EPTHeroes Large General Thread - Page 172
| 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. | ||
[Phantom]
Mexico2170 Posts
| ||
|
ref4
2933 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:00 Drow wrote: This example is awkward because in football scoring first means you don't need to score again so you defend (in general) alot stronger. And progressively the more desperate one team gets to equalize the worse shape their defending will take and the easier they will be to score upon. So... sports snowball. There is the turnover time for ball possession in basketball to prevent the team with a lead from trolling around with the ball and not scoring. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 05 2014 02:55 sushiko wrote: And moba/arts have never been about last hitting. It's about gaining an advantage to maximize your chances for a decent push/kill throne. I liken some players' fetish with last hitting with all of those people who complained about SC2 incorporating unlimited unit selection and multiple building selection. Obviously, there's more of a gameplay point to last hitting and denying creeps, but I certainly don't see these things as being essential features of MOBAs. Frankly, I think that they are more tedious than compelling, but that's just me. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
On November 05 2014 02:52 Plansix wrote: Removing leveling wouldn't do much to lessen snowballing and it would just flatten the game out. The team that is "in the lead" would have just as much ability to hold on to it, with or without levels. Sure, if you get 4 levels behind, your likely to lose. But the same game state can happen without a leveling system just by the other team having a superior position on the map. Leveling and XP give you a way to improve your position in the game without interacting with the enemy team directly. Without it, its just all about who is standing where and what part of the maps you control. Well your right that game-position definitely matter and rightly so. But I do wonder though. Why does increasing in level then benefit the stats of your hero. This seems to be an intentional decision to reward players who previously played better to perform better in the next teamfight. From my experience playing Heroes of the Storm, I definitely felt in a disadvantage position when 2 levels behind, but ofc it's possible that it could be influenced by the fact that there is a correlation between being behind in level and being the inferior team. Having played more League than Heroes, the effect is really really strong there though, and it's not just related to game-position. Maybe someone more experienced in Heroes could elaborate more here. Regardless of how signficaint the effect is, I still don't see the advantages of this system. The team that won a battle is then more likely to use to gain superior map control afterwards (?), and the way attributes/abilities scale with winning teambattles only functions to make this effect more signifcaint. My question is, why is this system (regardless of the exact effect) advantageous? I could see it being advantageous if one enjoyed being in the "underdog" role and defending and defending and eventually catching up. Those types of games definitely have their charm, but the majority of the time it just ends up being a victory for the "ahead"-team that is dragged on. | ||
|
FHDH
United States7023 Posts
You absolutely can remove both levels and items and still have snowballing you just have to have more dynamic maps with more buildings/features you can destroy/disable/build/whatever off the back of tactical victories, and these will allow you to...uh...oh right have more of an advantage in the next fight. Then you have the same snowballing advantage but it's not through levels...? So better...? It's not an invalid design decision but to say it's the natural evolution of the genre is, I think, silly. I definitely think snowballing should be kept in check. It should always be possible to make a game essentially hopeless but it shouldn't be too quick/easy unless you not only got outplayed/unlucky early but also just picked a terrible lineup. However if you talk about removing such things so that after the reset teams can fight on equal footing again you have to consider what your win conditions are and what kind of game you actually want to design. Because it's definitely not a moba any more. Games in this genre have a map with objectives and strategies that may be employed in the fight over resources and other strategic advantages. You have to think about how many of these you want to eliminate in order to prevent teams getting stronger as they win a fight, and what you're left with after that. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Lets put it this way, you can still snow ball in an FPS too. Everyone has been in that game where you can't walk 10 feet without getting picked off and you just lose. Removing leveling isn't going to reduce the frequency mopping the floor with you. | ||
|
Drow
Canada60 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
The problem is without being able to secure strategic advantages the game becomes completely different and it stops making sense as a moba and making it similar to a sport basically means...make it a true brawler with a scoreboard and leave it at that. I don't know about relating strategic advantages to being ahead in levels. Like let's say you play Sc2 and you have twice the army supply of your enemy. Is that really a strategic advantage? Well, it's possible that it could have come as a result of you outplaying the enemy strategically, but it could also have come from better mechanics. Regardless, you have an advantage now, and the question is - in terms of game design - does one player having an advantage result in entertaining gameplay? If you win a teambattle in League or Heroes, you farm/kill mercarnies/take objective and then eventually attack. I guess you could argue that strategy here is related to the different types of decisions you can take. Okay, if that's the case, let's