DotA vs LoL...which is better?

[General Twinkletoes]

What I think LoL did better than DotA:
- champion/item balance (half the skills/items of DotA would be considered retardedly broken in League)

Why's that a good thing? You can be balanced without nerfing everyone into the ground. Dota skills are more OP than the league skills, but... how does that matter? Dota skills aren't balanced around League, they're balanced around Dota. Do you like having your powerful skill on a 2 minute cooldown? Waiting 2-3 minutes to use my fun spells (that even then aren't too powerful) is not fun.

Honestly the cooldowns are one of the main reasons I prefer Dota. I don't like having several minute gaps in between my fun spells, and it's boring to be able to spam bad spells in lane without thinking about mana at all. That's why I like Leblanc, she's not reliant o a really powerful spell on a long cooldown, and you can't just brainlessly cast your spells in lane because you'll probably run out of mana.

 

[AwesomeHatMan]

LoL has a lower skill cieling, many skills are similar, it is generally less advanced, has simpler characters and much of the tactical stuff (like denying or roshan) has been removed in LoL).

No tactical stuff like Roshan??? Have you heard of Dragon or Baron Nashor??? I wasn't going to comment on this thread but that statement was ridiculous.

As for which game should you play? I personally prefer LoL. DotA players seem very proud of how they kept the denying mechanic which does take more skill but I like how it's missing in LoL as it means you focus more on early harass rather than just farm and deny. Now I'll admit I haven't played DotA2 only the original in WC3 but to my knowledge DotA2 focuses on just farming up more than teamwork, ganking and objectives when compared to LoL.

As for other differences I miss the tree paths and rises from DotA but I prefer the red/blue system in LoL to runes in the river.

All online communities are toxic when big enough because many people in general are. In the end I'd say LoL because you may be surprised how many of your friends play it and games are best when played with friends

 

[General Twinkletoes]

LoL has a lower skill cieling, many skills are similar, it is generally less advanced, has simpler characters and much of the tactical stuff (like denying or roshan) has been removed in LoL).

As for which game should you play? I personally prefer LoL. DotA players seem very proud of how they kept the denying mechanic which does take more skill but I like how it's missing in LoL as it means you focus more on early harass rather than just farm and deny. Now I'll admit I haven't played DotA2 only the original in WC3 but to my knowledge DotA2 focuses on just farming up more than teamwork, ganking and objectives when compared to LoL.

I don't think that's the case. The towers being weaker and the fact that heroes don't have a get out of jail free card with flash means the early game is less passive.

 

[kingthrall]

still find it funny this thread is going, when nobody seems to be able to compare my game to lol/dota. Looks like my game wins on all fronts. Maybe you should look it up on ebay for 10 dollars, and then facepalm yourself on all the time and money wasted on this populist crud.

 

[Syntax Error]

Dota is better. LoL can't DENY it.

EDIT:
It always gets rubbed in because that one mechanic opens up a whole lot more on how a game can pogress. I asked my officemate who plays LoL about the average game length. He said LoL games tend to finish in 30 minutes, while from my personal experience, DotA games tend to go on for at least 45 if the teams are evenly matched. This can be traced to denying.

See, the absence of denies means that the lane farm is contested on;y by your lanemate, but let's assume proper lane composition and you are playing as a carry while your mate is rolling support (he's not taking farm from you). Because you can't be denied Gold/XP by the enemies, you get farmed faster. Because of the faster farm, you get your items quicker. Because you get your items quicker, you can lay waste to the enemy support more often, which brings in more gold and more items and more kills. All these just because your enemies can't do anything to impede your farm in the lane.

Granted, there's merit to that (faster games being the primary one), but that's probably the reason why hardcore DotA fanatics hate the simplification.

 

[EtherealBeaver]

No tactical stuff like Roshan??? Have you heard of Dragon or Baron Nashor??? I wasn't going to comment on this thread but that statement was ridiculous.

Killing roshan is a much larger time investment and the gain is much more game changing and significant in terms of options and stragetic options/limitations.

Who should get the aegis? Do we focus on killing the one with aegis? Do you just rush in, suicide and use the positioning to set up initiation if you have the aegis? Do you use aegis for baiting? Do you use it to play defensively, ensuring your carry is harder to gank? Do you simply ignore trying to kill the enemy with aegis because he will revive anyway?

Obviously getting a free revival gives a ton more options and decisions assosiated with aegis than just that. It is more complex basically. Whether it is better or worse from a funfactor/design perspective is really mostly up to the player but both variants (baron and co. vs roshan) support their respective goal pretty well. One is simpler and less advanced in a less complex game, the other gives more options, is a bigger risk and can be used more strategically.

