Dota 2 : Dota Harder

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Jesse » Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:24 am UTC

Right, because that's how games work. I mean, SC2 is absolutely nothing but maths based on imperfect information (Since you can't see the whole map, same as in DotA/LoL). What point were you trying to make with that statement?

User avatar
Kag
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:56 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Kag » Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:13 pm UTC

That you don't have imperfect information when denying. You can't not know that your opponents are doing something that would make denying a bad idea.

Also, obviously that's not true of all games.
The Great Hippo wrote:I am starting to regret having used 'goat-fucker' in this context.

User avatar
Will
There are about a million things I can do from behind
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:12 pm UTC
Location: St. Heraldwulf's Stone
Contact:

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Will » Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:37 pm UTC

You don't have imperfect information in Chess, either. Do you suggest that Chess does not have strategy?
Meaux_Pas: Is it fucking Taint Sunday or something?
liza: Screw y'all, I'm going to the moon

User avatar
Adam H
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 6:36 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Adam H » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:39 pm UTC

Kag wrote:That you don't have imperfect information when denying. You can't not know that your opponents are doing something that would make denying a bad idea.
Uh, you never know what your opponents are going to do next, and they often are capable of doing things that make denying/last-hitting a bad idea.
-Adam

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:37 pm UTC

Zcorp wrote:Until you understand all the pieces in chess and how they move and interact I'd hardly call you a playing it to just move pieces around and hope it works out and that they are legal. In much the same way I'd say you aren't really playing dota until you have a strong understanding of the game rules, game board and game pieces. Until then you are just learning to play it.


I think here we'd totally disagree.

How many people truly know complex interactions of those chess pieces, how many people Actually know 400+ Hero abilities, how many people actually know 300 SC2 Build orders to the closest 5 seconds?

Virtually none.

That doesn't mean people aren't playing the game, they're just not playing it at a competitive level. Most people could play any of those games for years and STILL not know.

You can absolutlely play DotA with very little previous knowledge and be perfectly fine, I think you could easily be in the top 50% of player skill without ever learning all those abilities an items, just knowing a few important ones to you and adapting as you go. It's just not that complicated.

My group of friends brought me into DotA 2, I had never played original DotA.

My instructions were 'Play Sniper, You try to get the final hit on each of those creeps and you can hit your own to prevent the other team from getting it. Just buy the recommended items and don't chase your opponent, stay in the middle lane for now'
That's it, and that was plenty.
About halfway through the first game I had learned the courier, item stats, and read each skill for both my own team and opposing team and finished with more kills than deaths.

Had I mastered it after 1 game? No, of course not. But was I playing the game, yes of course I was. And I can go queue up games where not 1 of the 10 people in the game know by heart the abilities everyone else has, and It's still perfectly fine.

I don't even think that's a very low level, I'd be willing to bet 2 out of 3 DotA 2 players could not name all 110 Heros by sight let alone tell you their abilties.

When I say daunting to brand new player, I mean Game #1. Counter-Strike Makes sense the first moment you see it. You Shoot Them, They Shoot You. You control one guy and you have 1 primary action. Perfecting it would take years, but you can totally play it in seconds.

Compare that to Civilization 4. If you had no prior experience and someone just gave you that game...You'd have no concept of what to do. There's elaborate tutorials on what to do and hints and tips throughout because they know its not intuitive.

Christophoros wrote:Here is where I beg to differ. I would expect most relatively experienced players (maybe 500+ games?) to know every hero's abilities instinctively, along with a rough knowledge of range, time delays on casting and ways that they combo. Even middling players (maybe 250+ games) will know this for the most commonly played heroes. Learning the tactics to counter those abilities, especially the way two hero's abilities work together, takes a lot longer.


I don't think this is a beg to differ thing..I think it's a vast perception difference in who 'most people' are. I say Most pople don't know all abilities...you say most people over 500 games played would know....Fuck I would hope so. They have a learning disability if they don't.

250+ Games of LoL or DotA is not a 'middling player' That's a pretty commited player, those games take like an hour each. 500 Games of DotA is 5 times the amount of time I've spent in Skyrim

What % of LoL and DotA players do you think have clocked in at even over 100 games?

I think we're just talking about some very different things.

User avatar
Christophoros
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:01 pm UTC
Location: The realm of the undead
Contact:

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Christophoros » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:04 pm UTC

Iceman wrote:
Christophoros wrote:Here is where I beg to differ. I would expect most relatively experienced players (maybe 500+ games?) to know every hero's abilities instinctively, along with a rough knowledge of range, time delays on casting and ways that they combo. Even middling players (maybe 250+ games) will know this for the most commonly played heroes. Learning the tactics to counter those abilities, especially the way two hero's abilities work together, takes a lot longer.


