EPTAs far as the garden terror is concerned I am not sure if I have had the same experience as you, but that would be ironic if that is the outcome of the patch since they reduced the terrors movespeed to hero level from being faster than heroes to stop just what you are talking about.
Heroes Large General Thread - Page 398
| 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. | ||
|
YouGotNothin
United States907 Posts
As far as the garden terror is concerned I am not sure if I have had the same experience as you, but that would be ironic if that is the outcome of the patch since they reduced the terrors movespeed to hero level from being faster than heroes to stop just what you are talking about. | ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
On April 08 2015 23:33 xDaunt wrote: I kinda agree. The first golem is almost meaningless. I dunno, I almost ended a Hero League match with the first golem (75-ish skulls). We had Sylvanas and Zagara and the only reason we didn't end was because our Sylvanas teleported over the second wall to kill the opposing tank despite after us all agreeing that our strat was going to be push with Golem and do everything to keep Sylvanas alive (sometimes the yolo-bloodlust is just too strong). I think strong push comps (especially Sylvanas) necessitated toning down the early golems, maybe the first golem's power varies too widely between 'strong push' and 'balanced' comps though. Edit: Our golem still made it to their keep despite us being 4v5, then we pulled back as not to be greedy. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 09 2015 02:45 Wuster wrote: I dunno, I almost ended a Hero League match with the first golem (75-ish skulls). We had Sylvanas and Zagara and the only reason we didn't end was because our Sylvanas teleported over the second wall to kill the opposing tank despite after us all agreeing that our strat was going to be push with Golem and do everything to keep Sylvanas alive (sometimes the yolo-bloodlust is just too strong). I think strong push comps (especially Sylvanas) necessitated toning down the early golems, maybe the first golem's power varies too widely between 'strong push' and 'balanced' comps though. Edit: Our golem still made it to their keep despite us being 4v5, then we pulled back as not to be greedy. I'd posit to you that your push was really strong because of having Sylvanas and Zagara, not because you had a 75-skull first golem. | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
| ||
|
Wuster
1974 Posts
I'm not sure we could have pushed that far with a 30 skull golem. I would concede that the synergy there was strong and might not be strong enough with other comps, but I haven't played enough on that map post-patch to say (I guess the map randomizer change worked!). | ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
| ||
|
FreeZEternal
Korea (South)3396 Posts
| ||
|
739
Bearded Elder29905 Posts
Casting Sylvanas' Shadow Dagger on Rehgar will no longer cancel his Ghost Wolf form. Good, cause it was irritating. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On April 09 2015 07:20 xDaunt wrote: I'm convinced that Blizzard needs to implement a hard cap on the possible rank ranges of players in hero league. I'm tired of being matched with Rank 40s. There's just no excuse for ever matching a Rank 1 with a Rank 40. It's not fun for anyone involved. The problem is that Rank in almost no way relates to skill. Anyone who plays enough with enough variance can proceed through the ranks and hit Rank 1. MMR has nothing to do with rank either, so the ranking system is completely and totally pointless. Also @above: Sylvanas needs to be disabled on Mines, it's just impossible to anti-siege that hero unless you're so far ahead you can steamroll them. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 09 2015 07:51 deth2munkies wrote: The problem is that Rank in almost no way relates to skill. Anyone who plays enough with enough variance can proceed through the ranks and hit Rank 1. MMR has nothing to do with rank either, so the ranking system is completely and totally pointless. Also @above: Sylvanas needs to be disabled on Mines, it's just impossible to anti-siege that hero unless you're so far ahead you can steamroll them. I disagree. Most players will cap out eventually when they start receiving roughly as many points for wins as losses. If what you are saying were true, there'd be no shortage of rank 1s that I'd be matched with in lieu of all these rank 40s who are clearly newbs. I just had a game where I triple queued. We all were Rank 1. We got paired with 2 rank 47s who we just beyond awful. Each died 10+ times (the Valla was like 4-15 and had basically no hero damage). I don't care how you cut it, but they had no business being matched in a game with us. Yet there they were. Blizzard's matchmaker is shit and they need to own up to it. | ||
|
xuanzue
Colombia1747 Posts
