Hood Changes - Discussion [Merged Threads]

1235752

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 27,352 ★★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drenlin said:

    Wow, change notes have been out for 30 minutes and everyone already knows exactly how this change is going to effect him? Let the release happen, use the champ, then condemn it if it’s warranted

    I think the most important aspect of the Hood change is being overlooked, and it is something that while Kam mentions at the end of his video, I don't think he made the direct case for. If I understand Kam's video correctly, Kam makes the case that the devs took away too much relative to what they added back, and that's problematic for the players who invested in Hood for those things the devs took away. From that perspective, maybe we all should wait and see if that's true.

    However, I believe that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Hood is good or bad. It doesn't matter if the devs added enough, or not enough. The real problem is that Hood's update reflects a toxic design philosophy, and I don't use that word lightly. The philosophy is basically this: we can take away anything we want, as long as we put more stuff back.

    This game doesn't work that way, and in fact is moving farther and farther away from that. Usefulness is not linear: we don't have champs that are 8s that are better than 7s. We have champs that are useful in this fight, and champs that are useful in that fight. We have champs good in some situations and not in others. And we have a content design philosophy magnifying those differences in higher tier content. You need a roster with a wide range of capabilities to do all the content coming out.

    We no longer live in a world where the devs can turn a champ that is a 4 into a champ that is a 7 and walk away happy. Instead we live in a world where Hood had very specific buff control capabilities that were severely weakened in some aspects, and then had other stuff added. We cannot simply say the stuff added is "better" than the stuff removed, because for the players who were relying upon Hood to do those things that were removed, the champ no longer functions as desired in their specific roster.

    This is already problematic in a game where champion acquisition is random, so you have to deal with the hand you're dealt. But this game is also a game in which the resources to rank up champs to combat effective levels relative to the rest of the roster is also limited and expensive. Every single player faces a unique challenge when ranking up roster, unique due to the fact that everyone's roster is in effect randomly generated. For some people, Hood was their best options for certain things, and they invested in Hood because of that fact. Those investments are now lost. This is true even if Hood is now better at other things, because there's no guarantee that those players *needed* those other things.

    Maybe Hood is better for a new player picking him up today, and maybe Hood is not better. But that's irrelevant, or should be irrelevant. Those players are getting a better Hood on the backs of other players getting a worse Hood and losing resources they spent in good faith on a champ that changed for no reason.

    i say "for no reason" because if there was a need for Hood to lose the utility he lost, that would be one thing. Hypothetically speaking, if losing that utility was the *only way* for Hood to become more relevant to the playerbase at large, then this change would be awful but necessary, and we should all accept that some things are awful but necessary. But it is impossible to make the case that the loss of utility was necessary, because the devs could have added less powerful versions of their new mechanics and kept his original utility, as they don't conflict.

    If preservation of player investment was an actual priority with the developers, Hood could have been updated in a way that made him better for everyone.

    Instead, the devs played a numbers game. Improve Hood for the masses, and if enough people like it, it doesn't matter how much damage occurs to the people already invested in him.

    Whether you like the Hood update or not, whether you think the Hood update makes him more valuable or not, no matter what playtesting eventually shows, I think every player should consider the Hood update dangerous, because it says the devs don't care about pre-existing player investment. They only care about what players will invest in champions in the future. And if the devs continue to update champions with this philosophy, they will eventually take something away you like and for no reason.

    I understand there's some grey area here. Most game changes, most champion updates, take something away. Some of that is inevitable. The question is whether what was taken away is sufficiently useful and important that the preservation of investment is important. But I think the Hood change is unambiguously far over the line. There is no question whatsoever that he had important use cases, and there's no question some of them were taken away. Hood is not a grey area case.
    totally agreed.
    I think it's also pertinent whether the champion is actually getting ranked up for use of the ability that's removed. When buffing Yellowjacket, i doubt many people would have complained if his stun after power sting expired was removed in place of some new abilities. Nobody is ranking up yellowjacket for that ability. People are ranking up Hood for his buff control, and that is a useful ability. Like you said, people are filling a buff control champ hole in their roster and Hood is much much worse for that role.

    There should never be a situation when an ability is removed in favour for new ability (which is arguably just damage in this case)

    Imagine, taking this to it's extreme, that Kabam decided Ghost needed a rework (would never happen of course, but bear with), they decided that they would remove ghost's phasing and in place they would give her a chunky fury buff that triggered on special attacks. People ranked up ghost because of what she does, phasing and big damage along with a host of utilities. Removing the phasing dramatically changes her as a champion and the extra damage does not replace what she was ranked up for. Removing some of Hood's buff control capabilities changes him as a champion. You cannot argue that just because he got some more damage it's a justifiable change.

    And if you say these situations are different, yeah they are, ghost won't be changed and she won't have her phasing removed, but where do you draw the line of Kabam removing a champions utility in place of adding a bit more damage?
    Therein lies a fundamental problem. I'm not entirely sure they're updating Champions to become preferred Rank-Ups. They're updating them to be more useful in the current game climate than they were previously. Certain balancing measures need to be done in these cases because it's not just about adding more. The effects of the Abilities combined need to be considered. So I'm not totally against the idea of having to remove existing Abilities overall. However, I do see it as problematic when it's overly used because it becomes more of a swap-out situation than an update. If that's the case, I'd rather have less buffs a year, and more siginficant reworks. In terms of taking away utility to add something else, that can sometimes happen though. Champs are being changed. There's no guarantee they'll be used for what they were used for before.
    There in lies the problem. You cannot just change the champions core ability without taking into consideration the people who have ranked him up for they ability. If I rank up mysterio for poison immunity and kabam just updated him saying that mysterio should not have poison immunity because that makes him too op, that's a problem. These reworks were supposed to make a champion better, I am not sure it does in this case.

    Considering all the champions before this were desperately in need to changing, I am not sure why kabam picked hood and why they changed him like this.
    There's no guarantee that Champs will do the same thing they used to when you change them.
    I was waiting for u to show up and defend this
    I'm not defending anything. Haven't said I like it or hate it. I haven't even seen him used yet. What I'm talking about is the idea that all they have to do is add more. That's a horrible way to balance a game.
  • The_HoTUThe_HoTU Posts: 127
    Nooooooo
    Hood was one of my favourite champs in the game.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 27,352 ★★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drenlin said:

    Wow, change notes have been out for 30 minutes and everyone already knows exactly how this change is going to effect him? Let the release happen, use the champ, then condemn it if it’s warranted

    I think the most important aspect of the Hood change is being overlooked, and it is something that while Kam mentions at the end of his video, I don't think he made the direct case for. If I understand Kam's video correctly, Kam makes the case that the devs took away too much relative to what they added back, and that's problematic for the players who invested in Hood for those things the devs took away. From that perspective, maybe we all should wait and see if that's true.

    However, I believe that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Hood is good or bad. It doesn't matter if the devs added enough, or not enough. The real problem is that Hood's update reflects a toxic design philosophy, and I don't use that word lightly. The philosophy is basically this: we can take away anything we want, as long as we put more stuff back.

    This game doesn't work that way, and in fact is moving farther and farther away from that. Usefulness is not linear: we don't have champs that are 8s that are better than 7s. We have champs that are useful in this fight, and champs that are useful in that fight. We have champs good in some situations and not in others. And we have a content design philosophy magnifying those differences in higher tier content. You need a roster with a wide range of capabilities to do all the content coming out.

    We no longer live in a world where the devs can turn a champ that is a 4 into a champ that is a 7 and walk away happy. Instead we live in a world where Hood had very specific buff control capabilities that were severely weakened in some aspects, and then had other stuff added. We cannot simply say the stuff added is "better" than the stuff removed, because for the players who were relying upon Hood to do those things that were removed, the champ no longer functions as desired in their specific roster.

    This is already problematic in a game where champion acquisition is random, so you have to deal with the hand you're dealt. But this game is also a game in which the resources to rank up champs to combat effective levels relative to the rest of the roster is also limited and expensive. Every single player faces a unique challenge when ranking up roster, unique due to the fact that everyone's roster is in effect randomly generated. For some people, Hood was their best options for certain things, and they invested in Hood because of that fact. Those investments are now lost. This is true even if Hood is now better at other things, because there's no guarantee that those players *needed* those other things.

    Maybe Hood is better for a new player picking him up today, and maybe Hood is not better. But that's irrelevant, or should be irrelevant. Those players are getting a better Hood on the backs of other players getting a worse Hood and losing resources they spent in good faith on a champ that changed for no reason.

    i say "for no reason" because if there was a need for Hood to lose the utility he lost, that would be one thing. Hypothetically speaking, if losing that utility was the *only way* for Hood to become more relevant to the playerbase at large, then this change would be awful but necessary, and we should all accept that some things are awful but necessary. But it is impossible to make the case that the loss of utility was necessary, because the devs could have added less powerful versions of their new mechanics and kept his original utility, as they don't conflict.

    If preservation of player investment was an actual priority with the developers, Hood could have been updated in a way that made him better for everyone.

    Instead, the devs played a numbers game. Improve Hood for the masses, and if enough people like it, it doesn't matter how much damage occurs to the people already invested in him.

    Whether you like the Hood update or not, whether you think the Hood update makes him more valuable or not, no matter what playtesting eventually shows, I think every player should consider the Hood update dangerous, because it says the devs don't care about pre-existing player investment. They only care about what players will invest in champions in the future. And if the devs continue to update champions with this philosophy, they will eventually take something away you like and for no reason.

    I understand there's some grey area here. Most game changes, most champion updates, take something away. Some of that is inevitable. The question is whether what was taken away is sufficiently useful and important that the preservation of investment is important. But I think the Hood change is unambiguously far over the line. There is no question whatsoever that he had important use cases, and there's no question some of them were taken away. Hood is not a grey area case.
    totally agreed.
    I think it's also pertinent whether the champion is actually getting ranked up for use of the ability that's removed. When buffing Yellowjacket, i doubt many people would have complained if his stun after power sting expired was removed in place of some new abilities. Nobody is ranking up yellowjacket for that ability. People are ranking up Hood for his buff control, and that is a useful ability. Like you said, people are filling a buff control champ hole in their roster and Hood is much much worse for that role.

    There should never be a situation when an ability is removed in favour for new ability (which is arguably just damage in this case)

    Imagine, taking this to it's extreme, that Kabam decided Ghost needed a rework (would never happen of course, but bear with), they decided that they would remove ghost's phasing and in place they would give her a chunky fury buff that triggered on special attacks. People ranked up ghost because of what she does, phasing and big damage along with a host of utilities. Removing the phasing dramatically changes her as a champion and the extra damage does not replace what she was ranked up for. Removing some of Hood's buff control capabilities changes him as a champion. You cannot argue that just because he got some more damage it's a justifiable change.

    And if you say these situations are different, yeah they are, ghost won't be changed and she won't have her phasing removed, but where do you draw the line of Kabam removing a champions utility in place of adding a bit more damage?
    Therein lies a fundamental problem. I'm not entirely sure they're updating Champions to become preferred Rank-Ups. They're updating them to be more useful in the current game climate than they were previously. Certain balancing measures need to be done in these cases because it's not just about adding more. The effects of the Abilities combined need to be considered. So I'm not totally against the idea of having to remove existing Abilities overall. However, I do see it as problematic when it's overly used because it becomes more of a swap-out situation than an update. If that's the case, I'd rather have less buffs a year, and more siginficant reworks. In terms of taking away utility to add something else, that can sometimes happen though. Champs are being changed. There's no guarantee they'll be used for what they were used for before.
    There in lies the problem. You cannot just change the champions core ability without taking into consideration the people who have ranked him up for they ability. If I rank up mysterio for poison immunity and kabam just updated him saying that mysterio should not have poison immunity because that makes him too op, that's a problem. These reworks were supposed to make a champion better, I am not sure it does in this case.

