|
|
On May 13 2012 19:03 cilinder007 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:02 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:59 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:58 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:54 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:09 Erasme wrote:Ursa is the easiest hero to counter, he can't get a kill by himself. And ofc carries are better late game, that's why they carry the game. Btw, saying that something is imbalanced will just stop you from having fun and getting better, because you'll blame the game instead of your own mistakes. On topic ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sTScZ.png) imbalanced ursa cant kill razor cuz he has no damage *evil laugh* And it's fucking hard to lasthit as Razor lol, deceptive attack animation Oh look, it's an utterly and completely 1-sided game that dragged on for 41:14. And you know it was 1-sided and dragged on, how? What if the radiant team got wrecked for the first 15 minutes and then started warding and playing as a team and turned it around and won all teamfights from then on? Oh, right, you don't. Winning teams will often end up with a ton more kills due to often winning 2-3 teamfights before the game is completely over. Not to talk about fountain farming. I do. I watched the replay. The game was over at about 25-30 minutes. You missed the point of why i said it. Jesus christ you're dense. You talk like 90% of the games in DotA are lopsided, THEY ARE NOT. But low skilled player don't know how to use wards, smoke and so on to get back into a game. They are. Just spectate any front page match. are the matches on the front page the definition of balance in dota ?
No. This was about lopsided matched, and the shitty matchmaking system, not balance.
|
On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else?
What we're trying to get through to you is that in high level games, hero picks are in game strategy, not pre-game race selections. In starcraft 2, you select your race before the game starts, there's no reaction, no strategy in that. In dota 2, you see what your opponents pick, and you react. It's completely different. It'd be more like choosing what units you could use in game in starcraft 2, at the start of the game, and seeing what your opponent picks. If you choose stupidly, of course you'll lose very often, and some units will have lower winrates than others.
|
hmmm, demon is on some drug drink today and trash talking everyone including his teammates.... hmmm EG seems desperate for a spott in TI2
|
On May 13 2012 18:55 Emnjay808 wrote:
ugh, i just played a game with Riki.
i dont like the new silence effect after he blinks.
but i suppose its needed for balance since hes so strong. T_T
i can't find the patch notes, riki has been nerfed?
|
On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else?
You seem to believe the game should be balanced around statistical evidence drawn from low level AP. Which is the same as drawing evidence for balance from bronze league 4v4. Please use some degree of intelligence when analyzing gameplay, rather than resorting to "It happened in my experience, and here are some misleading statistics to back me up".
|
|
|
On May 13 2012 19:02 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 18:59 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:58 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:54 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:09 Erasme wrote:Ursa is the easiest hero to counter, he can't get a kill by himself. And ofc carries are better late game, that's why they carry the game. Btw, saying that something is imbalanced will just stop you from having fun and getting better, because you'll blame the game instead of your own mistakes. On topic imbalanced ursa cant kill razor cuz he has no damage *evil laugh* And it's fucking hard to lasthit as Razor lol, deceptive attack animation Oh look, it's an utterly and completely 1-sided game that dragged on for 41:14. And you know it was 1-sided and dragged on, how? What if the radiant team got wrecked for the first 15 minutes and then started warding and playing as a team and turned it around and won all teamfights from then on? Oh, right, you don't. Winning teams will often end up with a ton more kills due to often winning 2-3 teamfights before the game is completely over. Not to talk about fountain farming. I do. I watched the replay. The game was over at about 25-30 minutes. You missed the point of why i said it. Jesus christ you're dense. You talk like 90% of the games in DotA are lopsided, THEY ARE NOT. But low skilled player don't know how to use wards, smoke and so on to get back into a game. They are. Just spectate any front page match.
Yeah, no.
I have played a good 6k+ DotA games and spectated a good 1-2k at a decent level of DotA.
I know that lop-sided games exist but if both teams play like a team and pick accordingly to the situation and build accordingly to the situation, nope, nothing lop-sided about it.
You keep talking about pubs which have no relation to balance, length of games or anything.
Public players don't lose or win because of heroes or items or builds, they lose because of bad mechanics and no coordination.
They lose because either they are bad or their oppononent abuse that they are mechanically superior or they're both equally bad and it's a coinflip.
But if you put people who know what they're doing against eachother it's far from lop-sided, and DotA games aren't long, they're maybe longer than SC2, but long DotA games are 60 minutes, not 40 minutes. 35 minutes is the average and that's fine, i wouldn't want the game to be anything less than 35 minutse averagely. I don't care to push2win every game, this isn't SC2, the game isn't designed to be that fast, the game is designed so you can defend if you need to hold out and turtle(Which is why you might feel like games drag out) and it's designed so you can be aggressive if your picks allow it.
But seriously, i'm done here, you're too dense and think you know what you're talking about regardless of having near no experience. Even the front-page games are a bad example.
Nobody disagrees that match-making isn't perfect, and regardless of that a lot of heroes are not even ported yet.
