**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Comments
What you might not know, but no reasonable professional would ordinarily randomly guess about, is what "their jobs" actually are, or treat an entire company monolithically. It is not the content developers' jobs to read or monitor the forums. It is the community managers' responsibility to do that: the mods. The developers should be doing their jobs, which is content development. They might check in periodically, but they almost certainly aren't monitoring the forums continuously. So there would also be a delay between when the moderators felt the announcement thread was something noteworthy to pass on, and when anyone involved with content creation or operations management would have been informed.
On top of that, game developers of online games rarely have direct access to the live production systems. They cannot simply make changes "on the fly" for the game except in certain very specific circumstances. If they did not already decide to have an early access preview of Act 6 built into the game from a while back, no amount of brilliant coding could have created that possibility quickly, because they would have had to bundle up those changes into an update package and get completely separate operations people to load it into the game. All this takes time, which is why some bug fixes can be made quickly (if they involve a small change to data) and some take much longer (if they cross the threshold to making this process take a significant amount of time to coordinate).
You can't assume you can just shoot an email to a bunch of content creators at any random moment in time and get a reply immediately. They usually give at least one to two days for beta testers to respond. You can't enable content creators for early access without asking for permission or opt-in. And you can't create the game changes that allow this to happen or even flag the content creators that opt-in into the game databases on the fly, because almost no online game works that way and we know from experience that MCOC doesn't work that way.
Whatever your background, no reasonable professional anything would make these kinds of errors. On the other hand, if you want to play dueling resumes, sure, we can play that game also. I don't work in a quality department, I own the company. I don't get paid handsomely, I get paid mid six figures. And I don't guess about how game development works, I've done contract work for game development in the past. I'm willing to call this a draw, unless you would like to play on.
tl;dr Let’s give it a shot. It wouldn’t be the first time we freak out about content before hand and then realize it’s achievable.
I would consider myself an end game player — 100% LOL, Act 5, etc. and have been playing for about 2 years. I’ve never jumped on a “boycott bandwagon” and have supported the game and the decisions made by developers.
Lately, however, I have been questioning a lot of decisions made by the game team. The ability to target a specific 5* without spending (even with spending the chances are slim) has been taken away and replaced with the new Featured 5* Crystals that offer a much lower chance at getting a specific champ you want. Because of this, I don’t appreciate seeing people in here saying, “if you can’t do it yet then you’re not ready,” when u know that skill-wise I am more than ready for this content. The more accurate statement would be, “you haven’t gotten lucky enough to pull a 5* counter for (x) lane,” which isn’t right.
I’m a paying customer of this RNG based game, and if I haven’t lucked out and pulled a 5* void (or full in the blank) I should be allowed to use my 4* like I did in variant, my first LOL path, Act 5.4 ultron (4/40 unduped Medusa), and the maze. I feel like by completing the content to unlock Act 6, that should be enough to demonstrate that my skill/roster at least deserve a shot at some of these fights.
Given the fact that you’ve released content that’s at least as “frustrating” as Act 6 appears to be, and allowed 4*s into it, you set a precedent for the rest of the end game content. At least be honest about your reasons.
The last thing I’ll say is that when you guys decided to release 6*s, you gave the community notice so we could prepare for the change. What you’re doing now is the equivalent of giving 1 week notice about 6*s entering the game, not giving people opportunity to hold off on opening their 5*s in order to obtain 6* shards. Can you imagine the backlash? It probably wouldn’t have been much different from this.
It’s not so much WHAT decisions you make, but HOW you make them that will determine the community’s reaction.
Thanks 🙏🏼
No one is telling you that you have to Rank a 5* AA to replace your 4*. If that's what you're choosing to use, then you will have to, yes. The only current obligation is a 5* or a 6*. This is the next level of content, and a 4* won't always carry us through every new level of challenge. We have 3* versions that we Ranked and had to Rank the 4* versions. No different. That's what comes with multiple Rarities.
The amount of Resources to take a 5* to R3, the equivalent of an R5 4*, are about the same. For people at that stage of progress, some T4CCs and Basics aren't a cap.
On the other hand, if you believe that "viable" means "will always be usable in all present and future content" then 5* and 6* champs are explicitly non-viable. All the resources you put into 6* champs will one day be expended on champions you won't be able to use. That's simply the way these kinds of games work. There's only two possibilities: one day the champ will be deprecated when it comes to the top tier content, or the game ends before that happens and all champs become deprecated for all content.
Technically there's a third possibility: the game goes into permanent maintenance mode and nothing is ever added again that deprecates anything, but I doubt if Marvel would allow the license to continue for any length of time on a game like that.
Dr. Zola
If you can't use the 4*, then the inferior quality of that 5* just increased to more useful.
To be clear, I don’t go out of my way to rank 4*s over 5*s. But my 5* luck is quite woeful overall (considering How many crystals I’ve opened) so I’ve had no choice but to rank up 4*s and just happen to pull 5* versions afterwards which i then have no need to use resources on, unless they’re going to R4 or higher.
Diversity is off-topic, but I have and will always support people not playing in a box. If it's a bad thing to encourage people to explore more than just what The Jones' say is worth Ranking, then I'll be bad. I supported Diversity for a number of reasons, including the fact that people get way too set in their ways when it comes to using Champs. The very same issue we're having here. Change comes with doing things differently.