Upcoming XP Changes

Sure. chip_holden explained the situation quite well:

There is no denying that the changes being made to the game are quite drastic. Many posts have been made lamenting this, but I think that these comments are missing a crucial aspect that could spin the negative take into a more positive route. When a change is made of this magnitude, the game itself changes at its core. When the game changes at its core, it requires a completely different perspective in order to execute successful strategies. It is in this area that I believe most of the HOTS community is failing at the current time. The game is about to change: we, as a community, must adapt our play styles to fit what will be strongest, and I think we have missed a few key ideas so far.

First of all is the idea that turtling will be the way to go (sitting back, not fighting, freezing waves, and soaking XP). I disagree that this will be the smartest way to play for one primary reason; freezing a wave and turtling requires a hero in each lane in order to gain benefit.

Vision is key in this game, especially at high levels. As the game stands now, teams usually aim to generate a rotational advantage whereby they can force their opponents to be in a predetermined location (this is one reason people preach wave clear; if you clear the wave quicker than your enemy, you KNOW where they will be, even if just for even a brief duration). This grants vision, but, more importantly, a window of map control that can be utilized to gain a further advantage.

If an enemy team is freezing waves and having a hero babysit a lane, then guess what? They are not covering a different lane to its fullest potential, leaving a window of opportunity to capitalize on. If you KNOW that Yrel is bot soaking a frozen wave, then you can more safely push in towers on the opposite side of the map. You have essentially created a rotational advantage PERMANENTLY in that lane, giving you map control to gain an upperhand elsewhwere.

“But Chip, if you do that in all lanes they will gain an XP lead, which is what the game is all about.” This is the predominant argument against the changes I have seen thus far in most threads. My argument, however, is that XP itself is far less important than it used to be. Continuing to operate under the impression that XP game is the primary objective, under a game which has changed its function, is illogical.

If you are able to get all 3 forts down as your enemy turtles and soaks, they may gain more XP from minion soak, but they will have a harder time with mercs, a nil effort on structure XP (which still exists), and a VERY difficult time moving on the map without granting vision. This is the part that I think may be most crucial: the macro play we will need to see will be more varied if my theory crafting is correct.

Lets say we get to the mid game, where Blue has killed all 3 forts, but sits behind in level 13 to 11 or 12. Red has frozen all 3 lanes to generate this XP advantage, and the objective comes up. Whatever Red tries to do now, Blue will have vision of there movements and can react accordingly. Red may have the XP lead, but Blue ALWAYS will have the opportunity now to say "we just won’t fight you. If Red moves towards the objective, Blue can move to another lane to utilize their extra pushing power. If Red moves to respond, Blue will have vision. A smart team with a structure advantage (but level disadvantage) is something we have NEVER seen before, but it creates some interesting choices that must be made.

In the end, (and TLDR) this is why I think people are jumping the gun on the changes. We have not even begun to fully predict how to best use the situation to our advantage. We have in front of us two choices that must be made: do we play for the level advantage and loss of map control, or the map control but a level disadvantage? Personally, I think that is a brilliant dichotomy to play around, and I am excited to see how this will evolve the game as a result.

And in my own words:

These changes are, ultimately, designed to make the lane a competitive place again instead of something you just rush through to soak. For players who think 5v5s happen too much or want for split-pushing, they now have an avenue to do that if they can outplay in the lanes. Take your catapults and push with them instead of roaming around and expecting them to magically do the thing.

If you don’t, you’re giving the defending team a big window to even the match, which is exactly why these complaints of “we were down all match but we didn’t lose” are coming up – the winning team is throwing their lead.

4 Likes

why? this would give the team that is winning a clear advantage. imagine lev 20 in a 30 min game, the losing team gets 4 kills, usually you would go core and win. but not if the core has armor, this would almost require the losing team to catchup in forts to win.

