D3 Nerfs your invested characters to try make us buy packs

ShomiTheMonkey

Although they must make money in some way, bringing in Ultra powerful characters only to Nerf them later leaves me bitter even if it is of the seriously overpowered Sentry and Hood now, by comparison though does anyone remember how Spider-man used to be actually fun to play in this game? They will continue to make PVP near impossible unless you have certain characters so why should you try for the new ones in PVP or Seasons? The prices they ask for 10 and 42 Cover packs is nearly criminal and the odds of getting useful covers that you do not already have are almost always criminally low (often less than 20% chance of getting a 3-4* cover from cover packs). Please introduce fairness and hope to people that want to continue to play your game. What do you all think, will X-Force and 4* Thoress decimate the future of PVP only to be Nerfed eventually?

JamieMadrox

You use criminal and fairness a lot for a situation where you were given notice weeks in advance. Sentry + Hood was incredibly overpowered and unbalanced the game a lot. Did I take advantage of this? Of course I did. Am I going to fault D3 for fixing it? A little, but not to the point where I'm going to come on here an complain about it. The combo still works, it just takes a little longer to trigger and does a little less damage. You may actually need to play a match for more than 20 seconds now.

Maybe you can use that extra time to appreciate what the devs have created here and what they're trying to do to keep it going.

Unknown

The changes to The Hood doesn't even address why he's overpowered in the first place. Nobody used Twin Pistols while The Hood's paired up with Sentry for obvious reasons.

I'd like devs in general, not just this game, to be more responsible rather than the 'don't worry we can patch it later' approach. See MTG for an example of a game that pretty much has to be balanced right the first time because they can't just patch the physical cards printed if it turns out to be broken later. While nobody expects perfect balance in any game, some of the imbalance stuff is rather egregious. It's better than the 2 AP Thunderclap in the past but there's still a lot of mysteriously imbalanced characters out there.

NorthernPolarity

ShomiTheMonkey wrote:

Although they must make money in some way, bringing in Ultra powerful characters only to Nerf them later leaves me bitter even if it is of the seriously overpowered Sentry and Hood now, by comparison though does anyone remember how Spider-man used to be actually fun to play in this game? They will continue to make PVP near impossible unless you have certain characters so why should you try for the new ones in PVP or Seasons? The prices they ask for 10 and 42 Cover packs is nearly criminal and the odds of getting useful covers that you do not already have are almost always criminally low (often less than 20% chance of getting a 3-4* cover from cover packs). Please introduce fairness and hope to people that want to continue to play your game. What do you all think, will X-Force and 4* Thoress decimate the future of PVP only to be Nerfed eventually?

Spidey was "fun" to play? If your definition of fun is stunlocking the enemy team for 20 turns and trying to kill him with the other character you bring, then sure, he was "fun" to play.

Your logic doesnt make any sense because the nerfs are doing exactly what you want them to: how is nerfing the most broken character in the game not trying to introduce "fairness" into the game? The whole point of nerfs in the first place is to make it so that certain characters arent mandatory, which is exactly what theyre trying to do with the sentry nerf. Balancing is hard. Sometimes they dont get it right the first time (as you can see in literally ever game with patches): how can you expect to be flawless?

Unknown

Phantron wrote:

The changes to The Hood doesn't even address why he's overpowered in the first place. Nobody used Twin Pistols while The Hood's paired up with Sentry for obvious reasons.

I'd like devs in general, not just this game, to be more responsible rather than the 'don't worry we can patch it later' approach. See MTG for an example of a game that pretty much has to be balanced right the first time because they can't just patch the physical cards printed if it turns out to be broken later. While nobody expects perfect balance in any game, some of the imbalance stuff is rather egregious. It's better than the 2 AP Thunderclap in the past but there's still a lot of mysteriously imbalanced characters out there.

I absolutely agree with almost everything here, I just wanted to point out that even with all the balancing they attempt, MtG still has its little issues that slip past QA, simply because there's *always* someone out there that will find a way to do something new with what they've been given. It's why you see ban-lists for certain cards in tournament play.

ShomiTheMonkey

To Phantron, Jamie, Northern and all others that view this topic,

My question to you all as part of what I was trying to put out here is that D3 may have profited heavily off of putting out Ultra powerful characters, letting us spend invest massive amounts of time, effort and in many cases money to get thesed now nerfed characters maxed, then they put out new characters that become the essential Ultra powerful shield hopping characters (example: Is 4* Xforce on par with 4* Invisible Woman?)?. Although I appreciate the idea of this game, maybe the characters should have been playtested more thoroughly, then sell their game to make their money as a Retail priced game instead of Free to Play with the Pay to Win option that is very much present in the game. They could have sold Character expansion packs as well to make their money. These type of Pay to Win games can be depressing to people who feel they have money to spend, then wind up with a character they no longer even like or use. They could have gone in 2 or more release directions with this game and they chose the "Take your time and chances to hopefully earn the covers you are missing" instead of "Here is a fair and balanced puzzle game for one set price, expansions available later". Why encourage the gambler segment of the gamer population with faster "Pay to Win" options?

As for the Spiderman example, I meant that at least that character was fun to play as compared to Sentry. Spiderman was overpowered but I would have still had fun using him after being hit by a slightly smaller Nerf hammer. I try to convey multiple ideas at the same time so I'm sorry if it didn't come out clearer at first. I want this type of game to exist but I feel the fully playtested, Retail retail release direction would have been more fair and probably more fun for everyone. What do you all think?

Unknown

ShomiTheMonkey wrote:

To Phantron, Jamie, Northern and all others that view this topic,

My question to you all as part of what I was trying to put out here is that D3 may have profited heavily off of putting out Ultra powerful characters, letting us spend invest massive amounts of time, effort and in many cases money to get thesed now nerfed characters maxed, then they put out new characters that become the essential Ultra powerful shield hopping characters (example: Is 4* Xforce on par with 4* Invisible Woman?)?. Although I appreciate the idea of this game, maybe the characters should have been playtested more thoroughly, then sell their game to make their money as a Retail priced game instead of Free to Play with the Pay to Win option that is very much present in the game. They could have sold Character expansion packs as well to make their money. These type of Pay to Win games can be depressing to people who feel they have money to spend, then wind up with a character they no longer even like or use. They could have gone in 2 or more release directions with this game and they chose the "Take your time and chances to hopefully earn the covers you are missing" instead of "Here is a fair and balanced puzzle game for one set price, expansions available later". Why encourage the gambler segment of the gamer population with faster "Pay to Win" options?

As for the Spiderman example, I meant that at least that character was fun to play as compared to Sentry. Spiderman was overpowered but I would have still had fun using him after being hit by a slightly smaller Nerf hammer. I try to convey multiple ideas at the same time so I'm sorry if it didn't come out clearer at first. I want this type of game to exist but I feel the fully playtested, Retail retail release direction would have been more fair and probably more fun for everyone. What do you all think?

I doubt there's this secret plan like 'Let's release Sentry and make $200 each and then nerf him hahaha!' because if that was the plan we should have a Platinum 4* version of Sentry now. That said, I agree play testing should be more thorough. I think games in general rely on patch as a crutch and while you can't have a perfectly balancing game, you really shouldn't have too many decision where nobody in their right mind would think it's balanced.

For the fun factor, overkill can be fun but because this game is inherently competitive, overkill tends to come back and haunt you in the form of scaling in PvE and the crazy point drops in PvP. After all, if everyone can beat everyone else easily, what is supposed to keep your score afloat in PvP or PvE? I think it'd be fun if they had a mode where it's not competitive versus players and you're allowed to use things that'd otherwise be totally unfair. I wouldn't mind if there's a scenario where you get to take a 2 AP Thunderclap Ragnarok against 3 level 395s and totally own them to relieve some stress.

Unknown

Business is business. This game taught me a lesson "dont invest any money online game".

Quebbster

NorthernPolarity wrote:

Spidey was "fun" to play? If your definition of fun is stunlocking the enemy team for 20 turns and trying to kill him with the other character you bring, then sure, he was "fun" to play.

Very much this. I used stunlocking extensively back then, and it was never any fun, just tedious. Effective though, absolutely. After the change, I enjoy playing Spider-man a lot more - he has good defense tiles and stunlocking can definitely be useful. He can still stunlock the last man standing even if he can't keep the enemy team locked up indefinitely.

Unknown

The next character who will be nerf must be x force wolverine because i see him everywhere and the game is still unbalanced after funbalance so many times

Unknown

Here is my take on these threads in general:

If you had Sentry, did not have X-Force maxed, you are pissed as all hell about the extreme nerf to Sentry. If you were mostly casual, but decided to pay a bit for covers to max him, even more so.
If you had Sentry, and also have X-Force maxed, you are not pissed at all. Sentry is just another bench warmer.
If you didn't have Sentry, and have X-Force maxed, you are thrilled because you have the new FotM for PvP.

I'm catagory #1 above, the nerf was (as usual) over done, I'm done. not worth getting annoyed like this in a game.

JamieMadrox

monica123 wrote:

The next character who will be nerf must be x force wolverine because i see him everywhere and the game is still unbalanced after funbalance so many times

People seem to forget that XForce is a 4* character; they're supposed to be over powered compared to a 3* character.

Unknown

vayhle wrote:

Here is my take on these threads in general:

If you had Sentry, did not have X-Force maxed, you are pissed as all hell about the extreme nerf to Sentry. If you were mostly casual, but decided to pay a bit for covers to max him, even more so.
If you had Sentry, and also have X-Force maxed, you are not pissed at all. Sentry is just another bench warmer.
If you didn't have Sentry, and have X-Force maxed, you are thrilled because you have the new FotM for PvP.

