|
On March 17 2010 01:15 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2010 01:06 CharlieMurphy wrote:
To add to what Chill said, I personally dislike this whole eco macro long game every person has copycat FE builds that SCBW's metagame has shifted into. The game has become somewhat stagnant because of this, to the point where their strategies are so perfected that they can deal with anything and respond to anything. This is partly the reason why (I believe, anyways) that there are so many new weird maps and map concepts. To keep the game fresh and keep players for just doing their 1 strategy that is safe on every LT clone map.
Whenever I see a pro like Fantasy getting fucking rushed so bad that he lifts off his base and almost cries I fucking cheer. When I saw Boxer bunker rush Yellow over and over to the point where he claims imbalance, I fucking loved it. 'Cheese' is great. And There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing it every game if you want to. If you are trying to be a great player then you should definitely practice any strategy to the point of exhaustion. 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.
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 02:57 mnofstl007 wrote:
there is a lot of psychology that goes into cheesing especially in BO 3/5/7 series but even in ladder. I had a session where i played the same guy 4-5 times. After the first loss i decided to cheese and won. The next game i knew he was expecting cheese so i fast expo'ed and went hardcore turtle. IDK cheese is lame, but not to the point of where i would say no1 should do it, wins are wins. IDK if anything cheese leads to better builds which incorporate the ability to quickly defend/quickly and smoothly transition.
this imo hit in right on the head
|
Your OP is based on the assumption that all people playing the ladder care most about improving. Getting the immediate win outweighs long term gosuness for many.
And not all cheese wins off the bat. So practicing it allows one to practice their different transitions after their cheese has done a lot, some, or even no damage.
|
Any competent player is capable of DEFENDING a cheese. Cheese has its trade offs and does not always win. Transitions out of cheeses into mid game are very important to understand. It took me many games to figure out an effective transition for PvZ out of early void ray or pheonix.
PvP is all about cheeses atm, and it comes down to every little bit of micro between two players in keeping your zeals alive and killing the opponent's zeals.
Defending against a 6 pool could just mean putting a forge down before your core and skipping gas for a bit later. Tight wall + 2-3 cannons = lots of dead zerglings.
|
Really the only problem with 'cheese' is that it's the most ambiguous vague term that people like to throw around anytime they disagree with a strategy (and by disagree I mean lose to ).
"OH NO HE MADE CANONS BEHIND MY MINERALS WHEN I WAS FAST EXPANDING LIKE A GREEDY BITCH. YOU FAGGOT CHEATER, DONT YOU KNOW THAT EVERYONE IS SUPPOSED TO FAST EXPAND, YOU, YOU NON CONFORMIST1!!!!"
|
I wish beta players would cheese more and actually abuse imbalances. They are there not to get better before the release strikes but to make the game more balanced.
|
On March 17 2010 03:49 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Really the only problem with 'cheese' is that it's the most ambiguous vague term that people like to throw around anytime they disagree with a strategy.
"OH NO HE MADE CANONS BEHIND MY MINERALS WHEN I WAS FAST EXPANDING LIKE A GREEDY BITCH. YOU FAGGOT CHEATER"
People just get caught up in the korean macro standard and in the process of wanting to become the best, think they should be emulating the best down to every last macro detail. I remember when Ret didn't want to re some dude on ICCUP because his build was "weird".
mTw-Tak3r from War3 is a good example of a good player who cheesed whenever he possibly could. The type of player that makes the game interesting again.
|
How does one define a "better player"? Wins and losses? Technical skill? APM? Tourney victories? The premise itself is subjective. If cheese strats are effective, come up with an effective counter. When the Germans invaded Poland with the Blitzkrieg, the Allies didn't cry "OMG CHEEZ!" they got "roflstomped" as it were, pulled out of Europe and then dropshipped it after several years of coordinated harass supplied by US minerals, gas and factories  .
Cheese and its effect on the game is only relevant if one strat is clearly dominant and makes the game unplayable for everyone. That hasn't happened yet, and when it does Blizz patches the game to correct it. To say therefore that Cheesers aren't any good and their wins are somehow invalid strikes me as sanctimonious. You can't tell someone they're having fun the wrong way.
Hate cheese? Don't get cheesed!
|
rofl, I very much agree wth CM's post. People throw the word cheese around WAY too much.
Also, [uci] Fizik and other people saying comptetent players can block cheese. They can block it but even at the highest levels pros lose to cheese. Just look at Nal_rA and his tricky rushes or Flash vs. Jaedong on HB ridge that one game.
|
If you get a reputation for throwing in the odd cheese build, imo you get the advantage early game. If i was to play standard player i basically know his BO before game starts and prob dont have to adapt for a suprise attack, putting me in the comfort zone. Cheese ftw :D
|
On March 17 2010 03:58 AmericanJesus wrote:How does one define a "better player"? Wins and losses? Technical skill? APM? Tourney victories? The premise itself is subjective. If cheese strats are effective, come up with an effective counter. When the Germans invaded Poland with the Blitzkrieg, the Allies didn't cry "OMG CHEEZ!" they got "roflstomped" as it were, pulled out of Europe and then dropshipped it after several years of coordinated harass supplied by US minerals, gas and factories .
LMAO
|
In some ways I agree, in some I don't.
What you said, " If you can't beat a person straight-up you're the worse player, no matter what." is straight up wrong.
While I personally agree that to further advance your skills, playing standard will teach you faster/better than cheesing, you cannot make a blanket statement like this.
Am I to understand Yellow is a better player than Boxer because Boxer bunker rushed him 3 games in a row to win the finals?
The better player is the one that wins. Obviously in beta's current state that doesn't hold true because imbalance can play a large part in who wins, but in a balanced game, whoever wins is the better player in my opinion.
|
I highly disagree. What you're calling luck is basically when you play on your opponents unpreparedness. The most famous generals in history have one thing in common: they have all mastered the art of surprise. The key is to use surprise, but not to entirely rely on it. In that case you're putting the game in your opponents hands. So don't play weak 'cheese' strategies, but discover good ones.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
man this beta is doing amazing things to charlie's ego.. he fucking wins a game and suddenly he is calling out idra.. anyone EVER thought they'd see this day rofl?
|
On March 17 2010 04:19 -orb- wrote:
What you said, " If you can't beat a person straight-up you're the worse player, no matter what." is straight up wrong.
While I personally agree that to further advance your skills, playing standard will teach you faster/better than cheesing, you cannot make a blanket statement like this.
Am I to understand Yellow is a better player than Boxer because Boxer bunker rushed him 3 games in a row to win the finals?
What I meant was moreso "if you can never beat a person straight-up you're the worse player."
Which is straight up correct.
And who said Yellow was better than boxer? They didn't play straight-up so we don't know. Just because Boxer cheesed doesn't mean hes definitely worse, just means he cheesed that game. If he couldn't ever beat yellow in a straight-up game then yeah, he's worse. Being better and winning aren't necessarily correlated 100%.
|
Cheese is just another strategy. It is a high risk, high yield strategy. Starcraft is a strategy game, so there's no issue with using strategy, even if it's one that catches your opponent completely off-guard.
|
gotta mix in the cheese, be unpredictable and solid is all areas.
all is fair its only a video game you play online, try to enjoy it.
|
The better player is the one that wins.
/Thread
This is a tactical wargame people. Cheese is just another kind of strategy. Stop it if you can.
|
On March 17 2010 04:31 AmericanJesus wrote:/Thread This is a tactical wargame people. Cheese is just another kind of strategy. Stop it if you can.
If my 10 year old brother beat Flash with a new cheese strat, you would consider him the better player? k.
|
Cheese is a meaningless derogatory word created by the autistic upper class players who prefer to obsessively perfect one specific kind of play. The same as any kind of manners; contrived rules which push conformity. There is nothing wrong with it, honestly the word annoys me as does any whiner who uses it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
