Fuck me, just deleted a huge post by clicking a bookmark. Gah.
[quote CAFG]'Fun' games (at least to faz-) are ones that are 'herocentric', which requires the spawns to be nothing more than food, and not a counter or have game-ending effects. I wouldn't be opposed to this, but let's at least be honest about it and call it like it is. Either the game's competition resolves around how you can get the most out of your food(which has plenty of depth) by team splashing, multi-laning, or constant lane presence(medic); or spawns are treated as something more than food, and become an integral part of every game and needed to win.
When faz hates the idea of players being required to do anything with spawn - if a hero can't handle the problem himself with his spells then something is wrong. I still contend that faz wants spawn to have nothing more than the role of being food.[/quote]
The huge difference between Reavers and improving spawn is that Reavers, due to their nature as 16 exp splash beasts, are required to be powerful as hell in order to warrant getting them. As such, they force the conclusion of the game by themselves.
On the other hand, if each team spawns say 180 HP, 20 damage Broodlings, spawns go from being feed to being a power in their own right. This isn't a problem, though, because both teams do so. Neither team has to "deal with it." These spawns then act as a form of map control. With hero support, you shift the conflict towards the opponent's base and eventually reach a warp gate or defenses. Because the spawns aren't complete feed, over time they need to be fought back or you will lose the warp gate or have a hole broken in your defenses.
So yes, they do need to be "dealt with," but what you're actually dealing with is the enemy hero who is supporting those spawns in, not the spawns themselves which effectively cancel each other out. In such a scenario, spawns are neither feed nor the focus of the game, which you contend must be such (in a false dichotomy, since we're throwing around logical fallacies).
Having spawns as map control is an element of DotA that I've always wanted to see in Temple Siege. Since we're working on fine tuned balance in this version, it would require an entirely different branch because such a change would throw the hero balance completely out of sync.
One change that would remedy how spawns are without completely removing their uses is to make buildings "one-time" spawns. That way, you can get a Reaver to break through a spawn cluster, or to assault cannons, or something along those lines. But you aren't forcing the game to be decided by doing so, you aren't spawning Reavers forever so it's not a win/lose type of thing. If you get stopped and it dies, it's a minor defeat and you lose a small edge. I seem to recall you agreeing with me on nested victories: this would be one such.
[quote Genocidal.Legend]Summoner vs mech, this is why you lose:
-Summoner out exp's you
-Mech Cannot stop Swarmkill of base
-Summoner can mass spawn mech so easy due to 2x/3x income[/quote]
Those are the legitimate claims that you made. The first and second are obvious: if the situation devolves to a 1v1 base race, nothing will beat a good Summoner. Does that make it a hard counter to every class? Also, Siege Tanks deal damage in swarm, so I do have a counter if you're stupid enough to bring the Summoner itself, which evidently you would be.
As for the third, it's probably true, but I don't really care. I can't stop anyone from doing that no matter what course I take in the game unless I go spawns myself, and I'd rather just not play if I'm going to force the outcome in such a way. So, I'll bitch out my opponents but I can't really stop them from using such options, it's a part of the game (that I'd prefer seeing changed).
[quote Genocidal.Legend]-Take the game out of your hands and hopefully win for you? This is exactly what i am talking about, you absolutely have no idea what you are talking about. Only noobs would throw out reavers and "Hope that it will win for them", Reavers are there for the guaranteed win not, something you just randomly throw out. They put the game back in your hands by the way because you gain map control, and pin the heros to their base.[/quote]
I'm sorry, weren't you just arguing that Reavers took skill to use? Now you're saying that they are a "guaranteed win" if used in the right scenario? That strangely looks exactly like what I said earlier:
[Quote FaZ-]The only reason to get Reavers is a tactical decision that takes the game out of your hands and hopefully wins for you.[/quote]
As for game-relevant stuff:
If the Guardians are going to auto-target spawns and cannons, I'd rather see them be similar to the Archer L1 in that the first hit is random, but subsequent hits can be directed manually as you please. That depends on the precedence of target selection, however.
When I watched the replay and in one of your deaths to volt L2 you lost your orb and you said "OMG I DIDNT KNOW VOLTS L2 SUCKS IN SUMMONED UNITS!".
That was me, although obviously I didn't say it in such a way, and I was referring to the Dark Orb. I didn't realize that it was drawn in such a way because an Orb usually has absolutely no reason to be near a Volt. I said "nvm" shortly thereafter when I thought about how it draws in LM L1, Mutant L2, etc.
I was genuinely surprised that my Orb, a pet, was pulled, and thus the question of the Companions. I doubt any of you would have thought anything of running it by a Volt either, it's not a situation that's usually, if ever, seen. I have been spoofed before, but that game wasn't one.
No excuse really there, I didn't know whether or not Volt L2 pulled pets because I rarely play as Volt. If not knowing that makes my opinions of balance faulty, you desperately need to take a logic course. You just said yourself that every time you think you have something to learn, there's something new. That was new to me.
Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Feb 24 2023, 12:34 pm by Decency.
None.