Witness the Great Revival! Act 6 Chapter 1 - Coming March 13th

1626365676878

Comments

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,225 Guardian
    Ace_03 said:

    I know this video is supposed to help us. But we all have strong opinions against this change. Grant said CCP members being pro Kabam is nonsense and that Kabam can’t censor their material. But, bear in mind that getting promoted by them casts doubts on how unbiased they can be.

    It’s very nuanced but there is a difference in: “I would prefer that they allowed 4 star champs into Act 6” as opposed to “I’m disappointed... or against…” (Yes, there is a difference).

    Act 6 will be very difficult and losing synergies will hurt badly. It’s really that simple. I don’t need to watch a video tutorial or wait and see how much losing any benefit will hurt.

    If feel there is a huge conflict of interest here.

    Respectfully.

    Kabam exercises more control over the posts on the official forums than they do (or can) Youtube videos. Youtubers can (and do) address topics that aren't even allowed to be discussed on these forums. Content creators thus have more editorial freedom than I do on the forums.

    If content creators can't be trusted because of the assumption of Kabam influence, then no forum poster can be similarly trusted to be objective, neither you nor I nor anyone else, because Kabam exerts more influence on us than it does them.

    Someone will mention money, but that's less than irrelevant because Youtubers make money ranting about changes that we can't rant about here, because rants are not allowed here. But Kabam allows Youtubers including content creator program members to rant about game changes all the time, and Youtubers do make money off those rant views. There's actually a huge *incentive* to complain about game changes and to explicitly disagree with Kabam, because you'd get far more views from videos complaining about changes than agreeing with changes.

    Factoring financial incentives makes it more likely that youtube content creators would be biased *against* Kabam rather than in favor of them, because that's almost certainly where the money actually is.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,799 ★★★★★
    Kobster84 said:


    Not really the cable has a very specific nodes that if you don’t have vision or magik it’s going to be a horrible fight

    Based on the Reddit writeup Dormamu will be best for that fight. Magik may be the next best option. Other options include:

    Vision (like you said)
    Quake (high block damage but possible at r4+)
    Psylocke (sp1 draining to 0 power prevents all power gain)
    Modok (sp1 reverses power gain buffs)
    Luke Cage (same as MODOK with 4+ exhaustion debuffs + invulnerability when duped)
    Void (petrify debuffs when power gain buffs are active)
    Duped Cap IW w/tech champ (same as Void)
    Ghost w/Hood synergy (phase during sp3)
    Doctor Octopus (power lock)
    Doctor Voodoo (sp2 power burn prevents sp3)
    Spider-Man Stark Enhanced (heavy attack power drain)
    Spider-Gwen (sp1 enervate)

    The Extinction Protocol node was introduced in Variant with 3.2 Ultron's boss. I remember that fight's power gain not being as bad as I'd expected. Cable's power gain buff makes that node more difficult, a handful of the above champions should still be able to solo that fight without boosts.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,789 ★★★★★

    Kobster84 said:


    Not really the cable has a very specific nodes that if you don’t have vision or magik it’s going to be a horrible fight

    Based on the Reddit writeup Dormamu will be best for that fight. Magik may be the next best option. Other options include:

    Vision (like you said)
    Quake (high block damage but possible at r4+)
    Psylocke (sp1 draining to 0 power prevents all power gain)
    Modok (sp1 reverses power gain buffs)
    Luke Cage (same as MODOK with 4+ exhaustion debuffs + invulnerability when duped)
    Void (petrify debuffs when power gain buffs are active)
    Duped Cap IW w/tech champ (same as Void)
    Ghost w/Hood synergy (phase during sp3)
    Doctor Octopus (power lock)
    Doctor Voodoo (sp2 power burn prevents sp3)
    Spider-Man Stark Enhanced (heavy attack power drain)
    Spider-Gwen (sp1 enervate)

    The Extinction Protocol node was introduced in Variant with 3.2 Ultron's boss. I remember that fight's power gain not being as bad as I'd expected. Cable's power gain buff makes that node more difficult, a handful of the above champions should still be able to solo that fight without boosts.
    Doc Oc was one of the first that came to mind. He doesn't need Awakening.
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,351 ★★★★
    Are we going to see any content using non God tier or play without synergies since that is one of the complaints on this thread?
  • Dexman1349Dexman1349 Posts: 3,060 ★★★★★
    Dshu said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    The simple answer would be because it's a progress gate. People don't have nearly as many Max Sig 5*s and 6*s as they do 4*s. Well, at least those below a certain point. The simplest way to put it would be that the 4*s would make it easier than they want it to be.

