This suck because now i cant use my 4* HEIMDALL who i just rank 5 because i was hoping to use him for act 6 just to find out hes not allowed in Act 6, funny thing i did the (easy ) first path of LOL without a 5* champ and only used 900 units on revives. Act 5 i did completion with mostly 4* Starky and 4*Blade and4* Medusa etc whom i just pull as 5 Star recently, now im at the point in the game where i have 85 *stars so this don't really affect me but for those who are affected i feel for them because as a player of 4 years i do know how hard it is to pull Good 5 or 6 star Champs my best 6 * is iron fist and i have 7 Six star champs. Kabbam i hope you reconsider and allow 4 stars because recently you have been pushing out alot of 4 star rank up and awakening Gem offer and people bought them with the idea of one day using them for content, people bought awakening gem to awaken their 4 star Starky, Ghost, Blade, Void etc just to be told oh yea those champion will be useless for act 6. I know you have said many time you have no plans to release rank down gems again but i think you should reconsider that because i could use the material i use to rank 5 Heimdall to rank up someone else.
CHAMPION REQUIREMENTS Act 6 is some of the most challenging content to date, and the perils within require only the strongest Champions of The Contest. Chapter 1 will contain CHAMPION REQUIREMENTS that will restrict the Champions you use to ONLY 5 and 6-Star Champions.
I took 6 damage from parry against the 40k PI ultron(11k attack) in epic nick fury quest using a 4/40 CAIW, only synergy was the science synergy(50% weakness). Act 6 starts with opponents of PI even lower than that, so probably with lower health, attack, so he is usable there.
Compared to my 6* storm, a 4* CAIW is obviously more useful, and can even do more damage, and i would pick him over storm most of the time. So why doesn't he count in 'only the strongest champions' because of the star rarity? He has the damage to handle act 6, and can take the block damage, so what reason is there not to allow me to use him?
This suck because now i cant use my 4* HEIMDALL who i just rank 5 because i was hoping to use him for act 6 just to find out hes not allowed in Act 6, funny thing i did the (easy ) first path of LOL without a 5* champ and only used 900 units on revives. Act 5 i did completion with mostly 4* Starky and 4*Blade and4* Medusa etc whom i just pull as 5 Star recently, now im at the point in the game where i have 85 *stars so this don't really affect me but for those who are affected i feel for them because as a player of 4 years i do know how hard it is to pull Good 5 or 6 star Champs my best 6 * is iron fist and i have 7 Six star champs. Kabbam i hope you reconsider and allow 4 stars because recently you have been pushing out alot of 4 star rank up and awakening Gem offer and people bought them with the idea of one day using them for content, people bought awakening gem to awaken their 4 star Starky, Ghost, Blade, Void etc just to be told oh yea those champion will be useless for act 6. I know you have said many time you have no plans to release rank down gems again but i think you should reconsider that because i could use the material i use to rank 5 Heimdall to rank up someone else.
A decision like this by Kabaam feels like it's made with someone like a 4* Heimdall specifically in mind! He's just as useful as a 4* to a 5* in the ways most people use him on Questing teams...So let's just make it a 5* so you have to wait until your RNG is in your favor. 4* Heimdall saves too many units!
I thought a simple solution is allow 4* in Chapter 2.
They definitely should; since there isn't a way to get to chapter 2 without completing chapter 1. But that wont fix the fact that 6.1, which is permanent content, will still have this issue.
So, for those of us that don’t speak “game developer”, is this about synergies? Is it about champs that never made the 5/6* cut? What is it about someone popping in with a SW that makes being creative difficult? Why can’t you build this precisely as if the player only has 5/6*, and then if they show up with 4* they get nuked by the content, and that’s on them? What’s the downside FOR US if you let 4* in?
There isn't a downside. They released characters like Heimdall and Hela that were keeping people alive and giving them second chances. A r5 4* is just as good as a r3 5* and they don't like it because the latter costs more to level despite the fact that it might not always be as useful. So what's a way to eliminate these 'second chance' mechanics and synergies?
