sorry, double

If you play competitively i think anything goes but those who play occasionally for fun are in my opinion allowed to ban doubles in their own games if they find them lame, annoying and not fun to play against. Their goal is most often not to climb the ladder (i think) but to have a good time with the game. How can some "pro" here then tell them how they should play the game?

Just trying to say that i think that the "not fun" argument is a viable argument if you do not intend to play competitively but just a casual (custom) game for fun.

I myself have nothing against doubles.

someone mentioned two oaks - they could not get near them. would you allow oak and ub? you won;t touch them with pent and spit, then foul grasp, then another pent spit combo. again, people are afraid of dups when in fact nothing is wrong, it's teamwork. and of course if you are rook and they have two ub's, that sucks and all but it's not ridiculously unbalanced, they ahve two guys that can counter you, it happens. would you bitch as much if it was ub and reg? probably not, even thoguh are both counters, they aren't duplicates so people don't care as much

oh man, i don't get some people

Generally the issue of doubles is that some of their abilities scale *way* to well with themselves. The games I play in never allow doubles, but in cases where the opposing team presses the issue we allow it to demonstrate why we don't allow it, usually resulting in their most brutal death.

The other issue is that while doubles are indeed counterable, it generally requires you to either go doubles yourself or recompose your team to deal with the ability scaling of a double. However this just proves how damn well balanced this game is, each and every demigod possess one or more powerful character-defining ability.

A lot of the time the no double rule is for variety, though when I used to be able to play 5s, nobody cared if both sides had a double due to issue of finding 5 people who could play a unique demigod competently and there only being 8 whopping demigods.

For those who mentioned Sedna and Queen of Thorns, that combo isn't that much of an issue due to Queen's lack of burst damage and susceptibility to stuns. Double Queen isn't anything special either since Bramble Shield doesn't scale well past level ~7 or so since it doesn't take into consideration armor mitigation. Now if Bramble Shield could prevent debuffs while on...

I noticed people kept mentioning Snipe, Spit, Mines, Heal, but there are many other deadly abilities that scale incredibly well due to doubles.

Double Silence: Imagine two Sednas getting this, putting you into a full ten seconds of not being able to use any abilities mid-game.

Double Shield: At rank 3 or 4, you can't interrupt, stun, or slow a shielded character, 3000hp pots anyone? Good luck with the killings. Don't forget at max rank Shield prevents the Oak himself from being afflicted by debuffs when Shield is used.

Double Foul Grasp: I have never seen Foul Grasp trigger Stun Immunity(tm) but I could be wrong. Stay a while and listen!

Chain Boulder Roll + Hammer Slam: This hurts...a lot especially in larger matches.

*Mass Charm and the Aoe Freeze trigger stun immunity on creeps but I don't know if they trigger it on demigods.

*Double TB is still just as susceptable to stuns and silence so no scaling danger there.

I'm not fully against doubles, I just find it very boring to fight with or against. However that may be due to me getting very bored of this game.

Stay a while and listen!

I lol'd ^^ 

People talk about how awesome 16 towers or 12 mines is, but guess what?  So is 8 towers and 6 mines.  Double regulus is not in leui of one regulus.

ShakeNBake you fail to mention that you were using double TBs who were trying to circle of fire and rain of ice us to death... not a single fireball to be seen. Seemed kinda silly to me that you guys kept trying to get close to us..

double whoppers are OP

burger king should be nerfed

I like some different flavors in my game; unless peiople are doing random and dubs get picked then; well shit happens and keep playing

I like all random games personally.

I ahve played some dubs; we had two UBs v two rook.

It was an all random game; but all the towers hurt; but one UB spit; one grasp and then the two switch roles with the other spitting and one grasping.

it hurts. Alot.

Not too different from say Spit + charm followed by grasp and bite. or frost nova and rain of ice; ect ect.

All I want to reiterate is that, just as this game was not seemingly balanced over 1vs1 matchups, this game does not seem to have been balanced around allowing doubles.  From a balance perspective, what should stack?  Should UB spit stack i.e. is it currently balanced?  If it didn't currently stack, would you say it was unbalanced then?  Should regulus mines "stack" (so that two regs can have 12 mines as opposed to still being capped at 6 total?)  If they didn't currently stack, would we be arguing that they should?  There's just tons of abilities and configurations to consider, and I just don't feel confident that they were throughly considered and tested during beta.  As such, I find "no doubles" to result in what I perceive to be fairer and more balanced matches, and until we work out the intricasies of how doubles should be balanced I prefer to keep it that way.

I wouldn't use "stack" to describe two players working together. Sure 2 sets of mines "stack", but in pretty much the way mines would "stack" with a pounce/spit/hammer/etc etc. 

From a balance perspective, this seems to be your arguement:

1. We never play with doubles, so I don't know if they are balanced
2. Until we know they are balanced, we should never play with doubles

Which amounts to "I don't want to try doubles because I never tried doubles before" 

"Sedna is OP because when I damage her, she heals, there is nothing my team could do" - LOL

Double randoms are by far the worst double. You can get a Ub/Sedna team, LE/Oak, Reg/TB. Need I say more.

Retarded pointless posts like yours are what's sad.

I never said I always lose to that combo, I don't usually allow it because playing against that is boring as shit, trying to kill things through bramble shield, mulch,  heal + 4 priests.

L2Play

And by the time you realize whats happening, the rooks happily towerspammed their way to your citadel and you are dead in under 15 minutes. The two rooks would gain levels like mad, as they would both get xp from both creep lanes at the same time, all the while eating away on your defenses at a rate you will never be able to match.

