Champion Spotlight - Sentry [Updated: Added 5-Star Stats]

1262729313240

Comments

  • Hittched wrote: »
    I'd be happy if they simply increased the 30% chance to 50%

    Or maybe it scales with reality warps

  • Also if you run suicides you can’t get the Indus table buff from his sig ability rendering it useless. At least make him poison immune @Kabam Miike
  • Neroa65Neroa65 Posts: 302 ★★
    Also if you run suicides you can’t get the Indus table buff from his sig ability rendering it useless. At least make him poison immune @Kabam Miike

    Bet they didn't think of this. Or did they?? Running suicides now makes one part of his sig ability 100% useless.. As if he wasn't underwhelming​ already.. And it's funny how they recommended recoil as a mastery for him. Why would I run recoil without suicides?

    I get it though.. These devs are human. No matter how you scrutinize the whole thing, they can't possibly​ consider every facet of how he'd turn out or can they?? But in all honesty, Sentry needs work.. But not a lot of work.. Just a few increase in % and he'll be good to go. And an immunity perhaps.. I'd like to see some unique immunities like Armor Break Immunity.. That'd be cool. Really cool.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    Yeah, real interesting. His Indestructible at max sig which is 100% trigger would not trigger if suicides were used. He has low base damage and crit. Ramping up his damage with suicides would just cause him to fall under a health threshold that would carry over his charges plus the suicides would negate his Indestructible. Oh brother...

    I enjoyed the part where @Hubris_hater was complaining about reading about people complaining about Sentry.

    @Idelest I enjoy your YouTube page. You are correct in the miscommunication and misleading hype of this champs spotlight.
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    Well hopefully the people that got a free Sentry because of the crystal mistake will realize how bad he is and share their thoughts on this horrible champ. Even free he's not worth using.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    edited January 2018
    And may I remind everyone that people aren't just complaining about Sentry. They are providing critical feedback that developers need to know about. There has been many comments and testing about where to use Sentry. People are actively searching and seeking ways to use Sentry.
    1. He has no power control.
    2. He has no significant regeneration.
    3. He has no damage output except on rare chances, but otherwise a dwarfed base damage and crit.
    4. That damage burst happens once in a 3 min fight.
    5. He is not poison or bleed immune.

    A champ without damage, without power control, without longevity in a fight, without immunities - where can you use that champ? He isn't LoL viable, he isn't Uncollected quest viable, he isn't Story quest viable, he isn't AQ or AW viable.

    Disclaimer: I am speaking about AQ map 6 where there are tons of bleed and poison or starburst or degen. I am also talking about AW tier 1 where placement of champs like Medusa or Modok or Dorm or Mephisto are prominent. Sentry is not an answer to any of the nodes nor enemies on those nodes.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    Twunt wrote: »
    And may I remind everyone that people aren't just complaining about Sentry. They are providing critical feedback that developers need to know about. There has been many comments and testing about where to use Sentry. People are actively searching and seeking ways to use Sentry.
    1. He has no power control.
    2. He has no significant regeneration.
    3. He has no damage output except on rare chances, but otherwise a dwarfed base damage and crit.
    4. That damage burst happens once in a 3 min fight.
    5. He is not poison or bleed immune.

    A champ without damage, without power control, without longevity in a fight, without immunities - where can you use that champ? He isn't LoL viable, he isn't Uncollected quest viable, he isn't Story quest viable, he isn't AQ or AW viable.

    Disclaimer: I am speaking about AQ map 6 where there are tons of bleed and poison or starburst or degen. I am also talking about AW tier 1 where placement of champs like Medusa or Modok or Dorm or Mephisto are prominent. Sentry is not an answer to any of the nodes nor enemies on those nodes.

    Neither are many Champs in the game. How is that a viable argument?
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    I would normally ignore this forum hermit, but let me feed you.

    As a 5* r4 to take 400 or more hits and touted as having special damage output, you can’t use suicides on him, everything is relying on spotlighted abilities that rarely occur, he has no utility - tell me what you are debating against. And please reply directly to my points rather than talk about “Kabam intent” or arguing around semantics.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    Twunt wrote: »
    I would normally ignore this forum hermit, but let me feed you.

    As a 5* r4 to take 400 or more hits and touted as having special damage output, you can’t use suicides on him, everything is relying on spotlighted abilities that rarely occur, he has no utility - tell me what you are debating against. And please reply directly to my points rather than talk about “Kabam intent” or arguing around semantics.

    No semantics. Champs have varying strengths, uses, and Abilities. Not all Champs will be viable for End-Game Content. Nothing, other than the fact that it's a Science Champ and the love of the character, indicates that this Champ needs to be OP. All this reaction over one Champ. There will be some that are more OP than others, and that's just how the game is built. Otherwise we have a valley of Champs that are mutably uniform with varying attributes, but ultimately the same effects.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    Twunt wrote: »
    I would normally ignore this forum hermit, but let me feed you.

    As a 5* r4 to take 400 or more hits and touted as having special damage output, you can’t use suicides on him, everything is relying on spotlighted abilities that rarely occur, he has no utility - tell me what you are debating against. And please reply directly to my points rather than talk about “Kabam intent” or arguing around semantics.

    No semantics. Champs have varying strengths, uses, and Abilities. Not all Champs will be viable for End-Game Content. Nothing, other than the fact that it's a Science Champ and the love of the character, indicates that this Champ needs to be OP. All this reaction over one Champ. There will be some that are more OP than others, and that's just how the game is built. Otherwise we have a valley of Champs that are mutably uniform with varying attributes, but ultimately the same effects.

    Okay. Moving on because you said nothing of substance to contribute to the conversation.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    You're certainly entitled to that opinion. Doesn't necessarily mean it's correct. I contributed. I'm just not on the band wagon. The game has Champs that have different uses and strengths. That's just how it is. Otherwise, people wouldn't care about a Blade because there would be nothing to compare it to.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,701 Guardian
    Twunt wrote: »
    Twunt wrote: »
    I would normally ignore this forum hermit, but let me feed you.

    As a 5* r4 to take 400 or more hits and touted as having special damage output, you can’t use suicides on him, everything is relying on spotlighted abilities that rarely occur, he has no utility - tell me what you are debating against. And please reply directly to my points rather than talk about “Kabam intent” or arguing around semantics.

    No semantics. Champs have varying strengths, uses, and Abilities. Not all Champs will be viable for End-Game Content. Nothing, other than the fact that it's a Science Champ and the love of the character, indicates that this Champ needs to be OP. All this reaction over one Champ. There will be some that are more OP than others, and that's just how the game is built. Otherwise we have a valley of Champs that are mutably uniform with varying attributes, but ultimately the same effects.

    Okay. Moving on because you said nothing of substance to contribute to the conversation.

    I'm not defending GW in any way, and I am not claiming I know why he's saying anything in general, but speaking entirely on my own behalf, I don't believe it is a good idea to argue or even mention except as an aside that a champion has no use as you see it in tier 1 AQ/AW and LoL. That is a trivial argument for anyone, player or more importantly developer, to dismiss. The response is: most things don't.

    Personally, I find the earlier part of your statement incomplete but more compelling. When I think in terms of whether a champion has a use, and not whether he is the best at anything, I can usually think of something. Colossus is bleed immune. That gives him a use, even if there are other bleed immune champions that might be seen as better. Falcon has DAA, which means he is useful against things like evade champions and things that proc defensive abilities. Not the best, but you can still use his strengths there. Cyclops blue has unblockable SP1 with high combo, which gives him a use against auto-blocking champs. If the question is not "what are they the best at" but just "what can they do" then most champions have an answer to that question. I'm not sure Sentry does. There's nothing I would currently recommend him for, over and above a generic random champion. That seems to be a bigger problem than anything else.

    In matters like these, in my experience especially when communicating with (or at) game developers you are only as good as your weakest argument, not your strongest. Take that for whatever it is worth.
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    edited January 2018
    DNA that's the problem with Sentry. He doesn't do anything..lol. I completely agree with your previous comment. Colossus has bleed immune and armor. He might still have uses in developing defenses, he definitely used to. People love to bash Luke Cage but he also is bleed immune and has resistance plus indestructible. Those can be useful on occasion. Sentry has NO utility, no immunities, no unique abilities. His design was to deal large physical damage I'm assuming. Well he doesn't so we have a broken champ in my opinion.
    Luke Cage was deemed bad enough to revisit and he's much better than Sentry..lol
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    What makes it worse is he's so close to being a good champ. He's very fun to use and looks amazing. The developers did a great job in that regard. It's like staring at a brand new corvette without a motor. Looks great but going nowhere fast.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,701 Guardian
    DaMunk wrote: »
    What makes it worse is he's so close to being a good champ. He's very fun to use and looks amazing. The developers did a great job in that regard. It's like staring at a brand new corvette without a motor. Looks great but going nowhere fast.

    I have a theory regarding Sentry that feels right based on prior experience, but it is mostly speculation on my part. I think the original intent was for Void and Sentry to have some duality, with Void being the much stronger defensive champion and Sentry being the much stronger pure offensive champion. Internally, Sentry was originally much stronger. The design was mostly the same but the numbers were different and larger. But internal testing showed that Sentry was too powerful offensively as originally designed. So he was nerfed, and his offense reduced in a number of areas simultaneously. That hit him too hard, but as the intent by then was to reduce his extraordinarily high damage, the changes were accepted as doing that. No one realized he was hit much harder than needed (or didn't consider it) and he was released without altering original design specification for the character.

    That's how a champion intended to be and described to be offensively powerful ends up having unusually low offense. The devs originally aim too high, then nerf too hard, then release something other than originally intended.

    Void on the other hand didn't exceed their internal requirements and released mostly as is. And while I say the design intent might have been for Void to excel at "defense" I say that in terms of abilities and not tactics: many "defensive" champions are also excellent attackers: Wolverine, Magik, even Scarlet Witch has a lot of abilities that would be mostly defensive on paper but which make her an excellent attacker.

    It sounds weird, but designing things in a game is often like the Price is Right. The strongest things we get from the devs are the things that are closest to the line without going over. Something 99% of the maximum allowable strength we get to have. Something 101% of the maximum allowable strength gets nerfed in testing to 65% of the maximum strength we get to have. I think it is possible Sentry suffered that fate.

    If he did, that would also explain Kabam's reluctance to immediately buff him after launch. There would be process reasons for not doing so, and political reasons for not doing so.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    You're certainly entitled to that opinion. Doesn't necessarily mean it's correct. I contributed. I'm just not on the band wagon. The game has Champs that have different uses and strengths. That's just how it is. Otherwise, people wouldn't care about a Blade because there would be nothing to compare it to.

    Do you have Sentry?
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    I've suspected that too. Reasons aside they released a champ that's only useful if you don't have any other champs. Spider Gwen is a step up from a purely attack stand point. Utility champs produce more damage. There's not one category in which he's better than another random champ and in most cases he's the worst possible option.
    I can understand kabam not wanting to revisit a champ just after release. I'm sure pride, politics, time, money, and just not wanting to admit they made a big mistake come into play. Let's be honest though, I don't care about their internal politics, I just want a good game and he detracts from the game.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    edited January 2018
    Twunt wrote: »
    You're certainly entitled to that opinion. Doesn't necessarily mean it's correct. I contributed. I'm just not on the band wagon. The game has Champs that have different uses and strengths. That's just how it is. Otherwise, people wouldn't care about a Blade because there would be nothing to compare it to.

    Do you have Sentry?

    He's low output. A turnip could see it. That still doesn't license the idea that all Champs would be material for End-Game. If we are going to have an actual conversation, that requires an open-minded approach to both sides. All I see is quips because I'm not petitioning for a buff. They can't all be OP. A statement that is made repeatedly because it's lost in the one-sided argument. People need to be more investigative before they decide to go for a Champ. Otherwise you're playing Roulette. Didn't deny that he's low output. I'm saying if they released him as is, and have not amended him, then for all "intents and purposes", that is the desired outcome at the moment. Why people are personally offended by a lower-performing Champ and set their own standards for how they release their own content is beyond me. I'm sure I could understand if I saw sense in it, which I don't.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    Tsunani wrote: »
    So, now who pulled sentry on void crystal bug will receive 2 champs.. What about us who were misleaded by a spotlight that was showing an awesome champ? I think the solution for us should be the same.. Give us Void too.

    The Spotlight didn't mislead anyone. It listed his Abilities and how they function. To the best of my knowledge, and I've seen a fair amount of testing, he's operating as noted.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,701 Guardian
    I'm saying if they released him as is, and have not amended him, then for all "intents and purposes", that is the desired outcome at the moment.

    Well, that would be true up to the moment they change him, so that's not really saying anything significant. You could also say that if I give the devs feedback and they decide to make a change based on that feedback, then that was the desired outcome at that moment also. This vaguely reminds me of the religious argument that goes everything happens because of God's plan, and who are we to interfere with God's plan? And the retort is, if I interfere, that must be because it was God's plan for me to interfere with his plans all along.

    Until the devs straight up tell me what their design methodology is, I'm forced to make educated guesses, as does everyone else. Some of those guesses are decent ones, and some are ridiculous ones. But everyone must judge the developers based on their own standards. Because those are the only ones they have. The devs must be given certain latitude to develop the game as they see fit: I'm the first one to tell people that in general. But that doesn't immunize them from criticism, especially at the extremes. I don't think I can make an air tight case that Sentry is broken given the normal game design requirement to be reasonably useful, but I believe I am getting closer to being able to do so every day I think about the champion. The number of legitimate possible counters to that are dropping towards zero.

    And remember that just because it is in the game and the devs haven't changed it *yet* doesn't mean it is working as intended. They've admitted to Carnage, and the beta tests are testing very strong buffs for two champions that obviously are currently performing far below what Kabam intends for them. They just haven't changed (on the live servers) yet.

    By the way: "That still doesn't license the idea that all Champs would be material for End-Game." What dialect of English is that? I met someone from South Africa once that did not know what an "out of band" change was, because that was an American idiom. Is there somewhere in the world where "license the idea" is a local idiom I've never heard of? Also, the phrase you are probably searching for is "materially useful" not "material." Materially useful uses the word material as an adjective, and it means "significant." Increasing the price of a Corvette by eight cents is a difference, but not a material difference. Calling something "material" uses the word as a noun rather than an adjective, and means that something actually exists. All champions are material for end game, because you can place them on your team. When they die, you've lost some material. But not all champs are necessarily materially useful, because not all of them confer benefits that are sufficiently useful to be worth mentioning.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    Twunt wrote: »
    You're certainly entitled to that opinion. Doesn't necessarily mean it's correct. I contributed. I'm just not on the band wagon. The game has Champs that have different uses and strengths. That's just how it is. Otherwise, people wouldn't care about a Blade because there would be nothing to compare it to.

    Do you have Sentry?

    He's low output. A turnip could see it. That still doesn't license the idea that all Champs would be material for End-Game. If we are going to have an actual conversation, that requires an open-minded approach to both sides. All I see is quips because I'm not petitioning for a buff. They can't all be OP. A statement that is made repeatedly because it's lost in the one-sided argument. People need to be more investigative before they decide to go for a Champ. Otherwise you're playing Roulette. Didn't deny that he's low output. I'm saying if they released him as is, and have not amended him, then for all "intents and purposes", that is the desired outcome at the moment. Why people are personally offended by a lower-performing Champ and set their own standards for how they release their own content is beyond me. I'm sure I could understand if I saw sense in it, which I don't.

    What do you mean? I don’t understand.
  • Neroa65Neroa65 Posts: 302 ★★
    Following the way the game was designed and contents released. Nodes and Alliance contents and such inclusive, we've been given the idea that for a champ to have any reasonable "usefulness", said champ must have at the very least, 1 out of a few things. Those few things include -
    1. High Damage output
    2. Power control
    3. Immunity to some form of Damage Over Time (Shruggers, damage/DoT time reducers included)
    4. Ability Accuracy Reduction
    5. Some form of Substantial Regeneration, etc

    The notion of playing for fun was thrown out the window a long time ago, at least for top tier players.. Because quite honestly there is no such content. Sure some awesome fun to beat content like boss rush comes once in awhile but even then, you have to work with champs that have one of what is listed above.

    Sentry has none, zero, zilch. His spotlight gave us the idea that he'd be a high damage champion, but that's what it was in writing. Playing him was another story entirely.

    When his abilities do proc, you can maybe see the idea behind his whole mechanics. He's supposed to hit real hard and he's supposed to be so powerful that his specials, none of them can be blocked if played right. He's supposed to be "overpowering". But quite honestly, he's none of that which is why he needs some work.

    Those arguing about balancing the game can take a hike. 70% of every player with a R5/65 5* champion, took blade to R5. 25% ranked up either GR or Stark Spidey to R5. Check any Leaderboard. I've even come across an alliance where every single player is attacking in AW with "The Holy Trinity" - Blade, GR and Stark Spidey. Blade and Stark Spidey are offsetting the game even more than Scarlet Witch.
    If I recall, a lot of champs got hit real hard because people favored them more than others, which led to the 12.0 apocalypse.

    I'm not saying any of them should be nerfed.. I'm simply saying justice needs to be done to Sentry.

    Also people who pulled Sentry from the new featured Crystal are getting free voids.. I don't fully understand it but we should get free voids too and Science Awakening gems. Because he is that bad.. Not that it'd make any difference I'd rather Sentry be worked on.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    Neroa65 wrote: »
    Following the way the game was designed and contents released. Nodes and Alliance contents and such inclusive, we've been given the idea that for a champ to have any reasonable "usefulness", said champ must have at the very least, 1 out of a few things. Those few things include -
    1. High Damage output
    2. Power control
    3. Immunity to some form of Damage Over Time (Shruggers, damage/DoT time reducers included)
    4. Ability Accuracy Reduction
    5. Some form of Substantial Regeneration, etc

    The notion of playing for fun was thrown out the window a long time ago, at least for top tier players.. Because quite honestly there is no such content. Sure some awesome fun to beat content like boss rush comes once in awhile but even then, you have to work with champs that have one of what is listed above.

    Sentry has none, zero, zilch. His spotlight gave us the idea that he'd be a high damage champion, but that's what it was in writing. Playing him was another story entirely.

    When his abilities do proc, you can maybe see the idea behind his whole mechanics. He's supposed to hit real hard and he's supposed to be so powerful that his specials, none of them can be blocked if played right. He's supposed to be "overpowering". But quite honestly, he's none of that which is why he needs some work.

    Those arguing about balancing the game can take a hike. 70% of every player with a R5/65 5* champion, took blade to R5. 25% ranked up either GR or Stark Spidey to R5. Check any Leaderboard. I've even come across an alliance where every single player is attacking in AW with "The Holy Trinity" - Blade, GR and Stark Spidey. Blade and Stark Spidey are offsetting the game even more than Scarlet Witch.
    If I recall, a lot of champs got hit real hard because people favored them more than others, which led to the 12.0 apocalypse.

    I'm not saying any of them should be nerfed.. I'm simply saying justice needs to be done to Sentry.

    Also people who pulled Sentry from the new featured Crystal are getting free voids.. I don't fully understand it but we should get free voids too and Science Awakening gems. Because he is that bad.. Not that it'd make any difference I'd rather Sentry be worked on.

    That list is our own. Nothing stated that a Champ MUST have those.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    I'm saying if they released him as is, and have not amended him, then for all "intents and purposes", that is the desired outcome at the moment.

    Well, that would be true up to the moment they change him, so that's not really saying anything significant. You could also say that if I give the devs feedback and they decide to make a change based on that feedback, then that was the desired outcome at that moment also. This vaguely reminds me of the religious argument that goes everything happens because of God's plan, and who are we to interfere with God's plan? And the retort is, if I interfere, that must be because it was God's plan for me to interfere with his plans all along.

    Until the devs straight up tell me what their design methodology is, I'm forced to make educated guesses, as does everyone else. Some of those guesses are decent ones, and some are ridiculous ones. But everyone must judge the developers based on their own standards. Because those are the only ones they have. The devs must be given certain latitude to develop the game as they see fit: I'm the first one to tell people that in general. But that doesn't immunize them from criticism, especially at the extremes. I don't think I can make an air tight case that Sentry is broken given the normal game design requirement to be reasonably useful, but I believe I am getting closer to being able to do so every day I think about the champion. The number of legitimate possible counters to that are dropping towards zero.

    And remember that just because it is in the game and the devs haven't changed it *yet* doesn't mean it is working as intended. They've admitted to Carnage, and the beta tests are testing very strong buffs for two champions that obviously are currently performing far below what Kabam intends for them. They just haven't changed (on the live servers) yet.

    By the way: "That still doesn't license the idea that all Champs would be material for End-Game." What dialect of English is that? I met someone from South Africa once that did not know what an "out of band" change was, because that was an American idiom. Is there somewhere in the world where "license the idea" is a local idiom I've never heard of? Also, the phrase you are probably searching for is "materially useful" not "material." Materially useful uses the word material as an adjective, and it means "significant." Increasing the price of a Corvette by eight cents is a difference, but not a material difference. Calling something "material" uses the word as a noun rather than an adjective, and means that something actually exists. All champions are material for end game, because you can place them on your team. When they die, you've lost some material. But not all champs are necessarily materially useful, because not all of them confer benefits that are sufficiently useful to be worth mentioning.

    I could have worded it differently. I can't speculate if that was the intended goal of Sentry or not, but it's clear that it's one that they're standing by.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,066 ★★★★★
    Thanks I guess. Lol. Doesn't matter to me, my friend. Numbers on a page.
  • Neroa65Neroa65 Posts: 302 ★★
    Neroa65 wrote: »
    Following the way the game was designed and contents released. Nodes and Alliance contents and such inclusive, we've been given the idea that for a champ to have any reasonable "usefulness", said champ must have at the very least, 1 out of a few things. Those few things include -
    1. High Damage output
    2. Power control
    3. Immunity to some form of Damage Over Time (Shruggers, damage/DoT time reducers included)
    4. Ability Accuracy Reduction
    5. Some form of Substantial Regeneration, etc

    The notion of playing for fun was thrown out the window a long time ago, at least for top tier players.. Because quite honestly there is no such content. Sure some awesome fun to beat content like boss rush comes once in awhile but even then, you have to work with champs that have one of what is listed above.

    Sentry has none, zero, zilch. His spotlight gave us the idea that he'd be a high damage champion, but that's what it was in writing. Playing him was another story entirely.

    When his abilities do proc, you can maybe see the idea behind his whole mechanics. He's supposed to hit real hard and he's supposed to be so powerful that his specials, none of them can be blocked if played right. He's supposed to be "overpowering". But quite honestly, he's none of that which is why he needs some work.

    Those arguing about balancing the game can take a hike. 70% of every player with a R5/65 5* champion, took blade to R5. 25% ranked up either GR or Stark Spidey to R5. Check any Leaderboard. I've even come across an alliance where every single player is attacking in AW with "The Holy Trinity" - Blade, GR and Stark Spidey. Blade and Stark Spidey are offsetting the game even more than Scarlet Witch.
    If I recall, a lot of champs got hit real hard because people favored them more than others, which led to the 12.0 apocalypse.

    I'm not saying any of them should be nerfed.. I'm simply saying justice needs to be done to Sentry.

    Also people who pulled Sentry from the new featured Crystal are getting free voids.. I don't fully understand it but we should get free voids too and Science Awakening gems. Because he is that bad.. Not that it'd make any difference I'd rather Sentry be worked on.

    That list is our own. Nothing stated that a Champ MUST have those.

    Hence why usefulness is in quotes.. Besides the flow of the game went that way because it was designed that way. Not us. If anything, the only thing the players themselves can affect the way it flows is arena.
  • ThalionThalion Posts: 65
    edited January 2018
    Tsunani wrote: »
    So, now who pulled sentry on void crystal bug will receive 2 champs.. What about us who were misleaded by a spotlight that was showing an awesome champ? I think the solution for us should be the same.. Give us Void too.

    The Spotlight didn't mislead anyone. It listed his Abilities and how they function. To the best of my knowledge, and I've seen a fair amount of testing, he's operating as noted.

    well, it does indeed misleading, for example, a lot of people read the spolight and tought his state will not drop, his passive description lead to this line of thought, @Kabam Miike even has to clear this in another post in this thread.


    About your another comment 'a lof of champions are not usefeull in high-end content', well maybe they are as bad as sentry? In m1/m2/m3/m4 (even m5 i could arguee) you could use pretty much ANY character in this game and still clear your path, that dosent say anything about the character itself
This discussion has been closed.