**UPDATE - iPAD STUCK FLICKERING SCREEN**
The 47.0.1 hotfix to address the issue of freezing & flashing lights on loading screens when trying to enter a fight, along with other smaller issues, is now ready to be downloaded through the App Store on IOS.
More information here.

Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1…2728303233…67

Comments

  • CPT_SmashCPT_Smash Member Posts: 17 ★
    If you nerf a mid-tier (in overall utility) champ like Cull, then I’m done.

    That’s setting a dangerous precedent going forward. We spent A LOT of money getting Cull. Most of us that have him maxed out rarely use him. He’s great for very few situations, but not many others.

    Listen to the players. This isn’t about the ‘meta’ or ‘rebalancing;’ and if any of you actually played the game you’d realize that this is just a slap in the face to your player base.
  • BigPoppaCBONEBigPoppaCBONE Member Posts: 2,391 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    r3dy said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Beyond00_ said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Honestly, they haven't even started the rework yet (presumably), and people are going off the wall. All we know is the data has shown that his Damage is higher than any other Champ, so that will most likely change. We don't know how much, we don't know what else will come, all we know is he's changing. Is anyone else waiting to see, or are we all on fire? Lol.

    Data, how about actually playing the game first and see for yourself?. Also they wrote the data, so how could that be a surprise?.
    I play the game. Yes, they wrote the data. They also examine it to see if it's where they want it to be. That's the other part of the job.
    Yeah but they have to see it before release, its call quality assurance and testing
    It's impossible to analyze data before a release. The data is what shows how they perform(ed). Past Tense. If you mean they should find all problems before they release, the game would never go live. Testing won't prevent issues from coming up.
    quite the opposite, most of the issues in any product are solved before release, base on the data that was gathered during testing, and i dont mean "all problems", but damage can easily be tested. If you are going to tell me that kabam doesn't know what the damage will be of champions they are releasing, then that shows how poorly is the testing process (if there is any...), users are not doing anything "weird" with cull to get the crazy damage, they are just using the champions as it was design
    they have an idea, but ideas can be wrong. Again you need 1000 poins of data from every type of interaction to get a statistically relevant idea on how they work.
    They should have more than an idea or they're doing it wrong. For instance, they should know exactly how many heavies Cull can get off in a 3 minute period. Any more than that and something is wrong with the engine. Based on that, they can calculate the maximum number of armor breaks he can apply without enhancement over that period. Using that information and the relevant inputs, they would be able to transform and evaluate that damage calculation under a wide variety of conditions automatically and have them flagged when above or below certain values.

    Statistical relevancy and randomized sampling plans aren't necessary. Why would they be? If the calculations have been through the validation and verification process it would be a wasted effort to repeat testing pointlessly. After that any unexpected outcome would be a bug.
    except what you just described is base interactions with the game engine, not interactions with the nodes or how the players are using them.
    Many Node interactions would just be additional inputs. Not a big deal. If they were the kind that absolutely needed in-hand testing, then you would do that before going live. Another reason why playtesting is important before going live. If your playtesters aren't good enough or inventive enough to closely replicate or articulate to the team what players are capable of, you need better ones. Like playing Quake-style, even if your testers aren't good enough to do it, they should be smart enough to realize that it can be done and articulate that.
    Many but not all. here is the thing though, if you are so sure of this why dont you get intot he game buisness, the MMO game buisness is plague with balance nerfs and upgrades. If you have insight and knowledge that no one else in the buis has then you can make a killing.
    I haven't said anything requiring specialized knowledge or uncanny insight. Sad if a working company putting out an active game needed me to break them off this basic scheme.
    Except no game company that I have ever heard of is successful solely with testers, so therefore if what you claimed would work it would have to be specialized knowledge of uncanny insight. I have not met a single MMO company who has not normalized all asspects of the games that goes by without changing things.
    I never said that with only internal testing a company would solve every problem that will or could ever come up. That's nonsense.
    I also never said that a company should never have to or want to change anything in their product. That's nonsense too.
    You said the playtest team should be good enough or inventive enough to closely replicate or articulate to the team what the players are capable of. If that was true then they would not release champs that come out as needing a nerf based on the communities play.
    Part of a good process is that you have a team that listens to the testers and understands what they're saying and decision makers that listen to the team. Obviously they can't foresee every minute aspect of everything a player might conceivably do. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out.

    Part of a good process is observing your product in the wild and making timely decisions based on those observations. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out.

    Things happen. Plans change. Knowing this, the process needs to encorporate the reality of how actions will be perceived and reacted to.
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    BigPoppaCBONE said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    r3dy said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Beyond00_ said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Honestly, they haven't even started the rework yet (presumably), and people are going off the wall. All we know is the data has shown that his Damage is higher than any other Champ, so that will most likely change. We don't know how much, we don't know what else will come, all we know is he's changing. Is anyone else waiting to see, or are we all on fire? Lol.

    Data, how about actually playing the game first and see for yourself?. Also they wrote the data, so how could that be a surprise?.
    I play the game. Yes, they wrote the data. They also examine it to see if it's where they want it to be. That's the other part of the job.
    Yeah but they have to see it before release, its call quality assurance and testing
    It's impossible to analyze data before a release. The data is what shows how they perform(ed). Past Tense. If you mean they should find all problems before they release, the game would never go live. Testing won't prevent issues from coming up.
    quite the opposite, most of the issues in any product are solved before release, base on the data that was gathered during testing, and i dont mean "all problems", but damage can easily be tested. If you are going to tell me that kabam doesn't know what the damage will be of champions they are releasing, then that shows how poorly is the testing process (if there is any...), users are not doing anything "weird" with cull to get the crazy damage, they are just using the champions as it was design
    they have an idea, but ideas can be wrong. Again you need 1000 poins of data from every type of interaction to get a statistically relevant idea on how they work.
    They should have more than an idea or they're doing it wrong. For instance, they should know exactly how many heavies Cull can get off in a 3 minute period. Any more than that and something is wrong with the engine. Based on that, they can calculate the maximum number of armor breaks he can apply without enhancement over that period. Using that information and the relevant inputs, they would be able to transform and evaluate that damage calculation under a wide variety of conditions automatically and have them flagged when above or below certain values.

    Statistical relevancy and randomized sampling plans aren't necessary. Why would they be? If the calculations have been through the validation and verification process it would be a wasted effort to repeat testing pointlessly. After that any unexpected outcome would be a bug.
    except what you just described is base interactions with the game engine, not interactions with the nodes or how the players are using them.
    Many Node interactions would just be additional inputs. Not a big deal. If they were the kind that absolutely needed in-hand testing, then you would do that before going live. Another reason why playtesting is important before going live. If your playtesters aren't good enough or inventive enough to closely replicate or articulate to the team what players are capable of, you need better ones. Like playing Quake-style, even if your testers aren't good enough to do it, they should be smart enough to realize that it can be done and articulate that.
    Many but not all. here is the thing though, if you are so sure of this why dont you get intot he game buisness, the MMO game buisness is plague with balance nerfs and upgrades. If you have insight and knowledge that no one else in the buis has then you can make a killing.
    I haven't said anything requiring specialized knowledge or uncanny insight. Sad if a working company putting out an active game needed me to break them off this basic scheme.
    Except no game company that I have ever heard of is successful solely with testers, so therefore if what you claimed would work it would have to be specialized knowledge of uncanny insight. I have not met a single MMO company who has not normalized all asspects of the games that goes by without changing things.
    I never said that with only internal testing a company would solve every problem that will or could ever come up. That's nonsense.
    I also never said that a company should never have to or want to change anything in their product. That's nonsense too.
    You said the playtest team should be good enough or inventive enough to closely replicate or articulate to the team what the players are capable of. If that was true then they would not release champs that come out as needing a nerf based on the communities play.
    Part of a good process is that you have a team that listens to the testers and understands what they're saying and decision makers that listen to the team. Obviously they can't foresee every minute aspect of everything a player might conceivably do. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out.

    Part of a good process is observing your product in the wild and making timely decisions based on those observations. I didn't think that needed to be spelled out.

    Things happen. Plans change. Knowing this, the process needs to encorporate the reality of how actions will be perceived and reacted to.
    I have no argument to any of this.
  • r3dyr3dy Member Posts: 30 ★
    Anyway, Kabam you really need to do somethings with the lack of testing, its becoming a big issue when you nerf a champ after release because you didn't know how it works.

    Yes cannot test everything, but damage can easily be tested before release, there is no excuse for not doing it
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    WarHawk_Taz_1 said:

    And I was planning on a Legends run of 6.3 LOL on me. :D

    You should still have time, 6.3 should be out well before the change.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,520 ★★★★★
    striker_overlord22 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I mean, the argument is moot because if a Champ is doing too much or too little, they're most likely seeing it in the upper crust regardless. They're already looking there. I'm just saying looking at all data means looking at all data. Fundamentally I don't agree they should isolate it to one demographic unless it's on something at that demographic alone. Champs are at every level.

