|
Okay, I'm a master league random player who reveals race every time yet hard out cheeses 40% of the time and does semi cheeses for the rest. An excerpt of my repertoire:
- TvT: 12rax proxy marauder, 11/11 proxy, 11/11 reaper
- TvZ: 12/14 2rax (1 proxied. 11/11proxy, 11/11reaper, 8 rax reaper
- TvP: 11/11 reaper, marauder pressure + proxy fact. 11/11 proxy, 12/14 rax with one proxied, proxy 8 rax reaper.
- ZvT: 10pool, 6pool + drones, 7 roach rush, 14g14p speed+bane all in
- ZvZ: 10pool, 10pool speed all in
- ZvP: 11overpool, 10pool, 7pool. 11overpool is typically into a 2base roach or swarmhost push.
- PvT: Single rax proxy (in plain sight in their base), single rax stalker proxy outside of their base, double rax stalker proxy
- PvZ: inbase 2gate proxy
- PvP: inbase 2gate proxy
I seldom deviate from these cheesy build orders, I will only do so if the map doesn't allow any of them. Consider a PvX on frost or a TvX on Whirlwind.
Why? what's the fun
What is not the fun?
I don't get people who open up 1rax expand or hatch first or whatever. It takes forever before you actually start interacting with your opponent, micro against your opponent or react to your opponent in some way. You just sit in your base and execute your planned build with zero interaction with your opponent. If I wanted to just execute a build I have planned I would play against the AI. I for the love of god don't get people who actually like to Forge FE. Why would you limit the interraction with your opponent before 10 minutes to a probe being annoying to a hatchery that is trying to go down?
By its very nature, StarCraft is designed as a game to play against a human opponent, to see a human on the other side, to know it's a humand and to take advantage of that, to get into some's mind, to try to fool a human being and in reverse outwit it and not be fooled by a human being. The phrase "Okay, we have some down time here, so what do you want to talk about Artosis?" is a testament to a flaw in the game if supposedly the optimal way is to play like that. They are hired to talk about the game, not about what they thought about pacific rim. If there is nothing to talk about in the game then the game isn't interesting. And no, this is not a BW circlejerk, in BW this was worse.
Now, quite often builds like 10pool and 7roach rush and 1 gate proxy actually normalizes into a some-what normal game except the early game wasn't mind numbingly boring. But not always, sometimes I flat out win with it, sometimes I flat out loose with it due micro mistakes from either side. Even if this was always the case, I would still do this. Quality over quantity.
Take Naniwa vs San at IEM New York, no game ever got a mining natural but the games were superb. It was constant action, micro and tactics, not a single moment of downtime. But apparently many people hate that because it 'didn't get to the lategame'. Good riddance, the lategame in PvP can get exceedingly boring, it's the early game in PvP that is interesting. If it were up to me, PvP would be redesigned so that it would never reach the lategame just to avoid that dreaded scenario where both sides have extremely powerful armies that can annihilate the other on one mistake which makes both sides super scared to attack. If it were up to me one of those players would've died long before that stage. I don't get what people like about that.
Well, I do get it, I think, my hunch is is that it has to do with the fact that people remember recent events more. People remember the last part of anything better. Mvp vs Squirtle in the finals is a good example. People say it was such a good series. Ehh, did they watch the same series as I? The majority of the games were super boring and bad. Squirtle looked extremely off in the first 3 gamse and the games were bad, the next 3 games he won with nothing interesting. Especially the game on Metropolis was remarkable, people said it was good but it was super boring with nothing going on, it just had a super dramatic and climactic ending but that was it. And then the final game, the _only good game_ of the series, the only game that kept you constantly on the edge of your seat and what happened in it? Yeah, it was a cheese by Mvp, but it was the last game so people remember it as a an epic closure.
Now, there are different flavours of cheese. Things like DT-cheese or whatever I never do, they are jsut gambles and don't lead to early interaction, I don't enjoy them as much. I've had a long standing argument with map design whioch basically comes down to that I'd rather see protoss 1base 4gate each game than 2base 8gate each game. It's the same principle with less downtime. As far as I'm concerned, naturals can be opened up a bit more to encourage a bit more cheese and aggression because the game is super boring right now. People made naturals more easy to defend in the hopes that it would eliminate the cheeses, well, it didn't, it just delayed them to 2bases. I'll take a 4gate over an 8gate. It cuts downtime, and in general, the viewer the units the more important micro becomes. Micro is often a lot more spectacular with very few units. I thought 4gate vs 4gate every game was a lot more interesting than these zealot/archon/immortal armies we have no clashing every game with nothing going on in advance. 4gate vs 4gate came down to micro and tactics far more. But hey, we have our 'macro game' now right? Can anyone explain to me exactly why 'macro games' are a good thing, it usually just seems to mean 'downtime game'.
 
|
In before people say "the more skill the player has the longer they want the game to be."
back on topic, I can relate to you a bit that is is more fun and in general on the ladder, most people can't adapt or deal with certain early game builds because they just do a build they copy from a pro without all the knowledge that went into the build as to why it works.
These greedy macro builds actually have contingency plans to deal, it relies on scouting and micro that many of the players don't do or don't have.
That being said, the reason people do the macro builds is because they have most efficient flexibility. They can get just enough defense/units in time to deal with anything while maximizing their economy.
Also,
People like to build units outside of the teir 1/2 stuff.
People like to macro and build/sim city.
People like to win more consistently.
PS- You should play me on bloodbath http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=431926
SpoR.919 NA
|
This argument is brought up quite often in basketball, since games are often decided in the last 5 minutes of the 4th quarter, so most non-bball fans don't understand why play the first 3 1/2 quarters. It's a silly thing to ask, but to each their own. IMO, that is the nature of starcraft, that is the "norm". You are skipping about 90% of what starcraft is all about, and you only like 10% of it. That's fine, but just understand that you aren't experiencing starcraft as a whole, because you don't really like starcraft as a whole.
On October 25 2013 03:39 SiskosGoatee wrote:
proxy 8 rax reaper.
LOL can I get a replay
|
On October 25 2013 03:39 SiskosGoatee wrote:
I don't get people who open up 1rax expand or hatch first or whatever. It takes forever before you actually start interacting with your opponent, micro against your opponent or react to your opponent in some way. You just sit in your base and execute your planned build with zero interaction with your opponent. If I wanted to just execute a build I have planned I would play against the AI. I for the love of god don't get people who actually like to Forge FE. Why would you limit the interraction with your opponent before 10 minutes to a probe being annoying to a hatchery that is trying to go down?
As a socially awkward user I find it more comfortable to first approach the opponent with my worker and slowly progress to business.
|
On October 25 2013 03:44 MarlieChurphy wrote:
In before people say "the more skill the player has the longer they want the game to be." I really don't buy this, micro, multitasking and crisis management shines way more during cheese than during a long game. A lot of players known for their micro and tactics like MKP, Jjakji, MC, are also known for their cheese.
That being said, the reason people do the macro builds is because they have most efficient flexibility. They can get just enough defense/units in time to deal with anything while maximizing their economy. It might be the optimal way to play for the win, but is it the most fun way to play?
People like to win more consistently. You will always get a 50/50 winrate on the ladder, so meh.
I'm not in NA, but I remember encountering a SpoR multiple times on EU?
On October 25 2013 03:54 ffadicted wrote:
This argument is brought up quite often in basketball, since games are often decided in the last 5 minutes of the 4th quarter, so most non-bball fans don't understand why play the first 3 1/2 quarters. It's a silly thing to ask, but to each their own. IMO, that is the nature of starcraft, that is the "norm". You are skipping about 90% of what starcraft is all about, and you only like 10% of it. That's fine, but just understand that you aren't experiencing starcraft as a whole, because you don't really like starcraft as a whole. Well, I'm saying the other 90% is badly designed if it comes down to downtime for the most part and not enjoyable.
It's like saying you don't enjoy the full game if all you do is 1v1 and you're not on the Arcade ever.
