Style Vs Cheese

[Bloodcount]

Idra rulz and he is absolutely right about this.. Although today in 2v2 games(with a random guy that I beat in 1v1 but had a nice conversation and decided to go 2v2) and zerg as my race I've blocked photon cannon cheese, photon cannon block, wall in, proxy baracks, proxy gates... 6 pool, pretty much most of the cheese strategies... exept the reaper rush but I blocked that 1v1 (lost eventually though) I am definitely back with zerg now (I went as far as owning a platinum and almost winning against a diamond)

So, cheese might be easier, but being good owns cheese... if you are good enough that is



Not so on-topic: if anyone has any favourite idra replays, I'd be grateful if you post them here or PM VM them. I've seen some pretty awesome and pretty stupid replays from him and I don't really want to search too much :d

 

[GooS]

I've noted another thing aswell, after winning against 4 cheesers today, all of them left as soon as their proxy died, be it a gateway/pylon or rax. Which just adds to the

CHEESERS ARE BOORING AS FUCK!

 

[YourFace]

lol, no offense, but you're bringing cheesers down so you can feel more pro, when in fact, you can not defeat anyone with skill at starcraft 2.
Cheesing is fun and amusing. Not having cheesers is boring.

 

[Ioannes]

Very interesting read (did you come up with the terms cheese and style?). I liked it, even though I didn't see any clear thesis to it.

Overall, you claimed that style > cheese. I agree, style is more pleasing to use be used unto you. The game is more interesting and entertaining when tanks, dropships, carriers and so on do various things, as opposed to each game being a random match between n cheese strategies. I myself have dreamed of pwning someone with more APM than me just by making a Knight invisible and using my Archmage to mass teleport in his main base (and then teleporting back using a Tome of Town Portal).

Ideally, an RTS will reward style- gameplay and disregard monotonous cheesing. But for that to happen, broadly speaking, the game itself will have to include a greater variety of units with more abilities. If you have those, you will be able to do fancier maneuvers and combinations with your archers, mages, knights and so on. ?????. FUN!

But there is a downside. The more things the units are capable of doing, the longer it will take to learn what you can do with them. In Wc3 the footman is a simple troop who has a single ability that reduces arrow damage. If Blizz wanted to make the game more style-ish, they could give him the ability to form lines, squares and those formations that Roman cohorts do. But before you could do that, you'd have to familiarize yourself with it. Which would take time.

There are many units in SC2. If all of them had one additional special ability this would mean that new players would need a good few hours before familiarizing themselves with the gameplay. SC2 would turn into something like Sudden Strike 2, units will dig trenches and make ambushes and so on.

That's a problem. Why? Because Blizzard have always made their games easy to learn and hard to master. In other words, quick to memorize what each unit does and slow to become good at using them.

Easy to learn means that there will be few things to know about each unit before using it. Riflemen are tough, priests heal, dragonhawk riders are good against air and towers, etc.. On the other hand, giving units multiple abilities, such as in tactical RTS's (on WW2 for example) means that the player will be overwhelmed with information about his army. Remember your first moments with Microsoft Word or the World Editor. You can do many things with them, but at the beginning it is easy to feel discouraged. Learning curve - it suffers from increased variety.

Unfortunately, it is variety that allows for style playing to be a tangible way of winning. Which suggests that Blizz games will always suffer limitations in the viability of style gaming. Do they? Yes. Diablo is simple in its basics, and has little variety. Its gameplay is monotonous (although by no means not interesting at times). StarCraft and WarCraft? Less so, because they are strategy games, yet there still is a limit on what you can do with each race and hero (Blizz are doing their best to push this limit, which is laudable). I'm taking too long.

What about cheesing? Well, cheesing is, as I understand, little brains and more reflexes. The learning curve means that at one point the melee mode will exhaust its style capacity and only reflexes will decide the outcomes. Meaning it will lean to the cheesing side. Which kills interest.

But, overall, style can only stay for so long. Blizz are proud of their learning curve. In today's world of expectations for a simple game, it is unlikely that Blizz will abandon this. Which means that cheese gameplay, which thrives on simplicity and APM will also linger. Sorry. Grab the editor and make something interesting yourselves.

 

[GooS]

lol, no offense, but you're bringing cheesers down so you can feel more pro, when in fact, you can not defeat anyone with skill at starcraft 2.
Cheesing is fun and amusing. Not having cheesers is boring.

To clarify, I am not good at starcraft 2, my micro and macro is far from enough to make it against any other than casual players.
Note: The cheese mentioned in my previous post were the cheesers me and my friend managed to win over, as many or more left us in defeat.

I can, in no way, see what the fun in cheesing is.

 

[Bloodcount]

lol, no offense, but you're bringing cheesers down so you can feel more pro, when in fact, you can not defeat anyone with skill at starcraft 2.
Cheesing is fun and amusing. Not having cheesers is boring.

