Something interesting pointed out on the dev forum.
In DotA 1, the pathing doesn't account for units you don't have vision of blocking your path. In DotA 2, if there's an obstruction, your unit pathing will take you around, even if you do not have vision of said obstruction.
Could be situationally useful.
Reminds me of a bug on starcraft 2 to find where the enemies base was. Probably needs to be fixed asap.
It's not nearly as gamebreaking as in SC2 though. In Dota it's sometimes more annoying than useful, since your hero takes unexpected paths for no reason.
Could be very useful in tracking down someone that is trying to juke you - it takes a lot of experience, but a smart player can abuse this quite a bit, IMO. (I can think of a lot of kills that didn't happen because of this interaction, actually, so this is really good to know)
On January 17 2013 07:13 Gosi wrote: When Valve gives us a proper ranking system, what type of system would be the best do you think? Just straight up MMR/ELO numbers? Leagues with points? Do you want "seasons" with resets like iCCup or ranking to be forever etc etc?
I have honestly no idea what I want T_T
Standard MMR system, they can use leagues to mask actual ratings or just give us a value, doesn't matter to me.
I just want multiple ladder outlets.
Ideally:
Unranked (what we have now and would have all of the fun modes AR/SD/RD/LP you'd have an mmr to make balanced matches but it would be completely hidden)
Unranked EASY MODE (would get a lot of the "just for fun/casual" players who don't care about 'trying hard' into their own pool. this isnt a flame, this is a perfectly reasonable way to approach/play the game, have fun!)
Ranked (would allow you to track progress, strive for something, would allow you to become known more quantifiably)
Ranked Team (would allow amateur and pro teams to get their names out there)
Both ranked ladders would have websites that showed rankings, just like wowarena, hon, lol and others have.
Perfect world, there would be tournaments hosted in the game client similar to War3 but that might just be a thing of the past.
The ranked ladders would reset for seasons and hopefully culminate in some sort of tournament.
On January 17 2013 07:28 TheYango wrote: They just need a separate -EM queue and then suddenly a huge chunk of the players you hate to play with will go play that instead.
I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
On January 17 2013 07:28 TheYango wrote: They just need a separate -EM queue and then suddenly a huge chunk of the players you hate to play with will go play that instead.
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.**
**if you queue solo or duo. I don't have a lot of 4/5 stack data and what anecdotal information I would have for 4/5 stack issues would be very flawed since I 4/5 stack with a huge variety of skill between the players, which in theory seems hard to match-up. However, even in HoN playing with 3/4 the games were still reasonably matched. I think this is due to HoN not artificially inflating the rating of those that are grouped but simply taking the mmr average of all the players and finding an appropriate counterpart. I've heard rumors Valve artificially inflates rating of people grouped up because they assume the teamwork will be better but I dont think it's ever been confirmed since Valve doesn't have the best transparency.
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.
Wouldn't less people playing make the matchmaking less acurate? Less people means longer queues or looser matchmaking. Unless for some reason the players removed were not representatives of their actual MMR, I don't think it would help at all.
Is Ladder like SC2 a bad thing for DotA2? No. Why? Because people who plays for the fun will always play pubs like they did in WC3 DotA. Will it increase the amount of rage in the ladder? Probably. Is it a bad thing? Yes. But, the same shit happens in pubs. The difference between playing on a Ladder and in Pubs is the seriousness you are playing it. I can't queue up for CM without having a russian kid telling me to pick his favorite hero 20 times, and when I don't he leaves. DotA2 is a competitive game and not having a Ladder is odd. Really odd.
Stop lying to yourself saying visible stats are a bad thing for the community. People will rage and flame regardless.
I don't know if I would play on a Ladder that often due don't have free-time to do so but Valve denying the possibility of having a Ladder for the ones who are asking is dumb. And Valve always listen to the community. Or is what they say at least..
I used to get matched against pro players and now Im where I belong, with all of the other idiots who mostly know how to play. maybe it's broken down low, and that's worth addressing, but I think as a general rule in the top 30% of MM it's just fine, which is why I have hope that it will evolve into something better since it's not just totally awful and in need of full replacement.
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.**
**if you queue solo or duo. I don't have a lot of 4/5 stack data and what anecdotal information I would have for 4/5 stack issues would be very flawed since I 4/5 stack with a huge variety of skill between the players, which in theory seems hard to match-up. However, even in HoN playing with 3/4 the games were still reasonably matched. I think this is due to HoN not artificially inflating the rating of those that are grouped but simply taking the mmr average of all the players and finding an appropriate counterpart. I've heard rumors Valve artificially inflates rating of people grouped up because they assume the teamwork will be better but I dont think it's ever been confirmed since Valve doesn't have the best transparency.
Sounds like you need a tryhard mode where it is mandatory to pick broken tier heroes and have an actual composition.
I have 215 games won and I suck at every hero but this is my opinion on how Dota2 works when playing soloq
1) The whole game revolves around a strong mid pick who can outplay the opposing mid and have rune control in order to gank top and bot. Therefore snowballing the whole team
2) It's pointless picking double carries and fighting over CS on the side lanes. So long as somebody picked a strong mid, play a support and help your carry and mid as much as you can
3) If you want to win, you need to pick mid and carry the game yourself
4) There is no point playing anything other than mid, it requires so much more skill and awareness in order to manage bottle, runes, outplaying your mid opponent, understanding if top and bot are struggling in order to help them
5) When you are playing in a premade mid doesn't become as important as it is for soloq because you get to communicate properly with your teammates, which unfortunately almost never happens when soloqueing
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.**
**if you queue solo or duo. I don't have a lot of 4/5 stack data and what anecdotal information I would have for 4/5 stack issues would be very flawed since I 4/5 stack with a huge variety of skill between the players, which in theory seems hard to match-up. However, even in HoN playing with 3/4 the games were still reasonably matched. I think this is due to HoN not artificially inflating the rating of those that are grouped but simply taking the mmr average of all the players and finding an appropriate counterpart. I've heard rumors Valve artificially inflates rating of people grouped up because they assume the teamwork will be better but I dont think it's ever been confirmed since Valve doesn't have the best transparency.
