[Megathread] DotA 2

[Longview]

Its just that I think there shouldnt be a mechanic that cant be countered, especially when its the "Right click and watch them stand still until death" mechanic.

it can get countered though.

there's a plethora of ultimate abilities that go through bkb that allows you to keep them out of combat even if they get a bkb

blade mail

ghost scepter

heavens halberd

regular kiting stuff, blink, force staff

the list goes on...

[Sarevokcz]

I'm not someone who dies easy. Don't misunderstand, young lady. I play it safe.

But herein is the problem: If I play it safe vs a dual-lane, what will I ever accomplish? Nothing. I'm not gonna go and get myself killed, but I cannot carry if the support never comes into lane to help. I'm not going to have the gold. And not even get an XP advantage when the enemy can farm freely while I can't touch anything without losing a solid chunk of health.

First time ever someone called me lady.

And what is enemy team farming under your tower, if your support keeps denying them? And you will loose chunks of healt everytime you got for LH as melee anyway, regardless of the support being there or not. Its like a 3v3, with little less nukage, one side IS gonna win the lane just by favoured matchup and get decent ammount of LH and the other side is gonna sit there, not contesting and try to pull creeps so their carry can get some LH under tower until someone comes for gank.

[Deleted]

Now go back and read: Of the people who play crappy support, the most predominant issue I see is that they don't support, but are basically just spending the game jungling.

Like Alliance's EGM?

[Drunkenvalley]

Like Alliance's EGM?

There are far too many differences between a classic pub-match and the matches Alliance plays for it to be a relevant point. For one the carry gets pooled a bunch of regen to begin with if they expect harass/damage, and that's not gonna happen in pubs.

Additionally, anyone trying to make the implication that they won't attack you under the tower are blatantly ignorant of how the towers work, I'm sorry. It's easy to use the creepwave being there to get a safe tower-dive gank.

Supports are first and foremost going to have to deal with potential aggression. I am not asking someone to sit in the lane and just sap XP, but when I'm being harassed out of lane by two ranged heroes and they safely gank me because the creepwave is at the tower, then someone's doing shit wrong. You cannot just leave a relatively fragile hard carry alone versus two ranged and say "Deal with it," because that's just going to leave you with a severely underfarmed carry.

[Deleted]

There are far too many differences between a classic pub-match and the matches Alliance plays for it to be a relevant point. For one the carry gets pooled a bunch of regen to begin with if they expect harass/damage, and that's not gonna happen in pubs.

Additionally, anyone trying to make the implication that they won't attack you under the tower are blatantly ignorant of how the towers work, I'm sorry. It's easy to use the creepwave being there to get a safe tower-dive gank.

Supports are first and foremost going to have to deal with potential aggression. I am not asking someone to sit in the lane and just sap XP, but when I'm being harassed out of lane by two ranged heroes and they safely gank me because the creepwave is at the tower, then someone's doing shit wrong. You cannot just leave a relatively fragile hard carry alone versus two ranged and say "Deal with it," because that's just going to leave you with a severely underfarmed carry.

The carry usually isn't pooled at start. He gets the supports regeneration items if he is out and needs more, which you can most likely get in a public game too if you support has some and you ask nicely. It's very hard to dive under tower and it's very easy to see if they want to dive you under tower and play it safe by just pulling the wave back far and out of range for their stuns. You also have the option of running into trees and the support is just like 3 seconds away.

But yeah, dual lanes are different but I never see those at my MMR. I would truly like to see how it is facing a dual lane because it was a very long time since I did.

[Drunkenvalley]

The carry usually isn't pooled at start. He gets the supports regeneration items if he is out and needs more, which you can most likely get in a public game too if you support has some and you ask nicely.

I said 'if'; if they are sending a carry to a dangerous lane they'll pool him some regen. Though my brain is currently on derpmode as we tick by 2 AM here in Norway, so I don't remember a particular match to reference.

It's very hard to dive under tower and it's very easy to see if they want to dive you under tower and play it safe by just pulling the wave back far and out of range for their stuns.

I'm gonna be honest: It hadn't occurred to me to pull the creepwave further back. But thinking over it it's pretty obvious of a method. Thanks, I'll keep it in mind.

You also have the option of running into trees and the support is just like 3 seconds away.

