| Blogs > etofok |
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 10 2015 00:36 ahswtini wrote: what do people think about hon's buyback limit of 2 per champion?? Seems a little limiting. I would just increase the cool down to 10 minutes or so after the first use. And limit the comback gold and XP you can get while under the "buy back status". | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
I think the meta shift could have been enough to make the comeback features irrelevant since they were reduced so much anyway. You don't need to artificially juice other parts of the game to get around what you consider an unnecessary mechanic, you just tweak the lever that you think is broken. No need to overcomplicate matters. High ground is notoriously difficult to push into but that's a big part of why VS, Axe, Troll, Sniper and Jugg are in the meta now. They have the ability to neutralize single problem heroes (VS, Axe blink/taunt, Omnislash) and turn the fight into a 5v4 or they accelerate pushing (troll ult)), Vengeance aura) or simply have the abilities the sustain pushing (sniper range and healing ward). Messing with the comeback element or introducing additional winner's advantage components only makes these already-powerful heroes stronger. | ||
|
Acetone
United States200 Posts
On April 09 2015 23:18 Plansix wrote: If the comeback mechanic were adjusted to not provide its benefits to heroes under the “buy back” state, it would go a long way to making pushing high ground easier. Even if you killed someone and they bought back, they would still be robbed of the buyback gold and XP that they need to get back into the game. I remember seeing this idea on reddit some time ago, and it seems pretty reasonable. Maybe extending the buyback penalty to not just comeback gold, but reliable gains in general. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 10 2015 00:47 Acetone wrote: I remember seeing this idea on reddit some time ago, and it seems pretty reasonable. Maybe extending the buyback penalty to not just comeback gold, but reliable gains in general. I think it is one of the main issues with the system right now. There is a large window in the high ground push where defending players can get huge injections of gold and XP instantly, even if they lose rax. The attacking team will not get this option until it makes sense for them to invest in boots of travel. And the XP gains are likely to much across the board. Supports can score like 2-3 levels off of a good high ground defense and if that gets them to 11 or 16, its game changing. | ||
|
etofok
138 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Mao7ILC.png) this picture never ceases to amaze me | ||
|
Bisu-Fan
Russian Federation3336 Posts
On April 09 2015 14:57 Baozi wrote: ✔ Graphs ✔ Starcraft references ✔ Dank memes ✔ Well-reasoned and informed analysis with proposed solutions ✘ Srapnel, ha-ha hee-hee 4/5 nice post, commended basically this really good read tho :D | ||
|
Fencar
United States2694 Posts
On April 09 2015 14:57 Baozi wrote: ✔ Graphs ✔ Starcraft references ✔ Dank memes ✔ Well-reasoned and informed analysis with proposed solutions ✘ Srapnel, ha-ha hee-hee 4/5 nice post, commended I didn't notice any starcraft references. | ||
|
Reson
530 Posts
As well thought out as your post was, the same problem remains with all these ideas to "change the game" to go in a certain way. Manipulation. Dota is unique solely based on its origin and it's community inclusive idea generation based development. As least in the IceFrog era, he was the aggregator of information, judge of quality, and programmer but he was never the only game developer. The development model of Dota can not forcefully be recreated by any company and thus makes it near impossible for a game developer company to create something unique like Dota. Manipulation and planned development will create a MOBA like LoL where heroes are designed to fit a certain function to fill a certain lane. The developer tells you so. The objectives are highlighted so you know what steps to take to progress and win the game. Kill Dragon and/or Baron get some buffs. You win games in LoL by following a prescribed methodology given to you by the developer. Now compare that to Dota, there is no right way to win in Dota. You are only given an objective which is to kill the enemy Ancient. You can only storm down mid the whole game and ignore all other towers and win the game. You can use the strength of the common soldiers (creeps) to your advantage and get them to help you destroy buildings without your presence. You can kill Roshan to get a temporary item that gives you a second life to try to get an advantage. You can win early or win late. All the options are open. There is no artificial boost that magically assists you for no reason. The game was fair. (Oops I forgot about the garbage comeback mechanic that implemented an artificial boost for losing) Sure LoL is more popular as a game but that is because there are more people that want to play a GAME. They want artificial progress such as levelling up and getting better runes that make you artificial stronger than other players. They want Diablo Style RPG spell spamming to kill "minions". They want to be able to play the game without knowing anything or learning anything before playing (Burden of Knowledge) because they are just "playing a game". They want instructions on how to win the game. They want to be told how to succeed. They want to be told what their correct "job" is in each "role". As a Dota player I want none of this. Dota was a game where everybody begin each game equally. No professional player has any innate advantage over any average player. Everything that separates them is what is executed during the game. If those two players sat at a LAN cafe next to each other, they will have the exact opportunities to execute. A quick comparison to a real life sport like Basketball where 6" 6 220lb player has a clear advantage over a 5"5 150lb person. Another comparison to LoL where a lvl 30 account with runes will