TB/Reg(/anything) = fail team

Its just plain bad

By nzac on November 3, 2009 2:17:49 AM from

Sorry if i offend anyone but does anyone willing to chose this combination (Torch Bearer, Regulas and any other demigod) of demigods expect to win a game vs anyone but complete noobs?

One is ok in a team (i have seen game winning tb team support that ) but two mean you team cannot full the cirtical roles required for a team to be compeditive.

It really annoys me when i see two players join my team with the first one chosing tb or reg and then the second chosing the other one of the pair (happends way to often to me). I possibly do over react to this. When this happends, it means both (in my opinion):

the combination of demigods on our team is very poor
because the player (possibly both the other players) on my team chose this they have no (or very little) understanding of compeditive demigod (that is, how to play the game to win it).

sometimes if i, no always politely(loosing while on these teams gets to me), say that this is a poor chose of demigods they swap demigods but almost always the second point still ends up being true.

Can the combination of tb/reg ever be compeditive?

Do i over react to this? is there a demigod build i can play to support this combintion and make it so i can go into the game thinking that i have a in the least a 25 percent chance of winning the game?

Does anyone find it fun playing a game they can expect to lose badly in? (seperate question, but still relevent to the post)

+2 Karma | 33 Replies

You seem to over react and you haven't actually explained why you think that TB+Reg is a bad combination.

Quoting Spooky__,

reply 1

You seem to over react and you haven't actually explained why you think that TB+Reg is a bad combination.

If i need to explian this this then i guess im wrong and let the thread die.

But how many time can you remember winning with both tb/reg on your team or loosing to a team with both tb/reg on it (with players being close to equal skill, and no one playing overly stupid)?

Quoting nzac,

reply 2

If i need to explian this this then i guess im wrong and let the thread die.

Why let it die? I don't think you are wrong just like that, I am just interested in your explanation...

My view on this: they both have ranged attacks so I think they help each other quite nicely. They can both attack the enemy from a distance and they can both keep the enemy at distance (Regulus with mines and Torch Bearer can help with Ring of Fire). Torch Bearer can Frost Nova the enemy and then the Regulus can place his mines directly under them. Both Regulus and Torch Bearer can significantly damage and possibly kill off an enemy that starts to retreat with Fireball and Snipe.

I simply want to know where my view is flawed here according to you.

Quoting nzac,

reply 2

But how many time can you remember winning with both tb/reg on your team or loosing to a team with both tb/reg on it (with players being close to equal skill, and no one playing overly stupid)?

I have no distinct memories of always losing with them or alwas winning against them, and vice versa. I do have distinct memories of very annoying and very good Torch Bearer and Regulus players.

I assume you are at least partially theroy crafting here (stuning so mines can be layed is not the easyest think to pull of under good stuning 2vs2, and is still only good for 1200 or so damage and does not work to level 7 to 10).

I think a number of people (with good understanding of the game) would at least somewhat agree with what am saying so this would not occur often at all at high level play.

The main problem is nither can hold a lane by them selves (2vs2 general regen is possible to overcome in a resonable ammount of time but still not good enough). Both are ok support/utility demigods but nither can tank and if they loose towers early become rather difficult to pull their weight and not overextend. The main point is they both are only good for unesential and similar roles and both can be countered resonalby well by the same methords (e.g. health stack), niether can hold there ground 1vs1 and generally are unable to pull the same weight of the other demigods.

