We chat about videogames and videogame accessories.

Scouting your opponent is a major part of the StarCraft metagame. Surprising your opponent is a major part of any metagame. A win is a win.

It's worth noting that the story BRP posted is more than three years old. SC2's metagame has no doubt adapted to this strategy in the meantime. There is never a strategy that is going to guarantee a win 100% of the time outside of a solved game.

Bad players whine and complain. Good ones develop new and unusual strategies and counter-strategies that upset the player base. Metagames are fluid.

I've never said anything about my own opinion on "cheese builds," and I do agree that bad players will often "cry wolf" and call anything they lose against cheese. But, as Gnauga stated, there are clearly strategies that rely on brute force, luck, and/or surprise over actual skill or tactics. It can hardly be argued that building nothing but zerglings and then swarming the enemy in the hopes of an early victory displays much advance planning or forethought, for example. On top of that, if it's a commonly used strategy, counters will be developed quickly and many players will find random matchup games repeating themselves constantly as less skilled opponents attempt to gain an easy win and are countered and then crushed due to sacrificing resources for the rush.

Stepping away from Starcraft for a moment...

A win is a win.

Speaking as someone who has actually encountered multiplayer games containing legitimately overpowered gear/abilities/builds/etc., this comes across as an absurd bottom line. Multiplayer games at their heart should encourage skill, and when you can hand a player who has just started something that will enable them to defeat highly skilled players a large portion of the time, the game becomes worthless at encouraging players to become better. This is not a specific statement regarding cheese builds in Starcraft, before you jump on me for taking some personal stake in the previous argument.