try to make it possible to have different types of ways we reward a winning team with the exception that the reward cannot be related to increased probability of winning the next teamfight. I guess you could call that a constraint, but all games have different sorts of constraints, and I don't buy that this adds less strategy in itself. make it a true brawler with a scoreboard and leave it at that. Pleae understand that it was a simplifcaiton in order to draw parallels to MOBA's and real sports. In a typical MOBA you can look at towers killed and levels, and that's kinda 2 variables which can give a really good indicaiton of who is ahead/who is behind. With a different reward-mechanic then you will look at towers killed, but you can also add different new mechanics to the game that have an effect on "who is ahead/behind" as well. I don't think it will be easy to do this, but I would like to see game developers experiment with it. The system gives teams more options to come back or at least level out the playing field. You can play defensively and hope for a good team fight or try to soak up levels through "farming lanes" and taking merc camps. Without leveling, the only way "take back the advantage" is to directly confront the enemy team and attempt to take back positions on the map. Its all 5 maning all the time because they were very little reason to split up, even more so that heroes currently is. The important aspect here is to add options to the behind-team. Regardless of what system you have in place, if there is only one dominant way to playing the game, it will lack strategic depht. I wrote in a previous post that the reward of killing minions could be more related to lane-pushing than XP/gold. If minions for instance were better at killing enemy towers/bases, then it would add at least a second option for the behind-team as it could force enemy heroes to return to defend their base vs the minions). Removing snowballing also makes the team with the advantage feel like they lose because of the game, not because the other team played better. Game developers need to be careful hat the game does not feel like it punishes a team for doing well. If you can translate an advantage into objectives, you should still be able to hold on to that advantage. I think some people have criticized HOTS for not being good enough at making it obvious that players are rewarded for "outplaying" enemy team early game. I agree that the respawn-times in Heroes seems very weird, and I don't understand the logic behind like 5 second respawn time at level 1 and 60 seconds at level 20 (or so). If anything, this seems to be an almost artifical way of reducing the average game lenght while maintaining a low risk/reward in the early game. My belief is that there should be a relatively measurable reward for winning a battle, but this type of reward should not be related to the aspect I call snowballing (which I define as being more likely to win the next engagement). | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:18 Drow wrote: in HotS in particular having a level system in place gives an incentive to be in a lane without the intention of pushing it. This would then lead to heroes being more spread out on the map and creating a larger variety of engagements (number of players, creeps, towers varied). Why wouldn't a team want to push a lane? Pushing lanes => towers exhausting ammo => lots of pressure on enemy team / dead forts / freedom to take other objectives. | ||
|
Drow
Canada60 Posts
Don't get me wrong I've enjoyed games like this (CTF with ghosts on BW, or archery tactics on wc3 would seem like examples) but they never held my attention (or anyone elses as an esport) like dota. | ||
|
Drow
Canada60 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:34 xDaunt wrote: Why wouldn't a team want to push a lane? Pushing lanes => towers exhausting ammo => lots of pressure on enemy team / dead forts / freedom to take other objectives. Sorry should have said an extra incentive to just be in a lane in general. Didn't mean to imply that pushing was bad. Experience adds an extra factor to weigh when deciding if you should just push a lane or first get mercenaries etc. | ||
|
FHDH
United States7023 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:40 Drow wrote: That's a pretty gigantic constraint. Can you provide an example of a reward that would fit that constraint? You would have to simplify the game so immensely that I think you start to fall away from being a MOBA like game. Yeah that was my point earlier. I would agree that of mobas I've seen (and I am not as experienced with them as many here) HotS has more place to remove leveling because there are more varied non-xp/gold objectives to take after a won fight but uh...they ALL will give you an advantage on the next fight. If you take out the first wall you no longer have the ability to hop in and out. If you take the dragon knight or the golem or get booty tributes or what the fuck ever...these will all advantage you in the next fight. That is why you do them and that is why you fight over them and that is what makes the game interesting. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
