Talk:Hero Difficulty

From Dota 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Please note that we are currently reviewing this page in preparation for updating it. We'd love you to contribute to the discussion on the revisions we plan to make.

Chen vs Enchantress[edit]

Chen requires more micro than Enchantress? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) • (contribs) 08:44, April 30, 2014‎ • Please sign your posts with ~~~~

I would say so. Not only does Chen have more creeps to control at once, he also has more active spells to use.
--PimpadelicX (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


I assumed this page was taken directly from PlayDota (that's why it has a source link at the top), but I see a lot of people in the history editing this to add their opinion. Should this page not stay as the original author wrote? --PimpadelicX (talk) 08:56, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I've decided to change it back to the way it originally was. Nobody really edits this page, so I doubt anyone will read this for a while. If you're reading this, hats off to you for actually reading the Discussions page.
--PimpadelicX (talk) 06:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

SF's and Io's survival priority[edit]

Well, there's written that Shadow Fiend's survival priority is 3, which means "Stay long enough in battle to do enough harm". But imo SF must not die in battle at all. When he dies, he loses souls. Those 18 lost souls (if you died with full 36) mean you have to farm them again. And when you have less souls you are more likely to die again because of lacking damage. Then you have to farm again, but now you need to farm 27 souls... What I mean, a death pulls SF back for 2-3 mins, and that's awful for such a hero.

So I propose to change SF's survival prority to 5.

Also Io's survival priority is 2, so he "Just needs some quick seconds to throw all spells and do the job". Well, what about his 3rd skill when connected to the main carry? It is a massive DPS increase for him (main carry), so wisp's team is more likely to win the battle. I guess survival priority of wisp should be changed to 4 ("Stay long enough in battle to continuously support team").

That's all for now, tell me if I am right or not :)

The argument for Shadow Fiend minimap icon.png Shadow Fiend survival priority being 3 is that his death causes his ultimate to cast again, dealing even more damage to nearby enemies, potentially turning a fight. Also, while collecting souls can be annoying after death, it is not very difficult in the mid-late game, and he will most likely be farming anyway because he's the carry.
As for Io minimap icon.png Io, it is a support and it's life is expandable. While it is very helpful to have the Overcharge in play, if we're basing this off of the hero priority, I would not sacrifice Level 3 priority heroes such as Sven minimap icon.png Sven, Lycan minimap icon.png Lycan, or Slark minimap icon.png Slark to save an Io's life. Every hero is useful when they are alive, but if someone has to die, I would make it a support whose money loss does not affect the team as heavily.
But anyone can make an argument to change the position of certain heroes, because Dota is a complex game. I would say Witch Doctor minimap icon.png Witch Doctor is normally an expandable hero, but if he has an Aghanim's Scepter icon.png Aghanim's Scepter he becomes a much more vital asset to the team, especially a team fight oriented team. In my opinion, I would leave it as is because everyone has their own opinions, and this guide is supposed to be the opinion of R.B. Economy from PlayDota.
--PimpadelicX (talk) 09:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

This page is weird[edit]

I added this note to the general wiki discussion, but I should add it here as well.

This is an odd duck. It really belongs in userspace, I think, but I respect Pigbuster's decision to dissociate himself from it. I think linking to it from the front page is a poor idea. The idea behind community guides was that the creator exercised total control, but with a single officially blessed hero difficulty guide it's not clear how disagreements should be arbitrated. Should it be a free-for all? Should R.B. Economy have the last word forever? What about the fact that R.B. Economy hasn't updated his guide since 2011? There are no good answers except to remove the guide entirely, which I'm reluctant to do unilaterally. Until consensus is reached on a solution, I think I'll take up PimpadelicX on his proposal to revert and lock, and add a disclaimer to the top of the page. I don't feel strongly about this, so feel free to overrule me. --Kroocsiogsi (talk) 23:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I would just delete it - Lemoncream (talk) 02:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Small mistake in the table[edit]

Tinker - 4 5 4 4 3 4 The sum of that is 24, not 25.

I was comparing Invoker and Meepo[edit]

Surely, Invoker's Micro Management level should be 4 instead of 3 because Invoker has a maximum of 2 Forge Spirits or do we see them as not useful enough to micro compared to Visage's Familiars? Meepo's Farm / Last Hitting level should be at least 4 because Meepo requires key items: Aghanim's Scepter and Blink Dagger, surely at least Aghanim's Scepter.

