| 1 |
#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?
|
1 |
#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 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
#2 [spoiler] Honestly? I don't quite agree with this. ZK is certainly not thoughtfully explored (because of obvious low player count) but it DOES a developed meta and unificated gameplay. The whole raider-skirmisher-riot triangle and combat roles in general allow for generalization of units. I personally (for the first time) have gotten myself into top 50 just because I was mimicking other's play! I spectaced a lot of 1v1s; I watched Floris's tutorials; and then when SF333 came into scene, his casts and just replicated what the others were doing.
|
3 |
#2 [spoiler] Honestly? I don't quite agree with this. ZK is certainly not thoughtfully explored (because of obvious low player count) but it DOES a developed meta and unificated gameplay. The whole raider-skirmisher-riot triangle and combat roles in general allow for generalization of units. I personally (for the first time) have gotten myself into top 50 just because I was mimicking other's play! I spectaced a lot of 1v1s; I watched Floris's tutorials; and then when SF333 came into scene, his casts and just replicated what the others were doing.
|
| 4 |
You just say "I done all things myself when I was a nab because there was nothing to help me" yes because... you just didn't look hard enough for these things! And even then whether you want it or not you were also introduced into meta gameplay. [/spoiler]
|
4 |
You just say "I done all things myself when I was a nab because there was nothing to help me" yes because... you just didn't look hard enough for these things! And even then whether you want it or not you were also introduced into meta gameplay. [/spoiler]
|
| 5 |
TL;DR meta exists and unificated gameplay so does too
|
5 |
TL;DR meta exists and unificated gameplay so does too
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
#3 & #4 [spoiler] Competetive play has base in personal achievement. It is hard to pursue such thing in team centered game (as ZK at this time appears) since the only indicator of player development is also a balancing component. In other words the "better" you get the more punishing are results because you have to carry noobs and honestly? I myself hate carrying them. It is all a matter of attitude because when you take a look at 1v1 some competetiveness can be seen there although weak players still get matched with good players. The result: elo is meaningless which diminishes the competetive aspect. However there is still amount of progress there as if one of weaker players take up on the stronger. I had a couple of moments like these in my game time particularly when I was fighting @[ISP]Lauri in the semifinals of 1v1 tournament. I was like "I finally did it!". You don't get that feeling in team games because the enemy team blends all the players. [/spoiler]
|
7 |
#3 & #4 [spoiler] Competetive play has base in personal achievement. It is hard to pursue such thing in team centered game (as ZK at this time appears) since the only indicator of player development is also a balancing component. In other words the "better" you get the more punishing are results because you have to carry noobs and honestly? I myself hate carrying them. It is all a matter of attitude because when you take a look at 1v1 some competetiveness can be seen there although weak players still get matched with good players. The result: elo is meaningless which diminishes the competetive aspect. However there is still amount of progress there as if one of weaker players take up on the stronger. I had a couple of moments like these in my game time particularly when I was fighting @[ISP]Lauri in the semifinals of 1v1 tournament. I was like "I finally did it!". You don't get that feeling in team games because the enemy team blends all the players. [/spoiler]
|
| 8 |
TL;DR Elo system, teamsize and lack of matchmaking remmove the competetive aspect of ZK.
|
8 |
TL;DR Elo system, teamsize and lack of matchmaking remmove the competetive aspect of ZK.
|
| 9 |
\n
|
9 |
\n
|
| 10 |
On the final note: of course the players are bad since the game does not reward self improvement in almost any way.
|
10 |
On the final note: of course the players are bad since the game does not reward self improvement in almost any way.
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
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.
|
12 |
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.
|
|
|
13 |
\n
|
|
|
14 |
PsPs. Looks like the forum breaks when I use 2 hashes in the same line... it particularly breaks the spoiler tag for some reason :|
|
Are ZK players bad?