|
|
On June 09 2015 07:09 xDaunt wrote:Hah. I've been joking with people that my next hero league guide will be much shorter than Hero League 101. My new simple theory of success is in hero league is just pick Vikings every game. The split laning nonsense, at worst, completely nullifies all of your team's early game fuck ups. What's more insidious, however, is how deceptively good these little bastards are at teamfighting. I can't think of another hero that has an easier time getting into the enemy back line and disrupting the hell out of it --- and this is coming from someone who mains Zeratul. My favorite thing to do is to bait the enemy team to blow their cooldowns on me, at which point I just jump or bust out the SS Cancer Ship and laugh at their futile attempts to kill me as their squishies get murdered. It really isn't fair.
SS Cancer Ship ahahahaha XD
|
Northern Ireland22212 Posts
On June 09 2015 07:29 [Phantom] wrote:
In theory, maybe, since you can change items on the go they are more versatile, but in reality everyone goes to the internet copies an item "build" and call it a deal.
I don't think u shud judge a game based on what brainless trench players do
|
On June 09 2015 07:29 [Phantom] wrote:
In theory, maybe, since you can change items on the go they are more versatile, but in reality everyone goes to the internet copies an item "build" and call it a deal.
well item builds are far from set in stone. and change alot in order and key items depending on your and the enemy teams comp.
in dota/lol skill builds are 95% the same.but hots talents arent that different either since usually there is a very clear choice.
|
On June 09 2015 08:57 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 07:29 [Phantom] wrote:
In theory, maybe, since you can change items on the go they are more versatile, but in reality everyone goes to the internet copies an item "build" and call it a deal. well item builds are far from set in stone. and change alot in order and key items depending on your and the enemy teams comp. in dota/lol skill builds are 95% the same.but hots talents arent that different either since usually there is a very clear choice.
heroes talents just sound like what you said about item builds, but of course if you always go for one talent build you get experienced with it and suck with the others, just like with items.
Just easier to pick the right one compared to items, but they fulfill the same goal gameplay wise. Only thing is that some may dislike progression through items or talents, but there are not many out there that do I belief.
And if they wanted they could change the talent picks into a talent tree and make it as complex as the item system that the original dota used.
So yay that we have more variety now.
|
On June 09 2015 07:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I haven't ever played LoL or DotA, but what makes items in those games promote more (or less) diversity than HotS's talent trees? Are the two systems really that different from one another, to insist that one game has more variety than another?
It's not diversity/variety that I was arguing, but depth. Item systems aren't necessarily more diverse than talents, though they can be and some are. My primary concern, however, was how the systems effect and affect gameplay.
The primary problem with HotS' talent system is that it is tied to team level. Because everything that can make your hero stronger is determined by your team's overall performance there isn't any individual development. As such all the gameplay and strategies centered on individual development are either missing from or severely muted in HotS.
As a secondary problem, the talent system is more rigid than an item system. While you have choices you can only make them in a set order and at set milestones.
So as a result concepts like, "I'm going to be laning against a high magic damage opponent during the early game, do I buy a cheap magic resist item or take a risk and put that off until later" simply don't exist. There really isn't laning in HotS, and even if there were you don't necessarily get that choice at that point.
If Talents weren't strictly determined by level and were more flexible as to what choices you could make and when I don't think items would be particularly missed.
|
On June 09 2015 21:58 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 07:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I haven't ever played LoL or DotA, but what makes items in those games promote more (or less) diversity than HotS's talent trees? Are the two systems really that different from one another, to insist that one game has more variety than another? It's not diversity/variety that I was arguing, but depth. Item systems aren't necessarily more diverse than talents, though they can be and some are. My primary concern, however, was how the systems effect and affect gameplay. The primary problem with HotS' talent system is that it is tied to team level. Because everything that can make your hero stronger is determined by your team's overall performance there isn't any individual development. As such all the gameplay and strategies centered on individual development are either missing from or severely muted in HotS. As a secondary problem, the talent system is more rigid than an item system. While you have choices you can only make them in a set order and at set milestones. So as a result concepts like, "I'm going to be laning against a high magic damage opponent during the early game, do I buy a cheap magic resist item or take a risk and put that off until later" simply don't exist. There really isn't laning in HotS, and even if there were you don't necessarily get that choice at that point. If Talents weren't strictly determined by level and were more flexible as to what choices you could make and when I don't think items would be particularly missed.
What do you mean that there isn't *really* laning in Heroes? I'm not familiar with what the LoL and DotA versions of laning are, but isn't what Zagara/ Sylv/ Viking-soak/ Azmodan do "laning"? (And most other heroes in the early game anyway, when soaking exp is significant?)