There's no basic 5* arena so people can't grind them out for free that way... 5* crystals still cost 10k, not 2k shards... so players aren't generally popping them en-mass like they don't matter where as 4* crystals are popped 10+ at a time.
SW duped with 99 sig is still too strong for them.
There is no downside for US, their players and source of revenue, if they allow 4* characters in.
Once again, that's why their 'response' talks about "protective measures". It's protective/beneficial to them.
This is nonsense. I refuse to spend on this game. It's unfair that I spend money on this game to get champions and now I'm restricted from using those champs.
@Zardu_Hasseulfraü Well said bro thats how i'm feeling right now i just use my 4* as synergy for Variant save me alot on revives and units and now i cant use him for act 6 i think its nonsense, this has nothing to do with skills more with RNG of pulling useful 5 star champs i can say i have over 80 5 star champs and i still use my 4 stars in uncollected and variant.
Kabam will close this and say "an explanation has been given"... But does not directly address WHY the 4* champs are banned. Instead of providing a solution or hearing the community, we are pouring our opinions out to deaf ears.
Everyone will get sued to this requirement soon enough. There is far too much angst and worse about this, IMO. It's a game, it has rules, life goes on, you know?
Everyone will get sued to this requirement soon enough. There is far too much angst and worse about this, IMO. It's a game, it has rules, life goes on, you know?
smh. People are frustrated at what looks like a greedy cash grab. They may get used to it but it doesnt mean it's not a frustrating and complaint worthy move.
Everyone will get sued to this requirement soon enough. There is far too much angst and worse about this, IMO. It's a game, it has rules, life goes on, you know?
I would rather see '6.1 is too hard' complaint threads every day than not be allowed to use my 4*s in act 6
4* anyway shouldn't really be used to fight at higher content like this. What would you tell someone asking for advice on how to proceed with act 6, if they say that their top team is maxed 4*s? Probably that it would be smart to try and rank up stronger champs first. So kabam have just tried to make that decision for the players, albeit in a not-so-smart way.
Having a synergy slot, though, would both fix the biggest issue for most of the players that this content is aimed at, and would also maintain their progression locking requirements. And also provide a pretty cool feature for use in other parts of the game that they might bring in the future, or even design around it.
The response doesnt make sense - guys, lets be honest here, this response it utter BS. Why do you care whether we bring a 4 star or even a 2 star champion? why should you define that? thats up the the end player, not you.
You sole reason so people can't use synergies, but of course you wont say that...
I fully stand opposed to that as a solution. They just need to allow 4*s. Banning champions (if this is act-wide) is a very dangerous precedent to set for the future of the game. Not only will they release higher star ratings to outdate your roster, they’ll ban them outright. It opens the doors wide only to whales or the extremely lucky, and whales will beat out luck in the long run. It’s genuinely the most greedy thing I have witnessed from Kabam.
I have got to think kabam thought this out very well. i have got to assume kabam know exactly wat they are doing.
There is no way that they could have done this and notr expected this reaction. surely they were all sitting around discussing this and saying, bvut the players will get angry, the players will threaten to boycott. surely they knew this reaction was gunna happen.
which leads me top believe their is a bigger plan and bigger reasoning. why do something that is gunna upset your playerbase this much unless is it but one piece of a bigger puzzle that will ultimately pay off.
Thank you all for the discussion on this topic. There’s been a lot of constructive feedback and thoughts, and it’s been valuable to us for considerations and internal discussion. We wanted to be clearer with our intentions, and better clarify why we want to do this and how it aligns with our past direction in the game.
This is not the first time we’ve hard-gated something behind a form of progression. We use gates liberally, oftentimes to prevent players from having frustrating experiences in content beyond their capabilities, but also because we’re game developers and we have some intended play experiences in mind that we--through both iteration and personal gameplay experience--believe smooth out the ride and make the whole thing as enjoyable as possible.
