|
United States47024 Posts
On June 13 2012 18:09 BlueSpace wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 17:36 WaveofShadow wrote:On June 13 2012 16:44 Shikyo wrote:
About this silly discussion:
Personally I prefer 50-50 kill score games over 5-5 kill score games This, 100 times this. Nothing worse than watching a pro game with a sub-10 kill score for both sides at the 30 min mark. Also agreed but unfortunately I have the impression that sub-10 kill score games are actually what happens if both teams play "correct". Some pro-games look more like a giant version of chicken and the first one to stick his head into a bush gets it literally chopped off. Riot needs to start working on some mechanism for teams to recover from bad mid-game fights. What would you guys think about allowing buybacks like in Dota. I think that might help. That way players could take calculated risks once they have enough gold and that might allow for more riskier plays and more action overall.
See, the comparison to DotA here isn't quite so simple. Due to stuff like limited wards and Smoke of Deceit, a large part of why so many more kills happen in DotA is because a lot of the time you're playing a game of poker with your incomplete information. Enemy support goes missing, and you know they have Smoke in their inventory, you have to make an intelligent gamble on where he is. You can't rely on the fact that you have wards covering every possible entrance to your lane, because you can't.
It makes for exciting gameplay for a spectator to watch because even at the highest level, it means you get to see kills happen (and some of the VERY best Chinese players have Flash-like star sense for feeling when they're about to get ganked, which is fun to watch as well). But for the player, I can see why people might feel it's "unfair" ("unfair" in the same way that Poker can be unfair).
|
On June 13 2012 22:08 Plague1503 wrote:
How to lane vs Yorick as Renekton? I got my ass handed to me today HARD, even though we won in the end.
I havn't laned the matchup specifically, but I feel like once you hit 3 it shouldn't be the worst matchup in the world. His ghouls give you easy fuel for the double E and your Q should kill his stack of ghouls. I assume it would be similar to Riven vs Yorick just without the massive kill potential at 6.
That being said Yorick is obnoxious as hell. Just make sure you're returning damage on him. Renekton should kill Ghouls with AoE accidentally, should win any true trade where you both use all your skills, and he has a sustain advantage in that his Q gives him the same regen as Yorick's E and he doesn't have mana costs; if Yorick gets a mana item such as tear of the goddess you should be able to just win every trade hard because you spent that gold on real items, and if he buys armor instead you just have to abuse the brush until he runs out of mana then he's your bitch.
Yorick is just one of those champions. So long as you keep up in CS you're usually much more useful as the game goes along. A well played Yorick beats most champs.... unfortunately it isn't particularly difficult to play Yorick well.
|
Now that I think of it, shouldn't something that's "unfair" or "unfun" when it comes to basic design (not individual characters) even out in the long run due to a solid matchmaking system? ("Solid matchmaking" being hard to deal with in a game like League/DotA is a different issue. =P)
A person who makes "bad" calls in the situation you described will simply get their ranges wrong because they don't know better. The more bad calls he makes, the more he will play vs people who employ this type of "higher level thinking" less frequently. I think this stuff specifically (smoke + incomplete ward coverage) is something that should be implementable without resulting in a lot more "unfun" situations.
This is like a whole different topic than early-/lategame scaling which is bound to lead to more "unfun" spots the worse you are.
|
United States47024 Posts
The thing is, regardless of how good you are, games of incomplete information will just feel unfair at times. It feels bad to get cheesed in SC. It feels bad to lose to a lucky River in Hold'em. It feels bad to get smoke ganked in DotA. Good matchmaking doesn't mean you see those situations less often. Sometimes, your opponent just lucks out. That incomplete information can also create great gameplay, but it's really up to the person whether you consider that tradeoff to be worthwhile. I don't think you can definitively say it's better one way or the other.
|
So how do you guys rate Olaf vs WW top?
I feel it's kinda even in lane, early more for olaf but later WW sustain kicks in. However i feel very useless as WW later if I can't stop olaf from diving my carries. Any thoughts?
|
As a spectator I do have to say I find DotA with Tobiwan a ton more exciting to watch than LoL, at least in general. When everybody has these big important blinks and CC abilities (even the supports) it makes things pretty dang fun to watch and the casters for DotA are leagues ahead of LoL casters since it's a far older game.
I sort of wonder if the extra length of CC just gives the spectator more time to examine or appreciate the play, or what.
I still play mostly LoL though because DotA too hard.
|
I personally think its more a lack of any rock-paper-scissors type mechanism, and the associated mindgames. (like eco > standard > cheese > eco in SC)
incomplete information in the dota sense is more unfair than cheese in SC, because you cannot possibly have enough wards or see someone with smoke. in SC, you can sacrifice economy for an earlier scout. That decision i think, makes sc a game that is more interesting, and sets up more back and forth 'gray area' instead of the black and white of a dota gank (you're dead or you're not).
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 13 2012 22:49 Kaneh wrote:
incomplete information in the dota sense is more unfair than cheese in SC, because you cannot possibly have enough wards or see someone with smoke. in SC, you can sacrifice economy for an earlier scout. That decision i think, makes sc a game that is more interesting, and sets up more back and forth 'gray area' instead of the black and white of a dota gank (you're dead or you're not).
Well, that's not entirely true. Sentry wards actually do see smoked enemies just like they normally would see invis targets, it's just that it's an expensive choice to accompany all your observer wards with sentries for the purpose of seeing smoked enemies.
|
True, a greater tradeoff for warding might be good for LoL. Limiting wards doesn't sound great though, because it's not a tradeoff for safety, it's just a limit for safety. Instead, ward prices could be higher. But maybe having just a few wards shouldn't be that expensive. So wards could become more expensive the more you currently have. Or they could last shorter the more you have placed. Stuff like that.