And I feel that a lot of heroes have multiple builds that they can pursue, depending on their (and their opponents') hero composition. Furthermore, depending on how a game is currently playing out, you may choose different talents (more damage, more heal, etc.). I don't think every build is set in stone before the game actually starts- reacting to the specific game you're in (not just the general meta) is important- and certainly possible.
I think the only "rigidness" is that once you choose a talent, you can't go back and change it a later time... but there has to be *some* level of risk in your decision-making, so I think it'd be rather silly to be able to change any skill at any time.
|
I'm really enjoying Nick's stream: http://www.twitch.tv/nickhots
Always answers questions, very relaxed, top player, played Protoss, looks like Sheldon Cooper... All wins in my book 
Probably my favorite Heroes stream to watch ^^
|
On June 09 2015 21:58 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 07:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I haven't ever played LoL or DotA, but what makes items in those games promote more (or less) diversity than HotS's talent trees? Are the two systems really that different from one another, to insist that one game has more variety than another? It's not diversity/variety that I was arguing, but depth. Item systems aren't necessarily more diverse than talents, though they can be and some are. My primary concern, however, was how the systems effect and affect gameplay. The primary problem with HotS' talent system is that it is tied to team level. Because everything that can make your hero stronger is determined by your team's overall performance there isn't any individual development. As such all the gameplay and strategies centered on individual development are either missing from or severely muted in HotS. As a secondary problem, the talent system is more rigid than an item system. While you have choices you can only make them in a set order and at set milestones. So as a result concepts like, "I'm going to be laning against a high magic damage opponent during the early game, do I buy a cheap magic resist item or take a risk and put that off until later" simply don't exist. There really isn't laning in HotS, and even if there were you don't necessarily get that choice at that point. If Talents weren't strictly determined by level and were more flexible as to what choices you could make and when I don't think items would be particularly missed.
You're really romanticizing item building. At any level past bronze, there's very *very* little diversity in item builds. As AP mid for example, you're only choosing between potions build or doran's ring. That's it. As AD bot, there's even less - you can essentially just set your build to autobuy. The only thing that changes is what do you buy when you back. If you're ahead maybe you grab BF sword first... that's pretty much it. Much later in the game, you just take whatever survival item fits your enemy's composition.
Sure, you can build BT first or as mid you might choose between Zhonya's first or wait on it... but that's not much of an impactful gameplay decision. A different build is only *slighty* more burst or *slightly* more sustain. It doesn't fundamentally change the way you play your character *at all*.
However, the talent design does - or should. In the current balance state, too many heroes just don't have two good options for builds - but if they were all like Anub'arak or Sylvanas (except her ult), you'd have *much* more variation in playstyle. Hybrid Assassin Sylvanas and Splitpush Sylvanas fundamentally play differently, while Zhonya's first Ahri doesn't play differently from Rabadon's first.
The only change that needs to be made is that there need to be better options at each talent level - which Blizz is currently implementing and analysing.
|
On June 09 2015 06:22 Zeon0 wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dUso3Zh.jpg) I think I found my favorite hero(es) :D
LV hard2play
I'm pretty sure splitlane soaking will be nerfed, it goes against the design of the hero.
|
Yeah I wouldn't be shocked if they make it so each Viking only earns like 66% XP or something. I am still shocked SS Cancer Ship got approved since that was during the time they were hard-on for killing on second life bars.
|
On June 09 2015 22:48 Tenks wrote:
Yeah I wouldn't be shocked if they make it so each Viking only earns like 66% XP or something. I am still shocked SS Cancer Ship got approved since that was during the time they were hard-on for killing on second life bars.
I'm actually ok with the overpowered ult, since it has counterplay. There's very little counterplay to one hero earning 3x the normal amount of xp and just winning by abusing the basic mechanic of team power in the game.
|
Aren't the Vikings Unstoppable when in the boat as well? I thought I recall trying to Mosh the boat and it just went on it's merry way owning fools.
|
On June 09 2015 22:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 21:58 Seuss wrote:On June 09 2015 07:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I haven't ever played LoL or DotA, but what makes items in those games promote more (or less) diversity than HotS's talent trees? Are the two systems really that different from one another, to insist that one game has more variety than another? It's not diversity/variety that I was arguing, but depth. Item systems aren't necessarily more diverse than talents, though they can be and some are. My primary concern, however, was how the systems effect and affect gameplay. The primary problem with HotS' talent system is that it is tied to team level. Because everything that can make your hero stronger is determined by your team's overall performance there isn't any individual development. As such all the gameplay and strategies centered on individual development are either missing from or severely muted in HotS. As a secondary problem, the talent system is more rigid than an item system. While you have choices you can only make them in a set order and at set milestones. So as a result concepts like, "I'm going to be laning against a high magic damage opponent during the early game, do I buy a cheap magic resist item or take a risk and put that off until later" simply don't exist. There really isn't laning in HotS, and even if there were you don't necessarily get that choice at that point. If Talents weren't strictly determined by level and were more flexible as to what choices you could make and when I don't think items would be particularly missed. What do you mean that there isn't *really* laning in Heroes? I'm not familiar with what the LoL and DotA versions of laning are, but isn't what Zagara/ Sylv/ Viking-soak/ Azmodan do "laning"? (And most other heroes in the early game anyway, when soaking exp is significant?) And I feel that a lot of heroes have multiple builds that they can pursue, depending on their (and their opponents') hero composition. Furthermore, depending on how a game is currently playing out, you may choose different talents (more damage, more heal, etc.). I don't think every build is set in stone before the game actually starts- reacting to the specific game you're in (not just the general meta) is important- and certainly possible. I think the only "rigidness" is that once you choose a talent, you can't go back and change it a later time... but there has to be *some* level of risk in your decision-making, so I think it'd be rather silly to be able to change any skill at any time.
There's an early phase in LoL/DotA where objectives are largely too difficult to handle, and so the various players settle in lanes for the first 7-12 minutes or more before the game begins to shift toward objectives and pushing. In HotS the smaller size of the maps and the early importance of the objectives eliminates that as a major aspect of the game. You may have a hero whose primary job is to push, but it's not the same as there being an entire, extended phase where teams divvy themselves between the lanes and square off.
Again, I'm not arguing about build diversity, but how those decisions change how the game is played and even generate gameplay. Because there isn't individual development in HotS securing and accelerating the development of important heroes on your team isn't part of the game, suppressing the development of a specific threat on the opposing team isn't in the strategical lexicon, and spending resources on a short-term boost as a means of attempting a comeback or closing out the game largely isn't possible.
Talents are rigid because the choices you make come at predetermined times with predetermined options. If Illidan wants to take reduced ability damage early on that's too bad, he doesn't get that option until level 13, but in LoL you can choose to buy a cheap armor or magic resist item whenever you have the resources to do so.
As I noted before, if the talent system was separate from team levels and more flexible we probably wouldn't be debating this since only the truly pedantic would care that HotS didn't have items.
|
On June 09 2015 23:19 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 22:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 09 2015 21:58 Seuss wrote:On June 09 2015 07:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I haven't ever played LoL or DotA, but what makes items in those games promote more (or less) diversity than HotS's talent trees? Are the two systems really that different from one another, to insist that one game has more variety than another? It's not diversity/variety that I was arguing, but depth. Item systems aren't necessarily more diverse than talents, though they can be and some are. My primary concern, however, was how the systems effect and affect gameplay. The primary problem with HotS' talent system is that it is tied to team level. Because everything that can make your hero stronger is determined by your team's overall performance there isn't any individual development. As such all the gameplay and strategies centered on individual development are either missing from or severely muted in HotS. As a secondary problem, the talent system is more rigid than an item system. While you have choices you can only make them in a set order and at set milestones. So as a result concepts like, "I'm going to be laning against a high magic damage opponent during the early game, do I buy a cheap magic resist item or take a risk and put that off until later" simply don't exist. There really isn't laning in HotS, and even if there were you don't necessarily get that choice at that point. If Talents weren't strictly determined by level and were more flexible as to what choices you could make and when I don't think items would be particularly missed. What do you mean that there isn't *really* laning in Heroes? I'm not familiar with what the LoL and DotA versions of laning are, but isn't what Zagara/ Sylv/ Viking-soak/ Azmodan do "laning"? (And most other heroes in the early game anyway, when soaking exp is significant?) And I feel that a lot of heroes have multiple builds that they can pursue, depending on their (and their opponents') hero composition. Furthermore, depending on how a game is currently playing out, you may choose different talents (more damage, more heal, etc.). I don't think every build is set in stone before the game actually starts- reacting to the specific game you're in (not just the general meta) is important- and certainly possible. I think the only "rigidness" is that once you choose a talent, you can't go back and change it a later time... but there has to be *some* level of risk in your decision-making, so I think it'd be rather silly to be able to change any skill at any time. There's an early phase in LoL/DotA where objectives are largely too difficult to handle, and so the various players settle in lanes for the first 7-12 minutes or more before the game begins to shift toward objectives and pushing. In HotS the smaller size of the maps and the early importance of the objectives eliminates that as a major aspect of the game. You may have a hero whose primary job is to push, but it's not the same as there being an entire, extended phase where teams divvy themselves between the lanes and square off.
