Dota 2 Beta

[rigwarl]

Zcorp, I'm sorry but I cannot possibly explain myself any clearer than I already have. This is the first time out of my thousand or so posts on this forum that someone has not been able to understand me. I mean, when you make these two interpretations, I have no idea what else to say.

5 Navi players can pick/ban completely randomly, pick lanes completely randomly, and not control the map by NEVER ganking and only fighting within their lanes and they would beat a team of DotA players at the ~top 5% level. Furthermore, note that the reverse of the above situation is not true. Therefore, I'm inclined to say mechanics are more crucial than strategy and tactics combined, for whatever definitions you have made up for the latter two and failed to include- unless you also call "right clicking on a creep when it has low HP" a "strategy or tactic".

So your argument is that the best players in world in any game can easily random other players?

When did I say the game required little strategy? I simply said mechanics (or in this example, athleticism) are more important than strategy, and if you don't believe that being athletic is more important than being a great strategist for an aspiring NFL player, then you're free to believe that. I suspect over 90% of NFL players would say you're wrong.

So your argument is that because games require being adept at the basics of the game to do well, the game is defined by those basics and not by anything else?

[Zcorp]

Zcorp, I'm sorry but I cannot possibly explain myself any clearer than I already have. This is the first time out of my thousand or so posts on this forum that someone has not been able to understand me. I mean, when you make these two interpretations, I have no idea what else to say.

That's because you are trying to defend absurdity.

Therefore, I'm inclined to say mechanics are more crucial than strategy and tactics combined, for whatever definitions you have made up for the latter two and failed to include- unless you also call "right clicking on a creep when it has low HP" a "strategy or tactic"...When did I say the game required little strategy? I simply said mechanics (or in this example, athleticism) are more important than strategy, and if you don't believe that being athletic is more important than being a great strategist for an aspiring NFL player, then you're free to believe that. I suspect over 90% of NFL players would say you're wrong.

You said relatively little strategy, compared to 'mechanics.' Which you seem to define as basic elements of any games game-play, or 'athletics' in the case of football. As all game require you to be adept at their basic elements, defining a game by this ability is absurd. As it does nothing to help distinguish genres of games. Beyond the 'mechanics' we look at the patterns of behavior that give an edge over the opponent to assist us in understand the skills required to do well in a game In the case of Dota we can observe that a strong strategical mind on a team is incredibly important, I have said it is the defining aspect of the games play. This does not mean tactics is an insignificant part of the game. This is unlike a FPS as in that genre there is generally near constant engagement, reducing the importance of choosing when, how and where to engage.

That you state Dota is closer to a FPS than say Starcraft (one of the most significant games of the RTS genre, or hey Warcraft which it was built upon) is absurd.

Sorry that this is to difficult for you to understand.

[rigwarl]

Nothing you said is difficult to understand, and I don't appreciate the fact that you don't think I can understand your words. However, your argument is horrible because the ONLY reason you have given hinges on a single replay and you repeating over and over that you don't need to explain yourself because it's "obvious I'm wrong" despite many other people in this thread not agreeing with you. Here, let me try it in your own argument; perhaps it will be easier to understand.

So your argument is that DotA is harder to play than football? That is ridiculous, and it can be seen in how much time football players have to spend working out in order to compete. Here, look at this one video where the winning team clearly demonstrated better mechanics despite an inferior strategy. That you state that a game where you control 1 guy* is more similar to a game where you control hundreds of guys than another game where you control 1 guy is absurd. Absurd means it's really silly. Silly means you shouldn't be saying that. I'm sorry you are unable to understand this sentence because pig brown microphone.

But, I'll go ahead and respond to your latest post anyway. I think you have a massive misunderstanding of what is basic and what is not. I can pick the worst carry champion- let's say Crystal Maiden- and go only mid lane and build ONLY Buriza's on her and probably still get to top5% on the DotA2 ladder if there is one when it's released. Why? Because despite that horrible strategy, I have good mechanics (and I'm even more of a strategy player myself). However, my friend, even given a perfect strategy coached by Navi standing over his shoulder and directing his every move, has no chance of reaching top5% because he simply doesn't have good enough mechanics.

* <3 Meepo but that's not the point

[Adacore]

This is unlike a FPS as in that genre there is generally near constant engagement, reducing the importance of choosing when, how and where to engage.

