Team Balance Theory
A thesis of team balance theory with regards to Warcraft 3: DoTA
The genre of Real Time Strategy (hereafter referred to RTS) is currently dominated by the popular game Warcraft 3, the third installment in Blizzards epic story of fantastical warfare. One thing that has encouraged continued play of the trilogy has been the inclusion of a map editor, allowing the player to custom design his/her own levels, game types, and campaigns. Combining the elegance of the map editor with moderate coding skills results in a polished, extremely engaging variant of W3, called Defense of the Ancients.
The premise is thus: two magical forces, the Scourge and the Sentinel, are battling between each other. There are two bases, in opposite corners of the map, consisting of unit producing structures (that constantly churn out new foot soldiers to send against the enemy), Towers, both benign and malevolent (benign towers provide resources in able to produce foot soldiers, malevolent protect the base and the three lanes of attack leading to each base with powerful ranged attacks), and a key structure, which causes the end of the game in favor of whichever side destroys it.
Aside from the average foot-soldiers both factions spit out (commonly called "Creeps"), there are heroes, controlled by the players, who form focal points of combat and interest during the game. Heroes are, by definition, more adept at combat than a lone creep, and progress through a series of levels. At each level you may increase the power of one of the three basic or one advanced skills, or increase by 1 point each the heroes three attributes (strength, agility, and intelligence). The three basic skills may be increased a maximum of four times, and no basic skill can be at a level more than half the hero's overall level, except when beginning the game, when you are allotted one skill point (and are at level 1), and the advanced skill can be upgraded only three times (once at level 6, once at level 11, and finally at level 16).
Each hero reaches a maximum level at level 25, at which point the three basic skills are maxed out at 4 each, the advanced at 3, and the small increases to attributes add up to +10 to all skill levels. The heroes progress through the levels through a system of exponential experience earning: killing other heroes and creeps earns both money and experience, with opposing heroes offering significantly more of it than do the creeps. Killing towers offers little experience, but a large amount of gold, and killing other buildings offers little gold and little or no experience.
Some familiarity with the vernacular is requisite to an understanding of this essay.
"Farming" is a term that means steady killing of creeps, to earn money and experience. This is a common practice early and late in the game, when all the players race to acquire level or item superiority.
"Pushing a Lane" means to aggressively attack along one of the three fortified paths of the forest. Two lanes circle around the sides of the map, with one cutting through the middle. There are minor paths through the woods, and a frozen river that intersects all three lanes across the middle of the map, but the computer-controlled creeps stick to the three main lanes, and the most money and experience is generally to be earned there.
"Healing" or "Buying" is when a hero is either low on health or fat with the spoils of combat, and returns to base to replenish life points or to spend money on items.
"Items" are both complicated and essential to winning the game. They can be bought from two characters and a store in town, or a "special store" each team has in the woods. None of these characters or stores can be destroyed. Items provide opportunity to nullify or reduce the effects of opponents' specific spells or abilities, and also to drastically increase your own power or abilities independent of the level scale.
"Recipes" are a combination of items that result in a super-item. Combining smaller items with a spell bought from one of the characters in town results in an item that combines the aspects of all the involved items, and adds something special. Sometimes the effects of the item are extremely powerful; also, sometimes the effects of the super item are only nearly related to the items used in its construction. There are three levels of reciped items, with the highest level being the most powerful and expensive to build.
"Recharge" rate is the period of time between spell use to spell use, during which you may not cast a spell or use an ability. The recharge rate varies from hero to hero and spell to spell, and can be extremely short (Lycanthropes may use Howl every 1.5 seconds) or very long (the Faceless Void may only Time Stop every 5 minutes).
The main concern of this essay is to determine how to balance teams in a game of DoTA. Currently, my dorm floor has two quite excellent players, who are very familiar with the items, their prices, the possible characters and their classes, many of the recipes, and various tactics for maximizing profit and experience at all periods of the game. Jon and Jack are, far and away, the kick-assingest players we've got.
