GitP WarCraft 3: The Frozen Throne group (thread II)

[Spartacus]

I think most people know it better as EDH, actually.

[Woodzyowl]

Fair enough. I didn't know, I've only been playing MTG for around 5 weeks now.

[Winterwind]

I've played only regular MTG myself (occasionally in some variant to allow for 3-4 players), never tried EDH though. I'm not sure any of my legendary creatures would make a good commander, though, and while building a Highlander-deck would be easy enough, I'd have to check whether my card pool would allow me building one that makes sense, too.
(Probably yes though, it's grown pretty decent over these last few years. )

Ahem, anyhow.

So it looks like I somehow managed to forget posting a reminder yesterday... so let me do that now: Reminder, our custom map session is today. Hope to see you all there.

[Winterwind]

And reminder again: Melee session tomorrow.

So, as mentioned in the voice chat yesterday... do we still want to keep having Sunday sessions at all? Quite frequently, people don't really seem in the mood for melee anyhow, and also these days the people frequenting the Friday and the Sunday sessions are the same anyhow, so if we wanted to play melee we probably could do so on Fridays, too. Kinda like we'd intended to do way back when this group started three years ago - back then we wanted a session where we'd play both customs and melee, but then there were so many people adamantly opposed to melee that we couldn't ever play it on the same day as when we played customs - I think these days we could do just that just fine. In fact, it might make the process of agreeing upon what to do easier and diversify the amount of things we do in the session.

And I've heard people complaining about so many sessions cutting into their free time too severely - and I actually agree, I kinda feel the same way.

So... do we want to keep the melee session? Or shall we have only one weekly WC3 session henceforth?

[Woodzyowl]

Since I know how much Winter hates triple posts, I'll go ahead and say it: tomorrow is our next custom map session. I will probably be there until 6 or so, like last time.

[nooblade]

So, as mentioned in the voice chat yesterday... do we still want to keep having Sunday sessions at all? Quite frequently, people don't really seem in the mood for melee anyhow, and also these days the people frequenting the Friday and the Sunday sessions are the same anyhow, so if we wanted to play melee we probably could do so on Fridays, too. Kinda like we'd intended to do way back when this group started three years ago - back then we wanted a session where we'd play both customs and melee, but then there were so many people adamantly opposed to melee that we couldn't ever play it on the same day as when we played customs - I think these days we could do just that just fine. In fact, it might make the process of agreeing upon what to do easier and diversify the amount of things we do in the session.

And I've heard people complaining about so many sessions cutting into their free time too severely - and I actually agree, I kinda feel the same way.

So... do we want to keep the melee session? Or shall we have only one weekly WC3 session henceforth?

The multigamers won't want to melee but who cares. Yeah?

I might want to propose changing Sunday into Conquest for Glory day. But I've been having the Warcraft blues, lately doing things like reading the books I always wanted to or pulling my Spelunky deaths into the thousands and wins up to single digits. I did actually get a win though; it was so, so awesome. Clearly I should try a Spelunky/Warcraft day like all the multigamers, except my apparently limited perception and reflexes would turn that day into Spelunky with Skype chat interruptions.

Furthermore, I haven't played CfG in so long I wonder if it was really fun or what. It might be the kind of thing that I return to later and nitpick about. And we never did have a "balanced" game for it, it always seemed to snowball one way or another. I lost a bunch of map stuff in a few computer switches, too, so it won't be easy to do quick changes just to see what happens. Interest in BfG or other maps as long-term project canidates is almost at zero; there's an abundance of interesting and actually rewarding projects to work on outside of the Warcraft world.

[The Orange Zergling]

And reminder again: Melee session tomorrow.

So, as mentioned in the voice chat yesterday... do we still want to keep having Sunday sessions at all? Quite frequently, people don't really seem in the mood for melee anyhow, and also these days the people frequenting the Friday and the Sunday sessions are the same anyhow, so if we wanted to play melee we probably could do so on Fridays, too. Kinda like we'd intended to do way back when this group started three years ago - back then we wanted a session where we'd play both customs and melee, but then there were so many people adamantly opposed to melee that we couldn't ever play it on the same day as when we played customs - I think these days we could do just that just fine. In fact, it might make the process of agreeing upon what to do easier and diversify the amount of things we do in the session.

And I've heard people complaining about so many sessions cutting into their free time too severely - and I actually agree, I kinda feel the same way.

So... do we want to keep the melee session? Or shall we have only one weekly WC3 session henceforth?

Whoops, I forgot that I never got around to answering this. My bad.

Personally, I'd be perfectly okay with collapsing the sessions together. I like hanging out and playing with you guys a lot, but these sessions really do cut into my free time rather substantially, and it's the exact same people coming to both sessions every week, basically all of whom play both custom maps and melee.

[Inhuman Bot]

Do you even need to post reminders anymore? I'm pretty sure we all know if we're coming or not.

(I won't be this week.)

[Winterwind]

Since I know how much Winter hates triple posts, I'll go ahead and say it: tomorrow is our next custom map session. I will probably be there until 6 or so, like last time.

And thank you very much for doing so, especially since I kinda sorta forgot doing it myself.

I'll be there, though I may be slightly late.

The multigamers won't want to melee but who cares. Yeah?

