This would cause a shift in the meta as players would now just pick hero’s that have strong ults and passively creep til 5 before looking for fights. This would also encourage solo hero play in order to hit 5 faster for the ult. I dont see either of these as positive changes from a player or spectator stand point personally.
1 Like
I think that ultimates at Lv6 is fine. I don’t think the ‘Ultimates are special because they are powerful and rare’ argument is wrong, it makes closer/longer games more epic and enjoyable to watch and play.
Of course the game is already balanced in that area with Heroes being able to creep until Lv5, It would make it easier to even get multiple heroes with their ultimate and it would undo a lot of balancing up to this point, particularly the change from RoC to TFT.
If anything, the game has been fine like this for 15 years, and people were fine with it.
they could also just increase the amount of xp heroes get from killing units or neuts. But I agree, I want them to make the game more fun and this would do so, I’ve been watching a ton of replays and you’re right, not many actually reach lvl 6, and thats not fun. I think they need to start changing the game for the better, I know alot of wc3 vets are screaming “keep it the same” but the game needs tweeks, why do you think dota is so popular, its because they patch the game every year that completely changes it so it feels fresh, I hope they do the same with wc3.
Making changes is fine, but it has to be done in increments, and I would consider these ideas to change how XP works is a pretty significant change. I am all for them making changes later down the road, but my preference is to see an actual expansion released a year or two after Reforged. That way, instead of making a bunch of changes to the base game, they can keep TFT as it is and still bring us something fresh and new. We just have to be patient
They have been making regular balance patches to WC3 for like the last year or so already. The issue has nothing to do with refusing to change the game its that the proposed change by the OP is bad for reasons already stated.
Getting ultimate ability just from creeping seems bad since races like human that can creep quite faster compared to the rest would get a buff
Buffing / nerfing all abilities to fit the choice would be a loooong and grindy process and it will cause a huge comunity uproar
Making it so that you can only creep to lvl 4 might be a required change that will have outcomes I can’t really think of now
1 Like
What if you can only creep to level 4? Wouldn’t that palliate the problem (why have I remembered the word “palliate”…)?
Because now, reaching level 5 is quite a given with enough creeping. Whereas in this case, you could only bet on reaching 4. The rest should come then solely from PvP.
The only argument against this would be that level 5 physically requires less XP than 6. But at the same time, can you really measure it with creeping disabled post-4?
Also, don’t forget that even a hero having his ult at lvl 5 would be weaker than the same hero at lvl 6. The Demon Hunter, for instance, would have Mana Burn lvl 2. A small consolation, but it’s something to keep in mind.
I think there is merit in the concept, as it gives an interesting choice for players to choose to max lvl5 spells, or take an ult.
Unfortunately this game is balanced around ults being certain power, and some heroes not valuing ults at all, and changing this affects the balance and meta in an ubpredictable way.
We might see boosts in use for PotM and Dreadlord for example, but it also lends to exploiting dark ranger and alchemist ults early on.
If we cap creep exp to level 4, then we promote earlier 2nd hero play and limit single hero strategies into mid-game. Also heroes like Death Knight remain unaffected by this since their ult is not viable at lvl 5, considering Death Coil is much more valuable and his mana pool is limited at lvl5 to be using animate dead liberally.
But for a hero like Archmage, suddenly Humans gain a lot more mobility and harassment potential simply through creeping and harassing. This sorta promotes steam tank or mortar rushing even more.
1 Like
Stomp and Clap 3 are better than many ultimates by now. Meanwhile DK and Lich still have useless ultimates. Better fix those issues instead.
1 Like
But honestly, can you imagine Warcraft 3 in 2030 with ultimates barely seeing play? From the grander design standpoint, I feel as if something needed to be done. Even if it breaks the game for some time (and many think Reforged is going to either way).
The fact that the game is not balanced around ults at all is bad design, and it is a non-issue solely because ults are never seen.
This is literally one of those rare occasions where I would prefer the hypothetical new Warcraft RTS.
Rebalancing might help.
Or do you honestly believe that ults have no place in WC3 at all, that WC3 succeeded despite them, and that they’d better be removed instead?
Do you think that Blademaster Bladestooooorming a bunch of Dryads or Towers feels anti-climactic, or too climactic, or cheesy?
only read your original post, (mostly just the title tbh)
and… i like it, no idea why people keep losing their brain cells over trying out fun sh!t, but i’d either prefer what you said.
or allowing us to creep up to level 6.
though i have been thinking about this whole thing in small flashbacks over the passed months, and to be fair i think the problem is that we can get up to 3 hero’s.
sure we’re not forced but the fact that its THERE and most people get the second hero is enough. i think heros in wc3 are not the gamechanging commanders but they are at the same time… how so ? well people quite often use hero’s as getaway cards to solve certain issues instead of using units or other game elements.
i’ll give a small example: guy is having issues dealing with air units ? no problem just go ahead and BUY brewmaster from the shop just for breath of fire.
that is both impactful and insanely cheap at the same time, yet it works and it serves as a better option in 50+% of cases which is just shocking.
items have the same impact on the game.
