News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: Cheese  (Read 16813 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lomendil

  • Mad Prophet of Commorragh
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10734
  • Country: 00
  • If it's comprehensible, it's obselete
Re: Cheese
« Reply #40 on: June 21, 2007, 08:03:36 PM »
Anyone else think that games with roughly equal sides are the best ones?

Variety - if everyone used the same top-tier-power lists in order to be on even terms, wouldn't things get boring quickly?

Does anyone else agree with me that min-maxed lists using only the most powerful options are also usually the dullest and most formulaic to use and play against?


People who don't believe in 'cheese' - are you all of the 'win at all costs' view, where it's more important to be victorious than to have a straight-up even contest? (Something of a rhetorical question, since I used to be a shameless powergamer myself back a decade-and-a-half ago, and am well aware of the mindset that lies beneath the justifications - justifications which, I might add, go little beyond saying 'because I can' when boiled down. Not that I have anything personal against powergaming, I just wish people would just be honest about it. On another site a couple of years back I remember seeing a 'cheese' argument, and one player just came out and said 'I do it because it makes it easier for me to win.'. I was delighted to finally see a powergamer being up front about it. Good for him. Natch, many people don't like admitting that kind of thing, often least of all to themselves, and I'm sure the denial forcefields will be up at double-strength right away after reading this. So probably a big fat waste of time on my part, though it'll probably enterain the enlightened readers. Ack, it's a hard world folks, but life goes on. ;) Don't feed me, I'm just a troll.  :P)



Also, I think the argument is seen too often as 'gamer vs fluff', and I think this is wrong. I don't criticise powergamers on the basis of fluff, since it's possible to come up with plausible fluff for literally any possible army list. Gameplay is all that matters to me. I like games between sides of roughly even power, using interesting lists, and I find that the results of powergaming with most Codices runs counter to that.
 

Powergaming, btw, is a neutral term in my opinion, and a slightly different one to 'cheese'. 'Cheese' means unfair, implying abuse of game rule, and exploting imbalances. Powergaming is rather different, in that it just means 'most powerful under the rules'. A powergaming list can be cheesy, but it isn't necessarily e.g one needs to powergame a Dark Eldar or Ork list to be on even terms, assuming games of 1500+ pts, due to the relative power of the options compared to other Codices.


A last word - people who falsely cry cheese are far worse than even the most inveterate Machiavellian powergamer. If I had to choose between getting rid of players who exploit imbalance and bad losers unfairly blaming an opponent's army list, I'd choose the latter every time. That's one good thing to end on - at least everyone here hates those people, so some common ground there.

« Last Edit: June 21, 2007, 08:05:42 PM by Lomendil »

Offline Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen

  • Da Biggest; His Fluffiness; Warboss
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheese
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2007, 08:08:29 PM »
Even though I think cheese exists, it doesn't bother me especially.  Infact, people denying it's existance causes me alot more grief.  I'm odd that way.

Cheese is fine.  Power Gaming is fine.  Just don't pretend your tactics beat my list that didn't even have enough models to bulk out to 1000pts without taking useless wargear because you weren't willing to play a Combat Patrol.

And please don't try to say your Daemonic Speed Nurgle Daemon Prince is fluffy.  Please, just don't.

~Andromidius
aka. Boris the Bear

Offline Lomendil

  • Mad Prophet of Commorragh
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10734
  • Country: 00
  • If it's comprehensible, it's obselete
Re: Cheese
« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2007, 08:26:34 PM »
And please don't try to say your Daemonic Speed Nurgle Daemon Prince is fluffy.  Please, just don't.

Why not? Someone with bloated adrenal glands and hypertrophied leg muscles would sound pretty sick to me.

I agree, speed isn't a classic property associated with Nurgle, but big difference between unfluffy and atypical, IMHO.

Offline Redlion

  • Infinity Circuit
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2487
  • Country: 00
  • I *LOVE* EO and 40K.ca
Re: Cheese
« Reply #43 on: June 21, 2007, 10:24:35 PM »
Lol, I agree it exists. I have even been accused of it myself plenty of times. Even if I thought it wasn't justified. I liked using a wide variety of different units as well, I like using basic troops as well.

I can already tell you right now what many Eldar players are going to have a hard time fielding. Without being called cheesey.

