EPTAs for people comparing NA/EU to KR. The great thing about KR servers is they dont give a shit about cheesing or playing all-in. In fact from what i've seen and heard they play the most aggressive and cheesy out of all the the servers. You wonder how they have top notch unit control. It isn't playing everygame to the lategame and having one big huge engagement.
How to get to masters, the metagame and you. - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
MysteryMeat1
United States3292 Posts
As for people comparing NA/EU to KR. The great thing about KR servers is they dont give a shit about cheesing or playing all-in. In fact from what i've seen and heard they play the most aggressive and cheesy out of all the the servers. You wonder how they have top notch unit control. It isn't playing everygame to the lategame and having one big huge engagement. | ||
|
Ryder.
1117 Posts
OP, good job on this thread. Hopefully it will encourage people to learn how to adapt to what they are playing against, instea of just rote learning build orders. | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On January 31 2013 06:27 arcHoniC wrote: Holy crap people are a bit stuck up about the 'beautiful macro' games and stuff. Winning is winning and figuring out the meta game is just a big of a talent as macroing is. The player losing to 7 roach rushes is NOT a good player, they are generally taking calculated risks which although is good for tournaments, it is not the case for ladder play. Ladder play should bridge the line between safe and greedy and not too far into one section because that is when risks occur. Hyper agressive, cheesing or whatever you want to call it keeps the game honest and is a huge part of the games balance. Learning how to play good overall game and macro game is much harder than learning how to stop cheese/all-ins. | ||
|
Nerski
United States1095 Posts
On January 31 2013 11:08 Ryder. wrote: I honestly don't know how some people think that people who use builds that exploit the metagame are any less 'legitimate' of a masters player than those who just blindly stick to a build they learnt yet don't actually understand and are unable to hold off a simple and outdated aggressive build. I mean 7 roach rush has been around since what 2010? People who cannot adapt when the game doesn't go the way they want it to are less deserving of a place in masters than the OP IMO. OP, good job on this thread. Hopefully it will encourage people to learn how to adapt to what they are playing against, instea of just rote learning build orders. It doesn't make them less illegitimately a 'master rank' player. What it does is make them less legitimately a Master player of the game. I think that's where you get the argument, people who go masters rank is masters rank, and people who go masters rank doesn't mean your a master. You need to know how to cheese to be a master of the game, but you need to know how to play a standard long game too. That doesn't apply for being a Master Rank on ladder. Largely nobody knows you or if you are just a cheese player and you can get away with it and be Master Rank, it doesn't however make you a master of the game. Where I think it annoys people is the SC2 ladder is the only initial way to gain position and note of how 'good' you are. People who look for ways to abuse the system for pure rank and not skill de-value the system as a measure of skill. For the pureists that is annoying because their rank of Masters means less if there is ways to have less skill but still achieve the rank. All that said personally I say play the game however you want, so long as your realistic about how good you are. I've seen countless people cheese to masters just to try to be able to say look at me I'm masters I'm good and know what I'm talking about...when in reality they don't. The SC2 forum over at blizzard is absolutely filled with these people and I think that's what gives anyone who would cheese to masters a bad rep. | ||
|
Hezzina
United States48 Posts
On February 01 2013 04:59 Nerski wrote: It doesn't make them less illegitimately a 'master rank' player. What it does is make them less illegitimately a Master player of the game. I think that's where you get the argument, people who go masters rank is masters rank, and people who go masters rank doesn't mean your a master. You need to know how to cheese to be a master of the game, but you need to know how to play a standard long game too. That doesn't apply for being a Master Rank on ladder. Largely nobody knows you or if you are just a cheese player and you can get away with it and be Master Rank, it doesn't however make you a master of the game. Where I think it annoys people is the SC2 ladder is the only initial way to gain position and note of how 'good' you are. People who look for ways to abuse the system for pure rank and not skill de-value the system as a measure of skill. For the pureists that is annoying because their rank of Masters means less if there is ways to have less skill but still achieve the rank. All that said personally I say play the game however you want, so long as your realistic about how good you are. I've seen countless people cheese to masters just to try to be able to say look at me I'm masters I'm good and know what I'm talking about...when in reality they don't. The SC2 forum over at blizzard is absolutely filled with these people and I think that's what gives anyone who would cheese to masters a bad rep. I think that this is a flawed way of thinking based on the fact that you are summing that people who do very aggressive openers are that of a lower skill bracket then those who play macro. A skill level of a person can easily be broken down into 2 groupings, Sense of the game, and the ability to multi-task. Sense of the game on a macro player will be found around scouting and being able to figure out what your opponent is doing to be able to find a timing at which you can push out and win the game. Multi-tasking for macroers falls into the category of being able to macro while microing and be able