I learned my lesson; don't spend money on this game!

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Come on, who didn't see this coming? Ragnarok was by far the most complained about and overpowered character in the game. That's why I didn't try to level him because I knew it was going to happen. His red is still effective to the point where it is how it should have been since the beginning with a huge increase in damage. I still like him.

Nobody saw a 300% increase in AP cost coming, sorry.

His red is still effective with a huge increase in damage? You just lost all credibility. It does 8xx damage at level 115. Thor does 1113 at level 85.

Wait, it only does 800 damage? Wow, I thought that an extra 260% of baseline actually meant something. This is pretty bad. But still, my point still stands, besides the damage part.

Nemek

GT-47LM wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Come on, who didn't see this coming? Ragnarok was by far the most complained about and overpowered character in the game. That's why I didn't try to level him because I knew it was going to happen. His red is still effective to the point where it is how it should have been since the beginning with a huge increase in damage. I still like him.

Nobody saw a 300% increase in AP cost coming, sorry.

His red is still effective with a huge increase in damage? You just lost all credibility. It does 8xx damage at level 115. Thor does 1113 at level 85.

Wait, it only does 800 damage? Wow, I thought that an extra 260% of baseline actually meant something. This is pretty bad. But still, my point still stands, besides the damage part.

It's now 967. (Still not great.)

Unknown

Nemek wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

GT-47LM wrote:

Come on, who didn't see this coming? Ragnarok was by far the most complained about and overpowered character in the game. That's why I didn't try to level him because I knew it was going to happen. His red is still effective to the point where it is how it should have been since the beginning with a huge increase in damage. I still like him.

Nobody saw a 300% increase in AP cost coming, sorry.

His red is still effective with a huge increase in damage? You just lost all credibility. It does 8xx damage at level 115. Thor does 1113 at level 85.

Wait, it only does 800 damage? Wow, I thought that an extra 260% of baseline actually meant something. This is pretty bad. But still, my point still stands, besides the damage part.

It's now 967. (Still not great.)

Yeah, still terrible considering that a 2* can out due a 3* in damage with the same amount of AP and replace 5 tiles instead of 4. I think Ragnarok and Thor should switch places now lol. But seriously, I thought that with 260% base damage it would have been doing around 1500 damage, which would have made him still pretty great.

Eddiemon

"&#91 wrote: »

"]
I was thinking of the "character combo" with GSBW or with M/C.Storm to fuel their green skills. I think that is much more interesting to be able to have teams that work well together and can use different strategies rather than 3 independent characters that dont support each other. It is similar to what you say about venom, it was also a strategy requiring 2 characters (spidey/venom) and it was nerfed.

But that was my point. Spidey and venom needed each other to work. Spidey does no damage and venom could never hope to get 8 webs out. Whereas I could keep rag fed off his own cascades mostly. Sure a better use of the green was nice, but while widow needed rags, rags didn't need her.

Unknown

Eddiemon wrote:

"&#91 wrote: »

"]
I was thinking of the "character combo" with GSBW or with M/C.Storm to fuel their green skills. I think that is much more interesting to be able to have teams that work well together and can use different strategies rather than 3 independent characters that dont support each other. It is similar to what you say about venom, it was also a strategy requiring 2 characters (spidey/venom) and it was nerfed.

But that was my point. Spidey and venom needed each other to work. Spidey does no damage and venom could never hope to get 8 webs out. Whereas I could keep rag fed off his own cascades mostly. Sure a better use of the green was nice, but while widow needed rags, rags didn't need her.

Spidey most definitely does not need venom lmfao

Spoit

Eddiemon wrote:

"&#91 wrote: »

"]
I was thinking of the "character combo" with GSBW or with M/C.Storm to fuel their green skills. I think that is much more interesting to be able to have teams that work well together and can use different strategies rather than 3 independent characters that dont support each other. It is similar to what you say about venom, it was also a strategy requiring 2 characters (spidey/venom) and it was nerfed.

But that was my point. Spidey and venom needed each other to work. Spidey does no damage and venom could never hope to get 8 webs out. Whereas I could keep rag fed off his own cascades mostly. Sure a better use of the green was nice, but while widow needed rags, rags didn't need her.

Even buffed in lighting rounds, Rag's green is not that great

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

Spidey most definitely does not need venom lmfao

For NOW.

Unknown

Rags' green is one of the worst green skills in the game.