Wraithlords, wraithguard, avatar, Eldrad, harlies, falcons, prisms, dragons, etc.

Whether totally justified or not. IE....3 wraithlords in a 500 point list is obviously over the top. You will see some goofball do it though. Why because he can. He can come up with all the fluff etc, etc.
The Eldrad/Avatar combo, is already getting it as well. Totally unjustified in most cases though. Again in a 500 point game, no dice imo. However some goofball is going to do it.

The problem is, all the other players suffer for it. Because of word of mouth, and the newer players hear it, and then they see an 1850 point game, or participate in a game against a different composition, and point value, and lose the game, it will be blamed on those exact units, whether that was really the factor or not. So it just snowballs from there, thats what happened with the star cannon, even if you had a single one in your army, your whole army was cheesey to some, the exact same thing with the wraithlord.

The list just goes on and on really, and most things are blown way out of porportion.

 I have no problem with it, except let me know up front what the rules of engagement are before we duel. IE....if its a knife fight, don't bring a gun. Otherwise, it really isn't fair, and I have every right to cry foul, at least in this example, not that I would live long enough to complain about it though. If there are no rules of engagement, I am also fine with that. As long as all parties and participants know the rules up front.

If someone brings 3 wraithlords to a 500 point tourney, fine, as long as the tourney allows such things, thats upto the organizers of the tourney to decide on, and make clear on before the tourney though, right.

Personally if no such clarification was made before the tourney, I would be kind of ticked off, if I received unsportsman like marks for bringing an army to win the tourney.
And I was unaware of just such a composition was indeed frowned upon. Say I was a new player. GW could set FoC limitations for different size point battles. However usually unit's costs are often enough to do it, however that does not mean there can't be exceptions. Again if GW won't do it, Tournament organizers should definitely make the necessary adjustments, to keep things on a more even keel.

It can get hard to figure these things out though really, there are so many exceptions, its not even funny, common sense is really all that can be used in some cases. And even then, isn't always right in every case. Anyway I also agree there is a big difference between fluff, and powergaming. Personally, while fluff is cool, I think to much emphasis is placed upon it in tournaments. Thats fine if its made very clear what those guidelines are, and all exceptions are upfront though, see but again, many examples are going to be subjective to an individuals own personal point of view. How can you dock someone's creativity and justify it.

You can, and its done all the time now, many times unjustly though. Things need to be clarified more, and these things should be known before hand. Because when someone goes out, and spends an awful lot of money, and invests an awful lot of time/ and even more money, to model, and paint his army, its a real slap in the face to that player, to dock them on fluff, and army composition. Some obviously know about the little loopholes as well, there are just many factors to be considered. In many cases it has to be viewed on a case by case basis, where more than one or two people's opinions are involved.

It can be hard to be gentle in some cases though. Some definitely need to be taken behind the woodshed, for a spanking, because they definitely know better, and they definitely know they shouldn't do those types of things.

« Last Edit: June 21, 2007, 10:41:43 PM by Redlion »

Offline Treg_pjwninaro

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 242
Re: Cheese
« Reply #44 on: June 21, 2007, 11:36:35 PM »
I firmly believe that cheese is real, but yo are never, repeat, never, allowed to call it after a game.  Not until 3 weeks after. 

Mainly the term is used as an excuse as to why you lost (my excuse is piss poor luck - I lost 3 eldar heavy skimmers - 2 souped- upped falcons and a Serpent with VE in THREE TURNS - an the army didn't have that much anti-tank)

As for comp score in tournies - I'll give you whatever you give me.  I will tell you this.  If you give me high, I'll give you high.  Low, low.  No answer - very low.  I don't believe in comp score, so I will try to bypass it.

  I have played the three falcon list, and I max out Elites.  Why?  Because that's how Beil-Tan has to work in 4th.  I can't really take it to many tournes, as I only have 2 troops - dire avengers and pathfinders.  I find my army fluffy in its own way - Air Cav.  I have had an obsession with skimmer transports, and I take what I like, not what my opponents will.

I play to have fun.  To me, three falcons is fun.  Fun is taking the units you like.  If you say you play to have fun, you can cry cheese against me, as I do the same you do.

