Ghost Rider regen duration changed

2

Comments

  • KarnageKarnage Member Posts: 152 ★★
    Don't let this thread disappear, I want some answers man!!
  • SarcasticTaurusSarcasticTaurus Member Posts: 446 ★★★
    WOW!! Typical Kabam.

    Lets see what the reasoning is... the ol' faithful "This is a visual bug"
  • ShrimkinsShrimkins Member Posts: 1,479 ★★★★
    If it really has changed duration then it should be easy to prove. Someone post a video of before and after, and let's see.
  • Zuko_ILCZuko_ILC Member Posts: 1,513 ★★★★★
    This is quite alarming to be honest. I'm not sure why Kabam changed his description and didn't fix him since he wasn't working as his description stated. Very disappointed in these changes.
  • PlanetSaturnPlanetSaturn Member Posts: 56
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Hulk_77 wrote: »
    Sorry, had an error above, thought it was from 3 to 4 seconds on damnation, but it is 3.5 to 4 seconds.

    So, it isn't 33% longer to reset the cycle, it is 14.3% longer to reset it. Which is still going to be painful on long fights.

    Nothing has changed with GR. They changed the descriptions of his abilities to match what was happening in game already.

    My guess is that the regen was just an oversight and should have been included.

    A lot of people have their GR ranked up because they read his abilities, and his stats
  • ShrimkinsShrimkins Member Posts: 1,479 ★★★★
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Hulk_77 wrote: »
    Sorry, had an error above, thought it was from 3 to 4 seconds on damnation, but it is 3.5 to 4 seconds.

    So, it isn't 33% longer to reset the cycle, it is 14.3% longer to reset it. Which is still going to be painful on long fights.

    Nothing has changed with GR. They changed the descriptions of his abilities to match what was happening in game already.

    My guess is that the regen was just an oversight and should have been included.

    A lot of people have their GR ranked up because they read his abilities, and his stats

    no one in mcoc history has taken their GR to r4 or r5 because they thought the fate seal lasted 5.3 sec instead of actually being 5 sec.
  • MattManMattMan Member Posts: 435 ★★★★
    edited February 2019
    Silent nerf.
  • PlanetSaturnPlanetSaturn Member Posts: 56
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Hulk_77 wrote: »
    Sorry, had an error above, thought it was from 3 to 4 seconds on damnation, but it is 3.5 to 4 seconds.

    So, it isn't 33% longer to reset the cycle, it is 14.3% longer to reset it. Which is still going to be painful on long fights.

    Nothing has changed with GR. They changed the descriptions of his abilities to match what was happening in game already.

    My guess is that the regen was just an oversight and should have been included.

    A lot of people have their GR ranked up because they read his abilities, and his stats

    no one in mcoc history has taken their GR to r4 or r5 because they thought the fate seal lasted 5.3 sec instead of actually being 5 sec.

    yeah, but what about the regeneration?
  • This content has been removed.
  • KarnageKarnage Member Posts: 152 ★★
    edited February 2019
    no one in mcoc history has taken their GR to r4 or r5 because they thought the fate seal lasted 5.3 sec instead of actually being 5 sec. [/quote]

    So that makes it okay to silently nerf him?
  • Solrac_2Solrac_2 Member Posts: 497 ★★
    No one in mcoc history likes silent nerfs :)
  • KarnageKarnage Member Posts: 152 ★★
    Hey there, thanks for bringing this to us. We're asking the rest of the team about this and will get back to everyone here once we have more information.

    Thank you, looking forward to an explanation ☺️
  • ShrimkinsShrimkins Member Posts: 1,479 ★★★★
    edited February 2019
    Karnage wrote: »

    So that makes it okay to silently nerf him?

    He wasn't silently nerfed. Read the patch notes. Not a single person has provided any evidence that the regen time is actually different now than it was pre-patch.
  • MattManMattMan Member Posts: 435 ★★★★
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Hulk_77 wrote: »
    Sorry, had an error above, thought it was from 3 to 4 seconds on damnation, but it is 3.5 to 4 seconds.

    So, it isn't 33% longer to reset the cycle, it is 14.3% longer to reset it. Which is still going to be painful on long fights.

    Nothing has changed with GR. They changed the descriptions of his abilities to match what was happening in game already.

    My guess is that the regen was just an oversight and should have been included.

    A lot of people have their GR ranked up because they read his abilities, and his stats

    no one in mcoc history has taken their GR to r4 or r5 because they thought the fate seal lasted 5.3 sec instead of actually being 5 sec.

    Let’s say someone did. Is Kabam wrong now?

  • Cryptic_CobraCryptic_Cobra Member Posts: 532 ★★★
    edited February 2019
    Shrimkins wrote: »
    Karnage wrote: »

    So that makes it okay to silently nerf him?

    He wasn't silently nerfed. Read the patch notes. Not a single person has provided any evidence that the regen time is actually different now than it was pre-patch.
    Besides the evidence that has been provided via screenshots >_<
  • chunkybchunkyb Member, Content Creators Posts: 1,453 Content Creator
    Descriptions accurately reflecting what really happens in the game is a huge deal. Champion descriptions are the first usable info we have in deciding whether we want to spend/grind/save/hope for a particular champ.

    I'm glad kabam has recently been working on description corrections... But it is still very disheartening to find out information has been bad for x amount of time. There's been quite a string of those lately. It's good they've been found and corrected, but I'd prefer they be accurate from the start. And it's not only affecting champs, but also masteries.

    I hope that by now a quality control team has been put together to check descriptions of champs, abilities, masteries, nodes, items, and boosts to ensure things are on the up and up.
  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Member Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★
    Karnage wrote: »
    Hey there everyone, apologies for the confusion here, but this was an intended change to the description of his Lifesteal that was meant to go out with the updates to the description of his Damnation, Fate Seal, and Bleed that also went out in this update. The duration of all of these abilities are still the same as they have been, but their descriptions now accurately display the base length of time these abilities last before they've had their duration increased for previous Judgements that have been placed. We will update the patch notes to note this change in description.

    Again, we apologize for the confusion, and for leaving this out of the patch notes. There has been no change to the in game length of Ghost Rider's Lifesteal ability.

    That's fair enough, but can I ask how its taken you 4 years to pick up on it? I'm quite willing to accept that his stats/timings haven't actually changed other than in the text as I haven't done the research to know either way yet (I'll still be doing some testing to confirm what you say is correct, no offence lol). But you have to admit, it seems a bit strange that after 4 years of nobody noticing that the text is wrong, and not just on one ability, but 4 of his 5 main abilities, and now all of a sudden you've decided to correct it? I'm not saying either way because I really don't know at the minute, but you have to admit it sounds fishy...

    More like 2 1/2 but yes, it’s strange they just now discovered it. However there has been a lot of talk about text accurately reflecting actual in game abilities. I don’t think it’s the craziest thing that they might be just doing some due diligence and auditing the champions to see if everything is displayed correctly on the Champion page. It may seem unlikely but I don’t think it’s the craziest thing we’ve seen in 4 years.
  • ShrimkinsShrimkins Member Posts: 1,479 ★★★★
    Ghost Rider hasn't changed

    oh wow. I was right. Kabam is not out to screw everyone with silent nerfs. Shocker.


  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Member Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★
    The outrage here is ridiculous, honestly. It was an error but GR has been working the same for this whole time. If you guys really thought it was a problem, why didn’t you bring it up 2 1/2 years ago when he was released? It’s not like his text stated 10 seconds for lifesteal and it’s always been 5. He works the same exact way he’s always been working and people always say he’s great. I swear people just want to complain about everything.
  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Member Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★
    Karnage wrote: »
    Hey Karnage,

    We always try our best to ensure that the information that we share with you is as accurate as humanly possible. But, we are human, and humans make mistakes. There is so much new content coming out constantly that it's not always possible for us to go back and catch mistakes in older content.

    Ghost Rider was released just about 2.5 years ago, and in that time, this was never brought up, and wasn't noticed in any tests. We try to avoid these situations, but they happen. Right now, we're doing some pretty big sweeps on descriptions, so we've been catching some of them again.

    Ghost Rider hasn't changed, and although I understand the frustration, when we discover a mistake, we have to fix it. Ideally, we would make it work as described, but for the sake of game balance, we cannot always do that.

    @Kabam Zibiit Thank you for the clarification, that does make perfect sense. But you must understand this from a summoners perspective also, I completely understand that mistakes can be made, but 4 mistakes on the same champion, that haven't been rectified for 2 and a half years, is pretty big, especially for such a well used champion such as Ghost Rider. Those are some pretty big changes to the description of his abilities, not that I think it would put anyone off ranking him, but that is the ONLY information that us as summoners have to go off when we're making our rank up decisions. I honestly can't be bothered to work out the duration differences between the other text changes, but a difference of 4.5 seconds worth of regen is pretty significant, I'm sure you'll agree, that's roughly a 16.5% difference in duration.
    I'm not one to cry for compensation (although I'm sure some will lol), I'm more than happy to work for my rewards, but can I make a suggestion? Well, I'm going to make it anyways so tough 😂
    If you're going to be overhauling the text on multiple champions, especially for such significant changes, that you inform the community, not by the forum (which the vast majority of summoners never look at), but instead put out some in game mail notifying everybody of the changes, apologise for the mistakes, and do them all at once, or as much as humanly possible. I'm no expert in coding, but I'm assuming if youre not changing the mechanics of the champion and only changing the text it wouldn't be that difficult to rectify the description of multiple champions at the same time.
    And it wouldn't hurt to offer a little something by way of apology for the mistakes, but again, I'm not personally bothered about compensation, especially if his actual mechanics haven't changed. I just think it'd be a nice gesture on behalf of Kabam to the community, considering they have been working on false information for the past 2 and a half years (apologies about the 4 years comment I've played for close to 3 years and he was one of my first champs so assumed he had been around forever lol).
    But thanks for clarifying the situation.

    I’m not sure about the compensation part but I agree with this. An in game mail should be sent out and an apology should be made. As long as the actual mechanics aren’t changing I don’t think compensation is needed but an explanation of a mass text changing to reflect accurate abilities would be a good gesture. If this isn’t communicated I can already see people clamoring about nerfs everywhere. It’s more of a pre damage control for Kabam to contain the issue so nerf posts don’t pile up in seconds.
This discussion has been closed.