Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Can't wait to forget my first multiplayer battle...

43 posts, 991 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 3 (43 records)
sort

2 months ago
"Pairing with someone of your skill" leaves something to be desired. I forget who it was that I fought in a regular, 1v1 multiplayer match. But, I was level 0, they were level 39 and I think I'd made a couple of construction bots before my factory was obliterated.

"Steamrolled" is a word.
+2 / -0
This is a game with very steep learning curve to say the least. Try coop or skirmish vs AI.

Edit:

I looked through your history. Your first battle seems to be against CArankmad_kraft who is now 41 lvl. The battle you were talking about appears to be http://zero-k.info/Battles/Detail/846681

So my impression is that you got the game and jumped straight into action. This is gonna yield you nothing but frustration. If you wanna continue with Zero-K you have to learn basic game mechanics, get a grasp on general game progression. For example, you straight-up built caretaker and advanced radar, didn't took any mexes, didn't raid early. Conclusion is simple: get experience by playing coop.
+6 / -0
2 months ago
it really depends on the player, for example me and my many smurfs have always played gently with newbies in 1v1.
i battle with them and try to keep the battlefield interesting.

but irl if you can build mex and units you are an "average" player, the main hurdle is learning how to not die in the first 5 minutes due to heavy raiding.

the best tip i can give you is to build raiders non-stop and get control of the map. you shouldn't need a radar to see your enemy, keep your enemy in sight of raiders at all times and you should not have any problems.
+1 / -2

2 months ago
there's like 5 people playing this game outside of peak hours. proper matchmaking, is expecting a lot...
+3 / -0
my advice is do make radar.. the raider spam mentioned above is a good idea =) that and porc bottlenecks that reduce enemy maneuverability.. try to force the enemy into set piece battles that you can win.. try not to end up chasing any attacks.. running round the map after stuff thats attacking you is the beginning of the end.. try to attack the enemy enough so that they are forced to defend just as much (see ~ chess ~ tempo)
+0 / -0
Remember also that games are recorded by default. If you lose, consider reviewing the replay and watching what the other player was doing. If they beat you, chances are you can learn from them.

It's never a good idea to forget a learning experience.

EDIT:
On that note, here is my evaluation of that replay (times are approximate):

1) You dropped your comm first and fairly quickly in pre-battle preparation stage. This suggests you may not have taken much time to think about the map and the sorts of tactics it will favour. That said:

2) I noted both of you went cloak, a fair choice on that map. While a bot factory, it has units that are fast enough to run around the map quickly which is good when it is a wide open field.

3) Your opponent builds first from his factory, you are many seconds behind. By the time your first scythe (we'll come onto this in a bit) comes out, your opponent has 3 glaives.

4) In the first minute you squander resources on an unaffordable caretaker and advanced radar. Caretakers will only help you build faster if you have more income, they do not just magically increase rate of build as similar structures might in other games.
a) Zero-K has a streaming economy - resources pour in at a steady rate based on the number and value of metal extractors you control. Similarly every construction unit including caretakers drains resources at a steady rate. There isn't much point in building caretakers unless you have more than 20 metal/second (m/s) income: the caretaker will drain 10m/s alongside the 10m/s your factory does.
b) BASIC radar used to be an almost mandatory build until commanders were given radar by default in a recent patch. Advanced radar is very rarely worth the trouble. When you do need large area coverage, you're better off with a net of basic radar.

5) By 1 min 30 seconds, your opponent has built 5 metal extractors to your one, and has more energy income. The outcome is likely sealed at this point. Economy is crucial: if you're pumping enough resources, it doesn't matter how much you lose.

6) You get raided and lose your first expansion constructor at about 1 min 50. This seems to deter you from attempting any further expansion.

7) Between about 2 mins 30 and 3 minutes, you make your first offensive move by trying to knock out some economy. However, Scythes are micro-management intense units. Simply leaving them to hit things will simply result in losing them, as happened here. It was easily intercepted and destroyed.

8) By 4 minutes, your opponent has about 2x more income than you do. You do a bit more poking with scythes but again to little effect. They are taken apart by defenders, doing only light damage.

I could go on, but the outcome was sealed early.

That is no surprise of course, and no shame to you, you were matched against a considerably more experienced player. Bear in mind the matchmaker is only as good as the material it has to work with and there are often not many players around playing 1v1 matchmaker (I will often get matched against people so much better than me that they stomp me almost as hard as you got stomped).

Key lessons to consider:
1) Expand, expand, protect - this means taking mex and balancing offence with defence so that you can deter raiders from your own economy and constructors.
2) Build what you can afford - light raiders like glaives will accomplish more for you than heavy ones like scythes and at less cost when you lose them.
3) You can build nearly 4 glaives for the cost of a scythe - 4 glaives can be in up to 4 places at once, scouting, identifying and engaging easy targets - or consider point 2, you can have 2 or 3 glaives poking your opponent and 1 to protect a constructor.

None of this is easy, but if this was an easy game, you probably wouldn't have people around who have been playing for years. They'd have moved on long ago.
+5 / -0
2 months ago
USrankBaphnedia, ZK has a very high pace compared to a lot of rts. Many players commander-assist raider construction right out of the gates, so that they can cause havoc asap.

What I suggest is getting yourself a standard start-up strategy that will at least give you a fightng chance.

