Is this version of war the finished product ?

EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 633 ★★★
Seriously hoping there is more adjustments coming this is just horrid, are we playing the finished product now? Does anyone actually like this mess now?
«1

Comments

  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 633 ★★★
    Honestly not trying to be super negative or whatever but it's really bad, needs a lot of work.
  • HeroBoltsyHeroBoltsy Posts: 626 ★★
    The community prays it is not. Kabam will disagree.
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 1,716 ★★★★
    HeroBoltsy wrote: »
    The community prays it is not. Kabam will disagree.

    They said it's not final
  • Deadbyrd9Deadbyrd9 Posts: 3,454 ★★★★
    I think your post should be called the finished version of the game haha
  • Darkstar4387Darkstar4387 Posts: 2,145 ★★★
    edited September 2017
    This most likely isn't their final version, this seems more like a beta test then a finished map and it seems like are testing us to see to see how we react to it and then they will likely adjust said map in a new season of war.

    Though it could also be their final version but considering how well it's going over, it might not be long until there's a full revolt on their hands if they don't do something soon to fix this game, their servers, and the war
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    I sure hope not but afraid it's pretty close. Kabam has gotten to the point were if we don't like it tough ****. It's gotten worse since netmarble took over, didn't think that was possible.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Based on the fact that they mentioned there was room for further adjustment, it may not be. However, based on that same fact, I don't believe it will return to the way it was either. That's never been the process. They take the existing idea and improve on it. Rolling back is rarely feasible or possible.
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 633 ★★★
    Based on the fact that they mentioned there was room for further adjustment, it may not be. However, based on that same fact, I don't believe it will return to the way it was either. That's never been the process. They take the existing idea and improve on it. Rolling back is rarely feasible or possible.

    See the thing is that they didn't really introduce anything new, how hard is it to make a map and slap on some nodes. Seems like map making should be an afternoon worth of work, if this format/layout is broken then start from scratch.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Based on the fact that they mentioned there was room for further adjustment, it may not be. However, based on that same fact, I don't believe it will return to the way it was either. That's never been the process. They take the existing idea and improve on it. Rolling back is rarely feasible or possible.

    See the thing is that they didn't really introduce anything new, how hard is it to make a map and slap on some nodes. Seems like map making should be an afternoon worth of work, if this format/layout is broken then start from scratch.

    They introduced more than a new Map. They introduced Diversity, and took out Defender Kills. Which is the source of the majority of complaints. If they didn't introduce anything new, we would be having a different conversation.
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    Yeah but people pointed out a major flaw in the new design, well before they took down the last version of the AW and released this one. In fact they had a week to make the appropriate changes and still released a very flawed product.

    The arena and Scarlet Witch proposed changes were quickly scrapped, they could have gone ahead with them and this would have been the result. People complaining multiple times a day in multiple threads.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 633 ★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    Yeah but people pointed out a major flaw in the new design, well before they took down the last version of the AW and released this one. In fact they had a week to make the appropriate changes and still released a very flawed product.

    The arena and Scarlet Witch proposed changes were quickly scrapped, they could have gone ahead with them and this would have been the result. People complaining multiple times a day in multiple threads.

    The feedback that has been adjusted so far since the introduction of it has been the adjustment to Diversity across the BGs and the Placement issue where Allies wouldn't place. There are certain mathematical possibilities that could be readjusted. The main argument is against Diversity and I'm not entirely convinced it's leaving.
    The Arena Change which you're referring to I'm unclear on because the one I'm thinking of is still here. We have the new Arena setup.
    As for SW, I'm not sure either because she was changed with 12.0.
    Which changes to the Arena and SW are you referring to?
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    edited September 2017
    Way back in early 2016 they had come out with a plan to change the arena, cause so many were complaining about the cutoffs being way too high, and it was also the proposed answer to not grinding as much. I think some of the complaints came from top players. So it was gonna be some but not limited to the following. Of course these are examples and may not be correct in costs or times.

    Refresh Times - 3* 2 hours, 4* 6 hours, 5* 8 or more hours I think.
    Units to refresh - 3* 10, 4* 20 and 5* 30.
    Milestones were gonna increase by like 20% and Points per fight were gonna give 30% or something.
    More Battle chips and gold I believe.

    Everything I listed is based off memory, the amounts and costs may not be the actual amounts, but may be off a little.

    Note: I don't think 5* were around at the time. Although funny enough the changes to the arenas ended up going into the 5* anyways. Longer refresh times, they give more points and they cost more to refresh.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.

