Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

why did you stop playing?

108 posts, 4076 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 6 (108 records)
sort

8 years ago
Of course you idea about half unit remove is absurd. Zero K is unique because this 'complexity'. However i don't see Zero K as complex game. It's RTS who is more focused on strategy then just heavy apm like Starcraft2.
Maybe you receive so much negative votes because of absurd ideas about game?
You are more porc player as i observed in games. I rarely seen you using counters against mobile units. Its not game complexity but lack of your skills.
+0 / -0

8 years ago
I stopped playing because gaming takes too much time from me. And i need pause. Also ZK is so low player count.
Comunity toxicity isn't such problems for me. Some players are ragers and some are clowns. If somebody annoy me i have no problem say what i think about it.
+2 / -0


8 years ago
Infrastructure is too broken and support is fleeting. Releasing a stable and setting an engine is much harder than in the past. The bugs with the revert back to Spring 100.0 are too frustrating to fix. The error spam is fixed in dev but a stable needs to be made for it.

Sometimes with 1v1 I felt too tired to play well. It takes a lot of attention to not get overwhelmed by a high level 1v1. This tends to be a minor and occasional thing (but it is worse at tournaments).

I like small team games but if you pick a game from 6 random active players I am likely to end up playing 1v3. Skill disparity is too great. Revitalize clanwars.

The high activity time is usually past midnight to early in the morning.
+0 / -0
8 years ago
AUrankAdminGoogleFrog problem with clanwars was that there was not enough interest to have a rotating rooster of clans and in the end there would be nobody wanting to face GBC.
+0 / -0
8 years ago
The problem with clanwars is 15 players linit. With current playerbase it should be 5 to make it competive, otherwise everyobe will join either MM or GBC and duals are always boring.
+0 / -0
8 years ago
15 players limit? What do you mean?
First of all clanwars always had 3v3 format so that is 3 players per clan playing 3 games.
Second thing: one cannot just simply join GBC: our clan is closed to public and a new member must be invited into the clan in the first place. I don't exactly know how it works in MM but I haven't noticed and issues regarding clan switching during clanwars regardless.
+0 / -0


8 years ago
Maybe we need to have a curated high-level small teams get-together thing.

When a couple people agree to clear their schedule and come in at the same time, maybe get on mumble, and play in a semi-structured fashion so you don't spend 5 minutes afking together in a room before leaving, it can be loads of fun. Evo get-togethers were great and lasted until forb didn't have the time to host them, despite a virtually non-existent playerbase compared to zk.

Clanwars have a higher barrier to entry and are harder to organize.
+1 / -0

8 years ago
i continued playing because rl allows me to do so again. the game is old but has awesome and unique features. surely it has bugs and quirks.
+1 / -0
quote:
15 players limit? What do you mean?


Oh I though teh clan members limit is 15, but it seems atht its eitehr 20, or no limit at all. Anyway, the problem still exists - too high clans' member limit.

quote:
one cannot just simply join GBC


That makes things even worse. It wont be jsut a bunch of ranom players, some of them skilled, otehrs not, but only selected good players. Which, in current low-on-players community leads to monostate in which noone can compete versus THE clan which has most of good players.
+0 / -0
Skasi
quote:
quote:
remove half the units in zero-k.

How would that solve anything?

It could help clean up any [boring], [annoying], [funky] or [badly designed] units. This in return could make ZK less frustrating/tedious to play and more interesting as a game.

To clarify: I'm not saying all these concepts should be removed forever or that ZK should become dull, without any interesting units (I rather want the opposite). Some (esp. the "funky" ones) can probably be brought back in a new form after being made less quirky, potentially more "consistently usable" and more fun to use and play against.


quote:
Of course you idea about half unit remove is absurd.

The idea is definitely not absurd. After all, removing half the units is how CA and later ZK were born. (context: CA had a very large number of BA units removed, ZK had a very large number of CA units removed)
+1 / -0
8 years ago
@Saksi but CA and ZK along with removal also had units added, repurposed and reorganized. Simply removing half of the unit pool would result in a broken, unbalanced game.

Skasi I somewhat agree with you however such operation would require a lot of work and ZK dev team is unwilling/incapable of making it. In reality it wont happen unless there will be people able to commit to such project and they would recive enough attention for that to matter. Right now there is precisely one person that has tried it and its CHrankivand.
+0 / -0
I think you malign porc, Wolverine, Dirtbag, Racketeer, Archer, Placeholder and Buoy.