1 Like

The core debuff could be one way a good suggestions for the devs to fix this issue. I like it better to give a better reason to defend/attack the front forts other than cata’s that actually gives the enemy more exp. Could be changed to cata’s that give no exp in return, or farm the exp, or something that gives it more value.
The value for destroying a fort is a cata every 3 mintues. Either not threatening enough, or rewarding enough to target a fort. Keep in mind it doesn’t need to be exp to increase the forts value.

Though curse will still have this problem because the exp value in minions. (maybe even rewarding winning capping team a decent amount of exp)

Sorry for the errors or it’s hard to read. Usually responding quickly on my breaks at work.

The funny thing is, since the qm changes, yes I have longer queue times but for the first time I actually feel like games are evenly matched and had much fewer stomps. 2 weeks later you are introducing xp changes again which artificially will remove stomps but not because of skill. The smart move already is to afk soak (literally hiding in a bush to let the minions kill each other); these changes are just going to make it worse.

2 Likes

The current, and previous, xp pacing of the game has the team get the first objective, use that to get an xp lead to get 10 first, when then allows them to bully the other team away from the objective, and then use the next one for another xp lead to which they then use to maintain control for the game via level and talent advantages because the surge of xp from towers/forst (depending on version optimization) allows the winning team to use their xp momentum to control much of the map and get mercs and the like to deny the losing side the effect.

with the ptr changes dropping the xp reward from structures, the current complaint is that that not only loses incentive for teams to contest early objectives (leaving lanes loses xp a defending team could gain) but the addition of catapults can push the lane outside of the soak range of the ‘leading team’ to the point that early leads become a liability that favors the behind side, so that discourages clashing and trying to ‘get ahead’ by contesting stuff instead of just splitting merc/soak safely till later talents, and stronger minions.

Having structures in the back gain armor from structures ahead means that there is still a award available for a side to increase their ability to push later, but it doesn’t come as an xp snowball, or a momemtum in minion movement that favors the side that’s behind.

If it team is ‘winning’ through much the game, then it would allow them to maticuloursly clear all the lanes and get a push advantage for taking core, but on the other hand, a strong counter-clash with long enough death timers would mean the defending side may still have time enough to focus down one lane and turn the game around and race for a win.

The suggestion curbs the resource concerns expressed both of the previous year and the current ptr experiment while providing incentive to win clashes/objectives as a means to get an advantage somewhere less pronounced than complete talent leads.

and sifting through your post history makes this post rather ironic since you have a blinded tunnel vision of doom saying and bullying…

1 Like

It’s really as simple as narrowing the death timer scale so that early game structural advantage matters and one late game team fight can’t instantly turn a clear loss into a win. The death timers could scale from 17 seconds to 45 seconds, with death timers increasing by an alternation of 1 and 2 seconds from level 1 to 20. For example, level 1 death timer 17 seconds, level 2 is 18 seconds, lvl 3 - 20s, lvl 4 - 21s, lvl 5 - 23s, etc. This way, early game structural advantage actually feels impactful because you know that if you get team wiped at lvl 20 you probably won’t lose the game if you had a structural advantage and haven’t lossed a keep or keep wall yet.

Explain to me, again, why you feel it is necessary to completely alter the HOTS experience by removing EXP from getting forts and keeps? I don’t understand the logic behind it. Of all the problems with the game, I’ve never heard a single person complain about the EXP gain from killing structures.

Stop changing things just to change them. Address the REAL issues of the game, like the horrid imbalance of the heroes, the fact you destroy the current season by releasing heroes you allow to immediately be played in league, radical and sweeping “balance” changes dropped in the middle of competitive seasons, a report system that certainly appears more often than not to punish innocent people (when it works at all), the MMR situation that keeps so many at the bottom tier of players, the increasingly crippling queue times, and the fact competitive play is anything but.

Fix all of the above and THEN tell us how you’re going to change the fundamental aspect of the game.

8 Likes

I personally dont like the armor idea. Games would last too long. Imagine a team that has lost their 3 forts and a keep and the other team that has lost 1 for and keep. This would mean that the losing team would need to “Catch up” before going core after a team wipe.