Myself, Jesse, and Tony are developing, good players. We understand the heroes we are, we understand basic recipes, but our play falls apart at higher levels and our tactics are less than ideal.
Ross, Sarah, and Noe are mediocre (to be fair, Noe might not be, but I've only played one game with him). Mediocre might be a very polite way of saying Sarah has no experience with this game and is horrible. I do not mean to slight her character or person, only to say that she is loath to waste as much time on this game as we do.
Now, how to balance the teams? Jon and Jack have lately been quite fond of 4 on 2 games; them versus whoever else wants to play. I originally went along with this, but it readily became apparent that a 2-to-1 numbers advantage did very little to impact the outcome of the game.
I put forth that numbers advantage means very little in DoTA unless the players have all reached a thresshold of skill level, at which point they realize how to attack, defend, buy, and optimize their character in a passably optimal manner.
One major concern in the early game is farming. Early levels are both dangerous for teh heroes and very fruitful, because you earn, relative to the amount of experience you need to advance a level, a large amount of experience for each creep that perishes in your proximity. Good players can stay close to a combat without being involved in it, and know how to position their character to take further advantage of creeps by killing them himself (and therefore earning more money and experience) than merely letting his inferiors do the work. Good players know how to take advantage of the staggered waves of foot soldiers to mount the most effective attacks on towers (juggernauts in a sea of ants, if you will, when compared to creeps), and they also know how to conserve life points to prevent the need to return to base and heal (a waste of time and a loss of opportunity to level and earn money).
Good players also understand player combat, and how to track the location of other heroes and their status. This is of advantage because surprise attacks: cornering a hero between a group of creeps, a tower, or another hero, provide an opportunity to steal money from your opponent, gain large amounts of experience, and halt your opponent's plans, as with every level the amount of time a player must wait until he can respawn after death increases. Player killing of other players (pk'ing), is a major part of DoTA strategy, and common advice given to new players (n00bs) is "Kill shit, don't die."
That such advantage can be garnered from killing other players is integral to my theory that having extra, inexperienced players on a team in a game of DoTA is a disadvantage. Basically, having someone that doesn't know what they're doing on your team is giving your opponent (who will have no problem dispatching them) free experience and gold. In addition, each team has only so much gold to buy their initial items with, and having more players on a team dilutes your starting items. The players on a team four strong cannot each afford Power Treads (a low-level recipe that is excellent for early in the game), where their opponent can probably afford Power Treads AND the beginnings to a Perseverence (a mid-level recipe that is excellent in the early and mid-game, and is included in multiple, powerful recipes that are affordable later in the game.
Not only does a smaller team composed of experienced, better players start out with more gold and therefore a significant individual advantage over the members of the other team, and not only do the players level up more quickly and earn more money due to player kills, but the system for splitting experience is skewed in their direction, also.
When two players from the same team are near an enemy unit when it dies, the experience is split between them. Three major lanes of attack means three players from each team can be active in combat without a dilution of experience points, but having an additional hero active in a lane roughly halves the levelling potential of the individuals in that lane, which in turn allows for easier player kills for the other team, and decreases the ability of those players to threaten the opposing base or push aggressively through towers in the mid- to late-game.
Finally, the issue of items must rear its head. Unless you are familiar with the higher and mid-level recipes (the low-level recipes are almost never worth investing in), your ability to compete mid- and late-game is severely hampered. A level 18 character with good abilities and crappy, cheap items is only just a match for a level 18 character with crappy abilities and good, well thought out item selection.
In conclusion, the only way to balance teams initially, and in so doing develop an adept and dynamic player-base is to, basically, do draft or "playground style" picks. The two best players should be on opposite teams, and they should alternate picking. Ending up with more players is not always a disadvantage, but the only way to get out of the situation of it always being one is to have dynamic games where the best player on each team can guide the worst and explain the events of the game while they experience them. A p/maternalistic style of play and a stratified skill level when organizing teams is the only way to have truly balanced teams now and in the future.
Reviews for Team Balance Theory: A thesis of team balance theory with regards to Warcraft 3: DoTA
"I am awestruck. Possibly flabbergasted."
-Aaron
"I'd like to read it."
-Ross
"You have far too much time on your hands"
-Jesse
15 Comments:
You completely neglect the fact that someone can be pushing a lane uninterrupted while Jack and I are pushing our own lanes. 3-2=1 uninterrupted lane. The game is won by pushing, not pking.
Attribute bonus is +20 with lvl 10 attribute bonus. lvl 1 is +2, lvl 2 is +4, and so on.
"The three basic skills may be increased a maximum of four times, and no basic skill can be at a level more than half the hero's overall level"
Actually, that is incorrect. Say we have a hero with only one useful basic spell/ability. They can choose it at hero level 1, then hero level 2, do an attribute bonus. At hero level 3, they can then have ability level 2. At hero level 4, attribute bonus, then hero level five, ability level 3, then hero level 6, ultimate lvl 1 or ability level 4. There are a few exceptions, namely medusa the gorgon, but other than that, ablities are limited as suchm that is ability 1 at hero 1, ability 2 at hero 3, ability 3 at hero 5, and ability 4 at hero 6.
You left out the fact that the creeps in a given lane will become stronger by destroying the opponents unit producers, and the principle of the gg creeps.
Thank you for saying that i am a kick-ass player, that makes me feel special.
You are right in a few aspects. First, Jack and I are both pretty ruthless strategists. Second, we know our items almost perfectly. However, if you guys could get a strategy together and figure out items, it would be fine. I would say that given a pool of players all with equal skill, the people advantage easily trumps the money advantage. Therefore, as the rest of you increase in skill, there will become a point where the 2v3/2v4 becomes equal, and then another point where you will be able to beat jack and I easily.
Also, Jack and I are much better at staying in combat than the rest of y'all, therefore leveling quickly.
Ok, true, my bad about the skill/attribute increases/so many levels.
The problem with your argument about an uninterrupted lane is that if it's myself pushing (in a hypothetical game of you and Jack vs. me and others), then you're most likely pushing very hard on two lanes, or getting a decent amount of pks, or both. 2-1=1=your advantage. My essay stated that the games will become equal when basic gameplay reaches a certain threshhold: that thresshold is not needlessly dying early in the game. I say needlessly, because sometimes it's not a bad plan. It's not horrible to stay in range of a tower to kill another player, and be killed by the tower, because perhaps the xp bonus was worth the wait to respawn, or something. Who knows. However, that thresshold must still be reached by the other members of the team in order for number advantage to start taking effect.
I purposely left out the idea of gg creeps and the unit producers because until you are high level, even a semi-advanced player as myself has a hard time coordinating enough of an offense with an inexperienced team to take out unit producers *and* continue pushing on the other lanes (which is needed to get some advantage out of the situation, as it forces you into defence wherever you are).
Yes, eventually we may be able to beat Jack and you easily. However, my thesis is not that you are unbeatable, but that the games we play now, which might appear balanced due to number advantage, are actually LESS balanced because of it.
Good points. Also, the money is not really being stolen persay. The amount of money awarded to the person doing the killing depends on the killee's level, and how many kills they had gotten in a row (ie. killing spree bonus cash). The amount of money lost is 50 + 30xhero level. Therefore, in a roundabout way, the money is being stolen, but not really. The dead person's money is lost, and the killer gets money, but not directly from the dead.
I don't think they are unbalanced sue to the numbers advantage, I think they are unbalanced simply due to skill. that said though, the numbers advantage will at some point allow you to beat us even though you will not be at our skill level.
To Noe's credit, he was the only one who got a kill last game. And he's pretty decent, kicked Ross' ass in another game.
Theredherring has a point understanding Warcraft after a certain degree is just way too much. I think Evan should seek counseling... really I do...I swear I think he might need some counseling.
lol
Well, I've read through your post and the comments Evan, and I must say that you make an interesting case. However, I do agree with Jon on most of the points he makes, but would like to add a few more of my own.
In regards to early-game strategies, in a 2v3, 2v4 or 2v5 game, the larger team should always have a least one hero per lane with more in the open, "unprotected" lane. This accomplishes two things:
1) There is a counter to the pushing of the heroes on the small team. In the last game we played, I pushed a lane unopposed for a substantial amount of time. Had someone tried to counter me early-game, I probably would have either been killed, or at least been force to retreat. This slow down could prove fatal in the mid to late game.
2) While it's true that if two or more heroes are pushing a lane together, they gain XP slower than a hero on their own. HOWEVER, the combined early-game damage of two heroes is far superior to that of the single hero. This evidence alone suggests that two heroes could push a lot faster, forcing the smaller team to go on the defensive earlier.
One very important factor that you are forgetting in your argument Evan, is that frequently Jon and I do not pick our characters. We let the computer choose for us (or in the case of an all-random game, everyone gets a random hero). This can result in us having huge advantage or we get screwed.
As for "dynamically balanced" teams, when we have played this way in the past, a mid-level player can easily fall in to the habit of pounding the newest player. This is a somewhat dishonorable tactic, even though it allows you to level up quickly and get more money. Jon and I typically do not deliberately target (or "hunt" them as we have been accused of doing) players that we know are not at the same level as us. This is different from killing heroes while stopping a push, or pushing ourselves. And remember that for some heroes, their primary function is to be sneaky and kill enemy heroes in any way possible.
Fine. Let the middle-good player go hunting. He/she won't get any better, and meanwhile I'm going to be running all over the place trying to keep the lines fortified. I (and the player he's beating on, to a certan extent), am the real beneficiary of this tactic, as it makes me a better, more fluid player.
Also, at high levels you and jon have a tendency to slack off on the offense, and not win asap. You dick around killing Roshan and getting cool items and then run around killing people in three hits for a minute or two and then smash our base (something that is most frequently done by level 25 characters in our games, but that I have frequently seen done by characters of < lvl 20 online). This is annoying, as it prolongs an already lost game.
It all boils down to getting better, and all I'm saying is that the 4 on 2 games will NEVER be fair until the people playing them reach a certain skill level...it's not really that high of a skill level, actually. Until they do, however, having more people on your team is a disadvantage.
And seriously, we VERY seldom do All Pick games, and when we do we all choose crummy mid-range characters because we have no idea what they play like. I once chose Troll Warlord, but he was boring. It's more fun to make bad characters good than it is to justify being a Skeleton King, Troll Warlord, or and of the abuseable nukers.
First off, I am laughing. I am laughing because you know how competitive you are, and the only reason you are saying the Troll Warlord, Skele, and other strong characters are boring is because we are skilled enough to beat you when we have mediocre characters and you have strong ones. In fact, the only reason for this at all is because you are losing. As soon as you start winning you stop complaining, as is demonstrated when you are on a winning team, and in extensive Halo playing.
Yes we slack, because winning quickly is no fun. We give you a chance to kill creeps and level up. Typically we will just kill pushes, then let the creeps do their own pushing. Yes, we will run around the woods getting cash for cool items and such, but that's just life, staving off boredom. Would you be any happier if we ended the game in 25 minutes? In fact, I remember specifically you requesting once that I stay away so you could fight creeps.
I hope that we agree that the skill level you guys have to reach to make the games even is not jack and I's skill level. As was demonstrated this evening you can kill us when you team up. Just keep doing that. Sure, we will have more money, better items, and probably more kills, but you'll push harder and be more likely to win. I hope that is what you mean when you say "not that high of a skill level actually". I certainly hope you are not implying that Jack and I are not that good.
Further, half of the reason why you die so frequently is overestimating your hero's abilities and not knowing the abilities of the hero you are fighting. This comes from experience, that is, knowing hero abilities, and also knowing to check up on opponents to see how much dmg they are doing, how much mana they ahve, and what items they are carrying. Also, there are plenty of times you are simply failing to run.
I am spending time on this because I feel like you are accusing Jack and I of not being sporting. For the record, Jack does do some slightly dishonorable things at times, but for the most part I would consider him a good sport. I would definitely consider myself a person who values sportsmanship and fun over winning. It would be silly to be personally offended over a game, but I would definitely be offended if you were generalizing this to my character.
You need to fix your time zone.
Of course I don't whine when I'm winning. But I do listen to other people when they're constantly losing.
Is it ok with you that I want to play balanced games? I don't find games fun at all unless they are competitively balanced, or there's some agreement to just goof off, neither of which we are doing. Of course I'm competitive, but I really should repeat that I like BEING competitive...I don't like being constantly outmatched. It's not like you and Jack aren't getting any better while we are, either.
Yes, generally I'd prefer you to just beat us asap. I find being caught up in a game for 45 minutes to be much less preferable than being trashed in 25. At least when you're trashed it's a realistic idea of what will be going on when we do get good enough to take you on.
Maybe I am saying you aren't being sporting, or at least not listening to my requests for balanced games. Even with this huge dialogue going on, we have yet to play a game with equally stratified team skill levels in a very long while.
Think of it this way...what if we were playing CTF in Halo 2, but every time you got a kill you got stronger? What if each kill garnered you money, and you could buy things? What if some things were flat-out better than other things, and one team knew what they were doing, and the other really didn't? Would that be very fun?
No. No it would not. And you wouldn't just tell people to get better, because they'd stop playing. You'd try other variants of Halo and come back to that when they are better. That is where I'm coming from. I have ceased to have fun playing 2 on 4 games in W3 DoTA, not because you or Jack are unsporting, but because the way it's set up isn't amenable to my taste. Sue me.
(It doesn't help that SOMETIMES you guys are unsporting, but it's really not fair for me to bitch about that, because you have a point about stopping pushes and pking as a bonus; there's no way to monitor it, so it'll have to remain as is, which is like porn: "I can't define it but I know it when I see it")
Fine. Yesterday was Jack's birthday, special occasion. We'll do a "balanced" game today, or that is, whatver your idea of balanced is since you are whining the most. You know what's going to happen? The winning team is going to depend on whether Jack or I gets the better hero. I'm not a huge fan of chance dictating the outcome of a game.
For the record, Jack had to deal with weeks of getting owned by me before he reached my skill level, and he did it with a smile on his face.
As far as the listening goes, we have been. We give you tips,and you tend to ignore them. There is a formula for success, granted you have to vary it depending on the hero and your opponents, but there is a basic order of things that I have described and you neglect (ie getting an eaglehorn when you have st based character, not getting a roh or a mask asap, etc).
I don't know how you're playing, but I do plenty of goofing off.
You're right though, Jack and I are getting better. I played online last night to make sure I was still sharp, and had three kills in the first 15 minutes with the crystal. only items i had were boots and a circlet. However, I would say that my skill level is increasing at a decreasing rate, eventually you guys will catch up.
Of course I'm not goofing off if there's even a remote chance of winning: I'm trying to get better.
Yes, Jack had to deal with that, but he did it (as far as I know) playing 1-on-1. We are not. Not that I'd prefer to only play 1-on-1, but sometimes that'd be cool.
Whining on my blog isn't whining. It's stating my opinion. In-game, I laugh my ass off whenever I get killed, because it hardly ever surprises me that I die, only that I die that quickly. Dying so fast is funny. Outside of game, I'm allowed to have opinions about what is fun or not. I'm perfectly alright with letting this dialogue go in favor of playing more, but on my blog I get the last word if I feel I want it. That's just how it goes. Same with you on your's.
And here is my final word regarding your comment on items and such: I'm experimenting. Don't fault me for experimenting now just because you did earlier and have it worked out to your satisfaction. To be fair, aiming for a Butterfly with any melee character isn't such a bad idea...perhaps not the most efficient along the way, but the Butterfly is hella-good.
hey, im headed down to purdue the 24th or 25th if you still have interest in going.
- ben
Post a Comment
<< Home