I'm catagory #1 above, the nerf was (as usual) over done, I'm done. not worth getting annoyed like this in a game.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

GrumpySmurf1002

Jamie Madrox wrote:

monica123 wrote:

The next character who will be nerf must be x force wolverine because i see him everywhere and the game is still unbalanced after funbalance so many times

People seem to forget that XForce is a 4* character; they're supposed to be over powered compared to a 3* character.

So much this. And it's not like they build 4* where they're unbeatable. A (mid-top tier) 3* handles XForce amazingly compared to the gap in 2->3* power.

Not to mention all these people running 2/2/4, level 150 XForce's are effectively putting cannon fodder out there. You need at least 4/4/x to make him viable, and really anything below 5/5/x is no worse than facing Punisher, Torch, or Psylocke.

JamieMadrox

All of this complaining highlights one very good point for me.

Players are people that invest heavily in "the best" and nothing else and then complain when the best is no longer the best.

Competitors are people that invest in "the best" and "the second best" and "the third best" and so on. They don't complain when the best is no longer the best because chances are they already have the next best ready to go.

Unknown

ShomiTheMonkey wrote:

does anyone remember how Spider-man used to be actually fun to play in this game?

You lost me here. in the old OP stun-lock way was never fun to play. It was monotonous and lacked any depth of strategy or thought at all. Gather , eventually chip away their health and win while they're stunlocked. Pretty much a guaranteed win. Maybe not always PVP viable, but it tore up PVE (where match time rarely matters) something fierce.

bombing with wasn't much better. Boost 3 , 2 , 2 +all, match , cast World Rupture, match ,cast Sacrifice, win. Sure, you'd get a bad board where you've gathered 27 and are still stuck on your original 5 , but it's rare.

In a competitive and time sensitive environment, the cleanest and fastest strategies will often be crowd sourced and distilled, but that doesn't make them fun. The Bomb Squad may still be viable, but the risk/reward has been increased as the time required for the kill has increased.

Balancing and retooling characters (especially like this where they're still viable, not obsoleted) seems fine with me, and is good for the long term health of the game.

Unknown

Although the OP might not expressed himself to everyone's liking, I share his frustration with characters getting nerfed that we've vested time, energy and sometimes $$$$ into.

Unknown

This is the risk you take when playing a game like this!

At least you vets got to exploit it and make gains. Get over it.

Unknown

Jamie Madrox wrote:

All of this complaining highlights one very good point for me.

Players are people that invest heavily in "the best" and nothing else and then complain when the best is no longer the best.

Competitors are people that invest in "the best" and "the second best" and "the third best" and so on. They don't complain when the best is no longer the best because chances are they already have the next best ready to go.

The only problem is that up to this point, the best and 2nd best, etc were all 3 star characters. Now X-Force and 4Thor (in about 40 days) are the best and those are out of reach for most casual, F2P players. Spiderman, CMags, Sentry, Hood were all difficult to max, but obtainable.

To compare, 3star to 4star

PvP 1 cover Top100 vs. Top1
PvP 2 covers Top25 vs. N/A
PvP 3 covers Top5 vs. N/A
PvP Alliance Top100 vs. N/A
PvP Progression 1100 vs. 1300
PvE 1 cover Top150 vs. Top2
PvE 2 covers Top50 vs. N/A
PvE 3 covers Top10 vs. N/A
PvE Alliance Top100 vs. N/A
PvE Progression ~10% vs. N/A
Season Progression ~30% vs. N/A
Season Alliance N/A vs. Top100
Token Drops 17% vs. 3%

To sum up, to get a 4star cover, you must be a member of a top100 alliance, score 1300 in PvP, or finish in the top 0.2% of PvP or PvE. Outside of that, you are relying on a 3% drop rate from tokens. While there are a lot of 0.2%ers on this forum, it is much easier to get 13 covers for a 3Star (even with 30 of them to dilute the pool) than get 13 covers for a 4Star.

This is where the frustration from those of us stuck in the transition comes from. The goal line just got moved 20 yards further and you broke my quarterback's arm. A long, slow tedious process just got longer and slower.

Unknown

I'm with you. I don't have a maxed out X-Force yet. Without Sentry and Hood, there is no way to shield hop my way up to get X-Force covers either.

For me, Sentry is practically useless now. By the time his World Rupture goes off, there are only 2-3 tiles left to do anything.

Once I hit 600 points, I see nothing but maxed out X-Force + Dino/Fury/Hood. It just feels like there is no way whatsoever to compete. I'm finally hanging it up after about a year of fun.

HailMary

papa07 wrote:

The only problem is that up to this point, the best and 2nd best, etc were all 3 star characters. Now X-Force and 4Thor (in about 40 days) are the best and those are out of reach for most casual, F2P players. Spiderman, CMags, Sentry, Hood were all difficult to max, but obtainable.

I sympathize with the ever-slower pace of the 2*-3* transition. I do. The expanding 3* character pool and the vaulting of high-tier 3*s exacerbates that.

But, why should "most casual, F2P players" expect to max out the two best characters in the entire game?