Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Map: Otago 1.4
 Otago 1.4
Title: [A] Teams All Welcome
Host: Nobody
Game version: Zero-K v1.13.12.0
Engine version: 2025.04.11
Battle ID: 2325500
Started: 19 hours ago
Duration: 9 minutes
Players: 8
Bots: False
Mission: False
Rating: Casual
Watch Replay Now
Manual download

Team 1
Chance of victory: 54.9%

USrankSnuggleBass
AUrankUnicorn_cats
USrankUFO_JESUS
USrankChonkyPeanut
Team 2
Chance of victory: 45.1%

NZrankDouble_Helix_DNA
USrankShadybear18
USrankR3MX
AUrankrcSparkyPete
Spectators
FIrankFFC
AUrankmankarse
USrankentropy3
AUrankAdminAquanim
GBrankBLaNKMiND
TWrankKitty116065
AUrankSarathos
VErankTunacantine
BArankXenomorpHer
USrankLennyTheLing

Show winners



Preview
Filter:    Player:  
sort

NZrankDouble_Helix_DNA
18 hours ago
Saved to clan.
Ultimately the 3v1 gamble south failed. Need to understand why.
+0 / -0

NZrankDouble_Helix_DNA
5 hours ago
(edited 5 hours ago)
Bad comp. On rewatch swapping to moderator vs fencer is a lost cause. Letting snuggle control the air and making zero AA instead of zoning the ravens out was a critical mistake.
AUrankUnicorn_cats the badgers made cost vs moderator, which is famously garbage at dealing with chaff. I think this shows how garbage badger is, instead of showing how good it would be. Fencers would have handled moderator spam much faster, and potentially have wiped it out entirely.

Badger making cost is just a bait statistic. Apparently metal cost takes damage into account, even if the damage is healed off. What this means is that as the game goes on, badger 'makes cost' while dealing minimal damage to a lot of units and killing none of them.
+0 / -0

USrankSnuggleBass
97 minutes ago
I think the badger were pretty great. The best thing they could have made. Fencer would be run down (or fail to do damage for fear of being run down) and there's more to winning the game than just getting value. Regardless of whether they made cost or not, they slowed you down without committing to a static position, meaning he could give and take and retake in his lane with little consequence. He was able to contest reclaim without committing force, and he was giving LOS for me to bomb.

Badger is bad, I don't think this is an exemplar of that.

As for why you lost? You were out expanded by 3 ground vs. 4 ground. You didn't beat UC by enough to justify it, and you didn't hoover up the reclaim at a significantly greater pace than he did. Essentially you committed to aggression that didn't quite pay off.

I'd love to say me going air was a big deal but I don't think it was.
+1 / -0

NZrankDouble_Helix_DNA
79 minutes ago
At around 4 minutes in I think we should have held vs UC and rotated over to UFO's and chonky's side to try and push there. You are right, the aggro didn't succeed
+0 / -0

USrankSnuggleBass
54 minutes ago
Oh also, I keep seeing you make these calls to pick on weak players. It can work but I don't think it's the right call a lot of the time. When you gang up on weak players you give strong players space. If you kill their production you give strong players their metal. You also kind of force them to be useful (as a tank) when otherwise they might be hiding.

I know that's not what ended up happening this game, and that it's not always a bad idea, but I don't think it was a good call in the opening stage.
+0 / -0