 

[KaosuHamoni]

If I have to listen to Luna or Witch Doctor again I will have to hurt something

Oh my lord Dan, I think I've broken you with my soundboard =D

[HEADING=1]SELEMENE COMMANDS[/HEADING]

Anyway, I like both, but for different reasons. LoL is where all my tryhard goes, because I'm actually reasonably good at it (Gold IV and rising), DOTA is where I go to play stupid-fun heroes with absolutely no regard for people's sanity (Lycan, Slardar, AXE, Sand King, Night Stalker, AXE, Spectre, Windrunner, AXE...)

So yeah, that's my take on it.

 

[DaViller]

Another reason why i prefer dota is laning. Denying gives active controll over where the lane will go and tower diving is less risky. Most lol players i met have problems adapting to that. They get zoned out and wait for the lane to push to theyr tower then 1 of 2 things happen.

Option 1

The enemy keeps them zoned out, anti pushes and denies them all theyr exp

Option 2

The enemy tower dives and straight up kills em.

Thats what i like about dota, you have more ways to screw your enemy over. This results in a more active and exiting laning. From my admittedly limited experience in lol the low lethality of spells in combination with the way to strong towers and flash leads to to many getaways and less overall agression. Dotas high lethalty coupled with denys means you are forced to fight and put yourself into danger if you dont want your exp gain be reduced to 0.

Thats my main problem with lol tower diving very early is to dangerous. Players should not be given a retreat that is this safe it takes tension away. I like that you cant feel safe in dota even if your under your tower.

 

[Naeras]

Some short, personal notes that I have made on the games:

- LoL is more accessible
Dota 2 is loaded with a lot of stuff that takes ages to get used to, LoL is slightly easier on that regard. It's still a relatively beginner-unfriendly game, but a bit less so than Dota 2.

- LoL is more objective-based
Dota 2 has towers, barracks and Roshan. LoL has towers, barracks(inhibitors), red- and blue buffs, dragon and baron. Knowing the timing for these sets up for more team-fights, which is a good design decision.

- LoL has better hero design (on the average)
Dota 2 has a lot of old heroes from the original Dota mod that have one active ability and three boring passives. LoL rarely have passive abilities in the moveset, which makes the average champion there more fun to play. I still think the best designed/most fun to play heroes are in Dota 2, but they definitely have the worst ones as well.
Dota 2 also has more gimmicky heroes overall(stealth heroes, illusion heroes, Tinker, etc), which might or might not appeal to your tastes.

- Dota 2 allows lane control on an entirely different level than LoL does
Pulling and denies allow a good player to position the lane so that you become hard to gank, and the opposing team becomes easy targets, while simultaneously denying them experience and farm and allowing harassment. You can't really control the lane to the same degree in LoL.

- Dota 2 rewards mobility way more than LoL does
With everyone having access to TP scrolls and smoke, and there being several available attack routes into every single lane, it allows for far more movement options than LoL does, where moving from lane to lane is a relatively time-consuming thing. The attack routes reward aggressive ganking play, while the TP scrolls means teamplay gets a lot easier if the communication is in order.

- Playing support in LoL sucks compared to Dota 2
Playing support in LoL is essentially sitting in lane with your carry and ensuring that he gets farm, and then maybe you'll get a couple of levels in the process. In teamfights you might throw out your ult or something, and then die because you're a support. Warding is a relatively simple matter, but it's still your job. It's a really boring role to play in that game.

Playing support in Dota 2 is an entirely different matter. Yes, it's still your job to ensure that your carry gets to kill shit, but when you've chased everyone out of lane, there are a million other things you can do. You can roam to another lane and set up a kill there, you can stack the jungle so that your carry gets more farm, you can just go out of lane and make people play conservatively. The warding game in Dota 2 is also much deeper than in LoL, and good warding and game sense shifts the momentum to the point that I've made people ragequit by warding and counterwarding better than them. If you're playing a support well in Dota 2(and your teammates aren't retarded), you not only feel like you contribute greatly, you feel like you're one of the big reasons why your team is winning. Can't say I've ever had that feeling if I've been supporting in LoL.

- Dota 2 has more available lane setups than LoL
LoL has 2-1-1+jungle as the only viable lane setup. Dota 2 has like five more of them. Allows for greater strategic variability.

- Dota 2 has a better business model
Others have mentioned this already, I don't think it needs to be mentioned again.

