I recently re-watched a video that I had forgotten about for years. The video shows Boxer doing one of the most famous rushes in SC history.
It's funny how history repeats itself. I don't think I need to point out the striking similarity to the SC2 version of the same rush, which we all call "cheese". (me included). Are we just jaded to creative, non-standard play? Remember how exited you were when you saw a bunker rush for the first time in broodwar? Or when you first saw a proxy gateway in someone's base? When Huk made a mothership at MLG, it was a "crazy" move just to please the fans, because we had already assumed we knew what "standard" play was for protoss. I feel like the broodwar scene was not as quick to rule out the use of certain units as the sc2 scene is. It's just a thought.
Maybe it's just cuz Boxer can do anything, and we won't call it cheese
I'm not so sure if I agree with that considering the Idra v Jinro series in the GSL. Idra cheesed on Jungle Basin, and I know a lot of people that thought it was pretty epic/awesome regardless of who held out. For me, I hate when people cheese because they simply can't play standard. That doesn't mean I hate cheese universally, just when it's used as a replacement for playing well. When a top pro cheeses in a match and executes it well, I'm pretty sure people enjoy it.
The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
People don't hate on popular players when they cheese because usually there cheese is amazing. Like when watching oGsMC doing his 2 voidray zealot rush he microed his voidrays so well that it was impressive. But there are non skilled cheese like Rain's Marine/SCV all in against nestea. There was really no micro in it and he cheesed out a player who was obviously better than him.
As long cheese takes skill to do I'm ok with it but anything like 4 gate or Marine/SCV all ins are just dumb cheeses that a three toed sloth could do.
There are more cheeses in sc2 as in Sc1, sc1 plays more of a macro game most of the time. Due to the large size of the maps cheese is also fairly ineffective and extremly risky most of the time. in SC2 its much more rewarding to do so. The reason that it everyone goes nuts when a BW player does cheese is because it does not happen often, while in SC2 it happens all the time. Cheese is also more exciting in BW due to the (flawed) AI, which means that holding of a cheese requires supreme micro sometimes, which players are applauded for.
Over time hopefully the amount of cheeses will decrease in sc2 as players go for a more macro oriented game.
From a guy who only got into BW because of SC2, I think the difference is 1) Bad players cheesing to get to a level they could not otherwise make it, and 2) The frequency of the strategies.
I think as SC2 becomes more refined a lot of the problems will iron out, and cheese will become what it should be, a suprise, tightly controlled and meticulously executed by top players who got to their position through solid mechanics and good strategy.
Cheese isn't bad, cheese is fine. Idra cheesing was the best thing ever both for us and for him. Being able to cheese, and cheesing sometimes is a good thing, without a doubt. Cheesing all the time or relying on cheesy builds/all-ins in order to be successful is not a good thing. The problem isn't cheese, it's how much cheese there is. Someone like BitByBitPrime is a problem, he all-ins and cheeses all the time. ActionJesuz seems to cheese "too much" as well.
But mixing up your play with cheese now and then, like Idra did with the cheese vs Jinro is a good tihng. It puts your opponent on edge, they never know what's coming, and shows you have a good repertoire of skills. Even Flash and Jaedong cheese (each other) in Starleague finals.
Admittedly I've gotten angry a few times, but I generally have no problem with cheese. It's a good way to mix your game up and it's by no means a guaranteed victory. I've always had the mindset of "if you lose to cheese it's your fault" and make sure to scout vigilantly and look for any tells the opponent may have.
Also, as a protoss player, I find knowledge of cheese builds pretty much essential for PvP.
And Yellow and Boxer both look like ballers. I think it's rare to see cheese at a progaming level, and because of that, the type of cheese that is played, requires TOP LEVEL execution, which makes it even more exciting.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Essentia wrote: The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
On February 19 2011 08:58 nkr wrote: To me it feels like the cheeses / all-ins are much more rewarding and less risky in sc2, compared to brood war.
Well said. It's a matter of frequency and risk involved for me as well.
I don't particularly dislike cheese but as it stands, whenever a player feels he isn't as good as his opponent or just isn't confident on a map, he makes the skill difference relatively null by forcing the game into a situation where he feels he has an advantage for a small portion of time and just goes for broke at that point.
The result is that we see less "real" games based on trying to win at any given time through superior play and strategy and more timing based games. If you paid attention, you could probably predict game lengths just based on who is playing. If you know who is probable to cheese, you know that the game will end around X minutes, win or lose, because that's when his attack is coming.
Overall, it makes the games less interesting and tense because for most of the matches where there's a heavy favourite, we see players taking this route.
I don't particularly respect cheese outside of doing multiple games with someone. When you're playing random ladder people and 6pool every 1v1 map outside of scrap station, you're not doing anything to improve your skills as a gamer.
That said, cheese is an important and awesome (jinro's 5hp marine) component of set-based play. It keeps you unpredictable.
i dont understand why people care so much about cheese... its a strategy and if you want to do it, go for it high pay off but very high risk
not everyone that cheeses is a low level player, many pros do it because it adds variety to their play-style and because they believe it will catch their opponent (who they have probably played multiple times on ladder or in tournaments) off guard.
however, many people rage at me when i cheese (more ragers than nonragers) which leads me to believe a large percentage of the sc community disapproves of these tactics
On February 19 2011 08:57 Antedelerium wrote: I'm not so sure if I agree with that considering the Idra v Jinro series in the GSL. Idra cheesed on Jungle Basin, and I know a lot of people that thought it was pretty epic/awesome regardless of who held out. For me, I hate when people cheese because they simply can't play standard. That doesn't mean I hate cheese universally, just when it's used as a replacement for playing well. When a top pro cheeses in a match and executes it well, I'm pretty sure people enjoy it.
Exactly. For myself, cheese is obnoxious on the ladder because there are a lot of players who use it as a crutch. I also think cheesing against a player you don't know is different than professionals who are playing in a series and know their opponent and that person's style. It's more defensible there given that it is a series and picking off a game cheesing doesn't mean it's over for the other person. In the 2008 OSL finals, Stork opened with cheese and won that game as well as the whole thing, but not before Fantasy nearly ggplay'd him. The fact that players use it to mess with the other guy and gain a psychological edge for the whole set makes it substantially more elegant than "Ima 9pool my way up the ladder".
I think in general people hate cheese on ladder, believing that their opponent knows only cheese and can't play for real, but I think that most people that cheese can still play a macro based game. It's also important to know at least a couple super cheese strats in case you find yourself in a bo7 or something, they can really help keep your opponent honest... no super fast crazy expo play, or crazy fast tech without making defense.
I also do a lot of proxy 2 gate in PvP, not because I don't feel that I can't win any other way, but with a war3 background I can usually out micro my opponent... so in this case the cheese allows me to dictate the gameplay to my strengths.
As people figure out the game more, we're already seeing way less cheese than in the first couple GSLs, I think that it will become rarer and rarer as people figure out the counters.
Cheese in BW just seems slower, like the time it takes between you scouting the cheese, and the cheese killing you is quite long and you get some time to deal with it, even as the cheese hits you and you aren't fully prepared you can hold it. In SC2 it just feels like you scout it when you die, and if you didn't gamble on that it's coming it's just over, you just die. Mostly scv-marine allins though but that will probably get a lot better with bigger maps as well, everything else is fine in my opinion. There's a difference between cheese and retarded cheese :p
There is a huge difference between cheese and "creative, nonstandard play."
"Creative, nonstandard play" can occur at any point in the game. It covers transitions, unit compositions, timing pushes, anything you can think of. Cheese covers a very specific period of time and exploits a set of advantages that generally have few counters. Ideally cheese should be a heavy risk/reward strategy, but some cheeses don't fall under this category.
Also consider that cheeses are "imbalanced" across the races. Zerg has a very limited set of options due to its mechanics (no proxy buildings except hatch, no spinecrawlers except against Z, wall-offs effective until muta), and becomes highly predictable. Terran and Protoss, not so much.
