| 1 |
Thanks for the interesting feedback. I'm not sure how much of it can be addressed because I feel like the problems are deeply entwined with issues of skill ceilings and finding equally skilled opponents. Zero-K has a smaller scale compared to games of the TA genre, but I thought it had a somewhat comparable scale to Starcraft 2. Scale is also a bit tricky to define.
|
1 |
Thanks for the interesting feedback. I'm not sure how much of it can be addressed because I feel like the problems are deeply entwined with issues of skill ceilings and finding equally skilled opponents. Zero-K has a smaller scale compared to games of the TA genre, but I thought it had a somewhat comparable scale to Starcraft 2. Scale is also a bit tricky to define.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
One question to ask is whether you want to manage a large scale battle or whether you want to play in a large scale battle. Large battles are common in packed teamgames, however, each individual player is probably managing a small front. For the largest scale games I'd suggest 1v1 on reasonably large maps. I think managing multiple domains across a large front leads to the largest sense of scale. The difficulty here is that playing a 1v1 on a large map tests a lot of skills, so I would expect many newer players to end up playing small games on large maps.
|
3 |
One question to ask is whether you want to manage a large scale battle or whether you want to play in a large scale battle. Large battles are common in packed teamgames, however, each individual player is probably managing a small front. For the largest scale games I'd suggest 1v1 on reasonably large maps. I think managing multiple domains across a large front leads to the largest sense of scale. The difficulty here is that playing a 1v1 on a large map tests a lot of skills, so I would expect many newer players to end up playing small games on large maps.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
Here are some reasons skilled players may have larger scale games.
|
5 |
Here are some reasons skilled players may have larger scale games.
|
| 6 |
* Experienced players can keep their units alive. Most armies are able to avoid most encounters that will not go well for them, especially in the early game. It can be very hard to damage an army that has decided to retreat. The feeling of sending small squads into the meatgrinder is reduced when you get better at evaluating engagements and retreating.
|
6 |
* Experienced players can keep their units alive. Most armies are able to avoid most encounters that will not go well for them, especially in the early game. It can be very hard to damage an army that has decided to retreat. The feeling of sending small squads into the meatgrinder is reduced when you get better at evaluating engagements and retreating.
|
| 7 |
* Experienced players have larger economies. More economy creates larger armies.
|
7 |
* Experienced players have larger economies. More economy creates larger armies.
|
| 8 |
* Experienced players attack more on multiple fronts. Even if the armies consist of 10 units, attacking with three armies imparts a sense of scale.
|
8 |
* Experienced players attack more on multiple fronts. Even if the armies consist of 10 units, attacking with three armies imparts a sense of scale.
|
| 9 |
* Experienced players are more able to handle multiple factories. There is a lot to do when you are managing land and air.
|
9 |
* Experienced players are more able to handle multiple factories. There is a lot to do when you are managing land and air.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
A lot of Zero-K (and many RTS games in general) is about making your own progress. If you are new and can only handle a small economy then you could spend the whole game only making small squads of units. If you don't have the experience to keep those units alive then you'll never build up an army. If your opponent does the same thing then you're going to have a small-scale game.
|
11 |
A lot of Zero-K (and many RTS games in general) is about making your own progress. If you are new and can only handle a small economy then you could spend the whole game only making small squads of units. If you don't have the experience to keep those units alive then you'll never build up an army. If your opponent does the same thing then you're going to have a small-scale game.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
Zero-K
may
be
harder
to
learn
to
the
level
required
to
play
at
a
scale
comparable
to
Starcraft
2.
You
need
to
expand
to
get
any
sort
of
economy.
Zero-K
fighting
is
focused
more
on
raiding,
where
it
is
easy
to
lose
units,
than
long
buildups
followed
by
sudden
clashes.
|
13 |
Zero-K
may
be
harder
to
learn
to
the
level
required
to
play
at
a
scale
comparable
to
Starcraft
2.
You
need
to
expand
to
get
any
sort
of
economy.
Zero-K
fighting
is
focused
more
on
raiding,
where
it
is
easy
to
lose
units,
than
long
buildups
followed
by
sudden
clashes.
Large
armies
are
relatively
hard
to
use
in
Zero-K
as
units
cannot
shoot
through
each
other.
A
lot
of
the
progression
in
Zero-K
comes
from
developing
defenses
throughout
your
territory.
The
amount
to
spend
is
very
hard
for
players
to
balance
as
too
much
leads
to
a
lack
of
expansion,
while
too
little
leaves
you
open
to
raiding.
|
| 14 |
\n
|
14 |
\n
|
| 15 |
I would call @B698598 was a large scale game. Large armies started appearing about 11 minutes in, but there were many armies all over the map prior to that.
|
15 |
I would call @B698598 was a large scale game. Large armies started appearing about 11 minutes in, but there were many armies all over the map prior to that.
|
| 16 |
\n
|
|
|
New player feedback