    Considering all the champions before this were desperately in need to changing, I am not sure why kabam picked hood and why they changed him like this.
    There's no guarantee that Champs will do the same thing they used to when you change them.
    I was waiting for u to show up and defend this
    I'm not defending anything. Haven't said I like it or hate it. I haven't even seen him used yet. What I'm talking about is the idea that all they have to do is add more. That's a horrible way to balance a game.
    Yeah but when buffing a champion, you shouldn't take away the main things that made players use them. Thats like turning a nice beef burger and taking away the beef patty and replacing it with more lettuce. It's not as good as it was.
    How can you tell if it's as good as it was if you haven't even seen it play out yet? For that matter, good or bad isn't always measured by doing the same things with it. That's kind of the point that I'm making that seems pretty obvious. I'm not sure how people automatically think that changing a Champ will result in the same uses. In fact, that somewhat contradicts the point of changing them.
  • ThatGuyYouSaw235ThatGuyYouSaw235 Posts: 1,888 ★★★★★
    edited February 27
    chhese
  • ThatGuyYouSaw235ThatGuyYouSaw235 Posts: 1,888 ★★★★★
    edited February 27
    cheese
  • ThatGuyYouSaw235ThatGuyYouSaw235 Posts: 1,888 ★★★★★
    approval wtf
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 27,352 ★★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drenlin said:

    Wow, change notes have been out for 30 minutes and everyone already knows exactly how this change is going to effect him? Let the release happen, use the champ, then condemn it if it’s warranted

    I think the most important aspect of the Hood change is being overlooked, and it is something that while Kam mentions at the end of his video, I don't think he made the direct case for. If I understand Kam's video correctly, Kam makes the case that the devs took away too much relative to what they added back, and that's problematic for the players who invested in Hood for those things the devs took away. From that perspective, maybe we all should wait and see if that's true.

    However, I believe that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Hood is good or bad. It doesn't matter if the devs added enough, or not enough. The real problem is that Hood's update reflects a toxic design philosophy, and I don't use that word lightly. The philosophy is basically this: we can take away anything we want, as long as we put more stuff back.

    This game doesn't work that way, and in fact is moving farther and farther away from that. Usefulness is not linear: we don't have champs that are 8s that are better than 7s. We have champs that are useful in this fight, and champs that are useful in that fight. We have champs good in some situations and not in others. And we have a content design philosophy magnifying those differences in higher tier content. You need a roster with a wide range of capabilities to do all the content coming out.

    We no longer live in a world where the devs can turn a champ that is a 4 into a champ that is a 7 and walk away happy. Instead we live in a world where Hood had very specific buff control capabilities that were severely weakened in some aspects, and then had other stuff added. We cannot simply say the stuff added is "better" than the stuff removed, because for the players who were relying upon Hood to do those things that were removed, the champ no longer functions as desired in their specific roster.

    This is already problematic in a game where champion acquisition is random, so you have to deal with the hand you're dealt. But this game is also a game in which the resources to rank up champs to combat effective levels relative to the rest of the roster is also limited and expensive. Every single player faces a unique challenge when ranking up roster, unique due to the fact that everyone's roster is in effect randomly generated. For some people, Hood was their best options for certain things, and they invested in Hood because of that fact. Those investments are now lost. This is true even if Hood is now better at other things, because there's no guarantee that those players *needed* those other things.

    Maybe Hood is better for a new player picking him up today, and maybe Hood is not better. But that's irrelevant, or should be irrelevant. Those players are getting a better Hood on the backs of other players getting a worse Hood and losing resources they spent in good faith on a champ that changed for no reason.

    i say "for no reason" because if there was a need for Hood to lose the utility he lost, that would be one thing. Hypothetically speaking, if losing that utility was the *only way* for Hood to become more relevant to the playerbase at large, then this change would be awful but necessary, and we should all accept that some things are awful but necessary. But it is impossible to make the case that the loss of utility was necessary, because the devs could have added less powerful versions of their new mechanics and kept his original utility, as they don't conflict.

    If preservation of player investment was an actual priority with the developers, Hood could have been updated in a way that made him better for everyone.

    Instead, the devs played a numbers game. Improve Hood for the masses, and if enough people like it, it doesn't matter how much damage occurs to the people already invested in him.

    Whether you like the Hood update or not, whether you think the Hood update makes him more valuable or not, no matter what playtesting eventually shows, I think every player should consider the Hood update dangerous, because it says the devs don't care about pre-existing player investment. They only care about what players will invest in champions in the future. And if the devs continue to update champions with this philosophy, they will eventually take something away you like and for no reason.

    I understand there's some grey area here. Most game changes, most champion updates, take something away. Some of that is inevitable. The question is whether what was taken away is sufficiently useful and important that the preservation of investment is important. But I think the Hood change is unambiguously far over the line. There is no question whatsoever that he had important use cases, and there's no question some of them were taken away. Hood is not a grey area case.
    totally agreed.
    I think it's also pertinent whether the champion is actually getting ranked up for use of the ability that's removed. When buffing Yellowjacket, i doubt many people would have complained if his stun after power sting expired was removed in place of some new abilities. Nobody is ranking up yellowjacket for that ability. People are ranking up Hood for his buff control, and that is a useful ability. Like you said, people are filling a buff control champ hole in their roster and Hood is much much worse for that role.

    There should never be a situation when an ability is removed in favour for new ability (which is arguably just damage in this case)

    Imagine, taking this to it's extreme, that Kabam decided Ghost needed a rework (would never happen of course, but bear with), they decided that they would remove ghost's phasing and in place they would give her a chunky fury buff that triggered on special attacks. People ranked up ghost because of what she does, phasing and big damage along with a host of utilities. Removing the phasing dramatically changes her as a champion and the extra damage does not replace what she was ranked up for. Removing some of Hood's buff control capabilities changes him as a champion. You cannot argue that just because he got some more damage it's a justifiable change.

    And if you say these situations are different, yeah they are, ghost won't be changed and she won't have her phasing removed, but where do you draw the line of Kabam removing a champions utility in place of adding a bit more damage?
    Therein lies a fundamental problem. I'm not entirely sure they're updating Champions to become preferred Rank-Ups. They're updating them to be more useful in the current game climate than they were previously. Certain balancing measures need to be done in these cases because it's not just about adding more. The effects of the Abilities combined need to be considered. So I'm not totally against the idea of having to remove existing Abilities overall. However, I do see it as problematic when it's overly used because it becomes more of a swap-out situation than an update. If that's the case, I'd rather have less buffs a year, and more siginficant reworks. In terms of taking away utility to add something else, that can sometimes happen though. Champs are being changed. There's no guarantee they'll be used for what they were used for before.
    There in lies the problem. You cannot just change the champions core ability without taking into consideration the people who have ranked him up for they ability. If I rank up mysterio for poison immunity and kabam just updated him saying that mysterio should not have poison immunity because that makes him too op, that's a problem. These reworks were supposed to make a champion better, I am not sure it does in this case.

    Considering all the champions before this were desperately in need to changing, I am not sure why kabam picked hood and why they changed him like this.
    There's no guarantee that Champs will do the same thing they used to when you change them.
    I was waiting for u to show up and defend this
    I'm not defending anything. Haven't said I like it or hate it. I haven't even seen him used yet. What I'm talking about is the idea that all they have to do is add more. That's a horrible way to balance a game.
    Are you aware of what buffing is
    Yes. I'm aware. I'm also aware that there's an entire game to consider when buffing and balancing.
  • Texas_11Texas_11 Posts: 1,998 ★★★★
    I don’t think the data on their end support the theory that Hood was nerfed. I read cat murdocks article and she did have some very strong points, but I think overall hood will now be more than a synergy piece. She had some concrete examples like vision AA and a couple nodes which I understand, but overall he will be more useful to the game and everyone else.

    The Fate seal wasn’t a long one , but if they kept the fate seal he would be gaining power like a mad man. Hood hopefully will now be a viable champ instead of a niche champ that everyone apparently used for fate seal.

    His core kit is still there; controlling buffs, gaining power , miss mechanics, and more damage. It’s just not realistic to think rebalances don’t go both ways.

    I don’t think it’s fair that a champ gets buffed, but I’m pretty sure their data supports their decision.

    It’s basically when people were complaining that old man Logan’s regen was a buff instead of passive. No one ever used him that much and the data showed.
  • Texas_11Texas_11 Posts: 1,998 ★★★★
    I’m okay with disagrees, but I really want to know how this affects you. How it effects me? It doesn’t, his fate seal has never been a powerful one and haven’t thought about a time I needed a fate seal, no one i know of is over the top on the buff
  • PulyamanPulyaman Posts: 1,882 ★★★★★
    Texas_11 said:

    I’m okay with disagrees, but I really want to know how this affects you. How it effects me? It doesn’t, his fate seal has never been a powerful one and haven’t thought about a time I needed a fate seal, no one i know of is over the top on the buff

    That's why I am also waiting to decide what it means for my roster. I took him to rank 2 over sym Supreme and longshot mainly for his stagger and fate seal and also for the synergy with kingpin. I am still not happy with the change, but holding to make my decision.
  • Texas_11Texas_11 Posts: 1,998 ★★★★

    Texas_11 said:

    I don’t think the data on their end support the theory that Hood was nerfed. I read cat murdocks article and she did have some very strong points, but I think overall hood will now be more than a synergy piece. She had some concrete examples like vision AA and a couple nodes which I understand, but overall he will be more useful to the game and everyone else.

    The Fate seal wasn’t a long one , but if they kept the fate seal he would be gaining power like a mad man. Hood hopefully will now be a viable champ instead of a niche champ that everyone apparently used for fate seal.

    His core kit is still there; controlling buffs, gaining power , miss mechanics, and more damage. It’s just not realistic to think rebalances don’t go both ways.

    I don’t think it’s fair that a champ gets buffed, but I’m pretty sure their data supports their decision.

    It’s basically when people were complaining that old man Logan’s regen was a buff instead of passive. No one ever used him that much and the data showed.

    His staggers are now shorter and it's his staggers in combination with fate seal that made him such a good buff controller. Staggers to nullify buffs on demand and fate seal to nullify any buffs that may have slipped through. His buff control is now much weaker. And in addition to that, the hex seal reduces AAR by 65% and if played well with the heavy refresh could be kept up the entire fight. It was a bit stressful to keep it up previously which is what ppl wanted changed but now he just flat out can't. This combined with his sig made up his core. Now he doesn't have that.

    He was my first maxed out 4* and was always on my team throughout act 5 and eq when I was starting out. That level of buff control was amazing. The tihing is that ppl are pissed that Kabam traded of his utility for damage and that utility was his core mechanic which was why ppl still used him till date. Plus his invisibility wasn't ever reliable and is now even worse as it seems on paper.
    But his staggers have a 100% chance to proc instead of the 85% so they don’t last as long because they apply more frequently? I understand that part about if something slips through the cracks fate seal can take care of that the ability to remove buffs. But with MD can you imagine how powerful he would become he would be like Doom on steroids. The 65% AAR is nice, but I’m not sure how much I went to Hood for ability accuracy it was nice. But his core mechanic wasn’t really fate seal , his core mechanic was managing buffs and power gain Which he stills does through staggers I’m curious to see how he will affect people. He has always been a good option for the champion boss. But I don’t think that should change

