Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1161719212267

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,602 ★★★★★
    Personally I'm waiting to see what's proposed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,602 ★★★★★
    Rex89 said:

    Please change ghost , corvus and domino damage they are doing more damage

    Evidently not according to the data.
    Also, it stands to mention, what happens in the near future when people can R3 those 6* Culls?
  • Bear3Bear3 Member Posts: 996 ★★★
    Doesn’t matter. They advertised a product. People bought it for months. They devalue that product right after all the avenues to spend are completed. They need to issue compensation. Cut and dry. His damage is too much? Don’t agree given his downfalls. But fine... compensation needs to be issued though. I didn’t even think she hulk tickets were needed!

    🐻
  • PlantesanPlantesan Member Posts: 335 ★★

    Plantesan said:

    Plantesan said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Plantesan said:

    I am curious at what point did they start collecting data, because didn’t they have an adjustment on him already? Seems kinda silly to do another one

    The game constantly records data. The problem with datamining champion performance is that initially the performance of every champion is skewed by the fact that very few players have them, and the players that do tend to skew higher in skill than average. They aren't completely representative of the playerbase. Conversely, they are also less experienced with the champs, and there's less meta-information about the champs floating around.

    Over time as more players get and rank champions up and start using them, the breadth of the players who have the champ becomes more representative of the whole playerbase, and the overall performance of the champ tends to rise as both the skilled players get more practice with them, and things like guides and videos and friend-of-a-friend experience filters down to the rest of the players.

    Given how crystals work, it could be three to six months or more before you get a rough representative sample of players using a champ, and six months to a year before the champ's full potential actually shows up in the data when the majority of players using them have a better understanding of the champ.

    To put this another way, everyone seems to be assuming that the "data" being collected is about the champion, so all it takes is one person playing the champ to show what the champ can do. But the data being collected is not about the champ. The data being collected is actually about *us* and how we do when we have the champ. Champs are balanced not based on how good they are, but on how good we are when we play them. It is the combination of champion and player that is being judged, across all the players playing the game.
    Working from your explanation, would it be wrong to suggest if the data began to show the majority of the players using him were clearing content not designed to be cleared so easily, that this adjustment (plus their recent featured crystal for him) could be seen as a bit shady?
    I think you're mistaking rebalances with Shulk. That was a very specific bug which was brought to light by a very specific piece of content being "cheesed". Not the same, really. Looking at the data in this case means looking at the numbers, not what content is being cleared. It's not about who used him in End-Game. Had it been something that jeopardized the level of content, it would have been looked at sooner. In this case, you have two Champs, one showing they underperform in the data, the other showing they overly perform. The two extremes highlight each other, and the goal isn't to neutralize all Champs. Only rebalance any noticeable extremities. Thus far, they're proposing exactly what they said they would. They're doing it retroactively in this case because of the overwhelming response about Maw. However, they can't do one and overlook the other. The data isn't just in 6.2, or LoL. It's not just about preventing people from breezing hard content. It's about balance for the health and longevity of the game, and being proactive in stopping issues down the road.
    If they aren’t using end-game content in this collection, I would ask then what data points could be they using to make that call on Obsidian that a QA/QC team could have figured out on their own?
    I'm saying they're not looking at End-Game exclusively. They're looking at data overall. Champs perform in more than one area in the game.
    I am aware of that. In the grand scheme of it all, the comment to be made to kabam would be “show us the data!” Even though there is no way they will.
  • Bear3Bear3 Member Posts: 996 ★★★
    Namor has so much more to him than damage though. Highest insane damage was what made cull worth all that.

    🐻
  • This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,602 ★★★★★
    Plantesan said:

    Plantesan said:

    Plantesan said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Plantesan said:

    I am curious at what point did they start collecting data, because didn’t they have an adjustment on him already? Seems kinda silly to do another one

    The game constantly records data. The problem with datamining champion performance is that initially the performance of every champion is skewed by the fact that very few players have them, and the players that do tend to skew higher in skill than average. They aren't completely representative of the playerbase. Conversely, they are also less experienced with the champs, and there's less meta-information about the champs floating around.

    Over time as more players get and rank champions up and start using them, the breadth of the players who have the champ becomes more representative of the whole playerbase, and the overall performance of the champ tends to rise as both the skilled players get more practice with them, and things like guides and videos and friend-of-a-friend experience filters down to the rest of the players.

    Given how crystals work, it could be three to six months or more before you get a rough representative sample of players using a champ, and six months to a year before the champ's full potential actually shows up in the data when the majority of players using them have a better understanding of the champ.

