Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KnowsNoLimits

So here we go again, new builds are coming but we are stuck with the Hero Deck

Recommended Posts


@M e t h O z quote:

You are all just whiny babies that want easy stuff.. rofl!! :S

If you don't like playing a huntress like every other crybaby out there that wants easy stuff, then don't play it.. lol

If they actually have the hero deck unlocked.. you all just gonna "try other builds", find out that you cant play other builds cuz they're not as effective as you'd like your easy runs to be.. and then come back here and whine about Huntress being better and go back to your current building state meta but with an extra heroes..

is not a game problem.. its a players mentality problem.. 

When I create a ***ty product that consumers are frustrated with I like to tell them their frustration is all in their heads and they'd enjoy it if they weren't such whiny babies

It's how I made millions of dollars


I wish we had more voices like yours on these forums

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Ngamok quote:

There needs to be more variety in this game.  Not just Trap Huntress, DPS Huntress, Waller, and Frosty.

u cant do that if u dont have more slots on HD for pick more heroes to combine it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all!

Great discussion going on here, btw :)

Just a reminder to keep it civil and keep feedback constructive.

Personal attacks and trolling/flamebaiting will not be tolerated :(

Don't mind me, just passing through!

Emoji_LightningBug.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@jmhjm quote:

You are actually getting me to post something as I continue my protest of the hero deck.

This idea is soooo full of assumptions. Last I read, people were whining they could only group with DPS Huntresses. Unless someone has five of the same niche class and spec, it is far more likely people simply don't have more options.

In a P2W model, people they pay gain an unfair advantage. Having unlimited builders is NOT an unfair advantage when so many just want to (and only do) build. Running hundreds of hours of DD1, I don't recall a single run where I wasn't allowed to build if it wasn't solo or I declared I was builder. Typically you are expected to upgrade and repair. Now with more viability running around, you can upgrade, repair, and DPS. I don't need to pay a penny to do that.

Lastly, the money making idea of cosmetics only still involves having a player willing to part with money. If there is a legit reason someone WANTS more characters, or WANTS more outfits, they can both pay. There are no gates involved by not paying. There is no advantage at all.


So are you suggesting that if the hero deck were to be removed, the player with more characters would not have more power than a player locked at 4 characters? Just look at the current meta - its actually 5 characters(Frosty Apprentice/Traptress/DPS/Waller Squire/Purge Evil Monk). The existing meta right now is 1 character more than the number of character slots. If the hero deck were to be removed, no matter how much I try, the level of content a F2P player can solo is always going to be lower than that of someone who pays. Right now, if the hero deck was removed, I would have to cut one current meta aspect out to do NM4 as a F2P player(and it would likely be monk). That means the player who paid will have an easier time and be able to do content harder than I can no matter how much I try. They will be able to bring in more characters, have more options, and as a result be able to be more powerful. And as more build options and tools get added to the game, the removal of the hero deck will make this gap even larger. I don't see how you can reasonably argue that having access to more characters does not make you more powerful. By that logic, should a person with only a single hero should be able to complete content as much as a player with multiple heroes, because adding more heroes doesn't increase your power? If adding more characters didn't increase your power that would be the case, but very clearly it is not.


What I think you are saying is that the game is still playable for F2P players, and that most F2P people right now haven't reached the point where character slots limit them. And it may be true. I'm actually not arguing for or against having P2W mechanics in a game. But Trendy has come out and specifically stated that they want ethical microtransactions in the game. If they were to remove the hero deck and keep character slots exclusively available through money, it would go against their very design. That is the point I'm trying to make is that they cannot just simply remove the hero deck and call it a day. They have to either go back on their decision to only have ethical microtransactions, or introduce methods that F2P players can acquire character slots.


I actually think the latter is the best idea, and probably using wyvern tokens. But then, the issue becomes one of finance. I don't know where Trendy's cash flow is coming from, but I have to imagine at least some significant portion of their money comes from people buying gems to buy character slots. They risk losing that cash draw if they introduce methods of acquiring character slots without money, so suddenly there is a much larger debate about the value of removing or changing the deck. They risk not actually drawing more players into the game by changing the deck with losing sales from that side of it, and the issue becomes much more nuanced. I don't know the numbers, but I have to imagine these are the thoughts going through their head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cash flow comes from skins, again stated by Trendy. Why else do you think they are pushing cosmetics so hard?