    His invisibility basically you get 2 hits and free intercepts. I never used his invisibility because I was afraid of getting caught. We shall see how he does. But I try not to pass judgment until I see it live.
  • Texas_11Texas_11 Posts: 1,998 ★★★★
    Pulyaman said:

    Texas_11 said:

    I’m okay with disagrees, but I really want to know how this affects you. How it effects me? It doesn’t, his fate seal has never been a powerful one and haven’t thought about a time I needed a fate seal, no one i know of is over the top on the buff

    That's why I am also waiting to decide what it means for my roster. I took him to rank 2 over sym Supreme and longshot mainly for his stagger and fate seal and also for the synergy with kingpin. I am still not happy with the change, but holding to make my decision.
    Long shot has best fate seal in game one SP2 rip. I’m holding my opinions as well. I ranked him up , for no reason other than I think he still wears kswiss and looks cool. No synergies quite yet
  • yuwyuw Posts: 145
    edited February 27
    I think they should just keep hood as it is pre-buffed if they think he would be too powerful with the buff while still keeping fate seal
  • Ezra7676Ezra7676 Posts: 628 ★★
    Very similar situation to Namor it's looking like. We need the same option to play the new version and rank down if we want.

    I ranked this champ up to r5, used an AG and dumped enough sig stones to get him to over sig 150.

    It's only fair to allow us to rank down and rank up another champ that still has the abilities we ranked Hood up for.
  • Amazing_Demon05Amazing_Demon05 Posts: 2,754 ★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Drenlin said:

    Wow, change notes have been out for 30 minutes and everyone already knows exactly how this change is going to effect him? Let the release happen, use the champ, then condemn it if it’s warranted

    I think the most important aspect of the Hood change is being overlooked, and it is something that while Kam mentions at the end of his video, I don't think he made the direct case for. If I understand Kam's video correctly, Kam makes the case that the devs took away too much relative to what they added back, and that's problematic for the players who invested in Hood for those things the devs took away. From that perspective, maybe we all should wait and see if that's true.

    However, I believe that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Hood is good or bad. It doesn't matter if the devs added enough, or not enough. The real problem is that Hood's update reflects a toxic design philosophy, and I don't use that word lightly. The philosophy is basically this: we can take away anything we want, as long as we put more stuff back.

    This game doesn't work that way, and in fact is moving farther and farther away from that. Usefulness is not linear: we don't have champs that are 8s that are better than 7s. We have champs that are useful in this fight, and champs that are useful in that fight. We have champs good in some situations and not in others. And we have a content design philosophy magnifying those differences in higher tier content. You need a roster with a wide range of capabilities to do all the content coming out.

    We no longer live in a world where the devs can turn a champ that is a 4 into a champ that is a 7 and walk away happy. Instead we live in a world where Hood had very specific buff control capabilities that were severely weakened in some aspects, and then had other stuff added. We cannot simply say the stuff added is "better" than the stuff removed, because for the players who were relying upon Hood to do those things that were removed, the champ no longer functions as desired in their specific roster.

    This is already problematic in a game where champion acquisition is random, so you have to deal with the hand you're dealt. But this game is also a game in which the resources to rank up champs to combat effective levels relative to the rest of the roster is also limited and expensive. Every single player faces a unique challenge when ranking up roster, unique due to the fact that everyone's roster is in effect randomly generated. For some people, Hood was their best options for certain things, and they invested in Hood because of that fact. Those investments are now lost. This is true even if Hood is now better at other things, because there's no guarantee that those players *needed* those other things.

    Maybe Hood is better for a new player picking him up today, and maybe Hood is not better. But that's irrelevant, or should be irrelevant. Those players are getting a better Hood on the backs of other players getting a worse Hood and losing resources they spent in good faith on a champ that changed for no reason.

    i say "for no reason" because if there was a need for Hood to lose the utility he lost, that would be one thing. Hypothetically speaking, if losing that utility was the *only way* for Hood to become more relevant to the playerbase at large, then this change would be awful but necessary, and we should all accept that some things are awful but necessary. But it is impossible to make the case that the loss of utility was necessary, because the devs could have added less powerful versions of their new mechanics and kept his original utility, as they don't conflict.