have a clear advantage over a lvl 1 account with no runes. Dota is fair every time. It doesn't matter how much time and money a player has put towards the game, they will have a equal opportunity when the game begins. But we are on the path of losing this fairness, the comeback mechanic is a reward for losing and a punishment for winning. How can this concept be fun in any pub game where coordination is not expected. Cooperation is expected but we would be hard pressed to find coordination even in high level games. We as the players must think of both the pro games and pub games. Icefrog's mantra as posted in his blog has always been to make the game fun. Of course he will weigh the thoughts of pro and high level players more because they know Dota the best. A common game developer company mistake is to listen to the majority which is almost definitively the less knowledgable group. The ideal solution is to reverse the manipulation now. Remove the comeback mechanic before every single balance that comes after it has taken it into account. If we try to solve it in any other way, we will only be implementing more and more manipulation into the game. If the majority gets what they want, buybacks and high ground will be changed next to compensate for the fact that a losing team is rewarded for accomplishing the exact same thing as the winning team. Buyback and high ground changes are suppose to punish the losing team to compensate for the punishment to the winning team caused by the comeback mechanic. The cycle of manipulation of the game will never end. Leave the direction of the game alone and let the players (which is everybody playing the game) determine how they believe the game should be played. I hope for Dota to remain a proving ground where winners win and losers lose. I hope that as players of this great game that everybody has had a hand in creating you want this too. P.S. Early push Deathball was what Navi used to gain the majority of their success. When Navi was rolling with that strategy pre TI2, there were no complaints. They were complimented as "aggressive" and "daring" to try to finish the game early. | ||
|
Acetone
United States200 Posts
On April 09 2015 06:40 etofok wrote: This is the most important part of a strategy game - map control. In Starcraft when a player gets contained he is going to lose the game eventually, because he’ll run out of resources. If you've ever played TvT you should know what I mean. Check out this wiki page to read some more if you aren't familiar with the concept. On April 10 2015 06:08 Reson wrote: @etofok As well thought out as your post was, the same problem remains with all these ideas to "change the game" to go in a certain way. Manipulation. Dota is unique solely based on its origin and it's community inclusive idea generation based development. As least in the IceFrog era, he was the aggregator of information blah blah dota rocks lol sucks blah blah. I feel kinda bad saying this, because you seem to have put a lot of effort into it, but this post seems to consist mostly of irrelevant nonsense. | ||
|
Reson
530 Posts
On April 10 2015 09:21 Acetone wrote: I feel kinda bad saying this, because you seem to have put a lot of effort into it, but this post seems to consist mostly of irrelevant nonsense. No need to feel bad. In a way it was a drawn out version of saying whatever solution OP or anybody comes up with to solving the current "problem" is irrelevant cause they would be solving the wrong problem. I get why someone may think what I was wrote was irrelevant but I am interested in what parts you thought made no sense. I noticed you summarized most of my post as "Dota rocks and LoL sucks" but that's not my point. My point is that if Dota follows along this path of manipulating the game to fit a certain mold it would be inevitable that it becomes like LoL. It is evident in the way people discuss how things "should be" in Dota like game length, degree of strategy, and how close games are. | ||
|
deadmau
960 Posts
On April 10 2015 09:21 Acetone wrote: I feel kinda bad saying this, because you seem to have put a lot of effort into it, but this post seems to consist mostly of irrelevant nonsense. Yea was hard to understand but I can kind of see what he's trying to hint at. Just the notion of adding a comeback mechanic to solve a non-existant problem was really weird, like why add it for no reason. Push/Deathball had already been nerfed 2 times in one patch. Why weren't all the 6.82 changes allowed to come to fruition without the random unnecessary addition of Comeback Mechanics? As I asked before, given all the other changes of 6.82, were comeback mechanics necessary to fix 6.81b? I hear this really stupid argument right now that goes like this...."it doesn't matter if comeback mechanics are unnecessary, they were added and OP, but they were tuned to a shell of it's former self, it's here to stay so suck it." What kind of logic is this? And for the most part I think everyone that ladders has learned to account for it by now unless you're brain dead. | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On April 10 2015 12:30 Reson wrote: No need to feel bad. In a way it was a drawn out version of saying whatever solution OP or anybody comes up with to solving the current "problem" is irrelevant cause they would be solving the wrong problem. I get why someone may think what I was wrote was irrelevant but I am interested in what parts you thought made no sense. I noticed you summarized most of my post as "Dota rocks and LoL sucks" but that's not my point. My point is that if Dota follows along this path of manipulating the game to fit a certain mold it would be inevitable that it becomes like LoL. It is evident in the way people discuss how things "should be" in Dota like game length, degree of strategy, and how close games are. I don't think we need to worry about Dota becoming like LoL. League was molded around its monetization model which is why new heroes -- which you have to purchase -- feel so powerful and capable of handling a variety of situations (these are termed "toolbox heroes"). An effect of this design, whether intended or unintended, either stagnates or streamlines the evolution of the game depending on your perspective. You don't want to spend money on a hero that obviously sucks or is weak in the current meta, and obviously Riot doesn't want that either. Dota comes from a more classic and cavalier school of design where order emerges from chaos. It's a style any player of Brood War or Marvel vs Capcom 2 or Counter-Strike will immediately recognize: when everything feels overpowered, nothing is overpowered. Icefrog has been pretty good about sticking to this design philosophy and adding and changing stuff generally because "it would be cool" (and only sometimes because a hero is actually too strong), which is fine because stuff has a way of working itself out. | ||