I need to state the obvious to you again as you have seemed to miss my  previous reply.

The majority of people don't have 4 characters, they sure as hell aren't getting there money from extra hero slots.

This is where it gets really stupid. TE wants money through cosmetics yet with the HD in place there is no incentive to buy more than 2 a class. If you had no limits (see what i did there) to how many characters you could use at one time, people will be way more inclined to buy more outfits for each individual build character.

As it is now additional Hero Slots can easily be easily stay purchasable with gems as well as in game currency.

They are losing more money with the HD in place than with out it since as they have stated are wanting money through skins.

Also since you bring up solo play. That's the biggest thing the HD ***s people over with.

You want to talk about power play a solo player is at more of a disadvantage than a group of players, unless you have ridiculous stats to help clear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Removing the hero deck and making hero slots purchasable with wyvern tokens is the most logical choice. Maybe find a different angle for another way to monetize. Hero slots is almost always a bad idea in any game,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F2P model in it's self doesn't make sense for THIS game. Look at the successful games that are free to play most are MOBAs and MMORPGs (including ARPGs). Why are they successful? Massive replay value. MOBAs earn replay value from the competitive nature of a PVP game. MMORPGs just have so much content and classes that you want to replay to try characters.  This is a tower defense game built around strategy to defeat levels. If there is only a select few ways to do that then all you have to keep you going is loot. I think we all know grinding for loot sucks when the process is dull. Hamstringing players creative play though will not create replay value. Forcing me to play with other people to count on them to bring what I don't is not a positive thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Skyaliciouse quote:


http://imgur.com/iGDFkBk

I could go into detail of other defense units, but (not trying to be rude or flamebait or nothing) I'm not wasting my time on it. Granted it does show up at 0.2 defense crit chance in the page, it still procs critical strikes insanely high. I've played with 20% & I've played with 44%, there is an obvious difference. Also, couple of people I met thought crit chance cap for trap is 30%, not matter what they did, whatever amount of crit chance they had, they just couldn't get past 26%. And we tested around with it in missions, no difference even though tooltip says 26%.

TDLR; If it matters to much, you can spend your own time to test it. I'm not wasting mine.

That's not really "testing" though.  You and some other people have anecdotal evidence surrounding crit rate.  Heavily anecdotal


It's anecdotal because there's 0 repeatability in your "methods".  In fact, the methods sound like you got some people together and you all guessed at supposed caps from playing a lot?  I mean, I know some of those guys are just wrong because the tooltip goes over 26%.  Unless it's a specific defense, in which case you'd have a bit more credibility if you included what defense it is.  And yeah, I know blaze balloon breaks that "tooltip cap" because of the build gear for it - that doesn't lend itself to anything here and I'm unsure why you posting a pic of you with some of that gear equipped is supposed to say (besides the semantical:  you said 30% tooltip cap but this 1 defense can go over.. but let's not go there,ya?)

But that's the issue with your claims.  The claim is very specific: crit caps at 26%.  But the explanation of how you got to that conclusion is vague, extremely vague.  


My original post harped on the difference between tooltip display and stat page display because one caps at 30% with all defenses and the other will continue to go up.  The only way to test it in game (afaik, which is why I asked you to elaborate, it isn't lost on me people could be way more creative than me and figure out alternate methods) is to parse the total # of attacks of a defense and the # of crits it had while having gear equipped with higher than 30%.  Then that ratio, over a long period of parsing will point to the truth.  Eventually I'll get bored enough to do it, but not really excited about figuring it out atm


Can frankenstein 43% crit rate on squire cannon but to be sure whether I'm seeing 43% or 30% crit rate would require a lot of eye bleeding counting so... nah, I'm not wasting my time either.  But then I disqualify myself from making hard claims about crit rate, and I'd ask that you do the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand this has been all off topic

I think this tangent arose simply because you made bold claims that would be very important to corroborate because it's very difficult (or tedious) to actually test and come up with such a specific conclusion.  So it'd be pretty important for a bunch of us if you did exhaustive testing on it and were able to corroborate it

