Kabam, need to have a serious discussion about Ebony Maw

Dtl7714

TheSpicyKnight said:

Drooped2 said:

This really only effects people who have a 1 champ crutch .

I know theres arguements for 6 champs
But when was the last time you saw a team made of 3 of these in war?
Ghost corvus sure team them the third wont be Ultron electra gamora or sym spidey.

And everyone I know in any tier above gold uses logic when picking teams and if they feel its a risk uses the aw tool made by hector to reveal defenders

Honestly, I doubt anyone is going to have too much trouble with this in AW. But like what @Hamin said earlier I think it's a dangerous precedent to set for the players just like how Kabam were releasing champs that negated Dexterity. Fortunately, they stopped after Heimdall and I hope that they'll stop releasing champs with a invincible mechanic like Maw in the future.

But, who knows. Maybe Kabam will change his mechanic one day when there's a highly stacked Corvus that we can cheese with Maw.

That's why I am voicing displeasure, and others should too if they feel the same. The more they think it's acceptable, the more likely they will do it in the future.

Dtl7714

Drooped2 said:

The precedent is a touch scary but until I see a trend I'm just not worried. I'm getting an ebony maw for attack I see a ton of node 27 corvus fights that ill.never worry about again

Exactly. I could care less about a single character affecting a few characters. It is the precedent for this character design that should not be encouraged. Silence is compliance. So it is either let it be known this not wanted or dont be surprised when it is repeated.

GroundedWisdom

I'm sure they're going to design the game how they want either way. Lol. If something is necessary for the direction they want to go, they'll add it. The fact is, they've always encouraged people not to rely on the same tactics. When you have a Champ that relies on Guaranteed Crit, there are little directions to go that don't involve changing the Champ themselves, and we all know that would go over like a brit shick house. Besides that, he would be stealthier than Corvus, just because of his position in The Army. I honestly think it's being blown out of proportion either way, it's one Champ that can't be touched by a few others. It's not an omen of doom.

Dtl7714

GroundedWisdom said:

I'm sure they're going to design the game how they want either way. Lol. If something is necessary for the direction they want to go, they'll add it. The fact is, they've always encouraged people not to rely on the same tactics. When you have a Champ that relies on Guaranteed Crit, there are little directions to go that don't involve changing the Champ themselves, and we all know that would go over like a brit shick house. Besides that, he would be stealthier than Corvus, just because of his position in The Army. I honestly think it's being blown out of proportion either way, it's one Champ that can't be touched by a few others. It's not an omen of doom.

Not all would agree with you that unhittable champs are an inevitable and needed progression.

And I'm sure there wanting people to use a wide variety of champs is on some level encouraged due to them wanting people to spend money.

And it's currently 1 champ, I would prefer that number not grow. While I will admit they will do what they want to to do it doesn't hurt for people to add opinions on what they would like to see.

GroundedWisdom

Not all agreed with the 12.0 nerfs, but they were necessary for a very important reason. They're not going down the road of people dominating content with the same Champs again. This is what balance is. It's a counter to a very specific Ability. If the need arises in the future again, I'm sure something else will be introduced and people won't like it equally as much. Why? Because people don't like change, and they want to continue to use the OP Champs for everything. Problem with that is, there is no change and there is no future in that.

Dtl7714

GroundedWisdom said:

Not all agreed with the 12.0 nerfs, but they were necessary for a very important reason. They're not going down the road of people dominating content with the same Champs again. This is what balance is. It's a counter to a very specific Ability. If the need arises in the future again, I'm sure something else will be introduced and people won't like it equally as much. Why? Because people don't like change, and they want to continue to use the OP Champs for everything. Problem with that is, there is no change and there is no future in that.

Do you have amnesia. Nobody agreed with the 12.0 fiasco. Something about a boycott. And to sit their and say it was necessary to nerf champs with the champs they have released since then is rediculous. And that was done to roll back op champs so they could introduce new God tier champs for people to buy.