In regards to the newly released Oracle.[edit]

I believe that Oracle minimap icon.png Oracle's rating in the chart should something like: 3 3 3 1 2 4  16 .  --Markov25 (talk) 19:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm point of view. Playing oracle for a while:

Knowledge = 5 ; Oracle need to know so much heros mechanism (spells, abilities, autoattack, damage type...) and anticipate them. A simple Oracle mistake due to lack of game knowledge can be fatal for all team. Map Awareness = 3 ; Oracle is fagile need to be aware of incoming gank. Can assit ganker Positioning / Reflex = 4/5 ; Oracle is fragile positionning is important. Classic combo Purifying Flames+Fortune's End failed have a lot of consequences. False promise need a good timing or to prepare a gank at the right time, protect someone from incoming dmg (lina, zeus ult...) etc... Farm / Last-Hitting = 1/2 ; urn / mana boots / mek / wards Micro Management = 2 ; Eurl combo, Orchid... Survival Priority = 4 ; If killed early in TF = no false promise bonus, heal or even purge from Fortune's End.

TOTAL = Around 20-21 imo

Mana Management[edit]

Just looking over the heroes and I have noticed that there is no rating being applied to the need to manage mana. Many heroes require to different degrees to manage their mana levels to be effective. Take Zeus for example; Zeus has horrendous mana issues and is practically useless if he does not have enough mana to cast at least a few spells; it is quite vital that he does not squander his mana by using it efficiently (don't skill up arc lightning early as it reduces his ability to last hit due to having less mana per creep kill, etc.) as well as knowing when he has to do something specific about it (go back to fountain/grab rune for bottle/use arcane boots (or soul ring) regularly/build for mana regen (bloodstone, euls)/etc.).

Basically, I feel that some heroes are getting an "easier" rating because mana management is not being taken into account. This specifically came up as an issue for a friend - he looked at the chart and assumed Zeus would be easy as long as he had some map awareness only to then be taken aback by how difficult it was to control Zeus' mana (which is why I used him as an example). The chart lists map awareness as being the only difficulty in playing Zeus, suggesting that Axe for example is far more difficult to play than Zeus if you have good map awareness; yet my friend (who has good map awareness and has friends who can report things of importance to him) finds Axe far far easier because mana management isn't something that is such an issue for Axe.

There are heroes like Crystal Maiden who does not require much mana management due to her passive allowing her to use her mana far less efficiently - also, Lion, Alchemist (after 6), Outworld Devourer (after 5), etc. Outside of heroes who have easy mana return, there are heroes who are not so dependent on mana and managing it in the first place, like Riki, Troll Warlord, etc. These heroes are potentially easier for someone to play than other heroes (who otherwise might have a higher rating) if it mana management that they find most troubling, but again the chart does not help here.

I know this is R.B.Economy's chart, but would it be possible to add mana management to it as a seventh aspect?

Clinkz Discussion[edit]

I feel like the Positioning/Reflex and Survival Priority should both be changed to 5 and here's why.

Clinkz has three spells who all have above a 20 second cooldown. No other hero has to deal with this. Therefore, to play Clinkz effectively, you have to know when to use your spells and how to manage not one, not two, but three cooldowns effectively. It's not that his spells are hard to pull off, it's that he needs all of his spells during teamfights, but he has to correctly manage them all as if he misuses one too early, his effectiveness and survival during a teamfight is going to be reduced dramatically. Examples including having Death Pact fall off during a teamfight, therefore not having enough damage/survivability, Clinkz cancelling Skeleton Walk too early and then gets picked off, or Clinkz using Strafe on a tower, but losing the buff when a teamfight begins.

As for Survival Priority, Clinkz falls off late game, so he needs to build up items for the mid game. If he keeps dying, he cannot get the items he needs to make an impact during the midgame through pushing towers and picking off solo heroes.

Therefore, I would certainly NOT recommend Clinkz as a hero to play as for a beginner.

This article is completely out of date and basically defunct. We were going to delete it... - Lemoncake(talk) 07:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

So many biased views/things that are blatantly incorrect[edit]


Knowledge of heroes, abilities, items and game mechanics. Higher rating means the hero requires you to be more knowledgeable of the game.