At level 50-60, it's easy to forget that for much of an early player’s experience they are bumping into padlock icons all over the quests menu:
- A multitude of our arenas cannot be played without specific Champion rarities, and to be competitive requires a lot of them. - Normal and Heroic difficulty event quests are locked behind levels 12 and 25, respectively. - Master was, for a long time, gated monthly behind the 100% exploration of its Heroic counterpart. - Uncollected difficulty requires not only reaching level 40, but completion of Act 5, Chapter 2. - Even entering Beginner asks you to be level 6!
And this is just looking at the monthly event quests. Dungeons need you to have a sizeable count of certain rarities before you can access the very same ones. Side Quests follow similar locking mechanics to the Monthly Events, and we’ve used gating methods both inter-quest (Dimensional Rifts and their shards) and more explicit (Danger Rooms rarity requirements, the current Recon Missions) to craft a specifically targeted experience or to more tightly tune the content we’re making.
On the topic of tuning, that is our goal when using more stringent requirements in quests. Back Issues #1 used this explicitly with the Class requirements; we did this so we could build areas in each quest where lesser-used Champions could stand out--Hawkeye’s power drain capabilities in Chapter 1, Quest 1, for example--and be important for strategy where they normally would not. We’re aiming to do similar things in Back Issues #2, with a different approach. (More on that soon!)
One reason we do this is because of how progression changes over time. Once you’ve achieved Level 60, we lose a numerical value of your time and experience in the game. The gap between a fresh 60 and a veteran 60 can be massive, just like in many other MMO games. One of the best ways we have to continue using those gates as both protective and progression measure is targeting the baseline strength and breadth of your roster.
Act 6 (and other content) is built with specific challenges in mind. The requirement of 5 and 6-Stars is a broader application of the idea, but it allows us to build a more tightly-constructed experience around a more specific box of playstyles. Making one-size fits all content for an immense player toolbox can lead to things being more watered down and general, rather than the specific moments we can make when we know the lower and upper limits of each player as a matter of fact.
Lastly, this is permanent content. When we place strict requirements on a Side Quest, it’s a gold rush; there’s only ~30 days to build or enhance a team for the quest in question, and it can be a real crunch to get it done. (I myself am going to have a hell of a time with the Avengers leg of the Recon Missions.) Act 6 is going to be around forever. If you can’t get into it right away, that’s alright. It’ll wait for you!
Again I appreciate the discussion around this, and when we say we’re taking your feedback we mean it. When there are lots of opinions and discourse around a topic like this, we take it seriously. I’ve already had two meetings today to chat about it with a variety of teams. I hope my points better explain our stance on gating content, and why we feel comfortable doing it here in the way we are.
I like how you totally ignored and did not address synergies and their role in the game.
I wanted to drop one more note in here on something unrelated to the Champion Restrictions. We've just granted a very small group of Content Creators early access to Act 6 Chapter 1 Quest 1. The purpose of this is so that they can make educational videos for you all on what you can expect in that first Quest before it is even live.
These Creators will be playing on their own account, with their own resources and team. They have not had any resources granted to them, and they will not be eligible for the Legends rewards from Chapter 1.
We'll be sharing out their content with you all as they release it closer to the release of Act 6 Ch1.
Good to know they can't get legends, does this include the beta tester too .
Of course not. Lol. Beta testers gave feedback and things were changed. So even beta testers don’t know what to expect.
How do we know how much was changed, could be just 1 new node or lots. Still gives them a huge unfair advantage an a long time too make specific rank ups to help with it. Taking a legends run from the beta tester too should definitely be done imo
I would rather see '6.1 is too hard' complaint threads every day than not be allowed to use my 4*s in act 6
4* anyway shouldn't really be used to fight at higher content like this. What would you tell someone asking for advice on how to proceed with act 6, if they say that their top team is maxed 4*s? Probably that it would be smart to try and rank up stronger champs first. So kabam have just tried to make that decision for the players, albeit in a not-so-smart way.
Having a synergy slot, though, would both fix the biggest issue for most of the players that this content is aimed at, and would also maintain their progression locking requirements. And also provide a pretty cool feature for use in other parts of the game that they might bring in the future, or even design around it.
Why shouldn't 4*s be used in act 6 fights? If players are skilled enough to beat it with their 4*s, but have trash 5*s/6*s, the 4* ban would stop them from being able to do act 6.
The content should not be aimed at people with big rosters of 5*s and 6*s, but people who have the skills to beat it. They should just release the content and let people try it out to see how far they can get. Plus the 4* ban wouldn't stop people from completing it in the first few weeks of release, since those people are the ones who use mostly 5*s/6*s only.
I'm not saying synergy slots is a bad idea, I'm saying removing the ban would be better
I love seeing comments like these. Means arena scores are going to start going down. And maybe a higher percentage of the comments will start becoming more constructive than useless.
I think a legitimate progression gate for Act 6 should be along the lines of: Level 60, 100% Act 5, and 100% Realm of Legends. These are very attainable goals and would definitely limit the "newer" players you mentioned from attempting to do content that is beyond their reach.
Thank you all for the discussion on this topic. There’s been a lot of constructive feedback and thoughts, and it’s been valuable to us for considerations and internal discussion. We wanted to be clearer with our intentions, and better clarify why we want to do this and how it aligns with our past direction in the game.
This is not the first time we’ve hard-gated something behind a form of progression. We use gates liberally, oftentimes to prevent players from having frustrating experiences in content beyond their capabilities, but also because we’re game developers and we have some intended play experiences in mind that we--through both iteration and personal gameplay experience--believe smooth out the ride and make the whole thing as enjoyable as possible.
At level 50-60, it's easy to forget that for much of an early player’s experience they are bumping into padlock icons all over the quests menu:
- A multitude of our arenas cannot be played without specific Champion rarities, and to be competitive requires a lot of them. - Normal and Heroic difficulty event quests are locked behind levels 12 and 25, respectively. - Master was, for a long time, gated monthly behind the 100% exploration of its Heroic counterpart. - Uncollected difficulty requires not only reaching level 40, but completion of Act 5, Chapter 2. - Even entering Beginner asks you to be level 6!
And this is just looking at the monthly event quests. Dungeons need you to have a sizeable count of certain rarities before you can access the very same ones. Side Quests follow similar locking mechanics to the Monthly Events, and we’ve used gating methods both inter-quest (Dimensional Rifts and their shards) and more explicit (Danger Rooms rarity requirements, the current Recon Missions) to craft a specifically targeted experience or to more tightly tune the content we’re making.
On the topic of tuning, that is our goal when using more stringent requirements in quests. Back Issues #1 used this explicitly with the Class requirements; we did this so we could build areas in each quest where lesser-used Champions could stand out--Hawkeye’s power drain capabilities in Chapter 1, Quest 1, for example--and be important for strategy where they normally would not. We’re aiming to do similar things in Back Issues #2, with a different approach. (More on that soon!)
One reason we do this is because of how progression changes over time. Once you’ve achieved Level 60, we lose a numerical value of your time and experience in the game. The gap between a fresh 60 and a veteran 60 can be massive, just like in many other MMO games. One of the best ways we have to continue using those gates as both protective and progression measure is targeting the baseline strength and breadth of your roster.
Act 6 (and other content) is built with specific challenges in mind. The requirement of 5 and 6-Stars is a broader application of the idea, but it allows us to build a more tightly-constructed experience around a more specific box of playstyles. Making one-size fits all content for an immense player toolbox can lead to things being more watered down and general, rather than the specific moments we can make when we know the lower and upper limits of each player as a matter of fact.
Lastly, this is permanent content. When we place strict requirements on a Side Quest, it’s a gold rush; there’s only ~30 days to build or enhance a team for the quest in question, and it can be a real crunch to get it done. (I myself am going to have a hell of a time with the Avengers leg of the Recon Missions.) Act 6 is going to be around forever. If you can’t get into it right away, that’s alright. It’ll wait for you!