And now his red is one of the worst red in the game.

Excluding the awful 4* abilities.

Unknown

What do you people expect? The developers don't give a flying tinykitty what people think. They will make some overpowered covers so that people will hopefully spend money to try to stay competitive - then nerf it to oblivion so that they can make something else the flavor of the month.

Repeat until they have driven away all of the people who are willing to pay money, then close up shop.

It is a dumb, short sited way to run a game, but it makes money in the short term, and they have probably already decided that this will not be a long term money maker.

BigMao

That would be a shame. I love Marvel characters and the puzzle/RPG combination that is the PQ series. If D3 Publisher disrespects or manipulates their community in order to monetize their games, they would fall into same category as Zynga and I would no longer be motivated to play games published by them.

Kiamodo

BigMao wrote:

Nemek wrote:

The problem with listening to users is that they are very short sighted and are more interested in immediate gratification and not what's best for the future of the game.

I acknowledge I don't know what's best for the future of this game. In order to make a good product, developers and publishers need a balance of their own skills / experience and user feedback. I'm sure they are weighing the costs and benefits of this nerf, but it's up to us to determine the costs and tell the developers this move isn't worth it.

My claim is simple; unannounced and heavy-handed nerfs make this game less fun for players, and make customers less willing to spend money. It can ruin the game for me and that's all I'm qualified to say.

Completely agree

Unknown

You know what, I'm actually glad they nerfed him this hard! Very glad! You know why? Because when a newbie asks what they should spend their hp on, the immediate response is: COVER SLOTS! So why are you guys spending money on covers??? Instead you all should be buying cover slots like a good casual player. It's the only thing that won't change on you overnight!

Kiamodo

Davometer wrote:

You know what, I'm actually glad they nerfed him this hard! Very glad! You know why? Because when a newbie asks what they should spend their hp on, the immediate response is: COVER SLOTS! So why are you guys spending money on covers??? Instead you all should be buying cover slots like a good casual player. It's the only thing that won't change on you overnight!

You make no sense sir.

Unknown

My 1st and only purchase up to now, was mainly for a "thank you" to the devs for this game (600HP - for 5.98SGD).

My second purchase would have been for the 2500HP to complete my Rag Red from level 3 to level 5. The reason is because his OPness will make it easier for me to get more covers. I had to save HPs to be able to upgrade Red Rag from Lvl 1 - 3. I wasnt really planning on spending so much time again grinding for 2500 HP.

So I guess what I am trying to say is the main reason for my would have been other purchase was "OPNess of a character - will lead to less grinding and to get easier covers". This for me justifies my would be purchase as I dont normally spend for IAP and would rather pay for a full game. Now that it is likely that there will be more nerf coming (Spidey and Mag), I dont have any reason to purchase HP anymore as the game would be more or less balanced.

I am happy that I have saved 25 dollars because of the nerf. Still the gamer in me feels a bit sad. You know, I guess everybody wants to experience playing OP at some point in a game.

BigMao

I would be willing to spend money on a balanced game, though I would still try to optimize my return by redeeming my HP for the best covers. A balanced game would have better replay value and longevity, in fact that weighs in favor of support.

Nerfs like these are demotivating because they introduce too much uncertainty into the equation; there's less of an incentive to invest time or money into a character. It doesn't have to be this way - since HP is not a true currency, the developers are free to give refunds in order to satisfy our sense of fairness. This makes it a customer service issue rather than a game balance issue.

As players we're at the mercy of the developer's systems and rules, but we're also free to choose to support them or not.

Kiamodo

BigMao wrote:

I would still be willing to spend money on a balanced game, though I would still try to optimize my return by redeeming my HP for the best covers.

Nerfs like these are demotivating because they introduce too much uncertainty into the equation; there's less of an incentive to invest time or money into a character. It doesn't have to be this way - since HP is not a true currency, the developers are free to give refunds in order to satisfy our sense of fairness.

As players we're at the mercy of the developer's systems and rules, but we're also free to choose to support them or not.

Very good point.

Unknown

I would have preferred hats. I can spend money on hats.

Unknown

This type of game model shouldn't be supported in my opinion, and I hope it goes away. I'm happy to say I didn't spend anything on this game, but ironically I'd pay them 15-20 bucks for a full version of the game.

Unknown

Saint Matthew wrote:

I would have preferred hats. I can spend money on hats.

If history serves, I would have spent a ton on costume changes.