Are ZK players bad?

It's my opinion that ZK players in general are not meeting their potential at ZK to the same extent that players of other RTS games do for their respective game. Given that there are numerous mechanisms in place to reduce the disadvantage experienced by new players (factory repeat and fight command for example), shouldn't there be the opposite trend? If players are not barred from high level play until they learn how to multitask the crap out of everything, shouldn't this mean players are performing at a higher level as they can focus efforts on decision making rather than mindless macro?

Don't get me wrong, there are good players here, and I'm far from the top. I'm not having a go at anyone and this assessment is not that players are inherently bad. Rather, I want to know if people agree that players are not meeting potential (why/why not?), discuss which particular facets of good play are being missed, what differences there are between RTS games that change how the community approaches it, and what can/should be done to address it.

These are my thoughts as to the cause of the effect assuming that the effect is in fact real.

#1 - Dilution
[Spoiler]
TLDR: Player comprehension of core game mechanics is diluted by the enormous number of options.


#2 - Expertise is not being shared effectively
[Spoiler]
TLDR: Is ZK still so unexplored that it rewards autodidacticism over skill?


#3 - Our culture is dank
[Spoiler]
TLDR: Resign lobsters!


#4 - Players are just bad
[Spoiler]
TLDR: Maybe there's a negative correlation between ZK demographic and skill.


Do you think there is an effect? Why/why not?
If so, what are the areas of play most affected?
What do you think is the most likely cause?
What can/should be done to address this?
Do you think you're affected?

IMO suboptimal play and lack of a consistent meta in ZK comes down to three things:

1) The game is very complicated (100-odd units, unit and weapon behaviour is quite complicated) compared to other modern RTS games

2) The comparatively small playerbase and small number of games played; the game is not thoroughly explored

3) There are many maps and they are very different from one another. This effect is not to be underestimated; if we played on Red Comet and only Red Comet for a month (and didn't give up out of boredom) strategies would look a lot more polished.

If one went back and looked at the quality of Brood War play back in its very early days (thinking 1998-2001 kind of era) I imagine there would be some similarities in terms of the strategies employed being unrefined, simply by dint of lack of experience and exploration.

With respect to #2 in the original list, maybe I understand the game well enough now to write some kind of guide without it being laughably bad. Wouldn't count on finding the time, though.

EDIT: On that note I seem to recall mumblings about a ZK game wiki being made at some point. Anyone know what's become of that?

EDIT 2: I suppose a wiki kind of already exists, but it's kind of offical and you have to go through the deprecated Googlecode to edit it.

life sucks. what do you expect?

#1 is depth. You may learn how to 6 pool in SC 2 but then it doesn't really help you when you play terrans right? Of course that people will try to focus on certain parts of the game instead on wanting to comprehend the whole. Trollcoms are just a lazy way to play ZK. But isn't it good that game gives you many options and possibilities?

#2 [Spoiler]
TL;DR meta exists and unificated gameplay so does too

#3 & #4 [Spoiler]
TL;DR Elo system, teamsize and lack of matchmaking remmove the competetive aspect of ZK.

On the final note: of course the players are bad since the game does not reward self improvement in almost any way.

Ps. Yogzototh the problem with you league is that "masters" are the best players around which includes exactly the people who you have mentioned. Leagues should not be tied to any particlar balance skill point values and instead into precentage based scale. Also the problem with Dorne, Godde, rANDY, ElTorero, klon is that there are just not enough able enemies to give them a real challenge so they just move on.

PsPs. Looks like the forum breaks when I use 2 hashes in the same line... it particularly breaks the spoiler tag for some reason :|

I've said this a lot in past, highest level in ZK is not even SC2 master, it's more like diamond.

ZK doesn't have much of a 1v1 environment, most players are just casual only want to play giant team games for fun. Nothing wrong with that I guess, there's a reason SC2 is a ded game, who wants to try hard anyway lol.

Theres two real isuues here.

1) Player base is very unhelpful, they don't share tips with new players and tend to insult new players.

2) Also, units arent really a problem, but there is no real guide to using them. All we have is space-click descriptions.

This is too much elististic talk for me. Why always the comparison with Starcraft? In the end you should play because you have fun, not because you can win some "e-sports price" by "training" 10 hours a day and climb up some ranking.

Small teams and 1v1 players being more helpful is not 'elitism', that's empiric fact.

Some people enjoy plumbing the depths of a game to really master it, and that's fine. It's also generally quite entertaining when several people have done it and play against each other, which is a nice bonus.

Why rain on their parade?

That's not my experience.

Are you new players having trouble playing PvP doing 1v1s or team games?

1v1s have been an absolute blast. Players (Possibly sans Firepluk) are respectful and those who have more skill than me have been quite helpful with suggestions.