Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1434446484967

Comments

  • Apple_user2Apple_user2 Posts: 100
    So how much would cull change like with his abilities cause was going to r5 him now not sure
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★

    So how much would cull change like with his abilities cause was going to r5 him now not sure

    They haven't looked at what will change yet. At least not that they've told us. We don't know.
  • Japam12345Japam12345 Posts: 685 ★★★

    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
  • mcofnycmcofnyc Posts: 28
    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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
  • AkhilxcxAkhilxcx Posts: 255 ★★

    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
  • AkhilxcxAkhilxcx Posts: 255 ★★
    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
  • Stockpile_000Stockpile_000 Posts: 16
    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?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★

    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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    When they have to design content around Champs that have extreme capabilities, it has other effects.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    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.
  • PlantesanPlantesan Posts: 234 ★★

    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...
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    CFree said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
  • SupermancaSupermanca Posts: 45
    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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    Plantesan said:

    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.
  • ZuroZuro Posts: 1,697 ★★★★

    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    Zuro said:

    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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...
  • ZuroZuro Posts: 1,697 ★★★★

    Zuro said:

    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 20,516 ★★★★★
    Zuro said:

    Zuro said:

    Zuro said:

    Akhilxcx said:

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.