And this is why I'm saying some people are crappy supports. When the only support you see is that they'll bother to go help you defend yourself from a tower dive it's a bit silly. It "helps" since with the aid of the tower we come out on top, and so I can farm for a little while, but there's no way I can catch up to the enemy's farm in that sort of situation.

But yeah, dual lanes are different but I never see those at my MMR. I would truly like to see how it is facing a dual lane because it was a very long time since I did.

I find the average pub level is still dual-lanes on the sides and a single mid hero. If it's a CM mode it's almost 100% trilane vs trilane, and those matches are simply way easier to farm in from my POV.

But again, in my average pub game it's dual lane vs dual-lane. Well, it would've been dual-lane if I ever saw my duo-partner, but he's busy pulling creepwaves instead of helping anyone fend off an aggressive duo.

[Hermanni]

Experience from three sources while the offensive dual lane only gets experience from one could very much turn the tides in your favor. KotL being 3-4 and PL being 5 while the offensive is 3-4 will help a lot.

I have no doubt you win your dual lanes. But I still believe that the players you were facing probably didn't try to do what I suggested.

I think you might be overestimating the amount of experience you actually get from pulling even if you can do it uncontested. Or the amount of xp you lose from losing control of the creep wave and having most of it denied.

When it comes to the players I've been against, if they actually go out of their way to pick KotL/PL I would argue that they probably are more or less into the whole tryharding business.

Sure, but my first post was that KotL/PL is harder to beat than most support+carry lineups.

But what I've said previously is the whole reason for why professionals don't dual lane anymore.

Easier to beat than most lineups. The real synergy of KotL/PL, aside from the Chakra+Lance spam that is actually good at getting rid of solo heroes, is the same of any KotL/hyper - Keeper buying the carry enough time and space to farm in the mid-game. On a lane they are weak against non-solo matchups.

What 'professionals' do is completely irrelevant. Dual laning doesn't work in tournaments because the current way pros copy each other, which means trilaning or preparing for a trilane in every game, is in itself a counter-play to almost any attempt to dual-lane. Winning with a dual lane doesn't mean that you only won because your enemies aren't pros. Winning with a dual lane means you exploited a weakness in enemy lineup or in their predictability, and being able to do so allows you to win against anyone - even the pros. And that is good dota and that is what makes you a better player much more certainly than just doing stuff you see in TI3 because that's what pros do or because that works in pro games.

Even the pro 'meta' evolves, even if it is slow because most teams seem to be afraid of change, and working out counter-strategies is what separates good teams from the rest. You can watch all the internationals and there's 2 recurring themes for the top finishes - they're either teams that had a solid strategy going in that they had invested heavily in, or they were teams who adapted to all their opponents and changed their game (and to an extent, the meta-game) to something that works against what their enemies are doing. In both cases, superior strategy is what makes them raise above other teams. Being able to outplay your enemy this way is at least to me more satisfying than winning a game that is a carbon copy of half the matches of last week. Maybe the enemies have been weaker players, but I imagine it's because they think they're unbeatable because they're applying 'pro strats' against my random hero button.

Sure there's plenty of arguments to why it can or can't work, but actually making it work matters more than arguing about whether or not nobody in the whole world can stop a support from pulling and automatically getting 3 levels.

[Deletedaccount1]

Like Alliance's EGM?

His name is actually Double D

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/dota2/images/8/8d/EGM.jpg
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__...7/72/Edd.1.png

[Deleted]

I think you might be overestimating the amount of experience you actually get from pulling even if you can do it uncontested. Or the amount of xp you lose from losing control of the creep wave and having most of it denied.

When it comes to the players I've been against, if they actually go out of their way to pick KotL/PL I would argue that they probably are more or less into the whole tryharding business.

You get level two from one double pull. If you are chain pulling you can hit level 6 around 8-9 minutes I think. But more importantly, your carry gets solo experience. Meaning he will be around level 7-8 instead of 4-5. That is quite significant. Pulling isn't just about you getting experience, it's about you getting experience and giving your carry experience. And it controls the lane.

What 'professionals' do is completely irrelevant. Dual laning doesn't work in tournaments because the current way pros copy each other, which means trilaning or preparing for a trilane in every game, is in itself a counter-play to almost any attempt to dual-lane. Winning with a dual lane doesn't mean that you only won because your enemies aren't pros. Winning with a dual lane means you exploited a weakness in enemy lineup or in their predictability, and being able to do so allows you to win against anyone - even the pros. And that is good dota and that is what makes you a better player much more certainly than just doing stuff you see in TI3 because that's what pros do or because that works in pro games.