Sure, buying tower hp upgrades and tower damage would slow them down a little, but just that... a little.

Nah.. if its cataract, you just can't ignore a dual rook combo in the central lane. If you do, you lost. Then again.. given its a 2v2, hell even a 3v3.. taking down that tower farm will be a real pain in the ass.. plus if its a 3v3, the third guy can freely run around capping flags. While the two rooks keep all your team busy as you are trying to merely survive.

Prison and war rank 7 trebs.. I seriously doubt that fortresses would exist long enough for those to be viable i mean come on.. dual rook: 2x struct transfer, + trebs at level 8 (demigod level 8, which they will get a lot sooner than your ws7) + all the other crap they have.. nah.. that map is a nightmare against rooks. Because its so small and open, a well placed tower system can effectively deny you the whole middle of the map, only allowing you to move at the sides, which pretty much ensures that they not only will tear your defenses down pretty soon, but you will never live to see that warscore 7 of yours. With no flags, theres no warscore.

Crucible really requires mobility, so 2v2 rook combo is a failure.. if its 3v3 tho.. two rooks could make a push for the first intersection out of your base and thats it game over.. no way you would be able to go past them once they settle there, unless you learn to fly or use some teleportation item. This however is less likely to happen and a lot riskier to do that the previous two things.

I wouldn't mind playing as or against doubles online at all, and I don't think it's exploiting the game mechanics by doing so, but at the same time, I don't think the game developers had 16 Towers or 12 Mines in mind when designing the game. I think I only have a problem with doubles when they both follow the same build, but unfortunately, that can't be stopped during a game. I think it's more fun when everyone is different and has a different role to fill, but doubles are nothing to whine about. If it really was such a problem in terms of balance, the game would have been designed so that it was impossible to chose a demigiod online if someone on your team already had it.

Csebal, I once played against 3 rooks on Crucible. They pushed all the way to our base. We still managed to win (we weren't doubles or triples).

doubbles suck simple as

Those who said double rooks are not OP are the ones who probably never met good rook players.

If other side got two tower rooks the game usually ends before anyone can reach level 8 (not warscore 8) You just can't stop rooks from ripping the defense apart.

And Dual Sedna.... No, just no. One with that crazy active/passive healing with priest is more than enough already. You guys don't realize that while they might no kill and you got no kill, but thet can push while you can't.

There are countless ways to make this game lame as hell... No, no doubles.

Rooks can't retreat because they're slow. What you describe only happens if you let them take the middle unopposed. As soon as things start going badly for a double rook team they are in a lot of trouble, rebuilding tower farms from scratch is difficult and so is retreating.

On Cataract I don't see how two rooks are going to sit in the center outside your base for long. They will need to return to buy items, have mana issues and also health issues. Every time they retreat it takes a long time for them to set up outside your base again with an amount of towers that is more than just a nuisance.

If they push center lane, they have an XP advantage (assuming you let them take it) but you'll have both the other flags giving you a combat advantage.

If I were playing against a double rook combo I would push their gold mine flag, what are two rooks going to do about moves like that? Spend all their time porting back and forth to protect their income stream? Run back periodically? They're either exposed because they have no tower farm to back them up, or they can attempt to beat you while you have 3x as much gold as them.

Minions > Sedna.

So pushing with 2 Rooks is lame, and pushing with 2 Sednas is lame, but pushing with 1 of each is ok? BS. 

I could come up with equally arbitrary reasons why any combination of DGs is "lame" for one reason or another (too much damage! too many stuns! too much burst! too much defense! boring to use! boring to play against!).  

Conclusion: there is no "lame." There is only effective and ineffective (and whiners, I suppose). 

L2Post

Incorrect. Stacking two of the same Demigods with the same builds is a decision made by those playing the Demigod to dramatically enhance the potential those builds offer. Using one Hammer/Stun Rook with a Tower Rook is entirely acceptable - stacking two of either shifts the advantages of those builds out of the acceptable counter range. For balance to be achieved in any game with multiple classes, or Charatcers like Demigods, each class must have effective methods for dealing with most situations. They should always have a weakness - their counter - as this removes the 'God' class from the mix and prevents any one class from dominating the playing field. The problem in Demigod with stacking two of the same builds - and you'll notice my earlier post mentioned specifics about a character rather than the character in general - is that you defeat their intended counters and it forces the opposition to stack the counter class of which ever character your stacking. This dilutes down what counters can be used - instead of any character, correctly played, being able to counter, only a handful of acceptable counters can be used. This, in turns, ensures that the match becomes unbalanced. Argue as you may against it all you like, if Demigod Stacking wasn't a big issue like you say, why is removing it a big deal if any other combination of Demigods provided equally as many oppourtunites?

No it doesn't. Effectiveness of one build against another is a spectrum, not a binary. One need not be the direct counter to X in order to have a decent chance of defeating X. One need only not be directly countered  by X. Therefore if X counters Y which counters X which counters X, and the opponent chooses XX, probably any combination that isn't YY will have a decent chance.

Your objection seems founded on a belief that games will often be over before they start based upon the selected (doubled) DGs. But this is not the case. DG X does not counter DG Y. Instead, the word "counter" relates specific builds, not DGs in general. Given that there are multiple ways to play most DGs, it is difficult to imagine a situation where a non-doubled team of DGs cannot select a combination of builds that give them a decent chance of winning against any doubled team. 

Scrubs become upset when they lose and invent excuses which delegate blame from themselves to external factors usually involving some "lameness," or other breach of "honorable play" commited by their opponents, such as doubles.