I am not sure to who this is reffering too, but after beating a few diamonds today I will sweep the floor with you. My race-your choice. The "not having cheesers is boring" Really got on my nerves. I fail to see why having battles with a larger variaty of units, battle quality and over all better experience for both players is boring. DO tell.

If it is reffered to GooS, he CAN play. Trust me on that one, I've played not one or 2 games with him and he is one of the best team mates anyone can have.


GooS said that he has beaten some cheeses today. Same goes for me- What' I've blocked is 6 pool, proxy barracks, reaper rush, proxy gates, proxy barracks AND gates, reapers and six pool...

the only thing I lost too was spine craler built on my creep, although I find this rather stylish- I wasn't looking, + it takes skill

Ioannes, I have created the term style. (Took it from DMC's stylish meter- when you use different attacks) Cheese is created by the community. I agree with you on some things, but even 10 footman, divided into groups and surrounding the enemy, sniping out the ranged attackers and using the defend ability can be as stylish as hell. It is not the units's abilities, is how you use them + everyone has different style understandings.

 

[Oninuva]

Being in diamond doesn't mean your good, especially if your in one of the newer created leagues. So in turn, beating diamonds =/= good. If you look at their match ups, a lot of the lower point diamonds > 400 will match up against gold and platinum instead of diamonds. Your league/ranking doesn't matter much, to determine how good you are blizzard has a hidden rating for each player.

 

[Bloodcount]

I am not in diamond.I fought against them accidently- It was in the custom games and after the games I wanted to look up their lagues and saw it.

Anyway, I am not trying to say that I am good, people who have played with(against) me can say weather I am or not. Personally I highly doubt my skills at every win I make...

 

[BANANAMAN]

What about cheesing? Well, cheesing is, as I understand, little brains and more reflexes. The learning curve means that at one point the melee mode will exhaust its style capacity and only reflexes will decide the outcomes. Meaning it will lean to the cheesing side. Which kills interest.

But, overall, style can only stay for so long. Blizz are proud of their learning curve. In today's world of expectations for a simple game, it is unlikely that Blizz will abandon this. Which means that cheese gameplay, which thrives on simplicity and APM will also linger. Sorry. Grab the editor and make something interesting yourselves.

I would like to just point out that this may or may not be true for Starcraft II Since when Starcraft:Broodwar's meta game developed and matured for the last 12 years it's learning curve grew smaller and smaller so much so that the lack of innovative play decreased which lead to more predictable plays and a much more refined meta game.


Cheese seems to be the best choice right now but give it a few years and everyone that's decent in the game won't loose to Cheese.

 

[Bloodcount]

>Cheese seems to be the best choice right now but give it a few years and everyone that's decent in the game won't loose to Cheese.

Yeah.. you are right about this one Well put.

 

[kingbdogz]

As much as I agree with you, I don't think it's a matter to complain about. The fact that the game can have both cheesing and styled-strategies is what makes it so great and complex. Plus, most of the time cheeses are extremely easy to counter. Six pool? You should have scouted. Proxy Barracks? You should have either scouted or had some units by then. Void Ray rush? Wow they are easy to counter, even as Zerg with their anti-air unit coming tier 2, I can counter it with 2 queens while I get my Lair up. You should have also scouted, effectively crippling their plan.

I understand how cheeses are boring to play against, but they are easy to counter and will get you a free win. Once you proceed into higher leagues you will see a very small amount of "cheesing" in your matches.

WhiteRa was actually pretty innovative and stylish in his earlier matches, it's just that a lot of people now copy him and they have become known as cheesing because they are quite easy to use in lower-skilled matches.

Anyway, as soon as Blizzard gives us SEA players cross-realm support (confirmed within 60 days of release), I'm going to challenge you to a match, Bloodcount!

What league are you in?

 

[Bloodcount]

I wasn't really complaining, just saying how I see the things


>WhiteRa was actually pretty innovative and stylish in his earlier matches,

My fault in that case. I've seen some mid-late beta replays (and not a few by that) of whiteRA vs TLO and some other doods. There his strategies were pretty much copied by most of the lower players who want wins.

>I understand how cheeses are boring to play against, but they are easy to counter and will get you a free win. Once you proceed into higher leagues you will see a very small amount of "cheesing" in your matches.

I don't really mind people cheesing against me- I can break it most of the time.

>Anyway, as soon as Blizzard gives us SEA players cross-realm support (confirmed within 60 days of release), I'm going to challenge you to a match, Bloodcount!

Sure, I never deny a match.

>What league are you in?