The only real examples of cheese might include the three falcon, definatly Iron Warriors and Asscannon marines.

Also side note on special characters - never cheesy.  Powergaming, maybe.  However, I like the rules for Jain-Zar, and will take the rules and the model, but call it high exarch of howling banshees.  Eldrad - high farseer.  It is unfair to assume that you must take the name and fluff with a special charater
Beil-Tan 6000pts
Space Marines 1500pts (selling)

rULES aS wRITTEN.
"Two questions for you: who invented the Caps Lock key and where do they live, and why did they decide to put it next to the Shift key?"
-Doomhammer
Uriel Ventris is GW's answer to Super-man, Jesus and the Fonz, all rolled into one Space Marine.
-Chuckles

Offline sebster

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 175
Re: Cheese
« Reply #45 on: June 21, 2007, 11:48:04 PM »
Let me give you another good example: One day we where playing for a campaign and I was up against a marine, no force org chart, no rules he even had more points. I used my standard Mech list expanded to 2500 following force org chart and theme, using transports and fast units. I had no ap3 or better weapons except for the 10 dragons and banshees in 2500 points!!! My opponent new what was coming and designed a list disregarding force org and having all the las/plas, devastating, predatory, terminating goodness ever, plus of course the classic librarian in a powered up HQ squad and a few ACs here and there! In the end of the game he had lost every single man (painstakingly refused to retreat to fight another day), and I had lost my banshees and 7 dragons. So what do I hear after that?: “Dang you Ianos and your CHEESY Eldar!!!”

That isn't an argument.  Someone making a false accusation of cheese does not mean cheese doesn't exist.  This is the internet, so at some point you've probably been accused of being a nazi.  That was a false accusation (well probably, I don't know your political affiliations :)) but it doesn't mean there isn't and never have been any nazis.

Quote
As for the “know when I see” argument your politician was simply ill informed and not right:

Pornography, sometimes shortened to porn or porno, is, in its broadest state, the explicit representation of the human body or sexual activity with the goal of sexual arousal and/or sexual relief. It is similar to erotica, which is the use of sexually-arousing imagery used mainly for artistic purpose. Over the past few decades, an immense industry for the production and consumption of pornography has grown, due to emergence of the VCR, the DVD, and the Internet, as well as the emergence of more tolerant social attitudes.
(Source: Wikipedia online encyclopedia)

You should probably do some reading on the issue if you want to declare something 'not right'.  Yes, there are many definitions of porn and most of them fit nicely as long as you're willing to look at the broad picture.  However, there is a large grey area of things that might be considered porn, which people can debate until the wee hours of the morning.  An oil painting that includes nudity?  What if it wasn't just nudity, but showed a sex act?  What if it wasn't a painting, but a photograph?  What if the artist claims it was intended to satirise, or challenge our taboos, rather than to titillate.  It simply isn't as simple an issue as finding a definition, as that definition has to be applied to a massively diverse range of creations.

It's the same thing with cheese.  There is a large grey area of what is and isn't cheese, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

That said...if you play in a private leage or only amongst friends - even the rules are up to you to decide.  In the larger world (tournaments, store games, etc.) it is dangerous to bring your prejudices along with you.

To me, cheese is taking an army list that maximises your chance of winning while ignoring the greater social context.  So if you're playing among friends where there is a tradition of selecting varying and diverse lists, and you keep bringing the same optimised list just for the sake of winning, that's cheese.  On the other hand, if you're playing in a tournament or in a culture where the emphasis is on playing as competitively as possible, you can't be cheesy.

There is nothing wrong with either style of play.  There is something wrong with people who decide their preferred style of play is the only way to play the game and use that style whereever they play.  That means turning up with a fluffy list to a tournament and complaining in every game about the other guy's cheesy army, and it means turning up to a gaming club with a cheesy list and ignoring the fact that no-one else likes playing your list.

Offline Trumpet42

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Cheese
« Reply #46 on: June 22, 2007, 02:50:34 AM »

Example: 3rd edition codex Blood Angels spamming Assault Cannons and Death Company, with minimum Scouts as troops.

This goes against their background, agreed?  Blood Angels are basically a codex Chapter with a few ad-hoc units, so they should be mostly made up of Tactical Marines with a balanced selection of support units.  When they show up with 3 Baal Predators and 9 Land Speeder Tornados, and an utter minimum of Scouts then something is very wrong indeed.