I'm not entirely sure what or whom you mean by "multigamers". But, at least as of lately, pretty much only people who'd play both customs and melee would show up. The ones who wouldn't tend to either show up late, leave early or not show up at all - leaving more than enough of a window for the rest to play either.

Besides, if the composition of the people showing up should change and we'd have more people opposed to, say, melee, showing up again, hey, it's not like we cannot reorganize it all to have a separate melee session once more any time we want, right?

Do you even need to post reminders anymore? I'm pretty sure we all know if we're coming or not.

(I won't be this week.)

People do sometimes not show up and then say they forgot when there was no reminder, though.

The reminder PMs, on the other hand? I have to admit I've been thinking about stopping sending those out for quite a while now. I honestly don't think they are actually accomplishing anything anymore - right now, there are precisely three people who have not either elected to not receive them or don't show up ever, meaning that the vast majority of the people I send them to neither shows up nor even acknowledges their existence in any manner. Which makes it feel kinda pointless and frustrating for me to do all of this (which would be partially responsible for why I've been a bit less reliable when it comes to sending them out lately than usual, too). So, yeah, I've been thinking about asking whether I really should keep sending these PMs out or whether I shouldn't just stop doing that for quite a while now.

[nooblade]

Sounds simple to me Winter. If you don't want to send out PMs then don't send out PMs. If I knew anyone around here who had Warcraft who I really wanted to join, I think I would send them a PM. Maybe I'll do that once a week for Cynan and Yakkul, except I don't want weekly SC2 PMs.


So I had fun with CfG last Friday, even if noone else did. It makes me want to do BfG stuff again.

You all made it sound like some small changes would make it work out, but I don't think that's an option now. I lost more CfG stuff than I had thought, and deprotecting and sorting all that nasty low-level code would be bad. That doesn't sound like an appropriate challenge anyway. Half of motivation is making the thing interesting or rewarding. I think I will just continue with the BfG stuff I set aside a while ago; there are lots and lots of little changes I wanted to make it really mine. I think I will focus on making it faster (less than 20 minute games) and simpler, and especially on the bubble-snare-combo system.

I wrote a new combat system this morning. Fixing the Priest's shields so they work for low hp targets (CfG's works by healing you after you take damage, but it doesn't work if you happen to die) requires rerouting all damage through some kind of system, but it appears to work well. Plus I can do several fun things with armor, positioning, or built-in critical hits. For example, when attacking from behind, armor is lowered and the chance to have a critical hit is doubled. Or whatever. I hate the critical hit ability and I'd rather just have the numbers generated in a trigger anyway. There were a couple WC3 crashes but the source (something related to call UnitDamageTarget) has been eliminated, I think. More work to do, including damage reduction and return, like both of them at once with retaliation, but that won't be terrible methinks.

Most of my time will probably be soaked up by triggering abilities. Especially with combos, I don't relish the, "double unit timeframe, check for snare, attack once, wait half a second, triple unit timeframe, check for snare, attack again, stop another half second, check for snare, quadruple timeframe and display special attack animation, return to normal timeframe, unpause." Maybe I'm doing it wrong, I'll have to think about that.

[Inhuman Bot]

So I had fun with CfG last Friday, even if noone else did. It makes me want to do BfG stuff again.

I can say I didn't.

[Winterwind]

Sounds simple to me Winter. If you don't want to send out PMs then don't send out PMs. If I knew anyone around here who had Warcraft who I really wanted to join, I think I would send them a PM. Maybe I'll do that once a week for Cynan and Yakkul, except I don't want weekly SC2 PMs.

This has nothing to do with me wanting that some people join us or don't. It's just that, as far as I can tell, anyone who wants to show up will show up, regardless of PMs, and all the others won't. Back when the group was new the PMs served a useful reminder role, but these days? I don't think they really do anything anymore.

So I had fun with CfG last Friday, even if noone else did. It makes me want to do BfG stuff again.

For the record, I actually did have fun - though I'm not sure how much of it came from being curious to see just how ridiculously powerful I might yet get. I agree with the others, the Warrior is quite assuredly way overpowered in its current state.
Playing it again did bring up some severe issues with the game I did not remember anymore that it had, though.

You all made it sound like some small changes would make it work out, but I don't think that's an option now. I lost more CfG stuff than I had thought, and deprotecting and sorting all that nasty low-level code would be bad. That doesn't sound like an appropriate challenge anyway. Half of motivation is making the thing interesting or rewarding. I think I will just continue with the BfG stuff I set aside a while ago; there are lots and lots of little changes I wanted to make it really mine. I think I will focus on making it faster (less than 20 minute games) and simpler, and especially on the bubble-snare-combo system.

I wrote a new combat system this morning. Fixing the Priest's shields so they work for low hp targets (CfG's works by healing you after you take damage, but it doesn't work if you happen to die) requires rerouting all damage through some kind of system, but it appears to work well. Plus I can do several fun things with armor, positioning, or built-in critical hits. For example, when attacking from behind, armor is lowered and the chance to have a critical hit is doubled. Or whatever. I hate the critical hit ability and I'd rather just have the numbers generated in a trigger anyway. There were a couple WC3 crashes but the source (something related to call UnitDamageTarget) has been eliminated, I think. More work to do, including damage reduction and return, like both of them at once with retaliation, but that won't be terrible methinks.

