Should catapults be removed from the game to even out matches?

General Discussion
if those give you a hard time... then your team trew the match and still is...
I'd say it's a symptom and a cause. But either way, teams should be rewarded for doing well. Games shouldn't be prolonged because of dumb comeback mechanics. Both teams start out from the same place, you shouldn't get assistance because you screwed up. Part of the game is screwing up and other teams taking advantage of it. Why in the world would we just forgive mistakes for no good reason? Just to keep the game going no less. If the other team does better and wins, get over it. You lost. Move on. Games that have these comeback mechanics are virtually all panned by critics and players alike. UT3 when it came out and Dawn of War 3 just recently had comeback mechanics which just resulted in stupid stalemates.

Again, both teams start from THE SAME PLACE. You both have the same chances to win, you both went through the same draft. Why would we shoe-horn in opportunities to remove the progress made? Catapults exist as a reward. Both teams can get them. So no. This is a bad idea.
No they are needed. You get rewarded for pushing a lane fully in till the other lane pushes that lane in as well. The specialist class would be nerfed badly if we take them out of the game.
Catapults push the enemy waves closer to your own base making it safer to gather exp and more dangerous for the enemy - use that to your advantage.
One thing common I've noticed is that everyone thinks you need to be "rewarded" for killing the keep.

I'm not exactly sure where this stems from but I think it is a learned behavior exclusive to this game (or mobas in general)

There is no other game that rewards you for "doing well" other than winning the actual game. The scoreboard is the reward for doing well and thats getting points up there which amount to a win. The reward of this game would be destroying the core, and I have no doubt in my mind that if catapults were never introduced in to this game your desire to win would not differ at all.

The fact of the matter is, catas are not actually necessary in this game but you've been taught that they are.

Looking at the winrates I think it is almost undeniable that catas are extremely impactful.

However one thing that I would like to get from the players (that nobody seems to provide) is the reasoning behind the 90% winrate of teams who get catas first. That means 90% of matches are slanted towards one team

If catas are your reward for doing well, then 90% of games are already clinched by the matchmaker before you've even entered. No matter the mode you choose. if catas are your reward then you're already doing better than the other team AND IT IS EASILY ASSUMED that you will continue to do better than the other team.

so i ask again. Why is it necessary to put the team that is ALREADY LOSING at a further disadvantage if you've been out-playing them for the entire match already?
Short answer: No.

Long answer: Catapults exist in order to give value to keeps and give the team who worked hard enough to destroy them a reaosn to do it as their wave will auto push.

This game has enough comeback mechanic and it's really easy already to throw won matches.


that doesn't explain the 90% winrate with the first catapult spawn.

.


First team to kill the core has 100% winrate.
08/30/2018 11:20 AMPosted by FrostyPyro
First team to kill the core has 100% winrate.


absolutely true.

So what is it about the keep that makes it 9/10ths as important as the core?

do you believe that simply ONE keep should sway the match 90% in favor of that team?

I dont.
It's so high because noobs will ignore catas on their core even if they're at core themselves.....
The op clearly does not understand that this game is designed around short matches and by removing catapults you just greatly increased a matches length because you just removed a major source of lane preasure.

Whats next, limit the level lead another team can have by only a single level? And when one side gets accesd to the next talent tier both teams get it because this is giving the winning team an 'advantage'.

Or how about you can only claim the map objective once then you need to let the othet team have a turn. Just to be fair?

And you fail to addess if it is the catapults causing this massive win rate or if it is a combination of all i listed above minus catapults because from my experience alot of those first keep down wins are not cata related but rather a push with objective resulting in the defending team being down 3 men and losing after level 20.

Perhaps we should also include you cant attack the core while the defenders are down in number? Because that would be an advantage towards the team that is winning to that took first keep?

So short version: you have failed to make any valid arguement proving that catas are the cause of this win rate and need to be remove rather than it just being a snowball or late game push after a decisive team fight that nets the keep and the win.
I think you might be overlooking into it. Maybe it's not about first catapult making 90% of the matches win, maybe it's just the "first team that opens a win condition has a 85-90% chance of winning". Maybe people don't know how to play when you are behind?
08/30/2018 11:48 AMPosted by Darak
I think you might be overlooking into it. Maybe it's not about first catapult making 90% of the matches win, maybe it's just the "first team that opens a win condition has a 85-90% chance of winning". Maybe people don't know how to play when you are behind?


That would mean that so many teams are so far behind at the point of the catapult spawn that they only have a 10% chance to turn the tides.

and this counts for ALL GAMES.

So I am still open to an offered alternative. Keep in mind that this is including ALL CLOSE MATCHES. So even if we were to assume that the matchmaker was shanking 70% of matches in to mmr-made stomps, there would be 30% "close games" and of these "30% close games" you'd still only have 1/3rd of a chance to mount any sort of a comeback once catas are on the field.