Again I appreciate the discussion around this, and when we say we’re taking your feedback we mean it. When there are lots of opinions and discourse around a topic like this, we take it seriously. I’ve already had two meetings today to chat about it with a variety of teams. I hope my points better explain our stance on gating content, and why we feel comfortable doing it here in the way we are.
I can't seem to understand this. There's no good reason whatsoever as to why you've done this. You talk about levels, well a lot of people have been asking for a new form of leveling system for veterans or a raised level cap but you didn't listen. If you did, you wouldn't be in a situation like this Also skill should be first and foremost the deciding factor to determine who can complete content. Some are highly capable of using 4star heroes to succeed where people using 5star heroes fail.
First off, I’m pleased someone from Kabam provided an official game team response to the concerns about gating Act 6. The fact that it wasn’t part of the initial announcement, however, underscores the chasm between game team and player perceptions.
Ignoring the paternalism (hard gates exist to be “protective” to veteran players?), there are a few lines from Kabam Goggy I find insightful:
At level 50-60, it's easy to forget that for much of an early player’s experience they are bumping into padlock icons all over the quests menu
Of course, there’s a bunch of stuff that keeps noobs from doing hard content and quitting early. But most involve side events, not Story. What precisely does excluding a L60 player’s maxed 4* (stronger than a unranked 5*) protect against?
Act 6 is going to be around forever. If you can’t get into it right away, that’s alright. It’ll wait for you!
What I read: If you’ve already finished Act 5, but have been punished by the game’s version of pRNG, don’t worry—just keep doing EQ for the same rewards month after month and hope the game eventually gives you something useful in Act 6 (or burn resources to progress).
Once you’ve achieved Level 60, we lose a numerical value of your time and experience in the game.
Many updates have gone by since the Summoner level was capped at 60. Why has it remained capped at 60 for so long? Does no one really keep records of XP earned beyond 60?
The requirement of 5 and 6-Stars is a broader application of the idea, but it allows us to build a more tightly-constructed experience around a more specific box of playstyles. Making one-size fits all content for an immense player toolbox can lead to things being more watered down and general, rather than the specific moments we can make when we know the lower and upper limits of each player as a matter of fact.
I have no idea what this jargon means—lost me at toolbox.
But my opinion of what “tightly-constructed...box of playstyles...immense player toolbox” gets at is this: it sounds as if the team feels like it lost control of the game by releasing a slate of high-powered champs at higher rarities over the last year that could wreck content solo—and even more so via synergies. To me, “tightly-constructed” seems like a wonky way to say synergy nerf and reining in power creep.
This shouldn’t be read as being snarky to Goggy —he had the courage to provide a rationale and that deserves our respect. I haven’t seen Act 6 at all, so I hope I’m wrong about all of this.
I appreciate the official statement, but it doesn’t make me feel like this is a player-centric change.
@Kabam Miike thanks a lot. I have really enjoyed playing with Aegon and because I'm not a super star, my 4* starlord helps me keep the combo just incase I get hit because the game lagged or I messed up. Now because I don't have starlord or proxima midnight as a 5* that synergy doesnt work for me anymore in act 6. Yes I know it's permanent content but I want to play something new to keep me interested in the game. These are the characters I ranked up and because of this I have to wait or waste resources that I was saving for someone else. Oh and this won't get me to but your unfair percentage crystals.
As a loyal player and someone who has spent money thanks for taking away what I earned a week before it comes out.
I thought you guys said you were going to communicate better. A major game change and you tell us a week before. Deja Vu - Parry change.
Comments
Act 6 starts with opponents of PI even lower than that, so probably with lower health, attack, so he is usable there.
Compared to my 6* storm, a 4* CAIW is obviously more useful, and can even do more damage, and i would pick him over storm most of the time. So why doesn't he count in 'only the strongest champions' because of the star rarity? He has the damage to handle act 6, and can take the block damage, so what reason is there not to allow me to use him?
