**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
We have not set an end-date for the new period, but we will update this banner when we have more information.

Isn't it a bit hypocritical

Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
in General Discussion
There are number of champs Thor, Wolverine, ect that we can not get as 5*s yet we have to face them in events.

Comments

  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    BUZZdog3000 wrote: »
    Ya, and what's your point. Wolverine 5 star would break the game you would not be able to die.

    I don't know how that would break the game considering there are a number of champs that can block/reverse healing effects. Not to mention nodes that heal block so it would not be game breaking at all. My point is like I stated, why do we have to face them if we can't get them. All champs should be available is my point especially with 6*s coming.
  • WinterSpider112WinterSpider112 Posts: 65
    What's your guys point some champs would be to powerful as 5 stars because they're powerful enough as 4 stars
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    That's not the definition of hypocritical. Those Champs have never been offered as playable. The ones being added to the Crystals have previously been playable.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    That's not the definition of hypocritical. Those Champs have never been offered as playable. The ones being added to the Crystals have previously been playable.

    Hypocritical: characterized by behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel. I do not know the exact reason why Kabam did not include these champs for players to obtain but they did so because they feel either they are to powerful or unbalanced for us to have but not them.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    Also I understand that they were never offered but that's not my point, they all should have been is what I'm saying.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?

    You do understand that owning something doesn't negate the fact someone can be a hypocrite. So yes it does.
  • ForumGuyForumGuy Posts: 285 ★★
    edited October 2017
    OP, they're too scared to add them. I mean here's an example of what a 5* SW could do.

    i80twa1bw2b7.jpg

    Even doctor strange's disappointing self could do very well as a 5*.
    ...Basically they'd be op, and kabam says they won't add older champs like that or whatever bs they said. It's like...what was the point of nerfing them than lol.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    ForumGuy wrote: »
    OP, they're too scared add them. I mean here's an example of what a 5* SW could do.

    i80twa1bw2b7.jpg

    Even doctor strange's disappointing self could do very well as a 5*.
    ...Basically they'd be op, and kabam says they won't add older champs like that or whatever bs they said. It's like...what was the point of nerfing them than lol.

    That's a whole other issue. If they won't release them as 5*s unnerf them. Four stars will be almost useless vs 6 stars anyway.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    Also my exact point. We have to face them with crazy stats like that but can't get them.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    If we could only face what we could get this stale game dies faster .. yay

    I'm not saying that. We could not get Kang or Thanos for a long time and they can always add boss characters that we can't get. But these are just basic champs. Also very funny that ur post about something dying was ur 666 post.
  • ForumGuyForumGuy Posts: 285 ★★
    edited October 2017
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    If we could only face what we could get this stale game dies faster .. yay

    I'm not saying that. We could not get Kang or Thanos for a long time and they can always add boss characters that we can't get. But these are just basic champs. Also very funny that ur post about something dying was ur 666 post.

    Frank strange
    Symbiotes
    Ultron drones
    Unstoppable ant
    Spider witch?
    Electro luke
    Modok
    Jessica Jones.
    There a huge list of unplayable

    Those clearly don't need to be playable tho lol. Well Jessica Jones and M.O.D.O.K do.*
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    Those were pretty funny. I loved Ust. Antmans S2.
  • flygamerflygamer Posts: 345 ★★
    the game will always win....
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,883 ★★★★
    King Groot has very high regen and he's available as a 5*. Blade has great regen from what I've seen. Wolverine wouldn't break the game if made as a 5*. With the nerf certain champs revived they would be fine as 5*s. Voodoo is ever bit as powerful as SW. Thor is not close to the top of cosmic damage dealers. No reason I can see not to release those champs but Joe Fixit and Electro won't be added either.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?

    You do understand that owning something doesn't negate the fact someone can be a hypocrite. So yes it does.

    They have full creative license to add whatever they want for content. That doesn't make them hypocrites. That makes them Game Developers.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    Dropfaith wrote: »
    If we could only face what we could get this stale game dies faster .. yay

    I'm not saying that. We could not get Kang or Thanos for a long time and they can always add boss characters that we can't get. But these are just basic champs. Also very funny that ur post about something dying was ur 666 post.

    Frank strange
    Symbiotes
    Ultron drones
    Unstoppable ant
    Spider witch?
    Electro luke
    Modok
    Jessica Jones.
    There a huge list of unplayable

    Still say I'd like Spider Witch to be playable. Lol.
  • Crimson8399Crimson8399 Posts: 749 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?

    You do understand that owning something doesn't negate the fact someone can be a hypocrite. So yes it does.

    They have full creative license to add whatever they want for content. That doesn't make them hypocrites. That makes them Game Developers.

    If I own something and I say you can't do that but I can it is within my right to do so but still makes me a hypocrite.
  • KestrelleKestrelle Posts: 441 ★★
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?

    You do understand that owning something doesn't negate the fact someone can be a hypocrite. So yes it does.

    They have full creative license to add whatever they want for content. That doesn't make them hypocrites. That makes them Game Developers.

    Someone really needs to get you a dictionary. If you're going to contradict people, at least be right. If M Night Shamalamadingding got upset with another author for misleading everyone through an entire story before hitting them with a twist, full creative license be damned, he'd still be a hypocrite
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    Crimson8399 wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    So because they can offer whatever content they choose, that makes it hypocritical that they're not adding Champs not previously released as playable? You do understand it is their game, right?

    You do understand that owning something doesn't negate the fact someone can be a hypocrite. So yes it does.

    They have full creative license to add whatever they want for content. That doesn't make them hypocrites. That makes them Game Developers.

    If I own something and I say you can't do that but I can it is within my right to do so but still makes me a hypocrite.

    By that standard everyone should be able to design and modify the game. Call it what you like, but it's their job. I don't call the people at McDonald's hypocrites because they won't let me back into the kitchen.
  • KestrelleKestrelle Posts: 441 ★★
    That is an absolutely terrible analogy. The better one would be that they won't let you into their kitchen, but get mad at you when you won't let them into yours.

    More importantly, stop trying to assign context to definitions. That's not how languages work
  • unknownunknown Posts: 378 ★
    Based on champs like mephisto and Hyperion, I just wish they would fix scarlet witch and Dr strange back to their original selves
  • Kabam PertinaxKabam Pertinax Posts: 327
    Hey everyone, while I appreciate that this thread had the potential to be a discussion on in-game content vs. content available to players, this thread has devolved into arguing semantics and is no longer considered constructive. For this reason, I'll be closing this thread down.
This discussion has been closed.