I don't think this is a beg to differ thing..I think it's a vast perception difference in who 'most people' are. I say Most pople don't know all abilities...you say most people over 500 games played would know....Fuck I would hope so. They have a learning disability if they don't.

250+ Games of LoL or DotA is not a 'middling player' That's a pretty commited player, those games take like an hour each. 500 Games of DotA is 5 times the amount of time I've spent in Skyrim

What % of LoL and DotA players do you think have clocked in at even over 100 games?

As you may know, LoL has a between-game levelling system. Each game, win or lose, grants you some XP. Get enough XP, and you level up, getting access to minor boosts. Choosing which of these boosts to take on which heroes is another layer of depth, but ignore that for a second. Cap is level 30.

You are deemed to be an experienced player when you reach level 30. That takes roughly 350 games, assuming a slightly weighted win:loss ratio. So yes, I would say that a 250 game player is middling in experience, and a 500+ game player is experienced.

You would be seriously surprised how many games people clock up. I have 2000+, and am VERY rarely the player with the most.

Wow. Assuming 45 mins per game, that's... more than two months of solid play. OK, I had not realised that until now. I'm going to go cry.
"Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake."

"Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement."

Never Forget

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:41 pm UTC

Ya, I am familiar with the LoL leveling system, but I think being someone who is level 30, your view of the game is...other people who are level 30.

The vast majority of players won't ever actually play that many games. I know experienced people do play tons more, I've got about 7000 SC2 games played. But I also realize that after doing that I apparently outrank 96% of the other players on the Ladder.

When I play ladder matches, if I look at my opponents, they will also have thousands of games played but that's because I'm never going to to be playing a Platinum or below player...but like 85% of people are Platinum and below. And if a player down there in skill did play that many games, odds are they wouldn't know some things I take for granted that people just know.

So I think you'll find most LoL people actually never hit 30.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 833
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby DaBigCheez » Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:08 pm UTC

Iceman wrote:Ya, I am familiar with the LoL leveling system, but I think being someone who is level 30, your view of the game is...other people who are level 30.

The vast majority of players won't ever actually play that many games.

Idle musing: I'd agree that the median player is probably below level 30 in terms of "all accounts ever created that have played at least one game"; I'd be interested to see whether level 30 players make up more or less total-hours-played-per-day than sub-30 players, even if sub-30 players outnumber them 10:1, simply because said players played a couple games eight months ago and never logged in again. (Same goes for DotA and DotA 2, though less so with HoN due to the buy-in cost.)
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Zcorp » Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:34 pm UTC

Kag wrote: Anyway, you're missing the point, which is that it is an observable fact that depth doesn't scare away casual players. Whether or not you call that accessibility is totally irrelevant.
No, you are missing my point. I'm disagreeing with your point, because it is wrong. Complexity or depth pushes away casual engagement of anything. In every observable activity you do not find people doing complex things if they are passionate about it or good at it.

By the way, what's a situation where being able to deny lets you make a strategic decision?

On top of what as already been stated, denying or not allows you to exert some control over the position of where the creeps meet in the lane.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 833
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby DaBigCheez » Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:52 pm UTC

Zcorp wrote:Complexity or depth pushes away casual engagement of anything.

I don't really agree with everything Kag's saying here, but I take issue with this statement.

Go is not particularly complex. It is quite deep. It can be played casually.
Chess is more complex than Go, but is still quite simple mechanically relative to something like DotA 2 or LoL. It is still quite deep. It is a popular casually-played game.

Complexity and depth are simply not the same thing, and it is the complexity, as a barrier to entry, that pushes away new players, not the depth. A game can be deep without being complex. I am not certain whether a game can be complex without being deep, but I suspect that it can.

LoL may well be less deep than DotA 2, but the arguments made simply from mechanical complexity do not support that.

I am also incredibly unsurprised that a thread relating to a game in the genre has been derailed by a comparison to another game in the genre, wherein those who prefer one or the other come in to defend their choice as the objectively superior game. It is something of a tired pattern; those who prefer DotA probably don't need to spend their energies smugly looking down on LoL, and those who prefer LoL probably don't need to come in here and angrily point out that LoL is not Chutes and Ladders. I realize I'm guilty of this as well with some of my previous posting.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Thu Jan 03, 2013 9:14 pm UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:
Iceman wrote:Ya, I am familiar with the LoL leveling system, but I think being someone who is level 30, your view of the game is...other people who are level 30.

The vast majority of players won't ever actually play that many games.

Idle musing: I'd agree that the median player is probably below level 30 in terms of "all accounts ever created that have played at least one game"; I'd be interested to see whether level 30 players make up more or less total-hours-played-per-day than sub-30 players, even if sub-30 players outnumber them 10:1, simply because said players played a couple games eight months ago and never logged in again. (Same goes for DotA and DotA 2, though less so with HoN due to the buy-in cost.)