   1) Requires general knowledge of this hero, general skill build and item build. General starting items. 
   2) Understands game mechanics such as orb effect, buff placer, melee and ranged items. 
   3) Requires increased knowledge of this hero abilities, and how all items work. 
   4) Requires immense knowledge of this hero, alternate skill builds and item builds. Able to determine the right targets in battle. 
   5) Requires knowledge of all heroes/abilities/items, mechanics, counter abilities and counter items."

My problems with each point: 1) All looking good so far 2) Info about melee and ranged items should go on every viable carry and utility hero thanks to Battlefury, Abyssal blade and Vladimir's Offering. Orb effect refers to virtually every hero in Dota who right clicks and might buy a UAM that isn't orb of venom (or has a UAM as a spell) 3) Pretty much a given for all heroes. AS your skill increases, opponents will play different heroes and buy different items. Name one hero who doesn't need to itemize? 4) This is just a way to use a lot of words to say nothing at all. What is "immense knowledge? Spell interactions? That's fairly basic and will naturally increase for ALL heroes as your skill level increases 5) The first part is a given. Part about counters should be more specific. Something along the lines of knowing when a hero is a safe pick (so heroes like Brood and Meepo would be rated higher while safe picks like Brewmaster will be rated lower) and knowledge of what items enemies can pick that will force you to change your playstyle. (referring specifically to playstyle and not itemization so Rat heroes should play safer if enemy has an orchid etc.)

My second gripe is with how some heroes are scored. Invoker for example is listed as 5-5-5-5-3-5. Ignoring the first column (which I find mostly irrelevant), map awareness. What's different about invoker compared to most heroes when it comes to map awareness? He has sunstrike. That is it. No other map awareness required that other heroes don't require. I can see positioning being a 5. Farm/last hitting. Does invoker need to be six-slotted to be effective? No. Does he scale as well with items as other heroes? No. All invoker REALLY needs is xp which is why midas is/was a common item for him. Giving him above a 3 barely makes sense. Micro management. Needs to be split into 2 catagories. 1 for controlling multiple units, another for mechanical skill (which would also include reflexes). Finally Survival Priority. 5 really shouldn't be a 5 for it's ratings. Heroes like Meepo, Alch, SF etc. Should get fives. Carries who either give enemy large amounts of gold (Alch), xp (meepo), or carries who require snowballing to be effective should be given fives. Invoker doesn't mind falling behind in gold, and the xp you get from killing him generally isn't that much on less he's stomping you.

I focused mostly on Invoker here, but just skimming through one can see how either biased, or outdated the info on the page is. The preceding unsigned comment was added by ABQ98 (talk) • (contribs) 10 January 2016 • Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Lich is easier than Crystal Maiden[edit]

Seriously how can you place Lich higher? Crystal Maiden requires MUCH higher positioning and item knowledge to be able to effectively use her ult. Lich simply requires the player to press on an enemy, preferably when there are a few others around him. He is less effective at stopping people, seeing as CM has a heavy slow (W) and a stun (Q). But that simply makes him more condusive to a nature of pure support. There is no ganking or forcing mindset as there is with CM. The mindset of Lich is pure and simple: help your team by using your skills. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) • (contribs) • Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Delete this page or allow us to make changes to the rankings please[edit]

Filled with outdated information that shows a lack of understanding for the majority of heroes and as many new players use this page when trying to decide on easy heroes to learn as it is the first google result for a credible site The preceding unsigned comment was added by ABQ98 (talk) • (contribs) • Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Rework necessary[edit]

The values in the table are in dire need of a complete rework I think. For example Naga Siren only has 3 points in micro here (Techies has 4?), Nyx assassin and riki have 5 in farm, … --Litzsch (talk) 11:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Also I just noticed looking at the old PlayDota post, that contrary ro what the Ambox says, the values in the table have already been changed since the original post. --Litzsch (talk) 14:42, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Go ahead and redo it if you want, i was planning to but I dun have the time for it ._. - Lemoncake(talk) 14:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok I'll start redoing the article tomorrow then. Should the categories stay as they are or is it ok if I modify them? --Litzsch (talk) 22:18, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
The categories REALLY need to be changed. They make very little sense in their current form. I'll add an entirely new section so we can discuss it in there. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

