Perfect Unit Control On Fastest

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

The FACT remains lance 95% or more of RPGs can be beaten on FASTEST. So your fact still fails to prove shit in this case. If I beat an RPG on EF sure it takes skill if I then beat it on Fastest it takes more skill, that is also a fact. You are talking about latency but when an RPG can be beaten on both EF and F the F one would take more skill, jeez not hard to figure out.

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

You're talking about how there's latency on fastest yet the same maps can beaten on Fastest that are beaten on EF. So what you're saying is by playing an RPG on Fastest we are also dealing with latency you are not, I guess we are just that good. If a map can be beaten on EF and F the F is going to be harder because of reaction times and not having all day to click on their units, and by your own words we deal with some FACT that latency makes it harder to control our units, I guess we are just gods. Lmao.

[Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart)]

I will never agree with you on this Blid. I'll agree with you EF takes more skill or makes the game better in GOW/BNEs because of as you all put it "time to plan". You need no time to plan in an RPG. It's purely about unit control and killing all the enemies. You don't have to worry about pulling miners or choppers and balancing building/creating units with fighting. Slowing an RPG down doesn't hold the same argument for slowing it down to increase the skill like GOW in my opinion. Playing RPGs at the fastest speed makes it a better game and makes you react faster and use better unit control.

In good RPGs, it's entirely a game of micro/unit control.  There is literally no macro (town building, resource gathering) and you generally only have a single unit.  With a slower speed, you can have better control of that unit.  You can dodge stuff better, take your shots better, and so on.  I mean, obviously so, because the speed is reduced.  I don't know why you wouldn't want that unless the map is so easy you don't need it.

[{Lance}]

Take this example then:

15MBit Satelite connection (Assume this is War2 being online) vs
15MBit Cable Internet   (Assume this is War2 being played locally)

Can you tell me which one is better,  and why?  If you cant understand the analogy, then you're not yet capable of understanding why a Vet player would say that EF (or slower speeds) are the speeds in which skill requirement INCREASES.  You're saying that skill increases the higher the latency gets and that just isnt the right answer because you're forgetting (or perhaps ignoring) the physical barriers.  Harder != "IMPOSSIBLE" because it's impossible for Fastest speed units to respond as quickly as EF unit response.  That CANNOT be debated because of the network latency problems that every single game ever created has and that issue will never go away.  Ever.  As technology increases, the latency may be lowered,  but it's never going to reach a point where Latency = 0.  Even Light has latency as proven by the fact that it can be bent by gravity.  And currently technology cannot travel faster than the speed of light (Fiber travels close to speed of light)

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

Lance: Slowing something down and being able to control it doesn't mean it can't be done on the faster speed. Sure you can control a unit better when it's moving slower because you have more time and there is less latency as you say. That doesn't mean the same map and unit movement cannot be done on Fastest. Play some RPGs on fastest and ef and you will see playing it on EF makes it easier.

Blid: When I play RPGs I do it purely for the challenge. QUICK{hR} and I when not able to get games will play the newest RPG I've found or made over and over until we beat it. The ones I make they get harder and harder as we complete one. The challenge to us is to increase the difficulty of each RPG and the dodging, taking shots, and so on has to be done at the fastest speed on the spot, that's how we like it. Some of the RPGs we have beaten have taken months to finally beat. Some RPGs I have beaten: Archer Swat, Archer Assassinz, all the Dodge The Cats, The Dark Cave!, Khadgar Detectives, The Icy Cave, The Icy Cave 2, The Lost City!, Ranged Warriors, The Icy Road, Quest To Smaug, Quest To Mordor, The Infernal Gate, and many more. I play RPGs for a good challenge, I like the razor fast reactions and UC needed to play them on Fastest.

