So Serpent is Fair and Balanced but Spiderwoman needs a Nerf?

You all can go to heck in a handbasket. Have been playing this game for years and I have had about enough. Valiant, Alliance leader, etc. This game used to be fun. I could write a lot of words about specific points that have turned this game into an endless exercise in frustration but I don't have the patience for that right now. Maybe I will write that post as an exit interview...but I will likely just uninstall and move on. Cheers, Kabam. Well played. Brilliant.

Comments

YodaKaj

i just rank 5'ed my 6* SWoman. for nothing

M_A_D_D_Y

This whole month feels like Kabam speed-running how many dumb moves they can pull off before the player base finally rage-quits…

Adri1Herranz

Cuando han a despedir al responsable denlos bugs, de las misiones adaptativas y otras grandes maravillas que se les ha ocurrido este mes !

Thiartc

the whole thing is easy to explain - for serpent they had a hero coming to the game that could defeat him and they didnt want to nerf him cause then no one would care or buy her

here with Spider Woman, they probably have no incoming wallet toucher on the way to counter her and enrich them so they just nerf

_Kill_Switch_

It's frankly hilarious how Kabama could've just said "hey, we'll be bumping up Spiderwoman's defender rating from a 3.5 to a 4/4.5 because she appears to be a tad more potent defensively than we had initially calculated" and that would've literally fixed the "issue". But noooooo, they pick the dumbest, most illogical, triggering option available and expect us to be okay with it. It's laughable.

Troy_Elric123

Technology exists for champion abilities to only work on defense and offense. Many champs have reduced or increased potency to abilities while on defense. All kabam has to do is take her ensnared while on defense to 0 potency or 1 or something. But they refuse coz money money.

PT_99

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2880909#Comment_2880909

Bro who even cares what rating the hero is on their buggy glitchy website? 5/5 4/5 Serpent at release should've been 7/5

It's not card game but damn Kabam really loves their imaginary ratings system, even tho it doesn't work.

Fuzzycat

Kabam won't lay a finger on Dark Phoenix, Serpent, Onslaught, or Enchantress - even when half the community is screaming they're busted defenders. But Spider-Woman? Nah, she wasn't even on anyone's radar as OP defender, and yet Kabam nerfs her defensive kit - which, oh by the way - guts her offensive kit too. Then they puff out their chests and go, "We don't want too many OP defenders, do we?" Sure, buddy! That's Kabam logic for you: pure nonsense, delivered with a straight face.

For the past several years, I've noticed that Kabam's playbook is just roll dice, gaslight the player base, and call it "balance." At this point we're all trapped in an abusive relationship with a developer that unabashedly bleeds Marvel fans dry like an ATM. Yeah, they'll keep raking in cash for now - but one day the camel's back will snap, and when it does, Kabam/Netmarble will be the ones choking on dust. Because ignoring your player base isn't a business model, it's a countdown timer.

Wicket329

Y’all are fundamentally misunderstanding the rating system. IT IS NOT a reflection of what the champion actually is in-game. IT IS Kabam’s statement of what they intend the champion to be.

Serpent was created specifically to be a defender. That was the intention. They were not surprised when he was a top tier defender because he was always supposed to be, that’s why he is marked as a 5/5.

Spider-Woman was not created to be a defender. That was not the intention. They were surprised that she was a top tier defender because she was not supposed to be, as she is intended to be a 3.5/5 defender.

The two should not be compared because they were not intended to fulfill the same role. Game balance isn’t achieved by making every champion balanced with every other champion. That would be boring and bad. Game balance is about achieving a balance across the entirety of the champions in the game. Some are meant to be attackers, some defenders, some dual threats, but not all can be everything. If that were the case, people would have no incentive to get new champs and the game would suffer as a result. Spider-Woman was built to be a moderately challenging defender, but one with plenty of counters. Does this change make her hit that mark? I have no idea. Does it result in her utility or damage ratings now being inaccurate? Maybe! But those are the arguments to be making about this, not “other champ better at defense so Kabam stupid.”

