Great post Frog and I think this highlights a lot that Zero-K gets right.
A few random thoughts.
- I think this is where a lot of what zero k gets right.
- In the original total annihilation, the T1 units are still used once a player has T2 - they are good enough and often not even worse than T2 units for their metal. I like this about TA. BAR has made a decision to make T1 mostly irrelevant except for spam I think to their loss. In my head, if you're going to have tech levels, to keep it interesting some T1 units should still be viable. Zero K manages this area very well. I do have some thoughts I might write down at some point.
- Getting rid of tech levels and managing that another way is far better. Every constructor being able to build every unit - for the most part - really saves a lot of brain space.
- I prefer the ZK economy to BAR, but wonder if a middle ground may be better. I Zero-K You always feel metal starved and always need to preserve your units as more metal isn't coming to replace losses in team games - a loss of metal is a permanent loss of capacity to impact the battlefield, except maybe if you win a massive wreck field. Due to the scaling in BAR, this just isn't the case to even close to the same degree and units are far more expendible.
- I understand the need for game ending weapons, but don't love the current setup for Zero K - I think a lot more could be done in this space to make it more interesting - I think a level in between nukes and the three game ending weapons could be interesting.
