| Forum Index > Heroes of the Storm |
|
ETisME
12255 Posts
It's way too early to say anything since easy ai is really damn easy. Some points that you probably didn't know: Tank in siege mode can move slowly and does not have mount, it will have a booster instead (unlike mounts which needs time to summon, this one doesn't) Everyone has a passive. The recall ability is called heartstone. | ||
|
Jaaaaasper
United States10225 Posts
| ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
While I believe this can be worked out with cooldowns and its a very early stage, it cannot be that whirlwind in itself consumes whirlwind, has no cooldown and generates fury as well. Other than that, AI too easy, but fun game nonetheless. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On November 19 2013 13:15 danl9rm wrote: There are 2 heroes I really want to play right now. Techies and/or Abathur. Whichever comes first, I'm done with the other game. Abathur is ínteresting but I really dislike support. But I think he can work very well in the hands of a master supporter. He can assist any hero on the map (right now, just with stab, spikes and a shield) but his other abilities are not what I would call very useful. The toxic nest is meh and the locust isn't really that sick. But it might get better when he levels up. If anyone needs infos on heroes etc, I am happy to try out stuff and inform people | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On February 18 2014 15:40 ETisME wrote: I have found a way to play the alpha and some "hack" that lets me choose which hero to use against easy ai. It's way too early to say anything since easy ai is really damn easy. Some points that you probably didn't know: Tank in siege mode can move slowly and does not have mount, it will have a booster instead (unlike mounts which needs time to summon, this one doesn't) Everyone has a passive. The recall ability is called heartstone. The tank in siege mode cannot move. At least not in the alpha right now | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
On February 18 2014 15:43 Jaaaaasper wrote: It looks like a further dumbed down league of legends. I was hoping for something a bit more innovative or at least non traditional from blizzards take on the genre, but I was hoping for old blizzard, and forgot that we only have modern blizzard. You mean creating a game that is nothing like LoL or Dota is not innovating the genre ? Using different maps and objectives in a genre where until now we had just one map(and one objective) is traditional ? Cmon man... Sometimes I don't get it. Why so much hate towards one company ? | ||
|
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
On February 18 2014 19:24 Pr0wler wrote: You mean creating a game that is nothing like LoL or Dota is not innovating the genre ? Using different maps and objectives in a genre where until now we had just one map(and one objective) is traditional ? Cmon man... Sometimes I don't get it. Why so much hate towards one company ? Having less features than similar games isn't "innovative" at all. Not to mention there are plenty of DOTA-clones out there with the same mechanics already (no items, branching in-game progression, etc.). It's like saying Hearthstone is "innovative". It's highly accessible (compared to other online card games) and fun, but in terms of gameplay there isn't really anything new. That's what I expect from HotS. If the person you're responding to expected something else, then they should look elsewhere. P.S. people criticize Blizzard because they basically took two franchises and made them kind of a joke. Yeah D3 and SC2 sold alright but when you consider the legacy of the prequels, it's very hard to frame the performance and subsequent public receptions of the sequels as a success. | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
On February 18 2014 21:13 hariooo wrote: Having less features than similar games isn't "innovative" at all. Not to mention there are plenty of DOTA-clones out there with the same mechanics already (no items, branching in-game progression, etc.). It's like saying Hearthstone is "innovative". It's highly accessible (compared to other online card games) and fun, but in terms of gameplay there isn't really anything new. That's what I expect from HotS. If the person you're responding to expected something else, then they should look elsewhere. P.S. people criticize Blizzard because they basically took two franchises and made them kind of a joke. Yeah D3 and SC2 sold alright but when you consider the legacy of the prequels, it's very hard to frame the performance and subsequent public receptions of the sequels as a success. People also tend to forget that Blizzard brought the prequels to us. Without them, you would never had the joy of Starcraft and Diablo to begin with. | ||
|
greenelve
Germany1392 Posts
On February 18 2014 15:43 Jaaaaasper wrote: It looks like a further dumbed down league of legends. I was hoping for something a bit more innovative or at least non traditional from blizzards take on the genre, but I was hoping for old blizzard, and forgot that we only have modern blizzard. Thats how i feel since a while, looking at Blizzard games.  The only traditionel thing about Blizzard is, they keep sticking to their credo "gameplay > graphics". unfortunetely, the gameplay isnt that good either that it used to be. :/ | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
On February 18 2014 21:13 hariooo wrote: Having less features than similar games isn't "innovative" at all. Not to mention there are plenty of DOTA-clones out there with the same mechanics already (no items, branching in-game progression, etc.). It's like saying Hearthstone is "innovative". It's highly accessible (compared to other online card games) and fun, but in terms of gameplay there isn't really anything new. That's what I expect from HotS. If the person you're responding to expected something else, then they should look elsewhere. P.S. people criticize Blizzard because they basically took two franchises and made them kind of a joke. Yeah D3 and SC2 sold alright but when you consider the legacy of the prequels, it's very hard to frame the performance and subsequent public receptions of the sequels as a success. Where are those games ? If there are plenty of them I must know at least one... Unfortunately I don't. It's funny that you focus on the features that are missing, but not on the new ones. Whatever pleases you. | ||
|
Big G
Italy835 Posts
| ||
|
Striker.superfreunde
Germany1118 Posts
As latest example: Hearthstone is a classic blizzard game, cooperated with some stock market laws. Easy to learn, hard to master with damn good overall product value. Everybody who feels foolished by Blizzard in some way or an other should give it ( HotS ) at least a try...  | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10107 Posts
