Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   
Title: [A] Teams All Welcome
Host: Nobody
Game version: Zero-K v1.12.5.1
Engine version: 105.1.1-2457-g8095d30
Battle ID: 1903422
Started: 13 days ago
Duration: 12 minutes
Players: 6
Bots: False
Mission: False
Rating: Casual
Watch Replay Now
Manual download

Team 1
Chance of victory: 19%

USrankMrJigglesGod
USrankwildemind
USrankCColtManM
Team 2
Chance of victory: 81%

USrankRiposteR
USrank123vtemp
USrankBuckymancer

Show winners



Preview
Filter:    Player:  
sort
12 days ago
I found out after the match that some chatters I couldn't see were accusing me of smurfing. It's flattering, but I think anyone who believes that isn't paying enough attention to my mechanics :)

The evidence brought up can be summarized as:
1) I know too much for a new player
2) I play too well for a new player
3) I used all my factory's state commands this game.

Point 1 is just the product of doing so much research and analysis before installing. There's a lot of advice and data on the wiki, and hundreds of hours of publicly available gameplay videos. I can also apply math and logic, for example calculating overdrive payback periods, without the game client. So I was able to put together a lot of information on strategy, unit compositions, tactics and execution methods before I ever stepped into the Teams All Welcome room.

Point 2 ought to be expected given point 1 plus any prior experience with an RTS plus how the team balancer handles new accounts. I have some good strategies, but I'm clumsy at executing them and often run into situations I don't know how to handle. A lot of my wins are coming from RTS 101 principles - claim territory, expand, use resources from the expansions to build units to hold the territory and harass the player across from me - and that's good enough because the team balancer expects less of me than that.

Point 3 is interesting, because it's specific enough that I can mostly point to where I got the ideas. Repeat build factory guard is straight from the wiki's economy tutorial. IIRC the low priority factory came from a Godde replay cast, but something like that is necessary to keep expanding with the factory on repeat build factory guard, and adjusting the factory is easier but slightly worse than adjusting individual workers. The retreat setting also has a wiki tutorial, but I botched it by never setting up a retreat zone.

Ironically, the one somewhat Zero-K-specific advanced concept I attempted was something nobody called out. After killing a radar, I hid a group of scorchers in a spot I was pretty sure was a radar shadow for any backup radars, then did a run-by with them later when I had a bit better intel. But I'm not sure how much the radar-hiding aspect of the plan actually helped, and the replay shows they had no nearby radar tower anyway.

Finally, my "Lessons Learned" lists generally contain things any experienced player should have internalized but which I obviously hadn't as of this replay, like "Retreat unit states don't work without a retreat zone" and "Set the factory rally point before the second unit exits or else the produced units spread out in a way that causes micro difficulties deploying them". Or things I didn't have the attention to even think about at the time, like "My rearmost Mason should make energy proactively rather than idling 'til I energy stall and making energy reactively". They're a necessary part of my improvement process, when I notice and review things I could not improve at otherwise. Publishing them is optional but, given that I write them up anyway, why not?

In any event, I've already spent a day's full playtime just analyzing the commentary on one replay. I'm not smurfing, the only nonpublic Zero-K I've played has been campaign and skirmish content also on this account. I would appreciate it if the discussion of the topic at least proceeded respectfully, as opposed to the caustic gossip that went on behind my back in this game.
+4 / -0
As best I can tell from the replay, the possibility that this might not be your first account was originally broached by the opposing team, and I think they are entitled to discuss that possibility when deciding what strategy to pursue. Further to that, players who are actively participating in a game and are under pressure do get some latitude (in terms of expressing themselves politely); that latitude would not be extended to spectators and people posting on the forum/discord/etc outside a game.

But yes, everybody should discuss other players respectfully.
+1 / -0
10 days ago
I agree, the brief discussion in the other team's chat at the beginning was acceptable because it was part of a threat assessment, and USrankwildemind was mostly talking about what I was doing during the previous game we were both in.
+0 / -0