If you want to make a comparison argument, look at other champs who are marked as 3.5/5 defenders and see how she stacks up against them. If she is worse than them with this change, then okay! That’s a good argument to make! Bring that up and it might convince the devs of your points, but what you’re doing now definitely will not.

Wicket329

Also, this is going to be my hot take, Serpent is not that scary. Since release, he’s been droppable by widely available champions, it’s just that those champions weren’t the usual mystic class ringers and so they were largely ignored. I was cheesing 7r3 AW bosses with my 6r4 unascended Sym Supreme since like day one, and he’s only gotten easier since then since almost every Mystic champion released since Kushala straight bullies him.

Patman24

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2881171#Comment_2881171

I don't get these arguments. Like its good for you if you have an easy time fighting him, but that doesn't really change the fact that the majority of the player base hates fighting him and has a horrible time.

TheUglyone123

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2881169#Comment_2881169

This just further affirms why this nerf to spiderwoman makes no sense. If they think her offense doesn’t need a change (their words, not mine), why are they affecting her offensive prowess via removing her ensnare on offense too? If they removed it on defense only (which they are more than capable of doing), then this would not be half as bad. I don’t think she even needs this change on defense, but I can understand the logic behind removing it on defense to bring it more in line with Kabam’s intention.

The reason serpent keeps coming up in discussions is simply because Kabam as labeled him as “balanced” when he clearly is not. Swoman is much more close to balanced by comparison. It’s less about the kits compared to each other, its Kabam labeling one as “fair and balanced” when they clearly are not, and one that is “not fair“ and adjusting a part of their kit that affects something that isn’t even what they are trying to adjust.

Also, the argument that serpent is easy for you to fight is cool, I guess, I’m sincerely glad he isn’t an issue for you. Swoman has been relatively easy for me with a plethora of different attackers. This subjective experience argument isn’t all that valid for either side.

Wicket329

I think the argument that the change should be made for defense only has merit. As you say, Kabam has stated they didn’t have an issue with her offensive performance, and so I think that’s a good point to raise.

My Serpent point is not that I’m particularly good at fighting him, it’s that he has had counters the whole time and is, in fact, balanced. Like, I promise using Sym Supreme for him is an absolute no-brainer face roll. That’s not a brag, it’s just press special and think happy thoughts, there’s no skill involved in it. But Serpent is a 5/5 defender and was designed to be punishing if you bring non-optimal champions to the fight. Spider-Woman is not meant to fill that role, and so should not be as punishing if you bring non-optimal champions against her.

Again, you can’t compare two champions like you’re trying to compare SW and Serpent. Same reason it doesn’t make sense to compare Shang Chi or Archangel and Serpent, they have different design intentions. Nobody argues pure attackers are unbalanced because they aren’t good defenders, that would be crazy.

The point here is that Kabam takes a long view at game balance. They have to plan how many potent attackers and defender and dual-threats there are in the game, and when a champion who is not intended to be one of those things ends up becoming one, it can throw off future designs. My comment is explaining why Kabam doesn’t tweak the numbers to match the character. The numbers are the rubric, not a description. So they have to tweak the characters to match the numbers.

Eze221

Completamente de acuerdo me siento decepcionado de esta decisión injusta de Kabam e incluso estoy pensando seriamente en abandonar el

TheUglyone123

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2881220#Comment_2881220

I can see what you are saying, even if I don’t fully agree on the serpent take. The biggest issue I have is what you said first, that this is an offensive nerf, when Kabam explicitly said that the offensive side didn’t need to be tweaked. So I won’t argue the ensnare on defense whatsoever, like I said above. So I actually think we agree on this

HaverTime

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2881169#Comment_2881169

If they want to lower Spider-Woman's defensive capabilities down. Why not actually remove the buff (Fumble) that boosts her defensive capabilities? With ensnare and no fumble she would absolutely feel like a 3.5/5.

Or better yet, make it so the ensnare only activates on offense? If she is performing where they want her to attack wise (which they themselves have stated), why change her offensively? Weakening her offensively isn't mentioned as a need anywhere in their post. So why are they doing it?