Also it's important to call things like that out before rumors start.  If you wanna just say you assume/think it's 26% go ahead, that'll catch you a lot less flak than saying you've tested it.  That implies a level of certainty that begs to be questioned


Here's an explosive trap with the tooltip saying 30%, actual stat was 35% (30% gave me 29.990 - weird).  Seems your conclusions are based around people not having enough defense crit to be able to go past 30 :\

30B3EEC97563B3E964083399AE5B489B7473E90C


Hope you've at least reconsidered your 26% figure.   And hope anyone reading isn't influenced by it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time someone asks me if I have a serenity monk my standard answer is always "When Trendy fixes the Hero Deck, I'll bring one". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@KnowsNoLimits quote:

Cash flow comes from skins, again stated by Trendy. Why else do you think they are pushing cosmetics so hard?

I need to state the obvious to you again as you have seemed to miss my  previous reply.

The majority of people don't have 4 characters, they sure as hell aren't getting there money from extra hero slots.

This is where it gets really stupid. TE wants money through cosmetics yet with the HD in place there is no incentive to buy more than 2 a class. If you had no limits (see what i did there) to how many characters you could use at one time, people will be way more inclined to buy more outfits for each individual build character.

As it is now additional Hero Slots can easily be easily stay purchasable with gems as well as in game currency.

They are losing more money with the HD in place than with out it since as they have stated are wanting money through skins.

Also since you bring up solo play. That's the biggest thing the HD ***s people over with.

You want to talk about power play a solo player is at more of a disadvantage than a group of players, unless you have ridiculous stats to help clear it.

Do you agree or disagree that without giving F2P players a way to get character slots would result in a mechanic that is P2W? I'm not asking if you think that it would affect a lot of players. Part of the design philosophy of this game is based on the fact that there isn't P2W transactions. You can argue it wouldn't affect a lot of people, but just simply removing the deck adds a P2W mechanic in the game. I'm not saying its a bad or good thing to do so. I'm saying that if Trendy wants to be committed to maintaining that design principle they must also add in a way for F2P players to get character slots to remove the deck.


I'm not advocating for the hero deck. I don't like it either. I feel like I can't experiment(I'm actually really convinced blaze balloon is amazing, but I can't really test it easily). What I am saying that to maintain the stated design principle they cannot simply remove it. In my opinion, none of this matters. The amount of players affected by the hero deck limitation are those who have more than 4 characters. As you mentioned, its a small percentage of the population. If so few players have 4 characters, how does the fact the hero deck exists limit the majority of the playerbase? What is important is that Trendy finds ways to drive new players to the game, and producing more content, rather than fixing design issues that affect a small amount of the playerbase.




Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've said the reason for not allowing paid insta-hatch back when eggs were on a 8hr timer was because it'd be p2w.

I think removing the hero deck and not removing the cost associated would be SUPER p2w to them if the egg thing was p2w.


You've said it well though.  Their philosophy of anti-p2w + want to make money is at odds with "what community want".  I say that in quotes of course because it's really tough to gauge that accurately when such a small amount of people even have 4 characters, let alone want more.  It's also not clear (other than 2nd hand of 2nd hand stats) what % of gem spending goes into hero unlocks


Only reason I'd be with the hero deck is because people at trendy have the foresight (Emoji_Huntress.png) to be able to tell that without the hero deck the DD2 community would be split with regards to how they play.  Example being, of the 10k that play only 100 play consistently + have every build and every game in higher difficulties consists of the 9,900 entering/leaving until they match with one of those guys while they perpetually play a DPS

That's not a fun game for the 9,900 in my very dumb example


@Sadinar quote:

I feel like I can't experiment(I'm actually really convinced blaze balloon is amazing, but I can't really test it easily).

I know these feels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sadinar quote:Do you agree or disagree that without giving F2P players a way to get character slots would result in a mechanic that is P2W? I'm not asking if you think that it would affect a lot of players. Part of the design philosophy of this game is based on the fact that there isn't P2W transactions. You can argue it wouldn't affect a lot of people, but just simply removing the deck adds a P2W mechanic in the game. I'm not saying its a bad or good thing to do so. I'm saying that if Trendy wants to be committed to maintaining that design principle they must also add in a way for F2P players to get character slots to remove the deck.


