Change her regen to 5% Make her bleed chance just a nice 80-100% on crits Change her "per buff" ability to "for each buff on the enemy, she gains a flat 5% crit rate chance" Make her souls go up to 20-25 Do a middle ground of her old and new SP3
There should also be some added utility as well which she doesn't really have. She USED to have additional low armor in her abilities but they removed it instead of just giving her like 500 or 1000 just to help make her a little tankier. WHy not just let her have an armor up buff from an ability she used to have? It would make her alittle more useful as Armor up buffs have use like Havok and no other mystic has that (cept UC).
Change her regen to 5% Make her bleed chance just a nice 80-100% on crits Change her "per buff" ability to "for each buff on the enemy, she gains a flat 5% crit rate chance" Make her souls go up to 20-25 Do a middle ground of her old and new SP3
There should also be some added utility as well which she doesn't really have. She USED to have additional low armor in her abilities but they removed it instead of just giving her like 500 or 1000 just to help make her a little tankier. WHy not just let her have an armor up buff from an ability she used to have? It would make her alittle more useful as Armor up buffs have use like Havok and no other mystic has that (cept UC).
it's a beautiful idea, but so unfortunate that kabam wont listen to us begging for a change to this old and nice character. sometimes i think that they only wanted to get rid of his sp3. and when this happend, of course they are satisfied with her... i dont know maybe i'm wrong
1) If you didn't have before the update, you will probably find some utility in her.
2) If you had her before the update, and used her, you are probably not happy with the update.
3) If you had her before the update, and didn't use her much, you probably won't be picking her up unless there's specific content made that she will really shine at.
I fall into the third. I stopped using Gully a while back, and while hopeful she would return to use, it just isn't going to happen unless there's a specific need to.
There was a time when she was really great, but those days passed a long time ago and the update really didn't bring her to a useful level again for me.
The Gully "buff," was just another example of how the developers and community disagree. They are happy, we who support the game aren't. Case closed. Just do what I and many other players are doing; pretend she doesn't exist and just another champion on your roster who isn't worth anything, like Thor Jane Foster.
You only speak for yourself, not “the community”.
Less than one percent of players ever post here, and of those who did only a portion of them agree with you.
I still don't get why they thought it was an awesome idea to take the community voted champ to buff.... look at the things she did the best..... completely screw them up and give a bunch of new abilities and a new playstyle... The process should have been:
1) See what people love the best about her... and... LEAVE THAT ALL THE WAY ALONE 2) See where she might have some holes in her kit that can be approved on and start there 3) Give an immunity (any immunity) and add another debuff mechanic 4) Add a couple new synergies 5) Give some new animations
Instead they Yeeted the baby with the bathwater for no good reason.
If you listen to the forum community, the Guilly redesign was a failure of truly abysmal proportions. She does deal more damage, if you ignore her SP3, but her utility didn't really improve. Although I have been clipped once or twice when I've forgotten she goes Unblockable now, on defense.
Kabam does listen to the community, but that's only a fraction of what they take notice of. They listen to numbers more than our opinions: Is she being used to clear content? If so, what*? Is she dealing more damage? Is she regenerating more? Is she being placed more on defense? Is she getting more kills?
*She's actually pretty awesome in the Mystic chapter of Cav EQ this month. Is there anywhere else?
I suspect they'll look at some of those metrics eventually. Hopefully they'll ignore the 'testing' phase just after the buff where people were trying her out. And maybe, just maybe, the statistics on how much she's used will convince them that this redesign went the wrong way. Or maybe she's getting used more than the forums recognise and they won't.
They reduced her crit damage increase per soul, lowering her damage potential (unspent souls gave her big yellow numbers, and ramped up her synergy with purgatory a ton). Her regen was added to her base kit (nice), and while it removed the RNG element, it is pretty worthless. Her additional layer of armor was removed, leaving her with terrible block proficiency and damage mitigation.
Her chance to place bleeds was decreased unless the opponent has buffs that she can’t otherwise interact with. She now HAS to spend her souls on special attacks, which makes her damage inconsistent and forces you to trade damage for utility. Her special 3 was changed, trading the soul-based percentage attack for an unimpressive degen debuff.
