Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Title: MM 1865: 1v1, Rank Singularity
Host: Nobody
Game version: Zero-K v1.8.3.5
Engine version: 104.0.1-1435-g79d77ca
Battle ID: 861594
Started: 4 years ago
Duration: 14 minutes
Players: 2
Bots: False
Mission: False
Rating: Competitive
Watch Replay Now
Manual download

Team 1
Chance of victory: 83.8%

GBrankPRO_Dregs
Team 2
Chance of victory: 16.2%

ATrankATOSTIC

Show winners



Preview
Filter:    Player:  
sort
USrankDregs asked me to have a look at this game involving Thug. In short I don't conclude anything about shield balance on the basis of this game. I think USrankDregs plays it incorrectly by being too eager to dive in to push an advantage, attacking piecemeal and not using Rover mobility.

[Spoiler]
By 3:00 both players have expanded fairly peacefully. USrankDregs is doing a bit better on economy but ATrankATOSTIC is about to fix it with a Caretaker.

At 3:00 USrankDregs spots the enemy commander and moves all units to fight it head-on. All the fighting in the relevant parts of the game takes place in this area. I think this is the strategic mistake of the matchup, since choosing to fight in a single location negates the Rover speed advantage.

[Spoiler]
By 5:00 USrankDregs has lost a Ravager, Ripper and Fencer (630 metal) to attacking into the enemy commander and then retreating. ATrankATOSTIC has lost a Thug and an Outlaw (420 metal). I think there is a big mistake here, which is the 1050 metal in army left rallied just south of the battle. This latency in getting units to the front probably makes up the difference in economy management from earlier.

[Spoiler]
At 5:24 ATrankATOSTIC pulls back to meet his reinforcements and kills the Rovers.

[Spoiler]
At 6:05 ATrankATOSTIC attacks and picks off an out of position Ravager. The Stardust fights it off with support and he loses a Felon and some other units.

[Spoiler]
By 6:41 the pattern for the rest of the game is set. USrankDregs feeds handfuls of units into the shieldball on multiple occasions. Other positions on the map are barely attacked.

USrankDregs has spend 1310 metal on defenses on the other side of the map so far, while ATrankATOSTIC has spent 530. The shieldball costing 2150 is fought piecemeal by Ravagers and Rippers over the next minute, but with no individual assault costing more than 500 metal.

Thug is certainly looking fairly powerful and it is interesting to see the slow valuable units beat the less efficient mobile units. None of the engagements seemed to be wildly off. I would expect 630 cost in Rovers to lose when assaulting 420 cost in Shields plus a Lotus and Guardian commander.

What I want to see from Rover is more mobility play and better use of Fencer. In this game each battle had one or two Fencers sitting on the side of each battle, however they had to set up after the battle started because a lot of battles were Rover assaults. I think Fencers should be used to force confrontations instead of as a bit of extra DPS (if they should be used at all here). Fencers are significantly faster than Thugs and have the DPS to break through three Thug shields. In theory they are impossible to catch or harass without Bandit or Rogue.

This game could have gone differently if the Rovers that were idling near the battle at 5:00 participated. The faster reinforce time of Rover is part of the mobility advantage, and it was not used.
+1 / -0
Great breakdown and analysis of how the game played out. It's hard to refute where I messed up, but it doesn't invalidate the core sentiment I've been getting at ever since the outlaw buff.

Even if I had played better I would still assert that in rovers vs shieldbots, equal metal spent on both sides, shieldbots will always come out on top in combat thanks to unit synergy.

There's only so much time you have a "mobility advantage" over shieldbots for. But being that Fairyland is a good defensive map and it's so easy for the SB player to just queue an outlaw and shutdown any raid, what are you actually meant to do with this mobility?

Once you've failed to raid their base, there's usually only 3 expansions left to check. One of which will usually have their commander, one of which will be empty and pointless to raid, and one of which will be easily re-inforcable. It doesn't take long for the SB player to secure enough spots to fund an army that can't be fought by rovers anymore.

Are rovers meant to expand faster than SB under duress of bandit raids which rover's cheap raiders are bad at handling? Build porc to prevent it even though you know that a shieldball will invalidate it shortly anyway?

I also don't want to spend all of my micro barely chipping away at thugs with fencers just because they move quickly. Unless you have an overinvestment in them, you're not going to do meaningful damage before you're pressed back onto the defensive.

Meanwhile unit-wise scorcher is a nono thanks to outlaw/bandit. Ripper gets toasted by felon/rogue. So does domi. Ravager is really all you have left but outlaw makes those struggle and shield's variety of units quickly step in and solve that - particularly snitch.

Now, I'm not asking for water to be parted here. I just want you to see that Thug's durability/cheapness and Outlaw's overtuned damage/slow/range is the core of why rovers can't cost effectively do much about them.

