negative goodwill for a nerf on rag

Unknown

You're an idiot. It wasn't an exploit or cheating. You're one of the worst posters on these forums.

BigMao

HulkSmash wrote:

You make yourselves out to be a charitable bunch with your "support" but the fact is none of you put money into a donations pot. You saw an exploit in Rag's 2red ap ability and 'invested' in yourselves to gain an advantage over the competition then you cry why the playing field is levelled. The majority had voiced their concerns for months and I'm sure the game lost more players who didn't own a rag due to not being able to compete than the 'cheaters' who blew their money on rags red so they could end their matches before they even start. The hulk event had space for 500k players and I think it hit about 70k max which indicates there is not nearly the numbers playing that D3P want.
Level the playing field = a more attractive game.
An attractive game = more players join
(If they join and come up against endless unbeatable Rags they leave)
If they can beat Rags the same as every other character they stay and play and spend money on all characters equally instead of just rag's red!
Its simple business you cretin!

The actual situation is not as simple as you describe, I'm sorry it's beyond your simple mind's limited ability to understand.

My in-game purchase was a transaction rather than a donation, because I was receiving something in return. However, there was value in the idea that my purchase was supporting the developers. Since I made a purchase, of course I want to get the most bang for my buck, is it rational to do otherwise?

Unknown

jozier wrote:

You're an idiot. It wasn't an exploit or cheating. You're one of the worst posters on these forums.

Jozier,

You and I haven't come quite to the right analogy yet and I I'm enjoying trying to come up with something ....putting that aside...i completely, 100% agree with you on this statement. What that guy said was not productive, helpful or even thought provoking. That comment needed a downvote...

Unknown

Whether anyone arguing about legal ramifications to changes made in this game is correct or not, the landscape of video games and how developers are accountable for their product could be about to evolve. Anyone else following some of the DICE lawsuits?

http://www.vg247.com/2013/12/18/battlefield-4-second-class-action-law-suit-filed-against-ea-over-quality-concerns/

Unknown

HulkSmash wrote:

_fulu_ wrote:

HulkSmash wrote:

Hahahaha all you rag lovers can go suck eggs!

1. Paying to win is cheating
2. You bankers f*cked up the economy in the first place.

My sympathy is non-existent! Well done D3P for listening to the fans. Rag was a big hairy bumhole!
Peace!

Supporting the game I enjoy is cheating, eh? Child.

Through my Amiga, SNES, megadrive, PS1, Dreamcast, PC, Xbox & 360 history i never had to pay once to complete a game and you dont with this! If youre supporting the game then stop moaning like lil **** n just play!

So you didn't buy those games? I'm not wasting time with you, as I don't care that they nerfed rags, who I didn't buy, I earned him back in October. I care that you characterize buying something in a game as cheating, when said game would not exist if no one paid. You are an obtuse, shortsighted fellow and should probably excuse yourself while people are actually discussing the game.

Unknown

thank you for all the comments.

i agree with saint matthew because it is a question about the form and substance of a transaction. legally speaking i know that i bought the hp and iso only. the substance of this transaction is to encourage players to change them to covers and used up their hp. i think the depreciation rate of these covers is a very important infomation for the players. it will affect the planning of how to use their hp.

business is business. d3 has the right to nerf any characters. maximizing profit is one of the objectives of doing business. i am not satisfied with their business strategy in this case.

itstime1234

I love the spin used on this forum that the nerf was a business move and D3 was just looking to tinykitty all the innocent buyers. Is it not just as logical to assume this was done to help enhance the game and not let one character dominate them all. This isnt lord of the rings and Rags is not the one ring, he is a character amongst a host of others.

Everyone has been saying Rags is overpowering and needs to be reduced and he isnt the first character to be nerfed and won't be the last. He is still fairly strong just not insane like before. This game is about tile matching, not being able to end every game in 3 moves. Where is the skill in that.