And against most opponants this is going to be crushing, as the combination of the Death Company's (which is often called cheese by itself, but I don't agree as it's a manditory unit...) sheer assault power and the massed Assault Cannon will turn most armies into mush.  The fact a Necron Monolith spam will utterly crush such an army is irrelivant.  It's still abuse of the background and of the unit selections.

~Andromidius

I play BA, and i have been called "cheesy" for taking 1 baal, 2 Tornados, and DC before by an IG player with Las weapons out the wazoo in an 1850 game. i take a minimum of 2 10-man Tac. Squads and my scouts and have been called cheese for having 10 man squads (before DC). i believe this fabled "cheese" is just something your opponent didnt expect, and doesnt like to fight against or deal with.

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: Cheese
« Reply #47 on: June 22, 2007, 04:22:08 AM »
Apart from the fact that different posters have again given different definitions of cheese no one can actually say what exactly is cheesy and what combos should be not played in a balanced game. The “I know when I see it” argument still exists yet none can define what the 10 cheesy armies are and whether removing one option or 2 or 3 makes them balanced again.
I also keep seeing people claiming that they can classify cheese because they have played a lot of games and they know they are right. Well I have also played a lot of games and I too know I am right. My problem is not if cheese or not exists, for as long as it cannot specifically be defined I cannot accept it. There is no exact measurement for it and in a game of numbers and strategies subjective opinions have no place in deciding ones win or loss.
As for the “list that requires no tactics”, I have seen such lists and because people don’t consider them cheesy I can say nothing, e.g. Nurgle with 2 defilers troops and Prince but the list that I lost with would easily be called cheesy because it was all skimmers and had 2 decked out prisms and 4 serpents. His one defiler died turn one from his erroneous thinking and then I spent the entire game moving around calculating everything to the last detail, using all the opponent’s mistakes to the max and all he did was just sit there and shoot what he could see/reach. Yeah his list was “fluffy” and mine was “broken” yet I still lost despite my great efforts to use everything right.
Some also said that because some people cannot identify cheesy lists they simply yell at anything they don’t like. Well go tell that to them after they have lost in a tournament and they simply mark you down because they feel like it. It is totally subjective and if I give the same list to 100 people they will give 100 different opinions about how imbalanced the list is.  And it is not like I‘ve run into some brats that call anything cheesy, virtually anyone will whine about my army as long as they loose.
And another thing, there are many armies that operate in “maxed out” and multiples and others that operate the best by using variety. A variable marine list is one of the best lists can think of, while a variable Khorne list is bind to not operate. So the marine player can use that to force victory by making the Khorne player play suboptimal. Now that’s downright unsporting.
 
So the best things to do in the current environment to win are:
a)   Build an all around list, usually marines (no offense they are simply the best at it), that simply rocks in the hands of a decent player and use no duplicate options.
b)   Go around saying how fluffy your army is and how you love the game and the fun.
c)   Force people to use their armies the same way either by comp scoring or by peer pressure because almost everyone believes in cheese.
d)   Get all the appraisal of been a good player with a “non-cheesy” list and win all the tournaments and games.

So if people like to cheese everyone else so bad then I will simply no longer go against the stream. Comp scoring? Alright, I won’t play my “cheesy” themed Eldar list (which by the way gives me headaches to operate to the max); instead I am going to create a point denial one that looks balanced with no duplicates, and no maxing. Then before game I will simply mark down in my mind anyone having anything annoying for me in his list. Examples are one or two whirlwinds, they are cheesy they auto kill my aspects with no los for 85 points. Any single las/plas with less than 10 members, they are cheesy since marines will definitely become combat squad ruled yet the player insists not to follow the fluff and the other chapters. Assault cannons, even a single assault cannon is cheesy since it destroys any unit type better than any other weapon with less cost than anything else. Oh and of course in any case anyone has a duplicate, that’s cheesy in my eyes and totally un-fluffy. Yep you are right; I know it when I see it!
« Last Edit: June 22, 2007, 04:25:35 AM by Ianos Stormbringer »
The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen

  • Da Biggest; His Fluffiness; Warboss
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheese
« Reply #48 on: June 22, 2007, 04:27:39 AM »
I play BA, and i have been called "cheesy" for taking 1 baal, 2 Tornados, and DC before by an IG player with Las weapons out the wazoo in an 1850 game. i take a minimum of 2 10-man Tac. Squads and my scouts and have been called cheese for having 10 man squads (before DC). i believe this fabled "cheese" is just something your opponent didnt expect, and doesnt like to fight against or deal with.

