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

1v1 Discussion

30 posts, 1070 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (30 records)
sort
I'm concerned that players in the 1400 elo range are in the top 50 list for 1v1. This shows that previously active players have stopped playing 1v1s and been removed from the list.

1v1s are a great way to train micro skills and flexibility. I encourage all of you to play more 1v1s!
+0 / -0
7 years ago
Perhaps a 1v1 tournament would help get people more excited.

1v1s are also nice to spec because they are usually short and action packed :)
+0 / -0

7 years ago
I stop playing for two weeks and suddenly the 1v1 scene falls apart. Coincidence? Almost certainly.
+1 / -0

7 years ago
quote:
1v1s are also nice to spec because they are usually short and action packed :)


Except when they are not... cough fields of isis *cough*
+0 / -0
7 years ago
Snuggle, I would like to face you at some point. I know you have the blood of a Godde Slayer >:D
+0 / -0

7 years ago
Maybe if utter garbage shit maps were de-fearued, people would be able to overcome the mental scars they cause, and maybe venture over to the 1v1 room more often. Some maps have too much "social momentum" that makes people think they are good, but really aren't (just look at the initial map pool for last tourney).

Pregame RPS is still a huge issue. Dynamic commanders was the answer.
Player 1 chooses battle comm with rocket.
Player 2 chooses eco comm. Thanks to dynamic comms which removed all pregame rps, the eco man can morph rockets and not lose...oh wait...he can't. A little design oversight there heh :P

Having good maps only might help with this as you actually get a chance to react instead of immediately being at a massive disadvantage(duck vs glaive on small map? or bandit v glaive? venom vs any raider on a small map?) because your units are just straight up worse in the early game (most people below 2k dont micro so it doesnt matter there).

+1 / -0
Skasi
quote:
I'm concerned that players in the 1400 elo range are in the top 50 list for 1v1. This shows that previously active players have stopped playing 1v1s and been removed from the list.

The main reason for this was definitely the code change for ladder generation. Ladders now omit players who do not play the respective game type. This happened ~4 months ago.

On 14. May 2016, 1543 1v1 elo was enough to make it into top50. That was ~1.5 months after the change. Now 1543 1v1 elo is enough to make it into top34. I assume that this might've been caused by the recent infra drama. It could also be possible that elo was recalculated from replays after some changes to its formula caused by all the math threads, I didn't follow any of them too much.
+1 / -0

7 years ago
Have we not played before? huh.

ATM my client has stopped working, and I'm inclined not to fix it because semester's started and I can't justify ZK. I'd love to play you once uni's done or my willpower breaks.

As for slaying Godde? Yeah but that was only once. Others have beaten him way more than that. Oh and I beat his face in once when I was newish in an FFA. Perceived insanity let me focus him down while everyone else left me alone (who'd be dumb enough to attack the guy who's in Godde's way?).

USrankFealthas
Supcom has other advantages. Like starting the game with more raw resources (kinda, since they build their mex and e faster). Even if they are at a disadvantage, based on the map you can make educated decisions about the likelihood of a rocket com being an issue.

Same with fac matchups. If your cloaky can't beat amphs, then you should really be concerned about versing them as a possibility and just not choose cloak on that map. Not that the matchup is nearly as bad as it used to be.

Honestly at your elo I'm sort of baffled as to how you can even be frustrated by these perceived imbalances, since you lose so precious few games. If you're only losing what? One in three or four? How can you have accrued enough losses due to imbalance to warrant your constant cries of imba? In your opinion, what proportion of your losses are due to imbalance as compared to mistakes or being outplayed?
+0 / -0
Skasi
7 years ago
quote:
Thanks to dynamic comms which removed all pregame rps, the eco man can morph rockets and not lose...oh wait...he can't. A little design oversight there heh :P

Not a design oversight. As I understand it the initial design was having a single chassis that would change its model based on what you morph and could be turned into an eco or battle commander. There's been a lot of talk about this in #zkdev. In the end it wasn't implemented for whatever reason, so blame the implementation, not the design.
+0 / -0

7 years ago
Funny fact that such player like @NewbiePrototypestill - is in top 50. 1vs1 top is really strange.
But i think that is good that now ladder display players who play the respective game type.
+0 / -0

7 years ago
What are the bad 1v1 maps? If they're bad, why hasn't no one (recently) commented in their thread and asked for removal?
I don't have a big issue with the 1v1 map pool.
+0 / -0
I'm not sure that Fields of Isis is bad as such, but I believe it is the only map on which I have built a nuke and fired it in anger in a 1v1. (The nuke hit. I still lost.)

I dislike
- Sands of Time (finding buildable terrain is a pain, though otherwise it's an interesting concept)
- Desert Needle Small (it's a bit big for 1v1)
- Hide and Seek (purely personal distaste, there's nothing objectively wrong with it)
- Desert Plateaus (with the spread-out mex it plays very strangely)
- Isis Delta (a much better map in small teams, but in 1v1 amph seems like the only viable fac)
- Drab (the megamex are ridiculous, the map is strongly divided and very porcy)

but I am not convinced that any of them are so bad as to need removal. (I would personally shed no tears for Drab, but I think other people like it.)

In terms of factory balance, I don't think there are many maps (if any) on which only one of Cloaky and Shield is viable, so I don't see how maps will fix any problems with the glaive vs. bandit matchup.
+3 / -0

7 years ago
I agree on most except SoT which I think is not that bad, just maybe needs the terrain leveled in the craters.
+0 / -0


7 years ago
What is the ideal 1v1 map?

What makes 1v1 fun for people?
+0 / -0


7 years ago
The ideal 1v1 map is the one you play 10v10 on.
+0 / -1


7 years ago
There are a few 1v1 maps which will discourage me from playing. There are more that would depend on my state of mind. A large 1v1 map might be good but I'll feel like Avalanche.

Rapids_v1 may be a good map but I don't recall a good game on it. The cliffs and water might just make the factory choice too prescribed. It tends to be a bit of a stomp.

Into Battle_v3 feels far too cheesy. The start positions and mex layout don't work for someone trying to play a 'standard' game as you'll often be against something weird. Sometimes it can be fun. This problem increases with small teams.

Iceland_v1 is a large economic slog. Often both sides will go air before any significant engagements occur just due to the high economy and difficulty of movement that the map presents. It has a long raiding distance and many chokepoints so the early raiding game is unrewarding. However, midgame raiding is much more important. Games on Iceland_v1 can be quite fun but they take a lot of attention and are exhausting.

Desert Needle Small 3.2 feels similar to Iceland except that the map is easier to read and the midgame side expansion is easier to lock down. Valles_Marineris_v2 has the same long-raiding-distance-economic-slog effect as Iceland and Desert Needle Small with the caveat that Valles Marineris lacks redeeming features (midgame side raiding). I feel like a lot of people don't understand this style of map so I tend to have uninteresting games on them.

IncultaV2 and Comet Catcher Redux deserve a mention because they are large yet have an early active raider game. I find these maps a bit easier to play because a lot of the game involves raiders and attempting to expand. You're always in the raider game so it is quite easy to know what to do.

Maps like Eye_Of_Horus_v2 and Bandit_Plains_v1 sit somewhere between the two categories because raiding is somewhat possible and they have little safe metal. These maps tend to be enjoyable.

I dislike Sands of Time v1.0, probably for many reasons. The cliffs break LOS, radar and movement speed so raiding is quite hard. The mex layout is uninteresting. You're restricted to bot factories which are not great on large maps. Their raiders are worse at dealing with the attrition inherent in long distance raiding and their non-raiders are slow so it is hard to transition to other units.

Anyway, I think a clean up (perhaps with rotation?) of the map pool would be useful.
+6 / -0
Into Battle could be fixed by adding normal start boxes.

Iceland may be a little big, but I generally like the type of gameplay it supports where you have to spend alot of time trying to control the map due to how spread out it is. Its better than being slightly too small and having defenders secure the whole map.

Here are some other maps that need reviewing:

Isle of grief
Iced coffee
Calayo
Aquatic divide
altair crossing
Coastal
vittra
desert cliffs
desert plateaus
zion
tartarus
sands of war
moonQ10x
isis delta
geyser plains
frozen planet
flooded valley
fields of isis
drab
cull
avalanche
cooper hill

All these maps are either cheesy, have bad pathing, are imba, have "capture middle hill and win" syndrome, or are just boring slog fests where most metal is guaranteed for each player(little fighting for map control). Some combine a few of these features as well. IMO gameplay isn't very good on any of these and the pool would be better off without them.
+1 / -0


7 years ago
My review of USrankFealthas list:

Sands of War, Flooded Valley, Cull and Coastal all outright require ships/hover/amphs. Current state of pure-water ZK is not conducive to good games.

Iced Coffee is cheesy and has a lot of chokepoints, but tends to produce reasonably tense games when cheese fails or is not used.