TB is a good support player if played right, Orcun_BL is realy good at this (forgot to save the replay). Reg is in general forced back easly by the general demigod.

if i may jump on this:

i agree with the op that tb+reg+anything is a fail playing against good players. the reason is that tb and reg are ranged and squishy demigods (at least for the early and early mid game). thus none of the can hold a falg, none of the can push and and put pressure early on. one ranged is fine as he can go with a melee one.

what spooky described above would work in a 2vs1 situation, but in such a situation it does not matter what you play at all.

both demigods, tb and re, are a very nice addition if played right, especially if the build and items are adapted to the enemies faced. but both together in a 3vs3 is fail.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 5

if i may jump on this:

i agree with the op that tb+reg+anything is a fail playing against good players. the reason is that tb and reg are ranged and squishy demigods (at least for the early and early mid game). thus none of the can hold a falg, none of the can push and and put pressure early on. one ranged is fine as he can go with a melee one.

what spooky described above would work in a 2vs1 situation, but in such a situation it does not matter what you play at all.

both demigods, tb and re, are a very nice addition if played right, especially if the build and items are adapted to the enemies faced. but both together in a 3vs3 is fail.

Not try and call you out or anything cel but, by what you are saying right now ub+Rook will win anygame because the can/are health styled demigods (many they can stack health even early game), I am afraid that I can’t agree with that. But the biggest problem I have seen this entire game seems to revovle around ub, sedna and erebus and every other demigod just seems not not hold much water against those three, which is something I hate.

I have played against good teams with TB/Reg and Sedna and I got completely owned. Didn't have a chance. I wouldn't count TB+Reg out just because they are squishy.

@heavenlysynn: wtf where have i said such things? but thx you cannot agree with something i never have said. would be nice not to put things in my mouth i did not said

@esuzu: so what? maybe they were better than you and your mates. additionally the map you are playing has a high influence on how big the disadvantage ist. btw. in late game or late mid game tb and regulus can get quite good as pusher. that's why i said early and early mid game. if you don't profit from your advatage at that time you have against such a team you will fail later if they play well.

neverless: tb+reg+X has allways a quite big disadvatage in 3vs3. if it leads to a fail of course depends on the palyers as well.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 8

@heavenlysynn: wtf where have i said such things? but thx you cannot agree with something i never have said. would be nice not to put things in my mouth i did not said

So you telling me you did not just say this?

Quoting CelMare,

reply 5

By these words I assume you believe UB and Rook are perfect together because they are both melee and both can stack a lot of health and defense. You didn’t say it directly; but that doesn’t change the fact that this is something you can comprehend.

first of: the fact they two are not melee making them week does NOT imply that ANY melee is a good substitution! and especially not that two!

you failed ad logic.

what i said only implies that the most melee demigods are better to have two of them, but this does not say who and even not that they are perfect!

additionally your assumption does not include the possiblity that some of the existing demigods although tehy are melee may have some other disadvatages not making them the perfect one to take. you failed again at logic!

second: i gave a short answer not explaining the problems in all details but the major problem is they are not melee, implieng they cannot stand long in melee range thus getting pushed back fast. ofcourse if you have a range hero with staying power they would not fail, but they would be overwpoered anyway if there ranged dmg is similar to the melee ones.

you want to talk what combinations are better? or the best? different thread.

so you assumption is overinterpreting my words. nothing i said justifies your assumption! but you may ask me if i think ub + rook are better than tb + reg (what still does not mean i amy think they are perfect!).

edit: btw. rook is quite squishy in the first levels too. makes your assumption based on my words even more absurd.

tl;dr ranged sucks, melee is OP.

P.S. I wouldn't count rook as melee, he more of a special sort of character: in most games most of his damage comes from tower/shoulders/hammer not from his melee attack.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 10

first of: the fact they two are not melee making them week does NOT imply that ANY melee is a good substitution!

you failed ad logic.

Fail ad logic, you simply just said what you are now arguing against. You gave no implication that you thought any different until now, sorry dude but we aren't mine readers we only know what you are thinking when you type it.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 10

what i said only implies that the most melee demigods are better to have two of them, but this does not say who and even not that they are perfect!