We're not nearly hard enough on cheese. It's an easy to execute, skilless strategy in all but the highest levels, and even then it tends to be in most cases (Hello, Mr. Bit) In pro matches, it's still too strong and common in comparison to what it was in BW and, lets be honest, a vast majority of people in the ladder cheese because they're inept and want to win arbitrary points to make themselves feel like they're not terrible at a video game.
Ok your missing the point I think. SCV marine control like BoxeR does in the video is not easy at all. Cheese in SC2 is annoying because it doesn't require skill.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Essentia wrote: The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
I came here to post something similar, it's not that the builds themselves are annoying (even though they are) it's how often we see them that make them bad. Cheese vs normal play should be a nice balance of around 75-85% being standard, with those cheese games being an exciting micro slugfest in the middle. I also think the style of cheese plays a part, I like to see cheese where it's so incredibly on the edge the entire time for both players, where 1 wrong move is a loss, not where you know who will win instantly.
I believe the saying is "It's cheese unless it's boxer doing it" or something along those lines, and that's because of the overall style he plays and his personality, I'd watch him cheese 90% of his games, because he makes it interesting, it will be builds you hadn't seen before, or new twists on those builds.
Another example from SC2 was the hatchery cancel into baneling nest at natural, THAT is a fun to watch cheese the first few times. If it suddenly was used over and over for some reason, it would lose that appeal.
On February 19 2011 09:01 ThePieRate wrote: People don't hate on popular players when they cheese because usually there cheese is amazing. Like when watching oGsMC doing his 2 voidray zealot rush he microed his voidrays so well that it was impressive. But there are non skilled cheese like Rain's Marine/SCV all in against nestea. There was really no micro in it and he cheesed out a player who was obviously better than him.
As long cheese takes skill to do I'm ok with it but anything like 4 gate or Marine/SCV all ins are just dumb cheeses that a three toed sloth could do.
I feel that it takes a significant amount of skill to 4gate or Marine/SCV, especially at higher level play. People just know how to stop 4gates, making them pretty ineffective. Same with Marine/SCV.
I don't 4gate very often, but when I do, it usually takes near perfect micro to pull of.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Antedelerium wrote: I'm not so sure if I agree with that considering the Idra v Jinro series in the GSL. Idra cheesed on Jungle Basin, and I know a lot of people that thought it was pretty epic/awesome regardless of who held out. For me, I hate when people cheese because they simply can't play standard. That doesn't mean I hate cheese universally, just when it's used as a replacement for playing well. When a top pro cheeses in a match and executes it well, I'm pretty sure people enjoy it.
i agree with this. for example, someone like actionjesus, i just downloaded the games he played at assembly, its just nothing but cheese and allin. its good for a player to sprinkle in a few allin/cheeses here and there but when that's all u do, its really hard to watch. and you're not really going anywhere with just those 2 types of plays all the time.
blows my mind how some people were so excited to see him play at assembly, even with his pre-tournament statement of "i have some secrets up my sleeves", there wasn't any doubt that it was all cheese.
Cheese is fine. Anyone who can't handle cheese as part of the game is purposely handicapping themselves due to a perceived "unfairness". If the cheese is gamebreaking then its a balance issue, but otherwise a player can and should do what it takes within the limits of the game to win if that is their goal. I'm fine with cheese, no caveat about "substituting skill" or any crap like that.
On February 19 2011 08:58 nkr wrote: To me it feels like the cheeses / all-ins are much more rewarding and less risky in sc2, compared to brood war.
Exactly the point. Doing a Boxer in Starcraft 2 would be to actually play "standard". SC2 is deeply flawed in this aspect, since a Terran playing standard would mean a bigger risk of losing. What he (Boxer) pulled off here is the opposite of the Starcraft 2 equivalent, so you can not compare it at all. We all remember the classic Idra loss when he instantly spots the 4gate, and act accordingly to hold it off, but still fails miserably, because of how SC2 works. This was not the case in BW, since knowing it would come would nullify it completely (at this level).
On February 19 2011 09:21 etheovermind wrote: Ok your missing the point I think. SCV marine control like BoxeR does in the video is not easy at all. Cheese in SC2 is annoying because it doesn't require skill.
This. This. I wish I could express is as good as this post did.
EDIT: Actually, comparing a Boxer rush to SC2 cheese should be bannable...
EDIT 2:
On February 19 2011 09:11 Caliber wrote: i dont understand why people care so much about cheese... its a strategy and if you want to do it, go for it high pay off but very high risk [...]
Actually, no. There is not a very high risk. Playing standard punish you even harder. However, your quote stands true in BW, but maybe that was what you were referring to?
The difference is people in sc2 have no skill to do anything but cheese. No one hates sc2 pros who cheese in a series because it's smart and they aren't cheesing because they're terrible.
I personally dislike when I scout someone on 9, and know immediately that I have 3 minutes to respond to their build or I'm dead. I don't always have the responses in mind when I build my original buildings, which may leave me in a situation I hadn't expected (not so much what I'm building, as where and when I'm building it).
I also, however, dislike use of the term "cheese". Here's why: people who like to rage about "cheesing" don't learn to make their builds solid against these builds because they refuse to accept these types of strats as legitimate. Then, they begin to ascribe the term "cheesing" to anything they don't know how to respond to instead of thinking about what their response should be. A 2-base play is not a cheese. A non-standard play that you've never seen before is not a cheese. Just because you don't know how to stop something (usually because you haven't considered it), doesn't make it easy or skillless to execute - and it sure as hell doesn't mean (as the definition of cheese we all so often forget states) that the rush you're faced with doesn't have a next step.
You should be mad when you get cheesed and lose. You shouldn't be mad at your opponent, though, you should be mad at yourself. I personally believe that if you try to cheese on the ladder in 2 years, you're going to get shut down. It works now because we're terrible at this game. Dealing with it only makes you better.
Personally, I don't hate the people who cheese their way into diamond. I feel sorry for them that they put so much time into a strat which in a matter of time (possibly years, but still...) won't be able to get you out of bronze. In the same amount of time, you could've just learned how to play the game.
Cheese is fine. In fact it's even fun once in a while. When FD cheesed against inca in GSL1 it was pretty great. But then, when you cheese every fucking game, it's not only unentertaining but incredibly annoying. Im looking at you Bitbyebitprime
Cheesing because a map sucks (Jungle Basin) is not an argument against cheesing, it is an argument that the map sucks and even pro-gamers would rather cheese than try to play it standard.
There's also a huge difference between cheesing and reactive rushing. If you scout something irregular or that your opponent has a vulnerability window, taking advantage of that isn't cheesing. Either your opponent allowed you to scout it which was an error, or he was crossing his fingers and praying for random luck that you would go the wrong way and if you didn't it was an "I lose". Blame the opponent in those situations, not the rusher.
mmmm i think i saw more cheese in bw then in sc2 tournaments. But its mostly that way, player didn't trained the map and thinks the opponent did -> cheese. In sc2 there is also this protoss players don't like to train pvp -> cheese.
Another reason is. You play a sequel so you have seen this in bw already often enough ;p .
The proxys are totally the same. (except the workers that is)
concerning the ladders, if people don't want the matchup they cheese to end it quick. Thats reinforced due to every race in sc2 is imba except your race.
So everything is the same as with bw. (except that i guess the skills units have are more thought through and that way unless blizzard intended it we won't see something like stasis on your own dragoons to block a ramp or radiated cloud of vessels flying over the zerg army its still there but way harder to use as it was in bw)
Well, if in SC1 someone got to the finals of a the largest tournment, and on ladder this happened 10% of the time(9.99%) too much, then the people would complain. And if this wins about 45% of the time(it wins about 60% of the time in reality) then there would be even more whining. People are not whining as much because protoss can hold with 1 FF and have enough time for reinforcements and zerg is the least played race. Even less with players above diamond.
1. I think that the major part of this is the perceived skill of the player. I play against Idra for example, I cannon rush every game because I am inferior, so people are angry they got robbed out of watching Idra play a great macro game, or people get angry that I actually win because I am undeserving (and I believe if you win 2 matches in a BO3 by cheesing than you are the inferior player).