So if a team doesn't pick a tri lane but picks jungler (which does happen quite often, Chen, Enigma, Enchantress etc), wouldn't that be a scenario where a dual lane wins? You are arguing that offensive dual lanes don't work because of tri lanes. I am saying it won't even work against a defensive dual lane and a jungler, which is the most common scenario in a public game and does happen in professional games too.

Playing public dota and winning with a unorthodox strategy and then calling it good Dota is silly to be honest. Exploiting enemy weakness and predictability doesn't necessarily mean you are playing good Dota. It's like not going BKB on a hero because you know most public players are bad and won't be able to disable you enough anyway or chain stuns properly but you know that against any good player (professionals, if you will) you wouldn't get away with that. That's not good dota in my opinion, that's just pub stomping.

Even the pro 'meta' evolves, even if it is slow because most teams seem to be afraid of change, and working out counter-strategies is what separates good teams from the rest. You can watch all the internationals and there's 2 recurring themes for the top finishes - they're either teams that had a solid strategy going in that they had invested heavily in, or they were teams who adapted to all their opponents and changed their game (and to an extent, the meta-game) to something that works against what their enemies are doing. In both cases, superior strategy is what makes them raise above other teams. Being able to outplay your enemy this way is at least to me more satisfying than winning a game that is a carbon copy of half the matches of last week. Maybe the enemies have been weaker players, but I imagine it's because they think they're unbeatable because they're applying 'pro strats' against my random hero button.

All Internationals were won by a team that had a strategy and playstyle they stuck to. Not because they brought some super weird strategy or laned in a completely new way. They did what they do best. Sure, you can work out counter-strategies and think you are good, but what happens when the opponent adjust their play a bit? iG in last year international got countered. They altered their picks just a bit but still stuck to the same playstyle and won. You have to have a solid playstyle first to start counter-strategizing and picking. I think that is what most players are trying to do in public games. There's no point to start thinking outside the box when you don't even know or understand what's inside the box.

It's easy to go random build in public games and make it work and then think it is far superior to what the pros do. You see some professionals in public games go weird item builds and still make them work in public games but then when you see them play professional games they go back to more common items because they know it's better.

Stability is usually better unless you out-skill your opponent. I thought you'd know that from playing in Paragon, no? Wouldn't you have valued a reliable player who plays it safe and does consistently good DPS more than a guy that takes risks and might wipe raid but sometimes do insane DPS?

Sure there's plenty of arguments to why it can or can't work, but actually making it work matters more than arguing about whether or not nobody in the whole world can stop a support from pulling and automatically getting 3 levels.

Making it work in a public game doesn't mean anything really. Sure, dual laning might be good in pubs and win you games. I never argued against that. But if you are going to say that it works against anyone, even pros, then you better make it work against pros, right? I find it a bit silly to sit and argue saying that a certain strategy is so good and it's just that the pros are slow to adapt being the reason why it isn't seen in the pro scene and then use the argument that you win with it in public games as a proof.

Just look at Vici Gaming. Top public players, stomp everyone and everything in public games. Suddenly they play competitive and they have to adapt a lot of their play. Things they thought worked doesn't work against a real team with players who know what they are doing.

[Charge me Doctor]

Please. If the support is denying creeps hes bad because he doesnt support you, if he sticks to lane and harrases/protects you then hes bad because he soaks XP and doesnt keep the creeps in check and when he sticks out of LoS and occasionaly harrases/tries to zone out, the hes bad because he doesnt keep the creeps in check and has no money for wards... We all heard those arguments here already, support is apparently only good if he can do all those things at once... Oh heres the funny thing, you cant do all three at once with only ONE support even in 2v1 scenario, let alone 2v2 and we have seen plenty of times how even pros cant keep the creeps in check with TWO supports against solo suicide

Is it so hard to adapt to your support? The solution to him pulling creeps is going defensive under tower (if needed), not being blind, dying because you didnt watch minimap and blame your support for your incompetence.

Depends on set-up.
If you are duo lining hard line and you face solo carry farming, you need to give denying higher priority than farming. Ward-blocking and denying and harassing, that's how you play duo against solo farmer.
If you play duo easy lane again solo farmer, carry needs to farm, dodge hits. That's all. Support needs to do pulls (indirectly denying creeps), zone enemy from exp, set up ganks, ward the shit around.