1 Like

Well, i consider leave the xp gaining but nerfed, still, like a reward for destroying the keep should be more or less a little buff for the mercs that will go to that lane (and this should have a cd wich the result of more strategic plan), destroying the second keep will be the result of summoning the catapults with each minion wave, of course, this is still and issue on some maps where there are no minions wave on the mid lane, still, i got the idea to command not elite mercs to push specific lanes when they are recruited, is more rewarding and is an entirely new experience

I will try to explain from a program and design philosophy why blizzard is having such a hard time with balancing the game.

whenever you design software you have to adhere to certain criteria, and when you design a game you have to be very rigid with your vision otherwise you will never finish the game or end up with scope creep.

For HoTs, Blizzard wanted a moba that satisfied the following (these are 2 very rudimentary elements)
1 - Games should be finished around 30 mins at the most
2 - Promote Team fights

those are 2 core elements in the game for better or worse that must be adhered to, because that is how the game was designed. anything that they try to do will eventually be limited by those 2 elements.

let me explain what has happened the past year that has caused concern for blizzard

Games must end around 30 mins - they implemented 2 simple mechanics in the game, passive xp to scale team exp and heroes talents are capped at lvl 20 (yes I know there are some heroes that scale to infinity for their talent ie Illidan’s and Zuljin) both those elements help hots to achieve the 30 min and under game mark.

Element 2 - promote team fighting, mechanics - objectives that destroy structures which gives experience. pretty simple concept, however when games got "snow balled " - there were no team fights. so they had to rectify that issue by reducing exp on structures.

point is they are facing some issues here trying to balance out the 2 main design philosophies of the game. they can modify game mechanics that isn’t snowbally but then it would be hard to keep it under 30 mins. a lot of games would end up in a stale mate for a long period of time.

hopefully that makes sense, its pretty late here

2 Likes

And bring back tower ammo.

4 Likes

So ramp up Minion damage over time instead of all these changes, boom problem fixed.

There is just a easy way to balance the major problems of this game now, just bring back the tower ammunition system, if that is not enough, u can just set when a hero is near the tower, the ammunition recharges 25% faster to prevent early game siege and snowball effect.

this will just make sgt hammer v.s. ai fights even more unbearable since they will just barrel down the lanes to the core resulting in a sub lvl 10 game that is extremely boring even on elite.





2 Likes

or bring back TLV :wink:

The game is not tuned for AI move.

Does anyone see the trend or what’s coming?
A year from now we will see another update:

*We’ve removed minions. We felt that they were hindering team fights because players were focusing on them instead of team fights.

*We’ve removed all but 1 lane. Players were split for half of the games instead of team fighting. So we removed all of the lanes. Now, there will be nowhere to hide from a team fight.

*We’ve removed all but 1 keep on each side. Players were trying to destroy keeps and towers instead of team fighting. So we took em out.

*All objectives are now moved to the center of all maps. This way, players won’t have any question of where the next team fight will be. Forget spending game time going up or down in a map on their way to the objective. We’ve put them all in the middle so that more time can be spent team fighting.

*We’ve removed pregame time. The seconds before the gates opened were time people could be spent in a team fight. So as soon as you spawn from the loading screen, you can now go straight to the objective to team fight.

…

They are robbing the game of all depth to make it an isometric version of overwatch.

6 Likes

How about keeping the xp changes as they were announced, but introduce a possibility to “rebuild” destroied forts and keeps - and succeding to do so would reward the team with ‘comeback-xp’? A little bit like Towers of Doom, but also different (easier/faster since less structure dmg is needed): instead of turning the enemy sturcture into ones own structure, the team that took a fort/keep gains a fountain and tower that grants vision (like those that were removed in the last changes from next to the forts/keeps) in that location. If the team that has lost the original structure succedes in recapturing the tower, a NPC rebuiling team starts to work on rebuilding the previous fort/keep (for a fixed amount of time till they are finished); a process that can (maybe) be interrupted by recapturing the tower (again)?

This way, the pushing team gets rewarded by a (small) save zone that grants them vision and the defending team has a reason to move out into the enemy territory and get some comeback xp (and ‘comeback territory’.