EPTI may have to level up heroes for the gold as well. Got 7k for Hammer the first day, and then a total of 3k since. Really want Nova or Stitches but at this rate 10k will take forever.
Heroes Large General Thread - Page 136
| Forum Index > Heroes of the Storm |
Add yourself in the TL Player list if you want to play with TL people, and /join teamliquid channel ingame. Also check out the new Heroes Liquipedia. | ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
I may have to level up heroes for the gold as well. Got 7k for Hammer the first day, and then a total of 3k since. Really want Nova or Stitches but at this rate 10k will take forever. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On October 16 2014 08:23 Serejai wrote: In contrast to the really, REALLY fucking awful 1-6 run I had yesterday I managed to go 6-2 today, with one of those losses being to a pro team and the other due to two people being talent gated. For all intents and purposes today was a great day. I may have to level up heroes for the gold as well. Got 7k for Hammer the first day, and then a total of 3k since. Really want Nova or Stitches but at this rate 10k will take forever. Yeah, I'm sitting on almost 4k and I have Tassadar and Falstad. Currently saving for Nazeebo or Nova...I can't help but fear Nova is going to get nerfed because she pubstomps so hard though. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
Another question: How does it compare to SC2 in terms of "ladder feel"? The more I'm reading, the more I'm actually interested in playing. Let's see if I can be lucky and get an invite! | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On October 15 2014 11:55 ETisME wrote: The problem stems from the sc2 engine, if it gets more spotlight then blizzard can fix it for both, if it can be fixed at all Yes, i'd much rather people keep talking about it. Honestly there's some big issues with the sc2 engine that were never fixed from beta, that went all the way from 2010 to i assume people still playing the game in 2017, maybe even longer with a pro scene. I was very sad to see it carried over to Heroes, because i am sensitive to microstutter, latency etc and while i loved sc2, a few big problems with the engine drove me crazy day after day and i seemed powerless to actually fix or even improve them. I signed up like a day and a half ago and it looks like i just got in Heroes alpha, lol :D :D Maybe it's the gtx970's :D On October 15 2014 11:22 FeyFey wrote: Never be surprised that your awesome Computer is not awesome in a beta or an alpha :p . Just do your job and report performance issues. That stuff can usually only be fixed after you find the hardware that is being a diva. I'm not worried about this, but i am VERY worried about the microstutter (frametime variance) issues (which are massive and the biggest issue by far!), and the little things. For example with sc2, another issue is that when a lot of units are out on the map, and even without many - there is a little freeze of about 70 milliseconds that happens at a predictable time interval. It will happen at, for example 22:30, 22:40, 22:50 on the game timer. If you're on a 60hz screen, it's just like the game skipping ~4-5 frames in a single freeze. If you're on 144hz though, it's ~10 frames skipped and it's extremely obvious. Here is a video example showing this issue - even with the 30fps limit on youtube, it's painfully obvious. It correlates exactly with game timer on any game speed, be it normal or faster x4-x8 (~5-10x faster). ^There are two freezes in that vid, the first one is longer, which is a bit unusual but the freezes like the second one happen all the time, it's common for them to happen 5x per minute, so you can easily have 100+ in a long game that spends a lot of time over 100 supply per player. It's not an asset loading issue, it's just a stall somewhere - i had just pre-loaded the whole replay before recording that. Note that they happen at 21:00 and 21:10. Always. Also, the big issue, frametime variance, is immediately fixed if you pause a replay in sc2 when you're viewing it - so it's obviously happening in some part due to the system load from simulating/communicating the game state etc. To be fair Blizzard has never made a good game engine. Essentially Blizzard has been using the same engine since Warcraft; they just take bits and pieces, update things, etc. World of Warcraft runs on a highly modified Warcraft III engine, and SC2 also runs on a differently-modified Warcraft III engine. There are probably still bits and pieces of the original Warcraft engine lingering around. So, in the case of a game like Heroes... it's running on a WC3 engine, modified to an SC2 engine, and then modified again to Heroes. There are bound to be a lot of efficiency issues, but it's really not viable for them to make a new game engine. Unlike other