Heroes of Newerth

[S2]Nomes Blog: The Designer’s Folly

Leave your comments here.

Photoshop contest to place S2 heroes on the given chart?

Impossible, Warden would be way too far to the left then.

I don't understand why there's a curve, there's no Y-axis

Your wit needs leveling, it's painfully obvious that the Y-axis is a numeric counter

Distance from good balance

Actually he'd be far to the right. He practically plays himself, so gives the player no options, and he can't really be played anything other than a ganking semi-carry, but since he was designed to be played on automatic he was well implemented and, probably to nome, he's fun. If you read this no offense nome

For some reason, I just don't have much interest in reading these blogs ever since Emerald Warden hit the scene .

I bow, because in this thread I am in the presence of people who can casually jest at a guy taking his time to explain what he considers to be important facets in games design.

Clearly, you are all endowed with skills so far beyond Nome that you can make light of such explanations.

I don't really undertand why people whine about Emerald Warden when a hero like Flint is far more one dimensional.

Obvious or strong synergy is to blame for a lot of overdesign imo. Its ok in moderation, you obviously want each skill to at least slightly support each other and build a theme for the hero, but I really hate heroes where its obvious the designer intends the skills to be used in a certain order, or skill in a specific way. Synergy between heroes is dangerous too. Ultimately it limits choice because the optimum has already been designed into the hero.

But yah, I definitely see where Nome is coming from.

Well said, KissKiss. As much as I loathe "+1" posts . . . + 1.

I lol'd.

On a serious note, for an article that aims to make one simple point, it sure adds a lot of unnecessary wordiness.

Here, let me help:

I believe that a good design depends on employing good design principles such as proper implementation, optimization and the fun factor to create a hero that fits into a specific role, while also providing room for player-driven innovation not intended for the hero by the designer from the outset.

Side note, I imagine you clicking the "make passive" checkbox on Emerald Warden's ultimate and laughing maniacally as you finish writing this article.

This post has been edited by Decawink: Sep 14 2011, 12:17 PM

Monkey King is your fav hero then?

Flint requires alot of skill as he needs a lot of positioning. emerald stands in the middle of a teamfight and people around him die

Exactly. Saying Flint is easy to play does not make sense at all.

All heroes need good positioning. Some are more forgiving than others. Given Flints extra attack range I'd say positioning yourself correctly was actually easier than a few other ranged agi heroes, among them Emerald Warden, FA, even MoA. None have strong escape skills and each is as squishy as Flint.

Its moot anyway. I don't really care which is easier to play. I think EW is pretty poorly designed, but if you asked me what I thought the least interesting most one dimensional hero was I'd answer Flint in a heartbeat. Boring to play, boring to watch.

As for Monkey King...idk I've not really played him that much or seen him played. I do like how you can combo his skills in a variety of ways, but I also feel that some moves (Like leaping off a tower, throwing the rock thing down and then using the second leap off that) are too situational and unreliable given the rewards. Maybe he is a little overcomplicated? Idk. I think most of my favorite heroes are ones which have maybe 1 or 2 really dynamic skills that can be used in a few inventive ways for clutch plays, and then the rest of the skills are pretty bland. Andromeda is a perfect example imo, 2 simple actives, a bland passive but also this Ultimate which can be really clutch but also isn't overcomplicated. I think when you fill a hero with skillshots and more dynamic skills you end up with something thats a little too hit and miss to be used competitively.

ps. I really moaned about MoA when he first came out, mostly because of his 2nd AcidToss kinda skill and that really he is like a swiss army knife of skills. Nukes, AoE, Slows, Stuns and a Global MiniSteroid/MiniShield type ult on a Agi hero seemed like a recipe for balance nightmare. I'm not so convinced he is OP now having played him a bunch in pubs. I mean, I do well with him, but its pubs sooo... I will say that so far he is actually a lot of fun to play. There is some skill in being able to choose which skill to use when, and its rewarding when it goes right. I still don't really like the idea of so many skills on one hero but I can see why he's in the game.

Just my humble opinions.

I love the positioning of legionnaire, so manly

Yeah, landing a good Legio taunt ist quite hard and annoying sometimes.

This.
Since I read micro was bad, I haven't read his blog.

This post has been edited by Danelaan: Sep 17 2011, 17:21 PM

Excessive micro is bad because it artificially raises the skill required to play the hero. This is common sense.