Staredit Network

I meant to say "you don't need to use a hand for the phone", but I guess you have a reaaally tiny one.

Here is where I stand on this:

It's either toss wins, or a deadlock. I know that slow lings can break a line of cannons + zeals, so zerg could never get into toss's base. The question is which side can secure more of the map, and I am positive that it is toss.

The reason I think toss wins is because they can much more easily secure expos when they can plop down cannons wherever they want.


Also, which unit wins on a small ration doesn't say which unit will win on a larger ratio. 2 lins > 1 rine, but 8 rines > 16 lings.

ADDITION:
I almost forgot, what time will we play?

I hope for a friendly match.

ADDITION:
I got his PM, and we will be playing at some point soon.


I forgot to say in it: proper ling positioning will beat poorly microed m&m, but well microed m&m looks like it is impossible to beat. You (everyone!) should watch the boxer highlight movie without Livewire as the BGM (it really highlights his m&m micro).

haha, want to rematch again then?

(you could never have broken through my cannons, btw)

i can't do it *right now* if you want

ADDITION:
Also, the fact that you offensive sunkened me wouldn't prove that zerg beats toss mineral only (the same if I had off cannoned you). That shows that cheese wins, not that x would beat y the majority of the time.

ADDITION:
i shall finally add that after watching replay i can say it was *the worst* game i have ever played in my life

being off sunkened seriously threw me off, i had no idea what to do

i'd like to rematch just to have another deadlock again (it will happen).

if I hadn't been off sunkened I could have moved out of my base, that is the entire reason the game turend out like it did

it really doesn't prove anything except that your build raped the out of mine (but I still don't see how you could have managed to get past all my cannons + more cannons i would have built with my extra money + more cannons I would have built with the money I hadn't mined)

are you avail right now?

op sen

ADDITION:
We played another min only, and I did a better build. Psycho is the master of cheese, but none of it ends up working. I built a late second pylon, but luckily he had late lings, so they countered each other.

my late first + second pylons added up as well


no one game will prove anything, but you did say that the only way to win with no minerals is to cheese

if that game had dragged on, it may have been another tie, who knows

I have never seen 5 + ofenseive hatcheres in one game. O.O

I can't cheese, because whenever I do it seems to die so fast and then I am left with nothing in my base T______T.

Yes i did a test, four slow lings kill 1 zealot 3 lings survived (same cost, and psi/conrol)
and in bulk: 40 lings beat 10 zealots and 12 lings survived


he didnt run by, i saw rep, he was stupid not to, it was gg.



ADDITION:
BTW, those stats for the 40 vs 10 was an average survival rate, keep in mind i didnt micro at all.

stop

you don't kow what you are talking about

you have to position both sides, and plus it won't be a 4:1 ratio because the sides produce units differently

you probably surrounded the zeals or something

it was 2-1 or 2-0-1 toss, however you want to look at it

psycho HIMSELF admitted that he had to cheese in order to try to win without gas (watch the second game it is seriously unreal)

you proved that cheese can win/tie

offensive hatching is cheese by anyone's definition


this whole thing is gay though, because static defense is too good without tech units to beat it

cheese strats are do or die strats, not invinicble ones

there really aren't invinicible strats unless your opponent does a f*cked ed up build


my 8 pylon was a bit late, and my second pylon was very late

Cheese strats are considered cheese strats (bad/annoying) because they rely more on non-real decisions, decisions military tacticians wouldn't normally make. Do or die like ihatett pointed out. A more practical approach is trying to play normally with strategies that stem from more logical thinking.

Cheese thinking: "shuttle + reaver might pwn tons of peons"

Logical thinking: "i have to backup my reaver, so I should first distract the enemy before sending in my few shuttles full of support units"

You can go ahead and use the "it's just a game, why should it matter" arguement, but remember that some people have a sense of honor and like to be justified in playing honorably. Not tricking the opponent, but exploiting on his lack of ability to cover all bases at once.