    They have a grasp on it. They designed it. The issue revolves around the environment that was created by the use of certain specific Champs and the exclusion of many others. This is evident by the incredible resistance people have to using others. People are entitled to their opinions on Champs, but when it creates a game where there are over 100 Champs in existence and the focus is on a select few because they are boosted to the point where they dominate a game mode, that creates a problem from a design perspective, in spite of popular opinion. The direction they want to go is to make it a more diverse experience, rather than that. It's not the first time we've seen the issue. The nerfs were somewhat similar. The game revolved around the same few Champs that could breeze through content. They understand the Vet perspective. They also have to consider the entire game as a whole, not just the desire to dominate coming from one demographic. There are other problems that arose which I won't debate because it will just generate a debate on whether there were problems or not. The main point is it's about making use of all Champs. Not just the "killers".
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    As for Scarlet Witch, there were complaints about her sig being broken or misleading about the whole, she has a chance to not proc anything at all complaints. So they were gonna supposedly make it so at sig 99 she was gonna proc anything with a critical hit. Just maybe not stack as much, they I think were gonna cap her buffs and debuffs in exchange for her having a 100% chance to proc anything at sig 99.

    So people complained cause the info is and probably still was confusing to some even me, so maybe I don't remember exactly what the changes were, I'm just telling you what the supporters were saying they were gonna be and a bit of what the mods said.
  • BinawayawhileBinawayawhile Posts: 287
    This game and its content will always be far from being the finished result.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Ah. You have a better memory than I do. Lol. This would be different. The system is already implemented, so the direction I can see it going is adjustment, not reverting. I have yet to see a total revert. For a Developer, that's not prudent. Even with 12.0 they made compromises, but the core of it was there. I think I have a vague memory on the SW issue. I believe it may have been a discussion after the nerf. I would have to check the Archives.
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    Ah. You have a better memory than I do. Lol. This would be different. The system is already implemented, so the direction I can see it going is adjustment, not reverting. I have yet to see a total revert. For a Developer, that's not prudent. Even with 12.0 they made compromises, but the core of it was there. I think I have a vague memory on the SW issue. I believe it may have been a discussion after the nerf. I would have to check the Archives.

    I guess you could say I have a half decent photo graphic memory, I have to see things to remember them, but vaguely would be the best way to describe it.

    My point was they didn't have to roll out the new AW. They could have thanked people for pointing out the flaw and held off on the release till they tweaked the scoring system (which is what I was referring too, not diversity), and they could have also looked over the whole thing in the meantime.
  • DD2DD2 Posts: 309 ★★★
    They introduced more than a new Map. They introduced Diversity.

    Where did they find this diversity? Did an expedition team find it on Everest? Was it found in the thick jungles of the Amazonian rain forest? Deep space mission?

    It takes a few mouse-clicks to bring back the old one. It's easy and nothing is lost.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    Ah. You have a better memory than I do. Lol. This would be different. The system is already implemented, so the direction I can see it going is adjustment, not reverting. I have yet to see a total revert. For a Developer, that's not prudent. Even with 12.0 they made compromises, but the core of it was there. I think I have a vague memory on the SW issue. I believe it may have been a discussion after the nerf. I would have to check the Archives.

    I guess you could say I have a half decent photo graphic memory, I have to see things to remember them, but vaguely would be the best way to describe it.

    My point was they didn't have to roll out the new AW. They could have thanked people for pointing out the flaw and held off on the release till they tweaked the scoring system (which is what I was referring too, not diversity), and they could have also looked over the whole thing in the meantime.

    From what I understand, the numerical flaws were pointed out after it went live. As per people not placing. There are others that have been highlighted by Members who examined the numbers from a detached perspective. Feedback is why we are here. Sometimes things are highlighted after people play in it. It takes a bit of experience to wrap around it. Initially, there were reactions and they were emotionally-based. Which people have every right to express. No debate here. Just that it doesn't provide much practical information. I don't think it's so much an issue of not providing a finished product, but predicting possible outcomes. It's a new system. There will no doubt be wrinkles to iron out.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Actually, I would almost say that having a hands-on approach is one of the best ways to point out issues. Having people play it can give some information on a scale that simple testing may be blind to.
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    Ah. You have a better memory than I do. Lol. This would be different. The system is already implemented, so the direction I can see it going is adjustment, not reverting. I have yet to see a total revert. For a Developer, that's not prudent. Even with 12.0 they made compromises, but the core of it was there. I think I have a vague memory on the SW issue. I believe it may have been a discussion after the nerf. I would have to check the Archives.