You can not talk about balance when 20% of the hero pool is missing and when you have an unfinished match-making system where results might vary greatly. Look at singsing when he viewerstacks, he's suddenly against people 10 times below his skill-level and regardless of him always going bad builds, he often stomps them due to being better mechanically.
|
On May 13 2012 19:06 5-s wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else? What we're trying to get through to you is that in high level games, hero picks are in game strategy, not pre-game race selections. In starcraft 2, you select your race before the game starts, there's no reaction, no strategy in that. In dota 2, you see what your opponents pick, and you react. It's completely different. It'd be more like choosing what units you could use in game in starcraft 2, at the start of the game, and seeing what your opponent picks. If you choose stupidly, of course you'll lose very often, and some units will have lower winrates than others.
Then the outcome is somewhat predetermined by what hero you picked, before the game starts or by your definition, before the action starts.
|
On May 13 2012 19:10 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:06 5-s wrote:On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else? What we're trying to get through to you is that in high level games, hero picks are in game strategy, not pre-game race selections. In starcraft 2, you select your race before the game starts, there's no reaction, no strategy in that. In dota 2, you see what your opponents pick, and you react. It's completely different. It'd be more like choosing what units you could use in game in starcraft 2, at the start of the game, and seeing what your opponent picks. If you choose stupidly, of course you'll lose very often, and some units will have lower winrates than others. Then the outcome is somewhat predetermined by what hero you picked, before the game starts or by your definition, before the action starts.
Which is in no way impacted by balance, but rather the proficiency of your own ability to make choices in relation to your opponent's ability to make choices.
|
On May 13 2012 19:10 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:06 5-s wrote:On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else? What we're trying to get through to you is that in high level games, hero picks are in game strategy, not pre-game race selections. In starcraft 2, you select your race before the game starts, there's no reaction, no strategy in that. In dota 2, you see what your opponents pick, and you react. It's completely different. It'd be more like choosing what units you could use in game in starcraft 2, at the start of the game, and seeing what your opponent picks. If you choose stupidly, of course you'll lose very often, and some units will have lower winrates than others. Then the outcome is somewhat predetermined by what hero you picked, before the game starts or by your definition, before the action starts.
Exactly, just like in broodwar and starcraft, some of the outcome is determined before you even see your opponent. Your build order matters. Your draft matters.
|
On May 13 2012 19:09 Dattish wrote:id: 15762690 ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/seMWa.png) Why carries don't win a game alone, even at a low level.
15894369
15894368
15894376
15804360
15591648
I can find 5 lopsided games for every 1 even game all day long if you want. These are randomly pick from the list of all games, and a random players profile.
|
so you posted 5 low level games out of 100000, your point is ?
|
On May 13 2012 19:09 Unleashing wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:02 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:59 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:58 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:54 Unleashing wrote:On May 13 2012 18:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:09 Erasme wrote:Ursa is the easiest hero to counter, he can't get a kill by himself. And ofc carries are better late game, that's why they carry the game. Btw, saying that something is imbalanced will just stop you from having fun and getting better, because you'll blame the game instead of your own mistakes. On topic imbalanced ursa cant kill razor cuz he has no damage *evil laugh* And it's fucking hard to lasthit as Razor lol, deceptive attack animation Oh look, it's an utterly and completely 1-sided game that dragged on for 41:14. And you know it was 1-sided and dragged on, how? What if the radiant team got wrecked for the first 15 minutes and then started warding and playing as a team and turned it around and won all teamfights from then on? Oh, right, you don't. Winning teams will often end up with a ton more kills due to often winning 2-3 teamfights before the game is completely over. Not to talk about fountain farming. I do. I watched the replay. The game was over at about 25-30 minutes. You missed the point of why i said it. Jesus christ you're dense. You talk like 90% of the games in DotA are lopsided, THEY ARE NOT. But low skilled player don't know how to use wards, smoke and so on to get back into a game. They are. Just spectate any front page match. Yeah, no. I have played a good 6k+ DotA games and spectated a good 1-2k at a decent level of DotA. I know that lop-sided games exist but if both teams play like a team and pick accordingly to the situation and build accordingly to the situation, nope, nothing lop-sided about it. You keep talking about pubs which have no relation to balance, length of games or anything. Public players don't lose or win because of heroes or items or builds, they lose because of bad mechanics and no coordination. They lose because either they are bad or their oppononent abuse that they are mechanically superior or they're both equally bad and it's a coinflip. But if you put people who know what they're doing against eachother it's far from lop-sided, and DotA games aren't long, they're maybe longer than SC2, but long DotA games are 60 minutes, not 40 minutes. 35 minutes is the average and that's fine, i wouldn't want the game to be anything less than 35 minutse averagely. I don't care to push2win every game, this isn't SC2, the game isn't designed to be that fast, the game is designed so you can defend if you need to hold out and turtle(Which is why you might feel like games drag out) and it's designed so you can be aggressive if your picks allow it. But seriously, i'm done here, you're too dense and think you know what you're talking about regardless of having near no experience. Even the front-page games are a bad example. Nobody disagrees that match-making isn't perfect, and regardless of that a lot of heroes are not even ported yet. You can not talk about balance when 20% of the hero pool is missing and when you have an unfinished match-making system where results might vary greatly. Look at singsing when he viewerstacks, he's suddenly against people 10 times below his skill-level and regardless of him always going bad builds, he often stomps them due to being better mechanically.