Most of my time will probably be soaked up by triggering abilities. Especially with combos, I don't relish the, "double unit timeframe, check for snare, attack once, wait half a second, triple unit timeframe, check for snare, attack again, stop another half second, check for snare, quadruple timeframe and display special attack animation, return to normal timeframe, unpause." Maybe I'm doing it wrong, I'll have to think about that.

Sounds fascinating. At least, the parts of it that I understand. My knowledge of how WC3 maps work covers only the regular editor.

[The Orange Zergling]

This has nothing to do with me wanting that some people join us or don't. It's just that, as far as I can tell, anyone who wants to show up will show up, regardless of PMs, and all the others won't. Back when the group was new the PMs served a useful reminder role, but these days? I don't think they really do anything anymore.

To be fair, I actually use them to gauge whether you're going to be coming or not.

For the record, I actually did have fun - though I'm not sure how much of it came from being curious to see just how ridiculously powerful I might yet get. I agree with the others, the Warrior is quite assuredly way overpowered in its current state.
Playing it again did bring up some severe issues with the game I did not remember anymore that it had, though.

It wasn't quite the thumb-screws I remembered it being, but I still found it to be a quite negative experience overall. The issues I found with it from our one game, personally:

-Stuns and invisibility should never be on the same hero in an AoS or AoS-like map. Each mechanic is far too powerful and offers far too much versatility in their own right to be combined and still remain reasonable. Not to mention that they're both two of the most frustrating mechanics to fight against in all of RTS. Fun to use, maybe, depending on personal taste, but the person controlling them is not the only person in the game.
-It's completely impossible to tell which side is more powerful. Generally you can use each team's level or the number of towns they control as a benchmark as to which team is ahead, but combat and hero power doesn't reflect that in any way. Teams that are so far behind they have no chance of winning the game still have a basically 50-50 chance of winning any given fight, which might work in the overall scheme of the game but feels really awkward and removes any weight the game might have otherwise.
-The game's balance is ridiculous. I think all of the balance concerns have been addressed previously, though, so I won't dwell on this.
-Many heroes have one and only one correct build of items, with everything else being strictly worse. This defeats the entire purpose of having items in the first place, namely having customization.
-Having to buy consumables or items that do nothing other than counter stealth is stupid, because there is no such measure that has to be taken for other types of heroes. It makes stealth even more absurdly powerful and even more frustrating to fight against. To make myself clear, I'm advocating removing these items (and, more importantly, removing the the need for them) entirely, not to add equivalents for strength and intelligence heroes.

[nooblade]

I should do stealth next. Thanks! That will be very important. Maybe there won't be anything really fun to do afterward, but if it works out well, then I'll be more interested in finishing.

I'm not sure if stealth will work out if the stunning is completely removed. I definitely wouldn't want to do a bladewalk masterwind thing. That would be boring. I also don't want to have response always delegated to teammates, that appears to not work (although Warrior-Priest-Hunter could be faulted for being low on stuns to use against an enemy Rogue). If hypothetical plans for allowing bubbles to be used all the time (which requires a different kind of stun), then that, with the teamwork stuff, may work out IMHO.

Do AoS rules apply? I'm thinking they're a bunch different. Eh.


For balance in CfG, some hero groups work well. I want to change it up a bit, but here's a run-down on hero groups.

Paladin-Rogue is a basic unit that does exceptionally well. Blessing of Protection can shut down the stun response to a sneak attack, which would then prompt one of the three other-target bubbles. Usually there's only one Paladin, Druid, or Priest on a team, and what an unfortunate bugger he or she is! Paladins generally tend to go well with stealth heroes because Blessing of Protection prevents snares. I might change that. The Hunter has that too with Beast Within, although she can't do that and her combo.

They're supposed to be weak against snares with two ultimate bubbles, but I haven't really noticed yet. They can outrun enemies sometimes. Adding a Priest to the mix may help there.

Mage-Priest is exceptional at ranged combat, if the former buys an ice staff, and the latter a fire staff to be used in shadow form. They have little in the way of snares, but the ice staff with the first upgrade, plus the possibility of Mind Slay or Frost Nova or Blink or Teleport will allow you to shoot and scoot a little. There's a long chain of silly events after a Warrior charges at someone, but you can avoid it in the first place (for a bit) by silencing him IIRC. But it's not a healing Priest, shadow form precludes healing.

Thinking of this reminds me--someday I want to try using Blessing of Protection on a Ninja using Mijin Gakure. The Ninja might not die. That would be hilarious.

Druids go well with Warriors because it Entangling Roots is quick and can complicate the charge chain easily. Or charge or whirlwind can help protect the Druid, if he flees. The Druid's roar ability helps out with Warrior damage where a Mage or Priest wouldn't be able to do so much, and Rejuvenation allows him to flee and still heal. The Druid is funny in general because he can contribute healing, Roar, and Roots to the team while also fleeing from everything (at higher speed in wolf form) until enemies give up on him. The Dragoon's jump thrust can be similar, and the two armor reducing abilities together are fun.

That's enough for now.

