EPTWhy You Shouldn't Cheese in Ladder - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On March 16 2010 23:16 JTPROG wrote:In my opinion, which is probably correct, cheesing should not be the strategy you use on a game-to-game basis. Simply put - cheesing is not difficult. In my opinion, which is probably correct, people shouldn't be using roaches against me in ZvP. Roaches are very easy to make and maneuver and by not using them to counter my army the zerg will be getting an effective 100% increase in rate of practice. Also I don't like roaches. Btw how are you supposed to execute cheese properly in tournys if you can't practice them online? And wtf is cheese anyway, a couple of weeks into beta and you think you're able to classify what is "standard" play at this point, that is quite ridiculous. Like if I were using some advanced fe sair build in PvZ back in 2001 people would probably call it cheese. Bitch plz. | ||
|
Pekkz
Norway1505 Posts
On March 17 2010 01:09 JTPROG wrote: And do you feel you were alot better than your opponents doing this? Do you feel it was really hard to do and/or took much practice? Do you feel you were getting better at the game by doing it? Or was it something almost anyone can just pick up and win with? I'm not saying anything about your skill level, you can be great for all I know, just want your opinion to make a point. It all depends on the game. Some of the games you will just run over people who did not see your rush coming and its not close at all, those games prolly everyone could win with very little effort. Some games they do suspect somthing is coming, and it comes down to your build / micro / position. I think cheese requires skill to pull off at a high level, but its alot easier to get good at it then it is to get good at late game. When people play without scout information on you, and they dont prepare for a rush at all, its really just a hole in their gameplay as i see it. When people cheese me I dont get mad on anyone else then myself for letting them do it to me. | ||
|
Qiin
Australia102 Posts
I personally love watching games where someone attempts to cheese but fails! haha | ||
|
UbiNax
Denmark381 Posts
On March 16 2010 23:16 JTPROG wrote: Just don't go into every game with the mindset "I only play to win" and try to cheese the majority of your games. Because while you may win for now, in the end, it is you who will lose. Oh i will go into every game with the mindset " i only play to win " because i find winning fun, so i play to win  About cheesing the majority of your games, if you cheese in every match you play then you're obviously doing something wrong if you wanna win, you should cheese if you scout your enemy and see that it would give you an advantage and win you the game, if it wont help you win the game... then dont do it. but you gotta realize cheese is a part of the game and it will be used by ANYONE from time to time if it helps them win the game. PS: Cheese is always good, it goes with alot of food np, cheese is for everyone it comes in all flavors! infact im eating cheese in my sandwich right now! Cheese <3 makes the world a happier place! | ||
|
Adeny
Norway1233 Posts
| ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On March 17 2010 01:33 Qiin wrote: Although i think most of the community frowns upon cheesing, its part of the game and its vital beta testers figure out these things so they can get nerfed (if needed). I personally love watching games where someone attempts to cheese but fails! haha I can ALMOST understand why people get annoyed by cheese 11 years after the release of starcraft, but why would you complain about such a thing early on in sc2 beta? Looking back at boxer, he was a pretty huge cheeser, I mean the guy introduced the bunker rush for gods sake. I really think that's one of the reasons why people liked watching him, because innovative "cheese" carried out by exceptional micro can be very exciting to watch. His strongpoint never was macro, and so he went about winning games a little differently than everyone else, which is one of the reasons he is considered one of the most innovative sc player to current date. | ||
|
MMmmmmmmmm
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
So if you have a new idea for a cheese or want to try new things out, go ahead. Just don't go into every game with the mindset "I only play to win" and try to cheese the majority of your games. Because while you may win for now, in the end, it is you who will lose. There's nothing negative about being able to pull of creative and aggressive play, or as you would call it "cheesing". It takes skill too you know. The best players of the game will be able to adapt and act on their feet by changing their game plan depending on what the opponent is doing. If you see your opponent going for a greedy, economic build, you punish that build through aggressive play, beacuse you play to win. If you see him going for a safer build, you adapt for a longer game and try to force an economic lead through harass and superior multitasking/macro, beacuse you play to win. Cheesing isn't a guaranteed win, neither is playing long macro games. While playing long macro games might improve your mechanics, It won't always makes you a better player. The most glaring and obvious example as of late is the TSL 2 finals between Nony and Idra. The best players will have both skillsets. | ||
|
JTPROG
United States254 Posts
On March 17 2010 01:15 IdrA wrote: the reason the bw meta game shifted to that is that people like to win. cheese became more rare because its inherently luck based. doesnt matter how strategically genius you are, if they scout or guess what you're doing, and what you're doing is dependent on them not knowing what you're doing, you lose. you can know how good flash is, you can know exactly what hes gonna do, and hes still gonna beat you because hes just that fucking good. how people could prefer horang to flash given that, or how they fuckin love fantasy getting allined by a trash player because he didnt wall properly, is beyond me. not only is it gay, its bad for esports. ya cheese can be exciting (because of the luck/simplicity of it, its very obvious to a crowd that when proxy bbs gets scouted the game has reached a turning point. the climax is less clear in real games), but bad players winning, and luck based games, are not good for something that wants to be a real competition. also, oddly enough, its largely bad players (the kind who are capable of winning because of these cheesy strategies) who defend it as some kind of strategical genius. for instance, someone who would ling allin a famous player and then post the replay of it while bragging about how they masterminded the strategical flow of the game. lol I think IdrA is the only one who understands/seems to agree with what I'm saying. That's okay, I'll take a pro gamer over 100 others. Chill wrote: And if cheese is working to qualify me, why wouldn't it work in those actual tournaments? You are making a lot of generalizations that you assume people are just going to fall in line with, like cheese = easy, skill-less; drawn-out macro game = the purest form of skill. I would like you to start from the beginning, make your real point, and back it up. This wishy-washy "you won't get better" doesn't cut it because if I'm winning with cheese what else do I need to get better at? I'm already winning? I don't care that I'm not winning the way you want me to. Because you face random people on the ladder each game who aren't expecting cheese. Try a BO5. You won't win a tourney using cheese every game. You need solid standard play. Winning on the ladder essentially means nothing if it's cheese. | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
| ||
|
Tristan
Canada566 Posts
| ||
|
neobowman
Canada3324 Posts
I don't really play for more than 2 hours a day so i know I'm not going to be able to break the C- level anytime soon. Instead, I make up cheeses. it's just as satisfying to beat some B people using a cheese you made yourself as it is to reach C for the first time. For a strategy player like me who lacks mechanics, cheese is pretty much my gameplay. It also screws anyone who plays against me when I go standard. | ||
|
Colpan
United States196 Posts
| ||
Chill
Calgary25961 Posts
On March 17 2010 01:59 JTPROG wrote: You won't win a tourney with cheese. There are countless examples proving you wrong. Winning on the ladder essentially means nothing if it's cheese. Depending on how you look at this, it is either subjective or circular logic - Take your pick. So this boils down to "play with your best chance to win"? I agree. | ||
|
Chill
Calgary25961 Posts
On March 17 2010 02:10 TheElitists wrote: I think we have gone off topic. The OP wasn't whining about the merits or demerits of cheese I don't think. It's more him saying that in the beta right now there is a lot of cheesing going on and its to get the jump on all the people you have a large skill advantage over. His thesis is that people are cheesing too much and it is squabbling the giant opportunity we have to gain a huge advantage over the other players by being in the beta. His argument is that we should all train for the idealistic game he wants us to play. That's dumb. He can't even say he's arguing we should "play to win" because by his own admission the easiest way to win is to cheese. He's arguing that we should seek to fully understand this one aspect of the game which he has decided is critical. | ||
|
iamke55
United States2806 Posts
