Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
After reading through the TOS and comments we all need to realize what spending (money, time, units) in this game really means.
Unfortunately we are not buying a champion to own. Everything in our accounts, including champions and all other materials, are not ours. We don’t own them. They are Kabams and they have the right to change them at will. Instead of comparing it to buying a car, we need to think of it as only buying the right to use a specific car at a raceway that is owned and operated by another company. If that company wants to change the car they let you use in anyway before the next time you visit the raceway, it’s up to them.
So instead of spending for a champion that will last, people are spending to only have that champion on their roster to use however that champions is at that given moment. Next time you log in they could be different.
What the announcement did is instantly devalue champions. With the realization that any champion may not stay good, it’s not worth the same to try to obtain a specific champ anymore. You don’t have any clue if what you have now will ever stay the same.
So now that we realize the champions are not ours, we should focus on what we do have control over. What we can do is:
1. Continue to leave comments that will hopefully help Kabam come to the conclusion of doing a more educated rebalance (ie a true “balance” by increasing block proficiency if his damage will be decreased to make him and overall more useable character)
2. Express any our concern over the overall process or communication, or lack of player /game understanding and involvement
3. Be knowledgeable about the true decreased worth and false ownership of champions and materials and spend less, or not at all, as prior to the announcement.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
apparently according to you bcoz you are referring to 'kabam data' in the whole post, maw was underperforming in offence since the beginning so maw needed it, not sure cull needed it though. also it isn't necessary that both champs should be from same months like colossus and oml or she hulk and spider gwen for rework or rebalancing.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
all i wonder is did kabam forget all those god champs like hulkbuster, moon knight or og magneto bcoz they need these rebalancing to even adjust in new meta
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
She-Hulk wasn't a rebalance at all. It was a bug fix.
Hello Kabam, there are people saying some comments made by Kabam mods hint that the changes to Cul might be because some players feel punished for not having him. Is that true?
Hello Kabam, there are people saying some comments made by Kabam mods hint that the changes to Cul might be because some players feel punished for not having him. Is that true?
Not exactly. One of the side-effects of having Champs that score much higher is a system where it's all about having the few that do the most. Directly, it's not just about people not having him.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
It still doesn’t make his statement pointless.
This adjustment (justified or not) creates a possible reluctance to bring champs up beyond r3/r1 for 5/6* respectively (assuming they are not needed for prestige bumps) if we know that they can adjust/rebalance/etc at any point in time...
They always could. That's always been a possibility. What they're striving for is revisiting Champs within a 3-month period for minor revisions. There are a number of reasons for this, like lessening the work load of larger reworks and creating more options for content. Not sure where this whole argument for Ranking came in, but you might as well Rank as usual.
They always could. That's always been a possibility. What they're striving for is revisiting Champs within a 3-month period for minor revisions. There are a number of reasons for this, like lessening the work load of larger reworks and creating more options for content. Not sure where this whole argument for Ranking came in, but you might as well Rank as usual.
Oh my g...because that is all people care about... their time and resources put into the game, and some of those resources are hard to come by (awakening gems and class particular sig stones)
R3 is that happy medium for clearing content and not feeling entirely ripped off by any kabam decision down the road...
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
That’s an absurd statement! What history or evidence do you have that supports the conclusion that changes to one champ cannot happen unless there are changes to another champ released at the same time?
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
That’s an absurd statement! What history or evidence do you have that supports the conclusion that changes to one champ cannot happen unless there are changes to another champ released at the same time?
They were both released at the same time. The schedule for these was every 3 months. If they go back to look at him, they also have to look at the other Champ from that month, and the two extremes are apparent.
This morning I used my t5b on Corvus. Way better and more reliable champ than cull. My six star cull will sit at R1 forever and collect dust. Never ranking him up and never using him again.
They always could. That's always been a possibility. What they're striving for is revisiting Champs within a 3-month period for minor revisions. There are a number of reasons for this, like lessening the work load of larger reworks and creating more options for content. Not sure where this whole argument for Ranking came in, but you might as well Rank as usual.
Oh my g...because that is all people care about... their time and resources put into the game, and some of those resources are hard to come by (awakening gems and class particular sig stones)
R3 is that happy medium for clearing content and not feeling entirely ripped off by any kabam decision down the road...
If you're suggesting people don't Rank anything, that's not going to help anyone clear content. It's also going to shortchange the data moving forward.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
She-Hulk wasn't a rebalance at all. It was a bug fix.
Okay another example 12.0 old champs got nerfed so Japam point is still invalid
Its ridiculous that you intend to nerf cull. His damage isn't that impressive without a great deal of work. With that in mind he needs to be left alone. With what you have to go through to ramp him up to that point his damage output is deserved.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
She-Hulk wasn't a rebalance at all. It was a bug fix.