I think you'd be almost 100:1 if you counted people like that, but yes, I bet the total of 30+ games might rival people who do play a lot.

There's something like 80 million LoL accounts, I've got to think 70+ million of those are basically done playing. But I think even in those millions left, you've probably only got several hundred thousand who are 30+ and playing Ranked games.

Is there a ranking site for LoL like SC2ranks? Like do people know how many people are like, Atleast Gold ELO? I think in most games only like 5% of people who play it end up gettin really into it.

Zcorp wrote:
Kag wrote:
Anyway, you're missing the point, which is that it is an observable fact that depth doesn't scare away casual players. Whether or not you call that accessibility is totally irrelevant.
No, you are missing my point. I'm disagreeing with your point, because it is wrong. Complexity or depth pushes away casual engagement of anything. In every observable activity you do not find people doing complex things if they are passionate about it or good at it.


I think you are just disagreeing on terms. Depth itself wouldn't generally deter people, but Up-front complexity might.
LoL/DotA depth becomes more apparent the more you play, but part of the reason it's so appealing to casuals is the entry into it is very smooth, its not complex, its not daunting, but the more you play and learn the more you appreciate.

Something like and RTS, there's just a but more to know, there's more moving parts you need to control, there's an economy you need to manage and so on, when getting a brand new players into it, there's a lot of conceptual things you need to explain and then they're good to go.

Compare it to Dwarf Fortress you'd take a day or more just explaining the game to people, its dauntingly complex and not friendly to beginners.

I don't think its just the depth, but the speed you must know how much of that depth in order to even play it, and I think that's the accessability of it.

I think it might be gamespot, I haven't seen this in quite some time but I know one of the major game reviewers always gave both a rating score and had a category called 'Learning Curve' which was their estimate of how long you'd be playing it before you were at a point where you'd playing a semi-reasonable game.
I think you'd find for a Platformer you're like 10 minutes, a MOBA you're like 1-2 Hours, an RTS like 4-6 hours, something like Civilization like 8+ hours and so on. Not to be playing WELL, but just actually playing a game where it doesn't feel like you're in the tutorial anymore.

User avatar
DaBigCheez
Posts: 833
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby DaBigCheez » Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:02 pm UTC

The problem that arises, of course, being that while you're in that "figuring out the controls and gaining basic competence" stage, you're being stomped into the dirt by more experienced players laughing about your lack of ability while your teammates yell at you and berate you for "ruining the game" and threaten to report you to the relevant authorities. Even playing in bot games, where they exist, alleviates this a lot less than one might think.

I do think there is more up-front complexity to a game like DotA than you're giving it credit for; between essentially needing to look up the new set of champions in the game at the start of every match, trying to get used to the item shop (usual reaction from even players experienced in one MOBA going to another = "WTF is all this crap?"), and learning the particle effects takes substantial time - and perhaps even more importantly, the appearance of so many things that one has to become familiar with ("what are all these particle effects going off in a teamfight? which one of these hundred items am I supposed to buy? why? why am I invisible now?") can be daunting to a newer player.

And you can see this, as much as anything, by the efforts of game designers to remove the "wall of text" factor. Recommended item builds. Death screens that show the abilities used against you and what they do. Paring down the list off all the heroes/champions to a subset you can play (in games with a rotating set of free champions). They're effectively tutorials, and in many cases they serve by reducing the amount of available information, unless the player chooses to look deeper, much like the managers/advisors in Civ games. They exist because the game designers realized there was a need for them - because the sheer amount of information presented up-front otherwise can cause new players to go "screw this, I don't know what I'm doing and it'd be way too much effort to figure all this crap out".

I'd agree that you can be moving around, right-clicking your creeps, getting some gold, doing some denies, avoiding dying to towers, and so on within a game or two. However, this seems to me more like setting up an advancing pawn wall, then being shocked when your opponent moves a knight past it because "wait, they can do that?" And the pieces are replaced by an entirely new set each game, except for the pawns...the analogy's a bit of a stretch, but there's an element of re-learning that has to be done each game until you've learned all the heroes/champions that simply isn't there in a game like chess. Or, alternately, it's like playing Twilight Imperium without knowing the tech tree because there's too much stuff there to look at - you can move your pieces around, you can go for objectives, but you're gonna be surprised when someone pulls moves you thought were impossible because you haven't learned them yet.

