| 1 |
How is being forced to do something increasing options? Nevermind I answered my own question (if you are forced to build an additional unit type while the obvious optimal strategy was to just build one unit type then you gain the option of which additional unit type to build). However, it does not lead to more options in all cases. If you are forced to build lots of different unit types then people will probably have a bit of a counter to everything and armies themselves start violating Quant's Rule (they get samey). I don't think ZK is particularly bereft of options.
|
1 |
How is being forced to do something increasing options? Nevermind I answered my own question (if you are forced to build an additional unit type while the obvious optimal strategy was to just build one unit type then you gain the option of which additional unit type to build). However, it does not lead to more options in all cases. If you are forced to build lots of different unit types then people will probably have a bit of a counter to everything and armies themselves start violating Quant's Rule (they get samey). I don't think ZK is particularly bereft of options.
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
Is
it
not
cool
to
have
a
squad
of
identical
units?
You
can
reason
quite
cleanly
about
their
capabilities,
they
will
invariably
have
really
satisfying
power
in
some
areas
and
a
few
glaring
weaknesses
in
others.
You
can
use
the
weaknesses
of
opposing
armies
to
your
advantage.
People
already
make
quite
mixed
armies
to
patch
those
weaknesses.
They
do
so
because
of
the
basic
properties
of
the
units,
not
because
some
economic
fiddling
incentivizes
them
to
make
armies
which
we
deem
to
be
pretty.
|
3 |
Is
it
not
cool
to
have
a
squad
of
identical
units?
You
can
reason
quite
cleanly
about
their
capabilities,
they
will
invariably
have
really
satisfying
power
in
some
areas
and
a
few
glaring
weaknesses
in
others.
You
can
use
the
weaknesses
of
opposing
armies
to
your
advantage.
People
already
diverse
armies
to
patch
those
weaknesses.
They
do
so
because
of
the
basic
properties
of
the
units,
not
because
some
economic
fiddling
incentivizes
them
to
make
armies
which
we
deem
to
be
pretty.
|
|
|
4 |
\n
|
|
|
5 |
Perhaps there is a difference in viewpoints. I think monospam is almost entirely absent from teamgames because even if one player is spamming a single unit they are only a small portion of their team's total spending. Furthermore it is fairly rare to see someone just spam one unit. Also, any sort of ramping cost must apply to entire teams because otherwise some really stupid stuff can regarding unit sharing. However, ramping cost across an entire team would be an absolute pain to deal with. Ramping cost is still a pain to think about in 1v1 and I haven't seen problems in 1v1.
|
Dynamic unit cost