|
I have no problem with cheese at the pro level. In fact, it's usually very entertaining.
What I do have a problem with is cheese at lower levels. Everything I've been told about SC/SC2 is that learning to macro properly, learning standard builds, etc. is how you become a better player. So when I'm playing to try to actually learn the game and become better, and I constantly face people who cheese because they get more satisfaction out of a victory screen than from actually improving their game, yeah, it's fucking frustrating.
I've never played BW on anywhere near a competitive level, but if I did, I'm sure I would get equally pissed at getting cheesed.
|
I'm just confused over what people actually considers cheese. I play games where I'm thinking I'm doing a fairly normal build and as I'm about to win I get called a cheeser. Usually it's because I feel like I have a large enough advantage to keep making units and win right then and there instead of backing off. I don't see how those situations are cheese.
|
On February 20 2011 07:18 gruff wrote:
I'm just confused over what people actually considers cheese. I play games where I'm thinking I'm doing a fairly normal build and as I'm about to win I get called a cheeser. Usually it's because I feel like I have a large enough advantage to keep making units and win right then and there instead of backing off. I don't see how those situations are cheese.
They're not cheese. It's just frustrated people trying to rationalize their loss. 
|
On February 19 2011 17:27 Rabiator wrote:If Starcraft is to become an accepted eSport then the games must be worth watching and super short cheesy ones arent really satisfying the viewers for the time they want to be satisfied. Longer games with multiple engagements are the best for satisfaction simply because the longer a game goes the more it can differ from other games. Cheese is limited to very fast and short games and has only a limited amount of variation in it. This said I think there are some great games out there where people cheesed and the defender won in a long and epic micro fight, but these are very far and few between. Most of the time it works or doesnt work and it is quite clear from the beginning so there is no tension in the game. Consider this: How would you feel if a Hockey / Basketball / Football match only lasted until the first goal? Would you be happy if it was over after five minutes? Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. I have given you my reasons why cheese is bad, could you give me your reason why it is supposed to be good? Simply because I dont like being called close minded for having an opinion.
I believe your comparisons doesn't stand.
a cheesy game is imo mroe like a football hail mary, a hockey breakaway or a insta-wade-to-lebron alley-oop.
In basket/hockey/football, there are multiple reset points in the game (after a basket/goal/each play), whereas in starcraft, the only reset is at a new game of the same serie.
following your logic, hockey shifts should be longer because the longer players are on, the more differently they'll play, or in football, they would need to tackle a player twice in the same play before stopping the play, because the longer the play goes on, the more it'll differ from other plays.
In starcraft, the only way to get a fresh start (excluding score) is to start a new game. In football, every new play is a new start, similarly to hockey or basketball. In baseball, every inning is a new start, should we expand baseball to 5 outs and 6 strikes as to increase the "entertainment value" of the game? is it cheesy if a batter hits a home run on his first swing because he only swings once?
i will not answer to your saying that there is no tension in a cheese.
On February 19 2011 16:21 SlapMySalami wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. wat read your post you sound mighty close-minded in that everyone should believe what you believe
thank you for stuffing those words into my mouth.
edit: would people agree that cheese is similar to backdoor (BD) in dota?
|
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote:
The point of E-Sports is that unlike real sports, the better player should win 99.9% of the time because the games should be designed in a way that the better player should win 99/100 times.
Not only do I disagree with this, I would not enjoy e-sports if it were true. Starcraft is clearly not a game where you can beat someone almost 100% of the time if you're better than them. Maybe if you're WAAAAY better than them, but certainly not at a competitive level.
What makes you say this?
|
There isn't enough cheese. There should be more, much more.
This way, people might actually start taking scouting seriously and early enough, would shift their builds into more secure ones and not overly greedy. Nothing more boring to spectate than a match where both players start with super greedy macro builds, no aggression at all until like 12 minute and then it ends in half/half map tank line.
People cry foul cheese oh you lower caste player! because they die to something they could simply scout and prepare for. Really, where does the fault lie in that situation then? Use more resources to scout the opponent and you don't die to cheese.
