When I watched the replays from the recent GBC vs. Mean clanwar, I noticed there was a fair bit of discontent expressed by the opposing side about the prevalence of raider spam. ZK is very raider heavy, even moreso in 1v1 (they were talking about a 3v3). I personally like the high action that the raider game meta facilitates from the start, but I don't give two shoots about 'interesting' units if they're not effective. Slow units are boring to me because their stats might be different but their potential application is so much more limited. More interaction and options can only be a good thing. So I'm fairly pro raider spam I guess. I searched the topic on the forum but couldn't find a thread seriously discussing this issue, which implies that while people have a problem with the meta, it only seems to occur to them that it's a problem when they're losing to it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ If the game lasts long enough the raider spam dies out, but it's pretty much a guaranteed component of every game. Do you think that the raider-spam monoculuture is bad for ZK? If you do, have you got any suggestions to fix it that would result in a better game?
+2 / -0
|
I love raider spam, and the fact that it's viable for most of the game in 1v1s. Not that I'm particularly good at it, but it sets up a nice dichotomy between raider play and other military strategies. In fact, the interactions between differing military, economic, and strategic "philosophies" is the most interesting part of ZK to me. Raider-heavy games feel much more kinetic than games focusing on slower units. There's a tangible sense of movement, almost like grappling. You get a bit of that in composite forces, but it's more like sumo wrestling. So the element of speed adds to the thrill of game for players as well as spectators. Raider-heavy play also looks and feels intuitively more skillful to execute (whether that's true is another discussion). Strategically, it comes with all the caveats you mentioned of course. I guess that's sort of the gambit. But I love the role it plays in the philosophical ecosystem of ZK.
+1 / -0
|
Raider game is fun but both clusterfuck games and planes factory keep killing it, which is why I hate both of them
+0 / -0
|
It's basically rushdown/mixup play. It's strong when it's doing well, and it breaks down quickly if properly defended against. Given that Zero-K's territory-oriented nature makes defenses hard to set up well without sacrificing money, good raider poking can go a long way for the first several minutes. The only way I could see it becoming less prevalent would be if overdrive didn't fall off as fast. That way defensive play would be more viable without relying on supermexes. However, the key thing is more "how do we make non-raider play more engaging", and I'm not sure there. The emphasis on physics means quick units just get more ways to interact, since they can better avoid projectiles and generally quickly rearrange themselves to best handle a fight, but how one best rearranges their forces in a fight is an interesting real time problem. Riots and Skirms don't move that fast, so their formations are more static and their movement play is less exciting overall. Something to improve that which uses the physics system, rather than involve activated abilities (or even anything effective that does) escapes me at the moment.
+1 / -0
|
Raiders are the core of ZK balance and the most interesting phase of the game. Without them being so important the game would get way more boring much quicker as it turns into assault/turret spam. You can see this on any small, choke point heavy map and in 10v10.
+4 / -0
|
ZK needs more Raider Weekends!
+0 / -0
|
quote:
When I watched the replays from the recent GBC vs. Mean clanwar, I noticed there was a fair bit of discontent expressed by the opposing side about the prevalence of raider spam. |
Watching mobility and aggression deliver the beat down to the porc kings was pretty entertaining to me!
+5 / -0
|
From what I saw it was just burp complaining about Scorchers whenever he lost his commander. Raiders are probably not as powerful as I think they are because early Warrior strategies have been more effective than I anticipated.
+2 / -0
|
In ZK fast units are mandatory to be able to keep up with one's opponent. Thus for most facs there is only one unit to choose from which makes the raiding game boring unit-wise and strongly dependant on the "random" factory selection. More low-weight and fast units should increase the unit variation. Allocating the speed attribute to a whole fac instead of only one single unit in each fac might be more interesting. For example lv could be actually fast and able to easily outrun shields and cloaks instead of having levelers getting run over by snails. Ofc this would have to come at a cost, like for example high acceleration times, low turn rates(when driving fast) and low weight units. Imo zk has done a great job on giving each unit its specific properties. But meanwhile factories have lost their characteristics and are only viable because of a needed unit they contain, instead of their interaction with the map.
+1 / -0
|
Skasi The only thing that poll shows is that ZK doesn't have any idea what the heck it wants.
+0 / -0
|
Or that most people didn't participate/know what the question is about.
+2 / -0
|
quote:
In ZK fast units are mandatory to be able to keep up with one's opponent. Thus for most facs there is only one unit to choose from which makes the raiding game boring unit-wise and strongly dependant on the "random" factory selection. More low-weight and fast units should increase the unit variation.
|
True, although this would require a LOT of updates. quote:
Allocating the speed attribute to a whole fac instead of only one single unit in each fac might be more interesting. For example lv could be actually fast and able to easily outrun shields and cloaks instead of having levelers getting run over by snails. Ofc this would have to come at a cost, like for example high acceleration times, low turn rates(when driving fast) and low weight units.
|
Yeah... lv fac is still full of fail. All other facs should have at least one unit dedicated to each thing (raiding, arty, assault, etc.) One of the big problems is that some facs have no real type of one unit (Spiders have no arty, and neither do subs). [q] quote:
Imo zk has done a great job on giving each unit its specific properties. But meanwhile factories have lost their characteristics and are only viable because of a needed unit they contain, instead of their interaction with the map. |
Yeah... big problems here. Some factorys such as lv are only valued for scorcher. Same thing with others. the only real way to fix this would to be either a nerf or a unit made specificly that could counter it, but the latter basiclly becomes a specialty unit.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
Some factorys such as lv are only valued for scorcher. |
No. Also raider spam is fun, atleast compared to teamgame cancer striderspam porcfest. Raiders have their time, but in almost all matches I play people transition out of them into heavier things once the map is more consolidated. Those that do no tend to lose. There is no balance mandate from the GreatFrog that says "thou must build raiders". People build them because they are the correct tool for the early-mid game. Their mobility and cost lets players achieve their goals of early expansion/defense. You can't be one of those people that refuses the use the best tool and then complain about having less than optimal results.
+2 / -0
|
quote:
Allocating the speed attribute to a whole fac instead of only one single unit in each fac might be more interesting. For example lv could be actually fast and able to easily outrun shields and cloaks instead of having levelers getting run over by snails. Ofc this would have to come at a cost, like for example high acceleration times, low turn rates(when driving fast) and low weight units. |
LV is already fast. Off the top of my head: scorcher - top two fastest true raiders ravager - fastest assault slasher - fastest turret leveler - fastest true land riot wolverine - fastest skirmisher/minefield dominatrix - fastest converter mason - fastest land worker crasher - fastest land aa(?) If you make factories absolute representations of their ideals that will make gameplay far more stale. The decisions made in game will be more restrictive, and matchups more likely to come down to RPS. quote:
Yeah... lv fac is still full of fail. All other facs should have at least one unit dedicated to each thing (raiding, arty, assault, etc.) One of the big problems is that some facs have no real type of one unit (Spiders have no arty, and neither do subs). |
Having a factory that is weak at a particular thing is fine, preferred in fact. It allows you to do things like have obnoxiously powerful units such as flea and venom, without making the factory itself overpowered. It's not as if you can't switch if you really need it, or morph your com, or ask a team mate. quote:
Some factorys such as lv are only valued for scorcher. Same thing with others. the only real way to fix this would to be either a nerf or a unit made specificly that could counter it, but the latter basiclly becomes a specialty unit. |
This is so wrong. LV is super powerful at mobility in general, so long as the map allows them to be. Yes scorcher is a super-unit, but you can't ignore the implications of fast assaults, or three different types of artillery, or riot units that are faster than a stardust. The only unit in there that could be argued is peripheral to the fac is dominatrix, and I think that has a big role in particular match-ups (HT for instance).
+0 / -0
|
LV has a number of powerful units - scorcher rocks yes, but also Riot tank is great, Wolverine is epic skirm/arty, Slasher is a good porc creep unit, and the impaler is awesome artillery. The downers are: Ravager is pretty weak in comparison to the Reaper - if the fac could make both, you would very rarely if ever make Ravager outside the very early game. Lveh fac doesn't have an anti-heavy, so it gets outclassed quickly once unit density increases.
+0 / -0
|
quote:
mason - fastest land worker |
Nitpicking: Mason 72, Quill 84 (elmo/s).
+0 / -0
|
The Mason is the worst con, hands down.
+0 / -0
|
Nah, it's fast and has decent hp, it can expand faster than most coms and survives abit longer, which gives your scorchers a bit more time to save it. In this aspect it is better than conjurer(which you can hide ofc if you have spare apm and radar) and convict (when raiders dive under it's shield). Maybe they deserve a slight speed buff.
+0 / -0
|
Fair call sprung, mb. IvoryKing I far prefer mason to quill, they're so cumbersome even if they do have the top speed. I also consider it better than crane and welder, but they're not as comparable since they have different subrolls. IMO it's also better than prebuff weaver, but now that weavers got some cool new tricks it's probably worse? Either way, it's sufficient. Flipstip LV does not need a buff.
+0 / -0
|
I wouldn't mind cars getting a non-fail antiheavy or any functional answer to Reaper. Domi and Scorcher can work sometimes, but not really any often.
+1 / -0
|
