The 3* Nerfing : What Exactly Happened, Again?

TLCstormz

Can some of you brave souls please list, EXACTLY what happened with the 3*s?

What was done?
How was it done?
Why it was done?

How long did it take for them to fess up and come clean about what they did? OR ever ACKNOWLEDGE it? Several months, correct?

Any and all links would be appreciated. And NOT by just me.

;+)

DrDevilDinosaur

I assume you're talking about the tier wide "nerf"

There was a time when you couldn't champion a fully levelled character - but there where still event buffs.
With the introduction of championing, it became possible for players to level their characters to a point which had previously only been attainable when buffed (and now the buff was going to come on top of that), so as a result they kinda squashed the stat gain over those 100 levels.

A level 266 3* character today is weaker than one before championing was introduced. Although, potentially, that 3* can be 266 every day (and ~366 when buffed) so the argument is that we still got "more powerful" characters in the end.

I don't recall they ever tried to hide it but it kinda came out like;

forums: hey, when you added championing you nerfed 3*'s until they hit max champ level
d3/demi: uh, well, we never said that wasn't going to be a part of it
f: you never even mentioned it!
d/d: you didn't ask!

Personally, I don't really care. It's basically the least harmful thing that demi have done in the greater scheme of things. But if they were going to go to the effort of tweaking some of the stat gains for some of the levels of some of the characters why not just go all in and redesign the whole bit?

acescracked

I truly wish I had more time on my hands to care about this.

carrion_pigeons

It wasn't all that much of a nerf. It got a lot of bad press because people reacted badly to it being done with no mention, but all that actually happened was that buffs were normalized across the 100 champ levels, when championing was brought into the game. Which is to say that before about level 200, 3*s who are buffed for the week are buffed less than they used to be, and after 200 buffed 3*s are buffed more.

It had essentially no impact on PvE, and while it did herald the death of competitive 3* play in PvP (since buffed 3*s were about the only 3*s people played anymore), the competitive 3* scene was thinning out enough that hardly anyone actually had the ability to both notice and care at the same time. That didn't stop people from wailing about it at the top of their voices for months because they didn't understand what had actually happened, though.

A_Wise_Man

It happened when champ levels came out. Same happened to 2*. The official reason was so that characters of lower tier that ended up the same level due to boosts would be able to beat teams of the next * level due to the boosts....which was the entire reason for boosts in the first place and a major strategy in building a pvp team. At the same time, 4* boosts took a huge increase to be able to compete with 5* at the same level....****? The logic is backwards on the whole issue. Whats the point of boosts if it doesnt really boost your roster to compete with the next tier unboosted? I dont know and i suspect few do. Also money.

aesthetocyst

If anyone cares, the R91 rebalancing hit 1*s hardest of all.

We never got to see a lvl 550 Juggs in his pre-R91 form. Lvl 550 Juggs is weaker than his old self was at level 270

GurlBYE

DrDevilDinosaur wrote:

I assume you're talking about the tier wide "nerf"

There was a time when you couldn't champion a fully levelled character - but there where still event buffs.
With the introduction of championing, it became possible for players to level their characters to a point which had previously only been attainable when buffed (and now the buff was going to come on top of that), so as a result they kinda squashed the stat gain over those 100 levels.

A level 266 3* character today is weaker than one before championing was introduced. Although, potentially, that 3* can be 266 every day (and ~366 when buffed) so the argument is that we still got "more powerful" characters in the end.

I don't recall they ever tried to hide it but it kinda came out like;

forums: hey, when you added championing you nerfed 3*'s until they hit max champ level
d3/demi: uh, well, we never said that wasn't going to be a part of it
f: you never even mentioned it!
d/d: you didn't ask!

Personally, I don't really care. It's basically the least harmful thing that demi have done in the greater scheme of things. But if they were going to go to the effort of tweaking some of the stat gains for some of the levels of some of the characters why not just go all in and redesign the whole bit?

It was probably one of the more damning things for people mid 3 star transition, and widened the gap for people not yet at 4 star.
If it weren't for the 10 cp at 575 added like a year later, pvp would still just be 4 stars hitting eachother.

It's why people with 4's can dust and destroy pve's.

Like champing my first 4, cyclops red DOUBLES in damage when he's boosted (10K to 20K)
most 3's don't go up anywhere near as significantly

Bowgentle

GurlBYE wrote:

Like champing my first 4, cyclops red DOUBLES in damage when he's boosted (10K to 20K)
most 3's don't go up anywhere near as significantly

They do, they just need to be at 266 before the boost.

266 Torch does 4173 on red - 412 Torch does 10023.

Having played with a few 266s boosted to 412 now I totally understand why they lowered the old numbers - 3s are crazy when max-champed and boosted.

Yes, it will take about a year of heavy play to get them to 266, but you'll get there, eventually.

Natsufan01

They actually announced the change before it went live, but like a lot of communication back then, it wasn't explained well, so people were confused by it. I found a few topics from before, but honestly only read thw first post or two to make sure they were relevant to the topic. If you want to look for more, i found these around page 145. The feature went live around jan 6th or 7th 2016, so look for topics around that date.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37715

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37688

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37689

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=37610

JamieMadrox

Locking this because dredging up a year old change to the game that isn't really relevant anymore seems like trolling. We've been living with this for a year; there's no reason to revisit it.