I guess we may be talking about different levels of competence for basic play, here. A chess beginner who knows all the pieces will get destroyed by a halfway-experienced player until they learn about things like scholar's mate; a DotA beginner who knows the controls will get stomped on by experienced players until they stop buying a boot for each foot. The problem is that, by the nature of MOBA matchmaking, the DotA beginner is much less likely to have an environment in which to play against other beginners and learn the ropes, and the extremely toxic communities (which I believe emerge as a result of the basic nature of the games) will typically discourage them from trying to claw their way past the knowledge cliff to where they can reasonably start to compete. Bot games help, but if I was told up-front "oh, yeah, you should probably play in the tutorial mode for about 50 hours before you're ready to play for real, but don't worry, it gets really good after you put the time in", I'd make a snarky comment about Final Fantasy 13 and find something else to play.
existential_elevator wrote:It's like a jigsaw puzzle of Hitler pissing on Mother Theresa. No individual piece is offensive, but together...

If you think hot women have it easy because everyone wants to have sex at them, you're both wrong and also the reason you're wrong.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Zcorp » Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:34 am UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:Go is not particularly complex. It is quite deep. It can be played casually.
? Go is quite certainly complex, and do you honestly see people casually playing Go? You see people just kind of pick it up whenever when they are bored and go for a game? You know, akin to how people casually play whatever other game they are playing on their device like Angry Birds?

Chess is more complex than Go, but is still quite simple mechanically relative to something like DotA 2 or LoL. It is still quite deep. It is a popular casually-played game.
Maybe the problem is my more technical usage of what casual means in the game industry. However, Chess is certainly complex, like Go the arrangement of pieces has an intricate relationship on other pieces and the game in general. Chess is more accessibile than Go in that there are less barriers toward learning and playing the game.

LoL may well be less deep than DotA 2, but the arguments made simply from mechanical complexity do not support that.
The added mechanics are not the primary reason why Dota is more complex, it is just one example of it. The reason dota is more complex is that these added mechanics plus greater variance in game pieces and a game board with more depth all add it up it being more complex.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Fri Jan 04, 2013 8:33 am UTC

DaBigCheez wrote:I do think there is more up-front complexity to a game like DotA than you're giving it credit for; between essentially needing to look up the new set of champions in the game at the start of every match, trying to get used to the item shop (usual reaction from even players experienced in one MOBA going to another = "WTF is all this crap?"), and learning the particle effects takes substantial time - and perhaps even more importantly, the appearance of so many things that one has to become familiar with ("what are all these particle effects going off in a teamfight? which one of these hundred items am I supposed to buy? why? why am I invisible now?") can be daunting to a newer player.


While I agree that the large knowledge requirement is a major accessibility issue for DotA, I think it's an equally large problem that a lot of things taken for granted in DotA are completely unintuitive and arbitrary. When your problem is "there are a lot of items and I don't know what they do", at least it's straightforward to solve - you know it's just a matter of reading up or experimenting with them until you can remember. "Don't attack enemy creeps", on the other hand, is a concept which is simply bizarre to a lot of new players - how many other games are there where it's considered a sound strategy to deliberately get your allies killed while trying to avoid damaging enemies?

ebbitten
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby ebbitten » Mon Jan 07, 2013 2:25 am UTC

I just got a bunch of dota 2 game's to give out as gifts from steam.
If you want one just end me a pm

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:09 pm UTC

EmptySet wrote:
DaBigCheez wrote:I do think there is more up-front complexity to a game like DotA than you're giving it credit for; between essentially needing to look up the new set of champions in the game at the start of every match, trying to get used to the item shop (usual reaction from even players experienced in one MOBA going to another = "WTF is all this crap?"), and learning the particle effects takes substantial time - and perhaps even more importantly, the appearance of so many things that one has to become familiar with ("what are all these particle effects going off in a teamfight? which one of these hundred items am I supposed to buy? why? why am I invisible now?") can be daunting to a newer player.


While I agree that the large knowledge requirement is a major accessibility issue for DotA, I think it's an equally large problem that a lot of things taken for granted in DotA are completely unintuitive and arbitrary. When your problem is "there are a lot of items and I don't know what they do", at least it's straightforward to solve - you know it's just a matter of reading up or experimenting with them until you can remember. "Don't attack enemy creeps", on the other hand, is a concept which is simply bizarre to a lot of new players - how many other games are there where it's considered a sound strategy to deliberately get your allies killed while trying to avoid damaging enemies?


It may seem bizarre because they never thought about it, but its not really that counter intuitive.

I get gold for hitting the enemy creep last...and so does my opponent. If I have the ability to stop my opponent from hitting them last... that sounds good, I'm depriving him of Gold. Now you may not innately be aware you're allowed to do it, but as soon as you see it happen or someone tells you, it should be obvious why you do it.

Same with avoiding damaging and controlling the pushes. You might not think of it first thing, but it should occur to you quite quickly that it's better to fight near your own towers.

