|
On October 15 2014 03:46 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2014 03:03 sagi wrote:Honest question, no bashing: How does the game hold up as a competitive game? Meaning will skill prevail and can better teams reach the top consistently? I've seen only one match so far where noblesse&co dominated starting 80% of the match and then lost because of couple of succesfull attacks from the opponent. Felt like some rubber band kept the teams even for most of the game and that the dominating team didn't get any significant advantage they would have deserved for playing better. Did I completely misjudge what was going on? GL to TL. Hope you'll make NaNiwa rage.  There is a catch-up mechanic. Basically you get bonus XP if you are losing on hero levels and you kill an opponent's hero. So it makes even trades benefit the team that is down. And not to mention if you are a higher level you have a longer death timer. So doing even trades when up is a really bad idea. I didn't watch the match you're referring to but it is easy for a team to dominate the game up to level 10'ish or so then completely fall on their faces later due to poor team coordination and execution. That is the good part about the game is it is rarely completely over. In DOTA and LoL you can sometimes call a game 15 minutes before it ends and the final minutes are nothing more than a formality. That isn't exactly the case here. Basically Heroes is a game all about being in the right place at the right time. Unlike something like DOTA or LoL where it largely revolves around doing the right thing at the right time. Since every hero features some form of skillshot there is a fairly high skill ceiling for people to execute their skills.
Your description of Heroes has piqued my curiosity. Although I still dislike most mobas, I might tune into HotSt to see how different it feels.
|
It has some cool concepts. To callback to Starcraft there isn't really a concept in Heroes of "When ahead get more ahead" like in DOTA/LoL. Since you can't farm. So you can get a few early hero kills, get some gold, get an item to help you farm and snowball from there while avoiding teamfights to let you get gold. The only way to get more ahead is really to just go and kill the other team again. Really the only advantage, outside of the obvious in terms of levels and talents, of being ahead is you generally have map control which lets you control the objectives and merc camps. But even those force the winning team out to engage the opponents. And if a team is down and suddenly takes a 5-for-2 trade it can quickly become an even game.
|
On October 15 2014 03:46 Tenks wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2014 03:03 sagi wrote:Honest question, no bashing: How does the game hold up as a competitive game? Meaning will skill prevail and can better teams reach the top consistently? I've seen only one match so far where noblesse&co dominated starting 80% of the match and then lost because of couple of succesfull attacks from the opponent. Felt like some rubber band kept the teams even for most of the game and that the dominating team didn't get any significant advantage they would have deserved for playing better. Did I completely misjudge what was going on? GL to TL. Hope you'll make NaNiwa rage. There is a catch-up mechanic. Basically you get bonus XP if you are losing on hero levels and you kill an opponent's hero. So it makes even trades benefit the team that is down. And not to mention if you are a higher level you have a longer death timer. So doing even trades when up is a really bad idea. I didn't watch the match you're referring to but it is easy for a team to dominate the game up to level 10'ish or so then completely fall on their faces later due to poor team coordination and execution. That is the good part about the game is it is rarely completely over. In DOTA and LoL you can sometimes call a game 15 minutes before it ends and the final minutes are nothing more than a formality. That isn't exactly the case here. Basically Heroes is a game all about being in the right place at the right time. Unlike something like DOTA or LoL where it largely revolves around doing the right thing at the right time. Since every hero features some form of skillshot there is a fairly high skill ceiling for people to execute their skills.
I see. As a viewer I can see that it's definitely a good thing to keep the match interesting right up to the end. On the other hand, as a player that might get really frustrating. I guess it's OK as long as the effort required to catch up is on par with the opponents deeds earlier, i.e. not something gifted to them by only waiting for the crucial ending moment to cancel everything else. Sounds like a tricky thing to balance... glad Blizzard is an expert on that.
I wonder how that's going to affect the overall strategy in the long run. I'm not too thrilled if the leading teams end up evading fights like a paranoid skunk.
PS. I found the match I was referring to + Show Spoiler + Hopefully I didn't lie too much about the events. :D
|
Most Mobas have a catch up mechanic. Dota has it with networth now and League has Xp on creeps as well as some other weird xp mechanics.
|
On October 15 2014 03:49 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2014 03:46 Tenks wrote:On October 15 2014 03:03 sagi wrote:Honest question, no bashing: How does the game hold up as a competitive game? Meaning will skill prevail and can better teams reach the top consistently? I've seen only one match so far where noblesse&co dominated starting 80% of the match and then lost because of couple of succesfull attacks from the opponent. Felt like some rubber band kept the teams even for most of the game and that the dominating team didn't get any significant advantage they would have deserved for playing better. Did I completely misjudge what was going on? GL to TL. Hope you'll make NaNiwa rage. There is a catch-up mechanic. Basically you get bonus XP if you are losing on hero levels and you kill an opponent's hero. So it makes even trades benefit the team that is down. And not to mention if you are a higher level you have a longer death timer. So doing even trades when up is a really bad idea. I didn't watch the match you're referring to but it is easy for a team to dominate the game up to level 10'ish or so then completely fall on their faces later due to poor team coordination and execution. That is the good part about the game is it is rarely completely over. In DOTA and LoL you can sometimes call a game 15 minutes before it ends and the final minutes are nothing more than a formality. That isn't exactly the case here. Basically Heroes is a game all about being in the right place at the right time. Unlike something like DOTA or LoL where it largely revolves around doing the right thing at the right time. Since every hero features some form of skillshot there is a fairly high skill ceiling for people to execute their skills. Your description of Heroes has piqued my curiosity. Although I still dislike most mobas, I might tune into HotSt to see how different it feels.
