Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Making the decision to BAN 4 Star Champions from Act 6 is BEYOND a cheap move.
But dropping the news on the community ONE WEEK before the release of Act 6 that 4 Star Champions are now completely useless for future story progression when you've been constantly selling 4 Star awakening gems, 4 Star rank up gem packages and 4 Star Champion crystals is just straight up a trash tier move.
There are no valid reasons why 4 Stars shouldn't be allowed in Act 5 other than you want to encourage more people to buy 5 Star Champions.
This game should be about skill & strategy, 4 Stars have always been a great way to fill roster gaps, even in high tier content like Act 5, Variant 100% & Endgame challenges.
This is honestly a shameful decision.
You've taken a lot of steps in the right direction over the last couple of years, but this is a HUGE step in the wrong direction.
also people who need to rely on the crutches that are champion synergies need to learn to adapt.
yes synergies are great. yes they make things easier.
but thats just it. they should make it easier for you to do things. not be the only way you are able to do things.
if you need danger sense to kill modok you need to practice and learn to kil modok. if you need wasp to make ghost good you need to practice more and good without. yes it makes things easier much much easier to the point of almost too easy but she is still great by herself.
I have 5/65 Medusa. i barely use royal family synergy.
synergies make the job easier but should not be the crutch you rely upon.
practice without, improve your skills, it may be hard, it may take time but your skills will improve and you will be a better player for it.
I've played this game a while now and TBH I totally understand your line of thinking and I'm not bothered by the decision made by Kabam for whatever reasons they may have. BUT, I do not agree with your line of thinking mainly for the following reasons. If a player wants to have synergies to make it easier be "the only way they are able to do things", or be the crutch they rely on, they have every right to do so unless it was disclaimed that those very things will not be available to use as currently intended. ESPECIALLY if they paid money and time to gain those synergies and champs as hyped, advertised and sold by Kabam. What you or any other player does or doesn't do is not the issue nor the solution here. The issue is the ethics or lack there of displayed over the years, and there are hundreds of solutions better suited for ACT6 greivances then "improve your skills......you will be a better player for it". The "git gud" schtick is really missused IMO because everyone has different ceilings for skill whether it be physical skill or intellectual skill. And the "if you're not good enough, just quit playing" responses some use are ignorant at best. I'll close with a couple analogies for examples to be considered.
1. You buy a smartphone because you were wooed by the salesperson that although a bit expensive, the relavency of all its top notch hardware will be up to par in performance and future app compatibilty during your lifetime because although not 100% guaranteed, advancement in technology has reached its peak for generations to come...... 2 yrs later, your smartphone begins overheating and your told your model is now obsolete.
2. You join a paid dues baseball league for "one and all" so you train your heart out and never miss a game and give 110% of all your effort. There's a player who happens to be an ex MLB star and tells you that you need to improve to his skill level or else you need to pay more dues or forfeit what you have already paid and leave the team until the time comes when you are at his level.
I honestly do not understand that decision. There is neither logic nor sense to the prohibition of the 4 *. This will leave people months on end trying to gather 5 decent ones to go through. This is extremely frustrating. What is the purpose of this? do people buy packages of fragments of 5 *? I am really very disappointed
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
I think this is a pretty reasonable compromise, we've solved it!
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Personally not a fan of that idea. Why reduce the effectiveness of a 4* when, I believe, they’re already up against that challenger rating or whatever it’s called.
It would still allow synergies while at the same time allow kabam to devalue the use of 4*s. While not an ideal solution it's a valid suggestion from a player who will be minimally if at all effected by the 4* ban
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Personally not a fan of that idea. Why reduce the effectiveness of a 4* when, I believe, they’re already up against that challenger rating or whatever it’s called.
Cause it acts as a disincentive to bring 4*s (which aligns to Kabam’s goal) but still hands the choice to the players on whether they want to go ahead with it or not.
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Personally not a fan of that idea. Why reduce the effectiveness of a 4* when, I believe, they’re already up against that challenger rating or whatever it’s called.