Worst thing to happen to the game is when the most economic openings also become super safe to fast cheeses. Then we might as well start streaming/replays from 10 minutes.
|
As a lot of people have said, I believe cheese is okay in a couple of scenarios:
1. To throw off your opponent's rhythm in a BoX match. It is especially powerful (see Julyzerg v. Best (?) i believe; July did 4 pool the first match and you could see Best visibly shaken for the rest of the match.
2. Used in an unexpected situation to throw off a player who you believe has planned for a longer more macro-oriented game.
Situations where cheese is NOT okay:
1. Where you're cheese play is better than your standard and you're using it as a replacement to rank up or beat better players artificially
2. Similar to number 1, where you use it consistently as your staple build.
Now i'm not saying cheesy players don't have skills, they do. But it's highly focused in micro games or very specific situations. This tends to lead to "easy" wins that aren't necessarily deserved, especially getting into higher level of play where other aspects of the game are seen as necessary (macro, timing, multitasking, harassment, etc.)
Also, because sc2 still is going through balance patches, certain cheeses seem almost impossible to stop, especially with improved AI (this can work both ways, but IMO it seems to work in favor of the aggressor because of the strength of cheese).
Ultimately, cheese can be brilliantly performed, but because we see it plaguing ladder games and the such, we often times get annoyed. Sure brood war and ICCUP have cheese on there, but the majority of players have moved on from that to the point where you can get a good set of macro games without having to face cheese. This being opposed to SC2 where a player can get cheesed multiple times in a row with the average being something like 1/2 to 1/3 of the time (at least in my experience).
So ultimately, are we being a bit too hard on cheese? Maybe, but hopefully it'll drive cheese away from being so popular.
|
On February 20 2011 07:18 gruff wrote:
I'm just confused over what people actually considers cheese. I play games where I'm thinking I'm doing a fairly normal build and as I'm about to win I get called a cheeser. Usually it's because I feel like I have a large enough advantage to keep making units and win right then and there instead of backing off. I don't see how those situations are cheese.
People usually just want something to blame their loss on so they label something as OP/cheesy. Also people label things they dont understand cheesy. I cant tell you how many times I've been called a cheeser for using iEchoics 2fact 2port build this last week.
|
The problem, IMO, is that cheese, particularly very early cheese, isn't race balanced simply because it isn't meant to be and perhaps ultimately does not need to be balanced. In other words, offensive options for different races and their corresponding risks are not the same. The defending race can stop cheese, but it doesn't mean they have the same offensive options.
It makes cheese play a very lame. I feel this was less the case in SC1.
|
On February 20 2011 11:16 Hypemeup wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2011 07:18 gruff wrote:
I'm just confused over what people actually considers cheese. I play games where I'm thinking I'm doing a fairly normal build and as I'm about to win I get called a cheeser. Usually it's because I feel like I have a large enough advantage to keep making units and win right then and there instead of backing off. I don't see how those situations are cheese. People usually just want something to blame their loss on so they label something as OP/cheesy. Also people label things they dont understand cheesy. I cant tell you how many times I've been called a cheeser for using iEchoics 2fact 2port build this last week.
They also scream imba when really they should just be looking at themselves.
on topic: I don't really mind cheese play. To some people, especially at the top tier competitive level, it's really all about winning and producing results. You gotta do what you gotta do.
|
i think it's fine. what confuses me is bitbybit hate. what sucks on ladder is that you don't know anyone's tendencies. when someone cheeses EVERY SINGLE GAME and you KNOW it, i don't see what there is to be angry about. dunno if the players took it personally, but artosis making fun of bitbybit all through the GSL was pretty annoying.
his micro didn't seem that great, i was surprised at how effective it was. foxer cheese would be OP.
