Can we all just agree to stop requesting nerfs

Let me tell you why ..

1) Just because you think a defender is too hard to beat is NOT a good enough reason to nerf a champion

2) Major nerf to champion in the past has happened very rarely and for a reason. Now, those were kKabam's reason and we could debate them all day long but what I want to point out is that those nerfs were not because gaming community demanded them.

3) It's a major waste of time honestly. I know I know, if I don't wanna read it, I shouldn't click on it. I get that. I am talking about OPs time because NEVER in the history on this game kabam has ever nerfed a champion because we thought he/she was too powerful. It has never happened and never will.

just my 0.2 cents.

Comments

SpiritOfVengeance

I totally agree.

I still hate modok though.

Hulk_Smells

seriously. just stop. nerf this, nerf that. nerf your whining.

Aquama

Yes. Op champs give the game a more challenging element and something to look forward to.

DNA3000

imnoone wrote: »

NEVER in the history on this game kabam has ever nerfed a champion because we thought he/she was too powerful. It has never happened and never will.

Just to clarify, what anybody *says* about a champion has no bearing on whether it gets nerfed. What we *think* about the champion can affect whether a champion gets nerfed, if and only if the vast majority of the playerbase agrees (and this is almost impossible to judge from forum posts) and they act upon that belief by using the champion everywhere to the point of skewing usage statistics, AND it turns out they are correct and when everyone plays that champion all of the time they are highly successful with that champion.

Outside of extreme corner cases, entities like MCOC champions are nerfed in an MMO when three conditions are met. One: that thing dominates playtime to a very high level. Two: when that champion is played it earns rewards at a much higher rate than average. Three: this dominance affects the game at a large percentage of all levels of play.

These three criteria are not debatable, because they are directly measurable by an MMO operator. No one's opinion on whether these three things are happening matters.

We all thought Scarlet Witch was OP. That didn't matter. We all said so in the forums. That didn't matter either. We tried to convince everyone to rank up 3* SW and have her mow down content with her. That still didn't matter. But we succeeded. That mattered.

Lunchbox45

Ill sign!

Tinklestinkie

no
Nerf your anti nerfs

unknown

This content has been removed.

TurbulentUrFace

I honestly couldn't agree more. Yes, sometimes in a game you'll have a hard time beating something. If they nerfed every difficult piece of content the game wouldn't be fun. It's called Contest of Champions. Who likes a contest with no challenge?

unknown

This content has been removed.

Bahamut

Elitehunter wrote: »

Nerfing is not da wae

Doo u no da wae?

imnoone wrote: »

Let me tell you why ..

1) Just because you think a defender is too hard to beat is NOT a good enough reason to nerf a champion

2) Major nerf to champion in the past has happened very rarely and for a reason. Now, those were kKabam's reason and we could debate them all day long but what I want to point out is that those nerfs were not because gaming community demanded them.

3) It's a major waste of time honestly. I know I know, if I don't wanna read it, I shouldn't click on it. I get that. I am talking about OPs time because NEVER in the history on this game kabam has ever nerfed a champion because we thought he/she was too powerful. It has never happened and never will.

just my 0.2 cents.

Who the hell flagged this post? Why?! You troll, get over here, look me in the eye, and tell me that this post IS NOT legit. People who flag posts that are actually worth reading really trigger me

DNA3000

Bahamut wrote: »

Who the hell flagged this post? Why?! You troll, get over here, look me in the eye, and tell me that this post IS NOT legit. People who flag posts that are actually worth reading really trigger me

If a post is flagged, it just means the mods have to read it to see if it is actually spam or abuse. If it isn't, the flagging means nothing except the moderators might warn you about abusing the flagging function. It otherwise doesn't harm the original poster. It could harm the one doing the flagging, especially if they make it a habit.

But just out of curiosity, how did you know it was flagged? It is (improperly in my opinion) flagged spam, but that's not easy to know except for the original poster. I only know it is flagged because I manually checked just now.