2. Because SC2 is so unestablished, the best players so far are also unestablished, tomorrow iNcontroL could figure out that archons are the secret unit in PvP and that if you rush for two of them you can hold any PvP build, and all of a sudden iNcontroL is the best PvP player in the world. More on topic, even if Idra cheeses Jinro, it still feels more like a "rip off" than a risk. Boxer was an established best player with multiple wins under his belt, people knew he was the best, so when he cheeses it is extremely exciting to watch, because you have the feeling he could have won without it. If I say who is better Idra or Jinro? The answer should be that you have no fucking clue because it could all change tomorrow, and you still feel ripped off because it is difficult to tell who is the better player over the course of multiple 30 minute games, nevermind a 1 minute long micro fight.
TL;DR: Perceived skill makes observers feel as though they are being robbed of watching a great macro game and in SC2 we have no idea what player's real skill is, making us feel even more robbed.
Just also to add... Boxer literally had 2 scvs and thats it mining. There weren't any mules to sustain that rush for any longer like it would in sc2. It was alot riskier to do this in that game and I believe this was the first time i ever saw a successful scv rush in BW :O
Who cares about "cheese". If people "cheese" every game and that allows them to win, I blame the game, not the player. I don't really understand how anybody can hate a player who "cheeses" all the time and wins. Blame Blizzard for allowing that to be possible if that's now how you want the game to be.
What do these things have in common? They all require a disproportionate amount of skill to hold off than they require to execute. But I know, who cares about skill... This is SC2, not Broodwar... This game was SUPPOSED to be more noob friendly as evidenced by the macro mechanics, maps, easy wall-ins, mules and chronoboosts for faster all ins, over triple the gas on one base compared to BW, and the list goes on...
I think the sooner we accept that SC2 is not and never will be broodwar, the better off we will be.
Well it seems like cheese have decreased some since the game first came out and thats really good. i never cheese on ladder always try to fast expand and macro unless its obivious that my opponent is doing an all in or a timing push i cant handle if i fast expand.
Still i think cheese is a little to strong especially in the protoss vs protoss matchup and P or T against Z. other matchups are fine in my opinion. as mentioned above the problem with cheese is that it takes so much more skill to defend against it than doing it. everyone can do the cheese and the differences from a pro player doing a cheese and a low master-high diamond doing a cheese isnt really that big as it would be in a macro game. the point is you can steal victorys you dont desverve by cheesing :D they should have given better defender advantage the only defender advantage now is
The high ground ( in some situations it can even work against you ) your workers and the ability to instantely reinforce
Another problem is that buildings that are supposed to be used defensively like bunkers and Photon cannons can be used so aggressively before your opponent even got a unit out. this only apply to zerg tho. watching Idras stream it seems like he got so many undeserved loses due to photon cannons- bunkers making him lose the game even at the slighest mistake.
Also i have no idea why blizzard is so bad at balancing they arent listening enough to the players Forexample why Buff Phoenix buiilds that are already doing super good against zerg?
On February 19 2011 09:14 Ighox wrote: Cheese in BW just seems slower, like the time it takes between you scouting the cheese, and the cheese killing you is quite long and you get some time to deal with it, even as the cheese hits you and you aren't fully prepared you can hold it. In SC2 it just feels like you scout it when you die, and if you didn't gamble on that it's coming it's just over, you just die. Mostly scv-marine allins though but that will probably get a lot better with bigger maps as well, everything else is fine in my opinion. There's a difference between cheese and retarded cheese :p
Not to mention micro seems to be more effective in BW than in SC2. Just something i notice, When i played BW i was under the influence that you could come out ontop of a situation with sick micro almost always. But in sc2 when someone comes in with a counter or a strong push you didn't prepare exactly for the game is pretty much over.
I personally love cheese, I love seeing it, playing it, and playing against it, things can get very intense in cheese wars. It is part of the game, relax and enjoy it.
I think, like alot of people have said, all-in 1 base play isn't exciting anymore because....
1) The risk/reward of such a strategy is skewed because of macro mechanics. If you did a marine/SCV rush in BW, you couldn't sustain that push, it was one and done. If you didn't pull it off, you lost. In star2 we have mules. Terran players are finding more ways to pull SCV's and win every day. Protoss are transitioning out of 4 gate without dealing a ton of damage and winning, zergs are being crazy aggressive with roach/ling and still being able to support a good economy.
2) It's a reliable way to win, thus popular. We see high masters players in all regions who only 4 gate, or 3 rax, or 6 pool, etc. Even some pros rely primarily on 1 base all-in timings, like ActionJezus, BitByBit, and a few more. It feels odd to know that there are players who win most of their games in wins by the 7 minute mark, who would crumble if they had to play a stretched out game. I'd say that a good 65%+ ladder games are 1 base timing attacks. I would venture to say that, especially in most matchups, these 1 base timings are, in fact, standard, not macro games.
3) As a player, I think that it's just so ANNOYING trying to play a macro game on ladder. As a zerg player in particular, 4 gate is so hard to manage because the standard play looks exactly like a 4 gate. A player could want to 3 gate expand, and at the last minute say fuck it, throw in another gate and go for it. There are certain tells, but none of them are definite. A terran player will probably 2 rax me 75% of the time, and on a whim can decide to just bring all his SCV's.
All-in-all, I feel that the problem with all-in one base plays at the moment is that there really is very little risk (unless you 6 pool, or proxy gate, it's hard to transition out of those) and as a result, the plays have become so popular that they are becoming the norm. As a result, we're seeing less of the cool drawn out strategies that result in cool timings and strategies that we saw in BW that allot of people saw as the exciting plays.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Essentia wrote: The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
we saw little of it back then because there weren't $80,000 1st prize tournaments, and the strategy was more unstable than it is now. What goes on now is the following:
1) I want to win this tournament 2) My opponent is better than me 3) The longer the game goes on, the less chance I win 4) I should put all my eggs in one basket and try to win immediately.
I think if anything, that logical conclusion was not common among players. It is only after people got an understanding of the game that they realized this. Of course, in BW, by that time, people were so good that they were beyond poorly-constructed cheese.
I don't mind people cheesing. What I mind is people cheesing EVERY GAME. BitByBitPrime for example, has an awful macro, and most of his wins came from marine-scv allins, which is ridiculous.
Having a cheese as a "surprise plan" is good, I still remember Kiwikaki's cannon rush on MLG DC which made me totally amazed by his unit control.
On February 19 2011 09:14 Ighox wrote: Cheese in BW just seems slower, like the time it takes between you scouting the cheese, and the cheese killing you is quite long and you get some time to deal with it, even as the cheese hits you and you aren't fully prepared you can hold it. In SC2 it just feels like you scout it when you die, and if you didn't gamble on that it's coming it's just over, you just die. Mostly scv-marine allins though but that will probably get a lot better with bigger maps as well, everything else is fine in my opinion. There's a difference between cheese and retarded cheese :p
Actually cheese in bw usually gave you a win before the 5min mark just as everything I regard as cheese in sc2. Then alot of people call attacks hitting even after 5min cheese but then it's a timing attack and nothing else. Played a 3v3 a couple of days ago and we entered some guys base at the 6min mark and he started some rant about cheese.
The annoying thing in sc2 is as you said you can scout it and you are like, well meh, too bad. Like when I played close position on meta and had an ovvie outside his base, saw him move out, so I started to place crawlers but he was in my main right before they popped.
Cheese in tournament is needed in some way because if you play too standard all the time you can be exploited so much easier than if you have a few tricks in your sleeve.
Where I don't understand cheese it's on the ladder at every level except master. I can understand if you're on a pretty bad streak and you want to snap out of it and just playing straight macro game won't cut it. Go ahead and cheese, but getting in diamond because all you do is cheese is just wasting your time I think. What;s the point of being in diamond if you belong in bronze skill wise? At some point you'll try to get better and realize that you wasted so much time just getting into diamond for basically nothing.
One of the problem of Sc2 and there's nothing you can do about it is a lot of players come from BW where standards were set a long time ago, where people figured out how to stop most cheese and people are more comfy playing macro games.
There's nothing like that in Sc2 yet. People are still trying to figure out a lot of stuff and patches coming out affect the game almost every month.
