BIGGEST IN E-GAMING: DOTA 2 Tourny @ ONE MILLION euro prize!

[ImpulsE69]

If you wanted to be perfectly literal and say 100.0% balanced then this would be correct, but it is possible to have effectively balanced gameplay with asymmetric factions. This is shown in lots of games, Starcraft, L4D, even dota, because the balancing is based around "rock paper scissors" style of unit and strategy counters.

And who would want to play or watch a game where both sides were exactly the same each time? Yawn! (though it would be neat if you could clone a football team and have it play itself to see what would happen, ignoring the ethics of that of course)

I understand what you are saying, but in normal competitive sports where people start iwth the same pieces, positions, the only variable is the player themselves. Chess, basketball teams, etc. It's not the game itself that have differences, but the players themselves make the differences. When applied to MOBA's, the chars in the game represent the positions(like pawns, queen etc), and the players represent the..well different players. In this case, those positions are different, therefore not balanced and amplified by the skill of the player. It would be more balanced if you said.."require 1 each of every type of character" but even then it's only balanced if each team uses the same character for each, because different characters have different pros/cons and stats. - (in essense, that adds again to the skill of the player playing those pieces." In chess, a pawn is a pawn, a rook is a rook. etc.

And...sorry but SC is far from balanced. It is probably more balanced than these games simply because its only 3 maximum "pieces" (not counting the sub pieces which will vary). DOTA is not balanced with 100+ characters to play unless they are all basically replicas of each other, and even then, it comes down to what is actually chosen. Certain char combos are better against other char combos. You could say rock paper scissors is in effect, but if one team has 5 rocks and the other team has 5 papers. It's unbalanced. (yes that is very generalized because there shouldn't ever be 5 of the same thing).

Now, if you make them both have the same piece (2 rock, 2 paper, 1 scissor). They are still starting with balanced stats. The way MOBAs work though is: 1 red rock, 1 blue rock, 1 notepad, 1 papertowel, 1 green scissor vs. 1 blue rock, 1 green rock, 1 toiletpaper, 1 notepad, 1 blue scissor). (or in LoL ranked case..not even the possiblility of the same peice at all).

...after typing all that out, whether you agree with it or not, anyone who says this type of game has a low skill cap is very mistaken.

 

[Chiropteran]

DOTA is not balanced with 100+ characters to play unless they are all basically replicas of each other, and even then, it comes down to what is actually chosen. Certain char combos are better against other char combos. You could say rock paper scissors is in effect, but if one team has 5 rocks and the other team has 5 papers. It's unbalanced. (yes that is very generalized because there shouldn't ever be 5 of the same thing).

The game begins at champion selection. Bans exist for a reason. Other than the debatable advantage of first or second pick, each team starts with the exact same "pieces" as the other- 4 bans and 5 champion selections.

edit: additional thoughts:

If you are terrible at champion selection, your team will play out the rest of the game with a disadvantage. Just like if you have a terrible start in chess and lose both your bishops and your queen, you are forced to play out the rest of the game at a disadvantage.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The game begins at champion selection. Bans exist for a reason. Other than the debatable advantage of first or second pick, each team starts with the exact same "pieces" as the other- 4 bans and 5 champion selections.

edit: additional thoughts:

If you are terrible at champion selection, your team will play out the rest of the game with a disadvantage. Just like if you have a terrible start in chess and lose both your bishops and your queen, you are forced to play out the rest of the game at a disadvantage.

I agree that champ selection is a part of it. But are bans a way of balancing or skewing the balance in your favor? I think the argument could go both ways. Also, having not played DOTA (only LoL) can you have the same exact characters on both teams? Because again, all characters have different stats. Since you bring up first pick, that can severly skew advantage if both teams cannot pick the same characters.

 

[Chiropteran]

Since you bring up first pick, that can severly skew advantage if both teams cannot pick the same characters.

No, both teams can not have the same characters (usually, not sure about what modes are possible though). But the advantage is debatable- some characters counter others, and in some ways it can be more advantageous to pick second or last rather than first. Imagine if you played rock paper scissors, but you picked after your opponent- that is what DOTA is in some ways. So first pick isn't always best.

