Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

!Nerf the static defence!

47 posts, 1560 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 3 (47 records)
sort

2 years ago
Plot team-game length vs game date if all other arguments fail. It used to be said that Zero-k is not tower defence game...
+4 / -1
2 years ago
Replace all static weapons with a little flag that pops out saying "Bang!", triple the metal cost
+8 / -0
2 years ago
It used to not be. I personally blame terraforming, artillery being too good at killing units, assault units being meh, and Funnelweb, the great strider porc-father-mother.
+0 / -0
2 years ago
I dont think its possible to balance static defence in a way that works for both small games and clusterfucks with the same rules. If you have 16 players on a team then the area they need to defend becomes narrow enough that it can be covered with static defence easily. This is likely the fundamental appeal of large team games, you dont need to worry about maneuvers in a huge space like 1v1 comet catcher, you can build a stinger and then spend an hour watching your singularity build.

Large team games are like a big sandbox specifically for the people who want to just terraform shapes and make super units. If you make the static defenses that enable this weaker, then i suspect the games will just get denser.
+4 / -0
2 years ago
AUrankisaach

Exactly. That's why I love lobstepots just like any other noob. No responsibility, no overwhelming pressure. Possible to tryhard if feeling like it, possible to chill out and let the team work for you. 1v1 on the other hand is EXTREMELY pressuring on nerves.
+4 / -1
Its terraforming. Broken game mechanic that doesn't integrate with most facs or units, and cheap to use.

Make terraforming cost increase with player count :-)
+4 / -5
Terraforming needs shallower angles me thinks. Crabs on tall toothpicks are evil.

That being said its true that lobsterpots will invariably be porc-fests compared to smaller games.

And even then, I see lobsterpots being decided by maneuvers early on quite frequently, before the porc has had the time to get dense.
+0 / -0

2 years ago
Surprisingly few comments, everyone resigned totally to the situation?
Considering early mid stinger being soft win condition and the gauss/faraday fortresses, does anyone really enjoys the mind numbing slow artillery wars this is causing?
+1 / -0
quote:
Surprisingly few comments, everyone resigned totally to the situation?

Or, yknow, maybe they disagree with you.

Not sure what I think, myself. I do think AUrankisaach makes a reasonable point that there will always be a room density where this becomes a problem.

quote:
Plot team-game length vs game date if all other arguments fail.

It would be difficult to do this while accounting for all extraneous variables but I doubt there would be much of a trend. That being said, games not getting meaningfully longer would not make you wrong either.
+3 / -0


2 years ago
Almost got my anti-arti Impaler widget ready for prime time. This should counter Tremor, Emissary, Sling and Badger quite hard. :D

Basically, when a shot from one of those units comes into view, an Impaler within range on Return Fire traces where the shot came from and fires an Impaler shot back. :)

Now I need to figure out an averaging mechanism for tracing back Merlin shots and convincing other devs that Lance shots should be as visible to widgets as they are to eyes...


Though I really don't think static defences are the problem. The problem is coordination, static defences are just the Schelling point people use.
Unless you're talking Desolators most assaults will make cost against turrets. Two Ravagers can kill a Stinger and a Minotaur can kill two Gauss at once (Gauss don't make cost vs most assaults).
+3 / -0
2 years ago
How can you separate Tremor shells or Merlin rockets if there are multiple relatively close to each other? Not to mention, those units can fire on the move.
Tracing a Lance shot back to its origin might be problematic too, even if you have an equation of the line of it's beam. Though it seems to "sweep" sometimes, in that case it is easier.

GBrank[GBC]1v0ry_k1ng https://zero-k.info/Forum/Post/214113#214113
quote:
Its terraforming. Broken game mechanic that doesn't integrate with most facs or units, and cheap to use.


I have to agree, it is too cheap. And terrain is selectively permeable. Repair beam/cloud can pass through, for example.
+1 / -0
2 years ago
While I respect NorthChilean greatly as a player, I frankly hear this as complaining about an aspect of the game that a player can't deal with. It's a little strange to me, because one of his favourite tactics, the shielded domiball, is especially deadly to porc. Nothing sucks more than having your own stingers start to shoot you.

Guys, there are many, many ways of dealing with fortifications. Any sort of artillery spam is a problem. The new repair costs are a problem for me, because I used to rely heavily on caretaker to refresh my porc. Now it's simply not as effective. A good shieldball EATS porc. Krow is a problem. Domiballs are problems. Bertha is a problem. Phantom is a problem.

So many solutions ... including the easiest one: GO AROUND.

Players keep charging their units into my porc and I keep eating their corpses, and the question is: why? Go around. You don't HAVE to engage. Unless, of course, the porc is at the halfway line of a map and dominates the map. In which case the question is simple: why did the other team allow a porcer to advance to the midline in the first place? The answer is almost always lack of units, lack of expand and rushing useless crap like fusions at the start instead of raiding and expanding.

IMHO, of course :)
+1 / -0


2 years ago
nerf terraform cost :-)
+0 / -2

2 years ago
You're repetitive enough without reposting the same thing you said seven posts earlier on the same page, GBrank[GBC]1v0ry_k1ng.
+0 / -0
2 years ago
The problem isn't necessarily that porc is invencible, but that terraformed porc frequently makes the game boring via greatly narrowing the range of usable units as well as creating the same situation on every map.

Porc is much more interesting, both to build and to assault, when you actually have to work with the map and terrain given to you, instead of creating the same configuration at a low cost in every map.

Its also more interesting when its not intentionally terraformed in a way that takes most units out of the equation, such as spires or pits that most units can't shot up/down.
+1 / -0
2 years ago
only thing that rlly needs a nerf is the gauss hp regen. Halve it, or make it only take half damage isntead ofa fourth
+0 / -0


2 years ago
It would be nice if steep terraform (the kind a bot can't walk up) cost a lot more given how it completely negates a lot of units. For instance, putting a Gauss on a sufficiently tall pillar that no assault apart from Grizzly can even hit it costs... 200 metal. Yep. For only +50% cost you can make your Gauss invincible to the things that are supposed to be able to kill it. :/

ROrankAnagram : The regen is mostly irrelevant. Properly porced areas will have the invincible sunken caretaker.

quote:
How can you separate Tremor shells or Merlin rockets if there are multiple relatively close to each other?

No particular need to separate unless you've got like 10 Impalers in range who aren't in cooldown. Tremor needs 3 Impaler hits for a kill anyway.
+3 / -0
2 years ago
quote:
putting a Gauss on a sufficiently tall pillar that no assault apart from Grizzly can even hit it costs... 200 metal. Yep. For only +50% cost you can make your Gauss invincible to the things that are supposed to be able to kill it. :/
Pretty much perfectly summarizes my problem with current terraforming.
+0 / -0

2 years ago
Units, not stingers! Stinger is cheap enough to totally dominate anything until early mid game - the comm rush to mid and stinger pork commonality is illustration of this. It should be unit preference, not "most probably can get away with comm and stinger". The current teamgame situation rewards nonactive pluking in the back - as long someone gets few stingers up frontline, you are relatively safe to sit there and build superweapons in your own small fort. Point being - nonactive backline play should result new game fast, not after 30..40 min agonizing delay. Weaker general static defences would force more active play, as backline forts would not be ceaply defendable.
+1 / -0
I think i'll try to test/PR "seismic damage damages buildings that would be moved by it" next week.

(Dirtbags will have to cost much more with this rule, because detonating over structures would move them, and thus give dirtbags significant anti-structure damage on death. You shall see city walls crumble, and towers fall.)

(A dedicated seismic suicide unit could be interesting)
+6 / -0
Page of 3 (47 records)