Comments on: Dota 6.64 - Tangible signs of a DPSgeddon

By: doNNy

doNNy — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 03:34:33 +0000

woW . . . . . . .
my ITEm killer blooDsekeER
- Power treads
- Battle fury
- Helm of dominator
- Butterfly
- Lothar Edge
- Buriza do canon

aND likeD Blo0DseKEeR. . . . . . . .

ok thANk’z ^_^

By: Terrokhan

Terrokhan — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 04:22:32 +0000

On another note, if you actually watched the replay it was mym’s ganking that won the game.

By: Terrokhan

Terrokhan — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:58:23 +0000

This particular match was not won because of dps heros. The armour reduction strat which includes sladar + lanaya and maybe tide and vs is very popular this version. Because reducing enemies armour it gives dps an early entrance into the game.

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 12:24:57 +0000

MODERATORS: Kindly quote my quotes if BBCode doesn’t work here… Thanks (and remove this line)

Now I got some time…
Taken from your first post on DPSgeddon:
1. [quote]Unless leaguers make quick adjustments and stop insisting on a quick-gank playstyle, they will lose easily to a DPSgeddon-oriented lineup. I’m afraid, this time the frog will not listen to Kuroky’s pleas for a return to the gank-heavy era of 6.48b.[/quote]Actually we’re going to see more ’surprise surprise’ heroes… like venge, spectre, etc. and others getting dagger. The game will still remain a ‘quick’ one.

2. [quote]many veterans, even leaguers, even myself (I am actually very good with the RAL if you didn’t know ) will find themselves out of place, their skills not as useful anymore.[/quote]
[quote]However this does not mean that support heroes especially the RAL will lose their dominance. In fact their position will be even more comfortably entrenched because of it. One does not need to be the Emperor to command the Empire. In fact, all one needs to do is to be the High Priest influencing the Emperor. One case in mind - Bane has his Enfeeble skill causing a 120% loss of DPS. Imagine how convenient that would be when you square off against a DPS.[/quote]
You actually countered your own text. lol?

3. [quote]The greatest losers in the coming DPSgeddon will be the gank cum AoE spell heroes, while the greatest winners, aside from the DPS, the supports who will anoint them as the messiahs of the future.[/quote]
Absolutely wrong! The new heroes that are used will be the one with ARMOR SHREDDING SPELLS… armor is heavy on gold in the new versions.

From your 2nd post on DPSgeddon:
1. [quote]What I really want to emphasize is you will see a dramatic reduction of lineups that focus exclusively on “ganking” or “pushing” or “blink-stun” in the future.[/quote]
Well, I say we’re gonna watch some blink-gank, roam-gank, simultaneous-two-lane-push, trilane strategies i.e. ganking and pushing and blink daggers will be seen even more! Should I post replays showing these?

2. What happened to Bristleback and NA??? You said they will rise further.

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:58:31 +0000

Taken from your first post on DPSgeddon:
[quote]Unless leaguers make quick adjustments and stop insisting on a quick-gank playstyle, they will lose easily to a DPSgeddon-oriented lineup. I’m afraid, this time the frog will not listen to Kuroky’s pleas for a return to the gank-heavy era of 6.48b.[/quote]

2. Countering your own self???????
[quote]many veterans, even leaguers, even myself (I am actually very good with the RAL if you didn’t know ) will find themselves out of place, their skills not as useful anymore.[/quote]
[quote]However this does not mean that support heroes especially the RAL will lose their dominance. In fact their position will be even more comfortably entrenched because of it. One does not need to be the Emperor to command the Empire. In fact, all one needs to do is to be the High Priest influencing the Emperor. One case in mind - Bane has his Enfeeble skill causing a 120% loss of DPS. Imagine how convenient that would be when you square off against a DPS.[/quote]

By: CF[X]

CF[X] — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 09:21:46 +0000

exactly. by balance, both line-ups was competent. what failed was the laning strat of TeG, and their mistake letting lanaya farm up. if you look at it, kuroky did as what he did in every single game, but this time, it was more of plaaystyle mistake rather than a DPS hero having a solid early game. if that was the case, then PoTM would have been more contributive than she was. this is not a replay showing that DPS heroes are now as great as in carries, this is a replay of a team mistaken in their overall strategy, and the best carry player in the world was present in it. as simple as that

By: reiva00

reiva00 — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:06:51 +0000

I think I see where you are going CFX. But like Prince said, the DPS heroes in recent replays (when used well of cors) now have the tendency to contribute a lot more than they used to. But in terms of strat by TeG, I think Loda’s comment on Gosu was pretty useful:

Anyone else who thinks viper should have soloed mid vs Lanaya?
Zeus vs triple lane is better than Viper vs tripple lane aswell, and just by sending sand king bottom early they would have much better lanes.

Potm solo top
Viper solo mid
SK Zeus bottom with chen in the forest

If this was followed, perhaps TeG would have had a better chance, although the loss looked to be inevitable. But do see it in the broad perspective that caspian described in his last post. Early-game is no longer hell for DPS carries.

By: CF[X]

CF[X] — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:08:16 +0000

i agree a lot with DPSgeddon (although i think the idea is a bit shallow), but not with this post of ‘tangible’ sign. this game was a loss leaned more towards a team playing with better strategy. lanaya/slardar did not win most of the game.

By: The DS Prince

The DS Prince — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:41:08 +0000

In response to Phoenix and CFX my reply is quite simple. I never said that games were tending towards “several carries” or being that DPS can equal being a carry. My main point is 1 or 2 heroes specializing in physical damage in one team will feature heavily in future games, with support heroes propping them up for whatever role they are being intended for. The other point is, these 1 or 2 “physical damage” heroes will also be very powerful. These same DPS heroes could be regarded as “carries”, or they can also simply replace the role that heroes specializing in spell damage have been assuming in leagues. I think reiva understands what message I’m trying to get across very clearly. I quote:

People are so quick to assume that when DPS is mentioned, Troll is the top pick. On the contrary, the best DPS heroes require skill and coordination, like the Lanaya visible in this replay. This Armageddon does not necessarily mean that the metagame will change to a long and boring one, but evident in this replay, the fast pace that DPS heroes can bring to the earlier aspects of the game will definitely show a more exciting future for DotA.

What I really want to emphasize is you will see a dramatic reduction of lineups that focus exclusively on “ganking” or “pushing” or “blink-stun” in the future. Instead more and more lineups will see these DPS heroes assuming a much bigger role than before. In the past it used to be assumed that DPS heroes needed “farm” time to get strong. This will not be anymore - as is amply demonstrated by Kuroky’s Lanaya. And if this is true that it also follows that DPS heroes are thus very very strong, even overpowered if possible, because they are no longer encumbered by an “early-game” weakness but are now strong at all levels.

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:31:46 +0000

Just came to say I disagree with whatever Caspian says in this post and in his last post on DPSgeddon. I don’t have the time for proving my point though… Slardar has been used a lot of times in the past without being the main carry.
My point is just that DotA is far from getting line-ups with several ‘carries’. No need to counter or promote my statement.
Peace!
[Wrote this just because caspian goes on explaining a wrong concept the second time.
Words of Icefrog: "Most changes are usually a compilation of many different sets of data and requests over time. By “type of player” I do not mean competitive or casual at all, I mean the segment of player groups that use different mediums to express their views. The important thing to keep in mind when thinking about a remake is trying to make sure that the qualities players enjoyed in that character are maintained for the rehash."]
Again, no need to counter me. I just don’t have time for this.