I'm not advocating for the hero deck. I don't like it either. I feel like I can't experiment(I'm actually really convinced blaze balloon is amazing, but I can't really test it easily). What I am saying that to maintain the stated design principle they cannot simply remove it. In my opinion, none of this matters. The amount of players affected by the hero deck limitation are those who have more than 4 characters. As you mentioned, its a small percentage of the population. If so few players have 4 characters, how does the fact the hero deck exists limit the majority of the playerbase? What is important is that Trendy finds ways to drive new players to the game, and producing more content, rather than fixing design issues that affect a small amount of the playerbase.

That's why I have said additional hero slots should be available through in game currency as well as gems, not HD slots.

Trendy say alot of things though, one thing they keep saying is that they want solo players to be on equal ground as people who group together, yet I have remain to see it. The Hero Deck just cements the fact that this game isn't meant for the solo player and that you will always be at a disadvantage when doing so.

Removing the HD certainly doesn't create a p2w scenario in any sense. The HD effects the End game players and the hardcore players. Those who like to stray away from the set meta and experiment with different builds which in some cases is alot stronger than the meta. You can't get more casual than having the game force you to only have 4 characters at a time which is obviously one slot for each class.

That is a terrible response, you think it's more important for Trendy to focus on new content before they fix the HD?

They can bring all the content they want, but if you don't have a solid foundation to build upon it's going to mean nothing. The more they bring new Hero's/Builds to the game is the more you are going to see the HD's flaws.

This is the beginning of the trouble with the HD.

Put it this way if they don't remove the HD when the game is more established then people like me won't stick around for long and this can become casual Defenders 2 joining the ranks of DDE. Where no thought or strategy is required for building, all you need is dem stats and shoot monster looking things to progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As per the content thing, something to think about along side everything said thus far is if there's new content that's balanced around the hero deck and/or relies on the hero deck then it will need revamping if/when the hero deck is changed


Tbh, it's better to make a decision and/or stand on this issue in its totality asap.  Since it isn't exactly programming intensive I don't see it detracting from developing new content, either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Pachipachio quote:

As per the content thing, something to think about along side everything said thus far is if there's new content that's balanced around the hero deck and/or relies on the hero deck then it will need revamping if/when the hero deck is changed


Tbh, it's better to make a decision and/or stand on this issue in its totality asap.  Since it isn't exactly programming intensive I don't see it detracting from developing new content, either

The programming end of this isn't as simple as removing it in one delete key.  Even taking the easy route and expanding it to say 6 slots still takes a few guys a few days to do.  They have to go through the roadmap document which is the size of an fn dictionary, find the exact call modules and tweak them, test em, tweak em again til bug free.  Then theres also a bit of a graphical revamp to make it hold 6 without looking like crap.  A complete removal requires rewritting tons of modules instead of a few and scrapping quite a lot of paid work already which is kind of a huge no no in the gaming industry.

A true fix to the situation will take months to accomplish and we will likely see something similar to what I mentioned above as a bandaid solution very soon.

Another technical issue you all may very well be overlooking is the net side of things.  Say you have 4 players with 4 slots in a current match.  Thats 16 packets of information loaded into each match and updated during the match to reflect any gear changes.  Sure the packets are small but the constant stream of them being increased could very well cause lag issues and longer load times.  Now you may be thinking "well it didn't matter in dd1/dde", but that game also functioned differently and did suffer quite a lot of annoying lag.  Just some food for thought.  There will likely never be a total abolishment of the deck... so if you want it fixed, think outside the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see what you're saying, lends a lot of perspective to the laymen(me)


Is it as progamming intensive as other new content though?  Specifically, new items/stats/effect, new map, new monsters?