Overall, I definitely prefer Dota 2, but LoL has several strong points that might make it more appealing to you.

 

[General Twinkletoes]

No tactical stuff like Roshan??? Have you heard of Dragon or Baron Nashor??? I wasn't going to comment on this thread but that statement was ridiculous.

Killing roshan is a much larger time investment and the gain is much more game changing and significant in terms of options and stragetic options/limitations.

Who should get the aegis? Do we focus on killing the one with aegis? Do you just rush in, suicide and use the positioning to set up initiation if you have the aegis? Do you use aegis for baiting? Do you use it to play defensively, ensuring your carry is harder to gank? Do you simply ignore trying to kill the enemy with aegis because he will revive anyway?

Obviously getting a free revival gives a ton more options and decisions assosiated with aegis than just that. It is more complex basically. Whether it is better or worse from a funfactor/design perspective is really mostly up to the player but both variants (baron and co. vs roshan) support their respective goal pretty well. One is simpler and less advanced in a less complex game, the other gives more options, is a bigger risk and can be used more strategically.

Just letting you know, you quoted the wrong guy

 

[infinity_turtles]

Killing roshan is a much larger time investment and the gain is much more game changing and significant in terms of options and stragetic options/limitations.

Who should get the aegis? Do we focus on killing the one with aegis? Do you just rush in, suicide and use the positioning to set up initiation if you have the aegis? Do you use aegis for baiting? Do you use it to play defensively, ensuring your carry is harder to gank? Do you simply ignore trying to kill the enemy with aegis because he will revive anyway?

Obviously getting a free revival gives a ton more options and decisions assosiated with aegis than just that. It is more complex basically. Whether it is better or worse from a funfactor/design perspective is really mostly up to the player but both variants (baron and co. vs roshan) support their respective goal pretty well. One is simpler and less advanced in a less complex game, the other gives more options, is a bigger risk and can be used more strategically.

I'll give you Roshan gives a bigger gain, but it definitely isn't a bigger risk. Ursa can solo Roshan at 6, and other Heros can take him pretty early on too. Hell there was a patch where Ursa could take Roshan at lvl 1 and finish by 2:20(Not really viable in a real game, and it was a result of a bug with fury swipes' reset, but it was still possible), and Ursa and Skeleton King together can take him at lvl 1 period.

Baron's Spawn on the other-hand is known as the pit of throws for a reason, and given the less valuable buff it gives and damage the team will take is often more viable for baiting the other team.

 

[EtherealBeaver]

Just letting you know, you quoted the wrong guy

Woops thanks. Edited it now

 

[EtherealBeaver]

Killing roshan is a much larger time investment and the gain is much more game changing and significant in terms of options and stragetic options/limitations.

Who should get the aegis? Do we focus on killing the one with aegis? Do you just rush in, suicide and use the positioning to set up initiation if you have the aegis? Do you use aegis for baiting? Do you use it to play defensively, ensuring your carry is harder to gank? Do you simply ignore trying to kill the enemy with aegis because he will revive anyway?

Obviously getting a free revival gives a ton more options and decisions assosiated with aegis than just that. It is more complex basically. Whether it is better or worse from a funfactor/design perspective is really mostly up to the player but both variants (baron and co. vs roshan) support their respective goal pretty well. One is simpler and less advanced in a less complex game, the other gives more options, is a bigger risk and can be used more strategically.

I'll give you Roshan gives a bigger gain, but it definitely isn't a bigger risk. Ursa can solo Roshan at 6, and other Heros can take him pretty early on too. Hell there was a patch where Ursa could take Roshan at lvl 1 and finish by 2:20(Not really viable in a real game, and it was a result of a bug with fury swipes' reset, but it was still possible), and Ursa and Skeleton King together can take him at lvl 1 period.

Baron's Spawn on the other-hand is known as the pit of throws for a reason, and given the less valuable buff it gives and damage the team will take is often more viable for baiting the other team.

That doesnt really say anything about the complexity though. Power is relative to the game but since all it does it make everyone on a team hit harder, the only real answer to when the opponent team killed Baron would be to stick together and turtle until the buff is over. Aegis gives a ton of more options to both teams as mentioned above

 

[infinity_turtles]

That doesnt really say anything about the complexity though. Power is relative to the game but since all it does it make everyone on a team hit harder, the only real answer to when the opponent team killed Baron would be to stick together and turtle until the buff is over. Aegis gives a ton of more options to both teams as mentioned above

I was only arguing risk, as the aegis does add more complexity then baron buff, but the response to it's not quite as binary as you're implying depending on team comp, who's ahead, ect ect. Split pushing might be a good idea, turtling as you said, picking people off, engaging because you've just got the better comp/are ahead of enough or even engaging regardless of their advantage at the first opportunity solely so you can kill and reset the buff on a few champions before they've started to push.