Unknown

players comment is an important source for improvement. we are talking about how a business can be run better. i am sure that the company is looking at this forum so our constructive comment is useful.

Spoit

itstime1234 wrote:

I love the spin used on this forum that the nerf was a business move and D3 was just looking to tinykitty all the innocent buyers. Is it not just as logical to assume this was done to help enhance the game and not let one character dominate them all. This isnt lord of the rings and Rags is not the one ring, he is a character amongst a host of others.

Everyone has been saying Rags is overpowering and needs to be reduced and he isnt the first character to be nerfed and won't be the last. He is still fairly strong just not insane like before. This game is about tile matching, not being able to end every game in 3 moves. Where is the skill in that.

Exactly. Their standard is 12 Ap for a move that does less than 1k damage. Which is what people are complaining about. You think the blowback for rags is bad? Watch the forums burn in a couple weeks when they get around to thor/wolvie

itstime1234

Really your comments and all the others are for the goodwill of the business not because your fav character can no longer manhandle everyone else.

I am sure the countless comments on I deserve a refund, this sucks for me as I wanted the all powerful rags and the numerous comments on oh we should sue were clearly for the benefit of D3 right.

Spin it all you want, you are just angry that without some skill you wont be able to dominate the game anymore.

Unknown

itstime1234 wrote:

Really your comments and all the others are for the goodwill of the business not because your fav character can no longer manhandle everyone else.

I am sure the countless comments on I deserve a refund, this sucks for me as I wanted the all powerful rags and the numerous comments on oh we should sue were clearly for the benefit of D3 right.

Spin it all you want, you are just angry that without some skill you wont be able to dominate the game anymore.

Quit being a hypocrite. You are spinning it just as much by not accounting for the people that spent real $, some of whom dropped cash the day of the nerf. How would you feel if you bought a MacBook and hours later it changed into a Dell, and you can't get a refund or an exchange? Better yet, now every laptop you buy will be subject to changing into another laptop. Of course, this time you have advance warning on certain models. But are you will to buy those models now? Don't kid yourself.

Unknown

if i pay money, i want to use this character to dominate the game for a period. there is no doubt about this. according to my experience in other games, no character can dominate the game because they will design new characters to make the old ones less attractive. the game can be balanced also. of course these methods are not so effective as nerf.

itstime1234

The game is not broken, your analogy is garbage. End of the day, if someone strictly dropped money for Rags, clearly they wanted the all powerful character so that they could win every competition.

This is more akin to baseball where people were taking steroids then all of the sudden Baseball said no more and all these great players became mediocre. I dont feel bad for them and I feel slightly bad for someone who dropped money the same day, that does kind of suck.

And please explain where I am "spinning" the truth.

itstime1234

To Kubrick,

That is your experience elsewhere. You know what the experience in this game is, to nerf and rebalance, go look at classic storm and loki. This wasnt some new idea specifically for Rags. The fact that it got nerfed is no surprise if you looked at this forums comments for months now. So you took the gamble, it got nerfed. Nothing sinister about it.

Unknown

lol calling my analogy garbage. Nowhere in my post did I insinuate anything was broken. Read it again. This time notice that I only used the word 'changed'

And then your analogy compares something completely illegal to use (steroids) to something that was and is still legal to use (Ragnarok). Sigh lol

Unknown

i think the gambling theory is a good analogy. this is exactly the reason why i uninstalled the game two days ago. i like certainty. i dont do gambling.

according to your gambling theory, if i put my bet on a long winning horse, i accept if he lose because someone trained a better horse, but not nerf by the horse racing company.

do you ageee? business ethic exists for a long time. it is developed by so many companies in the past. the only question is :do you consider it is an important issue when doing our business.

Unknown

The fact of the matter is you guys bought hero points, you did not actually pay money for a Ragnarok cover. One may argue that by using the hero points to upgrade it IS paying for that wonderful red Rag. But it's very different, they are not obligated to keep a cover cemented in time because you (the special snowflake) used your purchased or earned hero points on one. They fulfilled their end of the transaction by transferring said hero points to your account for use. You chose to use the hero points to upgrade the cover. There have been other covers that have been nerfed and changed why would one ever assume a cover, would or could, be immune to the same fate? The fact is he is not 'useless' there are just other options, some (if not all) of which will probably be nerfed in the future.

As stated previously in the thread, this is a puzzle tile matching game, it was clearly not intended to have a specific cover that could deal high damage for low cost (lowest cost in the game) and create tiles. I would not be surprised to learn games could be ended without making a single manual tile match. Let's face it, we've all had those perfect boards, but Rag 'created' those boards. When compared with other skills of various 3* covers one can clearly see a pattern. The covers with low AP costs scale enormously better than covers with high AP cost. It's quite obvious, it is a silly mechanic to allow some skills to scale in cost (by lowering it) while scaling in damage (increasing as the cover gains levels). Which is why the 3 most popular (end game) covers all use this mechanic (Ragnarok, spiderman, magneto).

It's hard to post anything constructive in this forum because honestly I've never seen any real good support for why the covers listed above should have skills that work like that and others don't. I see people on both sides posting inflammatory comments, and as a rule those are the comments most discussed. While some people call it cheating or exploiting, others whine about semantics instead of addressing the problem.

I think the Ragnarok nerf was quite good. Still a viable cover, and will still be strong in lightning rounds. Lord knows it's better than Loki...

Unknown

panthroq wrote:

The fact of the matter is you guys bought hero points, you did not actually pay money for a Ragnarok cover. One may argue that by using the hero points to upgrade it IS paying for that wonderful red Rag. But it's very different, they are not obligated to keep a cover cemented in time because you (the special snowflake) used your purchased or earned hero points on one. They fulfilled their end of the transaction by transferring said hero points to your account for use. You chose to use the hero points to upgrade the cover. There have been other covers that have been nerfed and changed why would one ever assume a cover, would or could, be immune to the same fate? The fact is he is not 'useless' there are just other options, some (if not all) of which will probably be nerfed in the future.

As stated previously in the thread, this is a puzzle tile matching game, it was clearly not intended to have a specific cover that could deal high damage for low cost (lowest cost in the game) and create tiles. I would not be surprised to learn games could be ended without making a single manual tile match. Let's face it, we've all had those perfect boards, but Rag 'created' those boards. When compared with other skills of various 3* covers one can clearly see a pattern. The covers with low AP costs scale enormously better than covers with high AP cost. It's quite obvious, it is a silly mechanic to allow some skills to scale in cost (by lowering it) while scaling in damage (increasing as the cover gains levels). Which is why the 3 most popular (end game) covers all use this mechanic (Ragnarok, spiderman, magneto).

It's hard to post anything constructive in this forum because honestly I've never seen any real good support for why the covers listed above should have skills that work like that and others don't. I see people on both sides posting inflammatory comments, and as a rule those are the comments most discussed. While some people call it cheating or exploiting, others whine about semantics instead of addressing the problem.

I think the Ragnarok nerf was quite good. Still a viable cover, and will still be strong in lightning rounds. Lord knows it's better than Loki...

Take a bow sir! The first sensible post I've read in months!

Unknown

kubrick wrote:

i think the gambling theory is a good analogy. this is exactly the reason why i uninstalled the game two days ago. i like certainty. i dont do gambling.

according to your gambling theory, if i put my bet on a long winning horse, i accept if he lose because someone trained a better horse, but not nerf by the horse racing company.

do you ageee? business ethic exists for a long time. it is developed by so many companies in the past. the only question is :do you consider it is an important issue when doing our business.

1. Watch the film Phar Lap to see a horse racing nerf in real life
2. The company made all the money possible from Rag and have moved on..
3. If you've uninstalled the game then please vacate the forum. There's no use for you here anymore!

Eddiemon

Isn't negative goodwill badwill?