**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
We have not set an end-date for the new period, but we will update this banner when we have more information.

Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1…1819212324…67

Comments

  • RagamugginGunnerRagamugginGunner Posts: 2,210 ★★★★★
    DrZola said:

    Rickybobby1 said:

    I don’t want rank down tickets.... I want the team in charge of putting out content to test the content. Put KT1 on your payroll if you have to. Slow down with rapid firing everything out to us. This is becoming absurd.

    This point shouldn’t get lost in the conflagration...testing, testing, testing.

    Get the CCP participants as well as some real world endgame players to test drive champs pre-release and before you start selling them to the community.

    And actually listen to their analysis.

    Dr. Zola
    They should have a CCP beta where they give them the champ a month early to test them out. Let them live stream and create videos on the champs to get ideas and feed back on what to test. Would get people interested and put a stop to the need for nerfs.
  • F1TLYFEF1TLYFE Posts: 56 ★
    Let it be known
  • RoninManRoninMan Posts: 747 ★★★★
    Ronin still needs some additional tweaking to make him desirable. Just a little extra bleed damage or beef up his DAAR. These are small changes that wouldn’t make him too powerful.
  • Bear3Bear3 Posts: 996 ★★★
    Yup need to wait to get champs from basic crystals and don’t rank them up for about a year or you’ll just get scammed and robbed. Featured 5* crystals aren’t worth it either now that those 5k extra shards are just going to champs being nerfed. It doesn’t matter what they change is. If it’s a negative change in any way then compensation is required. They need to do content creator program and then not release cavalier featured crystals for 3 months after to properly test champs. They allowed people to spend 1000’s and then nerf him right before he enters basics. Beyond shady.

    🐻
  • Mason302Mason302 Posts: 1 ★
    MCOC Team said:

    Summoners,

    The next two Champions to get the rebalance treatment will be Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw. These balance updates will be limited to the tuning and balancing of a Champion's existing kit, abilities won’t be added or removed.

    Ronin:

    We’ve taken a look at Ronin’s performance and are happy with his both his performance and his abilities. We will not be making any balance changes to Ronin at this time.

    Cull Obsidian:

    After looking at our data across all the game modes we have determined that Cull Obsidian is out damaging every other high-damage Champion in the game. While he does have his limiting factors, once he's fully ramped up he is able to end fights before even high-level Opponents can do any meaningful damage to him.

    The goal of Cull’s rebalance is to make tuning changes that keeps Cull Obsidian as one of the top damage dealers in-game.

    Ebony Maw:

    You said it and we saw it in the data. Although Ebony Maw is a decent Defender, he is underperforming as an Attacker (the designer said something about his Degeneration DPS being just sad and wrong).

    We are looking to boost both his defensive and offensive potential, but with an emphasis on offense.

    Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw’s balance changes should be live in approximately 3 months.

    Ronin not getting any kind of buff is absolutely ridiculous. He is fun to play but he lacks a decent, consistent damage output. The fact that human torch, a more viable champion than ronin, is getting a buff and ronin is a complete joke. I have him as a six star and he needs a buff so he is a more viable option.
    #justiceforronin
  • NinjAlanNinjAlan Posts: 358 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Dizzy said:

    Not a Cull player. Just saying that it's a little shady that Kabam told us explicitly that this would only impact champions not in the basic, but then would go back and adjust three champs in the basic.

    I'm fine waiting on ranking up a champion to R5 until he/she enters the basic. It's tedious, but if I'm really terrified they'll get nerfed I'll wait. I'm not fine waiting forever because I'll never know when a champion is "safe" to rank up.

    Can you point to where they said it would not affect those in basic? I am pretty sure you are taking their statement out of context.
    It's posted in here several times. Do you actually read threads? Or just find ones you can easily disagree with?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    UmbertoDelRio said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    UmbertoDelRio said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Not to fuel the fire but Ronin isn't even that bad. Lol.

    That's definitely fueling the fire.

    The fire in my heart.
    XD
    I'll let it go. I just like him is all. I don't have an issue with him.
    It's okay, I also really like him. I'd just like to like him even more.
    Fair enough. I enjoy playing with him no matter what.
  • F1TLYFEF1TLYFE Posts: 56 ★
    edited September 2019
    Sad
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Posts: 2,254 ★★★★★
    I foresee Kabam not changing Cull Obsidian. For those that don't know this is a straw too far and that's what the complaints are about, not Cull Obsidian. They will regret changing Cull because this will effect their bottom line if they do. Kabam I suggest you listen to your player base and leave him as presently constructed or at least announce a significant increase in his block prof as well. Otherwise this will be 12.0 all over again and I'm not saying this just to say it.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    So what happens the next time they have to rebalance a Champ? This is round 1 of regular revisions. Do people threaten to Boycott everytime one comes?
    If there's something that needs to be adjusted, they will adjust it. That's what they've committed to. People can't threaten to take the revisions hostage everytime a Champ they like is being questioned.
  • ldj86ldj86 Posts: 5 ★
    They have been pushing these Crystals for month!
  • ldj86ldj86 Posts: 5 ★
    months
  • F1TLYFEF1TLYFE Posts: 56 ★
    ldj86 said:

    They have been pushing these Crystals for month!

    They actually have
  • RoninManRoninMan Posts: 747 ★★★★
    Lormif said:

    THALEMKYKO1 said:

    ESF said:

    Lormif said:

    Gkohler said:

    The whole retuning idea is wrong. Test your champs properly before releasing.

    I spent a ton of real life money on obtaining Cull. And that was based solely on his damage. I’ve ranked up all the way up to R5 and use him often. How fair is it to change anything at any time just because a champ is too good? That changes everything with this game. New champ comes out and does insane damage, but now there’s most likely a chance that character will be nerfed. What’s the point in trying to obtain a champ when that champ will most likely be changed in months time? Totally unfair.

    Lets give an example
    Champ a does 20k damage
    Champ b does 22k damage
    Champ c does 19k damage
    Champ d does 40k damage.

    There is obviously an issue with champ d. It does not mean there is an issue with being the top damage dealer, but that d's damage is way out of control. It means they have to design fights specifically with him in mind, similar to blades danger sense. This weakens the value of all other champs because they can no longer compete, and now everyone has to have cull to clear content.
    How do people not see this? The argument he takes a lot of potions and ramp-up time so he still should have absolutely game-breaking DPS is ludicrous -- I could say the same thing about Sentry.

    You can't have a game that says beat this content with Sentry and another character does the same content in 10-15 hits
    And like I said champ d will do 5k damage in his first fight so if they buff him in other ways to make him more sustainable I don’t mind otherwise don’t touch the champ
    Your statement makes no sense.. Lets take a look at the damage output of a normal 8 fight path

    acculmative:

    Champ a does 20k damage
    Champ b does 22k damage
    Champ c does 19k damage
    Champ d does 5k damage.

    Champ a does 40k damage
    Champ b does 44k damage
    Champ c does 38k damage
    Champ d does 45k damage.

    Using these numebrs you can see that even with the first fight he is doing 5k damage after the second fight he has already recovered and done more:

    Champ a does 60k damage
    Champ b does 66k damage
    Champ c does 57k damage
    Champ d does 85k damage.

    Now he is doing a third more than anyone else after the third. This will grow until he is doing close to double the damage still, the first fight does not matter, over the course of the fight he will greatly surpass the others.
    I don’t understand. How are these numbers possible? In the first fight doesn’t every champ need to have the same damage output to go to the second fight? I.e. the first defender has 50k HP so every attacker will have 50k damage output. I do not think this illustration is the best unless you can clarify. Maybe if you said x champ did 40k with 20 hits vs y champ that did 50k with 5 hits it would be a better illustration.
  • Bear3Bear3 Posts: 996 ★★★
    It really doesn’t matter if his damage is too much or just right. They sold a product under a certain specifications. They need to honor it or give compensation. Kabam said they test their champs but can test it as much as we can? Then you need to stagger the release more instead of adjusting every champ you release. Release two champs half as often.. guess what you bought yourself? TWICE THE TESTING TIME! Create champs further ahead so they can be tested properly. Sorry but this is not a coincidence that he’s being nerfed right after all the arenas, cavaliers and featured 5*’s aren’t around. They scraped every dollar first and then dropped the nerf.

    🐻
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,503 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    So what happens the next time they have to rebalance a Champ? This is round 1 of regular revisions. Do people threaten to Boycott everytime one comes?
    If there's something that needs to be adjusted, they will adjust it. That's what they've committed to. People can't threaten to take the revisions hostage everytime a Champ they like is being questioned.

    I don't think the argument is about all future readjustments. Adjusting champs who are underperforming is welcomed by the community. When they adjust champs down after advertising and selling thousands in cavalier crystals usually multiple offers for champs that are overhyped by Youtubers it creates a sense of mistrust in the community. They adjusted cull twice to balance his power already and it was excepted by the community. He isn't a game breaking champ as he stands since he has very low block proficiency and requires parry to function as intended. I'm not even a fan of cull myself since I prefer intercept to parry but I see a huge problem with nerfing a product after multiple sale pushes. I'd rather see them under promise on a champs power and abilities and later over deliver with a buff as needed. If the game team and content creators are testing these champs they should have some idea before the release if they will be overpowered
  • Justin2524Justin2524 Posts: 1,626 ★★★★
    ldj86 said:

    You will be losing money in the long run! Handcuffing the Whales. People will be less motivated to spend money. Great idea Kaaloss profit! Whoever came up with this great idea should be walked out the door! Thought you wanted to make make not lose it! LOL

    Exactly.. the fact that they're willing to lose money over this tells me they really care about the game and to ensure its balance and longevity.

