The game experienced a brief connectivity issue this morning. The team promptly fixed the issue and things are back to normal, thank you to everyone who passed along reports!

Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes

1…5960626465…67

Comments

  • JamesJJamesJ Member Posts: 1 ★
    Stellar said:

    One question for Kabam

    You announced Cull will be rework because he out dammage every other champion but at the same time you create Guillotine 2099...
    Just seen Seatin video in its newly acquired Guillotine 2099 and the dammage are as impressive as Cull and thus with no digi-souls left ! Where Cull has to build its increased dammage !

    She does even degen dammage that no champion can stop !

    Where is the logic ?

    There is no Logic haven't you heard they make OP champs then Sell them then they nerf them and make the next OP champ for people to spend thousands on.

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Sieger7999 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:



    Broke their own word?

    As stated many, many times in this thread they explicitly said that these tweaks would be announced prior to the champ being added to the general pool, for cull this rule was broken.

    So yes, without a sliver of doubt they broke their own word with the cull announcement and honestly not sure how you weren’t aware of this? they owned up to it sure but you can’t complain if people don’t believe it won’t happen again with Namor.

    The "rule" was broken because people wanted Maw looked at. We asked for it. It wasn't even a rule. It was their objectives. Plans change.
    First people ask them to go back further, then they get upset they saw more than just Maw that needed something, then they hold it against them for doing what they wanted. SMH.
    I know you've repeated this ridiculous claim about Kabam looking at Cull because players asked Maw to be looked at over and over and over but it won't become true until you back up your theory with actual evidence. It's hilarious how you consider this assumption of yours as if it is self-evidently true. Has anyone representing Kabam even remotely suggested that they decided to evaluate Cull because players asked them to look at Maw? I didn't think so.
    Do the math. They announced the commitment to reevaluating Champs, and that they had plans to look at HT and Anni. Then people all started asking about Maw. Mods commented that they just missed the cutoff. Shortly after, they announced that they looked at the data, and people were right about Maw. They also announced that they noticed Cull, who was also released at the same time. You can call that ridiculous, but I think ridiculous is ignoring the evidence in front of us and calling it just an assumption.
  • StellarStellar Member Posts: 1,108 ★★★★
    HENRIQUE_FORTE said:



    The logic is that Guillotine 2099 will also be nerfed in some months, after we, players, test her. I mean, if they release 2 or 3 new champions every month, how can they test them properly? Damn, the whole act 6.2 was tested by a single player, why would they bother to pay someone to test new champions?

    That’s THE PROBLEM !

    They have all the content creator at their disposal to test the new champions !

    Why don’t they involve them 1 month before the champion is released ?
    I am sure the youtuber would accept to test the futur champion 1 or 2 months before just to make sure we will not have such nerf... again
  • dot_dittodot_ditto Member Posts: 1,442 ★★★★
    JamesJ said:

    DarthPhal said:


    I don't need a snickers my reaction is warranted and valid Im being robbed out of hundreds of dollars.
    Nah, I generally disagree with GW entirely, and agree with some of what you say .. but even on this, I have to agree with GW on this .. you are way out of line ... you need to take it down a few notches.
  • arsjumarsjum Member Posts: 413 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Sieger7999 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:



    Broke their own word?

    As stated many, many times in this thread they explicitly said that these tweaks would be announced prior to the champ being added to the general pool, for cull this rule was broken.

    So yes, without a sliver of doubt they broke their own word with the cull announcement and honestly not sure how you weren’t aware of this? they owned up to it sure but you can’t complain if people don’t believe it won’t happen again with Namor.

    The "rule" was broken because people wanted Maw looked at. We asked for it. It wasn't even a rule. It was their objectives. Plans change.
    First people ask them to go back further, then they get upset they saw more than just Maw that needed something, then they hold it against them for doing what they wanted. SMH.
    I know you've repeated this ridiculous claim about Kabam looking at Cull because players asked Maw to be looked at over and over and over but it won't become true until you back up your theory with actual evidence. It's hilarious how you consider this assumption of yours as if it is self-evidently true. Has anyone representing Kabam even remotely suggested that they decided to evaluate Cull because players asked them to look at Maw? I didn't think so.
    Do the math. They announced the commitment to reevaluating Champs, and that they had plans to look at HT and Anni. Then people all started asking about Maw. Mods commented that they just missed the cutoff. Shortly after, they announced that they looked at the data, and people were right about Maw. They also announced that they noticed Cull, who was also released at the same time. You can call that ridiculous, but I think ridiculous is ignoring the evidence in front of us and calling it just an assumption.
    Except there is no math here, just more speculation by yourself constructed in such a way that seemingly supports your theory (here is a spoiler for you: it does not). Once again, you have absolutely no evidence for what you claimed. But what do you do? Double down by claiming "they also announced that they noticed Cull" [emphasis added]. Are you even listening to yourself? They announced no such thing. There is absolutely no indication and no evidence whatsoever showing that Kabam devs decided to evaluate Cull because the players asked them to improve Maw. None.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    edited October 2019
    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Sieger7999 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:



    Broke their own word?

    As stated many, many times in this thread they explicitly said that these tweaks would be announced prior to the champ being added to the general pool, for cull this rule was broken.

    So yes, without a sliver of doubt they broke their own word with the cull announcement and honestly not sure how you weren’t aware of this? they owned up to it sure but you can’t complain if people don’t believe it won’t happen again with Namor.

    The "rule" was broken because people wanted Maw looked at. We asked for it. It wasn't even a rule. It was their objectives. Plans change.
    First people ask them to go back further, then they get upset they saw more than just Maw that needed something, then they hold it against them for doing what they wanted. SMH.
    I know you've repeated this ridiculous claim about Kabam looking at Cull because players asked Maw to be looked at over and over and over but it won't become true until you back up your theory with actual evidence. It's hilarious how you consider this assumption of yours as if it is self-evidently true. Has anyone representing Kabam even remotely suggested that they decided to evaluate Cull because players asked them to look at Maw? I didn't think so.
    Do the math. They announced the commitment to reevaluating Champs, and that they had plans to look at HT and Anni. Then people all started asking about Maw. Mods commented that they just missed the cutoff. Shortly after, they announced that they looked at the data, and people were right about Maw. They also announced that they noticed Cull, who was also released at the same time. You can call that ridiculous, but I think ridiculous is ignoring the evidence in front of us and calling it just an assumption.
    Except there is no math and once again you have provided no evidence whatsoever. None. You are just stretching the dots trying to build an evidence that does not exist. You are further doubling down by claiming "They also announced that they noticed Cull" [emphasis added]. Lol, they have made no such announcement.
    Your argument gets weaker the more you come back with that rebuttal.

    "Marvel Contest of Champions
    Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes
    MCOC TeamMCOC Team
    September 11 in General Discussion
    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."

    I'm not going to mince words over things that really have no productive purpose in the discussion.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    SettlersofCatan said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Tell me what scenario involves you spending that money in any way you can claim ownership of what you're buying or take it back. There is none. You're not investing into anything you own. You can't take your money back if the game ends tomorrow. You don't own your Account. None of us do.

    This game sells the illusion that the sandcastles we spend so much time building (sandcastles being our rosters and accounts) will last until the game shuts down.

    Nobody actually thinks we get anything back after it shuts down.

    We just don't want our castles kicked down for the utterly transparent motive of hey just build it back up again (buy our crystals and offers).

    You may not realize this but some players spent 5 or 6 figures (50-100k+ of real money) just on Cull, so you can't begin to comprehend why players are this frustrated. You sit on the sidelines from a safe distance away and keep talking as if you're an authority figure on this game.

    Sorry, but you're not. You have no idea how much cash and time players spend on this game so maybe you should start listening. You're really arrogant for someone who doesn't know much about MCOC.
    I've already stated what the objectives are for these rebalances, as I've gathered from their feedback. I do not agree that it has anything to do with some plan to get people to spend, switch things up, then get them to spend again.
    Cull was bugged not once, but twice. They dealt with that promptly, and were honest about that. These revisions are about minor balances that will make larger reworks less possible later on. Not about trying to get people to spend then mess with that. It's about having a better system for keeping the game balanced and healthy. This not only helps with the amount of work that goes into reworks, but it frees up content because great imbalances affect the content you put out.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    I'm not the one spewing anything here. This entire Thread came back to life and took a negative turn because people chose to point fingers at me and stir it up again. I'm not responsible for any choices they make. I'm explaining them. I don't have any more control than others do, and being ignorant to me won't affect their choices any more. What I'm trying to do is explain the situation without yelling fire. We don't know what they're adjusting. We know what they said, and they explicitly said they're tweaking existing attributes, and they mentioned he was doing more than any other Champ. There's a purpose to these revisions, and no amount of kicking and screaming or trying to pick me apart will really change their goals.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    edited October 2019
    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    arsjum said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Sieger7999 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:



    Broke their own word?

    As stated many, many times in this thread they explicitly said that these tweaks would be announced prior to the champ being added to the general pool, for cull this rule was broken.

    So yes, without a sliver of doubt they broke their own word with the cull announcement and honestly not sure how you weren’t aware of this? they owned up to it sure but you can’t complain if people don’t believe it won’t happen again with Namor.