The 8-8-8 strat was fairly popular for a while no? It's not that hard to find an example
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=8-8-8 reaper&page=&utm_source=opensearch
On October 25 2013 04:03 Stratos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2013 03:39 SiskosGoatee wrote:
I don't get people who open up 1rax expand or hatch first or whatever. It takes forever before you actually start interacting with your opponent, micro against your opponent or react to your opponent in some way. You just sit in your base and execute your planned build with zero interaction with your opponent. If I wanted to just execute a build I have planned I would play against the AI. I for the love of god don't get people who actually like to Forge FE. Why would you limit the interraction with your opponent before 10 minutes to a probe being annoying to a hatchery that is trying to go down? As a socially awkward user I find it more comfortable to first approach the opponent with my worker and slowly progress to business. Oh well, I find it far more amusing when I like someone to be very explicit about it to see how they'll react and make them uncomfortable. Especially when they're teachers.
|
I don't understand what cheese you're using in PvT.
Also, how can you make in base proxy gates work in master? I'm platinum, and I don't lose to proxy (I'm aware of the fact that plat cheesers are worse than masters cheesers, but still it's easy to beat).
|
OP, I don't care for the game anyway but IMO the reason why you and other people disagree is that you give too much importance to direct interaction with your opponent whereas other people would rather see interesting interactions. I understand your position but I couldn't feasibly care less about your little early game skirmishes that result in a win. They bore me even more than longer games, which CAN sometimes (although rarely) end up being dynamic and interesting.
That said, you're right about PvP. The quicker that shit ends the better, no matter what.
|
On October 25 2013 04:40 Kinon wrote:
I don't understand what cheese you're using in PvT.
Also, how can you make in base proxy gates work in master? I'm platinum, and I don't lose to proxy (I'm aware of the fact that plat cheesers are worse than masters cheesers, but still it's easy to beat). I actually beat a couple of GM's with proxies when they scouted it.
It all comes down to zealot control vs ling control honestly. It pretty much always gets scouted with an overlord or with drones, it doesn't really matter, it comes down to control, of course if it doesn't get scouted at all it's a free win.
I think it's a complete myth that cheese is more effective at lower levels of play. I once made a point to a platinum player, I said I would proxy gate ever game and I won 5-0. He knew it was coming and still couldn't stop it.
|
On October 25 2013 04:17 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2013 03:44 MarlieChurphy wrote:
In before people say "the more skill the player has the longer they want the game to be." I really don't buy this, micro, multitasking and crisis management shines way more during cheese than during a long game. A lot of players known for their micro and tactics like MKP, Jjakji, MC, are also known for their cheese. Show nested quote +That being said, the reason people do the macro builds is because they have most efficient flexibility. They can get just enough defense/units in time to deal with anything while maximizing their economy. It might be the optimal way to play for the win, but is it the most fun way to play? You will always get a 50/50 winrate on the ladder, so meh. I'm not in NA, but I remember encountering a SpoR multiple times on EU? .
Pros known for cheese are generally not respected in the same way macro/mechanical players are, and the good ones tend to stick around a lot longer. Maka(rax) and bitbybit are trashmode. MKP is a another example, a lot of people think he's shitty as far as terrans go, and I tend to agree. jjakji is kinda the same, he's not really shining anymore and barely was when he was, and MC is just good at everything and he mixes it up, which is great.
A lot of people (myself included) base the fun factor on winning. If I'm playing a game and just losing all the time, that's not fun for me. So whatever way wins, is more fun for me. It's all relative. fyi, winrate isn't always 50/50, the algorith tries to place your MMR at 50% but it's not always going to be there, especially if you are top master.
I have the map on all servers, do I have the same # on every server? And no, that is not me. There are a bunch of poser SpoR.
just FYI, I also open with early aggression builds (not all in by any means) that rely on doing damage or slowing the opponent down so I can take game/map control early and spread creep earlier.
ZvP & ZvZ I open 7pool, 9drone, drone-scout, double ex trick, 6lings, lord, Queen. I'll usually spine a zerg too, they are forced to pull drones (even up the drone mining count for minutes until my lings arrive) Depending on what my drone sees or does, I decide if I should cancel queen/make drones/make more lings. Very specific variance here of the utmost importance why this isn't all in. It's a really great build, sometimes you can just get a quick win, sometimes it sets you up for midgame, sometimes it forces opponent to go all in and lose (because I know how to deal), and the only way it outright loses is if I fuck up too bad.