That's not cheesy.  That's quite well balanced actually.

And I can say what exactly is or isn't cheese.  Any unit spamming that isn't stated as being common practice for that army (Gaunt spamming = good.  Harlequin spamming = bad).  It's not a difficult concept, in my opinion.

~Andromidius
aka. Boris the Bear

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: Cheese
« Reply #49 on: June 22, 2007, 05:11:40 AM »
I play BA, and i have been called "cheesy" for taking 1 baal, 2 Tornados, and DC before by an IG player with Las weapons out the wazoo in an 1850 game. i take a minimum of 2 10-man Tac. Squads and my scouts and have been called cheese for having 10 man squads (before DC). i believe this fabled "cheese" is just something your opponent didnt expect, and doesnt like to fight against or deal with.

That's not cheesy.  That's quite well balanced actually.

And I can say what exactly is or isn't cheese.  Any unit spamming that isn't stated as being common practice for that army (Gaunt spamming = good.  Harlequin spamming = bad).  It's not a difficult concept, in my opinion.

~Andromidius

Oh there's another one, i must start to counting at some point! ;)
So according to your definition if i have 3 squads of 3 scatter/shuriken vypers with and 3 squads of 3 double-scatter war-walkers then i am definately not cheesy because it isn't common practice. Ok, then try to convince the gaunt spammer after i scatter his entire army to death in the first round or two! 8)
The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen

  • Da Biggest; His Fluffiness; Warboss
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheese
« Reply #50 on: June 22, 2007, 05:13:36 AM »
You misunderstand me.  That IS cheesy, because you're spamming units that isn't backed up by the background.  The Eldar don't spam anything, they use combined arms.

~Andromidius
aka. Boris the Bear

Offline Goyder

  • Workshy Lord Moddissar General, The King of Tanks
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4071
  • Australian
Re: Cheese
« Reply #51 on: June 22, 2007, 05:26:51 AM »
Big Brother Goyder is watching you.

If this goes south, it'll be locked.

Thankyou.
Real men fight in Tanks!

Offline sebster

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 175
Re: Cheese
« Reply #52 on: June 22, 2007, 05:35:26 AM »
Apart from the fact that different posters have again given different definitions of cheese no one can actually say what exactly is cheesy and what combos should be not played in a balanced game. The “I know when I see it” argument still exists yet none can define what the 10 cheesy armies are and whether removing one option or 2 or 3 makes them balanced again.

There isn’t an exhaustive list that everyone is going to agree on.  People debate what is and isn’t porn, what is and isn’t art, but these things definitely exist.  You just need to treat each case on its own.

Quote
I also keep seeing people claiming that they can classify cheese because they have played a lot of games and they know they are right. Well I have also played a lot of games and I too know I am right. My problem is not if cheese or not exists, for as long as it cannot specifically be defined I cannot accept it. There is no exact measurement for it and in a game of numbers and strategies subjective opinions have no place in deciding ones win or loss.

It’s just a case of being mature and learning what is and isn’t acceptable in your gaming community.  If you’re playing with the same group and have been for a while, you should all know where you stand.  If you’re in a new group or just don’t know where your opponents stand on what is and isn’t cheese, talk to them.  When it comes to tournaments I can’t say for sure, because I’m not involved in that scene.  I’d lean towards letting everyone take the best, killingest stuff they can and damn the composition scores, but I can’t really lend any insight.

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: Cheese
« Reply #53 on: June 22, 2007, 06:05:52 AM »
That is an addition that was not included in the previous definition (although anything can be practically fluffified), let's say you are right. What about this then?


1 Leman Russ Demolisher (Heavy Support) @ 165 Pts
     Demolisher Cannon; Hull Heavy Bolter; Heavy Bolter Sponsons

1 Basilisk (Heavy Support) @ 130 Pts
     Earthshaker Cannon; Hull Heavy Bolter
     Rough Terrain Modification [5]

1 Sentinel (Fast Attack) @ 40 Pts
     Heavy Flamer

1 Sentinel (Fast Attack) @ 40 Pts
     Heavy Flamer

1 Hellhound (Fast Attack) @ 115 Pts
     Inferno Cannon; Hull Heavy Bolter

9 Armoured Fist Squad (Troops) @ 161 Pts
     Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

     1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
          Lasgun

     1 Chimera @ [85] Pts
          Heavy Flamer; Hull Heavy Flamer

9 Armoured Fist Squad (Troops) @ 161 Pts
     Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

     1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
          Lasgun

     1 Chimera @ [85] Pts
          Heavy Flamer; Hull Heavy Flamer

20 Conscripts (Troops) @ 98 Pts
     Flamer (x2)

20 Conscripts (Troops) @ 98 Pts
     Flamer (x2)

0 Command Platoon (HQ) @ 82 Pts

     4 Command Squad @ [82] Pts
          Grenade Launcher (x4); SharpShooters

          1 Junior Officer @ [40] Pts

0 Infantry Platoon (Troops) @ 193 Pts

     4 Command Squad @ [41] Pts
          Lasguns (x4)

          1 Junior Officer @ [41] Pts
               Bolter

     9 Infantry Squad @ [76] Pts
          Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

          1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
               Lasgun

     9 Infantry Squad @ [76] Pts
          Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

          1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
               Lasgun

0 Infantry Platoon (Troops) @ 193 Pts

     4 Command Squad @ [41] Pts
          Lasguns (x4)

          1 Junior Officer @ [41] Pts
               Bolter

     9 Infantry Squad @ [76] Pts
          Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

          1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
               Lasgun

     9 Infantry Squad @ [76] Pts
          Heavy Bolter; Lasguns; Flamer

          1 Sergeant @ [6] Pts
               Lasgun

Models in Army: 122


Total Army Cost: 1476

It is a fluffy mixed IG division using the basic IG rules without the cookie cutter weapons of choice. Tell me now how a gaunt spammer should feel about this one... ::)
The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen

  • Da Biggest; His Fluffiness; Warboss
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheese
« Reply #54 on: June 22, 2007, 06:16:47 AM »
I give up.  You just don't seem to understand what I'm saying, so I'll leave it be now.

~Andromidius
aka. Boris the Bear

Offline Lazarus

  • Infinity Circuit - The Voice of Reason
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10258
  • Country: us
  • Armies: Space Wolves & Imperial Guard
Re: Cheese
« Reply #55 on: June 22, 2007, 07:21:34 AM »
I think that many people associate cheese w/ powergaming.

I play in lots of tourneys where comp scoring is involved. Each venue will seemingly have a different tolerance for power (a deffinition of cheese perhaps) and it's up to you to know what that is if you want a chance to win there.


I remember getting in a huge fight (debate) with a member on these forums on how he refused to acknowledge the existence of cheese. He had never been to a comp tourney before and I met him in person at a rather large one.....after the event he understood completely what I was talking about.

These threads pop up from time to time and it's always the same thing. Either we acknowledge cheese but may not be able to accurately define it or we close our ears and chant that it does not exist.

GW has a different term and they call it "beardy"....

Lazarus.
"If someone used the ridiculous cover saves rule on me I'd probably punch him in the face. If he's still standing he would be entitled to punch me in the face, take my army, and my woman if he can. This is known as the Conan rule of play, and is not forbidden in the core rules and encourages serious amounts of sportsmanship." - Carniflex

Offline The Reborn

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3107
  • Country: england
  • I'm being out-gunned by a darn Carnifex....
  • Armies: Eldar, Harlequins.
Re: Cheese
« Reply #56 on: June 22, 2007, 07:33:55 AM »
Quote from: Lomendil
Anyone else think that games with roughly equal sides are the best ones?

Variety - if everyone used the same top-tier-power lists in order to be on even terms, wouldn't things get boring quickly?

Does anyone else agree with me that min-maxed lists using only the most powerful options are also usually the dullest and most formulaic to use and play against?

