Item dependant-ness and late game oriented-ness

i *dont* like this, and i feel that mai map is leaning too much towards that title
i needs suggestions on how to fix this!

Grass Hopper wrote:i *dont* like this, and i feel that mai map is leaning too much towards that title
i needs suggestions on how to fix this!

I agree. The map is insanely item dependent and heroes can stack up about 50+ damage in about 10 minutes easily with basic damage bonus items.

My solution: reduce global damage bonuses, str/agi/int bonuses, atk damage +% bonuses, armor bonuses by 50% (keep costs).

or

Second solution: greatly reduce creep / forest creep bounty (to about 6 to 8 gold per creep and 15 to 25 gold per forest creep) and add a periodic +X gold to all players and greatly reduce the amount of gold loss for dying (even make it zero?). This will make the game scale over time but not allow certain creep-slaying heroes to mass damage etc very quickly.

Why?: Play AotZ - the highest statistic item is +4 intelligence, and it remains one of the most balanced AoS maps.

Simply reduce all the stats of the items. It'll make the numbers game less relevant and force people to adapt to what they have.

You can also remove items from the game, which I wouldn't be opposed to.

There might be certain modes which halve the bonuses of all items or ban certain items from even being bought. A no items mode would be extremely challenging and interesting even.

@Xeno:

Agreed, with slight disagreement. Don't exactly think reducing bounty will help that much. It's a numbers game, but look: We gain 50-70 gold on average per kill. Your suggestion is helpful, but is too much. We don't want to make the game ten times longer.

That being said, we should seek not to make our map like other maps.

We also have to be careful not to drastically shift the playing field on those who play our game, who will complain that the game is longer and more power and there isn't as much pwnage anymore and so on and so forth.

acutally, drastically reducing items bonuses will make games shorter, because they are no longer decided on who gets the best items, but instead on player's skill and how they spend their gold (hireables etc)

im actually not oposed to halving all item bonuses

Grass Hopper wrote:acutally, drastically reducing items bonuses will make games shorter, because they are no longer decided on who gets the best items, but instead on player's skill and how they spend their gold (hireables etc)

im actually not oposed to halving all item bonuses

The simple solution to game length based on items not being powerful is to have spawnable units at each base (e.g you can spawn a dreadnought manually using gold for assaulting a base - making pushing more effective since heroes no longer deal 200 damage).

The variety in spawnable units could be endless, from cannon fodder to ultimate destructive force.

Edit: I just found out this is already possible >.<

I think both those ideas are good lowering bounty and item stats. I have not played in a while but when i was i always felt like i would not go to buy till i had no other option and at that point i could get a major item or a big piece of a recipe.

I like that idea that buying a one time hireable could be a better value than an item long term.

While I see the basic problems, I disagree with the proposed solutions, if only because doing something like halving all item bonuses would affect balance more than you think. I realize that this change would be global BUT you have to keep in mind that DPS heroes will do less, tanking heroes will tank less, and casting heroes will have less mana regen. IAS bonuses and all that will be reduced, and heroes that rely on items to cover their weaknesses will be highly disadvantaged.

I'm having trouble explaining this, but the way I see it, unless all skills/stats/damage/etc. on the map are changed, then balance is going to be thrown out of whack.


That being said, I personally like the way it is now. The games occasionally get to the point where the guy with the best items destroy everything, but to be honest, more often than not, it's character and player skill that have the greatest effect. Items do make a big difference, but don't determine the winner in and of themselves until past the 1 hour mark (and even then...).

well, the problem i see is that more often thna not (for me anyway) in a game where the average player skill level is above shit, the game lasts longer than 40 minutes, and so in an actual skilled game, it comes down to how long you can last and how quickly you can farm up your items.

and i know it will affect balance, but i dont think it will be that huge.
take a typical end game senario: everyone who has marginal dps capabilities can wtf-own those that cant (ex => fuegan vs... farseer) which is entirely done by items, when that happens... items are too powerful.

even then, halving item bonuses will also making it more about skill over your hero rather than massing the right items to make it so your hero doestn ahve any faults

Grass Hopper wrote:well, the problem i see is that more often thna not (for me anyway) in a game where the average player skill level is above shit, the game lasts longer than 40 minutes, and so in an actual skilled game, it comes down to how long you can last and how quickly you can farm up your items.

and i know it will affect balance, but i dont think it will be that huge.
take a typical end game senario: everyone who has marginal dps capabilities can wtf-own those that cant (ex => fuegan vs... farseer) which is entirely done by items, when that happens... items are too powerful.

even then, halving item bonuses will also making it more about skill over your hero rather than massing the right items to make it so your hero doestn ahve any faults

Removing such large item bonuses would also make spells more effective for a longer duration - so you can actually still inflict damage with a 300 damage nuke for example instead of 50 damage after magic resistance and armor.