This is not the case in many FPS games like Counter Strike or Call of Duty at a competetive level. Those games are largely about positioning, the choice of when/how/where to engage, outthinking your opponent, &c. - at the top level everyone has good aim, the deciding factor is the tactics and team coordination.

[rigwarl]

This is unlike a FPS as in that genre there is generally near constant engagement, reducing the importance of choosing when, how and where to engage.

This is not the case in many FPS games like Counter Strike or Call of Duty at a competetive level. Those games are largely about positioning, the choice of when/how/where to engage, outthinking your opponent, &c. - at the top level everyone has good aim, the deciding factor is the tactics and team coordination.

Exactly, DotA is similar. Everyone at the top level has good mechanics (last hitting, aiming, etc.) because that's the #1 skill to have. Between two teams with equal mechanics, the team with a better strategy will win. Also, obviously a team with slightly worse mechanics can beat a team with a vastly inferior strategy. You will NEVER find a top player who has bad mechanics (again, because it's the most important thing in DotA), and no, it is not "basic", because 99% of the DotA population doesn't have mechanics even close to on par with the worst Navi player. Unless you're seriously saying that 99% of the DotA population is incapable of the "basics" of the game.

In fact, you can ask any team at that level whether they'd prefer a new recruit with amazing mechanics and pretty good strategy, or vice versa. Answer: the first 100% of the time.

[Zcorp]

This is unlike a FPS as in that genre there is generally near constant engagement, reducing the importance of choosing when, how and where to engage.

This is not the case in many FPS games like Counter Strike or Call of Duty at a competetive level. Those games are largely about positioning, the choice of when/how/where to engage, outthinking your opponent, &c. - at the top level everyone has good aim, the deciding factor is the tactics and team coordination.

So you would define FPSs as a strategy game then? If not, what would you define as a strategy game?

I can pick the worst carry champion- let's say Crystal Maiden- and go only mid lane and build ONLY Buriza's on her and probably still get to top5% on the DotA2 ladder if there is one when it's released.

Great do it now, and show me in dota 2. As we can't actually see the top 5% show me you can win 70% of the time in 50 games. Playing as CM going full bruize with no party.

Or hell why not demonstrate it for me in dota, in dotaliscious.

[skeptical scientist]

Sometimes we like to fool around and do something like all 5 pick Intelligence heroes and build only boots + Burizas the entire game- it is EXTREMELY TRIVIAL to have positive winrate vs a team of 5 ~top3%* level players doing such strategies, simply because we will outfarm them, outharass them, outjuke them- hell, it doesn't even affect us THAT much for the first few levels (If you make it worth my while I have no qualms proving it to you on the DotA2 beta client- I will make it worth yours as well if you truly believe that what I just said isn't true). Yes, we will lose to equally skilled players doing such a silly strategy; I really thought this was obvious and didn't think it needed explicit mention, but apparently I was wrong. I also apparently need to mention that there's no need to link the same game 3 times on 1 page.

I'll accept this premise, as it coincides with my own experience using stupid builds (e.g. first item rapier, such as your other example of troll builds) to make pub games more interesting, and still winning most of the time. However, your conclusion that strategy is less important than tactics does not follow. There are many elements to strategy besides item/hero selection, and presumably part of the reason that you will do well in such a situation is precisely because you use better strategies (in addition to doing primarily mechanical things like last hitting/juking/harassing better). Furthermore, another part of the reason this is true because there is such a wide skill curve in DotA, which means even reasonably skilled players are so much better than the average pub that they can intentionally handicap themselves in any dimension of play (item builds, champion selection, denying, ganking, etc.) and still have a high win percentage.

This doesn't mean that strategy is unimportant. I'll ask you a different question: have you ever been in a game where an incorrect strategic decision cost you the game? I'm quite sure the answer is yes. As to the question of relative importance, I'm not even sure how one would quantify such a thing.

[rigwarl]

@Zcorp, It's a big time commitment for a stranger (particularly one who is very hostile to me...), but I will definitely do it if you make it worth it for me (monetary). If you don't believe I can do it, I will match your side and make it worth it for you. PM me for more details if you're interested.