- - - Updated - - -

The carry usually isn't pooled at start. He gets the supports regeneration items if he is out and needs more, which you can most likely get in a public game too if you support has some and you ask nicely. It's very hard to dive under tower and it's very easy to see if they want to dive you under tower and play it safe by just pulling the wave back far and out of range for their stuns. You also have the option of running into trees and the support is just like 3 seconds away.

But yeah, dual lanes are different but I never see those at my MMR. I would truly like to see how it is facing a dual lane because it was a very long time since I did.

DO sharing ring of health still works?

[Hermanni]

You get level two from one double pull. If you are chain pulling you can hit level 6 around 8-9 minutes I think. But more importantly, your carry gets solo experience. Meaning he will be around level 7-8 instead of 4-5. That is quite significant. Pulling isn't just about you getting experience, it's about you getting experience and giving your carry experience. And it controls the lane.

Except for the part where your lane is unfarmable while you're gone pulling, or the part where a single hero can disrupt your pull and make the stacked creepwaves run all the way to enemy tower.

This line of talk is completely pointless though, because there's always a counter-play, so we're going to just be stuck in an endless loop of 'dual lane? go pull - pull? ward the camp - warded camp? sentry it - sentried camp? counter sentry.' There's enough arguments for and against it to fill several pages of pointless back-and-forth rambling when it's much easier to play it in practice and see how you can make it work. And when it consistently works in top MMR even against pros and tryhard stacks, it's good enough for me.

Exploiting enemy weakness and predictability doesn't necessarily mean you are playing good Dota.

As far as I'm aware, yes it does. It's not only good dota, it's good in any game which involves outplaying a human opponent. When both teams pick 2-1-1 and lane offlane-mid-jungle-support-carry without even stopping to consider what they could do differently to throw the enemy team off balance, that is some very dull dota.

You have to have a solid playstyle first to start counter-strategizing and picking.

Obviously you need to have good mechanics and deep understanding to actually play the strategy game, which is why not many people understand it. That's the core difference between the two kinds of winning teams I described - The other banks on their practice and knowledge of their own lineups and strategy to be good enough to make up for possible counter plays, and the other banks on their knowledge of strategy and overall understanding of the game to counter their enemies despite having less space to master all their strategies.

Last year LGD did exactly the same thing every game and went 20-0 until they hit a brick wall on Na´Vi. Na´Vi did poorly until they figured out how to change their play to counter what the Chinese teams were doing to all the other Western teams.

Stability is usually better unless you out-skill your opponent. I thought you'd know that from playing in Paragon, no? Wouldn't you have valued a reliable player who plays it safe and does consistently good DPS more than a guy that takes risks and might wipe raid but sometimes do insane DPS?

We had both kinds, neither necessarily better than the other.

Making it work in a public game doesn't mean anything really. Sure, dual laning might be good in pubs and win you games. I never argued against that. But if you are going to say that it works against anyone, even pros, then you better make it work against pros, right? I find it a bit silly to sit and argue saying that a certain strategy is so good and it's just that the pros are slow to adapt being the reason why it isn't seen in the pro scene and then use the argument that you win with it in public games as a proof.

Just look at Vici Gaming. Top public players, stomp everyone and everything in public games. Suddenly they play competitive and they have to adapt a lot of their play. Things they thought worked doesn't work against a real team with players who know what they are doing.

I've made it work against pros and won. Sure you will argue that they weren't trying their hardest, but neither was I. I didn't say pros being slow to adapt is the reason it isn't seen on their little scene. I said it wouldn't work in that scene right now. I probably wouldn't try dual-laning vs a pro team in a serious match either. The strategy is good in a context of a pub game right now, and being able to recognize that is far better dota than trying to adapt pro strats without any thought put into it. And I'm sure people who use this to their advantage in pubs would do better in competitive environment than people who try really hard to play like the pros do.


What this all comes back to is that what pros do is irrelevant. I'm fairly sure that there is a strong correlation between being able to strategically outplay your enemies in pub games and being able to do it in 'serious' games, and it should be obvious that the exact strategies don't actually need to be the same. I'm also pretty sure there is a correlation between the kinds of players who simply copy what they see and refuse to play outside what they think is 'right' and the kinds of teams who consistently display zero adaptability and never get anywhere.

