Act 6 Focus Group Feedback

RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
in General Discussion
Alright, so the proverbial cat is out of the proverbial bag. The final Act 6 nerfs are going live. I was lucky enough to be part of the focus group that gave feedback on the pain points to Act 6. So, in an effort for full transparency and accountability, here is my feedback in its entirety. I must warn you, it's very, very long. If you've seen any of my other posts before, the sum of these 2 documents dwarf them

Boss Fights:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TrIhwMVULhx5w2QITqxv822dZNb4-sIKL0lY-wlMDmc/edit?usp=sharing

Path Fights:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RwpdGCytFReCg5iY3DgDM5fVMSQnxMGc4K02j8_hlk8/edit?usp=sharing

Overall, the changes they've made are...alright. As you'll see in my feedback, I don't think they went far enough, not even close, but I was being very liberal with which fights I included, simply because I would rather mention a fight and it not get changed, than miss a fight that needed changing and nothing happened to it. 2 clear examples to me are the fact that Strength in Numbers still exists at all, and the continued existence of Buffed Up, Pilfer Sym Supreme.

I would invite any other focus group members to share their feedback here if they want, or can do. No obligation. I just thought it might be interesting for the rest of the community to see what kind of feedback was given.

Best of luck in Act 6 to all of you who haven't done it yet, and to those who have, congrats!
«1

Comments

  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    Lvernon15 said:

    Overall they’re solid, but why make certain fights harder?? Like caiw boss, I don’t know nodes but I don’t see any scenario where havok is easier than iceman, they’re totally unnecessary, and more nodes needed toning down, why only rouge on dyb path? Should be all of them made into generic champs or add bleed vulnerability

    I believe it's on the Energy Absorption: Ice and Diss track path. Iceman has 3 immunities and the initial coldsnap almost made you bring a coldsnap immune who could place 3 debuffs, or a ranked up Havok.

    I don't think Havok was the right substitute though
  • Lvernon15Lvernon15 Member Posts: 11,598 ★★★★★
    Rockypantherx said:

    Lvernon15 said:

    Overall they’re solid, but why make certain fights harder?? Like caiw boss, I don’t know nodes but I don’t see any scenario where havok is easier than iceman, they’re totally unnecessary, and more nodes needed toning down, why only rouge on dyb path? Should be all of them made into generic champs or add bleed vulnerability

    I believe it's on the Energy Absorption: Ice and Diss track path. Iceman has 3 immunities and the initial coldsnap almost made you bring a coldsnap immune who could place 3 debuffs, or a ranked up Havok.

    I don't think Havok was the right substitute though
    Ah, yeah, shouldn’t be havok, don’t know of many power drain/armour up champs who can place 3 debuffs and are coldsnap immune, warlock is the only one who comes to mind and that would be slow as hell since the debuffs would have such a low uptime
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    Lvernon15 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Lvernon15 said:

    Overall they’re solid, but why make certain fights harder?? Like caiw boss, I don’t know nodes but I don’t see any scenario where havok is easier than iceman, they’re totally unnecessary, and more nodes needed toning down, why only rouge on dyb path? Should be all of them made into generic champs or add bleed vulnerability

    I believe it's on the Energy Absorption: Ice and Diss track path. Iceman has 3 immunities and the initial coldsnap almost made you bring a coldsnap immune who could place 3 debuffs, or a ranked up Havok.

    I don't think Havok was the right substitute though
    Ah, yeah, shouldn’t be havok, don’t know of many power drain/armour up champs who can place 3 debuffs and are coldsnap immune, warlock is the only one who comes to mind and that would be slow as hell since the debuffs would have such a low uptime
    Sasquatch could work as well I think
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
  • Wiredawg1Wiredawg1 Member Posts: 504 ★★★★
    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
    Of course, when I say I ‘like it’, I mean comparatively to what it was, and anything is 100x better
  • SpideyFunkoSpideyFunko Member Posts: 21,961 ★★★★★
    Why did they replace biohazard? It was fine. I was looking forward to it.

    now it’s poison, dang it.
  • DarkSoulDLXDarkSoulDLX Member Posts: 675 ★★★
    What about the BS gating system in chapter 2 that strips players rosters to the bare minimum and it also makes 6 stars useless!
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    LJF said:

    I know this isn't precisely on point, but since it's about the focus group and I was invited, it makes sense to share as feedback should Kabam read it.

    The invitation did not arrive in time for me to participate. Kabam sent me an email with about 48 hours notice that group would be live, and it was open for approximately 72 hours over a weekend. I discovered the message the following Monday, and by the time I joined the servers, the conversations were closed. I think more lead-up time would allow people the opportunity to participate, which would increase feedback quality.

    Additionally, there was no discussion or back-and-forth with Kabam on the observations, it was just a data dump. I was able to read the entirety of the focus group's discussion even though I missed the participation window, and it was all coming from players. If Kabam joined the discussion, there could have been additional information gathered that could help them with the adjustments.

    Neither of these points are groundbreaking, and the idea of the focus group was awesome. I would love for Kabam to do this again/make it more permanent so they can gather feedback from different players at different levels in the game. If they do, I hope they consider these two changes.