New Categories and their Rankings [Current as of 3rd 08/17][edit]

I agree with the current names for the categories, just not their order or their internal rankings. I will place each category in its own space so they can be edited individually as we discuss them. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:14, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I think the internal rankings you are suggesting are good in theory, but need to be more precise in praxis. For example the knowledge rating basically boils down to how the current editor is feeling about something (Someone might give Io 3 points in knowledge and someone else 5). This is fine, as long as it's only one person doing all the ratings, but as soon as multiple people work on it, the ratings would become inconsistent.--Litzsch (talk) 07:52, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Could you suggest alternatives under the individual ratings? I believe that Farming, Survival, and Micromanagement are all very tight in terms of rating. Mechanics, Positioning, Game Sense, and Knowledge are much less clear cut. I'll suggest examples for each point to assist in discussion. --Sniperdubey (talk) 08:46, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


  1. Requires basic knowledge of this hero, ability combos, and items required to be used effectively.
  2. Requires basic knowledge of this hero and of the opposing heroes to be used effectively.
  3. Requires intermediate knowledge of this hero to be used effectively.
  4. Requires intermediate knowledge of this hero and of the opposing heroes to be used effectively.
  5. Requires a deep understanding of this hero to be used effectively.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:20, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I would probably use rating parameters like this, to make the ratings more specific:
  1. Requires general hero, skill and item knowledge
  2. Understanding of advanced game mechanics like orb effects, orb walking, …
  3. Requires advanced hero, skill and item knowledge
  4. Needs to quickly identify which heroes to target
  5. Requires knowledge of all heroes, skills and items.
The problem I'm still having with this is, that general and advanced knowledge are pretty subjective terms and could be interpreted differently by different people.--Litzsch (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Any rating system applied would still be fairly biased. It's best not to specify anything too much though. Try assigning heroes to various numbers using your rating. --Sniperdubey (talk) 12:54, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
You're probably right. Maybe we should just implement your rating system as it is, and if someone has a better idea later on, it can still be changed. --Litzsch (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


  1. Simple spells; neither exact timing nor quick reactions are necessary to play this hero.
  2. Non-targeted spells; quick reactions necessary to play this hero.
  3. Non-intuitive ability interactions between items and abilities used by this hero.
  4. Complicated ability interactions between items and abilities used by this hero.
  5. This hero requires a high degree of mechanical knowledge and understanding to achieve anything in a game.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Example Heroes

  1. Drow Ranger, Skeleton King, Lion
  2. Mirana, Axe, Pudge
  3. Bounty Hunter, Phantom Lancer, CM
  4. Oracle, Invoker, Puck
  5. Techies, Earth Spirit

Game Sense[edit]

  1. This hero requires general map awareness and basic game sense.
  2. This hero requires heightened map awareness to use their skills and abilities.
  3. This hero requires predictions or constant map awareness to be effective.
  4. This hero requires heightened game sense and constant map awareness to be effective.
  5. This hero requires advanced map awareness, predictions, and an advanced understanding of player movement to be effective.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:28, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I renamed this category to Game Sense as Awareness is more a part of it than Game Sense is a part of Awareness. -- Sniperdubey (talk) 07:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


  1. This hero requires basic positioning techniques in lane.
  2. This hero relies on good positioning to be effective, but it is not critical.
  3. This hero relies on good positioning to be effective, and it is critical.
  4. This hero relies on good positioning and advanced knowledge of NPC movement to be effective.
  5. This hero relies on excellent positioning to contribute to a game.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:30, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


  1. This hero does not rely on items and has many abilities that can get gold.
  2. This hero does not rely on items and has few abilities that can get gold.
  3. This hero relies on items but has many abilities that can get gold.
  4. This hero relies heavily on items and has many abilities that can get gold.
  5. This hero relies heavily on items but has few abilities that can get gold.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:35, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Example Heroes

  1. CM, Shadow Shaman, Jakiro
  2. Lion, Windranger, Ogre Magi
  3. Mirana, Kotl, Sand King, Magnus
  4. Alchemist, Luna, Gyrocopter
  5. Chaos Knight, Spectre, Antimage


