|
I think it's a mistake to equate carry with farm. Here are some examples to think about.
- If a team runs lich spectre offlane (which the chinese did in the past), and essentially sacrifices the spectre's farm early on in favor of the tempo heroes, isn't the spectre still the carry?
- If a team puts their carries in safelane and offlane (like Alliance used to), in the 1 and 3 farm positions, isn't the offlane 3 still the carry, and not the midlane 2 which is given more farm in the early game? Later on the offlane "3" will transition into the "2" by farm priority, but he was still always the carry and not the mid lane tempo hero.
Carry is not merely determined by farm, but by how the team views it strategically.
|
For me,
Core is:
The hero/position that you build your game upon and expect it to impact the game on your favor. Make it a 4 protect 1 antimage, TI3 bulldong furion, storm player in mid to snowball or offlane centaur that you expect to have blink. they don't have to scale in late game either. Think pugna+DK with a 5 man ward push lineup, those 2 core heroes soak XP/gold briefly to obtain some levels/minor items and rain on your tower. It doesn't mean they'll farm a long period of time rather you make your plans according to the performance of those heroes.
Carry is:
The role in which you expect to have impact after soaking some xp/gold. There is no mainstream "early game carry" s far as I remember. The impact is higher the more your secure farm on it. In traditional sense, agi carries generally scales well with items and the game progresses. Some carries have different peak times and performance gradients. I.e void or gyro scale more and more as the farm progress going well. Tiny is another example but shows a very good mid game presence with magic damage, later fall a little bit in physical damage department, then will scale very good approaching 6 slot.
In general carries are cores but you don't generally rely on purely full skill set as carries but you can play a core role with skill set only without farm priorities.
|
On July 10 2015 12:49 aboxcar wrote:
I think it's a mistake to equate carry with farm. Here are some examples to think about.
- If a team runs lich spectre offlane (which the chinese did in the past), and essentially sacrifices the spectre's farm early on in favor of the tempo heroes, isn't the spectre still the carry?
- If a team puts their carries in safelane and offlane (like Alliance used to), in the 1 and 3 farm positions, isn't the offlane 3 still the carry, and not the midlane 2 which is given more farm in the early game? Later on the offlane "3" will transition into the "2" by farm priority, but he was still always the carry and not the mid lane tempo hero.
Carry is not merely determined by farm, but by how the team views it strategically.
Well if they farm more after a certain point in time they are still the carry, right? In terms of overall nw and cs they will pass their respective tempo controller almost always, because they farm a lot more.
Spectre is the carry, because she at some points starts farming and will never stop until she is six-slotted. If we use your example and they just didnt give spectre any farm but continue to play her as a tempo controlling offlaner around her ultimate, she wouldnt be the carry imo.
|
On July 10 2015 12:49 aboxcar wrote:
I think it's a mistake to equate carry with farm. Here are some examples to think about.
- If a team runs lich spectre offlane (which the chinese did in the past), and essentially sacrifices the spectre's farm early on in favor of the tempo heroes, isn't the spectre still the carry?
- If a team puts their carries in safelane and offlane (like Alliance used to), in the 1 and 3 farm positions, isn't the offlane 3 still the carry, and not the midlane 2 which is given more farm in the early game? Later on the offlane "3" will transition into the "2" by farm priority, but he was still always the carry and not the mid lane tempo hero.
Carry is not merely determined by farm, but by how the team views it strategically.
The term reflects the entire game, not just the laning phase.
|
Yes I agree with above posts
But what if they get shut down and the Spectre never gets a chance to break into the top of the farm?
My point is that focusing on the farm aspect is myopic and sometimes even meaningless. The purpose is to be able to think and talk about the larger strategic meta-game.
In other words, saying that "farm is what makes the cores, and the most farm is what makes the carry" is not enough. We can't really discuss anything meaningfully if we stop here.
|
On July 13 2015 13:56 aboxcar wrote:
Yes I agree with above posts
But what if they get shut down and the Spectre never gets a chance to break into the top of the farm?