    To put this another way, everyone seems to be assuming that the "data" being collected is about the champion, so all it takes is one person playing the champ to show what the champ can do. But the data being collected is not about the champ. The data being collected is actually about *us* and how we do when we have the champ. Champs are balanced not based on how good they are, but on how good we are when we play them. It is the combination of champion and player that is being judged, across all the players playing the game.
    Working from your explanation, would it be wrong to suggest if the data began to show the majority of the players using him were clearing content not designed to be cleared so easily, that this adjustment (plus their recent featured crystal for him) could be seen as a bit shady?
    I think you're mistaking rebalances with Shulk. That was a very specific bug which was brought to light by a very specific piece of content being "cheesed". Not the same, really. Looking at the data in this case means looking at the numbers, not what content is being cleared. It's not about who used him in End-Game. Had it been something that jeopardized the level of content, it would have been looked at sooner. In this case, you have two Champs, one showing they underperform in the data, the other showing they overly perform. The two extremes highlight each other, and the goal isn't to neutralize all Champs. Only rebalance any noticeable extremities. Thus far, they're proposing exactly what they said they would. They're doing it retroactively in this case because of the overwhelming response about Maw. However, they can't do one and overlook the other. The data isn't just in 6.2, or LoL. It's not just about preventing people from breezing hard content. It's about balance for the health and longevity of the game, and being proactive in stopping issues down the road.
    If they aren’t using end-game content in this collection, I would ask then what data points could be they using to make that call on Obsidian that a QA/QC team could have figured out on their own?
    I'm saying they're not looking at End-Game exclusively. They're looking at data overall. Champs perform in more than one area in the game.
    I am aware of that. In the grand scheme of it all, the comment to be made to kabam would be “show us the data!” Even though there is no way they will.
    Calling them out to provide the data isn't going to do much, no. If you're asking if I believe they're just lying about it, I'd say I don't believe that. Not just on blind faith. There's no reason to believe that. Furthermore, the evidence suggests if they were looking at Maw, they were looking at other data. I think what we have is a case of people denying it's true because they don't agree it should be changed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,602 ★★★★★
    VOLK1902 said:

    Rex89 said:

    Please change ghost , corvus and domino damage they are doing more damage

    Evidently not according to the data.
    Also, it stands to mention, what happens in the near future when people can R3 those 6* Culls?
    Tell me who is going to even consider ranking him up this high?After this nerf corvus is overall better option by any means and people will rather wait to get corvus than rank cull.
    If left unchecked is what I meant.
  • RonldRonld Member Posts: 4

    Is this even legal. This must fit the literal legal definition of a bait and switch scam one way or another. As a long time player and having spent around $1k hard cash on obtaining Cull since he became available and around $30k in total of this game if this is how decisions are made then I'm for real quitting. I wanted to love this game and it was literally my past time in the last 2 years but treating customers this way is just disgusting. I would also want to see your empirical data on Cull vs every other high damage champion you weighted against how the decision and scoring matrix concluded it should be Cull and not the likes of Corvus or Ghost. I also wonder if we can petition a complaint to Marvel to suspend their license to use Marvel based on unethical business practices and damaging of brand identity

    I completely agree with this
  • Bear3Bear3 Member Posts: 996 ★★★
    They shouldn’t be changing anything to lower his damage though GW.

    🐻
  • Bear3Bear3 Member Posts: 996 ★★★
    The practice of having months of arenas, cavaliers, and featured 5* 6* and then nerfing that champ after is despicable... regardless of how big or small.

    🐻
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • ZuroZuro Member Posts: 2,882 ★★★★★
    Imagine waiting almost half a year to do these adjustments after people spended/grinder for their life for all that to be thrown away if this isn't greedy I Dont know what is and no of this would happen if Kabam just...TESTED THEIR FRICKING CHAMPS
  • ButtehrsButtehrs Member Posts: 6,126 ★★★★★

    Did anyone even know who Cull Obsidian was before Infinity War was released? The answer is no because his name in the comics was Black Dwarf. But for some reason he has a whole bunch of die hard fanatics who absolutely love him in this game. Hmmmm?

    And why would that matter in this topic? Lol
  • ZuroZuro Member Posts: 2,882 ★★★★★

    Thank you! You have saved me so much $$$$

    Now I know not to EVER spend on any new featured champion crystals.

    Don't spend on any old champs either who knows the might get nerfed too
  • This content has been removed.
  • RoronoaZoro_96RoronoaZoro_96 Member Posts: 13
    This is extremely disappointing. Coming from someone who spent money and resources to acquire and rank 5 cull obsidian, not even rank down tickets are enough if you’re going to nerf cull even in the slightest. Countless people have spent a big amount of money to pull this champ and now a few months later you want to nerf the champ we all spent money/units on? This is unacceptable. Do you guys even test champs before you release them? Are you going to refund everyone’s money that was wasted on this champ??
This discussion has been closed.