Talk:DotA Allstars

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 July 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Baldur's Gate series Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

Archives Archive 1 (start - December 2006)

Contents 1 Needs more gameplay information 2 Article structure 3 Colloquialism? 4 International play 5 6v6 Source 6 Micromanagement 7 Picture 8 Hero Classes - original research 9 "initiating, support, carry?" 10 Useful site, should be added to external links 11 Not balanced full of POV

[edit] Needs more gameplay information

For instance, the different game modes, and a list of heroes. Open stakes 22:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

this article originally listed all of the heroes and the allusion they represented, but other users decided that that information was irrelevant to the article hence it was removed. if you can find a tactful reason as to why the info should be added back in, then by all means show it, because the info removed can easily be found on other sites (which i referenced BUT I AM A STUPID VANDAL AND KEEP CHANGING IT!!). Ironstove 06:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article structure

I'd like to change the structure of the article. Currently it goes Gameplay, Development, AI versions, Current player trends, and Strategy. I think that for a typical (non-player) reader, the most logical order would be

• Gameplay
  • Hero classes
  • Game modes
  • Strategy (including more than the anti-noob mentality)
• Current player trends
• Development
• AI
• External links

Any objections or comments? Thanks, Dan Slotman 23:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colloquialism?

Is this section really needed? These are all just common "chatspeak" terms that can be found in any game, not just DotA. 71.113.98.232 06:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope, they are not needed. Go ahead and remove them, along with any other uses of jargon throughout the article. Dan Slotman 23:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] International play

I am concerned with the relevance of a large portion of the following block of text. I think the notable portion is that DotA is an internationally popular map, but I don't think that the various IRC channels, 3rd party tools, or methods for preventing leavers are relevant to the article.

Currently, DotA Allstars is popular among many players around the world, as observed on the Battle.net servers. Players of DotA Allstars, particularly in the Asian region, normally play in Internet cafes. Dota Allstars is played heavily in southeast Asian countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. In part due to several IRC channels on GalaxyNet over the years, largest being #Zion (host channel for the gaming tool Zion) currently, number of players are rising dramatically. Players are increasingly joining clans and leagues from these countries, and many of these clans now rival more established North-American clans.

In Europe, there are many so-called pickup-games. Players play by first adding up for a game in the channel #dotapickup.euro on QuakeNet, then, when the list is full, a private game is being made on the realms, and all the players who signed up (referred to as the "players on the list") joins the game, and the game is played. This is quite popular, mainly because it protects against leavers. It does so by banning people who leave the game from the IRC channel itself, so that the banned player is unable to add on the channel, and can hence not join any games.

What do you guys think? Keep in mind that this sort of detail is strongly opposed by those judging Good articles, which this should hopefully aspire to. Dan Slotman 19:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I trimmed the section down to include information about international play without the specific details of how setting up games occurs. Dan Slotman 06:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 6v6 Source

There's a problem with obtaining this source. DotA Allstars forum has deleted all the posts that are relevant to this. I know that I have heard the same thing about 6v6 as in the article. TehNomad 17:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The 6v6 version is an illegal copy of the game. It's not supported by IceFrog or dota-allstars.com If you do find it necessary, you can always just google: Dota 6v6. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Primadog (talk • contribs) 09:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Micromanagement

Dota is not as micromanagement intensive as Warcraft 3. Most good Warcraft 3 players reach at least 150 actions per minute on average with 700 actions per minute spikes over 5 second spans. In dota most players have 40 actions per minute unless they are bored and spam actions repeatedly. They don't have spikes unless they are clicking many times on the same spot. Dota is even slower than World of Warcraft in terms of actions per minute. Of course, one would need to find a source for the statement that it is micro intensive. I will mark it as unsourced for now. -iopq 05:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

This is an excellent point that I hadn't considered. The sentence under consideration is, "Compared to Warcraft III, Dota is very micromanagement-oriented." If I recall correctly, I was the original author of that sentence, and I intended it to explain that Dota has no macro at all. I'll edit it to reflect that meaning, which I hope will resolve the problem.

As an irrelevant side note, I question your numbers for DotA. Good dota players manually patrol their hero to control when attacks take place in order to last-hit creeps. This takes roughly 3-4 actions per second. Although these are mindless actions—it obviously isn't the same mental commitment as casting spells or flanking archers—they still push a dota player's average into the 150 action range. Averaged over the game though, Dota will absolutely lose out to ladder WC3 in terms of actions, simply because there are not as many units to control. There isn't a lot to do while healing at the fountain. Dan Slotman 18:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I believe that version is at least 6.40 of dota, otherwise the ice troll hero wouldn't be there? Cheng Liu 23:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You can see the version in the upper-righthand corner of the screenshot. It is 6.39b. Dan Slotman 17:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hero Classes - original research

I have added a original research tag to the Hero Classes section. I have tried to find a citation for this section and found nothing. The section appears to be a unpublished synthesis of self published discussions and strategies. In other words, you can find lots of discussions and strategies that use the terms described in this section, but no were do you find them defined in the same place. This is why I believe this to be original research.

Regards, Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 11:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you screwed up the whole page, but... let's see. Anyway, sorry(as a member of TDA), but I do not agree with removing official link to TDA forum, and I have undid your change. DarthRahn 17:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

No one has been able to provide any evidence that this is not WP:OR. Hence I deleted it. Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 12:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "initiating, support, carry?"

