@@snuzzy4984 current wow pvp is best its ever been. If you enjoyed having 30 min matches where you wait and wait and wait for rounds of cds and no one dies then go play MoP. Most specs can one or two shot now and requires actual skill to prevent, notice, kite or absorb such cooldowns. Btfo
@@christtel1484 Current WoW pvp takes such a rediculous amount of time to gear up to (6+ hrs/day) just to stay relevant. If you think thats the best its ever been, you're delusional
I’m in the hospital after a heart attack & am about to get a bypass surgery tomorrow. I’m scared. But this just made me laugh out loud & made my day. Thank you for this Artosis.
Patch 1.04: Wraith and Scout get their rate of fire vs ground nerfed. Protoss Carrier buffed, Battlecruiser buffed, almost everything Protoss made cheaper, dragoon buffed. Incidentally, both photon cannon and spore colony get their damage type changed from explosion to normal.
I remember waaaaaaay long ago when Blizzard changed ladder speed from fast to fastest, what a great time that was. Going from custom fastest speed games, then playing a 'fast' ladder game was hell.
"Yo, this is CrazyJim of Warcraft3, Starcraft Vanilla, Broodwar and Diablo2 fame, all of which I was #1 in the entire world at my hey day. My ability which exceeds everyone on Earth is balance design and spotting over powered things. So when they do radical reworks, I'm literally one of the best people on Earth to understand what is going on and what to build." very humble guy
Hydralisk with "normal" dmg meaning 100% to all armor types at 1 supply would demolish marines,zerglins, zealots,mutalisk. This 1 change alone would make a game a mess. Basically, hydras would deal twice as much dmg to small armor units. Even with 50% dmg against zealots as of now, they are pretty good against them with micro and big numbers. However, scouts could use some love, maybe devourers could also get a little more love. Fun fact: Scouts got buffed costing 25 min and gas less then they used to long ago.
maybe go other way around and make muta medium instead of small but then again it tilts the ballance and mech and sair would be even more OP it's hard to change sth after 20years and not flip the table. Scout and Devo where designed (and are good) anti-heavy air like carriers/BC in extended AA fights, but they could use some love to not beeing so clumcky,slow as hell and not cost efficient (Scout,which is only P unit that has 0 armor o_O).Better think of how to fix PvZ or ZvZ where it's better just to do more muta instead of teching hive to get spells
@@model84 The point is that mutalisks are fake news cheaters who lie that they have low hp when they are one of the tankiest fliers (and that Artosis saying that "Missle Turrets are crappy AA because their attack is explosive" is a little silly too).
@@MajkaSrajka any splash/aoe tends to disagree (heck, even goliath), but i get your point, hence my 'idea' that muta should be medium instead of small and we all know that you don't listen to Arty:)
That's amazing. His point about the 10000x strategy is actually probably correct. If you just a-move, and the game's so fast that you kill all his workers in a fraction of a second, before he has time to a-move his workers, yes that would be the 'best' strategy. But trying to relate that to Fast vs Fastest is absurd. Yes, it being insanely fast would suck, but that doesn't mean slightly faster is worse. You could use his same logic the other way "Fast is worse than fastest because a slower pace is worse. You know a slower pace is worse, because if the game was 1000000x slower, it would take you an entire day just to get your first couple of units out and that would be super boring. Therefore a slower pace is bad."
The point of that argument was to demonstrate that increasing speed can decrease skill requirements by giving a concrete example where it does. Many people think (faster speeds = higher skill ceiling) which is not true. I play sc2 and don't know enough about sc1 to know if fast or faster has the higher skill ceiling so can't comment on that
@@tamask7749 A-move what, your base or his? if you A-move yours to "counter" his worker rush you'll already be dead, and if you're a-moving his base to get him first then you've already conceded to him that that would be the best strategy. Keep in mind this is 1000x speed
@@zxcvbnm2992 yes and no slower speed gives your room for error but faster speed also allows for one to take advantage of an opening its a tough thing to find a speed that hits the perfect middle ground, but its also not really about speed, in sc2 for example everything just explodes to quickly if you can lose 16 workers in a few seconds from a mine drop its more about units dieing to quickly then it is about how fast everything is moving in the game SC2 is very much not a casual friendly game and at least in my opinion is why it didn't make blizzard the kind of money it should have BW had a much better balance between casual play and sweaty ranked matches with the speed of the units and such being close to the same, the only real difference is for the most part not everything blows up at once in BW a reaver drop doesn't kill a line of workers in just a few seconds etc...
you can do a perfect base and army on fast (according to this dumbo) and so you have to be good at everything (I guess) and do everything, whilein fastest you can just 'catch your oponent off guard' without having to do everything perfectly. I think that's the argument.