I suggest mex + 2 solars and then right away a Lotus next to your factory. Between the Lotus and the Commander you should have enough firepower to get rid of early raiders. Thereafter continue expanding in a similar fashion, with 1-2 solar per mex and a Lotus next to groups of mexes. Use the Shift key to queue up commands that will auto-execute.

Regarding the factory, I suggest a few light raiders like Glaive right away. Use these to go scout the enemy. If you get lucky you may find an unguarded constructor or eco structures to destroy. Generally I find a ramp-up of units best - ie - lighter units and then progressively bigger ones. Rushing a single heavy unit means that you will lose map and lose the early raiding.

ZK is a game that very much rewards a player making lots of units and expanding fiercely.

I suggest mastering a single factory before trying a bunch of them. Cloaky, Light Vehicles and Tanks are the most forgiving facs for new players to use.

I also suggest either playing coop vs AI or duelling AI before 1v1 or lobsterpots.

People in the "All-Welcome" room are not always as welcoming as the title suggests, especially when a new player is dragging their team down.

GLHF! :)

+2 / -0

2 months ago
*sigh
very simple answer:

there was noone around in your skill-range. noone. so the game HAD TO give you the next best.

+3 / -1


2 months ago
The AI doesn't cheat. It makes the perfect soft landing for 1v1 multiplayer
+0 / -0
2 months ago
In my humble opinion, a game offer that involves overpowered opponents should display a warning.
+4 / -0


2 months ago
quote:
In my humble opinion, a game offer that involves overpowered opponents should display a warning.

Is this a way to ban SErankGodde from matchmaker forever
+2 / -0
what about a reward for beating a player who is far above your level? (slayer award)
do you even get more ello for beating a top player?
(not sure its even still called elo)
+0 / -0


2 months ago
I agree very much with FIrankAdminAlcur.
A change to the UI should be made displaying your opponent or your ELO difference before you accept.
I'd be willing to try doing it if people think it's a good idea.
+1 / -0

2 months ago
I think not having a warning (or have the warning as you look at the players in-game, since the level of the opponent may intimidate new players. Otherwise they might be thinking about the interface and what they're doing in the fight rather than focusing on the 104 levels of their opponent, when they might want to be thinking about the battle.
+2 / -0
quote:

A change to the UI should be made displaying your opponent or your ELO difference before you accept.
I'd be willing to try doing it if people think it's a good idea.


This is bad idea. For few reasons, one of which is dodging games against opponents you know about. That could lead to frustrating experience, especially at the top. Imagine everyone refusing to play vs Godde and Godde being sad as he has noone to play with.

If anything, if the match found is not very close (further than 55% to win let's say) there could be extra warning and it should be free to skip without getting out of the queue.

"Like I found a game because you waited for so long, but its not very balanced - do you still accept?" intention. It should also not inform you whether the other person has lower or higher rank with this warning.


Honestly I am pro nick obfuscation during the game and revealing them only after battle concludes. It can be less stressful if you don't know if you're supposed to loose because you're vs Godde or some noob much lower than u - thus giving your all nonetheless.

Of course players may wish to tell you who you are against in chat and that's okay. Hence mind games begin :D I hope it could be opt-in option for yourself, not neccesarily for everyone if people don't like it.
+4 / -0


2 months ago
quote:
For few reasons, one of which is dodging games against opponents you know about.

Almost all 1v1 matches I get are against players I have a less than 10% chance at beating according to WHR.
So I've just completely stopped playing 1v1s instead, which is sad because it's a pretty fun game mode.

Which is better, playing no 1v1s or playing against a subset of opponents?
+0 / -0

2 months ago
Does nobody beneath you ever queue up dyth? Also, slightly above you is atostic and he plays often - would be a relatively even match up for you no?
+0 / -0
quote:
Almost all 1v1 matches I get are against players I have a less than 10% chance at beating according to WHR.

Your last 10 MM duels are 7 wins and 3 losses.

1) Win against @Omoiyari (90% expected win chance for you)
2) Loss against SErankGodde (2.3%)
3) Win against GBrankmatthewwightman (98%)
4) Loss against @Sparkles (20%)
5) Win against GBrankmatthewwightman (98%)
6) Win against @Sparkles (20%)
7) Loss against CZrankpsaniac (62%)
8) Win against CZrankpsaniac (62%)
9) Win against CZrankpsaniac (62%)
10) Win against CZrankpsaniac (62%)

Only one of these is below 10%. Perhaps a larger selection would yield your conclusion; however, this quick check fails to replicate it.
+1 / -0

2 months ago
I forgot to say previously, but regardless of your first game's experience, welcome to the forums and our community USrankBaphnedia, glad to have you :)
+9 / -0
Oh yes, welcome USrankBaphnedia :)
I hope you get better luck with your 1v1 matches.

EErankAdminAnarchid : Sorry, I was in a rush this morning. By "matches" I mean the the "1v1 match available" notifications. For the last few months I have been carefully checking the top 20 player list before accepting matches (if someone is mostly a 1v1 player, is online and not in a room or watching a battle then they're probably the one looking for a 1v1) and so mostly ignoring said notifications due to not wanting a stomping (my hunches about who it was who's looking for a 1v1 based on the player list have been correct most of the time).
I also hadn't realized the difference between me and @Sparkles had shrunk that much. Last I checked I had a 9% chance of victory against her...

The CZrankpsaniac games were tough, but good. :) The SErankGodde and GBrankmatthewwightman matches less so.
+0 / -0
Page of 3 (43 records)