[Suggestion] Replace / Purchase Permanent Towers

By Shadow_Avenger on June 29, 2009 2:30:10 PM from

I'm sure this has been suggested somewhere before. Having towers destroyed and being unable to replace them is a source of constant annoyance to me. I would like to be able to have the option to pay gold to replace permanent towers or to create additional towers to bolster our defenses. However, I don't think it's a good idea to allow players to place towers anywhere they choose.

Proposal:

Each map should have a tower spawn point at each default tower location. If the tower is destroyed, a player has the option to buy a tower from the item shop and place the tower in the tower spawn point. The actual gold cost of a tower should be less than 1k gold, will have to test out the balance of this a bit, but I think anything above 1k is just too costly and might as well get some gear. Spawn points will not be available until the original towers has been destroyed, and not before the proper war rank has been achieved (as some towers spawn at certain war ranks). For example, if one of the side towers goes down early in Cataract, you can replace it so that you can use its strategic purpose and not suffer too much from an early loss of a tower.

Optional:

There can be tower spawn points in addition to the default tower locations that players can place in order to boost defenses. These will have no towers at their locations unless a player decides to place a tower there. An example would be to place an additional lane tower in Cataract, bringing the front towers to 2, making advance up that lane more difficult for the enemy.

More ideas:

This idea can be expanded to not only towers, but to other unique buildings that provide a strategic advantage, like trebuchets (non-fort version, like on Brothers), or other builds that might not exist yet, such as a permanent version of Totem of Revelation with longer sight range, or permanent (insert stat here) ward increasing allied (insert stat here) in its radius, or wherever your imagination takes you.

Final thoughts:

I feel this would expand the horizons of the game, increase depth of strategy and tactics, and ultimately make the game more interesting and diverse for everyone. (You like how I just said practically the same thing 3 times differently? ) On the other hand, if it's possible, maybe this can be modded into the game.

+4 Karma | 24 Replies

Permanent building destruction is one of the key features in both Dota and Demigod. It's how you progress. If you could replace them then it wouldn't be as important to defend them.

I really like the idea of being able to place a one-time tower in pre-set spots to bolster defence, but being able to replace towers after they're destroyed doesn't really seem to fit with the gameplay.

1k would be way to small of a price to pay. Think if you had to pay 10k per tower? Or exponitially grow in costs starting around 1k or 2k. That way, sure if you screw up once or twice its not a big deal and you can buy that tower back. But you won't be able to afford another tower if you're in trouble.

I like the idea of adding a 1 time extra tower in a few key locations. Maybe that could be in their instead of replacing towers. And each extra tower you buy either costs more or just starts off costing 4k or so.

Replacing or adding towers needs to be a big thing because thats what this game is about. If you could replace towers at will for cheap then games will all last an hour minimumly. But with a limited replacement feature it might allow a team to come back if they can use their replacement tower intelligently.

The only way I could see this working is if the tower-drop item started out fairly costly and got more expensive every time you purchased one. As was said, pushing through the defenses toward a given target is 'usually' the point of the game. You're not supposed to be losing towers on a regular basis and when you do, it's supposed to hurt.

Sure, this would technically add strategic options but all I really see it doing is making games drag out longer.

*edit: Or, in other words, what he^ said.

Dota did have a few heros from time to time who could rebuild towers. Im thinking of RoC Dota though. it didnt end up being over powered since that hero had to spend money to use that skill. I was quite fond actually.

I'm willing to be flexible on the pricing. It should not be cheap, but not completely off the wall that it's an unviable option. It should be a distinct choice between something like upgrading creeps, getting some gear, or building a tower. I think towers will mostly be important beginning to mid-game, as late-game towers are just taken down like Legos. However, a scaling in pricing will be helpful in not allowing games to drag, and make it more strategical where you place your first couple towers.

My opinion is it would prolong the game unnecessarily. 3v3s go about 30 min and 4v4 go about an hour (max). I think any longer is too long =P. I'm not a big fan of turtling.

RoC Dota also had Mandevar, the hero whose ult could MOVE towers! And the Tree of Life. And the fountain.

Good times....

That didnt stick in the game friend. Oh to have a hero like Draina who had a negative mana aura....good times....such good times.