I think a couple games in I mentally re-oriented to think of creeps as resources instead of allies/enemies. I Want the enemy team's resources to come to my side so itcan be harvested, and I don't want my resources to go to their side unless I plan to get immediate benefit.

Again though I think some of these things are barriers to player becoming GOOD at the game, you don't need to know particle effects and stuff to play it, and you can just buy your recommended items and then read a few things as you go.

Is it as easy as Pac-Man? No. But I also don't think its as complicated as Company of Heroes which has like a 9 mission tutorial, or Dwarf Fortress which you just can't play until you know way more.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:32 am UTC

Iceman wrote:
EmptySet wrote:
DaBigCheez wrote:I do think there is more up-front complexity to a game like DotA than you're giving it credit for; between essentially needing to look up the new set of champions in the game at the start of every match, trying to get used to the item shop (usual reaction from even players experienced in one MOBA going to another = "WTF is all this crap?"), and learning the particle effects takes substantial time - and perhaps even more importantly, the appearance of so many things that one has to become familiar with ("what are all these particle effects going off in a teamfight? which one of these hundred items am I supposed to buy? why? why am I invisible now?") can be daunting to a newer player.


While I agree that the large knowledge requirement is a major accessibility issue for DotA, I think it's an equally large problem that a lot of things taken for granted in DotA are completely unintuitive and arbitrary. When your problem is "there are a lot of items and I don't know what they do", at least it's straightforward to solve - you know it's just a matter of reading up or experimenting with them until you can remember. "Don't attack enemy creeps", on the other hand, is a concept which is simply bizarre to a lot of new players - how many other games are there where it's considered a sound strategy to deliberately get your allies killed while trying to avoid damaging enemies?


It may seem bizarre because they never thought about it, but its not really that counter intuitive.

I get gold for hitting the enemy creep last...and so does my opponent. If I have the ability to stop my opponent from hitting them last... that sounds good, I'm depriving him of Gold. Now you may not innately be aware you're allowed to do it, but as soon as you see it happen or someone tells you, it should be obvious why you do it.

Same with avoiding damaging and controlling the pushes. You might not think of it first thing, but it should occur to you quite quickly that it's better to fight near your own towers.


Yes, it's possible to deduce why you should attack your own creeps in Dota with a bit of thought. However, this is nowhere near as intuitive as "the other guys are The Enemy and must be destroyed" or "I should keep these guys alive, because they attack the enemy players but not me!" Also, while you may think of creeps as resources, in a lot of cases they are allies - they help you push towers, and early game they offer some protection from enemy players because they retaliate if you are attacked. It's easy to see how people could make that mistake, especially when it wouldn't be a mistake in the vast majority of other games.

gorbysantos
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:52 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby gorbysantos » Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:55 am UTC

And if you've never ever ever played anything like that type of map, obviously you're still a novice.

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:05 pm UTC

EmptySet wrote:Yes, it's possible to deduce why you should attack your own creeps in Dota with a bit of thought. However, this is nowhere near as intuitive as "the other guys are The Enemy and must be destroyed" or "I should keep these guys alive, because they attack the enemy players but not me!" Also, while you may think of creeps as resources, in a lot of cases they are allies - they help you push towers, and early game they offer some protection from enemy players because they retaliate if you are attacked. It's easy to see how people could make that mistake, especially when it wouldn't be a mistake in the vast majority of other games.


Ya, I get that its not the most automatic idea people would have, but its also not a baffling or confusing idea. I think most people presented with the idea that you can deny your own creeps would pretty quickly be able to figure out why you would do that.

Continuing with the PacMan comparison it's probably not much more counter intuitive than chasing ghosts after you Consume a large Pellet to eat them...or turning directly towards a Ghost because you know its coding will make it turn before it reaches you.

It's not the most simple game ever, but its not that confusing a concept either. There's simpler stuff in games and there's much more complicated stuff in games too.

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Jan 09, 2013 4:57 pm UTC

Played a game yesterday thanks to the generous donation of a key from ebbitten.

As a former hardcore dota player for years, I was dissappointed. It was mainly the graphics. Its an odd smeared/smudged style. I could not recognize a single hero unless I zoomed in or clicked on them to get the hero name (and I still remember all the heros and their abilities). But I laned against Slark and another hero and there was no real graphical difference between them... it was liking watching Ants.
I tried several different settings and it didn't change, although I didn't try something crazy small like 600X400. This was also true of the Neutrals, i remembered all of them, but they if you attack the Satyr... the 3 neutrals look exactly the same except for size.

I attacked the Ogers once and there was no real difference between the shaman and the warriors except for the feintest blue tint that I noticed after about 10 seconds of fighting.

Even the Terrain, the stairs or entry points from River to jungle is completely 'smeared' and I was moving on memory alone since there was NO obvious graphical differnece between river wall and connector.