There's already a huge improvement from GSL 1 to now and it's not even close as far as game quality and it's only what like 6 months since? It just takes time, but Sc2 will get at a point where cheese isn't as effective and popular and the games will be amazing.
I rarely cheese myself, but I really like playing against cheese and watching cheese. It's so intense, and not all games have to be 20+ min macro games.
I dont understand how people can get offended if they get cheesed.
I only have a problem with ladder cheesing. I'm always trying to find nice long fun game, yet every play I see seems to want to do an all-in. After holding off 100+ of them, I'd love to get to a point where it's less frequent. At least in ladder, it just isn't fun.
SC2 people need to realize that cheesing in a BOX series,regardless of it being SC1/2, isn't all about getting the upper hand ingame .. but it also work as MIND GAMES .. who would have thought Boxer would cheese x3 in that series? im pretty sure one of them wasn't yellow
who would have thought of Idra going for a cheese vs Jinro in that BOX?? we all know how he(idra) despised cheesing right?
Amount i see/saw in Starcraft 1 professional matches:
=========
it's all relative people...
Yep, this right here. See an SCV/marine all-in the first time? Holy shit what just happened, brilliant win. See it every game after that? Mix it up a little...
Someone in here will help me, hence I can't remember who said it... But a pro-gamer once said: A cheese is just investing in a single attack. It will either win you the game, or swing you OR the opponent into a favored position. This is nowhere any different from a 200/200 army on 3 bases. At SOME point you need to commit.
And yes, most likely it will be inferior players cheesing - or the favourites cheesing to catch their opponents offguard. But to me, cheese is fair, allowed and will most of the time be easier to defend than execute (not talking marine-scv-a-move all in here).
And as a spectator, I'm already watching 10+ macro games everyday, learning how to get the correct unit composition, timings and rough BO's... I'm more interested in seeing cheese honestly. If not counting BitByBit, there's ALOT more macro (or timing push) based games than cheese. And on ladder - even in masters - I still face alot of cheese. It's part of the game. Obviously you're supposed to deal with it, rather than argueing why it's bad.
Seems to me that people who say they that cheese means your not as good as the other and obviously arent good at all are just ignorant, they can play both and probably dont cheese every game. If they do get over it, a cheese can be as easy to stop as it is to do, your the one who needs to get better if it beats you not the other guy.
I think people are just mad that there getting there arse handed to them by somone who decided to play how he wanted and not play standard like some may feel they have to.
plus cheese can be fun, and if you somhow know your oppenant and how they play you can somtimes catch them off guard for a win.
Cheese makes games boring, and ruin the whole build up of a series/games. It is like watching a movie, and just having the main character get shot for no reason, and then the movie ends. It just ruins SC2 as a spectator sport because it just ends a game.
On February 19 2011 08:54 Trogdor wrote: I recently re-watched a video that I had forgotten about for years. The video shows Boxer doing one of the most famous rushes in SC history.
It's funny how history repeats itself. I don't think I need to point out the striking similarity to the SC2 version of the same rush, which we all call "cheese". (me included). Are we just jaded to creative, non-standard play? Remember how exited you were when you saw a bunker rush for the first time in broodwar? Or when you first saw a proxy gateway in someone's base? When Huk made a mothership at MLG, it was a "crazy" move just to please the fans, because we had already assumed we knew what "standard" play was for protoss. I feel like the broodwar scene was not as quick to rule out the use of certain units as the sc2 scene is. It's just a thought.
Maybe it's just cuz Boxer can do anything, and we won't call it cheese
can you post the most infamous and hated cheese videos of bw
the problem is that cheese is way stronger in sc2. especially for terran. we complain about marine scv rushes, but what is the difference between that and boxer's scv rush? if boxer failed, he would actually come out BEHIND. that can't happen in sc2 because now terran has mules. terrran can never come out behind from 2raxing a zerg, so there is no reason why he should not cheese him. that is why we complain about it. because the risk vs reward is nowhere near where it should be.
I'm okay with cheese as long as it is not too much and it has been way too much on the Blizzard maps. I still hope the bigger GSL maps will not eliminate cheese entirely, it's always nice to see some exciting plays mixing with standard games, especially when its a bo5+ series.
Well I think it just became an issue because it was such a solid build executed by so many players so often. It arguably didn't take much skill, and this is still in a young game which hasn't sorted out problems like all in SCV rushes.
I can't say I watched too much Brood War in all fairness, nevertheless I think very crazy and unexpected all ins will still be considered entertaining, but when it becomes more of a surprise that a player plays standard, then I feel it will be looked down on.
Cheese makes games boring, and ruin the whole build up of a series/games. It is like watching a movie, and just having the main character get shot for no reason, and then the movie ends. It just ruins SC2 as a spectator sport because it just ends a game.
NO! There is a difference between cheesy players and players who use cheese to throw their opponents off. THose cheesey players will never be hated on enough. Cheese does add a interesting component to the game but right now its just too easy to use.
I actually love watching cheese whenever both players show good micro and it's not all one sided. I would love to see more cheese in tourneys and standard games that transition into both players being severely economically disadvantaged but surviving, and then keep watching them try to kill each other. It's better than both players just macro'ing up and barely harassing up until they decide to throw massive armies at each other (not to say this is how it has to be without cheese! Standard play can be incredibly fun to watch as well, I'm just trying to provide contrast)
I think the more relevant question is: is it too hard to stop cheese in sc2, compared to how risky it is? If you want an sc2 without cheese, my guess is you get a very boring and non-dynamic game where early attacks are heavily disadvantaged. Any exciting version of sc2 is going to have cheese in it, and if you can win with cheese, that's great, if you can win often with cheese, good for you as long as it's due to execution. If you cheese almost every game, I fail to understand how you find sc2 fun to play when you make it so one-dimensional for yourself (not to mention you'd be unable to win a bo5/7), however I will not speak against you; any classy player will gg to cheese and move on, getting all raged up and condescending just shows how incomplete your game is. Then again, when cheese is the most viable option, the game balancers are more to blame than those who pick up on that viability. But I don't think we're anywhere near this.
The micro in cheese defence is often far less entertaining than it was in brood war because of the improved unit ai. It's also far more common in sc2 and takes less skill to execute effectively.
Based on the reaction to this thread, I'd say as a whole that yes, TL is too hard on cheese.
In all seriousness, there needs to be some distinction between cheese and... all the other things that could be mistaken for cheese. And that distinction is largely decided by the metagame. What I'm getting at is that when we talk about "cheese" we mean something unusually out of the normal style of play, usually a high risk, high reward play.
If we're actually seeing as much so-called "cheese" as people think we are, then it's not cheese (at the current spot in game development) because there's clearly not a high enough risk for the majority of players to avoid it, whatever the reward.
The question of whether spectators prefer short or long games is entirely different. A sunken bust isn't cheese, but ends a game quickly if it succeeds - and because people don't like short games, when Flash was doing this every game he got called cheesy and lame. But he was actually just... trying to win.
Cheese is I think being used in a negative light. That being said cheese can both be skillful and non-skillful. There are some effective early game all-ins that require little to execute and there are others that are the same effectiveness and yet harder to execute.
But the kicker here is "cheese" is usually defendable, therefore a successful cheese can be considered skillful in breaking the defense.
IMO, there is nothing that you can not defend against right now in the game. Proper scouting and the right actions can defend anything.
All in all, the reason cheese is frowned upon because we get frustrated when we lose to it and rightfully so. It is a stupid loss. However, stupid on the defenders part not recognizing it.
I was thinking about this the other day. I actually think people are much nicer to cheesers nowadays, especially at a high level. I'm not talking about GSL, but many top foreign teams advocate the use of "whatever works" rather than trying to improve your game. As it is a new game, no one knows what standards will really end up being, so there's not yet as good as reason to stop using any strategies as long as they are effective. I remember in broodwar, people were often just ignored/told off if they did anything but a standard macro style during a tryout or practice game.
I think one of the reasons BoxeR's cheese has been glorified so much is because of the great deal of micro it required; in BW, the pathing wasn't as good as the pathing in SC2, so doing something like an SCV rush took a lot of precision.
In SC2, the pathing is INCREDIBLE, and thus I feel exploiting cheese has become a lot easier.