[Longview]

DO sharing ring of health still works?

just did it in a game, it does work!

[zehzao]

Just played a game as Enigma, teammates were Ursa, PA, Naga and NYX. I started by buying wards and courier, upg the courier asap. Had to share jungle with Ursa, tried to afford mek, still after 6 minutes they started to yelling about wards. I have to find a team to play with.

I had that same problem so many times, couple games ago i went random and got dazzle, bought wards, courier and flying, at 7-8m mark another ward on runes, at 15m i got yelled "where are the wards on the enemy jungle? you've to deny their jungle, give us vision and ward our camp .. shitty support", it was a tidehunter. just sad.

I really love playing support but its almost impossible to support solo queue, with a couple friends its awesome, but by yourself not always a good idea.

[Deleted]

As far as I'm aware, yes it does. It's not only good dota, it's good in any game which involves outplaying a human opponent. When both teams pick 2-1-1 and lane offlane-mid-jungle-support-carry without even stopping to consider what they could do differently to throw the enemy team off balance, that is some very dull dota.

I don't find the laning phase fun at all. Because it's so much more dictated by what you are facing and if you are at an advantage or not than about whether or not you are better than your opponent. Except for mid, of course, where you can outplay people. Dota becomes fun for me during mid game when rotations happen, when you use the whole map to your advantage and actually have more than one spell to use. Not everyone cares about throwing opponent off in the first 5 minutes.

Last year LGD did exactly the same thing every game and went 20-0 until they hit a brick wall on Na´Vi. Na´Vi did poorly until they figured out how to change their play to counter what the Chinese teams were doing to all the other Western teams.

Yes, Na'Vi changed their playstyle because they got beat. You do know that iG beat Na'Vi first, right? But Na'Vi didn't win the tournament simply because that strategy might work once or twice but the Chinese adapted a bit and Na'Vi couldn't figure it out. In the end, if you come in with a strong playstyle, you are already one-up. Enemy has to figure out you first before you need to care about them. LGD didn't get knocked out by Na'Vi, they got knocked out by iG. Who knows what would have happened if LGD faced Na'Vi again.

I've made it work against pros and won. Sure you will argue that they weren't trying their hardest, but neither was I. I didn't say pros being slow to adapt is the reason it isn't seen on their little scene. I said it wouldn't work in that scene right now. I probably wouldn't try dual-laning vs a pro team in a serious match either. The strategy is good in a context of a pub game right now, and being able to recognize that is far better dota than trying to adapt pro strats without any thought put into it. And I'm sure people who use this to their advantage in pubs would do better in competitive environment than people who try really hard to play like the pros do.

You have? Do you have a replay? And not some pro with Sheever support or like Merlini with friends and you winning your lane against his friends while he was mid and then winning game and saying it works against pros.

Of course people who adapt to their environment are better players than those who blindly copy but why try to reinvent the wheel? Why go dual lane when you have a reason for not going it? I don't go offensive dual lanes because first and foremost, I have to have a guy who is willing and knows how to play it and secondly I must trust him. When I see openings, I go but if he doesn't follow I might just die. Why would I dual lane? There is no reason. You can dual lane because you probably play with a stack. Most public players don't do that. Even when I play with my friends I don't like to lane with them because they are so much worse than me and they don't see opportunities like I do or understand the game as I do.

I copy pros but I also recognize that dual lane might work in public games. Copying and being able to recognize weaknesses and strengths are not mutually exclusive. However, I still don't play offensive dual lanes and I wouldn't go a dual lane even if someone asked me unless I knew he wasn't retarded. I don't see why analyzing players who you think are good is a bad thing and copying them is bad.

You are saying public players are trying to copy professional Dota too much but there is no reason why they would try a dual lane. Copying blindly is bad. Copying while understanding the strength and weaknesses isn't worse than inventing something new. You can't invent everything.

What this all comes back to is that what pros do is irrelevant. I'm fairly sure that there is a strong correlation between being able to strategically outplay your enemies in pub games and being able to do it in 'serious' games, and it should be obvious that the exact strategies don't actually need to be the same. I'm also pretty sure there is a correlation between the kinds of players who simply copy what they see and refuse to play outside what they think is 'right' and the kinds of teams who consistently display zero adaptability and never get anywhere.

