Sheep Tag 7.2.7B

Farms
-Aura Farm actually grants movement speed as it says it should increased to 2% from 0%
-Aura Farm attackspeed aura now applies to structures (frost farm)


Abilities
-Invis removed


Items
-Bomber impact delay decreased to .25 from .5
-Bomber damage increased to 59 from 50
-Bomber range increased to 1200 from 1000


New Item Endurance Aura
-buy endur
-Cost 80/112
-Increases attack speed by 12% and movespeed by 2% in an AoE of 1600


New Item Brilliance Aura
-buy bril
-Cost 70/98
-Increases mana regen in an AoE of 1600 by 2


New Item Blizzard
-buy bliz
-cost 80/112
-24 Damage Per wave with 5 waves AoE 270
-Cast Range 800
-Item will stop channeling if unit moves


New Item Claws of Attack +240
-Requires 4 Claws of Attack +60
-Claws of Attack +240 Recipe which cost 140/180 gold
-To buy recipe type -buy r240


General
-Added Multikills Double, Triple, Quadra, Penta, Legendary
-Mulikills count as kills within 8 seconds of each other
-Wolf max mana reduced to 500 from 640
-Attempted to remove the damn dollies again
-Fixed the weird bugs with afk and -fafk cmd

This is the last major update for a while I will be busy with school/break coming up. Anyways enjoy. If there's any serious bugs I'll try to fix them asap.

Download

http://www.epicwar.com/maps/217663/

alright i bought +240 damage item and tried to -sell it it didnt give me gold rest is fine ^^

what convinced you to remove the invis? it's probably a good idea to explain stuff like this after people debate it for days.

CHIEFHERO[SKS] wrote:

what convinced you to remove the invis? it's probably a good idea to explain stuff like this after people debate it for days.

I got an enormous amount of complaints about it ruining games. Since it serves little purpose in today's sheep tag other than to pls a few people that barely play I just decided to go with removing it instead of wasting more time balancing and reworking it's clear hardly anyone likes it.

There are several arguments against invis amir, but the main 2 I think are these :

* It encourages safemassing.

* It adds on to the 2-20 problem.

Shoop wrote:

There are several arguments against invis amir, but the main 2 I think are these :

* It encourages safemassing.

* It adds on to the 2-20 problem.

But safemassing fixes the 2-20 problem rofl Without safemassing even retards like you mass fast like chickens on crack and fill the map with farms faster than chaise dies, damn idiot^^ And does anyone, who want more mastery added to the game, still think safemassing is something bad in the first place?

I think we mean different things by safemassing then.

What I mean is the kind of massing which requires not risk and no challenge, essentially when you mass at areas with 0 wolves and complete vision.

BIG mistake beer. you're being persuaded by drew/chakras ridicule and cowardice. but since you didn't point out which invis arguments you thought were flawed or which anti-invis arguments pushed you towards your decision, i assume you have a resistance to arguments and debates aren't really influencing you? maybe you don't care about having objective reasons for making decisions?

anyway, if you're gonna make changes based on majority vote, the correct way to do it is to make an anonymous poll and include as many players as you can. having a chat on east with drew, shoop and chakra (not publishing their reasons on the forums so people can point out flaws and provide counter-arguments) might seem like a good way to develoup the map to you, but this is how the map has been develouped since 2008/chakra was mapmaking. it doesn't just sound like a crazy method on paper; history attests to it being a crazy method.


anyway, no hard feelings and GL with the map. i hope you develoup a level of independance and self-respect and stop basing decision based on what will get you the most friends. over and OUT!

CHIEFHERO[SKS] wrote:

BIG mistake beer. you're being persuaded by drew/chakras ridicule and cowardice. but since you didn't point out which invis arguments you thought were flawed or which anti-invis arguments pushed you towards your decision, i assume you have a resistance to arguments and debates aren't really influencing you? maybe you don't care about having objective reasons for making decisions?

anyway, if you're gonna make changes based on majority vote, the correct way to do it is to make an anonymous poll and include as many players as you can. having a chat on east with drew, shoop and chakra (not publishing their reasons on the forums so people can point out flaws and provide counter-arguments) might seem like a good way to develoup the map to you, but this is how the map has been develouped since 2008/chakra was mapmaking. it doesn't just sound like a crazy method on paper; history attests to it being a crazy method.


anyway, no hard feelings and GL with the map. i hope you develoup a level of independance and self-respect and stop basing decision based on what will get you the most friends. over and OUT!

