**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Comments
Surely the testers tested all synergies before the champ was given out, so, what went wrong? If Kabam needs testers that actually, you know, test things, I am sure plenty of people would be glad to take champs for a ride before they are available to the public.
Another champ that would have been released with a bug that took one player 1 video to find. This further proves that the champ release process HAS to be changed. Real players need access to the champs before they go live like I said in my post right after the Cull nerf announcement.
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/159130/better-way-to-release-and-test-champs#latest
Also to give my perspective..if a champion is changed before being released to the game is absolutely fine. If i can tank sp2 or sp3 just using dexterity it's obviously over powerful. I can use my Darkhawk or warlock and spam the sh$$t out of opponents. I personally loved this synergy but knew at the back of my head it's too good to be true..3 days of good weekend are always welcome.
Also the solution of once per match is not logical at all. If it can be like 5% a bar of power or something close it would be fine but still can be misused in hands of super skilled players. So need some better ideas here for sure..
Thanks all for your time guys!
There a bit of negativity here about the testing; but props to you for acting fast to prevent another issue that would have caused a lot of upset; like the Nick Fury synergy bug fix did.
Personally I'd vote for a cool down, plus a reduced quantity of power, rather than once per fight limit; but as long as it does get a bit better limited, that's cool.
Otherwise they wouldn't emphasize "each time" in the description.
I think their intention is to be best counter to all Champs (Abomination, Morningstar) who can inflict bleed or poison when being hit.
But developers forgot the existence of nodes such as "Biohazard".
On one hand i can really see that kabam is trying to communicate with the players more and we get an answer on the issue quite fast which is something i can appreciate and is definitely an improvement.
On the other hand this seems to me like the usual "we thought of a cool interaction but didn't really put any thought on the implications" and now they try to pass it as a "description error?" which has 2 big negative aspects imo:
1) Kabam shows weakness on designing and testing their stuff once again and more importantly
2) after they realize they did an oopsie they try to cover for it instead of admitting it.
Now the above is only speculation but it would be hard to convince me otherwise since this is a recurring situation. I would personally appreciate much more admitting to your mistakes (when they happen) and try to improve on your designing and testing than trying to deny everything and let us guessing when you are actually saying the truth and when not.
On to the topic now. A "once per fight" trigger feels really weak and pretty much makes this a synergy you wouldn't actively go after. A timer on the trigger every x seconds would be a nice way to control the balance in my opinion.
They need to test the stuff better but i am very happy to see the communication part!
KUDOS KABAM!
*cull obsidian flashbacks*
At least this is before she is released but I wonder if this fix would occur if we didnt notify the team
Caltrops is the only node I can think of that will truly benefit Robots within this synergy (unless they invent a crazy node to go with caltrops now too).
Aside from that, just a few matchups can make this synergy insanely good... like fighting against Yondu, Abomination and Man-Thing.
It is indeed a crazy good synergy, but it’s way to situational to be nerfed, from my point of view.
I'm with you, I don't want to spend money, items and most important, my time on champs because of how great they are on day one only to see 90-days later what made them great was taken away.
With that being said, nobody, including @Kabam Miike or anyone on there staff make that guarantee, it's not a reasonable request.
If a champ affects the game in a way that wasn't intended, they will "fix" it. I get your point, it should have been corrected prior to release, and lets hope that's the case moving forward because if it keeps happening then consumers will no longer perceive this as measuring data and re-balancing, but rather baiting consumers into buying only to switch what they purchased at a later date to something less desirable, and in my opinion and from my pov, that is not the case.
Give them a little trust and let them earn the rest. That's typically how every relationship starts.