|
On February 06 2016 23:54 NonY wrote:
Sometimes I think people are just jealous. Think about it: you are playing against the best "safe" player in the world who is expecting you to do something weird and is trying hard to scout it and prepare for it. With a knowledgeable player on alert and limited options, you still have to find a way to break him. It's not that easy and usually involves a level of strategy that 99% of viewers aren't even aware is happening. So the viewers don't understand how it's working which makes them doubly jealous. They want to call it luck but the players are able to keep being successful with it over many tournaments against many people so they can't call it luck. All they see is someone accomplishing a really difficult task over and over again and not understanding how and they get upset about it.
This so much, and most people should understand it, although i noticed that most people here dont even play the game anymore.
But if you play the game and you rank up, you notice many more things, and spectating is even more fun! The only negative thing about ranking up is to see that most casters ( not all) are pretty dumb really.
I am sure that i have no idea of what is really going on all the time, but whenever i find a new 'strategy' or way of looking at the game, then its just like i had my first peace of candy or my first time being high.
|
On February 07 2016 00:01 Bojas wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2016 21:45 Nebuchad wrote:On February 06 2016 21:36 Bojas wrote:
Also, think of BityByBit if you were around during that era, did you like how he played? Did you respect him? Yes I did. Do you respect Sniper? I know Sniper is a Zerg but to be honest I don't recall his playstyle. I was mostly inactive at the end of 2012 to like mid 2014.
Sniper is one of the zergs who benefitted the most from BL/infest. His playstyle was basically: play some different stuff when ahead in series, and when it really matters, go BL/infest and freewin. He won a GSL doing that and he gets a lot of undeserved hate for it.
Sniper is interesting because he's playing macro, and I'm certain he got his fair share of terrans 2raxing him, as any zerg did at the time. But he's the one who won't get any respect for what he accomplished, because of the context. This helps put the honor of not cheesing into perspective: you can tell it's ultimately used to justify a biased perspective, as there are plenty of situations where circumstances dictate that the cheeser is the good guy and nobody has trouble accepting it.
|
There's this "Play to win" vs "Play for Ego" blogpost by Greedy Goblin that anyone who thinks cheesers aren't being honorable should read. It follows up on Sirlin and I think highlights the real reason why some people act the way they do.
|
Doesnt exist in sc2. Stephano had "honorable" play because he invented ZvP for ~2 years.
Hardcounter design kills "honorable play" perfectly.
|
France13009 Posts
Tbh abusing the queen buff/BL infestor bad design was easier than cheesing yet with better results but it's not the players' fault if abusing bad design / balance gives you the best shot.
|
The diehard "proper" players mostly left years ago when it was clear blizz wasnt going to make a game they enjoyed, i dont think ive seen many of those comments in a long time
|
BW was full of cheese tactics and thanks to that game never stagnated to the very end (with the sole exception of ZvZ). Istead of whining, koreans started creating less-cheese-friendly maps and safer strategies. The balance was all about racearms - BO's were invented via experiments and not whining and patches. I have no sympathy for so-called "honorable" losers, becouse they tend to overuse not only word "cheese" and "cheap" for those who beat them, but also "noob" and general mockery for those who losing against them.
|
Peolpe say that because cheese is much more easy to do than macro game and depends more of the capability from the defender to scout and react properly than the agressor execute it well. But that's just mimimi most times its just lack of scout of the opponent.
|
On February 07 2016 00:41 Poopi wrote:
Tbh abusing the queen buff/BL infestor bad design was easier than cheesing yet with better results but it's not the players' fault if abusing bad design / balance gives you the best shot.
I don't disagree with that, the point is that it's not enough for someone to cheese for him to be deemed not honorable. He needs to cheese AND be the bad guy. Which is why you can tell it's not a legit criticism, more of a justification.
|
On February 06 2016 19:20 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2016 19:13 NEEDZMOAR wrote:
But that doesnt mean its not a 100% viable way of playing. In the end its all about winning right? Its all about having fun. But if the game with cheese tactics isnt fun, why are you playing ladder, designed mostly to compare the lengh of the wieners, in the first place? Show nested quote +Because cheese lets much worse opponents win vs someone who is better in general. This is argumentation of 12-years old spoiled kid, not the mature player, who should know better that many players will do anything to get away with victory.
I said I dont like executing cheeses, I love playing against them because its often an easy hold (since I play very safe). How did you not understand that?
edit: additionally, I dont find it entertaining to watch cheesers because coinflipping a bit of luck and nice execution is not as impressive to me as someone whos very good at the skillsets required to play a macro game, which means that I personally value non cheesy players higher than cheesy players.
note this is obviously my personal opinion.
Yes this is a part of the game, yes a win is a win, but honestly what impresses you the most? a guy whos able to flip a coin, or a guy whos able to do 123 things simultaneously.
|
On February 07 2016 00:48 Aocowns wrote:
The diehard "proper" players mostly left years ago when it was clear blizz wasnt going to make a game they enjoyed, i dont think ive seen many of those comments in a long time Ya, they probably all went back to Age of Empires Treaty 40 or something like that.
|
On February 06 2016 22:08 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2016 22:06 Big J wrote:
Cheese by definition is a play that only works when the opponent makes a mistake. Hence it is not a skillfull way to play. You realize that macro games rely on forcing your opponents to do mistakes? So outmultitasking someone is not a skillful way to play for example?
You're talking about winning. but the point of playing macro in a balanced game is that you don't rely on your opponent's mistakes for not losing the game and rather wait or try to force mistakes so that you win eventually by being the better playermaking less (severe) mistakes or executing better. When you cheese you lose the game when the opponent makes no mistake, even if you make no mistake either.
|
On February 07 2016 01:21 NEEDZMOAR wrote:
I said I dont like executing cheeses, I love playing against them because its often an easy hold (since I play very safe). How did you not understand that?