    Do you believe that it is ethical that once they identify a potential issue and start to review it that they continue to sell that champions featured crystal without letting the community know they are investigating a potential issue that could get the champion nerfed?
    The Champs are released into circulation. That's how the game works. They can't just take them back or put them in quarantine.
    They shouldnt have re-issue that cull obsidian fgmc few weeks back then (which i bought an odins worth in units) seems fraudulent to me.
    Offers are on a schedule, and unless there's some kind of specialty promotion, they go out as planned. For that matter, they offer Champs no matter what fixes or changes come. That doesn't mean they're doing anything to deceive people.
  • Cam77778888Cam77778888 Member Posts: 113 ★
    Cull is never used by myself at 5/65. I have 14 other champs that have more utility and better than cull. If you take away his damage and do not increase another ability to offset u are nerfing him.
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    WarHawk_Taz_1 said:

    Lormif said:

    WarHawk_Taz_1 said:

    And I was planning on a Legends run of 6.3 LOL on me. :D

    You should still have time, 6.3 should be out well before the change.
    Since your trying to be positive and share that "positive energy" Tell me something.

    You expect me to purchase approx 3 Odins, sit playing the game for 10-15 hours straight. Repeat that in December, for the "Never seen before 6* champ (awakened)" Take the champ to R2, most likely R3 by then. To find the champ nerfed in Feb or March.

    Totaling my loss : 6 Odin's, 15 hours of straight gaming x 2
    7 Tier 5 Basics (not even counting other catalysts)

    Thanks for that advice bro. I'm on it.
    Never claimed that. You stated you were going to try a legends run on 6.3, which should be out in the next 2 months, probably next month. My comment directly and only related to that. What you do in 4 months is up to you.
  • UfuomahUfuomah Member Posts: 37 ★
    Kabam, u would urge you guys to hire beta testers before releasing new champs. Not the unpaid labour that run beta tests from the summoner pool but actual paid testers who know this game very well. As well as someone like say kt1.
    Do deep, extensive tests so your final product does not need to be ammended after release. This way you can gradually regain the trust of your player base.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 19,519 Guardian
    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Dizzy said:

    at this point in the game, when they are in the basic, we should be able to safely decide that we are / are not going to invest resources in specific champions.

    It seems silly, but I'm starting to think that Kabam needs to provide a warning every time a player buys an offer, exchanges for a crystal, awakens or ranks a champion, or spends any money or currency on anything, that the game is subject to change at any time for balance, implementation, or any other reason, and the player should not take any action predicated on the assumption that the game won't change, because it will.

    Because there is no safe time to invest in resources. You are required to agree there is no safe time to invest resources. If you do not agree, and believe the players deserve to have a guarantee of safe periods to invest resources, you're legally not allowed to play the game.

    If this is something you feel you need, that's fine. Everyone needs different things from their entertainment. You shouldn't feel compelled to change your mind. But the EULA for the game you play requires you to agree. The EULA cannot force you to agree. But it prohibits you from playing the game if you don't agree.
    Or here’s a novel idea: test your stuff before you sell it. Play your own game. And if even moderately testing content is too onerous, then provide a liberal return/refund policy and stop treating the community with condescension.

    Dr. Zola
    You say "or" as if this contradicts what I said. It does not. I'm not saying there isn't lots of room for improvement, but the absolute best game development team with the absolute best respec policy a game can sustain is still not going to provide the poster I was replying to with "safety." There will still be the possibility of future game balance changes that won't be compensated for, because there's no way to prevent completely future balancing changes, and there's no way to completely allow do-overs for every little change in a sustainable way. I don't think most players even understand what the real danger of RDTs even is in this game, even when used sparingly, much less making it the go-to answer for all future game changes.

    You can do everything you're mentioning, and still not be safe. Safe from game changes is impossible. And I'm willing to be proven wrong, if someone can find a game that adheres to your two principles of test so mistakes never happen and games never need balancing, and/or compensate for every change to the extent players demand in all cases.

    At the end of the day, if you think safety is possible, I doubt I could convince you otherwise. However, absent a very persuasive argument, at the end of the day I believe we doom any attempt to improve matters when we make the ultimate goal an impossible task.
    I don’t think “100% safe” is possible, nor should it be.

