|
Haven't you ever gotten that annoying feeling that the game you're playing is lagging like hell after watching a couple of replays at x2-x4 speeds?
It's just about the same feeling that strikes you when moving from Fastest to Fast.
Thus I think a faster fastest setting would be adopted fairly quickly. I personally wouldn't mind the new "fastest" setting being 1.5x faster than the current one. That would actually be perfect. Not really noticable in a game-altering kind of way, but rather just as an enhancement to the new game.
x2 would be way too fast imo. But 1.25x-1.5x would definitely be doable. I don't see any draw backs. It would give the game a "new" and fresh feel. And I think Blizzard wants something to spice it up a bit, something to make the 3d game more exotic and stand out from its 2d counterpart.
I approve of the FFS -- faster fastest setting -campaign
And so should you! Being pro-FFS is the new fad after the MBS got so ridicilously outdated.
|
Anything faster than SC1 fastest is silly. Can we please remember this is a tactical strategy game, not a reflex/apm tester. I played quakeworld to an extremely high level, and BW to a decent level. Those are probably the two deepest and nuanced 1v1 multiplayer games ever. I'm all for making the game hardcore, and i am against newbifying the game, but come one, there has to be reward for people who have brilliant strategic play but not necessarily light speed APM. Otherwise what is the point?
There is a rare breed that can combine the two, and good on (or god damn?) them  . But a pure APM player doesn't deserve to be rewarded over a pure strategy player, there has to be a balance. In my opinion, great tactics and timing with mid level APM should > frenzied APM everytime, that is how it should be.
I have been reading these forums for years. It seems to me alot of people on here who actively campaign for ridiculously hardcore inclusions into SC2 would never have the ability to actually use these to their advantage, they just want to see replays of pro Koreans using it. More elite VODS/reps to the collection, yay.
What next, an APM based ladder?
"pfft, i'm not playing you ya n00b, your stats say you are only a 200 APM'er. I don't vs. anyone under 350 thx"
APM automatch?
"HAY I GOT AUTOMATCHED TO SOMEONE WITH 200 APM BUT THEN IN OUR GAME HE HAD 500 APM. FUCKEN HACKERS.BLIZZARD SUXX. MY LADDER RATING IS RUINED. THANKS BLIZZARD"
|
it will be faster and looser, good for a casual game.
both players will play worse, but its a good way to play if you only have a tiny bit of time
|
The fastest setting will always be the competitive speed because it increases the skill required to play the game. And we like seeing skill correlate with with wins.
|
Hyper Speed Setting sounds ridiculous, wonder how long it will take players to master it.
|
I think it should be in there, but be ridiculously fast for kicks, or at least Blizzard should allow a similar thing to be implemented. Think like SSB "Super Sudden Death" style, where all players start with 300% damage.
It shouldn't be played competitively, but Super Sudden Death is very fun. It would be hilarious seeing people trying to keep up with ridiculously fast speed.
That being said, I do NOT think it should be legal in ladder, and in fact, maybe not even be a normal speed setting available under options, but maybe a setting that can be done in UMS maps.
|
fastest = perfect balance between micro and macro.
faster than fastest= more focus on macro.
slower than fastest = more focus on micro
|
30 second 4 pool
2 minute nuke rush
max out in under 5?
|
On May 03 2008 13:57 LaLuSh wrote:
Haven't you ever gotten that annoying feeling that the game you're playing is lagging like hell after watching a couple of replays at x2-x4 speeds?
It's just about the same feeling that strikes you when moving from Fastest to Fast.
Thus I think a faster fastest setting would be adopted fairly quickly. I personally wouldn't mind the new "fastest" setting being 1.5x faster than the current one. That would actually be perfect. Not really noticable in a game-altering kind of way, but rather just as an enhancement to the new game.
x2 would be way too fast imo. But 1.25x-1.5x would definitely be doable. I don't see any draw backs. It would give the game a "new" and fresh feel. And I think Blizzard wants something to spice it up a bit, something to make the 3d game more exotic and stand out from its 2d counterpart.
I approve of the FFS -- faster fastest setting -campaign
And so should you! Being pro-FFS is the new fad after the MBS got so ridicilously outdated.
do you realize that with anything faster than fastest, micro will become non existent?
