| 1 |
In regards to GoogleFrog's main concern:
|
1 |
In regards to GoogleFrog's main concern:
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
I want to ask why is it so important for smaller units to stay relavant in end games of massive maps?
|
3 |
I want to ask why is it so important for smaller units to stay relavant in end games of massive maps?
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
I know ZK is supposed to be a flat tier game, and it's unique in that design feature. But you have to admit the only thing preventing Superweapons from being made in the first place is cost. And that is a tier... the Superweapon price tier. And no one is calling you guys out on it, it's fine because at that economic level, it's not ZK anymore. It's Titan ZK. And the superweapons justhelp make the game go faster.
|
5 |
I know ZK is supposed to be a flat tier game, and it's unique in that design feature. But you have to admit the only thing preventing Superweapons from being made in the first place is cost. And that is a tier... the Superweapon price tier. And no one is calling you guys out on it, it's fine because at that economic level, it's not ZK anymore. It's Titan ZK. And the superweapons justhelp make the game go faster.
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
Why prolong the game with more fussy small unit exchanges when you're at the super economy scale?
|
7 |
Why prolong the game with more fussy small unit exchanges when you're at the super economy scale?
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
Forcing the players to have long drawn out, exhausting exchanges with unit spam is just disrespecting their time.
|
9 |
Forcing the players to have long drawn out, exhausting exchanges with unit spam is just disrespecting their time.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
In the back of a player's mind, they just want to end it when they're at that level.
|
11 |
In the back of a player's mind, they just want to end it when they're at that level.
|
| 12 |
\n
|
12 |
\n
|
| 13 |
Bigger Maps = Bigger Guns.
|
13 |
Bigger Maps = Bigger Guns.
|
| 14 |
\n
|
14 |
\n
|
| 15 |
All this demonstrates is that the game grows with the map, and not that Dets are OP.
|
15 |
All this demonstrates is that the game grows with the map, and not that Dets are OP.
|
| 16 |
\n
|
16 |
\n
|
| 17 |
Experienced player knows that Sand Castle = Dets, Tiny Skirmish = No Det.
|
17 |
Experienced player knows that Sand Castle = Dets, Tiny Skirmish = No Det.
|
| 18 |
\n
|
18 |
\n
|
| 19 |
This
is
the
game
they
chose
and
want.
No
amount
of
tweaking
will
change
this,
short
of
completely
breaking
the
superweapons.
|
19 |
They
map
they
choose
will
dictate
the
style
of
gameplay
they'll
engage
in.
No
amount
of
tweaking
will
change
this,
short
of
completely
breaking
the
superweapons.
|
| 20 |
\n
|
20 |
\n
|
| 21 |
I also suspect players crave the opportunity to use the toys they don't often use, it's a novelty pissing match. And if that's what they want, I don't think it is very fair to dictate otherwise.
|
21 |
I also suspect players crave the opportunity to use the toys they don't often use, it's a novelty pissing match. And if that's what they want, I don't think it is very fair to dictate otherwise.
|
Rage post: detriment is useless