No what you said was range was weak because they are squishy and ranged, so that makes me thing you didn't take into account none of their passive abilities and active skills that make up for their squishiness. And the fact a good range player will always keep some form of distance and speed between themselves and the melee can easily put melee at a disadvantage there.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 10

I sorry the problem I have seen with you man is you give the argument and good ones to, but you fail to accept the counter arguments or acknowledgment to the positive/negative to what your are arguing like you are doing here to range style demigods.

Quoting lifekatana,

reply 11

tl;dr ranged sucks, melee is OP.

P.S. I wouldn't count rook as melee, he more of a special sort of character: in most games most of his damage comes from tower/shoulders/hammer not from his melee attack.

Really so over player that use rook Melee isn't using him properly than?

@heavenlysynn

again, i indeed said tb and reg together, having only one melee in team making the team weak at EARLY AND EALRY MID GAME because they are ranged so squishy demigods.

there passive abilities or other utility skills are at this stage not present or not strong enough . so for the mentioned time period you lack of control over flags! depending on the map you play this has quite big disadvantages!

additionally a ranged player cannot do dmg while running away. the possibilites to kite are not existant or to few at early levels. hence they start with a quite big disadvatage.

if you face stupid opponents not exploiting this advantage early when they have it you surely can win later when your ranged demigods are able to stand against a melee and/or have their utilities to fight them.

additionally being a ranged fighter usually implies doing less dmg than a melee because he can stand away doing dmg. that's of course not allways true but e.g. for regulus it is (depending on his build):

what i said is not the point of discussion - the point is what you assume based on that. and here you heavely FAIL at logic. even more than me at spelling!

Quoting heavenlysynn,

reply 13

Quoting lifekatana, reply 11tl;dr ranged sucks, melee is OP.

P.S. I wouldn't count rook as melee, he more of a special sort of character: in most games most of his damage comes from tower/shoulders/hammer not from his melee attack.
Really so over player that use rook Melee isn't using him properly than?

at early game? YES! a rook that goes much into melee at the first levels is doing it VERY wrong!

First off wow a literacy attack, ya that’ll get your point across; make a meaningless attack at my literacy. My point being, I wanted you to understand ranger aren’t at as much a disadvantage throughout the game as you are making it out to be; if you understand that than I am just wasting my time in this discussion.

oh my god. i said it is ME failing at spelling. not you! you fail at logic! and now even at reading!

i did not said ranged demigods are a fail on there own. haveing TWO OF THREE ranged demigods is a fail in EARLY GAME!. here again you seem to not being able making conclusions of simple things i said.

btw. as much dsiadvatage as i say? i didn't said how much i simply said they are and that's enough. at early game as a ranged char you need a tank (a melee) or you need to be two vs one to not being forced to retreat from a flag. you don't do enough dmg to force them leave the flag to you early on! and the only melee in your team cannot be at both sides at the same time! end of story.

that ranged demigods get stronger later being able to hold a flag alone is not important and never was part of my claim. if you aren't able to understand what i wrote and continue making absurd assumtions and conlusion better stop saying anything at all.

TB+Reg you need really good players, otherwise dont even consider. But I believe even with matched teams you cant compete with 1 general vs 2-3 generals.

Quoting CelMare,

reply 17

oh my god. i said it is ME failing at spelling. not you! you fail at logic! and now even at reading!

i did not said ranged demigods are a fail on there own. haveing TWO OF THREE ranged demigods is a fail in EARLY GAME!. here again you seem to not being able making conclusions of simple things i said.

btw. as much dsiadvatage as i say? i didn't said how much i simply said they are and that's enough. at early game as a ranged char you need a tank (a melee) or you need to be two vs one to not being forced to retreat from a flag. you don't do enough dmg to force them leave the flag to you early on! and the only melee in your team cannot be at both sides at the same time! end of story.

that ranged demigods get stronger later being able to hold a flag alone is not important and never was part of my claim. if you aren't able to understand what i wrote and continue making absurd assumtions and conlusion better stop saying anything at all.

