Should champion buffs affect older content?

There have been times in the past where champs that get buffed increased the difficulty of older content, content that was already there prior to their buff, why should when you do a quest affect your ability to complete it and why do players that have already completed it get to have an eaiser time?

Champs arent changed in rol abyss and lab but thats not the case for everything else? And i can only hope thats also not the case for eop and the gauntlet.

Comments

Shadowstrike

It's a slippery slope and if you don't allow for some changes in other content by citing the fact that endgame content champs haven't been changed, then people are going to start arguing why aren't the original builds not being applied to Alliance events or the arenas, etc.

Ackbar67

Buffs don't always make a champion harder to fight, just look at Juggernaut; he's a far easier fight now than he used to be. Also, if you want all content to be equal difficulty regardless of when it's completed, shouldn't your attackers be locked to the champions that existed when it was created? Why do new players get to blast through the collector with a rank 3 6* hercules when we had to slog through with a 4* daredevil?

I_tell_no_tales_1

I neither disagree nor agree with you

While some champions were easier in older days their counters were also less
Now we have more counters to their buffed counterparts too

shut_up_heather

I mean. Its hard to draw the line here. I recently cleared my first 5.2.4 path and Hulk as a defender had the new kit. But im fairly sure it wouldn't be buffed hulk in act 1. Theres no definite separation between "older" and "newer" content.

DNA3000

Good point. So from now on, champion buffs will no longer affect champions in pre-existing content, but you also will be prevented from using anything that didn't exist when it was released. Fair?

So not only will you no longer be able to use champs that did not exist when the content was released, you will also have all your champs temporarily de-ranked to the highest rank that was achievable when that content was released. It isn't fair that players were limited to 6* rank 2s when 6.1 came out, and now players can blast through it with rank 4s. No Herc, no 7* champs, no Sigil potions.

Oh wait, on second thought that's a horrible idea.

The champions in Labyrinth and Abyss in general do not change when champions are updated, because those are in fact different champions. That isn't our Red Hulk with buffs, that's a completely different Red Hulk. Buffing Red Hulk doesn't automatically buff Ex Red Hulk any more than it buffs Captain Marvel. But when the player version of the champion is used in content, most of the time that version changes along with the player version, because it *is* the player version. And the idea that buffing those champions somehow disadvantages future players ignores the fact that future players always have *enormous* advantages in running content in general. They always have the benefit of more public knowledge and experience, they have the benefit of having access to champions that did not exist when the content was created and can much more easily counter the content, they have the benefit of having access to higher rarities and ranks that did not exist when the content was originally balanced. We don't consider this unfair in general, this is just how the game evolves over time. Complaining about one tiny ripple upstream against the huge current downstream of player advantages seems to be missing the forest for the trees.

Anly

This is very correct however i feel like the fact that the game is based almost entirely on rng negates this argument just because someone can have a champ dosent mean they do, and most guides are released when contents drops so any future changes would go unaccounted for

Pikolu

Easy fix, limiting champions to what was available then means guides don't need updated because they'll never get outdated!

Anly

And if the player dosent have a viable options or any of the champs available back then, then they would end up with 0 champs.

[Deleted User]

Good thing it's easier than ever for players to obtain multiple viable options

Anly

No they have more access to crystalsn what you get out of them is completely up to fate

BitterSteel

The percentage of useable champions has gone up in crystals, through buffs + better champions added, so you're more likely to have viable options from any given crystal pull

And as you admit, they have more crystals anyway which does increase chance to get good champions. 2 attempts is more likely than 1 to get a viable option. Just because both are "up to fate" doesn't mean one isn't more likely

DNA3000

What do you mean "negates that argument?" The argument is that when there are more and better options for dealing with content, the content is easier because that's how we typically define difficulty. Individual players may possess more or less of those options, but that's irrelevant. The presumption is that when more and more powerful options exist, players will eventually get them.

I'm sure there are players that felt that Act 7 was easier for them than Act 5, simply because when they tackled Act 7 they had a better roster, relatively speaking, than when they tackled Act 5. For them, Act 7 was easier. But we don't say that well, maybe Act 7 is easier than Act 5. Act 7 is objectively harder regardless of individual anecdotes.