GroundedWisdom

I don't have amnesia at all. I'm quite aware of what went on, I was in the middle of it the whole time. If you're comparing Champs they have now to the ones they had then, I don't think you entirely grasp what took place and why it was necessary. It wasn't done to promote God Tier Champs they have now. The whole God Tier scale isn't even a design of Kabam. People spoke out at how drastic the changes were, and some adjustments were made, but the fundamental core of what had to be changed was still changed.
No Champs exist in the same fashion. They can't. The Devs reached a point that they could no longer offer challenging content because those Champs bypassed everything numerically. A combination of their Abilities, Synergies, and the old percentage-based system made it impossible to create anything they were challenged by through the limitations of the Base Stats and how they were magnified with that system. Which is why not only the Champs changed, the system did as well. We have DR now, and although there are powerful Champs, none exist as OP as those did. They've gone to great lengths to ensure that doesn't happen again because when a Dev loses control of the future of their product, that's the beginning of the end of it. No Champ exists of the same caliber, and those changes were necessary for the game to continue. Some are powerful, and it was never the goal to stop creating powerful Champs, but they have balances, weaknesses, and counters.
I used that example because it was another instance where something was resisted but necessary. When you have Champs that have 100% chance at anything, that limits the options you have to counter that. People are arguing that there's a softer way, but there literally isn't when that is what you're trying to counter in the design. Sorry to say, but sometimes things are not wanted, but necessary for the overall vision.

Cliffordcan

Drooped2 said:

This really only effects people who have a 1 champ crutch .

I know theres arguements for 6 champs
But when was the last time you saw a team made of 3 of these in war?
Ghost corvus sure team them the third wont be Ultron electra gamora or sym spidey.

And everyone I know in any tier above gold uses logic when picking teams and if they feel its a risk uses the aw tool made by hector to reveal defenders

Gold isn’t a tier, it’s a placement rank. Wouldn’t expect someone in T4 to understand that though.

Dtl7714

GroundedWisdom said:

Okay, first of all, the Moderators have a job to do. Don't mistake that for some kind of personal judgment.
Secondly, you're either being argumentative yourself, or contradictory, but 12.0 was 100% necessary. That's not even my opinion, that's common knowledge. You just answered your own argument. They were able to make harder and harder content BECAUSE 12.0 happened.

Something that was boycotted and hated and to my knowledge your the only one who defends was 100% neccessarry? That is most definitely not common knowledge. And to say that it was needed to make harder content is a questionable statement. There wasnt some magical barrier removed that allowed them to jack up pi and add difficult nodes and add fight mechanics. Could have been done with or without 12.0

GroundedWisdom

No, it couldn't. You seem to think that what is necessary for the game is based on popular vote, for some reason. People can boycott whatever they want, but that doesn't make it less necessary for the future of the game. I'm afraid it IS common knowledge. They never changed those Champs and the entire system on a whim. It was necessary to regain control of their design. You can believe that or not, but it doesn't make it any less true, and I just explained why it was necessary. I could go deeper into it, but I'm not convinced you would listen.

Scopeotoe987

Wasn’t parry badly affected by 12.0? Also yes, 12.0 was meant to Create diversity in character choices, but made difficulty absurd like labyrinth of legends where a rank 4 5 star lord could die in a few blocked hits. Also made characters very weak in content such as Scarlet Witch which was considered to be the worst hit in the time of 12.0.

SummonerNR

How can we turn this thread off, like all your back and forth that were deleted earlier in other thread, you just jumped into this one to do the same thing. Nobody gonna change the others opinion.

GroundedWisdom

SummonerNR said:

How can we turn this thread off, like all your back and forth that were deleted earlier in other thread, you just jumped into this one to do the same thing. Nobody gonna change the others opinion.

That's just it. We can debate until the cows come home, but it's already been responded on. The Thread asked for a serious conversation on it, so that's what I'm having. For all intents and purposes, this is their position:
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/823801#Comment_823801

Which is the same point I'm trying to bring home. It's just not accepted.

