----------
----------
However, the design of Warcraft III tends to emphasize racial themes over diversity: each race has a radically different distribution of hero types, regeneration mechanics, macro, and unit composition. Tier systems and unit roles are consistent enough across races, but there are still outliers—Spell Breakers and Faerie Dragons do not have identical roles in gameplay, nor do Banshees and Sorceresses have very much in common at all, outside of the "secondary caster" descriptor. The Undead and Night Elves have answers to Tauren and Knight units, but not equivalents. The Undead have exactly one siege unit, while each other race has two. Need I go on?
----------
I don't really see your point. Sure, the races aren't identical, and of course there are intentionally gaps left unfilled in each race's design options. This creates stress in matchups, which I don't claim to know is a good or bad thing.
----------
You do claim to know, though, because you have stated a belief that the game is improved by adding a very different hero role to an existing race, instead of merely providing an alternate to existing ones. I actually deliberately avoided the concept of an "assassin" hero for the Humans because, even if such a thing can be balanced, I would not be up to the task.
----------
Many of these things are intentionally reinforced, and yet Warcraft IV will almost certainly not have any of these mechanics - take a look at world of warcraft, for instance, where many themes from warcraft lore had to be toned down in a game that's largely PvE. Starcraft 2 is an even bigger indicator.
----------
I did not set out to remake Warcraft III in my image; I set out to add a single hero to its existing design, in a way that would not disrupt the design choices made by the developers. Consider the design of the original StarCraft, with abilities like Dark Swarm and Stasis Field. The first StarCraft game had several powerful area-effect abilities that were used and abused in high-level play and required almost inhuman micromanagement and fast calculation speeds (including trivia knowledge, i.e. Swarm's radius doesn't actually match its art) to use effectively (not Calculus, though; I'm a mathematician and I know what Calculus is). Warcraft III has fewer of these, and a slower overall pace, but it is still not entirely free of these things.
I hope that is a sufficient explanation for you to see my point; I do not require you to agree with it.
----------
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. Jass natives are the common.j functions that are used to interface with wc3 native code (object editor doesn't provide natives)
I also don't know what you're implying about a list of nevers.
----------
A trigger response to EVENT_UNIT_ATTACKED can be abused by players because it applies when a unit begins its attack, not when the attack "resolves" (i.e. before damage or a "miss" is calculated and guaranteed, whether or not a missile animation delays the action). This is not a reason to never use EVENT_UNIT_ATTACKED; it is a reason to use it carefully and, perhaps, sparingly.
For the record, I would rank myself 9th, too, on the basis of Energize alone; that thing is bad.