Alternative to Hero bans, Discussion//suggestion

[ScottMAstar]

So I didn't put this into the actual suggestion forums because this pertains to a mode not introduced and is more of a "which do you prefer more" type of thing.

SO here it is, I personally don't like the whole ban system. In high level play, however, it is absolutely necessary. I know this, and there is no argument there. However, I also believe that the ban system is somewhat detrimental to the game as it stands because the hero pool is currently not that large yet. You can ban a counter(for example a team that plans to pick jeraziah with the first pick can ban electrician who is the only hero with a purge, I know this might be a joke of an example but its just to give the idea)to a hero and that hero can then proceed to dominate, in theory of course. Not just that but it sucks to see the same heroes being banned over and over again and it can't be fun. On the flip side, it would suck to see a team of the same heroes over and over again because the heroes are just too strong in high level play.

So heres the trick. I thought maybe instead of giving a set number of bans per team, give a set number of God Tier( not all heroes that I list will be the true "God tier" im just using that term for simplicity) per team.

Example
The Example God tier is:

-Defiler
-Jeraziah
-Magmus
-Tempest
-Behemoth
-Nighthound**^_^

Now instead of banning before picks, the picks just go like normal but with a limit of 2 of theses heroes per team. Theses heroes would be indicated by some special border on thier portrait or something. Now of course more should be added so that teams have to make tough choices, but this is the idea. Maybe 3 per team or even 1 per team. In my opinion this would completely fill the role that bans represent and at the same time open up even more strategy. Instead of banning heroes that would be strong agsinst a hero on yuor team, you would have to either pick him or just deal with him. Instead of seeing a team aiming for the 5 most powerful heroes in the game, they would be limited to 2 of those heroes and have to grab 3 heroes that best synergize with them while still countering the other teams picks. And of course, these limits would only be available through either advanced game options or through the -CM mode when it is implemented so as not to rain on the pubs parade.

I hope this wasn't too long or complicated, but I know I can't be the only one who hates banning. If this idea isn't good enough, maybe someone has a better one. As long as bans become a thing of the past. The whole ban system is old and it is absolutely not the best way to handle things.



PS. This isn't a debate over which heroes are "God Tier", thats a completely different topic of discussion. This is a debate over whether placing limits on hero picks is a better method than banning heroes before picks.

[crizux]

Bans are as much a part of drafting as picking. Want to do a push strat? Ban Behemoth. It's just another of the game's tactical maneuvers.

Needless to say, hero synergies within a team negate the effects of "over powered" heroes more times than not--barring ridiculousness of something like the first incarnation of TC in DotA, which wasn't a stable map so it was inadvisable to use it for scrims/clan wars/tournaments. That being said, these over powered heroes can be mutually agreed on to be removed from the drafting process entirely.

In other words, there are ways around having over powered heroes in a game that is strived to be balanced. Therefore, why would you want to condone having over powered heroes not only present in the game but being presented as instantwinlolyoulose when DotA--barring phases and fads through out time--hardly functioned this way in the last few years. HoN can do without your system.

[ScottMAstar]

"HON can do without your system"

Wow thanks that seems kinda harsh, its just s simple idea to get around a concept that I personally hate. I am actually surprised that I am the only one that doesn't like the banning system. You say push strat so ban behemoth? Well eventually there will be more push counters than there are bans so that will be a useless reason. I still believe eliminating bans would open the game up to more strategies, if even just for a brief time since things would be different.

Also this isn't "condoning" over-powered or imbalanced heroes, its ackknowledging the fact that, no matter how balanced the game is, there will be heroes who are without a doubt stronger than other heroes in a coordinated environment.

Maybe I got off on the wrong foot here, seeing as 10 people voted but only 1 left feedback. This is a discussion, not as much a suggestion. I just added one to jump start a discussion. I find it ridiculous that you are all not interested in coming up with an idea around bans. "Hey whenever you play high level heroes the other team can tell you that you can't play X hero." Pretty lame and it was only necessary for dota, this is HoN.

[DoomsDay]

I feel that bans are just as necessary as picking is. Giving hero's a god tier, not only skews the view of them by pubs, but is more limiting then the ban system. Now i know that it was your goal for it to be limiting, but imo while some heros really are just overall better than others, its the way that they are played that make them "overpowered". Also in competitive games, players will know how to counter hero's or just play smarter, eg... warding, ganking more often, better last hit deny skills.

Basically by having s2 rate the hero's it gives more of a closed mindedness to the picking and i think if it was implemented, you'd see more teams with similar line-ups rather than more diversity. As it stands now, i think that picking and banning works fine. Like in your example of electrician and jeraziah, should electrician be banned, it just forces the other team to have to buy a nullfire blade instead. So imo the banning system actually make people have to play smarter which in turn creates more competitive play and more entertaining games for people to watch/play.

[ScottMAstar]

Yeah I am not trying to argue that bans are needed, its just that I personally can't stand seeing the same heroes banned in every single game. Hopefully that will fade out with more heroes, but then what? The banning thing will just get ridiculous when the number of viable heroes begins to move toward the hundreds, and even right now there are so few heroes that specific heroes are constantly targeted.

Banning the same 4 heroes in every game(even though they are absolutely not overpowered by any means) is basically declaring that they are being limited to X number of them per team. They are like heroes among heroes.

[GENCIVE2PORC]

Problem is that tier lists are very subjective

[Konsume]

I don't get why you want to complicate something that was quite simple at first!

Those bans are part of the strategy and well needed to prevent heroes abuse! :P If I were to be allowed to get any 1-2 "GOD TIER" heroes it would be Jere and Tempest.... and it would make RETARDED GAMES!

no seriously bans are the best way to do this :P

[HONYoda]

There is a ban hero function, please tell me how to use this? LOL

Bye Arachna and Scout...

[HONYoda]

Yeah

[Konsume]

There is a ban hero function, please tell me how to use this? LOL

Bye Arachna and Scout...


There is no functions. Its -CM from dota... and not yet IN HoN.

It's only used in competitive play in HoN... don't try to use it in HoNs public game =)

[ScottMAstar]

I don't get why you want to complicate something that was quite simple at first!
P

I don't really want to "complicate" things, even though that is what this suggestion would be doing. I just want to see someone come up with something better than banning heroes from being used. Later when there are more heroes, instead of balancing the heroes or coming up with a system I bet you will just add more bans. 5 years from now what will competitive HoN be? 200 heroes, each team is allowed 20 bans, and tempest, defiler, behemoth, magmus etc will still be getting banned every game. Banning is fine now but think about this for a moment. Dota has much more heroes than HoN, allows slightly more bans per team, and has approximately the same number of heroes being picked for the meta game. So what happens when S2 decides to use the fact they have much more manpower, funding, and reason to constantly balance existing heroes and add viable new heroes. The bans WILL get out of hand, or a new system will have to come about since a team will always consist of 5 of the same 15-20 heroes. This IS just speculation, but this is the answer to your question. Bans will be rediculous in the long run.

[netherflame]

Banned heroes are banned for a reason.

[crizux]

You neglected to see my point: you would be narrowing the perceived scope of viable picks in the game for a lot of people.

And there already are more counters to pretty much any strat than there are bans--that's why bans need to be carefully considered and strategised to minimise damage; a form of the game's competitive skill.

DotA doesn't have a pool of 94 strong, viable heroes that can be used in any line-up, but with the exception of perhaps Sniper and a few others, all heroes can be used in some form as a part of any strategy or counter-strategy, without the need to recognise any "over powered" heroes. Even once obscure heroes like Dark Seer eventually found their way--albeit limited--into competitive play, and if the players and devs of HoN alike aren't working towards a similar goal, then the game is not being made or played with the correct intentions.

tl;dr all heroes are meant to be equal in stature within the game and need to all be viable, and the concept of having a select few vital bans incorporate this idea

Edit: and if you think certain heroes ARE over powered, suggest a nerf to them. It is a community after all, it's not like the devs can see every possible imbalance within the game alone. Do something about it yourself. Be a whingy *****, but a productively whingy ***** rather than an unproductive one.

[HellFire69]

Banning heroes is fine. I'm not a huge fan of your idea!

[Kietharr]

Banning is strategic. It's not just used to ban the OMGIMBA heroes, in DotA it would often be used to prevent someone from getting a hero that they're ridiculously good with, like Loda SF. It's also meant to try to ban counters to a particular strategy. For example, turtle strats would often ban good pushers, push strats would often ban good turtle heroes, ect.

[ScottMAstar]

Stop explaining to me how bans work plz. I am not stupid.. I am very good at this game. I understand perfectly how bans work and the reason why they are there.

Thats not what im am getting at with all of this. You guys honestly don't think bans will either get out of hand or be useless to some extent when the hero pool begins to exceed the 100 mark? Say a pusher strat wants to ban good turtle heroes, well have 100 plus heroes the odds of having enough turtle herores regerdless of bans is very high. I forsee "push strats" will have to be more balanced in terms of both late and early game as bans will eventually become useless. Or do you all have some sort of theory on why they won't ever become out of hand or useless.