There's no basic 5* arena so people can't grind them out for free that way... 5* crystals still cost 10k, not 2k shards... so players aren't generally popping them en-mass like they don't matter where as 4* crystals are popped 10+ at a time.
SW duped with 99 sig is still too strong for them.
There is no downside for US, their players and source of revenue, if they allow 4* characters in.
Once again, that's why their 'response' talks about "protective measures".
It's protective/beneficial to them.
Having a synergy slot, though, would both fix the biggest issue for most of the players that this content is aimed at, and would also maintain their progression locking requirements. And also provide a pretty cool feature for use in other parts of the game that they might bring in the future, or even design around it.
You sole reason so people can't use synergies, but of course you wont say that...
i have got to assume kabam know exactly wat they are doing.
There is no way that they could have done this and notr expected this reaction.
surely they were all sitting around discussing this and saying,
bvut the players will get angry, the players will threaten to boycott.
surely they knew this reaction was gunna happen.
which leads me top believe their is a bigger plan and bigger reasoning.
why do something that is gunna upset your playerbase this much unless is it but one piece of a bigger puzzle that will ultimately pay off.
The content should not be aimed at people with big rosters of 5*s and 6*s, but people who have the skills to beat it. They should just release the content and let people try it out to see how far they can get.
Plus the 4* ban wouldn't stop people from completing it in the first few weeks of release, since those people are the ones who use mostly 5*s/6*s only.
I'm not saying synergy slots is a bad idea, I'm saying removing the ban would be better
You talk about levels, well a lot of people have been asking for a new form of leveling system for veterans or a raised level cap but you didn't listen. If you did, you wouldn't be in a situation like this
Also skill should be first and foremost the deciding factor to determine who can complete content. Some are highly capable of using 4star heroes to succeed where people using 5star heroes fail.
Ignoring the paternalism (hard gates exist to be “protective” to veteran players?), there are a few lines from Kabam Goggy I find insightful:
At level 50-60, it's easy to forget that for much of an early player’s experience they are bumping into padlock icons all over the quests menu
Of course, there’s a bunch of stuff that keeps noobs from doing hard content and quitting early. But most involve side events, not Story. What precisely does excluding a L60 player’s maxed 4* (stronger than a unranked 5*) protect against?
Act 6 is going to be around forever. If you can’t get into it right away, that’s alright. It’ll wait for you!
What I read: If you’ve already finished Act 5, but have been punished by the game’s version of pRNG, don’t worry—just keep doing EQ for the same rewards month after month and hope the game eventually gives you something useful in Act 6 (or burn resources to progress).
Once you’ve achieved Level 60, we lose a numerical value of your time and experience in the game.
Many updates have gone by since the Summoner level was capped at 60. Why has it remained capped at 60 for so long? Does no one really keep records of XP earned beyond 60?
The requirement of 5 and 6-Stars is a broader application of the idea, but it allows us to build a more tightly-constructed experience around a more specific box of playstyles. Making one-size fits all content for an immense player toolbox can lead to things being more watered down and general, rather than the specific moments we can make when we know the lower and upper limits of each player as a matter of fact.
I have no idea what this jargon means—lost me at toolbox.
But my opinion of what “tightly-constructed...box of playstyles...immense player toolbox” gets at is this: it sounds as if the team feels like it lost control of the game by releasing a slate of high-powered champs at higher rarities over the last year that could wreck content solo—and even more so via synergies. To me, “tightly-constructed” seems like a wonky way to say synergy nerf and reining in power creep.
This shouldn’t be read as being snarky to Goggy —he had the courage to provide a rationale and that deserves our respect. I haven’t seen Act 6 at all, so I hope I’m wrong about all of this.
I appreciate the official statement, but it doesn’t make me feel like this is a player-centric change.
Dr. Zola
As a loyal player and someone who has spent money thanks for taking away what I earned a week before it comes out.
I thought you guys said you were going to communicate better. A major game change and you tell us a week before. Deja Vu - Parry change.