|
Gimpb
293 Posts
It's obvious these changes are still very up in the air despite how long they've been around and will no doubt continue to need changes. There is one thing that is (at least in my opinion) very good about the rubber band mechanics: it helps prevent games from becoming zombies... you know, those ones that are over but don't end for another 25 mins. It's something dota has struggled quite a bit with in the past. It is in many ways an elegant way to deal with the issue since a highly vocal minority of the community is vehemently against surrender in pubs and this solution also prevents boring endings in pro games. Instead of ending games that are over, it makes it so the game isn't over--this is a very good thing that any change needs to preserve. Also, it's fine--actually good--if a game snowballs and ends as long as it isn't every game. I think we're seeing too few games ending early personally. I think they should shoot for an even mix of games that end in any given 10 minute period between 20 mins and 70 mins. If the game can't end early, there isn't much point in early game heros. The problem is it makes it so the early game doesn't matter so much. As an unintended consequence it also seems to amplify the importance abilities that can get you kills even when far behind amplifying the power of those heros (see laguna blade, sonic wave, finger of death). These abilities make it so you'll eventually be able to cash in those enemy streaks. I do really like the idea of scaling jungle creeps. Not sure if they need to give more gold but if they give the ability to deny the waves, that'll be a huge improvement. Currently, I think there's a lot you can do to work around the issue and even the pro scene has only scratched the surface on mitigating technique, I think. Even simply controlling creep wave balance is not typically done at the pro level outside the early game and it could make a huge difference late. Coming after a lane of rax from another lane after you've opened one is another under-used technique that removes the high ground issue, though exposing you to more towers. The problem is that while this may balance things at the pro level some time in the future, things will stay seriously out of whack for the vast majority of players because the solutions are subtle and technical. Here are a couple ideas I think could help: 1. Aegis doesn't take a slot, it's just a buff on whoever took it 2. Remove the high ground advantage from a lane. I'm thinking the enemy jungle lane. Just make it strait from the high ground by the ward hill strait into the base. Maybe constrict the opening a little to preserve a bit of defender's advantage. 3. Make the base larger - just more spread out so it's harder to stop split push and you get bigger dark patches when lanes start to fall. 4. A once per 10 mins extra strong creep wave cooldown, like the glyph, that is enabled when all the enemy's outer towers are destroyed. | ||
|
Yurie
11956 Posts
If an enemy heroes goes to a secret shop they can instantly disable what was bought for free. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
Heroes are now more than ever at serious risk of 6-slotting. This means that there is a realistic point in time where no amount of farming will increase your advantage, and that carries especially have been reaching that lately. It used to be that you would literally only max out on Antimage and Alchemist, with Tinker occasionally making an appearance or whatever hero Burning was playing that day, but now it's almost every game that you say "well, hero X has finished his item progression." The real issue is not that farming the whole map gives you too little. In fact, the The problem is that turtling gives you too much, along with everything else in the game. It's too easy to get items in this game, and that makes the items worth less. To restore the balance, income needs to be nerfed or items need further progression (which probably also ought to come along with stronger towers). | ||
|
Fencar
United States2694 Posts
| ||
|
rexob
Sweden202 Posts
| ||
|
Dagobert
Netherlands1858 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [Before] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6WVFjgx.jpg) + Show Spoiler [After] + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/vOPIWzp.jpg) | ||
|
aboxcar
United States447 Posts
(in much the same way a later blunder does not necessarily have to result in a "rubber-band" effect) should or shouldn't is one thing, but it is not a law of nature that things must be or are that way light of heaven once said that dota is a simple game--you make a series of correct moves, and then you win. there are some of us who still wish it could be so simple. | ||
|
etofok
138 Posts
you make a series of correct moves, and then you win. This can be said about everything | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
StarCraft2.fi
IPSL
Sziky vs JDConan
OSC
Solar vs Percival
Gerald vs Nicoract
Creator vs ByuN
RSL Revival
Classic vs TBD
herO vs Zoun
WardiTV 2025
herO vs ShoWTimE
SHIN vs herO
Clem vs herO
SHIN vs Clem
SHIN vs ShoWTimE
Clem vs ShoWTimE
IPSL
Tarson vs DragOn
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
