31 replies to this topic

[Whiteboard]

Game balancing, tryharding, bullshit arguments regarding how people enjoy having cheap wins. You can stop reading at this point as you already disagree with this topic before you began to read it.

 

At long last i've found a method of resolving stunlock issues.

 

Arguably, no one looks forward to getting stunlocked. Yet everyone yields to it as it is used against those who do. Creating a cycle of who can stun first -> to prevent being stunlocked themselfs.

 

Implemented as, instead of applying "Stun". All non-ultimate skills applies "Incapaticate" (In warcraft's case: "Sleep").

Meaning that the next action taken will break the disable against the afflicted target.

 

As it is now in dota and/or lod, players require a time window for multiple reasons:

 -Gap closing

 -Dps

 -Disabling hostile VIP target during clashes

 

Which in itself is an acceptable implementation of the game mechanic, removing freedom from hostiles - thus granting you freedom to do as you desire.

 

As the case is, you can easily extend that time window beyond regular limits for greater results. In some cases to the point where the hostile is left with a time window to act on his own accord. Which is the reversed effect of "Stuns", the time window is now larger than your freedom was for the majority of the fight.

 

To my personal exprienced, those are the most forgettable games. That the goal is: that opponents does not get to play.

Hence destroyed, raxed and lost the game.

 

Which only results in two possible options, the game is abbandoned quickly and people either:

 

- Host another one, to payback the removal of freedom

- Fucks off to spend their time elsewhere.

 

Neither of these cases are healthy for a community or a single individual to be exposed of.

 

-----

 

Now onto the "Incapatitation" chapter.

 

The classic scenario of throwing a "Storm Bolt" on a target early game is for the nuke and free hits. Which is most commonly followed by another "Stun" for more free hits.

 

Taking this scenario per example with "Incapaticate" in "Stun"'s place, the early game nuker will fill his role of nuking and giving his (potential lane mate" to engage for massive profit.

 

What would happen is, the "Incap" is removed with another "Incap", in turn removed by his ally. Which potentially might be another "Stun" / "Incap". The prey is nuked to smitherens and is dead (most commonly). But he was never out of the question to escape from the zone or retaliate for what it's worth. < Unless > The 2 mates were clever enough to interupt his blink-casting-point.

 

Such a scenario, gameplay has happend in spectrum of the original case. One stun replaces the other and he's visually watching his own demise without a single keystroke to make a diffrence or having the illusion/hope he ever could.

 

Should all regular "Stun" buffs be replaced, more skills will be available for diffrent agendas as valid options.

 

- People would pick "Ensare" more often, for a higher duration of <disabling escape>. Same can be applied to "Frostbite"

- People would pick Silence to prevent casters from outlashing during clashes.

- People would pick "Hex" or "Shackles" for a long crowd control duration.

 

But all these options are rendered invalid, as "Stuns" allready covers all of these functions and mechanics without drawbacks.

Most cases, they serve as a "Nuke" in addition to "Stunning" players.

 

With this concept presented, I anticipate people will make a big fuss as usual about meta changes.

People will complain, present question marks, rage, flame the forums etc. Meanwhile adept players will take on the challenge of new circumstances.

 

In the long run, I have all reason to believe that "The more you can do, the better" will result in a better community, more fun map to play and legitemate play ground for the "try-harders" to gauge their skill.

In the byproduct of removing/limiting things, that limits how much you can play.

 

---

 

Final words.

 

If your reaction to this was similuar to:

 

 - "Omg, thats so fucking broken."

 - "You wont need bkb anymore"

 - "This changes everything"

 

I have succeeded. This is the effect Icefrog have had on me, times numeral when releasing metabreaking heroes.

To name a few: Legion Commander, The Warden, Nightcrawler.

These heroes are there to stay, and it works. Dota is fantastic as such.

 

Now honestly, I dont expect jack shit from this community. It's up to you to prove me that I am wrong.

 

< Please leave hate / love / flame as you may have on the topic >.

 

- Sincerely, Whiteboard.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ech0]

I don't know what kind of modes you are playing but where i play stuns aren't such problem. Why? because some players know how to deal with them. Either way people make bkb/orchid if its a problem or more experienced players react to it while picking his hero for example with naix's rage. Not to mention the most used skill with essenceshift based carry what is shadow dance which is just ridiculously overpowered now since you cannot target the spells to it... only to ground, giving them enough time to kill any stunner or buff up their agility or escape or whatever they do. Second thing would be always to have 1 disable if you are playing a carry like chronospehere primal roar, mostly an ultimate or atleast 2 seconds stun, just to take their support out. If your team is filled with 5 players with carryish skills and enemy team has like 2 carries 2 support and 1 pusher then i would say you need to think more in the drafting sequence to avoid such situation.

