EPTI honestly don't see what this problem you speak of is. From personal experience, when I first started dota, a friend told me heroes have 25% magic resistance, ok? Ok. No further questions asked. It's not as if the skill descriptions are deceiving, for the most part at least.
[HoN/DotA] Let's Play~!! - Page 520
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Heen
Korea (South)2178 Posts
I honestly don't see what this problem you speak of is. From personal experience, when I first started dota, a friend told me heroes have 25% magic resistance, ok? Ok. No further questions asked. It's not as if the skill descriptions are deceiving, for the most part at least. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
m i rite?! ;p | ||
|
Heen
Korea (South)2178 Posts
| ||
|
randombum
United States2378 Posts
For example, for the longest time, I would take lina (or zeus or Qop, or any nuker really), add her three spell damages together at w/e level I was, look at enemy hero and go "Oh my max damage is 1xxx, he has under that, I can kill him." only to have him survive, counter stun me and I would die. This change would only effect noobs who have to read their skill to know what it does. It doesn't hurt you. A very simple duel tool tip would not hurt yyy(for creeps,) and (xxx) next to it for heroes. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
I didn't know purification was pure until it smacked me in the face and I was like, 'that's pure ain't it'. and it sure is!!! ;p | ||
|
randombum
United States2378 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On September 09 2009 05:06 randombum wrote: Not everybody even knows what pure damage means. And until just 10 seconds ago I didn't know purification was pure, just thought it did a lot of damage. I mean the first time you played BW and you used Vultures on large units and buildings, you probably realized Vultures are shitty against those kind of units, and if you probably wondered why. Except in DotA, there are LOTS of whys and that just comes from experience. | ||
|
Corr
Denmark796 Posts
On September 09 2009 02:28 Heen wrote: Played vs Err0r (India) tonight: http://www.playdota.com/forums/30895/adc09-round-3-err0r-vs-sup/ picks were slightly different from our usual style but it worked. We haven't had a chance to practice lately so you'll notice our play was rather sloppy. Thank god the host was playable unlike last time at least. Game 1 is full of fail on our part and we just win with superior farm. It kind of reminds me of our discussion in the previous page.. but then again I didn't feel we were losing badly at any point in the game, just 'wtf are you guys doing!?' That's the downside of gangbanging your opponent with your entire team: you lose map control even though you're getting more kills. Game 2 was fun to play. I couldn't resist the temptation to get midas (I still dislike the item itself). That's what happens when you get 4 spell casters without pushing power and opponent picks BB lol. Actually we had bb in mind with quite some time left but I was like 'hrmmmm let's see what other options we have' and everyone starts screaming that we only have 2 seconds left >_< Without having watched either replay I can't see how you'd lose game 1 unless you were REALLY sloppy. As to the second game I'm curious why you picked tide rather than ES. Do you not have an ES player capable of maximizing his potential in lanes/roaming? | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
 | ||
|
DevAzTaYtA
Oman2005 Posts
we should play again if ping was ok... u guys were pretty decent. our picks were so bad though lol ;p that last pick axe completely screwed us. and LOL @ 8 min dagger =] | ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On September 09 2009 08:20 DevAzTaYtA wrote: you were in our last game? whut hero were u? we should play again if ping was ok... u guys were pretty decent. our picks were so bad though lol ;p that last pick axe completely screwed us. and LOL @ 8 min dagger =] Yeah before game I was like those ex-Nafu guys aren't bad, and it's like RAPE at top and our Bane was "u sure?" We ran ward-less for the better half of 10 mins and it let you guys get back into the game. I was the Zeus. Our Axe/Bane are top level players though, the bane/axe played on some good teams (like Xeo). We were making fun of your picks and were pissed at you guys for doing that turtle bullshit, best part though was "morph wins gg ff" then 20 mins later "where morph items?" to "lulz morph dumb items". | ||
|
nosliw
United States2716 Posts
USA mic y clan member y | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
;p | ||
|
Heen
Korea (South)2178 Posts
1. it wouldn't change anything, bad players will still dive and BLAME something other than their judgment. It's usually luck or bullshit. 2. More reward for knowing your hero better. This is what separates good linas from the bads. The way they play is instictive and there isn't a second of hesitation. 3. Clearer damage type descriptions would be more useful than some newb friendly 'use this skill if he has under xxx life' 4. Just add a damn tooltip on the help menu: - 25% miss up hill - heroes have natural 25% magic resistance - etc. Frankly, this discussion surprises me because at first I thought this idea was ridiculous. Now, it appears I'm actually the minority? | ||
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
| ||
|
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
| ||
|
paper
13197 Posts
On September 09 2009 12:47 Heen wrote: The reason I'm against it is because 1. it wouldn't change anything, bad players will still dive and BLAME something other than their judgment. It's usually luck or bullshit. 2. More reward for knowing your hero better. This is what separates good linas from the bads. The way they play is instictive and there isn't a second of hesitation. 3. Clearer damage type descriptions would be more useful than some newb friendly 'use this skill if he has under xxx life' 4. Just add a damn tooltip on the help menu: - 25% miss up hill - heroes have natural 25% magic resistance - etc. Frankly, this discussion surprises me because at first I thought this idea was ridiculous. Now, it appears I'm actually the minority? the -25% reduced damage is so arbitrary: it adds an extra step when youre calculating damage output. i don't see how it's a bad idea when it produces clarity and less frustration for beginners. when you have clear cut numbers, it's a matter of addition and subtraction and averages. you get beginners who will say they need to get Y physical hits to average out some damage Z to get the hero under some X hp so they can use a spell that does exactly X damage instead of pondering if these bullshit percentages of numbers will do the job. it's so much easier when you have numbers to back up your experience instead of experience alone. | ||
|
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
On September 09 2009 13:10 paper wrote: the -25% reduced damage is so arbitrary: it adds an extra step when youre calculating damage output. i don't see how it's a bad idea when it produces clarity and less frustration for beginners. when you have clear cut numbers, it's a matter of addition and subtraction and averages. you get beginners who will say they need to get Y physical hits to average out some damage Z to get the hero under some X hp so they can use a spell that does exactly X damage instead of pondering if these bullshit percentages of numbers will do the job. it's so much easier when you have numbers to back up your experience instead of experience alone. Spells that target only Heroes should do either do pure or physical chaos under the current system. Giving the user numbers for damage against normal armor and not letting the spell ever target a unit like that. | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On September 09 2009 13:56 cgrinker wrote: Spells that target only Heroes should do either do pure or physical chaos under the current system. Giving the user numbers for damage against normal armor and not letting the spell ever target a unit like that. I agree, but the majority of spells are casted at heroes only even if they can be casted on creeps (barring shit like devour) in fact i'm having trouble thinking of a DD spell that's routinely casted on creeps over heroes (there is probably something like that, i'm just sleepy) makes me wonder whether the tooltip should say the damage it deals in the 99.9% of cases when you cast it on a hero(barring specific items or hero-specific skills) or the 0.01% of cases when you cast it on a creep actually no, it doesn't make me wonder, it's obvious to me what it should be. There's really no point for spells like magic missile to show the damage it deals to non-hero units. edit: wait, there's a 25% uphill miss chance in war3? neat-o i kind of assumed it was 45-50% like sc (forget the exact number), even though i realize there isn't a reason for me thinking that either way, just a number, everybody knows fighting uphill is silly ^_^ | ||
| ||
