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.
I'm familiar with how she works. She's on my Attack Team at all times. Try it. You can hold Heavy for about a 5 count before the AI will interrupt you.
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.
I'm familiar with how she works. She's on my Attack Team at all times. Try it. You can hold Heavy for about a 5 count before the AI will interrupt you.
I'm not the best Quake player in the world, but the fact that you completely ignored concussion in your reply pretty much proves my point to every other Quake player reading. Nobody expects enemies to just stand there and stare at Quake while she earthquakes them to death. That's unreasonable. But when you say the AI will interrupt you, how do you expect them to interrupt you if they can't hit you while concussed?
Dave wrecked my Boss Rush IW with 4* Quake, so I'm guessing Quake is still working fine. If there was a problem with Quake, I would assume he'd find it long before I could possibly notice it.
1. Why is Kabam writing new posts while blatantly ignoring this one? ANY response at this point would be welcomed. If one of the mods just dropped in to let us know “Hey guys, it’s September 24 and the sky is blue.” Just some acknowledgment that you are aware we are still here??
2. Why has no in game post been made, you know, for the people who don’t use the forums? Not every person who owns Cull, or is still potentially buying units for the hopes to get Cull is on the forums. Full transparency seems like a solid idea to me.
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.
I'm familiar with how she works. She's on my Attack Team at all times. Try it. You can hold Heavy for about a 5 count before the AI will interrupt you.
I'm not the best Quake player in the world, but the fact that you completely ignored concussion in your reply pretty much proves my point to every other Quake player reading. Nobody expects enemies to just stand there and stare at Quake while she earthquakes them to death. That's unreasonable. But when you say the AI will interrupt you, how do you expect them to interrupt you if they can't hit you while concussed?
Dave wrecked my Boss Rush IW with 4* Quake, so I'm guessing Quake is still working fine. If there was a problem with Quake, I would assume he'd find it long before I could possibly notice it.
The argument was that she somehow can hold a Heavy indefinitely while others can't, and since it isn't explicitly listed in her Abilities, it could be changed in the future. I'm talking about being able to hold a Heavy.
In any case, it really doesn't matter because it's not even related to the topic at this point. I answered the question that pertained to it. Could they say it wasn't intended? Sure. It's possible.
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.
I'm familiar with how she works. She's on my Attack Team at all times. Try it. You can hold Heavy for about a 5 count before the AI will interrupt you.
I'm not the best Quake player in the world, but the fact that you completely ignored concussion in your reply pretty much proves my point to every other Quake player reading. Nobody expects enemies to just stand there and stare at Quake while she earthquakes them to death. That's unreasonable. But when you say the AI will interrupt you, how do you expect them to interrupt you if they can't hit you while concussed?
Dave wrecked my Boss Rush IW with 4* Quake, so I'm guessing Quake is still working fine. If there was a problem with Quake, I would assume he'd find it long before I could possibly notice it.
The argument was that she somehow can hold a Heavy indefinitely while others can't, and since it isn't explicitly listed in her Abilities, it could be changed in the future. I'm talking about being able to hold a Heavy.
and what we all are saying is your response reads like you have never used quake and doesnt make sense. Please look at his earlier response about intercepting etc. Lots of red flags in your answers that make it seem you might not have quake in your roster IMO.
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.
I'm familiar with how she works. She's on my Attack Team at all times. Try it. You can hold Heavy for about a 5 count before the AI will interrupt you.
I'm not the best Quake player in the world, but the fact that you completely ignored concussion in your reply pretty much proves my point to every other Quake player reading. Nobody expects enemies to just stand there and stare at Quake while she earthquakes them to death. That's unreasonable. But when you say the AI will interrupt you, how do you expect them to interrupt you if they can't hit you while concussed?
Dave wrecked my Boss Rush IW with 4* Quake, so I'm guessing Quake is still working fine. If there was a problem with Quake, I would assume he'd find it long before I could possibly notice it.
The argument was that she somehow can hold a Heavy indefinitely while others can't, and since it isn't explicitly listed in her Abilities, it could be changed in the future. I'm talking about being able to hold a Heavy.
and what we all are saying is your response reads like you have never used quake and doesnt make sense. Please look at his earlier response about intercepting etc. Lots of red flags in your answers that make it seem you might not have quake in your roster IMO.
Mkay.
I can google an image too, let it go, you dont know quake its ok buddy, one day you will pull her. Its ok.
I don't post my IGN, but it's been blasted enough times. You're really not going to win that argument.
It’s pretty related to the topic. People are worried that now Kabam can just up and change champions at will for whatever reason they see fit. How can you not see this? Are you privy to what is supposed to be “working as intended” or do you just take everything that’s said at face value? Thinking that way means they could do anything they want to any champ on your roster and you’ll just shrug it off like “o well, wasn’t working right.” When do you draw the line?