Honestly though, the bigger tactical considerations over the course of a match in LoL are dragon and blue buff. Smaller in affect per kill, but the way they're continuously contested changes things a lot. It's a very objective driven game.

 

[Glongpre]

Also there are some ideas that made it into the game that I don't understand how no one pointed out its problems. One of the characters for example, sniper, can make it so his autoattack passively stun enemies. In early games, its annoying, in mid game, its tough as hell to stop, late game you have no chance of getting away fromt hat guy, he can literally lock down whoever he wants.

Yes, but he has so many weaknesses. Slow, no escape mech, low health. He is a late game monster, but his early game is very weak. I don't see a problem.



I think both LoL and DotA have their merits. I enjoy dota more because I find it to be more fun. Lol was ok, I didn't like how streamlined it felt and some of the gameplay decisions they made, like summoners abilities and no "anti-fun" stuff, were just not that great. I did love playing as pantheon though, but that is because he is a spartan, and is awesome.

I vote dota is better because...bias and stuff.

 

[The Wykydtron]

If I have to listen to Luna or Witch Doctor again I will have to hurt something

Oh my lord Dan, I think I've broken you with my soundboard =D

[HEADING=1]SELEMENE COMMANDS[/HEADING]

Anyway, I like both, but for different reasons. LoL is where all my tryhard goes, because I'm actually reasonably good at it (Gold IV and rising), DOTA is where I go to play stupid-fun heroes with absolutely no regard for people's sanity (Lycan, Slardar, AXE, Sand King, Night Stalker, AXE, Spectre, Windrunner, AXE...)

So yeah, that's my take on it.

Well if you would just put this video on repeat for an hour as my vengeance for all the bullshit Luna lines every two seconds that would be great. Just wait until I find that soundboard, all Anti Mage all the time.


TRUTH COMPELS ME!

 

[IllumInaTIma]

Dota 2 also has more gimmicky heroes overall(stealth heroes, illusion heroes, Tinker, etc), which might or might not appeal to your tastes.

How is that gimmicky? A gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. However, the special feature is typically thought to be of little relevance or use. In each case it's not a gimmick, but a central part of that character and playstyle. Stealth heroes terrorize enemy supports by ganking them and killing them in the middle of a teamfights. Illusion heroes with diffusal blade are capable of draining enemy heroes of mana in mere seconds and Phantom Lancer alone can fight entire enemy team. And Tinker! Give him Boots of Travel and he will become the most mobile and pushing hero in the game.

 

[WenisPagon]

I find league to be more fast paced and more big play moments. Also they are constantly changing the game and pushing out a ton of updates. I find the only problem with Dota champs is they are all warcraft based and that limits them to what they can do with them. Also there are some ideas that made it into the game that I don't understand how no one pointed out its problems. One of the characters for example, sniper, can make it so his autoattack passively stun enemies. In early games, its annoying, in mid game, its tough as hell to stop, late game you have no chance of getting away fromt hat guy, he can literally lock down whoever he wants.

As someone who plays both, I honestly feel DOTA heroes in general have a lot more nuance to them than League champs. You've got heroes with actual micromanagement to them, for example. Carry itemization is a lot less stagnant, too.

I actually think the opposite of you, because Riot has a client unfortunately wracked with spaghetti code left over from the days where the company wasn't as successful or competent. It's telling that a SHOM-style game mode hasn't been possible until very recently.

E: Sniper's bash is far from OP if you know what you're doing. In competitive play he's just about always been in "joke tier".

 

[DazZ.]

Yeah there is no ranked system...

Actually, there kinda is. It's just not an 'advertised' ranking system. As in, you can't actively check on a persons personal ranking. However, matchmaking is based on each players ranking.

I actually prefer this kind of system. It doesn't publicly advertise everyones "ranking", which means new or inexperienced players are less likely to be ridiculed or harassed pre-match.

Obviously there is elo to make matchmaking work, but it's not ranked like League or Starcraft where you're placed in a division. Both of those games have the unranked mode like Dota as well.

It's nice to have a place to take the game seriously and a place for a slightly more relaxing type of game where losing won't effect anything but mmr/elo, so I'd like to see something like that added to Dota.