2010-08-05 05:10, Nasco wrote:
OP - Your post pretty much reads like: I'm afraid of what's new and I don't really want to think/do a lot while I'm playing.

You provide no argument at all to justify that there's anything wrong with the kind of heroes you said you dislike. Well unless we count the smileys at the end of each description. Oh and btw. I did notice that you mentioned the possibility of breaking the link twice :P

Why can't you have the old heroes? well you can. The good news for you is they're still there. What do you want? Even more of the old heroes?? FFS, isn't 90 or so enough? Creating more of those same old one-dimensional heroes will only make IF repeat the same old stuff. It's nonsense. Time to give people that prefer non linear heroes more of a choice don't you think?

And new heroes aren't playable at competitive scene? How do you know that? They are simply banned from most games. And it's not that they are not viable. It's simply not easy to integrate complex heroes into your strategies or create new strategies to accommodate them! Also since new heroes are less predictable, exactly because they aren't so straightforward, teams ban them because they don't like the enemy to have a powerful hero that can surprise them.

When you see top teams playing against each other, in other words, facing their toughest challenges, most of the time they are playing some kind of tournament. Those are situations when there are prizes at stake. Needless to say they are going to play safe. Or maybe try a new strat every once in a while when they think their conventional tactics might fail against a given team but mostly they play safe. With heroes they know well. Of course, they'll sometimes tweak a little here and there, replacing heroes and laning and what not but those are minor changes.

You see, new heroes, exactly because they are more complex, can't easily replace the old ones in the old line ups. My guess is that we'll need a complete rework of the current typical picking and banning mindset. And when that day arrives, oh boy, those are gonna be exciting days for dota.

#5 and #7 - "do u think a new player can play one of those 3 new heros? i think not ^^" So what? There are very few heroes a new player could play well. Dota ain't tic-tac-toe. I thought we'd gotten over that by now.

You miss the old heroes? Well they're still there and there's no point in making more of the same exactly because it's more of the same.

And what you said about wc3 is irrelevant. There's a lot more to control than just heroes in wc3. They don't need to have dota levels of complexity in order for the game to be fun. Heck, as is, pro wc3 players already need to have apm's of 200+.

"somebody whos playing dota sometimes wont be able to see whats happening in clashes etc." That's mostly visual clutter. Wanna simply the spell animations and all that? Fine by me.

"most of the "old" heros have a easy to understand skillset but they are still unique in what they are doing." Exactly. They were unique because back then there was nothing like them. Now that those concepts have been exploited, they are no longer unique are they? It's time to face it. Pretty much all of the "one dimensional" hero types we were used to have been used by now. It's time to use your imagination.

#10 - Your "new heroes 4 skills = too strong" argument fails in so many obvious ways i won't even bother.

#11 and #32 - Facepalm.

#15 - "they kind of loose their importance during mid game...."
Dude...so many old heroes lose their importance after early game...what do you wanna do? remove them all? That's just how dota works and it's just fine. Heroes are strong at different stages of the game. What's wrong with that?

#16, 17, 29, 31 + 1

@ all you who think new heroes suck...why?? Not counting remakes such as visage or alche, you have barely seen them at competitive play because they are simply banned all the time. And what's so weird about AA? His hero theme? ffs he's just a badass mage that does cool stuff with ice. Nothing wrong there. His skills? lol, how? They fit his theme, synergize perfectly and are useful! What else could you ask for?? Yes his ulti description is long. SO WHAT? I'm sorry that you had to use your brain for a while there but he's a great hero!

#27 #28 Thanks for your enlightenment. Seriously.

#49 and #55 yes there is a big difference. Great thing nobody is advocating either then.

As for your second post. What you said on the first part about thrall puck and es is mostly true but the fact that, like you said "Simple skill design doesn't have to produce boring heroes with identical skillsets." doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with complex skill design. As long as those complex skills are useful, have synergy and fit in a hero's theme what's wrong with them? "good players regularly find innovative uses for their skills." True! But if good players can find innovative uses for simple skills just think what they can do with complex ones! I mean, is there any doubt in your mind that we're gonna start seeing some really cool moves with, for instance, wisp, as soon as the competitive scene starts adopting it?

As for the second part, well you have to recognize those are really hand picked examples. If you look at SD's disruption or demonic purge you'll see that they too do a lot and have short and easy to understand descriptions. Besides there's a reason for the complicated mechanics behind SD's poison. It's that way so that the skill's potential damage is high but the maximum damage isn't easy to achieve. Makes perfect sense to me. Oh and btw...it's not true that this skill does only one thing. You can use it to scout like you would with VS's wave of terror.

And by mentioning Puck's illusory orb and earthshaker's fissure you've mentioned two of the most versatile skills in dota. No wonder "old heroes" look good in the picture when you do this. What about those that are simple and don't do much (the majority)?

#59 New heroes can also be deadly when played right. Heck, that's probably true for most heroes in dota. And who says there's only way to play new heroes?? Lol far from it. Besides, the example you've given is irrelevant. Get hero X. Buy damage items and voila, you got yourself carry X. That doesn't mean that's an option a competitive player will take very seriously. The fact that you've seen a player do it once doesn't mean it's truly a good option.