Karawasa

I've been toying with the idea of redesigning the main website for quite sometime now. Rather than blurb, http://www.playdota.com/ I love their site. At the moment, I am thinking about basically copying their site. We would replace the hero graphics banner with our own. Same goes for the shield logos. I'd fit in a few spaces for ads. We'd do the towers/creeps like they do heroes. I'd consolidate the various game information into "Mechanics" and "Learn the Game." I'd get some sort of build explorer to replace the build lists (i.e. some interactive thing where you add elements or select a build and see what comes up, maybe with some analysis). What do you guys want to see on the main website? How should it look? What features should it have?

I'd like everyone to take a step back for a second and look at the design of the towers (duals/triples) that we are using. Enough time has passed where we can certainly consider remaking or replacing certain towers. In my opinion, we did an excellent job with the design of the support towers. Thus, I am personally going to be focusing my gaze on the damage towers. That doesn't mean you have to do the same though. What is bothering me (and thus was the spur for this post) is that amongst the damage towers there is a fair amount of repetition in underlying concept. We did an excellent job in masking this, but I believe we could add more to the game by tackling it. Let me give you two examples, 1. Vapor, Quaker, Tidal, Radius 2. Disease, Hydro, Flame, Flamethrower What is the deal with these lists? 1. All of these towers are AoE around the tower effect. 2. All of these towers are AoE around the creep effect. I'm not proposing that we go and destroy all of these towers. Rather, I am just giving the catalyst behind the decision to make the post. Though it wouldn't hurt to see these two lists cut down by one or two either. So back to the point. I'll start by suggesting some towers I would like to see changed, and why. I'd appreciate if you guys would not only critique my suggestions but also make your own. Mushroom: Not only is this tower like Magic ("gets beefier every X seconds"), it also suffers from not working correctly with buffs (thus requiring an absurd tooltip). Upon typing this post I realized a way I can fix Magic (but not Mushroom) so that it does work with buffs perfectly. Thus, this is one ability we can do without.Poison: This tower seems like the boring version of Ice. I think we can do better than to have two duals that are basically both shockwaves.Quark: This tower suffers from the not working correctly with buffs problem. At least with Zealot, you can argue that Well makes it charge faster so it equals out. So it feels like Zealot but suffers from unfixable problems.Vapor: We have enough AoE around the tower. Unlike the other ones, this is as bland as they come. I find this tower extremely boring too.Disease: This tower suffers from its limited nature (only so many corpses). It has to be overpowered because it can't be massed. At the same time, it loses effectiveness fast. As graphically pleasing as the effect is, I think it has to go.Flesh Golem: The idea of a traveling single target tower is not original (Oblivion). The teleport is cool looking. But, it is also bugged. Perhaps an Oblivion with only two minions at a time (to reduce micro intensity) would be a compromise that could eliminate the need for this tower.Flamethrower: Suffers from similar problems to Disease. Perhaps if the Napalm effect stacked such that you could essentially charge up units to explode for massive damage, would the problems be alleviated. Though with the way it is coded now, that isn't possible. I can probably fix that, but is it worth keeping the concept? It's axing time!

Bumping this again.

Anyone else want to chime in?

But hey, once we escape WC3 this ought to be a lot easier to do .

Any new thoughts on this? ImmolatusBurn is back working on this system so now is as great a time as ever.

Bump again. This is the PvP idea that would do much better than Super Weapons in my opinion. Here are some thoughts: -Items seem like they would be an additional layer of complication that are not needed. -There is plenty of reason to copy abilities from DotA, but we can certainly make our own too. Either way, I am not in contact with Icefrog these days so assume anything would have to be coded by us (which is fine). -How to deal with levels and XP? Can you only level up when in hero form? Creep kills give a small xp bounty, hero kills a large one? The stats would need to be done better this time so that the hero grows with the game properly. -Why for beginners only? If we do it right I imagine a mode that potentially may rival the main game. It offers a hybrid gameplay that takes competition to the next level. -Time to start brainstorming again. If not in WC3, we will certainly see this in the next incarnation of ETD.

Bumped before the next beta. I'd appreciate seeing some more multiplayer tests, especially with a replay. I really would like to nail it on the head for the next beta.

