Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

16162636466

Comments

  • mbracembrace Posts: 409 ★★
    People talk about making cull more durable, but it would also be nice to have rout activate quicker. I tend to draw a heavy attack by the time I get it going.
  • psp742psp742 Posts: 622 ★★★
    How come the Cull and Ebony thread has been hijack by NF neutering..

    if kabam did more testing they should have noticed that NF was purifying more debuffs than intended.. if it is clearly stated in NF description and ability that he can remove debuff (take note: a debuff not debuff’s’). Then people should not assume. But if it was not clearly stated in his abilities. Then it’s a nerf.

    Cull Obsidian is a one trick pony with raw damage once he complete his task.. block proficiency is poor, no immunities, and not suitable for all content. If Kabam reduces his raw damage from 100% to 80% but gives him block proficiency and other utility.. he will become more useful and might even be used in AW as attacker or defender.

    Ebony Maw on the other hand doesn’t really do much offensively, a 5* or 6* that has attack that is weaker than some 3* maxed champions. Only good he can do is make opponents miss him and waste time.. unlike in the MCU, where only way to win against his strong psychic abilities, Ironman IW blasted the spaceship wall and Maw got suck into space.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Posts: 1,505 ★★★★★
    psp742 said:

    How come the Cull and Ebony thread has been hijack by NF neutering..

    if kabam did more testing they should have noticed that NF was purifying more debuffs than intended.. if it is clearly stated in NF description and ability that he can remove debuff (take note: a debuff not debuff’s’). Then people should not assume. But if it was not clearly stated in his abilities. Then it’s a nerf.

    Cull Obsidian is a one trick pony with raw damage once he complete his task.. block proficiency is poor, no immunities, and not suitable for all content. If Kabam reduces his raw damage from 100% to 80% but gives him block proficiency and other utility.. he will become more useful and might even be used in AW as attacker or defender.

    Ebony Maw on the other hand doesn’t really do much offensively, a 5* or 6* that has attack that is weaker than some 3* maxed champions. Only good he can do is make opponents miss him and waste time.. unlike in the MCU, where only way to win against his strong psychic abilities, Ironman IW blasted the spaceship wall and Maw got suck into space.

    I brought up the NF situation and everyone jumped on it, that's how it happened.

    Back on topic, what exactly is the future of Cull with this announcement. I'm thinking that it is on hold or not going to happen.
  • Indrick781Indrick781 Posts: 372 ★★★

    So you're assuming they wanted it, knew it, advertised him as that, and then fixed it? That doesn't even make sense.
    In any case, I agree with Vydious. This isn't going anywhere.

    That's exactly what I think happened in my opinion. I don't think they ignored all the numerous content creator videos that were put out focusing on that specific video. I have no proof but I think after gameplay was introduced they were like holy **** that is too OP.
    I think you are giving the presence/highlighting of the synergy in content creator videos from the time a greater value than they actually had.

    It’s difficult to find videos specifically highlighting the synergy and even then it requires the people at Kabam responsible for that synergy to watch the videos which may not even be their job or outside their purview. It’s also unreasonable to demand for character designers to watch every published piece of content on their champion. It is reasonable to expect them to test their creations but even then that testing can be error prone. If they are testing intended functionality the test may (in error) only extend to debuffs placed by nodes and they are then unaware of the interaction with both suicide masteries.

    It would be quite easy, and is likely common, for employees of Kabam who watch CCP videos to not understand an interaction is unintended thus leaving it unnoticed until the time at which the knowledgeable parties are made aware of an interaction.

    For this reason it’s important for players, especially willing members of the CCP since they have early access, to question interactions that are either particularly powerful, ambiguous, difficult to understand or seem to contradict the wording of an ability. This way the Kabam team members who are responsible for these interactions can clarify, correct them ASAP, or (in the case of some players belief) be held to account and so the player base is well informed and errors are minimized. I’m not saying fault lies with players or the the CCP for these errors but that they can help reduce or eliminate some of them before they are released into the game by actively questioning abilities in the spaces provided to them (like champion spotlights, the bug forums, and whatever method is used for the CCP to communicate with Kabam).

