On sundays mapcraft eiviyn and palls talked a bit about dota and how could you improve it. The topic itself was interesting, but the conversation didnt really get anywhere so I wanted to create a thread of AoS styles and how could we improve it.
1. The style
Generally most dota maps have 3 lines which all spawn same amount of creeps (atleast what people stated on the stream). Its half true, half wrong. Iv seen couple of different styles of terrain in AoS, but the most popular style is of course the 3 line style since Dota popularized it. Is it the best style? no...I have found some maps have equally interesting creep pathing/spawn designs allthough there is nothing wrong with normal dota style.
3 lines. Same spawns on each lines, spawns consists of couple ranged and couple melee units. Lots of places for creeping and hiding.
Tides of blood style (ToB)
Large map with several bases and several spawns. Unit spawns consists of several different type of units (melee, ranged, spell caster). No neutral creeps.
Aeon of 6 gods style
Large map with one major spawn on middle. Several spawning buildings that mainly spawn units that travel to middle. Few lesser spawns in the edges. No neutral creeps.
Goku Style
Small terrain. Clifs near units pathing area. No neutral creeps. Spawns consists of ranged, melee units and occasionally stronger units.
2. The terrain
Some people might have forgotten or havent even experienced different styles of gameplay from dota. The terrain should naturally support the style of play and there has been many maps that have actually different gameplay from dota even though they have similar feeling.
In Aeon of 6G you have massive battle on the middle which gives nice epic feeling when your hero gains power and evolves to being a "god". The terrain in this map is really simple and it fits the map perfectly. You just join in a epic fight and get stronger...it was fun.
In Goku the game is fast paced and you can use terrain to suprise your enemies or to escape. People should think about different possibilities from normal Dota.
Tides of blood use more "passive" approach. where you have many large battles all over the map and you have to destroy several bases (not map to my liking though).
There are several possibilities for terrains. Personally I like Aoen of 6 gods style, where you have one massive spawn on the middle, yet you can also take alternative routes while others battle it out....
3. The Gameplay
This is where new ideas should shine. Iv been wondering quite a lot what could truly make a new and great Dota. While my own AoS makes it more fast paced and removes the creeping, I think there still should be some new mechanics to make it more interesting.
In Aeon of 6 gods you could buy tomes to increase your power and your hero would actually evolve to different unit and gain new skills as you became closer to godhood.
Random weather effects? Capturing zones to gain buffs to your allies? What do you think could work on a new dota map? Should there be Stronger creep spawns periodically?
I had more ideas and more to write, but Ill end this here. Feel free to discuss and add ideas of your own. Im sure I forgot something... :/. I hope I didnt make the post too confusing since many people probly havent played the old wc3 AoS maps...nonetheless discuss!
For me the game just feels static at top levels. For all the leveling and itemization, at the end of the day there is an ideal way to play and the element of choice disappears. Randomization of items and even having item drops could spice up the gameplay IMO.
The diagonal style was there to 1) make the lanes longer for more towers and 2) to add more room in between the lanes. This makes battles in lanes more isolated between those laners, which personally I think is a great thing.
With your style, it looks very fast and easy to walk in between lanes, meaning the second you starting building up a push of creeps to siege a tower, other enemies can instantly come across to stop it, making them redundant. Although speculation?
The layout has been done to death, but so far no1 has really come up with something better?
Just wanted to start off by saying that Aeon of 6 Gods was freaking amazing in WC3. I never got into DotA and when I did I failed terribly except for with that fire girl Lina Inverse or whatever she was called with her 1shot ultimate. But I loved Ao6G. Anywho:
I think I recall at least 1 more layout you haven't mentioned, which if done well, could make for quite interesting gameplay when you gotta watch all sides and prioritize where to go first:
Also, no idea how this would work, but if you want to differentiate from the generic AoS/DotA, you could make it more like a battleground with cap:able hubs which give you benefits like additional army spawns or buffs like in WoW's Isle of Conquest.