[{Lance}]

So let me get this straight,  you're of the opinion that as latency increase,  skill requirement needs to increase?  Try playing War2 on pkt:50 and then come back and tell me that skill increases after your units simply dont do what you tell them to do when you tell them to do it.  Because that is your argument,  that skill requirements increase as latency increases and that couldnt be further from the truth.  The only thing that increases with latcency................... is time.  Time isnt a skill nor can it be changed/challenged.  Any real War2 player will be able to tell you that their units do not respond in "time" when the game speed is increased.  This doesnt make it harder,  it makes things IMPOSSIBLE to be done as efficiently as they know they should be done.  That is the problem with the EF vs F community.  The F community doesnt realize that things truly can be done more efficiently on slower speeds.  This is also why an EF player will ALWAYS be able to out play an F player no matter what the speeds is.  Because the EF player is noticing the time difference between actions and will be able to tell you when something is due to latency and when something is due to skill.  Do not think that making things faster makes things harder, because it doesnt.  If you tried to increase war2 beyond Fastest,  using your logic you would think it becomes harder simply because things are happening faster.  But that wouldnt be true because its not the speed thats making it harder,  its the latency, or lack of being able to control your units, that is making it harder.  But then at that point you cant use the term "harder" because it's technically incorrect.  You have to then use the term "impossible" because you cant change time.  So if you swap the term "harder" with "impossible"  you may begin to see the light as to why we are all saying that skill requirement INCREASES as latency DECREASES.  You're argument is that as you slow things down, you have more time.  THATS WRONG.  Time CANNOT be changed.  You cant increase time nor can you decrease it.  But what you can increase/decrease is a person's skill at doing something.  Once you remove the time element (latency) you're left with just 1 thing.  The person's skill.  So the slower something goes,  the more of a person's skill can be revealed.

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

Your argument is just as ridiculous to me Lance. You are claiming that there is latency on the Fastest speed but that EF takes more skill. Anyone with any sort of brain can see slowing something down will make it easier latency aside. So yes slowing your units down and having more time to react will take more skill only because you have more time. Now for the latency, you are claiming there is less latency on EF which I believe, yet it is still possible to beat map X on fastest with that latency that could be beaten on EF without it. So by still being able to beat it with latency and faster you have the deck stacked against you yet we still play and win lol.

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

I'm not going to argue with you it's easy to understand. People can make the exact same unit movements on F they can on EF. Just because it is easier on EF DOES NOT mean that makes it more skillful. You once again mention jacking up Warcraft 2's speed beyond what the game is capable of that doesn't even play into the debate because its a mod, but yes it would get much harder until the point it would be impossible. Slowing something down to retarded speeds wouldn't prove your point any more than speeding it up. IF I slowed Warcraft 2 down to a virtual crawl it would just be boring and stupid wouldn't make the game any better. The only good point you really have is latency, yet you can't deny the fact any unit movement done on EF can be replicated on F. You are biased in this argument in that you only play EF and probably only ever have. There is latency on Fastest great doesn't mean the same unit movements can't be done that are done on EF and the people who will do them in RPGs will do them at a quicker speed and with less time to react. This will be my final post on this subject, play RPGs on Fastest then on EF you will soon see EF is pointless in RPGs and is for the short bus people who can't handle making precise movements on fastest. That is all.

[{Lance}]

any unit movement done on EF can be replicated on F

This is inaccurate and why you dont get it yet.  You cannot replicate (produce/copy/manufacture/modify time).  A unit on EF responds sooner than it will on F.  Period.  Thats not even debatable.  Why would you try to say you can replicate an impossible feat?  Because you cant.  It's IMPOSSIBLE because time cannot be modified.  You cant argue that F units respond just as fast as EF units.  BECAUSE THEY DONT,  and the technical reason for why that is, has been laid out for you in terms that I think even an unborn child could understand.

You cannot equate a faster speed with higher skill because skill is not based in time.  The only thing you increase with speed is the time between actions (latency).  Since time cannot be changed,  you therefore cannot say "it becomes harder" because time doesnt get "harder".  It's either possible or not possible.  0 or 1.  There is no 0.5 or 0.89 in time like there is with light.  Time either is, or it isnt.  There is no in between   (well, that we are aware of yet anyway, and I'm of the opinion that there is no in between).