    Too many werdz, apologies.

    I think the ultimate issue is that Kabam tests like a dev, not a player. They look at the interactions to make sure they are working as intended, but not for ways those intentions could be used to make content as easy as possible. I think they go in with a "This is how it is supposed to work" mentality and they might test for some obvious issues but they aren't looking at putting Cull with Gladiator Hulk, Heimdall+Angela, suicides, rout, 10 favor and then stacking 20 armor breaks to see what his maximum output is. They aren't looking at how to "break" the game with any said champion.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Posts: 1,505 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pr0t0t7p3 said:

    If Cull out damages all other high damage champs and you "tune" him so he no longer out damages them, doesn't that mean that the second highest damage champ now out damages all the others and by definition becomes over powered and requires a tuning???

    The problem Kabam is describing is almost certainly not that Cull outdamages (however that is defined) all other champions, but rather that he does so outside some internal metric. The way these metrics are defined are often relative not absolute. In other words, there might be a rule that says champions are allowed to be as much as 80% higher than the average for some damage metric. If that's the case, in this hypothetical example Domino could be 79% higher than the average champ and Cull 81%, and Cull would need to be rebalanced and Domino perfectly fine, even though the difference between the two was difficult to see.

    I'm not saying that's the case here, only that rebalancing doesn't generally involve one thing being highest: something has to be highest. It is that they exceed some maximum allowable number, and that number is usually computed relative to the average performance of all other things. Cull can be adjusted to honor that requirement and still end up being the highest damage champ in the game in theory.

    Technically speaking, although every game developer in the world calls this "rebalancing" it is not technically a balancing operation: it is a conformance operation. But game developers do not distinguish between balancing (which involves adjusting one or more things to honor a required relationship) and conformance (which involves adjusting one thing to conform to a set of boundary conditions). It's a shame game developers do not both think about and discuss these changes more accurately, because the semantics have a real side effect: when a dev says Cull needs to be rebalanced, they imply that Cull does more damage than something else, and that's wrong. But then players start wondering who Cull is being compared to. If they explained Cull was being changed to conform to the design rules players might still be just as upset, but they wouldn't be led down the false path of thinking that he's being incorrectly compared to some other champ. He's not, and all arguments attempting to show how that comparison is wrong are literally falling on deaf ears, because he isn't being compared to any other particular champ at all.
    Until Kabam presents the data that they used to come to this conclusion I'm inclined not to worry about where they're getting their data from. All I know is that he will hit less hard which has 0 benefit to the player base and makes them angry if anything.

    Even the ones that are on Kabam's side of the argument aren't saying they're happy about Cull receiving less damage.
    I was responding to a poster that wondered if Cull is being "rebalanced" because he's the highest, won't that simply mean that the second highest becomes the highest. That's not true, because Cull isn't being changed to deliberately not be the highest any more. This has nothing to do with where they get their data from, or whether their data methodology is reasonable.

    And this attitude about Kabam being required to show some sort of proof their data is correct is laudable, but the playerbase is fighting up a hill almost no playerbase of any MMO has ever succeeded at winning in. The absolute best example of players getting access to data and methodology I'm aware of comes from Eve Online, and that is both an enormous special case situation (Eve Online is both run by quants and has a playerbase that is dominated by quants) and still didn't get what the players here seem to be asking for. If Eve's players can't get it, I feel safe in saying MCOC's players are not even going to get close.

    How do you feel about this post now seeing as Kabam promised to give us more data in the future? lol
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,006 Guardian

    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pr0t0t7p3 said:

    If Cull out damages all other high damage champs and you "tune" him so he no longer out damages them, doesn't that mean that the second highest damage champ now out damages all the others and by definition becomes over powered and requires a tuning???