[Winterwind]

To be fair, I actually use them to gauge whether you're going to be coming or not.

Don't the reminders I post in the thread already work much better for that? I mean, in those, I actually kinda indicate via the wording (or even say it explicitly) whether I'm going to come, whereas the PMs tend to be phrased the same way no matter what.

Speaking of which, reminder, tomorrow is our next session. Hope to see you all there.


Regarding the whole Stealth thing - not limited to CfG, but in general - I've been thinking, and it occurred to me that maybe it's not so much Stealth itself that is the problem, but the role Stealth characters invariably occupy in all AoSs I could think of - that of "Walk into enemy team, pick out a squishy, stun-lock-murderize him/her before anyone can do anything about it, re-stealth to escape". Now, "assassin" seems intuitive for a Stealth character, sure, but I don't think it's necessarily the only option that preserves that "squishy hit&run" flavour, nor the only one that fits thematically - while it decidedly is the most frustrating one to play against.

I'm still thinking how to implement this best - it would require some kind of means of detecting stealthed characters (I have some ideas on that, too, see below) - but maybe it would be less frustrating if Stealth heroes were delegated to a "wear them down by hit-and-runs" or "debuff them by hit-and-runs" role instead. One that wouldn't instantly kill the person they pick out, and would require them to keep coming back time and time again, with the enemies having some way of protecting themselves against the Stealthed character, so that it ends up in a micro contest - heroes fire off their anti-Stealth measures, Stealth character tries to evade them, maybe the Stealthed one manages to do that and inflicts some damage on an enemy hero, maybe the Stealthed one is driven off, taking damage - but it's not a definitive thing, nobody has died yet, the cycle will be repeated, and just because one may have screwed up this time and was hit severely by the Stealth hero doesn't yet mean one is dead, has fed the enemy and has to wait for revival - no, one is given a second chance immediately, because it doesn't result in instant death.

As for how those anti-Stealth measures might look like - how about giving every hero something a skill they can target at the ground, that affects an area, oh, let's say slightly larger than a Flamestrike, and that causes every hero hit by it to un-stealth? Note, I really mean un-stealth - as in, if they want to be invisible, they will have to use the skill that makes them invisible again, not just giving True Sight in that area. That way, the Stealth hero would have four options - continue their attack unstealthed (probably not a wise move, since they are squishy, especially if they have on-hit effects that occur only when done while coming out of stealth), retreat unstealthed (dangerous, since squishy), re-stealth and continue with the attack (risky, as then once they attack and come out of stealth, their stealth will be on cooldown and they won't be able to use it to escape - and keep in mind that this version of Stealth character doesn't insta-kill with their assault), or re-stealth and retreat, to try again another time.

Add to this a two-stage Stealth: The Stealth character is only fully invisible if they have been stealthed for a long time. Otherwise, they are invisible and untargetable, but there is some sign indicating their presence and very general location, like a large cloud or something. That way, the Stealth character can initiate the first time without warning, but again, these Stealth characters are meant to be balanced in a way so that they cannot kill instantly, so they will have to retreat. But, the time to get this "full" Stealth is meant to be so long that if they actually wait it out the victim will be more or less fully healed up again - if they want to actually wear them down, they will have to go in earlier, that is, giving the enemy an idea where they might be. That way, the other side will actually know they should use their anti-Stealth abilities now - only, they won't know exactly where. This should, if it works the way I imagine it would, result in a micro-game between the Stealth char and the other side - the other side fires off their anti-Stealth measures, trying to anticipate where exactly the Stealth char is or where it might be moving to, the Stealth char tries to avoid the detection zones created this way and try to anticipate where the other side might think s/he is and move in unexpected patterns. And again, the loser of this contest doesn't have to be frustrated, because ideally, it should be balanced in a way that allows for a repetition of the process soon.

(The point of the full Stealth would be adding utility to the Stealth character - like allowing them to shadow the enemy team and wait for a good opportunity. Different Stealth characters might, obviously, have different mechanics, some maybe having better access to this full Stealth, others not at all.)

[nooblade]

I like requiring more than one stealth attack to kill. I had been thinking that slowing down the regular combat would help there (and it makes sense, kinda, you should be using combos to get your "one hit KOs"). And in general, people appear to get really, really stressed out over CfG (I'm thinking of Eve having to quit at the end of that last game). It's supposed to be a tactical game and not an intense micro one, IMHO. Making combos more important is another plus in my book, some classes have combos that don't even do much work (Eviscerate, Crescent Moon, Dancing Edge, TFT would say Fireball and I guess I can't disagree much because a fire staff does more). Yeah, there's a lot to say for nerfing regular attack damage.

Stealth characters usually use their bubbles to get away and re-stealth, except for the Rogue, which you'll more often use Vanish to get a second stealth attack. I wonder if I might replace Vanish with a blink-like bubble, or an invisibility that you can't attack from like with Wind Walk, to make it more like the other bubbles. And maybe the Hunter is another exception because she uses her bubble to increase damage and prevent stuns most of the time.

But I have to admit, I'm pretty doubtful about second-in-recent-memory assassination missions. The target will likely be able to bubble away bleeding damage and get healed unless there's actually battle going on. And it is very viable to keep using stealth during a battle, especially with the Hunter, but I don't think that's what we're talking about. But I dunno.