At the same time, DotA has taken that direction. In terms of the comeback mechanic (more bounty, especially for streaks, comeback runes implemented) and the other aspects are similar. Skillshots are always a thing.
|
On October 15 2014 04:34 sagi wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2014 03:46 Tenks wrote:On October 15 2014 03:03 sagi wrote:Honest question, no bashing: How does the game hold up as a competitive game? Meaning will skill prevail and can better teams reach the top consistently? I've seen only one match so far where noblesse&co dominated starting 80% of the match and then lost because of couple of succesfull attacks from the opponent. Felt like some rubber band kept the teams even for most of the game and that the dominating team didn't get any significant advantage they would have deserved for playing better. Did I completely misjudge what was going on? GL to TL. Hope you'll make NaNiwa rage. There is a catch-up mechanic. Basically you get bonus XP if you are losing on hero levels and you kill an opponent's hero. So it makes even trades benefit the team that is down. And not to mention if you are a higher level you have a longer death timer. So doing even trades when up is a really bad idea. I didn't watch the match you're referring to but it is easy for a team to dominate the game up to level 10'ish or so then completely fall on their faces later due to poor team coordination and execution. That is the good part about the game is it is rarely completely over. In DOTA and LoL you can sometimes call a game 15 minutes before it ends and the final minutes are nothing more than a formality. That isn't exactly the case here. Basically Heroes is a game all about being in the right place at the right time. Unlike something like DOTA or LoL where it largely revolves around doing the right thing at the right time. Since every hero features some form of skillshot there is a fairly high skill ceiling for people to execute their skills. I see. As a viewer I can see that it's definitely a good thing to keep the match interesting right up to the end. On the other hand, as a player that might get really frustrating. I guess it's OK as long as the effort required to catch up is on par with the opponents deeds earlier, i.e. not something gifted to them by only waiting for the crucial ending moment to cancel everything else. Sounds like a tricky thing to balance... glad Blizzard is an expert on that. I wonder how that's going to affect the overall strategy in the long run. I'm not too thrilled if the leading teams end up evading fights like a paranoid skunk. PS. I found the match I was referring to + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZZYp4v_6VA Hopefully I didn't lie too much about the events. :D
The come-back mechanic is here mostly to allow you to capitalize on mistakes. As the opposing team, (i.e. the leading team), all you need to do is not rest on your laurels and keep up your A-game.
There have been complaints that it is sort of unfair, and that the early game is basically irrelevant, leading to the 5 last minutes of any game being the real deal. I personally believe that isn't true. If you only have a slight advantage, don't expect to keep it by doing nothing. HotS requires you to be quite active, and it is quite easy to lose your lead if you slack on map objectives or botch a fight or two. As it should be, if you ask me.
Let's not forget that the come-back mechanic kicks in when a team is three levels behind or more. That is indeed a significant lead. Recovering from two levels behind isn't horrific, and I've seen it happen really often. Three levels also, but once you keep falling behind even with the come-back mechanic, then you're pretty much screwed. Then again, it means the other team is simply flat out better than you.
Overall, I haven't felt any negative effect of the come-back mechanic thus far. I think it makes for a more entertaining game and viewer experience, seeing as the game isn't over before it should be. Much like in WC3 where impressive feats of micro could bring you back from dire situations, it is possible and in fact common to get even and come back in HotS.
|
Yes. YES. YEEAAAAHHHHS!!!
Also, Sheth is back.
Every cell of my body approves.
|
Guys when is crms + other tl forum goers challenging sheth's squad for true TL representation at blizzcon?
|
People that think comebacks are impossible on DotA have neither
a) played dota or watched it competitively
b) read the last patch that buffed immensely the comeback mechanic
|
On October 15 2014 09:54 misirlou wrote:
People that think comebacks are impossible on DotA have neither
a) played dota or watched it competitively
b) read the last patch that buffed immensely the comeback mechanic
Nobody thinks they're impossible, but they are less likely for more team comps since a lot focus on midgame power. If they lose the early game and never get their midgame power, they have no chance, but often have enough waveclear to drag the game out for 50 minutes creating a shitty, shitty viewing experience.
That doesn't happen in HotS, and 1-2 teamfights are pretty much guaranteed to swing the game every time.
|
Yay, great news. I will definitely cheer for Sheth and the rest, nice to see him back  .
|
Good interview. I like how DunkTrain speaks very positively of HotS's game design. However, I'd be interested to know what he meant by: "some design choices that I'm concerned about". I have absolutely no major concerns about HotS's gameplay which I overwhelmingly approve of. All of my concerns relate to things such as business model, social features, and other systems to support the game (e.g. ranked mode, in-game streaming, etc.).
What is the chance that having a TL team for HotS will end the ridiculous arguments, especially from Dota 2 players, about whether or not HotS is too easy to be an esport?
|
On October 15 2014 09:54 misirlou wrote:
People that think comebacks are impossible on DotA have neither
a) played dota or watched it competitively
b) read the last patch that buffed immensely the comeback mechanic
a) This is nonsense. No one says it's impossible, just very unlikely. People come to the conclusion that comebacks are extremely rare in Dota 2 by watching it competitively and playing the game in person. The fact that comebacks almost never happen isn't even the main problem. It's that games drag on for 50 minutes, despite the fact that a comeback is exceedingly improbable. If, like SC2 or HotS, no comeback is going to happen, which is perfectly fine as some players are legitimately better than others, the game will quickly end in around 15-20 minutes, not drag on and on and on for around 50 minutes. Luckily in competitive play, the game is sometimes over in mid-game because the losing team ggs (if they didn't, it would no doubt likely drag out to 50 minutes as well), but this privilege is unfortunately not available in public games.
b) People who play HotS would tend not to go back to check the latest happenings of a inferior game. What is this change that you are referring to?
User was temp banned for this post.
|
That was paralleluniverse, everyone.
Please do go ahead and ignore him.
|
How many times can you get temp banned for the same exact shit posting until you're full banned?
|
(Off Topic Goofiness+ Show Spoiler +On October 16 2014 00:25 crms wrote:
How many times can you get temp banned for the same exact shit posting until you're full banned? TL mods are like the gods in Oblivion: you are allowed to stay on good terms even if you have a lot of infamy, so long as you have good posts. See: Idra. So the number kinda varies. However, I think the elegant solution is banning Parallel and Serejai from this thread and having a new thread only they can post in where they can bash each others' brains in.
OT:
Really digging the Nova changes. However, hot shots might be a little OP. I love the concept, but I'm a little worried about the burst potential it gives her.
Also, I had to make a spreadsheet to figure out which packs to buy with my blizzbucks.
|
On October 16 2014 07:10 Yoav wrote:(Off Topic Goofiness + Show Spoiler +On October 16 2014 00:25 crms wrote:
How many times can you get temp banned for the same exact shit posting until you're full banned? TL mods are like the gods in Oblivion: you are allowed to stay on good terms even if you have a lot of infamy, so long as you have good posts. See: Idra. So the number kinda varies. However, I think the elegant solution is banning Parallel and Serejai from this thread and having a new thread only they can post in where they can bash each others' brains in. .
Idra stayed on good terms because he contributed a hell of a lot to the community and was always answering questions on the Brood War strategy forum. Even when he was a pro gamer in Korea, if you PM'ed him a question about a matchup or build, he'd answer it.
I have no idea who this other guy is though.
|
On October 15 2014 19:08 paralleluniverse wrote:
Good interview. I like how DunkTrain speaks very positively of HotS's game design. However, I'd be interested to know what he meant by: "some design choices that I'm concerned about". I have absolutely no major concerns about HotS's gameplay which I overwhelmingly approve of. All of my concerns relate to things such as business model, social features, and other systems to support the game (e.g. ranked mode, in-game streaming, etc.).
What is the chance that having a TL team for HotS will end the ridiculous arguments, especially from Dota 2 players, about whether or not HotS is too easy to be an esport?
Do you know how many games have had tournaments propped up by the company who made it, whether it is a viable esport or not?
|
On October 16 2014 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2014 19:08 paralleluniverse wrote:
Good interview. I like how DunkTrain speaks very positively of HotS's game design. However, I'd be interested to know what he meant by: "some design choices that I'm concerned about". I have absolutely no major concerns about HotS's gameplay which I overwhelmingly approve of. All of my concerns relate to things such as business model, social features, and other systems to support the game (e.g. ranked mode, in-game streaming, etc.).
What is the chance that having a TL team for HotS will end the ridiculous arguments, especially from Dota 2 players, about whether or not HotS is too easy to be an esport? Do you know how many games have had tournaments propped up by the company who made it, whether it is a viable esport or not?
Pretty much every single MOBA there is + World of Tanks and SC2. Off the top of my head.
|
But if the comeback potential of dota was so great then why did they need to buff it in the latest patch? People want to have it both ways: say that there weren't any problems with dota and then point out that the problem was fixed anyway so you can't complain. If you don't think that there should be a discussion on dota in this thread then just say so instead of deflecting criticism in this somewhat dismissive way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
