**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.
Options
Removal of Thorns: a new case for rank down tickets
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'd probably rank down Falcon since AV can cover my AW evasion avoidance and electro isn't going to wreck me if I run into him. Falcon was specifically for thorn paths. I'm sure many RTDs wouldn't go to champs affected by these changes, but it's not like all the 12.0 tickets went to SW and DS either. I'm just not seeing the downside to people who aren't bothered by the changes, other than you want people to be unhappy while you act superior for making better rank up choices.
This game is definitely turning into a bad investment. I won't stop playing, but paying isn't looking attractive when they keep changing things for such obviou$ reason$. If you've tried talking about the cash grab stuff, then you'll see the moderators are very hard at work removing those threads and comments immediately. I'm glad this thread hasn't been closed down yet.
If they'd be more open about the process, then people would shut up and wait to see what happens. If there will be tons of degen nodes, then Antman and other long fight defenders could still be useful. Honestly, I wish they'd leave thorns alone since it wasn't that hard as long as people brought the right champ instead of trying to bull through it. You don't remove bleed nodes because people aren't smart enough to bring immunities, so why remove thorns because they don't bring defensive ability reducers? It required people to have different teams for different paths. If you want diversity, this is the wrong way to bring it about.
Also, Degen looks to be unavoidable damage leading to more health pots needed no matter what champ you bring, so removing thorns for more of these nodes was definitely not for our benefit.
You can argue (like @GroundedWisdom ) that the champs themsleves are not being changed, but you can NOT argue that those same champs will perform DIFFERENTLY in this "new" set up. This is the case for people calling it an "indirect" nerf.
The champs you use today in the game will no longer have the exact same ability once these changes are made. That's FACT. This is a perfect time for RDTs.
Lmao. That's funny. I actually think rank down tickets should not be allowed for r4 5* champs (and never thought they should have been). People took these champs up for whatever reason. I face a lot of alliances that "require" two r4 champs for prestige in aq--one alliance was requiring 3 by September. They aren't even shy about it--it's on their alliance pages. But, after these alliances shoot up in prestige for higher aq rewards and used those champs in war to get more 5* shards (and better 5* champs), they want to keep the rewards and want different r4 champs.
I understand that this is what they want, but it's not how the game was designed. I honestly don't know why kabam allowed rtds for 5* champs. The main nerfs weren't 5* champs at all. In fact, that would be the "best" argument for rtds which no one has really made. Kabam gave rtds when the game was fundamentally altered under 12.0 regardless of which champs were actually nerfed since the 5* champs weren't really nerfed at all (off the top of my head, only star lord was "nerfed," but it's been so long, I can't remember how big of a difference I saw). How is this change to alliance wars different? (I still would be opposed to rtds for r4 5* champs but at least I think this would be a slightly more appropriate apples to apples comparison). Maybe the answer is challenger rating and flat value was the nerf to champs? But that doesn't fundamentally alter them the way switch and Thor were fundamentally altered.
What Kabam CAN do, is change the prerequisites for handing out RDTs to cover such indirect changes, as it is their policy to modify as they see fit. Whether they opt to do so is entirely up to them, or if they just give some out as a 'feel good' gesture.
The Champs aren't performing differently at all. The Node is no longer there. The Champ still behaves the same as it always did. RDTs are not for changes to content. That's essentially saying that Ranking a Champ is not worth as much when that's Player opinion, and not the opinion of the game team. As I've said before, who you Rank and for what reason is up to you. The Champs aren't being changed, and that is what the RDTs are intended for. Fact.
100% agree with this analysis.
I would also make one more point. You have no clue whether these champs will serve a purpose in later content or in some event (minus ant man who just sucks--I'm sorry, but I still can't get past the number of people who ranked up an ant man for "thorns." Thorns is a damagin tile regardless of who you put there. Some are obviously better than others, but ranking up an ant man solely for thorns is just...yeah...I have beaten this horse to death). To just assume someone like black widow (who is a shell of her former self anyway) or Elektra will have no use on the new alliance war map is pure speculation. Just bc there isn't thorns, doesn't mean there won't be a different node that could benefit by an ability accuracy reduction champ. Lets say there is a stun immune node with increased abilities. U would want an ability reduction champ to tryto switch nightcrawler. You also don't know what 5.3 may bring. Granted a 4* champ against 6* champs may not be viable for other reasons, but it's also possible an ability reduction champ could be useful.