I was thinking of making a map dedicated to stealth junk the other day, but it seems like a bunch of extra work to try to make AI for assassination targets and there doesn't appear to be much for a full ring of stealthy people to do. Unless there's a defensive side to it too. But I have enough projects that I think I might know how to do, that I'll let it sit there.

[Winterwind]

Regarding normal damage, I think WC3's system of "primary attribute, damage scales with that" may be flawed. This means that for Strength heroes (and to some lesser degree Agility heroes, too) their damage scales with their durability. It's pretty silly that in buying those gloves that increase Strength, the Warrior also gains a massive damage boost, while everyone else takes those solely for the extra hit points. I think balance would be much easier to achieve if that primary attribute mechanic was removed.

Also... I'm starting to wonder whether CfG's concept wouldn't, maybe, work much better as some sort of turn-based tabletop wargame.

[Legoshrimp]

Well since some forgot the reminder (or was busy with a Warhammer 40k tournament).

Today is the next melee session!
Hope to see you there, also why did no one show up to friday's session D:

[The Orange Zergling]

@Winterwind:

Seems like it could be a pretty interesting experiment, and I'd be interested to see how it would end up playing, though I'm rather still of the opinion that invisibility in AoSs (and AoS-like games and maps) is an inherently broken concept that would be better off scrapped entirely.

Well since some forgot the reminder (or was busy with a Warhammer 40k tournament).

Today is the next melee session!
Hope to see you there, also why did no one show up to friday's session D:

I was busy performing in my annual taiko student recital. I think I told a couple people over Skype on Thursday but I just realized I never actually posted it in the thread. My bad.

[Winterwind]

Well since some forgot the reminder (or was busy with a Warhammer 40k tournament).

Today is the next melee session!
Hope to see you there, also why did no one show up to friday's session D:

I didn't forget, I just thought that this debate whether we should scrap the melee session and have the Friday session open for both customs and melee had ended with an affirmative result. Now I'm confused...

And, yeah, I kinda got entangled in playing LoL with RL friends on Friday, and failed to notice the time. Which, yes, tends to happen to me a lot lately. Sorry about that.

@Winterwind:

Seems like it could be a pretty interesting experiment, and I'd be interested to see how it would end up playing, though I'm rather still of the opinion that invisibility in AoSs (and AoS-like games and maps) is an inherently broken concept that would be better off scrapped entirely.

Depends on the particulars of the AoS map in question, I think. The more team-based it would be (with CfG being the team-based extreme and DoE being the lane-based extreme on the other side of the spectrum), the easier it could work, I imagine. It's particularly lane-based AoSs with a lot of heroes engaged in 1v1 duels, rather than in large teamfights, where invisibility is completely at odds with the map design.

[The Orange Zergling]

Depends on the particulars of the AoS map in question, I think. The more team-based it would be (with CfG being the team-based extreme and DoE being the lane-based extreme on the other side of the spectrum), the easier it could work, I imagine. It's particularly lane-based AoSs with a lot of heroes engaged in 1v1 duels, rather than in large teamfights, where invisibility is completely at odds with the map design.

My problem with it is that, in every way I've seen it implemented, it requires a response that no other mechanic in the game in question requires to be even playable against, let alone counterable.

In DotA, CfG and the like, you have to buy wards (or equivalents) to place that require that you sacrifice an inventory slot in order to use, and in games like that, one less item is a lot of power you're losing. Plus, they're frequently consumable, necessitating that you keep buying them over and over again when the only other consumables are universally-useful things like health and mana potions. Not only is this incredibly annoying to begin with, but it's doubly annoying because you only have to do this against invisibility; you don't see a mechanic like this to counter tanks or healers or anything.

In DoE, while I do give it props for keeping it simplistic, sidesteps a pothole only to fall off a bridge by making invisibility completely uncounterable, thus ensuring that some heroes are literally not capable of fighting against invisible heroes at all, which contributes to its already-sizable balance problems. I've defended this form of invisibility in the past, but the more I think about it, the more I turn against it and become convinced that invisibility is just not capable of being done well while still remaining recognizable.

Possible solutions that would make invisibility better for each system, respectively, but would, in my opinion, not cure the problem:

DotA/CfG/etc.: Give a ward skill to every hero that costs no mana and has a reasonable (not too long, not too short) cooldown. This way it costs no inventory space and no money and still retains the ward placing/hunting dynamic. Problems with this include command-card cluttering (it would add an extra button, which is usually not a problem but for some heroes that have more buttons than usual it could be), some people possibly not liking the ward-game in general (I'm neutral, but I figure there's got to be some people out there), and it being aesthetically unpleasing (though obviously function trumps form).

DoE/etc.: Give invisibility only to melee heroes and give all heroes and structures melee-range True Sight. This would allow all heroes, even ones without area-targeted AoE spells, to have some capacity to fight back, even if they have to get into melee range to do it, while still preserving all of the benefits invisibility brings, just without making invisible heroes invulnerable too. Problems include ranged heroes not being able to have invisibility and the problem only being lessened, not eliminated.

[nooblade]

@Winterwind: How would I put stealth into a tabletop game?