For me the game just feels static at top levels. For all the leveling and itemization, at the end of the day there is an ideal way to play and the element of choice disappears. Randomization of items and even having item drops could spice up the gameplay IMO.
To somewhat tie into this; what DOTA would need to get to 'the next generation', imo, is A) some kind of lane make-over as Eiviyn talked about and B) a replacement of the 'pendulum' winning-system. What this means is that in DOTA gameplay, whoever gets the first kill of is usually the one to win the game. This might not be as true for a single kill, but if a team gets 2, 3 or 4 kills ahead of the other team, their chance of winning increases dramatically. A LOT of DOTA games are over by the 15 minute mark because the kill score is 12-5, but it's too early for the winning team to actually kill towers and finish it off.
The fact that getting a kill not only cripples the opposing team for a set amount of time but also increases the speed with which your hero techs makes especially high-end games usually very stale. It's like two players are lying in a swimming pool, and whoever pushes his opponent down first wins, because he also pushes himself up and it simply becomes downright impossible for the 'drowning' player to make a comeback. Professional-level LoL games basically have this 'feature' where if every person on one team misclicks once, they've basically lost. Imagine you'd lose your SC match due to one misclick - this happens in some matchups (where drops or unit positioning is complete key for one player), but it's extremely rare in SC, especially when compared to DOTA games.
I think I can safely say that the AoS 2 project we're working on has improved upon both these concepts, which is why I've got good hopes for it and think it'll be deserving of its name.
Come backs are very common in Dota, with ganking you can always catch an enemy team out of position even if you're loosing badly.
Yes, and this is the only reason DOTA is playable at pub level. If you watch a pro-match or two, you'll notice that this 'out of position' will never happen. Which turns the game into one HUGE pendulum. Make no mistake - a lot of games that are played professionally have some kind of pendulum system. I think the crowning example of this would be something like Mortal Kombat or Streetfighter, where getting in one punch stuns your enemy long enough for you to get in a second or third without them being able to react. It's just that I think this 'system' has too much of a role in DOTA.
It's a very good thing in fact, people even expect it in game. It rewards people for accomplishments, such as if you work hard at the start, pull off a big kill streak, you then can get a big fancy item at the end you saved up for faster than your other team.
the only bad aspect is when 1 team has clearly won, but the game drags on for another 15+ minutes, with the loosing team being powerless. This should be avoided.
The fact that getting a kill not only cripples the opposing team for a set amount of time but also increases the speed with which your hero techs makes especially high-end games usually very stale. It's like two players are lying in a swimming pool, and whoever pushes his opponent down first wins, because he also pushes himself up and it simply becomes downright impossible for the 'drowning' player to make a comeback. Professional-level LoL games basically have this 'feature' where if every person on one team misclicks once, they've basically lost. Imagine you'd lose your SC match due to one misclick - this happens in some matchups (where drops or unit positioning is complete key for one player), but it's extremely rare in SC, especially when compared to DOTA games.
I think I can safely say that the AoS 2 project we're working on has improved upon both these concepts, which is why I've got good hopes for it and think it'll be deserving of its name.
Don't think you know what you're talking about. Kills do not add as much gpm as laning does. And, even so, only certain player kills matter at all. A support role death means nothing after wards are bought. A carry role death can mean alot, but most carries do not really start item farming gold until mid game.
The only time kills really matter is when the game is in pushing phase. Wasting an ultimate ability can be considered just as good as a death at this point. The reason DotA was considered so balanced is because pretty much all vital things in the game were like pin needles for the other team until the pushing phase. Kills, creeps, leveling, farming. Which is why the game takes 45 minutes plus to complete. The game is like a 45 minute arm wrestling match without much strength disparity, that goes back an forth. If a player would dominate the entire game, then of course the game would end early. But, a couple kills changed hardly anything.