But to the point, forget whether *I* can. Do you believe the best player in the world can? Then that proves my point that mechanics can get your farther than strategy, because I am 100% certain I can find a BUNCH of people (in fact, I would say most DotA regulars, not even mentioning people like my mom) who could not reach top5% with the entire Navi team standing over her shoulder coaching her for months, and I'm sure you would agree.

@skeptical scientist, I agree that the conclusion cannot solely be reached from the above situation, but I have offered tons of different examples to try to convince Zcorp and that is only 1 of many (and, since it came last, it's one of the "backup" ones of course). To the last question: many games. I have also lost a game due to me not being able to click on Gondar.

As to relative importance, your chance of getting on a pro team with godly strategy and mechanics in the 90th percentile = 0%. Your chance of getting on a pro team with godly mechanics and strategy in the 90th percentile? Pretty fucking good. If godly enough, these teams will actually hunt you down. No dice for the former situation.

[setzer777]

Uh...I'm pretty sure the term "real time strategy" as applied to video games does not refer to the literal question of whether the game requires (or primarily depends on) the dictionary definition of "strategy"*. Words have different meanings in different contexts, largely based on history and convention rather than some sort of planned out logical framework.

In the context of video games "real time strategy" is pretty much exclusively used to refer to games in which you control multiple units (it also usually implies some sort of resource and base management).

*It would make no sense as a genre definition if it was literal. You can find specific RTS games that probably require less dictionary-definition strategy than certain FPS games. Likewise the term RPG is not primarily applied based on how much "role playing" can be said to be involved in the game.

[skeptical scientist]

As to relative importance, your chance of getting on a pro team with godly strategy and mechanics in the 90th percentile = 0%. Your chance of getting on a pro team with godly mechanics and strategy in the 90th percentile? Pretty fucking good. If godly enough, these teams will actually hunt you down. No dice for the former situation.

Part of this is because you really only need one player with good leadership skills and top-tier strategic skills to organize the team, and the rest of the team can simply be good mechanically and follow directions. Pro teams will already have someone like this, else they wouldn't be pro teams in the first place, so they are more in need of people who can own when they have good direction from such a player.

Which team do you think would do better:
A) a team of 5 people in the top .1% mechanics-wise, and the 90th percentile, strategy-wise
B) a team of 4 people from the previous group, and one who is in the top .1% strategy-wise, and 90th percentile, mechanics-wise?

From my experience with LoL, I'd say the second team would do a lot better, because the 5th man can be the team captain (calling overall strategy) and play a champion that is less intensive in mechanical skill (e.g. a support). By making sure that the team as a whole is always in the right place at the right time mid-to-late game, they will compensate for one lane not doing nearly as well in the early game because they are outmatched in terms of raw mechanical ability.

This also coincides with my experience with DotA - there was one regular member of our group who would dramatically increase our win percentage when he played with us, despite usually having a negative record and poor CS compared to everyone else, simply because he was good enough at directing our overall strategy to make up for not being as good mechanically.

[rigwarl]

I would favor B, but even in that scenario, doesn't the game overall favor mechanical vs strategic skill by a factor of 400%? Which is pretty much my point; I have never, ever claimed strategy is not important. In fact I personally spend more time discussing strategy (I play LoL more now though) than actually playing the game.

[skeptical scientist]

I would favor B, but even in that scenario, doesn't the game overall favor mechanical vs strategic skill by a factor of 400%?

You might just as easily say there is no strategy involved in warfare, because an army where the individual soldiers are strategic geniuses won't do any better than an army where the commander is a strategic genius, and the soldiers are merely good at executing their orders proficiently. If an army of 500 skilled marksmen and one brilliant general is better than an army of 501 decent shots who are all brilliant tacticians, that hardly suggests that marksmanship is 500 times more important than strategy.

[Koa]

If an army of 500 skilled marksmen and one brilliant general is better than an army of 501 decent shots who are all brilliant tacticians...

I'm not even sure that would be the case. I'd think the latter army would be invisible and would slowly pick the other apart by attacking food supplies and setting traps, or even assassinating the general. Such tactics are far more effective in real life than they are in a game of Dota.

[rigwarl]

I would favor B, but even in that scenario, doesn't the game overall favor mechanical vs strategic skill by a factor of 400%?

