Spending money buys you time, not placements

Unknown

I'm frankly staggered at the amount of vitriol being thrown at the devs from people who 'spent money to buy ragnarok'. I'd just like to point out a few things:

1. Balance always comes first. It has to. Ragnarok was clearly overpowered and was always due to be nerfed. You spent money on a character because he was obscenely stranger than anyone else in the game and you ant be angry when that balance us addressed. Would you rather spend money on an unbalanced game?

2. You buy time with money, not tournament rankings. Whilst the costs I MPs are on the high side, the purchases are there to save you time. The Game is one of the best examples of a 'time tax' mechanic. If you spent money o rags, congrats, you have a still very strong 3* character which is more than a lot of people who don't spend money I have. Hel I've spent a fair amount myself and don't!

3. This will happen again. Of course it will. You should expect balance challenges I a preview game and a live one. You haven't been robbed or mis sold.

4. Take it as an opportunity to explore your roster and new team match ups. Enjoy the fact your game just got a lot more bloody interesting than spamming Thunderclap

Unknown

While part of this is true, the heavy handed nature of the nerf without any warning is part is why people are upset. I haven't looked myself, but if Rag's Red is now mathmatically WORSE than Thor's Red when both are maxed, then it's a bit overboard. It's a case of people paid money for something amazing, and it turned into a weaker version of something they (likely anyhow) already had. Many knew it was likely coming, but didn't expect it to be so heavy, and didn't know when it would come (and possibly not at all). On the whole, people have a right to be a bit upset, especially those who spent the money recently.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

While part of this is true, the heavy handed nature of the nerf without any warning is part is why people are upset. I haven't looked myself, but if Rag's Red is now mathmatically WORSE than Thor's Red when both are maxed, then it's a bit overboard. It's a case of people paid money for something amazing, and it turned into a weaker version of something they (likely anyhow) already had. Many knew it was likely coming, but didn't expect it to be so heavy, and didn't know when it would come (and possibly not at all). On the whole, people have a right to be a bit upset, especially those who spent the money recently.

I don't think the original post deserves such a well thought out rebuttal.

It deserves more of a "awful post" post.

Unknown

abuelo wrote:

I'm frankly staggered at the amount of vitriol being thrown at the devs from people who 'spent money to buy ragnarok'. I'd just like to point out a few things:

1. Balance always comes first. It has to. Ragnarok was clearly overpowered and was always due to be nerfed. You spent money on a character because he was obscenely stranger than anyone else in the game and you ant be angry when that balance us addressed. Would you rather spend money on an unbalanced game?

2. You buy time with money, not tournament rankings. Whilst the costs I MPs are on the high side, the purchases are there to save you time. The Game is one of the best examples of a 'time tax' mechanic. If you spent money o rags, congrats, you have a still very strong 3* character which is more than a lot of people who don't spend money I have. Hel I've spent a fair amount myself and don't!

3. This will happen again. Of course it will. You should expect balance challenges I a preview game and a live one. You haven't been robbed or mis sold.

4. Take it as an opportunity to explore your roster and new team match ups. Enjoy the fact your game just got a lot more bloody interesting than spamming Thunderclap

i'm keen to agree with DDD's post but just responding to your post...

balancing the game is one thing. destroying a character to be unusable is another. (and if you tell me he's useable, why wouldn't we use thor over him? thor's red ap is superior to ragnarok's now and does more damage at level 85, compared to ragnaroks red ap ability...at level 115.

at level 115, thor's red would do 1506 damage, compared to the current 967 level 115 ragnarok does, about 60-70% more.

not to mention thor's red generates one additional tile.

mind boggling.

Unknown

I won't be surprised at all if we see a Thor nerf that matches this one.

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

While part of this is true, the heavy handed nature of the nerf without any warning is part is why people are upset. I haven't looked myself, but if Rag's Red is now mathmatically WORSE than Thor's Red when both are maxed, then it's a bit overboard. It's a case of people paid money for something amazing, and it turned into a weaker version of something they (likely anyhow) already had. Many knew it was likely coming, but didn't expect it to be so heavy, and didn't know when it would come (and possibly not at all). On the whole, people have a right to be a bit upset, especially those who spent the money recently.

I don't think the original post deserves such a well thought out rebuttal.

It deserves more of a "awful post" post.

Eh. Reason is always worth bringing to bear, especially when others are lacking it. And that goes for both sides on this. He had some valid viewpoints. The big thing lacking here (beyond a kinder hand with the nerf bat) was a lack of communication. If the community knew that a character adjustment was coming, they could have made the considered choice on whether it was worth investing in a character that was being considered for changes in the near future.

Unknown

forgrim wrote:

balancing the game is one thing. destroying a character to be unusable is another. (and if you tell me he's useable, why wouldn't we use thor over him? thor's red ap is superior to ragnarok's now and does more damage at level 85, compared to ragnaroks red ap ability...at level 115.

at level 115, thor's red would do 1506 damage, compared to the current 967 level 115 ragnarok does, about 60-70% more.

not to mention thor's red generates one additional tile.

mind boggling.

The two things Rag has going for him over Thor is better match damage (a mixed benefit, since Rag only has 2 strong colors), and more hit points. That being said, given the meta of speed, you are still probably better off packing Thor unless Rag is buffed (ie lightning rounds).

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

forgrim wrote:

balancing the game is one thing. destroying a character to be unusable is another. (and if you tell me he's useable, why wouldn't we use thor over him? thor's red ap is superior to ragnarok's now and does more damage at level 85, compared to ragnaroks red ap ability...at level 115.

at level 115, thor's red would do 1506 damage, compared to the current 967 level 115 ragnarok does, about 60-70% more.

not to mention thor's red generates one additional tile.

mind boggling.

The two things Rag has going for him over Thor is better match damage (a mixed benefit, since Rag only has 2 strong colors), and more hit points. That being said, given the meta of speed, you are still probably better off packing Thor unless Rag is buffed (ie lightning rounds).

51/51 red/green for ragnarok at level 115. compared to 50/39/45 red/green/yellow of thor's at level 85.

trollface.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

The big thing lacking here (beyond a kinder hand with the nerf bat) was a lack of communication.

There surely will be even more lack of communication especially when many players quit.