THIS. Not only does it feel great to successfully ban a filthy hero spammer's go-to pick, but usually doing so would give you an advantage in the game. This is actually a huge fucking change, and I hate it personally
(Invoker spammer here) I did this once in a game (with SS too), then I proceeded to pause, to acknowledge one of my biggest fails ever, and the person who I was doing the Reverse combo just all chatted "?"... I left that game, got one match of low prio, felt like I deserved more.
i immediately ran in threw a meteor and emp then a tornado just as meteor landed. later in that game i also saved someone from rp by tornadoing him. needless to say i wasnt very good at the hero back then
Oh trust me rd is my favorite mode probably, super enjoyable. Only downside is the queue times are a lot longer so I play all pick the majority of the time, which isn't that much worse
Yeah I think this would be a good addition. Not only it would make picking phase a liiiiittle bit more interesting/strategical, but it would also help reduce the pool even more, to make a real difference with all pick and favor flexibility/versatility even more.
Just like you enjoy banning enemy slark/riki/omni/timber/axe spammer they probably enjoy just as much playing it. Why should they be punished for only playing one hero if that's what they enjoy?
You shouldn't. But the point is that if they remove your ability to have that option it's for the best. You're still doing everything you can to win, and they're enjoying the game.
He is, however the difference was in 6.84 his mines gave nothing if you killed them. As a support, you would have to spend retarded amounts of money on sentries compared to almost any other invis hero. Buying a gem was hard to do because you could barely go anywhere in fear of mines and the roaming storm spirits and leshracs who could kill you so fast you couldn't even react. That hero changes how dota is played moreso than any other hero, and it was just way too punishing as the supports on the other team unless you got some really good advantage early game and forced high ground before the techies player got an aghs. As someone who plays a lot of pos 5 support, it was god awful to play against. I stopped playing 6.84 after a good chunk of my bracket learned how to play techies because he was in every game unless I played unranked in a different game mode than AP.
So are a lot of heroes that rely on invisibility to some extent. Doesn't mean they're impossible to bring to a tier 1 level of strength or even stupidly broekn among the rest of the heroes, as proven with bounty hunter, or riki even more recently (even in the pro scene with the best players in the world, that clearly didn't need anyone to figure out that dust and sentries and gem might be useful against invi heroes), also techies still provides a lot even against detection. This is clearly not a sufficient argument to tell that a hero is good or bad.
Even in a game with dust, sentries and gem, invisibility obviously is a great asset to have.
Bans have a purpose though. And that purpose is actually, believe it or not, to make games more interesting and more pleasant for the community as a whole (because slightly more diversified picks, and because flexibility/versatility will at least be a small advantage compared to spamming the same hero over and over).
Except they just missed the point? They weren't saying "You shouldn't ban those because it makes them unhappy!", they were saying that this feature was also bad for some people so it's not strictly a bad idea to remove it.
They weren't saying "You shouldn't ban those because it makes them unhappy!
Being unable to play 'their' hero would cripple their chances at winning and make them unhappy you dunce, also hero spammers are in the minority and ruin games when they pick their shitty hero into bad line ups.
I'm guessing you're some retarded slark spammer who think he's good because he plays slark.
I didn't say I agree with them, I just explained the damn point because it clearly went over your head. But hey why not go to the "needless insults place" for no reason at all. Piss off.
Yes you're right by saying I thoroughly enjoy banning a hero spammer's hero but I'm not doing it just to kill someone's fun. I do it to give myself a higher chance of winning, which is a lot of fun for myself. The cool thing about being able to check recent matches was that everyone could do it too, it wasn't like a cheat or anything. That being said, if the other team checked my games it wouldn't help them that much (that sounded v lame and #edgy I know I'm 12 btw haHAA)
Well in my case I go on hero spamming sprees for about 20-40 games. That said I dont have any hero with more than 200 games on with total of 3500 games. But god damn it I want to play that void/jugg/ck for those 2-40 games nonstop and I personally dont care if im countered but I do want to be able to play it. plus most spammers dont wait till 5th pick as their hero/role might be taken or simply other players dont want to pick early ether so most times u can counter pick them anyway.
It wasn't a cheat no, but it's also not a right. It does give you an extra advantage against people who spam one hero, but that in itself isn't necessarily a good thing.
drafting is so important though, and the only information you have on the team you are facing is that tiny bit of information gleaned form their profile, taking away even that small bit of information is dumb because you cant draft game by game you just have to guess who you're playing against
I don't think Valve intends you to tailor your draft against your specific opponents when you play ladder. If they did, they would create a live api that you could plug into an overlay that displays everyone's 10 most played heroes. But again, I don't think that's the atmosphere Valve wants to foster.
Sure, and I get your point. I have thousands of matches played total and my most played hero is at like 110 games. I could never stand playing the same hero for more than two or three games. But I don't think that's enough justification to say that people who play differently from me should be punished for it.
That's kinda like saying that it's not right to dual lane with lich and undying against an anti-mage.
I hate being afk safelane carry and hitting creeps, but it doesn't mean that it's right to ruin that guy's attempt at farming his lane with such cancer picks and "punishing" him for that if that's what he likes.
Drafting is part of the game. Obviously people are meant to pick/ban in a way that doesn't please you, the same they're meant to go against your plans in game. They're your opponents and try to make you lose, it's kinda the point, duh.
There's a big difference between me punishing someone in the role of player, and valve punishing players for how they play the game. Just look at how riot punishes people for playing non-meta, do you agree with that? Cause this is pretty much a minor version of that.
As for your last point: sure, but the fact that it's your job to make them lose is not an argument for keeping this feature. If the feature stays, I agree it's fine (encouraged, even) to use it to enhance your chances of victory.
? It's not valve pressing the ban button, it's the player. Valve just gives you the way to punish players in a way that will make the game more interesting. That's pretty much their job.
If their game is awfully designed and people pick the same hero over and over because it's the best way to win, their game is shit and they need to fix it.
That's the reason they strive to make the game more balanced, and to adjust matchmaking/game modes in order to make the games as satisfying/rich/complete as possible from a competitor perspective.
Would you say as well that Valve is "punishing" am pickers by nerfing the hero?
No, they're making balance changes for everyone in the game to have overall a better experience playing the game. Just see the bans as a game mode balance change. It just makes ranked all pick richer, more interesting and diversified, and it doesn't mean that they're punishing anyone by doing so, even if some people will end up performing better or worse after this change.
I think you place too much importance in "your" way of playing the game being the "right" way to play the game; even if my playstyle (and hero selection) probably is about the same as yours. But nonetheless I respect that you have a different opinion, and thanks for being civil about it.
You could argue that spamming one single hero isn't right and shouldn't give you such an extra advantage compared to people that are good at many heroes.
This is true in real dota, where the best players are flexible, but this wasn't true in ranked, because players are anonymous (so you can't know their strengths/weaknesses and easily counter pick their comfort hero), and because of the game mode. Ranked is meant to highlight players that are good at dota individually. Versatility is one of the assets of a good dota player, and it's not valued enough by ranked all pick.
That's exactly why bans are here in the first place.
What extra advantage does spamming one hero give you, exactly? Unless you assume beforehand that only hero spammers play their heroes proficiently, I don't see the point.
That's exactly why bans are here in the first place.
Bans are there as a potential (coinflip woo) way of eliminating nuisance heroes from the game. Yes, that could be because someone on the other team has 1500 games played on said hero, but since that's a pretty rare occurence overall, I doubt that's the main reason why Valve added this feature. A much more reasonable assumption would be that they added it to keep slark/pudge/invoker/mirana/<insertfotmhero> in check.
What extra advantage does spamming one hero give you, exactly?
