**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
We have not set an end-date for the new period, but we will update this banner when we have more information.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
We have not set an end-date for the new period, but we will update this banner when we have more information.
Comments
1. So far as I can tell, the labels of "overhaul" "moderate" "tune-up" have become mostly useless, if not actually muddying the waters for a discussion about champion balancing. When they did nerfs/buffs to She- Hulk, Cull Obsidian, Namor, Torch, Maw, Colossus no one cared which one was the "Super-Duper" buff and which one was the small tweak. We just talked about whether folks were using/excited to use the champ more.
If there were a legitimate "Buff Program" that established firm codified principles, then the convo would be different. This empty labeling is also reflected in changing up the "cadence" of how many buffs are done per month. When they originally announced 4 per month (!) I think a lot of us probably felt like, uh, that seems a little ambitious/unsustainable. And that's proven to be the case.
I could be wrong wrt the mainstream majority of folks playing the game, but I suspect the majority of the vocal community here would prefer consistent reliability, even if champion buffs came out at an erratic indeterminate pace, i.e. one buff next month, two or three in January. The marketing of a "Buff Program" that reintroduces "Four Champions a Month!" ends up undermining your credibility if you don't actually deliver. I don't think I've ever read a post asking Kabam to churn out as many buffs + new champs as possible every month. Quality over quantity. especially when you already have 200+ champs in the game.
Which leads to the next point.
2. Let's face it: the community is smarter than the design team. This isn't meant to be a sneering "the design team are idiots, I could make Cyclops awesome w my eyes closed" type of comment. But it's the truth. It's true in the sense that crowdsourcing a larger group operating in good faith will generally yield more ideas, and spot more potential flaws than a much smaller group. Ten heads are better than two, usually. But also there are @DNA3000 and @BitterSteel types amongst others who are smart, and more importantly, seriously invested in the game's success. The CCP, so far as I can tell, is mostly utilized in a marketing capacity. I've seen most of the popular bloggers etc, make astute comments about champion flaws, trends in game economy, and many of them even take that extra step of trying to figure out constructive solutions to their complaints. But rarely do I see implementation of those ideas from Kabam.
I'm a sports fan and the way Kabam interacts w the CCP and the forum community has the vibe of when your team has a terrible owner, and everyone knows it, but you grew up loving "your team" and as a fan you ride it out hoping eventually the light clicks on, or you get a better, more conscientious owner. This past year has felt like Kabam got a new terrible owner who only cares about profit and the trickle-down effects are seen in all aspects of the game. It's not just champ balancing. It's the game economy where you create an artificial lack of resources, then sell those resources at prices that feel more exploitative than fair trade. And fundamental game mechanics not working for months.
To continue the sports analogy, when I see someone like Kabam Broccoli leave, it feels like your team losing that one talented exec who was in tune w the state of the game, who understood balancing the business along w the entertainment product, but because the owner has so much ego, and is unwilling to let their employees actually influence the future direction of the franchise, they get poached by someone else who properly appreciates their worth. Then you watch that other franchise reap the rewards while you're stuck w a team willing to tank because they have a core fanbase that will never leave.
So, TL;DR: if Kabam wants to save their game they should better utilize the community, the CCP, the folks who are providing *free* value for the sole purpose of improving the franchise. Otherwise they are leaving money on the table. Maybe one of the brainiacs here can do the breakdown of how much the CCP and forum community is worth versus selling overpriced catalysts and Deadpool shards for a month. Maybe I'm just a bad capitalist, but seems to me if the community were truly embraced instead of placated all of the problems in the game that don't require a Sir-Tap-a-lot could be solved, or put on solid track to happy middle ground between business and Art of making an incredible mobile video game.
(Sorry for the length, but I heard long forum posts somehow increase the drop rate on Kitty Pryde cav crystals, and I figured it was worth a shot.)
I mean there's a long-standing thread that Kabam Porthos set up in Suggestions and Requests with 26,000 views and 1,200 comments: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/103185/champion-improvement-suggestions-edited-by-mod-for-clarity#latest
There's several hundred buff suggestions in there (and very little evidence that anyone at Kabam apart from Porthos takes any notice). A lot of them are quite well thought-out; or at the least, contain some interesting ideas. If the Kabam design team wanted any of our input, at the very least the thread above demonstrates a pool of creativity that they could tap into.