First of all I apologize for the miss conception I’m use to attacks on my literacy because I can’t type like a novelist. But I got my point put down, your just trying to keep an argument going because someone doesn’t agree with you. Your point was made two posts ago all your doing now is igging on an argument.

no, you keep on making conclusions and assumtions based on my words that don't fit.

i never said i have problems with yyou not agreeing with my opinion if tb+reg+x is fail or not. i have a problem with what you make out of my words! saying they fail because they are squishy, partially low on dmg as ranged class in early levels of game play does not imply what you assumed. especially not considering rook as he is the second squishy demigod in the game in early levels and the one with the highest risk to die!

you keep on argueing that tb and reg become strong what i NEVER denied! you allways ignore the part of my phrases where i said EARLY AND EALRY MID GAME! this ignorance and the assuptions you made uppon my further opinion what i think is the best comination is what angers me here. up to now you even did not made ANY comment agains the op and my opinion. you only made assuptions about things that were not part of the said opinions and critizies them.

so READ again waht was said and stop twisting the things around.

I never ignored early or mid game, I just didn’t stick to early and mid; my point was refering to entire outcome of the entiregame which the starter was talking about which you built opun. Simly put you built ontop of a topic I didn’t agree with and instead of going after you for it, I brought it to you; like I said I can’t read your mind which is why I asked. You returned at me what seems to be an over aggressive manor.

FWIW one of the best teams that played was Reg/TB/UB..if they were still around we wouldn't see threads like this

Quoting Ke5trel,

reply 22

FWIW one of the best teams that played was Reg/TB/UB..if they were still around we wouldn't see threads like this

Do you think they could still compete in the current metagame?

And do you know what kind of build the UB played? I would think the best outcome possible for this thread would be how to win on these teams.

Edit: it is very rear for someone with above 45 percent wins will ever go tb/reg in the same team.

I made the thead to ask what can be done in the situation where both the other players in you team want (dont see a problem with) to go tb/reg, i dont like feeling that i have already lost the game if i play with these players (is there anything you can do other than quit or try to get one 'ballanced' off you team).

Due to living in New Zealand (near AUS) i am unable to play with EU players without some lag and also that the timezones sometime make it difficult to be fussy on who you play with (sometimes the choice is playing with noobs or not playing).

I have to agree with the original poster. I've been a TB from the release date.

I have been considering this for some time, and it seems that on a 3v3 situation Ice TB+reg can be a weakness on the team. It seems that most of the 3v3's have matched reg's. That leaves a TB+ other to match another teams 2 players. TB is not a meelee fighter, and hence has to give ground to the UB's, and the Oak's, and the Erebus, and Sedna's out there. If they are experienced players, this can be a bad day to be an Ice TB.

A fire TB does have a bit more "punch", but still doesn't likely push another meelee fighter out of the lane.

This is why I favor a 4v game vs a 3v game, but those are few and far between these days. A 4v, can usually support pairing a TB with another meelee fighter, making for a pretty tough combo.

I'm also specifically referring to the earlier levels. Once a TB has "the build of choice" he can gain currency and hold his own for a bit, earning cash for the team. Also AoE can really help at the end game.

Is a team without a general at a disadvantage against one with(excluding qot mid-lategame) ? I feel more and more that each team requires a certain set of roles to be filled mostly( not posivitive on importance on roles) by requirements of damage support and tank, and only a set few of characters are adaptable to these certain roles, being mostly generals. Assasins tend to be stuck in static roles where as generals can fill any roles. Some assasins are overwhelmingly good at their role that it tends to compensate in a balanced team role. What is the opinion on generals within the community? I find their survivability early game due to monks to be necessary to holding lanes and gaining wark rank, not only that but their adaptibility can have them filling any role exceptionally well. Is an evenly skilled team without a general matched versus one with going to compete? What is expert opinion?

The Forums Are Now Closed!

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

TB/Reg(/anything) = fail team

Its just plain bad