@Bane: I had already written about this, actually. It's pretty simple to check a "field of vision" for heroes within some distance of a stealth enemy at some rate using trigonometry. Compare the direction that the detector is facing with "arctan ( (StealthY - DetectY) / (StealthX - DetectX) )". With a provision for StealthX - DetectX being zero. And while that's going on, there could be a provision for minimum distance for stealth heroes, although it would have to be somewhere below melee attack range (unless the stealth attack bonus were to last a little longer than the stealth itself, that doesn't sound bad). It doesn't work when obstructions like small trees are involved, but those things aren't worth it unless I want to make a stealth-happy area, like a swampy or foresty thing in the map center, that completely disables it.

As I said before, directly looking at a stealth hero should be a guaranteed reveal. There are a few other bonuses too, like being able to trade fighting for detection. Generally the goal of stealth is to soak up "attenergy" of the enemies, not necessarily to cause damage, so I think a "fire and forget" solution would be bad.

But the "ward" thing might work as a backup. Flares in CfG were actually based on cloak of flames IIRC, the pitiful amount of damage shut off stealth completely in a different trigger. But that overlaps with other detection styles like fireball (when you can cast it anywhere, which I plan on). I think I might want to keep flares just to detect an area over time, or maybe also cause blindness or slowing like in that other zombie game.


Edit: Was bug-addled, but it works now. These things are tending to be more complex than I expected. Which doesn't bode well for future game projects, but at least it works.

[Winterwind]

My problem with it is that, in every way I've seen it implemented, it requires a response that no other mechanic in the game in question requires to be even playable against, let alone counterable.[...]

I agree, that is a flaw in the system.

Possible solutions that would make invisibility better for each system, respectively, but would, in my opinion, not cure the problem:[...]

Agreed with the DotA/CfG solution; I've seen people suggest on the LoL forums that that's what they should also do (add two more item slots that can be used for wards and potions only), and the designers admitted that it was a good idea and how it should be done, but that they weren't sure they could free up resources to implement it (also because it would "add quite a strain on the UI resources", whatever that means).
Not sure the solution you suggest for DoE would work, though. Firstly, it would require a re-balance, because for example Atrius wouldn't have a chance against an enemy hero who could actually see him. Secondly, it's fine that the hero assaulted by the Stealth hero could defend her or himself - but this solution would also allow everyone else allied with the assaulted hero, who was not in melee range to the Stealth hero at all, to attack the Stealth hero, including creeps and towers. With creeps being as strong as they are in DoE and Stealth heroes being so fragile, I find this would render Stealth heroes utterly worthless and unplayable. Your solution works in a 1v1 situation, but you pretty much never have a 1v1 situation in DoE, there's always creeps around.

@Winterwind: How would I put stealth into a tabletop game?

Good question. Hadn't really given that any consideration, but the off the top of my head idea would be, mark the spot where the stealth hero was when it entered stealth mode and remove the model/piece/whatever representing the stealth hero. In subsequent turns, the stealth hero can then appear at any spot that is within <movement speed of the stealth hero> times <turns that have passed since the stealth hero entered stealth mode> distance of the spot where it entered stealth mode. Optionally with a limit on how long the hero can remain stealthed.

Not sure how one would implement anti-stealth measures like flares, then, but on the other hand, making a 1:1 conversion would probably be a silly idea anyway, so one might as well scrap that concept, if no good solution is found.

[The Orange Zergling]

Agreed with the DotA/CfG solution; I've seen people suggest on the LoL forums that that's what they should also do (add two more item slots that can be used for wards and potions only), and the designers admitted that it was a good idea and how it should be done, but that they weren't sure they could free up resources to implement it (also because it would "add quite a strain on the UI resources", whatever that means).

Still continues to drain money, though. No other mechanic requires you to continually buy consumable items over and over again.

Not sure the solution you suggest for DoE would work, though. Firstly, it would require a re-balance, because for example Atrius wouldn't have a chance against an enemy hero who could actually see him. Secondly, it's fine that the hero assaulted by the Stealth hero could defend her or himself - but this solution would also allow everyone else allied with the assaulted hero, who was not in melee range to the Stealth hero at all, to attack the Stealth hero, including creeps and towers. With creeps being as strong as they are in DoE and Stealth heroes being so fragile, I find this would render Stealth heroes utterly worthless and unplayable. Your solution works in a 1v1 situation, but you pretty much never have a 1v1 situation in DoE, there's always creeps around.

Because DoE's balance is so pristine that it requires conservation.

Sarcasm aside, I don't think so. Atrius revolves around stunlocking and deals a ridiculous amount of damage; not to mention that, if he gets in over his head, all he has to do is retreat out of melee range. The range of his invisibility is quite large, and he has stuns, after all. And it's not like the troops on the lane will all automatically focus you down the instant you become visible. Finally, keep in mind that very few spells in DoE are unit-targeted with no aiming required at all; maybe only half a dozen to a full dozen or so. Where invisibility becomes a problem is auto-attacks, which frequently compose a significant portion of a hero's damage, or are central to the use of some spells (preparation spells, usually). Atrius having to actually worry about dying doesn't make him useless.

[Winterwind]

Still continues to drain money, though. No other mechanic requires you to continually buy consumable items over and over again.

