Best Of

There are so many things on your road map you have failed to do, that people have been waiting for. Maybe instead of taking away the features we actually like (champion buffs), and adding in something nobody asked for (ratings), while also returning to a system the community is vehemently opposed to (nerfing champs after you sell them), you could actually work on adding the features you promised in the road maps of days passed.

Let's see the "totally revamped" AW (we don't even have working AW of the old system)

Let's see the "Wish crystal" (which seems like just something you flat out lied about pursuing to placate people)

Let's see this recognition that sig stones being hard to come by was a problem expanded to 6 stars 2 years out and get some more in the game so we can sig up champs we like and not just our top prestige options.

Let's see you actually release something that works for a change.

Let's continue to see the buffs you over-promised and fell woefully short on.


Once you get those basics down, you can start adding "fluff" like this that nobody gives a hoot about.

‘Oh Herc has XYZ, so we won’t give him A as well, that’d be too much’, or ‘Ebony Maw has ABC, but could also do with D to bring him up to the right standard’.

Quake has literally 2 things next to its name and she is still one of the most broken OP characters after 5 and half years. That's why Kabam won't release her as a 6*.
It will be extremely difficulty to bring up a ranking system, since - as kabam keeps on agreeing with it - with 200+ champs MCOC has become a super complicated game in terms of character usage.

This is NOT a Ranking System and will not be saying one Champion is better than another, but a summary of Abilities that will help you compare Champions based on individual factors such as Damage or Survivability, but many Champions can occupy the same Rating. For example, both Hercules and Corvus Glaive will probably score 5/5 in Damage output.

I think you broke people with the numbers instead of keeping it simple and saying Very High. Unless there's some calculating aspect with the scores, keep it qualitative and simple.

Here you guys go again with something else that we didnt need in the game im done spending with you guys period..You guys always seem to make everything worse with the game... Instead of balance come out with new content or change chaacters special attack animations or something but this is trash.... My wallet is permanently close and will never ever spend with you guys again...

I have to Disagree. Balancing is necessary in all games like this, and we have lagged behind because we haven't had the ability to really communicate where a Champion should be before they're out in the wild, and this helps with that. It won't be perfect, which is also why we're integrating players into the change process as well.

People don't have a problem with balance. Everyone wants the champ curve tighter and doesn't want any champs to suck. What good does that do for anyone? Some champs have to objectively be the worst for a given piece of content, but that doesn't mean they have to generally suck.
The problem is releasing into the wild AND THEN, after selling their crystals and people spending their time and money on acquiring them, you determine they need to be tuned down. That's something you need to figure out before release. You can and should be able to with the level of access you have to your own game. The fact that you can't, and feel like you have to drag the process out for a ludicrous period and even then enlist us as unpaid testers is ridiculous. If you committed to only tuning up and not down after release (outside of fixing ACTUAL BUGS, not like Hercules' pointless nerf and claiming it was a bug), people wouldn't flip out. Down tuning, you need to figure out before release. You might have to let the occasional champ be a little OP for a while. Who cares? This isn't Street Fighter, you can and do adjust nodes and future champs (and old champs with buffs), to affect balance as well.

I don’t think this new champ balance system is a real pro player move in how it's being implemented.

If I understand the announcement properly, the main focus for champion tuning will be on the NEW champs every month of which the only way we’ll be able to get them are with:
1. Excessive arena grind where only 1000 people out of hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of people will get a 5 or 6* version of the new champ this way (focus on 5 and 6* rarity because they’re the most sought after rarity)
2. Money spent on preview bundles with a very low chance of luck
3. Units/money spent on special Cav/featured crystals with a very low chance of luck. So a main focus will be put on a small percentage of the community that will have the new champs in a 6 months window.
So the main focus of this balance system will be to initially affect a small percentage of the overall community

The area of champs balance where the MAJORITY of the community has been excited for and wants to continue (buffing existing under performing champs) will now take a backseat and will only be taken on IF there’s time depending on how excessive the new champ tunning is. As a point of reference there are currently 216 champs in the game and (in my opinion) these are the champs that are pretty useless in the game and making overall champion balance garbage (synergies to buff champs are not taking into consideration, just how the champ themselves perform on their own:
1. Abomination
2. Agent Venom
3. Air Walker
4. America Chavez
5. Ant Man
6. Beast
7. Black Bolt
8. Black Panther CW
9. Black Widow
10. Captain America
11. Captain America WW2
12. Captain Marvel
13. Cyclops
14. Cyclops Red
15. Daredevil
16. Dr Strange
17. Dormamu
18. Drax
19. Electro
20. Elektra
21. Green Goblin
22. Groot
23. Heimdall
24. Hulk
25. Invisible Woman
26. Iron Fist
27. Iron Fist Immortal
28. Iron Man
29. Iron Patriot
30. Jubilee
31. Korg
32. Loki
33. Moon Knight
34. Ms Marvel
35. Kamala Kahn
36. Nightcrawler
37. Nova
38. Phoenix
39. Sentry
40. Rogue
41. Rocket Racoon
42. Rhino
43. Red Skull
44. Spider Man
45. Spider Man Symbiote
46. Super Skrull
47. Superior Iron Man
48. Taskmaster
49. The Champion
50. Thor
51. Thor Jane Foster
52. Ultron Prime
53. Unstoppable Colossu
54. Winter Soldier
55. Yondu

55 out of 216 champs works out to 25% of the Champion pool needing attention and re-balancing to make relevant with the current game Meta, and those 55 champs are existing in likely 50%+ of the community’s roster as a 5 or 6* rarity.
If the interest is to serve the player community in offering a better balanced game experience then the MAIN focus should be continuing to improve the large pool of pretty useless champs and not the new champs released every month. I’d say with the new balance team you’ve created, a 75% focus should be on continuing the popular old champs buffing monthly (still 2 per month) and 25% focus on reviewing the new champs. Given my list above, and 2 old champ buffs a month we’re looking at almost 2.5 YEARS to address your underperforming champs which is kind of ridiculous to think THAT wouldn’t be your main focus.

Last, with the new balance system, one important point that was never addressed (that I can find) is Kabam fairly giving us the opportunity to change our mind on rank up decisions we made to these champs in their 6 month Beta/Balance window. If we acquired a new champ through means of time and/or money, AND ranked up those champs with resources acquired again through means of time and/or money, then we should 100% have the opportunity to rank them down and get back those resources (at a min.) if you decide to change them from their initial state. Generic rank down tickets are not the answer for this, but champion specific rank down tickets should 100% be implemented to be fair to the community that are lucky enough to acquire, play and essentially BETA TEST these champs FOR YOU! I personally have way less drive to push for newer champs now knowing any base utility they have that I’m excited for (and possibly fill a niche role in my roster) could change after I’ve invested in them.

I don’t think re-balancing champs is a bad idea, I jus don’t think this is the right way to go about it, and not much about this new system gives the community a lot of confidence in how this will end up going (given the recent track record from Kabam in the last year), and now one of the only reliable things to be excited about (WHO WILL BE THE NEXT 2 CHAMPS TO BE BUFFED THAT I MIGHT ALREADY HAVE??1?!!!!), isn’t a guarantee anymore, so 1 less consistent thing to be excited for every month. Personally, with how poorly the game has performed across the board the last year (game controls, stability, bugs, champ bugs, etc.) the one thing I always looked forward to was the new buffs announcement and then testing.

I hope this all goes well, I’m just honestly not optimistic at all… the last 9 months of playing a pretty broken game and mis-managed community has taken its toll on me.

There are so many things on your road map you have failed to do, that people have been waiting for. Maybe instead of taking away the features we actually like (champion buffs), and adding in something nobody asked for (ratings), while also returning to a system the community is vehemently opposed to (nerfing champs after you sell them), you could actually work on adding the features you promised in the road maps of days passed.

Let's see the "totally revamped" AW (we don't even have working AW of the old system)

Let's see the "Wish crystal" (which seems like just something you flat out lied about pursuing to placate people)

Let's see this recognition that sig stones being hard to come by was a problem expanded to 6 stars 2 years out and get some more in the game so we can sig up champs we like and not just our top prestige options.

Let's see you actually release something that works for a change.

