Guilly Thread: Why doesn't come up at newest?

Ranunculus

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/1972859#Comment_1972859

Sorry, I don't know how to link that properly, but I would like to know why the Guilly buff thread doesn't appear at top when something is posted there. Kabam?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Ranunculus

Looks like that. I didn't believe it till now.

SpideyFunko

that’s how they kill the thread

Ranunculus

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

Ranunculus

SpideyFunko said:

that’s how they kill the thread

Did that happens here often?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Ranunculus

Failure or censorship, Kabam?

BigManOnCampus

Ya i noticed that to the other day when i posted....

BigManOnCampus

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

Most players would rather kabam bring back gully 1.0 if they just going to leave her this way.

GrandOldKai

It's honestly rather upsetting if their response is really just going to be "let's push it under the rug and hope it blows over"

It won't.

Magrailothos

The link at the top didn't work for me, so hopefully this one will: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/282943/guillotine-a-community-choice-champ-and-nerf-are-u-happy-with-this-buff#latest

winterthur

SpideyFunko said:

that’s how they kill the thread

SummonerNR said:

Sometimes they get a date/time lock put on them as a final update comment from Mods is done, to avoid having new ppl coming in and further adding stuff to an issue that is now fixed.
(sometimes would just get “closed” after final remark, other times just time locked)

While still giving a Notification to anyone who had been part of the thread already, letting them know about the fix.

@SummonerNR, how do you see this?

Scarcity27

winterthur said:

SpideyFunko said:

that’s how they kill the thread

SummonerNR said:

Sometimes they get a date/time lock put on them as a final update comment from Mods is done, to avoid having new ppl coming in and further adding stuff to an issue that is now fixed.
(sometimes would just get “closed” after final remark, other times just time locked)

While still giving a Notification to anyone who had been part of the thread already, letting them know about the fix.

@ SummonerNR, how do you see this?

First off, talk about comebacks.

As for your question, sometimes, the thread won't show '1 new' or anything like that, even if someone else comments. The time of the last comment will remain the same. But the number of comments actually increases, and the 'Most recent by' (if you're on laptop) changes as well.
The best way to stay updated such thread is to favorite them, or to comment on them then changes your notification preferences so that you get pinged every time someone comments on a thread you commented on.

Ranunculus

Magrailothos said:

The link at the top didn't work for me, so hopefully this one will: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/282943/guillotine-a-community-choice-champ-and-nerf-are-u-happy-with-this-buff#latest

That's because it linked to my latest posts that have been deleted in the meantime.

hungryhungrybbq

Wow you're right. It's out of sight now. Have to search to find it?

I was/am one of the folks asking for a revert to previous state and/or take her back to the table. I've since done some more play testing. She's not *that* far off from a successful (my opinion) buff. Most of us are aware of the perceived negatives. We've all listed them. I'll start with the positives (my opinion) this time.

After further testing. The increased attack with soul count is in fact good. I believe that's in line with her original playstyle actually. Play aggressively and stack some souls. I think a lot of us (at least I know I did) enjoyed her original playstyle of playing aggressively (intercept if needed, etc) with basic attacks to stack souls. I can honestly say it's one of the reasons I always liked her. Aggessive, fast combat is enjoyable to me. I really actually like this component of her rework. It's a good idea.

Same with the new sig ability. Is the reduced strength necessary? Not sure (probably not), but I like the idea. I think this idea is a keeper too.

Ok, now the things I'd still like to see removed or adjusted. The regen is.. well, I think Kabam actually has agreed to look into it. So, not much for me to comment on there. For me, that's not as big of a deal as the sp3 and the bleed chance on basic attacks. Or the Pain Link. I'd rather focus on those. Tbh, the regen change isn't the deal killer for me.

Pain Link: Scrap it. I mean, it can be reworked or replaced with something else for sp1, but if saving on dev time is an issue.. just scrap it. If we *were* going to spend further dev time on the sp1... Let's replace it with some sort of actual attack use utility? Some form of Buff/Power control (Mystic ability) or some kind of attack utility like miss/auto block counter or something. "No one can hide from her mystical weapon, she cannot miss (or be autoblocked) for x seconds while...is active). Idk 🙂

Restore her original bleed chance/potency. Here's the thing. I'm simply not interested in the heavy spam/special reliant playstyle for her. It removes my favorite part about her combat style. Aggressive basic attacks. I'd probably just vote to scrap the bleed curse mechanic completely if it were up to me. But if it is to remain, make it an additional or optional mechanic. Maybe the "curse" actually does something for utility? And not something that we traded her bleed chance on basic attacks for. This is probably my greatest sticking point with the new/existing model.

And yeah, I used to brag about her and say people were sleeping on her sp3, etc. Post screenshots of an nice sp3 in chat, etc. That's something that made me want to play her that's been removed now. The degen is cool, but the actual damage of the special itself was literally nerfed to the ground. Less damage than a single medium crit...

This definitely needs to be reconsidered. I understand the fear of creating an overpowered champion, but we're not even close to being in danger here guys. 😅

Unknown

This content has been removed.

LeNoirFaineant

The Guilly thread is buried 8 paged deep and I just commented on it. That's garbage.

LeNoirFaineant

Better and more transparent communication? How about we just bury threads we don't like and hope everyone forgets about it? smh

Colinwhitworth69

LOL. People worry about the weirdest things.

AverageDesi

Colinwhitworth69 said:

LOL. People worry about the weirdest things.