You might just as easily say there is no strategy involved in warfare

I'm not sure where people keep getting this "no strategy" impression, my 2nd post in this thread, most recent post in this thread, and several in between all state there is strategy involved in DotA. Just not as important as mechanics overall. Yes, there are rare exceptions where adding the "one regular member" skeptical scientist refers to is superior, but it's much less common.

OK, let me put it this way. Let's say I meet two guys who've never played DotA before, but both are planning to play intensively for the next few months. One is known to have amazing reflexes and precision (e.g., a Touhou pro), and the other is world class Magic: The Gathering player, a Chess grandmaster, and #1 on the Civilization ladder*. Everything else about them is unknown. I would very, very highly favor the first to be more successful (either in solo ladder ranking or in tournaments). Not saying it's 100% impossible for the second (hell, he might turn out to be a Touhou pro too), but he's at a massive disadvantage simply because that's how the game is- more reliant on mechanics.

I can't say I know anything at all about warfare, but I suspect the 2nd guy would be a greater addition to most armies. This again, is the inverse of DotA, where the first guy would be preferred as a potential candidate by probably at least 90% of top DotA teams.

*Can we agree that Touhou is pure mechanics and 0 strategy, while the other 3 I listed are pure strategy and 0 mechanics?

[skeptical scientist]

My point is that the difference between strategic skill and mechanical skill is one is easily borrowed, while the other is not. Having someone behind you with good strategic instincts is very nearly as good as having them yourself, but having the world expert at last-hitting with amazing reflexes and 100% skillshot accuracy standing behind you will do you very little good. That is why you only need one person with good strategic skills on a team, while you need everyone to have good mechanical skills. Your conclusion that strategy is less important than mechanics for top-level play does not follow.

OK, let me put it this way. Let's say I meet two guys who've never played DotA before, but both are planning to play intensively for the next few months. One is known to have amazing reflexes and precision (e.g., a Touhou pro), and the other is world class Magic: The Gathering player, a Chess grandmaster, and #1 on the Civilization ladder*. Everything else about them is unknown. I would very, very highly favor the first to be more successful (either in solo ladder ranking or in tournaments). Not saying it's 100% impossible for the second (hell, he might turn out to be a Touhou pro too), but he's at a massive disadvantage simply because that's how the game is- more reliant on mechanics.

I would heavily favor the first on a solo ladder. Good strategic skills do you only so much good in pickup group, where you can't necessarily get others to follow your strategy, and probably don't have team voicechat. However, I could easily see the second doing better on an arranged team ladder.

[rigwarl]

I see what you're saying, but I think we're just using different measures of "more important". I would say being able to pass well is more important in soccer than being able to catch a ball with your hands, since you need every person on the team to be able to pass well and only 1 who can catch a ball.

However, I'm getting the impression you would say they are equally important because a top-level team cannot function without both.

[skeptical scientist]

I see what you're saying, but I think we're just using different measures of "more important". I would say being able to pass well is more important in soccer than being able to catch a ball with your hands, since you need every person on the team to be able to pass well and only 1 who can catch a ball.

However, I'm getting the impression you would say they are equally important because a top-level team cannot function without both.

That's a terrible analogy. Only one person on a soccer team uses his hands, but everyone on a DotA team needs to use good strategy for the team to do well (as evidenced by the number of times I've lost because somebody—who may even have been owning his lane early because of good mechanical skill—was in the wrong place at a key moment). That's why the strategic genius won't do very well on a solo-queue ladder—he may not be able to get his teammates to use good strategy, even if he knows exactly what they need to do to win. But if the strategic genius can get his teammates to follow his instructions, he will increase the chance of victory dramatically, even if he misses some skill shots and doesn't have fantastic cs.

[rigwarl]

I don't see the big difference between your warfare example with a group of marksman and 1 commander to order them around. I agree the soccer thing isn't too relevant, but is was based on your suggestions.

Furthermore, even in the extreme case for DotA in the example case B you mentioned earlier, in a simplified pool of 100 Touhou players and 100 Chess grandmasters, 80% of the former will be DotA pros and 20% of the latter will be DotA pros in the equilibrium state. It follows from that that overall, it is better to have mechanical skill if your livelihood depends on DotA.

I mean, sure, it's not ALWAYS better. If your trying a guess the color of a random card in a pile of 5 that has 4 reds, it's "better" to guess red. But not always, if the card was black. That's all I'm saying- guess red. I'm not saying the card will never be black.