Ah okay, thanks for the explanation I would absolutely hate to be confined to laning for 10+ minutes simply because the heroes were too weak to do anything else, so I'm definitely happy that Heroes allows you to do other things from minute one (or five-ish). Personal preference of course... I far prefer having more options.
Again, I'm not arguing about build diversity, but how those decisions change how the game is played and even generate gameplay. Because there isn't individual development in HotS securing and accelerating the development of important heroes on your team isn't part of the game, suppressing the development of a specific threat on the opposing team isn't in the strategical lexicon, and spending resources on a short-term boost as a means of attempting a comeback or closing out the game largely isn't possible.
Talents are rigid because the choices you make come at predetermined times with predetermined options. If Illidan wants to take reduced ability damage early on that's too bad, he doesn't get that option until level 13, but in LoL you can choose to buy a cheap armor or magic resist item whenever you have the resources to do so.
As I noted before, if the talent system was separate from team levels and more flexible we probably wouldn't be debating this since only the truly pedantic would care that HotS didn't have items.
Ah I see what you're saying. Personally, I like the fact that each hero comes with its own risks and rewards- it makes me think even more critically about which hero to choose for the team, since I know it will enjoy more unique benefits but possibly suffer from its own specific disadvantages because of the talents available. I can definitely see how some people would prefer more customization, although since the games have a million heroes already, I'm sure that redundancy and overlap is something the game designers want to largely avoid.
|
You can also talent most abilities at most talent levels. The issue is generally there is a "right" way to play a hero and if you take a defensive ability at one tier suddenly that playstyle gets messed up. But in DOTA it isn't like rushing a defensive item on a hero that generally doesn't want it at end-game is the "proper" way to play the hero but possibly in that game and in that situation you had to do it.
|
On June 09 2015 23:02 Crownlol wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2015 22:48 Tenks wrote:
Yeah I wouldn't be shocked if they make it so each Viking only earns like 66% XP or something. I am still shocked SS Cancer Ship got approved since that was during the time they were hard-on for killing on second life bars. I'm actually ok with the overpowered ult, since it has counterplay. There's very little counterplay to one hero earning 3x the normal amount of xp and just winning by abusing the basic mechanic of team power in the game.
What counterplay? Yeah, you can turn and try to kill the ship, but that's not exactly a grade A solution. The mistake that a lot of Vikings make is popping the boat too early. The better move is to charge in and try to assassinate squishy, burn your other cooldowns in the process, and then when your health is low, pop the boat and go to work. You can absorb so much damage that way and really make life miserable for the enemy team.
|
What are good cheap heros?
I don't mean good as in powerful I mean as in interesting. It seems like all the cheap heroes are awful (not from a balance perspective from a game mechanic perspective). e.g. playing Raynor is incredibly boring if you've played any other moba without judgment in terms of his actual in-game strength but Lost Vikings look fun even if they were a weaker pick (which it doesn't look like they are anyway...)
|
Could a simpler Lost Viking Nerf be to reduce their soaking XP radius?
If their radius was reduced to 1/2 or even 2/3rds a normal hero, it would require significantly more risk and multitasking to soak a land with them, which might make it more fair since you would be more likely to be killed and lose the XP or simply not be in position if you aren't actively watching them.
|
On June 10 2015 01:07 hariooo wrote:
What are good cheap heros?
I don't mean good as in powerful I mean as in interesting. It seems like all the cheap heroes are awful (not from a balance perspective from a game mechanic perspective). e.g. playing Raynor is incredibly boring if you've played any other moba without judgment in terms of his actual in-game strength but Lost Vikings look fun even if they were a weaker pick (which it doesn't look like they are anyway...)
Well that's subjective ofc. Valla and Tassadar are strong but they're so forgiving that you may find 'em boring.
Maybe Illidan, Anub, Muradin?
|
On June 10 2015 01:31 Big G wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2015 01:07 hariooo wrote:
What are good cheap heros?
I don't mean good as in powerful I mean as in interesting. It seems like all the cheap heroes are awful (not from a balance perspective from a game mechanic perspective). e.g. playing Raynor is incredibly boring if you've played any other moba without judgment in terms of his actual in-game strength but Lost Vikings look fun even if they were a weaker pick (which it doesn't look like they are anyway...) Well that's subjective ofc. Valla and Tassadar are strong but they're so forgiving that you may find 'em boring. Maybe Illidan, Anub, Muradin?
I suppose non-straightforward would be a clearer way of putting it? Like your standard tanks/healers/dps are boring as hell in this game imo (it's like half the range/damage/stun duration of other games so nothing too crazy happens) but there are some heros with interesting concepts but I dunno if any of them are not like 10k per.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