to do all the small tasks required in order to be able to win the game such as scouting, spreading creep etc. Many people believe that early aggressive players are less of a player because they believe that these 2 skills can only be developed inside of a macro games which is not true. Sense of game for someone who does aggressive builds every game comes from being able to gather information before the game begins and read their opponent during the first part of the game in order to be able to know which early aggressive builds or "Cheese" will work this process is also just often referred to as meta gaming. As well as at high level "cheesing" you need to be able to read how much information and what information you are feeding to your opponent in order to be able to know where you are able to push from and how well defended each area will be. For the ability to multi task a good "cheese" has a follow up behind it and is generally not a committed all in (I said good cheese not all cheeses) and thus the player who is doing the early aggressive build has to begin making an exit strategy from the aggression very early on forcing the multi tasking to a high level very fast into the game because you have to be able to micro while you macro during the aggression an example would be after the 7rr you need to through down an expansion, keep up with injects, manage larvae, and drone saturation. So on the ladder when people are claiming the these aggressive players aka "Cheesers" are diluting the skill population inside of the leagues I believe that it is a very false statement based around the fact that having a different set of skills makes you a less skilled player, just because someone is amazing at the trumpet but someone else is good at the Clarinet does not mean that one is a better musician then the other. “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” ― Albert Einstein | ||
|
humanimal
United States151 Posts
Yes it's mechanically easier and strategically simpler to win a game through a cheese/all-in. So the people who gain wins through these methods are looked down upon. But the problem with that is that a win is still a win. No matter how you got there, you still got there. IMO part of the reason why NA players/server is behind the other servers (besides gaming culture etc. etc.) is the fact that it's so against cheese. People define high level play by solid macro, reinforced with solid micro... but you just don't get to that point unless you can hold off cheese. And when players can't hold off cheese and then rage and dismiss it as a cheap loss, they aren't doing anything to improve. When people come up with general build orders like the 1 gate FE, 1 rax CC, 14 pool/16 hatch, they all take into account reactions to aggressive early game cheeses. You can't have a solid long-term plan without taking into account all the things that stop you from there. So to have solid macro and grow into a top player, it's more beneficial to welcome cheese. Defending cheese builds up your skills to hold off everything you need to until a macro advantage grows. It's all about doing everything you can to gain the advantage your build order is designed to give you. That's skill. Knowing what you're advantages are and trying to maximize it. Economic builds? Your advantage grows as time increases so your skills are built around surviving to that point. Aggressive builds? Your advantage is in doing enough damage to overcome the opportunity cost of not choosing a more economical build. Understanding the design of a build and playing to it's advantages should be how everyone plays. So you can have a skilled cheeser + unskilled macro player in masters vs. an unskilled cheeser + skilled macro player in masters. They're both still masters. And they're both gonna play to the advantages. If the cheeser beats the macro player, his ability to cheese > the macro player's ability to macro. He's not necessarily more skilled, but he's better at what he does than the loser is at whatever they do. And that's all it takes to win. Top players can do both. The reason they've been around so long is because they can do it all... and they can defend against it all. But up until you reach a point where it's hard to improve at skill ____ any further, variance in strategy is irrelevant because it's simply not needed. Edit: At the end of the day, saying player x is more skilled than player y isn't right or wrong. It's simply unclear. Player x is more skilled than player y at (macro, cheese, micro, timing attacks, etc.) is a much more "correct" statement. So when comparing skill, you can't just talk about overall skillsets. You talk about subsets of whatever you determine to be a skill in the game. | ||
|
Fliparoni
205 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
kill619
United States212 Posts
On January 30 2013 18:04 MichaelDonovan wrote: I've never understood people who capitalize random words in a paragraph for no reason. It's usually when someone knows the points they're trying to make aren't very good or don't make any sense at all so they try to make up for it by internet-yelling at people in hopes that others will misinterpret their confidence and boldness for correctness. | ||
|
ioCross
United States53 Posts
that's like saying ROFL 2GATE PROXY! I R CUNNINGZ. really, it's bad enough that you cheese your way out of plat, but to be proud of it, and to be as misguided as to think that you somehow are 'abusing the metagame' when all you're doing is being amazed by how your crappy cheese works vs players that don't scout. Just cuz you cancel your nat hatch doesn't make you some gosu... and most good players will take the original scouting drone and scout again around 4:30 to see what you're doing so if they know it's comming then its a matter of holding it so i don't know if you really got to masters with it.. but yeah whats the difference between what you're saying and going 2gate proxy? They are both viable ailbet cheesy strats.. but nothing spectacular. | ||
|
TheDougler
Canada8306 Posts
