Dota Developers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GoatAss

  1. This is a good idea, I'll see how to get it implemented somehow. I'd have it replace corrosion tower instead though instead of polar.
  2. @Bercut32 could you add me on steam? It'll help me with balancing the game watching your games.
  3. to reach top 10 frogs, players normally accumulate 350-400k networth. typically on insane/random. you'd have 120-180k networth depending on how you play.
  4. In random, you need a bit of experience to know when to begin building, what to build and where to build. Gotta realize early also when you may have trouble clearing the wave, that's when you shouldn't buy-sell excessively. Each version is different too.
  5. 1. nature/light overly nerfed. i sigh getting them. 2. eph much too weak late game 3. laser weak late game 4. haste strongest ele3 with slows 5. scoring system feels dull/unrewarding towards speed. speed is overly nerfed. 6. tidal should have small buff 7. quake tower weakest ele3. i dont even know what this tower is good for. 8. magic/disease appears fine. 9. hail stronger early. weak against frogs. so to say. only impulse, haste, laser are 'ok' tri towers.
  6. Although im not an express player..... express for what its called should reward speed the most. Nothing wrong with speed being more dominant in a mode meant for speed. Classic is where balance is necessary Frog killing is where economy is dominant Gotta thrive for speed, and get the highest score from speed. Gotta thrive for economy to get the most frog kills.... and gotta thrive for balance for highest score. Problem with this game somewhat is that there's no random factor. There will always be a build that best fits a version. A build that will yield the highest score. This is at least so for non-random. It's all about discovery.
  7. In x.y.z versioning -- y is for major changes, z is for minor changes. The version shouldn't be some math formula that quantifies the magnitude of changes. Do users need to do math to figure out how many changes are made when looking at a version number? y should be mostly about feature additions z are mostly about balancing.. this should rightfully be 1.9.1.... and 1.9.2 for any other small changes... and then 2.0 once you have some new features in.
  8. Alright. I like the overall feel of 1.9 so far. Earth feels better but I cannot do any definite feedback. Faster game is good. 1sec is good in other words. Difficulty is good. Scoring wise, ok you're right. While it's difficult to conclude the balance between frog-emphasis and speed-emphasis, which of the two being more imba... it does appear that both are equally important unlike previous version where theres too much emphasis on speed.
  9. Would be nice if there are statistics for things like - Fastest clear time per difficulty - Highest frog count per difficulty .. im sure we can think of more. I have my own php/sql coder who accomplish this if you do lack resources
  10. Finally we can feel powerful again
  11. Hes right though, its better to create a whole new game. People aren't very accepting of huge changes generally speaking.
  12. Actually, come to think of it, I take what I said back, I think majority of people would actually want more features, more new stuff. When I first started, I was totally oblivious to scoring. But of course it may differ if somewhere during pre-game phase there is a more obvious announcer or list of tables of everyone's highest score. Does make me wonder if majority of dota players play ranked or unranked. Perhaps top 500 players may take pride in the rank they have. Once you're far too low in rank, I don't think anyone would care. rank 5214 and 4999 who cares right? At rank 250, it's already a 1% minority.
  13. this i wouldn't quite so agree. every top played successful game in the pc gaming market were focused on the competitive side rather than fun stuff. but i do suppose there are "fun" games out there..... xcom? but perhaps its just me, i find challenges and scores more fun. maybe someone else should share their opinion on this. we could setup a poll why people play eletd on the main page of eletd.com things can become clearer then. btw, is it possible to setup an in-game poll? would it work at all? perhaps vote at game-end phase or pre-game maptyep selection phase.
  14. thumbs up
  15. The game is fairly new still, all aspects of the game requires improvement. However, if a certain build/strategy is being spammed, well, I do feel some changes need to be brought about. But of course, the essence of any game is reward. If tetris had no measure of improvement or progress (levels or scoring), I don't think anyone would have even know about the game. So I feel. By covering the competitive aspect, the rest should be covered too. For me, the overall competitive balance of the game should be addressed first before all else -- aka before looking into complete tower remakes, new features. At least so for 1.8. Remakes and new features require more development and time. I really would like to strengthen many towers -- atom, disease, water, earth, so many more. Watch them get abused if at all and then we can see how to improve in the next major version. The problem with current version is not that the current build is strong, but rather there aren't really any other viable builds. There's only one obvious route to the competitive side of it.
