[Megathread] DotA 2

[Deleted]

EG seem lost and confused about how to draft and play with their new roster. You noticed in MLG that they were experimenting with whether to have Sumail mid or Arteezy mid. I'm actually surprised EG got second, I thought they'd do worse. Sumail or Arteezy need to change their style and I don't think that will be easy. Right now it looks like ppd wants Sumail to be the one changing it up.

I find it funny though people are already saying this new roster is worse cause they got 2nd. Let's remember that EG got like three 2nd places before TI5 in smaller LANs.

[EqualWin]

i dont think they're confused, they're using their versatility which only will get good with time so its fine imo, llke sumail can play playmaker heroes when they pick a farming mid ta sf naga. or play qop/wr mid and rtz the hard carry.

[Deleted]

i dont think they're confused, they're using their versatility which only will get good with time so its fine imo, llke sumail can play playmaker heroes when they pick a farming mid ta sf naga. or play qop/wr mid and rtz the hard carry.

So why did Sumail play SF sometimes and sometimes TA? That's what I mean. They are not sure whether they want Arteezy on SF or Sumail on SF etc

[EqualWin]

So why did Sumail play SF sometimes and sometimes TA? That's what I mean. They are not sure whether they want Arteezy on SF or Sumail on SF etc

if u noticed it depends on the other core pick, when sumail played sf they had rtz razor/lycan. they'll get w.e they're most comfortable with/best for the team overall

when they play sf rtz, its the only "carry". with sumail as playmaker hero

they can switch and have lot of versatility which is good, ppd has to keep improving it

[Mellomania]

New Na'vi lineup seems to be: Dendi Sonneiko Alwayswannafly Funn1k & Dityara.

[Mellomania]

With the new update you now have to win LPQ games to get out of LPQ

Low Priority games now have to be won in order to count.
The number of Low Priority games needed to complete has been reduced.

[Lysah]

People are already getting around it by win trading, hilariously enough. Valve probably just needs to institute straight up time bans at some point.

[StrawberryZebra]

With the new update you now have to win LPQ games to get out of LPQ

Lets make people who are already angry at their teammates poor performances even more angry at their teammates!

Who seriously thought this was a good idea? LPQ is just going to be an endless void of rage and frustration, far from helping to make things better, its just going to make them worse. I get that its ment to be a punishment, but this system is going to end up punishing bad play as much as its going to punish bad behaviour. The length of time you spend in LPQ should be determined by how much of a dick you've been, not how much of a dick you've been and how good you are at winning games.
Valve really dropped the ball on this one.

Valve probably just needs to institute straight up time bans at some point.

There are lots of other punishments they could hand out too. Chat bans for example, would take away the ability to vent your rage over all chat, and there are plenty of other tools you can use in-game to communicate without chat which aren't going to spoil the game for others. Or maybe they remove your cosmetics temporarilly until you've played enough games without getting reported to earn them back.

On the other hand, they could also be doing a lot more to encourage positive behaviour too. Get enough commendations for Teaching? Have an in game mortar board item for Witch Doctor. Lots of Friendly ones? Have a Pony courier that leaves rainbow trails. Incentives to behave tend to work better than fear of punishments in my experience.

[Mellomania]

People are already getting around it by win trading, hilariously enough. Valve probably just needs to institute straight up time bans at some point.

Wouldn't making it impossible to que with more than 2 in party when in low priority fix that though?

[M1r4g3]

Lets make people who are already angry at their teammates poor performances even more angry at their teammates!

Who seriously thought this was a good idea? LPQ is just going to be an endless void of rage and frustration, far from helping to make things better, its just going to make them worse. I get that its ment to be a punishment, but this system is going to end up punishing bad play as much as its going to punish bad behaviour. The length of time you spend in LPQ should be determined by how much of a dick you've been, not how much of a dick you've been and how good you are at winning games.
Valve really dropped the ball on this one.



There are lots of other punishments they could hand out too. Chat bans for example, would take away the ability to vent your rage over all chat, and there are plenty of other tools you can use in-game to communicate without chat which aren't going to spoil the game for others. Or maybe they remove your cosmetics temporarilly until you've played enough games without getting reported to earn them back.

On the other hand, they could also be doing a lot more to encourage positive behaviour too. Get enough commendations for Teaching? Have an in game mortar board item for Witch Doctor. Lots of Friendly ones? Have a Pony courier that leaves rainbow trails. Incentives to behave tend to work better than fear of punishments in my experience.

There are chat bans? You have probably seen a few >well played! spammers that say nothing other than that, those are the chat banned people.(im guessing its the report>communication abuse thing)

Problem is if the punishments are too harsh people would just quit or make new accounts.

[EqualWin]

People are already getting around it by win trading, hilariously enough. Valve probably just needs to institute straight up time bans at some point.

they'll just play smurf? wasn't it time ban before?

an easy fix would be, not allowing party in lp? or stack vs stack or something.

