Best Of

I think it’s personally a little too early to tell, but I’m betting there’ll be positive and negative reception to the change

Odd timing. since Valiant EQ just got switched to requiring a “smaller” deck size while BGs will be switching to a “larger” deck size.

My initial thought is that these changes are too big. Either play around with the number of bans, or the deck size, not both at the same time. There will be too much noise in trying to figure out what is the ideal change.

My other thought is like what others have mentioned - expanding deck size does not magically increase the number of counters to champions like Cap Britain. While the number of bans could help, it is a double edged sword. These changes don’t solve the problem of champions with limited counters.

Except… deathless vision

@SirGamesBond i don’t spend a single penny on this game, not worth it my friend

@ahmynuts spittin straight facts bro..

Unless you're at least a Mysterium or Quantum player (or a dev), your opinion about this is irrelevant.

And truthfully, it should be only Celestial (or a dev), but I know that a lot of capable people don't have the time to grind BGs every season.

If you genuinely think this is a good idea that the majority of players will like, I'm honestly curious to hear why.

I'm not sure how in a time where some defenders require more specific counters than ever, where you're already limited to attacker options based on draft RNG, and rerolls are already limited to buying them and are still RNG, that you feel increasing the pool to draft from (decreasing odds of drafting a specific option you're looking for), increasing the bans (making it easier to completely remove a set of counters for a set of defenders), and then sprinkling in allowing a reroll per round now (as long as you're still willing to buy them), is a move that the majority of the playerbase is going to find enjoyable.

You can't really be this delusional

This has got to be one of the worst decisions Kabam has ever made.