Suggestion about golems

The biggest problem with ST today is safemassing. We should increase risk-taking. Here's my argument:

1) Less safemassing = more dynamic game. ST is too static atm.
2) Golems reduce the chance of sheep taking risks. By wolves investing in golems, they postpone getting claws. The cutting ability of the wolves is reduced. Safemassing is less likely to make your team die due to insufficient farms. Golems increase your chance of dying when taking risks/runtagging. Golems encourages safemassing and static gameplay.
1+2) Remove golems leads to a less static game where runtag and risktaking is more frequent.



My second argument against the golem is the 2-20 problem:

1) Games tend to end early or last 20 minutes.
2) Golems increases this problem. If the wolves invest in golems, they either get lucky kills early, or they don't get kills and lack the cutting power to take the sheep out.
1+2) Remove golems. It clearly increases the 2-20 problem.

Can you make a trial version for this beer?

Hey, good idea, just remove every item except claws!
I'm not against removing golems but what other ( new ) item will be used instead of a golem?

Probably we should just a cool down for using golems ( e.g. you can use first golem after 2min, after used you have to wait 30sec untill you can throw another one )

ty for the support.

we dont need a new item to be used instead of the golem. its insanely boring when 4 wolves buy golem and don't get any kills, and wolf last 20 min, boring FOR SHEEP AND WOLF IMO

Quote :

Probably we should just a cool down for using golems ( e.g. you can use first golem after 2min, after used you have to wait 30sec untill you can throw another one )

i like your idea with 30 sec restriction between golem throws. it limits the wolf to only 36 golems per 20 min game. we have to get more ppl to vote for idea tho or it wont be accepted.

I guess it's going to be more boring WITHOUT golem. It's always fun to throw a golem even if you dont kill him. Still Iron will be needed for later, what will we do?

That's why we need a new item for mid. Or atleast an iron golem. Probably the team can just buy 1-2.


Yeee, we will see!

Make map smaller = less savefarming easy isolations xD

Rofl at people completely missing the point

EnStekPaNnaWOLF wrote:

Rofl at people completely missing the point

?

Hey amir I'll make a deal with. Start playing sheep tag actively and I will take your ideas seriously.

you want me to increase the fun/activity you guys have, and work my ass of to improve the map at the same time?

nana. this isnt how it works. when the map is playable, i will come back. we just need to finetune it.




do you see any problems with my arguments beer? i thought we established that we wanna reduce the 2-20 problem and decrease safemassing.

We already made changes in order to deal with those problems. First lets analyze the effect those have, then we can take it from there.

we have played without the invis for about 9 months now. we've had plenty of time to analyze the effect. or are you talking about some other changes that solves the 2-20 problem?

i think it will be good if we further decrease safemassing. it will be good if we further decrease the 2-20 problem. and it will be good if we further reward risktaking. this is achieved by removing the golem.




beer, you might as well drink a bottle of jack daniels and assume that chakra wrote my arguments. it doesn't matter if i play ST or not if my ideas are for the best of ST. could you please explain where/if my arguments are flawed, or give a reason to not remove golems?

thanks for your cooperation. greetings, chiefhero.

And I think the problem more or less went away in the games without invis.

The solution to safemassing that has been presented is that we on the same time reduce farms to 2 hit.

i dont think so.

i don't see what it matters what either one of us think however. the invis was removed on the basis of it reducing the 2-20 problem in theory. i dont remember anyone providing statistics or evidence for the 2-20 problem to begin with, or how that number has changed after we stopped playing with the invis.

the golem is a step towards the 2-20 problem, and the removal of the golem is a step away from the 2-20 problem.





but sure, if the mapmaker feels comfterable rejecting the suggestion and basing his decision on how shoop ''feels'' the problem has been solved, not much we can do.

As I said I dont think we have any 2-20 problems in games without invis, therefore it feels stupid to remove an item soleley on that basis.

and as i said, i do think we have a 2-20 problem.

and as i said right after that, what anyone thinks should be irrelevant, seing as it has been irrelevant when used to justify other map-changes.



1) we should move away from the 2-20 problem and do our best to minimize it/the chance of it happenin.
2) golems increases the chance of it happening.
3) remove golems.

which of the steps is it that you don't agree with?

Quote :

you want me to increase the fun/activity you guys have, and work my ass of to improve the map at the same time?

nana. this isnt how it works. when the map is playable, i will come back. we just need to finetune it.

How dare anyone suggest you play AND make suggestions! How outrageous.
You, Beer, on the other hand, must play, make suggestions, AND make the map. Amir gots to do his hair.


I disagree with your step #2, and even if it is true, conclusion #3.
Step #2 is problematic because it takes into no account Iron Golems, which golems are a requirement thereof. Do you suggests Iron Golems contribute to the 2-20 problem? The case for golems, used strictly as charges and never upgraded, contributing is obvious, but do you have such a one for Iron Golems?
For conclusion #3, you must once again take into account Iron Golems, and must again ask the same question. Should we remove normal golems and replace them with Iron Golems? What about reverting them back to the more expensive, though longer-lived, golem? Perhaps leave the Iron Golem as well?

Outright removal before balancing attempts is silly. We didn't do it for invis nor stacks.

Quote :

I disagree with your step #2, and even if it is true, conclusion #3.
Step #2 is problematic because it takes into no account Iron Golems, which golems are a requirement thereof. Do you suggests Iron Golems contribute to the 2-20 problem? The case for golems, used strictly as charges and never upgraded, contributing is obvious, but do you have such a one for Iron Golems?

iron-golems spawn in the pen 5-10 sec after you purchase them(with a physical warning for the sheep to see). problem solved, we dont need the classic golem anymore. can we remove that then? the ability to kill sheep with golem jumps causes 2-20 problems.

Quote :

For conclusion #3, you must once again take into account Iron Golems, and must again ask the same question. Should we remove normal golems and replace them with Iron Golems? What about reverting them back to the more expensive, though longer-lived, golem? Perhaps leave the Iron Golem as well?

remove the ability to do cool stuff like golem-jumps. implement the iron-golems i proposed above. nothing changes around the purpose of the iron-golem(camper/extra wolf), while we get rid of the gameplay around normal golems(lucky golem-jump-kills that kill the sheep fast, or waste gold and the sheep live 20 min).



YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Jumping with Iron Golems does not contribute to the 2-20 problem.

but they do.

How?
If given the choice between Iron Golems that you can't jump and Iron Golems you can jump, jumping Iron Golems will not increase the 2-20 problem?

Why? Because, get a kill or not, they are not a direct setback for shepherds. Best explained with charts:
Graph of classic 2-20 problem:

Graph of a total lack of 2-20 problem ("Iron Golems that can't jump"):

Graph of a total lack of 2-20 problem ("Iron Golems that can jump"):


Edit: I know the images say chance of winning, but a better formulation of the 2-20 problem is chance of getting a kill, and say the charts are adjusted for number of currently surviving sheep.

iron golems DO set wolves back because claws are a better investment in every scenario. iron golems are only better if

1) you can use the initial golem to jump-kill someone fast and save time
2) you need iron-golems to guard the mid.

as for anything else, the claws have a higher probability of making wolves win fast.





this means:

when you get jump-golems and KILL someone = you increase the 2 problem. games end fast by ''lucky kills'
when you get jump-golems and FAIL to kill = you increase the 20 problem because claws is a better investment even if you get to keep the golem.

in other words: jumping golems, iron or not, increase the 2-20 problem.

Did you even bother to look at my pretty pictures?

First off, you must right off all other options of investment. The argument is whether if jumping iron golems create a 2-20 problem over nonjumping iron golems. That is, you are arguing that if we give the ability of jumping iron golems, it increases the chance of the 2-20 problem over that of the iron golem, not claws.

I made those graphs for a reason. You are probably looking purely at the peaks. Peaks, however, are a good thing (to a limited extent). That is, if the chance to kill, or even win, isn't abysmally low, then the game is most likely more enjoyable. The 2-20 problem is the trough. At the trough, which notice hovers below the 10% range from 5-11 minutes (chart #2 exits it at 4, #3 never drops into it), it means shepherds have a very low chance of getting a win/kill. This generally means they are most likely having a boring time, unless you like attacking farms...

So, now that peaks and troughs are settled, I suppose I must explain that jumping Iron Golems, jumping or not, do not create significant troughs. I concede that the chance of getting a kill at the spawn of the golem is high, but this does not then bring your chance of getting a kill a minute later lower than it was before you spawned the golem. Indeed, it is most likely higher, because of the golem.

That, is, I'll combine the picture:


The blue represents a jumping iron golem while the red is a standard iron golem. The jumping iron golem does not lower your chances below that of a non-jumping golem at any one point of time, only raises, thus no 2-20 problem (no trough!).

Edit: That should totally say chance in the image. :/

both iron-golems and jumping-golems cause a 20 minute problem(since the game is balanced towards the claws). meaning that more games will last 20 minutes if we start getting iron-golems instead of claws(no matter if they jump or not). jumping-golems(on top of increasing the 20 min problem) increase the 2 minute problem.

so jumping golems DO increase the 2-20 problem, because people will get them early for FAST KILLS! non-jumping golems DONT increase the 2-20 problem because people wont get them early, since they offer no benefits over the claws.

obviously jumping-golems dont have a higher chance of causing a 20 min game than non-jumping golems, but that isn't the point to begin with. the problem only occours when you add the jumping-ability because you're giving people a GOOD reason to get the item early instead of claws!



EVERY ITEM increases the 20 minute problem if you get it before claws. the question is which items gives you a REASON to get them before claws. which items CAN give you kills fast? this is what causes the 2-20 problem.

Quote :

I made those graphs for a reason. You are probably looking purely at the peaks. Peaks, however, are a good thing (to a limited extent). That is, if the chance to kill, or even win, isn't abysmally low, then the game is most likely more enjoyable. The 2-20 problem is the trough. At the trough, which notice hovers below the 10% range from 5-11 minutes (chart #2 exits it at 4, #3 never drops into it), it means shepherds have a very low chance of getting a win/kill. This generally means they are most likely having a boring time, unless you like attacking farms...

CHIEFHERO[SKS] wrote:

and as i said, i do think we have a 2-20 problem.

and as i said right after that, what anyone thinks should be irrelevant, seing as it has been irrelevant when used to justify other map-changes.



1) we should move away from the 2-20 problem and do our best to minimize it/the chance of it happenin.
2) golems increases the chance of it happening.
3) remove golems.

which of the steps is it that you don't agree with?

I already told you I dont agree with the first step lol.

Why does it matter what you think but not what I think? In a map without invis I dont think there is a 2-20 problem. You think there is. I am not saying we should base mapdecisions on what I think, but we shouldnt base them on what you think either. It has to be based on some form of wide agreement, and atm it doesnt seem like a lot of people agree with you that we should remove golem.