It would still allow synergies while at the same time allow kabam to devalue the use of 4*s. While not an ideal solution it's a valid suggestion from a player who will be minimally if at all effected by the 4* ban
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.
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.
I read your post. You had an issue with the guy commenting and saying kabam officially said that 4* were too weak. you then go on to say this isn't necessarily the case just that using 4* could lead to frustration. Is this not what you said ? I said it may have not been officially said but it was implied. So again i ask you what could cause players frustration if not that they are too weak for the content ?
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.
Forgive me if i'm wrong but you are saying that "MANY" players attempting to use 4* "COULD" have a frustrating experience and that is not debatable and is "UNDENIABLY" true. Well i say to you that you have no evidence to back that statement up as anything other then your opinion. For starters this is all hypothetical as act 6 is not out and people haven't attempted it with 4*. Even going on the UC monthly quest
1) You do not know how many of them are frustrated with a certain match up or mechanic 2) You do not know how many of them are frustrated because of an entitlement complex where they feel because they have completed previous content they should be able to complete this 3) You do not know if people are frustrated because there is an issue/bug in the game which is prevent them from doing it e.g. lag on darkhawk fight 4) You do not know if people are frustrated because they have bad luck in crystals and don't have the champions they need or want to tackle the content 5) You do not know if people are frustrated because their not skilled enough to do something consistently such as dodging certain specials.
All of these reasons equally could apply to 5 and 6*
So i would argue it's not using 4* which is causing the frustration but the reasons for having to use the 4* which essentially pertains to their bad luck in crystals.
Now your response has shifted away from your original statement regarding 4* and act 6 and moved onto talking about allowing people into difficult content above their skill level and roster strength causing frustrations as being true, which i agree this would be frustrating. This however doesn't have anything to do with 4* as being a road block in players having skill or roster strength. People have actually been building their roster with all the tools available to create a strong roster that can tackle challenging content, which has been done this way due to the RNG nature of the crystals. The example you gave implied that 4* are the reason we see frustrations by people in the uncollected EQ as you made a statement regarding 4* and then going on to say we see this happening now. However you finish that example by linking the frustration of players to a sense entitlement, as they feel that just because they have become uncollected means they should be able to do uncollected EQ, which has nothing to do with 4* specifically. There is countless videos showing people tackle these quests with 4* and we even see some people do it with 3*. This just proves that it's doable if you are a skilled player. So players frustrations aren't related to using 4* but their skill and sense of entitlement for meeting the prerequisite
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.
On the one hand you are saying it's impossible to know in advance if someone can or can't do something so banning them is impractical and on the other you're saying Kabam know that only a small percentage of players that will try it with 4* will be able to do the content so is one of the valid factors for this gate . That to me seems contradictory.
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Personally not a fan of that idea. Why reduce the effectiveness of a 4* when, I believe, they’re already up against that challenger rating or whatever it’s called.
It would still allow synergies while at the same time allow kabam to devalue the use of 4*s. While not an ideal solution it's a valid suggestion from a player who will be minimally if at all effected by the 4* ban
So we have a compromise. 😂😂
(Yeah the ban doesn’t affect me one bit tbh.)
It doesn't really affect me either and I am only opposed to it because of how the spring it on the community. I'd like to see kabam look at these compromises. I understand the frustration of the lower tier rosters
Maybe instead of a 4* Ban, there could be a global node that auto kills 4*. Would solve the synergy problem while still maintaining Kabams goal.
An alternative would be having a Chapter (or Act) Global Node that gives a passive 50% Weakness on the Attacker and +100% Champion Boost for the Defender if anything below a 5* is used.
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
Personally not a fan of that idea. Why reduce the effectiveness of a 4* when, I believe, they’re already up against that challenger rating or whatever it’s called.
It would still allow synergies while at the same time allow kabam to devalue the use of 4*s. While not an ideal solution it's a valid suggestion from a player who will be minimally if at all effected by the 4* ban
So we have a compromise. 😂😂
(Yeah the ban doesn’t affect me one bit tbh.)