This game got truly fun for me when I learned I could immortal/sentry all in, 1-gate before (robo in gold, stargate in platinum), and 3 gate pressure expand my way to victory. If it works for OP to just 7 roach rush every game then hell, more power to him. | ||
|
Hezzina
United States48 Posts
On February 02 2013 05:18 ioCross wrote: yeah, OP is very silly.. he finds a cheese build that works for him and thinks that he's a genius tactician now. Sun Tzu ain't got shit on him... that's like saying ROFL 2GATE PROXY! I R CUNNINGZ. really, it's bad enough that you cheese your way out of plat, but to be proud of it, and to be as misguided as to think that you somehow are 'abusing the metagame' when all you're doing is being amazed by how your crappy cheese works vs players that don't scout. Just cuz you cancel your nat hatch doesn't make you some gosu... and most good players will take the original scouting drone and scout again around 4:30 to see what you're doing so if they know it's comming then its a matter of holding it so i don't know if you really got to masters with it.. but yeah whats the difference between what you're saying and going 2gate proxy? They are both viable ailbet cheesy strats.. but nothing spectacular. Proxy 2 gate can be very cunning assuming you place it in areas that arnt commonly scouted and find ways in order to show that nothing is wrong inside of your base. Also assuming that in the meta game people are not going builds that are able to easily deal with fast zealot pressure, ie if zerg was going overpool as the standard the 2 gate pressure wouldn't do too much. So in the end you do need to be able to read the meta game in order to be able to 2 gate well. As well you have to know what your follow up is as all good early aggressive builds have an escape after wards. However if a well worded response about what this thread is closer to about wasn't what you where expecting then enjoy the fact that you are a big person coming in saying things that are extracted from text that explicitly state that this wasn't a build guide about myself. ^_^ enjoy your weekend good sir. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On February 02 2013 05:28 TheDougler wrote: I'm on OP's side with this. This game got truly fun for me when I learned I could immortal/sentry all in, 1-gate before (robo in gold, stargate in platinum), and 3 gate pressure expand my way to victory. If it works for OP to just 7 roach rush every game then hell, more power to him. Yep. People say that they love winning a macro game. I guess. I find more it way more fun winning a rush/cheese/whatever game though. Why? Because I do. It's not fun to me to sit there and build stuff for 30 mins when I could sit there and build stuff for 10 and still win. Plus, I like being in control of the game and making my opponent lose rather than making myself win, if that makes sense. Why do you think you should win if your micro is so much worse than mine that you can't even win with defender's advantage? | ||
|
Hezzina
United States48 Posts
On February 02 2013 06:20 danl9rm wrote: Yep. People say that they love winning a macro game. I guess. I find more it way more fun winning a rush/cheese/whatever game though. Why? Because I do. It's not fun to me to sit there and build stuff for 30 mins when I could sit there and build stuff for 10 and still win. Plus, I like being in control of the game and making my opponent lose rather than making myself win, if that makes sense. Why do you think you should win if your micro is so much worse than mine that you can't even win with defender's advantage? Fun to see someone who looks at the same thing I do about if someone lost a game or if their opponent won the game. I tend to draw the line as in order to "win" the game you have to have tempo control of the game forcing your opponent into an unfavorable situation which results in a win. If you don't have tempo control of the game its the opponent that lost. An example using the 7rr would be... My opponent loses the game - If I do a blind 7rr I don't try to mess with their minds because they scouted poorly. I win the game - Tends to be if I was able to successfully mislead a game, or if the game goes past the initial 7rr into a game where I am control due to the fact that they early aggression put my opponent on tilt and forced them to play at my own pace. | ||
|
-Kaiser-
Canada932 Posts
I think to be a well-rounded player, you need to both be able to all-in/cheese effectively and play a standard game, otherwise you're of limited use to any team you're in and you'll suffer in any BOSeries. If somebody's goal is to be high on the ladder, that's completely fine; it's how I get my all-in defense practice. That said, I think people who exclusively cheese are cheating themselves out of a lot of what Starcraft has to offer. Depending on what all-in you're doing, you might as well go play solitaire for the experience you're getting. | ||
|
imp42
398 Posts
What on earth does it have to do with the meta-game? it does not abuse some specific type of play like you try to argument (very greedy playstyle). It just abuses opponents too lazy or unable to scout. Like any other cheese. In fact, the definition of cheese is that it is inferior to standard play when scouted and relies solely on surprise. Regardless of the meta game. just my 7 roa.. I mean 2 cents. | ||
|
iamcaustic
Canada1509 Posts
| ||
|
-stOpSKY-
Canada498 Posts
On January 30 2013 16:42 Dagan159 wrote: Using cheesy builds to climb ladder- useful since march 31 1998. Learning how to abuse other players opening is only good if you can actually play the macro game at that level. As soon as players figure out how to defend your looking at losing a few 100 elo points. But hey, if you think getting that pretty star next to your name means you improved, by all means- go for it. Exactly. Then the meta game will change and you will change your game to counter their game. That's what this whole thread is suppose to be about, the meta game. Did this just go right over your head? | ||
|
SChlafmann
France725 Posts
| ||
| ||