Bumping this topic for justice. I'd really like to hear some opinions on this now that a good deal of time has passed. My personal opinion is that the tier 1 triple buff was both needed and adequate. These support towers now have enough oomph to consider building before late game, yet do not dominate the board once built. In regards to tier 3 duals, I think the nerf was needed but not adequate. My hunch is that 120% will be reasonable.

Let's revisit this topic once again. Draft Pick is top priority when it comes to modes. Beyond a working DP, I do not have concrete plans. Though I am strongly considering a PvP Hero Mode to replace Super Weapons Mode. What about new commands or features? Any effects or projectiles you're not fond of? Towers that might be put under consideration to be axed?

It is a good time to revisit the state of balance in anticipation of the 4.2. I believe with the 4.1 we did a good job given the nature of development at that point. Now that things have settled down, we can apply more focus along with a better method to achieve optimal results. There are two areas of balance, and I propose we do things differently for both. Micro Previous incarnations of micro balance could be summed up as "everyone give me your view on all the towers, or all the towers that have problems." This resulted in a lot of apple and orange comparisons and ultimately I ended up deciding which results to pay attention to. This time around I propose we have some more direction. I believe having agreed upon bases and methods will work out much better for us. What do I mean by this? I propose we balance all the damage duals relative to one that we all agree is balanced, and likewise for damage triples. I also propose that in testing relative balance we all use the same methods (such as how many creeps do I leak this wave, or what is the DPS over the period etc.). To start the process, we need to agree on some things. I'd like everyone to post one damage dual and one damage triple that they considered as balanced. I'd also like everyone to list the methods they used or would like to use in testing balance. Macro Previous incarnations involved holepercent doing the heavy lifting along with some fancy tables created. holepercent has offered to tackle the macro once again. What I would like to do differently this time around is divide the work more clearly. If holepercent excludes himself from micro testing, he can focus on macro better. The same applies to the rest of the team and excluding macro. What I am unsure about is whether to allocate an additional person to macro. I think it would be worthwhile to have a second opinion, but the second person can't share work with holepercent given the nature of macro balance. Is anyone else interested in taking on macro balance over micro?

Time to revisit this.

In my opinion he would make a good addition to our team. He has been around for a long time, he is one of the few active agents left, and he comes across as both knowledgeable and intelligent. Thoughts?

Now if only we saw you .

http://www.slackergamer.com/2009/07/elemen...for-warcraft-3/

Glad you like them, more are on the way. Though the Radius one is getting reverted because it causes lag.

Fixed.

It is not your imagination, and it will be fixed.

@emjlr3: My thoughts exactly. Nice of you to stop by. @Kaini: Flash is easier to distribute and monetize, but Java would provide the better game. At the moment, I am leaning towards Java (more on that later). Perhaps it is too early for an IRC meeting (i.e. some faces are missing from this thread). @13est: Yes, it is a large sum of money. Recent developments may change that (more on that later). In regards to the type of contribution, let me be clear in saying that there is no requirement for the financial. As it has always been, all that I require is your brain. That being said, if any of you are interested in having a "stake" in this project then you're welcome to PM me. @cohadar: It is true that graphics will be the bigger burden. I plan on hiring an artist or two to take care of these needs. Voluntary work (i.e. "community support") just won't cut it, unless we want a game out in years (i.e. unacceptable). In regards to legal issues, we will certainly not be using any Blizzard models/textures or modifications of them. In fact, I'd like to take this opportunity to try out a new artistic theme (WC3 is just a little too cartoony for me). Nice of you to stop by. The "more on this later" is in regards to the back and forth I have been having with MagicalHacker. This is preliminary, and I stress preliminary, but we may already have the coding needs fulfilled (and fulfilled well) with MH (and his business partner, another avid programmer). He strongly prefers Java over Flash, and that seemed a make or break point. Also, it seems he is not the only one to say so (everyone else in this thread has been saying Java > Flash too). If things pan out and MH and Co. take on the coding side of things, that alleviates costs too.

Noted, I will increase the duration.

The only reason I can think of to mass (aside from abusing a glitch) is when you are on random and do not have the elements for the upgrade. Of course, if you're massing the higher tiers then you are on too easy of a difficulty. In case my reasoning isn't apparent, upgrades are always a better value.

With the additional 15 movespeed bonus and the lower threshold for upgrades, Ronald should be a force to reckon with.

Didn't feel it was particularly underpowered when I have used it recently. What do you guys think?

With the changes implemented (150/10) and time to test, what do you guys now think?

Bot is back.