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

I'm only going to respond because you asked a question and misinterpret what I mean. If you can kill 100 grunts with a peon in EF you can kill 100 grunts in F. If you can make a fireball on a charging group in EF you can do that same fireball in F. If you can avoid a catapult until all of it's hp is done in EF you can do it in F. I am not talking about the actual speed at which it is done, I am talking about the end result. Any unit movement done on EF can be replicated on F by a good player. The units do the same thing just on a slower speed in EF giving you more time to execute that movement.

[{Lance}]

The units do the same thing just on a slower speed in EF giving you more time to execute that movement.

Again you actually have it BACKWARDS.  If you move a unit in EF,  it's actually going to move FASTER than it would with Fastest.  Just because it gets from point A to point B on F doesnt mean it reacted faster.  It just means that the animation completed quicker and animations have nothing at all to do with skill.  If you were to put 2 machines side by side,  one on EF the other on F and then click a spot on the map simultanously,  the EF peon would move first.  This means that things actually happen FASTER on the slower speeds which is completely the opposite of what you're trying to say.  You're saying that things happen slower.  When in reality,  they do just the opposite.

You are mixing up Animation speeds with skill and we all know that animation speeds dont effect anything other than visual perception.  (Keyword being PERCEPTION which is why I say it's all an illusion)

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

Let me be honest with you Lance, I don't give a fuck. Not even in the slightest, you know the map I just posted that I beat on F. Took me over an hour to get that video on F. I just beat the map on EF in about 10 minutes. It was also ridiculous in that you have to wait for each chop to finish before clicking the next unit, making it actually less skillful as a rhythm is harder to get into. The time I had to click each unit and respond to shit was sad though and made it easy. Anyone who plays RPGs for competitiveness knows slowing it down makes it easier. Feel free to tell me how RPGs on EF make it harder though when I just tried it and it made it easier. Also I knew this as its a pointless argument slowing down the computer isn't making it harder lmao.

[{Lance}]

I think the point here is that many of us have transcended the point at which the game animation perception has an impact.  You havent quite jumped that hurdle yet.  In otherwords,  you've not yet "seen the light"  lmao.  We're able to see into the future where as you're still stuck on what the screen is showing you and you cant see past what is handed to you.  Just do the math and you'll eventually see the light and then you'll be able to prove things (such as the 2 computer theory) without actually having to do the experiment yourself because you know that fact is fact.  I can tell you what would happen without actually doing it.  This is why I dont need to "play a map" to test things out because I already know all the math behind the scenes and I can calculate it without actually having to do it myself.  You on the otherhand are trying to prove things by actually trying it out yourself and seeing if your guess is right.  But you're always going to guess wrong because you dont yet understand the basic concepts behind whats actually happening on the screen.

Just because I know the math though, doesnt make the game any less fun (slowing it down for example).  It's because of this math that things ARE fun.  War2 is perfect

[xXxSmeagolxXx]

Here is how I know I'm right: Just played the RPG in the video on fastest took me 1-2 hours to beat. Played same map on EF took me at most 20 minutes. It depends on the game you are playing and RPGs is a game where fastest will make it harder. GOW is a different map, with different strategies, and different objectives than RPGs. I still really don't give a shit I'm not going to take twice as long in a game and make RPGs easier for me because EF is some golden speed.

[{Lance}]

EF vs F isnt a question of one being better than the other.  It's a question of which has less impact on skill.  The answer is that the slower the speed,  the less impact it will have on skill.  So then you have to measure just how much of a jump between each speed has on skill.  If you were to look at it on a graph, here is what it would look like:

F:  10
EF: 8
Faster:  7
Fast: 6
Normal: 5
Slow: 4
Slower: 3
Even Slower: 2
Slowest: 1
Local: 0

Now that you can see "The Math" behind what I'm talking about,  which speed sticks out to you as having the greatest "difference".  So the "golden" speed is in fact EF as you can see by the numbers.  It's not an opinion,  it's just a fact.