companies, they don't license out their engines so they would have no way of recouping the cost of developing a new one the way companies like iD or Crytek can. These issues don't exist in either Warcraft 3, or WoW. The WoW engine is actually quite good, they're even improving CPU related performance around now and WOD release. It's the baseline for functional MMO engines.. while sc2 is known as one of the worst RTS engines for all of these performance metrics. I mean, the sc2 engine is nice in a lot of ways, but it runs almost everything on 1 thread to the point where you can see 15% CPU load and be CPU limited on an 8 core CPU. It gives low FPS at times with nothing that anybody can do to change that. It has massive frametime variance problems, so 40fps feels like about 20-25 and you can actually, legitimately blind test the difference between 200fps and 300fps on a 144hz screen. The bad part is just blizzard not really being aware of this, there might be relatively easy fixes that would significantly improve the perceived performance of the engine, even if FPS numbers don't change much or CPU utilization isn't able to be easily improved. On that subject, they moved WoW to dx11 ages ago for performance. #LOTVdx12? | ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
On October 16 2014 15:59 KeksX wrote: For those of you who are playing, what are the pros/cons in comparison to other AoS-type games? Another question: How does it compare to SC2 in terms of "ladder feel"? The more I'm reading, the more I'm actually interested in playing. Let's see if I can be lucky and get an invite! In comparison to LoL and DOTA, this would be my list of pros and cons: Pros: More team oriented Less snowball effect Quick matches Everything is a skillshot Cons: More team oriented Everything is gated content (talents, heroes) Low overall player skill (possibly just an alpha thing) Heroes feel bland and uninteresting Autoattacking can feel clunky and sluggish on a lot of heroes I'm sure these lists could be a lot longer but these were the first things that came to mind for me. | ||
|
Bam Lee
2336 Posts
I just got into the alpha and while i can play starcraft very smooth on 60 fps on medium/high settings, i cant really run this game above 30-40 fps on average. if anybody is wondering about specs, i5-480m, ati mobility 5870 and 4GB ram | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22210 Posts
| ||
|
Bam Lee
2336 Posts
On October 16 2014 21:38 ahswtini wrote: I wonder how performance can be as bad as people say it is, when it's basically the SC2 engine only with far fewer units? Thats what i am wondering about as well. I have it all on low(something i never had to do in sc2) and i still cant hit constant 60 fps in practice games | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
@Serejai: What exactly do you mean with "gated"? I'm not familiar with that term! And do you think that the fundamental design is flawed in regards to hero feel, or is it something "fixable"? | ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
On October 16 2014 21:46 KeksX wrote: FPS isn't just a matter of engine, though. I can see a lot of game logic being still in heavy development phase and thus being inefficient/not optimized at all. First thing that comes to mind is the UI and shader effects. @Serejai: What exactly do you mean with "gated"? I'm not familiar with that term! And do you think that the fundamental design is flawed in regards to hero feel, or is it something "fixable"? You have to unlock talents for all of the heroes, and you have to unlock all of the heroes. The heroes take quite a lot of time to unlock. Right now all of the pay to win players have a pretty big advantage. It's much like Hearthstone, really, in that people who spend money on the game will have a noticeable advantage over those who don't until those who don't have spent hundreds of hours on the game. Probably won't be an issue with draft mode, though. The heroes just feel sluggish in general. They have that trademark Blizzard fluidity to them but that also has the side effect of making things feel unresponsive. I'm not sure if you've played League of Legends but it feels like most heroes have an autoattack similar to Annie's. It's weird because the skillshots feel fine; they are fluid and responsive, but the autoattacks leave much to be desired on many heroes. If last hitting was a thing in this game I'm not sure anyone would actually be able to do it because the attack animations are just so slow. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
I played League of Legneds, but it was quite a while ago... About the gating: That sounds nasty imho, but as long as you can properly play competetively without spending cash constantly(spending cash is absolutely fine imho, but it should not be higher than what you'd spend on any other game) I think I can live with that. Hopefully they can achieve that ~ | ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