For the record, it should be noted that the LoL designers have already announced how they are going to rework the stealth system, and it should be to your liking: They intend to give all heroes a short ranged true sight that reveals invisible heroes (I think it doesn't reveal wards and such though), and give stealth heroes an indicator (visible only to themselves) showing them how close they are to being detected. So, basically just what you asked for.

Because DoE's balance is so pristine that it requires conservation.

Sarcasm aside, I don't think so. Atrius revolves around stunlocking and deals a ridiculous amount of damage; not to mention that, if he gets in over his head, all he has to do is retreat out of melee range. The range of his invisibility is quite large, and he has stuns, after all. And it's not like the troops on the lane will all automatically focus you down the instant you become visible. Finally, keep in mind that very few spells in DoE are unit-targeted with no aiming required at all; maybe only half a dozen to a full dozen or so. Where invisibility becomes a problem is auto-attacks, which frequently compose a significant portion of a hero's damage, or are central to the use of some spells (preparation spells, usually). Atrius having to actually worry about dying doesn't make him useless.

Trust me, it's not going to work at all. Until high levels Atrius can't stunlock (and he pretty much requires an artifact for that anyway), and he's so fragile that if he ever actually became visible he would die instantly. Honestly, going up against a hero, I'd estimate he would be able to attack about 2-3 times before dying. That's how fragile he is. If the creeps from a wave all decide to focus him (and they will switch to him very quickly), he'll go down within three seconds - assuming he was at full health and the enemy hero just ignores him, otherwise it will take less. It's not about him needing to worry about dying. It's about him no longer being able to do anything, because the instant he becomes visible, he'll die or be brought close to dying before causing any significant damage. I'm not exaggerating when I say I think Atrius under the system you proposed would be the weakest, most useless hero in any AoS I have ever played. Superlative fully intended.

[Bunny of Faith]

the weakest, most useless hero in any AoS I have ever played. Superlative fully intended.

I'll just jump here to say that there are definitely more useless heroes in other AoSs, but DoE has some semblance of balance so it's probably a bit more noticable, if it would nerf Atrius so noticably.

[Winterwind]

I'll just jump here to say that there are definitely more useless heroes in other AoSs, but DoE has some semblance of balance so it's probably a bit more noticable, if it would nerf Atrius so noticably.

Note the "in any AoS I have ever played" qualifier. I readily admit that I am not privy to the Lovecraftian horrors of bad design you and Bane have subjected yourselves to in your "Let's test AoSs!" run.

[The Orange Zergling]

For the record, it should be noted that the LoL designers have already announced how they are going to rework the stealth system, and it should be to your liking: They intend to give all heroes a short ranged true sight that reveals invisible heroes (I think it doesn't reveal wards and such though), and give stealth heroes an indicator (visible only to themselves) showing them how close they are to being detected. So, basically just what you asked for.

So I heard. Sounds like a step in the right direction, at least.

Trust me, it's not going to work at all. Until high levels Atrius can't stunlock (and he pretty much requires an artifact for that anyway), and he's so fragile that if he ever actually became visible he would die instantly. Honestly, going up against a hero, I'd estimate he would be able to attack about 2-3 times before dying. That's how fragile he is. If the creeps from a wave all decide to focus him (and they will switch to him very quickly), he'll go down within three seconds - assuming he was at full health and the enemy hero just ignores him, otherwise it will take less. It's not about him needing to worry about dying. It's about him no longer being able to do anything, because the instant he becomes visible, he'll die or be brought close to dying before causing any significant damage. I'm not exaggerating when I say I think Atrius under the system you proposed would be the weakest, most useless hero in any AoS I have ever played. Superlative fully intended.

I just did some testing, and I have to say that that just isn't true.

Yes, the guy is fragile. He's only got 800 hit points at level 18 and his 12+2 armor doesn't do much to help. Maybe he would die that fast if, for some reason, you elected to not use any of his spells and there were literally no allied units nearby, but keep in mind several factors:

-Sandstorm lasts for 12 seconds at rank 5 and applies Blind, which reduces all damage output of troops (who only deal damage through attacks) by 75% because of Blind's miss chance. In addition, this applies to heroes, who for the most part pretty much just gain the ability to attack you by seeing you. Sandstorm's low cooldown also allows for multiple storms to be up at a time, preventing (or at least significantly delaying) the 'just walk out of it' counter.
-Ashes to Ashes' range is 700. This gives you a ring of about 500-600 range you can safely walk invisibly around heroes and structures without being seen. You can easily DPS troops down invisibly - they don't get true sight, after all - within this ring. And this assumes that, for some reason, the hero would be blinded but not any of the surrounding troops, which would almost never, ever happen; you'd assuredly get the troops too, since they don't move out of AoEs.
-If you engage a combined mob of enemy troops and heroes without any kind of allied support, you will die no matter what hero you pick, with maybe 2 or 3 special exceptions. It takes only a little bit of micro to make sure enemy troops go after other targets instead of you, after all, to the point of negligibility.
-And, finally, DoE's not all about hero kills, pushing is just as, if not more important. Even though Atrius is a hero-killer by nature, he still does pretty good damage to troops and is pretty good at supporting allies due to his Blind.