Hello,

I do not believe that the vast majority of DotA players has seen these strange new classifications before. I do not believe that they are widespread enough to be adopted into the wikipedia dota-allstars article. To back up my claim, try entering any random game of DotA and asking your teammate to "Pick Carry Hero Please." They would be very confused.

regards

Overmage 15:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

If you read official DotA Allstars forums you may notice that we use normal sense. There is no "assassins, nukers and etc. by DarthRahn 15:38, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Ideally we could get a citation for that section to avoid this sort of problem. There used to be a forum post by inDeed that covered it pretty nicely, but I couldn't find it. Is anyone else aware of anything that we could use for this? Dan Slotman 21:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that this section should be changed to Intelligence/Agility/Strength. Carry could be changed to Agility, Support could be changed to Intelligence and Initiator could be changed to Strength. The reason for this is that these are class types is that agility heroes are usually heroes with greater damage and attack capabilities than the other two classes. Strength heroes usually have disrupting abilities such as stuns (storm bolts, stomps, ravage, reverse polarity.) Also, Intelligence heroes usually have disables that hit one or two people and allow the rest of the team to chip away at the health of the enemies. The final reason for this change would be that players of warcraft and even people who were new to warcraft would more easily understand what types of heroes are used for each situation. User:Npw123 16:27, 24 February 2007 (ET)

It seems that the section in question has been removed entirely, but if something similar should at any time be reintroduced to the article, I hope you will refrain from making such substitutions as they are totally unfounded. Many Agi heroes are not carries (e.g. Vengeful Spirit), and many carries are not Agi heroes (e.g. Silencer, Queen of Pain). Similarly, Blackhole, which is *the* defining initiating move, is not on a Str hero, many Int heroes have no true disables at all, etc.220.255.237.190 12:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes - the section was removed. See Talk:DotA_Allstars#Hero_Classes_-_original_research. Gary van der Merwe ^(Talk) 12:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Useful site, should be added to external links

Sorry, I don't know how to format this properly. http://dotadata.com/index.php Is a website still in beta stages, but is a very useful tool and should be put on external links. The site allows people to upload their replays and there is scripts that analyze the games (look for yourself, a lot to mention). If majority agree, can someone add it, because im bad at these things.

There are several websites with many members, I understand that you would like to promote your own website but this is getting to be annoyed. As I stated in d-a forums wait until it gets approved by administration. Also please remember that Wikipedia is not a archive for advertising. by DarthRahn | talkpage on 11:54, April 3, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not balanced full of POV

It is a lot of praising and no mention of the usual criticism against this 'game'.

There is no criticism. We have official website for discussion of this game. Feel free to post your "criticism" in there. However as your IP says you are in validation stage and very new member of DotA forums. @by DarthRahn|talk on 11:54, April 3, 2007 (UTC)

While I appreciate your confidence, that's a comment very similar to what we'd hear from, say, the Iraqi War Minister. Is there no criticism because you don't allow criticism? Is there no criticism because the "pros" always flame out those who dare criticize their favorite game? The map certainly isn't perfect, as evidenced by the fact that it's constantly changing. If there wasn't any criticism, why do things get changed?

I think we could come up with a list of things that commonly pop up: rapid level acceleration that leads to a single overleveled character, redundant itemization with unclear tool tips, heroes that have very few alternative heroes to counter them or counter heroes that are too narrow in purpose to be good in a general, random game. These the big ones or am I missing any? @by Kayakyakr 08:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

You didn't miss anything really. This article was rewritten time and time again, and now it's perfect, I think. Almost everything was taken from d-a.com, and if you think you can improve it - go on.(ps. Please change [your signature] and add </small> to close the tag @by DarthRahn|talk on 11:54, April 3, 2007 (UTC)

Sorry bout the </small> thing. I was really just parodying your signature and didn't read to the end. It was late. I'm not invested enough in this endeavor to actually care overmuch about perfecting the wiki; I was simply supporting the comments of the poster above and his criticism of the game's perceived lack of criticism. It'll get better; you seem to be willing enough to make it so. - Kayakyakr 18:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I should point out that this is not the place to put out dota-allstars.com's 'positions', and most of this article is game guidish and cruft. In other words, there is little that people who haven't played the game can benefit from. I'm not going to bother even trying to get it into better shape, because people screw it up time and time again. Dåvid Fuchs ^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 19:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

David Fuchs makes several important points. Large chunks of the article are non-encyclopedic. In particular, sections on recent editions of the map should be deferred until they've been used in high-level play and/or given time to settle in. There are too many irrelevant details ("Roshan is weaker than before") and too many unsupported assertions. Editors should constantly keep in mind that a wikipedia article is intended for general consumption. Speculation and unsupported argument and too much detail are harmful because an uninformed reader isn't familiar with the counterarguments and background complexities.

Also, there are definitely criticisms that can be made of DotA, though the ones above largely aren't valid in my opinion. (I.e. tooltips are easily better than other use-map-settings maps of any complexity, and level acceleration is usually only a factor on easy mode games which aren't supposed to be particularly level-balanced.) However, both DotA's player culture and gameplay are punishing for new players. There is little-to-no in-game documentation to help new players (for example, nothing explains that orb effects don't stack or text that says, "Hey, creeps hurt—you shouldn't let the them attack you for no reason.") Thanks, Dan Slotman 15:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)