    But this far enough from safe to border on destabilizing.

    Dr. Zola
    Then we agree that safe is impossible, and Kabam should strive to be significantly better at problem prevention then they currently are. As I said, this isn't an "or" situation. This is an "and" situation.
  • WhatsthedillyoWhatsthedillyo Member Posts: 19 ★
    edited September 2019
    I think this is a bad precedent. You get a new champ spend money , time and resources to rank . 3 months later you are told you are not getting what you paid for.
    It reduces the incentive to get them. It s probably best to wait 3 months before deciding on rank up a new champ.
    Better don’t spend until you know what you are getting. This probably the best advice for every player.
  • ErosenseiogErosenseiog Member Posts: 287 ★
    Zeezoos said:

    I hope this is a joke. You’re ‘balancing’ Cull. Wow. All he has is damage. He eats potions for fun, his ramp up is painful and he isn’t an option (definitely not a best option) for most of the latest content. I don’t know what to say. The investment in him for me has been massive, and it turned out he’s not even the best cosmic. Probably not top 3. This is an awful decision.

    H
    IDoge said:

    mohmezd said:

    Cull isn't even top ten in the game... Ronin is fun, but garbage. You honestly have to be joking with these. Like what are you even doing

    You have no idea what you're talking about. Cull obsidian is definitely a top 10 champ in the game and Ronin is not garbage. Ronin was a champ meant to cater towards skilled people. He is not supposed to be the next Blade. He's supposed to be a great damage dealer with little extra bits utility
    How is he in top 10 buddy?For more than 95% content there are at least 4 better cosmic character than him. I have Medusa,Hyperion,Corvus,Cull as r1 6* or 4/55 and all the other 3 is more viable.And from what I have seen new Cap Marvel is better than him.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 19,519 Guardian
    TheTalents said:

    DNA3000 said:

    ldj86 said:

    Is this a impulse nerf? Have you thought about the consequences? You will be losing money in the long run! Handcuffing the Whales. People will be less motivated to spend money. Great idea Kaaloss profit! Whoever came up with this great idea should be walked out the door! Thought you wanted to make make not lose it! LOL

    I know a lot of people think this, and there's no way to convince them otherwise, but these kinds of balancing adjustments, from 12.0 to the present day, are critical to the long term survival of a game like this. All I can say is everyone who bet on the people who said 12.0 would be the death of the game have been definitively proven wrong, as has everyone else who has claimed that a particular game change would sink the game. By the time we can prove this claim is also just as wrong, everyone will have moved on to the next game-killing thing.

    This is completely separate from the fact that the kinds of processes Kabam is implementing now, with regard to things like post-release balancing passes, wasn't invented by Kabam. They've been around in the game development industry for long enough it is entirely possible the guy who came up with this great idea has already died of old age. Kabam isn't coming up with new ways to screw with the players, Kabam is in fact decades late to the party.

    In fact, it was *the players* who were demanding that Kabam do this kind of thing, way back when Sentry was released (if not earlier). The idea was that Kabam wouldn't revisit a champ until enough data had been collected for the long term performance of a new champ, and it was the players that said that was too long: new champs should be revisited relatively soon after release and tweaked if the data said it should be. The problem is tweaking works both ways: if the data says a buff is warranted then that will happen, but if a nerf is warranted then that will happen instead. Players cannot demand that the developers only buff. That request simply isn't taken seriously by any dev.
    I think you're re-writing history on 12.0. When the update first came out it was awful and would ruin the game. You forget that Kabam adjusted the game a second time and fixed the issues and gave us a massive compensation for it. Don't leave that out of your message when comparing this to 12.0.
    I was extremely involved with the 12.0 changes and all the surrounding "protests" at the time. The people calling 12.0 "the death" of the game were demanding a complete reversal of 12.0's changes, and if not that then at least a complete removal of Diminishing Returns, Challenge Rating, the large nerfs to Scarlet Witch, Dr. Strange, and Thor in particular, and the penetration and critical resistance attributes removed. They got exactly none of that. Many of the things adjusted in 12.01 and 12.1 were not even the things the most rabid players were complaining about, because most of the rabid players weren't even paying close attention to the changes or were only learning about them second hand.