 

So in my opinion stuns aren't any kind of problem in the game if you know how to deal with them. this change would only make  the game more harder to win against carries etc...And rendering supporting skills more useless having the benefit everybody picking tons of passives and blinkstrikes etc... I think this would just make the game lobsided and then there's slarks and ursa's running everywhere, also making skills like chronospehere even more op as it now.

[Whiteboard]

@Ech0

 

You raise alot of valid points, such as "Passive-stackers"-"Carries" topples the balance of what's available to stop them.

I realize youre not talking out of your own ass.

 

Now on to the main issue. You're wrong. Theres < Fuckloads > of shit that can stun carries. Infact, theres more to go around than whats allowed to be picked.

Before 2dpp was implemented on "Extended Balance" mode, it was very common to find jackasses who stacked up with 4 disables.

 

Why?

 

Stuns are simply just that great, to the extent it becomes boring. An opponent who does not play is no opponent at all.

 

This is a fundamental issue that I have with this specific concept - removing gameplay. But I know damn well at this point - that if I dont stun him before he stuns you. You're as good as dead. 7/10 garuanteed.

 

That is the focus regarding "Stuns". They are to overpowered to be ignored.

 

Countering blinkstrikes, I did mention "Frostbite" in my original post. And "Frostbite" disarms attacking and movement. Slows per example are extremly underrated, despite that they essentially can quad-drop their "combat-value-per-second" during a clash. Because they are worthless incomparison to an opponent who cant do anything at all. Thus dropping their "combat-value-per-second" to < NOTHING >.

 

I'm thankfull for giving my topic a consideration. But the fact is, that youre taking the standpoint of keep things the way they are.

For fear of change, fear of a new meta.

 

What's the harm, if implemented as a mode? You can stick to the things like you did before if you tried it and moved on.

Things can only change - if you let it.

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[Meatmuffin]

Personally, I share the hate for stuns as much as Whiteboard does, so generally, I approve of his suggestion. But Ech0 also made a valid point. 

 

 

What's the harm, if implemented as a mode? You can stick to the things like you did before if you tried it and moved on.

Things can only change - if you let it.

 

This would solve the problem for both stun-lovers/tryharders, and the creative people that like to experiment more. If someone can be arsed to do this, I would be pleased.

[Whiteboard]

@Meatmuffin

 

I'm somewhat split, in as of what to reply. Someone who agrees, cheers.

 

< Please leave hate / love / flame as you may have on the topic >.

 

I want this concept to reach a verdict.

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[Ech0]

Well i see if you guys are playing extended balance mode this can be an issue maybe.We are mostly playing balance off mode and there the stuns are more in a keyfactor of survival and succesfull battling and for enemies to counter they actually need to think of an tactic. There are various builds that can make "stunners" utterly useless and after implemention of silencer's old skill "passive aura last word" to the utility hero, there are more and more counters to deal with it.

 

I wouldn't say im wrong in the matter, more like we are playing different modes what is causing other types of issues you need to handle with. In my opinion stuns are one of the lesser issues that needs to be handled with.

As long as this change will be implemented to separate mode or will stay away from -bo, i have nothing against it.

 

Everything is counterable, but the matter of doing so may cost you the fun of gameplay.

 

Ech0

[Meatmuffin]

Ech0,

The thing is, in our mode (sdzm3lsebfh) there is a 11hero draft. And with only a few spells you can counter stuns. Last word is a perfect example of countering stuns, but you have a ~10% chance of getting the utility hero. Even then, I bet there are lots of people that do not even know what utility hero is, and what are it's abilities.

 

 If you don't have it, the most logic thing to counter stuns is getting Orchid or even Kelen's Dagger. But due to enemy having a buttload of disables, they won't let you to farm the items. Basically when you get the actual counter, they will be pretty much invading your base, and their carries will be farmed enough to counter your counters (BKB, Blade Mail).

[Whiteboard]

@Ech0

 

"Everything is counterable, but the matter of doing so may cost you the fun of gameplay."

 

Permastun isnt fun. It gives results. It removes gameplay from opponents.