Moderator is pretty poorly designed and Domi is pretty dodgy. Venom... eh, idk what I think about that unit.
+0 / -0
8 years ago
mostly time really and rl stuff to do. i spent countless hours playing zk and had lots of fun, but eventually it has run dry a bit. doesnt really have anything to do with the game as such, which is still great.
+2 / -0
Root problem - inadequate administration (including devs that do bullshitty balance change, especially towards cannon fodder). [And it is not only about ZK... this happened in many things in real world...]

Such things were already described before me many times, so i am not providing an examples...

I play now only from time to time, and cannot have serious attitude to ZK...
+3 / -1
Skasi
quote:
bullshitty balance change, especially towards cannon fodder

Could you elaborate?
+0 / -0
Firepluk
quote:
Could you elaborate?

1. let's make anti nuke intercept ANY nuke that flies somewhere in the stratosphere above the anti
2. in the sense of n1 let's leave reef anti-nuke intact, now you can move the reef and intercept almost ANY nuke targeted to the sea wherever you like... just 1 reef required
3. let's increase nuke price
4. let's make pointless unit renames to bring the confusion and forbid team communication
5. let's make funnel/detriment an useless pile of metal not worth even half the price
6. let's make heavy units un-trasportable, because they are flying slower than detriment is walking. This makes so much sense
7. let's share metal from OD to everyone equally, lobsters need some too
8. let's remove private income from coms/cons/labs/caretakers. Especially OP if you get 2-3 coms - no private income, more stuff to micro/macro, you can resign
9. let's turn an RTS into RPG shit, with 99 levels of com morphs. Especially OP when lobsters start to use it, because 95% of all possible com builds are utter trash
I can go on...

1-3 brings stalemates to new levels, 5-6 helps in the process cuz now u need to rush a DRP/meteor/starlight(huh) in clusterfuck games to bring an end it
7-8 makes it having little sense to make any eco at all
9 is just lulz
+10 / -0
8 years ago
PROMOTE ME TO LOB PRESIDENT

I'LL MAKE COMMORPH GREAT AGAIN
+2 / -0
I only want to elaborate Firepluk comment:
"perform bugfixes only ^^"
and
"8. let's remove private income from coms/cons/labs/caretakers. Especially OP if you get 2-3 coms - no private income, more stuff to micro/macro, you can resign"

I noticed that some changes actually make things much worse. For example, sharing commander income broke odd teams balance, now 11 months old issue that was never fixed: http://zero-k.info/Forum/Thread/19720

Game changes are often issued based on emotions not real usefulness or value of unit. Let's take example:
- eco was rewarded, later partly. Everybody envies eco guy, he makes big unit later. Eco nerfed, all shared, nobody with above average elo in team games can make eco anymore, because it simply doesnt make cost/sense.
- cons are private income. Nobody cares for long time. Firepluk starts to use them for private eco (singu changed see above), haters hate him and suddenly con eco shared, including commander.
- above change completely breaks odd team balance. Nobody cares for a year.
- funnel is nerfed. It doesnt make cost. But it's so cool, people make it often. So it's nerfed again. And again. Now we lost cool unit, it's utterly useless.
- Firepluk makes often nuke in large teams. He manages to micro silo, scythe, spy, etc. to stun or kill antinuke. He wins some games thanks to this. some envy and hate, nuke gets nerfed, antinuke buffed big time (intercepts anywhere). Now nuke not useful in most big team games.
- Detri used to be good, finishing off unit (it costs a lot). For reputation of amazing unit, some lobsters rush it often. It gets nerfed. It's utterly useless now. Bantha kills it. Ultimatum works vs it. Ultimatum doesn't work vs bantha for long time, weird bug that nobody cares (for years?).
+5 / -0
8 years ago
And to answer question: zero-k is till interesting game, but:
1) RTS community is always smaller than FPS or fantasy RPG
2) bugs... bugs... I remember when I started playing zero-k, it was desync every other game. Now desynces mostly gone, but e.g. I've seen on several occasions newbie turned away because lobby freeze, lobby cannot download map, etc.
3) most kids grow out of games, I notice myself games are more boring as I get older.
+0 / -0
Skasi
Firepluk confirmed RUrankTesto smurf? :P
None of your points elaborate on what "especially towards cannon fodder" is supposed to mean.
+2 / -0
Page of 6 (108 records)