Agree totally with all of the above.  I doubt that anyone abusing lists is going to agree with any of it though.....sadly.
Sorry for banging on about chess, but there is a good example of a very rigid, tactical gaming system, involving movement and "destruction".....because both players have the same units, and the same quantities and abilities for those units, the game is rigid.  The winner is the best tactician....or sometimes a better way to put it is that the loser is the guy who makes the first or worst, mistake.
40K, thank goodness, is a hell of a lot more fluid than that, with a much wider range of pieces and abilities for them.  This is where the fluid gaming system is open to abuse.  GW attempt to pen-in the abuse by providing a matrix of operation....they give us the rules, and there's a pointage system involving 2 or more forces of equal points, but there exists within this framework the possibility to construct ultra-powerful lists with better abilities than an opponent for the same points.

Merely stating that both armies are the same points is not enough to excuse the powermongery. 
It is just like taking part in a 100 metre sprint, with a 20 yard advantage....except that in 40K, you are allowed that head-start.  Thing is, you don't have to take it....you can use your conscience and be sensible.  GW are not perfect, the process of rules-making and introducing new models and codices is on-going....i don't doubt that things are getting better, but it will be a long time, maybe never, till lists become so balanced that cheesiness no longer exists.
There will always be players that seek advantage through any means and of course you have to build for yourself a healthy, competitive list....but any experienced player knows where to draw the line.  If you are experienced with your chosen army, you know where and how to include the cheese....so can we please have some honesty from the "no such thing as cheese" guys?  You know it exists...and you have the opportunity to not do it, to make games more fun, to be more sporting and competitive and win through tactics and not just model power....thing is, will you take that option?

Like i said, it's a conscience thing.  Happy blasting,

Reborn. :)

Offline Ianos Stormbringer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Always and never
Re: Cheese
« Reply #57 on: June 22, 2007, 08:38:37 AM »
I understand where you are all getting at and I appreciate your advice, I really do guys :), but maybe I simply see things differently.  Let me tell you how this unfolds in my mind piece by piece. Nobody I think argues that the game is balanced and everything is ok. What the unbelievers are arguing about is that in a game based on rules we are asked to base our decision on emotions.  Reborn said “experienced players know where to draw the line” yet I am posting lists here and nobody can draw it, where is that cheese line I we are not supposed to tread? I am not flaming or counter arguing here, I seriously don’t believe it can be objectively defined.

I keep thinking why in all other competitions people don’t act like this, I mean does the referee deny points if a team has better basketball players because they are cheesy? Do F1 pilots loose championships because they have better vehicles and skills? Even in amateur levels should I be disqualified in a 5x5 football championship because I am too good, imbalanced… cheesy!? ??? And don’t give me the chess/pieces argument I am not talking pieces here I am talking a whole team being significantly better than another and yet no-one considers that unfair but simply a fact of life.

So all this puzzles me especially since in 40k with not so expensive sum of money almost anyone can have a very good list (team) and yet almost everyone ends up hating that… I remember playing MTG and always being melancholic about the fact that no matter how good I was, I would never have the perfect deck because of money. And then I switched to 40k and I loved the fact that I could with 300 Euros amass a very good force. I painted my favorite army, I read the fluff and the rules, I made a themed Mech list because that’s what I saw as fluffy Eldar (despite everyone on the net and anywhere I asked where telling me to get 3 Wraithlords and a 16 man council), I wrote my fluff, I converted my models, I thought of my strategies and then I saw up and start playing games so that in the end I can hear “Ianos, your Eldar are cheesy!”

I sat down and seriously thought about it and I cam up with the following.

Facts:

1)   40k is not a totally balanced game; no game actually is including chess.
2)   40k is a game based on algebra, probabilities and geometry and for the most part has specific rules.
3)   It is a game where there are 3 results, win/draw/loss.
4)   Everything is calculated, accurately or not.
5)   Armies and equipment are all dictated by rules that allow personal selection but with certain restrictions.