Okay another example 12.0 old champs got nerfed so Japam point is still invalid
Not sure I follow that line of thinking. 12.0 had nothing to do with Shulk or the new rebalance schedule. Well, perhaps indirectly since they want to take care that the situation never happens again but...
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
She-Hulk wasn't a rebalance at all. It was a bug fix.
Okay another example 12.0 old champs got nerfed so Japam point is still invalid
Not sure I follow that line of thinking. 12.0 had nothing to do with Shulk or the new rebalance schedule. Well, perhaps indirectly since they want to take care that the situation never happens again but...
Japam said they don't rebalance old champs and I've gave several examples of them doing so
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
OK and? Japam was talking about how they aren't touching any old characters which is false in itself (She hulk, 15+ champions) so he was simply stating Cull isn't a new Champ either
She-Hulk wasn't a rebalance at all. It was a bug fix.
Okay another example 12.0 old champs got nerfed so Japam point is still invalid
Not sure I follow that line of thinking. 12.0 had nothing to do with Shulk or the new rebalance schedule. Well, perhaps indirectly since they want to take care that the situation never happens again but...
Japam said they don't rebalance old champs and I've gave several examples of them doing so
I believe what they meant was that the older Champs aren't included in these small reworks. Older ones would require larger reworks like Colossus and OML. At least I think that's what they were eluding to. I can't speak for them. They went further back because people wanted Maw done.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
Neither are Annihilus, Human Torch, and Ebony Maw. All are getting tweaked up. You completely missed the point. At any point Kabam could say they are rebalancing a champ and in 6 months the rank up materials used on them are wasted if the rebalance is actually a nerf like with Cull.
Yeah but they are NEWER champs and Kabam had made it clear that they, and those that follows them will be looked at.
And it's not 6 months - they'll signal the rebalancing within 3 months (Cull, Maw, Ronin).
The actual tweak will take 6 months, but within 3 months you'll already have an indication. So if you have Cull, or Maw or Ronin all you have to do is wait 3 months to see what's gonna happen, if you don't like it, don't take him R5.
Just another way this hurts your business model, Kabam. I just pulled a 6* Thing. Even unduped he's amazing and can take him to rank 2. Now I'm hesitant to rank someone up who's great because you might decide he's too great and nerf him. That's the issue this is causing. You'd be better served releasing one new champ a month instead of two and making sure they are perfect. You can always release two champs in certain months because you'd have extra lead time only having to release one champ a month.
Yeah but Thing isn't a new champ that's been scheduled for rebalancing.
Seriously man... lol
cull isn't new either. he is in basic pool now. Seriously man... lol
Neither was Maw. People wanted Maw redone. You can't do one and not the other from that month.
Ronin would beg to differ.
Ronin didn't need anything, as much as people want him buffed.
Comments
Seriously man... lol
Unfortunately we are not buying a champion to own. Everything in our accounts, including champions and all other materials, are not ours. We don’t own them. They are Kabams and they have the right to change them at will. Instead of comparing it to buying a car, we need to think of it as only buying the right to use a specific car at a raceway that is owned and operated by another company. If that company wants to change the car they let you use in anyway before the next time you visit the raceway, it’s up to them.
So instead of spending for a champion that will last, people are spending to only have that champion on their roster to use however that champions is at that given moment. Next time you log in they could be different.
What the announcement did is instantly devalue champions. With the realization that any champion may not stay good, it’s not worth the same to try to obtain a specific champ anymore. You don’t have any clue if what you have now will ever stay the same.
So now that we realize the champions are not ours, we should focus on what we do have control over. What we can do is:
1. Continue to leave comments that will hopefully help Kabam come to the conclusion of doing a more educated rebalance (ie a true “balance” by increasing block proficiency if his damage will be decreased to make him and overall more useable character)
2. Express any our concern over the overall process or communication, or lack of player /game understanding and involvement
3. Be knowledgeable about the true decreased worth and false ownership of champions and materials and spend less, or not at all, as prior to the announcement.
Seriously man... lol
This adjustment (justified or not) creates a possible reluctance to bring champs up beyond r3/r1 for 5/6* respectively (assuming they are not needed for prestige bumps) if we know that they can adjust/rebalance/etc at any point in time...
R3 is that happy medium for clearing content and not feeling entirely ripped off by any kabam decision down the road...
And it's not 6 months - they'll signal the rebalancing within 3 months (Cull, Maw, Ronin).
The actual tweak will take 6 months, but within 3 months you'll already have an indication. So if you have Cull, or Maw or Ronin all you have to do is wait 3 months to see what's gonna happen, if you don't like it, don't take him R5.
Simple as that.