Witness the Great Revival! Act 6 Chapter 1 - Coming March 13th

1606163656678

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,055 ★★★★★
    Kobster84 said:

    MattMan said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    Lagacy's preview of Act 6 Ch1 Quest 1 is up now! Take a look at his preview video for tips on how to avoid damage from No Retreat, and more!

    After seeing this video I have to say: You have to be kidding me! You expect us to have so many specific champions (some that cause bleed, power control champs, ones that generate fury buffs) and don´t allow 4* champions so we do not get the utility? That´s just such a bad move, Kabam!

    Answers to specific challenges? Yes. Specific Champions? Not so much.

    Act 6 will require counters to certain challenges, but there are more than just a handful of Champions with these abilities. There are many Champions that cause Bleed and are immune to it, many Champions that can manipulate and control power, and many Champions that can generate Fury Buffs (lots of Cosmic Champions fit that bill!).

    Roster exploration will be important in Act 6.
    Bad choice of words from me, but I hoped you get what I meant. I was wrong.
    Why exactly can 4* champions not take on these challenges? They can easily one-shot every single one of these enemies in the hands of a skilled player. So don´t give me the usual "We want to protect you" speech, that´s just not true.
    You want us to explore our roster and make over 70% of it unuseable. Do you even hear what you are saying?
    We have already talked about our reasons behind that decision. You can find it here.
    Those reasons have been rejected and debunked by the majority of the community as weak and nonsensical.
    Which is how some of us predicted it would be received even before they posted them, because people won't accept reason when they don't want something.
    except kabam gave us points which had nothing to do with the matter
    Those were the factors around the decision. The reasons are in there. They will just be disputed ad nauseum because again, people vehemently reject any reason. They don't want the gate.
  • AssumedNameAssumedName Posts: 247

    Lagacy's preview of Act 6 Ch1 Quest 1 is up now! Take a look at his preview video for tips on how to avoid damage from No Retreat, and more!

    I don’t see the beta test banner, which leads me to believe this took place on his live account. Can you confirm?

    If this took place on his live account how will he (and the other CCP) be allowed to do a legend run for 6.1? It’s nothing personal against Lags or the other content creator programmers. Just trying to see if how this will play out.

    It was not on the Beta Server and did take place on his live account. Our Creators were not given any items or resources to use, and played this as if it was their own run through. They are also not able to go for a Legends run in Chapter 1.
    Can I ask if there will be a big boss fight much like Kang, Thanos, Maestro and Collector in this chapter? Maybe Carina?
  • Tasty_Yum_YumsTasty_Yum_Yums Posts: 395 ★★★
    edited March 2019
    AndiYTDE said:

    More Act 6 Previews! Check out the latest Dork Lessons video on How to Fight No Retreat Nodes Like a Ninja!

    I must say: I´m impressed by how you keep dodging/ignoring the community. Even the people you have a partnership with!
    Answer me one simple question, without talking around the topic: Why can 5* R1-R3 enter Act 6, but equal/stronger 4* R5 champions are too weak to do that?
    Grab a snickers. It’s going to be awhile....
  • LegendsendLegendsend Posts: 92
    DrZola said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    Lagacy's preview of Act 6 Ch1 Quest 1 is up now! Take a look at his preview video for tips on how to avoid damage from No Retreat, and more!

    After seeing this video I have to say: You have to be kidding me! You expect us to have so many specific champions (some that cause bleed, power control champs, ones that generate fury buffs) and don´t allow 4* champions so we do not get the utility? That´s just such a bad move, Kabam!

    Answers to specific challenges? Yes. Specific Champions? Not so much.

    Act 6 will require counters to certain challenges, but there are more than just a handful of Champions with these abilities. There are many Champions that cause Bleed and are immune to it, many Champions that can manipulate and control power, and many Champions that can generate Fury Buffs (lots of Cosmic Champions fit that bill!).

    Roster exploration will be important in Act 6.
    Constructive criticism: why not ask the Content Creators to explore their rosters for the Act 6 videos they produce?

    I’m reasonable. For example, I’m willing to grant them a 5/65 Psylocke for power control, maybe a 5/65 Nightcrawler for evade, a 5/65 poison immune with Fury not named Medusa or Hyperion (maybe KG?), a 5/65 Falcon for a bleed champ and a 5/65 Groot for bleed immune. No 6*’s. But that’s negotiable if you’d like to add a 6* Red Mags to the team. Not saying it can’t be done, but that would be a more relatable resource in my opinion.

    Absent that, I’m not sure how watching a skilled driver rush around the track in a Ferrari is supposed to help those of us still driving Celicas, though it is fun to see.

    Dr. Zola
    This right here though... good stuff
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,697 Guardian
    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
  • DangusZoneDangusZone Posts: 32
    573739 said:

    Caltrops was cheap as you acknowledged so it was removed, but degen on a dex is a ok? 😂 just ask everyone for their card info.

    Just wait till it's paired with stun immunity and unstoppable shenanigans so interrupts are the only playstyle. Better start lvling Ghost with hood synergy and cap iw now :😉
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,321 ★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    The simple answer would be because it's a progress gate. People don't have nearly as many Max Sig 5*s and 6*s as they do 4*s. Well, at least those below a certain point. The simplest way to put it would be that the 4*s would make it easier than they want it to be.

    I know I should ignore you, but when do I get the chance to discuss with a Kabam employee?
    The official "answer" is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak. Are you seriously trying to say that 4* champs would be too OP for Act 6? Very funny
    I don't remember reading the comment that they would be too weak.
    Nor did I say they would be too OP.
    I said it would make it easier than they wanted. It's a progress gate. It's harder if you don't have what you need.
    Also, if it didn't make it easier to have 4*s, we wouldn't have 58 pages of people arguing they needed them.
    They said they wanted to, and i quote: "[...] use gates liberally, oftentimes to prevent players from having frustrating experiences in content beyond their capabilities". As far as I know, there are 3 cases in which Kabam has limited champions based on their strength: Infinity Dungeons (more on that below), Dange Rooms (here the restriction was meant to be part of the challenge) and Act 6. This esentially does mean that they want to say that 4* champions in Act 6 would lead to frustration since they are too weak. You want to deny that?
    Hang on, that's two different things. You said "The official 'answer' is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak." That's false: they didn't say that. They did say that allowing 4* champs in Act 6 could lead to frustration, but that doesn't mean there's anything explicitly wrong with 4* champs. Rather, that means all players are different, and for many players attempting to use 4* champs could lead to frustration.

    That's not debatable, that's undeniably true. We already see this now: there's lots of players who have expressed frustration over the difficulty of Uncollected monthly events, and the logic is often words to the effect of "they are uncollected, so uncollected should be something they should be able to do." Becoming uncollected is the prerequisite for doing uncollected difficulty, but many players who can't do uncollected difficulty believe that the problem is with the content if they are uncollected, because the prerequisite was met to do it.

    This thought process is completely wrong, but that doesn't mean it doesn't cause problems for the game that would be magically solved if the players who aren't ready for Uncollected were somehow barred from even attempting it. Of course, that's not practical: there's no way to know in advance if someone can or can't do it.