My point is that focusing on the farm aspect is myopic and sometimes even meaningless. The purpose is to be able to think and talk about the larger strategic meta-game.
In other words, saying that "farm is what makes the cores, and the most farm is what makes the carry" is not enough. We can't really discuss anything meaningfully if we stop here.
I think you need to learn the difference between "farm priority" and "farm", because you're arguing against a strawman.
There's no meaningful discussion if you don't understand what everyone else is posting in this thread.
|
To me, a 'carry' has always meant a hero that can and will scale with XP/gear (hard hitting right-clickers, more-or-less).
Ex:
Anti-Mage is a carry (looking for damage gear and heavy right clicks)
Lion is not (item choices are never based on right clicks and the hero is much more ability-dependent)
This does not mean, however, that a 'non-carry' cannot "carry" you/your team in individual games.
|
On July 13 2015 14:37 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2015 13:56 aboxcar wrote:
Yes I agree with above posts
But what if they get shut down and the Spectre never gets a chance to break into the top of the farm?
My point is that focusing on the farm aspect is myopic and sometimes even meaningless. The purpose is to be able to think and talk about the larger strategic meta-game.
In other words, saying that "farm is what makes the cores, and the most farm is what makes the carry" is not enough. We can't really discuss anything meaningfully if we stop here. I think you need to learn the difference between "farm priority" and "farm", because you're arguing against a strawman. There's no meaningful discussion if you don't understand what everyone else is posting in this thread.
Well originally I was arguing that core has been redefined so as to be rendered less meaningful.
The farm thing is kind of a tangent. Here, I want to say that the reductionism of focusing our lens on farm (or farm priority) blurs the larger picture. It is not that farm (or farm priority) makes the carry. It is the other way around. It is because a hero or position is a carry that we give him the farm (at the appropriate times, depending on our strategy). It's mistaking an attribute for the essential.
I suspect that everyone actually knows what a carry is. He is the one who "carries" you, but you can't very well define it like that. Even people who use the word "core" to mean farmer have an inchoate understanding that it is not the same as carry. But in struggling to define carry, people resort to farm (priority), and I think this is incorrect.
|
To me these terms all speak to explain something before the game starts. To me they're like the "Plan." Do plans change? Yes of course they do. But that doesn't mean the terms do in my opinion.
I see these terms as just a quick way of explaining farming priorities, 1,2,3,4 and 5. Before the game starts, the team decides who they are going to allocate the most farm to, the second most, etc. Positions to me are:
1 = Safe Lane Farm
2 = Mid Lane
3 = Solo Offlane
4 = Support number 1 who gets more farm priority than the other support
5 = Support number 2 who gets the least amount of farm priority on the team
To me the term "Carry" means the number 1 role, i.e. the one person/hero the team decides is going to get the most farm priority before the game starts. This doesn't mean a different person/hero can't get more farm then the Carry does, all it means is that if he does then he's doing it while his team is still giving top priority to someone else even though they're not getting as much. That doesn't then make that person the Carry, he's still not the person/hero the team is giving the most farm priority to so he's still not the Carry. It's weird to me that everyone here seems to think Carry means "a hero that scares well into late game" or "the person who actually carried us to the win." Just because you win on the back of a support CM playing really well, she's still a support...not a carry. Also, I've seen teams play and win with number one position Pugna or Slardar who both do not scale well into late game but are still, to me, the Carry because they were given the position 1 role by the team before the game starts. Carry doesn't mean "scales well into late game" to me, it means "person who is given number 1 farm priority before the game starts."
"Core" is just a quick way of saying the 1,2 or 3 role positions on the team, i.e. the 3 people/heroes the team decides is going to get the most farm priority, again, before the game starts. To me these terms have nothing to do with how heroes scale or how the game actually plays out, it has to do with farm priority and planning before anything actually happens.
So the terms don't mean anything really by the mid game, and definitely nothing by the end game. To me these terms should specifically mean for planning, not to give a definition of something as the game is progressing. That's really the only way these terms make any sense to me because once you start trying to apply what's actually happening to defining a word then the terms lose all meaning because ultimately anything can happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