    I know I should ignore you, but when do I get the chance to discuss with a Kabam employee?
    The official "answer" is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak. Are you seriously trying to say that 4* champs would be too OP for Act 6? Very funny
    I don't remember reading the comment that they would be too weak.
    Nor did I say they would be too OP.
    I said it would make it easier than they wanted. It's a progress gate. It's harder if you don't have what you need.
    Also, if it didn't make it easier to have 4*s, we wouldn't have 58 pages of people arguing they needed them.
    They said they wanted to, and i quote: "[...] use gates liberally, oftentimes to prevent players from having frustrating experiences in content beyond their capabilities". As far as I know, there are 3 cases in which Kabam has limited champions based on their strength: Infinity Dungeons (more on that below), Dange Rooms (here the restriction was meant to be part of the challenge) and Act 6. This esentially does mean that they want to say that 4* champions in Act 6 would lead to frustration since they are too weak. You want to deny that?
    Hang on, that's two different things. You said "The official 'answer' is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak." That's false: they didn't say that. They did say that allowing 4* champs in Act 6 could lead to frustration, but that doesn't mean there's anything explicitly wrong with 4* champs. Rather, that means all players are different, and for many players attempting to use 4* champs could lead to frustration.

    That's not debatable, that's undeniably true. We already see this now: there's lots of players who have expressed frustration over the difficulty of Uncollected monthly events, and the logic is often words to the effect of "they are uncollected, so uncollected should be something they should be able to do." Becoming uncollected is the prerequisite for doing uncollected difficulty, but many players who can't do uncollected difficulty believe that the problem is with the content if they are uncollected, because the prerequisite was met to do it.

    This thought process is completely wrong, but that doesn't mean it doesn't cause problems for the game that would be magically solved if the players who aren't ready for Uncollected were somehow barred from even attempting it. Of course, that's not practical: there's no way to know in advance if someone can or can't do it.

    Kabam isn't saying you personally won't be able to do Act 6 with 4* champs. They are saying that the percentage of people who can among all players who will try is low enough to be a problem. In and of itself that isn't the justification for the progress gate, but it is a legitimate factor in favor of it.
    Those posts saying uncollected is too hard also include people saying they have rank 4 and 5 5* champs and feel it's too hard. Players claimed the Capt challenge and champion challenge were too hard too. Yet for each of those posts there were people saying they did it with 3 and 4*s. I've done several uncollected events with 3*s just for the challenge. I used a mostly 4* team for the Capt challenge. I've also dipped as low as 2* for uncollected to take out certain bosses (sometimes I regret selling my 3* Ronan) if the content is that difficult let the difficulty and skill of the player be the gate has it has in the past. If you want to use gates based off of rarity maybe announce it a little more than a week before the release of the event. While I have a roster that will probably get through this content with little issue I still feel its wrong to spring this strict of a gate on the players 1 week before the release of an event even if it is permanent content. Kabam has also stated in the past it wants players to utilize more of their roster leading to the release of the 2* arenas we have seen in the past. The is the complete opposite of utilizing more of your roster its removing 80 to 90% of many players rosters. Is it the fear that lower profiles may close the gap with the top 5% that's got people saying it's ok to gate content like this. If so why are you afraid of the competition you will face if players can do the same content as you with lower tier champs?
    Just to play devil's advocate, perhaps Kabam's reasoning for excluding a large portion of the roster in the name of "exploring more of" it is in essence telling the player base to stop waiting for the god tier champs. Instead, learn the toolkits of the champs you do have, even if that means taking the 3rd or 4th best option for that particular utility.

