"We're going to continue to keep a close eye on all Mystic Champions" after MD changes

1235»

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 29,302 ★★★★★
    I'm saying you're trying to feed the wrong end. Lol. Bad euphemism.
    In any case, the bottom line is I don't agree that Tickets are owed, and I don't believe it changes anything about the Champs themselves. The latter is less of a belief, and more of a fact. No Champ depends on MD by intended design. There are no "Must have MD to function properly.". They changed the Mastery, and compensated. End of story in my books.
  • Hulk_77Hulk_77 Posts: 782 ★★★
    ManChild wrote: »
    Don’t you guys want more than one season and 3 weeks of tanking alliances for this “data” you are demanding comes out? Wouldn’t acccuracy of the data be just as important to us and our joint arguments against kabam as it would to them? I know in our lives it’s been “months” but in this game it’s been no time at all. Just a thought....

    Random sampling doesn't require more data than they already have gathered in 2 months.
  • MenkentMenkent Posts: 874 ★★★
    Page 5 now. Will this be another legit question that gets ignored until it's eventually closed when the thread has devolved hopelessly into off-topic arguments with (or about) the forum troll?
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    ManChild wrote: »
    Don’t you guys want more than one season and 3 weeks of tanking alliances for this “data” you are demanding comes out? Wouldn’t acccuracy of the data be just as important to us and our joint arguments against kabam as it would to them? I know in our lives it’s been “months” but in this game it’s been no time at all. Just a thought....

    Two seasons, beta testing was after season two and the changes went live prior to season four
  • NamelezNamelez Posts: 992 ★★★
    Why isn't there a Pure Skill thread rn ? Tons of people invested in it but it doesn't work like it should. MD got changed bc it didn't work like it should've. There's no need for RDTs... I 100% agree with @DarthPhal and @GroundedWisdom. Furthermore parry is an essential mastery. If not it wouldn't cost Stony Cores same for Dex etc. MD was for the ONE CLASS not ALL champions.. There isn't any AA nerf posts anymore. It was "Working as intended" just like MD but people got over it. MD changes doesn't change AW that much. In every tier AW from 2 to 22 Ive seen some kind of Mystic defender.
  • Hulk_77 wrote: »
    ManChild wrote: »
    Don’t you guys want more than one season and 3 weeks of tanking alliances for this “data” you are demanding comes out? Wouldn’t acccuracy of the data be just as important to us and our joint arguments against kabam as it would to them? I know in our lives it’s been “months” but in this game it’s been no time at all. Just a thought....

    Random sampling doesn't require more data than they already have gathered in 2 months.

    There's no reason for Kabam to random sample anything when they are literally in possession of all the data that exists in this context. But as to "demanding" that data, good luck with that. Detailed performance data is one of those things so hard to get the specifics of in general that I know developers that were reprimanded for obtaining it without permission, even when working on game components that related to that data.

    You might get someone to one day comment that they saw some sort of problem they want to remedy, or saw no serious problem, but I doubt you're going to get someone to comment on precisely what they saw in which parts of the game. Considering that "Cyclops is effective" is still a meme way past the point where most people currently on the forums are even aware of its source, I'm pretty sure no one is going to be allowed to make statements like that about datamined performance.

    You won't find anyone that has argued for more information disclosure from Kabam than me, and I would be hesitant to allow anyone at Kabam to post raw performance data on the forums if I was in charge, because unless it is exactly what the forums want to hear it will just cause problems. I would rather be bashed for silence then get in to an argument with someone over what the data says, when I have all of it and they have none of it.
  • MenkentMenkent Posts: 874 ★★★
    So, no response yet?
  • Hulk_77Hulk_77 Posts: 782 ★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    Hulk_77 wrote: »
    ManChild wrote: »
    Don’t you guys want more than one season and 3 weeks of tanking alliances for this “data” you are demanding comes out? Wouldn’t acccuracy of the data be just as important to us and our joint arguments against kabam as it would to them? I know in our lives it’s been “months” but in this game it’s been no time at all. Just a thought....

    Random sampling doesn't require more data than they already have gathered in 2 months.

    There's no reason for Kabam to random sample anything when they are literally in possession of all the data that exists in this context. But as to "demanding" that data, good luck with that. Detailed performance data is one of those things so hard to get the specifics of in general that I know developers that were reprimanded for obtaining it without permission, even when working on game components that related to that data.

    You might get someone to one day comment that they saw some sort of problem they want to remedy, or saw no serious problem, but I doubt you're going to get someone to comment on precisely what they saw in which parts of the game. Considering that "Cyclops is effective" is still a meme way past the point where most people currently on the forums are even aware of its source, I'm pretty sure no one is going to be allowed to make statements like that about datamined performance.

    You won't find anyone that has argued for more information disclosure from Kabam than me, and I would be hesitant to allow anyone at Kabam to post raw performance data on the forums if I was in charge, because unless it is exactly what the forums want to hear it will just cause problems. I would rather be bashed for silence then get in to an argument with someone over what the data says, when I have all of it and they have none of it.

    Maybe someone else's words have been confused with mine, but "demanding" the data is not something I'm asking for. I said I'd like to know the results of their analysis, maybe what they looked at in some detail, but not the raw data or anything approaching that. Or, if they're not done, where the progress is.

    They said they'd be monitoring, tracking, and measuring the impact. So, if they're good to their word, I don't see why we can't have an update on the status of that.
  • RagamugginGunnerRagamugginGunner Posts: 2,210 ★★★★★
    Menkent wrote: »
    Page 5 now. Will this be another legit question that gets ignored until it's eventually closed when the thread has devolved hopelessly into off-topic arguments with (or about) the forum troll?

    Yes.
  • Hulk_77Hulk_77 Posts: 782 ★★★
    If the analysis of the data is not yet complete after 2 months, can we at least know about how long it is anticipated to take?
  • Hulk_77Hulk_77 Posts: 782 ★★★
    Any update.

    I don't even use my 5r4 Juggernaut on defense anymore, this change completely torpedoed him as a defender.
Sign In or Register to comment.