|
On February 20 2011 07:46 megagoten wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 17:27 Rabiator wrote:If Starcraft is to become an accepted eSport then the games must be worth watching and super short cheesy ones arent really satisfying the viewers for the time they want to be satisfied. Longer games with multiple engagements are the best for satisfaction simply because the longer a game goes the more it can differ from other games. Cheese is limited to very fast and short games and has only a limited amount of variation in it. This said I think there are some great games out there where people cheesed and the defender won in a long and epic micro fight, but these are very far and few between. Most of the time it works or doesnt work and it is quite clear from the beginning so there is no tension in the game. Consider this: How would you feel if a Hockey / Basketball / Football match only lasted until the first goal? Would you be happy if it was over after five minutes? On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. I have given you my reasons why cheese is bad, could you give me your reason why it is supposed to be good? Simply because I dont like being called close minded for having an opinion. I believe your comparisons doesn't stand. a cheesy game is imo mroe like a football hail mary, a hockey breakaway or a insta-wade-to-lebron alley-oop. In basket/hockey/football, there are multiple reset points in the game (after a basket/goal/each play), whereas in starcraft, the only reset is at a new game of the same serie. following your logic, hockey shifts should be longer because the longer players are on, the more differently they'll play, or in football, they would need to tackle a player twice in the same play before stopping the play, because the longer the play goes on, the more it'll differ from other plays. In starcraft, the only way to get a fresh start (excluding score) is to start a new game. In football, every new play is a new start, similarly to hockey or basketball. In baseball, every inning is a new start, should we expand baseball to 5 outs and 6 strikes as to increase the "entertainment value" of the game? is it cheesy if a batter hits a home run on his first swing because he only swings once? i will not answer to your saying that there is no tension in a cheese. Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 16:21 SlapMySalami wrote:On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. wat read your post you sound mighty close-minded in that everyone should believe what you believe thank you for stuffing those words into my mouth. edit: would people agree that cheese is similar to backdoor (BD) in dota?
On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
whether you meant something different or not that is what you said there has been no stuffing of words
if you still don't understand your words they mean everyone who does not think of cheese the way you do is close-minded
or even everyone on TL is close-minded and you feel everyone (except you) is embracing cheese in the wrong way
|
On February 20 2011 11:24 underdawg wrote:
i think it's fine. what confuses me is bitbybit hate. what sucks on ladder is that you don't know anyone's tendencies. when someone cheeses EVERY SINGLE GAME and you KNOW it, i don't see what there is to be angry about. dunno if the players took it personally, but artosis making fun of bitbybit all through the GSL was pretty annoying.
Artosis mostly raged because BitbyBitprime had terrible control when cheesing, even though that was all he did.
Just because a player cheeses doesn't make him a bad player, but when ALL he can do is cheese, and that too with bad micro, he is one (relatively).
|
we are too hard on cheese? what? i love cheese in tournament games, i'll still get pissed when facing them. what makes you think we're too hard on it?
|
On February 20 2011 11:36 SlapMySalami wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2011 07:46 megagoten wrote:On February 19 2011 17:27 Rabiator wrote:If Starcraft is to become an accepted eSport then the games must be worth watching and super short cheesy ones arent really satisfying the viewers for the time they want to be satisfied. Longer games with multiple engagements are the best for satisfaction simply because the longer a game goes the more it can differ from other games. Cheese is limited to very fast and short games and has only a limited amount of variation in it. This said I think there are some great games out there where people cheesed and the defender won in a long and epic micro fight, but these are very far and few between. Most of the time it works or doesnt work and it is quite clear from the beginning so there is no tension in the game. Consider this: How would you feel if a Hockey / Basketball / Football match only lasted until the first goal? Would you be happy if it was over after five minutes? On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. I have given you my reasons why cheese is bad, could you give me your reason why it is supposed to be good? Simply because I dont like being called close minded for having an opinion. I believe your comparisons doesn't stand. a cheesy game is imo mroe like a football hail mary, a hockey breakaway or a insta-wade-to-lebron alley-oop. In basket/hockey/football, there are multiple reset points in the game (after a basket/goal/each play), whereas in starcraft, the only reset is at a new game of the same serie. following your logic, hockey shifts should be longer because the longer players are on, the more differently they'll play, or in football, they would need to tackle a player twice in the same play before stopping the play, because the longer the play goes on, the more it'll differ from other plays. In starcraft, the only way to get a fresh start (excluding score) is to start a new game. In football, every new play is a new start, similarly to hockey or basketball. In baseball, every inning is a new start, should we expand baseball to 5 outs and 6 strikes as to increase the "entertainment value" of the game? is it cheesy if a batter hits a home run on his first swing because he only swings once? i will not answer to your saying that there is no tension in a cheese. On February 19 2011 16:21 SlapMySalami wrote:On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. wat read your post you sound mighty close-minded in that everyone should believe what you believe thank you for stuffing those words into my mouth. edit: would people agree that cheese is similar to backdoor (BD) in dota? Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
whether you meant something different or not that is what you said there has been no stuffing of words if you still don't understand your words they mean everyone who does not think of cheese the way you do is close-minded or even everyone on TL is close-minded and you feel everyone (except you) is embracing cheese in the wrong way
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define close minded
i apologize, i thought you knew what it meant. i'm done here. i'm going into my host files to include TL there.
