On August 11 2013 15:06 TheYango wrote: Well those heroes have the problem of having long periods of down-time between their points of effectiveness. Brewmaster requiring 3 minutes between ultimates or Night Stalker being really weak during the second day when ult is down are weak points that allow the other team to snowball the game more than what you can gain with those ults up.
Two minutes is pretty much the breaking point for ult-dependent heroes in the current game (Dragon Form, RP, etc.). It's very unlikely for a hero with a period of inactivity longer than that to get played.
The buff to dragon tail and his level 2 form is absurd.
The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
Does it help any that I think Alliance is the single best team to "exploit" (using the word loosely here) their dire side advantage more than any other team in the game?
On August 11 2013 13:52 DucK- wrote: I mainly hated his face when he gave that roar in the player pod cam after beating Navi, as well as the roar after walking out of the pod during the end of the day highlights. I don't disrespect him as a player, because I acknowledge that he plays a very very solid carry suited for Alliance needs. But I just don't like him at all, and its again nothing to do with his plays,
But Dendi did pretty much the same thing after the TI2 "The Play" game against iG.
On August 11 2013 15:12 TheYango wrote: The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
These are fair points but do you think it's merely coincidental that the longest game in competitive DotA 2's history happened to be on a patch that is pushing towards shorter games?
What specific change caused team fighting early to become largely irrelevant? How did rat doto become so prevalent?
On August 11 2013 15:12 TheYango wrote: The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
These are fair points but do you think it's merely coincidental that the longest game in competitive DotA 2's history happened to be on a patch that is pushing towards shorter games?
What specific change caused team fighting early to become largely irrelevant? How did rat doto become so prevalent?
Bottle crow change nerfed big fight-forcing midgamers, as well as nerfing several ganking style heros.
Also because teams are just running Alch and stalling out games because greed assures that Alch will get his farm, and for a hero with such a crazy farm steroid, he carries just as hard as any other carry, if not harder due to the insanity of 1.0 BAT
On August 11 2013 15:12 TheYango wrote: The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
These are fair points but do you think it's merely coincidental that the longest game in competitive DotA 2's history happened to be on a patch that is pushing towards shorter games?
What specific change caused team fighting early to become largely irrelevant? How did rat doto become so prevalent?
Bottle crow change nerfed big fight-forcing midgamers, as well as nerfing several ganking style heros.
Also because teams are just running Alch and stalling out games because greed assures that Alch will get his farm, and for a hero with such a crazy farm steroid, he carries just as hard as any other carry, if not harder due to the insanity of 1.0 BAT
Ironically, none of the longest Dota2 games had Alch, because he peaks early exactly thanks to his greed steroid and falls off the later game goes due to mobility and disable items on enemy's team.
What I like about Alliance is what people call limited hero pool is actually being extremely competent at playmaking heroes. Give them LD, prophet, puck or mag and they'll make snow in hell. Even their farming shows it has been heavily optimized.
Eastern Dota in contrast feels extremely accomodated: they play to see who can make their carry(ies) farm the most. It's like going to school and one guy puts out beautiful works of art, the other just obssess about coming out with good grades. Yeah I know I'm picking on a typical asian stereotype, but it does feel like that.
On August 11 2013 15:44 Soap wrote: What I like about Alliance is what people call limited hero pool is actually being extremely competent at playmaking heroes. Give them LD, prophet, puck or mag and they'll make snow in hell. Even their farming shows it has been heavily optimized.
Eastern Dota in contrast feels extremely accomodated: they play to see who can make their carry(ies) farm the most. It's like going to school and one guy puts out beautiful works of art, the other just obssess about coming out with good grades. Yeah I know I'm picking on a typical asian stereotype, but it does feel like that.
Did Alliance really play Mag this tournament? i might be speaking out if ignorance here or something but i don't recall.
On August 11 2013 15:12 TheYango wrote: The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
These are fair points but do you think it's merely coincidental that the longest game in competitive DotA 2's history happened to be on a patch that is pushing towards shorter games?
What specific change caused team fighting early to become largely irrelevant? How did rat doto become so prevalent?
Bottle crow change nerfed big fight-forcing midgamers, as well as nerfing several ganking style heros.
Also because teams are just running Alch and stalling out games because greed assures that Alch will get his farm, and for a hero with such a crazy farm steroid, he carries just as hard as any other carry, if not harder due to the insanity of 1.0 BAT
Ironically, none of the longest Dota2 games had Alch, because he peaks early exactly thanks to his greed steroid and falls off the later game goes due to mobility and disable items on enemy's team.
yes but every game with Alch is like a 60 fucking minute game
On August 11 2013 15:12 TheYango wrote: The thing is, in the current game, the game simply isn't won on teamfights until the very late game. It's won on more subtle things like map control and resource distribution where are not very transparent to the spectator. This is why the games feel boring to a spectator because for the typical spectator, teamfights and action are the most transparent things.
For example, take the DK vs. Alliance game 1. The game wasn't won on ANY of the fights in that game. Most individual fights had very little impact on the game. The game was won on a single gank where DS lost a gem. At that point, Alliance's gold lead skyrocketed, everyone got farmed, and DK's loss was a foregone conclusion. Subsequent fights were simply meaningless because any single fight win was not enough to lose Alliance's stranglehold on the game.
This is fundamentally what has driven the "rat dota" way of playing the game--which is that so long as you maintain map control and smooth resource collection, being unable to teamfight simply will not lose you the game.
These are fair points but do you think it's merely coincidental that the longest game in competitive DotA 2's history happened to be on a patch that is pushing towards shorter games?
What specific change caused team fighting early to become largely irrelevant? How did rat doto become so prevalent?
Bottle crow change nerfed big fight-forcing midgamers, as well as nerfing several ganking style heros.
Also because teams are just running Alch and stalling out games because greed assures that Alch will get his farm, and for a hero with such a crazy farm steroid, he carries just as hard as any other carry, if not harder due to the insanity of 1.0 BAT
Ironically, none of the longest Dota2 games had Alch, because he peaks early exactly thanks to his greed steroid and falls off the later game goes due to mobility and disable items on enemy's team.
yes but every game with Alch is like a 60 fucking minute game
Because while Alch is a fast farmer, good ganker and teamfighter, he's actually a poor sieging hero. Most of the 60 minute Alch games ended up not being games where Alch wanted to stall, but rather where the OTHER TEAM was trying to stall past Alch's peak--where Alch's team had the direct teamfight advantage, but could not exert that advantage to be able to enter the base.
This is alliance tournament to lose/ they are crisp.. good decision making .and that Naga pick is really sick. i will be surprised if they lose this TI
B-God AM defeated Throwda Alchemist. After the defeat S4 acknowledged that Anti Mage is the best carry in the game on the right hands, he was forced to first banning AM. AM > ALL!
EPT
