| 1 |
I'm not sure multiplayer turning people new away is backed up by data. Here is player retention for the first four months of 2020 where a 'player' is someone who shows up in the playerlist of a replay on the site (ie, someone who played a multiplayer game).
|
1 |
I'm not sure multiplayer turning people new away is backed up by data. Here is player retention for the first four months of 2020 where a 'player' is someone who shows up in the playerlist of a replay on the site (ie, someone who played a multiplayer game).
|
| 2 |
https://i.imgur.com/4VBkM9S.png
|
2 |
https://i.imgur.com/4VBkM9S.png
|
| 3 |
\n
|
3 |
\n
|
| 4 |
It looks like about half the people who try online play come back to it. This only drops to 25% of people continuing to return after a month. Perhaps there is a difference between passworded games and autohosts. I presume some stats could be generated for them.
|
4 |
It looks like about half the people who try online play come back to it. This only drops to 25% of people continuing to return after a month. Perhaps there is a difference between passworded games and autohosts. I presume some stats could be generated for them.
|
| 5 |
\n
|
5 |
\n
|
| 6 |
This retention is a lot better than retention where a 'player' is simply someone who makes it to the main menu. One-day retention is about 30% in this case and one-week is 10%. This is understandable, as without any cost to trying ZK people are able to just pop in and see if it is for them (there is also no sunk cost keeping them around until they get it).
|
6 |
This retention is a lot better than retention where a 'player' is simply someone who makes it to the main menu. One-day retention is about 30% in this case and one-week is 10%. This is understandable, as without any cost to trying ZK people are able to just pop in and see if it is for them (there is also no sunk cost keeping them around until they get it).
|
| 7 |
\n
|
7 |
\n
|
| 8 |
[q]1. In 1v1 games, the early game is incredibly unforgiving and very snowbally. [/q]
|
8 |
[q]1. In 1v1 games, the early game is incredibly unforgiving and very snowbally. [/q]
|
| 9 |
I don't think people expect to jump right into 1v1 and find it forgiving. I don't think the start of ZK is exceptionally unforgiving. The commander can repel small raids and making turrets early (a common RTS noob trap) is not even that bad. Putting an LLT on each factory could be an ok change, however the design of it is a bit ugly. I think there is essentially no chance of this change happening because it would require modelling output that doesn't exist.
|
9 |
I don't think people expect to jump right into 1v1 and find it forgiving. I don't think the start of ZK is exceptionally unforgiving. The commander can repel small raids and making turrets early (a common RTS noob trap) is not even that bad. Putting an LLT on each factory could be an ok change, however the design of it is a bit ugly. I think there is essentially no chance of this change happening because it would require modelling output that doesn't exist.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
[q]2. Don't build factories if you want more units, build caretakers... [/q]
|
11 |
[q]2. Don't build factories if you want more units, build caretakers... [/q]
|
| 12 |
Take this up with @Anarchid. This topic has come up in the past two or three years and we've decided that it would be nice to satisfy what seems to be many player's desire to build a bunch of factories. It makes sense that more factories means more production, and a base with a bunch of factories visually looks more active. The idea is waiting on models that @Anarchid has been almost completing for quite a while now.
|
12 |
Take this up with @Anarchid. This topic has come up in the past two or three years and we've decided that it would be nice to satisfy what seems to be many player's desire to build a bunch of factories. It makes sense that more factories means more production, and a base with a bunch of factories visually looks more active. The idea is waiting on models that @Anarchid has been almost completing for quite a while now.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
There doesn't seem to be a ticket or searchable thread about the idea, so here it is in brief:
|
14 |
There doesn't seem to be a ticket or searchable thread about the idea, so here it is in brief:
|
| 15 |
* Each factory has a corresponding factory pad.
|
15 |
* Each factory has a corresponding factory pad.
|
| 16 |
* Factory pads are small (say 6x4) factories with the same build options as their corresponding factory.
|
16 |
* Factory pads are small (say 6x4) factories with the same build options as their corresponding factory.
|
| 17 |
* Factory pads cost around 160 metal and have 10 buildpower.
|
17 |
* Factory pads cost around 160 metal and have 10 buildpower.
|
| 18 |
* A factory pad is disabled if it is not within 600 elmos of a non-disabled allied factory corresponding to its type.
|
18 |
* A factory pad is disabled if it is not within 600 elmos of a non-disabled allied factory corresponding to its type.