On February 19 2011 12:34 DoubleRainbow wrote: Cheese makes games boring, and ruin the whole build up of a series/games. It is like watching a movie, and just having the main character get shot for no reason, and then the movie ends. It just ruins SC2 as a spectator sport because it just ends a game.
On February 19 2011 13:13 DoubleRainbow wrote: Cheese makes games boring, and ruin the whole build up of a series/games. It is like watching a movie, and just having the main character get shot for no reason, and then the movie ends. It just ruins SC2 as a spectator sport because it just ends a game.
Double posts make forums look idiotic, and ruins the impression of TL to newcomers. It is like watching a movie, and just having the main character say silly catch phrases over and over again. It just ruins TL as a community loving place because people find it pretty annoying.
The thing is, Boxer can actually play a straight-up game, and often did (at the time of that video). I have no problem with legitimately good players cheesing every once in a while - it keeps them unpredictable and keeps their opponents honest. I only bash on players if they rely on cheese to win and can' really win in a straight-up game.
On February 19 2011 08:54 Trogdor wrote: I recently re-watched a video that I had forgotten about for years. The video shows Boxer doing one of the most famous rushes in SC history.
It's funny how history repeats itself. I don't think I need to point out the striking similarity to the SC2 version of the same rush, which we all call "cheese". (me included). Are we just jaded to creative, non-standard play? Remember how exited you were when you saw a bunker rush for the first time in broodwar? Or when you first saw a proxy gateway in someone's base? When Huk made a mothership at MLG, it was a "crazy" move just to please the fans, because we had already assumed we knew what "standard" play was for protoss. I feel like the broodwar scene was not as quick to rule out the use of certain units as the sc2 scene is. It's just a thought.
Maybe it's just cuz Boxer can do anything, and we won't call it cheese
can you post the most infamous and hated cheese videos of bw
Before Flash was the ultimate weapon he first became famous by cheesing Bisu out of an OSL:
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.
From what I've read, most people are saying that all-in one base timings are OK in moderation, but become annoying and boring to watch when they're the basis of a players play. Maybe you like to watch a player who only 6 pools or 4 gates, but most people don't. It's fine to say that you don't want to see something all the time.
For instance, I'm sure most people love pizza, but ask a pizza shop employee who eats pizza every day if he likes pizza and 9/10 he'll tell you no, because that food he once loved is becoming boring. Same thing if you ask a person who works at a dairy queen. That's what these plays should be in my eyes, a special treat that happens every once in a while, not the basis of your in-game "diet".
I cheese sometimes on the ladder but thats either because my opponent made a mistake i think i can take advantage of or I am forced into it. For example I played a game a while back where a zerg player totally forgot my scouting probe in Jungle Basin and I proceeded to throw down a pylon near the rocks at the natural and 4 warp gate rush him. Or if I scout a zerg FE early enough i can cannon rush.
hehe well that's great in a bo5 bo7, but for example in Code S group stage, it's a bo1, and as a spectator you get all pumped for the matchup, and it ends in 5 min in the same exact way we see in our ladder games. It's not like there is anything fancy a pro can add to a marine+scv all in lol.
Cheese will remain a controversial topic until the very last player has accepted that cheesing is not a weakness and character flaw in the other player ("he can't play standard so he cheeses"), but a flaw in the own play ("I failed to scout and was punished for it").
Most people can't even agree on what cheese actually is, which strategies are included and when cheese stops and "real" play starts. There's a simple reason for that: Cheese isn't a strategy. Cheese is a psychological defense mechanism players use when losing and unwilling to accept it.
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.
On February 19 2011 17:29 Wolf wrote: I think most people who complain about cheese in SC2 are actually complaining about normal builds.
Interesting point, but I would like a more detailed explanation why you are saying that and what you mean by it. Are you saing that people are declaring things as cheese which are part of "normal builds" or what?
yes it sucks and annoying when someone cheeses me, esp. when i lose consecutive games to cheese. But still, i don't begrudge the people doing it. It's all part of the game.
On the tournament level, the amount of bs/hate heaped on players with cheesy reps (TSL_Rain?) just doesn't compute for me. People gotta keep in mind that pros have their own styles and some would not hesitate to use certain strategies if they think they have a pretty good chance of winning a game/match/series.
The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win. 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. In BW you can cheese once, and get away with it. In SC2 you can literally cheese / all in every time and make it to the best tournament in the world right now (BBB being the notable example of this).
The way SC2 maps are designed though (along with the macro mechanics) is that it really hurts people trying to play "standard" macro play because there are too many variations of cheese/all-ins that are too hard to defend against (because many of them look exactly the same).
Not to mention for some odd reason you can even transition out of those cheeses even if they are defended. This was never the case in BW; if your BBS got stopped, you were dead. Period.
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote: The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win. 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. In BW you can cheese once, and get away with it. In SC2 you can literally cheese / all in every time and make it to the best tournament in the world right now (BBB being the notable example of this).
The way SC2 maps are designed though (along with the macro mechanics) is that it really hurts people trying to play "standard" macro play because there are too many variations of cheese/all-ins that are too hard to defend against (because many of them look exactly the same).
Not to mention for some odd reason you can even transition out of those cheeses even if they are defended. This was never the case in BW; if your BBS got stopped, you were dead. Period.
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote: The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win.
Are you a totally inferior opponent if you still have chances to win the match? No you are not.
Players should do whatever they think gives them the best chances to win. I think people need to be less hard on "cheesy" players, and blame blizzard instead if they think there is imbalance. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Using cheese sometimes in tournaments or ladder is a great way to keep people honest. Instead of getting mad at cheesing opponents, players should get mad at themselves.
It's the fact that for a lot of people, cheese/allin's is how they play. It's really the only way they know how to play, and without it, they would lose.
There are people who get to masters through pure 4 gating. There are people who get to masters through dts, through void rays, through 2 rax all ins, through 6 pools, through the variety of all ins/cheese that exist.
In Brood War you would never see someone who got to the high level based on pure cheese/allins. That is why when someone does do it, it's exciting.
I am totally okay with cheese when it's used in tournaments (namely Bo3+). It keeps the opponent honest, and punishes those who decide to play very greedily (including eco-cheese).
Alternatively, I feel actually cheesing in ladder is rather pointless to some extent. The fact that cheese exists and can happen occasionally has the same effect on many players as cheese would in a tournament (keeping people honest, and punishing those who aren't). This is fantastic, as it ensures people have to scout well, and be prepared to handle situations they usually don't have to face. However, cheese gets annoying if you start running into it more often then 1/10 games. Additionally, you do run into some players who cheese every single game, and that's just an unfortunate decision on their part.
On February 19 2011 17:29 Wolf wrote: I think most people who complain about cheese in SC2 are actually complaining about normal builds.
Interesting point, but I would like a more detailed explanation why you are saying that and what you mean by it. Are you saing that people are declaring things as cheese which are part of "normal builds" or what?
For example, a two barracks opening on Xel'Naga Caverns where a Terran brings two or three SCVs to attempt to bunker. That's not a cheese build. That's a standard opening. Or on the same map, if a Protoss proxies a gateway in the back of the Terran's base, that's also a standard opening. It's meant to do damage. Sure, it's risky, but it's a normal build that's risky. Like going for a gas-less expand as Terran is risky. It's standard though. It's not cheese.
Cheese is an all-in attack that if it fails, there is no coming back. For example, pulling ALL SCVs in a two barracks opener and hoping to end the game immediately. There's no recovery there. Or proxying two gateways against a Protoss player; there's hardly any way to recover. A six pool is almost impossible to recover from also, but it's borderline not cheese because if you do enough damage, you can transition. A six pool pulling all workers is cheese.
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote: The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win.
Are you a totally inferior opponent if you still have chances to win the match? No you are not.
Players should do whatever they think gives them the best chances to win. I think people need to be less hard on "cheesy" players, and blame blizzard instead if they think there is imbalance. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Using cheese sometimes in tournaments or ladder is a great way to keep people honest. Instead of getting mad at cheesing opponents, players should get mad at themselves.
actionjesuz? he is totally inferior to every opponent he has ever played
I think we're hard on cheesers, not people that perform cheese. Its actually really cool when a top tiered player performs a cheese, and does it intellectual, not blindly.