My point was just that the work involved in changing the hero deck ought to be lower than the work involved in changing the hero deck down the line + all the content that's balanced around and/or relies on the hero deck to function property


So it's important for everyone to make a hard stand on it asap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Skyaliciouse quote:


@Pachipachio quote:


Hope you've at least reconsidered your 26% figure.   And hope anyone reading isn't influenced by it

*facepalm*

read the TDLR, I never claimed anything. I was misunderstood or I used the wrong word. But if it matters so much, fine. You got me dude /slowClap. But I won't be editting anything as I've explained enough in my TDLR that I am not claiming anything. I'm not forcing anyone to believe 26% is the hard cap. That testing is upto the player as always~

Yeah, um, not sure where the condescension is coming from with the facepalming and slow clapping.  You're missing the point of why I took this so seriously

Remember, this is what started it: "I've tested everything to know that it's different for everything. And, no. I'm not going to bother explaining. "

This wasn't about "getting you".  I honestly couldn't care less about "haha proving someone wrong", this is a DD2 forum dude, I'm not getting any ego out of pointing out people's errors in experiment ethics & math.  I won't even remember your name after this thread dies.  This was purely, as I've always stated and restated, about intellectual honesty and keeping information straight in the community.  Don't want a repeat of pet misiformation, exp misinformation, strategy misinformation, etc etc.  Even though you're saying " I'm not forcing anyone to believe 26% is the hard cap. That testing is upto the player as always~" That is absolutely not the message that comes across from using language like "I've tested everything ".  You've GOT to understand that influences people - you can't just go around making wild claims and hiding behind "well I told you to go figure it out yourself" no, you shouldn't make claims you can't back up sufficiently.  If it was about a person it'd be slander, if it was about an ideology it'd be propaganda, if it's about experiments it's intellectual lazyness/dishonesty.  

Have you been around when people thought there was screenshot proof of different pet rarities having different empower stat ranges all from one thread where one guy said he saw it? Even though that was impossible outside of a graphical bug which was never replicated (ie, probably in his head or at the very least never repeated/reproduced any significant amount of time)?


Btw, I read the TL;DR and responded in kind.  You still said it's an approximate cap in the TL;DR.  It's not, unless your approximate means a very large range, in which case saying 26% is completely unnecessary .  26% is nowhere, anywhere, anything, nothing.  Dunno how else to spell it out without being outright mean man, even in your concession it seems like you don't care/understand or you're continually being misunderstood by using the wrong language time and time again.  Which is absolutely a possibility on here, so I want to make it clear that I'm not berating you or mean to make any implications about who you are as a person.  This is purely about what experiments (ie testing) means with regards to your posts on critical hits

Not asking you to edit anything either.. just hoping to change your mind from what testing means and the validity of 26% in hopes that you'll still be a part of conversations and bring to the table good stuff.    Hopefully you're not the only one reading this, either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Sadinar quote:

I'm not advocating for the hero deck. I don't like it either. I feel like I can't experiment(I'm actually really convinced blaze balloon is amazing, but I can't really test it easily). What I am saying that to maintain the stated design principle they cannot simply remove it. In my opinion, none of this matters. The amount of players affected by the hero deck limitation are those who have more than 4 characters. As you mentioned, its a small percentage of the population. If so few players have 4 characters, how does the fact the hero deck exists limit the majority of the playerbase? What is important is that Trendy finds ways to drive new players to the game, and producing more content, rather than fixing design issues that affect a small amount of the playerbase.


It's more than just the four hero limit. This part never gets talked about but I absolutely hate the fact that your four slots open up over levels. I think this creates a mind set from the start that you don't need the other heroes. Then all of a sudden you reach endgame and realize you can't go on with just one hero. More so for me specifically on my first play through, being  DD1 fan I was absolutely livid that I couldn't use my other heroes that I had spent all that time making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Chappyy quote:

It's more than just the four hero limit. This part never gets talked about but I absolutely hate the fact that your four slots open up over levels. I think this creates a mind set from the start that you don't need the other heroes. Then all of a sudden you reach endgame and realize you can't go on with just one hero. More so for me specifically on my first play through, being  DD1 fan I was absolutely livid that I couldn't use my other heroes that I had spent all that time making.

