**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.
There is currently an issue where some Alliances are are unable to find a match in Alliance Wars, or are receiving Byes without getting the benefits of the Win. We will be adjusting the Season Points of the Alliances that are affected within the coming weeks, and will be working to compensate them for their missed Per War rewards as well.

Additionally, we are working to address an issue where new Members of an Alliance are unable to place Defenders for the next War after joining. We are working to address this, but it will require a future update.

Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1343537394067

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 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.
    I didnt say is it ethical to sell it, I asked you if its ethical to sell us something without telling us its under investigation? you didnt answer the question.
    Is it ethical? It's their product. They're not selling anything for ownership.
    Thus far, they've been upfront about the issues. There was one bug that was fixed. That led to another bug that made his Damage insane, and they responded to that quite quickly. This is the result of periodical rebalances and they already said they were coming. Supposedly with HT and Ann., but people couldn't let Maw go, so here we are. Not that I blame people. If it needs to be rebalanced, it needs to be done.
    Why wont you answer the question. The moment that they noticed the crazy damage and that it needed to be compaired to the other champs they obviously said nothing. During this period they looking into data, they continued to sell us the crystal during this period of time knowing that what ever outcome of their findings could result in the champion being nerfed. Do you think that is ethical its a yes or no question.
    You're asking me to comment on the accusation that they willfully and knowingly sold something that was defective, in order to deceive people. I'm not commenting on fallacies.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    It's not Fraud.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 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.
    I didnt say is it ethical to sell it, I asked you if its ethical to sell us something without telling us its under investigation? you didnt answer the question.
    Is it ethical? It's their product. They're not selling anything for ownership.
    Thus far, they've been upfront about the issues. There was one bug that was fixed. That led to another bug that made his Damage insane, and they responded to that quite quickly. This is the result of periodical rebalances and they already said they were coming. Supposedly with HT and Ann., but people couldn't let Maw go, so here we are. Not that I blame people. If it needs to be rebalanced, it needs to be done.
    Why wont you answer the question. The moment that they noticed the crazy damage and that it needed to be compaired to the other champs they obviously said nothing. During this period they looking into data, they continued to sell us the crystal during this period of time knowing that what ever outcome of their findings could result in the champion being nerfed. Do you think that is ethical its a yes or no question.
    You're asking me to comment on the accusation that they willfully and knowingly sold something that was defective, in order to deceive people. I'm not commenting on fallacies.
    No I am not. The champion is under a review, at some point during this review they noticed that Culls damage was insane and decided that it needed to be investigated. They started to do their due diligence knowing that the outcome of their research could lead into nerfing the champion. During that time they continued to sell and promote the champion without telling us they was a potential investigation going on that could lead to him getting nerfed. I am asking a very simple question is that an ethical business practice in your eyes.
    Except that is not entirely accurate. For one you have to understand that ALL aspects of the game are under continuous review. they dont stop reviewing some aspect of the game at some magical point in time after it has been released.

    In addition to this they have stated that all new champions would be under review.
  • BigPoppaCBONEBigPoppaCBONE Posts: 2,257 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    r3dy said:

    Beyond00_ 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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 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.
    I didnt say is it ethical to sell it, I asked you if its ethical to sell us something without telling us its under investigation? you didnt answer the question.
    Is it ethical? It's their product. They're not selling anything for ownership.
    Thus far, they've been upfront about the issues. There was one bug that was fixed. That led to another bug that made his Damage insane, and they responded to that quite quickly. This is the result of periodical rebalances and they already said they were coming. Supposedly with HT and Ann., but people couldn't let Maw go, so here we are. Not that I blame people. If it needs to be rebalanced, it needs to be done.
    Why wont you answer the question. The moment that they noticed the crazy damage and that it needed to be compaired to the other champs they obviously said nothing. During this period they looking into data, they continued to sell us the crystal during this period of time knowing that what ever outcome of their findings could result in the champion being nerfed. Do you think that is ethical its a yes or no question.
    You're asking me to comment on the accusation that they willfully and knowingly sold something that was defective, in order to deceive people. I'm not commenting on fallacies.
    No I am not. The champion is under a review, at some point during this review they noticed that Culls damage was insane and decided that it needed to be investigated. They started to do their due diligence knowing that the outcome of their research could lead into nerfing the champion. During that time they continued to sell and promote the champion without telling us they was a potential investigation going on that could lead to him getting nerfed. I am asking a very simple question is that an ethical business practice in your eyes.
    Bug 1 happened and they notified us. Bug 2 happened, and they notified us. Now they're letting us know 3 months in advance about this. How much notice would you like?
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    r3dy said:

    Beyond00_ 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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    Do you know when they made the decision? Do you know how long they've been sitting on the data? No. The only evidence we have is a comment a week ago about an incoming Announcement on Maw, and the conjecture that they sold it knowing it was changing. Memories of Strange conjecture.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    cdubby_22 said:

    Lormif said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 said:

    cdubby_22 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.
    I didnt say is it ethical to sell it, I asked you if its ethical to sell us something without telling us its under investigation? you didnt answer the question.
    Is it ethical? It's their product. They're not selling anything for ownership.
    Thus far, they've been upfront about the issues. There was one bug that was fixed. That led to another bug that made his Damage insane, and they responded to that quite quickly. This is the result of periodical rebalances and they already said they were coming. Supposedly with HT and Ann., but people couldn't let Maw go, so here we are. Not that I blame people. If it needs to be rebalanced, it needs to be done.
    Why wont you answer the question. The moment that they noticed the crazy damage and that it needed to be compaired to the other champs they obviously said nothing. During this period they looking into data, they continued to sell us the crystal during this period of time knowing that what ever outcome of their findings could result in the champion being nerfed. Do you think that is ethical its a yes or no question.
    You're asking me to comment on the accusation that they willfully and knowingly sold something that was defective, in order to deceive people. I'm not commenting on fallacies.
    No I am not. The champion is under a review, at some point during this review they noticed that Culls damage was insane and decided that it needed to be investigated. They started to do their due diligence knowing that the outcome of their research could lead into nerfing the champion. During that time they continued to sell and promote the champion without telling us they was a potential investigation going on that could lead to him getting nerfed. I am asking a very simple question is that an ethical business practice in your eyes.
    Except that is not entirely accurate. For one you have to understand that ALL aspects of the game are under continuous review. they dont stop reviewing some aspect of the game at some magical point in time after it has been released.

    In addition to this they have stated that all new champions would be under review.
    You are dodging the question as well. At some point during the review they started to question is that to much damage, by their own words his damage was way higher than other high dealing damage champs across multiple modes of the game. In order to make that statement they would have had to test and compare, something you have pointed out takes a very long time, during this period of time when they knew there was a potential problem a specific issue that they had narrowed down and decided to investigate on, they continued to sell and promote the crystal without letting us know. You both are avoiding a simple question is that ethical?
    I cannot answer a question that is based on a faulty premise. If your premise is untrue then your question of if said premise is ethical or not cannot be answered. In order to answer the ethical nature of said event I would need to know exactly when and who knew what, and how. Is the crystal offers automatic? did the game team know before hand? did they come to the conclusion the day they made the announcement or not. without knowledge of these and other questions you cannot answer your question, and we do not have those answers. You may be willing to place the cart before the horse, I am not.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    cdubby_22 said:

    By the way the answer is no, you cannot answer a simple question because if you say it is, it would make you as shameful as they are. Its a horrible, unethical business model that we allow to continue as a paying customer. Until we say no more it will continue to happen. I cant do this any more today, its exhausting, they have killed my love for this game. Hope you two have a great day. (Mike drop....you cant answer the question because you know everyone else in this chat is right)

    Your question was not simple. You ask us to evaluate data that we do not have to come to a conclusion based on said data.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    No. The answer is it IS ethical. It's their product, their property, and their responsibility to keep it alive and well. So if something needs to be resolved, that takes priority. However, pointing that out will just lead to more argument because there's an accusation and an assumption there, so I decided to overlook the question.
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★

    No. The answer is it IS ethical. It's their product, their property, and their responsibility to keep it alive and well. So if something needs to be resolved, that takes priority. However, pointing that out will just lead to more argument because there's an accusation and an assumption there, so I decided to overlook the question.

    That answer is just as faulty as his. If the game team did what he claims they did then it would be unethical, it would be a dictionary bait and switch which is illegal under most laws despite a ToS. The problem is he cannot prove his claim, but the same can be said for you.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,192 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    No. The answer is it IS ethical. It's their product, their property, and their responsibility to keep it alive and well. So if something needs to be resolved, that takes priority. However, pointing that out will just lead to more argument because there's an accusation and an assumption there, so I decided to overlook the question.

    That answer is just as faulty as his. If the game team did what he claims they did then it would be unethical, it would be a dictionary bait and switch which is illegal under most laws despite a ToS. The problem is he cannot prove his claim, but the same can be said for you.
    I meant the situation we have now is ethical. Not what he's implying. There's a reason I pointed out I don't respond to fallacies. ;)
  • CPT_SmashCPT_Smash 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 Posts: 2,257 ★★★★★
    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    r3dy said:

    Beyond00_ 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 Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    Lormif said:

    r3dy said:

    r3dy said:

    Beyond00_ 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 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 Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★

    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.
This discussion has been closed.