To somewhat tie into this; what DOTA would need to get to 'the next generation', imo, is A) some kind of lane make-over as Eiviyn talked about and B) a replacement of the 'pendulum' winning-system. What this means is that in DOTA gameplay, whoever gets the first kill of is usually the one to win the game. This might not be as true for a single kill, but if a team gets 2, 3 or 4 kills ahead of the other team, their chance of winning increases dramatically. A LOT of DOTA games are over by the 15 minute mark because the kill score is 12-5, but it's too early for the winning team to actually kill towers and finish it off.
The fact that getting a kill not only cripples the opposing team for a set amount of time but also increases the speed with which your hero techs makes especially high-end games usually very stale. It's like two players are lying in a swimming pool, and whoever pushes his opponent down first wins, because he also pushes himself up and it simply becomes downright impossible for the 'drowning' player to make a comeback. Professional-level LoL games basically have this 'feature' where if every person on one team misclicks once, they've basically lost. Imagine you'd lose your SC match due to one misclick - this happens in some matchups (where drops or unit positioning is complete key for one player), but it's extremely rare in SC, especially when compared to DOTA games.
I think I can safely say that the AoS 2 project we're working on has improved upon both these concepts, which is why I've got good hopes for it and think it'll be deserving of its name.
oh jeez --
first, read the guy above me's post.
second, half of WC3 mapping became people trying to "put a new spin on the AOS genre" when in reality all they did was make things more complicated and failed. the idea is to make a fun map. dont worry about anything else, which leads me to saying this:
dota got popular for a reason. i know the history of the map probably better than anyone here, and I can tell you that the things you expressed in your post were even more prevalent earlier on in the map's life. why did Allstars win out then? because players had the most fun playing it. the dota model works fine, and your criticisms of it are your opinion yet despite the "snowball effect flaw" as you perceive it, people love playing it on both a casual and competitive level. obviously it's not that big of a deal. honestly I'll side with the map that's popular as opposed to the map maker trying to pick apart the flaws and make something better, which people already tried doing in WC3. and failed hard.
Furthermore, if you're truly worried about the "snowball effect", study the original DOTA map on Wc3:RoC because your team could be down 5-25 in hero kills and still easily win the game if you had better strategy and execution.
edit: how far along is your map anyway? I hope it's close, because it's about to get a lot of competition in the coming months :/
XAOS (xtreme aos based on Monster Mash) from warcraft 3 was a pretty cool game. Basically it is a 2 v 2 v 2 v 2 game.
Each team is in a corner, and at the start of the game each player chose their race (Race impacted their buildings, units spawned and hero selection)
They each had 3 lanes, 2 lanes to the other corners and one lane to the center. When teams were destroyed there lanes would carry on as normal except once they reached a redundant base they would carry on to the next base. The middle lane would also meet in the middle for a huge battle.
Another aspect of this aos was the ability to add units to the computers spawns, also dependant on the race chosen. strategy was required because each race had different units which could win the battle. units with bloodlust, healing, dispel, meat shield. You had to have a good mix to push the tide of battle.
There were also creeps and random shops etc.
http://extremeaos.moonfruit.com/
-----
Another AOS, Eternal Conflict (Lost its popularity to DoTA because it was more difficult). Was pretty simular to DoTA in the lane aspect but instead of 1 lane in the middle it had 2, for a total of 4 lanes. which basically gave each member of the team their own lane.
Don't think you know what you're talking about. Kills do not add as much gpm as laning does. And, even so, only certain player kills matter at all. A support role death means nothing after wards are bought. A carry role death can mean alot, but most carries do not really start item farming gold until mid game.
Except the first sentence, all of that is true - the problem is that it doesn't at all deny my point. Obviously it's better to take out certain players and all, but that doesn't change the fact that getting kills in general puts you miles ahead of the other team quite quickly in LoL. I'll refer to pro games again - most of these are completely equal until one team gets a couple of good kills off. Past that, the game drags on while team B doesn't have a realistic chance of coming back.
The only time kills really matter is when the game is in pushing phase. Wasting an ultimate ability can be considered just as good as a death at this point. The reason DotA was considered so balanced is because pretty much all vital things in the game were like pin needles for the other team until the pushing phase. Kills, creeps, leveling, farming. Which is why the game takes 45 minutes plus to complete. The game is like a 45 minute arm wrestling match without much strength disparity, that goes back an forth. If a player would dominate the entire game, then of course the game would end early. But, a couple kills changed hardly anything.
Again, pro games beg to differ. I like your arm wrestling analogy, but fact of the matter is that in any game where both teams are in the same league, it'll be a completely equal power struggle until one team gets a couple of good kills off. Usually the first big 5v5 battle is the turning point where one team loses the game. The problem is that a kill A) shoots down the person who gets killed and B) rewards the killer, putting him significantly ahead of the victim. Regardless of your character, if you get enough kills ahead of the opponent's team (and the big point is that you don't even need a whole lot), it'll be harder and harder for them to catch up. For every 30-minute pro LoL game, there is generally only about 5 minutes worth watching. For for example SC2 melee, the first 3 minutes of the game is the only time not worth watching in the majority of matchups.
dota got popular for a reason. i know the history of the map probably better than anyone here, and I can tell you that the things you expressed in your post were even more prevalent earlier on in the map's life. why did Allstars win out then? because players had the most fun playing it.
But I never said DOTA wasn't fun. I'm a LoL player myself. Plus, I don't see how the original DOTA had a more prevalent snowball effect than DOTA games that are around now? The only reason one could claim that is because it was never really played professionaly (to the extend that games like LoL are now), which means you had a lot of these 3-shot wonders dominating games. That's a skill disparity though, and shouldn't in this case be used to talk about the map's balance. And if you want my honest opinion, I think the reason DOTA Allstars got on top was mostly because it kept the name DOTA. I was an avid Tides of Blood player at the time and though I'll have to disclaim that I barely played any Allstars, I thought it was one of the best balanced DOTA maps to date.
the dota model works fine, and your criticisms of it are your opinion yet despite the "snowball effect flaw" as you perceive it,
Of course my criticisms are my opinion - this whole thread is asking people about opinions. The OP is asking for 'ideas' how the DOTA concept could be improved.
people love playing it on both a casual and competitive level. obviously it's not that big of a deal.
...
Furthermore, if you're truly worried about the "snowball effect", study the original DOTA map on Wc3:RoC because your team could be down 5-25 in hero kills and still easily win the game if you had better strategy and execution.
Of course people enjoy playing the game. Again - I never said LoL is a terrible game, or DOTA a terrible genre. That said, people love playing it on a casual level is because the snowball effect doesn't really exist there. The reason 'comebacks' exist in any game with a risk/reward style of play is because the players that are on top make mistakes. The sole reason anyone has ever come back from being behind is because the top player let him by screwing something up himself. People on casual level make more mistakes, ergo more comebacks and ergo a less intensive game where everybody can do his own thing and still contribute. That style of play is brilliant, amusing and working like a charm.
honestly I'll side with the map that's popular as opposed to the map maker trying to pick apart the flaws and make something better, which people already tried doing in WC3. and failed hard.
You can do that, and you can honestly have fun playing your 'fun popular' map. I won't judge or condemn you. But you're failing to realize that it took someone who did exactly that, picking apart flaws and building something better, to come to that 'fun and popular map' that you're playing right now. You need to be critical and revolutionary tro create 'fun and popular' maps in the first place. The second you say "I'm happy with this" is the second progression stops. That's not to say that everybody should ALWAYS be looking for holes in maps in order to come up with CONSTANT improvement, but if you're talking in a thread called "DOTA Next generation", you're definitely in the wrong place to toss in the "But I'm happy with games like LoL" attitude. And all I was doing was pointing out something I think is necessary to be improved for the genre to evolve.
Again; I don't want to 'pick apart' your posts as much as I did now, but I feel you're missing both my point and the point of the whole thread.
edit: how far along is your map anyway? I hope it's close, because it's about to get a lot of competition in the coming months :/
We've got a "when it's done" policy, there =P. It's coming along well, and you should hear about it in the coming months, but we don't have an exact release date.
1. Allstars didn't win because it had the "DOTA" name; like 30 other maps had the "DOTA" name at the time as well. DOTA: ROC was released in December 2002. It was an overnight success because it was one of the first AOS maps on WC3 that used custom abilities. TFT Came out in summer 2003. When TFT came out, DOTA's original creator Eul was MIA playing Halo and had passed the map off to another editor. Due to his absence when TFT was released, no official port of the DOTA map was created on TFT and tons of different versions of "DOTA" by tons of random people popped up. There were literally 15 different DOTA maps circulating within 2 weeks of TFT being released. Guinsoo's map took all the best heroes from each of these maps and put them into one (copied and pasted literally) and called it "DOTA: Allstars". It ended up being the one that won out. because it was the most fun to play. Eventually the ROC map was ported (during the 4.XX series of Allstars) but it failed to get any popularity as Allstars had already won in the public. This time around, Classic DOTA couldn't play the "we have custom abilities and you don't" card as everyone had them with the TFT editor so Allstars kept going as it was more fun to play casually.
2. The earlier versions of Allstars (pre-6.0) had a greater snowball effect because carries didn't scale nearly as well. Their abilities weren't all necessarily designed with the intent of them being carries, as heroes weren't really designed with that philosophy yet. There was no Quelling Blade. Lastly, jungle creeps couldn't be farmed until 20 minutes into the game because they were so strong. For these reasons getting early kills and ganks especially ones that prevented the other team's carries from farming and allowed yours to do so created a much bigger disadvantage than it does now.
like, half the reason they did things such as add Quelling blade and fix neuts to be creepable earlygame was to combat the snowball effect idea, and honestly its just not really prevalent in the map anymore. if you get a bunch of early kills its really not going to matter come midgame because its not going to create a big enough advantage anymore.
On sundays mapcraft eiviyn and palls talked a bit about dota and how could you improve it. The topic itself was interesting, but the conversation didnt really get anywhere so I wanted to create a thread of AoS styles and how could we improve it.
1. The style
Generally most dota maps have 3 lines which all spawn same amount of creeps (atleast what people stated on the stream). Its half true, half wrong. Iv seen couple of different styles of terrain in AoS, but the most popular style is of course the 3 line style since Dota popularized it. Is it the best style? no...I have found some maps have equally interesting creep pathing/spawn designs allthough there is nothing wrong with normal dota style.
I drew a sample picture of dota styles Iv seen.
http://www.sc2mapster.com/media/attachments/19/321/terrainpathingstyles.JPG
Normal dota style
3 lines. Same spawns on each lines, spawns consists of couple ranged and couple melee units. Lots of places for creeping and hiding.
Tides of blood style (ToB)
Large map with several bases and several spawns. Unit spawns consists of several different type of units (melee, ranged, spell caster). No neutral creeps.
Aeon of 6 gods style
Large map with one major spawn on middle. Several spawning buildings that mainly spawn units that travel to middle. Few lesser spawns in the edges. No neutral creeps.
Goku Style
Small terrain. Clifs near units pathing area. No neutral creeps. Spawns consists of ranged, melee units and occasionally stronger units.
2. The terrain
Some people might have forgotten or havent even experienced different styles of gameplay from dota. The terrain should naturally support the style of play and there has been many maps that have actually different gameplay from dota even though they have similar feeling.
In Aeon of 6G you have massive battle on the middle which gives nice epic feeling when your hero gains power and evolves to being a "god". The terrain in this map is really simple and it fits the map perfectly. You just join in a epic fight and get stronger...it was fun.
In Goku the game is fast paced and you can use terrain to suprise your enemies or to escape. People should think about different possibilities from normal Dota.
Tides of blood use more "passive" approach. where you have many large battles all over the map and you have to destroy several bases (not map to my liking though).
There are several possibilities for terrains. Personally I like Aoen of 6 gods style, where you have one massive spawn on the middle, yet you can also take alternative routes while others battle it out....
3. The Gameplay
This is where new ideas should shine. Iv been wondering quite a lot what could truly make a new and great Dota. While my own AoS makes it more fast paced and removes the creeping, I think there still should be some new mechanics to make it more interesting.
In Aeon of 6 gods you could buy tomes to increase your power and your hero would actually evolve to different unit and gain new skills as you became closer to godhood.
Random weather effects? Capturing zones to gain buffs to your allies? What do you think could work on a new dota map? Should there be Stronger creep spawns periodically?
I had more ideas and more to write, but Ill end this here. Feel free to discuss and add ideas of your own. Im sure I forgot something... :/. I hope I didnt make the post too confusing since many people probly havent played the old wc3 AoS maps...nonetheless discuss!
For me the game just feels static at top levels. For all the leveling and itemization, at the end of the day there is an ideal way to play and the element of choice disappears. Randomization of items and even having item drops could spice up the gameplay IMO.
The diagonal style was there to 1) make the lanes longer for more towers and 2) to add more room in between the lanes. This makes battles in lanes more isolated between those laners, which personally I think is a great thing.
With your style, it looks very fast and easy to walk in between lanes, meaning the second you starting building up a push of creeps to siege a tower, other enemies can instantly come across to stop it, making them redundant. Although speculation?
The layout has been done to death, but so far no1 has really come up with something better?
Just wanted to start off by saying that Aeon of 6 Gods was freaking amazing in WC3. I never got into DotA and when I did I failed terribly except for with that fire girl Lina Inverse or whatever she was called with her 1shot ultimate. But I loved Ao6G. Anywho:
I think I recall at least 1 more layout you haven't mentioned, which if done well, could make for quite interesting gameplay when you gotta watch all sides and prioritize where to go first:
Also, no idea how this would work, but if you want to differentiate from the generic AoS/DotA, you could make it more like a battleground with cap:able hubs which give you benefits like additional army spawns or buffs like in WoW's Isle of Conquest.
To somewhat tie into this; what DOTA would need to get to 'the next generation', imo, is A) some kind of lane make-over as Eiviyn talked about and B) a replacement of the 'pendulum' winning-system. What this means is that in DOTA gameplay, whoever gets the first kill of is usually the one to win the game. This might not be as true for a single kill, but if a team gets 2, 3 or 4 kills ahead of the other team, their chance of winning increases dramatically. A LOT of DOTA games are over by the 15 minute mark because the kill score is 12-5, but it's too early for the winning team to actually kill towers and finish it off.
The fact that getting a kill not only cripples the opposing team for a set amount of time but also increases the speed with which your hero techs makes especially high-end games usually very stale. It's like two players are lying in a swimming pool, and whoever pushes his opponent down first wins, because he also pushes himself up and it simply becomes downright impossible for the 'drowning' player to make a comeback. Professional-level LoL games basically have this 'feature' where if every person on one team misclicks once, they've basically lost. Imagine you'd lose your SC match due to one misclick - this happens in some matchups (where drops or unit positioning is complete key for one player), but it's extremely rare in SC, especially when compared to DOTA games.
I think I can safely say that the AoS 2 project we're working on has improved upon both these concepts, which is why I've got good hopes for it and think it'll be deserving of its name.
Well the idea is it's 5v5, so 1 lane might be loosing, but another you're team might be winning.
Come backs are very common in Dota, with ganking you can always catch an enemy team out of position even if you're loosing badly.
Yes, and this is the only reason DOTA is playable at pub level. If you watch a pro-match or two, you'll notice that this 'out of position' will never happen. Which turns the game into one HUGE pendulum. Make no mistake - a lot of games that are played professionally have some kind of pendulum system. I think the crowning example of this would be something like Mortal Kombat or Streetfighter, where getting in one punch stuns your enemy long enough for you to get in a second or third without them being able to react. It's just that I think this 'system' has too much of a role in DOTA.
Snowball effect its called.