Sounds like you need a tryhard mode where it is mandatory to pick broken tier heroes and have an actual composition.
Not sure if that is a flame or what. I just want to always have winnable games. Many games are won or lost before the players finish loading. I almost exclusively random (which tbh is pretty broken if you are good with a lot of heroes) and have been known to call out drow pickers etc. (:
On January 17 2013 07:51 arena_say_what wrote: I have 215 games won and I suck at every hero but this is my opinion on how Dota2 works when playing soloq
1) The whole game revolves around a strong mid pick who can outplay the opposing mid and have rune control in order to gank top and bot. Therefore snowballing the whole team
2) It's pointless picking double carries and fighting over CS on the side lanes. So long as somebody picked a strong mid, play a support and help your carry and mid as much as you can
3) If you want to win, you need to pick mid and carry the game yourself
4) There is no point playing anything other than mid, it requires so much more skill and awareness in order to manage bottle, runes, outplaying your mid opponent, understanding if top and bot are struggling in order to help them
5) When you are playing in a premade mid doesn't become as important as it is for soloq because you get to communicate properly with your teammates, which unfortunately almost never happens when soloqueing
Anyone agree or disagree?
Any statement that assumes you are always the strongest player on the team is inheritently flawed. Plus crushing a sidelane can be equally or even more important.
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.
Wouldn't less people playing make the matchmaking less acurate? Less people means longer queues or looser matchmaking. Unless for some reason the players removed were not representatives of their actual MMR, I don't think it would help at all.
Yeah, you might be right. Valve used to blame the 'low' player pool for the bad matchmaking. They claimed they would rather get players into matches faster at the cost of mismatches than to increase the queue time to get more accurate matches. I actually argued with Eric Tams about this quite a bit many, many months ago. Now though, dota2 crushes the online numbers HoN ever had and it's still about as bad as it ever was.
On January 17 2013 07:35 SKC wrote: I'm not sure it will help that much if you are in a fairly high MMR. I have very little experience with EM, but from what I remember most people that played it were either new players or very terrible, boots first auto-attacking terrible. Most people still played regular AP, no matter how good they were.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but if (for sake of discussion) 25% of the playerbase was removed because they went to -EM. The MMR boundaries or whatever valve uses to determine match making would 'tighten' up so even those at the top would (should) experience better games but at the cost of a longer queue.
I might be totally full of shit with that interpretation, so I might need to be called out. Something with valves matchmaking is seriously goofed though, anyone who is reasonably high rated can tell you that. You can literally queue into a game on page 2 vs a well known NA stack, and the next game get matched with 4 people who pick 4 hard carries, no concept of lanes or strategy or how to use their hero. That is not a dramatic whine, stuff like this happens all, the, time.**
**if you queue solo or duo. I don't have a lot of 4/5 stack data and what anecdotal information I would have for 4/5 stack issues would be very flawed since I 4/5 stack with a huge variety of skill between the players, which in theory seems hard to match-up. However, even in HoN playing with 3/4 the games were still reasonably matched. I think this is due to HoN not artificially inflating the rating of those that are grouped but simply taking the mmr average of all the players and finding an appropriate counterpart. I've heard rumors Valve artificially inflates rating of people grouped up because they assume the teamwork will be better but I dont think it's ever been confirmed since Valve doesn't have the best transparency.
Sounds like you need a tryhard mode where it is mandatory to pick broken tier heroes and have an actual composition.
So it's tryhard now to actually play the game with some shred of strategy, pick competent team comps and not expect to start the game with a massive disadvantage?
On January 17 2013 07:51 arena_say_what wrote: I have 215 games won and I suck at every hero but this is my opinion on how Dota2 works when playing soloq
1) The whole game revolves around a strong mid pick who can outplay the opposing mid and have rune control in order to gank top and bot. Therefore snowballing the whole team
2) It's pointless picking double carries and fighting over CS on the side lanes. So long as somebody picked a strong mid, play a support and help your carry and mid as much as you can
3) If you want to win, you need to pick mid and carry the game yourself
4) There is no point playing anything other than mid, it requires so much more skill and awareness in order to manage bottle, runes, outplaying your mid opponent, understanding if top and bot are struggling in order to help them
5) When you are playing in a premade mid doesn't become as important as it is for soloq because you get to communicate properly with your teammates, which unfortunately almost never happens when soloqueing
Anyone agree or disagree?
1) Disagree. More noticeable at lower levels of play, but at higher levels the expectation is that supports do help secure runes/leave side lanes to gank. In other words, taking the initiative instead of relying on others.
2) Unideal team compositions are prevalent at all levels of play. As long as there's a sense of proper farm distribution, double carries in a team is ok-ish.
3) If you think you are that much better than your opponents, sure. However, it's more probable that you are more critical of other's play and inaccurately assessing your own abilities.
4) Disagree. Dota is a 5v5 game, Mid helps you improve in your personal microing/skill-level, but there are plenty of other important skills to be learnt. Often you see these mid players who are mechanically sound and capable, but strategically poor/stupid.
5) Communication is always important in a 5v5 game. I've played in plenty of stacks where we're supposed to have "good communication", but it doesn't mean it's an auto-win because people will still make mistakes.
EPT
