This just in

GrimSkald

Reading through the announcement again makes me wonder if OML once again represents a shift in design philosophy. We've seen these before - for example, the 3* tier used to have powers that had both up and downsides to them. Look at the Hulk, Human Torch, and the original build of IM40. They discarded this notion pretty quickly.

When they first released 5*s their stated intention was that the 5* characters scaled more with levels than with covers. This was intended to make them useful when they were incomplete - both Surfer (at least the original pre-buff build,) and OML really show that. Every character since then has not fared so well - sure there are some builds that are useful at lower covers but nothing that even comes close to a 13 cover build. Some characters (I'm looking at you, Jean,) are next-to-useless without 4 or 5 in a particular color.

Their original idea was a nice one, really, but it's really hard to build into their system. I suspect it's at least fallen by the wayside, and probably has even been discarded entirely.

I guess we'll see, maybe even later today.

Darknes21

This is total a totally unnecessary nerf! They only want you to buy more Health packs!

Magic

Over 10% of all battles won include an Old Man Logan on the player’s team. This is higher than the win or play rate of any other character in the game even when those characters are Powered-Up.

Really? Does that factor in his usage at 1 yellow cover in Lightning rounds with Thanos and also his usage at 1 yellow cover in PvE against 3 easiest nodes (preferably also with Thanos)?

What is the rate when you take out of the equation these instances? I think they should be taken out as he can be successfully replaced with any other 5* for match damage and the mechanic would still be effective. Just slightly less (or you would have to use more than one 5* - rotating them).

In my average day (OML at 3-1-1, lvl 315) i use him in all 3 easiest matches for PVP (12 matches in total out of 36) and in 2 DDQ matches. So 14 times in 41 matches. Plus never in PvP (that would be probably around 0-15 a day give or take). So around 25% of cases. Why? To save the health packs. But in almost all cases I can flip in my other 5* that are gathering dust and use the match damage the same way. I will not miss him as much as this stat could suggest.

fmftint

We buffed Cap, why u no use him?

BECAUSE HE IS 2/3/1, IMPOSSIBLE TO GET COVERS FOR AND I'M DEFICIENT ON 5 STAR DRAWS 12.8%

Hendross

Can't wait for this thread to be locked and another 45 pg official thread to be set ablaze.
:popcorn:

GurlBYE

It seems like making 5's reliant on levels instead of covers at lower levels was a bad move for a lot of things long haul.

And likely a lot to do with usage.

Everyone hears OML is good, rushes to get him, champ him, get bumped into high MMR, Use him for every match.

To top it off those dedicated players tend to play the most. (notice top place players in pve and pvp and what their scores are compared to average? and that whole statistic less than a week ago about people clearing nodes 1000 times? Put it all together)

GrimSkald

xidragonxi wrote:

GrimSkald wrote:

Though all in all no character can really make a board go to tinykitty quite like Phoenix....

80% of the matches that I lose are because Phoenix loses her mind on me. Usually when I'm using OML!

Teams also don't seem to have much issue beating up on my defensive team when I use OML. I really don't understand this perception that he's overpowered.

Yeah. I feel sure that I've wiped to teams that didn't have a Phoenix - the match damage, particularly the crit damage, at the 5* level can bring down a character very quickly. Still, I'm sure she's very much over-represented in that particular statistic. Ability to create strikes + ability to create cascades + buffing strikes on crits = a situation where bad luck can completely screw you. And bad luck happens from time to time...

Spudgutter

GrimSkald wrote:

Heh. I'm finally getting my 13th cover for OML later this week, but it doesn't matter since I won't have the Iso for him for at least a month or two. Also, I have Bolt, Widow, and Strange all covered, so this nerf won't affect me particularly. I guess it does mean I'll be seeing less OML in PVP, though, which is too bad. I'd rather deal with him than Bolt, really.

Though all in all no character can really make a board go to tinykitty quite like Phoenix...

My roundabout opinion on this is that I think a nerf is both unnecessary and a bad idea - I think he's not in any way overpowered, and as other people say here he barely brushes up against the top 5 5*s... Still, I'll wait and see what they do with it before I say anything substantial.

The irony is that this will still have an impact on several people, while still not changing who they use. Even if they reduce or remove his true heal, I will still use my level 375 5/3/1 OML, and I have 35 champed 4*'s.his match damage is just sooo much better.

I will also add, not only is he the best that's been around the longest, a lot of us vets have learned from people that once you raise up too many 5* past a certain level, you are forced to use them every single match! I have plenty of 5* at similar or better coverage then my OML. But as it stands, every event I use three to five different 4* with my OML depending on the situation. Unless you reduce his match damage, I'm still going to use him as much

Long and the short of it, OML is a victim of their design.

StevO-J

I'm not a 5* player and probably won't ever level my 5*s higher than my 4* champs if I ever start to but that's another thing altogether. I do use OML (3/1/3 lvl. 255) sometimes, because you know... true heal and stuff, quite useful on low lvl nodes in PVE. So while I do use a 5* occasionally I wouldn't really be bothered too much if they decide to send OML the way of Sentry before him (although I really hope they don't, better to buff others than nerf a few).