WHAT IF! They post tomorrow “Namor wasn’t supposed to regen at all and it was a typo, update ____ will rectify that issue.” Are you going to believe it was unintended for him to regen?
I think it’s a great quality that people want to believe everything Kabam I truly do. I don’t have any hostility towards anyone who defends them or anything. In a perfect world I would like to believe everyone is honest too, but it’s not that way. They are opening a very very very unstable door and we are just taking it.
In any case, it really doesn't matter because it's not even related to the topic at this point. I answered the question that pertained to it. Could they say it wasn't intended? Sure. It's possible.
Human beings can do all sorts of ridiculous unpredictable things. But no one would believe them if they said Quake's heavy mechanics were unintended, because that's impossible.
There's a fundamental difference between a game mechanic being intended and a performance result being intended. Performance results depend on how the players behave, and there's no way to predict that (which is a major discussion point of the thread). But an obvious game mechanic like Quake's heavy mechanics is unlikely to happen by accident and impossible to have been overlooked, because it is obvious in every single fight Quake conducts.
You can't look at one fight and know how all other players are doing. But you can look at one fight and know how the champion is doing. Cull's maximum damage output is obvious from watching one fight. His average damage across the entire playerbase is not obvious from watching any number of fights. Quake's heavy mechanics are obvious from watching one fight, and thus cannot be reasonably unintended at this point in time. If they changed those claiming they were unintended, I'd be here not just recommending RDTs, but CAT scans on the developers.
In any case, it really doesn't matter because it's not even related to the topic at this point. I answered the question that pertained to it. Could they say it wasn't intended? Sure. It's possible.
Human beings can do all sorts of ridiculous unpredictable things. But no one would believe them if they said Quake's heavy mechanics were unintended, because that's impossible.
There's a fundamental difference between a game mechanic being intended and a performance result being intended. Performance results depend on how the players behave, and there's no way to predict that (which is a major discussion point of the thread). But an obvious game mechanic like Quake's heavy mechanics is unlikely to happen by accident and impossible to have been overlooked, because it is obvious in every single fight Quake conducts.
You can't look at one fight and know how all other players are doing. But you can look at one fight and know how the champion is doing. Cull's maximum damage output is obvious from watching one fight. His average damage across the entire playerbase is not obvious from watching any number of fights. Quake's heavy mechanics are obvious from watching one fight, and thus cannot be reasonably unintended at this point in time. If they changed those claiming they were unintended, I'd be here not just recommending RDTs, but CAT scans on the developers.
Oh, I agree. I'm quite positive that she's intended to perform that way, and I understand how Concussion plays into it. I was speaking in terms of the actual mechanics alone. To be honest, I pointed out that the question doesn't even pertain to the current discussion, but I suppose I got stuck in a rabbit hole anyway. For all intents and purposes, it's possible to say anything is unintended if it's not explicitly mentioned.
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.
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
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.
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
I don't remember saying the words "agree or you can't play". I addressed the idea that they can't make changes because people spent money on the Champs and/or Resources. We're already agreeing to those conditions by playing and making purchases. They have the right to modify their own product. This isn't something that's new. If someone implies that they can change it, that's a given. It isn't something any of us have a choice on. What they have been trying to do, which falls on deaf ears, is be upfront about their plans. Well in advance, to be precise. If they aren't offering anything else, there's a good chance that hasn't been locked into place yet. First people ask for transparency, then they argue there aren't enough details. If they wait until the details are closer to finalized, then they argue they haven't been transparent. See the dichotomy?
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.
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
I don't remember saying the words "agree or you can't play". I addressed the idea that they can't make changes because people spent money on the Champs and/or Resources. We're already agreeing to those conditions by playing and making purchases. They have the right to modify their own product. This isn't something that's new. If someone implies that they can change it, that's a given. It isn't something any of us have a choice on. What they have been trying to do, which falls on deaf ears, is be upfront about their plans. Well in advance, to be precise. If they aren't offering anything else, there's a good chance that hasn't been locked into place yet. First people ask for transparency, then they argue there aren't enough details. If they wait until the details are closer to finalized, then they argue they haven't been transparent. See the dichotomy?
How is this transparency? “We will let you know PRIOR to the champion entering the basic pool.”
*Cull enters basic pool*
“We think Cull is too overpowered, we need to tune him down.”
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.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Looking at the last two pages, it's clear Kabam is deleting all but you posts. Why would they keep you're misinformation 8 times in a row and delete real comments?
People are upset because they spend alot of money on this game especially for new champions. I cant buy Crystal's or spend units grinding for a new champion without fear of them getting changed for the worse.