    Kabam isn't saying you personally won't be able to do Act 6 with 4* champs. They are saying that the percentage of people who can among all players who will try is low enough to be a problem. In and of itself that isn't the justification for the progress gate, but it is a legitimate factor in favor of it.
    Those posts saying uncollected is too hard also include people saying they have rank 4 and 5 5* champs and feel it's too hard. Players claimed the Capt challenge and champion challenge were too hard too. Yet for each of those posts there were people saying they did it with 3 and 4*s. I've done several uncollected events with 3*s just for the challenge. I used a mostly 4* team for the Capt challenge. I've also dipped as low as 2* for uncollected to take out certain bosses (sometimes I regret selling my 3* Ronan) if the content is that difficult let the difficulty and skill of the player be the gate has it has in the past. If you want to use gates based off of rarity maybe announce it a little more than a week before the release of the event. While I have a roster that will probably get through this content with little issue I still feel its wrong to spring this strict of a gate on the players 1 week before the release of an event even if it is permanent content. Kabam has also stated in the past it wants players to utilize more of their roster leading to the release of the 2* arenas we have seen in the past. The is the complete opposite of utilizing more of your roster its removing 80 to 90% of many players rosters. Is it the fear that lower profiles may close the gap with the top 5% that's got people saying it's ok to gate content like this. If so why are you afraid of the competition you will face if players can do the same content as you with lower tier champs?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 24,055 ★★★★★
    Pretty sure that's why he refrained from it.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,697 Guardian
    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
    I don´t think he´s saying that CCP videos are bad, he just wants Kabam to adress the reason why this post has 63 pages in 6 days: Why are 4* champions banned?
    I didn't accuse Seatin of saying CCP videos are bad, I'm accusing him of pretending to not be aware that these videos are coordinated with the content creators well ahead of time and with a specific release schedule, so accusing Kabam of deliberately releasing a CCP video to distract the playerbase is intellectual dishonesty of the first order.

    And I don't care what anyone wants, I only respond to what they say.
  • LegendsendLegendsend Posts: 92
    Siliyo said:



    I have saved over 100,000 5* shards in hopes of getting Aegon (released today), but also in hopes of getting more 4/55 champions for AQ and future Event Quests. Depending on how well I did, I would have been relatively confident going into Act 6. However, after 3 months of saving, I get utterly crapped on. Sure DV is good, GP & StarLord isn’t too bad and neither is Sabretooth. But everything else is TRASH. Your RNG system, Kabam, is a joke. Please reconsider how we obtain our champions. This will be especially important going forward if you’re going to enforce more champion restrictions.

    I definitely feel your pain... I've tried as well not to mention how much I saved for blade and got the utmost ****. At the same time though, you did get God tier characters out of 12 so that is 25% awesome which is a much higher percentage than usual... gotta take the good with the bad... And by the way I cannot lie... I chuckled when you said gwenpool and starlord arent that bad... Did not quite understand that one...
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,697 Guardian
    Dshu said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    The simple answer would be because it's a progress gate. People don't have nearly as many Max Sig 5*s and 6*s as they do 4*s. Well, at least those below a certain point. The simplest way to put it would be that the 4*s would make it easier than they want it to be.

    I know I should ignore you, but when do I get the chance to discuss with a Kabam employee?
    The official "answer" is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak. Are you seriously trying to say that 4* champs would be too OP for Act 6? Very funny
    I don't remember reading the comment that they would be too weak.
    Nor did I say they would be too OP.
    I said it would make it easier than they wanted. It's a progress gate. It's harder if you don't have what you need.
    Also, if it didn't make it easier to have 4*s, we wouldn't have 58 pages of people arguing they needed them.
    They said they wanted to, and i quote: "[...] use gates liberally, oftentimes to prevent players from having frustrating experiences in content beyond their capabilities". As far as I know, there are 3 cases in which Kabam has limited champions based on their strength: Infinity Dungeons (more on that below), Dange Rooms (here the restriction was meant to be part of the challenge) and Act 6. This esentially does mean that they want to say that 4* champions in Act 6 would lead to frustration since they are too weak. You want to deny that?
    Hang on, that's two different things. You said "The official 'answer' is that 4* champions would not be able to take on Act 6 because they are too weak." That's false: they didn't say that. They did say that allowing 4* champs in Act 6 could lead to frustration, but that doesn't mean there's anything explicitly wrong with 4* champs. Rather, that means all players are different, and for many players attempting to use 4* champs could lead to frustration.

    That's not debatable, that's undeniably true. We already see this now: there's lots of players who have expressed frustration over the difficulty of Uncollected monthly events, and the logic is often words to the effect of "they are uncollected, so uncollected should be something they should be able to do." Becoming uncollected is the prerequisite for doing uncollected difficulty, but many players who can't do uncollected difficulty believe that the problem is with the content if they are uncollected, because the prerequisite was met to do it.