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?
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 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 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 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 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).
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?
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.
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.
I think that as long as cheese is used when appropriate (aka close spawning positions and they want to get a quick win to close out the set or they're vastly behind) is something pro gamers have to do. They're playing for money so that's their livelihood of course. But when you have a player like Bitbybitprime who cheeses EVERY SINGLE GAME, then I lose all respect for them. Players should have a well rounded toolkit of tricks to use, including cheese, but it definitely shouldn't be half or more of their games. Otherwise, I don't know how they would ever know the game more than a macro player.
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote: The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win. 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. In BW you can cheese once, and get away with it. In SC2 you can literally cheese / all in every time and make it to the best tournament in the world right now (BBB being the notable example of this).
I don't know where you get that 99.9% thing from because it just doesn't work out like that. Flash, the best BW player in the world, has about a 70% win rate, and that's in a game where most of the cheese has been put to bed through better maps and build orders being so figured out. I know its possible in fighting games like Street Fighter but an RTS is a game of imperfect information, so an almost total winrate like that just never happens.
There are two reasons, in my view, why the early rush is still so strong in SC2, its because there are lots of maps with short rush distances and because the 'standard play' is still being figured out. At this stage of the original Starcrafts life it was no different, I played back in those early days and it was cheesetastic, 4pools, marine-scv rushes and proxy gates left right and centre, once things were figured out the cheese builds became less and less common.
Starcraft 2 will move beyond this, its already starting to do so, compare how many 1base rushes there were in the first two GSLs to the more recent ones, not to mention the difference map development will make.
I think of this as SC2s growing pains, or maybe its adolescent times, it'll grow up then we'll look back on players like BitByBit and laugh about it, shaking our heads that this sort of play could actually succed at the pro level.
On February 20 2011 05:37 superstartran wrote: The reason why Cheese/All-in play is looked down upon because you can be a totally inferior opponent and still win. 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. In BW you can cheese once, and get away with it. In SC2 you can literally cheese / all in every time and make it to the best tournament in the world right now (BBB being the notable example of this).
I don't know where you get that 99.9% thing from because it just doesn't work out like that. Flash, the best BW player in the world, has about a 70% win rate, and that's in a game where most of the cheese has been put to bed through better maps and build orders being so figured out. I know its possible in fighting games like Street Fighter but an RTS is a game of imperfect information, so an almost total winrate like that just never happens.
There are two reasons, in my view, why the early rush is still so strong in SC2, its because there are lots of maps with short rush distances and because the 'standard play' is still being figured out. At this stage of the original Starcrafts life it was no different, I played back in those early days and it was cheesetastic, 4pools, marine-scv rushes and proxy gates left right and centre, once things were figured out the cheese builds became less and less common.
Starcraft 2 will move beyond this, its already starting to do so, compare how many 1base rushes there wree in the first two GSLs to the more recent ones, not to mention the difference map development will make.
I think of this as SC2s growing pains, or maybe its adolescent times, it'll grow up then we'll look back on players like BitByBit and laugh about it, shaking our heads that this sort of play could actually succed at the pro level.
Totally agree, let's wait, the game is still young, new strategies are coming, etc ...
i'm pretty much ok with cheese if is used to win a series (you are 1-1 in a bo3 series and cheese the 3rd game).. but when a player's only strategy is cheesing is just stupid...
In my book cheesing is 6pool, cannon rush ect. They're boring because if scouted you win if not they most likely will it's boring. Worker rushes I don't consider as a cheese even thought they are because the player with better micro will win most likely not down to not having vision.
My recent ladder game have been all but 4 Terrans the 3 Toss cannon rushed and the zerg 6 pooled. It's just not fun to play at all. (Bronze in case that's not plainly obvious by the mass Terran.)
On February 20 2011 23:33 synapse wrote: Cheese on ladder = bad. Cheese in BoX series as part of a mind game = good.
This sums it up for me too.
On February 20 2011 23:39 XenOsky- wrote: i'm pretty much ok with cheese if is used to win a series (you are 1-1 in a bo3 series and cheese the 3rd game).. but when a player's only strategy is cheesing is just stupid...
I don't know if you watched any significant amount of play in BW, but even back then, as now, the "standard" game in a Brood War tournament was a macro game. 1base all-ins didn't really exist, proxies happened but only once in a series and as a psychological effect. Maps were bigger, so all-ins were less powerful. In addition, starting with only four workers meant the games got off to a slower start, so cheese took longer to do it.
Things are already improving in this regard, there were VERY few 2base all-in strategies from anyone in the GSL team league games, and while there were still quite a few 1base strategies, they weren't so much cheese just solid 1base strategies.
Overall, to answer your question about why a video of that strategy by BoxeR is popular and cheese in SC2 isn't is because cheese was much rarer in BW, so it was more interesting when it was done, just like long macro games are interesting right now because they are the rarity (for now)
On February 19 2011 09:01 Kipsate wrote: There are more cheeses in sc2 as in Sc1, sc1 plays more of a macro game most of the time. Due to the large size of the maps cheese is also fairly ineffective and extremly risky most of the time. in SC2 its much more rewarding to do so. The reason that it everyone goes nuts when a BW player does cheese is because it does not happen often, while in SC2 it happens all the time. Cheese is also more exciting in BW due to the (flawed) AI, which means that holding of a cheese requires supreme micro sometimes, which players are applauded for.
Over time hopefully the amount of cheeses will decrease in sc2 as players go for a more macro oriented game.
Agreed. There are so many cheese builds in SC2 and so many people (especially bronze leaguers) use them. Hopefully they'll learn how to do a real build so we can have good games...not 5 minute games.
On February 19 2011 09:01 Kipsate wrote: There are more cheeses in sc2 as in Sc1, sc1 plays more of a macro game most of the time. Due to the large size of the maps cheese is also fairly ineffective and extremly risky most of the time. in SC2 its much more rewarding to do so. The reason that it everyone goes nuts when a BW player does cheese is because it does not happen often, while in SC2 it happens all the time. Cheese is also more exciting in BW due to the (flawed) AI, which means that holding of a cheese requires supreme micro sometimes, which players are applauded for.
Over time hopefully the amount of cheeses will decrease in sc2 as players go for a more macro oriented game.
Agreed. There are so many cheese builds in SC2 and so many people (especially bronze leaguers) use them. Hopefully they'll learn how to do a real build so we can have good games...not 5 minute games.
I like to think of it as a trial by fire. Like making it past the lowest tier of the BW ladder, you will have to learn to defend the cheese.
And let's face it, 6pool can be beaten with worker micro and a 4gate hits around 6-7 minutes. You poke to see if the terran makes 2rax and keep a cout outside the base to see him pulling SCVs etc.
In conclusion: Learning to defend cheese should not take long if you are dedicated to scouting and defending against the. It gets a bit more complicated later up the ranks, but there's a reason the players in the bronze league are where they are.
I don't see SCV all in as a creative play... Sure Boxer doing it 10 years ago is creative, but doing it now is just being a "fucking cheesy nooby" to quote incontrol.
On February 20 2011 22:55 Darkong wrote: I think of this as SC2s growing pains, or maybe its adolescent times, it'll grow up then we'll look back on players like BitByBit and laugh about it, shaking our heads that this sort of play could actually succed at the pro level.
Cheese will always be stronger in SC2 than BW as long as mining remains as it is now.
The map solution won't work like it did for BW due to mining being saturation focused instead of expansion focused.
When pros cheese, we know they can play a game without it.
When a noob cheeses, its usually all they can do and they're not "mixing things up ", they're just plain out cheesing because thats all they know how to do, thats why people don't approve.
We may have been excited about boxer scv rushing once, but we weren't so happy when he bunker rushed yellow 3 times in a row. One time makes it new and creative, too many times and it's just exploitative.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Essentia wrote: The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
Either you weren't around or you need to take off your nostalgia-tinted glasses.
The strategies/metagame back then was way, way more volatile than they are in sc2 as of now. Standard wasn't anywhere near as established. It was boxer building bunkers in yellow's natural, three times in a row, and winning the finals. That's all there was to it, people were amazed at the unexpected play and some were pissed that the finals had been so short.
