|
|
On July 21 2013 03:54 Zorkmid wrote:
This game so needs a surrender option. So much time wasted. I've read the thread on that and there seems to be an interesting cycle. Younger and more superficial players think there should be a surrender option and the reasons against it don't occur to them. More nuanced DotA2 players see all the problems with having the surrender option and deny that there should be a surrender option. DotA2 veterans with thousands of games under their belt consider the horrendous loss of time caused by playing out lost or won games and think there should be a surrender option.
|
I'm a legendary veteran player and I think surrender is horrible.
So do my legendary peers.
|
Bearded Elder29905 Posts
Actually writing "pause" in console as spectator causes the game to pause with no PAUSE screen and gives effect of mass lag/server crush and makes people super confused.
So freaking nice to troll, LOL.
|
So MM isn't serious enough to be rated, but is serious enough to not have a surrender option? That is just stupid.
|
the problem with surrender is that it ruins threads
just like mm discussions
|
LoL > Dota 2. Discuss!
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 21 2013 04:51 Soap wrote:
So MM isn't serious enough to be rated, but is serious enough to not have a surrender option? That is just stupid.
go and read the thread and everything about it before you make comments please. Everything everyone is about to say has all been covered before. Its not about being serious its about not having people give up 5 minutes in and just waiting to concede at 15 minutes or whatever it is in other games.
Dota has a lot more comebacks than most other games. If you want the game to end, play with 5 and you can all leave at once and no one gets an abandon.
|
Bearded Elder29905 Posts
On July 21 2013 04:53 LuckoftheIrish wrote:
LoL > Dota 2. Discuss!
You should get punched for that pretty hard, you know.
|
On July 21 2013 01:55 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 01:52 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 01:45 superstartran wrote:
And he never said 50% of the community wants it, he said a large contingent of the community wants it, which is true. If it ends up that an open ladder ends up being successful, Valve's gonna have some issues. One being that everyone is playing on the other ladder instead of the in game matchmaking system, and two, there's gonna be the same issue that everyone else keeps parroting about. People are gonna be saying 'you're shitty I play in XYZ league while you play Valve MM lululululul.'
Instead of ever coming to that situation (which I do believe could happen in the near future, because people are kind of fed up with Valve's garbage MM system and lack of ladder/rating), Valve should just bite the bullet and implement it themselves, while also solving the 'toxic' community problem that everyone always seemingly bitches about. First of all: lol second a larger contingent of the community wants to have no ranking. so guess thats that. IHLs valve has done nothing but support. so its not really gonna be an issue. besides if someone is saying "you're shitty i play in X IHL and you play MM" i just laugh and say "you're in valve MM right now". Rating in pubs is stupid. stop it. And there is ranked MM, for teams. Really, if you can't find a team, how competitive are you at dota?
Because finding five similar skilled players who can communicate and work together all while having the same time schedule is not easy. Some people don't really want to deal with that, but would prefer to play in a slightly more organized structure where people don't last pick Meepo just because they want to, all without having to deal with admins who will play favorites just because their friend got butt hurt because they lost a game.
On July 21 2013 04:39 GreenGringo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 03:54 Zorkmid wrote:
This game so needs a surrender option. So much time wasted. I've read the thread on that and there seems to be an interesting cycle. Younger and more superficial players think there should be a surrender option and the reasons against it don't occur to them. More nuanced DotA2 players see all the problems with having the surrender option and deny that there should be a surrender option. DotA2 veterans with thousands of games under their belt consider the horrendous loss of time caused by playing out lost or won games and think there should be a surrender option.
Anyone that played DotA 1 with leaver protection basically had a surrender option. It was a waste of time to play games out if you felt like it was over.
On July 21 2013 03:34 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 02:20 Comeh wrote:On July 21 2013 01:58 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 01:57 PassiveAce wrote:
say what you will about tree
sst vs everyone is the real scourge of this thread
(not commenting on whos right or wrong or w/e just saying thats what it always comes down to.) ty lol. BTW people for some reason in pubs love to play ring around the warlock golem. i don't get it. its not a fight you can win, stop it lol. I think the idea is to try and kite the golem while everyone else focuses it down. It never happens though. specifically i was playing solo mid warlock vs a nyx. i get ganked by a naix who is set up by impale. why did i get a double kill there you ask? because i ran in circles around my warlock golem while naix chased me and got killed, while bonds finished off the nyx. i dont get it. why did that work. Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 03:15 ch33psh33p wrote:
Except right now the perception of the non-ranked mode is already absolute shit. You try to tell anyone you even REMOTELY take matchmaking seriously, you'll get one of two responses:
* Go make a team and do team MM you faggot
* Stop taking it so seriously its just matchmaking.