    I guess you could say I have a half decent photo graphic memory, I have to see things to remember them, but vaguely would be the best way to describe it.

    My point was they didn't have to roll out the new AW. They could have thanked people for pointing out the flaw and held off on the release till they tweaked the scoring system (which is what I was referring too, not diversity), and they could have also looked over the whole thing in the meantime.

    From what I understand, the numerical flaws were pointed out after it went live. As per people not placing. There are others that have been highlighted by Members who examined the numbers from a detached perspective. Feedback is why we are here. Sometimes things are highlighted after people play in it. It takes a bit of experience to wrap around it. Initially, there were reactions and they were emotionally-based. Which people have every right to express. No debate here. Just that it doesn't provide much practical information. I don't think it's so much an issue of not providing a finished product, but predicting possible outcomes. It's a new system. There will no doubt be wrinkles to iron out.

    Actually the numerical flaws were pointed out, before or while the AW were turned off, but is was well before they released the current one.
  • EvilEmpireEvilEmpire Posts: 633 ★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.

    They have a grasp on it. They designed it. The issue revolves around the environment that was created by the use of certain specific Champs and the exclusion of many others. This is evident by the incredible resistance people have to using others. People are entitled to their opinions on Champs, but when it creates a game where there are over 100 Champs in existence and the focus is on a select few because they are boosted to the point where they dominate a game mode, that creates a problem from a design perspective, in spite of popular opinion. The direction they want to go is to make it a more diverse experience, rather than that. It's not the first time we've seen the issue. The nerfs were somewhat similar. The game revolved around the same few Champs that could breeze through content. They understand the Vet perspective. They also have to consider the entire game as a whole, not just the desire to dominate coming from one demographic. There are other problems that arose which I won't debate because it will just generate a debate on whether there were problems or not. The main point is it's about making use of all Champs. Not just the "killers".

    They aren't doing anything to increase diversity, they still have 85% of champs basically useless, forcing us to mix them in on AWD doesn't change that. All the debuff/stun immunity nodes doesn't increase the pool of useable champs it reduces it even further. Revamping the old champs would be a great start but they have ignored countless threads on that too. I'm not convinced at all that they have a grasp on anything other than maximizing money spending and my experience with players who have spent large amounts of money is that they don't anymore because the company doesn't respect the money spent, it's always a water under the bridge mindset. That attitude combined with the lacklustre content recently doesn't leave me very hopefull for the future.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.

    They have a grasp on it. They designed it. The issue revolves around the environment that was created by the use of certain specific Champs and the exclusion of many others. This is evident by the incredible resistance people have to using others. People are entitled to their opinions on Champs, but when it creates a game where there are over 100 Champs in existence and the focus is on a select few because they are boosted to the point where they dominate a game mode, that creates a problem from a design perspective, in spite of popular opinion. The direction they want to go is to make it a more diverse experience, rather than that. It's not the first time we've seen the issue. The nerfs were somewhat similar. The game revolved around the same few Champs that could breeze through content. They understand the Vet perspective. They also have to consider the entire game as a whole, not just the desire to dominate coming from one demographic. There are other problems that arose which I won't debate because it will just generate a debate on whether there were problems or not. The main point is it's about making use of all Champs. Not just the "killers".

    They aren't doing anything to increase diversity, they still have 85% of champs basically useless, forcing us to mix them in on AWD doesn't change that. All the debuff/stun immunity nodes doesn't increase the pool of useable champs it reduces it even further. Revamping the old champs would be a great start but they have ignored countless threads on that too. I'm not convinced at all that they have a grasp on anything other than maximizing money spending and my experience with players who have spent large amounts of money is that they don't anymore because the company doesn't respect the money spent, it's always a water under the bridge mindset. That attitude combined with the lacklustre content recently doesn't leave me very hopefull for the future.

    The whole reason people consider those Champs useless is based on the comparison of how other Champs performed in the old War System. The ones that were considered the "Top Champs" were the ones who either did the most Damage in Attack, or got the most Defender Kills in Defense. The rest were called garbage. Which is why people have such a mindset that they all suck except for the same few ones. Now that we have a meta where they can all be used, people have a hard time letting go of that mentality.
  • Jon8299Jon8299 Posts: 1,067 ★★★
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.