GroundedWisdom

No, I didn't say having discussions was a waste of time. That's why we're here. I meant in terms of things that are necessary for the game, they will have to come to pass. 12.0 was one such example. While they did their best to compromise and change some things, the majority of what they had to do still played out, for example DR and the nerfs. In fact, I remember that boycott negated itself because even after the Players had their attention, it persisted with demands like returning Champs to the way they were, and that just wasn't happening.
As for Diversity, that was less of a necessity than 12.0, and that was really a mess in terms of people reacting. They wanted it to play a small role in the scoring, and the first few iterations didn't meet what they wanted. That was an ongoing process to get War to where they wanted it, and where we wanted it. People complained when they introduced it. "Bring back Defender Kills!". Then they complained it was worth too much in the scoring. Then they complained when they tried to remove it. That I would call a case of listening too much. People are seldom satisfied. I'm a bit jaded with that one, too many changes, and I still support using a diverse Roster. Here we are again with the same Champs being used over and over. In any event, that was more of a co-creation than 12.0. If you'll look back, the changes made after people spoke out never really affected the ultimate goal that they had to accomplish with 12.0.

TL:DR - If something is necessary for the health of the game overall, they will implement it regardless.

Nojokejaym

Lainua said:

I agree that there are many counters for Ebony Maw. I had no problem soloing him at epic difficulty this month. But the situation will totally change in alliance wars when you can not know beforehand your opponents. You don’t know which defenders you will face. There are many great mystic defenders and you rely heavily on crits to beat them quickly.

Unfortunately Corvus, Ghost and Ultron are three of most used champs in attacking phase. Many players build their team around them, making them central attackers. So with the release of Ebony Maw, they will have to change their playing style and it’s easier said than done. Who will you choose instead of Corvus if you don’t have other great attackers?

i use gulk, domino, quake, angela, magik or dr.voodoo

Dexman1349

TheSpicyKnight said:

GroundedWisdom said:

I'm sure they're going to design the game how they want either way. Lol.

This argument always bothers me. Correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like you think we should just be okay with it just because its their game and having discussions like this is a waste of time. If that's the case then it's true Kabam will design the game however they want, which is fine, but if the players disagree with that decision then they should push back to the best of their ability to at least reach compromise. If they don't then try again next time which is what we've always done and it sometimes works (ex. 12.0 and Defender Diversity removal).

That's just it. The players are constantly "voting" on the game with their time and their money. Kabam sees the user statistics, they know which champs are used/ranked/desired on a regular basis. How do you think they put together the "community choice" champ update poll? If they see every Corvus/Blade/Domino/Ghost getting immediately ranked up and added to attack teams, they have statistical data to reinforce the anecdotal stories online (yes, they even monitor Reddit and youtube despite not being able to moderate it). The only way Kabam doesn't know about a "commonly understood" player bug/exploit/trick/etc is if it isn't publicly posted.

If Kabam sees a disproportionate usage of a couple champions, they very much have the right/ability to "balance" the game. If a few champs beat everything, how do you make it fair to those who haven't been blessed by RNGesus and don't have those champs?

At the end of the day, this is Kabam's house. The write/change the rules as they wish. It's in their best interest to maintain those rules in a way that keeps players coming into their house.

Personally, I wouldn't lose any sleep at all if they re-wrote Maw's description to be blatantly obvious, "Maw cannot take damage from any other #BlackOrder champion.'

GroundedWisdom

Drooped2 said:

Dtl7714 said:

.

GroundedWisdom said:

I don't have amnesia at all. I'm quite aware of what went on, I was in the middle of it the whole time. If you're comparing Champs they have now to the ones they had then, I don't think you entirely grasp what took place and why it was necessary. It wasn't done to promote God Tier Champs they have now. The whole God Tier scale isn't even a design of Kabam. People spoke out at how drastic the changes were, and some adjustments were made, but the fundamental core of what had to be changed was still changed.
No Champs exist in the same fashion. They can't. The Devs reached a point that they could no longer offer challenging content because those Champs bypassed everything numerically. A combination of their Abilities, Synergies, and the old percentage-based system made it impossible to create anything they were challenged by through the limitations of the Base Stats and how they were magnified with that system. Which is why not only the Champs changed, the system did as well. We have DR now, and although there are powerful Champs, none exist as OP as those did. They've gone to great lengths to ensure that doesn't happen again because when a Dev loses control of the future of their product, that's the beginning of the end of it. No Champ exists of the same caliber, and those changes were necessary for the game to continue. Some are powerful, and it was never the goal to stop creating powerful Champs, but they have balances, weaknesses, and counters.
I used that example because it was another instance where something was resisted but necessary. When you have Champs that have 100% chance at anything, that limits the options you have to counter that. People are arguing that there's a softer way, but there literally isn't when that is what you're trying to counter in the design. Sorry to say, but sometimes things are not wanted, but necessary for the overall vision.

Though they didn't come up with the scale it doesn't change the fact that there that powerful.

And they didnt have the ability to develop more challenging content? You mean like adding RTTL, Labrynth, the monthly event quests on uncollected, maze, variant, adding acts, etc.

I have played this game the game since day 1and have watched the content difficultly slowly increase.

And again your one of the few who would say it was necessary. But as the most argumentative person on the forums that stance works out well for you.

That content wouldnt have been hard with old school thor.and perfect .block teams.

5-hit Thor, 2* SW in ROL, BW with 100% AAR....

GroundedWisdom

Nojokejaym said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Okay, first of all, the Moderators have a job to do. Don't mistake that for some kind of personal judgment.
Secondly, you're either being argumentative yourself, or contradictory, but 12.0 was 100% necessary. That's not even my opinion, that's common knowledge. You just answered your own argument. They were able to make harder and harder content BECAUSE 12.0 happened.

it wasn't necessary

Oh, yes it was. When they can't create new content that challenges those Champs in the old system because their Abilities bypass everything, then it was necessary. They hit a wall. Had it not been for those changes, the game wouldn't have lasted this long to debate it.

GroundedWisdom

TheSpicyKnight said:

GroundedWisdom said:

No, I didn't say having discussions was a waste of time. That's why we're here. I meant in terms of things that are necessary for the game, they will have to come to pass. 12.0 was one such example. While they did their best to compromise and change some things, the majority of what they had to do still played out, for example DR and the nerfs. In fact, I remember that boycott negated itself because even after the Players had their attention, it persisted with demands like returning Champs to the way they were, and that just wasn't happening.
As for Diversity, that was less of a necessity than 12.0, and that was really a mess in terms of people reacting. They wanted it to play a small role in the scoring, and the first few iterations didn't meet what they wanted. That was an ongoing process to get War to where they wanted it, and where we wanted it. People complained when they introduced it. "Bring back Defender Kills!". Then they complained it was worth too much in the scoring. Then they complained when they tried to remove it. That I would call a case of listening too much. People are seldom satisfied. I'm a bit jaded with that one, too many changes, and I still support using a diverse Roster. Here we are again with the same Champs being used over and over. In any event, that was more of a co-creation than 12.0. If you'll look back, the changes made after people spoke out never really affected the ultimate goal that they had to accomplish with 12.0.

TL:DR - If something is necessary for the health of the game overall, they will implement it regardless.

That's what I meant for compromise. And I don't mean that players can or should completely overturn Kabam's goals but influence how it's implemented. You're right that the ultimate goal for 12.0 wasn't really affected but, the way I experienced it, there was a much needed change for it's implementation. They wanted players to adapt to a harder meta by adding Block and Armor penetration and Crit Resistance to base abilities of all champions which made higher-end content, especially LoL, considerably more challenging to do which they removed because the players spoke out. Not only that but Kabam also buffed some of the nerfed champions so that players would have an easier time adjusting to the new meta. These are just examples of what I think the players are trying to do here.

In other words, I'm aware changes to the meta are inevitable. I'm just arguing for a smoother transition. And I know one champ isn't going to affect the game the same way 12.0 did since that would be ridiculous. However, I'm concerned that Kabam will continue on a slippery slope of releasing champs that are absolutely invincible to certain champions which will span to most practical champions in the game. That's my fear. If thats not their plan then great, this subject will be forgotten and we can go back to roasting people who post RDT threads. If it is or, even a little bit less extreme, then they know mine and many other's stances on this based on the reactions on the forums and hopefully they take that into consideration for the future.

I'm not concerned. That same effort for balance is not going to lead them to completely restrict game play. It's one Champ. I think people are getting carried away.