Gameplay was the same, the enemy were all noobs, and we crushed them.
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Menacing Spike » Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:56 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:It was mainly the graphics. Its an odd smeared/smudged style.


My god you would dislike HoN. It's this with a few more orders of magnitude.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:36 am UTC

Ixtellor wrote:I attacked the Ogers once and there was no real difference between the shaman and the warriors except for the feintest blue tint that I noticed after about 10 seconds of fighting.

Even the Terrain, the stairs or entry points from River to jungle is completely 'smeared' and I was moving on memory alone since there was NO obvious graphical differnece between river wall and connector.


The ogres? Really? One of them is bright blue and the other is bright orange. I've never had a problem telling them apart.

I also don't have any issues with with the river wall / stairs, different kinds of satyr, or most heroes. What resolution and screen size are you using?

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Ixtellor » Thu Jan 10, 2013 1:58 pm UTC

I will mess around with my settings and see if it improves.

But I watched a lot of gameplay videos.

In Dota 1 Juggernaut is bright blue, you can see the skulls around his neck, you can see his tusks/bone in nose, Banner with writing on it... lots of details to let you know in .00001 seconds (This is Juggernaut!).

In Dota 2 Juggernaut is brown with a white head. Rexxar... Brown. Tauren... Brown.

In dota 1 the lines are sharper than in dota 2. This makes no sense. Dota 2 should be dota 1 in Hi-Def not fuzzy...
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:54 am UTC

Ixtellor wrote:I will mess around with my settings and see if it improves.

But I watched a lot of gameplay videos.

In Dota 1 Juggernaut is bright blue, you can see the skulls around his neck, you can see his tusks/bone in nose, Banner with writing on it... lots of details to let you know in .00001 seconds (This is Juggernaut!).

In Dota 2 Juggernaut is brown with a white head. Rexxar... Brown. Tauren... Brown.

In dota 1 the lines are sharper than in dota 2. This makes no sense. Dota 2 should be dota 1 in Hi-Def not fuzzy...


It's inevitable that some heroes will be the same colour when there are so many of them. If he were bright blue it'd be worse, if anything - there are a tonne of blue heroes, including Lich, Ancient Apparition, Spirit Breaker, Zeus, Sven, Morphling, Wisp, Storm Spirit, etc.

Also, for what it's worth, I never got into the original Dota and find watching video of it headache-inducing. Everything is a dingy, muddy, low-resolution mess, I can't tell who any of the heroes are, the animations are terrible, and I have difficulty distinguishing heroes from creeps. Maybe you just need to give it some time to get used to the new designs? I know quite a few of the heroes look very different in Dota 2.

As far as graphic settings go, I if you want sharper lines I'd suggest disabling you start by disabling specular bloom, world lighting, fog, and maybe antialiasing, and go from there. Disabling high-quality water will also make the water/land transition sharper, though I'm not certain it will be any help in distinguishing the stairs from impassible banks.

ebbitten
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby ebbitten » Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:39 pm UTC

I still do have a bunch of keys left if anyone else wants one.

User avatar
WarDaft
Posts: 1583
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:16 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby WarDaft » Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:50 pm UTC

Complexity and depth are simply not the same thing, and it is the complexity, as a barrier to entry, that pushes away new players, not the depth. A game can be deep without being complex. I am not certain whether a game can be complex without being deep, but I suspect that it can.


Trivially true. Consider a non-simultaneous RPS variant with 10,000 different kinds of moves, and each having point changes relating to others rather than simple win/loss. A simple lookup table can tell you what the ideal counter to any opponent move is. However if we assign the score changes randomly amongst the moves then, by any reasonable definition of complex, the game is hideously complex for a new player. Or any human player at all.

On the other hand, look at Go. Inarguable depth, but simple rules. In fact I've heard new player advice to not consciously look for complex patterns, because their subconscious is better. That they should have a feel for the game rather than a plan, at least at first. And consider the system of Handicaps in Go... even in fairly mismatched games a few pre-placed stones or some compensation points can go a long ways to evening up the match.
All Shadow priest spells that deal Fire damage now appear green.
Big freaky cereal boxes of death.

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:05 pm UTC

I'm curious what people think of DotaBuff adding DBR, an ELO rating system.

The majority voted that they'd want it, but the subreddit seems to be having a shit fit over it and don't want rankings visible.

I'm all for it since I like competition, I'm curious what people think.

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:24 pm UTC

I am all for it.

It will help shut up a lot of people in game.

That guy screaming at you all game for feeding.... look up his ELO see its a 900.

Or some guy screaming at you with a 2500 ELO --- "Oh, I better listen".