    They have a grasp on it. They designed it. The issue revolves around the environment that was created by the use of certain specific Champs and the exclusion of many others. This is evident by the incredible resistance people have to using others. People are entitled to their opinions on Champs, but when it creates a game where there are over 100 Champs in existence and the focus is on a select few because they are boosted to the point where they dominate a game mode, that creates a problem from a design perspective, in spite of popular opinion. The direction they want to go is to make it a more diverse experience, rather than that. It's not the first time we've seen the issue. The nerfs were somewhat similar. The game revolved around the same few Champs that could breeze through content. They understand the Vet perspective. They also have to consider the entire game as a whole, not just the desire to dominate coming from one demographic. There are other problems that arose which I won't debate because it will just generate a debate on whether there were problems or not. The main point is it's about making use of all Champs. Not just the "killers".

    They aren't doing anything to increase diversity, they still have 85% of champs basically useless, forcing us to mix them in on AWD doesn't change that. All the debuff/stun immunity nodes doesn't increase the pool of useable champs it reduces it even further. Revamping the old champs would be a great start but they have ignored countless threads on that too. I'm not convinced at all that they have a grasp on anything other than maximizing money spending and my experience with players who have spent large amounts of money is that they don't anymore because the company doesn't respect the money spent, it's always a water under the bridge mindset. That attitude combined with the lacklustre content recently doesn't leave me very hopefull for the future.

    The whole reason people consider those Champs useless is based on the comparison of how other Champs performed in the old War System. The ones that were considered the "Top Champs" were the ones who either did the most Damage in Attack, or got the most Defender Kills in Defense. The rest were called garbage. Which is why people have such a mindset that they all suck except for the same few ones. Now that we have a meta where they can all be used, people have a hard time letting go of that mentality.

    Well that may true if they buffed the rest of the class masteries to be as powerful as MD.

    Juggernaut was considered garbage before his buff and before MD.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    EvilEmpire wrote: »
    Jon8299 wrote: »
    They listened back then when people told them they hated the proposed Arena changes, then again when they announced the changes to Scarlet Witch (it would have been the first time). Don't know why they didn't listen this time.

    They listen. That doesn't automatically involve letting people decide what changes come and what don't. There's a fine line between feedback, and trying to control the direction of the game.

    I think the main frustration between the vet players and kabam is how weak a grasp they seem to have on that level of gameplay.

    They have a grasp on it. They designed it. The issue revolves around the environment that was created by the use of certain specific Champs and the exclusion of many others. This is evident by the incredible resistance people have to using others. People are entitled to their opinions on Champs, but when it creates a game where there are over 100 Champs in existence and the focus is on a select few because they are boosted to the point where they dominate a game mode, that creates a problem from a design perspective, in spite of popular opinion. The direction they want to go is to make it a more diverse experience, rather than that. It's not the first time we've seen the issue. The nerfs were somewhat similar. The game revolved around the same few Champs that could breeze through content. They understand the Vet perspective. They also have to consider the entire game as a whole, not just the desire to dominate coming from one demographic. There are other problems that arose which I won't debate because it will just generate a debate on whether there were problems or not. The main point is it's about making use of all Champs. Not just the "killers".

    They aren't doing anything to increase diversity, they still have 85% of champs basically useless, forcing us to mix them in on AWD doesn't change that. All the debuff/stun immunity nodes doesn't increase the pool of useable champs it reduces it even further. Revamping the old champs would be a great start but they have ignored countless threads on that too. I'm not convinced at all that they have a grasp on anything other than maximizing money spending and my experience with players who have spent large amounts of money is that they don't anymore because the company doesn't respect the money spent, it's always a water under the bridge mindset. That attitude combined with the lacklustre content recently doesn't leave me very hopefull for the future.

    The whole reason people consider those Champs useless is based on the comparison of how other Champs performed in the old War System. The ones that were considered the "Top Champs" were the ones who either did the most Damage in Attack, or got the most Defender Kills in Defense. The rest were called garbage. Which is why people have such a mindset that they all suck except for the same few ones. Now that we have a meta where they can all be used, people have a hard time letting go of that mentality.

    Well that may true if they buffed the rest of the class masteries to be as powerful as MD.

    Juggernaut was considered garbage before his buff and before MD.

    Juggs and UC used to be quite popular at one time. Before Unblockable and other Buffs, Unstoppable was one of the most effective Buffs. Of course, that was a long time and many Champs ago.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 21,581 ★★★★★
    I remember using my 3* UC to beat Thanos.
Sign In or Register to comment.