On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
Here is a good lesson never go full retard
ROFL 1500 games never seen a comeback
I believe he meant all the comebacks he saw where due to the enemy making stupid mistakes, and not by his team stepping up their game.
On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
Here is a good lesson never go full retard
ROFL 1500 games never seen a comeback
At 17 minutes they were farming us inside our fountain, dropping rapiers on the ground and drawing pictures with sentry wards, but because of the stupid game mechanics we didn't even have the option to outplay them and make a comeback. What A Stupid Game.
On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
Here is a good lesson never go full retard
ROFL 1500 games never seen a comeback
I believe he meant all the comebacks he saw where due to the enemy making stupid mistakes, and not by his team stepping up their game.
He says hes never seen a comeback by people just playing better.... in a pub game.
Obviously smokes, dewarding, organizing initation and baiting never work.
i would like to be smoking what he is right now instead im up doing stupid exams
Who cares for your stupid dota2 rant now? I think blizzard does a very smart thing and whoever thinks that this cant work cause there are different maps (lol) is more than close minded..
On November 09 2013 06:25 Partha wrote: If this game uses the SC2 engine, it's primed for failure.
SC2 engine is absolutely horrible for any serious competitive games due to streamlining of pathing, spell-animation, attack animation and etc.
I predict this game will be a glorified version of the hero siege custom maps from WC3.
And everything in DOTA2 isn't streamlined? All their controls are extremely fluid and responsive just like in SC2. I bet you think a MOBA built on the buggy BW engine will be better huh?
On November 09 2013 06:25 Partha wrote: If this game uses the SC2 engine, it's primed for failure.
SC2 engine is absolutely horrible for any serious competitive games due to streamlining of pathing, spell-animation, attack animation and etc.
I predict this game will be a glorified version of the hero siege custom maps from WC3.
And everything in DOTA2 isn't streamlined? All their controls are extremely fluid and responsive just like in SC2. I bet you think a MOBA built on the buggy BW engine will be better huh?
Imagine if you could 5 hero stack from the fountain to one lane, ennemy think only one hero is coming and then bam 5 heros drill into them
On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
Get a load of this guy... 1500 games and you have never seen a comeback? I think I play at least one game a day where there is a distinct come from behind victory (by my team or the opponents).
Dota is great because it's not ONLY being able to win a lane or one team fight etc. It's about having overarching game sense to know when you have to capitalize on an advantage (knowing when it's safe to Rosh or push a tower) or how to turtle up and hold out for opportunities. Granted a lot of this does depend on the type of lineup you're playing with.
In fact, I would make the opposite claim. In my ~1,100 games I have seen very few where there was absolutely NOT a chance for a comeback and most of the time those losses would come from players that just gave up too soon / started trolling / general negative attitudes.
If you set something like a gold / tower / exp deficit "safe to leave" trigger, those lames are just going to give up after 5 minutes and troll / afk until the deficit is reached. This is something I hate even more than losing.
Yes, it's true that occasionally one team does reach an unbeatable level. But I would say you cant actually realize it's in this state until 15 minutes and those games are pretty much always over under 25 or 30. That extra 10 minutes is annoying, but it's so rare and so little time it definitely doesn't warrant that "go ahead and leave you pussy" trigger you want.
On November 09 2013 06:25 Partha wrote: If this game uses the SC2 engine, it's primed for failure.
SC2 engine is absolutely horrible for any serious competitive games due to streamlining of pathing, spell-animation, attack animation and etc.
I predict this game will be a glorified version of the hero siege custom maps from WC3.
And everything in DOTA2 isn't streamlined? All their controls are extremely fluid and responsive just like in SC2. I bet you think a MOBA built on the buggy BW engine will be better huh?
Imagine if you could 5 hero stack from the fountain to one lane, ennemy think only one hero is coming and then bam 5 heros drill into them
New metagame
lol you could do that with Earthshaker fissure before it was patched out :
On November 09 2013 06:08 paralleluniverse wrote: I'm surprisingly impressed.