    The problem Kabam is describing is almost certainly not that Cull outdamages (however that is defined) all other champions, but rather that he does so outside some internal metric. The way these metrics are defined are often relative not absolute. In other words, there might be a rule that says champions are allowed to be as much as 80% higher than the average for some damage metric. If that's the case, in this hypothetical example Domino could be 79% higher than the average champ and Cull 81%, and Cull would need to be rebalanced and Domino perfectly fine, even though the difference between the two was difficult to see.

    I'm not saying that's the case here, only that rebalancing doesn't generally involve one thing being highest: something has to be highest. It is that they exceed some maximum allowable number, and that number is usually computed relative to the average performance of all other things. Cull can be adjusted to honor that requirement and still end up being the highest damage champ in the game in theory.

    Technically speaking, although every game developer in the world calls this "rebalancing" it is not technically a balancing operation: it is a conformance operation. But game developers do not distinguish between balancing (which involves adjusting one or more things to honor a required relationship) and conformance (which involves adjusting one thing to conform to a set of boundary conditions). It's a shame game developers do not both think about and discuss these changes more accurately, because the semantics have a real side effect: when a dev says Cull needs to be rebalanced, they imply that Cull does more damage than something else, and that's wrong. But then players start wondering who Cull is being compared to. If they explained Cull was being changed to conform to the design rules players might still be just as upset, but they wouldn't be led down the false path of thinking that he's being incorrectly compared to some other champ. He's not, and all arguments attempting to show how that comparison is wrong are literally falling on deaf ears, because he isn't being compared to any other particular champ at all.
    Until Kabam presents the data that they used to come to this conclusion I'm inclined not to worry about where they're getting their data from. All I know is that he will hit less hard which has 0 benefit to the player base and makes them angry if anything.

    Even the ones that are on Kabam's side of the argument aren't saying they're happy about Cull receiving less damage.
    I was responding to a poster that wondered if Cull is being "rebalanced" because he's the highest, won't that simply mean that the second highest becomes the highest. That's not true, because Cull isn't being changed to deliberately not be the highest any more. This has nothing to do with where they get their data from, or whether their data methodology is reasonable.

    And this attitude about Kabam being required to show some sort of proof their data is correct is laudable, but the playerbase is fighting up a hill almost no playerbase of any MMO has ever succeeded at winning in. The absolute best example of players getting access to data and methodology I'm aware of comes from Eve Online, and that is both an enormous special case situation (Eve Online is both run by quants and has a playerbase that is dominated by quants) and still didn't get what the players here seem to be asking for. If Eve's players can't get it, I feel safe in saying MCOC's players are not even going to get close.

    How do you feel about this post now seeing as Kabam promised to give us more data in the future? lol
    I feel fine. Kabam hasn't promised to give us their actual data mining data. What Kabam said in the Comicon interview and in the forum announcement was that they needed to better explain their changes with player-facing data. I specifically discussed what this means in this thread last week, in a post replying to one of your posts here: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/1008127#Comment_1008127, so I'm assuming you saw it.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Posts: 1,505 ★★★★★
    That is the most hilarious stretches I've ever seen. You keep believing that lol. In your post you were talking about data period and players request to get more of it. To try to separate and make it seem as though you were asking for a different subset of data specifically is laughable. I'll leave it at that because Kabam might shut down this thread but we can all see the post. Who know's what type of data they'll give anyway, you might want to take that back?

  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,006 Guardian

    That is the most hilarious stretches I've ever seen. You keep believing that lol. In your post you were talking about data period and players request to get more of it. To try to separate and make it seem as though you were asking for a different subset of data specifically is laughable. I'll leave it at that because Kabam might shut down this thread but we can all see the post. Who know's what type of data they'll give anyway, you might want to take that back?

    So when I said I'm unaware of playerbases getting the data being discussed, you thought I meant the data they can see with their own two eyes?