Indeed, the leading in this game isn't done very well

Or I'm misunderstanding what the core, big idea, should be in DD2.   Which is definitely possible 


I believe the big draw to be creating a ***ton of characters like we did in DD1 and try new setups after gearing up new characters.  The replayability would come from wanting to try new things and gearing characters up to try those new things.  + Smashing the hell out of content when really well geared up (like diablo - I don't tihnk I'm alone in the fact that absolutely ravaging waves and waves of enemies is a big element of why hack n slash rpgs are fun)

Neither of two things are in currently.  Max difficulty is still pretty hard even with the best gear from that content and VERY FEW players are creating more characters


Locked to 1 character until level 4 makes it almost guaranteed that players will just play with one for a looooong time.  Imagine, instead, if everyone had to create 1 of each character on 1st log in.  What would the rates of multiple characters at 50 instead of single character at 50 be or rate of multiple over 20 vs 1 over 20?

I have a vision that most players create 1 character and go up in content until they need more... at which point they decide that leveling up to whatever they're at was a chore and quit or they go the join/leave games until someone else is building.  Neither of which is particularly healthy for the game.  Leveling should be fun, and creating characters from the get-go should be looked at more closely.  


Making players create all 4 characters at character creation would have been a nice experiment to run some months ago and run diagnostics on new players who came in during that time and their rate of leveling multiple characters - or it still could provide decent results; how far are we away from actual release?  Don't we have closed beta, open beta, and final still to come of the "phases"?


Unfortunate they didn't do more split testing (which I think is integral with new products.. but that's another conversation) with the hero deck and now we're all stuck here.  With all this data showing that a vast majority of players don't care one bit about the hero deck, which influences people's decisions on what to do with the hero deck.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't bother Posting your well thought out, and informed opinion....   they had a Survey.  We all love the Hero Deck.  Right?

I am not sure why Trendy is holding on to the idea so badly.  There is no good argument I have heard for the Hero Deck.  It almost feels like an Ego thing.  Someone on the team thought it was a good idea and championed it.  Despite all the negative feedback and obvious reasons why it is a bad idea they are fighting tooth and nail to keep it.

New Survey Question:
What is your opinion of the Hero Deck?
A. It is great
B. It is the greatest
C. All of the Above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@tonyb quote:

New Survey Question:

What is your opinion of the Hero Deck?
A. It is great
B. It is the greatest
C. All of the Above

Don't forget the second part. 

What is your opinion of the Hero Deck? (The hero deck is the part of the game that allows you to bring multiple heroes into the game)



Arrrrg this thread brought back all the salt I threw over my shoulder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@roboticaust quote:


@Pachipachio quote:

As per the content thing, something to think about along side everything said thus far is if there's new content that's balanced around the hero deck and/or relies on the hero deck then it will need revamping if/when the hero deck is changed


Tbh, it's better to make a decision and/or stand on this issue in its totality asap.  Since it isn't exactly programming intensive I don't see it detracting from developing new content, either

The programming end of this isn't as simple as removing it in one delete key.  Even taking the easy route and expanding it to say 6 slots still takes a few guys a few days to do.  They have to go through the roadmap document which is the size of an fn dictionary, find the exact call modules and tweak them, test em, tweak em again til bug free.  Then theres also a bit of a graphical revamp to make it hold 6 without looking like crap.  A complete removal requires rewritting tons of modules instead of a few and scrapping quite a lot of paid work already which is kind of a huge no no in the gaming industry.

A true fix to the situation will take months to accomplish and we will likely see something similar to what I mentioned above as a bandaid solution very soon.

Another technical issue you all may very well be overlooking is the net side of things.  Say you have 4 players with 4 slots in a current match.  Thats 16 packets of information loaded into each match and updated during the match to reflect any gear changes.  Sure the packets are small but the constant stream of them being increased could very well cause lag issues and longer load times.  Now you may be thinking "well it didn't matter in dd1/dde", but that game also functioned differently and did suffer quite a lot of annoying lag.  Just some food for thought.  There will likely never be a total abolishment of the deck... so if you want it fixed, think outside the box.

Its not that hard man. In the case of the hero deck its actually very simple.

As a temporary or even long term fix all they have to do is enable hero switching into the hero deck just like in the tavern( probably quite simple to enable this on the other maps).

As a way to keep the herodeck UI relevant they could enable quick switching for the heros in the deck with the f1-f4 keys and then if you want to bring in a hero that isn't in the deck you either have to hit I and swap him out or use the forge. If they introduced a build timer this would make the deck very relevant since swapping takes time.

And the net code wtf lol u have no idea what your talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...