 

Wisdom to learn from this: Winning > Playing the game.

I want to change that.

 

@Meatmuffin

 

Despite there being actual counters to stun-stackers, it's most commonly the case that you counter that with stacking up on stuns yourself.

Because -> The best default approach to any given game, is having as much stun as you can aquire before it begins.

 

That, I also want to change.

 

---

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard

[dmzipp]

YOU FIND A THING "FUN" WHEN YOU ARE ABLE TO AFFECT THE SITUATION

 

YOU KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE SLOWLY DOING DAMAGE TO YOU BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAVE LIKE ONE SKILL THAT DOES DAMAGE, SAME AS YOURSELF THIS IS THE EXTENT OF YOUR INTELLIGENCE

 

A SITUATION WHICH DEMANDS MORE INTELLIGENCE THAN HAVING ENOUGH HP AND A BLINK YOU FIND "UNFUN"

[Whiteboard]

@dmzipp

 

Thanks for the hate, keep it coming.

Also, likes the comic.

 

Anything in particular that should remain the same? Perhaps the ultimates? Incase you need a "Pure stun", such as "Primal Roar"? Or Black Hole?

Dont forget, theres still "Vodoo", which isnt a "Stun", which isnt affected by this rule.

 

 

Implemented as, instead of applying "Stun". All non-ultimate skills applies "Incapaticate" (In warcraft's case: "Sleep").

Meaning that the next action taken will break the disable against the afflicted target.

 

 

 

If you disregard the entire pool of abilities, to rely on "Stun"'s < alone >. Thats your decision in how to play the game. And thats exactly the thing im against with this topic.

 

Please, if you apply for the first sentence in this topic. Do follow it's advice.

[dmzipp]

I'm right. you're wrong. please focus on that.

[Whiteboard]

@dmzipp

"I'm right. you're wrong. please focus on that."

 

More stuns, more win.

 

I want to change that.

 

- Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[dmzipp]

more win what? when both teams are retarded? when one team wants to win and the other to pick something that doesn't work at all? statistically?

 

your bullshit can't be refuted if you won't even be clear about what you mean. if I say one of those things is wrong you'll say you meant something else.

[Whiteboard]

@Ech0

 

"Everything is counterable, but the matter of doing so may cost you the fun of gameplay."

 

Permastun isnt fun. It gives results. It removes gameplay from opponents.

 

Wisdom to learn from this: Winning > Playing the game.

I want to change that.

 

@Meatmuffin

 

Despite there being actual counters to stun-stackers, it's most commonly the case that you counter that with stacking up on stuns yourself.

Because -> The best default approach to any given game, is having as much stun as you can aquire before it begins.

 

That, I also want to change.

 

---

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard

 

 

My main point is, theres more "Stuns" to go around, than there is counters for it.

And if you have a great anti-"Stun" build. It means the opponents cant do anything -> Game is over, make a new one -> Repeat previous steps.

The main agenda, is that your opponents doesnt get to play.

That. I want to change.

 

 

But it doesnt matter, you have a bone to pick with me or either you disagree to this concept.

 

Say, hypotheticly - That you run out of arguments. You wouldnt agree with this topic nor support it. Simply because being out-argued.

You disagree/despise this topic/me, and you spout whichever comes first to mind, so that either of us yields and admits defeat, these arguments are paper thin from yourside, disregarding the main discussing topic alltogether.

 

Theres shit besides "Perma-stun" builds to counter carries. But you never need to reach that far. This is the established meta. More "stuns", more win.

 

And if you got a fucking problem with me, come talk to me at rgc (Username: Whiteboard), and get your main point directly at me instead of filling this forum with pointless flame -> which in turn will be forgotten by the week.

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[dmzipp]

there is more damage to go around than there is counters to it. I propose all damage be turned into flowers so I don't have to get my team to !ff when I die, there's no fun in that

 

It does matter and I'm not mad at you, only continuously disappointed. especially since after three posts where I've consistently told you that you are a shit you won't stop fluffing your "arguments" with bullshit about how undefeatable they are, acting exactly like a retard who thinks their ego is better defended by being an angry retard than actually presenting something presentable.

 

there is no way to get to your central point when you do not fucking have one. you want me to quote every part of your lies separately so we can argue for pages and you can obfuscate your lack of sense and hide behind something retarded like "my opinion" as if that had inherent worth despite lacking any sound arguments.