    The "rule" was broken because people wanted Maw looked at. We asked for it. It wasn't even a rule. It was their objectives. Plans change.
    First people ask them to go back further, then they get upset they saw more than just Maw that needed something, then they hold it against them for doing what they wanted. SMH.
    I know you've repeated this ridiculous claim about Kabam looking at Cull because players asked Maw to be looked at over and over and over but it won't become true until you back up your theory with actual evidence. It's hilarious how you consider this assumption of yours as if it is self-evidently true. Has anyone representing Kabam even remotely suggested that they decided to evaluate Cull because players asked them to look at Maw? I didn't think so.
    Do the math. They announced the commitment to reevaluating Champs, and that they had plans to look at HT and Anni. Then people all started asking about Maw. Mods commented that they just missed the cutoff. Shortly after, they announced that they looked at the data, and people were right about Maw. They also announced that they noticed Cull, who was also released at the same time. You can call that ridiculous, but I think ridiculous is ignoring the evidence in front of us and calling it just an assumption.
    Except there is no math and once again you have provided no evidence whatsoever. None. You are just stretching the dots trying to build an evidence that does not exist. You are further doubling down by claiming "They also announced that they noticed Cull" [emphasis added]. Lol, they have made no such announcement.
    Your argument gets weaker the more you come back with that rebuttal.

    "Marvel Contest of Champions
    Upcoming Cull Obsidian and Ebony Maw Balance Changes
    MCOC TeamMCOC Team
    September 11 in General Discussion
    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."

    I'm not going to mince words over things that really have no productive purpose in the discussion.
    I am not making an argument which can get weaker or stronger. No argument from my side is needed. I am simply pointing out holes in your argument. Simply, you have been making a claim without a shred of evidence. I only asked for that evidence. You have provided none but have been just stretching the dots trying to construct an evidence that does not exist.

    Tell me this now, what was the purpose of copy/pasting the original Cull and Maw announcement? Quote me the relevant part. Show me where they say Kabam decided to look at Cull as a result of players asking the devs to look at Maw? Please, highlight. Where in that announcement are they saying that by looking at Maw "they noticed Cull" [your exact words, GW]? I'll be waiting.

    Feel free to stop if you think this discussion has no productive purpose. Feel free to continue. But when you keep repeating fallacious claims ad nauseum, the odds are someone will call you out.
    What has no purpose is the whole argument about me making baseless claims. I'm making assertions based on the information provided. The purpose of posting the original statement is that the information I based those claims on is partially contained in that statement. Also supported by other comments on the Forum that provide a timeline that supports my claim. What's not productive is this whole "You're making false claims. You don't know for sure." debate that really adds nothing.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    To be specific, if one comment says they missed the cutoff, and shortly after, a statement is made that they went back and examined the data as a result of people speaking up, it's only evident that they did so as a result of people asking for Maw to be buffed. That's not baseless.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Member Posts: 2,254 ★★★★★
    SettlersofCatan said:

    ThaVillain said:

    SettlersofCatan said:

    In other games, characters are free and balance changes are frequent.

    Not sure how that model works in MCOC, but what we now have isn't working. Players are getting the worst of both worlds. High acquisition cost and volatility, and you can't have both.

    Want regular balance changes? No problem, Cavs should cost 20 units not 300.

    I like this idea... id be much more ok with the balancing program if acquisition cost was lower.
    Yup, much more palatable.

    But what I don't like about the idea, in a double edged sword kind of way, is that easier access to champs cheapens the whole thing. I like having a champ that not everyone else does. He's mine. I managed to win the RNG lottery and many others didn't. Have him at r5 and sig 200. Invested everything into it. Makes it a bit special.

    But I also despise the acquisition costs and these types of threads, so maybe it's best to forgo champ sentimentality and just give them all out for cheap. Don't care how rich anyone is, nobody likes spending thousands on Goal-post Shifting Contest of Champions.
    No I do not want champs to come so easy. The fact that champions are hard to get is the model that keeps the game going. That's why people didn't like cavalier crystals.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    What's balanced to us is not necessarily what's balanced to them. We might think he's not that good because his shortcomings cancel out his amount of Damage. However, having a Champ do a significant amount more in one aspect than others is not really balanced either, no matter what their other weaknesses are. Same for doing significantly less, as in Maw.
    All they've said so far is they're making adjustments to the existing attributes. Which means they won't be major changes. More fine tuning, really.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    UnFazedSkull said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    What's balanced to us is not necessarily what's balanced to them. We might think he's not that good because his shortcomings cancel out his amount of Damage. However, having a Champ do a significant amount more in one aspect than others is not really balanced either, no matter what their other weaknesses are. Same for doing significantly less, as in Maw.
    All they've said so far is they're making adjustments to the existing attributes. Which means they won't be major changes. More fine tuning, really.

    Are you done now? Because you said you were done like 14 million times and you just keep going at the end of the day ur not gonna convince anyone
    I never said I was done participating in the conversation. I've said I'm done participating with parts of the discussion that are unproductive or disrespectful in general. Nothing's really going to come out of that.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    We can argue that fact ad nauseum, but that's a legal right, in plain writing.
  • TheTalentsTheTalents Member Posts: 2,254 ★★★★★
    edited October 2019
    Lets get back on track. I don't want this discussion to get shut down. Stick on topic.

    I would much rather Kabam finish their update with Cull, Human Torch, Annihulus, Colossus, and Old man Logan before having new polls and waiting for changes. This is probably why the updates take so long, too much going on at once. 6 months is way too long.
This discussion has been closed.