It's interesting to me that there's still a misconception in RTS that slower game speeds make it easier for newer players. I think FPS guys understand this pretty well. The faster your time-to-kill is, the more luck is involved. A good player will be able to take advantage of extra time better than a weak player. I remember another video analyzing this effect in starcraft vs Age of Empires a long time ago but I forgot who did it.
@MichelleObama IsMale like I said, it's a pretty common misconception in this community. Surprising it's still so popular too, considering how long we've been around talking about it.
@@megaalan12 I think you are simply wrong. It is no misconception that playing on fastest needs more mechanical skill, more time management, better priorisation. Everything that makes someone skilled basically.
@@CanariasCanariass I can see the argument that slower game speed serves different skills than faster game speeds. I can also see how a slower game speed makes it harder to lose because of single unlucky mistakes. Luck, and bad luck, does play a smaller role in slower game speeds. But that is one of the reasons they don't play bo1s in tournaments. So it doesn't apply.
Can you create and add new skills to unit? If not, maybe you could code something that behaves similarly to mines, but isn't. But it's just a guess, never used the editor really.
The last time I tried anything in the SC editor was probably 12+ years ago, but here's my best guess on how you could "change" the arming time: - When a spider mine first spawns, switch its owner to a non-combatant CPU player (with one such CPU per human player). - After X seconds, switch the owner of the mine back to the player who created it. I might be overlooking details that would render this impossible in practice, but maybe it could work.
@@temptep I'm an expert editor and that is not possible like that. What if more mines than 1 are laid down per 4 seconds. There are many considerations and especially many limitations to the editor.
No, he's right that it would be the best strat. They'd be moving so fast and attacking so fast that whoever set them on attack move first would instantly win. It's big brain troll time.
No then all you have to do is to attack-move a probe around your nexus during the first few seconds of the game so that way he will chase the enemy probe just as fast, if the enemy probe ever stop to attack your nexus he will get obliterated. It's big brain troll time x2.
Aside from obviously taking longer, because obviously, I’ve actually always wondered how a Super-Pro Slowest tournament would work out. Like, how much impact would it have on players like Snow or Flash to suddenly have everything be 4x slower than their used to, and would they be able to adapt enough to beat the other player.
Always thought it would be cool to do something with Queens, Ghosts, and DA's to encourage people to use them more. Like maybe not having to research Ensnare, Cloak, and Maelstorm.
@@valentinom.4292 yes, but have a very specific usage. Late Late game. Ensnare to slow and show cloaked units, broodling to get rid of crucial units (mech,spellcasters, ultra in late werid zvz?) and parasite to keep track of crucial enemy units or just scout (or even some neutral units as a spotter)
@@valentinom.4292it's a spellcaster not a fighting unit. Mostly used to get rid of siege tanks in ZvT (sometimes to slow m'n'm), ensnare wraiths and slow sair/carrier in late zvp and muta in zvz. She can also infest terran command center to make infested terrans. Game is 20+ years old and wasn't planned to be an esport (unlike sc2),but just a fun game and players think of tons of stuff that creators didn't even intend
jesus christ imagine a world with normal damage type hydralisks 4 shotting marines killing zerglings and zealots 2x faster deleting worker lines this guy is a genius, 50/50 definitely a very fair upgrade to make hydralisks from one of the best units in the game into an absolutely unstoppable unit that beats anything
The only thing which needs to be patched/ buffed in SC1 is the Protoss Scout so we can finally see it being used effectively in games. Pro's say so too.
I made a few comments giving more info on this CrazyJim guy, and about how CRAZY he truly is, but they've all been removed for some reason. Artosis, are my comments being flagged for spam or do you have overzealous mods on your YT channel? Really confused cause I put a lot of effort into those comments.
jimdotcom is right. you wouldn't be able to defend unless you gave the attack order before the probes were in your base killing your dudes, and you wouldn't be able to give that order in time if they were moving 10000x you should challenge him to play on his modded client 10000x ums map
step 1, build an extra probe step 2 tell your probes to patrol around your base Your opponent can't possibly be expected to a-move to your corner significantly faster than you can issue a patrol command. And if you aren't on a 2 player map they'd have to split their workers
@@EnvoyOfFabulousness The counter: Build a few extra probes, THEN a-move across. It ends up as a game of blind chicken, with both players unsure how much they should mine and build before attacking/patrolling for defence. I can see the meta developing into some weird situation where both players have a certain amount mining and a certain amount patrolling, and then attacking with a certain amount at a certain time. You just have to hope that your strategy (to use the term very loosely) of whatever ratio of mining/attacking/patrolling you have and whatever time you or your opponent chooses to attack beats whatever combination of those things they were doing.