It doesn't really affect me either and I am only opposed to it because of how the spring it on the community. I'd like to see kabam look at these compromises. I understand the frustration of the lower tier rosters
Yeah. But I doubt they wanted it as a surprise one week before launch. I explained the rough timeline and sometimes their hands are tied as well from upper management. 🤷🏻♂️
The easiest bandaid approach for kabam at this point would to offer a few rank down 4* tickets to those who have done a completion run in Act 5 and would be eleigable for act 6.1
Im only concerned with one run through at the moment just to start getting the better rewards so i can start building up my roster for the rest. With the hint of further champ restrictions i will only be ranking absolute needs for monthly EQs and 6* champs. Which means not ranking that many 6* champs since it will take forever. Lol but at least i will have a better shot at them with the initial clear.
And not sure how the rest of the nodes will be but seems like a challenge within reach for 6.1 to get the cavalier title. Looking back at 5.2 (remembering how hard it was initially) it seems fairly easy now. Roster improved greatly with the uncollected title.
Act 6 will be here in a few hours. Until then I will grind the arena, work on content I need to work through. I'm level 58 and still need to clear Classic and Variant, as well as Act 4(I've only 100% Chapter 1, done 1 run through all of Chapter 2, gone through 1 run of the first three quests of Chapter 3.), RTTL, LOL, and of course Act 5. I know a lot of people on here have completed this, but I have taken time off various times and currently my 5* roster is small (4 5*s) and no 6*s. Still I'm excited about Act 6.
Act 6 will be here in a few hours. Until then I will grind the arena, work on content I need to work through. I'm level 58 and still need to clear Classic and Variant, as well as Act 4(I've only 100% Chapter 1, done 1 run through all of Chapter 2, gone through 1 run of the first three quests of Chapter 3.), RTTL, LOL, and of course Act 5. I know a lot of people on here have completed this, but I have taken time off various times and currently my 5* roster is small (4 5*s) and no 6*s. Still I'm excited about Act 6.
Variant was a nice roster boost for me the rank up gems really came in handy for me. That and Act 5 completion have the best rewards in my opinion. Plus the 2015 rank up gems did not cost gold so that was a nice added bonus. Strangely you needed the gold in your account but it did not use it. Anyway good luck man hope you get some good pulls and see ya in act 6 soon!
Act 6 will be here in a few hours. Until then I will grind the arena, work on content I need to work through. I'm level 58 and still need to clear Classic and Variant, as well as Act 4(I've only 100% Chapter 1, done 1 run through all of Chapter 2, gone through 1 run of the first three quests of Chapter 3.), RTTL, LOL, and of course Act 5. I know a lot of people on here have completed this, but I have taken time off various times and currently my 5* roster is small (4 5*s) and no 6*s. Still I'm excited about Act 6.
Variant was a nice roster boost for me the rank up gems really came in handy for me. That and Act 5 completion have the best rewards in my opinion. Plus the 2015 rank up gems did not cost gold so that was a nice added bonus. Strangely you needed the gold in your account but it did not use it. Anyway good luck man hope you get some good pulls and see ya in act 6 soon!
Act 6 will be here in a few hours. Until then I will grind the arena, work on content I need to work through. I'm level 58 and still need to clear Classic and Variant, as well as Act 4(I've only 100% Chapter 1, done 1 run through all of Chapter 2, gone through 1 run of the first three quests of Chapter 3.), RTTL, LOL, and of course Act 5. I know a lot of people on here have completed this, but I have taken time off various times and currently my 5* roster is small (4 5*s) and no 6*s. Still I'm excited about Act 6.
And deff make getting uncollected a priority, if not already! everything will change for you
Comments
This keeps 4*s still relevant, addresses Kabam’s goal on having roster exploration by discouraging (but not eliminating the use of 4*s), allows very skilled players to still use their rosters, and bring lower rarity champions along for synergies.
At the end of the day, having the “choice” to bring a champ that people have ranked is important to them.