Don't really have a good or bad feeling for cheese, but I have great respect for the strength of cheese in SC2. It definitely got me to scout more and more often! That is why I also have great respect for players like Nestea and Ret who train real hard to be cheesepoof, and its superawesome when they hold it off ^^
On February 19 2011 09:01 Kipsate wrote: There are more cheeses in sc2 as in Sc1, sc1 plays more of a macro game most of the time. Due to the large size of the maps cheese is also fairly ineffective and extremly risky most of the time. in SC2 its much more rewarding to do so. The reason that it everyone goes nuts when a BW player does cheese is because it does not happen often, while in SC2 it happens all the time. Cheese is also more exciting in BW due to the (flawed) AI, which means that holding of a cheese requires supreme micro sometimes, which players are applauded for.
Over time hopefully the amount of cheeses will decrease in sc2 as players go for a more macro oriented game.
Agreed. There are so many cheese builds in SC2 and so many people (especially bronze leaguers) use them. Hopefully they'll learn how to do a real build so we can have good games...not 5 minute games.
I like to think of it as a trial by fire. Like making it past the lowest tier of the BW ladder, you will have to learn to defend the cheese.
And let's face it, 6pool can be beaten with worker micro and a 4gate hits around 6-7 minutes. You poke to see if the terran makes 2rax and keep a cout outside the base to see him pulling SCVs etc.
In conclusion: Learning to defend cheese should not take long if you are dedicated to scouting and defending against the. It gets a bit more complicated later up the ranks, but there's a reason the players in the bronze league are where they are.
Oh I never lose to cheese now. I either have a few zealots out for 6 pool or if its marines I have some sentries and stalkers by the time he gets there. That's what's so funny. They get mad at me cause I don't lose to the cheese.
On February 19 2011 08:57 Essentia wrote: The reason we got so excited about it rather than angry is because of how RARE it was. But when you see it so often it's not that big of a deal and it is just flat out annoying.
Either you weren't around or you need to take off your nostalgia-tinted glasses.
The strategies/metagame back then was way, way more volatile than they are in sc2 as of now. Standard wasn't anywhere near as established. It was boxer building bunkers in yellow's natural, three times in a row, and winning the finals. That's all there was to it, people were amazed at the unexpected play and some were pissed that the finals had been so short.
It was in a semifinal (EVER 2004), and Boxer apologized in his interview. It was bold, but most people were disappointed. Plus it was 2004, and then standard BO had already started to emerge. I was not there in 2001, but from the game I watched, there were not that many cheese games, at least in OSL and MSL finals. I haven't watched that many game from 2001, but I did not see that much cheese. For instance, in the Boxer vs YellOw there was one cheese game (which failed) in the Bo5. I'm pretty sure there was none in the Garimto vs Boxer one. Though one could note that bunker rush was used an often used opening, as it does not really set you that much behind to do 7-8 rax. If you kill 2-3 drones, you have equalized, and zerg did not micro well enough at that time to completely stop it. As for bw today, I think most people like cheese, as long as it's not a whole serie, and that it's not just an undeserving player getting lucky with BO. For instance, when Stork 4-gated Flash last week, most people liked it, even Flash fans : it was a pretty funny strat, seldom used, and well hidden from a solid player. Bottom line : there was probably more cheese a long time ago in bw, but not that much. I have no idea how much cheese there is in sc2 though, so you might have been right.
On February 19 2011 09:01 ThePieRate wrote: People don't hate on popular players when they cheese because usually there cheese is amazing. Like when watching oGsMC doing his 2 voidray zealot rush he microed his voidrays so well that it was impressive. But there are non skilled cheese like Rain's Marine/SCV all in against nestea. There was really no micro in it and he cheesed out a player who was obviously better than him.
As long cheese takes skill to do I'm ok with it but anything like 4 gate or Marine/SCV all ins are just dumb cheeses that a three toed sloth could do.
Someone give this guy a medal. You basically said that perfectly, and exactly what I was going to write. Well done sir.
And yea, when pro players cheese, they don't do stupid cheeses. They make up their own cheese that requires a lot of micro. IdrA actually only lost his jungle basin game vs jinro because he didn't micro well. He should have immediately moved to the SCV line and disrupted bunker production. He could have cut the marine off as it came out of the rax later.
I have won like 7 in a row now...and have played a lot today. I keep beating silver/gold players...and am rank 1 in my bronze league. When I play silver/gold players it says "Even Match" and I even beat a plat that was "Slightly Favored" Why the heck isn't it moving me out of bronze. I am on a 7 win streak and have easily won like 20-25 today and only lost 3-5
Let me tell you my experience so far as a newby player. I used to play starcraft back in 1999-2000 and I watch GSL. With real 1v1 playing, I only just finished my 12th game total.
The game I just had was protoss vs protoss. I got put into platinum and this guy is First in his gold division.
I scout his base and he has one gateway near his nexus, so I turn around and go back again around 1 minute later... He has 2 gasses and 1 sentry. At this time, I decide to make 4 gateways and just kill him. By the time I ran in with 8 stalkers and 4 zealots, he only had 3 sentries and 1 stalker...... Then he yells at me for cheesing him.
I'm so confused because I just made a lot of units and killed him. How is that cheese?
I think cheese is going up against an unknown opponent with a all-in build and hoping you win.
However when you are playing against a player who you've watched play, or are in the middle of a series with, its not cheese. It's exploiting a player's weakness, and it is bullshit to call it cheese.
You don't have a pitcher throwing curve balls and hear the batter yell "You know I can't hit those!! This is God damn bullshit!! CHEESE!! CHEEEESSSE!!!!"
Its called thinking and planning if you have a problem with either one of those, you are indeed an idiot. Thats all there is to it.
Alot of people don't even seem to know what cheese is. Lots of people called jinros bunkers "cheese" vs idra in gsl. How is it cheese? Jinro did not sacrifice anything.
Cheese is the necessary evil here, but the balance must be delicate. BitbyBit almost every game isn't my idea of balanced cheesing, but a baneling bust or proxy all in type strategy once every 5 games allows for some variation in play. Not to mention how exciting it is to see a talented player micro their ass off to hold a strong all in build.
I think it's a fun aspect of the game. I like to 6 pool occasionally on ladder vs zerg or protoss just because it makes the game more dynamic and I feel comfortable enough in my play that even if it's not completely successful, I will come out ahead with my micro skills/decision making. Of course, it doesn't always work but I don't really see a 6 pool as all in as more of just forcing the game to get intense early.
On February 23 2011 15:10 Tomken wrote: Gimme a break, it's ridiculous how easy effective cheese is in sc2 in compared to BW. (AS TERRAN ATLEAST.)
"as terran at least" LOL hillarious hearing that from a protoss, seeing as it doesn't really get easier than the 4gate
4gate isnt cheese.
Isn't this arguing semantics? Cheese is an all-in strategy that has no real back up plan to it if the other person is able to hold it off an still have an economy. The real question is, are you stopping worker production or is it just pressure into an expand?
If we aren't talking about PvP, I would call the 4 gate a cheesy strategy. Cutting probes early to support 4 gates off 1 base against terran or zerg is auto loss if they hold it without any damage done to their economy.
SC2 appears somewhat more favorable to surprise aggression for a few reasons.
1) Short rush distances on Blizzard maps 2) Warpgates (greater ability to all-in) 3) Strong air-to-ground units (forcing sufficient anti-air or death) 4) Inject larva stacking --> greater possible surges of units 5) Overlords don't detect 6) No uphill miss chance
Of course, there are also defensive factors, such as Force Field, buffed cannons, bunkers/crawlers that can be sold/relocated --> less drawback to overbuilding defense, Queens, creep speed bonus, easy perfect wall-ins.
In general I think people bitch too much about aggressive play; if it was good enough to kill you, either it's a legit play, or you're not playing legit. (And "you only won because I made mistakes" is an idiotic response to aggressive play since half the point of playing aggressively is to press the opponent into errors.)