|
You're right dude, if boxer cheesed, cheese can't be a bad thing, he should be an example for all of us.
|
On February 20 2011 08:40 Trogdor wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote:
The point of E-Sports is that unlike real sports, the better player should win 99.9% of the time because the games should be designed in a way that the better player should win 99/100 times. Not only do I disagree with this, I would not enjoy e-sports if it were true. Starcraft is clearly not a game where you can beat someone almost 100% of the time if you're better than them. Maybe if you're WAAAAY better than them, but certainly not at a competitive level. What makes you say this?
Furthermore, there exist no games where you will win 99% if you are better, other than trivial games like nim.
|
Yellow VS Boxer - Almost everyone at the time hated that series. Only now when we look at it we remember it fondly. Brilliant mindgames, awful series.
|
to answer the question in the title. Yes we are being too hard on cheesers. piQliQ is good imo, he has good micro
|
On February 20 2011 07:46 megagoten wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2011 17:27 Rabiator wrote:If Starcraft is to become an accepted eSport then the games must be worth watching and super short cheesy ones arent really satisfying the viewers for the time they want to be satisfied. Longer games with multiple engagements are the best for satisfaction simply because the longer a game goes the more it can differ from other games. Cheese is limited to very fast and short games and has only a limited amount of variation in it. This said I think there are some great games out there where people cheesed and the defender won in a long and epic micro fight, but these are very far and few between. Most of the time it works or doesnt work and it is quite clear from the beginning so there is no tension in the game. Consider this: How would you feel if a Hockey / Basketball / Football match only lasted until the first goal? Would you be happy if it was over after five minutes? On February 19 2011 14:47 megagoten wrote:
TL is too close minded to embrace cheese as i feel they should.
as others have mentioned, the response in this thread should be enough to prove my point. I have given you my reasons why cheese is bad, could you give me your reason why it is supposed to be good? Simply because I dont like being called close minded for having an opinion. I believe your comparisons doesn't stand. a cheesy game is imo mroe like a football hail mary, a hockey breakaway or a insta-wade-to-lebron alley-oop.
Rofl ... a hail mary pass is a risky strategy that can happen at any time. Cheese is something that is restricted to the start of the game and designed to end the game. If the first goal / basket in a game would end it the players would act quite differently and that is the comparison. In any case how would you feel if your favorite sport ended a match after the first goal instead of after 90 mins or whatever? I think no one would bother going to a stadium for that ...
Sure you are right about the resets in regular sports, but there is a comparable thing to it in SC2 and that is playing a series of games. If the ladder was made up of Bo3s instead of Bo1s people would have to stop cheesing, because the element of surprise is part of the success of a cheese.
P.S.: I am still looking for an explanation as to why cheese is good.
EDIT: So far I only talked about why cheese is bad from a spectators point of view. There is an important reason why it is bad from a players point: Because it keeps people from THINKING. Professor Plott always talks about "transitions of builds", but there is none in a cheese and if people cheese on the ladder they are just going for a quick success but arent really good players. If you watch iNcontrols stream a while he makes pretty precise predictions on "one trick ponys" who dont necessarily cheese, but they still do the same thing ... always. It doesnt help the community evolving and developing better strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