  16. so has been any game. buff this hero, nerf that hero. new metas are made. new things are made. new trends are made. for me at least, i think changes makes things interesting. imagine if dota2 never gets any updates. what happens then? also right now, it isnt that a tower should be buffed at random, quite obviously no one builds vapor tower, hydro tower, and actually quite a very many number of them. to one way look at things, you can nerf overpowered towers. but one can also say, there are too many underpowered towers. nerf them all, game becomes hard buff them all, game becomes easy. but at the end of the day, easy or hard, people just pick the current strongest towers.
  17. Since frogs will eventually win... the difference is whether everyone loses at lvl57 or lvl60 on average. Boss is of no relevance. The difference though is source of scoring. By making frogs ever difficult, only means that the source of points should only be from speed, which is how it is right now. It's also less interesting being able to only clear 2-3 levels of frogs. This simply implies that at present, all strategies should entirely focus on speed-clearing. By making more points available from frogs, players can create their strategy around frog clearing too. I think people get around 100k points from frogs, often less right now.
  18. regarding scoring. one of the two would work 1) buff speed bonus 5% , frog+endnetworth bonus 10% otherwise higher increment on frogs per level to scale with hp increase. 2) buff frog, endnetworth 5% essentially the same thing actually. reward 10k score for perfect life game. as it stands, the main source of score is speed -- no different than before. furthermore since frogs are harder now, 4 levels of frogs on insane doesnt give you very much points compared to speed also, perhaps revert frogs hp, so that players can last frogs a little longer. it makes it interesting. right now, on average, we last till lvl57-58. once again its a matter of scaling. buffing doesnt buff certain players, nerfing doesnt nerf certain players. everyone gets to last frogs a little longer.
  19. Better to create something overpowered right now, than have the same old towers dominate. We can always nerf it later. Right now, minor updates I guess, small damage tweaks. Tower remakes later on. Perhaps implement big changes in 2.1 or 2.2. To some degree, I think versioning should follow x.y.z rather than x.y to imply big/small changes. lightning tower appears very weak, not sure if its stronger than before even. can someone confirm it? wasted about 30 seconds using this tower, kinda ruined my current high score.
  20. 1% stacking slow that lasts 1/2/3 (levels) second each stack, not that bad i think. 10 lvl1 towers would only do 10% slow, not worth it. 10lvl2 would do up to 20% slow, quite costly i think. 10lvl3 would do 30% slow, and it does cost money. or 1%/2%/3% stacking slow that lasts 1 second. perhaps restrict it to a single unit. i would need to really sit down and count good balanced values. well the idea is there, but the numbers are to be tweaked i think its easier to begin with an overpowered tower and then nerf it as necessary than produce something underwhelming and then buff it.
  21. Poison tower -- why not make it do dmg over time? somewhat like fire tower...... but maybe with a small difference 1% stacking slow? 300 aoe, poison3 doing slightly more dmg than fire3 perhaps. right now, as it is, its pretty similar to hail.
  22. ive not tried but i think there are other more rewarding towers at the moment.
  23. well, based on one game so far 1. i still find earth underwhelming.. but i had no decent slows. so earth is reliant while the rest arent so much so. i still prefer the 1.7 ability. it makes it unique, and i feel its better against undead. it had its purpose. 2. i still prefer old water. new water is reliant on slows. just like invoker. however, i have no doubt new water is great with slows and amps. i still think we should work around the 1.7 abilities and improve it 3. haste tower... i still do not like it, even with blacksmith3 i didnt find it strong aginst frogs, it did fare fair early on though. 4. fire is good now 5. bulky creeps is a good idea 7. scoring -- people need to get scores from somewhere. previously it was speed. now its insane. the speed bonus nerf should be reduced. quick clearing is a considerable art.
  24. If i were to guess, it would be your GPU overheating. To test, try leave the casing cover open for a week. Make sure the GPU free from dust too.
  25. If still needed, I can ask a friend in the SQL department. He does pgsql and oracledb mostly.