| 1 |
Continued from the Starcraft 2 thread.
|
1 |
Continued from the Starcraft 2 thread.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
1.
In
Zero-K
the
most
of
scount,
raider,
riot，AA,
defense
turret,
and
some
of
the
support/heavy/artillery
units
use
weapons
that
are
difficult
or
impposible
to
dodge,
that's
quite
a
lot.
|
3 |
1.
In
Zero-K
the
most
of
the
scount,
raider,
riot，AA,
defense
turret,
and
some
of
the
support/heavy/artillery
units
use
weapons
that
are
difficult
or
impposible
to
dodge,
that's
quite
a
lot.
|
| 4 |
|
4 |
|
| 5 |
Some of them are totally understandable, like riot need fast projectiles or instant hit weapons to counter raiders, but the others doesn't seem entirely necessary.
|
5 |
Some of them are totally understandable, like riot need fast projectiles or instant hit weapons to counter raiders, but the others doesn't seem entirely necessary.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
For instance, why did raiders need fast projectiles? Countering slow units like assaults and skirmishers doesn't require fast projectiles, so it seems the main reason is to make them good at intercepting other raiders, which is a job that could also be done by a well-placed riot. Slower projectiles would make raider vs raider micro (which is a big thing in high level play) more exciting to watch, good riot placements could create some drastic moments too.
|
7 |
For instance, why did raiders need fast projectiles? Countering slow units like assaults and skirmishers doesn't require fast projectiles, so it seems the main reason is to make them good at intercepting other raiders, which is a job that could also be done by a well-placed riot. Slower projectiles would make raider vs raider micro (which is a big thing in high level play) more exciting to watch, good riot placements could create some drastic moments too.
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
\n
|
9 |
\n
|
| 10 |
2.It seems the army growth in Zero-K rely a bit too much on economy growth, and not enough on unit saving. A lot of climatic moments in other RTS games come from the fact that the loss on the army can not be rebuilt easily, it can't be like that if the army size is largely a result of the current income rate.
|
10 |
2.It seems the army growth in Zero-K rely a bit too much on economy growth, and not enough on unit saving. A lot of climatic moments in other RTS games come from the fact that the loss on the army can not be rebuilt easily, it can't be like that if the army size is largely a result of the current income rate.
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
Starcraft 2 handle this by keeping the action level low for the most of the game, the result is sometimes one game only have one battle, it's pretty boring.
|
12 |
Starcraft 2 handle this by keeping the action level low for the most of the game, the result is sometimes one game only have one battle, it's pretty boring.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
The better approach might be simply making units more durable, or making retreatment more valuable, we can keep the action level high while still gathering potential energy for climatic moments.
|
14 |
The better approach might be simply making units more durable, or making retreatment more valuable, we can keep the action level high while still gathering potential energy for climatic moments.
|
Ideas to make 0K more enjoyable to the spectators