interesting thread btw
Thank you.
At least this thread is msotly selfaware. Making Heroes stronger just because a player farmed lvls is indeed a bad idea.
I agree, but at least this would fix the smurf problem a bit. 
Because it would rate higher leveled accounts higher than low level accounts and since there should be an restriction between low level and high level account anyway in a dream scenario, where the population is good this idea isn’t that bad for casual experience. Only in professional environment this idea is really bad.
You lost that privilege when you said “dumb idea” 
Well, it is pay-to-win with in-game-currency (1/3 of a new hero after all) and also farm-to-win. Both concepts are terrible.
But in a scenareo where the population isn’t that good, the idea might have some nasty unintended effects.
If the matchmaker doesn’t consider artifact availability/level/whatever, then the games could be unbalanced; but if it does take it into account, then it might be even harder to make good matches, because it has to find players with similar MMR and similar Artifact power.
That was a problem I had many, many years ago when I played Metal Gear Online: the game seemed to match players based primariliy on their XP level (or at least that was my impression), and I would gain XP and level up even if I kept losing horribly.}
So, it wasn’t long at all before I was matched against players who had an idea what they were doing, but I didn’t. I was never allowed to stay in the noob pool, where I belonged.
I have a similar anecdote with Age of Empires 3 and its tacked-on deck system.
That’s part of why I think games that are aimed primarily at being a competitive PvP experience should not have out-of-match progression. Skill should be what determines the winner, not who has spend more time grinding power-ups (or more money, in P2W games)
This is a multiplayer PvP game.
- Fairness: Every player has the same opportunities. Adding any kind of power creep would mean that new players have a lower potential.
- Team: It could get ugly if one team gets players and picks heroes with these perks activated, while the others do not.
- Reworks: I only have two characters above 50, but I don’t like to play them anymore, one of them is specifically undertuned (Nazeebo was nerfed for being overtuned less).
- Pacing: I don’t know what these artifacts are doing, but it’s not Diablo 3 where you gain double damage to kill double health creatures. Everything has a fixed health and any such upgrade acts as a buff. Just like you can trivialize a specific difficulty level once outgearing it, so could you mess with existing numbers: you could become a literally unkillable tank, or you could really oneshot people. The designers would have to compensate, but it would be impossible.
One way I see your idea working is the ability to have many more heroic upgrades, or even heroics, and you could unlock them.
But it’s generally assumed to be better to play many heroes, and that sort of means that no one should have these perks below account level 500.
Well, that’s overcomplication. I see why. But in Heroes you don’t know in advance. So purchasing these powers and using them would basically increase your MMR.
Would it though? Would matchmaker only match non artifact players versus other non artifact players? If so, then this idea is a “crush newbies” smurf’s wet dream, because all they would have to do is never buy the Artifacts, and they would always be matched against low level players.
And if matchmaking DIDN’T split the playerbase into haves and have nots, then it would be even worse, as low level players would automatically lose against players who have artifacts, making them want to never play the game again.
Oh, and with how small of a population we have, anything that splits the playerbase is probably a bad idea.
At least I thought so, because this proposal would give high-level account an advantage over low level account. That means, if you want the same advantage, then you need to keep one account playing?
Now it’s the question does OP means total level 50 or level 50 for every single hero.
ooo… which would you think is better? I had the idea of just achieving 50 in that hero unlocking the ability to purchase just for that hero.
to address both of these at once. the match-making system could be updated with an added clause. once an artifact is unlocked and you have that hero chosen you will enter a que with only artifact players.
at this point i don’t think they will rework any more heroes drastically as nazeboo or say a sylvanis. id love more tho. keep it fresh.
yea i believe in those underpaid interns tho! they can do it xD
valid point tho all memes aside. it would be a balancing nightmare however, its just cool guy points for reaching 50. could just cap the max damage all artifacts could output on a cd.
i had to be honest. its truly is a dumb idea xD
<3 Love you 2
im getting better at maltheal btw thanks to your previous help.
The drawback of that is that it would GREATLY increase queue times, as it would split the player base into 2 groups that would no longer be able to play together.
If that’s true, happy for you. If for some reason not, gladly help with him!
Interesting read about the artifacts. One of the items was Wirt’s Leg. Cool.
It technically is pay to win, as Boosts dramatically increase the rate at which you can level a hero, and the easiest way to get a Boost is to spend real money on gems. While I think it is a fun idea, I just do not think it is practical in this game, especially when tied to hero levels.
Maybe as a new game mode like brawl (if we’re ever getting those anymore)
Heroes of The Storm is fine at the moment. These ideas would turn the game into MMORPG which is not designed in the first place and it will complex the game with these mechanics what you’re asking for.
facts. but i think its one group of players who played the game to that point and dosnt like artifacts toggle it off to just play normally.
so its more like 2 groups with an added middle ghost group drifting between two.
if you wouldn’t mind. What’s your talent spread?