  1. This hero has many abilities that help keep them alive and they are naturally tanky.
  2. This hero has many abilities that help keep them alive or they are naturally tanky.
  3. This hero has a few abilities that help keep them alive.
  4. This hero has no abilities that help keep them alive, but they are not particularly easy to kill.
  5. This hero has no abilities that help keep them alive and they are easy to kill.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:38, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Example heroes

  1. Dragon Knight has Dragon's Blood to keep him alive, as well as high strength gain. Omniknight is also tanky and he has three abilities to help keep himself alive.
  2. Slark has pounce and Shadow Dance to help keep himself alive. Mirana has Leap and Moonlight Shadow.
  3. Viper has Corrosive Skin. Broodmother has Spin Web.
  4. Troll has nothing to keep him alive, but he's also not particularly easy to kill.
  5. Crystal Maiden has nothing to keep her alive and she's very easy to kill.

I believe ranking heroes in the order by which they should try to stay alive is pointless. All heroes should try not to die. It's far more useful to rank them on their actual ability to NOT die. --Sniperdubey (talk) 07:36, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


  1. This hero is the only unit you'll control and it has only a few active abilities and items you'll use.
  2. This hero is the only unit you'll control but it has many active abilities and items you'll use.
  3. This hero requires you to control more units than just the hero, but they have no active abilities.
  4. This hero requires you to control more units than just the hero and they have active abilities.
  5. This hero requires you to control more units than just the hero, and they have active abilities, and you will have many active items to use.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 01:41, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Examples of some heroes that might fit into each category.

  1. Medusa, Drow, Skeleton King
  2. Keeper of the Light, Sand King, Nyx
  3. Lycan, Naga Siren, Broodmother, Invoker, Terrorblade
  4. Meepo, Morphling, Brewmaster
  5. Arc Warden, Chen, Enchantress

I believe Micromanagement should be taken out of mechanics and made into a separate rating area. Heroes like Enchantress do not need a huge amount of mechanical skill to play, but they do need a large amount of micromanagement whereas a hero like Visage requires good mechanics knowledge AND micromanagement. --Sniperdubey (talk) 07:39, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Ability to Disable[edit]

  1. This hero has many stuns, roots, or strong slows.
  2. This hero has a stun, root, or strong slow.
  3. This hero has a silence, disarm, or weak slow.
  4. This hero has some way to control their opponent's position or a bash.
  5. This hero has no inherent ability to control their opponent's position or mobility.

What do you think of this as the base? Discuss what changes you think should be made, if any. --Sniperdubey (talk) 13:56, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Examples of some heroes that might fit into each category.

  1. Lion, Shadow Shaman, CM
  2. Lich, Gyrocopter, Omniknight
  3. Night Stalker, Silencer, Phoenix
  4. Bloodseeker, Faceless Void, Darkseer
  5. Lycan, Doom, Tinker
It might also be pertinent to list heroes with the ability to disable compared to those who lack that ability since it invariably makes playing that hero harder since they'd need to rely on their team mates.
I think this is already kind of included under "Survival" (at least the defensive aspects of disables) and the offensive aspects could be included under mechanics (something like: needs good timing their spells). I don't think we should add too many new Categories to the rating, since it only makes the rating system more complicated. --Litzsch (talk) 14:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
I do agree with not adding too many more categories. I was contemplating this: What if we axe knowledge and merge it into mechanics. Both of them feel a bit meh atm and many of the items under knowledge are pretty much mechanics [Orb Walking, etc]. Survivability is more focused on how a hero can either tank or escape from a bad situation. This category is more for how capable a hero is in putting other heroes into a bad situation. --Sniperdubey (talk) 15:52, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Currently Reworking[edit]

I am currently in the early stages of reworking this article. I am currently in the process of trying to set the rating parameters. If you have any input, please let me know by commenting here or on my profile! --Litzsch (talk) 12:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Can we use Valve's Complexity rating they have in-game here somehow? The current chart seems needlessly complex for the target audience, new players. Sanhard (talk) 23:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Visage mechanics[edit]

Controlling the familiar stone form became alot easier when it was updated in patch 7.10. I sugguest it would be better suited to a mechanics score of 4, im kinda new to wiki so I don't dare change it myself. Patch: "Added a sub-spell to Summon Familiars, that allows Visage to active the Familiars Stone Form from the hero."