But this is also a self-annihilating argument. If you argue that allowing players to bring stronger champs at stronger ranks doesn't reduce the content difficulty because some players might not have those things, then I can argue that updating the defenders doesn't necessarily make it harder, because you're assuming that the players will have a harder time with the updated defenders. But that depends on their roster. If RNG says the content doesn't get easier, then RNG says the content doesn't get harder either.

Anly

Also a roster getting steonger is alot different

Useable is different from viable, kate bishop is a very useable and capable champ but she isnt viable for everything

BitterSteel

She's viable for more than a Drax or a Groot. I think you're skipping the point a little

DNA3000

It isn't just the number of crystals that matter. It is the fact we can choose which ones to get. Do you open basic 6* crystals or featured? Which one you choose to open strongly affects the statistical distribution of your champion drops, and ultimately what your roster looks like.

One crystal is random. But across dozens and hundreds of crystals, statistics follows distributions. If you want one specific champ and they are in the featured crystals, you could get any one of the twenty four champs in the crystal when you open one crystal. However, if you open ten the odds of getting the champ you want isn't still one in twenty four, it becomes about one in three. If you open twenty, the odds become more than one in two. And if you open fifty, you now have almost 90% chance to get what you want.

Or you can throw your hands up, say its all RNG so nothing is guaranteed, and open basics. Which many people do. And as a result, nine out of ten of the former group get the champ they want, and three out of ten of the latter group do. Those players were all subject to the same RNG, but their decisions changed the outcome nonetheless.

My crystals are just as random as any other players'. However, my roster is not.

Anly

Allowing players to bring in stronger champs at stronger ranks reduces the difficulty of the content for that player, but a defender getting buffed still can make the content harder no matter what magneto for example is a harder defender than he was pre buff and no matter what your account looks like its still harder for some it may be 0.1% harder for others 100%

Anly

Technically theres no gaurantee the champions in the featured are viable against the buffed champ but thats a reach and a half

Buttehrs

Any champ can win againt any other champ. Theoretically at any rate. Also depends on the skill of the user.

Anly

With no nodes this is true

KnightOfTheRealm

Mystics and full energy damage champs that aren't incinerate immune cannot beat torch, in a normal matchup. If it's a 6* vs. 4* matchup in a duel, then yeah, sure. In a BGs match, for instance, it's not possible to win that matchup.

DNA3000

Allowing players to bring in stronger champs at stronger ranks reduces the difficulty for everyone, because everyone has that option. Even if a player doesn't have stronger options now, that doesn't change the fact that they have the option to eventually get those options and do the content then.

Building roster is a part of beating content. If a player joins today, Act 6.1 is impossible for them because they don't have 5* or 6* champs. The difficulty is literally infinite. Part of the process for tackling it is to build their roster to the point where they can tackle the content. When the content first launched, the best you could do then was much lower than the best a player can do now. Whether the player had low skill or high skill, the best they could do was a roster of 6* R2. Today they can theoretically bring 6* r5. They can bring 7* champs. And with that extra power comes more flexibility in which champs they bring. When Act 6.1 came out, there was a lot of discussion about which champs had enough damage to take on Crossbones. Today, that's less of an issue. Not every 5* R4 had enough damage. But a lot of 6* R3s have plenty enough.

More options means there are more ways for *everyone* to build their roster into an Act 6-clearing roster. More ways means less dependence on RNG, quicker acquisition of the minimum requirements, and more flexibility to supplement lower skill levels. These are benefits that everyone accrues. There's no reason to only count the players who just happen to have the additional options on day one.

Lovejoy72

How insanely confusing would it be for new players to have, like, three different versions of Gamora running around, based on when content dropped relative to her buffs? Or to deal with pre and post buff DDHK, not knowing which one you get? I don’t see the upside??

JChanceH9

DNA3000 has a point. When Labyrinth first dropped people were running it with 5/50 4* Starlords hitting the enrage and reviving. Now you could use a 5/65 6* Aegon.