Solswerd

DNA3000 wrote: »

Bahamut wrote: »

Who the hell flagged this post? Why?! You troll, get over here, look me in the eye, and tell me that this post IS NOT legit. People who flag posts that are actually worth reading really trigger me

If a post is flagged, it just means the mods have to read it to see if it is actually spam or abuse. If it isn't, the flagging means nothing except the moderators might warn you about abusing the flagging function. It otherwise doesn't harm the original poster. It could harm the one doing the flagging, especially if they make it a habit.

But just out of curiosity, how did you know it was flagged? It is (improperly in my opinion) flagged spam, but that's not easy to know except for the original poster. I only know it is flagged because I manually checked just now.

I cannot see flags on any posts....seemed to change in the last month or so?

DNA3000

Solswerd wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

Bahamut wrote: »

Who the hell flagged this post? Why?! You troll, get over here, look me in the eye, and tell me that this post IS NOT legit. People who flag posts that are actually worth reading really trigger me

If a post is flagged, it just means the mods have to read it to see if it is actually spam or abuse. If it isn't, the flagging means nothing except the moderators might warn you about abusing the flagging function. It otherwise doesn't harm the original poster. It could harm the one doing the flagging, especially if they make it a habit.

But just out of curiosity, how did you know it was flagged? It is (improperly in my opinion) flagged spam, but that's not easy to know except for the original poster. I only know it is flagged because I manually checked just now.

I cannot see flags on any posts....seemed to change in the last month or so?

Recently they quietly changed the forums so you cannot see the abuse and spam flags on the posts directly, and if you look in your profile (or anyone else's) profile you don't even see the abuse and spam counters anymore. I suspect that was to emphasize that the purpose of the flagging system is not to mar the post because you don't like it, but ONLY to communicate with the mods that the post is something they should review. Now, if you flag a post no one even knows you did it, so there's no point to doing so just to try to slap a flag count on it.

It is still possible to see what's going on if you are willing to play URL games. But there's no way to see them anymore conveniently. In fact, I think between when I first noticed this and now, they removed the ability for people to see those flags even on their own posts - I don't even see them on my own posts directly anymore.

shchong2

Indeed, and we should focus on WHO ELSE TO BUFF ....
Job well done on Luke Cage the pillow hands and Red Hulk the candle light
Now we can move on to discussing and doing BETA TESTING for the next 2 old champs that are forgotten in the junk yard

Solswerd

DNA3000 wrote: »

Solswerd wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

Bahamut wrote: »

Who the hell flagged this post? Why?! You troll, get over here, look me in the eye, and tell me that this post IS NOT legit. People who flag posts that are actually worth reading really trigger me

If a post is flagged, it just means the mods have to read it to see if it is actually spam or abuse. If it isn't, the flagging means nothing except the moderators might warn you about abusing the flagging function. It otherwise doesn't harm the original poster. It could harm the one doing the flagging, especially if they make it a habit.

But just out of curiosity, how did you know it was flagged? It is (improperly in my opinion) flagged spam, but that's not easy to know except for the original poster. I only know it is flagged because I manually checked just now.

I cannot see flags on any posts....seemed to change in the last month or so?

Recently they quietly changed the forums so you cannot see the abuse and spam flags on the posts directly, and if you look in your profile (or anyone else's) profile you don't even see the abuse and spam counters anymore. I suspect that was to emphasize that the purpose of the flagging system is not to mar the post because you don't like it, but ONLY to communicate with the mods that the post is something they should review. Now, if you flag a post no one even knows you did it, so there's no point to doing so just to try to slap a flag count on it.

It is still possible to see what's going on if you are willing to play URL games. But there's no way to see them anymore conveniently. In fact, I think between when I first noticed this and now, they removed the ability for people to see those flags even on their own posts - I don't even see them on my own posts directly anymore.

Thank you! I wasn't sure if everyone was in the same boat since I was still seeing people questioning who flagged them. It is probably a good change that will give them less false positives in the long run.

Heyheyhey

Nerf the lags