I keep thinking about how ZK would play if there were a gamemode where all of the static structures with weapons were disabled. I also think it would be interesting to have the static (and perhaps mobile) large shields and cloak fields disabled in the gamemode. On the flip side I wonder if a gamemode without mobile units (just the commander) would be any fun. I'm guessing it may just turn into a caretaker, defender, and eco war...but still might be interesting. Any thoughts?
+0 / -0
|
I don't like this idea makes game harder for no gain, defenses exist for a reason its only porcy forts that give them a bad name. And a porc only game would probably be mostly ddm/anni/behe creep and [insert superweapon of choice] rushs.
+0 / -0
|
In only defences type of game i would restrict morphs and anything moar powerfull than Stinger. Then it would have some sense - Behemoth/bertha spam + anni would be otherwise only way of playing. Other random idea - Commander wars gamemode- You got all 6 commanders morphed to level 5, and with that army you go to war. RPG-type of fight anyway :)
+0 / -0
|
no statics ZK would be very nice. Imo zk could work very well with no statics apart form the missile turret and light laser turret.
+0 / -0
|
  spring: I think that would work pretty well too, but why is the missile turret and light laser turret necessary? Couldn't the player just quickly build a mobile AA unit and a skirmisher? @Jaronidas: I'm not sure it's that cut-and-dry...you can protect things from artillery with a shield, and it is a big investment since you would want to be expanding your metal-extractor empire :) Your "random idea" reminds me of a souped-up version of [URL]http://springrts.com/wiki/War_Evolution[/URL]...sounds fun :) @Radavvadra: I know defenses exist for a reason (protects against rushes), however I think it could help people get used to playing with less defenses. I think I still tend to play overly defensively, and was thinking that this gamemode could force me (and others) to not porc. I'm not saying I would want to play this way all the time...it would just be an interesting exercise. Also, I'd expect the games would be a lot quicker, which would be good for when you just want to have a couple quick matches. I think you're right about what'd likely happen with a porc only game, still could be interesting though perhaps not as useful.
+0 / -0
|
  Isaactoo I see your point but IMHO I don't think we need another game mode too teach people not to porc, chickens already teach that by usually killing porcy players.
+0 / -0
|
True, eventually people learn to do less porc by losing, but it took me a bit to really try hard not to porc. It's funny how you can know you're over-doing your defense after the game, but in the next game you can still feel like you need more protection. It seems natural to defend yourself if you think a big attack is coming and if you think the opposition's defenses are superior, then you feel less inclined to assault until you have "enough" mobiles to penetrate it, but this never happens because you're too busy defending. If you knew there were no defense structures I think this would help the player venture out more.
+0 / -0
|
I think we can have a game mode which completely use mobile units as defense, any unit that hold its position and stop firing for some time(the length depend on the unit's cost)would receive some buff, and once it start moving again, the buff would be removed.
+0 / -0
|
There are options in springlobby for disabling specific units in a game that you host. I know this does not apply specifically to Springie-hosted games, but I would imagine they have the same options available somewhere, though it may or may not be coded yet...
+0 / -0
|
or host a game in TASclient. You can just call for a list containing all of the mods units and deselect the ones you dont want.
+0 / -0
|
i would love a game mode with no porc would be awesome i would however compromise and allow MT/LLT as they are kind of necessary to protect the vulnerable mexes and are still easy to deal with
+0 / -0
|
  qwerty3w: That'd be cool and interesting, however it may add incentive not to have them move. @N2maniac & spring: When I have tried springlobby and TASclient with Zero-K, Spring got stuck at the loadscreen on the treedrawer. Would be very nice if this would work (and if you know how to make it please say so)...however it would still be nice if it was available directly in ZK lobby because I'm pretty sure it's the only way for it to be "official".  Praetor: I guess that's a good compromise...although imo I think it'd still promote staying put instead of expanding since I've seen masses of these turrets before. I really like the idea of having no specific denial zones. However it would probably slow down expansion considerably since you'd have to leave at least one riot unit by most mexes, so I agree; it is a reasonable compromise. :)
+0 / -0
|
If there is no static defense, many artillery units would become quite useless, and the game might become a bit too aggressive, instead of sparing some of the mobile units for defense, players might find that using all units to rush enemy constantly is more effective.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
players might find that using all units to rush enemy constantly is more effective. |
Wait, there are other valid ways to play?
+0 / -0
|
Yes if not all kinds of assaults count as rush, and yes if static structures count as units.
+0 / -0
|
Artillery units wouldn't be as necessary, but they would still be useful verses econ, heavy units, and swarms. If you're saying that everyone would just use raiders, then I understand what you're saying, but then players would just learn to use anti-riots more. I'm not sure if I really see the game becoming too offensive as a problem. By the time the unit(s) reach the other base, the enemy will still have more firepower there because that's where they're being made.
+0 / -0
|
If your structures have occupy half of the map, you can't use that advantage to protect your frontline structures, cause your mobile units would need to reach the middle of map. If you build a new factory on front line, that would cost some resource, and the advantage would be reduced to half.
+0 / -0
|
This is true, but if you occupy half of the map the game must have been going on for a while...and I thought the main concern here was that the lack of defense structures would make early rushes end the game too fast. Also, I would think that being that far in-game, you'd have enough units in the field that the trickle coming from the factory wouldn't make much difference to this advantage anyway.
+0 / -0
|
ZK unit range-classes are too close to another. Raider + 20% = riot/assault riot/assault + 20% = skirm skirm + 20% = arty ? :( There should be a +40%-gap, that would give speed a higher weight in combat, not only for chase-runs. And because defenses have no speed at all, a skirm defense can beat skirms without being OP to raiders or too OP vs riots
+0 / -0
|
IMHO would be kind of fun to have a dropship kind of games or maybe some day in PW too. The idea is that the dropship can insta-build a bunch of units that have total cost < some predefined value. Whatever you do next is your choice, but it will be quite fun to have just 2 huge dropships "dropping" a bunch of units to go on a killing spree for a quick 1v1 instead of getting all the eco. And it would definitely look very fun in the PW as the commanders would actually be dropped to the battlefield, possibly with some units also. **I know that I am deep-shit-crazy.
+0 / -0
|