You just have to micro more carefully this way; it doesn't have to be the end of the world. If I recall correctly, you yourself admitted you thought Atrius was overpowered in his present state anyway.

[Inhuman Bot]

^^^^^

I think the fact that Kassar exists means Atrius isn't overpowered.

Note the "in any AoS I have ever played" qualifier. I readily admit that I am not privy to the Lovecraftian horrors of bad design you and Bane have subjected yourselves to in your "Let's test AoSs!" run.

You've played Regicide right.

**** crazy roy

[Winterwind]

So I heard. Sounds like a step in the right direction, at least.

Also, as if they heard you and did precisely what you were asking for.

I just did some testing, and I have to say that that just isn't true.

Yes, the guy is fragile. He's only got 800 hit points at level 18 and his 12+2 armor doesn't do much to help. Maybe he would die that fast if, for some reason, you elected to not use any of his spells and there were literally no allied units nearby, but keep in mind several factors:

And now consider that Rose deals more than 90 damage per hit, before even being boosted in any way apart from her aura. Arro Kree deals 300 damage with a single Fireball (that can neither miss nor be avoided at this distance, plus applies a 4 second burn). Victor deals 240 damage with a single spell that hits automatically. Kassar deals 200 damage with a spell and knocks down for a second. Sozen deals 150 bonus damage, on top of his regular damage, and gives a 20 second bleed. All of the above doesn't even take their ultimates and other special abilities into account.
That's too big a part of his health. It will devastate him.

-Sandstorm lasts for 12 seconds at rank 5 and applies Blind, which reduces all damage output of troops (who only deal damage through attacks) by 75% because of Blind's miss chance. In addition, this applies to heroes, who for the most part pretty much just gain the ability to attack you by seeing you. Sandstorm's low cooldown also allows for multiple storms to be up at a time, preventing (or at least significantly delaying) the 'just walk out of it' counter.

The enemy heroes gain much more than just the ability to attack you. The ones with unit-targeted spells, rather than ground-targeted, get to use those on you reliably, when before they could not at all; the ones that are ground targeted now know which direction you are coming from, so can actually hit you with them. Indeed, they will hit you with them, with you having no chance to dodge at this range, where before they pretty much couldn't do anything at all.

The damage from troops is reduced, yes, but the bigger creep waves deal about 150 damage per second pre-reduction. That's assuming they didn't stack up and there is more of them, which tends to happen all the time on DoE. So we're still talking about roughly 40 damage per second after the blind - that's way too much for Atrius to take. And that's assuming they would even all be blinded, which they very well might not be.

-Ashes to Ashes' range is 700. This gives you a ring of about 500-600 range you can safely walk invisibly around heroes and structures without being seen. You can easily DPS troops down invisibly - they don't get true sight, after all - within this ring. And this assumes that, for some reason, the hero would be blinded but not any of the surrounding troops, which would almost never, ever happen; you'd assuredly get the troops too, since they don't move out of AoEs.

Agreed. But since you will immediately die as soon as you engage an enemy hero, yet you can't push the lane without engaging the enemy hero, I don't quite see what you would be good for nonetheless. Especially since as soon as the enemy hero sees which of his troops are taking damage, nothing stops them from just going there to screen them with their true sight. Troops tend to be clustered, after all.

-If you engage a combined mob of enemy troops and heroes without any kind of allied support, you will die no matter what hero you pick, with maybe 2 or 3 special exceptions. It takes only a little bit of micro to make sure enemy troops go after other targets instead of you, after all, to the point of negligibility.

Yes, but they will switch back to you as soon as their target dies (which won't take long), and then they will target you, because - being melee, and after the enemy hero - you will be right in the midst of them, thus the closest target. You have no idea how often it has happened to me that I had a decent amount of health left, then suddenly the enemy wave decided to target me because Sandstorm had run out, or the number of blinded units had dropped below the threshold or anything like that, and the wave all alone basically one-shotted me.

-And, finally, DoE's not all about hero kills, pushing is just as, if not more important. Even though Atrius is a hero-killer by nature, he still does pretty good damage to troops and is pretty good at supporting allies due to his Blind.

Yes, but again, being able to push lanes requires being able to push back the enemy heroes, and this Atrius wouldn't be capable of that at all.

You just have to micro more carefully this way; it doesn't have to be the end of the world. If I recall correctly, you yourself admitted you thought Atrius was overpowered in his present state anyway.

He is, absolutely. Way overpowered. So is Arro Kree. Yet if one reduced Arro Kree's hit points to 200 and removed any health gain through levels for him, I would say one grotesquely overdid the nerf, and he'd be pretty much worthless now. And still, if given the choice between that Arro Kree and the Atrius you propose, I'd go with the Arro Kree, because I think he would actually be much more powerful and useful. At least his spells might accomplish something once in a while before him dying.

^^^^^

I think the fact that Kassar exists means Atrius isn't overpowered.

Eh, I don't think a specific hero should be required to counter another one. That's not balanced at all.

That's not to say Kassar was necessary - enough AoE was enough - but still. And those stunlocks were ridiculous.

You've played Regicide right.

**** crazy roy

Yes. I can't think of any hero on Regicide that I think would be as worthless as that Atrius, not by a huge margin.