instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Moderator: LIHL Staff
-
- Forest Walker
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 4:28 pm
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
instances that anti stuck are not allowed
I need to know what instances anti stucking are not allowed, since I was called out after trying to anti stuck to avoid a blood orc, and get the units behind him. I personally don't see anything wrong with this and think it is making good use of your units, but I will abide by the rules should it be bannable.
- BeepBoopBeep
- Protector of Nature
- Posts: 3256
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:23 pm
- Location: Australia!
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Antistuck
1. Can only be used on your side of the map only.
2. Cannot be used to kill steal leaks from your teammate (you can use it if your teammate is dead)
3. Cannot be used to delay units from returning to the king.
1. Can only be used on your side of the map only.
2. Cannot be used to kill steal leaks from your teammate (you can use it if your teammate is dead)
3. Cannot be used to delay units from returning to the king.
- BeepBoopBeep
- Protector of Nature
- Posts: 3256
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:23 pm
- Location: Australia!
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Feor wrote:Can it be used to delay bosses and summons attack?
Antistuck wasn't made to do the above so no. We are aware some people have been doing this so fair warning now to not.
-
- Forest Walker
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 4:28 pm
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
BeepBoopBeep wrote:Feor wrote:Can it be used to delay bosses and summons attack?
Antistuck wasn't made to do the above so no. We are aware some people have been doing this so fair warning now to not.
That happens from building on one side, but if people are actually anti stucking to stop turtles from killing the king that would be considered "unfair"
- BeepBoopBeep
- Protector of Nature
- Posts: 3256
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:23 pm
- Location: Australia!
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 9 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
BA_Fail wrote:Ok thank you, neither of those rules prevent me from doing what I did.
Ba technically it comes under #3 because what are you doing? Your not using it to catch leaks from your lane partner, your using it to delay it from returning to the king (MIDDLE).
For now i suggest antistuck only be used to catch leaks from a neighboring lane or actually used to antistuck units that are stuck.
Thanks for bringing this up we are going to discuss and come to an agreement on how antistuck should and will be used in the future regarding what yourself and feor have said.
Feel free to add some input on how you think it should be used.
-
- Forest Walker
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 4:28 pm
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 6 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
I think I need to explain it a little better. How I'm thinking about it doesn't delay sends to king any more than anti stucking to catch ally leaks. Since blood orc is WAY faster than most units and is basically a wall early, I want to avoid it and get there before the other creeps even touch king. Lets say on lvl 3 you hold with aquas, there is a blood orc going mid and you can let them all die to blood orc without anti stucking, or let king handle blood orc and profit from the units behind him?
Please do talk about this because this is what I would consider "skilled" use of the anti stuck and isn't any more unfair than catching ally leaks. Doesn't break any of the above rules either, but it may not be something lihl players would be happy about so I will stop doing this till you come back with the results.
Please do talk about this because this is what I would consider "skilled" use of the anti stuck and isn't any more unfair than catching ally leaks. Doesn't break any of the above rules either, but it may not be something lihl players would be happy about so I will stop doing this till you come back with the results.
- DonaldtheDuckie
- Treant
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:02 pm
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Agreed Fail, that is what I'd consider a skilled use of the anti stuck use as well. But I'd also consider antistucking summoning mana units to regain their mana so they can resummon when they spawn mid a pro antistuck use.
Healbycolor notified that it was bannable though, cause I was one of the players doing both. And I've now refrained from doing it, though I do believe it is one of many facets of the game that seperates noobs from skilled players and would thus like for it to be allowed by the lihl rules, so I support you!
Healbycolor notified that it was bannable though, cause I was one of the players doing both. And I've now refrained from doing it, though I do believe it is one of many facets of the game that seperates noobs from skilled players and would thus like for it to be allowed by the lihl rules, so I support you!
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
I would agree with ba_fail and donald on the subject, i do consider that this is a good use of antistuck, and doesnt differ a lot from catching leaks from weak side. Either way catching leaks also is a delay for towers to go in king.
Otherwise I 'd also like the admin/mods and plauers to take under consideration the possibility of completely not allowing antistuck except in cases units are actually stuck and not moving. That was the original purpose ( argument which Beep used ) and not in order to catch leaks. I would also like to say that since there is a sick delay on antistuck for some people, it would make the game fairer for both teams, if people that dont have any delay are not allowed to use it also.
Otherwise I 'd also like the admin/mods and plauers to take under consideration the possibility of completely not allowing antistuck except in cases units are actually stuck and not moving. That was the original purpose ( argument which Beep used ) and not in order to catch leaks. I would also like to say that since there is a sick delay on antistuck for some people, it would make the game fairer for both teams, if people that dont have any delay are not allowed to use it also.
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Any use of antistuck, besides ASing stucked creeps, is against HuanAk's original concept
Q: Who is Zyzz?
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
Getting full gold from leaks intentionally ruins the whole point of bounty decrease system.
- dweiler
- Plague Treant
- Posts: 1735
- Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 6:28 pm
- Location: The Netherlands
- Has thanked: 88 times
- Been thanked: 232 times
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
I've always wondered about that anti-stuck too. I never got why your units go to the middle of the lanes in the first place, why can't they just go straight to the sending area? I had figured in my head they go to the middle because the maker of the map did intend players to be able to catch leaks. But maybe it is a technical issue..
I don't think changes should be made at this point (as explained later), but for me it is not definitive, because:
I do think the case for banning anti-stucking altogether (except if units are stuck) for principal reasons (as explained by other people in this thread) can be pretty strong, and therefore I don't think it should be discarded too easily!
The same goes for allowing anti-stuck to units go to the middle for other reasons than to catch creeps immediately, because in the end, whether directly or indirectly all use of anti-stuck is aimed to catch creeps (as explained by Ba).
Personally, I would be in favor of no changes at this point of time, I think the game is pretty balanced and the 'as rule' causes no problems in the game at this point. I think it is a good rule to not change until it is necessary.
But once again, both of the other options don't seem unreasonable to me as well.
I'm glad I'm not the one burdened with the weight of making a decision on this one
I don't think changes should be made at this point (as explained later), but for me it is not definitive, because:
I do think the case for banning anti-stucking altogether (except if units are stuck) for principal reasons (as explained by other people in this thread) can be pretty strong, and therefore I don't think it should be discarded too easily!
The same goes for allowing anti-stuck to units go to the middle for other reasons than to catch creeps immediately, because in the end, whether directly or indirectly all use of anti-stuck is aimed to catch creeps (as explained by Ba).
Personally, I would be in favor of no changes at this point of time, I think the game is pretty balanced and the 'as rule' causes no problems in the game at this point. I think it is a good rule to not change until it is necessary.
But once again, both of the other options don't seem unreasonable to me as well.
I'm glad I'm not the one burdened with the weight of making a decision on this one

You don't stop playing because you grow old; you grow old because you stop playing.
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
MickeyTheMousie wrote:Personally, I would be in favor of no changes at this point of time, I think the game is pretty balanced and the 'as rule' causes no problems in the game at this point. I think it is a good rule to not change until it is necessary.
I agree at this point but should be reviewed over time maybe, for better clarifications in the future.
- DonaldtheDuckie
- Treant
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 6:02 pm
Re: instances that anti stuck are not allowed
If the use of AS was banned alltogether unless there are stuck creeps, as furbolg mentioned was Huanaks intended purpose with the function, it would make double building way less lucrative, which in my opinion would a rather big gamechanger in the 3v3 and 4v4 scene in the lihl. Personally I wouldnt mind this option being implemented, but I think it should either be completely allowed, or not allowed at all (unless for asing stuck creeps). But thats my opinion.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests