Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Map: Titan-v2
 Titan-v2
Title: Viktor87's Battle
Host: JPrankViktor87
Game version: Zero-K v1.5.2.24
Engine version: 103.0.1-648-g5775975
Battle ID: 448099
Started: 7 years ago
Duration: 23 minutes
Players: 7
Bots: False
Mission: False
Rating: None
Watch Replay Now
Manual download

Team 1

DErankChesti
AUrankAveragePlan
NZrankhedgehogs
Team 2

USrankc0ckroach
DErankSixPairsOfFeet
JPrankViktor87
JPranksergeysorokin
Spectators
GBrankLlamadeus
UArankMechanID
RUrankFirepluk
PLrankHectorion
UArankDIVO
RUrankpaccojl
BYrankRPG

Show winners



Preview
Filter:    Player:  
sort
NZrankhedgehogs
7 years ago
Guys, when it says "TEAM# has an overwhelming numercial advantage", all solars should immediately open and stay open, so we can win faster.

No point not opening them, all your combat units are dead, most of your mex, a lot of your energy. .
+1 / -0

GBrankTheEloIsALie
7 years ago
quote:
so we can win faster

If the point of that message was to make the game end as fast as possible, it would just end the game.
+0 / -0

AUrankSnuggleBass
7 years ago
Why doesn't it just end the game?

I've never seen the comeback happen. Meanwhile, the grind of killing off peoples stuff is frustrating.
+1 / -0
NZrankhedgehogs
7 years ago
(edited 7 years ago)
That comeback cannot exist, since by that point all or most of your combat units are dead, and your factory killed as well, preferably with some windgens killed, so comebacks cannot happen.

That is why those should Solars open. This gives the pleasure of destroying things, very quickly.
+1 / -0
USrankFealthas
7 years ago
By the time you get the overwhelming advantage message, there isn't much left to kill. Its not really a grind; you just walk over with random units and win.
+0 / -0

AUrankSnuggleBass
7 years ago
But even so Fealthas, how is that an enjoyable thing to do?

What about when people take their halbards or their gunships, and they send them to every corner of the map? Isn't that just a pain in the arse?

If part of ZK's design is automating stuff that doesn't require decisions, how is hunting down the last buried commander any different?
+0 / -0
USrankFealthas
7 years ago
I can't really disagree. I guess my main concern is about a system overly eager to declare victory/loss for someone. At what point is an advantage big enough to secure a win? Is it after a 10k metal lead? A 1000% metal lead? If a 1000% lead is sufficient, what about a 999% lead? Why not 998%? That could go on and on.
Theoretically, a game could be decided from the first battle (or even opening moves), assuming both players play 100%. But what if one plays at 99%? Then do you have to wait till the second battle? Or do you consider how the first battle went in greater detail? Are three dead ducks more worth 4 dead glaives with 1 glaive alive?
There just isn't a good way to determine victory by a system. !resign takes all of this nonsense away. I don't recall ever having problems with people not resigning(unless major lob).

Although something I could agree on is that if only non-attacking, non producing(factories) buildings remain, that counts as a loss for that side. Solar farms and razors no longer have to be cleaned up.
+0 / -0

JPrankgajop
7 years ago
Games should probably end when one team has no units, factories or defenses. Overwhelming advantage could trigger earlier, but I don't think it's such a big problem. People almost always resign when it's clearly over (at least in my 1v1 elo range).

As a sidenote: site shows both teams won with Bots:False? majorlob
+0 / -0

AUrankSnuggleBass
7 years ago
(edited 7 years ago)
You draw a line in the sand. Science tends to go with P = <.05.

There is a cost attached to making people play out the game. So long as the sum of games that are lost that would have been won is less than that cost, we should be closing out the games. If you've got 10 to 1 material advantage, what are your chances to lose?

Ten to one just seems more than fair. That's one scorcher vs. one commander. That's one scorcher vs. ten scorchers. If I'm yet to see this comeback after playing so many games, what're the chances it's a meaningful possibility?

If a game is lost once in 1000 when it should have been won, that's an acceptable cost. Hell, even the best hearthstone players can't win more than 70% of the time due to the inherent chance in the game. 1/1000 is nothing.
+0 / -0
NZrankhedgehogs
7 years ago
(edited 7 years ago)
I am sure no one has that much skill to actually comeback from a "overwhelming advantage", only to put up meaningless resistance with flea partisans.

Think about it:
You have more eco
You have way more units
You have map control
You see their units, even invisible.
You have tonnes of reclaim

Those odds facing them are too great to be turned around.

I have seen comebacks, and it looks awesome, but never that late into defeat did I see someone snatch victory. Yes, My base got attacked by a few tanks, smashed my windgens, but we kept going and finally won.
But it never said "allyteam0 has an overwhelming numercial advantage"

quote:
10 to 1 material advantage, what are your chances to lose?


10fleas vs 1 Banisher=100% chance to lose
+1 / -0


AUrankAdminGoogleFrog
7 years ago
The overwhelming advantage is triggered at 25x cost in everything for one team compared to all others.
+1 / -0

ILrankhokomoko
7 years ago
(edited 7 years ago)
The overwhelming advantage wasn't created to end the game faster, it was to prevent the enemy from running to the corner with a single gremlin and griefing everyone playing.
+2 / -0