ZvT, I open 9pool, extractor, lord, queen, 100gas-speed (back to mining), hatch, and just spam lings towards FE terrans and slip in drones whenever I do some damage. Pretty much the only thing that will stop this is mass hellion with marine support, but they are still slowed down quite a bit and can't kill me with this. Again, I am spreading creep much sooner which is why I prefer to open these early aggressive builds vs all the FE players.
|
The problem for me is variety.
If I know I'm going to cheese every game, or I know I'm going into something more macro-oriented, I find things a little bit stale. Gotta switch it up!
|
Props to ya man. Do whatever feels right
But the concern that I have with your play is that you've become one-dimensional. I don't cheese is necessarily bad or good, or macro games are necessarily bad or good. What I don't like is one-dimensional play in pro games. When a pro player does nothing but safe macro play for the late game, that is boring. When you know a pro player is going to cheese every game, that is boring.
You aren't a professional player anyways, and you play primarily on ladder, so it is not a big deal. But one dimensional play from professional players annoys me.
Anyways, I've gone on a tangent there. Best of luck to you, and keep on cheesing!
|
What you're missing is that people enjoy actual strategy. There's next to no strategy in a double proxy gate. Yes, you can find some if you try really hard, but every remotely decent Zerg knows how to play against proxy 2 gate. They can still lose to it through not scouting it or bad execution, but bad execution isn't strategy.
The interactions in a passive macro game are very much still there, they're just more subtle. Soulkey scouts better than any Zerg before him ever has. It allows him to adjust his build better and to quietly accumulate advantages. Small build adjustments aren't the all-out brawl you seem to like, but to me they're much more interesting since there's actual, subtle strategy behind it.
If everything that isn't straightforward action bores you, RTS is the wrong genre for you. It sounds like you'd be better off playing SSBM.
|
On October 25 2013 07:25 Bagration wrote:
Props to ya man. Do whatever feels right
But the concern that I have with your play is that you've become one-dimensional. I don't cheese is necessarily bad or good, or macro games are necessarily bad or good. What I don't like is one-dimensional play in pro games. When a pro player does nothing but safe macro play for the late game, that is boring. When you know a pro player is going to cheese every game, that is boring.
You aren't a professional player anyways, and you play primarily on ladder, so it is not a big deal. But one dimensional play from professional players annoys me.
Anyways, I've gone on a tangent there. Best of luck to you, and keep on cheesing!
I don't see how only cheesing is one dimensional, there are many more cheesy openers than there are standard openers.
On October 25 2013 07:43 Orome wrote:
What you're missing is that people enjoy actual strategy. Where 'actual strategy' is copying a build you saw a pro do like a robot because every map in the pool is designed so you can do that because of the insanely closed up naturals + photon overcharge.
There's next to no strategy in a double proxy gate. There is far more thought going into the interactions with cheese because they are unusual, they throw the game into a random state where neither player has experience with because they tend to normalize in unusual situations, it becomes an actual game of thinking and reacting rather than copying a build you saw a pro do.
Yes, you can find some if you try really hard, but every remotely decent Zerg knows how to play against proxy 2 gate Apparently GM's aren't decent because I've beaten multiple GM zergs with this while they scouted it.
They can still lose to it through not scouting it or bad execution, but bad execution isn't strategy. Or just due to faulty strategies in the heat of crisis such as placing a spine in such a way that I can fit two zealots between the spines and the minerals so the zealots can attack the spine without benig attacked by drones and lings? It's strategy and thought under stress. Can you make that call of where to place your spine in the heat of the moment or do you just frantically place one down?
The interactions in a passive macro game are very much still there, they're just more subtle. Soulkey scouts better than any Zerg before him ever has. It allows him to adjust his build better and to quietly accumulate advantages. Small build adjustments aren't the all-out brawl you seem to like, but to me they're much more interesting since there's actual, subtle strategy behind it. Ye,s and I don't want subtle strategies, I want people do die by their mistakes.
If everything that isn't straightforward action bores you, RTS is the wrong genre for you. It sounds like you'd be better off playing SSBM. SSB is boring exactly for that reason, it's extremely repetitive with nothing going on.
|
I agree with OP in the fact that the first few minutes can be boring in the sense that both parties do nothing to eachother besides scouting. I find that to deter alot of potential players from SC when they first see it because essentially its nothing for 5-6 minutes at best.
That being said, this is why I love watching When Cheese Fails on Youtube, because it is the basic premise of what you are doing, but people actually fending it off and not only displaying great adaptation skills, but overpowering the opponent. The best episodes are when both adapt and enter into normal gameplay. It makes the beginning alot more crucial, entertaining and fun to WATCH.
This is of course just my opinion and how I feel about it. Alot of people like the longer games, or macroing or building a particular build to perfection, and that's perfectly fine. It IS a game and it is to be played however it pleases to the user.
I just think the OP has a decent point. Though I guess I am a hypocrite, because I agree yet I never cheese ever. I am quite content to play to the 5-6 minute mark.
I suppose what's fun to watch is not always fun to do.
|
5 stars and I'd give 5 more if I could. For playing the way you like and not giving up to dumb anti-cheese bandwagon that pollutes the so called community. Also because I feel the same way about so called "macro games" which is a nice way of saying "boring games". Especially as a viewer, since I stopped playing myself long ago.
|
United States4883 Posts
I once talked to a friend who asked me what a "macro game" was. I replied, "Well...naturally it's any kind of game which has an end game goal. Which, I guess, is pretty much every game." That said, I think it's super good to think of cheese as just as much a legitimate strategy as any long game that makes it to 4+ bases.
HOWEVER, I don't think being a dedicated cheeser is good or fun. There are a thousand less variables during a cheese because your options are so limited as to what you can do at the start of the game. You cannot relish in beautiful army positioning or brilliant scouting maneuvers. You cannot enjoy the multi-tasking of defending while attacking in 3 different places. You can't make a million little adjustments to your normal build to slowly eke out a huge lead. You just kind of throw your cheese on the table and do the best you can with it, whether or not it's scouted.
This is a different skillset, sure. And I think it's necessary for any progamer to be well-versed in some cheeses. But I think only cheesing and denying yourself the enjoyment of a longer, positionally-based game is depriving yourself of half the game. Likewise, only doing "macro games" will never really bring you the enjoyment that cheeses hold. Both are important, but I personally get much more enjoyment out of longer games.
As for 4-gate vs. 4-gate, god no lol. Nobody wants a strategy game where you can only do one thing. Otherwise, it's not really a strategy game, now is it? At least the immortal/archon/chargelot wars are based on positioning and outmaneuvering your opponent; 4-gate vs. 4-gate was only about who could execute the build and micro slightly better.
|
OP is a scrub player trying to justify the fact he can't play the game and wants an easy way to win games. Sorry for saying it bluntly but I've met many and you are all the same.
|
I totally agree with your philosophy. You should get in their face asap and rumble from the beginning, I've always thought that about RTS. No-rush games are stupid imo. There is nothing more graceful and powerful and stunning than a quick efficient victory. Boxer's 3 rushes against Yellow is the greatest RTS moment of all time imo.
|
On October 25 2013 18:37 aTnClouD wrote:
OP is a scrub player trying to justify the fact he can't play the game and wants an easy way to win games. Sorry for saying it bluntly but I've met many and you are all the same.
Whiner loser trying to justify his losses to better players. Met many of you, all the same. Playing within their own made up set of rules that are actually not in game, crying cheese every time they lose, so pathetic, so disgusting. The only thing I still can't quite get about such scrubs is what kind of doublethink lets you admire top tier Korean pros who "cheese" (i.e. play to win) at every opportunity, from the famous Boxer vs Yellow finals to Life or Leenock sixpools, MMA marine rushes and so on.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
This argument is brought up quite often in basketball, since games are often decided in the last 5 minutes of the 4th quarter, so most non-bball fans don't understand why play the first 3 1/2 quarters.
I don't even know how you can make this comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