I vary from silver to platinum. (I am mostly a team player- more opponents, more battles, more place for style. )

 

[celerisk]

For the record, mentioning WhiteRa and cheese in the same sentence borders on insolence.
If nothing else, do some search on WhiteRa (P) vs Machine (Z), Bo7 (near the end of the beta).
There's actually three of them because one or two just didn't cut it



" a lot of the lower point diamonds > 400 will match up against gold and platinum instead of diamonds "

That's actually a good feature of the match making system.
If you lose (a lot or too much), it will put you against lower league players, to see if you're still worthy to stay in your current league

 

[black.sheep]

I can't be bothered to read though the pages of text about wherether pro's think that cheese is proper or not.
But cheese is in the game for two reasons.
1. It punishes teching/stupidly fast expos (Also known as keeping the oppenent "honest")
2. Provides lulz for causal players

The problem with cheese however, is that the current system of ranking means that most high ranked players got there, not because they refined build orders and practiced mechanics, but rather figured out a build that is hard to stop for any unpreapered player. The small rush distances in the current map pool do not help with stopping cheese.

 

[Siretu]

For the record, mentioning WhiteRa and cheese in the same sentence borders on insolence.
If nothing else, do some search on WhiteRa (P) vs Machine (Z), Bo7 (near the end of the beta).
There's actually three of them because one or two just didn't cut it

I didn't see the showmatch between machine and WhiteRa but I remember him going proxy stargate to try to catch the opponent by surprise about every single game in every single tournament I watched him play in, and I watched quite a lot of tournaments.

Still, WhiteRa is a good player, no doubt. He's very solid, but it justs make a little irritated every time other professional players get caught off-guard by that early void ray while I'm sitting watching and thinking: "Omg! He went for a fast void ray! Who would've though?"

 

[BANANAMAN]

I can't be bothered to read though the pages of text about wherether pro's think that cheese is proper or not.
But cheese is in the game for two reasons.
1. It punishes teching/stupidly fast expos (Also known as keeping the oppenent "honest")
2. Provides lulz for causal players

The problem with cheese however, is that the current system of ranking means that most high ranked players got there, not because they refined build orders and practiced mechanics, but rather figured out a build that is hard to stop for any unpreapered player. The small rush distances in the current map pool do not help with stopping cheese.

Personally I have an issue with number 1 since you seem to be implying that FE builds and "Teching up" are wrong and that people should do one base builds.If that's the case then why nullify one of the few advantages the Zerg has? And to a lesser degree for the Protoss.

FE builds are there to maximize economic potential of both the Zerg and the Protoss which is both a risky venture when done without careful planning.You seem to think that FE builds are builds that players forgo combat unit production in order to grab the natural expansion earlier than usual. Builds such as these where you neglect producing a substantial amount of Combat units instead focusing on improving your economy are called "greedy builds".True Zerg and Protoss players fast expand but then they usually do it after they had made certain precautions should an early attack arrive at their expansion therefore making cheesing them a more risky venture.

As for players that "Tech up" or keeping them "honest" May I remind you that this game,This sequel to Starcraft and Starcraft:Broodwar is supposed to surpass them both not only in single player but in multiplayer as well.Cheeses are not there to punish such strategies unless you call almost every strategy that calls for surprise and a bit of luck cheese.

Cheese is a pejorative expression which refers to a strategy that is highly unconventional and designed to take one's opponent by surprise. In general, cheese is hard to beat if not scouted but easy to defeat if it is scouted.

Origins: During a broadcast game on September 16, 2009, OGN commentator Um Jae Kyung (???) briefly discussed the difference between a bunker rush and a "cheese" rush. According to his explanation, the term "cheese" originated from the word "cheater's" (words in Korean are sometimes shortened by the middle syllables, so ??? [chi tuh zu] would become ?? [chi zu]). The strategy is characterized by, as opposed to a simple bunker rush, a practically unbeatable combination of most of the Terran's SCVs and a very quickly assembled group of marines. Because both Protoss and Zerg basic units are unranged, SCVs can effectively prevent the ranged marines from being destroyed by obstructing the path between the units, giving the marines a tremendous (and thus unfair) edge.

The usage of the term "cheese" has expanded to include most "all-in" strategies which involve a great sacrifice of economy, though some StarCraft communities use the term even more loosely to include mid-game strategies.

Cheeses exist simply because they are not there to "specifically" punish certain strategies but rather keeps the game fresh with new ideas and different strategies since the game is relatively young Cheeses (as per liquipedia's definition) will continue to exist as the game's meta game evolves.

 

[Bloodcount]

Personally I have an issue with number 1 since you seem to be implying that FE builds and "Teching up" are wrong and that people should do one base builds.If that's the case then why nullify one of the few advantages the Zerg has? And to a lesser degree for the Protoss.

Implying that people should stay in T1 and one base only is a really wrong statement.

It is fun when you have a lot of expos. for example yesterday I was playing a 2v2 with siretu. With a single push they destroyed all of my expos (2) but gave me enough time to Mass the Ulltimate Army of Death&Destruction (tm)

 

[Whitesock]

I just have to say, banelings are probably the most stylish units in the game. I love using them and I love seeing people use them as they promote such fun gameplay.

 

[YourFace]

I just have to say, banelings are probably the most stylish units in the game. I love using them and I love seeing people use them as they promote such fun gameplay.

sentries and stalkers.

 

[Oninuva]

I love in TvT when both terran proxy rax and it ends up being who can escape with more SCVs lol.