    The kinds of things they adjusted were things much more level headed players were talking about, like Parry stacking or CR overlap, or things like the block proficiency of intrinsically high block champions like Captain America. Dr. Strange, for example, had his heal increased in 12.0.1 but only because it was cut far too deep. It wasn't returned to its original value or even remotely close. It was, in fact, increased to almost exactly the value I calculated the absolute minimum floor the heal should be to not be considered broken in the Dr. Strange thread.

    This doesn't even include all the things the rabid complainers calling 12.0 the death of the game were demanding that were straight up impossible to address. For example, they were complaining that challenge rating decreased parry effectiveness and demanded that behavior should be removed even though that wasn't happening at all.

    This isn't stuff I'm just remembering now. This is stuff I pointed out at the time, after 12.0.1 came out, after 12.1 came out, when 14.0 released and people were comparing the AW changes to 12.0, and every so often up to now. The people who were there at the time and actively involved knows there was no unity among the players: there were at least three separate "groups" of "boycotters" (the top alliiance group, the Reddit splinter group(s), and the more amorphous mob in general) all with different demands. And there were lots of fringe complainers with varying degrees of fringiness. The "death of the game" people were one specific fringe group, and many were chanting that mantra even after compensation was released.

    In fact, there were fringy people complaining that *the compensation itself* would be the death of the game, because of its structure. Apparently a lot of people have forgotten how the compensation package worked, and how many people flipped out over how it worked.
  • Cmdrake428_Cmdrake428_ Member Posts: 10 ★
    So i used a generic 5* awakening gem on cull just days ago only to find out that they are nerfing his damage. So I wouldn’t have done that had i known until i saw the new update on him. Is there any chance they will return it to me?
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Member Posts: 2,254 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    TheTalents said:

    DNA3000 said:

    ldj86 said:

    Is this a impulse nerf? Have you thought about the consequences? You will be losing money in the long run! Handcuffing the Whales. People will be less motivated to spend money. Great idea Kaaloss profit! Whoever came up with this great idea should be walked out the door! Thought you wanted to make make not lose it! LOL

    I know a lot of people think this, and there's no way to convince them otherwise, but these kinds of balancing adjustments, from 12.0 to the present day, are critical to the long term survival of a game like this. All I can say is everyone who bet on the people who said 12.0 would be the death of the game have been definitively proven wrong, as has everyone else who has claimed that a particular game change would sink the game. By the time we can prove this claim is also just as wrong, everyone will have moved on to the next game-killing thing.

    This is completely separate from the fact that the kinds of processes Kabam is implementing now, with regard to things like post-release balancing passes, wasn't invented by Kabam. They've been around in the game development industry for long enough it is entirely possible the guy who came up with this great idea has already died of old age. Kabam isn't coming up with new ways to screw with the players, Kabam is in fact decades late to the party.

    In fact, it was *the players* who were demanding that Kabam do this kind of thing, way back when Sentry was released (if not earlier). The idea was that Kabam wouldn't revisit a champ until enough data had been collected for the long term performance of a new champ, and it was the players that said that was too long: new champs should be revisited relatively soon after release and tweaked if the data said it should be. The problem is tweaking works both ways: if the data says a buff is warranted then that will happen, but if a nerf is warranted then that will happen instead. Players cannot demand that the developers only buff. That request simply isn't taken seriously by any dev.
    I think you're re-writing history on 12.0. When the update first came out it was awful and would ruin the game. You forget that Kabam adjusted the game a second time and fixed the issues and gave us a massive compensation for it. Don't leave that out of your message when comparing this to 12.0.
    I was extremely involved with the 12.0 changes and all the surrounding "protests" at the time. The people calling 12.0 "the death" of the game were demanding a complete reversal of 12.0's changes, and if not that then at least a complete removal of Diminishing Returns, Challenge Rating, the large nerfs to Scarlet Witch, Dr. Strange, and Thor in particular, and the penetration and critical resistance attributes removed. They got exactly none of that. Many of the things adjusted in 12.01 and 12.1 were not even the things the most rabid players were complaining about, because most of the rabid players weren't even paying close attention to the changes or were only learning about them second hand.

    The kinds of things they adjusted were things much more level headed players were talking about, like Parry stacking or CR overlap, or things like the block proficiency of intrinsically high block champions like Captain America. Dr. Strange, for example, had his heal increased in 12.0.1 but only because it was cut far too deep. It wasn't returned to its original value or even remotely close. It was, in fact, increased to almost exactly the value I calculated the absolute minimum floor the heal should be to not be considered broken in the Dr. Strange thread.

    This doesn't even include all the things the rabid complainers calling 12.0 the death of the game were demanding that were straight up impossible to address. For example, they were complaining that challenge rating decreased parry effectiveness and demanded that behavior should be removed even though that wasn't happening at all.

    This isn't stuff I'm just remembering now. This is stuff I pointed out at the time, after 12.0.1 came out, after 12.1 came out, when 14.0 released and people were comparing the AW changes to 12.0, and every so often up to now. The people who were there at the time and actively involved knows there was no unity among the players: there were at least three separate "groups" of "boycotters" (the top alliiance group, the Reddit splinter group(s), and the more amorphous mob in general) all with different demands. And there were lots of fringe complainers with varying degrees of fringiness. The "death of the game" people were one specific fringe group, and many were chanting that mantra even after compensation was released.

    In fact, there were fringy people complaining that *the compensation itself* would be the death of the game, because of its structure. Apparently a lot of people have forgotten how the compensation package worked, and how many people flipped out over how it worked.
    12.0 to 12.1 was a drastic difference. Your more detailed explanation doesn't change that. I'm speaking for reasonable people here and not people saying death to the game. No one now is saying Cull Obsidian is the death of the game, the issue is that we can see where Kabam is going with this which is the point you all are missing defending this move.

    Let them re-work (what I really mean is nerf) a champion that is actually top 10 or people use regularly like Namor and see how its goes. This change with Cull will definitely hit their pockets so it doesn't matter how much I complain or you re butte the argument. You cannot continue to change champions by making them weaker specifically and expect people to buy crystals and spend at the same rate after working so hard to get them. That's just the facts, I'll be here in 3 months to watch it play out and Kabam go back on their words. In fact, I would say they would be much better off leaving the champions that are terrible the same and occasionally just re-working 2016 and past champions.
  • Justin2524Justin2524 Member Posts: 1,626 ★★★★
    But you knew some of the recent champs were going to be re-evaluated right? Kabam announced this last month.
  • PlantesanPlantesan Member Posts: 335 ★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    striker_overlord22 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I mean, the argument is moot because if a Champ is doing too much or too little, they're most likely seeing it in the upper crust regardless. They're already looking there. I'm just saying looking at all data means looking at all data. Fundamentally I don't agree they should isolate it to one demographic unless it's on something at that demographic alone. Champs are at every level.

    Do you believe that it is ethical that once they identify a potential issue and start to review it that they continue to sell that champions featured crystal without letting the community know they are investigating a potential issue that could get the champion nerfed?
    The Champs are released into circulation. That's how the game works. They can't just take them back or put them in quarantine.
    They shouldnt have re-issue that cull obsidian fgmc few weeks back then (which i bought an odins worth in units) seems fraudulent to me.
    Offers are on a schedule, and unless there's some kind of specialty promotion, they go out as planned. For that matter, they offer Champs no matter what fixes or changes come. That doesn't mean they're doing anything to deceive people.
    Seems more like a lack of communication between sales and the dev team (or whoever makes the call on champ adjustments) then...
  • SiriusBreakSiriusBreak Member, Guardian Posts: 2,156 Guardian
    @Cmdrake428_ You can try sending in a support ticket. Maybe they'll take it off of him and return it to you. I would advise doing this ASAP as each passing day makes it less likely to occur. Also, there's a chance the changes won't be so extreme that he's made useless. I doubt they'd reduce his damage so much he'd be undesirable. A rebalancing change isn't exactly a nerf. Some would argue otherwise, but I'm not here to argue semantics.

    There's a thread on She-Hulk asking who else didn't rank her down, and so far, the general consensus is (at least pertaining to those that answered) she's still useful and they didn't rank her down. I'm not saying don't ask for the gem back. Do try it, especially considering the timing. Then perhaps once the changes are live you can make a more informed decision as to whether you want to use it again. Provided they undo this. Best of luck.
  • Maxx_Roadhammer187Maxx_Roadhammer187 Member Posts: 1 ★
    Kabam please stop downgrading champs
    Make the champ put it in the game if u don’t like how good you have made the champ
    Make a counter, every enemy has a foe and every champ has an enemy
    Downgrading champs after people invest is false advertising surprised people don’t take kabam to court. Upgrading cool downgrading false advertising because people spend money to get what you made . Downgrades is not what the person is paying for .
    A lot of people I know are quitting the game because of this .
    Simply not a good business move on your end , not a good one at all
    Get it togather
This discussion has been closed.