If a player wants to have synergies to make it easier be "the only way they are able to do things", or be the crutch they rely on, they have every right to do so unless it was disclaimed that those very things will not be available to use as currently intended. ESPECIALLY if they paid money and time to gain those synergies and champs as hyped, advertised and sold by Kabam. What you or any other player does or doesn't do is not the issue nor the solution here. The issue is the ethics or lack there of displayed over the years, and there are hundreds of solutions better suited for ACT6 greivances then "improve your skills......you will be a better player for it".
The "git gud" schtick is really missused IMO because everyone has different ceilings for skill whether it be physical skill or intellectual skill. And the "if you're not good enough, just quit playing" responses some use are ignorant at best. I'll close with a couple analogies for examples to be considered.
1. You buy a smartphone because you were wooed by the salesperson that although a bit expensive, the relavency of all its top notch hardware will be up to par in performance and future app compatibilty during your lifetime because although not 100% guaranteed, advancement in technology has reached its peak for generations to come...... 2 yrs later, your smartphone begins overheating and your told your model is now obsolete.
2. You join a paid dues baseball league for "one and all" so you train your heart out and never miss a game and give 110% of all your effort. There's a player who happens to be an ex MLB star and tells you that you need to improve to his skill level or else you need to pay more dues or forfeit what you have already paid and leave the team until the time comes when you are at his level.
I am really very disappointed
(Yeah the ban doesn’t affect me one bit tbh.)
I read your post. You had an issue with the guy commenting and saying kabam officially said that 4* were too weak. you then go on to say this isn't necessarily the case just that using 4* could lead to frustration. Is this not what you said ?
I said it may have not been officially said but it was implied. So again i ask you what could cause players frustration if not that they are too weak for the content ?
You said Forgive me if i'm wrong but you are saying that "MANY" players attempting to use 4* "COULD" have a frustrating experience and that is not debatable and is "UNDENIABLY" true. Well i say to you that you have no evidence to back that statement up as anything other then your opinion. For starters this is all hypothetical as act 6 is not out and people haven't attempted it with 4*. Even going on the UC monthly quest
1) You do not know how many of them are frustrated with a certain match up or mechanic
2) You do not know how many of them are frustrated because of an entitlement complex where they feel because they have completed previous content they should be able to complete this
3) You do not know if people are frustrated because there is an issue/bug in the game which is prevent them from doing it e.g. lag on darkhawk fight
4) You do not know if people are frustrated because they have bad luck in crystals and don't have the champions they need or want to tackle the content
5) You do not know if people are frustrated because their not skilled enough to do something consistently such as dodging certain specials.
All of these reasons equally could apply to 5 and 6*
So i would argue it's not using 4* which is causing the frustration but the reasons for having to use the 4* which essentially pertains to their bad luck in crystals.
Now your response has shifted away from your original statement regarding 4* and act 6 and moved onto talking about allowing people into difficult content above their skill level and roster strength causing frustrations as being true, which i agree this would be frustrating. This however doesn't have anything to do with 4* as being a road block in players having skill or roster strength. People have actually been building their roster with all the tools available to create a strong roster that can tackle challenging content, which has been done this way due to the RNG nature of the crystals. The example you gave implied that 4* are the reason we see frustrations by people in the uncollected EQ as you made a statement regarding 4* and then going on to say we see this happening now. However you finish that example by linking the frustration of players to a sense entitlement, as they feel that just because they have become uncollected means they should be able to do uncollected EQ, which has nothing to do with 4* specifically. There is countless videos showing people tackle these quests with 4* and we even see some people do it with 3*. This just proves that it's doable if you are a skilled player. So players frustrations aren't related to using 4* but their skill and sense of entitlement for meeting the prerequisite
So what have i not read ?
Also On the one hand you are saying it's impossible to know in advance if someone can or can't do something so banning them is impractical and on the other you're saying Kabam know that only a small percentage of players that will try it with 4* will be able to do the content so is one of the valid factors for this gate . That to me seems contradictory.