I think if everyone was limited to one hero in their match the game would suddenly become far, faaaaaar more strategical and balancing issues will be slightly easier to solve as an impact since you don’t have to think about insane combinations of abilities one player can muster through the use of hero’s. and choosing good hero combinations in 2v2/3v3/4v4 games by the players would gain real weight.
it would also help in slightly tuning down the level of micro this game requires which i personally see it as a plus and a welcome change to casual audience.
1 Like
We are giving birth to WC4 here, Momoiro style.
Is that so cheap, however? Isn’t lvl 1 Panda quite trash, so you have to lvel him up, creep him, maybe even save mana items for him? That’s pretty cool, imo.
Honestly, I thought you would give a different example - the Orb of Venom on the DH which destroys air units.
Overall, you would like less diversity, less flashiness, more focus on the army, more tradition RTS. I doubt it can be done with the insanely long time-to-kill (TTK) in WC3. And I find hero combinations incredibly fun and deep. How could you not have heroes staffing each other? SH healing the BM? A Lich being saved by the DK on a sliver of health? MK Bolting Banished units. Those are such iconic parts of WC3.
But ults are not. Maybe, for the better, ironically?
2 Likes
Ults have a place in WC3, but I doubt we have the (Blizzard available) resources available to rebalance them all.
Some Ults are just mediocre, like Farseer Earthquake. Some Ults make a strong hero stronger, like Metamorphosis. I’m not sure its worth balancing the game around a new meta of early-mass teleport or early-charm tactics. I think it could be neat but the meta and strats will definitely change to exploit powerful ults, rather that the intended goal of having a meaningful option opened up.
The meta is always going to revolve around the most effective strategy. If Ults can be exploited, they will be. If tactics are too unreliable, they won’t be used in favour of more predictable ones. Thats how it works, and in terms of ults, a lot of them are designed to turn the tides of battles.
Would they really be early-game, however? Now they are never-in-the-game. How often do people even have 5/5 heroes? (It’s not that rare, I admit, but it does happen in deep lategame.)
It’s a PvP game, it’s ok (provided there’s a counter play). The bigger issue is ults’ being the sole reason for a won/lost fight, basically what I’ve always been hearing about Overwatch.
1 Like
Watch any of the Esports scene? Heroes have ults every game I’ve seen.
And what I mean about Ults is they’re designed to be powerful, and the game has had years of balance tweaks to make sure the game is paced enough to have them available in the late-game. Lvl5 is achievable within the time you hit T3, perhaps even before. That timing matters a lot in the overall strategy of the game, just like knowing when your opponent has Gryphons or Frost Wyrms available.
1 Like
I wonder, what percentage of games, and what percentage of games sees T3 at all. As far as I saw, rushes this year are not popular at all, yet ults are not common either.
But I’m still at WGL, maybe there was some craziness at WCG? Please, no spoilerino, however.
I have a counter proposal, adunai. Ultimates need to be researched twice. If you want it early then it better be at a 1/4th the effect.
The dreadlord calls down a tiny infernal shard.
Big bad voodoo only lasts 7.5 seconds.
Mass teleport only grabs 6 units.
Metamorphosis only lasts 15 seconds with 15 range and 125 bonus life.
I think you are going about this the wrong way.
Ulti at 5 and max lvl by creeping at 4 does not solve the core issue - that some lvl 3 skills are better than some Ulti’s (MK Bolt an example that was given earlier in this thread)
It would change a bit since some heroes would be forced to choose at lvl 5 between ult and lvl3 skill but some heroes like the Death Knight would just be f***ed over by this.
How is that a “core issue”? Ults are barely seen at all, it’s not an issue. Yes, the DK woud effectively remain unchanged, so he would lose on the opportunity cost, thus Animate Dead would better be buffed.
Another question is that of interrupts - some ults are horrifying if there are no interrupts, yet do little if there are.
Well you just gave the answer my friend. Ults are barely seen because:
- They are hard to get to - which is a good thing
- Once you get to 6 some ults are just bad - that is a bad thing
An ultimate skill by definition should be desirable. Lowering the level requirement for it does not change the fact that it’s bad and you’ll never pick it.
What if DK could go for Ulti at lvl 1? I bet players will still go for coil lvl 1 in most cases and that my friend is bad design.