    For example, you will need a champ that inflicts bleed but you don't have Blade, AA or Gwenpool. Instead you're looking to Black Panther, Guilly, or Drax. The major source of contention from the player base here is that while we may have those lower-tiered champs, we don't necessarily have resources readily available to rank those up because they aren't very good elsewhere in the game.

    So in addition to a champion rarity gate, it also is a bit of a resource gate as well.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,225 Guardian

    Just to play devil's advocate, perhaps Kabam's reasoning for excluding a large portion of the roster in the name of "exploring more of" it is in essence telling the player base to stop waiting for the god tier champs. Instead, learn the toolkits of the champs you do have, even if that means taking the 3rd or 4th best option for that particular utility.

    For example, you will need a champ that inflicts bleed but you don't have Blade, AA or Gwenpool. Instead you're looking to Black Panther, Guilly, or Drax. The major source of contention from the player base here is that while we may have those lower-tiered champs, we don't necessarily have resources readily available to rank those up because they aren't very good elsewhere in the game.

    So in addition to a champion rarity gate, it also is a bit of a resource gate as well.

    I think anyone trying to find a singular reason for all of the specifics of the progress gate aren't going to find one. While I wasn't in the room and can't therefore comment on what specific factors went into Kabam's decision, if I ask what would cause me to implement something like this, the relatively obvious conclusion is that this progress gate exists as a compromise of a number of different and partially opposing factors. This happens all the time in game development, and this dynamic often plays out in reality as a real compromise between many different developers who advocate different priorities that have to be balanced in the final product (and often, no one is entirely happy at the end).

    It is never this simple, but you can imagine different developers representing different positions, each advocating a set of imperatives. Developer A says they want Act 6 to have a quantum jump forward in difficulty: they don't want to keep making difficulty jumps in tiny increments. The people doing that content can't even notice that difficulty is rising: they keep complaining that nothing changes. And if we keep gradually increasing difficulty in such a way that players can easily adjust to it, then "relative" difficulty never increases, and thus rewards can't increase either (as rewards are tied to relative difficulty, not absolute difficulty, at least when the content is first introduced).

    Then developer B says fine, make Act 6 way harder, but then everyone will try it and then complain we made it too hard, its a cash grab, we only care about the whales, etc etc. If we're going to have to eat that criticism anyway, put a progress gate into it so only the highest tier players can even enter it. That way we can tune the difficulty for those players, our datamining won't be skewed by all the lower progress players trying and failing it, and to be candid half of them will tell the other half to "get gud" and the social dynamics surrounding the content will make difficulty complaints have way less traction.

    Developer C now jumps in and says "if we make a progress gate based on roster we should make it so players have to bring rank 4 and higher 5* champs (and 6* champs). Those are the "upper tier" champs anyway.

    Developer D counters: that will encourage players to rank up whatever they have, even if they were saving for more optimal rank ups, and they will argue they were "forced" to do so, even though Act 6 is going to be around forever and they didn't have to do that immediately. And if we make the progress gate tied to rank itself, that will put a lot of pressure immediately on rank up material availability. I don't want the progress gate to be based on rank, I would rather it be based on rarity. We're making 5* champs more available anyway, this directly ties the gate to something that's already increasing over time.

    Then Developer E jumps in and says "hey, I have an idea: lets delay the whole thing into Act 7, and lets put in a new currency and unlock system and a store that allows specific subsets of the progress lock to be bypassed and then" - and then they send that guy to fetch lunch (trust me, I've been there more times than I can count).

    None of them necessarily wants exactly what the design ends up being, but the design ends up factoring all of their concerns in and generating something that sits at the blurry center of their combined preferences. You end up with a progress gate, based on roster, factoring in high rarity champs, connected to a reward system that is already scheduled to increase the availability of those rarity champs over time which will depreciate the gate strength over time.

    Because this is how these things often go, it isn't easy for one person to specify the precise thought process that went into it. In fact, I've had conversations with multiple developers involved with a game change where each one of them honestly though the "reason" for the change was something completely different.

    It could be that there's just one singular architect for the whole thing. If so, I would have different questions for that one person than if it was a collaboration. But in my experience, something of this magnitude is usually a collaborative effort, and usually no one person authoritatively draws a line in the sand (except the deadline guy, he usually draws a line in the sand).
  • Bidzy7Bidzy7 Posts: 312 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Hang on, that's two different things. You said "The official 'answer' is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak." That's false: they didn't say that. They did say that allowing 4* champs in Act 6 could lead to frustration, but that doesn't mean there's anything explicitly wrong with 4* champs. Rather, that means all players are different, and for many players attempting to use 4* champs could lead to frustration.

    That's not debatable, that's undeniably true. We already see this now: there's lots of players who have expressed frustration over the difficulty of Uncollected monthly events, and the logic is often words to the effect of "they are uncollected, so uncollected should be something they should be able to do." Becoming uncollected is the prerequisite for doing uncollected difficulty, but many players who can't do uncollected difficulty believe that the problem is with the content if they are uncollected, because the prerequisite was met to do it.

    They may have never actually said 4* were too weak but it definitely was implied. What other reason could you have to say they would cause frustration ?

    Also you are saying that using 4* "COULD" lead to frustration and then saying that it is "UNDENIABLY TRUE".
    Sorry but you can't really say something like that is true because you can't speak on behalf of everyone. You yourself say it "COULD"

    Talking about people complaining about UC quest, there is a mixed bag of reason for peoples complaint. People using 5* also complain it is too difficult. I would say not having the right counter/champ for certain fights is probably also a big driver for the complaints. I will expect to see quite a lot of complaints when we get act, 6 looking at some of the nodes and champions people will have to face with a limited roster.

    Now having looked at Lags CCP video on act 6, i can see where this frustration they talk about would come from, which is the degen damage and block damage you will be taking. On a r4 and r5 Champion that degen isn't so bad and doesn't seem as punishing. On 4* and r3 5* i can see it being very punishing. Again not sure why they didn't just explain that, if it is one of the reasons for this rarity gating.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,799 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:


    I dont think it flags as a buff. I dont recall it's a node in variant but I could be wrong(aka modok may not work)
    Maybe not luke for same reason

    Duped Cable has a % chance to gain a power gain buff each time he fills a bar of power
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,225 Guardian
    Bidzy7 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Hang on, that's two different things. You said "The official 'answer' is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak." That's false: they didn't say that. They did say that allowing 4* champs in Act 6 could lead to frustration, but that doesn't mean there's anything explicitly wrong with 4* champs. Rather, that means all players are different, and for many players attempting to use 4* champs could lead to frustration.

    That's not debatable, that's undeniably true. We already see this now: there's lots of players who have expressed frustration over the difficulty of Uncollected monthly events, and the logic is often words to the effect of "they are uncollected, so uncollected should be something they should be able to do." Becoming uncollected is the prerequisite for doing uncollected difficulty, but many players who can't do uncollected difficulty believe that the problem is with the content if they are uncollected, because the prerequisite was met to do it.

    They may have never actually said 4* were too weak but it definitely was implied. What other reason could you have to say they would cause frustration ?
    Don't quote my posts if you're not going to read them.
    Bidzy7 said:

    Also you are saying that using 4* "COULD" lead to frustration and then saying that it is "UNDENIABLY TRUE".
    Sorry but you can't really say something like that is true because you can't speak on behalf of everyone. You yourself say it "COULD"

    It is undeniably true that allowing players into high difficulty content above their skill level relative to their roster strength could lead to frustration, because we have multiple examples of this already happening, which I stated in the post you quoted but did not read. I don't have to speak for everyone to say something could happen: a single example of it actually happening is enough to prove that it could happen. Which is the normal, ordinary meaning of these words.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,789 ★★★★★
    I think the whole point of the experience is only one part of the reason, and the larger part of that is to separate progress stages. When you look at the various ways to determine progress, Prestige, Rating, etc., the one thing those all have in common is the Champs people have. As it stands now, which was also referenced in the response, there is a vast array of progress levels after Level 60. When you consider how many people are Uncollected now, that includes an entire gamut of different growth points. When you also factor in the Synergies and availability of very powerful 4*s, not having a gate literally does very little to separate those progress levels. A few who haven't completed Act 5 will be separated, but essentially all that will happen is the same lump will migrate beyond that level.
    We could spend days in the "because why, because why...." cycle, but there's also a great deal that isn't even at play yet. There could be a number of things upcoming in the future, both for people at Cavalier and not. There could be a new level of EQ level that is at the level of Cavalier, increased incentives for those who aren't Cavalier, added help to prepare for Act 6, I mean we just don't know what's planned for the future. All that will be seen. In any event, that's the gate they've set.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,225 Guardian

    I think the whole point of the experience is only one part of the reason, and the larger part of that is to separate progress stages. When you look at the various ways to determine progress, Prestige, Rating, etc., the one thing those all have in common is the Champs people have. As it stands now, which was also referenced in the response, there is a vast array of progress levels after Level 60. When you consider how many people are Uncollected now, that includes an entire gamut of different growth points. When you also factor in the Synergies and availability of very powerful 4*s, not having a gate literally does very little to separate those progress levels. A few who haven't completed Act 5 will be separated, but essentially all that will happen is the same lump will migrate beyond that level.
    We could spend days in the "because why, because why...." cycle, but there's also a great deal that isn't even at play yet. There could be a number of things upcoming in the future, both for people at Cavalier and not. There could be a new level of EQ level that is at the level of Cavalier, increased incentives for those who aren't Cavalier, added help to prepare for Act 6, I mean we just don't know what's planned for the future. All that will be seen. In any event, that's the gate they've set.

    Did you used to write the Cylon dialog for the Battlestar Galactica reboot?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,789 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    I think the whole point of the experience is only one part of the reason, and the larger part of that is to separate progress stages. When you look at the various ways to determine progress, Prestige, Rating, etc., the one thing those all have in common is the Champs people have. As it stands now, which was also referenced in the response, there is a vast array of progress levels after Level 60. When you consider how many people are Uncollected now, that includes an entire gamut of different growth points. When you also factor in the Synergies and availability of very powerful 4*s, not having a gate literally does very little to separate those progress levels. A few who haven't completed Act 5 will be separated, but essentially all that will happen is the same lump will migrate beyond that level.
    We could spend days in the "because why, because why...." cycle, but there's also a great deal that isn't even at play yet. There could be a number of things upcoming in the future, both for people at Cavalier and not. There could be a new level of EQ level that is at the level of Cavalier, increased incentives for those who aren't Cavalier, added help to prepare for Act 6, I mean we just don't know what's planned for the future. All that will be seen. In any event, that's the gate they've set.

    Did you used to write the Cylon dialog for the Battlestar Galactica reboot?
    Stargate. XD
  • xNigxNig Posts: 5,294 ★★★★★
    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,351 ★★★★
    xNig said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
    While you may not need those God tier champs to beat those opponents I can't help but notice that they were the champs used by the ccp to showcase 6.1.1
  • DrZolaDrZola Posts: 3,669 ★★★★★
    Busa_6 said:




    Straight from the kabams ceo mouth, so you tell me who’s lying @Kabam Miike him, or are you guys lying to him on wtf y’all are doing

    🤔🤔🤔

    @Busa_6 Off topic, but you’re now the point man to post that pic of the Kabam CEO interview every time someone says logging in for the calendar is just a big nothing. He thinks our time is worth something even if his customers don’t.

    Dr. Zola
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,351 ★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    Dshu said:

    xNig said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
    While you may not need those God tier champs to beat those opponents I can't help but notice that they were the champs used by the ccp to showcase 6.1.1
    Simply because that's who they had ranked.
    So those are the only champs that had ranked? There is zero chance they may have had some lesser tier champs they may have ranked for I don't know maybe aw diversity? I may be wrong and legacy was using his aw defense team. I guess it's a shame that he only has God tier champs and synergies unlike the majority or the community who is lucky enough to have duped groots and iron Patriots
  • DarthPhalDarthPhal Posts: 1,064 ★★★★
    I wish it was being unlocked after maintenance. I want to start it tonight.
  • xNigxNig Posts: 5,294 ★★★★★
    Dshu said:

    xNig said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
    While you may not need those God tier champs to beat those opponents I can't help but notice that they were the champs used by the ccp to showcase 6.1.1
    If they have the optimal champs, then it’ll be dumb to not use them. Would you be watching the CCP (or would they even be one in the first place?) if they didn’t have these champs ranked up and making videos on how to play these champs?