As for 4 Warpgate, it always struck me as slightly suboptimal if you're not using it for extreme aggression (a 2-3 Warpgate build that builds additional units while Warp is researching ought to be more efficient, if you're following it with tech/expand rather than just units units units) but as long as you can force the opponent to stay up their ramp and build adequate units to defend, there's no reason you can't cut a round of production to tech/expand.
It's more like TSL Rain cheesed his ways to finals. BitbyBit cheesed his way through his bracket eliminating potential players to compete higher. Cheese is gay imo
On February 19 2011 08:58 nkr wrote: To me it feels like the cheeses / all-ins are much more rewarding and less risky in sc2, compared to brood war.
Bingo.
Cheesing is extremely easy and not very technical in SC2.
Take a look at 4gate and compare it to something like bull-dogging.
Bull-dogging was rather technical and semi-tough to micro, and only worked on certain maps in certain positions.
SC2 cheese: Make 4 warpgates, make units, bum-rush your opponent.
That would be my guess why cheese is annoying now.
Literally cheeses and SC2 in all-in take no thought process to carry out, and the builds are extremely simple, and even easier to carry out due to stuff like mine rally etc.
I would call cheese ''A strategy that relies partially or wholly on you opponent not scouting it or not knowing the appropriate response to it, and has little to no follow up step.''
An all-in ''A strategy that has no follow up step''
I would call cheese a type of all-in (barring alot of damage done) but not all-in a type of cheese. Things that invest alot and require damage done e.g iEchoic TvT opening, are not all-in.
Given that I would say that cheesing for the individual game is justified but not as a longterm trend. Cheesing improves a very limited set of skills.
Honestly, I rage too every time I lose to a six-pool or something that can't be scouted with a 9-probe until it's too late. With the small maps that are available, and the chances of scouting the wrong position in a 4 player map, sometimes its impossible to hold off a cheesy build with standard play.
However, things such as 4gate or DT's or cloaked banshees off one base CAN be scouted. Say for example you're playing zerg, and the protoss has blocked off with a gate, a cyber, and a zealot, such that you can't get in. If you're scared of a 4 gate run an overlord in at around 4:30 mark at the edges and scout for the 3 other gateways.
Another example: Say you are terran and you're 1rack FE-ing. You saw 2 gases being taken by a probe slightly earlier than usual with your scouting scv. Scan at the 7:00 minute mark for some scouting information (that is usually the time for a dark shrine to be put up).
By learning build times for other races, then these "cheeses" or 1 base all in can be scouted and give you enough time to prepare. Not only that, it'll improve your gameplay as a player, so I think cheese happening on the ladder is a good thing.
I really don't get it. I am still a newby so try to explain it to me..
For example, the marine scv rush you guys are talking about: Let's say you are playing normally, but then you see an opening where if you sent all your units and your SCVs, you would have a 95% chance of winning. What is wrong with taking that chance? You won, but now the other player is mad that you cheesed. Shouldn't the other player be mad at himself/herself for not being able to defend it?
On February 23 2011 21:35 nizz wrote: I really don't get it. I am still a newby so try to explain it to me..
For example, the marine scv rush you guys are talking about: Let's say you are playing normally, but then you see an opening where if you sent all your units and your SCVs, you would have a 95% chance of winning. What is wrong with taking that chance? You won, but now the other player is mad that you cheesed. Shouldn't the other player be mad at himself/herself for not being able to defend it?
The problem is that those kind of things don't make the game professional. If there are strategies that are extremely easy to pull off and the chance of winning is still pretty high, even on pro level, this makes for a bad game if you want it to be played on a professional level.
On February 23 2011 15:10 Tomken wrote: Gimme a break, it's ridiculous how easy effective cheese is in sc2 in compared to BW. (AS TERRAN ATLEAST.)
"as terran at least" LOL hillarious hearing that from a protoss, seeing as it doesn't really get easier than the 4gate
4gate isnt cheese.
1base all-in. If 4gate isn't cheese, then scv/marine all-in isn't cheese either
4 Gate isnt cheese, SCV/Marine ALL-IN is cheese (allin = every worker, not really scoutable).
You can easily transition out of a 4 Gate and be slightly behind or even, depending on what you are going to do. And 4 Gate isnt allin, at least most of em are not. If you do a Korean 4 Gate in PvP, well we can argue about that, but in general its easy scoutable and not really an all-in.
As much as i hate Mules, if you do an SCV/Marine ALL IN and it fails you have lost.
If you do a Push with some SCVs it isnt really cheese nor an allin, just a standard push, that at least every Zerg player has to know.
I hate cheese in ladder scenarios because I don't really have consistent practice partners so I depend on the ladder. Cheese, win or lose, basically prevents me from practicing the things I'd like to practice, which is why it frustrates me so much. Granted, I know I need to find people to practice with, but the reality with my schedule is that the ladder is the best I can do a lot of the time.
On February 23 2011 21:35 nizz wrote: I really don't get it. I am still a newby so try to explain it to me..
For example, the marine scv rush you guys are talking about: Let's say you are playing normally, but then you see an opening where if you sent all your units and your SCVs, you would have a 95% chance of winning. What is wrong with taking that chance? You won, but now the other player is mad that you cheesed. Shouldn't the other player be mad at himself/herself for not being able to defend it?
I was in that position once in a CSL match. Close positions, lost temple, I'd opened 2 Rax Terran (12/14 rax into Orbital) and my opponent was a Protoss who was heavily chronoing his nexus, took both gases, and didn't start building any units until after his core completed, with no second gateway or forge.
...so instead of continuing my game plan, I pulled my workers and won immediately. (SCVs + five marines & 2 rax reinforcement >> probes + one stalker.) There was no 'cheese' involved; he'd scouted me first, saw 2 rax, and opened greedy anyway. So he died.
That said, when people blindly plan a ridiculously aggressive build and have no followup, it's kind of pathetic.
On February 23 2011 21:35 nizz wrote: I really don't get it. I am still a newby so try to explain it to me..
For example, the marine scv rush you guys are talking about: Let's say you are playing normally, but then you see an opening where if you sent all your units and your SCVs, you would have a 95% chance of winning. What is wrong with taking that chance? You won, but now the other player is mad that you cheesed. Shouldn't the other player be mad at himself/herself for not being able to defend it?
The problem isnt that the tactic is working and people win with it. The problem is that the tactic has "no Plan B" and no follow-up. You either win or lose it with that immediate fast cheese. This will NOT turn anyone into a better gamer, because of the missing follow-up or missing variation. The thing is that people are able to beat cheese if it gets spotted, but the cheesing player - on a ladder - will only lose and then cheese again next game instead of being a living being and evolving (learning to play better) from his own mistakes. Stagnation is the issue for ladder games and boring to watch is the issue for tournament games (Boring because the game is over in five minutes instead of twenty AND because there is no tension due to cheese being unbeatable when not scouted early enough). Whoever wants to be mad should feel free to do so ... it is counterproductive in any case.
I see cheese under two completely different settings: in the pro-scene (tournaments) and in ladder games. I can completely understand cheesing in the pro-scene - people are playing for money, it's their job to win. So a player does what he thinks is necessary to win - simple enough. Still, this is frustrating to watch since we as espectators don't really have to care about X or Ys professional career, we are hoping for epic games (I see this as football matches - what was more exciting, Barcelona's title in 2009 or Internazionale's in 2010? Defensive football will many win games specially when it's done at the level Inter was doing it last year - perhaps some of the most impressive football in the last decade)
A completely differente situations arises in amateur games (most specifically the ladder). We aren't playing for money, recognition (I hope...) or anything else other than fun. We enjoy playing - but we enjoy it for different reasons: some people enjoy understanding the game and playing long games where where their understanding is tested vs. their opponents understanding; others enjoy winning. Most people lie somewhere in between the two, but a player who only cares about winning will have no problem cheesing as long as he percieves that's his best chance. The other kind of player will generally avoid cheese - not because he doesn't want to take the risk, but because he has no fun in it.
I don't think those of us who like long games should complain about cheese - just improve and learn to defend it - and even then we won't have fun (at least I don't) since the game was binary (defend vs. not defend) and had no long term planning/decision making to it.