The perception of the current MM system is already as shit as it would be if there was ranked and non-ranked, and at least then, the people that would want to play ranked could.
Right now they're just met with two completely ignorant responses, all for the sake of protecting people's egos. You're trying to make a pub serious. you don't go on Bnet and join a dota room expecting a serious game. so stop doing it in dota 2. life gets better.
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible.
On July 21 2013 04:54 CustomKal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 04:51 Soap wrote:
So MM isn't serious enough to be rated, but is serious enough to not have a surrender option? That is just stupid. go and read the thread and everything about it before you make comments please. Everything everyone is about to say has all been covered before. Its not about being serious its about not having people give up 5 minutes in and just waiting to concede at 15 minutes or whatever it is in other games. Dota has a lot more comebacks than most other games. If you want the game to end, play with 5 and you can all leave at once and no one gets an abandon.
Comebacks require a combination of high level of teamwork, communication, precise execution, and the other team screwing up. For all the stars to align in a competitive game, it is very rare that we actually do see teams come back from big deficits, let alone in public play.
|
On July 21 2013 03:55 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 03:36 TheYango wrote:On July 21 2013 03:26 ArcticRaven wrote:
I feel making the (hypothetical) ranked system only CM would help a lot in that regard.
Not that other modes ranked make any sense though. (Ranked All Pick ? What a joke) CM actually makes less sense than all-pick because drafting is totally meaningless in a mid-level game where you have 4 random players and nobody has any idea who plays what. All-pick restricted to the -CM hero pool is is the most sensible (or, even better, -XL or -LM if they get implemented) because as much as people like to bitch about "OP" heroes, none of the ones in -CM are game-breaking enough at the pub level to matter (obviously there's stuff like Phoenix and Arc Warden when we get the full release, but that's a completely different monster). The issue with AP is that picking faster matters. Even if you don't believe a single hero is that OP, a full stack insta-picking an OP comp definatelly matters. You won't be always queuing alone. Adding visible MMR to the solo queue wouldn't be that big of a deal, but people hardly play solo queue anyway. Most people want visible ranks in regular matchmaking, and I don't see how regular matchmaking could be competitive with AP. Perhaps it would need to be something similar to -CM, but without a captain and maybe even without bans. Isn't that how the other games do it?
Many people solo Q, wtf are you talking about? Queue is fine atm, I don't want some retards QQers because I picked a non OP heroe. If you stack, man up and go team MMR. I played LoL for about two years and the mentality was way more retarded in ranked than it is in dota right now, I don't want things to get worse when those who wants to be competitive are mostly looking to show their e-peen with stupid meaningless MMR in 5 random games. It worked yeaaaaars and yeaaars in counter strike, FFA is pub, if you wanted to play serious you would go on IRC, find 4 random mates, go on a mic server and look for a match. It did not took that much time, i don't do it with dota but I don't see why it would not work. The problem is the category of people who want to be competitive but are too lazy to find a way to do so. Seriously, time to get back to console dudes. 17 years ago, if I wanna lan doom I had to carry a fucking huge computer ffs.
TL;DR It jsut takes a small effort to play competitive, deal with it and don't add more ingredients for retardness to grow up in dota
|
On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible.
so like, banlist style leaver protection?
|
On July 21 2013 05:10 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible. so like, banlist style leaver protection?
Yes. Banlist style leaver protection games ALWAYS had a surrender option. Period. Everyone that played DotA 1 knows that. Essentially anything with leaver protection needed the surrender/ff option because it was a complete waste of everyone's time when it was clear one team was winning.
|
On July 21 2013 05:11 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:10 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible. so like, banlist style leaver protection? Yes. Banlist style leaver protection games ALWAYS had a surrender option. Period. Everyone that played DotA 1 knows that.
Um. did you even read the context of what you quoted before you got all surrender happy and sarcastic? because i said absolutely 0 about surrender guy. i made a comment about how MM are pubs. and you quote me then talk about leaver protection making them IHLs. and then i rebuttal, and then you talk about surrender again.
learn to internets man. or at the very least how to hold a conversation.
its like you are just picking a topic then being obstinate about it without reading what anyone is saying.
|
On July 21 2013 05:13 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:11 superstartran wrote:On July 21 2013 05:10 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible. so like, banlist style leaver protection? Yes. Banlist style leaver protection games ALWAYS had a surrender option. Period. Everyone that played DotA 1 knows that. Um. did you even read the context of what you quoted before you got all surrender happy and sarcastic? because i said absolutely 0 about surrender guy. i made a comment about how MM are pubs. and you quote me then talk about leaver protection making them IHLs. and then i rebuttal, and then you talk about surrender again. learn to internets man. or at the very least how to hold a conversation. its like you are just picking a topic then being obstinate about it without reading what anyone is saying.