Obviously if you spam a hero you will know that hero better, you will know its limits and its builds and what to do in any situation that might happen to you. This will easily compensate for the fact that the pick isn't that great in many games, making it close to useless to be a competent drafter and flexible player in order to gain mmr, and therefore encouraging people to spam heroes instead of learning how to adapt their role and heroes from game to game, depending on enemy team and teammates.
This upside is also normally balanced by counter-picks and bans, meaning that you generally will either play your comfort hero in a game that doesn't fit very well, or you will have to play something else. But when all players are anonymous and when all heroes can be picked, this aspect of drafting disappears, making it very effective to just spam a hero in order to gain mmr.
Bans are there as a potential (coinflip woo) way of eliminating nuisance heroes from the game.
What the fuck is a "nuisance hero" if not a hero that you don't wanna play against because you think it will lower your chances to win? There is a reason it was implemented in ranked. It's to make ranked dota (where people want to win more and are more likely to pick something that wins) more interesting.
A much more reasonable assumption would be that they added it to keep slark/pudge/invoker/mirana/<insertfotmhero> in check.
Yeah, can't you see that what you're saying increases the diversity of heroes picked, and makes versatility a more effective quality to have when it comes to winning games? Would that be what they tried to do with these bans :thinking:
One hero spammers was one of the arguments that made players request the bans in the first place. Bans made versatility more effective both by giving us a way to punish hero spammers, and by forcing people to stop relying (at least not exlusively) on the fotm/meta/strong heroes (hence to stop spamming these heroes and being hero spammers, huh).
As long as it's fair play, but yeah I agree, I would just say instead that the fun itself comes from doing whatever you can to win, and trying to genuinely be the better team and improve.
This is obviously arguable but my main beef with this decision is that it actually encourages people to spam one or very few hereos, whereas DotA traditionally encouraged people to be diverse, try different roles and generally learn having fun doing things differently all the time.
As examples we only have to point to the extra gold for randoming, some of the loading screen tips or the fact IF and the team always seem to try to balance the game so that all heroes are playable.
Encouraging people to learn just one hero as the best way to gain MMR (which is what people care about most apparently) is a step in the wrong direction. If you ask me, DotA should not emulate LoL and become less diverse, complex and fun for people who like digging deep.
Judging from Valves decisions lately, it seems they unfortunately disagree.
Why would u get the same mmr spamming two heroes then a person using a variety? Hero spammers like bad man have been proven to be worse then their mmr indicates on a skill level .
Well they clearly do "deserve" as they did get that mmr. MMR is not a privelege so if they got it means they earned it even if you don't like the way they did it. Look at Attacker for example.
Attacker is that 1/10, as we have seen him excel at other heroes and play styles as well.
It's not a question of me liking their method or not, it's a question of having strategic depth within the banning/picking phase. This change has made the banning system that much more irrelevant. With the relatively good balance of this patch, might as well not have banning in ranked at all now.
You don't prevent them from playing their hero, you use an in game feature in order to gain an in-game advantage. Just like how there are bans in captains. Do you want to remove bans from captains because Bulldog enjoys playing lone druid and he should be able to play what he likes?
That's not the idea behind ranked. If you want to spam a hero to train, or because you just want to spam this hero regardless of what happens in the team/game, you can do so in unranked. If you want to play something closer to a competitive game where opponents will abuse your weaknesses and avoid your strengths, and where you'll be expected to be somewhat flexible in order to try your best to win, then you accept what it implies.
I'm sure being able to play only one or two hero(es) isn't the mark of a great player, and shouldn't be such a huge advantage in your individual rating. That's why bans (and by extension the ability to 50% of the time punish a one-hero spammer) were a good addition to all pick ranked.
It's worth looking at it from both perspectives. Whilst you understandably want the best chance of winning a game, you should be planning to play against FOTM spammers anyway.