[Lysah]

Wouldn't making it impossible to que with more than 2 in party when in low priority fix that though?

Would help some yeah

they'll just play smurf? wasn't it time ban before?

an easy fix would be, not allowing party in lp? or stack vs stack or something.

Most people don't have smurfs that can queue ranked, so there is that benefit at least. It used to be time bans but who knows Valve's reason for changing it, I suspect it was monetary (people more likely to spend money on cosmetics if they can always play on their "main").

Personally, I'm in favor a threshold where you hit so many low priorities in your life and you lose your account permanently. At some point you have to accept that the player is not learning their lesson or trying to fix their shitty behavior. Of course, part of such a system would be removing the ability to shitcan someone into LP just by having the whole game report them. Even so, in over 4000 games I have literally never been in LP, it really isn't that hard to avoid.

[Longview]

i have some 2300 games and i have also never been in lp ever

at this point i think lp serves as a containment pool. your best bet is probably just to create a new account and try harder not to be an asshole.

[Lysah]

I can agree to that.

[LiiLoSNK]

I wonder if /vg/ is pizzasharks forum-LPQ when he gets banned from here.

[Drunkenvalley]

The way people describe LPQ you'd think it was filled with pedos, rapists, serial killers and Hitler. Calm down guys, it's pretty much unilaterally just that guy who abandoned after a really, really bad game, or people who were unwillingly abandoned due to unpredictable and temporary internet issues, etc.

[StrawberryZebra]

The way people describe LPQ you'd think it was filled with pedos, rapists, serial killers and Hitler.

Often all four at the same time. You're right though, its often just people who've abandoned one too many games recently with a couple of the people who feel the need to rage at everything that moves thrown in for good measure. Thats why I dislike having to win games to get out, its adding an extra layer of punishment on those people who are on a losing streak.

A lot of the LPQ pool could be removed entirely if you gave people a safe means to end a game that they were really not enjoying, but thats a discussion for another time.

[Drunkenvalley]

Yeah, like... most of the folks haven't even ruined games, because basically no one normal abandons games without it being really, really, really souldraining. The trench warfare kind of draining, where everything is so miserable that the moment the game is safe to leave literally everyone abandon, even the enemy team.

I still agree with folks who say we shouldn't have a surrender button though, because that is exploited in LoL to tap out because it's mildly too hard. But people just seem to think the guys in LPQ are exclusively "that Io who would relocate you into enemy fountain" and shit like that. They're not. You have to dig really, really deep to ever find those, even in LPQ.

[Kuntantee]

Would help some yeah

Most people don't have smurfs that can queue ranked, so there is that benefit at least. It used to be time bans but who knows Valve's reason for changing it, I suspect it was monetary (people more likely to spend money on cosmetics if they can always play on their "main").

Personally, I'm in favor a threshold where you hit so many low priorities in your life and you lose your account permanently. At some point you have to accept that the player is not learning their lesson or trying to fix their shitty behavior. Of course, part of such a system would be removing the ability to shitcan someone into LP just by having the whole game report them. Even so, in over 4000 games I have literally never been in LP, it really isn't that hard to avoid.

What is that threshold? Most people do not constantly abandon games, if you make it too low, you will be banning too often; make it too high and it will not be effective as people do not have abandonment fetishes.

In my opinion, best solution is increasing the # of LP games you have to play linearly. Example: increase the # of LP games you have to win every 2-3 games player abandons. Reset the counter for every 10 successful game player completes.

[Jester Joe]

I still agree with folks who say we shouldn't have a surrender button though, because that is exploited in LoL to tap out because it's mildly too hard. But people just seem to think the guys in LPQ are exclusively "that Io who would relocate you into enemy fountain" and shit like that. They're not. You have to dig really, really deep to ever find those, even in LPQ.

The one time I played in LPQ because my friend was stuck in it and I queued up with him, the enemy team had a wraith king who would literally just walk to the top rune and stand there. That's all he ever did, so I mean, he obviously was there, playing the game because he kept going back upon death, and he never got an abandon for inactivity, but we just kept farming him over and over again.

Not saying that's common, just that we must of dug really deep in one go lol

But I don't think Dota needs a surrender button either honestly. Unlike most other MOBAs (Like HotS and Smite), I've lost track of how many massive turnarounds I've had in Dota. Like just last night, I did terrible mid as Razor in Single Draft, we had a brood on the enemy team that kept wrecking our towers along with Pugna, they pushed us all the way up to our barracks when we only had two of their towers, and they got Roshan twice. But we actually stayed safe for the most part at our barracks, and only engaged when we could actually pick one or two off. Ended up turning the game around because our Faceless got fed enough from ending killing streaks and what not that they couldn't stop him.

http://www.dotabuff.com/matches/1887636738
Just even the exp advantage they had for a long time should give that away.

Oh, and I guess our Centaur did alright...
He's my friend before anyone points out he did a lot better than me, I'll never tell him that!