The newer generations of Escapees seem to think this is a news site. Me, I miss the old single-page layouts with their fine art interleaved with text!John Funk said:This isn't news, it's a column.Kurt Horsting said:
View From the Road: Cheaters Sometimes Win
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Ahh yes, I myself have been giving the SC2 metagame a bit of an off-hand touch.
But you're totally right, making my opponents believe I'm under-skilled results in that underestimated win. Zerg-rushing one guy in a FFA and killing him in the first 3 minutes leads everyone to be looking out to bash your brains in and over-estimate you...
Just like any sport or game, psychology plays a big part.
But you're totally right, making my opponents believe I'm under-skilled results in that underestimated win. Zerg-rushing one guy in a FFA and killing him in the first 3 minutes leads everyone to be looking out to bash your brains in and over-estimate you...
Just like any sport or game, psychology plays a big part.
Damn..One more reason for me not to try RTSs - not only do I know they're not my specialty, now I'd have to know multiple tactics in order to be able to choose from for when I encounter one of those .. mind trick-playing tricksters!
(wow, did I butcher that sentence good)
(wow, did I butcher that sentence good
)
It is call psyche warfare and it is perfectly fair. You can say what ever you want to your opponent to annoy them or make them think you suck, they should know it keep cool and play their best no matter what. After all you are wasting APM on the chat as opposed to the game so you aren't getting it for free.
No, you're not cheating (hell, Sun Tzu would give you a high five for essentially following his intellegence strategy), but it is being a bit of a dick...
From chapter 1 of Sun Tzu's The Art of War-Lionel Giles Translation
18. All warfare is based on deception.
19. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem
inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we
must make him believe we are near.
20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
21. If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.
22. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow
arrogant.
everyone that wants to get better at Starcraft 2 or any RTS should read this book its less than 40 pages.
18. All warfare is based on deception.
19. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem
inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we
must make him believe we are near.
20. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
21. If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.
22. If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow
arrogant.
everyone that wants to get better at Starcraft 2 or any RTS should read this book its less than 40 pages.
You gotta list the SC2 beer recommendations.
Psyching out your competition in chat or otherwise is definately not cheating. It might be a question of sportsmanship. I've never been so competitive as to do that, or to be offended if someone else did that to me. Though if I knew someone IRL or even over the Internet who made a habit of that, I might be less likely to go out for beers on Friday night.
Psyching out your competition in chat or otherwise is definately not cheating. It might be a question of sportsmanship. I've never been so competitive as to do that, or to be offended if someone else did that to me. Though if I knew someone IRL or even over the Internet who made a habit of that, I might be less likely to go out for beers on Friday night.
I was thinking, hey, maybe I should try this one playing against my friend on C&C3. then that made me think, this wont work against him... so no, i dont think it is cheating
Perhaps it isn't because you pretended to be drunk at all. Perhaps you kept winning because opponents just assumed you wouldn't rely on something as irritating and ungentlemanly as zerg rushing.
Even if people fell for such deception, I don't think it counts as cheating. It is common to bluff and mislead players in games with a strategic element - like poker or hungry hippos. These people shouldn't be letting up in the slightest just because they may think your drunk.
Even if people fell for such deception, I don't think it counts as cheating. It is common to bluff and mislead players in games with a strategic element - like poker or hungry hippos. These people shouldn't be letting up in the slightest just because they may think your drunk.
Cheating? No
Underhanded? Probably
Valid tactic? Definitely
On a related topic it is my experience that my gaming improves when having a bit of a buzz on. Being completely inebriated is of course devastating and often leads to keyboard patterns on my face. What I mean is having a few drinks with dinner, after a late night where you are starting to get sober or perhaps during an evening in good company. Basically in situations where alcohol is involved but you are not - well - shitfaced. In those cases my game improves. I have the most experience in fps on this account but it also holds true in beat 'em ups and other reaction based games. It is my opinion that the alcohol relaxes my in such a degree that instead of over thinking my tactics I just let them flow. Another valid reason might be that I am just that bad.