On March 17 2010 01:59 JTPROG wrote: lol I think IdrA is the only one who understands/seems to agree with what I'm saying. That's okay, I'll take a pro gamer over 100 others. I smiled when I imagined how hard you would've gotten pwned here if idra claimed he was just kidding. Your point about cheesing not winning you a Bo5 doesn't make any sense. Sure it might not win you the whole series if your opponent expects it, but it can take 1 game easily, and that's 1/3 of the series right there. Cheesing and "proper" play, which you can't even define, both take their own skill sets. In the end, skill in Starcraft is not about who can get to 200/200 with 5 expos the fastest, but who can win the most games. If you saw in game 1 of a Bo5 that your opponent doesn't pay much attention to his scouting worker, you can pick up a free win by cheesing the next game. If you see your opponent using the same no-defense fast expo build in games 1 and 2, you'd better have a quick rush prepared to all-in him in game 3. At the same time, if you see your opponent has a tendency to play nothing but the safest anti-cheese builds, you should exploit this by playing that no-defense fast expo build yourself! As for the comparison between a player who cheeses 50% of his games and the player who cheeses 10% of his games, the former guy sure has unpredictability on his side. Even if he is a bit worse at mid and late game, the fact that his opponents will all be using more defensive builds against him should make up for the latter guy's better mid and late game macro. | ||
|
Gedrah
465 Posts
On March 16 2010 23:16 JTPROG wrote: In my opinion, which is probably correct, Simply put - cheesing is not difficult. the need for micro is usually minimal. While I did read your entire post, I feel that I *could* have stopped reading at the above points and been fine. I like to think my quotation feels sort of like a short poem or haiku. Though the syllables are not correct. You make very flat subjective statements about a truth that depends on the relative skill levels of the two players involved. A player good enough to beat his opponent with cheese is probably not playing at a level where he will benefit significantly from a long-term macro game against that opponent. I'm sort of disappointed when someone worse than me tries to cheese, because I invested 3-5 minutes in my opening and then won because my enemy sucked and went all-in and died. Hence, I have to repeat openings until I get a "real" game. I do see your point. But those opening statements are folly. The ladder is and must be competitive and feelings have no place in determining which strategies are valid in a competitive setting. | ||
|
JTPROG
United States254 Posts
On March 17 2010 02:24 Chill wrote: There are countless examples proving you wrong. Depending on how you look at this, it is either subjective or circular logic - Take your pick. So this boils down to "play with your best chance to win"? I agree. There was a tourney where someone won every games using cheese? Even if so, how many times did that happen? "play with your best chance to win" And you won't win if you don't have a SOLID game besides cheesing, and this is done by practicing predominantly standard play, which is the point of this thread. Cheese little, standard much, if you want to get good. I doubt anyone has ever won a major tourney did not have a SOLID standard game. And i'm sure they didn't spend much more than 5% of their time playing cheeses either. | ||
|
-fj.
Samoa462 Posts
Also, as far as the whole "is cheese legit on a ladder or tournament" debate: The goal of the game is to win, and of you know your opponent has bad scouting, it's definitely possible to get an advantage by "cheesing". I don't see why you should let some joker who copies a standard build order and doesn't scout perfectly get ahead of you because he fast expanded, or even let him live past the 7 minute mark when there is an obvious way to beat his strat. The elephant in the room is that when two good standard players face off, they are often not playing to their full potential if they don't cheese. They both have good scouting, but with good execution, the cheeser can have even better distraction and denial of scouting, he can make his build look like something other than it is by letting certain things be seen and then canceling them, after killing the scout, for example. Sometimes playing standard and macroing up is just not the best tool for the job, especially in a best of X series. Some "cheeses" are actually just different builds that have different ways of dealing with all threats the matchup presents. For example, my favorite is an expansion into 4-barracks TvZ build that forces the zerg to either use his mutas defensively until I almost have vessels out, lose a considerable number of drones and minerals to sunkens, or go allin elimination against 3-4 control groups of mnm. Zergs that I play against (because I am D/D+ noob) get absolutely destroyed by this build because they are bad and can't deal with a new kind of situation in that matchup. But 4-barracks is not all in - if they cut drones, you have to cut SCVs.. if they don't, you don't. It does good against lurkers as well if you control it right, and if you play smart, you are safe against all other strats including zerg "cheeses". I think that a lot of "cheese" is just a different way of playing. As much as people whine and bitch about players like Kwanro and JF, they still win a lot of games, and it is simply because they are better than their opponent at Starcraft. Being good at Starcraft is not defined by APM, what builds you use, or anything else. It's defined by whether you win or not. | ||
| ||
