[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]

Even Faster or Fastest?
Ever since the first couple of months into War2BNE's life, this has been the main topic of debate in the Warcraft community. And so far, for the most part I have avoided it like the plague :). It seems as if the 2 'groups' of people can never get along, which really doesn't make alot of sense to me. I've always tried every type of game possible with Warcraft 2. Why should it be so difficult for the 2 communities to step back and forth between the 2?

Right now, I will compare, post all of my opinions on the 2 speeds. I've played many, many games on each speed. Far more than any of you know about (I have a good summer job :). I've been playing with the best even faster players ever since the beginning, and I've now played against the best fastest players. I've played many games with and against Lynchmob under various names (he and I allied many times, but he usually didn't know it was me when I played against him). I've also played for several months under a couple different names in the War2 Ladder Challenges channel. I do know both speeds very well.

Why I still like even faster better...
Yep, I still do like it better...and by a significant amount. I think fastest does have it's place, but I'm still a firm believer that even faster requires a more skilled game. Here is why I think that.

Fastest is too fast.
You DO have to click faster and build units faster, on the fastest speed, but it becomes a build mass units and send them at each other game. If you ever play games like BGH, Castles, or Watergrunts, you'll know what I'm talking about. Those maps are the extreme of just clicking non stop, and sending units without giving any thought to it. Fastest games on normal maps aren't nearly that bad, but they still lose alot of the strategy that comes with even faster games. You end up with more macromanagement than even faster games, but less micromanagement. I feel that this is a negative attribute.

If you were to ask, hhis would be the biggest reason to why even faster players do not like the top speed. You cannot pull your peons off of the gold mine. Now, I know you're all thinking that I'm wrong, but I don't mean it like that. If someone attacks your wallin suddently...say with 7 grunts. If you do not have any peons on wood, you are going to die. You can get peons off of the gold mine, but it's very difficult. If the game is set on high or extra high latency, or someone is lagging up the game, you are a dead man. Even if you have some choppers, you are going to have to use those to repair, and will soon have over 5000 gold banked, with no wood. On even faster, you can easily pull peons off of the gold mine, so you can choose which peons (gold or wood) you will pull to repair. Now I know what a bunch of you are thinking now, also. I've heard the argument a thousand times...

They are 2 different games.
If you play fastest games you will see the huge differences in the wallins. In the above example in the 'peons' paragraph, most people will tell you to have a tower up BEFORE those grunts hit you, and in a fastest games, this is good advice. This is simply because they are 2 different games. On the fastest speed, grunts will get through a unprotected wallin before you can even react, whereas on a slower speed, you can easily defend this even if it was completely unsuspected. This fact has led to a different evolution of building between the 2 players. In fastest games, most seasoned players will stack up a wallin with lots of buildings (usually farms and barracks), and stick a cannon tower up early on, even before they see an enemy unit. They also stack up so many buildings, that it leaves many of them unrepairable. Some even faster players do this to, but the better players just have a '1 building think' wallin that is flexible and repairable. I am not really saying that fastest wallins are that bad. They are just done this way because it works a little better on such a fast game speed, when you don't have to worry about pulling peons to repair. I believe that this is the biggest clue into the different varieties of the 2 game speeds.

Fastest is...faster.
And I'm guilty here too. When I come home and have an hour between classes or a little bit of free time to kill, I would prefer to play fastest games. They are fast, and are over with fast. I don't have to worry about a long game (for the most part). I just find a game and away we go. It's fast, it's fun, and I get a bunch of games in no time. This is probably the biggest reason why there are alot more fastest players than even faster. Well, that combined with the fact that any new players to any game will always put the game on the fastest speed :).

I think what keeps the 2 communities apart is simple stubbornness. They each believe that the other game setting is an inferior style of play. I personally don't think that. I just believe they lead to 2 different styles of playing. Unfortunately people usually stick with what they grew up with, which is why the even faster crowd is much more guilty of this than the fastest crowd. But who cares? Really. Give different speeds and different maps a try. There's alot more to this game than Garden of War/even faster and Garden of WarBNE/fastest. I'll even play the odd game of BGH or Castles free. Now that's a click fest.

So there ya go...I know it's hard to explain why one likes one more than the other, but I've given it a shot here. If you don't understand any of my 'points' here just post in the forums or email me and I'll try to explain it better. It's all a matter of personal preference, and find a game with more micromanagement more enjoyable to play. I like the games where I can easily pull my peons back and forth from gold to lumber. I like the games where I can choose which peons go to tower someone, or which peons repair or build buildings.

Back [an error occurred while processing this directive]