People are upset because they spend alot of money on this game especially for new champions. I cant buy Crystal's or spend units grinding for a new champion without fear of them getting changed for the worse.
Years ago I had a conversation with an employee who was not contributing to the company 401k because they were afraid of market conditions: basically they were afraid the market would go down and they would lose money. I explained to them that there was a risk they were not considering: the risk that by sitting permanently on the sidelines they would be falling behind their retirement goals and forced to work until they died.
There's a risk associated with pursuing or ranking up champions that will never go away, because at some point downstream things will change. The champ may get nerfed. Or, even if it is never touched the devs may simply decide to make content that champ is not good at. They don't have to touch Starlord to safeguard his damage, for example.
But there's also a risk associated with not doing anything, and that risk is you don't get to use those champs or use ranked up versions of those champs. The players who aren't afraid will get those benefits ahead of you. There's no safe choice: you have to decide which risk you want to take.
No matter what they do to Cull, this will be true. No matter whether they keep their review policy or change it, this will be true. They aren't ever going to promise you that they will never change anything. And you shouldn't believe any dev that makes that promise: they are lying. They won't likely even be there forever to keep that promise.
@GroundedWisdom Might be time to lay off. It's you vs everyone else at this point. You've made yourself clear, you're not going to change anyone's minds here. You've been pretty well discredited on this issue. Chances are, your making things worse.
Sorry, but if you think I'm leaving the discussion because I mixed up a Heavy with a Block mechanic, that's not happening. I realize this place can thrive on pointing out mistakes, but I'm a big boy.
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.
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
I don't remember saying the words "agree or you can't play". I addressed the idea that they can't make changes because people spent money on the Champs and/or Resources. We're already agreeing to those conditions by playing and making purchases. They have the right to modify their own product. This isn't something that's new. If someone implies that they can change it, that's a given. It isn't something any of us have a choice on. What they have been trying to do, which falls on deaf ears, is be upfront about their plans. Well in advance, to be precise. If they aren't offering anything else, there's a good chance that hasn't been locked into place yet. First people ask for transparency, then they argue there aren't enough details. If they wait until the details are closer to finalized, then they argue they haven't been transparent. See the dichotomy?
I’m aware you didn’t refer to the wording as that, that was aimed at how Kabam worded it. Apologies on the confusion there.
I hear ya, someone among the crowd will find something to argue about regardless of what is said. I can understand why people are upset; the spending multiple digits worth of $ into this mobile game (still have a hard time wrapping my head around that. 😵)
The mods will probably strike me down for this but lately even when they do attempt to be transparent, their delivery falls flat. I could be reading too much into it, but some of the mods not that long ago were good at communicating with the fan base without spoiling a lot of details.
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.
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
I don't remember saying the words "agree or you can't play". I addressed the idea that they can't make changes because people spent money on the Champs and/or Resources. We're already agreeing to those conditions by playing and making purchases. They have the right to modify their own product. This isn't something that's new. If someone implies that they can change it, that's a given. It isn't something any of us have a choice on. What they have been trying to do, which falls on deaf ears, is be upfront about their plans. Well in advance, to be precise. If they aren't offering anything else, there's a good chance that hasn't been locked into place yet. First people ask for transparency, then they argue there aren't enough details. If they wait until the details are closer to finalized, then they argue they haven't been transparent. See the dichotomy?
I’m aware you didn’t refer to the wording as that, that was aimed at how Kabam worded it. Apologies on the confusion there.
I hear ya, someone among the crowd will find something to argue about regardless of what is said. I can understand why people are upset; the spending multiple digits worth of $ into this mobile game (still have a hard time wrapping my head around that. 😵)
The mods will probably strike me down for this but lately even when they do attempt to be transparent, their delivery falls flat. I could be reading too much into it, but some of the mods not that long ago were good at communicating with the fan base without spoiling a lot of details.
Communication is always an ongoing process. No matter what you say, things can always be taken differently. Am I saying they're perfect? No. None of us are. I think in this case, the intention was just to let us know ahead of time that they're looking at it.
People are upset because they spend alot of money on this game especially for new champions. I cant buy Crystal's or spend units grinding for a new champion without fear of them getting changed for the worse.
Years ago I had a conversation with an employee who was not contributing to the company 401k because they were afraid of market conditions: basically they were afraid the market would go down and they would lose money. I explained to them that there was a risk they were not considering: the risk that by sitting permanently on the sidelines they would be falling behind their retirement goals and forced to work until they died.
There's a risk associated with pursuing or ranking up champions that will never go away, because at some point downstream things will change. The champ may get nerfed. Or, even if it is never touched the devs may simply decide to make content that champ is not good at. They don't have to touch Starlord to safeguard his damage, for example.