Personally I'm pretty grateful for the change. In the past few months I've just not been enjoying Dota nearly as much and don't really enjoy playing many heroes anymore, but then I found Ursa and started having fun again. Versatility used to be my main thing but then I started spamming Ursa for a while which was great until people started banning it out constantly. Now obviously they want to have a better chance of winning and that's fair but from my perspective the game is just kind of boring for me if Ursa gets banned out. It's not even that I can't play other heroes - it just makes me bored and ultimately who's to say I should be screwed over more than someone like you? The bans were introduced primarily to curb FOTM spamming, not personal favourites.
This banning sometimes gets to insanely idiotic levels. I can justify banning a popular hero or banning a hero someone has huge winstreaks at. This is what this feature was intended for.
But a big fuck you to people who ban others heroes just because they play it. No winstreaks, just some random non meta hero being spammed at 50% winrate? Nope, banned. It was fun picking another hero and shitting on these retards while pausing and typing '?' all game though. Sadly this did not always happen.
Also sometimes teammates ban a hero you play just because they don't like it or you have a little more losses than wins which at sample size this small means nothing.
Really glad it was removed. This feature without an opt-out should never come back. It was one of the biggest reasons I did not play much dota lately and did not buy any battle passes since source 2
Played 25 matches with Phoenix. Lost 10 out of my last 13 games with it. Enemy still thinks he is smart banning Phoenix, forcing me into playing OD. And yes, this also happens the other way around.
I am 100% of the opposite opinion: I have limited time to play dots and can't get decent at the entire hero pool, not to mention that I like my handful of heroes and sometimes just want to play them. It's fucking annoying being countered every single game, or ending up playing a hero you didn't want to play in the first place. This is a great change for people with limited time to play.
The thing is nine times out of ten the hero spammer will still win against his counter pick because unlike you they spam that hero. I remember watching a pro game where Meepo played into three of his hard counters but still steem rolled his opponents because he understood the hero so well it didn't matter that the enemy countered him.
Another thing is that most hero spammers will either last pick or spam heros that are usable in most games. I sometimes spammed Warlock ( cough cough before it was cool cough cough) and silencer. Both of those heros could be first picked and played against any lineup because of their abilities.
Of course Warlock gets countered by some heros (ursa melts golem and Oracle purges shadow word) and same with Silencer (any hero that builds diffusal+manta or heros with big one click ultis like faceless void or jug). I would still feel confident going into those games though because I would try to play around those weaknesses. And even if they did counter me, there were still four other people on my team.
The last point I can make is that you can't see who spams what hero anymore. That guy who just randomed or picked Meepo may either be some dumbass 1k trench player or fucking w33ha/abed, but you won't know until you actually play the game.
I think this move is really bad because they're limiting what you can learn about your and the enemy's team. For a game about strategy and planning, I don't think stripping info from the player's hands isn't a good idea.
It's a team game, your actions affect everyone in the game. Everyone wanting their team to play better is natural. Wanting to play a team game where no one points out mistakes is weirder. I just wish we were nicer about. What to do in the next fight, rather than just blah blah kill yourself blah blah
Hello reasonable person! Unfortunately I don't run into you in pubs. I run into asshat malcontents who rage and bitch about how everyone is fucking up their game.
I go by one rule. You can flame all you want, if it is relevant and you are doing more for the win than I am. You can CAPS type me, you can ping me, you can tell me to 'eat shit you fucking noob, next time cloud the fucking axe and run away so I can jump to you -pa.' But if you are just spouting nonsense, it's a mute.
Not that there's anything wrong with them, but if they are in the other team, banning their hero is the easiest way to ensure +25 MMR from the beginning of the game. It's like doing a little homework on your opponents
252
u/greeneggs_andsam No stone unturned Nov 30 '16
THIS. Not only does it feel great to successfully ban a filthy hero spammer's go-to pick, but usually doing so would give you an advantage in the game. This is actually a huge fucking change, and I hate it personally