Uhhh, sorry, my bad. It sounded like if i asked YOU directly, when my intention was general asking why would anyone play in ladder if he cant stand playing with cheesers - who are there, and all he wants is "fun" (not his ego boosting).
To your edited part - indeed, "straigh" win is more impresive, but it doesnt make cheese unhonourable - what is the whole point of this discusion.
|
I think it's just more embarrassing to lose early and so people get extra salty.
|
On February 07 2016 00:17 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 00:01 Bojas wrote:On February 06 2016 21:45 Nebuchad wrote:On February 06 2016 21:36 Bojas wrote:
Also, think of BityByBit if you were around during that era, did you like how he played? Did you respect him? Yes I did. Do you respect Sniper? I know Sniper is a Zerg but to be honest I don't recall his playstyle. I was mostly inactive at the end of 2012 to like mid 2014. Sniper is one of the zergs who benefitted the most from BL/infest. His playstyle was basically: play some different stuff when ahead in series, and when it really matters, go BL/infest and freewin. He won a GSL doing that and he gets a lot of undeserved hate for it.
Ah, well I still see that as a methodical style that took skill to refine. You can't reach lategame without being skilled, whereas there are tons of protoss and terrans that got GM by doing a one base build that takes very little practice to perfect.
Sniper is interesting because he's playing macro, and I'm certain he got his fair share of terrans 2raxing him, as any zerg did at the time. But he's the one who won't get any respect for what he accomplished, because of the context. This helps put the honor of not cheesing into perspective: you can tell it's ultimately used to justify a biased perspective, as there are plenty of situations where circumstances dictate that the cheeser is the good guy and nobody has trouble accepting it.
I think being "honorable" is a silly concept. My point is about the asymmetry in skill when it comes to defending and executing certain cheese builds. I'm not sure what you mean by " situations where circumstances dictate that the cheeser is the good guy''.
|
On February 07 2016 01:28 hitthat wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 01:21 NEEDZMOAR wrote:
I said I dont like executing cheeses, I love playing against them because its often an easy hold (since I play very safe). How did you not understand that? Uhhh, sorry, my bad. It sounded like if i asked YOU directly, when my intention was general asking why would anyone play in ladder if he cant stand play the cheesers - who are there, and all he want is "fun" (not his ego boosting).
Heres my take on it: I love SC2 because the RNG is minimal. in 99% of the cases Im losing because I fucked up.
I love a fair game where my mind is challenged. Now being cheesed is often very favored for the cheeser because hes been practicing the situation a ton and if im unlucky I have very little to no experience with it, which means its unfavorable.
It could also be like in ZvZ where theres no safe way of playing. the opening is a coinflip which either puts you behind or ahead (e.g if youre going 17 pool youre safe vs 13/12 but you will most certainly lose vs double hatch before pool or hatch gas pool).
Just because I dislike a part of sc2 doesnt mean im not going to play sc2. Its still great ina lot of other aspects and it gives me a lot of joy.
In fact I doubt its even possible to find activities you love absolutely everything about.
|
@NEEZMOAR that's also my point, additionally, cheesers will know in advance what the game will look like, so the strategic depth is extremely limited for them. Whereas the player that plans on playing a macro game has to scout and defend something he doesn't know is coming. I'm fine with this for tournament best of Xs, but I dislike it when people who do this every single ladder game get really far with it despite sup-bar mechanics.
|
On February 06 2016 17:20 syriuszonito wrote:
because it takes twice the amount of skill / game sense to win a macro game.
/close thread.
I do not agree! There is no way to quantify skill, except results. If I can destroy any player in the world with my first 5 units, then I'm the best at this game. It doesn't really matter if a godly macro player could roll me in the mid/late game, because he would never survive that long. So it you win, you have skill. It's as simple as that.
|
France13009 Posts
On February 07 2016 01:26 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2016 22:08 Poopi wrote:On February 06 2016 22:06 Big J wrote:
Cheese by definition is a play that only works when the opponent makes a mistake. Hence it is not a skillfull way to play. You realize that macro games rely on forcing your opponents to do mistakes? So outmultitasking someone is not a skillful way to play for example? You're talking about winning. but the point of playing macro in a balanced game is that you don't rely on your opponent's mistakes for not losing the game and rather wait or try to force mistakes so that you win eventually by being the better playermaking less (severe) mistakes or executing better. When you cheese you lose the game when the opponent makes no mistake, even if you make no mistake either.
But what if certain races are harder/easier to play? 
So the only good answer is "winning without cheating (and don't lose on purpose)".
|
On February 07 2016 01:49 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2016 01:26 Big J wrote:On February 06 2016 22:08 Poopi wrote:On February 06 2016 22:06 Big J wrote:
Cheese by definition is a play that only works when the opponent makes a mistake. Hence it is not a skillfull way to play. You realize that macro games rely on forcing your opponents to do mistakes? So outmultitasking someone is not a skillful way to play for example? You're talking about winning. but the point of playing macro in a balanced game is that you don't rely on your opponent's mistakes for not losing the game and rather wait or try to force mistakes so that you win eventually by being the better playermaking less (severe) mistakes or executing better. When you cheese you lose the game when the opponent makes no mistake, even if you make no mistake either. But what if certain races are harder/easier to play? So the only good answer is "winning without cheating (and don't lose on purpose)".
i have said on multiple occasions that I dom't believe in easier and harder in sc2. things that "feel" harder are also usually more powerful. it balances out, otherwise the game would show plain imbalances in winrates
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