This is not about whether nonlopsided games exist. This is about whether or not most games are lopsided, in an almost random sample of 5 games, I found 5 lopsided games, listed in the above post.
|
On May 13 2012 19:16 cilinder007 wrote:
so you posted 5 low level games out of 100000, your point is ?
His point is?
Filter the games list by high skill, and run down the list. Almost every single game is lopsided.
|
Why do you even use Dota2 games as an example? The game is not complete yet and if the game is not complete you can't exactly ask for balance. IceFrog has been perfectly balancing DotA for years and we love him for it. This isn't LoL or SC2, no reason to discuss balance.
|
|
|
On May 13 2012 19:11 5-s wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:10 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 19:06 5-s wrote:On May 13 2012 18:56 paralleluniverse wrote:On May 13 2012 18:13 Musou wrote:On May 13 2012 18:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
Suppose that hero X has a 80% win rate. Is he overpowered? I would say yes. But what if it actually turned out that the reason why X has an 80% win rate is because he is usually paired with another hero Y which supports X very well. It was then found that if X is not paired with Y, then X has a 30% win rate. Now given that X has an 80% win rate overall, but a 30% win rate when not with Y, is X sill overpowered?
The answer is again, yes. Being paired with Y is how X is almost always played and this is overpowered. Given this fact, X is imbalanced as the game is mostly determined before it even starts. But finding the cause of the imbalance and determining how to nerf X if at all, we would need to see that the cause is actually Y, and nerfs should mostly focus on how well Y supports X, rather than a direct nerf to X.
This example illustrates the difference between showing that there is an imbalanced hero, and what the cause or recommended fix to an imbalance is. A distinction you do not understand.
Except, no, that's not overpowered. If a hero X has an 80% win rate with hero Y and a 30% win rate without, either he gets banned, or his buddy gets banned. They don't both get picked. If you're talking about non-CM modes like AP, these mythical 80% win rates don't exist. And again, you can't balance based on heroes if there are valid strategies to counter it. You don't just look at the win rate of a specific hero and say "that's not balanced" if there are methods to counter it. Remember 1-1-1 being "impossible" to beat for protoss? They didn't change anything about the match-up because it was actually possible to win against 1-1-1. Players just hadn't figured out how to do it yet. Once players figured out counters, it was all about the execution. Whichever side makes a mistake first, loses. It's the same with these so-called "overpowered" heroes. Make a mistake, and you lose. Of course, if you choose the wrong build order (wrong hero drafting), you also lose. It's the nature of the game. Make bad decisions and you're going to lose. You also don't understand the difference between balance within races and balance between races with your analogy about 1-1-1 in SC2. What matters more wasn't the strategy, but Protoss' win rate against Terran overall. That was also an example of showing the difference between determining whether there is an imbalance and finding the cause of the imbalance. I never said that any hero has an 80% win rate, or that it applies only to CM. What if the same thing happened in CM but the cause was different. It was an item rather than a support hero. Would you then continue the argument by twisting my analogy about one thing and changing the subject to something else? What we're trying to get through to you is that in high level games, hero picks are in game strategy, not pre-game race selections. In starcraft 2, you select your race before the game starts, there's no reaction, no strategy in that. In dota 2, you see what your opponents pick, and you react. It's completely different. It'd be more like choosing what units you could use in game in starcraft 2, at the start of the game, and seeing what your opponent picks. If you choose stupidly, of course you'll lose very often, and some units will have lower winrates than others. Then the outcome is somewhat predetermined by what hero you picked, before the game starts or by your definition, before the action starts. Exactly, just like in broodwar and starcraft, some of the outcome is determined before you even see your opponent. Your build order matters. Your draft matters.
Your build can be adapted to what you scout. Your hero choice can't. As such, SC2 is balanced in the sense that every race before the game starts has an almost 50% chance of winning, the same is not true of DotA.
|
On May 13 2012 19:18 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2012 19:16 cilinder007 wrote:
so you posted 5 low level games out of 100000, your point is ? His point is? Filter the games list by high skill, and run down the list. Almost every single game is lopsided.
Is your definition of lopsided based on the end screen? That's kind of insane, that'd be like comparing the scores at the end of a rts game. Just like in those, the game snowballs after a certain point, so in Dota, eventually one team takes their lead and extends it so that the other team can't catch up, and end up dying more and more until the ancient falls.
|
|
|
On May 13 2012 19:22 Dattish wrote:
My point was that it's not the hero. It's the player.
Terrans weren't OP. They're just more skilled than everyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