Also, you can play best 2/3 and give the loser of each previous game the option of first or second pick, to minimize any advantage.

 

[SpicyTime]

You can't pick the same heroes in DotA, but that's what makes it much more entertaining to watch and play. Of course this leads to imbalances, but that's where the real skill of the pros comes in. These guys find imbalances, exploit them, then win matches. Subsequently, opposing teams find counter-strategies, making it go back and forth. This allows for shifts in the meta-game that are fun to watch.

 

[PrayForDeath]

The announcer sounds just like the HoN announcer to me, is there some crucial difference? Hell I thought it was even the same voice actor.

Naw dude, try playing the two next to each other. Night and day. (and HoN lets you purchase different announcers with in-game currency if you desire, but I'm sure dota will do something similar)

Valve has already stated the game with be free to play, so no worry about $60 retail.

Oh I was not aware of that. That changes alot then

I've already applied for the beta, looking forward to see how it plays out.

 

[fustercluck]

Prob already been brought up a bunch but isn't it kinda weird to have a big ole tournament for a game that just started beta testing (or so i've heard)?

 

[PrayForDeath]

Prob already been brought up a bunch but isn't it kinda weird to have a big ole tournament for a game that just started beta testing (or so i've heard)?

It is, but I guess Valve just wanted to use this as a way to get some exposure for their new game. However, there's a good chance it might backfire if they don't fix the lag issues and interruptions. The game doesn't look stable enough for a 'Tournament'.

 

[darkewaffle]

How long are DotA2 matches running? Friend of mine was watching the streams and said some of them approached the 2 hour mark ><

 

[PrayForDeath]

Yea there was a 95 min match. The rest are anywhere from 30 mins - 70 mins.

 

[Chiropteran]

The tournament makes me hate LoL. People actually play a game out to the end instead of surrendering as soon as one team has a slight advantage? Looks like fun. I really hate the early surrender mentality.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The tournament makes me hate LoL. People actually play a game out to the end instead of surrendering as soon as one team has a slight advantage? Looks like fun. I really hate the early surrender mentality.

Not a good comparison. There is a reason they aren't quitting. 1. They are being webcast 2. They are probably premades 3. There's money involved.

 

[xboxist]

Why does DotA exist as a prominent tourney game and not plain 'ol WC3? I guess the collective decided that DotA is just better?

Totally ignorant on the matter - sorry for the stupid question.

 

[smackababy]

You can't pick the same heroes in DotA, but that's what makes it much more entertaining to watch and play. Of course this leads to imbalances, but that's where the real skill of the pros comes in. These guys find imbalances, exploit them, then win matches. Subsequently, opposing teams find counter-strategies, making it go back and forth. This allows for shifts in the meta-game that are fun to watch.

Most heroes have counters. But yeah, the ban and pick phase plays a very important part of the match. Knowing your opponents helps a lot in this. Being able to ban their best and force a better match up is very good.

 

[PrayForDeath]

Why does DotA exist as a prominent tourney game and not plain 'ol WC3? I guess the collective decided that DotA is just better?

Totally ignorant on the matter - sorry for the stupid question.

WC3 has been prominent in tournaments for years. It's a completely different genre from dota (RTS vs MOBA), so you can't really say one is better than the other.

It's just a matter of dota being so ridiculously popular that valve decided to hire its main developer and turn it into a standalone game.

Most heroes have counters. But yeah, the ban and pick phase plays a very important part of the match. Knowing your opponents helps a lot in this. Being able to ban their best and force a better match up is very good.

I normally enjoy watching the banning phase. However, in dota 2 it's kinda boring since there's only like 34 heroes so far.

 

[SpicyTime]

Why does DotA exist as a prominent tourney game and not plain 'ol WC3? I guess the collective decided that DotA is just better?

Totally ignorant on the matter - sorry for the stupid question.