[Whiteboard]

@dmzipp

 

k, im done replying to you via this forum.

 

Rgc or nothing.

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[#Yolo]

Well it IS a team game and you should have allies to help you out either by healing you or stunning the enemy. "stun locks" is by far the easiest thing to counter when you have an ally. off the top of my head.

 

Silence:

Smoke Screen,Gust,Last Word,Waning Rift,Silence,blood rage, doom,crippling fear,orchid

 

Mana Reduction skills:

EMP, Mana Burn,Mystic Snake, Nether Ward

 

Immunity :

Rage, Repel,linkens sphere,black king bar

 

There are far harder combos to deal with like 

Essence Shift,Fury Swipes,geostrike,frostmourne

and good old

Totem,Jinada,Geminate

[Whiteboard]

@#Yolo

Brace yourself for sarcasm, as I happen to be in the bad mood. To argue against the same statement more than once.

Enjoy.

 

----

Guess it's settled then. People want "stuns". People prefer stunlocks, instead of using what's else available. The meta doesnt need to change.

 

Everything should remain the way it is, because "Stun", is too important part of the game that nobody looks forward to facing.

We should forget that this post ever existed, it's a joke. It's mindbaffling to think that people ocationally want to see new things than "Stun-locks". Since we already know it works, and you shouldnt fix what isnt broken.

 

I just simply have to deal with being a sandbag, which does not move until a bunch of timers has gone down / expired. And farm for bkb everygame, so that they in turn cant do anything except flee and stall for the timer to run out.

 

All of this above, I look forward to doing more, as I have yet not done it enough in the past. Anyone who attemps otherwise, will face the wrath of a guy on the internet.

------

 

But seriously thou, is it too much to ask for a mode, which has less "hard-stuns" ? Too lift up other abilities more. 

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[Whiteboard]

Now the topic is dead, everyone will move on with doing exactly as the sarcasm forespoke.

 

As usual, my expectations bestowed truth to come. And I despise the community for allowing this reality to persist.

 

-Sincerely, Whiteboard.

[Grief-Code]

Didnt read all on that topic.

 

But I need to agree to Ech0, anything is counterable.

 

Myself i'm no longer playing but I know the times back in the days well.

We always had -bo mode, and even in that mode we could easily counter anything. The main problem in that case is also the skill and the play type of the players.

I assume you don't know what I mean, it's simple:

 

Players with more skill, playing arrogant, they think they are the best and no one can stop them. But gooosh running solo as super good player into a perm stunner and die, the result, they die. What did they learn from it? Nothing, because they are the SUPER pros. Later coming here and rage cause its unbalanced and so on.

Ok, lets turn:

Super cool player in DOTA running alone lvl 25, into a well farmed naix level 23. Naix win, first time, second time, third time. Reaction: he is a hacker, fuck him. My team sucks this game sucks. fuck it.

 

Whats the diffrence?

- The super dooper pro player? Nope, he thinks still he is da pro.

- The team? No, still all noobs around here.

- The map? Ohhh its suddenly Lod. Lets blame the fucking map and mode.

 

I hope you understand the point.

It's basically the same, people run in, die, and need to blame someone. It's probably the thing they blame which is turning.

But the problem is, the DOTA player is blaming the team, and he is more correct.

Many people, like you in that rage post? or whatever, still forget that its still a suptype of dota, so your team is number one where you need to care about.

If you play as team, you can easily counter perm stun, glitches and also mass ROCs.

 

Playing in two, range with one stun and a carry. Range stuns, carry blink and kill.

 

Probably to bring up another story where I still can only laugh about is, that some weeks ago someone here from the forum played on our bot. it was sewww? He blamed our mode we are playing and said he is the best lod palyer in bulgaria whatever bullshit and so on. he is just a joke.

So back here he blamed our mode because he got owned. Same story, what changed, the map? no, the mdoe? yes. So lets blame the mode, because he is "da real mvp lod player from bulgaria".

So what did I said about 'real pros' and there playtype? They simple dont know whats a team, this is why they dont understand the basic of DotA/LoD. Sad to see such a guy calling himself the "best bulgaria lod player"

 

Except the last chapter, im meaning nothing on that thread offended to you whiteboard, but this is they typical image of players im seeing all day.

LoD is just a map, mode is just a mode, what you can create out of both, belongs to you. But keep in mind, without a team also the best player will totally loose.

 

Regards,

G-C