@@EnvoyOfFabulousness at 10,000x speed the time 1/100th of a second delay is over a minute and a half of normal game time. The game would basically be decided by who could enter the command first.
It's also irrelevant on the topic of Fast vs Faster. The x10000 straw man supporting the premise that "Faster is worse" because it exists in a realm where the game speed can surpass human reactions. Fast vs Faster does not exist in this realm. Therefore, it is a false premise on the Fast vs Faster topic.
I actually get his point but pretty sure I disagree. What he is trying to say is on fastest everything moves quickly enough that its hard to execute really great macro and micro. The commensurate increase in screen changes means your opponent has more opportunities to win simply by catching you off guard aka during a screen change. That said overall you'd be doing the same amount screen changes just at longer intervals. It might allow for more micro or more chances to catch stuff on the minimap but I dunno the fastest gamespeed seems pretty good. Any slower and the games would really drag out.
I know this is an old video, but he kinda has a point about being able to lay quick spider mines right in front of Dragoons. They take roughly 2 seconds to "burrow" so increasing that to 4 seconds wouldn't be that bad of an idea.
If at a slower game speed skill will show more success for players who are strategically superior then in that sense he is correct. However between balanced players the faster speeds favor the player with better mechanics and tactical skill. I think we can draw an analogy with chess. At extremely fast time controls a tactical genius does well vs a strategically superior player as a general rule.
honestly I think the only thing that could be patched for sc1 is scout's cost. should be reduced by 50. and even so, I hardly think it would see any play. blizzard might try reducing the cost by 25 and see what happens and then if it still see no play they might reduce by 25 more
Yup, you know how mines that require hundreds of minerals and gas for a barracks, factory, addon, upgrade, and vulture, you know how they just ruin "rushes".
Isn't the Protoss Scout being somewhat underpowered basically the only real balance issue in Brood War? Then again, if it wasn't, it might create some new strategy that would throw off the current great balance. But buffing it a little might be worth trying. Like give its ground attack a couple of points boost.
Tbh the game would be worse if scouts were used. Asymmetry makes the game more interesting. If wraith and scout both were just as good as mutas this game would be orcs vs humans. For scout to be usable and interesting... I dunno, give it a detection upgrade lol. Then its an expensive ob that is easier to keep alive. Or maybe some ability that lets it merge with a photon cannon to better defend the hydra rush lol.
@@CaptainWumbo Here's an idea! What if the Protoss Scout air damage switched with the ground damage? The Scout would become a speedy harraser like the SC2 banshee that picks off workers or vulnerable units like tanks. What do you think?
This has to be the result of some sort of narcissistic personality disorder, or he's just plain trolling. Everybody already agrees that scout is garbage and zvz is very one note buildwise, these are not revolutionary ideas. His opinion when it comes to map sizes and game speed is just personal preference for an old meta, I wouldnt mind seeing games being played on smaller maps, but not at the cost of missing out on the big macro games on large maps. Mines are extremely powerful but they are by no means broken. His suggested change would absolutely cripple tvt, making it even slower since vults wouldnt be able to surround and snipe tanks with mines. Tvp would also be affected massively in favor of the protoss, which I oppose as a protoss player. The problem with scout isnt just the cost and firepower, it also has no niche to fill within the game. Gols, goons and hydras are very commonplace units to be produced from each race against toss and all directly counter what scout would do. Mutas have a role because theyre incredibly responsive to micro and fast, corsairs have splash and wraiths have cloak. Compared to these, scout is just a big dumb flying dragoon with no uniqueness to it for it to be worthwhile to produce, even if it was made cheaper. To make it viable, the unit would have to be reworked completely, which could have a big impact on the balancing of the game, which I agree that is almost perfect. As for zvz, the lack of long term macro planning can be quite boring but trying to force hydras to force mutas off the meta is absurd, ling runbys will absolutely demolish any hydra player and mutas will be forced into the role of the harrasser only, rather than a fighting unit. It's just stupid. The display of mindgames and micro still keeps that matchup interesting and whatever balancing to be done should be done around maps.