I said she was really bad the first few months, not now. She has been fixed recently and is a bit better but who wants to rank up a new champ on day 1 when they are released then have to deal with them being bugged for months before engineering time can be put in by the game team to fix them? I value your opinion, but it would be best if going forward you read comments fully before you directly reply to them.
People have complained about the design of Phoenix. The Damage, building of Fury, etc. I'm not talking about bugs. That's not a design aspect. I read comments. You mentioned complete garbage. Bugs are not a reason to have Tickets either way.
That's precisely my point. Content will change. The Tickets are not for people to adjust their Roster with those changes because that's all based on who they prefer to use.
My Phoenix is r5 and sig 99 for one reason--prestige. But kabam, give me a rankdown ticket the moment she's not in my top 5 please! That will have changed my "use" for her and I should get those resources back for when...you finally have another good cosmic champ besides Hyperion.
Woah woah woah...Inigo Montoya is NOT a tired meme. He is a Legend from the 80s who will live in our hearts forever.
Antman is one who will be tonight to swallow for those that ranked him. He is still a pain depending on sig level on all or nothing but with those new boosts they nerfed that too as well. Really in this announcement there are a handful of champs that had like one or 2 good uses that literally have no use in game anymore at a higher level of play.
Luckily I don't have to worry since I don't have those champs ranked for that exact reason. But the request is valid to make and Kabam can go either way really for it. May make sense considering
Now ^^^that^^^ is a "fact."
No. That penalizes the players that didn't just rank up champs to have 5* r4 champs.
RDTs literally penalizes no player. Everyone would benefit from them. They may benefit some more than others, but no one is penalized.
That's inaccurate. The players who saved t2as bc they wanted to be careful about who to use them on but at the same time sacrificed prestige (and didn't join an alliance that mandated r4s to join) would suffer. It's a windfall for the players who have been using 5* r4 champs and now want a diffferwnt (better) 5* r4 but can't bc they already made their choice.
I'm yet to see a good reason not to do this. People who argue against it just seem to want others to be unhappy regardless of how it will impact them. So what if they ranked up a crappy champ when they had no options and now they want to rank up a better one? How is that stopping you from doing what you want to do, especially when you'll get the option to do the same? Is the prestige issue really that serious for anyone but the one guy that keeps going on and on about it?
Wrong. Like I said earlier, you're confusing a penalty with benefitting less than others. Everyone would benefit from RDTs. Some obviously more than others but no one would suffer from them, lol.
It's opportunity cost. It is a "penalty" in that sense.
So it's better for the people that ranked up thorn champs to suffer than the people who waited to rank up the best champs? You still have your best champs, and this would do nothing to take them away from you. It would actually give you a way to replace some champs that may have been surpassed by newer champs, so it's a potential benefit. There is no potential loss for you, at all.
What is the source of your suffering? Is it really just that you didn't rank up Antman for thorns because you wanted a better champ, but you would have done so if you knew a RTD was coming? Please explain how this makes your gaming experience less enjoyable in any way, other than you can't feel smarter for waiting anymore.
A similar situation might be if they added villainy to every node in AW (Will most likely never happen, but this is just an theoretical example), this would severely impact Magik, who is not a villain and would not be able to activate limbo or take benefit of MD. People who ranked her up for war defense would have to find another use for her since the changes didn't impact her abilities, just her usefulness.
I don't know if these changes warrant a Rank-down ticket, but it does suck for those who ranked up certain champs for thorns (Ant-Man, Collossus, Magneto, etc.) only to find out that the main use for these champs and reason for ranking them up would be gone soon.
I like how you immediately thought it was about you but deny any such allegations
You're right. If you looking at the topic incorrectly your 'argument' makes sense.
Short answer, yes. How long have you played this game? Aq rewards are based on prestige. 5* r4 champs give the most prestige (as of now). You are making the decision to get more rewards now taking up those champs. Additionally, you win more wars by taking up those champs now (which is how you end up with the champs you would rather have).
Sorry but I asked if it was an issue for anyone but you. It's clearly an issue for you. But if it's just you, then sorry but that makes it less valid.