    Like what someone mentioned earlier, because the nodes are so diverse, you’re looking to dig DEEP into your roster for options to counter certain node champ combinations. I also previously stated that the playerbase are too focused on “god tier champs” that they forget that there are other “non-god tier champs” who are capable of handling the node.

    The current mindset of the vast majority of the playerbase is “there is an optimal counter, the #1 choice, one of the ONLY few choices” that can be used. If I don’t have a 5/6* Variant of it, I’ll use my 4* one. That mindset is so restrictive.

    IMIW? Oh man I need a Corvus or Void or I’m never passing him. 😒 Don’t have a 5* one? Let me use my 4* one.

    But people never stop to think, “hey.. I might be able to use that unused 5* Elektra or 5* Falcon to take him down.”
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,789 ★★★★★
    In their defense, if you're going into a new Quest with a new Difficulty, are you going to reach for your mediocre Champs, or the best you can muster?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,789 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    Dshu said:

    xNig said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
    While you may not need those God tier champs to beat those opponents I can't help but notice that they were the champs used by the ccp to showcase 6.1.1
    If they have the optimal champs, then it’ll be dumb to not use them. Would you be watching the CCP (or would they even be one in the first place?) if they didn’t have these champs ranked up and making videos on how to play these champs?

    Like what someone mentioned earlier, because the nodes are so diverse, you’re looking to dig DEEP into your roster for options to counter certain node champ combinations. I also previously stated that the playerbase are too focused on “god tier champs” that they forget that there are other “non-god tier champs” who are capable of handling the node.

    The current mindset of the vast majority of the playerbase is “there is an optimal counter, the #1 choice, one of the ONLY few choices” that can be used. If I don’t have a 5/6* Variant of it, I’ll use my 4* one. That mindset is so restrictive.

    IMIW? Oh man I need a Corvus or Void or I’m never passing him. 😒 Don’t have a 5* one? Let me use my 4* one.

    But people never stop to think, “hey.. I might be able to use that unused 5* Elektra or 5* Falcon to take him down.”
    ^
  • CFreeCFree Posts: 491 ★★
    edited March 2019
    D
    Drooped2 said:

    Dshu said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Dshu said:

    xNig said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    On the subject on the first quest I see those wonderful Domino, Korg, Mephisto & Iron Man (Infinity War) fights which will be super fun for everyone that doesn't have an adequate counter in their 5 Star/6 Star roster and this is just the first very quest. Not too mention the massive disadvantage players that will have that don't have a god tier bleeder for the "These champions can only take bleed damage path".

    If you think the reaction is bad now, you're going to be in for a great time tomorrow mate.

    I believe it’s a common fallacy to think that you’ll need “god tier” champs to go through strong opponents.
    While you may not need those God tier champs to beat those opponents I can't help but notice that they were the champs used by the ccp to showcase 6.1.1
    Simply because that's who they had ranked.
    So those are the only champs that had ranked? There is zero chance they may have had some lesser tier champs they may have ranked for I don't know maybe aw diversity? I may be wrong and legacy was using his aw defense team. I guess it's a shame that he only has God tier champs and synergies unlike the majority or the community who is lucky enough to have duped groots and iron Patriots
    I watched Dave's havent seen lags yet. But they use the same champs for uncollected I bet.

    Let me guess corvus ghost... trying to recall lags roster stark and vision?
    Initially, Blade, GR, Corvus, Spark, and Omega Red. But also SS, Void, Vision and maybe others depending on who he what he was trying to counter.
  • MaatManMaatMan Posts: 958 ★★★
    edited March 2019
    *deleted as I quoted the wrong post
Sign In or Register to comment.