And then comes the cheese thing. This notion circumvents all the above mathematical basis and introduces personal preference to the rules. In essence the player effectively wants to change his opposing player’s rules and codex in accordance to what he thinks is right/good for him.
The anti-cheese theory gains more followers as terrain gets sparser, missions are disregarded and everyone prefers MEQs and then everyone condemns cookie cutters as if there it is only the rules/designers fault. The designers of the game have indeed been faulty but things would be a lot easier if people played the game as it should be played and that is 25% terrain, rolling every mission objective and parameter and most importantly 65% of the people not playing practically the same race.
The reason that most people play the wrong way and thus generate cheese cries is that the company once severely boosted and promoted certain races which now apart from their hard-core fans (which I deeply respect), have amassed a lot of players simply because they are considered “TEH B3ST!!!11”
As a result despite the fact that points costs and options and restrictions are designed to operate when each racial encounter has the same probability as any other, the players are designing lists to specifically beat MEQs practically disregarding all other encounters. This makes MEQ players consider their non MEQ opponents imbalanced since they end up wasting points in inadequate choices. Furthermore since MEQs usually fight MEQs they do not realize how powerful and incredibly cost effective their armies are compared to non-MEQs and consider the fact that there is a pretty much equal chance of a marine beating another marine, as game balance and when some other army appears to specifically designed to attack them, they will consider that improper and unfair.
In the end MEQ players will force themselves into the choices that can put the hurt mostly on marines but will also have a the firepower to kill non-armored troops (Assault Cannon anyone?), making themselves also appear “cheesy” to the non-MEQ players.
Apart from that I cannot count the times where people just want to play Alpha-Annihilate in a valley and then complain that IW beat their CC oriented army with little or no transports. Let’s see those same IW in dense terrain, with night-fight and escalation with the objective being the enemy deployment zone! How lovely!
Now there are two ways to deal with this phenomenon, the one is to endorse comp scoring and try to persuade people to take more fitting choices but this does not really limit imbalance and has the following side-effects:
1)   It is a treatment of a symptom and not the cause.
2)   Each man/group/community have their own sense of balance.
3)   Even if everyone had the perfect sense of justice no one can accurately define where you cross the line except clearly defined rules that if not followed will forbid playing.
The other way around is to re-balance the powerful armies and the low-power armies. This is done right now with the new codices and when the cycle is over people will realize that they cannot win without thinking by selecting race x and will instead orient themselves to what they really like and play best so that they have a chance to win and enjoy the game.
   Right now we are in the middle of this phase where every race is being rebalanced NOT according to the meta-game and marine dominance, but according to how powerful something is in relation to it’s enemies with equal chance of engaging any of them (hence combat squads, less heavy weapons etc.)
   Until then the best thing people can do is play the race they LIKE the most and honor the scenario and terrain because these are the real game changers and can really make cheese disappear in many cases. For the few cases it doesn’t be patient and JJ has made a promise which I believe he will keep.


P.S. I have been to tournaments too, I have faced all the power lists and once you get to business and play to your strengths and their weaknesses no one seems that powerful. Besides, if you go to a basketball game with your amateur friends and face 5 guys who play professionally, are you going to tell them they are cheesy and that they should change their team? Same with football, same with life and same with 40k… just FIGHT!!!

The strands of fate being pulled, foresight brings more gifts, treasures with pain, knowledge with strife and the laws of anarchy. For when the jurney ends, and the stardust settles, all that lies in the mirror of infinity is thyself.

Offline Andro Ist Keine Schwedischen

  • Da Biggest; His Fluffiness; Warboss
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5466
  • Country: 00
Re: Cheese
« Reply #58 on: June 22, 2007, 08:42:15 AM »
It's like bringing adults to a children's 5-A-Side football match.  If you want it to be put into perspective.

~Andromidius
aka. Boris the Bear

Offline The Reborn

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3107
  • Country: england
  • I'm being out-gunned by a darn Carnifex....
  • Armies: Eldar, Harlequins.
Re: Cheese
« Reply #59 on: June 22, 2007, 09:00:24 AM »
@Andromidius...agree completely with that assessment mate.  PS, as a SW player, visit the marine forum and find my post on page 1, might give you a laugh!!

@Ianos.....i understand a lot of your points, and they are well made.  I used to argue from the same vantage point, so they all seem very familiar.....but they are all basically flawed due to the process of list building.
Chess, btw, is remarkably free of bias.  The real shame here is that you seem to me to be a really intelligent guy, exactly the opposite of the type i see playing cheesy lists, or even supporting them....happy gaming mate.

-Reborn. :)

 


Powered by EzPortal