Sorry, I didn't read your posts because it usually persists in
1) I don't want stats because I will feel bad about myself
2) I don't want people to be mean to me
3) You're too try hard get out of my game, I want to force everyone to play my way
Pretty much the gist of it. I may come off abit aggressive, but I never said you had to play my way. All I want (as does a significant portion of the community) is an option to play my own separate que. You get your own non-visible rank que still.
|
On July 21 2013 05:19 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:13 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:11 superstartran wrote:On July 21 2013 05:10 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible. so like, banlist style leaver protection? Yes. Banlist style leaver protection games ALWAYS had a surrender option. Period. Everyone that played DotA 1 knows that. Um. did you even read the context of what you quoted before you got all surrender happy and sarcastic? because i said absolutely 0 about surrender guy. i made a comment about how MM are pubs. and you quote me then talk about leaver protection making them IHLs. and then i rebuttal, and then you talk about surrender again. learn to internets man. or at the very least how to hold a conversation. its like you are just picking a topic then being obstinate about it without reading what anyone is saying. Sorry, I didn't read your posts because it usually persists in 1) I don't want stats because I will feel bad about myself 2) I don't want people to be mean to me 3) You're too try hard get out of my game, I want to force everyone to play my way Pretty much the gist of it. I may come off abit aggressive, but I never said you had to play my way. All I want (as does a significant portion of the community) is an option to play my own separate que. You get your own non-visible rank que still.
Dear god are you full of yourself.
Oh and what a nice way to have a discussion, attacking the other posters!
|
On July 21 2013 05:21 Unleashing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:19 superstartran wrote:On July 21 2013 05:13 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:11 superstartran wrote:On July 21 2013 05:10 PrinceXizor wrote:On July 21 2013 05:06 superstartran wrote:
DotA 2 MM is more akin to games with built in leaver protection, which is basically open ladder/open IHLs. All which had surrender options. So please, your analogy is terrible. so like, banlist style leaver protection? Yes. Banlist style leaver protection games ALWAYS had a surrender option. Period. Everyone that played DotA 1 knows that. Um. did you even read the context of what you quoted before you got all surrender happy and sarcastic? because i said absolutely 0 about surrender guy. i made a comment about how MM are pubs. and you quote me then talk about leaver protection making them IHLs. and then i rebuttal, and then you talk about surrender again. learn to internets man. or at the very least how to hold a conversation. its like you are just picking a topic then being obstinate about it without reading what anyone is saying. Sorry, I didn't read your posts because it usually persists in 1) I don't want stats because I will feel bad about myself 2) I don't want people to be mean to me 3) You're too try hard get out of my game, I want to force everyone to play my way Pretty much the gist of it. I may come off abit aggressive, but I never said you had to play my way. All I want (as does a significant portion of the community) is an option to play my own separate que. You get your own non-visible rank que still. Dear god are you full of yourself. Oh and what a nice way to have a discussion, attacking the other posters!
Thats because he trolls this thread with the same crap every time:
1) I want ranked so I can rage out and be competitive with other people with my same mind set and I am convinced a ranked ladder will get me that. I want to be with the the hardcore people are seriously hardcore.
2) I want a surrender button so "I" decide when the games ends, because I don't want to waste "my" time.
3) Me, me, me, me, me
All this, all the time. It would be way easier for him to just get a group of people to play. I mean, I don't play with pubs because everyone wants to play with me and my super scrub ways. Maybe he is just to good to have teammates to can keep up with him.
|
The irc channel must be loling pretty hard now. I miss u guys ;_;
|
i just flame people that lose mid with tree armor and repeated ganks from his supports in irc
|
Lalalaland34507 Posts
On July 21 2013 05:28 Qbek wrote:
The irc channel must be loling pretty hard now. I miss u guys ;_;
Nah just cs:go and card trading.
Admittedly the progress on this page is amusing.
|
On July 21 2013 05:32 Firebolt145 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2013 05:28 Qbek wrote:
The irc channel must be loling pretty hard now. I miss u guys ;_; Nah just cs:go and card trading. Admittedly the progress on this page is amusing.
I expect nothing less of my irc brethren
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