Overall, good post. You understand the game, unlike most people I see in the comments. Fixing scouts would just be a matter of reducing the cost/build time a bit, and perhaps making one or both of the Scout upgrades come pre-researched. Of course there are a ton of ways to give it a niche to fill that would rework them, but there are many ways to do that without ruining the balance of the game. Pointless theorycrafting though since they will never update BW meaningfully again, sadly.
I honestly, would want a Broodwar Redux that just allows for auto-mining workers, multiple building selection, upgrade queueing, smart-cast, a select-all army hotkey, and more than 12 units to be selected. Yeah, give me all the hate in the world for wanting those things, but if it's it's own standalone, like, you know how on StarCraft you choose Vanilla or Broodwar? If there was a third option for these Redux changes, I think it'd help a lot in getting more people interested in the game. I honestly don't think it'd fracture the playerbase, I think it would actually bring new life to the game, while not interfering with tournies.
@@TriDevious The pros play as though there is no selection limit, I'm sure it'll be fine if this whole different edition of the game has some quirks to it.
"a select-all army hotkey" Spotted the starcraft 2 noob who F2 his army across the map "The pros play as though there is no selection limit" This is probably one of the most stupid thing I read in the brood war community.. no, they definitely do NOT lmao...
@@RipDoveStudio It won't be fine. Zerg will be OP. Just learn to play please. Even the boring parts. Or play SC2. What you're describing already exists-it's SC2. Play SC2.
I thought it would be some real patch ideas, what a bummer :-/ Like improving the Scout, making D-web more accessible, or improving Ghost slightly. SC1 is balanced, but seeing the other units used in tournaments wouldn't hurt.
I do actually want to see what pro players competing at like, normal or even slowest would look like. The pixel perfect micro would be incredible to watch in a sped-up replay. I have a counter to his proposal though, cause what if you made a game-mode that's 10,000,000x slower than Fastest and the loser is always whoever has a less reliable ISP.
Last time I was posting stupid ideas on Reddit someone attack moved 1 worker to my starting location and killed me (do workers even have attack move in BW?). This could only have happened on Fastest map settings. I demand vultures be rebalanced to fix this problem.
LOL, what's to stop the defending player from a-moving around his base right at the start? he would have the advantage of having an extra worker or two in the fight. The meta would be how many workers you leave mining while the rest a-move around waiting to defend or attack. Funnily enough, games might still take the same amount of time, even though there will be cases where you lose in 20 seconds. The best form of the Fast vs. Faster argument is that Faster selectively removes players who do not quite have the mechanics for 300-400+ apm/control 4-5 locations to compete, even if their strategic sense and timing is high enough to compete. The problem with this is that there are already players playing nearly perfectly on the fastest speed, and they would simply outmacro their opponent even further if the speed were set to fast. His argument only makes sense if there was a Faster than Fastest speed, and then maybe the focus on mechanics would clearly leave out many players who have the strategic sense and timing. That said, this ex#1 Vanilla Starcraft/Broodwar player with 20 years of rust post must be a troll... but if it's serious, he is delusional since he basically glossed over 20 years of strategy and mechanics innovation, and deemed that his strategic conception from a billion game changes ago overrides all of that.
@@dekisuba Leave 1-2miners to mine, a-move the rest will beat that strategy. You still have to defend cheese, but there's always a more economical defender's advantage if you are ready for it
I mean, in a way it is like a change of skill from speed and execution to strategy - or at least a bit of rebalancing the scales. In the same way that a turn based game has different skills required than an RTS. He just didn't make the point very well.
Ok now that he mentions it it is kinda bogus that super fast vultures can run up and drop a mine in your face. Mines ARE meant to be zone control on the land, not missiles
my god, he is right about the probe rush. You'd have killed all the workers/base buildings before the opponent can call their workers from the minerals, even if they have more. Imagine that.
As serious suggestions: - Protoss observer, 50% more life (or maybe a little more). Those suckers die too fast and your whole strategy is stopped on its tracks. - Protoss shields cost, starting from 100m 100g and same modifier or 150m 150g modifier +50 each. - Protoss hallucination 75 mana instead of 100. Sorry I'm a protoss player. Questions: - Why zergs don't use burrow or overlord drop to protect defilers in ZvT, is it too micro intensive? - Why protoss progamers don't use stop on reaver scarab to fire next scarab faster instead of getting stuck waiting for a scarab that more likely won't do any damage?
