4 ms·
One thing that this graph doesn't capture is that, especially for Peach, Ice Climbers, and Mewtwo, a single player has brought each of those characters into the
by debacle 12y ago
One thing that this graph doesn't capture is that, especially for Peach, Ice Climbers, and Mewtwo, a single player has brought each of those characters into the limelight.
These kinds of graphs don't translate well into MOBAs because the team size (5), character count (100+) and drafting mode (ban/pick/ban/pick) tend to create very stale metagames if the game is not rebalanced from time to time. That said, both Riot and Valve have made some pretty crazy balance decisions in the last 12 months.
- Igglyboo 12y agoMewtwo has always been low on the tier list and never has been an actual threat in high level play. Peach and Ice Climbers are spot on however.
- debacle 12y agoHe's always been low tier, but his jump in popularity was caused by m2k
- kajecounterhack 12y agoActually I'd say it was taj's video "shadowclaw" that inspired mewtwo players most
- valarauca1 12y agoI strongly disagree. We haven't seen a MOBA go without patches long enough to test if your theory is correct. Defense of the Ancients ended up at version 6.85 before develop ceased. League gets biweekly patches. DotA2 get monthly patches. The time scale we are talking about is 5-10 years of fixed metagame development. Which in nearly all games where this happened (primarily fighters and board games) we do continue to see metagame development as long as the game is played competitively. To assume one subgenre is excluded form this ignores the present data, and makes an assumption that the game is incredibly shallow.
- oblio 12y agoDota 2 monthly patches are generally not actual game play changes. They're mostly additions of cosmetic items and fixes for the Dota 2 platform. The thing with Dota 2 and other Dota clones is that the depth (problem space) is way too big. There's no way competitive teams would have the time to explore all the combinations and still be successful in a reasonable time frame, with the same roster. That's why every 3-6 months Icefrog (the main developer behind Dota/the game design lead for Dota 2) makes game balance changes: slight nerfs on the most popular heroes and generally slightly higher buffs on the least popular heroes. The main intent is to break this natural tendency of humans to "cluster".
- valarauca1 12y agoYes but the natural tendency to cluster is what leads to meta-game develop. As players cluster, better plays will attempt to find what counters this cluster, what its tactics are and what it is weak too. This leads to actual competition and exploration of the game, and competing strategies. The bi-monthy(ish) patch cycle prevents this, and just leads to players chasing patch notes. But I agree with you. The current patch system prevent this from happening. This is why we see such diverse play styles in games like chess, go, and older 1v1 fighters. Since the stagnant nature forces experimentation.
- oblio 12y agoThe amount of combinations is way too large for changes to happen fast enough (strategies/tactics/selection of characters). Look how long it took for some of the characters presented in this game to surface (6-8 years for some)- that cycle could literally take decades for some heroes in Dota & co. I actually like patches as a forcing function in this case. Your examples are actually great at proving my point: it took decades if not centuries for the current varied chess and go strategies to emerge. By that point we won't care about Dota & co anymore, we'll all be in the Matrix :)
- valarauca1 12y ago
- forrestthewoods 12y agoAuthor here! A lot of folks have said exactly that. I'm gonna work on a 2nd post that talks about the 'why' a bit more. There does seem to be a strong correlation between a characters rise and specific players who played them. That post will hopefully come soon. Thanksgiving makes it a little difficult to get out quickly as I'd like.