I mean shit.... We're even seeing Randy beginning to play SBs more frequently in favour of rovers on certain maps. This is a guy who said he picks what works until it gets nerfed, not disimilar to UG's modus operandi. This should be another subtle clue as to which way the wind is blowing on this topic.
+1 / -0
SErankGodde's solution to this matchup was spam ripper and then dodge every Rogue shot using superfluidity.

But that was when Ripper was overtuned. With that out of the equation, looks like things are back to normal.

I think Dominatrix changes hurt this suprisingly much. Rover kind of used to be able to do a judo trick by trying to steal Thugs and Outlaws while avoiding Rogue and Felon fire. This rarely was sufficient to win, but it was a decent stalling tactic.

This required the capture to be successful in a very short time; those times have significantly increased vs specifically Thug, so now the expected outcome of trying to steal individual Thugs from a ball is the semi-captured Thug filtering away before being captured, and Dominatrix taking (possibly fatal) amount of damage to Rogue/Felon.
+1 / -0

4 years ago
For clarification, my view on OPness/balance that Dregs is referring to is that I try not to complain about balance or something being OP, I much prefer to use what I believe is OP so I will either a) win a lot and others will start to see what I see, or b) I will be shown how to play against it or get ideas myself.

There may be an answer that I or others just hasn't discovered yet, even in the last few days I was struggling with Sea vs Hovers (Scalpel), but since then I think I've found a solution.

Any fans of StarCraft? No balance patches for years, and was considered Z>P until Bisu came along in 2006 and defeated Savior 3-0 in the MSL final with a new style of play revolutionising the matchup (https://liquipedia.net/starcraft/Bisu_Build).

Dregs, started kicking ass with Shields and its win/win. Others will soon be backing you up (and you'll score some ladder points as a bonus), or you'll learn ways to counter them for yourself.

+6 / -0
On the spectrum of commonly played Zero-K maps it seems to me that Fairyland is a map where Shieldbots should be mildly favoured over Rover - or at least, it wouldn't trouble me greatly if that were the case.
+0 / -0
Glad you chimed in Randy, it's always better hearing it from the source.

If playing SBs myself (or fencer spam or dagger spam on other maps) is the answer, then I lose appetite for ZK because I'm not really playing a game with options, I'm following a ruleset to the letter instead. Factory RPS and metas where certain factories are nearly mandatory are the most limiting things to gameplay here.

Now, you returned to ZK recently shortly after I did, our ratings were very similar. During this time you stuck (mostly) to what we mutually discovered to be key strategies. I half continued to deviate and tried to force alternative strategies and factories to work, and look how that's impacted my rating vs yours (although I am willing to admit that you're no doubt a more consistently good player than I am right now). Conversely, we've had games where you tried to mix it up and I went rovers/hovers and further validated our findings.

The reason I mention the above is because it illustrates just how handcuffed to a limited subset of options we are at the top 10 if we value our rating. If those options aren't broadened, we're just repeating the same shit, over and over again and frankly that's an insane waste of time - but worse still, a waste of all the other cool things built into the game that are owled because 2 or 3 things are overtuned.

We CAN subvert that issue with further balance tweaking, but I don't often hear anyone saying they have a problem with repetition. Glad UG did though (at least where map pool was concerned).
+0 / -0
Multiplayer B862972 2 on Banana Republic v1.0.1 Tried a bit of fencering the ball, didn't manage to kill a single thug in early game. Just wasted time. Also opted not to try raiding because outlaws/bandits, especially in chokepoints on that map would easily have stopped me from doing so and I don't like donating metal where I can avoid doing so. Maybe my best option was to go mostly ravagers but even still, bandits, rogues, outlaws and snitches would have done me in. I decide to switch to recluse spam and ATOSTIC simply makes a good play with cloaked snitches, GG.

Since it's part of the same brand of typical crap you can expect in this meta that I'm so wrong about, I built AA because I knew GS were coming. Imagine that, like fucking clockwork the locusts came. But it was already lost by then. The initial cheddar is strong enough without brie to go on top.

Postgame chat Randy says he doesn't agree with my perspective but I honestly can't see what options I have as rover here. The fact that so many people can argue against this for so long has frustrated me to the point where I'm honestly confounded. Really pissed off that I'm having to expend so much energy on something that to me, appears glaringly obvious.
+0 / -0
quote:
The fact that so many people can argue against this for so long has frustrated me to the point where I'm honestly confounded.

While i'm not sure what to do directly (maybe spam ripper? it's seems ungodly fast now that it's not useless, so you can outrun everything shield could use to stop it, and it can fight thuglaw adequately)...

However, as a meta thing, do what we did with Puppy - that was hyper efficient.
+0 / -0


4 years ago
My 2c Rover is screwed in this match up if it loses the early game initiative. Once a ball is allowed to form and put you in a position where you need to combat it, things go bad. Rover must try to use its mobility to indefinitely prevent that happening on anything close to an even cost:cost basis, and that imo takes much better play to execute than it does to defeat.
+3 / -0