Question about game history is trolling?

tizian2015

This thread was closed because of:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=59999

"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."

Question: Is it true, it is "not really relevant anymore"? It´s may not be for you, Jamie Madrox, but are there no players in the 2*, 3* transition who have to live with this? Is this "game feature" (nerfing whole tiers must be a feature for devs) in any FAQ to see it? Is this not a relevant information for players? Is a question about game history "trolling"? Shouldnt then half the forum be closed?

Great close! (/sarcasm)

Alsmir

Typical case of censorship.

Bowgentle

It's more like "this has been changed a year ago and the changes will not be rolled back. Deal with it."

The thread had trolling potential, so I can see why it would be closed before it could go there.
A bit prematurely closed, but knowing this forum, not a bad idea.

metallion

I see it as "This change is more than a year old and you're still being bothered by it?". We've all lived with this for so long, even the harshest critics back then should have accepted this reality within a couple months, so bringing up this topic again more than a year after the change is pretty pointless. And yea, given the way this forum works i agree that thread had trolling potential, best to close it before things get out of hand.

wymtime

If you have an issue with a mod locking your thread PM the Mod, don't create a new thread about being locked. If the Mod does not respond you can PM brigby then. Calling players or mods out in threads is not what the forum is about.

To answer your question buffed 3* were on equal grounds as 4* and that is why the need occurred. When champion levels came out they had to roll back the buff powers for 3* because 3* buffed would become more powerful or just as powerful as buffed 4*. It forced players who were soft capping thier 4* to champion them. One thing the Dev's have consistently done is to make changes so players level there characters and stop soft capping.

Pants1000

I was surprised it got locked too.

We should be able to have a discussion about past changes without it becoming a problem.

Basically champions allowed for level 350+ boosted/champed 3* characters, and the power curve needed to be adjusted so they wouldn't be too crazy.

What's done is done. Just keep adding levels to your champs and you'll see 3's can still get pretty darn powerful when they get close to the max.

liminal_lad

This is a year-old change. Move on. There are always new things to be mad on the Internet about.

SnowcaTT

nyck1118

Yea come on this is OFN. Move on there's other stuff to Complain about.

Member how boss rush sucked?!?!

Nightglider1

If we lock every thread that "might" have trolling potential, why bother with a forum at all? Just have read-only threads where news from the devs are communicated.

Infrared

I think the relevance is that there is now another nerf that was done without prior announcement, that affects many characters in the game. The way it was handled in the past may inform how it will be handled now.

carrion_pigeons

First of all, it was the least important, and least permanent, nerf in the history of the game. Anybody who actually played back then and took advantage of the competitive advantage offered by the large 3* weekly buffs is certainly getting an even bigger competitive advantage from high level champed 3*s now than they were even when the buffs were at their most extreme.

Second of all, go away. If it wasn't obvious you were trolling before, it definitely is now. Re-making closed threads and poisoning others with off-topic whining is not behavior you deserve any attention for.

Teskal

I think the first post of the thread was very unspecific, even unclear what was meant exactly. For how long are people asking for a change of Bagman, but the thread does not shut down.

Beside this, the game changes over the year several times. To take just back an update from a year ago, makes no sense and few changes were maybe even ok.

Some characters are needed to nerfed down or powered up. Sometimes it is sadly overdone like they did it with 1* Venom.

DrDevilDinosaur

I felt the line of questions and the general "tone" of the OP in the locked thread was that of someone looking for something to be angry about.

I think locking the thread was the right thing to do. I believe there are already a few historical "wrap up" threads of significant changes to the game and the impact on the meta - those would be worth reading for anyone who is interested in the game's history.

ClydeFrog76

This forum is easily the most sensitive one I've ever been a member of. Both the mods and the devs who take part are very heavy-handed in their censorship. It's their playground of course, but I think they could ease up a bit.

peteer01

metallion wrote:

bringing up this topic again more than a year after the change is pretty pointless.

I don't think it is though.

Should 1-star Juggs be viable in most PvP? Absolutely not. But which is better: That he was viable in the old balance of power before the change, or not viable in the recent balance of power events after the change?

That's a legitimate conversation. And it's a conversation that was starting, Juggernaut was specifically brought up.

Personally, the more characters that I have a reason to use outside of DD, the better. My personal preference is a Balance of Power event that could get newer players psyched about their best 1, 2 or 3-star characters allowing them to compete with the longest-term players, if just for that one event.

The other point that is valid is that most players, myself included, still don't have a max champed three star. That "a-ha" moment, where you realize the old boosted 166 is approximate (or not?) to the new boosted 266 is something most players won't know first hand until more than a year after the change.

Those to points alone are enough reason to think the conversation was both timely and legitimate for the original poster. At that point, if you think the conversation is still pointless, +95% of the other posts on MPQ General Discussion also qualify as pointless.

TLCstormz

looooolololol.

Thanks for the support, y'all.

Just please please please be careful on here. I received yet ANOTHER "official warning" for letting them know I felt that my thread being locked in that way was "rude".

ESPECIALLY because I was trying to gather the info for the benefit of ALL of us players. However......does it really matter WHY the thread was made? It was doing no one any harm, whatsoever. lol. Just, so so silly.

But anyway.....yeah......be careful, friends.

Linkster79

They probably didn't want another 71 page thread like this one.....

https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=10239

Quite old but still in my mind relevant and just because something happened doesn't mean that we should accept it and move on. Change happens by voicing displeasure, not sitting idly by.

JamieMadrox

1. Topic was locked because if you have an issue with the way a mod carries out their duties, starting a new thread attacking that decision isn't how to deal with it.
2. There were a number of factors that lead to the thread in question being locked. The content was the least of these, but the easiest one to discuss on here without stepping over the line of player privacy.
3. You're free to discuss any topic so long as you adhere to the forum rules.
4. As always, attacking mods, devs, other employees of Demiurge & D3Go, and other forum members will result in a warning or worse depending n the severity.

All of that said, the major reason for he thread being locked was that the tone of the post along with it including an attack on the devs that was both uncalled for and untrue.