    You all is crazy. And by you all, I may or may not be referring to you specifically. It depends on what day you read this.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,386 ★★★★★

    That is the most hilarious stretches I've ever seen. You keep believing that lol. In your post you were talking about data period and players request to get more of it. To try to separate and make it seem as though you were asking for a different subset of data specifically is laughable. I'll leave it at that because Kabam might shut down this thread but we can all see the post. Who know's what type of data they'll give anyway, you might want to take that back?

    I believe he was referring to the raw data, and how they would most likely provide an interpretation of what they were looking for, as opposed to the actual data they mined it from.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,386 ★★★★★
    Unless I'm off.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Posts: 1,505 ★★★★★

    That is the most hilarious stretches I've ever seen. You keep believing that lol. In your post you were talking about data period and players request to get more of it. To try to separate and make it seem as though you were asking for a different subset of data specifically is laughable. I'll leave it at that because Kabam might shut down this thread but we can all see the post. Who know's what type of data they'll give anyway, you might want to take that back?

    I believe he was referring to the raw data, and how they would most likely provide an interpretation of what they were looking for, as opposed to the actual data they mined it from.
    We don't know what type of data they'll give us first and foremost so he still has the opportunity to be incorrect on that front. Also, I can't assume that he is talking about raw data specifically, he basically tried to cover up his original response that I posted where he was blatantly incorrect.

    A lot of people in the gaming community can understand raw data, it's not that hard. This community is not that ignorant which is why our demands are high in general. We are able to play the game, grasp the concept and require Kabam to give us more data, raw or not.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,386 ★★★★★
    He gave an opinion on what he thought they might offer. He didn't claim to know what they will, he didn't even make the assertion that the Players couldn't handle the data they have. I'd say it's a fair assessment considering they won't likely release anything they hold as proprietary. You seem to be on some sort of crusade with this. They're offering more information. Might be a good suggestion to be happy with that instead of letting it become a rush. Just sayin'.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,386 ★★★★★

    He gave an opinion on what he thought they might offer. He didn't claim to know what they will, he didn't even make the assertion that the Players couldn't handle the data they have. I'd say it's a fair assessment considering they won't likely release anything they hold as proprietary. You seem to be on some sort of crusade with this. They're offering more information. Might be a good suggestion to be happy with that instead of letting it become a rush. Just sayin'.

    I don't know why you feel the need to put the cape on for @DNA3000. He is fully capable of doing so himself as he has done before on this very thread and I was actually looking forward to his response but just lost interest, thanks for that.

    A crusade huh? You literally putting all the things people say about you onto me and it comes off as a projection. Can we please get back on topic since I no longer feel the need to beat a dead horse? Thanks
    You're twisting the facts to argue on behalf of all Players when there's really nothing to argue about.
  • Urkel2Urkel2 Posts: 371 ★★

    Hey all,

    I know there will be a lot of questions about Rank Down Tickets and Compensation for changes, and there already are some. As a reminder, we did say that we will approach these on a case by case basis, and will not be able to make any comments on this yet, because we don't know what Cull's balance pass will look like at all yet.

    Also, remember that these changes are restricted to Tuning updates, and are will not change any abilities or utility. Our intention is that if you love your Champion now, you should still love them after.

    If you are going to nerf his damage you should at least fix his block damage! I have the 5 star at r3 and he loses %7 hp while blocking rol winter soldiers sp2 this is really bad considering even 4 star AA only loses %2 hp while blocking it! This is even lower than what corvus takes and corvus is already all around a better champ than him and requires less effort to ramp up.. Anyone who actually has him can clearly see this is illogical
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Posts: 4,043 ★★★★★
    JohnHS said:

    JohnHS said:

    I really wish there was a way to unfollow a thread ...

    I showed you a way, after that bookmark threads you want notifications from.
    You can't use that to unfollow specific threads. I still want to follow other threads I've commented on.
    More or less you can. Tap/click the star for threads you comment on.