Something is wrong somewhere. Either far too many games are so one sided that they just roll the other team, or catas create too much of an advantage.
Has to be one of the worst idea I've seen in my entire life
The core can typically destroy a single minion wave (without the catapult) without even going below it's shields. That's why all you need to do is clear out the catapults in a wave, and you're home free, your laner (typically a spec) should just do this regularly if you want them to keep in the team fights.

The problem without catapults is that tight matches would drag on forever. The core can tank minion waves so there is no need to split up or wave clear anymore. There is no use in towers then either beyond some XP gains and opening up a potential win condition.

The problem in many games is that if you gain the win condition, most people will give up. You can easily go after a fort AND a keep with a 4/5 man group if you wipe the other team late game so you CAN still win even if you have no forts, no keeps and are two levels behind - as long as you can wipe.

The catapults are also a very small contribution to comeback mechanics - you wipe out a wave WITH a catapult, you'll get (slightly) more XP than a wiping a wave without the catapult, you can thus gain more XP faster and level out with your opponents.
Am i the only one who grabs a camp in the fortless lane before object?

Which means cats be worseless.
AHA!

Now, I've looked into this, but there's an interesting little bit of comeback that comes free with the catapults.

Each catapult gives XP.
Meaning each minion wave gives more XP if it has a catapult on it.

Combined with the fact that a hero kill is worth about 66% of the XP of a minion wave, it doesn't seem too bad!
Yes, they should be replaced with trebuchets, which are vastly superior to catapults.
08/30/2018 11:57 AMPosted by BFGOMFG
08/30/2018 11:48 AMPosted by Darak
I think you might be overlooking into it. Maybe it's not about first catapult making 90% of the matches win, maybe it's just the "first team that opens a win condition has a 85-90% chance of winning". Maybe people don't know how to play when you are behind?


That would mean that so many teams are so far behind at the point of the catapult spawn that they only have a 10% chance to turn the tides.

and this counts for ALL GAMES.

So I am still open to an offered alternative. Keep in mind that this is including ALL CLOSE MATCHES. So even if we were to assume that the matchmaker was shanking 70% of matches in to mmr-made stomps, there would be 30% "close games" and of these "30% close games" you'd still only have 1/3rd of a chance to mount any sort of a comeback once catas are on the field.

Something is wrong somewhere. Either far too many games are so one sided that they just roll the other team, or catas create too much of an advantage.


The problem actually is that you can't do much without the information of WHEN the first keep was destroyed. Maybe the first keep was destroyed with the third objective where the team already snowballed and is ahead on talents, making this a good "push with objective and then core".

If we look at HGC statistics this year (first phase, western/eastern clash/MSB..), the average time of gameplay is something between 17-19 minutes per map. Usually people don't get keep with the first/second objectives, so we can assume the third/forth objectives are those that can get keep, which means the first keep is usually taken after 13 minutes of gameplay, where the death timers are bigger and a talent tier advantage is much stronger than early game.

So, basically what that means is that the team who wins a team fight late game usually can punish much more than winning early team fights/objectives, which is totally okay (because you don't want to extend average game duration to 20+ minutes). So losing first keep and having 85-90% changes of losing the game actually means you got micro/macro outplayed early/mid game and that maybe made you lose even hard late game.

I know I used HGC statistics, but I think those can translate to higher leagues. About lower leagues, I imagine it is much harder for them to have the mentality (like giving up another objective because you still need to get into the same talent tier and defend to have better chances to comeback instead of contesting down a talent) to make shotcalls that can actually make you comeback (Comebacks happen though, a lot actually).
Wanna bet team that has 3 level lead has 90% or more win-rate? Because that's what OP is looking for really when he talks about first team to lose a keep being small part of it. That team generally has 2-3 level lead and is up ult or talent tier. It's the team that will clear the map from camps, gets objectives, pushes more forts/keeps while the other team tries to defend dying and falling deeper to abyss or soaks while losing stuff and falling further into the abyss.

If your team loses because of the catapults odds are heavily that your team has fudged up royally in depush, macro and prioritization in general.

08/30/2018 11:16 AMPosted by BFGOMFG
One thing common I've noticed is that everyone thinks you need to be "rewarded" for killing the keep.

I'm not exactly sure where this stems from but I think it is a learned behavior exclusive to this game (or mobas in general)

There is no other game that rewards you for "doing well" other than winning the actual game. The scoreboard is the reward for doing well and thats getting points up there which amount to a win.


-You get guns and ammo from dead enemies, exp and score streaks, you get to capture points in FPS games and better locations from which to shoot or ambush. -You get buildings from enemies, reduce their resource income and troop build capacity, you swing army balance in your favor, exp for troops/heroes in strategy and tactics games.
-You get more options in sports games for goals as enemy is now on timer to do goal while all you need to do is not let enemy goal while you can still go even further in points to make game even less likely for them to win.
-You can be the number one in racing game with just as fast car as rest and nobody can get past you without you making a mistake or somebody intentionally sabotaging the game against you.
-In dancing/singing/intrument game you can make one mistake enemy doesn't and even with perfect score after enemy will win or even with more mistakes they may still win because they get combo points while you broke your combos making them more critical mistakes.
-You can play a friggin' tic tac toe and have 0 chance of losing as first pick taking the center.
Just what kind of game do you play where enemy gets no advantage for getting an advantage?!? And no, scoreboard isn't a reward(why on earth would you ever think it is?!? Scoreboard is a statistic you can use to check the score as the name very clearly tells you. In football it Could be 1-0 for example. All it tells is one team has advantage as they can win by not letting enemy score or they can score more themselves to make it even harder for enemy to have chance at winning. Meanwhile other team has to score to just even up and score twice to have shot at winning seeing as they are at disadvantage at that point.
08/30/2018 11:05 AMPosted by MrE
Catapults push the enemy waves closer to your own base making it safer to gather exp and more dangerous for the enemy - use that to your advantage.


In practice this doesn't help. Once the enemy team gets that much of an advantage, it's very easy for them to full on dive you and get a pick here and there if you split up to deal with multiple lanes under pressure. I honestly think the only thing needed is to increase the minion XP for the team that has a level disadvantage. If you could at least try to catch up on levels then it wouldn't be so one sided - but as it stands today on a lot of maps it's like you lose a fight, they get boss, they get buildings, they then get every camp and then they have a 2 level lead which means they hit harder and have more hp all because you lost one fight.

Ever since they made the laning/tower changes, all of the statistics on just about every map have extraordinarily high winrates for winning the first objective, indicating that the game has become more "snowbally" than it was before.

FWIW, I don't think we need a huge change like removing catapults, but I'd like to see a slightly higher chance of coming back into the match.
08/30/2018 11:16 AMPosted by BFGOMFG
I'm not exactly sure where this stems from but I think it is a learned behavior exclusive to this game (or mobas in general)


Its not exclusive to mobas, its an aspect of facilitating changes to the strategies as a game progresses. In chess, pieces have varying amounts of value both in points, and in player abilities to either secure victory, or to force a draw, esp depending on which side gets the first move — that's part of why players take about difference phases of the game. Similarly, as mentioned in sports, since gameplay is on a timer, the team that's ahead can shift tactics to focus more on stalling the clock out rather than trying to continue to overcome and score more points.

Many competitive games with a player vs player components have a resource to struggle over in the course of the game, whether its gold in dota, xp in hots, pieces in chess, stamina in sportsball, and so forth. Getting 'ahead' is a drive in these games to shift control and is apart of the challenge of the experience. are they needed? Probably not, but many of these effects end up getting a boost/focus on the effect because of the shift it creates. Otherwise the game is just 'more of the same' for the whole of the experience.

In the case of dota, the 'reward' is manifest in gold and progress toward the 'megacreep' condition esp because the defending side has a lot of advantages the aggressor doesn't and it can deadlock the game for massive stretches of time. In the case of HoTs, a shift in the catapult lane adds a means to push the lane out (which allows them some resource recovery) but its not like other games of a similar type were the whole of the wave is stronger compared to the defender.

Similarly, some heroes have abilities that offset this weakness, so the aspect of having this change is apart of the balance and flow of the game. The defending side has access to base to heal, closer proximity to allies recovering, an additional source of damage. These are elements that help defend from attacks, but attackers get a sort of boost to enable the flow to shift and change the dynamics of the game before that point because defensive conditions can deadlock the game.

Much of the resources of these games shift xp boosts to the aggressor because the defending side does get a boost in safety to their resource management in clearing a wave closer to their base.

In some games of sportball, there can be a similar shift for the defensive side because of the limit on how long the field will be, the same sort of tactics used to drive gameplay shift, and can deadlock, if some incentives aren't available to one side to compensate. For chess, a pawn can be exchanged for a stronger piece and that can seem like a 'win more' condition (on of other qualities) and its not a 'reward' that needs to exist, but its a condition that facilitates change and progresses toward the end point in a game sequence where things could just deadlock without other means of shifting some of the game momentum.

Having an aggressive momentum can be more keen both for getting to the end, but also for enjoying upsets that are both more desirable than just endurance burnout from either side tired of conditional stalemates.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum