As for how skill-based or not it is.... I've no qualms on that one. Aint any less skill-based than any of the others. BUT, this is going to be up to the player as to what is considered "skill-based" or not. I always hear all of that about Dota, about how skill-based it is and blah blah blah, but I dont see it that way. The "denying" bit for existence.... there's no real skill there. It's EXACTLY the same as last-hitting, merely with a different result, and with ALOT less intuitiveness to it. There's the idea of adding complexity for the sake of true depth, and then there's adding complexity to be able to say that you have lots of complexity, and my own thoughts are that Dota does *alot* of that second one (not that other mobas dont, mind you, because most of them do at least some of this as well). As someone that plays fighting games to death.... a genre that's *very* complicated as all hell.... something I've learned 10000 times over is that complexity does NOT equal depth. There's too much more to it than that. Again, that isnt really anything against Dota (and you've heard this from me before anyway)..... all of the mobas do that to some degree.... it's mostly just me trying to make a point. I'm too lazy to think of a better way to explain it, though you've heard this stuff from me before in different contexts, hah.
In terms of complexity, that in itself is not really relevant to me as a whole. What does matter in a competitive game is the skill-ceiling. The reason that say Super Smash Brothers Melee is still considered the most competitive over 10 years and 2 sequels is not only because it is more complex, but more nuanced and with a higher skill-ceiling. Sure, it has less characters and is harder to get into (though let's be honest, none of the Smash games are *difficult* to play), but the skill-ceiling is vastly higher than the newer alternatives.
The skill-ceiling or competitive value of a game basically comes down to one thing: How many choices the player has available to them at any given moment. The reason complexity tends to add skill, is that complexity also usually adds more choices. Compare Checkers to Chess. The games have many similarities, with many similar mechanics. However, the reason Chess is vastly more competitive than Checkers comes down to its complexity. Many aspects of Chess could be considered non-intuitive (the "Castle" mechanics, Knight movement, special "Pawn" rules, Checkmate, end-game draw mechanics, etc.), but in spite of what some may consider needless complexity (indeed, many steps have been attempted to simplify Chess), the fact of the matter is that the activity presents the players with MILLIONS of options PER game, where Checkers presents maybe a few thousand. The higher number of choices available to the Chess player is ultimately what makes it the game with a much higher skill-ceiling.
We can compare this to DotA and League of Legends. A League of Legends support is the most boring job in the entire Universe. There's a reason the role is so difficult to fill often within ranked or the "team finder" (or even normal games). Because few people want to do it. It's boring as all hell. The role basically has one responsibility for the entire laning phase (which lasts a lifetime). They harass the enemy champions. THAT'S IT. They don't last hit. They don't roam. They can't do anything else. They better just stay there and harass. What's even worse is that harassing can be a counter-productive activity if the enemy's combo has better harassment, or say they have a Blitzcrank that it becomes counter-productive to try and harass because if he hooks you, it could mean death. So in those common scenarios, you're not even really harassing, you're just protecting your carry, holding your mouth open while drool runs out waiting for them to go in on him, if they decide to at all. It's mind-numbingly boring and horrible, I've met few people who enjoy it (there are a few exceptions).
In DotA, a support is nothing like that. You mentioned non-intuitive complexities like denying and creep-pulling. And as much as you want to slam on these, they give the support *something to do*. Denying, in essence, just doubles the amount of creeps a player can target. This means the support can still last hit, even though he's not taking anything away from his carry. So already, just with the option of denying, you've DOUBLED what a DotA support can do, as compared to a League support. But wait, there's more. Creep stacking and pulling adds another mechanic which allows your support to deny the enemy experience while bringing the fight to the jungle and snowballing the lane. However, it can be countered by the enemy as well, so even though some players may call it "needless complexity", it actually makes the game a lot more interesting, especially for the support. In addition TO THAT, the support can carry a TP. If they see another lane in trouble (say an ally in a different lane is being dived), they can temporarily LEAVE the lane, be at the allied tower at seconds, and turn a disaster into a triumph. This doesn't exist in League, no support is going to be taking Teleport, and the cooldown on it is outrageous. But that's not all either, the support can also carry Smoke, meaning he can leave the lane and gank another lane fairly easily because he gets invisiblity and 15% increased movement speed. This makes for easy ganks on mid and other lanes that wouldn't really be possible in League (if a support leaves the lane in League it's obvious they're ganking because there's LITERALLY nothing else for them to do). Also the fact that Flash is available in League makes ganking almost downright impossible unless Flash has been burned first. In addition to that, the runes in DotA, sometimes called needless complexity, give the support something to do every 2 minutes, as battles for rune control can literally change the outcome of the entire game. In addition to that, the KILL POTENTIAL within the lane FAR, FAR outweighs LoL itself. In DotA, a support and carry can EASILY get a kill, or many kills within the laning phase, assuming they have a good combo. In League competitive play, kills within the carry/support lane without outside help are extremely uncommon.
So here are all these "un-intuitive", "needlessly complex", "pointless mechanics" that exist in DotA which may seem silly or frustrating to the uninitiated, but the fact of the matter is that these mechanics serve the purpose of giving the player vastly, vastly more options than a League player has, even though the latter game may be more streamlined for casual play. As a result, the skill-ceiling is undeniably higher.
Now does that mean that HoTS (I really hate that acronym because their first SC2 expansion has the same one), in removing even more complexities from the genre than League will be less skill-based? Well, not necessarily. Especially if they added complexity in other areas, such as in the map, the perks, or some of other more subtle game mechanics. But the fact of the matter is that complexity does usually translate to choices. Whether the choices are meaningful is a different discussion, but basically comes down to personal preference anyway. I think the nuanced complexity of Starcraft 2 is freaking annoying and overwhelming, especially when a lot of that "complexity" comes down to how quickly you can press buttons on a keyboard. But nobody can argue that SC2, with its overwhelming complexity, is the crown jewel of the competitive RTS genre, no other game comes close. And so it goes.
See, I have a hard time with that stuff about the skill ceiling being risen by things like what you mention, and fighting games like Smash are EXACTLY why.
People always say the same thing about games like Guilty Gear, Street Fighter, blah blah blah. How the skill ceiling is way high, and you gotta do all these things, learn all the frame whatsits and combo notations and hitbox somethings and blah blah blah, and that's WHY it's so high....
....and I say that's all a load of rubbish. Why? Because I've never met even a single opponent in any of those games (that I actually play alot, I dont do Street Fighter for instance, it's too slow-paced for me) that DID those things.... and yet didn't end up losing to me ANYWAY. And I do none of them, this due to finding them A: boring, or B: irritating, or C: just really stupid. They're all arbitrary, and they seem to be considered necessary as if the people saying such a thing would have to admit that the game in question is actually not as complex as they like to repeat it is. And yes, with these games I know what *actual* high level play looks like.... I'm not saying "Oh, I took down some local guy that's good at tournaments, clearly I'm really great". I mean "I've played them absolutely to freaking death for years, and for the one I play most I knocked out the second-ranked guy in the region awhile back, not just this minor area, and have seen Evo and all that to compare to". It's the genre I'm best at, better than shmups (which should say something, to anyone that's seen me do those) and I do literally not even a bit of that stuff I consider arbitrary. I found that it DOESNT add much of anything to the games, despite popular opinion, and so far, nobody's been strong enough to fully prove me otherwise.
Now granted, it's a bit different in games like these, that are so stat based with attacks that are often NOT dodgeable (games like Dota and League often having alot of "targeted" attacks that *will* hit if used when in range). Yet still, the mechanics of this nature tend to just bother me for exactly the same reason. The denying thing, for instance. It's.... just last hitting. If you can last-hit, you can deny. I've never seen the challenge to it. It's a timing-based mechanic. If it were in OTHER games, it might actually seem more interesting to me.... but it's in Dota, the one with by far the slowest laning phase. If it were in a different game, where there's usually constant back-and-forth attacks and spells being fired between lane opponents, THEN it might get interesting, to have to weave in amongst all the chaos to try to do that.... that'd be interesting. But that simply doesnt occur, due to Dota's combat style.
A good example of my problems with Dota actually IS the support role. Normally, I rather like playing this role. Using my speed to yank my team's carry out of the crushing jaws of an enemy's ultimate attack at the last possible second, completely confounding their efforts at making what looked like a sure kill... ahh, what fun that is. Not just ultimates of course, but many things can nearly bring about a teammate's defeat. I defend them CONSTANTLY in most mobas, because there's always some danger, some crazy attack being tossed their way. The fight begins quickly, and rages on for a long time. Dota though... the combat style and overblown costs of abilities utterly cancel all of this. And here's the thing: You're right, some of the mechanics in Dota give the support something to do.... but by my account, they SHOULDNT HAVE TO. Denying as "something to do" seems like grasping at straws to me.... it feels like they just couldnt think of something better, so it's simply a mirror of normal last-hitting. And really, things like warding just arent very interesting, even if there's a tactical decision to make. That there's typically next to nothing else on the map to interact with (a problem I see in pretty much EVERY moba; if I'm not the jungler, and I dont want to be, there's little purpose for me to use the jungle as a destination instead of a path to somewhere with something to do) just makes this even worse, moreso in Dota than other games due to the reasons I list here.
Now, as for the bit about it being easy to get a kill as a carry and support working together.... that, not attractive to me. Why? Because it's BORING. It's exactly the same to me as it is in a fighting game, if I'm playing that against people, and utterly erase a lower level player. What fun is that? There's no challenge there. The fight is pretty much over before it even started. I dont WANT "easy", I dont like "easy". Make me actually FIGHT for it. Give the enemy a chance to use skill to defeat me in an actual battle. Give ME a reason to put my skill to the test, as opposed to just outright assassinating them instantly due to superior position or surprise. Again, that's dull.