It's a very good thing in fact, people even expect it in game. It rewards people for accomplishments, such as if you work hard at the start, pull off a big kill streak, you then can get a big fancy item at the end you saved up for faster than your other team.
the only bad aspect is when 1 team has clearly won, but the game drags on for another 15+ minutes, with the loosing team being powerless. This should be avoided.
@Zarakk: Go
I started making a DOTA map EXACTLY like that (the terrain, at least). I pulled the plug on it fairly early on, but I feel that it could be very fun.
3 teams tends to fail badly thou, it never really works.
Don't think you know what you're talking about. Kills do not add as much gpm as laning does. And, even so, only certain player kills matter at all. A support role death means nothing after wards are bought. A carry role death can mean alot, but most carries do not really start item farming gold until mid game.
The only time kills really matter is when the game is in pushing phase. Wasting an ultimate ability can be considered just as good as a death at this point. The reason DotA was considered so balanced is because pretty much all vital things in the game were like pin needles for the other team until the pushing phase. Kills, creeps, leveling, farming. Which is why the game takes 45 minutes plus to complete. The game is like a 45 minute arm wrestling match without much strength disparity, that goes back an forth. If a player would dominate the entire game, then of course the game would end early. But, a couple kills changed hardly anything.
oh jeez --
first, read the guy above me's post.
second, half of WC3 mapping became people trying to "put a new spin on the AOS genre" when in reality all they did was make things more complicated and failed. the idea is to make a fun map. dont worry about anything else, which leads me to saying this:
dota got popular for a reason. i know the history of the map probably better than anyone here, and I can tell you that the things you expressed in your post were even more prevalent earlier on in the map's life. why did Allstars win out then? because players had the most fun playing it. the dota model works fine, and your criticisms of it are your opinion yet despite the "snowball effect flaw" as you perceive it, people love playing it on both a casual and competitive level. obviously it's not that big of a deal. honestly I'll side with the map that's popular as opposed to the map maker trying to pick apart the flaws and make something better, which people already tried doing in WC3. and failed hard.
Furthermore, if you're truly worried about the "snowball effect", study the original DOTA map on Wc3:RoC because your team could be down 5-25 in hero kills and still easily win the game if you had better strategy and execution.
edit: how far along is your map anyway? I hope it's close, because it's about to get a lot of competition in the coming months :/
Like what? DotA2? Blizzard DotA?
For a start you forgot the EOTA style and the classic AOS style. Also do not forget about the Blizzard DOTA that is coming with the HOTS expansion.
Contribute to the wiki (Wiki button at top of page) Considered easy altering of the unit textures?
https://www.sc2mapster.com/forums/resources/tutorials/179654-data-actor-events-message-texture-select-by-id
https://media.forgecdn.net/attachments/187/40/Screenshot2011-04-17_09_16_21.jpg
Since two of you decided to call me out on my posts, let me give a proper response.
Except the first sentence, all of that is true - the problem is that it doesn't at all deny my point. Obviously it's better to take out certain players and all, but that doesn't change the fact that getting kills in general puts you miles ahead of the other team quite quickly in LoL. I'll refer to pro games again - most of these are completely equal until one team gets a couple of good kills off. Past that, the game drags on while team B doesn't have a realistic chance of coming back.
Again, pro games beg to differ. I like your arm wrestling analogy, but fact of the matter is that in any game where both teams are in the same league, it'll be a completely equal power struggle until one team gets a couple of good kills off. Usually the first big 5v5 battle is the turning point where one team loses the game. The problem is that a kill A) shoots down the person who gets killed and B) rewards the killer, putting him significantly ahead of the victim. Regardless of your character, if you get enough kills ahead of the opponent's team (and the big point is that you don't even need a whole lot), it'll be harder and harder for them to catch up. For every 30-minute pro LoL game, there is generally only about 5 minutes worth watching. For for example SC2 melee, the first 3 minutes of the game is the only time not worth watching in the majority of matchups.