They added a few new-ish mechanics, like pain link (meh) and bleed curse (super meh), and changed her sig to place ruptures on bleed-immune champs. Her specter debuff can last for 20 seconds now, which is nice. The damage increase per soul seems nice on paper, but in practice it’s not great due to the soul cap and the forced loss of souls during special attacks and the over-10 soul cap.
I used a 3 -> 4 rank up gem on Guilly before the buff was announced, even though I had an unduped 6*. I really enjoyed the way she played, and she was my first natural sig 200 champ. I don’t use her anymore outside of arena, and the first round of incursions for the MS synergy. I know it’s not a huge deal, but I wish I could have that rank up gem back.
Outside of content meant for new players, I don’t really see how she fits any real roster needs. Against act 6+ opponents, her regen is hard-pressed to make up for the chip damage she’ll suffer. There aren’t many matchups I can think of where she shines, even in the variant chapter that was specifically set up for her old kit.
It’s unfortunate that the dev response was pretty close-minded. I don’t understand why they had the AMA if they had already decided that they were satisfied with the result. I understand that time and effort went into the rework, and many of the ideas that went into her updated kit were interesting on paper. In practice, they didn’t mesh well and didn’t work. I’m not sure why player feedback was invited during an AMA and then dismissed without any real consideration. The silence since that AMA has been disappointing.
Ah well. It’s February, new champion buffs right around the corner! Right? Um, new buffs incoming in March? Wait, new buff, singular? A value update only to Psychoman? Well, I guess I’ll look forward to the Winter of Pain rewards that we’ll get in April.
Is it not "complete" because a featured crystal sale or something equivalent did not appear after the rework?
In a sense, all data mining is incomplete because it is a simplified picture of what's going on, which you have to do when you monitor a game of this size, but sometimes those simplifications only blur what's going on and sometimes they don't look at what's going on at all.
It isn't easy to come up with realistic examples that don't get really complicated to discuss, so I'm going to make up a trivially stupid one to highlight what can happen when you look at numbers out of context. Imagine you have two champions, and one of them ends every fight at half health and the other ends the fight at full health half the time and zero health the other half of the time. You could say that the average amount of health both champions end with is about half health. But that average hides an important fact: champion one ends every fight successfully, champion two dies half the time.
I'm not saying Kabam does anything that obviously broken. But consider the data they did show regarding Guillotine. According to their data, Guillotine 2.0 heals about the same on average as Black Widow CV. So according to the data, those two champions have a similar level of performance when it comes to damage mitigation due to healing. But that very obviously wildly misrepresents the actual value of healing Claire has compared to Guillotine. Claire can heal from zero to full in a fight, and can heal a gigantic chunk of health in every fight reliably. She can heal almost on demand consistently. Claire is a very sustainable champion in that sense, and no one would claim Guillotine has comparable sustainability. So what's going on?
Deep down in the numbers, probably a similar issue to the sometimes-dead problem above. They are averaging healing across a large amount of fights across a large amount of situations across a large amount of progress tiers, and that average of an average of an average of an average is blurring the importance of player control. *Sometimes* we try to extract a lot of healing from Claire, and *sometimes* we try to extract more damage, and thus her healing averages out to a lower value than her potential actually is. But Guillotine's heal has zero agency: you're just always healing. So when Claire heals from 5% to 45% in one fight, then goes the next three fights healing nothing, that counts the same as Guillotine healing 10% in four fights. Even though one of those was almost certainly situationally more valuable.
When we use Claire in fights we know we're going to win easily, we don't bother healing: we focus on damage. We don't care if we start a path at 100% and end that path five fights later at 32%. We save the heals for when we need them so we don't die. Guillotine heals in situations we don't need the heal, and doesn't heal any more when we need heals. That difference in agency means the measured performance of the abilities fails to encapsulate the true value of the abilities. You can compensate for this by looking at other related statistics, and I would assume Kabam did in fact attempt to do this. But my experience and judgment says they are extremely likely to have made an error in this case.
Data is useful, and data can tell you non-intuitive things about how the champions behave in the game that you simply cannot predict by just looking at a champ on paper or even testing it. But data is looking at the game through the gaps in a fence. You can get the illusion of seeing everything when you are barely seeing anything. The data might be completely right, but fail to properly represent the fact that it is completely right about the wrong thing.
Is it not "complete" because a featured crystal sale or something equivalent did not appear after the rework?
In a sense, all data mining is incomplete because it is a simplified picture of what's going on, which you have to do when you monitor a game of this size, but sometimes those simplifications only blur what's going on and sometimes they don't look at what's going on at all.
It isn't easy to come up with realistic examples that don't get really complicated to discuss, so I'm going to make up a trivially stupid one to highlight what can happen when you look at numbers out of context. Imagine you have two champions, and one of them ends every fight at half health and the other ends the fight at full health half the time and zero health the other half of the time. You could say that the average amount of health both champions end with is about half health. But that average hides an important fact: champion one ends every fight successfully, champion two dies half the time.
I'm not saying Kabam does anything that obviously broken. But consider the data they did show regarding Guillotine. According to their data, Guillotine 2.0 heals about the same on average as Black Widow CV. So according to the data, those two champions have a similar level of performance when it comes to damage mitigation due to healing. But that very obviously wildly misrepresents the actual value of healing Claire has compared to Guillotine. Claire can heal from zero to full in a fight, and can heal a gigantic chunk of health in every fight reliably. She can heal almost on demand consistently. Claire is a very sustainable champion in that sense, and no one would claim Guillotine has comparable sustainability. So what's going on?
Deep down in the numbers, probably a similar issue to the sometimes-dead problem above. They are averaging healing across a large amount of fights across a large amount of situations across a large amount of progress tiers, and that average of an average of an average of an average is blurring the importance of player control. *Sometimes* we try to extract a lot of healing from Claire, and *sometimes* we try to extract more damage, and thus her healing averages out to a lower value than her potential actually is. But Guillotine's heal has zero agency: you're just always healing. So when Claire heals from 5% to 45% in one fight, then goes the next three fights healing nothing, that counts the same as Guillotine healing 10% in four fights. Even though one of those was almost certainly situationally more valuable.
When we use Claire in fights we know we're going to win easily, we don't bother healing: we focus on damage. We don't care if we start a path at 100% and end that path five fights later at 32%. We save the heals for when we need them so we don't die. Guillotine heals in situations we don't need the heal, and doesn't heal any more when we need heals. That difference in agency means the measured performance of the abilities fails to encapsulate the true value of the abilities. You can compensate for this by looking at other related statistics, and I would assume Kabam did in fact attempt to do this. But my experience and judgment says they are extremely likely to have made an error in this case.
Data is useful, and data can tell you non-intuitive things about how the champions behave in the game that you simply cannot predict by just looking at a champ on paper or even testing it. But data is looking at the game through the gaps in a fence. You can get the illusion of seeing everything when you are barely seeing anything. The data might be completely right, but fail to properly represent the fact that it is completely right about the wrong thing.
that was a very good explanation. altho i know they see and try to reach a result with data, they need to reach for people opinions and usages aswell. tbh if she was better in anything, i could say we expected so much from this buff. but she isnt... and we can even call this "hood like situation". they reverted him back because of a missing utility. but they did nothing when there were so much missing from guilly. i still have hope that they buff her again/revert her back. btw do you like this buff at all?
Is it not "complete" because a featured crystal sale or something equivalent did not appear after the rework?
In a sense, all data mining is incomplete because it is a simplified picture of what's going on, which you have to do when you monitor a game of this size, but sometimes those simplifications only blur what's going on and sometimes they don't look at what's going on at all.
It isn't easy to come up with realistic examples that don't get really complicated to discuss, so I'm going to make up a trivially stupid one to highlight what can happen when you look at numbers out of context. Imagine you have two champions, and one of them ends every fight at half health and the other ends the fight at full health half the time and zero health the other half of the time. You could say that the average amount of health both champions end with is about half health. But that average hides an important fact: champion one ends every fight successfully, champion two dies half the time.
I'm not saying Kabam does anything that obviously broken. But consider the data they did show regarding Guillotine. According to their data, Guillotine 2.0 heals about the same on average as Black Widow CV. So according to the data, those two champions have a similar level of performance when it comes to damage mitigation due to healing. But that very obviously wildly misrepresents the actual value of healing Claire has compared to Guillotine. Claire can heal from zero to full in a fight, and can heal a gigantic chunk of health in every fight reliably. She can heal almost on demand consistently. Claire is a very sustainable champion in that sense, and no one would claim Guillotine has comparable sustainability. So what's going on?