On October 16 2014 22:07 KeksX wrote: Sounds a little bit like the DotA animations where it can sometimes feel slow/sluggish and you have to practice lasthitting with a hero first. Is it similar to that? I played League of Legneds, but it was quite a while ago... About the gating: That sounds nasty imho, but as long as you can properly play competetively without spending cash constantly(spending cash is absolutely fine imho, but it should not be higher than what you'd spend on any other game) I think I can live with that. Hopefully they can achieve that ~ It's similar to DOTA, but a bit worse. Really don't know how to say it. There's just a clunky... unfinished feel to the autoattacks. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6334 Posts
I want to play it like it was meant to be played and come to my own conclusion, watching the streams and reading about the game gives me a bad feeling... this might change when I actually play it. To tell you guys the truth if the key was not tied to my account straight away I would have given it away in this thread. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
EDIT: @Serejai: Sounds like it can at least be fixed and might not be a design-flaw. Looking forward to finding out myself! Thanks for answering the questions btw. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On October 16 2014 22:07 KeksX wrote: Sounds a little bit like the DotA animations where it can sometimes feel slow/sluggish and you have to practice lasthitting with a hero first. Is it similar to that? I played League of Legneds, but it was quite a while ago... About the gating: That sounds nasty imho, but as long as you can properly play competetively without spending cash constantly(spending cash is absolutely fine imho, but it should not be higher than what you'd spend on any other game) I think I can live with that. Hopefully they can achieve that ~ I wouldn't hold my breath on that last part. Blizzard is being incredibly greedy with HotS' business model at the moment. About half of the heroes cost $10. Some skins and mounts cost even more (but that's aesthetics, so who cares). Gold prices are really high too, those $10 heroes cost 10k gold, while the latest heroes go up to 15k. That would be alright if gold earning wasn't abysmal. Earning gold in HotS takes a life time, seriously. It's just so damn slow. At the moment, most of that is due to the fact that they've largely removed any sort of progression for leveling your account past level 15. I can only imagine they're tweaking the progression and plan on implementing it back, but it blows at the moment. I mean, I certainly hope so - even Blizzard can't be that greedy. That is about my only gripe with the game. Blizzard could very well afford to not be greedy with their business model, they could still make tons of money off skins and what not, but they chose not to. I actually bought the Variety Bundle for €25. Note that this pack, without the sale, costs €71. There is another pack that costs €105 (again, off sale). Who the fuck would actually pay that much? You'd think that for such a steep price, you'd own every damn hero in the game plus the next ones. But no. You don't even get half of the heroes. I honestly don't expect Blizzard to keep up those prices. Everybody is outright saying it's too much, so I pretty much think Blizzard is going to make a statement somewhere along the lines of "we have reevaluated gold prices and real money prices, and yada yada". People are speaking up about it, so I do think they will. It's likely a test though. If people speak up, lower the prices and make it look like you're listening. If they don't, keep the prices as they are - or even increase them - and milk those suckers. Oh well. Rant over. Really though; greedy, greedy Blizzard. I still love the game though! xD | ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
And unlocking heroes with gold isn't viable, either. I'm level 18 and have unlocked one hero so far after doing my dailies every day since the reset. My total earned gold is ~10,000 and the average hero cost is about 6,500 gold. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
| ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
| ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22210 Posts
| ||
|
Serejai
6007 Posts
I'm expecting a $10 increase on the price of LOTV and the next D3 expansion when they announce them at Blizzcon, too. I'm pretty sure these prices are here to stay because there are TONS of people in the alpha that are actually buying them at those prices. Every game there are 3-4 players running around with a $25 mount or skin, and playing a 10-15k gold hero even though they aren't a high enough level to have bought those with gold. | ||
| ||