So I think its useful for putting people in their place and how much you should consider their criticisms and/or tips.
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
eculc
Wet Peanut Butter
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:25 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby eculc » Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:52 pm UTC

Ixtellor wrote:I am all for it.

It will help shut up a lot of people in game.

That guy screaming at you all game for feeding.... look up his ELO see its a 900.

Or some guy screaming at you with a 2500 ELO --- "Oh, I better listen".

So I think its useful for putting people in their place and how much you should consider their criticisms and/or tips.


the problem is...that guy with a 900? It's possible he just got an unlucky streak and got paired up with players that didn't know what they were doing, and the reverse is true of that guy with a 2500. now, obviously that's a bit extreme given the numbers you have, but the premise is the same. It serves more to be a catalyst for "STFU N00B UR 0NLY A 990 AND IMA 1015 SO IM BETR AND U SUK" than anything else.
Um, this post feels devoid of content. Good luck?
For comparison, that means that if the cabbage guy from Avatar: The Last Airbender filled up his cart with lettuce instead, it would be about a quarter of a lethal dose.

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:07 pm UTC

They did say they'd need a sample size of 25 to 50 games before giving a rating. You're not going to get that unlucky or lucky.

And if I got stuck with 4 900 players but the other team was say, 1100 I could carry against the entire team and still win. If you're actually several hundred points ahead you should just be able to carry it.

Yeah, its not going to be as accurate as say, SC2 1v1 MMR...but it'll be pretty reasonable I think.

And while it does lead to people smack talking, they already do that with 'I'm '14-8 KD this game and you're 9-7, you suck!' People who are abusive are abusive, this may be the new thing they say, but they were gonna be a douche anyway.

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Menacing Spike » Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:28 am UTC

It's not gonna happen anyway. See latest update.

FYI, I was against it - this sort of thing is just a tool used to dismiss other people in games whence it is implemented (WoW, HoN and such). Also, unlike in chess and such, it does not makes sense, Dota 2 being a team game.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:42 am UTC

Ixtellor wrote:I am all for it.

It will help shut up a lot of people in game.

That guy screaming at you all game for feeding.... look up his ELO see its a 900.

Or some guy screaming at you with a 2500 ELO --- "Oh, I better listen".

So I think its useful for putting people in their place and how much you should consider their criticisms and/or tips.


I don't think it would help shut anyone up - I already regularly see people blaming the rest of the team when they have the least kills, most deaths, least assists, no support items, etc. etc. etc. It's also not difficult to find complaints that people have become stuck in "matchmaking hell" (ie. they keep losing even though they are awesome because they get terrible teammates, which lowers their matchmaking rank, which results in them getting more terrible teammates).

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:24 pm UTC

EmptySet wrote:
Ixtellor wrote:I am all for it.

It will help shut up a lot of people in game.

That guy screaming at you all game for feeding.... look up his ELO see its a 900.

Or some guy screaming at you with a 2500 ELO --- "Oh, I better listen".

So I think its useful for putting people in their place and how much you should consider their criticisms and/or tips.


I don't think it would help shut anyone up - I already regularly see people blaming the rest of the team when they have the least kills, most deaths, least assists, no support items, etc. etc. etc. It's also not difficult to find complaints that people have become stuck in "matchmaking hell" (ie. they keep losing even though they are awesome because they get terrible teammates, which lowers their matchmaking rank, which results in them getting more terrible teammates).


This is kind of why I think it would have actually helped. So many people are rude and act like they're awesome, and they must be getting matched with bad people and stuff...but that's usually garbage.

Actually making it display your skill can shatter that delusion. If you're 1200, I bet your teammates are damn near 1200, and I bet in 4/5 games you're not the best on your team.

I look at the ratings as some form of feedback, i can't imagine playing a game like this long term and have zero way to tell how good I am objectively. Some games I can be like 31-2 others just get pounded 2-13...But i dunno the rank of the other people or myself, I dunno if I just did bad or everyone was better, I dunno If I had the breathing room to farm because my Bottom lane Support was 2150 ELO...or that their Pudge was 950 and he missed every hook, I didn't dodge it.

I don't understand the iea of an individual ranking not working because it's a 'team game'. Can people not detect that LeBron James is better than me? Don't we know Dendi seems better than us as DotA?
If the teams are basically random, over a long term we can see if the individual being on the team caused it to be more likely to win or not, it would be fairly accurate.

Valve's MMR does this, isn't just a matter of taking the info and recreating it, but they have kind of ruined that now.

I am quite competitive in this type of game, and not having any sense of rank or skill level really reduces a lot of interest I have in the game.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby EmptySet » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:59 am UTC

Iceman wrote:
EmptySet wrote:
Ixtellor wrote:I am all for it.

It will help shut up a lot of people in game.

That guy screaming at you all game for feeding.... look up his ELO see its a 900.