On April 09 2015 08:19 xDaunt wrote: I disagree. Most players will cap out eventually when they start receiving roughly as many points for wins as losses. If what you are saying were true, there'd be no shortage of rank 1s that I'd be matched with in lieu of all these rank 40s who are clearly newbs. I just had a game where I triple queued. We all were Rank 1. We got paired with 2 rank 47s who we just beyond awful. Each died 10+ times (the Valla was like 4-15 and had basically no hero damage). I don't care how you cut it, but they had no business being matched in a game with us. Yet there they were. Blizzard's matchmaker is shit and they need to own up to it. newbs paired with veterans only happen in premades of 2-3 players. the solution is that blizzard give a MMR to those mini-teams. so the guy rank1 whenever he wants to play with his friend rank47, can be paired with other people lvl 30 | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 09 2015 08:28 xuanzue wrote: newbs paired with veterans only happen in premades of 2-3 players. the solution is that blizzard give a MMR to those mini-teams. so the guy rank1 whenever he wants to play with his friend rank47, can be paired with other people lvl 30 This is wrong. I get paired with newbs when solo-queuing all the time. Are you guys playing the same game as I am? This is all obvious. | ||
|
xuanzue
Colombia1747 Posts
On April 09 2015 08:53 xDaunt wrote: This is wrong. I get paired with newbs when solo-queuing all the time. Are you guys playing the same game as I am? This is all obvious. and they are in solo queue too? have you asked them? | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 09 2015 09:04 xuanzue wrote: and they are in solo queue too? have you asked them? I have not asked, but it sure does not seem like they are partied in game. And even assuming that they are, tossing me into the mix with a bunch of Rank 40s does not balance out the fact that the other team is usually composed rank 5-30 players. Besides, given the frequency with which this is occurring I highly doubt that I am the chosen one who is damned to forever be thrown into newb premades when I solo queue. | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
|
dae
Canada1600 Posts
On April 09 2015 08:28 xuanzue wrote: newbs paired with veterans only happen in premades of 2-3 players. the solution is that blizzard give a MMR to those mini-teams. so the guy rank1 whenever he wants to play with his friend rank47, can be paired with other people lvl 30 When you get very high rated you end up getting matching with lower and lower rated players. See my Hero League Sky Temple game on 4/6/2015 3:40:16 PM - https://www.hotslogs.com/Player/MatchHistory?PlayerID=1427531 Can you honestly tell me that I should be in that game? Or that it's good matchmaking for me to be in it? You can find alot of examples of those types of games in my match history, usually when I'm playing off peak hours - Almost all of those ques are 6+ minutes though. Ideally matchmaking should take the 10 highest rated players in que, make a game out of them, and then repeat. Or at least try and limit the individual rating spread as well as the difference in the teams total ratings. Either way it will be better with more players, but it's painful while it lasts :-(. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 09 2015 11:41 dae wrote: When you get very high rated you end up getting matching with lower and lower rated players. See my Hero League Sky Temple game on 4/6/2015 3:40:16 PM - https://www.hotslogs.com/Player/MatchHistory?PlayerID=1427531 Can you honestly tell me that I should be in that game? Or that it's good matchmaking for me to be in it? You can find alot of examples of those types of games in my match history, usually when I'm playing off peak hours - Almost all of those ques are 6+ minutes though. Ideally matchmaking should take the 10 highest rated players in que, make a game out of them, and then repeat. Or at least try and limit the individual rating spread as well as the difference in the teams total ratings. Either way it will be better with more players, but it's painful while it lasts :-(. Ouch, and you had Scarlett on your team, too. My condolences. | ||
[Phantom]
Mexico2170 Posts
However this new changes are interesting. First of all, if you get a 70 akull golem or more, it will be nerfed to compensate and not be as powerful, and the first golems are less powerful, which is a good thing because it makes the game snowball a little less, but have interesting implications. Exacly how strong are the golems now? Does this mean that you shouldn't ignore anymore the non-golem lane? Weaker golems mean that mercenary camps, like the siege giagants, will be stronger agasin't the wolem, but since it is weker now, maybe theres no need to take them now? | ||
|
dae
Canada1600 Posts
On April 09 2015 14:32 [Phantom] wrote: The "ignore the mines" strat comes from early alpha, where people realized that actually ignoring the mines and taking mercenary camps was better than getting skulls, then Blizzard redesigned the map and became the base race that we all knew. However this new changes are interesting. First of all, if you get a 70 akull golem or more, it will be nerfed to compensate and not be as powerful, and the first golems are less powerful, which is a good thing because it makes the game snowball a little less, but have interesting implications. Exacly how strong are the golems now? Does this mean that you shouldn't ignore anymore the non-golem lane? Weaker golems mean that mercenary camps, like the siege giagants, will be stronger agasin't the wolem, but since it is weker now, maybe theres no need to take them now? Right now, it seems that you almost always want to fight for the small skull camps, but if the other team has an edge on you (health, level, teamcomp for fighting) it's almost as good as boss to just get the bruisers. | ||
| ||
