balance

something not works.

I need a buff, I sux

Me too, I sucks, having my elo dropping significantly last 10 games. From nearly 1900 to 1600.

dear GoogleFrog, you know how much I appreciate your efforts and who works with you to improve Zk.
But there is something wrong.
Balance is disastrous, I lost how much? 160 elo points in 2 months and almost 2 ranks?
And why? The problem is, I don't know.
I even seem to have improved some flaws in my game (some nastier will say that's not true at all :)), but I keep losing games after games. I went to watch the replays, and what's wrong is the balance.
It is not possible that I always go to the team that has been in trouble from the beginning, and not just my fault.
But does the balance also take into account the rewards (trophies) of the players or just the elo?
I mean, if a player has 1500 terraforming rewards, are they calculated negatively by the WCR? if it has 3500 trophies for complete annihilation is it considered positively with the same elo?
I also ask for a change in which it is impossible for players to build super weapons and bertha etc .. from the first minutes of the game without having done anything to echo, and that therefore these weapons are only unlocked
after at least 3 fusion (or 1 moho) and then a singu have been built by the team.
Now you can build superweapon.
It is a common sense rule, which already applies in other games, going by step you unlock other options.
See the damage done by this policy:

B957636 21 on Lost_v2
Here none of my team did singu, but in the meantime they built nuke and zenith right away.
(And in fact we lost, few made unity)
If you don't have the money, you can't afford to buy a Lamborghini ...

What you say confirms the rule I stated above, with parts reversed, only that you were lucky to be on the other team.
My proposal is to improve the game itself. To make it more interesting and not a resort to making trenches and who pulls the nuke first (a rather demeaning concept) which in the long run harms Zk, because he currently has no other alternatives to the Wellcome team room (except 1vs1). There was a vote some time ago, and as you say, I also voted for 4vs4 matches, but apparently not if it matters.
Anyway thank you for your advice

ChvaN: if you tell metal is shared, greedy people might still think "I should make more storages so that I do NOT share.". Would also like something to discourage storage building, more than explaining. Idea: for team games, make storages depend on unit numbers! Make one storage per 10 attack units (or for 2k unit value)! Problem solved ;-)

manero: a solution to so many games being 16v16 would be nice, but for now, when I play in that, I "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.".

quote: I also like playing in Small Teams, rather then Big Teams. The problem is: often there is 30 ppl in Big Teams and no one in Small, while others are in the private rooms.

Imo the giant "lobsterpot" is the worst part of ZK, and the reason I rarely play teams games. Balance is bad and the gameplay is boring and very slow paced. There needs to be a hard cap of 16 players per room, and there needs to be multiple active rooms during peak times.

I voted for 9 vs 9.

6 vs 6 allow variety starting factories.

And 9 vs 9 allow pushing in the beginning with multiple air players on one side.

quote: Also, I cant host battleroom that has 7v7 limit?

!maxplayers 14 works for me on a non-admin test account.

I dont play 1v1 really. So, good point. Maybe stupid storage exists only in big games, and more intelligent storage exists in 1v1.

I dont quickly build big defense stuff to front too, so before that point is also brought up, there is that, one more very minor good use for storing metal.

Anyway this was about balance...