Or some guy screaming at you with a 2500 ELO --- "Oh, I better listen".

So I think its useful for putting people in their place and how much you should consider their criticisms and/or tips.


I don't think it would help shut anyone up - I already regularly see people blaming the rest of the team when they have the least kills, most deaths, least assists, no support items, etc. etc. etc. It's also not difficult to find complaints that people have become stuck in "matchmaking hell" (ie. they keep losing even though they are awesome because they get terrible teammates, which lowers their matchmaking rank, which results in them getting more terrible teammates).


This is kind of why I think it would have actually helped. So many people are rude and act like they're awesome, and they must be getting matched with bad people and stuff...but that's usually garbage.

Actually making it display your skill can shatter that delusion. If you're 1200, I bet your teammates are damn near 1200, and I bet in 4/5 games you're not the best on your team.


Nah. People are aware that the matchmaking system ranks people by skill, even though it's not displayed. If it were displayed, they'd just use the exact same rationalisation to brush it off - "The only reason my rank is low is because I always get @#*$%& teammates who get me killed!"

I don't understand the iea of an individual ranking not working because it's a 'team game'. Can people not detect that LeBron James is better than me? Don't we know Dendi seems better than us as DotA?
If the teams are basically random, over a long term we can see if the individual being on the team caused it to be more likely to win or not, it would be fairly accurate.


I don't think people are saying that individual ranks are completely inaccurate because it's a team game, just that they have a much wider margin of error and take a lot longer to reach a good approximation than in 1v1 games, which can be an issue given how much people tend to freak out over small differences in rank.

I am quite competitive in this type of game, and not having any sense of rank or skill level really reduces a lot of interest I have in the game.


Have you looked into joining a league?

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Jesse » Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:27 pm UTC

I'd like it if they introduced a public MMR system for pre-made teams. So if you're just arsing around in pubs you don't get that problem, but when playing with my full team we can get a sense of how we're progressing.

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Menacing Spike » Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:53 pm UTC

Jesse wrote:I'd like it if they introduced a public MMR system for pre-made teams. So if you're just arsing around in pubs you don't get that problem, but when playing with my full team we can get a sense of how we're progressing.


Yes. If they implemented this my reservations would drop faster than the pants of an anti-gay politician alone with a male intern. This fixes the ego problem, you also get a number that actually makes sense (instead of "luck with Russian distribution rating"), etc.

Iceman
Posts: 667
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:41 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Iceman » Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:16 pm UTC

An MMR with a team would be nice,

But it doesn't actually tell you how you're doing as an individual. I get the play some DotA with Professional SC2 players sometimes..I'm sure our Team rating would be Diamond...but I am silver.

You're just deluding yourself the other way then.

As for individual ranks being more inaccurate....mmm..mildly, it might take more games to get a good ranking. But if you were ranked Gold and playing with Bronzes, you should singlehandedly be able to carry your team. If you're within like 100-200 points, you might be dragged down by someone really bad, but that will average out.

If you're considerably better, you'll just cause the team to win, that's kind of the point of it. Your ELO is 'The W/L Impact you have when placed with 9 random people'

Most people won't have a consistent 5 person team to play with either.

And it becomes much more difficult to rationalize being low ranked because of 'bad teammates' when you can visibly see them outranking you. Mental Gymnastics will still happen, but you'll also get some people who would just realize their place in the world and stop being so dickish.

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Zcorp » Sun Feb 24, 2013 3:18 am UTC

Still have quite a few passes to give out of anyone wants any. Happy to teach as well for any new players.

OklahomaJoe
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:42 am UTC

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby OklahomaJoe » Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:57 pm UTC

Interesting news on the Dota 2 front: the Swedish channel TV6 is going to be broadcasting The International 3 this year, as well as streaming it on their website. I've heard of and even attended "BarCraft," during GSL seasons in StarCraft II, but this is the first I've heard of a TV station outside of South Korea actually deciding to broadcast an eSport on regular television.

In other news, the 6th milestone on Compendium sales was reached, so the prize pool now exceeds $2.6 million, and Compendium owners will get an Immortal quality item. I'm curious about what the item will be, since we've already got a courier. Maybe a ward?

User avatar
Menacing Spike
Posts: 2982
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:25 pm UTC
Location: Fighting the Zombie.

Re: Dota 2 Beta

Postby Menacing Spike » Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:09 pm UTC

OklahomaJoe wrote:I'm curious about what the item will be, since we've already got a courier. Maybe a ward?


There are a lot of possibilities - either something existant, like a ward skin, HUD, or announcer; or something entirely new. Tree skins? Water color? Consumables animations? Taunts? Creep skins?

By the way, unlike in Dota 1, auras don't see to show for me, does anyone have the same problem?


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests