So no more nerfs?

Does that mean champs like nico, dark phoenix and Karolina are safe? Does it end with spider woman or are they doing a few more and closing it? Thanks just was confused seeing different videos saying different things

Comments

BringPopcorn

Nope, unless they tell you straight up they won't change them. It means they were "too busy reviewing them" and if they want to change them they can do it in Nov, Dec

Tiger360

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2893984#Comment_2893984

oh damn I thought they are scrapping the programme now that’s a shame lol hopefully some of my favourites don’t get touched, it’s mainly the busted defenders idm getting a rebalance

Ercarret

The program ends after the next batch in January, with Spider-Woman being the last addition to it.

Then we'll see what happens going forward. Post-Spider-Woman champions won't go through the rebalancing program, meaning they most likely won't get touched one way or another unless something really goes awry and Kabam has to go in and do some emergency changes for whatever reason. Probably akin to how they changed the interaction between Solvarch and Dazzler so that Dazzler couldn't just KO him with one Sp1 no matter the health pool.

BringPopcorn

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894051#Comment_2894051

Nope, they can do whatever they want whenever they want now.

Kabam (Osaurus) Rex

@BringPopcorn I believe you're still misinterpreting what I'm saying. The idea of "they can do whatever they want whenever they want" has always been true since day one - this is not something new and has always been the case.

What we're explicitly stating is that we'll be touching new Champions LESS than we have been, returning to an era before Champions faced monthly balancing.

Ercarret

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894062#Comment_2894062

What I said: "…they most likely won't get touched one way or another unless something really goes awry and Kabam has to go in and do some emergency changes for whatever reason."

What Mike said: "…in case of emergency, we do reserve the right to intervene for game health just as we always did…"

Soslayan9

I’m taking the choice to see a silver lining here - hopefully scrapping this program and monthly or batch timeline framework brings some thought on how to better evaluate and prioritize which champs need rework.

Should not be so much about “game economy” but more about game viability and play quality. We all get there needs to be monetization / incentives to turn players into cash providing consumers. The potential to turn a marginal number of folks to make that happen into a bigger number comes through the confidence that the playability is not just satisfying for the few but also reliable and enjoyable for almost all.

I love this game to bits - but right now I can’t recommend it when just a few years ago you wouldn’t be able to keep me from being a walking-commuting-work pause playing billboard for MCOC.

Dr. Crab

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894083#Comment_2894083

I just said something very similar to this in the thread were Mike mentioned this. He’s being very nice over there so I don’t want to sound ungrateful or rude for the sake of it but that’s basically it, like what determines when something is unhealthy? Look at SW, her kit is blunt, it was new content that cause her emergency. Like where is this line drawn and why can’t the content/node change instead of the champion.

Kabam Crashed

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894062#Comment_2894062

I'm going to back Mike up here and say this as clearly as possible. Throughout the entire history of MCoC, the game team has had the right to change any champion at any time. Before the rebalance program, we exercised this right very rarely. With the introduction of the rebalance program, we hoped we would be able to make more frequent changes to champions to help better craft the meta. Spider Woman made us realize that wasn't the case, meaning there was no reason to continue the program as it was not serving its purpose.

So now things are going back to exactly what they were before the program was initiated. If you weren't worried about us nerfing a champion before the program was introduced, you should not be worried about it moving forward. We will continue to dedicate resources to buffing champions through reworks and tune-ups, as we always have.

We are never going to promise that a champion will never be changed. Even passing the rebalance program without changes didn't guarantee a champion would never be changed in the future. But I can say that none of the champions released since Spider Woman have any changes planned. I'm personally ranking them up assuming they aren't going to be changed. That doesn't mean it's impossible they will be changed, as it has never been impossible, but it's highly unlikely. Our philosophy for nerfing champions is going back to what it was before the rebalance program, which is what Summoners wanted.

Ercarret

I don't think it was any specific piece of content that was why she got changed, even if she got very difficult to handle with specific nodes. From how I understand it, that Ensnare basically turned her into the new Domino in terms of just failing all of your abilities left and right. However, the difference between Domino and Spider-Woman is that the main thing you have to worry about with Domino is her ability to fail your abilities. If you can deal with that, you're more or less good against her. Spider-Woman, meanwhile, has a bunch of other primary threats that you are meant to bring counters for, but her Ensnare can fail all of those counters from working properly. This is what makes her so annoying to fight.

I personally hate that and I will defend the defensive side of the nerf to my grave. The problem was, in my mind, just how it affected the offensive side of her. I think that Kabam could probably do a much better job at talking with the community when these (negative) changes come to champs once in a blue moon. If they wrote a longer post where they laid out their reasons for changing her and why they think it's absolutely necessary, I think it would go over a lot better with the community (even if it's not entirely friction-less) than just writing a short one-paragraph post about it that basically just says, "nerf incoming!"

BringPopcorn

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894075#Comment_2894075

If the idea of always doing what you want whenever you want was always true, where is Nico, Karolina and Dark Phoenix review? They were due over a week ago; how is cancelling the balance program stop something you guys were supposed to have done already?...

BringPopcorn

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894091#Comment_2894091

I am sorry but I believe the program was created to create transparency for players regarding new champs?.. So we are going back to the not so transparent days? Yay....

Co workers backing up each other jeez who would have thought....

Dr. Crab

@Kabam Crashed

(Kidding, thank you for the response)

Soslayan9

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894097#Comment_2894097

There’s an occasion there to better communicate or update the process of reworks or tune ups. In a way isn’t that what Rex was hinting at ?

I’d rather they take some time to hash it out seeing as everything just spontaneously combusts as soon as it’s posted.

ThatGuyYouSaw235

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894091#Comment_2894091

Why this was realised now with Spider Woman and not before with Serpent despite his review being rather damning is very curious.

GroundedWisdom

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894104#Comment_2894104

Perhaps it has something to do with the uncertainty the program creates.

GroundedWisdom

Although it's likely more about how it doesn't serve their objectives.

BringPopcorn

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/2894100#Comment_2894100

So they scrap out something they have been using for years before comming out with a better alternative?....

I guess its work ethics, most companies I know think of the alternative first, explain why the alternative is better and it will replace the old system.

I personally don't know what is worse, that the system they currently used for years didn't work out to their expectations or that they replaced a system that worked for them from the beginning….