But there's also a risk associated with not doing anything, and that risk is you don't get to use those champs or use ranked up versions of those champs. The players who aren't afraid will get those benefits ahead of you. There's no safe choice: you have to decide which risk you want to take.
No matter what they do to Cull, this will be true. No matter whether they keep their review policy or change it, this will be true. They aren't ever going to promise you that they will never change anything. And you shouldn't believe any dev that makes that promise: they are lying. They won't likely even be there forever to keep that promise.
I think there’s a needed distinction here between more organic shifts (for example, the shift away from bleed dominant champs, the shift away from mystic wars) and more artificial, programmed shifts (for example, building in a fudge factor for screwing up a champ’s introduction).
And I wish people would stop beating up the “nothing can ever change” straw man. Give him a break—I’ve yet to see anyone argue that the game should stay 100% static.
I don’t expect us to agree on this one. But it’s qualitatively different from my perspective.
Comments
Dave wrecked my Boss Rush IW with 4* Quake, so I'm guessing Quake is still working fine. If there was a problem with Quake, I would assume he'd find it long before I could possibly notice it.
2. Why has no in game post been made, you know, for the people who don’t use the forums? Not every person who owns Cull, or is still potentially buying units for the hopes to get Cull is on the forums. Full transparency seems like a solid idea to me.
I'm talking about being able to hold a Heavy.
WHAT IF! They post tomorrow “Namor wasn’t supposed to regen at all and it was a typo, update ____ will rectify that issue.” Are you going to believe it was unintended for him to regen?
I think it’s a great quality that people want to believe everything Kabam I truly do. I don’t have any hostility towards anyone who defends them or anything. In a perfect world I would like to believe everyone is honest too, but it’s not that way. They are opening a very very very unstable door and we are just taking it.
There's a fundamental difference between a game mechanic being intended and a performance result being intended. Performance results depend on how the players behave, and there's no way to predict that (which is a major discussion point of the thread). But an obvious game mechanic like Quake's heavy mechanics is unlikely to happen by accident and impossible to have been overlooked, because it is obvious in every single fight Quake conducts.
You can't look at one fight and know how all other players are doing. But you can look at one fight and know how the champion is doing. Cull's maximum damage output is obvious from watching one fight. His average damage across the entire playerbase is not obvious from watching any number of fights. Quake's heavy mechanics are obvious from watching one fight, and thus cannot be reasonably unintended at this point in time. If they changed those claiming they were unintended, I'd be here not just recommending RDTs, but CAT scans on the developers.
Cull Obsidian changes yay or nay?
(Not particularly sure why this was deleted originally, a little unfortunate, but oh well)
It was a “agree or you can’t play” wording, so please just stop falling back to that. You’ve beaten, ignited and buried that topic, sir.
Moving that aside, I believe someone said it recently that if kabam comes out and says along the lines of “we are considering bumping up his block proficiency to balance out the damage output.” Then people should (hopefully be content)
If they don’t...then people could fall back on ‘keep your champs at r3/1if you aren’t going for prestige/alliance purpose...let kabam figure the r4+ data points out with new champs moving forward’ approach
*Cull enters basic pool*
“We think Cull is too overpowered, we need to tune him down.”
That’s not transparent, that was a lie.
Looking at the last two pages, it's clear Kabam is deleting all but you posts. Why would they keep you're misinformation 8 times in a row and delete real comments?
I cant buy Crystal's or spend units grinding for a new champion without fear of them getting changed for the worse.
There's a risk associated with pursuing or ranking up champions that will never go away, because at some point downstream things will change. The champ may get nerfed. Or, even if it is never touched the devs may simply decide to make content that champ is not good at. They don't have to touch Starlord to safeguard his damage, for example.
But there's also a risk associated with not doing anything, and that risk is you don't get to use those champs or use ranked up versions of those champs. The players who aren't afraid will get those benefits ahead of you. There's no safe choice: you have to decide which risk you want to take.
No matter what they do to Cull, this will be true. No matter whether they keep their review policy or change it, this will be true. They aren't ever going to promise you that they will never change anything. And you shouldn't believe any dev that makes that promise: they are lying. They won't likely even be there forever to keep that promise.
I hear ya, someone among the crowd will find something to argue about regardless of what is said. I can understand why people are upset; the spending multiple digits worth of $ into this mobile game (still have a hard time wrapping my head around that. 😵)
The mods will probably strike me down for this but lately even when they do attempt to be transparent, their delivery falls flat. I could be reading too much into it, but some of the mods not that long ago were good at communicating with the fan base without spoiling a lot of details.
And I wish people would stop beating up the “nothing can ever change” straw man. Give him a break—I’ve yet to see anyone argue that the game should stay 100% static.
I don’t expect us to agree on this one. But it’s qualitatively different from my perspective.
Dr. Zola