On February 18 2014 21:31 NarutO wrote: People also tend to forget that Blizzard brought the prequels to us. Without them, you would never had the joy of Starcraft and Diablo to begin with. People also tend to forget that what Blizzard has been doing since the very beginning was giving genres accessible titles. That's what they do and what they are good at. | ||
|
Yacobs
United States846 Posts
On February 18 2014 21:31 NarutO wrote: People also tend to forget that Blizzard brought the prequels to us. Without them, you would never had the joy of Starcraft and Diablo to begin with. Blizzard didn't do anything. The PEOPLE at Blizzard brought the prequels to us. Unfortunately for your argument, virtually none of the decision-making talent that created the original Diablos, Warcrafts, and Starcraft are at the company anymore. On February 19 2014 00:31 Godwrath wrote: People also tend to forget that what Blizzard has been doing since the very beginning was giving genres accessible titles. That's what they do and what they are good at. You're right. But YOU forget that when Blizzard started the industry was a different place. Nowadays all but the most indie of games are made to be as accessible as humanly possible. So when Blizzard continues this taking genres and making them more accessible they're effectively making things even dumber than they already are. All it takes is a cursory glance at Diablo 3 and the latest WoW expansions to see this loud and clear. | ||
|
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
On February 18 2014 22:34 Pr0wler wrote: Where are those games ? If there are plenty of them I must know at least one... Unfortunately I don't. It's funny that you focus on the features that are missing, but not on the new ones. Whatever pleases you. Dawngate. It's not your job to know all the mobas out there but not knowing them isn't an argument. So "unfortunately" you're just ignorant. There are no new "features". It's going to be like Hearthstone; it will have the most basic features of the genre and be highly accessible and generally fun. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17749 Posts
On February 19 2014 01:47 hariooo wrote: Dawngate. It's not your job to know all the mobas out there but not knowing them isn't an argument. So "unfortunately" you're just ignorant. There are no new "features". It's going to be like Hearthstone; it will have the most basic features of the genre and be highly accessible and generally fun. Oh... shudder. It's going to be a game that is fun. The horror!!! | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On February 18 2014 21:13 hariooo wrote: Having less features than similar games isn't "innovative" at all. Not to mention there are plenty of DOTA-clones out there with the same mechanics already (no items, branching in-game progression, etc.). It's like saying Hearthstone is "innovative". It's highly accessible (compared to other online card games) and fun, but in terms of gameplay there isn't really anything new. That's what I expect from HotS. If the person you're responding to expected something else, then they should look elsewhere. P.S. people criticize Blizzard because they basically took two franchises and made them kind of a joke. Yeah D3 and SC2 sold alright but when you consider the legacy of the prequels, it's very hard to frame the performance and subsequent public receptions of the sequels as a success. The hell do you mean "less features"? If you're talking about replays and shit: it's an alpha. If you're talking about jungling/denies and stuff, denies have been a horrible idea since their inception and they have a million more sub-objectives in the "jungle" in HoTS than any other DotA game. The reason why it's not, IMO, going to be a good game is that it focuses so much on teamwork. You live or die by the other members of your team much moreso than in any other DotA-esque game. Given the shared XP, no gold, and all of the group objectives, you can't carry a team of dumbs like you can in the other games. I really don't like that and it gives me a reason to avoid it. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10107 Posts
On February 19 2014 01:20 Yacobs wrote: You're right. But YOU forget that when Blizzard started the industry was a different place. Nowadays all but the most indie of games are made to be as accessible as humanly possible. So when Blizzard continues this taking genres and making them more accessible they're effectively making things even dumber than they already are. All it takes is a cursory glance at Diablo 3 and the latest WoW expansions to see this loud and clear. If anything, now they have even less reasons than ever to change their way to make games, if not to make them even more accessible. | ||
|
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
On February 19 2014 02:31 deth2munkies wrote: The hell do you mean "less features"? If you're talking about replays and shit: it's an alpha. If you're talking about jungling/denies and stuff, denies have been a horrible idea since their inception and they have a million more sub-objectives in the "jungle" in HoTS than any other DotA game. The reason why it's not, IMO, going to be a good game is that it focuses so much on teamwork. You live or die by the other members of your team much moreso than in any other DotA-esque game. Given the shared XP, no gold, and all of the group objectives, you can't carry a team of dumbs like you can in the other games. I really don't like that and it gives me a reason to avoid it. How did you turn a general comment regarding how HotS will almost certainly be one of the more simple, straightforward entries into the genre (ie as streamlined as possible without complicated or "innovative" features to confuse their playerbase) into a tirade against denies? I don't know who you're trying to argue against because it clearly isn't me. I'm going to play it because playing HotS with my more casual friends is going to be a much more lightweight and relaxing an experience than the DOTA we're currently playing. And if Hearthstone is any indication, the game itself will be fun enough so I don't really mind at all. | ||
|
willoc
Canada1530 Posts
So that's one (That most people haven't heard of). Where is the plenty more? Please back up your claim with some examples. | ||
| ||
|
|
LiuLi Cup
Clem vs Krystianer
Dark vs Jieshi
OSC
Solar vs Lemon
MaNa vs LunaSea
NightPhoenix vs DnS
HonMonO vs TBD
MindelVK vs TBD
OSC
The PondCast
Master's Coliseum
herO vs Reynor
MaxPax vs Serral
OSC
OSC
SOOP
Classic vs GuMiho
Master's Coliseum
Astrea vs TBD
GuMiho vs TBD
H.4.0.S
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