My guess is because DotA was the first of the MOBA genre that could be played competitively. All MOBAs before DotA, starting with Aeon of Strife in Starcraft, were fun, but not deep and completely imbalanced.

Whereas in WC3, there were many RTS games already out there, with the most popular competitive RTS being Starcraft.

 

[Chiropteran]

Not a good comparison. There is a reason they aren't quitting. 1. They are being webcast 2. They are probably premades 3. There's money involved.

It's a fine comparison. The "money involved" part is irrelevant if the game was already lost/won. Premades? I've seen premade groups surrender at 20 minutes plenty of times. The only thing that matters is they are not surrendering after an early failure and... *gasp*, sometimes the game turns around and the initially losing team takes the win.

 

[ImpulsE69]

It's a fine comparison. The "money involved" part is irrelevant if the game was already lost/won. Premades? I've seen premade groups surrender at 20 minutes plenty of times. The only thing that matters is they are not surrendering after an early failure and... *gasp*, sometimes the game turns around and the initially losing team takes the win.

Money to be made alone is enough reason to not surrender. You aren't talking casual gamers here, you are talking tournaments. It is a totally different ballgame. Ask anyone who surrenders early why they do it, "because it's a waste of time if i know i'm going to lose, I can just play another game". I don't agree with that statement, but that's the excuse I hear time and time again. Now if you told those people that if they won they got money? Then, they are alot less likely to just give up.

 

[ivan2]

Money to be made alone is enough reason to not surrender. You aren't talking casual gamers here, you are talking tournaments. It is a totally different ballgame. Ask anyone who surrenders early why they do it, "because it's a waste of time if i know i'm going to lose, I can just play another game". I don't agree with that statement, but that's the excuse I hear time and time again. Now if you told those people that if they won they got money? Then, they are alot less likely to just give up.

that and the kids who's playing their last game before bed, "please, its my last game, make it last 2 hours"

 

[Chiropteran]

"because it's a waste of time if i know i'm going to lose, I can just play another game".

If you are saying that is why stupid people surrender, sure I'll buy that. I don't agree with the general premise though. If a game is truly "unwinnable", surrender makes sense money or not. If there is some chance to win a game played for money, I'd certainly take that same chance in a game for fun. Hell, if I am playing for fun winning isn't even the only goal. Doing my personal best, or seeing how long I can hold out with feeding teammates, or just trying an alternate build to make the best of a bad situation. In a game played for fun where win or loss really has no real consequences, what is so important about surrendering fast to get a better next game?

I'd rather win one game through a turn-around than win 10 games due to a good early game lead that caused the enemy team to surrender.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I completely agree with you, but that's not the context here. The point is, there is money involved. It's a big motivator..that and the spotlight is on them.

I also agree that at any point, if your team can get their act together the tide can change at the drop of a hat. I've seen it happen many times...then again, I've seen it just roll downhill too

 

[StinkyPinky]

I don't even know what the fuck DOTA is. I'm getting old and losing touch.

 

[smackababy]

I completely agree with you, but that's not the context here. The point is, there is money involved. It's a big motivator..that and the spotlight is on them.

I also agree that at any point, if your team can get their act together the tide can change at the drop of a hat. I've seen it happen many times...then again, I've seen it just roll downhill too

That is not always true. There are situations where you cannot win.

I watched some replays and the replay AI is terrible. I also am not liking the look after watching it for awhile. I did at first, but now not so much. I can tell the models and such are way unfinished though. 32 heroes is a bit low as well.

 

[TheUnk]

I really don't like the look at all. Everything seems to blend together and looks very dull. The HUD looks really outdated. How about shrinking all that worthless junk so the player has more vision.

 

[Chiropteran]

I really don't like the look at all. Everything seems to blend together and looks very dull. The HUD looks really outdated. How about shrinking all that worthless junk so the player has more vision.

Could easily allow a lot more vision just be increasing the maximum zoom. The vision being limited is a conscious decision to make the game more "skillful" because you can't see everything around you at once.

As far as the HUD UI, I like it big and simple, but it's really the sort of thing that should be adjustable in UI options, hopefully it will be.