Quoting Andianqz,

reply 7

My opinion is it would prolong the game unnecessarily. 3v3s go about 30 min and 4v4 go about an hour (max). I think any longer is too long =P. I'm not a big fan of turtling.

If there was a limiting factor, such as increasingly expensive costs or limited supply of new towers, it wouldn't result in turtling, imo. If priced correctly, it may not even be used in a match, depending on the decision of the team.

I've often pondered this myself, however I think it would ultimately be a bad thing. Being able to rebuild, even at an escalating cost, some of the destroyed towers would really only delay a game's end - if you're constantly having to rebuild your towers you're clearly not defending properly. And if you could rebuild your towers then there wouldn't be as much urgency in defending your towers as there currently is.

no thank you. just going to give weak players the option to extend the game.

You can tie towers to war rank really easily, so that when you advance in war rank new towers will appear in predefined spots. I toyed with the idea of trying to change the death penalty citadel upgrade (which is useless) to a war rank rate increase upgrade, then tying a bunch of additional tower spawns to war rank, to give teams an option of investing in some sort of defense if they are getting pushed hard in the mid game, but decided it wasn't really worth it.

I don't want to see teams choking up one of the side cataract lanes with 5 purchased towers, but if you can't choose where to put them, they're next to worthless anyway.

I like the idea, but I think it would be better implemented as an option in the custom games menu - "Tower Replacement - allow/disallow". It would make for some potentially extremely long games if it were made part of the default options, and that isn't always what people want. I seem to be part of the minority that likes the long epic from time to time, though, so it would suit me nicely.

Quoting InfiniteVengeance,

reply 1

Permanent building destruction is one of the key features in both Dota and Demigod. It's how you progress. If you could replace them then it wouldn't be as important to defend them.

It's just a matter of balance. The cost of rebuilding should be high enough, that destroying them still is very important, but not too high so that rebuilding one doesn't equal finanical madness.

You can tie towers to war rank really easily, so that when you advance in war rank new towers will appear in predefined spots.

This already happens on most maps. It's Cataract that is crap. (One fortress? What a joke)

Power of the Tower.

Quoting InfiniteVengeance,

reply 16

You can tie towers to war rank really easily, so that when you advance in war rank new towers will appear in predefined spots.

This already happens on most maps. It's Cataract that is crap. (One fortress? What a joke)

It's pretty funny when you push early on Exile and have enemy fortresses appear behind you and cut off your retreat path. I once was Tower Rook and was advancing so had basically a square of towers -- the fortress appeared right in the middle of them.

Towers become worthless about half way through. Why would you want to buy back a tower? Not to mention that if you have cash to buy a tower back, you are probably on the winning team anyway. A better suggestion would be to make the tower upgrades more worthwhile.

I guess I'd just like some option of bolstering defenses, and the current tower upgrades just don't seem to be very significant, past the first level upgrades.

Rebuilding towers was my suggested solution to this, but maybe there are better ways.

A better suggestion would be to make the tower upgrades more worthwhile.

Now that, I would support. Plenty of the higher-level citadel upgrades need to have some attention given to their cost-to-benefit ratios.

Once the upgrades we already have are deemed worthwhile, I'll be more apt to get on the bandwagon for new ones.

I guess I'd just like some option of bolstering defenses, and the current tower upgrades just don't seem to be very significant, past the first level upgrades.

Rebuilding towers was my suggested solution to this, but maybe there are better ways.

broken quote tags YES

You answered your own question - they need to seriously buff the upgrades.

Quoting Melric,

reply 18

A better suggestion would be to make the tower upgrades more worthwhile.

This is acceptable too, I think the damage upgrade should also increase tower range, would cause some frustration for Reg players. And that's always a good thing.

Buy gadgets if you want towers to live. Replacing towers defeats the purpose of...well...destroying them. No point in destroying them if they are going to be near instantly replaced. No point of defending them for the same reason.

Of course, if you instead heal your towers, you actually accomplish what you want, which is tower staying power. The real problem is that towers simply stop mattering the longer the game goes on, especially with manuevers such as port capping. Make towers more useful throughout the game before bothering to make them replaceable or more heal-able.

Well, you DO get 300 gold for destroying a tower...and it'd costs the enemy even more gold to replace.

I had forgotten about Univ Gadgets. They heal for so little, though.

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.

[Suggestion] Replace / Purchase Permanent Towers