ADDITION:
Oh yeah, I'm glad to see you guys are actually playing each other and not just discussing it (or flaming ... which I better not see again). Once you get into the game and start realizing how things work with no gas, you begin to realize which races are at more of an advantage. And you can understand why 8-10 min/gas is the preferable standard starting base for most maps.

FINALLY I'm unbanned... Anyways... In a more wide open map or a map without higher grounds or higher mains, i think the game would depend more on units. Mabye a map like Incubus 2004. I would like to play someone in a mineral only game.

I dont know what im talking about huh? ok. ill keep talking anyway.

I considered the building difference. I thought it would only help zerg more.

Like i said, I didn't micro at all. I sent them both towards eachother and lings easily won.

And second game you knew what he was doing, muche easier to counter a cheese attack then isnt it?

Why were you banned Wesmic?

Haha, the cannon rush, that is a better definition for a cheeze strat. I agree.

What's a cheeze strat?

Sry, i am oblivious to these alien terms

Alien was a joke.

Then it's cheezy, not cheeze. Cheeze is a noun, cheezy is an adjective

Yea i know, but my question was what are some examples of these cheeze strats (other than ones already given)

Besides the offensive hat and the cannon rush (PP 04 #7)
Others would be anything that is unorthodox. You really can't think of one, thats why its cheeze, because its odd and unusual.

I promise you, ask anywhere: cheese is synonomous with "do or die". Proxy gate, offensive hatch, 1 base carrier, 4-pool, etc. All are "strategies" that don't really take skill, they instead rely on your oponnent not scouting it. If you get scouted, you lose, otherwise, you win.

Ask anyone, anywhere., that is what cheese means.

Assuming all players gain minerals at the same speed, and they were stacked, protoss would probably win. It would depend on the micro management used by each player, and strategies. Zerglings wouldn't be able to upgrade speeds without minerals, so there goes their usual advantage. Marines don't really stand much of a chance without stim and medics. Besides, a dozen zealots can rape 3 dozen lings that lack the attack speed upgrade.

If it were a small map though, zerg would stand a better chance, because if they could get lings to their opponent's base with lings quickly enough, they might be able to prevent substantial opposition. That is, If.

First of all, all money maps are in toss's favor.
Second, I dont think 36 lings lose to 12 zealots, but i cant test because i dont have my sc, but you make 4 lings for every zealot, so it would be more like 48 instead of 12, and the lings win easily in that case.

ADDITION:
Well 36 lings got raped by 12 zealots... like 6 or 7 survived each time.

but 48 vs 12 is a diff story.

I simulated that last suggested experiment Once, and the lings Did rape the lots. 12 lots vs. 48 lings (assuming no upgrades to any) = 13 lings.

Now that we've done that, we've got to take into consideration possible defenses at player's bases. One single photon cannon with a dozen zealots in front of it vs. four dozen lings (assuming no ups) comes out with these results: every time the toss one, although the number of zealots left varied. Ten trials were done for better accuracy. Remainding lots (commas seperate trials) = 6,7,6,6,4,8,8,6,9,8. That comes out to be 68/10, which means that on average 7 zealots remain after the offensive by zerg with full hp/shield buildings.

Please note though that this is done with the defense of a player's base included. It would Then depend on who attacked first (which can be assumed zerg, since their units are cheaper overall).

I will clear everything up. Zerg = pwned by terran and zealot.
Zealot = pwn zerglings like a bullet through a pillow
Terran = fly base to an island, Run from zealots, shoot, run, shoot, run, pwn zealots. Pwn lings like a bullet through a pillow.
In the end... Ding Ding Ding! Terran.

marines: owned by sunks
marines: owned by cannons
marines: owned

ADDITION:


1-base lurk isn't cheese, because it isn't entirely do-or-die. It's more like 8-rax.

The things that I mentioned are do or die, though, and are entirely cheese. You can't distract your opponent while doing any of those (because you either won't have units yet or you won't have enough). This assumes both players are playing well.

Zerglings beat zealots for cost (4 zerglings for every 1 zealot)
Have you not heard of flanking?