Deep down in the numbers, probably a similar issue to the sometimes-dead problem above. They are averaging healing across a large amount of fights across a large amount of situations across a large amount of progress tiers, and that average of an average of an average of an average is blurring the importance of player control. *Sometimes* we try to extract a lot of healing from Claire, and *sometimes* we try to extract more damage, and thus her healing averages out to a lower value than her potential actually is. But Guillotine's heal has zero agency: you're just always healing. So when Claire heals from 5% to 45% in one fight, then goes the next three fights healing nothing, that counts the same as Guillotine healing 10% in four fights. Even though one of those was almost certainly situationally more valuable.
When we use Claire in fights we know we're going to win easily, we don't bother healing: we focus on damage. We don't care if we start a path at 100% and end that path five fights later at 32%. We save the heals for when we need them so we don't die. Guillotine heals in situations we don't need the heal, and doesn't heal any more when we need heals. That difference in agency means the measured performance of the abilities fails to encapsulate the true value of the abilities. You can compensate for this by looking at other related statistics, and I would assume Kabam did in fact attempt to do this. But my experience and judgment says they are extremely likely to have made an error in this case.
Data is useful, and data can tell you non-intuitive things about how the champions behave in the game that you simply cannot predict by just looking at a champ on paper or even testing it. But data is looking at the game through the gaps in a fence. You can get the illusion of seeing everything when you are barely seeing anything. The data might be completely right, but fail to properly represent the fact that it is completely right about the wrong thing.
I think that's an example of what led to the confusion with Namor.
I don't think it was a good update. It did improve the champ's worse case performance to be more moderate, which is something the devs have stated is one of their goals for champion updates (so they aren't complete trash if someone pulls them, especially early). But in my opinion it didn't improve the overall utility of the champ and arguably reduced it. And it does two contradictory things. It improves early game performance at the expense of removing late game utility, which in and of itself is not fatal, but it does so while simultaneously making Guillotine's healing less useful to beginning players and more of a weak sustainability tool for experts.
If you're going to make a champ for newbees, give it more conventional damage and more sustainable healing. If you're going to make a champ for veterans and high progress players, give it more late game situational utility. Instead the devs broke the healing for new players and added no real late game situational utility to replace it. There are things to like in Guillotine 2.0, but those things don't form a cohesive whole in my opinion.
I don't think it was a good update. It did improve the champ's worse case performance to be more moderate, which is something the devs have stated is one of their goals for champion updates (so they aren't complete trash if someone pulls them, especially early). But in my opinion it didn't improve the overall utility of the champ and arguably reduced it. And it does two contradictory things. It improves early game performance at the expense of removing late game utility, which in and of itself is not fatal, but it does so while simultaneously making Guillotine's healing less useful to beginning players and more of a weak sustainability tool for experts.
If you're going to make a champ for newbees, give it more conventional damage and more sustainable healing. If you're going to make a champ for veterans and high progress players, give it more late game situational utility. Instead the devs broke the healing for new players and added no real late game situational utility to replace it. There are things to like in Guillotine 2.0, but those things don't form a cohesive whole in my opinion.
yeah and that's very disappointing. kabam can make her great. she just needed a bit not an overhaul. this left a sour taste of buffing program... hope kabam see and respond to this thread
I don't think it was a good update. It did improve the champ's worse case performance to be more moderate, which is something the devs have stated is one of their goals for champion updates (so they aren't complete trash if someone pulls them, especially early). But in my opinion it didn't improve the overall utility of the champ and arguably reduced it. And it does two contradictory things. It improves early game performance at the expense of removing late game utility, which in and of itself is not fatal, but it does so while simultaneously making Guillotine's healing less useful to beginning players and more of a weak sustainability tool for experts.
If you're going to make a champ for newbees, give it more conventional damage and more sustainable healing. If you're going to make a champ for veterans and high progress players, give it more late game situational utility. Instead the devs broke the healing for new players and added no real late game situational utility to replace it. There are things to like in Guillotine 2.0, but those things don't form a cohesive whole in my opinion.
yeah and that's very disappointing. kabam can make her great. she just needed a bit not an overhaul. this left a sour taste of buffing program... hope kabam see and respond to this thread
Pretty sure Kabam basically shut the door, put a lock on it, and threw away the key, on revisiting this any time soon in the AMA thread about it...
So best I can guess this thread is not going to be responded to, or at best we may get a dismissive - we are taking your feedback to the game team type response and thread closed.
I don't think it was a good update. It did improve the champ's worse case performance to be more moderate, which is something the devs have stated is one of their goals for champion updates (so they aren't complete trash if someone pulls them, especially early). But in my opinion it didn't improve the overall utility of the champ and arguably reduced it. And it does two contradictory things. It improves early game performance at the expense of removing late game utility, which in and of itself is not fatal, but it does so while simultaneously making Guillotine's healing less useful to beginning players and more of a weak sustainability tool for experts.
If you're going to make a champ for newbees, give it more conventional damage and more sustainable healing. If you're going to make a champ for veterans and high progress players, give it more late game situational utility. Instead the devs broke the healing for new players and added no real late game situational utility to replace it. There are things to like in Guillotine 2.0, but those things don't form a cohesive whole in my opinion.
yeah and that's very disappointing. kabam can make her great. she just needed a bit not an overhaul. this left a sour taste of buffing program... hope kabam see and respond to this thread
Pretty sure Kabam basically shut the door, put a lock on it, and threw away the key, on revisiting this any time soon in the AMA thread about it...
So best I can guess this thread is not going to be responded to, or at best we may get a dismissive - we are taking your feedback to the game team type response and thread closed.
yeah. what a shame. i'm sure she will get another buff, but only a value one. she'll never get her old stuff back. but hope they change her somehow. i dont want to pull her at all.
thanks everyone for commenting on this thread. especially @DNA3000. sure this thread will be dead soon so wish you all the best. hope we dont get such messy buff again and ever. i'd be happy if they make any change to her, but i'm sure that wouldnt happen for a long time.
Comments
Change her regen to 5%
Make her bleed chance just a nice 80-100% on crits
Change her "per buff" ability to "for each buff on the enemy, she gains a flat 5% crit rate chance"
Make her souls go up to 20-25
Do a middle ground of her old and new SP3
There should also be some added utility as well which she doesn't really have. She USED to have additional low armor in her abilities but they removed it instead of just giving her like 500 or 1000 just to help make her a little tankier. WHy not just let her have an armor up buff from an ability she used to have? It would make her alittle more useful as Armor up buffs have use like Havok and no other mystic has that (cept UC).
1) If you didn't have before the update, you will probably find some utility in her.
2) If you had her before the update, and used her, you are probably not happy with the update.
3) If you had her before the update, and didn't use her much, you probably won't be picking her up unless there's specific content made that she will really shine at.
I fall into the third. I stopped using Gully a while back, and while hopeful she would return to use, it just isn't going to happen unless there's a specific need to.
There was a time when she was really great, but those days passed a long time ago and the update really didn't bring her to a useful level again for me.
Less than one percent of players ever post here, and of those who did only a portion of them agree with you.
The process should have been:
1) See what people love the best about her... and... LEAVE THAT ALL THE WAY ALONE
2) See where she might have some holes in her kit that can be approved on and start there
3) Give an immunity (any immunity) and add another debuff mechanic
4) Add a couple new synergies
5) Give some new animations
Instead they Yeeted the baby with the bathwater for no good reason.
Kabam does listen to the community, but that's only a fraction of what they take notice of. They listen to numbers more than our opinions:
Is she being used to clear content? If so, what*?
Is she dealing more damage?
Is she regenerating more?
Is she being placed more on defense? Is she getting more kills?
*She's actually pretty awesome in the Mystic chapter of Cav EQ this month. Is there anywhere else?
I suspect they'll look at some of those metrics eventually. Hopefully they'll ignore the 'testing' phase just after the buff where people were trying her out. And maybe, just maybe, the statistics on how much she's used will convince them that this redesign went the wrong way. Or maybe she's getting used more than the forums recognise and they won't.
Her chance to place bleeds was decreased unless the opponent has buffs that she can’t otherwise interact with. She now HAS to spend her souls on special attacks, which makes her damage inconsistent and forces you to trade damage for utility. Her special 3 was changed, trading the soul-based percentage attack for an unimpressive degen debuff.
They added a few new-ish mechanics, like pain link (meh) and bleed curse (super meh), and changed her sig to place ruptures on bleed-immune champs. Her specter debuff can last for 20 seconds now, which is nice. The damage increase per soul seems nice on paper, but in practice it’s not great due to the soul cap and the forced loss of souls during special attacks and the over-10 soul cap.