    This thought process is completely wrong, but that doesn't mean it doesn't cause problems for the game that would be magically solved if the players who aren't ready for Uncollected were somehow barred from even attempting it. Of course, that's not practical: there's no way to know in advance if someone can or can't do it.

    Kabam isn't saying you personally won't be able to do Act 6 with 4* champs. They are saying that the percentage of people who can among all players who will try is low enough to be a problem. In and of itself that isn't the justification for the progress gate, but it is a legitimate factor in favor of it.
    Those posts saying uncollected is too hard also include people saying they have rank 4 and 5 5* champs and feel it's too hard. Players claimed the Capt challenge and champion challenge were too hard too. Yet for each of those posts there were people saying they did it with 3 and 4*s.
    Yes, that's correct. That's specifically what I said, so we're in agreement here.
    Dshu said:

    if the content is that difficult let the difficulty and skill of the player be the gate has it has in the past.

    So we also agree that difficult content can block the progress of a player, even in content they have the prerequisites to attempt.

    Where we apparently disagree is whether a game developer has the right to ameliorate that situation in extreme cases by adding roster prerequisites. I believe they do, and I think the vast overwhelming majority of game developers also do, based on their analogous behavior. You want them to be forced to only do what they've done in the past, and you believe that twitch skill should be the only kind of game play that is progress-gate worthy. I fundamentally disagree with that.
  • V1PER1987V1PER1987 Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★
    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
    I don´t think he´s saying that CCP videos are bad, he just wants Kabam to adress the reason why this post has 63 pages in 6 days: Why are 4* champions banned?
    I didn't accuse Seatin of saying CCP videos are bad, I'm accusing him of pretending to not be aware that these videos are coordinated with the content creators well ahead of time and with a specific release schedule, so accusing Kabam of deliberately releasing a CCP video to distract the playerbase is intellectual dishonesty of the first order.

    And I don't care what anyone wants, I only respond to what they say.
    Well ahead of time... You mean, like 5 days? Because that´s when they have decided to give them Early Acces, just one day after the initial announcement. That´s not "well ahead of time". They are doing everything to distract the community from the main topic, you are too blind to see that (pun intended)
    What’s the pun?
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 6,187 ★★★★★
    V1PER1987 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
    I don´t think he´s saying that CCP videos are bad, he just wants Kabam to adress the reason why this post has 63 pages in 6 days: Why are 4* champions banned?
    I didn't accuse Seatin of saying CCP videos are bad, I'm accusing him of pretending to not be aware that these videos are coordinated with the content creators well ahead of time and with a specific release schedule, so accusing Kabam of deliberately releasing a CCP video to distract the playerbase is intellectual dishonesty of the first order.

    And I don't care what anyone wants, I only respond to what they say.
    Well ahead of time... You mean, like 5 days? Because that´s when they have decided to give them Early Acces, just one day after the initial announcement. That´s not "well ahead of time". They are doing everything to distract the community from the main topic, you are too blind to see that (pun intended)
    What’s the pun?
    Lol I thought the same thing
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,321 ★★★★
    @DNA3000

    Where we apparently disagree is whether a game developer has the right to ameliorate that situation in extreme cases by adding roster prerequisites. I believe they do, and I think the vast overwhelming majority of game developers also do, based on their analogous behavior. You want them to be forced to only do what they've done in the past, and you believe that twitch skill should be the only kind of game play that is progress-gate worthy. I fundamentally disagree with that.

    Actually I'm in disagreement on this gate for 2 reasons
    A- the one week notice about the 4* ban. It's a very restrictive ban from a game team saying they want to encourage people to use more of their rosters yet removing 80 to 90% of a lot of players rosters at the same time. Developers want to add a hard gate like this I'm fine with it but be up front about it and let the player base know well in advance. If they want this gate it should have been added for 6.2.
    B- kabam has been selling 4* offers for rankup and awakening of champs while saying to the community 4*s are still a very relevant part of the game and will remain so for some time. This to me is a flashback to pre 12.0 when they released the awakening offer and rankup offer knowing they were going to nerf the champs 1 month later.

