pumkin wrote: Why the hell would they introduce these nerfs in the middle of events? Where is the common sense? It's already questionable, granted, given the decisions they've been making in the past couple of weeks. But seriously, how hard is it to wait until an event is over? I have a growing list of adjectives for these devs and they include flabbergasting, puzzling, baffling, questionable, absurd, unbelievable, inexperienced...
Psykopathic wrote: Ares is just captain kill himself.
IceIX wrote: pumkin wrote: Why the hell would they introduce these nerfs in the middle of events? Where is the common sense? It's already questionable, granted, given the decisions they've been making in the past couple of weeks. But seriously, how hard is it to wait until an event is over? I have a growing list of adjectives for these devs and they include flabbergasting, puzzling, baffling, questionable, absurd, unbelievable, inexperienced... It is rare for there not to be a PVE event running and there is always a PVP Tourney of some type or another up. There is no "good" time to do this. At the middle or end of an event is bad since it changes meta. At the start of an event is bad since people need to figure out the new meta too quickly to place well.
timber wrote: Wow. This is really disappointing. I've never posted before (more of a lurker on here) but these changes motivated me to register and post. I understand people feeling like there wasn't enough variety in PVP and that it seemed like Thor and Wolverine were on every team, they practically were, although facing level 85s of them never scared me, I found them extremely beatable. But wow, I think to get more variety in the PVP, I would have tried to elevate some of the other characters that never see play. Or I would have realized that the game isn't that old and new characters are always coming out that could add to the variety of team building. I feel like people have a lot of right to be upset over these changes too. People that have spent time and money to develop their characters. I work in game design and development (actually work with the Marvel license too, and I'm usually on the receiving end of angry forum posts) and we're very wary of nerfing previously released product given how much people invest in these games. I've been playing the game since October and I feel like the rug just got taken out from under me. Especially since this happened in the middle of an event (where I'm already pissed that I have to fight level 230 "Deadly" enemies that can kill my guys in one shot in every mission) I'll be curious to see how many people complain about these changes and whether Thor and Wolverine get bumped back up again. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get my **** kicked by Maggia goons. Oh and my prediction.....Original Black Widow is the next to get knocked down. She's insanely good.
Razzi wrote: I have some key issues that I feel need to be addressed. I agree that Wolverine and Thor are unbalanced. I think the developers over did it much like they did with the Ragnarok nerf. I'm not crazy about Thor's Red ability being an 8AP skill. Mjolnir's Hammer is arguably worse than Photon Blast now, which is a pretty bad ability. His Yellow ability does dramatically less damage, it's just such a huge change. I like that it generates tons of green AP, but at such a high AP cost/per damage it's basically useless. My first instinct was to pair him with GSBW, but at that cost it's asinine. You nerfed Thor's damage, his AP cost, and his potential to save up red ap to chain his abilities. I cannot envision Thor being used at all in tournaments or pve. He went from top dog to non-threatening. Clearly we're moving away from spammable abilities, but you need to make subtle adjustments on the fly and see how things work. Not make dramatic adjustments like this that destroy the feel of the characters. Furthermore, I find it incredibly unfair that I optimized my characters and now suddenly my Thor isn't ideal, because his Green Ability went from worst to best. I'm sure Ragnaroks third ability will be better than his other two and I'll have no way to fix him. Respec > Huge nerfing of characters (Ragnarok, Thor, Wolverine), simply because it's unfair to not let my fix my cover selections.The Big Issue: In PVE events, and this new Daredevil Event in particular, I have had to use Thor and Wolverine coupled with 3 different AP boosts(500 Iso per battle) just to have a fighting chance to beat these ridiculously high leveled enemies you're pitting us against. Without these characters I have zero chance to win against such high leveled enemies. Are you going to address this? Will future events be easier to compensate for the lack of Thorverine? Are these 230 enemies going to be standard for PVE events moving forward? I much prefer the way the Hulk event worked, in the sense that there was one easy area and one hard area. Now I basically have to choose between doing the event or the tournaments, because I don't have enough healthpacks or iso for boosts to do both. I basically get two tries per PVE battle before I have to quit playing, which is not fun.
gobstopper wrote: Can you explain to us simple folk why introducing game-altering changes mid-event is worse than before/after a PvE? "Because it changes the meta" - Well, you are doing that no matter when you patch. Your explanation is mindboggling.
IceIX wrote: gobstopper wrote: Can you explain to us simple folk why introducing game-altering changes mid-event is worse than before/after a PvE? "Because it changes the meta" - Well, you are doing that no matter when you patch. Your explanation is mindboggling. Hmm? I didn't say it was worse. I just said that there's no good time for us to really do so. We don't run events that are a month long like some games. Ours might run a week. After making changes to other characters (Ragnarok for example) it took a while for players to adapt their strategies. As in, more than a full Tourney cycle long. For that entire time that people were adapting, meta was shaken up and nothing was very solid for anyone.
ArchJojo wrote: Playing with wolverine. Getting strike tiles for every 3 red instead of 5. I still like him !
Psykopathic wrote: IceIX wrote: gobstopper wrote: Can you explain to us simple folk why introducing game-altering changes mid-event is worse than before/after a PvE? "Because it changes the meta" - Well, you are doing that no matter when you patch. Your explanation is mindboggling. Hmm? I didn't say it was worse. I just said that there's no good time for us to really do so. We don't run events that are a month long like some games. Ours might run a week. After making changes to other characters (Ragnarok for example) it took a while for players to adapt their strategies. As in, more than a full Tourney cycle long. For that entire time that people were adapting, meta was shaken up and nothing was very solid for anyone. I know this one is all from just what perspective you look at it from but my vote for any major character changes would be right when a Pve event ends simultaneously with the next starting or preferably at the end of a Pve event right when there is a 4 day break.
IceIX wrote: It is rare for there not to be a PVE event running and there is always a PVP Tourney of some type or another up. There is no "good" time to do this. At the middle or end of an event is bad since it changes meta. At the start of an event is bad since people need to figure out the new meta too quickly to place well.