Probably easier to implement in LoL: Limited number of cheap wards and unlimited expensive wards.
|
Sentry wards only see invisible units, and not regular (or is it in a smaller radius than regular wards?), if I recall well?
Personnally I'm fine with the complete information, having an opponent you felt you outplayed but who got lucky is one of the worst feelings I have when playing. And that way, if for example I ward my lane and still get ganked (because I tunnel-visioned and didn't see the jungler, because they timed/pink'd it and abused my blind window, etc.) well then it's my fault, a point I can work on, or a nice play by my opponents. I'm all for that. Less "guts", but more room for analysis and improvement of one's mechanics, I feel.
Regarding Olaf vs WW, I'd give a clear advantage to Olaf. He can build an exec calling for sustain (wriggles not as useful against WW) and basically screw WW everytime they trade, Olaf w/ sustain will put WW oom before he runs out of HP, he's hard to gank because of his ult while WW is still as gankable, and you can zone him and harass him early on.
|
Ward price could go up by a certain amount every time you buy one and the price could decay over time .-.
|
The bigger issue is the map is boring and can be covered with 4 wards rather stupidly.
|
On June 13 2012 22:56 spinesheath wrote:
True, a greater tradeoff for warding might be good for LoL. Limiting wards doesn't sound great though, because it's not a tradeoff for safety, it's just a limit for safety. Instead, ward prices could be higher. But maybe having just a few wards shouldn't be that expensive. So wards could become more expensive the more you currently have. Or they could last shorter the more you have placed. Stuff like that.
Probably easier to implement in LoL: Limited number of cheap wards and unlimited expensive wards.
Wards of varying durations for different costs also an option. i.e. 1 min ward for 30g. Would be nice for Lee 
|
On June 13 2012 22:31 TheYango wrote:
The thing is, regardless of how good you are, games of incomplete information will just feel unfair at times. It feels bad to get cheesed in SC. It feels bad to lose to a lucky River in Hold'em. It feels bad to get smoke ganked in DotA. Good matchmaking doesn't mean you see those situations less often. Sometimes, your opponent just lucks out. That incomplete information can also create great gameplay, but it's really up to the person whether you consider that tradeoff to be worthwhile. I don't think you can definitively say it's better one way or the other.
No, that's what I meant when I talked about ranges. If you lose to a 3% chance on the river, you know it was a 3% chance because you can do the math for it (actually it's not that easy since you have to do the math vs the enemy range). Same in SC or DotA.
If the support goes MIA what you called "star sense" earlier is nothing else than enough experience to do the math unconsciously. If he moves to gank mid 20% of the time, top 15% of the time and randomly runs to fountain 65% of the time you can actually do the math whether being super careful (and losing lasthits/xp in the process) is worth it or not. Now, because of the insane amount of variables in a game like SC/League/DotA/Poker it becomes incredibly hard to correctly judge those ranges and their possible outcomes.
However, people who literally spent thousands of hours in those situations tend to judge them more accurately. The difference between an actual professional and random Joe is that random Joe will give the actual outcome more weight than the theoretically correct outcome.
tl;dr: The more incomplete information (= the fewer information), the harder is it to judge and evaluate your decisions correctly. The area where decisions are so close to 50:50 that they won't matter in the long run becomes bigger. However, what we call "skill" when it comes to decison making is how good you are at distinguishing what is black/white/won't matter. That is what matchmaking is there to balance.
The best player in the world isn't right all the time. He is just right more often than the competition. What makes becoming good hard are good/bad streaks in the actual outcome. Just because a six sided dice rolled a two ten times in a row doesn't mean it's suddenly more profitable to bet on it rolling another two.
Similarly, just because the same decision led to a positive/negative outcome ten times in a row doesn't neccessarily mean it was a good/bad decision.
|
Every game I've ever lost I've had teammates doing badly therefore all my teammates are bad!
|
On June 13 2012 23:51 Slayer91 wrote:
Every game I've ever lost I've had teammates doing badly therefore all my teammates are bad!
Every time I saw you build Deathcap on Riven we won!
|
It's pretty legit riven sucks without a hat.
|
On June 13 2012 17:08 Shikyo wrote:
Some observations about Draven:
ASPD beyond zerkers seems to suck because it either gets wasted or interferes with the Q juggling, so I think PD is out of question or not optimal, or at least doesn't synergize with his skillset at all.
Gonna disagree with that. Get a PD and have blood rush up 24/7, eat everyone alive. Phantom dancer as a first item isn't great, but IE/PD still lets you wreck stuff like any other AD carry, only the added bonus is you can spam blood rush while eating into them. Let's you chase down people with Vayne ult like ferocity.
|
After playing Draven nonstop and tanking to 1.2k elo I realize that I can now win games by just last hitting and being 120 minions ahead by 20 mins... how does 200 elo make such a gigantic difference anyway? It's like night and day
And at above I don't think anything about PD synergizes all that well with that anyway, like what exactly makes PD superior to Triforce for Draven?
|
On June 14 2012 00:33 Shikyo wrote:
After playing Draven nonstop and tanking to 1.2k elo I realize that I can now win games by just last hitting and being 120 minions ahead by 20 mins... how does 200 elo make such a gigantic difference anyway? It's like night and day
And at above I don't think anything about PD synergizes all that well with that anyway, like what exactly makes PD superior to Triforce for Draven?
Having played as Draven and against Draven several times, I actually think a PD/IE Draven is pretty scary. Otherwise, I think he sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
