**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
Not that I agree the rest of her kit is fine, but they did literally say they were happy with the state of most of her kit, but would keep an eye on the healing.
To be precise, it is entirely possible that on average, measured across every player in the game, BWCV heals less per second than Guillotine. But we know BWCV has vastly superior *potential* for healing. She can heal to full in one fight in a way that rivals 11.0 Dr. Strange. Her healing is unquestionably superior. So why is she healing less per second? The logical conclusion is that BWCV heals less per second because she doesn’t *need* to heal more. Unlike Guillotine (either version) BWCV’s heal is mode dependent: players have to “ask” for it to get it. But BWCV has a lot of other stuff going for her, including alternate damage mitigation: she has some limited power control for example. She has buff nullification. These things can lower the damage she takes, which lowers the need for heal, which then causes players to ask her to heal less.
Also, averaged across literally everyone, there are probably tons of players who don’t play BWCV efficiently. If you just go ham with her, you’ll keep switching modes, and only one third of them have healing, whether you need healing or not. There’s a skill threshold for healing more than a little.
All this is to say that just because a champ is higher or lower on this graph, doesn’t mean their healing is better or worse. How much you actually heal in a fight depends on a lot of factors that make direct comparisons very dangerous. New Guillotine’s heal should have ended up much lower than OG Guilly’s heal. The fact that it doesn’t show up that way is difficult to reconcile with the fact that life steal isn’t as influenced by player play style as other heals. But the fact that there’s so many ways to invalidate the comparison when it comes to other champions makes it more likely that the discrepancy between measured and calculated heal efficiency is due to the problematic nature of the very coarse metric being used.
The fact that Kabam’s own metric says healing was lowered but they don’t explicitly state that this is a problem is troubling, but the fact that this metric says nothing useful about other champion’s healing means we can’t really trust it to guide us to a good spot for Guillotine anyway. At least, not in the form presented. Calculation and analysis can be useful, but it has to be done very carefully. This appears to be too blunt of a tool to base design reviews upon.
So this is what really grinds my gears. Original Recipe Guillotine had these utilities:
1) Regeneration
2) Deal with opponent’s healing
3) Gain strength throughout the fight
New Guillotine does those same exact things but adds a second way to gain strength throughout the fight. No way for her to do anything that she could not do before.
As I understand it, the stated purpose of the buff program is to make champions relevant in today’s Contest. This is especially important in light of how they are seeking to change earlier story content. So that begs the question, what about her change makes her more relevant?
Also, interesting that they say they will endeavor to release a buff in the foreseeable future. Endeavor means try so they aren't even committing to doing it and the foreseeable future could be pretty much anytime until the game shuts down since they supposedly plan everything out so far in advance so most of their future should be foreseeable for them.
Regen per second comparison might be a good metric if all champs have the same optimal gameplay style and similar stats and defensive (and offensive) abilities and masteries. It also depends on how they were actually played for the sample as DNA points out. How big a regen per second actually is should be measured relative to all those factors.
For example, I see there Diablo and Angela. Both of these champions sustainability skyrocket with suicide masteries. Diablo also reduces incoming damage from all sources when awakened (up to 30%!), and Angela has sizeable armor ups.
Hulkbuster is very tanky (large armor), blade and wolverine are healing machines if you keep your power and don't throw specials. Ghost rider can heal substantially more if you use judgement of malice last.
All in all, comparing healing per second as if it is the only metric for sustainability can be highly misleading. And even with all that noise added together, new Guillotine's regen is lower.
Couple of final notes
- Please, PLEASE, move away from those graphs. For communication purposes, I would use a barplot with the axis switched: champions names in the y-axis (horizontal text is typically easier to read), metric in the x-axis (descending order also makes comparisons easier), and for the love of god, change the font size.
- Provide *context* to the data behind the plot. Else publishing a figure like this is meaningless.
- The post only focused on regen, while the lack of utility was the main concerned I've seen. So what I'm getting at is that the team targeted her to have decent damage and very low utility that is also currently covered by lots of other champions (not even niche). Is that right? because that was old Guillotine as well: her place in the game didn't even change one bit after a big community vote/event.
Also if they're doing this AMA just to talk about the regen, they might as well not bother. Guilly with Wolverine's level of regen is still not endgame material because she's got no utility.
she is less powerful than prebuff, her sp3 went from dealing +80k to 3k. lol, what a joke
This is the end of Guillotine as far as I am concerned, and absolutely the end of any interest I have in community choice buffs. Kabam’s design aim for her is seriously underwhelming & disappointing and, in my opinion, a complete waste of their time and effort.
About the plot, I just wrote a quick & dumb R script with the data I see in the devs plot
Numeric values are not the exact ones since only the plot was provided. I'm also assuming they are using the sample average regen per second. Hope I didn't mistyped a number...
It isn't good, even ignoring the SP3.
I am sure that there are many of us around that could assist with formatting data for presentation. I myself would be happy to help, I'll even sign an NDA if it means we can look at data in an easily accessible manner.