But I never said DOTA wasn't fun. I'm a LoL player myself. Plus, I don't see how the original DOTA had a more prevalent snowball effect than DOTA games that are around now? The only reason one could claim that is because it was never really played professionaly (to the extend that games like LoL are now), which means you had a lot of these 3-shot wonders dominating games. That's a skill disparity though, and shouldn't in this case be used to talk about the map's balance. And if you want my honest opinion, I think the reason DOTA Allstars got on top was mostly because it kept the name DOTA. I was an avid Tides of Blood player at the time and though I'll have to disclaim that I barely played any Allstars, I thought it was one of the best balanced DOTA maps to date.
Of course my criticisms are my opinion - this whole thread is asking people about opinions. The OP is asking for 'ideas' how the DOTA concept could be improved.
Of course people enjoy playing the game. Again - I never said LoL is a terrible game, or DOTA a terrible genre. That said, people love playing it on a casual level is because the snowball effect doesn't really exist there. The reason 'comebacks' exist in any game with a risk/reward style of play is because the players that are on top make mistakes. The sole reason anyone has ever come back from being behind is because the top player let him by screwing something up himself. People on casual level make more mistakes, ergo more comebacks and ergo a less intensive game where everybody can do his own thing and still contribute. That style of play is brilliant, amusing and working like a charm.
You can do that, and you can honestly have fun playing your 'fun popular' map. I won't judge or condemn you. But you're failing to realize that it took someone who did exactly that, picking apart flaws and building something better, to come to that 'fun and popular map' that you're playing right now. You need to be critical and revolutionary tro create 'fun and popular' maps in the first place. The second you say "I'm happy with this" is the second progression stops. That's not to say that everybody should ALWAYS be looking for holes in maps in order to come up with CONSTANT improvement, but if you're talking in a thread called "DOTA Next generation", you're definitely in the wrong place to toss in the "But I'm happy with games like LoL" attitude. And all I was doing was pointing out something I think is necessary to be improved for the genre to evolve.
Again; I don't want to 'pick apart' your posts as much as I did now, but I feel you're missing both my point and the point of the whole thread.
We've got a "when it's done" policy, there =P. It's coming along well, and you should hear about it in the coming months, but we don't have an exact release date.
I'll respond to a few of your points
1. Allstars didn't win because it had the "DOTA" name; like 30 other maps had the "DOTA" name at the time as well. DOTA: ROC was released in December 2002. It was an overnight success because it was one of the first AOS maps on WC3 that used custom abilities. TFT Came out in summer 2003. When TFT came out, DOTA's original creator Eul was MIA playing Halo and had passed the map off to another editor. Due to his absence when TFT was released, no official port of the DOTA map was created on TFT and tons of different versions of "DOTA" by tons of random people popped up. There were literally 15 different DOTA maps circulating within 2 weeks of TFT being released. Guinsoo's map took all the best heroes from each of these maps and put them into one (copied and pasted literally) and called it "DOTA: Allstars". It ended up being the one that won out. because it was the most fun to play. Eventually the ROC map was ported (during the 4.XX series of Allstars) but it failed to get any popularity as Allstars had already won in the public. This time around, Classic DOTA couldn't play the "we have custom abilities and you don't" card as everyone had them with the TFT editor so Allstars kept going as it was more fun to play casually.
2. The earlier versions of Allstars (pre-6.0) had a greater snowball effect because carries didn't scale nearly as well. Their abilities weren't all necessarily designed with the intent of them being carries, as heroes weren't really designed with that philosophy yet. There was no Quelling Blade. Lastly, jungle creeps couldn't be farmed until 20 minutes into the game because they were so strong. For these reasons getting early kills and ganks especially ones that prevented the other team's carries from farming and allowed yours to do so created a much bigger disadvantage than it does now.
like, half the reason they did things such as add Quelling blade and fix neuts to be creepable earlygame was to combat the snowball effect idea, and honestly its just not really prevalent in the map anymore. if you get a bunch of early kills its really not going to matter come midgame because its not going to create a big enough advantage anymore.