Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: [Confirmed] The Neutrals dont sleep tonight

  1. #1
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    236

    [Confirmed] The Neutrals dont sleep tonight

    im not sure if this is bug or not but in dota 1 they are sleeping so that means when you get close to them they dont attack you unless you did first, that's not in dota 2, i sometimes use the camps as a place to hide from enemies which is quite unfamiliar place for some of the people.
    extra information doesn't harm sometimes.

  2. #2
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    655
    well, they still didn't implemented it (don't forget that creep were sleeping only the night, and not all of them)

  3. #3
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,698
    Intended change

  4. #4
    Basic Member ThoAppelsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,892
    r u srs m8?

  5. #5
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    635
    I wouldn't call it intended, but it is known for a long time and no simple oversight.

    I remember an interview with synderen probably over a year ago where he said that he asked icefrog about this matter and when it will be implemented. Icefrogs response was the question why neutrals should sleep and that he should give an argument why having a sleep cycle is superior. While synderen said there are minor implications, in the greater scheme of things it really doesnt matter all that much and its up to a design choice.

    It's not on any list and probably should go on either one, but it is already known and kind of intentional for the moment

  6. #6
    Basic Member ThoAppelsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,892
    Come on... this is ridiculous
    canSleep=1 makes units that are in the neutral hostile team sleep at night when idle
    canSleep=0 or absence of this setting leaves the unit awake all the time

    Was it that so hard for IceFrog to set them to zero for 10-15 neutral units, that he made such a comment..?

    If I were asked, my answer would be that those units are idle most of the time, and it seems just natural for some of them to spend their time sleeping while being idle. With some of them, I mean the ones for which it would be natural to sleep, like wolves and satyrs, unlike golems
    There are some gameplay impacts, but not big enough to mention in my opinion... It becomes somewhat important when you want to hide inside the juke spot behind the scourge ancient neutral camp of Black Drakes, to make your pursuants lose the track of you, while having extremely low health. Currently the Drake Camp would just give away that there is someone behind since they would be chasing you down to there and attacking you, which would also kill you since you were on low health.

  7. #7
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    635
    I don't know why he made such a comment. As quite some time is gone since that interview he possibly has forgotten the whole topic already.

    Personally I welcome many intentional changes, but in this case I wouldn't mind seeing the sleep cycle back. It was a nice detail.

  8. #8
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    236
    Quote Originally Posted by ThoAppelsin View Post
    Come on... this is ridiculous
    canSleep=1 makes units that are in the neutral hostile team sleep at night when idle
    canSleep=0 or absence of this setting leaves the unit awake all the time

    Was it that so hard for IceFrog to set them to zero for 10-15 neutral units, that he made such a comment..?

    If I were asked, my answer would be that those units are idle most of the time, and it seems just natural for some of them to spend their time sleeping while being idle. With some of them, I mean the ones for which it would be natural to sleep, like wolves and satyrs, unlike golems
    There are some gameplay impacts, but not big enough to mention in my opinion... It becomes somewhat important when you want to hide inside the juke spot behind the scourge ancient neutral camp of Black Drakes, to make your pursuants lose the track of you, while having extremely low health. Currently the Drake Camp would just give away that there is someone behind since they would be chasing you down to there and attacking you, which would also kill you since you were on low health.
    this is exactly the idea of it, well said my friend

  9. #9
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    236
    bump

  10. #10
    Basic Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Belarion View Post
    I wouldn't call it intended, but it is known for a long time and no simple oversight.

    I remember an interview with synderen probably over a year ago where he said that he asked icefrog about this matter and when it will be implemented. Icefrogs response was the question why neutrals should sleep and that he should give an argument why having a sleep cycle is superior. While synderen said there are minor implications, in the greater scheme of things it really doesnt matter all that much and its up to a design choice.

    It's not on any list and probably should go on either one, but it is already known and kind of intentional for the moment
    You wouldn't call it intended after Icefrog said it was intended? You clearly even remember when it was stated... lol

    Quote Originally Posted by mhd54 View Post
    bump

    While intended changes are open for discussion you really shouldn't bump it and congest the front page. If people feel the need to discuss it they'll do it on their own. Unless your hoping for blash to put it on the Intended Fix/Bug list. He probably wouldn't have done it anyway. Neutrals aren't completely fleshed out so you might as well just wait. It's not like Icefrog just forgot they were supposed to sleep or that he is missing ancients.

    Also: http://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=1396
    http://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=47592
    http://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=5440

    But this thread should suffice for discussion: http://dev.dota2.com/showthread.php?t=34774

    Though if we are postulating Icefrog's design choice for no real reason, like so:
    Quote Originally Posted by ThoAppelsin View Post
    Come on... this is ridiculous
    canSleep=1 makes units that are in the neutral hostile team sleep at night when idle
    canSleep=0 or absence of this setting leaves the unit awake all the time

    Was it that so hard for IceFrog to set them to zero for 10-15 neutral units, that he made such a comment..?

    If I were asked, my answer would be that those units are idle most of the time, and it seems just natural for some of them to spend their time sleeping while being idle. With some of them, I mean the ones for which it would be natural to sleep, like wolves and satyrs, unlike golems
    There are some gameplay impacts, but not big enough to mention in my opinion... It becomes somewhat important when you want to hide inside the juke spot behind the scourge ancient neutral camp of Black Drakes, to make your pursuants lose the track of you, while having extremely low health. Currently the Drake Camp would just give away that there is someone behind since they would be chasing you down to there and attacking you, which would also kill you since you were on low health.
    Then it is also quite possible Icefrog kept the minuscule change in Dota 2 to see the effect it would have since he believed there was no real reason to leave it in the game. The only reason they slept in the Dota map is because the ancient time it was created probably had them sleeping as per the normal for any Warcraft 3 map custom or actually in the game and there was no reason to change it because it was traditionally used in the every map. But, I find it reasonable that he would change the parameters and stop the creeps from sleeping in a later patch if he decided it was a better mechanic. I mean I do enjoy making useless guesses about why Icefrog does what he does and all, but it doesn't make this topic anymore useful.

    So, in conclusion, the term Intended Change seems to fit quite well. Doesn't stop you from wasting your time discussing it. This topic should probably be closed since there is a larger topic already about it. Seriously mate, waste your time, seriously.
    Last edited by Wiener; 05-14-2013 at 03:29 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •