Champs can hold a Heavy. At least 5 seconds. As for Quake, her description specifies that her Abilities charge with Heavy. Could they come out and say it's a bug and she isn't meant to hold indefinitely? Perhaps. I don't see what this has to do with the subject either way.
Let me simplify it. The "intended" in "Working as intended." is theirs. This isn't just some personal whim that they exercise whenever they don't like something, and it isn't a malicious chess piece they shift to benefit themselves. They know the game, they know the intended outcome, they know what they're doing. This community is great at pointing things out, and that's one of the benefits of communicating. However, it's their game. They can and will improve it and fix things in line with their objectives for the betterment of the game. There is no possible scenario where no Champ will ever be free from revisions. It's always going to be a possibility. That's just how the process of improvement and adjustment works.
There's a difference, and it's not just whenever they please.
ah to quote facts matter, and the fact is by your own posts just now on quake you clearly illustrate why we are so upset, I love that you can change your mind and finally see it our way. It takes a big person to change, I sincerely am proud you have come around to our side.
Not sure what you read, but they don't just change things whenever they want. There's always a reason behind those changes and it's not personal bias. If you mean the mixup, yeah. I was mistaken about Heavy and Block. I'm replying in between leather dye coats at work. Lol.
There's a difference, and it's not just whenever they please.
ah to quote facts matter, and the fact is by your own posts just now on quake you clearly illustrate why we are so upset, I love that you can change your mind and finally see it our way. It takes a big person to change, I sincerely am proud you have come around to our side.
Not sure what you read, but they don't just change things whenever they want. There's always a reason behind those changes and it's not personal bias. If you mean the mixup, yeah. I was mistaken about Heavy and Block. I'm replying in between leather dye coats at work. Lol.
Well you clearly dont know the difference between block and heavy, so I am not going to explain why the quake illustration sheds light on how they could say she isnt acting as intended because of a description error like they have used countless times. If you dont understand that, and you think its ethically ok to change something after we have paid for it because they own it, while not giving us the data behind the decision so we can make educated decisions for future purchases and rank ups, or to continue to push a champ after they are investigating an issue that could lead to it being changed I cannot help you. the effort and time it would take to explain it to you again is time I dont have. Enjoy your day at work we can agree to disagree.
Literally just explained I mixed them up and apologized. If you want to press that, by all means. I don't mind being wrong. I'm right more times than wrong, I'm sure. People talk about ethics when it comes to purchases, but pointing out that it's their product is the only response to that. They're not selling something for ownership. In fact, they're explicit in the conditions on spending in the TOS. It can be modified in the future. You're not buying a product as-is. You're renting permission to use certain aspects of their product. That's a conditional rental. The condition is, you have no proprietary ownership to it, and they can change it for the well-being of their product. As for the data, they're not going to divulge the raw data. They may, if they choose, provide a list of aspects they examined. They may not. If you're asking if there are any choices for purchase or Ranking that you can make which are guaranteed will never change, that guarantee doesn't exist. See TOS.
And if Q&A on this topic with the broader forums is a problem, have Q&A with some of the CCP participants. Seems simple to me.
Dr. Zola
I've done that sort of thing before, in a different game. This is not so simple. As I mentioned previously, some things you can discuss, some things you can't. So you'd either have to dance around many of the questions posed by the CCP, or you'd have to NDA them, and both of those things can often come across as deceptive. And you'd be hanging the CCP participants out to dry because not only would you have to limit what they say, you'd also not be in a position to defend them much on the specifics.
And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the issue of conflating communicating with editorializing. When you are a party to communicating directly with the developers of a game, you have to be extremely conscious of the difference between explaining a developer decision and defending a developer decision. If you fall into doing the latter when you're supposed to be doing the former, you can make the situation worse than if you did nothing at all. This is an incredibly difficult thing to do consistently.
And collectively, whomever is involved must have enough credibility to function, and ironically just talking to Kabam would damage every participant's credibility on day one. The content creators already get a lot of low-level flak for being in bed with Kabam, even though that's baseless. If the content creators know why Kabam does something, it can be much harder to criticise them about that thing: that's human nature. But what will that look like from the outside? It will look like a bunch of content creators got together with Kabam and the next day all of them simultaneously starting criticizing them much less.
This *can* work, and I've seen it work, and I would certainly give it a try if Kabam decided to do something like this. But it can also blow up in your face if you don't do it just right.
They didn't do anything to SS. AA was closer to the situation because no Champ is able to bypass Stun Immune. Ever. Same with the Heavy chain.
*Wasp has entered the chat*
They mentioned themselves that she was specifically intended to do that. I believe that was pointed out. Champs are only supposed to do that when indicated, like Wasp.
And if Q&A on this topic with the broader forums is a problem, have Q&A with some of the CCP participants. Seems simple to me.
Dr. Zola
I've done that sort of thing before, in a different game. This is not so simple. As I mentioned previously, some things you can discuss, some things you can't. So you'd either have to dance around many of the questions posed by the CCP, or you'd have to NDA them, and both of those things can often come across as deceptive. And you'd be hanging the CCP participants out to dry because not only would you have to limit what they say, you'd also not be in a position to defend them much on the specifics.
And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the issue of conflating communicating with editorializing. When you are a party to communicating directly with the developers of a game, you have to be extremely conscious of the difference between explaining a developer decision and defending a developer decision. If you fall into doing the latter when you're supposed to be doing the former, you can make the situation worse than if you did nothing at all. This is an incredibly difficult thing to do consistently.
And collectively, whomever is involved must have enough credibility to function, and ironically just talking to Kabam would damage every participant's credibility on day one. The content creators already get a lot of low-level flak for being in bed with Kabam, even though that's baseless. If the content creators know why Kabam does something, it can be much harder to criticise them about that thing: that's human nature. But what will that look like from the outside? It will look like a bunch of content creators got together with Kabam and the next day all of them simultaneously starting criticizing them much less.
This *can* work, and I've seen it work, and I would certainly give it a try if Kabam decided to do something like this. But it can also blow up in your face if you don't do it just right.
Interesting...but at this point I don’t think it even has to be 20 Questions. The team could provide insight on the process to allay the reasonable concerns of players.
As for the NDA, I thought that was standard procedure for Kabam—even for non-CCP players who participate in advisory roles—or has that changed?
My comment got deleted as well for stating the obvious but I will do so once again in a nicer way. There is multiple way Kabam can resolve these ongoing issues with the Cull updates. I believe the silence on this issue is due to them deciding how to proceed moving forward.
1) You can announce that Cull's block proficiency will be increased. Removing the fear of a nerf. 2) You can end the 3 month which is actually 6 month adjustment period ( which will go along way with community trust.) 3) Release the data that they use to determine a bug or what makes a champ too powerful 4)Make a defined set of rules that we can understand what constitutes a character adjustment moving forward.
Kabam keeps selling Namor crystals, people spending money into it... Then will wait a bit and go nerfing Namor... Same history. IMHO these are bad bad practices.
Once again, when executing nerf, maybe Cull is not going to be my favorite cosmic champ, while having hyperion and Medusa unawakened. SO, will Kabam return me back my cosmic awakening 5* gem? Will return my almost 120 cosmic level up gems? I guess no way, so IMHO again, this is a very bad bad bad thing.
Kabam keeps selling Namor crystals, people spending money into it... Then will wait a bit and go nerfing Namor... Same history. IMHO these are bad bad practices.
Once again, when executing nerf, maybe Cull is not going to be my favorite cosmic champ, while having hyperion and Medusa unawakened. SO, will Kabam return me back my cosmic awakening 5* gem? Will return my almost 120 cosmic level up gems? I guess no way, so IMHO again, this is a very bad bad bad thing.
Even if they return the sigs and a rank down ticket that doesn't return back money spent. Personally I think they should stick to improving champs that are more than 2 years old. No one is getting upset about a Venompool buff, also the nerf has to make sense if you're going to do it. I'm still a little salty that Dr. Strange hasn't been restored, he would be a slightly above champ nowadays, not even god tier.
As for the NDA, I thought that was standard procedure for Kabam—even for non-CCP players who participate in advisory roles—or has that changed?
It depends on what you're envisioning. But the question of an NDA isn't just about whether you have one, but what it covers. If the NDA blanket covers everything, then that sort of defeats the purpose because the players involved then can't talk to the rest of the playerbase. So it has to cover some stuff but allow for the communication you want to happen. But it would be Kabam deciding what does and doesn't get communicated, and that then creates the problem of potentially creating the appearance of being puppets.
I've seen games with player advocacy groups that aren't covered by NDA. It is hard to say what Kabam's standard procedure would be in this situation, because I'm unaware of them using this kind of thing in any of their games. It is uncommon in general for any game, but it does sometimes work. They have a direct line to the developers, but in return they are expected to exercise restraint and discretion when using it, and serve to act as a high signal to noise channel between the players and the developers of the game. Because the communication is mostly an amplified and refined version of what players are talking about anyway in one direction and replies intended to be passed back to the player community in the other direction an NDA isn't necessary in these cases.
I mean, I'm not trying to sound rude, just exhausted with beating around the bush for fear people will get upset. Do people have a right to their feelings? Sure. The reactions are just too much. Let's wait and see what's coming.
Exhausted from what? No one is forcing you to respond, particularly since you don’t work for Kabam and have no inside data. You’re exhausting yourself providing your speculation that people have asked you not to provide. As you frequently note, it is a forum and you’re free to speak your mind; however, complaining about being “exhausted” is a bit much.
The reactions aren't even based on anything that's come to pass yet. All they said was he was doing more than other Champs in one form or another. Then Nerfgate 2019 started. From what I understand, these aren't even major overhauls. Just minor tweaks to adjust some imbalances. People heard Damage, started crying nerf, and some are even jumping ship. All before anything has even been indicated to change.
I dont understand if you're a kabam employee or new to the game or just love kabam for some reason. After all the BS kabam has pulled with champs like AA, SS, She hulk, doctor strange, SW etc. Kabam cannot get the benefit of the doubt. They clearly said his damage will be reduced and there was no mention of balancing him by increasing his block proficiency. They just said they will reduce his damage. So as far as kabam goes, that just means that his damage will be nerfed to the point where they think that cull wont be able to clear any future/current content they release easily.
Everyone that's saying that this is blown out of proportion clearly has no stake in this. They either dont have cull or dont want rank up cull. There are people who have spend hundreds and thousands on dollars on that operator and have ranked him up.
It is fair for them to be worried cause there is a good chance that the money they spent is just gonna be waste. It's a shame to see that instead on supporting your fellow summoners, people are defending kabam because kabam has obviously done what's "good" for the community.
I'm neither an Employee, or new to the game. We all have the same stake in it, if you want to be technical. SS NEVER operated at 100%. Ever. People keep citing it as some great tragedy and it was a text error. Shulk was a bug. Nothing about her even indicated she was meant to do that. People didn't know, fair enough. They allowed people the special case of Ranking her down. 12.0? That was 2 and a half years ago. Good Lord, we can let it go. I'm sure getting tired of explaining that those changes were necessary to save the future of the game. I feel like Asland. "I was there when it was written." It IS blown out of proportion. People beg for them to be upfront with us about changes like this and when they do, we chase them to the bell tower. We don't know what's being altered yet. All we have is a 3 month heads up. Out of that, people are stirring up controversy on other platforms, and half the Player Base thinks they can't Rank Champs. I'm sorry to say this, but the money we spend doesn't go into an investment. We're leading permission to use their game. They have every right to change it if they feel those changes will make future content easier to design. We're not making a purchase we can take home or investing into Shares in the company.
Shulk wasnt a bug until the abilities they gave the champ made end game content easily beatable. thats the problem, they made changes to make her better, gave her abilities based on a heavy attack, and when it hurt their bottom line they changed her again. It wasnt a bug, it doesnt say that hyperion's heavy attack takes twice as long as Civil Warrior, because the abilities dont describe the animations. It also doesnt say that you can hold Quakes heavy forever while you cant with others, do you mean to tell me because its not listed its a bug? Mean while we live with bugs forever. The issue with Cull is they continued to sell and push the champ without even telling us they were looking into an issue. When they started his review at some point they noticed the damage and started comparing him with others on all of the modes of the game. They said that in the statement so I bring it up because that is what were told. Obviously to do that comparison it would take time before they decided he needed to be changed. Because even you have said it takes time to test, so it wasnt over night. The moment they found something that they had to take a closer look we should have been notified on a closed thread so we could risk the buying of crystals and the rank ups. then when they had made the decision to make that announcement that changes were coming anyone that had bought the crystal or ranked up the champ couldnt complain because we knew they were looking into something. Instead the let the creator content program to send out videos after videos and offered that crystal on a weekly basis. I really dont see how you defend them, but we are all entitled to our opinions I guess.
She was bugged. It was brought to their attention that way, but she wasn't the only Champ fixed.
So by your definition Quake is bugged, because holding down block forever is not in the description then?
Not the same at all. Any Champ can hold Block. Until you get hit at least. No Champ is meant to chain Heavies like that unless specified.
Thats completely false, no other champ can continuously hold a heavy, do you play the game?
No other Champ can continuously hold a Heavy? Hmm....pretty sure they can.
I’m curious. Which champs (other than Quake) can continuously hold a heavy?
I mean, I'm not trying to sound rude, just exhausted with beating around the bush for fear people will get upset. Do people have a right to their feelings? Sure. The reactions are just too much. Let's wait and see what's coming.
Exhausted from what? No one is forcing you to respond, particularly since you don’t work for Kabam and have no inside data. You’re exhausting yourself providing your speculation that people have asked you not to provide. As you frequently note, it is a forum and you’re free to speak your mind; however, complaining about being “exhausted” is a bit much.
In general, I do my best to choose my words respectfully. When you're me, and everything you say tends to be inflated, you have to be more careful in situations where people are reactive so you don't add to it. I'm not always successful in that, but I do my best. After a while, you get tired of wording things generally, and you just want to be straightforward.
The reactions aren't even based on anything that's come to pass yet. All they said was he was doing more than other Champs in one form or another. Then Nerfgate 2019 started. From what I understand, these aren't even major overhauls. Just minor tweaks to adjust some imbalances. People heard Damage, started crying nerf, and some are even jumping ship. All before anything has even been indicated to change.
I dont understand if you're a kabam employee or new to the game or just love kabam for some reason. After all the BS kabam has pulled with champs like AA, SS, She hulk, doctor strange, SW etc. Kabam cannot get the benefit of the doubt. They clearly said his damage will be reduced and there was no mention of balancing him by increasing his block proficiency. They just said they will reduce his damage. So as far as kabam goes, that just means that his damage will be nerfed to the point where they think that cull wont be able to clear any future/current content they release easily.
Everyone that's saying that this is blown out of proportion clearly has no stake in this. They either dont have cull or dont want rank up cull. There are people who have spend hundreds and thousands on dollars on that operator and have ranked him up.
It is fair for them to be worried cause there is a good chance that the money they spent is just gonna be waste. It's a shame to see that instead on supporting your fellow summoners, people are defending kabam because kabam has obviously done what's "good" for the community.
I'm neither an Employee, or new to the game. We all have the same stake in it, if you want to be technical. SS NEVER operated at 100%. Ever. People keep citing it as some great tragedy and it was a text error. Shulk was a bug. Nothing about her even indicated she was meant to do that. People didn't know, fair enough. They allowed people the special case of Ranking her down. 12.0? That was 2 and a half years ago. Good Lord, we can let it go. I'm sure getting tired of explaining that those changes were necessary to save the future of the game. I feel like Asland. "I was there when it was written." It IS blown out of proportion. People beg for them to be upfront with us about changes like this and when they do, we chase them to the bell tower. We don't know what's being altered yet. All we have is a 3 month heads up. Out of that, people are stirring up controversy on other platforms, and half the Player Base thinks they can't Rank Champs. I'm sorry to say this, but the money we spend doesn't go into an investment. We're leading permission to use their game. They have every right to change it if they feel those changes will make future content easier to design. We're not making a purchase we can take home or investing into Shares in the company.
Shulk wasnt a bug until the abilities they gave the champ made end game content easily beatable. thats the problem, they made changes to make her better, gave her abilities based on a heavy attack, and when it hurt their bottom line they changed her again. It wasnt a bug, it doesnt say that hyperion's heavy attack takes twice as long as Civil Warrior, because the abilities dont describe the animations. It also doesnt say that you can hold Quakes heavy forever while you cant with others, do you mean to tell me because its not listed its a bug? Mean while we live with bugs forever. The issue with Cull is they continued to sell and push the champ without even telling us they were looking into an issue. When they started his review at some point they noticed the damage and started comparing him with others on all of the modes of the game. They said that in the statement so I bring it up because that is what were told. Obviously to do that comparison it would take time before they decided he needed to be changed. Because even you have said it takes time to test, so it wasnt over night. The moment they found something that they had to take a closer look we should have been notified on a closed thread so we could risk the buying of crystals and the rank ups. then when they had made the decision to make that announcement that changes were coming anyone that had bought the crystal or ranked up the champ couldnt complain because we knew they were looking into something. Instead the let the creator content program to send out videos after videos and offered that crystal on a weekly basis. I really dont see how you defend them, but we are all entitled to our opinions I guess.
She was bugged. It was brought to their attention that way, but she wasn't the only Champ fixed.
So by your definition Quake is bugged, because holding down block forever is not in the description then?
Not the same at all. Any Champ can hold Block. Until you get hit at least. No Champ is meant to chain Heavies like that unless specified.
Thats completely false, no other champ can continuously hold a heavy, do you play the game?
No other Champ can continuously hold a Heavy? Hmm....pretty sure they can.
I’m curious. Which champs (other than Quake) can continuously hold a heavy?
I already explained that bit. I was busy and confused Heavy with Block. In the technical sense, all Champs can hold a Heavy for at least a 5-count. As for Quake, I've been testing it, and you'll only get away with a 5-count in most cases, before the AI will Intercept and you have to either Evade, or Block. Once in a while it will take a passive stance and you can stack more, but lately, the AI won't let you just Quake 'n Bake.
I already explained that bit. I was busy and confused Heavy with Block. In the technical sense, all Champs can hold a Heavy for at least a 5-count. As for Quake, I've been testing it, and you'll only get away with a 5-count in most cases, before the AI will Intercept and you have to either Evade, or Block. Once in a while it will take a passive stance and you can stack more, but lately, the AI won't let you just Quake 'n Bake.
I would recommend dropping all discussion with Quake. It seems to me you're not familiar with how she works, because you're saying increasingly weird things to cover for this. For example, it is literally impossible for the AI to intercept you while you're holding heavy. You can't be intercepted if you're not moving forward. And you're not supposed to hold block while the defender attacks until you've applied a concussion, which makes Quake auto evade all basic attacks from most champions.
Edit: I should mention for completeness sake that of course you get the first miss for free: I meant continuing to hold block as the defender attacks should be avoided until you have concussion. My brain didn't remind me of this until after I posted.
Comments
People talk about ethics when it comes to purchases, but pointing out that it's their product is the only response to that. They're not selling something for ownership. In fact, they're explicit in the conditions on spending in the TOS. It can be modified in the future. You're not buying a product as-is. You're renting permission to use certain aspects of their product. That's a conditional rental. The condition is, you have no proprietary ownership to it, and they can change it for the well-being of their product.
As for the data, they're not going to divulge the raw data. They may, if they choose, provide a list of aspects they examined. They may not. If you're asking if there are any choices for purchase or Ranking that you can make which are guaranteed will never change, that guarantee doesn't exist. See TOS.
And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the issue of conflating communicating with editorializing. When you are a party to communicating directly with the developers of a game, you have to be extremely conscious of the difference between explaining a developer decision and defending a developer decision. If you fall into doing the latter when you're supposed to be doing the former, you can make the situation worse than if you did nothing at all. This is an incredibly difficult thing to do consistently.
And collectively, whomever is involved must have enough credibility to function, and ironically just talking to Kabam would damage every participant's credibility on day one. The content creators already get a lot of low-level flak for being in bed with Kabam, even though that's baseless. If the content creators know why Kabam does something, it can be much harder to criticise them about that thing: that's human nature. But what will that look like from the outside? It will look like a bunch of content creators got together with Kabam and the next day all of them simultaneously starting criticizing them much less.
This *can* work, and I've seen it work, and I would certainly give it a try if Kabam decided to do something like this. But it can also blow up in your face if you don't do it just right.
As for the NDA, I thought that was standard procedure for Kabam—even for non-CCP players who participate in advisory roles—or has that changed?
Dr. Zola
1) You can announce that Cull's block proficiency will be increased. Removing the fear of a nerf.
2) You can end the 3 month which is actually 6 month adjustment period ( which will go along way with community trust.)
3) Release the data that they use to determine a bug or what makes a champ too powerful
4)Make a defined set of rules that we can understand what constitutes a character adjustment moving forward.
Once again, when executing nerf, maybe Cull is not going to be my favorite cosmic champ, while having hyperion and Medusa unawakened. SO, will Kabam return me back my cosmic awakening 5* gem? Will return my almost 120 cosmic level up gems? I guess no way, so IMHO again, this is a very bad bad bad thing.
I've seen games with player advocacy groups that aren't covered by NDA. It is hard to say what Kabam's standard procedure would be in this situation, because I'm unaware of them using this kind of thing in any of their games. It is uncommon in general for any game, but it does sometimes work. They have a direct line to the developers, but in return they are expected to exercise restraint and discretion when using it, and serve to act as a high signal to noise channel between the players and the developers of the game. Because the communication is mostly an amplified and refined version of what players are talking about anyway in one direction and replies intended to be passed back to the player community in the other direction an NDA isn't necessary in these cases.
Edit: I should mention for completeness sake that of course you get the first miss for free: I meant continuing to hold block as the defender attacks should be avoided until you have concussion. My brain didn't remind me of this until after I posted.