This game corrects many of the reasons why I believe that Dota sucks.
I've been complaining for a long time that in Dota, games needlessly last probably on average 45 minutes, despite the fact that the winner is mostly obvious after 15-20 minutes, with the rest of the game being completely pointless, since the winner is already known. It's great to see that they're reducing game length down to 15-20 minutes.
It's also great that there's multiple maps, whereas Dota 2 quickly becomes boring and monotonos on the same maps.
You're so ridiculously wrong it's almost not worth of an answer. The only reason games aren't closer is because in pubs whiners will throw the towel as soon as something goes wrong. The truth is the game is extremely well balanced, and allows comebacks in a ton of situations.
It's a game that rewards a team for creating an advantage by setting an uphill slope for the opposing team to climb, but at the same time, a well planned battle can set the base for a comeback pretty frequently.
The game only becomes boring when you give up early (or someone on your team, which is why pubs can get boring)
considering all the mechanisms that are in place to keep the winning team winning in Dota, I don't think you can claim that the game allows comebacks very often. It happens, but it's mostly when one team has pushed down a few tier 3 towers, but somehow forgotten that the other team has a PL farming unmolested somewhere on the map, they have no real counters and then the tide turns. But with all the unreliable gold stuff, the mega creeps, the aegis and other ways to gain an advantage.. a team in the lead will stay in the lead and ultimately win, unless that team really messes up.
With about 1500 Dota2 pub games played by now, I don't think I've ever seen a game get turned around by just playing better (smoke plays, de-warding, organizing initiations, baiting etc).. there really should be an automatic "game is safe to leave" function that kicks in once you've reached a certain gold/xp/tower deficit, because more often than not, the game is wasting your time by design.
Here is a good lesson never go full retard
ROFL 1500 games never seen a comeback
how about you read what I wrote? I've never seen a comeback that didn't occur because the other team basically let it
On November 09 2013 06:25 Partha wrote: If this game uses the SC2 engine, it's primed for failure.
SC2 engine is absolutely horrible for any serious competitive games due to streamlining of pathing, spell-animation, attack animation and etc.
I predict this game will be a glorified version of the hero siege custom maps from WC3.
And everything in DOTA2 isn't streamlined? All their controls are extremely fluid and responsive just like in SC2. I bet you think a MOBA built on the buggy BW engine will be better huh?
Imagine if you could 5 hero stack from the fountain to one lane, ennemy think only one hero is coming and then bam 5 heros drill into them
New metagame
lol you could do that with Earthshaker fissure before it was patched out :
On November 09 2013 05:22 hootsushi wrote: Looks solid so far and it almost looks like WC3, dat nostalgia feel. Opted in, hope it doesn't suck. Please don't suck, please.
It looks nothing like WC3... The graphics and the general atmosphere alone are way different. WC3 had very cartoony graphics and just a less serious ambiance than SC2 does, it was always quite fitting.
On November 09 2013 08:43 Quotidian wrote: how about you read what I wrote? I've never seen a comeback that didn't occur because the other team basically let it
If a comeback occurs then by the definition of "ahead/behind" the other team must have made a mistake or played sub-optimally somehow, because otherwise they were never actually ahead in the first place. That's true of any game.
As for HotS it looks like it's worth a shot, but the graphics are worse than Dota 2 and it seems a lot more casual-oriented, so we'll see.
I'm not necessarily a big fan of last-hitting for its own sake (it can be pretty frustrating) but I'm not sure you can easily get rid of it without dumbing down the game too much or making it into something totally different.
I did sign up for the beta, but a friend of mine who just made a B-net account and doesnt own any Blizzard game, he gets a message that he has to have at least one game in order to sign up. Has anyone else encountered this, if so and its true, is there a way to sign up without owning any previous Blizzard title?
EPT