    Not sure why people cannot see this.
  • NojokejaymNojokejaym Posts: 3,903 ★★★★★
    Lol y’all complaining as if y’all didn’t know this was coming after they announced their 3 month plan for champs
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,649 Guardian
    Plantesan said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Plantesan said:

    I am curious at what point did they start collecting data, because didn’t they have an adjustment on him already? Seems kinda silly to do another one

    The game constantly records data. The problem with datamining champion performance is that initially the performance of every champion is skewed by the fact that very few players have them, and the players that do tend to skew higher in skill than average. They aren't completely representative of the playerbase. Conversely, they are also less experienced with the champs, and there's less meta-information about the champs floating around.

    Over time as more players get and rank champions up and start using them, the breadth of the players who have the champ becomes more representative of the whole playerbase, and the overall performance of the champ tends to rise as both the skilled players get more practice with them, and things like guides and videos and friend-of-a-friend experience filters down to the rest of the players.

    Given how crystals work, it could be three to six months or more before you get a rough representative sample of players using a champ, and six months to a year before the champ's full potential actually shows up in the data when the majority of players using them have a better understanding of the champ.

    To put this another way, everyone seems to be assuming that the "data" being collected is about the champion, so all it takes is one person playing the champ to show what the champ can do. But the data being collected is not about the champ. The data being collected is actually about *us* and how we do when we have the champ. Champs are balanced not based on how good they are, but on how good we are when we play them. It is the combination of champion and player that is being judged, across all the players playing the game.
    Working from your explanation, would it be wrong to suggest if the data began to show the majority of the players using him were clearing content not designed to be cleared so easily, that this adjustment (plus their recent featured crystal for him) could be seen as a bit shady?
    "Could be seen as" a bit shady? No, I don't think that's wrong. I don't think it is shady, but I can see how it can be seen as shady. One thing I've learned over time is there's a real disconnect between all game developers in the universe and most game players, that isn't really talked about much, so much so that most game players don't realize it is there and even most game developers don't realize it is there.

    This is a big oversimplification, but game players view games as if they are a golf course they are trying to beat. The course remains mostly fixed (yes, I know they change course layouts on occasion, so the example isn't great) and the player wants to keep coming back over and over, getting better at beating that course. The challenge is fixed, and the player judges their progress relative to the challenge.

    However, almost all online games are designed as if they were graded on a curve. Your grade isn't determined by how well you do against the test, it is determined by how well you do against all the other players. Content is designed relative to the players: when the players do better that means the content was easier, and when the players do worse that means the content was harder, and adjustments are made. In our case when champions do better than intended that means they were designed too strong, and vice versa. The players' performance determines how good the champions actually are, and when they do especially well with them, that can be cause for a nerf.

    The developers would say that if the players do way better with one champ than another, that means that champ was made too good, and beyond a certain threshold it has to be adjusted. The players would say if the players do way better with one champ than another, they should be rewarded for that performance and not punished. This is a fundamental difference in perspective, that I'm not sure how to resolve.

    This isn't just limited to game development. If you've taken the SAT exams in the United States, you can compare your score with other people who took the test at the same time. You can't directly compare your score with other people who took the test at different times, because the people who make the test keep changing the test and the test's intrinsic difficulty, to try to normalize the scores over time. That means it is entirely possible that the test you took was significantly harder than the test someone two years ago took. Is that fair? It depends on what you think the purpose of the test is. If people are smarter today than yesterday, should they get better scores? A student might say yes. The test administrators would say no. They would say the purpose of the test is to highlight differences between all the students taking the test at the same time, not to reward one year's students with better scores if they are better test takers than any other year's students.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,234 ★★★★★
    Dshu said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    So what happens the next time they have to rebalance a Champ? This is round 1 of regular revisions. Do people threaten to Boycott everytime one comes?
    If there's something that needs to be adjusted, they will adjust it. That's what they've committed to. People can't threaten to take the revisions hostage everytime a Champ they like is being questioned.

    I don't think the argument is about all future readjustments. Adjusting champs who are underperforming is welcomed by the community. When they adjust champs down after advertising and selling thousands in cavalier crystals usually multiple offers for champs that are overhyped by Youtubers it creates a sense of mistrust in the community. They adjusted cull twice to balance his power already and it was excepted by the community. He isn't a game breaking champ as he stands since he has very low block proficiency and requires parry to function as intended. I'm not even a fan of cull myself since I prefer intercept to parry but I see a huge problem with nerfing a product after multiple sale pushes. I'd rather see them under promise on a champs power and abilities and later over deliver with a buff as needed. If the game team and content creators are testing these champs they should have some idea before the release if they will be overpowered
    The comment was made that Cull wouldn't be adjusted or it would be 12.0 all over again. That suggests a very perpetual situation. Give in, and the next time it creates a situation where people are controlling the game.
    It works both ways. If a Champ is way too powerful, balancing can work the other way. I'm not saying that to create a fear of every strong Champ being adjusted. It entirely depends on the context of the data. The bottom line in this case is he was showing higher than any other, and that's higher than they intend any Champ to hit within the snapshot they collected.
This discussion has been closed.