    This.
  • HeattblasttHeattblastt Member Posts: 254 ★★
    They have not touched 3 class specific paths in 6.2.5 !!!! I feel they also need to be nerfed!!!
  • JueVioleGraceJueVioleGrace Member Posts: 1,424 ★★★★★
    There's some good changes don't get me wrong, but some of them just feel kinda odd.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Wiredawg1Wiredawg1 Member Posts: 504 ★★★★
    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
    Of course, when I say I ‘like it’, I mean comparatively to what it was, and anything is 100x better
    @Rockypantherx one of my main issue here is they saying they wanted to get rid of niche fights where only 1-2 counters worked. How is doing that by replacing it with another niche fight with only a few counters....what that saying. A blank still a blank if you polish it lol. Think ya know what the blank means
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
    Of course, when I say I ‘like it’, I mean comparatively to what it was, and anything is 100x better
    @Rockypantherx one of my main issue here is they saying they wanted to get rid of niche fights where only 1-2 counters worked. How is doing that by replacing it with another niche fight with only a few counters....what that saying. A blank still a blank if you polish it lol. Think ya know what the blank means
    Well to be fair, any champ that places poison will work. You can simply parry stun to remove the furies to land your poisons, and the poisons inherently reduce the regen. It’s not the outcome I would have liked, but it’s essentially just a slightly more annoying acid wash fight now

    Hell, Acid Wash hulkbuster in map 7 was worse
  • Wiredawg1Wiredawg1 Member Posts: 504 ★★★★
    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
    Of course, when I say I ‘like it’, I mean comparatively to what it was, and anything is 100x better
    @Rockypantherx one of my main issue here is they saying they wanted to get rid of niche fights where only 1-2 counters worked. How is doing that by replacing it with another niche fight with only a few counters....what that saying. A blank still a blank if you polish it lol. Think ya know what the blank means
    Well to be fair, any champ that places poison will work. You can simply parry stun to remove the furies to land your poisons, and the poisons inherently reduce the regen. It’s not the outcome I would have liked, but it’s essentially just a slightly more annoying acid wash fight now

    Hell, Acid Wash hulkbuster in map 7 was worse
    A lot of changes don’t make sense. Some do but some of the worst pain points not even addressed
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • RockypantherxRockypantherx Member Posts: 3,917 ★★★★★
    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    Rockypantherx said:

    StevieManWonder said:

    What really confuses me about the changes is that they swapped the Do You Bleed Rogue with Do You Bleed OML. OML has a 95% reduction to bleed damage. It’s actually gonna be a longer fight and does nothing to address the issue, people are still gonna use a ramped up Ægon or Corvus and hit into block instead of placing bleeds on the opponent.

    Precisely

    I’m going to be honest, the more I look at these changes, the more superficial they feel. We saw the feedback, and I’m not sure how much was actually listened to. Obviously some were made, I like the acid wash Mysterio change
    That change on acid wash is imo about as worse....take into account king griots health pool and fact he regens and you can only apply debuffs when he regening it’s still going to be an annoying fight. Just look at the thunderstruck one in 6.4.2
    Of course, when I say I ‘like it’, I mean comparatively to what it was, and anything is 100x better
    @Rockypantherx one of my main issue here is they saying they wanted to get rid of niche fights where only 1-2 counters worked. How is doing that by replacing it with another niche fight with only a few counters....what that saying. A blank still a blank if you polish it lol. Think ya know what the blank means
    Well to be fair, any champ that places poison will work. You can simply parry stun to remove the furies to land your poisons, and the poisons inherently reduce the regen. It’s not the outcome I would have liked, but it’s essentially just a slightly more annoying acid wash fight now

    Hell, Acid Wash hulkbuster in map 7 was worse
    A lot of changes don’t make sense. Some do but some of the worst pain points not even addressed
    Absolutely agree
  • Wiredawg1Wiredawg1 Member Posts: 504 ★★★★
    LJF said:

    Wiredawg1 said:

    LJF said:

    I know this isn't precisely on point, but since it's about the focus group and I was invited, it makes sense to share as feedback should Kabam read it.

    The invitation did not arrive in time for me to participate. Kabam sent me an email with about 48 hours notice that group would be live, and it was open for approximately 72 hours over a weekend. I discovered the message the following Monday, and by the time I joined the servers, the conversations were closed. I think more lead-up time would allow people the opportunity to participate, which would increase feedback quality.

    Additionally, there was no discussion or back-and-forth with Kabam on the observations, it was just a data dump. I was able to read the entirety of the focus group's discussion even though I missed the participation window, and it was all coming from players. If Kabam joined the discussion, there could have been additional information gathered that could help them with the adjustments.

    Neither of these points are groundbreaking, and the idea of the focus group was awesome. I would love for Kabam to do this again/make it more permanent so they can gather feedback from different players at different levels in the game. If they do, I hope they consider these two changes.

    Actually one of your points is ground breaking. They stated reason for the group was so kabam could go back and forth with players. If they didn’t do that. Then they already had their minds made up on what they was changing
    I didn't say this. Kabam did tell the group that they were reading everything and soaking up the information. So they didn't just ignore what was said. My point was a conversation allows for additional development of the ideas and ultimately a better result. We didn't get that extra step.
    I saying what kabam said at start. Focus group was so they could have dialogue with players. And from what you and others are saying that didn’t happen
Sign In or Register to comment.