  • psp742psp742 Posts: 622 ★★★
    Lower Culls damage by a tad, give him better block proficiency, add (one) fury to Cull as per each debuff; so more debuff against Cull, more fury stacks up (solves the adjusted lower base attack damage). The improved block proficiency should make Cull Obsidian better for other content.
  • KillKaronKillKaron Posts: 3
    Hi,

    I post again my message with few changes. I hope moderator don't delete this time :

    Like everyone here, I do not understand why you want nerf Cull Obsidian.
    If you like watch YouTubers, you should watch these videos :

    - KT1 made a very good video on this subject
    - Seatin does not even rank Cull Obsidian in the best champions.

    According to Seatin ranking liste, you have at least 18 champions to nerf before Cull Obsidian !!!

    Even with the release of Cull Obsidian, the players mainly use only 3 champions for the LOL: Ghost, Aegon and Domino ... No Cull Obsidian.

    It's not enough to look the raw damage stats ...
    Namor beats almost as hard and it regenerates and it benefit from the suicide’s masteries ...
    Captain Marvel Movie beats almost as hard and she has immunities ...
  • KillKaronKillKaron Posts: 3
    You cannot make mass purchases by offering a character with very good statistics and then decreasing it after.
    A lot of customer paid for this Cull Obsidian ... not for the next one.

    If you do that, it's like misleading advertising.

    Sorry @Kabam Miike but rank up ticket it's not enough !!!

    Customer bought Cull Obsidian cristal in order to win a god tier list (the best hitter) not mid tier champion.

    If you really nerf Cull Obsidian, why you don't give the opportunity to exchange Cull Obsidian with any of champion ?
    If you have a 5 star lvl 200 Cull Obsidian, you can choose an another champions 5 star lvl 200.
    If it's a 6 star, you can change during 2 weeks after Cull Obsidian nerf.

    It's not a problem if you think all champions are balanced.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,386 ★★★★★
    I don't think they're going by a YouTuber's Tier List. They're operating out of the data they collect. Systematically, actually.
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 9,847 ★★★★★
    KillKaron said:

    You cannot make mass purchases by offering a character with very good statistics and then decreasing it after.
    A lot of customer paid for this Cull Obsidian ... not for the next one.

    If you do that, it's like misleading advertising.

    Sorry @Kabam Miike but rank up ticket it's not enough !!!

    Customer bought Cull Obsidian cristal in order to win a god tier list (the best hitter) not mid tier champion.

    If you really nerf Cull Obsidian, why you don't give the opportunity to exchange Cull Obsidian with any of champion ?
    If you have a 5 star lvl 200 Cull Obsidian, you can choose an another champions 5 star lvl 200.
    If it's a 6 star, you can change during 2 weeks after Cull Obsidian nerf.

    It's not a problem if you think all champions are balanced.

    People buy crystals all the time. Many times without the CCP team even getting them so you make purchases at your own risks.
  • KillKaronKillKaron Posts: 3
    Do you really think that !!!
    All players I know have try to win Cull Obsidian or Namor with cristal shard or unit or real money.

    I’d like Kabam publish these data 😁 (cristal buy for champion highlight)
  • psp742psp742 Posts: 622 ★★★
    Sad Ebony Maw is still not getting attention, at least increase Ebony damage from mediocre to mid tier bleed or 80% reduced accuracy and attack damage for opponents.
  • TaintedTainted Posts: 11
    @Kabam Miike @Kabam Lyra @Kabam Vydious what is the conclusion on this ? Are you going to nerf cull or not ? Will this be announced in december ?
  • POOKYmanPOOKYman Posts: 6
    I hope they don’t nerf Cull and fix only block proficiency
  • ChagaljChagalj Posts: 13
    Has there been any news on this? I just got a cosmic gem and hesitate to use it on my r3 cull. Are they nerfing him or not?
  • Titoo78Titoo78 Posts: 4
    @Kabam Miike @Kabam Lyra @Kabam Zibiit any news on this topic ? Many players are still on hold for ranking up those champions without any informations...
This discussion has been closed.