WickedBear

[quote] Sure and at the start of every game, we just do the demigod dance.. Our team picks a demigod, your team changes its own to match that, then ours changes to match your change.. and so on. You realize i hope, how stupidly futile your argument is. In an ideal world, you would have no idea what the enemy will bring in terms of demigods and as such.. you would have to adjust your own selection to cover the boradest spectrum possible in terms of skills. Now if you ca

[quote who="Sly_Squash" reply="15" id="2297538"]Whenever someone says "Demigod X is OP because he can beat Demigod Y 1vs1" the community replies that the game balance isn't centered around 1vs1 so this is fine. So why is it that people in this thread say doubles are fine? If Demigod X is OP against demigod Y, why wouldn't Demigod combo XX be overpowered against demigod combo YY? [/quote] Because it's your choice to play an obviously bad matchup. You can play 6 di

[quote who="ddd888" reply="19" id="2297495"] that is ABSOLUTELY FALSE even if i choose always my opponent the ranking after a bit will reflect the right value for each one if my opponent is a noob i will beat him, i will go up in ranking and he will go down and so on you probably have no clue how the rankings work, but being custom matters for maybe 1% of the your rating [/quote] I'm

[quote]The reason you wait 5-15 minutes to start a game is because you're playing premade, and people either know this when they see your game up and don't bother joining, or they figure it out when they join your game after looking up your players. There are numerous instances of people stating on the board and within the game lobby that they try and join games to get on the host's team to improve their chances of not facing an arranged team - that is the reason games take so long to f

[quote who="nobalkain" reply="2" id="2297434"] This thread just shows how the majority of the Hardcore players are just snobs and jerks. How dare someone who plays for FUN ask the Elite to add a simple word in the title. [/quote] It assumes the "elite" aren't just people playing for fun who happen to be good. Hypocracy at it's best. How DARE people who suck come in and ruin MY fun when i'm trying to have a decent game?

[quote]Where did this come from? I've never claimed to be good.[/quote] Sorry, ill rephrase that. You think it's a better mechanism to become a better player than team play. I'm not getting back into this, i had enough of the random talk before random was implemented.

[quote who="lifekatana" reply="6" id="2297391"]Oh yeah because you have your shield on just when you walk into an INVISIBLE minefield. [/quote] Oh right, because you're not going to be aware of where FIVE REGULUS ARE HANGING AROUND TOSSING MINES.

[quote who="XaviorsFist" reply="4" id="2297368"]The only set of doubles I sometimes won't allow (mostly if it's an all expert game) is double regulus's. And the only reason for that is MINES. 6 mines is annoying enough but 12 all set together is overkill. Doubles really aren't overpowered it just doubles up on abilities that are usefull on maps. Although I do hate that people say you can exploit the same weakness on each player because they chose the same demigod. Well truthfully y

RA 1 was the last good C&C, you people are nuts. The series died at Tiberian sun's god awful release.

[quote]What i wrote is pretty much 1x1 as far as managing a project goes. Its the simple facts that you have to take into account when you decide about resource allocation. It has nothing to do with poorly designed code, as the same principles could be applied to about any job you name, that can have multiple people working on the same thing. Not only does your post contradict my own experience, but it also fails to meet plain old common sense.[/quote] Not really, what

Because anything that challenges the status quo for the random player is immediatly deemed not fun for them. There's a common trend with bad players ive found is, when they hear somthing that might even be remotely a half decent opinion that aligns with their own, they immeaditly accept it into their "psuedo rulebook" that becomes passed around very quickly. I've noticed this in many games. If you think this is bad, play 2 hours of lunia. In a game type that's called 5v5, you'll get called a

[quote]Stats can be an extremely useful matching and rating tool and the fact that some guys on top of the ladder may not log in frequently has nothing to do with their skill level. If that kind of thing bothers you then you should be arguing in favor of decaying stats, not against stats in general.[/quote] I don't really care whos on top of a ladder. I've never been point centric in games because it defeats the purpose of what a competitive player should be doing: learning. Lad

[quote]Software development is similar to this. There are simply tasks you can't delegate to more people, as the task is not big enough for more people to work on. Not to mention, that software development is a lot more complicated than lifting a ball, so the more people you have working on the same thing, the more organization and planning you require to prevent chaos, which in turn reduces overall effeciency[/quote] This only applies to code that is written poorly, with po

[quote]This isn't right though, rankings are an excellent way to measure player skill when good players fight each other. Works fine for chess, quadradius, warcraft 3, WoW, and a number of other games.[/quote] It is right. There is no accurate way to measure how good a player is by the games hes played because it cannot take into account all factors, especially if were counting "custom games" in the ranks. The moment you start letting people choose their opponents stats mean not

[quote] YOU KNOW YOU WANT THIS POWER, FAME AND GLORY BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BECAUSE I AM A VASTLY SUPERIOR HUMAN BEING.[/quote] You too? :( I thought It was only me. But seriously, can we NOT turn this thread into the one I replied to a month about begging stardock not to have an all random mode option. Yes we get it already, you like random things. You like random partners, on random maps, with random heros. You think that makes you good with no direct data to back it

[quote]the game is too often decided by the first kill[/quote] Wrong. And why would you want them to take development time away from fixing the BUGS, instead of rewarding people for losing consistently?

[quote]Anyway, GPG is aware of the crash problems. For those people who have them, it happens a lot. Other people (most people) it never happens.[/quote] Everyone I know that has played the game (5+) has crashed to the desktop by alt tabbing. But honestly, I don't care about that as much as the game play bugs which I see as the common consensus on what everyone really wants fixed. If I'm speaking about somthing different, I apologize.

[quote]let them be options - the 'pros' can play without them, whose who want it can have it. lot of people are complaining about premades- that means a lot of people play casually(don't want to get serious people to paly a ton). this offers those casual players a way back in the game when their team is down - people make mistakes, casual players arn't gonna be experts, if they can learn form it they can get better and actualy compete in the match[/quote] The options are about as poin

[quote]The intent is not to randomize the teams in all custom games - it is to provide an option for the host of a custom game to allow teams to be randomly selected. There are many of us who would join a game named "4v4 RANDOM TEAMS" in a heartbeat to guaranty not having to worry about team stacking.[/quote] That's my problem with it. I already wait 5-15 minutes to start a game, with more options to slow the game from starting instead of fixing the REAL issues at hand, I m

I'm not being harsh, I was actually quite curious how he would defend my preconceived notions of regulus play-- which I admit are most likely flawed.

All these idea's are un-needed, and don't make any logical sense. There's no reason why if you are winning a fair fight, somone should get an opportunity to catch up unfairly. You have a fair way to catch up, PLAY BETTER. It's very rare a game is decided over 1-2 deaths unless its the last minutes of the game. TBH, this is spoonfeeding newbies, and ruins competitive play.

[quote] you two saying they should sue is a great example of our legal system: dear god that things seems similar, we should sue please, give me a valid reason for them to sue. i'll even let you assume they can shut s2 down and get some cash. but hey, we were making a dota game!!!1!!1 - letting people work on a huge project that is what they are getting money to live

epic

The creator of DOTA is Eul, i sincerely doubt hes involved in any of these projects as he lost interest in it. Blizzard can sue anything that is pretty much a direct copy of what it is. People who pass up games because of DRM, are people too cheap to buy the game anyway. I've never met somone in my life that said "oh yeah.. I didn't buy that game because I could only play it if i paid for it". Blizzard wouldn't sue over a tower defense map, because none of them had a centraliz

Who the hell is IceFrog? Unless hes a blizzard employee I don't think hes authorized to do anything regarding blizzard's intellectual property. And if hes some important DotA figure, DotA was founded and supported by Eul, to say it was anyone else's is ludicrus. Yes they would sue from lost revenue of advertising on battle.net. Yes this could potentially prevent dota from making its way into SC2 somehow, or even WC4. Maybe they had their own plans to release a project? There could be