I know this jim guy, he was posting crazy shit on r/gamedesign too and advertising his stream where he was “making an mmo”. I tuned in and he was moving around some spaceships in unity and talking about how he didn’t have any networking code done. His website is full of wild religious crazy stuff too, poor guy.
When you're at my level of StarCraft skill, the game is perfectly balanced. But watching StarCraft Pros it can have the appearance of being unbalanced. Especially with the way Zerg players wrecked everyone this last ASL. Pro's are so good at exploiting certain things, that any weakness is just laid bare. Not saying the game needs a balance update, but on the Pro level it can appear that way at times. And speaking of that, I felt like the defilers were destroying everyone and Protoss players had such a difficult time with them. Why do the Pros refuse to make Dark Archons? They can just zap those annoying bastards. I know its not that easy, but it's better than letting defilers constantly cast dark swarm all game long.
Crazy exhibition game idea: have pro players play the game at fast then play back the replays at Fastest. That would mean the game is so much slower and they could then play better and far better than a person could at fastest.
Fast can be more skillful, he is right there. And vultures being best unit in the game was never disputed by anyone, same with ZvZ being a bad matchup. He didn't say anything too crazy, just had a funny way with words.
I made a list of hypothetical changed i would make to broodwar a while ago Was interesting to do But i would not expect anyone to take it seriously I also did it with sc2 when i was still following that But it was too frustrating so I quit I like how broodwar doesnt get balance changes, the game is always the same which increases familiarity and understanding over longer periods of time.
Your making fun at the cost of others who tried to make a constructive post. Maybe subjective, but I found it decently reasoned. Anyways you reacted decently mannered. Thanks
The idea that BW is perfectly balanced is such a fucking meme. A game that's perfectly balanced after a few patches 2 decades ago when the designers had no idea what was coming over the next 20 years? The argument basically states that BW is perfectly balanced out of blind luck. In truth, the balance in this game is horrendous, and map balance can only go so far in counteracting the imbalance of the base game.
I think the point with the hydralisk upgrate is correct. ZvZ is broken. You just make mutalisks/scourges vs zerg. The vultures should have reduced mines up to 1-2/ increased time to deploy/ or cost at least 20 minerals to deploy. The scouts... if they were efficient, people would have make them. The game is not perfectly balanced but some unbalance makes this game more unpredictable and therefore more fun to watch than sc2.
He does have a point re scouts and ZvZ mutalisks. Scouts are just so bad that they see no use whatsoever - that's not a good state of balance. I am not sure how to fix them though (perhaps increase their range??). ZvZ is utterly degenerate in SC1 - like 6 drones per player, easy to lose on random guess of build order, if you do both survive then it evolves into nothing but a muta vs scourge battle with very small numbers of units, no actual strategy required (only micro), not fun to watch at all. Compare to SC2 ZvZ where there's a variety of builds and all of macro, micro and map positioning play a key role.
I feel like he had a point but came to some wrong conclusions, if you look at BW vs SC2, SC2 is a faster game and some people argue that makes it harder for people to demonstrate a skill gap
i think he actually has a point. I have recently been watching Winter play Age of Empires 2 and the "slower" game speed allows for more back and forth between macro and micro during fights rather than being forced to babysit your units constantly. I would be curious to see what Starcraft 2 looks like at a slower game speed such as Normal. Of course the first 2 minutes of the game will be much slower paced but once things ramp up, which is the whole point of RTS, i can see why a slower game speed would be just as if not more skill-based than a faster game speed
I think it depends a lot on what we actually mean when we say skill too. Like on slower speeds players would obviously be able to do more meaningful actions per in-game minute, which in turn would lead to a "higher level" game in the sense that the final product will be more perfected when you have more time to do things. But on the other hand it also means that everyone is given a huge amount of reaction time. You wouldn't have anywhere near as much split second decision making and harassment would be way easier to deal with. Effectively it'd make Starcraft more like chess in practice on slow speeds. Perfected but limited. I think more importantly though, the vast majority of people would just find the game a hell of a lot more boring that way
There is a speed that is ideal for gameplay. I don’t know what it is but it probably isn’t exactly fastest, I agree. Fastest wasn’t pick scientifically, the designers made their best guesses
In other words you want to dumb down the game and make it easier because your multitasking isn't fast enough to keep up with the faster players with MORE skill.. gotcha.
@@Snootypriss I play both. I'm just saying the game speed is a very easily accessible setting in Sc2 but we only use fastest and no one seems to question it. When anyone questions it they get made fun of like "LLOLLLL u dont like insanely fast rts speed u are low skill noob". it's cringe.