Let's continue to see the buffs you over-promised and fell woefully short on.


Once you get those basics down, you can start adding "fluff" like this that nobody gives a hoot about.

‘Oh Herc has XYZ, so we won’t give him A as well, that’d be too much’, or ‘Ebony Maw has ABC, but could also do with D to bring him up to the right standard’.

Quake has literally 2 things next to its name and she is still one of the most broken OP characters after 5 and half years. That's why Kabam won't release her as a 6*.
It will be extremely difficulty to bring up a ranking system, since - as kabam keeps on agreeing with it - with 200+ champs MCOC has become a super complicated game in terms of character usage.

This is NOT a Ranking System and will not be saying one Champion is better than another, but a summary of Abilities that will help you compare Champions based on individual factors such as Damage or Survivability, but many Champions can occupy the same Rating. For example, both Hercules and Corvus Glaive will probably score 5/5 in Damage output.

The problem is actually how the champs are designed.

Know the difference between high damage and ramp up. A.

If it’s a ramp UP damage champ. Then it should start with good/ok damage and get HIGHER if you can play their extra sketchy play style. The more risky or complicated play style should have higher reward.

If they are meant to have utility. Don’t bury it behind their sig/awakened ability. Put utility on the base kit and every sig just accentuates the base kit to make them more like themselves. When this isn’t the case. You immediately remove them from the “useful champs pile” for anyone except the top top players and the “lucky”. And you create a paradox where 6* Namor is a “bad roll” for a new player. Not only will the 6* not “do what he does” for a looooooong time. But now they will be less likely to invest resources into the 5*. Which they could use for their utility.

The next point actually has to do with content design. But it effects every single champ. Because this is how players gauge usefulness and damage.

Decide what level champs are supposed to be able to do X content. Legendary side quest for example. And stick to that. Now design every new champ up to that bar, then assure they can do it.

These things would negate 90% of your rebalances. And would cure complaints in most cases.

The other 10% are the champs we have now that are just terrible.

Here you guys go again with something else that we didnt need in the game im done spending with you guys period..You guys always seem to make everything worse with the game... Instead of balance come out with new content or change chaacters special attack animations or something but this is trash.... My wallet is permanently close and will never ever spend with you guys again...

Hard Disagree. Balancing is MANDATORY in all games like this, and we have lagged behind because we haven't had the ability to really communicate where a Champion should be before they're out in the wild, and this helps with that. It won't be perfect, which is also why we're integrating players into the change process as well.

If balancing is mandatory for game health, why are the devs not immediately going after Quake, Ghost, and Corvus? They have done more to imbalance the game than everyone else.

Good question. Why are the devs trying to refocus on rebalancing champions shortly after they come out rather than much later? Same answer. The longer a champion is, the harder it is to rebalance because the wider the impact is and the more entrenched the users of that champion are.

There are no absolute rules when it comes to game operation. Everything is a compromise between competing forces. There are absolutely no free lunches. Give the players less rewards and they will balk. Give them more rewards and you force downstream changes they won't like. Nerf a champ and you'll piss off some of your players. *Don't* nerf a champion and you'll anger others in a different, possibly invisible way.

Players often say that if the devs are supposed to do a thing, why don't they always do that thing: if they aren't supposed to do that thing why don't they never do that thing. Because every action they take helps something and hurts something else, and thus every action has to be calculated to do more good than harm. Reasonable intelligent people can disagree on where that line is, so no decision will ever be universally seen as the right one. For example, I argued strongly against the Guillotine 2.0 buff. I believe I was on solid grounds. The devs did it anyway not because they ignored me, not because they are stupid, and not because they are incompetent. They did it because they disagreed. It can be a tough pill to swallow, but sometimes that's all there is to it.

The devs know that if they nerf a champ, they will anger some players. If they don't, bad things happen to the game that ultimately worsen the game experience for some players. A dev can decide that nerfing Quake causes more harm to the game than good, but nerfing champion X four months after release does more good than harm. That's a judgment, and different people will disagree about whether that judgment is the right one. But whether it looks consistent from the outside or not, it is still a judgment they have to make based on what they think the right choice is at that time.