TvZ mm vs lurk. hahaha
reaver harass terran base with tanks? hahahaha.
turtling will become the norm. it'll be almost impossible to attack early on with harass.
muta harass? it'll go out the door.
current build orders are already moving towards macro. 2 gate vs terran is so out in the pro scene. make the game any faster and mechanics and timing will all be out the door.
currently, maybe a window for a timing rush is 30 seconds? how about doubling the game speed and reduce that down to 15 seconds? good luck with timing rushes...
|
They should make fastest the new normal, and maybe create a hyper mode.
But they should not make a speed slider. It will always creep up to the faster side. 2 or 3 settings would be fine (a slower mode for parents maybe?).
|
i think a hyper mode should be put in for fun :}
|
On May 03 2008 16:32 Polyphasic wrote:
do you realize that with anything faster than fastest, micro will become non existent?
TvZ mm vs lurk. hahaha
reaver harass terran base with tanks? hahahaha.
turtling will become the norm. it'll be almost impossible to attack early on with harass.
muta harass? it'll go out the door.
current build orders are already moving towards macro. 2 gate vs terran is so out in the pro scene. make the game any faster and mechanics and timing will all be out the door.
currently, maybe a window for a timing rush is 30 seconds? how about doubling the game speed and reduce that down to 15 seconds? good luck with timing rushes...
And what exactly do you base these opinions on? Did micro become non-existant when players switched from fast to fastest back in 1999-2000 ? I bet you're one of those not having played one single b.net ladder game back when the speed setting was set to fast and it actually was popular. I remember microing ranged units was such a joy on fast, as you'd actually have the time to do it properly. With fastest I initially felt impeded, but eventually got used to it to the point where fast became annoying.
What exactly are YOUR arguments?
By what nonsensical logic would micro disappear if the speed was turned up by 25% or 50% ?
What the hell would be different with reaver harassing (except for the fact that reavers aren't in the current SC II build) ? Shuttle would move faster, scarabs would fire faster after the reaver was dropped. All these things theoretically benefit someone who is good at microing and multitasking.
Why would "reaver harass terran base with tanks? hahahah", be impossible if the shuttle moved 25% faster, if the scarabs fired 25% faster, if the reaver spent 25% more time in the shuttle? In my opinion reaver harass would require MORE attention of the terran player than it does the protoss. Terran has to follow that shuttle with his tanks to any cost.
If you on the other hand were arguing for something stupid along the lines of: "uhuhuh, terran will have turrets if the game is 2x faster, good luck reaver harassing!!!". Duh, knucklehead, the protoss will have reavers 2x faster as well. And I was never proposing a 2x increase. 1.25x to 1.5x is plenty and enough.
And what'll be wrong with muta harass? Can you explain instead of just claiming stuff totally unsupported by arguments? I bet 25%-50% faster mutalisks in the hands of players like jaedong and savior would be a pain in the ass for any terran player. It would require tremendous effort to keep the M&M's well positioned.
And if the window for a timing attack is 30 seconds for an attack within the first 5-10 minutes, a 1.25x-1.5x increase will only decrease the window by about 5-8 seconds.
I don't feel that is too much of a sacrifice. The ability to make ultra fast tech or strategy switches (to more macro oriented style) will more than make up for it. Players will have to be on their toes and boost performances compared to SC1.
A timing push might still come at the 5 minute mark. Only difference is that it might involve 18 zealots with +1 speed instead of 12. Or, better yet: the timing push will perhaps be pushed forward a minute or two making the game even more action packed and unpredictable...
So... What exactly are you arguments again?
|
On May 03 2008 17:21 LaLuSh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2008 16:32 Polyphasic wrote:
do you realize that with anything faster than fastest, micro will become non existent?
TvZ mm vs lurk. hahaha
reaver harass terran base with tanks? hahahaha.
turtling will become the norm. it'll be almost impossible to attack early on with harass.
muta harass? it'll go out the door.
current build orders are already moving towards macro. 2 gate vs terran is so out in the pro scene. make the game any faster and mechanics and timing will all be out the door.
currently, maybe a window for a timing rush is 30 seconds? how about doubling the game speed and reduce that down to 15 seconds? good luck with timing rushes...