Case in point ☝️

BigManOnCampus

LeNoirFaineant said:

Better and more transparent communication? How about we just bury threads we don't like and hope everyone forgets about it? smh

seems to work.

hungryhungrybbq

Any comment from a mod on this one? 🎤

ThatGuyYouSaw235

Kabam, I really hate to say this because I really love your game and I want to see you improve.

But as it stands right now, you are incompetent.

For the past few months, you have been disregarding the end-user experience. From the obvious lack of effort in September, to miscommunication on the revive compensation concerning the input and parry bugs and then this whole debacle and how it somehow managed to fly onto the top of your list after a whole month. The clear lack of attention you guys have shown when responding to issues.

Then there was the outdated v8, where there are doubts that you even tested the thing in the first place considering the likes of the Venompool boss made it through, where the best option wasn't even a #Merc. Although I cannot fault you too much since you did fix it for the most part. The variant is still bland in design with a de facto P2W gimmick with Redpool which is big red flag for me personally. Also, the rewards don't match the difficulty.

Now, you guys are burying that thread with no comments. That thread was the cause of your nerf to Guillotine, while advertising it as a buff. We saw the same thing with Hood except the community was more 50/50, but you guys covered it and even reverted him less than half the time it took you to respond to this. Now the whole community agrees that Guillotine needs to be reverted and worked on again, but none of you are budging.

What happened? I don't want to fault you too much as I have no idea what is happening at your workspace, but seriously, what is your end goal with this? You're ignoring the people that play your game and know the mechanics front to back.

I don't care if this is deleted, I just want someone from Kabam to see this and maybe it might be the piece of criticism that gets you going again. Please, I want you to improve, just don't shove this under the carpet because it is going to bite you sooner or later.

Jeffdamen

Wow would you look at that. My comment about not having free speech was deleted.

Fryday

Following the closed off my other/similar discuss and @Kabam Porthos advise.





I will continue the discussion here.

It does seem rather strange that a few threads having this problem.

Some examples:-
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/1973939#Comment_1973939

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/282943/guillotine-a-community-choice-champ-and-nerf-are-u-happy-with-this-buff/p11

Look like starting from the 15th (or maybe today 16th) of November. It is possible that it is a random bugs on the server for the forum. Since this is a forum bugs, and not a game bugs, I guess this would be the best place to report and discuss it.

Can the admins team report this to whoever oversee it and comment back.

C.C @Kabam Porthos @Kabam Miike

GroundedWisdom

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

It's still open. It's just not being bumped. They've indicated they're looking at the data. So they're aware.
Consequently, she won't work any better or worse if people continually "bump" the Thread, which seems to take place quite often.

hungryhungrybbq

GroundedWisdom said:

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

It's still open. It's just not being bumped. They've indicated they're looking at the data. So they're aware.
Consequently, she won't work any better or worse if people continually "bump" the Thread, which seems to take place quite often.

Right, and active participation on each thread is usually the deciding factor for how long a thread remains relevant or visible. It's usually a natural/self regulating way of keeping current/relevant topics active and allowing less current ones to fade away. In this case, a thread's relevance (usually determined by the level of participation) has instead been artificially controlled or altered. That's the difference.

GroundedWisdom

hungryhungrybbq said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

It's still open. It's just not being bumped. They've indicated they're looking at the data. So they're aware.
Consequently, she won't work any better or worse if people continually "bump" the Thread, which seems to take place quite often.

Right, and active participation on each thread is usually the deciding factor for how long a thread remains relevant or visible. It's usually a natural/self regulating way of keeping current/relevant topics active and allowing less current ones to fade away. In this case, a thread's relevance (usually determined by the level of participation) has instead been artificially controlled or altered. That's the difference.

I'm not sure where you got that active participation was the deciding factor, but it's the Forum protocol, as enforced by Moderation.

hungryhungrybbq

GroundedWisdom said:

hungryhungrybbq said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

It's still open. It's just not being bumped. They've indicated they're looking at the data. So they're aware.
Consequently, she won't work any better or worse if people continually "bump" the Thread, which seems to take place quite often.

Right, and active participation on each thread is usually the deciding factor for how long a thread remains relevant or visible. It's usually a natural/self regulating way of keeping current/relevant topics active and allowing less current ones to fade away. In this case, a thread's relevance (usually determined by the level of participation) has instead been artificially controlled or altered. That's the difference.

I'm not sure where you got that active participation was the deciding factor, but it's the Forum protocol, as enforced by Moderation.

What do you mean? I'm talking about the normal automated procedure and how it usually works unless a Mod manually overrides it.

GroundedWisdom

hungryhungrybbq said:

GroundedWisdom said:

hungryhungrybbq said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Ranunculus said:

I just don't understand. Guilly doesn't work any better or worse because of any discussion of the quality of her buff. Why don't allow the discussion to progress or to die?

It's still open. It's just not being bumped. They've indicated they're looking at the data. So they're aware.
Consequently, she won't work any better or worse if people continually "bump" the Thread, which seems to take place quite often.

Right, and active participation on each thread is usually the deciding factor for how long a thread remains relevant or visible. It's usually a natural/self regulating way of keeping current/relevant topics active and allowing less current ones to fade away. In this case, a thread's relevance (usually determined by the level of participation) has instead been artificially controlled or altered. That's the difference.

I'm not sure where you got that active participation was the deciding factor, but it's the Forum protocol, as enforced by Moderation.

What do you mean? I'm talking about the normal automated procedure and how it usually works unless a Mod manually overrides it.

Correct, and this is not news. They've had the ability since the Forum opened. It's not something that's done on a personal whim. It's used to keep the Forums organized, and when a subject has been discussed, and addressed, there's really no need to keep bumping it on a daily basis.