When 5*s were introduced I think it was stated that it was the point to have them be useful at low number of covers, which is now held against OML if I'm not mistaken? What happened there? And as others have pointed out, OML is one of the oldest 5*s in the game so logically more people are going to be able to play him regularly. I seriously doubt this was taken into account.

As with most previous nerfs, keeping in mind that the stats have yet to be released, what is the point of nerfing something good you've had to play quite a lot to obtain? Isn't it the point of playing, to get stuff that make the struggle easier in the long run? I'm not going to accuse anyone of 'bait and switch' but I really don't see the problem as long as the characters aren't too overpowered in a general sense, which I think OML is not as there are quite a few characters that I'm more loathe to fight than him.

Anyway, guess we'll have to see how hard he is going to be hit by the Nerf Bat... (hoping for a light tap, fingers crossed...)

ZeiramMR

I'll reserve my comments on the nerf until I see how he has actually changed. But I hope they have a buff for a different character as well to soften the blow.

mpqr7

I actually will use C5p once I get him championed. He's now at 4/4/4 and sitting in my BH queue... just gotta pull a few hundred more LTs to get his 13th and 14th covers!!!

I *WOULD* use SS, but he's at 5/1/5, so with only 1 Red, he's completely useless, even if I level him up to lv 420.


That's your fault, D3 not mine!!! You only give me RNG, and I can't use BH on SS because I don't want to win another BH Black or a BH Blue!!


Argh!! I'm not even that upset about them nerfing OML. But I'm upset that you don't give us any other alternatives!!!!! I'd love to use the 5* heroes, but they're basically impossible to win! RNG is not a viable option! I happen to have lucked into a 5/2/5 OML after years of grinding and throwing away numerous OML Blacks and Reds, and now you will take away all that hard work.

Thanks for nothing.

Handoftheking26

This looks like an attempt to increase health pack sales, NOT a re-balance....of course he's most used, he was the 2nd 5* and the first useful one....he is the king of early round pve, not the scariest char in game....this is a **** thing to do since many players have been literally waiting years to cover him...

Dormammu

I'm pretty bored with 1 or 2 cover OMLs on every... single... team in PvP. Every player who has been lucky enough to obtain his yellow cover pairs him with 2-stars, 3-stars, 4-stars... it doesn't matter.

Also, one good thing about this nerf is that maybe everyone will be so distracted by it that they'll quit complaining about vaulting.

GurlBYE

Dormammu wrote:

I'm pretty bored with 1 or 2 cover OMLs on every... single... team in PvP. Every player who has been lucky enough to obtain his yellow cover pairs him with 2-stars, 3-stars, 4-stars... it doesn't matter.

For me they make great fodder on my way to 575.

CrookedKnight

The right way to rebalance OML would be to make his healing less of a crutch while beefing up his damage-dealing powers. Right now he's effectively immortal (on offense) in the 4* and below tiers, but easily steamrolled by proper 5* teams, with no middle ground where he's balanced.

firethorne

You want to see more 5* diversity? How about making 5* characters not completely dependent on RNG, and take two years for most people to fully cover.

Of course OML is going to show up huge in your statistics. First, he's a classic Marvel favorite. People love Wolverine. Next, he was one of the first 5*'s released, and more people have him, so of course he's heavily used. This isn't rocket science

He also isn't overpowered. He simply had utility as soon as you had one yellow cover, unlike many others that need their full load-outs to be useful.

Nerfing is a mistake. And coming on the heels of vaulting and the bizarre vintage token, its almost as if the devs want their game to implode.

fun_and_gun

mpq must really hate wolverine. I'm hoping that this isn't true but this may be the death of wolverine 2.0 (4* xfw was 1.0 for those that don't remember).

gmp72

The problem with statistics is that you can make them say what you want.

Why don't you look at a more meaningful statistic :

How many players who have Bolt and Thanos champed use OML in their matches ??

I think you would be quite surprised.

I'm afraid you've made yet another decision that's completely out of touch with your user base.

Why don't you talk to the players who have played this game for 1000+ days BEFORE making such wide sweeping changes ?

The only way you going to compensate for doing this is to :

Offer a swap for every OML cover the player has for a 5* cover of their choice. Plus the ISO that was sunk into him.

Sorry to see this day

gmp72
DJU

Phumade

The only way nerfs at this level of rarity become fair is give players a 1:1 5* replacement.

I feel bad for all those players who saved up for months to have a "chance" a pulling him out of classics. This is a big FU to all those players who worked hard for months.

Even if the nerf is minor, your doing it in a tier, where decisions are made on a 3 month time frame. (and players really obsess over consequences of pulling this token or that token and or timing of opening). You should announce this nerf in the same 3 month time frame so players have an "opportunity" to rebuild their roster in the appropriate fashion.

i.e. you feel its important to nerf OML for game health. Fine. announce that in 3 seasons OML will be nerfed and in what ways. Then give players 3 months to try and develop a replacement char.

vs.

That character you've been chasing for the last 15 months. We are making a major nerf next week that invalidates all that effort.

Sincerely,

1. Give people a 3month time frame to rebuild an alternative 5* or
2. give people a 1:1 replacement on OML covers. Its fine if you want to limit it to classic 5* or 5* that were released around the OML time frame.

nonnel1

The devs must have apple stock... cause there will be a lot of broken phones tomorrow that will need to be replaced...