When you give an overhaul you need to decide which abilities stay and go. We used to have this problem with moderates too, that’s how we got into the Hood situation. They decided that a fate deal should go in favour of their new abilities they’ve added. Kabam did learn from that and since then, moderate updates haven’t taken away from champions anywhere near as significantly as Hood.
Today, we have the same problem in new form. Instead of a moderate update taking away good abilities, it’s an overhaul. Kabam are giving an overhaul to champions like Guilly, who could do with just a moderate. When overhauling Guilly, because she has some good abilities that people have actually ranked her up for (especially since she has insane damage with Purgatory synergy, good healing and a heal reversal), it puts a risk into the update that needn't be there. If Kabam overbalance, or remove abilities, the buff could move her sideways or even down in standings in some areas.
If overhauls were simply given to the lowest champions, with nothing to add to the contest, there wouldn't be this issue. Taking Groot, what's really going to be changed about him that anyone could be disappointed about? Same with Cyclops, Iron Fist, Karnak. These sorts of champions should be overhauled, because they bring nothing of value to the contest. Champions like Phoenix, kamala, Venom the duck are being ranked up for uses, and at the moment it feels like that's the calibre of champions we are potentially seeing as overhauls. And I'm not basing that off conjecture, that's what I'm talking about with the "tune up + moderate must be less than overhaul numbers in order to still have overhauls at the end of the schedule".
If Kabam want to set the record straight and reassure that this was a turn of phrase, and not a confirmation that there are tons of overhauls, then that is absolutely fine and I'd welcome it. But at the moment, this is worrying to me. I mean, here's my sorting of champions who need buffs into different levels
If anyone wants to reply and say "Why isn't X in this level", be my guest, but unless you think I've got 10-20 champions in moderate or tune up that should be overhauls, it doesn't really affect my point.
My point is thus, taking a look at the Moderate updates, can you see a champion there that could get an overhaul that doesn't have any abilities of value that could be lost? MODOK's SP1 reversal or autoblock, Dormammu's power control? Nebula's shut down of robots? This is what I mean. To have plenty of overhauls to get through after all of the tune ups and moderates, that means 10-20 of these champions in the moderate column will need to have been put down under overhaul, in which case, we could see an overhaul for Hawkeye where in order to balance his new abilities, his Sp1 power drain now drains half as much power, or it's been moved to his Sp2. And sure, his new abilities may be cool enough to make that feel ok, but what happens if they don't give him cool enough abilities to make that an ok trade in the playerbase's eyes? I'll tell you what happens, Guilly's buff happens.
If that happened, all we would see is in a few months when Kabam give a "buff" to a champion and they give that champion new abilities and remove some other abilities. Instead of calling it an overhaul, it's called a buff, and the issue remains. Changing the name doesn't really change how they'd approach giving someone like Hawkeye a buff if they wanted to overhaul him, they'd do it. Even if it's called just a buff.
Can Guillotine 1.0 be updated with the safe pipeline? No, because a core problem with Guillotine was soul mechanics. A common complaint and almost certainly datamined widespread issue with Guillotine is (was) that her soul mechanics were problematic. In a momentum fight where you can kill fast enough, you can stack up souls fast enough to kill even faster. But outside of that, she could easily stall out. That was guaranteed to be tackled in a Guillotine update. And the instant you look sideways at soul mechanics, much less tamper with them, you are not allowed to use the "safe" moderate pipeline.
imo, they should 1. bump her base bleed chance and keep the increased chance against buffed characters. this makes her feel like an actual mystic character and gives her some real spicy matchups like venom, cull etc. her bleed curses being able to stack does a lot to really amp her bleed stacks and I think it's the best part of her new kit.
2. they should give her pain link a reduction to non-physical damage. I love the idea of it and I think this would make it a more useful ability, especially if you're a suicide user.
3. i think they should bump the damage gained from each soul, as well as the degen from her sp3. I also think it should lower the opponents defensive power rate so that you can spam more heavies and build up more bleeds from her other specials.
I do think that the buff as it is is underwhelming, but I also think that people are ignoring how blatantly ridiculous her old healing and sp3 were especially in the context of modern end game content. I'm not a kabam apologist but I do think that there has been a pretty intense backlash about this buff when it's no worse than anything that happened during 12.0.
That list of champions identifying the problem champs is fantastic!
