Age of Heroes

The end of an age. Dota is nearing the end of an age. The end of the porting of vanilla dota heroes. We started out with a small amount but we have arrived at a state in which the last hero might come very soon. It took five to seven years, but all the heroes have been finally ported, within the next twenty six thousand and three hundred hours. We have come to a successful place in dota history.

We are at a place where curiosity can take hold of the developers both amateur and professional. Where if I get my progressive and liberal way, dota will be ushered into an age where it completely adopts new material that was never thought of in vanilla dota.

We see the advent of upcoming idea creation. Just think of all the possibilities. Dota doesn’t have to just stop with heroes and items. Heroes, the main staple of the game can make room for a new type of commodity in the game that hold equal importance as towers, items and the heroes themselves. A place where we have more than, just, creeps.

I cannot think of anything past what I know, but I will read something next week and an aha idea will come. Next, I will stretch forth my brain and produce an idea that can be given. The only thing I want to push now is my attribute change.

Just think of the possibilities that can be made if we take the game to a whole new level. The object is to always have the player’s interests in heart. A point of view that, sometimes, encompasses the idea of holding and creating ideas players might not realize they hold valuable.

Remember just a few months ago, % cooldown was introduced. It was highly debated about its effects on the game. Some people said the entire game would need to be redesigned. Others did not bring up a good point to counter it.

What have we seen with this implementation? That Cooldown manipulation doesn’t really change much. The only way it would be problamatic, in theory, and this is just in theory, is if it became a stat or was versatile in its power level. In other words, if it grew depending on your level, this would completely destroy the game.

Then again i’ts just a theory. In reality, it might not have an effect. Another thing that was heavily debated was attack range icrease or ARI. Ari is by far very situational. It adds nothing to the game. It’s only viable on like two heroes. If theres a third, fourth or fifth than they haven’t been found yet. There are a few I would get it on though. Weaver, the health helps him out dramatically, and he could use the extra attack range. Also, lina. She has more range than drow so the extra range over drow could make our fiery soul more lethal.

With that said, if this community can become more open minded with idead they wanted in the game. We might have a very interesting game for in the end. I admit you don’t want to make the game complicated. You want to add depth. The more depth the better. What is depth, any thing you add to the game that adds interest or keeps the player coming back. You want the player to be curious about your game always. They should gain a certain knowledge, but, and at some point everything they hold as a skill should hold up to challenges presented in the game. Let me define skill and challenge.

Skill: A learned behavior that takes some knowledge to uphold when competing with a challenge.

Challenge: A difficult situation or situations, in game design they start off simple and get more difficult as the game progresses.

With those two ideas in mind you want to create enough variables in the game where players find them selves doing several activities.

Yet, why does this matter. It matters because you can add variables to the game: Activities (Healing, jungling, disabling), mechanics ( break, feedback, stun. Etc. I think there are like nine variables. Activities, Ability Mechanics, Heroes, Attributes, Items, Economy (hero levels, Buyback, Fortification, Gold and Experience), abilities, Hero Stats (health, attack range, damage, etc), Creeps, and Towers. Am I missing any? Not sure. But these things can be added to these ten variables and not disrupt the flow of the game dramatically.

Heres why. If you take out creeps, you have just an overly large battle arena. If you take out towers you have no defense. If you take out items, you have no reason to have economy in the game. If you take out abilities and ability mechanics you have ‘Fire Emblem’ in real time oppose to turn based. These variables define the game. But in no way shape or form is it impossible to not add new variables or change the variables that are there. As long as you do not remove any, because a lot of the game depends on the other variables. Heroes depend on items, items depend on economy, economy depends on heroes.
But you can change these variables with out killing the game. If you change attributes, you will still be able to build your hero with items and fight as a five man team. Your hero will still get stronger through economy as the game progresses. But if you remove attributes than your hero’s economy becomes hard to define, and pointless.

For this reason, I want to define LOL’s attributes. They still have attributes it’s just less defined than dota’s. Attributes are built in stats that are not categorized into groups. Dota groups it’s hero stats into basic, main attribute, agility, strength, intelligence. Basically, these attributes do the same thing, it just harder to remember if Lol adds to many changeable stats compared to dota but easier to remember if they keep a low amount of changeable stats compared to their opponent.

If you have eight or less changeable stats than you don’t need to categorize them. Anymore and you will need to start categorizing them in some sort of pattern. In dota, it’s the pattern that makes the idea easy to remember. In lol it’s the low amount of changeable stats. If they add to many than they will need to add something compared to what dota does. In honest truth, I think dota could categorize them more and into more efficient pattern. I am creating one at the moment.

This is how I see the idea of changing attributes, creeps, etc. I see them as changeable variables. The same way Lol sees it. They don’t see a static game, where each part is a variable. Agility is not a variable it’s a component of a variable. If you don’t see this you will think that changing agility is a big problem but it is not. The idea is simplistic to change.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s