And what exactly do you base these opinions on? Did micro become non-existant when players switched from fast to fastest back in 1999-2000 ? I bet you're one of those not having played one single b.net ladder game back when the speed setting was set to fast and it actually was popular. I remember microing ranged units was such a joy on fast, as you'd actually have the time to do it properly. With fastest I initially felt impeded, but eventually got used to it to the point where fast became annoying. What exactly are YOUR arguments? By what nonsensical logic would micro disappear if the speed was turned up by 25% or 50% ? What the hell would be different with reaver harassing (except for the fact that reavers aren't in the current SC II build) ? Shuttle would move faster, scarabs would fire faster after the reaver was dropped. All these things theoretically benefit someone who is good at microing and multitasking. Why would "reaver harass terran base with tanks? hahahah", be impossible if the shuttle moved 25% faster, if the scarabs fired 25% faster, if the reaver spent 25% more time in the shuttle? In my opinion reaver harass would require MORE attention of the terran player than it does the protoss. Terran has to follow that shuttle with his tanks to any cost. If you on the other hand were arguing for something stupid along the lines of: "uhuhuh, terran will have turrets if the game is 2x faster, good luck reaver harassing!!!". Duh, knucklehead, the protoss will have reavers 2x faster as well. And I was never proposing a 2x increase. 1.25x to 1.5x is plenty and enough. And what'll be wrong with muta harass? Can you explain instead of just claiming stuff totally unsupported by arguments? I bet 25%-50% faster mutalisks in the hands of players like jaedong and savior would be a pain in the ass for any terran player. It would require tremendous effort to keep the M&M's well positioned. And if the window for a timing attack is 30 seconds for an attack within the first 5-10 minutes, a 1.25x-1.5x increase will only decrease the window by about 5-8 seconds. I don't feel that is too much of a sacrifice. The ability to make ultra fast tech or strategy switches (to more macro oriented style) will more than make up for it. Players will have to be on their toes and boost performances compared to SC1. A timing push might still come at the 5 minute mark. Only difference is that it might involve 18 zealots with +1 speed instead of 12. Or, better yet: the timing push will perhaps be pushed forward a minute or two making the game even more action packed and unpredictable... So... What exactly are you arguments again?
Just one problem with all your faster micro analysis: the controlling player still has to macro.
When that shuttle is zipping around 25% faster, that reaver is firing 25% faster, rebuilding scarabs faster, being chased and fired upon faster, more time will be required watching it, and while all this is going on, your resources are piling up 25% faster. Damage required to even stay in the game at that point would be extreme.
Mutalisk micro? Same situation: muta micro takes a great deal of effort to do properly, and one slip-up can practically ruin it, so not only do you have to be very careful and watch the mutas, you now have to do it 25% faster!
Players don't have infinite multitask abilities. In a 25% faster version of starcraft, the game will tend more toward macro and timing than fancy micro. This also makes it less approachable by non-players, since it's fairly simple to watch micro and understand what's going on, but you can't just look at timing. Being required to learn the game before actually making sense of what's happening isn't good for the game as an e-sport.
So... What exactly are you arguments again?
|
Oh boy...I've learned to be efficient with my measly 70 apm, but on higher speeds....
|
Seriously though, rumor has it the current "fastest" was meant to be a joke speed...look how that turned out 
|
I could play at super high speeds just for fun, on ladder I demand normal (sc1 fastest) speed !!
|
You know, I bet you that they had this exact same discussion with "normal" and "fastest" when they were making SC in the first place.
|
Micro-intensive tactics and strategies would fall of the grid. SC2 will become a cookiecuttergame. Increasing the speed will reduce the possibilties of the game severely on every level of game. It would only be good to those who lack creativity. The gameflow is already sped up by the 2 extra workers and the extra unitabilities.
I think apm among players is distributed in a bellshaped curve. When the game is sped up the the curve would shift to the right and widen a bit, but apm on average would increase less then 25% if the game is sped up 25%. We would lose a lot of players on the slow side of the Bell-curve. A lot more than we would gain. Due to human limitations micro-intensive strategies will be less rewarding and unviable.
Macro would become the norm. It would become too hard to fool unit-ai responses with micro. SC2 with faster then fastest as standard will become an elitist game with a very small playerbase.
Nothing wrong with it implementing it as a fun setting though.
|
In WarCraft 2 Battle.Net Edition Blizz included the speed "fastest" as a joke, as it was roughly twice as fast as the speeds that were common before the days of battle.net. Unfortunately most new players picked up on it and ended up playing a twisted click-fest instead of the game that it was meant to be. It also contributed to the game's downfall by splitting the non-custom community into two factions, those who played the more strategic and microable "even faster" speed and the adrenaline driven fastest players. Not a welcome scenario, to be sure.
|
Its kind of like RA 2, although that game sucked, the fastest setting was insane, buildings and units were created so fast and moved so fast.... it was kind of fun haahah
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