|
| 19 |
* When placing a factory, all complete allied factories of the type you are placing have green circles of 600 elmos radius drawn around them. When your cursor is within one of these circles the blueprint changes to the factory's corresponding pad.
|
19 |
* When placing a factory, all complete allied factories of the type you are placing have green circles of 600 elmos radius drawn around them. When your cursor is within one of these circles the blueprint changes to the factory's corresponding pad.
|
| 20 |
\n
|
20 |
\n
|
| 21 |
Factory pads are cheaper than Caretakers because inflexible parallel construction is generally worse than flexible serial construction. Dedicating 10 BP to producing a particular set of units should come with a reward, just like dedicating 10 BP to a particular location (Caretaker) comes with rewards. I also like how factory pads will let players make a Jugglenaut or Grizzly without forgoing unit production for two minutes. This could be a much-needed buff for Amph.
|
21 |
Factory pads are cheaper than Caretakers because inflexible parallel construction is generally worse than flexible serial construction. Dedicating 10 BP to producing a particular set of units should come with a reward, just like dedicating 10 BP to a particular location (Caretaker) comes with rewards. I also like how factory pads will let players make a Jugglenaut or Grizzly without forgoing unit production for two minutes. This could be a much-needed buff for Amph.
|
| 22 |
\n
|
22 |
\n
|
| 23 |
The
variant
of
the
idea
without
the
600
elmo
circle
is
simpler
risks
destroying
the
logistics
of
bring
units
to
the
front.
It
would
enable
cheap
proxy
factories,
which
could
be
interesting
to
test
out,
but
I
expect
would
destroy
defender's
advantage.
|
23 |
The
variant
of
the
idea
without
the
600
elmo
circle
is
simpler
but
risks
destroying
the
logistics
of
bring
units
to
the
front.
It
would
enable
cheap
proxy
factories,
which
could
be
interesting
to
test
out,
but
I
expect
would
destroy
defender's
advantage.
|
| 24 |
\n
|
24 |
\n
|
| 25 |
A button in the UI to upgrade the factory is not likely to do much since, when people want to make more units, they will just repeat what worked already (make a factory) rather than search around for better options. If they searched for better options then they would find Caretaker. Besides, a factory pad is basically an upgrade that is represented as an object in the world, which is better than having the game occur in numbers and states within a unit.
|
25 |
A button in the UI to upgrade the factory is not likely to do much since, when people want to make more units, they will just repeat what worked already (make a factory) rather than search around for better options. If they searched for better options then they would find Caretaker. Besides, a factory pad is basically an upgrade that is represented as an object in the world, which is better than having the game occur in numbers and states within a unit.
|
| 26 |
\n
|
26 |
\n
|
| 27 |
[q]3. Flow-based resources. [/q]
|
27 |
[q]3. Flow-based resources. [/q]
|
| 28 |
I don't think flow is a huge problem. If someone makes twice as many Caretakers as they need then they have probably only wasted 1000-2000 metal, this is nothing compared to how inefficient they are playing in other areas. I don't think people getting the hang of ZK in singleplayer care that much if the game is playing more slowly than we are used to. The economy in ZK doesn't have the traps of TA and SupCom, where resources are spent at random rates and stalling energy causes everything to shut down.
|
28 |
I don't think flow is a huge problem. If someone makes twice as many Caretakers as they need then they have probably only wasted 1000-2000 metal, this is nothing compared to how inefficient they are playing in other areas. I don't think people getting the hang of ZK in singleplayer care that much if the game is playing more slowly than we are used to. The economy in ZK doesn't have the traps of TA and SupCom, where resources are spent at random rates and stalling energy causes everything to shut down.
|
| 29 |
\n
|
29 |
\n
|
| 30 |
I like the idea of giving nanospray colour meaning, but I worry that colour is too informationally noisy. Stalling hard on metal is fine most of the time. Nanospray colour is also already set to team colour. Nanospray already changes density in response to build rate. The density range could be increased to make the changes more obvious. Perhaps making the nanospray lighter or darker would be a good addition.
|
30 |
I like the idea of giving nanospray colour meaning, but I worry that colour is too informationally noisy. Stalling hard on metal is fine most of the time. Nanospray colour is also already set to team colour. Nanospray already changes density in response to build rate. The density range could be increased to make the changes more obvious. Perhaps making the nanospray lighter or darker would be a good addition.
|
Hangups preventing adoption