That's a pretty gigantic constraint. Can you provide an example of a reward that would fit that constraint? You would have to simplify the game so immensely that I think you start to fall away from being a MOBA like game. Sure, there are different options. (1) You kill one of the enemy bases immediately. (2) You kill enemy minions on lane so you have stronger pressure later on. (3) You reward players who win teambattles by increased "scouting" options, for instance through wards or "scans" (though ofc one can argue that this also has an effect on the battle as it allows the winning team to have a higher probability of winning. It's also why I believe it is more idealistic than 100% possible. (4) You can add different structures which the enemy can kill, with each structure having different advantages/disadvantages. One structure could impact enemy respawn time. If you kill that, then enemies in the future respawns slower (or your own respawn faster). Or you could kill the "healing mechanic" which is related to how fast enemies reengerate HP after a battle. This means that if enemey team wins the next battle, then they have a difficult time punishing your team as they have lower HP. Or ofc they could kill towers etc. (5) Objectives. Not sure 100% how this should work, but it can be very exciting and add some flavor to the game. I think as long as the objective-advantage is only temporary, and doesn't strenghten the team for too long (say longer than 1-2 minutes), then it adds some diversity to the gameplay rather than making one team much stronger in an engagement than another team. If we look at the Pirate-map in HOTS, it really has its charm. Killing someone with coins and figthing over them can add exciting moment and winning the objectives doesn't have any direct snowball effect. The problem with the map is that if your already ahead, then it's very difficult for the enemy team to contest the objective, and while on most maps you can make a comeback if enemy overcommits, the enemy doesn't have to do this here as he can stay in the middle of the map. Thus, I happen to think the Pirate-map would work even better if it had a different "reward"-mechanic. | ||
|
RCMDVA
United States708 Posts
What it is actually more like... is being behind in a car race. If you aren't right up on the other guy's bumper...you don't have that come from behind option, and all you hope for is the guy blows a tire or loses an engine. The only thing i can think of right now, the way the game is structured is for the losing team to be able to do something like increase the difficulty of the opponents creeps... so that the losing team has a chance to catch back up with XP. Or you can abandon your existing forts (think salvage) to increase the health/attack of your Core. | ||
|
Drow
Canada60 Posts
(1/2) Scoreboard/not a reward unless next flight is influenced (3) Influences next fight like you said (4) Influences next fight again or not a reward (5) influences next fight A temporary advantage in 3 and 5 seems to be the closest it comes. | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:00 [SXG]Phantom wrote: How does Hotslogs works? i just registered, told me to put my battle tag and that thing in the replays foldels (the #-Hero-####) thing, and then it just told me my win rate and stuff, but as far as i know, i didn't ever uploaded anything, and also im lvl 4 with zagara and there it says im lvl 1, although it does got the lvl 9 valla and lvl 8 raynor and others right. I suggest downloading their program which will automatically find your replays and upload them https://www.hotslogs.com/Account/Upload It is the second major header. Didn't want to link directly to the .exe since I'm not sure if TL flags exes as a possible virus or anything. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
On November 05 2014 03:56 Drow wrote: Those don't fit because they are not rewards without simply being a scoreboard or influencing the next fight. (1/2) Scoreboard/not a reward unless next flight is influenced (3) Influences next fight like you said (4) Influences next fight again or not a reward (5) influences next fight A temporary advantage in 3 and 5 seems to be the closest it comes. I am talking about having different options to the winning team after a teambattle. If there only was one option, then it would be boring. Scorebards? That's irrelevant in itself. Is football a bad game becasue you can see who is ahead by looking at the score-board? If anything, I would tempt to argue that it makes the game easier to follow if new viewers easier can tell who is ahead or behind. Also, your not correct. If you destroy enemy tower or "after battle healing effect", then it doesn't impact the outcome of the next battle. If you kill enemy minions, which then puts pressure on enemy lanes, then you gain a tactical advantage but it won't (necceasrily) impact a straight up engagement. Also, let me be more precise. The constraint is "make the effect as little as possible". If let's say the reward mechanic impacts next battle by 40% in LOL and 20% in HOTS, and my suggestions can get it down to 5%, then that's pretty satisfactory. And I am sure that with further tweaking and more idea generation, much better solutions can be developed than what I spend 2 minutes thinking off. | ||
|
Drow
Canada60 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9342 Posts
On November 05 2014 04:07 Drow wrote: Thats fair then since losing bases or giving scouting will always have an effect on the positioning of your next fight and creates a snowball if you have any sort of objectives that depends on map control. Even without the heroes themselves actually growing stronger. Well I think we are talking about something else. I am talking about a straight-up engagement advantage. In general, you seem more focussed on tactical advantages, which I don't see a a big issue with. In fact, I think a tactical advantage adds diversity to gameplay. Straight-up engagement advantage however is just boring in my opinion. This is why I am not against objectives (if done "correctly"), but dislikes items/attributes/abilities correlating with winning teambattles. Could a tactical advantage where the enemy can run circles with you eventually leads to snowball? Sure, it's posible. But then where is the justification here for having both tactical advantages and straight-up engagement advantage simutaneously? So far some of the arguments was that it would lead to less strategic depht, which - as I previously argued - do not agree with. Anyway, I think I am off here. I hope I got my point across whether you agree with me or not. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On November 04 2014 22:00 Whalecore wrote: Yeah I'm pretty sure Protoss in general laughs at the puny power levels of all the other games' heroes. I've been looking at it all wrong; 4 Zerg heroes should be worth 2 Terran heroes should be worth 1 Protoss hero. Everything makes sense now. But Zagara OP man. | ||
| ||