    If preservation of player investment was an actual priority with the developers, Hood could have been updated in a way that made him better for everyone.

    Instead, the devs played a numbers game. Improve Hood for the masses, and if enough people like it, it doesn't matter how much damage occurs to the people already invested in him.

    Whether you like the Hood update or not, whether you think the Hood update makes him more valuable or not, no matter what playtesting eventually shows, I think every player should consider the Hood update dangerous, because it says the devs don't care about pre-existing player investment. They only care about what players will invest in champions in the future. And if the devs continue to update champions with this philosophy, they will eventually take something away you like and for no reason.

    I understand there's some grey area here. Most game changes, most champion updates, take something away. Some of that is inevitable. The question is whether what was taken away is sufficiently useful and important that the preservation of investment is important. But I think the Hood change is unambiguously far over the line. There is no question whatsoever that he had important use cases, and there's no question some of them were taken away. Hood is not a grey area case.
    totally agreed.
    I think it's also pertinent whether the champion is actually getting ranked up for use of the ability that's removed. When buffing Yellowjacket, i doubt many people would have complained if his stun after power sting expired was removed in place of some new abilities. Nobody is ranking up yellowjacket for that ability. People are ranking up Hood for his buff control, and that is a useful ability. Like you said, people are filling a buff control champ hole in their roster and Hood is much much worse for that role.

    There should never be a situation when an ability is removed in favour for new ability (which is arguably just damage in this case)

    Imagine, taking this to it's extreme, that Kabam decided Ghost needed a rework (would never happen of course, but bear with), they decided that they would remove ghost's phasing and in place they would give her a chunky fury buff that triggered on special attacks. People ranked up ghost because of what she does, phasing and big damage along with a host of utilities. Removing the phasing dramatically changes her as a champion and the extra damage does not replace what she was ranked up for. Removing some of Hood's buff control capabilities changes him as a champion. You cannot argue that just because he got some more damage it's a justifiable change.

    And if you say these situations are different, yeah they are, ghost won't be changed and she won't have her phasing removed, but where do you draw the line of Kabam removing a champions utility in place of adding a bit more damage?
    Therein lies a fundamental problem. I'm not entirely sure they're updating Champions to become preferred Rank-Ups. They're updating them to be more useful in the current game climate than they were previously. Certain balancing measures need to be done in these cases because it's not just about adding more. The effects of the Abilities combined need to be considered. So I'm not totally against the idea of having to remove existing Abilities overall. However, I do see it as problematic when it's overly used because it becomes more of a swap-out situation than an update. If that's the case, I'd rather have less buffs a year, and more siginficant reworks. In terms of taking away utility to add something else, that can sometimes happen though. Champs are being changed. There's no guarantee they'll be used for what they were used for before.
    There in lies the problem. You cannot just change the champions core ability without taking into consideration the people who have ranked him up for they ability. If I rank up mysterio for poison immunity and kabam just updated him saying that mysterio should not have poison immunity because that makes him too op, that's a problem. These reworks were supposed to make a champion better, I am not sure it does in this case.

    Considering all the champions before this were desperately in need to changing, I am not sure why kabam picked hood and why they changed him like this.
    There's no guarantee that Champs will do the same thing they used to when you change them.
    I was waiting for u to show up and defend this
    Same but hoped that this was free of a troller but oh well.
  • Amazing_Demon05Amazing_Demon05 Posts: 2,754 ★★★★

    Actually, they do need to remove things sometimes. As long as they've been doing rebalances, people have never responded well to the idea of taking anything away. They seem to believe all you have to do is add a little of this and a little of that. There's a reason they've called rebalances and not additions. It's not always additive.

    If you wanna play word games
    Its called a tune up not tune down

    Removing a core ability of his lowers his utility and thus will be useable in even less scenarios now.
Sign In or Register to comment.