Cooper Hill and Desert Cliffs are small (which begets cheese), and have a prominently important center position.

Geyser Plains and Avalanche are small and flat, which also often begets cheese, but otherwise they are good maps. Perhaps, a slight upscale would fix the cheese issues.

Tartarus is ugly and has narrow chokepoints. Zion is as horrible as it is ugly because it breaks line of sight and has no space to maneuver.

Frozen Planet, Fields of Isis, and Aquatic Crossing have a lot of easily controlled chokepoints that often lead to static warfare, but i find Frozen Planet's high cliffs and smaller economy to produce more interesting games.

Drab is like the above, but also forcing amph/hover and featuring an ultra-safe supermex. Porc war guaranteed.

MoonQ10x is ugly, unbalanced, and forces bot factories at large raiding distances.

I find little objection to Vittra asides from its elongated nature allowing positional warfare to set in somewhat easier than on other maps. But it often does produce good games.

I have little objections to Altair Divide and Isle Of Grief as well. Both allow extremely wide arrays of playstyles and strategies and seem to produce interesting games. Aesthetically, IOG could have slightly taller cliffs and a few more features.

In general, i find that maps with diagonally spaced starts are more conducive to good 1v1 games (or maybe good games at all). Ravaged having diagonal starts probably saves it from becoming an utter chokepoint hell that it could otherwise be. Titan Duel is almost the perfect map for zk - if it just had some shallows!

Elongated shapes with start positions at maximum distance are the worst. This is what harms Vittra, defines Icy Run, and makes Zion even worse than its terrain would suggest.
+2 / -0


7 years ago
I quite like Ravaged, and generally find that more chokepoint-oriented cliff-heavy maps make for a wider viable spread of factories.
+5 / -0
Rapids_v1
Terrible map. IMO any map with domains 100% blocking you from your opponent is bad news. In teams it's a little better since there's fac variety, but 1v1 is just amphs or GScheese.

Into Battle_v3
I actually really enjoy this map. The meta still hasn't settled on it, and I've seen most facs used effectively. There's lots of cheese, and it's quite difficult to defend, but there's enough metal to make it worth it. If the early game doesn't go completely one-sided (for me, that's most the time), you can be in for quite a game.

Iceland_v1
GF had some really good points here. This is such a klon map XD. The midgame positioning can be pretty intense if you get there with a game still in contention, but that doesn't happen that often in my experience (worse than into battle IMO). Air switch tends to cripple someone due to the sea-cliffs and backyard expansion, but then it often takes a very long time for the game to grind to an end. I think I'd like to see more metal coming out of the mex to accelerate both players into the more interesting midgame.

Desert Needle Small 3.2
One of my favourite maps. Really good fac diversity (all bots are viable, spiders are viable, LV and hover are viable, GS is viable, tanks are tanks). Good starting metal that is clustered but not necessarily that easy to defend. Lots of map exploits to make games interesting. Reclaim available early but not in that 'cooper hill' way. Multiple points of contention across the whole map. The one thing that holds it back is that players tend to flounder with the mid-late game where the economies take off and the expansion isn't as simple as other high eco maps. Most games end with both people having their base worth of mex and maybe a corner, not because the mid mex are unattainable but because people are spread too thin trying to do everything. Also erryone insists on making striders, which is bad IMO, but it simplifies the game for them. If we ever got people capable enough to play this level to its potential that would be spectacular, but until then... Well... I enjoy it even if others don't :)

IncultaV2
Is a good CCR lite. Competition from Alien Desert, but I think inculta wins out. A big issue with alien desert is that it's very difficult to expand past your initial four mexes, meaning that investment in raiders superiority is also the best economic policy, since then you can get a complete corner contain while expanding yourself. Inculta isn't easy to defend, but the bumps to help a bit, and your fifth mex isn't quite so far away. Otherwise they play out pretty much the same, to the extent that the start positions are the same too.

Comet Catcher Redux Classic. Here's the flat eco true Scotsman.

Maps like Eye_Of_Horus_v2 and Bandit_Plains_v1 Great maps for similar reasons.

Sands of Time v1.0
Disgusting. Radar doesn't work. Can't use vehicles. Map is enormous. You can't gather information about opponents and then react to that information in any meaningful way. Feels like both players are blind countering each other all day. Game ends with GS ball every time (somehow more than other maps) because at least GS can bloody see and move properly. Get rid of it plz.
+5 / -0
Page of 2 (30 records)