I don't see the correlation. I play by probability. If the most probable scenario is that the opponent has a solo off lane, then I pick my items accordingly. I am not going to pick my items according to if they had a dual lane. Congratulations, you managed to throw me off in a game because you are random opponent that I have no control over and you picked a dual lane. Is that now somehow good Dota from your side and bad from my side?

What you want me to do about it? I'll try my best to adapt but if my support doesn't know how or my jungler doesn't know how, then we got a problem, right? That was my point. I believe public players generally don't know how to handle a offensive dual lane and I think a defensive dual lane with a jungler will generally beat an offensive dual lane.

How can you say that your dual lane works well and that it crushes a defensive dual lane in theory just because you managed to do it in public games? Especially when you say yourself that you threw the enemy off guard and them thinking it would be an solo off lane. How do you know that they responded as well as they could to your dual lane?

[ThrashMetalFtw]

Any1 else getting games count as "abandoned" after they have become "safe to leave"?

Today I was even put into the "lower queue priority because of abandoned games or player reports" because of it. The game itself DCs, I'm unable to reconnect, and after a few minutes (and failed attempts at reconnecting), the game becomes safe to leave, and apparently this counts as "abandoning" it, when it obiously shouldn't.

It could also be player reports, but I don't see how that could be the case, as I have been the dominant player of our team in pretty much all matches recently. Is it possible for me to get put into this "lower prio" shit because of random guys reporting ppl just for trolling? Not sure how the system works, but if you can get reported without reason, and then get punished for it, the system is kind of flawed...

[Lysah]

Professional scene will be back to dual lanes well before TI4.

Thus says my crystal ball.

[Mamut]

I just started playing dota. Finished tutorial vs bots and now wanted do 10 games from tutorial vs normal people. And oh my god its just nightmare. I lost so far every game (5 atm). Im ALWAYS playing 4v5 or even 3v5 because people are leaving at start or after 5-10 min. Even if its 4v5 people dont have idea what the hell they are doing. They just run around and die to everyone. Even when I tell help mid/top/bot coz there 3-4 enemies they do nothing and just let them destroy towers.

Im new to this game but seriously. How someone can be sooo bad? All games for new players look like this or Im just very unlucky?

[Drunkenvalley]

All games for new players look like this or Im just very unlucky?

A mix of both. From what I've seen the new players are always terrified of engaging into fights, but the level of crap you got put up with sounds like you were a fair bit unlucky as well.

[Deleted]

Any1 else getting games count as "abandoned" after they have become "safe to leave"?

Today I was even put into the "lower queue priority because of abandoned games or player reports" because of it. The game itself DCs, I'm unable to reconnect, and after a few minutes (and failed attempts at reconnecting), the game becomes safe to leave, and apparently this counts as "abandoning" it, when it obiously shouldn't.

That means that you have abandoned and the game is safe to leave for the other people.

[Scummer]

This isn't because you afk'ed for too long?

- - - Updated - - -

I just started playing dota. Finished tutorial vs bots and now wanted do 10 games from tutorial vs normal people. And oh my god its just nightmare. I lost so far every game (5 atm). Im ALWAYS playing 4v5 or even 3v5 because people are leaving at start or after 5-10 min. Even if its 4v5 people dont have idea what the hell they are doing. They just run around and die to everyone. Even when I tell help mid/top/bot coz there 3-4 enemies they do nothing and just let them destroy towers.

Im new to this game but seriously. How someone can be sooo bad? All games for new players look like this or Im just very unlucky?

Well you're kinda unlucky sort of not.

I lost most of my first games. It just happens. DOTA is a very team play and role driven game which basically nobody gets when they start and thus games will wind up just being bad. It's not fun initially to fall victim to this but once you've played a couple more games the MM system will sort you with people of your own skill (most of the time).

I guess the best piece of advice I can give you for low level pub matches is pick what role the team needs. I know it sounds simple. But more often than not most people will play carry heroes because initially that's all that they know - farm gold and kill.
Learn each heroes role and why they fit in different teams and why one hero may counter another.

The fact is that as you've probably realised in your first few games, not many people give a toss about how their hero compliments their team.

Sadly there's not much you can do about people abandoning. It gets less frequent the more games you play. People also do it in the lower bracket simply because they don't realise they will get knocked down the lower priority queue.