So i should keep invis in game just cause you and 1 other person like it? I dont even like it. But I tried arguing very hard from your point of view and after shoop attacking every angle i approached him at I came to the conclusion that invis has no purpose in sheep tag the way we play, maybe in sheep tag rots but not in revo.

why do you think those cowards have to chase you all over bnet to sell their ideas without any critisicm/opposition? you think its because their arguments are strong? you think they spend time doing this because they are clearly dominating debates? its a classic tactic from shoop and drew, used to manipulate chakras crack-brain through flawed arguments (without opposition to point it out) and ridicule of the opposing arguments (again, without any opposition). "lol!! did u see the newest invis argument!! so flawed! remove the item beer!".

its a shame that it's happening to you as well. i was really hoping we could try out a different st vision this time(and keep typical drew-ideas FAR away from the map unless they are properly justified).

you're setting yourself up for a disaster, and shoop/drew are going to kill all the creative ideas i know that you can bring to the table ("Yo0o Can You ExplAin ThE LoGiCaLL ConSiStEnT ArGuMeNTaTiVe ReAsoN to AdD GoLeMs u HaVe NoT DonE it!"). chakra is going to jump on whatever side drew is on. and this is your council. basically drew. the guy who has been responsible for EVERY single change in our map from 2008-2011. the map that you initially wanted to CHANGE! crazy... anyway, no hard feelings and good luck.

Amir is a joke.

He is doing exactly what I did when I became mapmaker, when Madhatters tried becoming the mapmaker, and now that Beer is. Amir presents zero points of argument and instead attacks the individual. During the Amir vs. Shoop invis mini-debate, Amir said, "the 2-20 problem should be EMBRACED if it's caused by a difference in skill between the teams." That is, Amir thinks ST is better boring if we can add an ounce of skill. Who in their right mind would think this is a legitimate platform to argue on?

You lose every argument, Amir. You say crazy things and come up with strange points that make no sense.

Here, I think, is the arugment where Shoop convinces Beer to make a map (originally just a test map?).

And for argument's sake. If the point of invis is to use low sight radius to make massing freely harder, why not just reduce farm/sheep sight radius?

''this is the most excited shoop's been since a girl talked to him about sports for 5 minutes last year''

yo, chill out chakra. i don't think you understand the arguments. you pop up every 3 weeks and tell us that invis is a bad item because the map got filled with farms when 3 wolves went invis at the same time..or some other CRAZY shit like ''dont remove the redirect. golem jumps is the most anticlimatic moment!! also add irongolems!" or whatever it was you said. trust me, i might be a nutbar factor 2, but you're definitelly a nutbar factor 7 and above when it comes to saying stuff that makes no sense to anyone

anyway..yeah, the 2-20 problem is a argument made by low skilled players. i benefit from it. im usually on the wolf team that plays 2 minutes, and on the sheepteam that lasts 20. you're increasing my wolfing-time and decreasing my sheep-time by getting rid skillfull items like stacks/invis/golems. you want everyone to last 10 min, every game and sing kumbayah my lord. and you seriously think this is a good map idea? do you have a tumor the size of a goat growing out of your left hip?

its also SO obvious that the ''safemassing'' trash is a flawed argument. unless you wanna remove golems, strpotions, beam(shoops idea getting countered by shoops arguments, love this shit ) etc... oh and yeah, unless you agree that reducing wolf movespeed by 50% is also a good idea !!increase runtag!!




it's kind of embarresing that people older than 12 years old think forcing equal scores is a good idea in a competetive game.

Quote :

the 2-20 problem is a argument made by low skilled players. i benefit from it. im usually on the wolf team that plays 2 minutes, and on the sheepteam that lasts 20.

That is not the 2-20 problem.

The 2-20 problem is a condition in which shepherds may, if lucky, win from a wacko kill in the first two minutes, such as a lucky snipe, image jump, or mistake by the sheep. If the shepherds don't get a luck kill in the first two minutes, then games tend to last until shepherds start getting one hit, when shepherds gain a legitimate chance of killing sheep again.

Now, you can argue that the extend of it isn't as large as complained, or that it doesn't even exist, but you can't simply redefine it.

the problem is that the 2-20 problem isn't caused by random chance. getting invis kills and golems kills is not luck-based. and PLEASE dont bring another retarded objection such as "what if sheep gets a spike when u throw golem and cant react? lUcK!".

the reason for a 2-20 type of gameplay is that some people get kills when they buy invis/golems early, while others don't. you might think this is an effect of random chance, but i think this is an effect of difference in skill and decisionmaking.

you have no objective way to justify stopping at any point, saying "we dont wan't to reduce the 2-20 problem anymore". the end-goal is 10 MINUTE WOLF FOR EVERYONE!!!!




it amazes me, it really does, that i have to explain why its a bad idea to force equal results regardless of the skill-difference of the teams. its embarresing and bordering on annoying by now.

Quote :

you might think this is an effect of random chance, but i think this is an effect of difference in skill and decisionmaking.

It is not black and white. It is both part chance, and part skill. However, the argument is that the "part skill" is an overwhelming, inherently unbalanceable part.

Quote :

you have no objective way to justify stopping at any point, saying "we dont wan't to reduce the 2-20 problem anymore".

Again, you live in a very simple world of "yes" and "no." However, as with all things, it is a mutli-factor decision.

If we all played ReVo 1v1, there would, indeed, be no argument for the removal of invis. If a shepherd wants to take the risk of wasting its gold, this risk being the chance the sheep pops out, among other things, it should be entitled to that. However, we do not play 1v1. We play with teammates. And perhaps in tournament games invis does have a place, but we do not play tournament games continuously--we do not play with allies who all know how to effectively use invis both individually and as a team. And what does that result in? Your allies wasting their gold, wasting their time, wasting their shepherd running around invis trying to randomly snipe a sheep.
Now, you might argue that the team deserves to lose, and you'd be right, but what about the few, or only, good players on that team? They get flustered and bored with their useless allies. Sheep too get bored of not only easy wins, but of boring game play, for even if used correctly, invis isn't much fun for sheep.

You can argue all you want that you want the personal liberty, that you can use invis successfully and should be able to, that you don't care if your team utterly fails by trying to mimic your actions, but from what I understand is you don't play. Without playing the game--without being subject to horrible allies--you have a complete misconception of the problem.

Now, you can, of course, argue against this in two major ways. You can say that allies can be bad with or without invis, and you'd be right. But the significant problem of invis is that it is a gateway into laziness. This is because it looks like a illegitimate use of time or a legitimate tactic to always do. It is obviously, as you yourself have admitted, not. Further, you can argue that you shouldn't play with bad people. This, however, is not an alternative. We can not simply ban everyone who falls for the trap invis proposes--you'd be playing with nobody, and fast in the size of our current community.

i dont buy that the luck-part is overwhelming or anywhere near the skill part in terms of getting invis/golem kills. i'd even claim that not even mirror kills, despite the obvious 50-50 chance, have an overwhelming ''luck factor'' to it compared to the skill factor.

the risk of your teammates fucking up(getting invis and being bad) is a risk you accept in any team-game, no matter how the gameplay is designed. infact, this is an argument for the invis. invis allows me to get kills/impact the game by my OWN skill, when im entirely dependant on my ''bad team'' in isolations. invis is a solution/counter to bad allies. do you want to remove isolation as well, since we don't play 1on1?

these are all separate objections to the invis tho. focus on the 2-20 problem. whether the sheep have fun playing vs invis or not is irrelevant. whether invis leads to laziness/afk is another point.




i don't know.....theres so many separate points and fallacies in your post. just quote whatever you need a reply to and ill get to it. the above should answer most of it, and stick to the 2-20 problem.

You missed the complete bulk of my post, but I'll sum it up.

Quote :

the risk of your teammates fucking up(getting invis and being bad) is a risk you accept in any team-game, no matter how the gameplay is designed.

Invis encourages your teammakes to fuck up. The loss from this over weighs any possible advantage skill grants the individual to win.

Done?

Edit:
I don't really care about the 2-20 problem that much, but I'll argue it. But first, I must know what angle to come from: Do you argue that invis doesn't encourage a 2-20 scenario?

the invis encourages people to fuck up, yet it increases the ammount of games that end really fast (2-20 problem). but wouldn't the invis just add to the 20 problem if it increases the ammounts of fuckups? or does it increase the ammount of success(opposite of fuck-up i assume) by equally much?

anyway. no, it doesn't encourage fuckups. but this is a separate point i'll address later.



your argument is this:

1) 2-20 problem is bad.
2) invis increases the 2-20 problem.
3) remove invis.

im saying 1) is incorrect. adress that. im saying that 2-20 is GOOD! it lets people who practice alot have less wolfing and more sheeping. you want to INCREASE wolfing and DECREASE sheeping for the best players. you want to PUNISH progress and skill.