[Box Boy]

So I started playing DotA yesterday, and I've put in roughly 5 30-40 minute matches, and though I've got most of the basics in mind (if not perfected or even well practiced), I've got a pair of questions:

1) What's up with the shops in the wild I've been finding, selling things not available in the main? Are they randomized in order, or even important at all?

2) Any good ideas for 'starter' characters? I've been using Lich/Earthshaker a good bit because I like the AoE attacks and simple item progression so far (Lot'sa health/mana potions early, attribute boosting gear until I can afford the bigger stuff like rods and special weapons, always grab a wand first, ect.), I kinda get a lot of people expecting me to be doing a lot of things with them, as apparently they're both 'carriers' or pseudo-support, or something, and I'm not really pulling my (expected) weight with them.

[skeptical scientist]

So I started playing DotA yesterday, and I've put in roughly 5 30-40 minute matches, and though I've got most of the basics in mind (if not perfected or even well practiced), I've got a pair of questions:

1) What's up with the shops in the wild I've been finding, selling things not available in the main? Are they randomized in order, or even important at all?

Assuming it's the same as DotA 1, they've been there for ages, and items are fixed. Some items are only available in base, some only in the "secret shops" and some both places. It adds an interesting dynamic because you can plan a build to take advantage of secret shop items, and not have to go back to base to buy for a long time. (In dota 1, I loved doing this on Windrunner, basically just building an orchid malevolence with secret shop items bottom lane).

2) Any good ideas for 'starter' characters? I've been using Lich/Earthshaker a good bit because I like the AoE attacks and simple item progression so far (Lot'sa health/mana potions early, attribute boosting gear until I can afford the bigger stuff like rods and special weapons, always grab a wand first, ect.), I kinda get a lot of people expecting me to be doing a lot of things with them, as apparently they're both 'carriers' or pseudo-support, or something, and I'm not really pulling my (expected) weight with them.

Lich is a good starter champion. DotA has a rather steep learning curve, and people tend to yell at new players a lot (because nobody likes getting stuck with one on their team), so you may just have to put up with some amount of venom while you're learning.

[Zcorp]

1) What's up with the shops in the wild I've been finding, selling things not available in the main? Are they randomized in order, or even important at all?

The 'secret shop' located between the Left and Middle lanes on the Radiance/Sentinel side and between the Right and Middle lane on the Dire/Scourge side are identical and have items you generally can not get anywhere else.

The 'side shop' refers to the shop located left of the left lane and right of the right lane. These are identical to each other as well, they sell nothing unique to these shops, instead they just make accessing some other items easier.

2) Any good ideas for 'starter' characters? I've been using Lich/Earthshaker a good bit because I like the AoE attacks and simple item progression so far (Lot'sa health/mana potions early, attribute boosting gear until I can afford the bigger stuff like rods and special weapons, always grab a wand first, ect.), I kinda get a lot of people expecting me to be doing a lot of things with them, as apparently they're both 'carriers' or pseudo-support, or something, and I'm not really pulling my (expected) weight with them.

Lich is a decent starting hero, but playing the support role well isn't easy, and using your ult poorly can cost your team fights or games.
If you stick to tanks to start off with you should do fairly well. Your job is to soak damage and get some stuns and hits in, so you should be able to do that even if you don't know enemy abilities, and you will be a little harder to take down so ideally not dying to frequently. Most of these heroes are also melee which will force you to learn positioning, pulling and jungling to a decent level as well.

[Box Boy]

'Kay, thanks for the heads up on the shops, I'm not actually using them yet as it's too difficult to get the Gold necessary for the one or two items in 'em that interest me, and I'm still working out what to do with my current Heros, but it's nice to know what they're for.

Also, I've pretty much dropped Earthshaker now as it was just too difficult to use effectively for me at the moment, but I've gotten a bit better with Lich (i.e. finally gotten the hang of his ultimate and what items I need to focus on getting) and found out that I absolutely LOVE Riki.

[Kaiman]

DotA IS a real-time strategy game. Arguing that it's tactical and not strategic is silly for two reasons. One, even though DotA is tactical and not strategy by the narrow nitpicking definition, most people aren't using the right military definitions of strategy and tactics anyway. Two, "strategy game" outside of historical conflict sim games has almost always used the word in the all-encompassing sense that can mean strategy, operations, tactics, and even logistics and politics to some extent. Command and Conquer and Starcraft are RTS's even though they are tactical by the strict definition.

Single-character RTS would be the best designator, even though you can technically end up controlling more than one unit, the point is you have one character rather than an entire "side" or "army".

The other option is to use "DotA clone" or "AoS clone" which I'm sure everyone would agree is quite silly.

Not really - almost every game in the genre is basically Wannabee DotA.

DotA 2 is awesome in some ways, mostly because it's free from the constraints of Warcraft. The spell countdowns actually having numbers, the channeling bar, the new hotkeys (i love being able to cast items with the keyboard FINALLY), are all awesome. The build interface needs some work because it requires moving the right hand from the mouse to the keyboard and back unless you can type the item all with one hand. The graphics are just HoN ripoffs and suffer from the same problems - more modern than Warcraft sure, but the functionality isn't any better and in some cases is worse.

Lich is a good starter champion. DotA has a rather steep learning curve, and people tend to yell at new players a lot (because nobody likes getting stuck with one on their team), so you may just have to put up with some amount of venom while you're learning.

I disagree with Lich being a good hero for a beginner. I do agree that pub DotA players usually do insult new players too much, which is funny because most of the people doing it aren't that good themselves and think that K/D/A stats tell the entire story of the game and have no concept of team play whatsoever, and most of them wouldn't be able to give a single bit of useful advice to help the person play better anyway.

The best beginner heros have 3 or 4 of the following if not all 5:
1)Aren't especially easy to kill (because you can't get better if you're sitting out of the game)
2)Have 1 or 2 passive spells (easier to remember how to use the ones you have if you aren't try to manage 4 at a time)
3)Don't need a lot of positioning or aiming to use spells well
4)Don't require tons of farm to get key items to be useful
5)Don't frustrating run out of mana easily

Skeleton King (3 passives, single target spell, gets 2 friggin lives) and Tidehunter (damage block, simple but powerful spells) are pretty good in that sense. Dragon Knight too, if you want to try and carry rather than tank/support. Necrolyte is nice because of his healing and mana regen spell. Most agility characters aren't good for beginners but I'd say Naga is a good start.

[Zcorp]

The build interface needs some work because it requires moving the right hand from the mouse to the keyboard and back unless you can type the item all with one hand.

Within the control options you can customize item hotkeys as well as pretty much everything else.

[Aurum2]

Anyone play on SEA servers?

[Harwestor]

Anyone play on SEA servers?

Not me unfortunately

[Metaphysician]

So, I just got in to the beta and I after the initial excitement at the prospect of playing what looks to be a fantastic game, the dread set in. Even now I am downloading the game and all I can think is, "holy shit, I'm doomed". I mean, I'm good at games in general and I tend to pick things up fairly quickly, but all I've heard about this game is that if you are new, you don't stand a chance of ever having any fun because you will just get destroyed over and over and there is nothing you can do about it. So, any suggestions as to resources, methods for improvement, heroes to try or general advice to help me out? I've played League of Legends, and was pretty good at it (don't worry, I have no illusions that these games are similar or that my experience will help me in any way). I just want to know what I can do to prepare as best I can before jumping in and getting my ass handed to me. Also, what lessons should I look to take away from my impending terrible defeats?

[rigwarl]

You're already aware of the differences but my best tips for LoL players transition to DotA that I can think of:

-use your abilities very sparingly as you have much less mana
-always carry a TP and consumable health regen
-minions will do a lot more damage to you, while towers will do a lot less
-learn how to pull creeps into lane, pretty much an auto-win for your lane at lower levels of play
-learn the shop hotkeys so you don't lose money when you die
-learn the ward/counterward spots, and use them
-I agree with anyone that mentioned earlier that Lich is the best beginner hero. He's support at higher levels of play, but don't worry about roles so much when you're just starting out, you can easily go around and kill people with him by yourself like you would on Gragas if you're doing well.

Also I'm surprised you say that LoL doesn't help you at all? Sure they are different but 90% of the mechanics are the same. Since I've played LoL with you I bet you'll do fine after you learn what all the guys do and the last hit timings, but you'll probably get owned until then.

[Zcorp]

So, I just got in to the beta and I after the initial excitement at the prospect of playing what looks to be a fantastic game, the dread set in. Even now I am downloading the game and all I can think is, "holy shit, I'm doomed". I mean, I'm good at games in general and I tend to pick things up fairly quickly, but all I've heard about this game is that if you are new, you don't stand a chance of ever having any fun because you will just get destroyed over and over and there is nothing you can do about it. So, any suggestions as to resources, methods for improvement, heroes to try or general advice to help me out? I've played League of Legends, and was pretty good at it (don't worry, I have no illusions that these games are similar or that my experience will help me in any way). I just want to know what I can do to prepare as best I can before jumping in and getting my ass handed to me. Also, what lessons should I look to take away from my impending terrible defeats?

I'd be happy to show you the ropes at some point, PM me your screen name or email.

[Metaphysician]

Well I haven't actually played yet, just finished dowloading. I think it was more that I'm not expecting League experience to carry over too heavily into the game, I also was employing a bit of hyperbole. Seems like people like Lich a lot... I'll check it out. Thanks for the input.

@zcorp thanks, I'll always take a bit of ropes showing.

EDIT: Woohoo. First day of dota 2 down. Here are my first impressions. #1, so much to learn. Much thanks to zcorp giving me the rundown so I know the warding protocol and placement and various other edges such as neutral creep pulling and stacking. I'm very much still getting used to the pace of the game, quite slower than League of Legends, which honestly, I appreciate. I did three bot games today against mediums just practicing last hitting and getting to know the store and the map somewhat.

Then I ventured into my first game vs humans, we got crushed, 39-12 in kills lol, but I had five of our kills, playing Lich, and only seven of the deaths. My laning partner fed a total of 14 times. When he got tired of feeding my lane, he went to other lanes and fed there leaving me solo against fed heroes... it was ok, I played careful and did pretty well. Eventually two people quit and we lost, but I didn't feel bad. I try not to tilt anymore with games like this, ruins the rest of your games. I'm glad I didn't tilt because zcorp got on shortly after and he gave me the basics rundown. Then we jumped into another game, which we won, handily I might add. I went 3-1-9 as Lich so I was pretty happy with that. I really like the feel of the game, the graphics are gorgeous. I like the challenge of it and, as always, I love competition.

Another thing that makes this game so much insanely better than LoL and many other games is the balance and the distinct lack of a "best five" champs to play. What meta-game there is seems to be extremely loose and it seems that all champs are viable and good in the right context, which is amazing.

Anyway, those are my day one impressions for anybody that was wondering. This is my first dota experience ever at all and so far so good.

[Zcorp]

Is anyone looking for access?

[Menacing Spike]

Already have access, thanks to a kind stranger on 4chan.

Anyone want to talk about the game?

[eeris]

I wouldn't mind access to DotA 2.

[Zcorp]

PM me your steam account.

[eeris]

PM'd you.

[ebbitten]

I'd also be interested if anyone has an extra key.

[Laserdan]

Kaiman you could always use item hotkeys in dota, with one of the countless applications that add functionality. Being external is not an argument because if you play dota in any seriousness, you'll be using tools to avoid the battle.net ping enforcement and make it possible to administrate the game.

[Zcorp]

6.76 released http://www.playdota.com/changelogs/6.76 likely to be moved over to dota 2 next week.

[Menacing Spike]

Kaiman you could always use item hotkeys in dota, with one of the countless applications that add functionality. Being external is not an argument because if you play dota in any seriousness, you'll be using tools to avoid the battle.net ping enforcement and make it possible to administrate the game.

That's a shitty argument. I guess you think macros are okay too?

[Zcorp]

Kaiman you could always use item hotkeys in dota, with one of the countless applications that add functionality. Being external is not an argument because if you play dota in any seriousness, you'll be using tools to avoid the battle.net ping enforcement and make it possible to administrate the game.

That's a shitty argument. I guess you think macros are okay too?

Customized hot keys is quite a bit different than macros.

Items hotkeys were in wc3 by default they were simply in an awkward place. No one is arguing for macros and customized hotkeys were generally allowed in most leagues and tournaments for dota 1. Dota 2 has customized hotkeys without third party programs and Valve has stated explicitly that using macros (like the Invoker macro that was made in dota 2) is a behavior they believe to be cheating.