Underhanded? Probably
Valid tactic? Definitely
On a related topic it is my experience that my gaming improves when having a bit of a buzz on. Being completely inebriated is of course devastating and often leads to keyboard patterns on my face. What I mean is having a few drinks with dinner, after a late night where you are starting to get sober or perhaps during an evening in good company. Basically in situations where alcohol is involved but you are not - well - shitfaced. In those cases my game improves. I have the most experience in fps on this account but it also holds true in beat 'em ups and other reaction based games. It is my opinion that the alcohol relaxes my in such a degree that instead of over thinking my tactics I just let them flow. Another valid reason might be that I am just that bad.
You realize that Zerg are the easiest, most OP race of the three. There are three standard Zerg almost auto win strats. Strat 1) Speedlings... lots and lots of speedlings (zerglings with the speed upgrade) and if you still need firepower after that, for whatever reason, Banelings are good for ramming walls or defenses. Strat 2 (the one you used)) Roaches... lots and lots of OP roaches that have ridiculous damage and armor with the ability to heal, in burrow especially, if they run into trouble. Strat 3) If all else fails and the game lasts long enough, spam Ultralisks and you are unstoppable.
All of these strats only require Attack Moving to a location and almost not paying attention to them at all while you spam more units at your base. So you winning with roaches most of the time has nothing to do with informing them that you were drunk. Plus, depending on what league you were playing in (which I would guess Copper / Bronze from how you said the other people were playing) there are plenty of horrible people there.
All of these strats only require Attack Moving to a location and almost not paying attention to them at all while you spam more units at your base. So you winning with roaches most of the time has nothing to do with informing them that you were drunk. Plus, depending on what league you were playing in (which I would guess Copper / Bronze from how you said the other people were playing) there are plenty of horrible people there.
nice article, and i would say that those tactics are no more "cheating" then any bluf you would do in a poker game. its just taking the mental advantage
In the SC1 days I used to join "NO RUSH" games and then proceed to rush my opponents. When the brood war expansion was released I won more than a few games as Protoss with Dark Templar spam simply because my opponents neglected to build any sort of stealth detection, which was somehow considered "unfair" of me.
Yeah, not exactly cheating, but certainly in poor sportsmanship...to them. In my experience cries of 'cheating' and 'exploit' and being a 'poor sport' are the mewling of a LOSER.
You won, they lost, end of story. Touch cookies, suckers.
Yeah, not exactly cheating, but certainly in poor sportsmanship...to them. In my experience cries of 'cheating' and 'exploit' and being a 'poor sport' are the mewling of a LOSER.
You won, they lost, end of story. Touch cookies, suckers.
I more or less used a similar technique in a 3-man Worms game(we were all on the same computer, taking turns). Basically, the two other players (much more experienced than me) started by reducing my forces to just 1 worm. then, they fought it out between themselves. At one point, however, they were both down to one worm each and right next to each other, so I did this:Random Argument Man said:
one of the other guys got so pissed, he closed the computer before my turn was done (actually, he had been looking for every opportunity to prove himself better than me, so I didn't feel bad about that cheap move
)also, on a 3v3 on Red Alert 3 (I was Allies), one guy attacked and destroyed all of my base, except one power generator and my ultimate weapon. He must have assumed that it wasn't enough to power up my weapon, but...let's just say the protons I fired at his base toward the end of the game proved him wrong (our side won)
One of my favourite things in the game Defcon was the psych-out metagame that played in the chat log, especially if you started in Diplomacy mode where every player began allied together and the alliances gradually splintered or fractured. In a 6-player game, playing one guy off another ("He's moving his ships toward your shores -are you going to tolerate that kind of aggression?") could be the key to victory.
In that game dishonesty never felt dishonourable. Some players disagreed, complaining as former allies decimated their cities with nuclear fire. But to me it seemed like that's how a nuclear wargame should be.
In that game dishonesty never felt dishonourable. Some players disagreed, complaining as former allies decimated their cities with nuclear fire. But to me it seemed like that's how a nuclear wargame should be.