Not really on topic, but I want this clarified because I suspect most people dont know. Spawn towers in the foward most base in a lane can spawn 3 units at a time, anything behind that only can have 2 up at a time. This is an intended addition to make putting them up front more valuable to go with the additional risk.Demon, those people building spawn towers in forward bases deserve losing them... if you really play IHs and do that, people should have flamed you to death by now...
Tact's going to get nerfed not because she possesses this ability, but the speed at which she can take something down, the frequency she can do it, and the difficult of countering it. And by difficulty to counter i dont mean a single attack, I mean dealing with constant, repeated assults, which currently have no way to really handle it besides practicly parking a hero at the tower all game to protect it - which is a horrible situation. Furthermore, evenif you chase her away the instant you arrive from the port, she'll easily come back and kill any worker trying to repair it before much of the damage she caused in her first attack is fixed. Add this to bouncing between 3 obs just to slowly wear them down and you've got an extremely fucking annoying situation on your hand that makes people want to ban games with tact in it.Oh, and as for the heroes that CAN swing the game quickly like tactician, well all I have to say is this: see the thread that's trying to get her NERFED because she can actually kill buildings relatively efficiently so she CAN'T.
I believe I said this before: the rax in dota are in the main base, protected by multiple lines of towers (aren't they even invincible till the foward towers are killed?). This means nothing really can change untill you're that far in the game, and lets people more or less ignore it. One of the premises of EotA is intended to be caring - not the happy feeling caring, but the "oh shit if we don't pay attention to this we're fucked" caring. Yes, its a bit rough, its suppose to be.And as has been mentioned, by the time rax are being knocked down, the game is just about over, and not really before unless there is a HUGE mismatch.
Furthermore, an individual outpost means less in EotA. I've gone through this discussion in the past, and I should bring this here again: is losing an outpost causing you to lose the game, or is losing the game causing you to lose the outpost? In more or less every game i've seen where we surrender after one outpost goes down, its because we're losing heavily in every aspect (all fronts are failing to push well, our heroes are outleveled, we're probably behind on cores due to being unable to take down enemy obs). In close games I've been in, losing an outpost, while obviously not a good thing, doesn't spell doom and it still can, and has, gone both ways.Usualy it involves deciding on a plan on how to even things up, and having people work together enough to carry it out.
I had an excellent game last week where we were largley on defense the entire game, but still pulled it together for a victory. We didn't turtle, but we certainly weren't on the pushing end untill late in the game (at least, that's my take on it, others may dissagree if they feel so, as it included well known people; Toxik, Siege, BPV, mian, hammel, dont remmeber rest). Pure offense isn't demanded, but losing the entire battlefield to your enemy shouldn't be a winning strat unless it has more tt then just that.As was said, the problem with EotA is this. The defenders defend because they defended.
If EotA had ways of coming back, then the -surrender option should not even be in the game
These two statements actualy counter each other. Why? Repairs and rebuilding. There's very little in EotA that isn't SOMEHOW replacable, although it can be hard or expensive. This is part of what allows combacks, but its also part of what can sometimes make games into an hour long siege long after the game ends, since they can just throw up more towers and repair the ones that are up.That's the exact problem, don't you think? The fact that between "okay, we won" and when the game says "you are victorious" is such a long time means that there is something HORRIDLY wrong here. IDEALLY, a game should have the moment when it's acknowledged that one side will win and that they actually DO win should be ONE AND THE SAME.
I'm also going to add that the game is suppose to end when one team secures the artifact. Since people often don't do this, it adds overhead to the game. Since this thread likes to reference chess, its sorta like having the king almost in check mate, but refusing to put it there becuase its more...fun? intuitive? standard? to capture all the other peices first. Sure, there may be some time issues with how fast control swings one way or another, which I may change, but short of forcing the artifact to spawn at 100% I doubt that'll work. Admittedly, a forced artifact spawn could have interesting results...
DarnYak