Anly

You cant say "here this champ can beat this content" then have the odds of getting that champ be 0.40% whats the plan there? The player is just indefintely stuck until they pull a viable option?
they dont have the option to get that champ, they have a chance to, they have a option to purchase crystals, what they get from them isnt up to them

Yes there is less of a dependence on rng with each new addition to the roster but the rng hasnt gotten to where you could actually argue this point since a majority of crystals you open are gonna suck it feels like there are another set of odds entirely when opening a crystal, 80% chance to get a bad champ and 20% to get someone good, i mean kabam has already proven they know what champs are good and which are not and with the whole paragon crystal fiasco with the odds seeming fishy it makes me suspect that there could be other places where that is true aswell, since you usually work with stuff like this can you confirm or deny this?

Anly

good point however most content was released way before buffs, or atleast any truly game changing buff so they wouldnt see any real change in defenders until about act 7

Lovejoy72

They would see different versions in early story then all monthly EQ, war, side quests, AQ….

Anly

They wouldnt see any different versions in early content, what im suggesting isnt nearly as complicated, anything as it is now would remain the same but only future content would receive changes for example a gamora in act 1 wouldnt be reverted to how she was in act 1

I could make the argument to progress lock defender changes in eq but that would be taking it to far, all in all good points made by everyone 👍

[Deleted User]

There is no content that requires one specific champion to complete it unless that champion is somehow guaranteed. The amount of viable options is more than ever and their use in content is better than ever.

For example, Act 5 is debatably the first truly difficult piece of story content for new players. The first 4 quests in chapter 1 use Flare, Life Transfer, and Breakthrough as global nodes. All of those nodes benefit any attacker you want to take into the quest, while Life Transfer and Flare can end you if you're not careful. But of course, Kitty, Herc, Ghost, Corvus, Gladiator Hulk, and much more have greater benefit in those quests. None of which were released until after Act 5 dropped. You can use almost any champion you want, but none of the most viable options existed at the time, so new players are much more likely to get through that same content much faster and easier.

And then onto Act 5.2. I personally believe 5.2.4 is the hardest quest for new players in all of act 5, as Masochism was such a struggle for me at the time. I personally used Sabertooth with the Killmonger synergy as my counter to Masochism, but after doing some research I've heard of a lot of different champions that make Masochism very easy to deal with. Those being: Nick Fury, Proxima Midnight, Toad, Jubilee, Captain Britain, Archangel, Warlock, Apoc, Bishop, Storm, Ghost, Quake, Storm X, Omega Red, BWDO, Gorr and White Magneto. That's not all, but these are just 17 champions that counter Masochism better than most. Can you guess how many have either been buffed or released since this quest went live? Can ya? It's 15. Only two of those champions, Archangel and Quake, were just as viable in 2017 as they are today.

So not only have we gained at least 15 champions capable of tackling that single quest with ease since players were tasked with taking it on for the first time, we can now farm crystal shards much faster, giving us more chances at better pulls.

And even then, I'm still using a 6* Sabertooth in Act 7, just as I did with a 4* Sabertooth in Act 5. Because this game finally allows us to use our diverse rosters, of meme tier to beyond got tier champions, for some of the highest level content in the game.

That "80% chance to get a bad champ" might have been true in 2017. But today, a friend of mine who just started his account a few months back is tackling 5.2.4 with 6* rank 1 Nick Fury, Knull, and Goldpool, 4* rank 4 Apoc and 5* rank 3 Blade, entirely free to play. None of those champions were available at the time of Act 5.

CyborgNinja135

The amount of champions that are actual defensive threats after being buffed can be counted on one hand. Not only that, champions buffs tend to enhance offensive capabilities of champions and rarely add mechanics that will make them tough defenders. Usually it's just a small ability to keep you on your toes. I don't see a reason why the shouldn't affect older content.

Kerneas

As we get new, more powerful champions that get released, it's only logical that we also face more powerful champs. If you wanna maintain the game's difficulty level, it's only fair to buff old champs in our rosters as well as in the quests.

Afterall, would it be "fair" if new players used their Galans against old, unbuffed champs like Spidergwen? Ir'd just make old content trivial.

So for the sake of some balance, I think it's only fair to buff the old content too.