I used a 3 -> 4 rank up gem on Guilly before the buff was announced, even though I had an unduped 6*. I really enjoyed the way she played, and she was my first natural sig 200 champ. I don’t use her anymore outside of arena, and the first round of incursions for the MS synergy. I know it’s not a huge deal, but I wish I could have that rank up gem back.
Outside of content meant for new players, I don’t really see how she fits any real roster needs. Against act 6+ opponents, her regen is hard-pressed to make up for the chip damage she’ll suffer. There aren’t many matchups I can think of where she shines, even in the variant chapter that was specifically set up for her old kit.
It’s unfortunate that the dev response was pretty close-minded. I don’t understand why they had the AMA if they had already decided that they were satisfied with the result. I understand that time and effort went into the rework, and many of the ideas that went into her updated kit were interesting on paper. In practice, they didn’t mesh well and didn’t work. I’m not sure why player feedback was invited during an AMA and then dismissed without any real consideration. The silence since that AMA has been disappointing.
Ah well. It’s February, new champion buffs right around the corner! Right? Um, new buffs incoming in March? Wait, new buff, singular? A value update only to Psychoman? Well, I guess I’ll look forward to the Winter of Pain rewards that we’ll get in April.
It isn't easy to come up with realistic examples that don't get really complicated to discuss, so I'm going to make up a trivially stupid one to highlight what can happen when you look at numbers out of context. Imagine you have two champions, and one of them ends every fight at half health and the other ends the fight at full health half the time and zero health the other half of the time. You could say that the average amount of health both champions end with is about half health. But that average hides an important fact: champion one ends every fight successfully, champion two dies half the time.
I'm not saying Kabam does anything that obviously broken. But consider the data they did show regarding Guillotine. According to their data, Guillotine 2.0 heals about the same on average as Black Widow CV. So according to the data, those two champions have a similar level of performance when it comes to damage mitigation due to healing. But that very obviously wildly misrepresents the actual value of healing Claire has compared to Guillotine. Claire can heal from zero to full in a fight, and can heal a gigantic chunk of health in every fight reliably. She can heal almost on demand consistently. Claire is a very sustainable champion in that sense, and no one would claim Guillotine has comparable sustainability. So what's going on?
Deep down in the numbers, probably a similar issue to the sometimes-dead problem above. They are averaging healing across a large amount of fights across a large amount of situations across a large amount of progress tiers, and that average of an average of an average of an average is blurring the importance of player control. *Sometimes* we try to extract a lot of healing from Claire, and *sometimes* we try to extract more damage, and thus her healing averages out to a lower value than her potential actually is. But Guillotine's heal has zero agency: you're just always healing. So when Claire heals from 5% to 45% in one fight, then goes the next three fights healing nothing, that counts the same as Guillotine healing 10% in four fights. Even though one of those was almost certainly situationally more valuable.
When we use Claire in fights we know we're going to win easily, we don't bother healing: we focus on damage. We don't care if we start a path at 100% and end that path five fights later at 32%. We save the heals for when we need them so we don't die. Guillotine heals in situations we don't need the heal, and doesn't heal any more when we need heals. That difference in agency means the measured performance of the abilities fails to encapsulate the true value of the abilities. You can compensate for this by looking at other related statistics, and I would assume Kabam did in fact attempt to do this. But my experience and judgment says they are extremely likely to have made an error in this case.
Data is useful, and data can tell you non-intuitive things about how the champions behave in the game that you simply cannot predict by just looking at a champ on paper or even testing it. But data is looking at the game through the gaps in a fence. You can get the illusion of seeing everything when you are barely seeing anything. The data might be completely right, but fail to properly represent the fact that it is completely right about the wrong thing.
If you're going to make a champ for newbees, give it more conventional damage and more sustainable healing. If you're going to make a champ for veterans and high progress players, give it more late game situational utility. Instead the devs broke the healing for new players and added no real late game situational utility to replace it. There are things to like in Guillotine 2.0, but those things don't form a cohesive whole in my opinion.
So best I can guess this thread is not going to be responded to, or at best we may get a dismissive - we are taking your feedback to the game team type response and thread closed.