hopper1979 said: Here you go his corrections show up after Drax, basically they fixed his black so it is passive again still not as good as it was originally but he is decent again. I am glad they kept the green as is with the "fix" to the black and the rework of the green and red it actually may be a slightly more usable character, not necessary better but more usable.http://forums.d3go.com/discussion/64024/time-gem-season-updates-updated-5-2-17/p1
Crowl said: One obvious benefit to him I found in this latest pvp, his black and the 10ap version of his red make him very useful against peggy, the former chips her down while you gather the red and the latter is unaffected by her yellow.
BlackBoltRocks said: Ozark Boatswain said: Never thought Mr. Fail would be good for anything..
Ozark Boatswain said: Never thought Mr. Fail would be good for anything..
irwando said: Buffed Carnage is just broken. No one should be putting out that much damage for no AP. Medusa's passive is powerful and this is 10x that. Why couldn't the dev's just leave him alone in the first place?Just not worth playing against him in PvP which I'm sure is what most people are counting on.
bbigler said: Just wait for the day when you see a 4*Grocket + Carnage + Medusa team. Unboosted is already great. Boost 1 of them and you better stay away. 2 boosted and you're sure to lose.
mexus said: Champed him just now. Tried Medusa + Lockjaw + Carnage in Simulator and it was OK.
Punisher5784 said: mexus said: Champed him just now. Tried Medusa + Lockjaw + Carnage in Simulator and it was OK. Exactly. I expected this to replace Medusa, Grocket and Gamora.. but Lockjaw is so lacklusterI used to use Medusa, Carnage and Bl4de alot. That team real works well in PVE.
ZommyGD said: Just found this error about the comic cover. At the last page of the character information, it’s Maximum Carnage, published in 1993, not 1963.
I Believe 1963 is the year that particular comic series started. It is number 380, so it being 30 years after the start of the start of the Amazing Spider-man series fits (there were periods where the comic was published biweekly).
Check some other cover data and I Believe you will see this is a consistent pattern.
Quebbster said: ZommyGD said: Just found this error about the comic cover. At the last page of the character information, it’s Maximum Carnage, published in 1993, not 1963. I Believe 1963 is the year that particular comic series started. It is number 380, so it being 30 years after the start of the start of the Amazing Spider-man series fits (there were periods where the comic was published biweekly).Check some other cover data and I Believe you will see this is a consistent pattern.