Addressing also the bit about the teleport scrolls: Now THAT is a mechanic I hated from the start. Absolutely hated it. To me, it merely pulls into the limelight the problems with the combat. Yes, it allows you to get to other lanes quickly to make it in time to help.... but it shouldnt HAVE to. It's only necessary because of the "over nearly instantly" nature of the combat. It exists entirely because there's just no time to simply MOVE there. The mechanic simply isnt necessary in any other game. My teammate, in need of help, can use skill and cunning against a prolonged siege to hold off the enemy until help arrives. Which is also more satisfying. ....not to mention that the bloody scrolls take up an item slot that could be used for something more interesting. I never liked that part. And yes, one could make the arguement of "well, it tests your ability to react quickly!". That one is sort of up to the individual; in my case, I'm way too fast for that to add any challenge whatsoever. Others though, yes, they might find it does add something.
And one of the core things that just bugs the hell outta me with that game, and is possibly the central reason why I have issues with it, is the view that everyone takes on it. This idea that complexity of mechanics creates additional proper difficulty. The same as a comparison between Smash as a series, VS something like Guilty Gear as a series. I tell you though, this isnt the case. And not because of my experience with fighting games. No, I actually say this because of the shmup genre.
The shmup genre contains not only some of the most difficult games that exist, but also THE most difficult game that exists. The one that nothing else has ever come close to. This game is Mushihime-sama Futari. Specifically, the mode named "Ultra". When you select this mode, the game actually brings up this red warning screen, with text that translates to: "You will absolutely meet your death here. Are you sure you want to continue?". It doesnt do this just to be flippant or amusing; the question is actually relevant.
I play that genre at an extremely high level. This one is very easy to prove, with videos that I've made. I think some people on this forum might have seen them; I know Chris has, though I dont entirely remember WHY I showed it at that time. They show the absolutely stupid level of difficulty that these games produce. Futari, however, is different. Whatever crazy awesome stuff I do in all of the other videos, which includes Ultra mode in the first Mushihime, mean very little in Futari. I can beat the first game, which is nigh-impossible as it is. The second? It took me a year of CONSTANT play... starting at the high level of skill I already had going into it... to beat the FIRST level. The second? Beyond me. I've no chance. It's too much, way too much. Each stage gets exponentially harder. And the end boss is the worst of all, making the rest of the game look easy.
That game though... it has no complexity of mechanics. At all. No shield levels to manage, no weapon switching to use enemy weakness to your advantage, no weird sword things to knock bullets out of the way, and not even any real powerups. You shoot (constantly, there's never a reason to stop), and you dodge. That's it. It couldnt be easier to learn how to control your ship to it's fullest. There's no goofy special commands, or weird almost-glitchy tricks that exploit an engine quirk.... none of that. None of it at all. It's you, against the unending purple doom. But the game will EAT YOU. If I had to make an estimate based on everything I know of the genre (which includes expert players I've seen), I'd say that less than 15 people in the world have ever beaten it.
Yet it needs no added complexity of mechanics to do this. PLAYING the game isnt hard. At all. There's zero difficulty there. LEARNING the game's mechanics isnt hard, because there barely are any. You shoot the.... everything, and you dodge.... well, also everything. The difficulty lies in the design of the game's content, the things that it throws against you. It's able to become THAT insanely absurd with just that. And that's how competetive games are to me. Complexity of PLAYING the game? Not the real challenge. It's that way in fighting games. Wether the game mechanics are super complicated... as in GG.... or supremely simple, as in Smash... that matters not. The true challenge is that which you go up against. The skill of your opponent. It's not about how the mechanics WORK, or what they ARE, be they complicated as Dwarf Fortress, or simple as Space Invaders. It only matters what you DO with them.
And that to me is where Dota's problem lies. It throws in all of these things, not because they truly add to anything, but because of a misguided idea as to what "difficulty" actually is. PARTICULARLY in a competetive game. Now, understand: I'm not saying that complexity is a bad thing. Not at all. But some games try too hard to go down that route, to the extent where things start to get arbitrary, or weird, or whatever, and Dota launches down that path. I can get very high challenge out of all of the other mobas.... while keeping the action CONSTANT, and thus interesting.... so I find myself going to those games insead.
Understand here, I dont actually think Dota is a bad game... far from it. I still end up rather liking it. It's a good game! It's so damn popular for a reason. My interest in it lately has come back a bit, since I'm not feeling as burned out by the whole thing as I was before. But so much of the hype and such surrounding it just seems way off the mark to me and just BUGS me. Also note, I'm not making a direct comparison to just LoL with all of this either. Yeah, most people tend to do exactly that. I am not most people. I know full well LoL has it's problems. Oh yes, it has them. That character roster, for example. WHY in the bloody hell do they NOT BALANCE THE DAMN THING? What's the point of having 2000 characters if only 30 of them ever get used? Why even ALLOW any to be totally irrelevant? Ugh. I loathe that aspect of that game. All of the OTHER mobas can do that bit right.... why cant that one? I could ramble on for some time about the issues I have with that game. I still like it though. Smite is the same, and I'll find things to rant about with Heroes of the Storm as well. Just give me some time, and I'll have an irritable list to show, guaranteed
All of this does make for alot of interesting debate though. .....interesting PEACEFUL debate. If I rambled about this anywhere else, I'd just get screamed at...
