|
On March 17 2010 00:16 JTPROG wrote:
If one player cheesed 50% of their games, and another player cheesed only 10% of their games, after one year of intensive playing, who do you think would be the better player?
that's not even a good hypothetical question.
My definition of a good player is one who knows how to control the flow of the game from the moment of spawning on the map. You act as if cheese is 100% win and unbeatable. Every Strat has a counter (hopefully) in a balanced game.
|
Sounds like you're dodging the question.
|
On March 17 2010 00:06 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
As it's possible to win games with 'cheese' at the highest level amongst progamers in Korea you are basically arguing anybody could take a game from those guys performing the same kind of cheese. It's plain wrong. There is a lot of skill in cheesing as there is in a long game. It requires planning, practice and lots of thought.
eh, a big part of that is who you're playing. if you have a progamer playing vs kwark, but he thinks its bisu, kwark's bulldog could very well work if it catches him off guard, just because its a very powerful strategy that requires 0 execution beyond knowing the build order. but if the progamer knows hes playing kwark he'll never ever lose because he'll be willing to sacrifice econ to be safe vs any kind of build, knowing that he can make up the advantage.
there are cheeses that are difficult to execute, either mentally or mechanically, and there are some that are simply a matter of doing a build and hoping they dont expect it. the latter really is pretty much the same whether its a top progamer or just any competent protoss, though obviously the progamer could follow up a semi-success much better, making it look like it was more skill dependent than it really was.
|
No, I answered it. You can't judge a player's skill on the basis of "he does strategy X 50% of the time, therefor he is better". Doing a 4pool for 50% of your games would give you the same game experience as doing a 1 rax FE for 50% of your games. You're going to run into counter builds or people who can't deal with it equally with either strategy.
Again, like I said cheese is a relative and stupid term imo. It's just a weak excuse for players who think the game should be played a certain way without even understanding why most top players don't do the cheese strats.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Advancing to the level of understanding where you don't distinguish between cheese and non-cheese should be a requirement for opening threads on strategy.
|
So by cheese you mean using strategies that win games?
If thats the definition, which you seem to have laid out, then yes everyone is cheesing all the time. I mean, what the hell are you even talking about. You don't like proxy rush? Well then scout and counter it. You don't like 6 pool? Well then scout and counter it. They're putting themselves way behind economically to take this chance. It's not 'cheese' unless you consider winning games cheese, at which point I'm just done with you.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure this is just a ragepost.
|
Calgary25998 Posts
I play for myself. I'm not trying to improve, I'm playing to have fun. If I feel cheese is going to be fun, I do it. This is fun, not self-improvement.
|
I think people should try to cheese and stress test the limits of every build. If one cheese build is found to be uncounterable in the beta, then it can be fixed. IT's also very entertaining to watch.
However, an argument to support your point; players looking to master the game should not practice cheese in the Beta, because it is very likely that these builds will change completely from one patch to another. Solid play is more likely to stay the same up to the launch of the game.
|
if you cheese too much and the higher up you go the smaller the player pool gets (in the release matchmaking system anyway) then you'll get a reputation as someone who cheeses and they will prepare for it. Either way you spin it you'll need to be flexible in higher ranks and I can't see cheesing every game as viable past a certain point.
|
On March 17 2010 00:22 Tray wrote:
So by cheese you mean using strategies that win games?
If thats the definition, which you seem to have laid out, then yes everyone is cheesing all the time. I mean, what the hell are you even talking about. You don't like proxy rush? Well then scout and counter it. You don't like 6 pool? Well then scout and counter it. They're putting themselves way behind economically to take this chance. It's not 'cheese' unless you consider winning games cheese, at which point I'm just done with you.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure this is just a ragepost.
that is exactly what I'm saying. If a guy named Larry thinks 2 gate zeal to expo is cheesy because it's not a conformed standard opening then he has already lost. It's like kids at the arcade crying because you keep thowing hadoukens over and over. LEARN TO DEAL WITH IT, THEN MOVE ON.
I've played sooooo many games on bloodbath and your kind of players are all the same. "Oh it's just a rush map, 4pool>All, Tanks>All, etc. etc." You're always looking for some kind of excuse to why that strategy/map/race/unit is bullshit.
|
If one player cheesed 50% of their games, and another player cheesed only 10% of their games, after one year of intensive playing, who do you think would be the better player?
The one whose strategy was best suited to the particular game in question, and best exploited the strategies of the mass of the players. Depends on both the game and the metagame.
The best player is the one who actually wins most of the time, which is not the same as the one who can macro up the best-looking army in a 20-minutes no-rush game.
|
On March 17 2010 00:23 Chill wrote:
I play for myself. I'm not trying to improve, I'm playing to have fun. If I feel cheese is going to be fun, I do it. This is fun, not self-improvement.
True, if you play purely for the sake of fun, then by all means I'm not referring to you, and you should play how you wish.
But to everyone else, look at the question I posed, can you honestly say it will be the 50% cheeser who will be better than the 10% cheeser after one year? I think not. And i'm saying if you HAD to give an answer, which one would you likely choose.
|
Here is an easy way to break this down so you can understand:
Cheese = Strat A, Cheese Defense = Strat B, Cheese Defense-Defense = C
A always beats C
B always beats A
C always beats B
Now if you can formulate a safer more adaptable build somewhere between C and B then you are fine. Furthermore, if you can utilize a timing scout and reduce the chance of luck and probability on that scout to seek out Strat A, B or C. Then you can basically just adapt your build to be slightly ahead while still being safe.
To answer your question AGAIN, you are making cheese out to be negative. And there is no context for your 'cheeser' hypothetical, like I said. Cheese is a completely valid strategy just like 1 base fast teching to a Carrier is. The difference between the 2 is that most players can easily make a decision between now and 10 minutes, while with cheese it is more skillful to read and decide in the first 2 minutes.
|
On March 17 2010 00:31 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Here is an easy way to break this down so you can understand:
Cheese = Strat A, Cheese Defense = Strat B, Cheese Defense-Defense = C
A always beats C
B always beats A
C always beats B
Now if you can formulate a safer more adaptable build somewhere between C and B then you are fine.
or more simply
Cheese beats Economic, but is beaten by Defensive
Economic beats Defensive, but is beaten by Cheese
Defensive beats Cheese, but is beaten by Economic
Something like that?
|
So why are we discussing the effectiveness of cheese? I'm just saying it won't make you a better player skill-wise (except for maybe at that particular cheese).
|
On March 17 2010 00:34 TheElitists wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 00:31 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Here is an easy way to break this down so you can understand:
Cheese = Strat A, Cheese Defense = Strat B, Cheese Defense-Defense = C
A always beats C
B always beats A
C always beats B
Now if you can formulate a safer more adaptable build somewhere between C and B then you are fine. or more simply Cheese beats Economic, but is beaten by Defensive Economic beats Defensive, but is beaten by Cheese Defensive beats Cheese, but is beaten by Economic Something like that?
yes, If you wanna get technical you can even say this
Map: Bloodbath
Zerg vs Terran
Both players know 4pool is a totally valid threat.
So Terran can opt for 8rax/10bunk near his CC to defend it. Again both players are aware of this defense.
So Zerg can opt for a 9pool and now has a slight economic advantage over that earlier rax. Both players are aware of this counter build.
Now, Terran can opt for a 9/10rax/bunk instead. Seeing a trend here?
Now Zerg can get back to saying 5pool is a few seconds slower than 4, but still almost as powerful with a larger/safer economy. An 8rax is a little too fast to defend it, but a 10 rax is too slow.
etc.
etc.
etc.
Cheese is all part of mind games. It is the sole basis for strategy development. Without it we have nothing but people building units whenever they feel like it. It is the reigning governor of all that is RTS.
Now, your opinion that "cheese won't make you a better player" is just that, your opinion. But know that it is exactly the same as saying "doing a standard build every game won't make you a better player".
|
But, I guess the point the OP is making might be right to an extent. We have a rare opportunity to get thousands of games of experience over 99.999999999% of players as beta testers and if you just cheese every game you aren't getting much practice at some of the more intense and in the long run more important comfort with mid and late game strategies.
|
On March 16 2010 23:16 JTPROG wrote:Because while you may win for now, in the end, it is you who will lose.
Did anyone else get the PSA, anti-drug use kinda feel from this.
|
I feel like adding a cheese to your gameplay is very useful so you are never predictable and the opponent always know he has to scout you carefully. Practicing cheese is nice, I had this rule on starcraft that whenever I played a zerg on a ladder I would proxy gate 50% of the second games against the same opponents and overall I'm pretty sure I learnt much about very strict timings I wouldn't know otherwise.
|
I'm really curious as to what prompted the op to make this thread.
I'm willing to bet he got cheesed and raged, instead of thinking, "Hmm what can I do to adapt my strategy in order to still keep on par with the economic standard as well as defend these crappy cheesers".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
