread is now back on-topic.

[B]On March 17 2010 13:48 Xenocide_Knight wrote:
cheesing is the gradual road to discovering your own "standard". And if your "standard" is different from the current "standard", then you are an innovator

On March 17 2010 08:22 JTPROG wrote:
Solid, standard, etc.

On March 17 2010 13:29 IdrA wrote:
if you really think that people winning a handful of games with a decent % with fast pools means that cheese isnt luck based you arent worth arguing with. but then anyone whos ever seen you try to discuss anything before already knew that.
do you think you're good now or something? we already played, you got raped. you're trash, dont be cocky cuz you cheesed a handful of good players and made it into the top 30 of a platinum division or something.