Live data from Hacker News

Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

zero-k.info

141–147 of 147 posts

Re: Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, ZK doesn't population caps like e.g. Starcraft. The actual limit is actually the CPU/GPU (and maybe your bandwidth too). ZK's 16vs16 host, the "lobster pot" as they call it, can barely be playable if your rig is too weak.

> ZK doesn't population caps That sounds like poor RTS design. Popcap is one of the simplest and most effective "anti-snowballing" mechanisms. Once you're "maxed out", you cannot get further ahead - you must attack and trade to build new stuff. If you can just keep making stuff without ever being forced to trade, whoever gets ahead first, eventually wins. Supply also serves as a comeback mechanic - you were even, but…

Snowballing also happens a lot in SC2, and also even in Chess. That's simply the normal way to win, even if on the other side it feels bad when you get steamrolled by overwhelming forces.

Comebacks in high-level SC2 games don't usually happen as you say. More often, the losing party relies on their opponent overlooking some peculiar tactic like using DTs (for those who are not familiar with SC: invisible units that can only be detected with specific means). Otherwise a bad engagement very often means defeat in short/mid/long term.

Finally, ZK does have very long range static weapons that can hardly be countered (unless you destroy them). If the opponent "camps" in their base, you just start to build one that will either vaporize their army or buildings, or slowly wear them down. But really, camping is usually newbie-level strategy.

Re: Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ZK doesn't population caps That sounds like poor RTS design. Popcap is one of the simplest and most effective "anti-snowballing" mechanisms. Once you're "maxed out", you cannot get further ahead - you must attack and trade to build new stuff. If you can just keep making stuff without ever being forced to trade, whoever gets ahead first, eventually wins. Supply also serves as a comeback mechanic - you were even, but…

Popcap is just one of the ways to design an RTS, there are others. Zero-K solves the problems solved by popcap in other ways. Income tracks map control, and controlling more of the map is hard, so players that are ahead don't have the freedom to sit back and build up an overwhelming army. Armies are fighting or jockeying for position throughout the game and army size and composition keeps escalating. Defenders advant…

(GoogleFrog used to be a high-level ZK player and also part of the dev team of ZK, if I'm not mistaken.)

Re: Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

#143
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am OK with war games as long as there's no humans or human-likes in the game. ZK's sentient robots are fine for me, contrary to something like 0 A.D. (which even has female workers - maybe I'm old school, but that's even more a no-go for me).

In Total Annihilation, the Arm side had actual humans inside the robots. Has that lore changed in Zero-K? I feel like such a pedantic nerd asking this, but the debate over people vs. sentient robots was the whole reason for the war!

IIRC the robots have won against humanity, but then the robots started to fight among themselves for resources. The player is one of those robots who has some sort of amnesia. Well, this matters as much as the details of the trees in a racing game, in my view.

Re: Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh well I guess that depends on the win condition, and yes I can imagine 1000v1000 units can be fun (myself am an avid enjoyer of 4v4 in SC2). But especially as the number of players go up, I think the popcap should be going down. I've played a couple custom 2v2 games in SC2 with a reduced popcap (100 instead of 200) and the games were wiiiiiiiild: you have very little economy and turtling is just impossible, so the…

I love turtling. I hate that the prevailing strategy seems to be always be on the offense and micro eighty million stupid little things. esports and APS have ruined competitive RTS play. Turtling lets me build up my base and economy and nurture a curbstomping offense after which I can overwhelm my opponents. If I wanted to play a tactical RTS there are a million options out there that limit you with horse-blinders

there are a lot of games where turtling is a viable strat, just not for the entire game. a game without a counter to turtling only ends when one side gets bored.

the fact that any popular game attracts a bunch of sweaty gamers that want to optimize every little thing is not related to the viability of turtling.

Re: Zero-k: A libre sci-fi RTS game, with an economy based on metal and energy

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not sure why you would expect that turtling (porc(upine)ing) would work in a competitive game with 2 teams, the opponnents will just take the rest of the map and then crush you using these extra resources. That's exactly the issue, when playing in a random team. Matchmaking can be a real dice roll in a small playerbase (which SC2 4v4 is). Sometimes I get teammates 500MMR below me, where the metagame is almost alway…

I'm reading this as confirmation that turtling is a good strategy.

Never said it isn't; like every strategy it boils down to good execution and working to avoid getting countered.

I just personally hate to play against turtles ;)

Post reply on HN