Yeah, I agree on making the spells maybe play similar roles, but not be the same old effects.
I think it would be a good idea to keep the same upgrade style. either in upgrades, or spell upgrades or mana, or w/e. I also am finding myself slightly opposed to adding items, just because i ask myself, what's the point? I mean, maybe adding in special effects to attacks, and maybe MS bonuses or w/e, but I think part of the reason TS was so good was the differences in MSs and such that balanced the game and made it a lot more entertaining. Having a Lm that can move as fast as a mutant would just suck. Also, how would gold for items be obtained? Through last hits? we already get exp and upgrades form that. Adding gold might add a bigger snowball effect for a team getting all the farm.
Also, are we considering taking more the dota style of play and having a shitton of heroes, or the old school Ts play where there arent as many heroes? Also, is it gonna stay 3v3? or might it change to 4v4 or 5v5? I'd personally say it depends on how many heroes you plan to add. Like, if there are 60 heroes, you dont want to keep it 3v3, because then there are way too many possibilities of strategy combinations, and a lower chance of countering certain strategies.
Going along with Rockz, an example of how my favorite hero, LM could be used with the same exact spells (this is assuming from the old versions where dragoons was lvl 3 and lvl 4 was still reavers).
L1- like sentry's shield but bigger, can move, random unit in shield damaged (or just make his attack speed higher and let him target)
L2- Use HSMs that target units based on threat, like the reavers did.
L3- Create a wall around him, AOE DOT maybe?
L4- just more of L2...
Light mage would actually be one of the weirdest/hardest to port and keep to the original (without doing the old "units spawn" thing. Notable others might be mutant, archer, mech, phantom, and spec ops/engineer, IMO.
Either way, TS definitely needs a place in SC2 mapmaking. It'll blow all those crappy dota clones outta the water.
Firstly, I think we should actually give the heroes names, like LoL does, instead of boring predictable stuff like "Medic" and "Silencer".
Secondly, I think we should implement a game mode where there would be 4 opposing bases with 3 heroes each base (1 per lane, so to say).
It would look like this.
I believe turrets should be deny-able, and heroes should not be. Minions are another matter entirely which I would personally prefer them to *not* be deny-able, but that is debatable.
1. I disagree. It is much more beginner friendly, and actually adds character to their name more than a name like Boogaboo does. What does Boogaboo do just by looking at his name? You have no idea. Now if Boogaboo's name was Pulverizer, it's a lot easier to tell what he's probably gonna do in battle.
2. Also no. Not only would having 12 players in a single match be a strategical and balancing nightmare, but two teams is much more enjoyable than multiple teams. The reasoning being that two teams could easily push another team into submission to get them out of the game early, especially if they have late-game heroes. In a 2v2, this would be a little harder, as that late game team only has to defend against a team their own size instead of effectively a team twice their size.
3. I think we should keep minions the way they were in the first TS, along with the base system and such. Make minions a little stronger, but not to the level of dota and such. TS is great because it has so much hero interaction, and the beginning of games isnt always farming like it is in dota. Also, I say stick to the old style exp system.
You have my Testing and bug-finding sword, Unholy.
Post has been edited 3 time(s), last time on Sep 25 2010, 3:29 am by ShredderIV.
None.