    I would be siding with you on the gate had notice been given to the player base a reasonable amount of time before the act 6 release date. I could have even excepted it a month ago when they started sending out the cryptic messages ingame. I will continue to side with the majority on this forum thread though because I believe how this gate was put in place was wrong. Move it to 6.2 and move the cavalier title as well if you want to but kabam should do something to show the players they are willing to compromise and this wasn't a giant money grab leading up to this.
  • Banning 4* is beyond senses to understand. 4* r5 is almost similar to 5* r3 and for rank four u needed tier two alpha, which is rare to get. Why not make quest so tough to force us for 5* , rather than leaving us with no choice.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,697 Guardian
    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
    I don´t think he´s saying that CCP videos are bad, he just wants Kabam to adress the reason why this post has 63 pages in 6 days: Why are 4* champions banned?
    I didn't accuse Seatin of saying CCP videos are bad, I'm accusing him of pretending to not be aware that these videos are coordinated with the content creators well ahead of time and with a specific release schedule, so accusing Kabam of deliberately releasing a CCP video to distract the playerbase is intellectual dishonesty of the first order.

    And I don't care what anyone wants, I only respond to what they say.
    Well ahead of time... You mean, like 5 days? Because that´s when they have decided to give them Early Acces, just one day after the initial announcement. That´s not "well ahead of time". They are doing everything to distract the community from the main topic, you are too blind to see that (pun intended)
    The original announcement was on March 6. The announcement that content creators were granted early access to the content was on March 7. That means the decision to grant early access must have occurred before the announcement was posted, because they would have been asking content creators to opt-in on March 6 at the latest, and must have made the decision and set things in motion no later than March 5, if not significantly earlier.

    Unless you think that Kabam saw the thread blow up, decide to scramble up an early access preview, made the game changes necessary to do that, contact the content creators, and gotten opt-in replys all within less than one day. Kabam couldn't move that quickly if the building was on fire.
  • LegendsendLegendsend Posts: 92
    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    AndiYTDE said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Seatin said:

    Little embarrassing you're using CCP videos to try and distract everyone and still continue to avoid addressing any actual reason why you won't allow 4 Star Champions in Act 6. We see through it.

    That's uncalled for. Especially for someone who knows how the content creator program works, of course these videos have to be planned in advance and released on a schedule.

    I thought long and hard about illustrating how low this is by demonstration, but I decided against it, not because it wasn't warranted, but because it was a little too easy.
    I don´t think he´s saying that CCP videos are bad, he just wants Kabam to adress the reason why this post has 63 pages in 6 days: Why are 4* champions banned?
    I didn't accuse Seatin of saying CCP videos are bad, I'm accusing him of pretending to not be aware that these videos are coordinated with the content creators well ahead of time and with a specific release schedule, so accusing Kabam of deliberately releasing a CCP video to distract the playerbase is intellectual dishonesty of the first order.

    And I don't care what anyone wants, I only respond to what they say.
    Well ahead of time... You mean, like 5 days? Because that´s when they have decided to give them Early Acces, just one day after the initial announcement. That´s not "well ahead of time". They are doing everything to distract the community from the main topic, you are too blind to see that (pun intended)
    The original announcement was on March 6. The announcement that content creators were granted early access to the content was on March 7. That means the decision to grant early access must have occurred before the announcement was posted, because they would have been asking content creators to opt-in on March 6 at the latest, and must have made the decision and set things in motion no later than March 5, if not significantly earlier.

    Unless you think that Kabam saw the thread blow up, decide to scramble up an early access preview, made the game changes necessary to do that, contact the content creators, and gotten opt-in replys all within less than one day. Kabam couldn't move that quickly if the building was on fire.
    Actually it's not that hard... and they get paid handsomely for it... it's called their jobs...
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,697 Guardian
    Dshu said:

    Actually I'm in disagreement on this gate for 2 reasons

    We can talk about what your objections to the gate are separately, but I was specifically referring to the posts in question. Of course none of my statements would apply to your position on the gate, because they were replying to a statement you made about the announcement, not the gate itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.