Well, let's take the example you gave. Fuegan vs Far Seer. When he can do 900 nuke to a hero with jack-shit HP, she's not gonna have time to do much. Her ult, however, would 1 shot almost every non-tank if she gets to them without them seeing her.


Or take someone like Warphead. A successful Zzap will WTF-own most low HP heroes, and himself if he can't get some magic resist built up.

What about Zoe? Any non-tank melee hero won't have the STR/Magic resist to survive it.

By nerfing items, you essentially rape agi chars, buff int to a certain extent, and heavily help STR heroes, especially ones with powerful abilities.

Removing such large item bonuses would also make spells more effective for a longer duration - so you can actually still inflict damage with a 300 damage nuke for example instead of 50 damage after magic resistance and armor.

This is exactly my point. This has been taken into account and balance was created with this in mind. We would have to change a lot of abilities to re-balance it.



Finally, character choice has a greater impact than item choice in the overall scheme of things. I realize we are working on balancing that, but shouldn't that be balanced *FIRST* and items be balanced individually?

Just to be clear, I don't think that nerfing items is a bad idea, but I DO think that a global nerf to all items is bad.

pssst: armor doesnt affect spell damage >.>

but i know what u mean, mroeso on the higher hp pools than the armor/magic resist

edit @from:
well, when most heroes have ~2k hp towards the end of the game, spells mean absolutly nothing.
and most of my 'carry heroes' have ways to deal their damage without real items (innate dmage boosting items/ias, skills like Gorechild that gives straight +dmg)
and by halving armor and hp items, agi heros still deal their damage, but to less reduction, and lesser hp pools.

it is a *huge* change. but tahts why i want to playtest this version *ALOT* before making sure that im ok with halving the item benefits.

see, you think its a bad idea, but i think its worth a try... so im gona go ahead and try it. but i wont actually implement it unless im 100% sure that it helps the game

after thought: making the 'late game rape heroes' not rape late game will actually shorten game length imo

It's much harder for any one character or class to dominate now since all stats are reduced. Everyone dies easier from all attacks, which will increase the number of kills, time spent out of lane, and so on.

As for Zoey, his spells are number-set, so that means we'll have to balance the numbers slightly, but not too much. He does about 1k-1.2k with all his nukes, so characters can survive.

I think the key point is that we have to understand that lowering the stats on items will buff some heroes greatly, especially those who have number-set skills (Yum, 700 damage strike from Psyker), while other heroes will be nerfed, such as those that really need their end-game items (Agi heroes for the most part).

And that's perfectly fine. If it gets so broken we need to fix it, then we will.

not to mention its the eziest choice to fix everything (well, attempt to fix everything - we dont know if it will work or not) and if it doesnt work.... just reload the other map and try something else to fix the problem

So why don't we make the balance changes for now, copy that changed map and save a copy in case it screws with everything?

i already have

I also have a suggestion from earlier. Reduce how many items it takes to make an item. We don't need Power Armor, then *random* armor, then Terminator Armor.

Just make it Terminator Armor, lower the stats, and make it buildable from base items.

The same would go for all the other items.

This is because we're stuck in a mode of upgrading our items when in fact we should really be getting the final versions of the items except with reduced bonuses.

Add in the fact that we don't have straight +stat items (aside from the +10) and I think it should work well in limiting how effective heroes become.

eh, the armor upgrades, as they currently are, suck
i want to make each tier of armor do something unique-but-related. so you actually have a reason to upgrade to the inbetween armor.
(not to mention if wraithbone armor becomes a basic armor, then that would help out a bit)

We have adamantine, flac, wraithbone, and carapace armor, which should be good enough to fill any base armor need.

Perhaps 1-2 pieces of armor in a set? Some armors are unique and don't have an upgrade item, so that's how 1 would exist.

like hydraulic and holosuits
and isnt carapace armor for scouts? or am i off?

Grass Hopper wrote:
so im gona go ahead and try it. but i wont actually implement it unless im 100% sure that it helps the game

As long as we're clear on that, then we're good.