1. Every champion in tune up, moderate and overhaul gets an adjustment to their base abilities - do it.. add 5-10% … quick and easy.. hit the file and type those number buttons… see what the results are… low hanging fruit.. you get more dmg and you get more dmg…
2. Make a plan and stick to the plan of choosing 3-4 champions to then reassess into tune up, moderate and overhaul per 1-3 months (this is what kabam originally announced right?)
3. Do number 2… but assessing from the minor adjustment to base abilities from 1.
4. Stick to the schedule of 2.
Sheesh… easier than doing COVID safety protocols and communications I bet..
Korg, I suppose this was a subjective one I’d rather they start from the ground up for him. Korg in the MCU is the Polar opposite from Korg in MCOC. One is an annoying pain in the behind, the other is a light hearted, lovable, quotable gem. Kabam have recently talked a lot about design process and comic/movie roots and they quite clearly haven’t done that with Korg. I think he should reflect the movie and be more fun, rather than a pain on defence.
Thinking about my point of the thread, I do actually agree on X23, people rank her for her regen and bleed, and I suppose a rework could take that away if it was an overhaul. My rationale when I made this list (a couple months ago I might add, so before this Guilly overhaul situation happened) was that I would like to see her have a different Kit to wolverine and to forge her own way instead of just having regen and bleed like Wolverine. A different way to do damage, and to regain health. But I think a moderate would do now, and take her to a different place than Wolv, without having to overhaul.
Night crawler I’d say could have a moderate with some utility added, but I envisioned an overhaul to his modes as well. I suppose it could be a step in between overhaul and moderate, similar to Yellowjacket’s moderate update, but I just think with the amount of changes I would give Nightcrawler, I’d rather give him an overhaul.
Like I said, it’s a subjective list and I’m absolutely convinced if you made your own, people would pick it apart just the same. There are a few champs who could go either way.
Kam confirmed that they only got Guilly due to a premature release into the CCP beta. So as I said, I think for some buffs if they were released to the CCP in order for them to highlight issues with the buffs, and importantly with enough time to act on this feedback, it would greatly improve the buff program.
1) On the designer's interpretation of Marvel lore when designing a champ:
Yep, Korg in the MCU is a gentle giant, sure. So @BitterSteel argues he should be one too in the game, as it is it clashes with MCU's portrayal of him. There's two clear problems with this way of thinking:
(a) Groot is also a gentle giant, both in the MCU and even more so in this game. He's so incredibly gentle that indeed he's basically useless in the game. See where I'm getting at?
(b) This one's the biggie: a designer's take on a champ is nothing more than a literary interpretation of how it was portrayed in movies and comics, and as such, critical interpretation theory tells us how ANY interpretation of pretty much ANYTHING written or on film is no more than a partial, subjective and conveniently selective and conveniently consistent portrayal made by those who interpret it. So, back to Korg's portrayal on the MCU vs in the game. Sure, in the MCU he's a big huggy carebear in terms of his PERSONALITY, but he's also a seasoned gladiator that for all we know, has survived several matches of a bloodthirsty sick game to the death, all for the amusement of those who watch. If he has survived so many matches it must not be by being a just "gentle giant". In fact, he must have been a tanky royal pain in the butt to all of those he defeated ( and presumably KILLED) on the MCU's GM contest. The thing is that, although it is implied in the MCU that this is so, we don't get to see much of this side of his character... instead most of his screen time revolves around being this sort of feel good touchy feely comical relief. So, @BitterSteel bases his view of Korg on this dimension of the character and uses that to state a point. But guess what? Most likely Korg's MCOC designer chose to necessarily concentrate on that other non gentle, pain in the butt side of Korg when designing him... and arguably it was done so masterfully. That, right there, is critical literary theory in action : one's interpretation of X cannot help but be partially representative and subjectively and conveniently self-serving. One can argue though that some of the mcoc's interpretations of characters are less grounded than others in Marvel comics/MCU lore, but the fact remains that they are and always be just convinient interpretations that serve a purpose on the game. This purposes have become irrelevant as the game has changed over time ( hence why the designers's interpretation of OG CA in 2015 is completely out of touch from today's MCOC) so if/when they tune up/moderately buff or overhaul outdated champs they might just recontextualize the OG interpretations or chose a to base it in a completely new interpretation, a reinterpretation if you will. But again, they will be interpretations nonetheless... with all the baggage that this implies.
2- Why is no one talking about how buffs (regardless of them being tune ups, moderate or overhauls) affect THE CURRENT STATIC CONTENT OF THE GAME?
So, again, let's take @BitterSteel 's table of champs that need buffs as an example . So he says that the likes of Korg and Nightcrawler, for example, need an overhaul (to some it might just be a tuneup or a moderate) . I imagine that if one says that Korg or NC NEED a buff ( whichever its scope) it must be because of the very clear fact that besides ranking and sigging them up for AW defense, they have pretty much no other use in the game. Indeed, I would never normally consider to bringing Korg, NC to go questing, or AQ or AW attack or whatever.
Regardless, NO, I DO NOT THINK THAT SUCH CHAMPS SHOULD BE BUFFED JUST BECAUSE I WOULD NEVER BRING THEM ON A QUEST. Why you say? It's simple :
BECAUSE DOING SO WOULD MAKE THEM PROHIBITIVELY DIFFICULT TO FIGHT ON STATIC CONTENT WHERE THEY ALREADY FIGURE AS ROADBLOCKS.
Just remember all the Korgs and Nightcrawler you have fought on Story quests, Variants and such. Sure, maybe now that you have a stacked roster with counters for them and you've mastered how to defeat them they might seem trivial to you. But still, I dare you to say that you wont shiver and poo your pants when you see a Korg or a NC in current content and you didn't bring a counter for it on the specific nodes where their at. Now imagine lower level, struggling summoners that do not have your roster nor your anti NC/KORG experience. Now imagine if they would make them even more powerful than they are via a buff (whatever its scope). Boom! A Buffed KORG/NC in one of them many tricky nodes can be the reason for a struggling, novice ( and so novice too) summoner to just ragequit the game. People quitting the game for it being too difficult is a real thing, if you don't believe me just go and ask yourself why Kabam was forced to nerf the entire Act 6. People quitting the game due to difficulty means less revenue for Kabam. Even I, with a fairly decent roster and experience against NC/Korg, shiver to the thought of fighting a buffed one in the many unexplored paths of Act 6.
That is why nope, they should be left untouched . Some champs such as Korg, NC, Annihilus, etc. in their current state are meant to be royal pains in the butt to fight against, but not necessarily great/useful to take with you on a quest. And that is perfectly fine. Not all champs in the game should be Dooms that are useful for both defending and attacking. And because their role is to be a pain to fight against, that is precisely why they should never be buffed, the implications this would have for static content are just too risky to fathom.
Just my two cents
( Man, I hope that this " long post= high chance of getting Kitty" rumor is true...otherwise I just wasted like 1 hour of my life, lol)
If not, then it seems like( as others said )....the buffs are not being tested properly.
I for sure appreciate it, so thanks!
I think releasing the buffs, even in written form to the CCP while they’re being designed (so months before the release) would vastly improve the design process.
Imagine if 4 months ago, this buff spotlight had been released to the CCP. Straight away the issues would have been raised, and there could have been a chance to fix it.
Was it already too late, or...?
Anyway, there definitely is a 'focus group' available (whether it just be content creators, or the community as a whole) should they actually want a player opinion on upcoming changes - but it doesn't seem like it's being put to (proper) use.
Because as it stands (and I think I already said this), it doesn’t seem like they tested their own changes, because I'm not sure how "this is fine" could be an appropriate response to some of the champion changes they've done.
It was too late to change Guilly before the update went live for sure. Even if, and this is a big if, Kabam respond today and say we’re going back to the drawing board with Guilly, it won’t be live for months from now.
It takes a long time to update and test champions. It’s not something that can be done a couple weeks before the update goes live when there’s some bad feedback on the spotlight.
I would also imagine the team feels a little gun-shy after the Hood and Guilly reactions. It’s also not inconceivable they might feel their work isn’t appreciated.
But…a common thread running through many game issues like this one is failure to use the community as any meaningful type of sounding board.
I don’t think champs or updates need to get democratic okay from the community—that’s absurd and unworkable—but we already operate as a type of de facto beta testers for the game with each update. Why not utilize some portion of the thousands of players to test out significant changes or to gauge change receptiveness?
Perhaps even this is too hard, and I would appreciate someone from
the team explaining if so. For all of my critiques, I’ve always enjoyed the game and want it to succeed. Part of that is a functioning update program.
Dr. Zola
🎶 It's so haaaaaa-aaa-ard to say goodbyyyyyye to yesterday 🎶😭