Upcoming Character Change to Wolverine (Old Man Logan)

Magic

Azoth658 wrote:

Guys stop thinking of the micro and I'm talking about the hardcore players. The fact that 10% of all node clears from all players including those that don't have oml have an oml on the team it shows that on barely any covers he is a beast.

No he is not. I have him at 1 yellow cover so he heals when in clear trivial pve nodes or lighting rounds. His match damage can be replicates with any other 5* (might need to invest some iso). The trivial nodes are 33% of PVE that many players do daily (I don't use him on essentials). He doesn't see the light of day in any other fight (not Pvp, not hard nodes on pve). Clearly not a beast.

His true healing is hurting Health pack sales. Easy.

JVReal

The statistics are deceptive.

I'm not in 5* land, I don't PVP, but I use my 3/4/0 OML for 1/3 of the PVE nodes every PVE. The 3 easy nodes in every sub, I use OML, X23, Thanos, because time is everything, and it just gets them out the way. that's 21 victories on nodes I could use anyone, but I chose healers, because its quick and efficient. those 21 Victories could just as easily come with my using 5* IM or 5* Dr. Strange, or Goblin like I used to use all the time for his black.

I never use my OML for any of the other 6 nodes in PVE. But if you look at my stats where 33% of my victories involve OML... its not because he's overpowered. He just heals decent. I used to use Daken, and Patch, it's just a good character.

Where 5* actually matter, I've heard many people say he isn't the best.

He's the most useful for smaller rosters who aren't in 5* land. The only one of my under covered 5* that I actually use because I can only use him in those little fights. He is not carrying my PVE victory at all. He is not essential to my strategy. It is a stupid idea to nerf him because of your faulty interpretation of statistics.

zulux21

Ratvader wrote:

Maybe my grasp of math is bad but if 10% of wining teams use him that means 90% DONT!!!!!!!!!!

Thats by no means unbalanced! The argument is a fraud. Its a straw man designed to distract from the truth:


OML heals.

I'm actually curious what the last month's thanos stats look at.

I would say something like 70% of my matches have 3* thanos right now as most of the matches I do are either the trivial ones in PVE or against bots in PVP lol.

to be fair OML is on my team for most of those as well (as is daken) so that they can heal and take all the damage. but still.

GurlBYE

the statistics should be used to make others 5's better at lower covers.

Like my 5 cover phoenix (lol when did this happen) is useless.
My Silver surfer with 4 red? Lol.
Cap America with 4 yellow? Thats cute but who cares.

I'm not the target of 5's being useful low cover, but thats what I'd read from the data.

Azoth658

Ratvader wrote:

Maybe my grasp of math is bad but if 10% of wining teams use him that means 90% DONT!!!!!!!!!!

Thats by no means unbalanced! The argument is a fraud. Its a straw man designed to distract from the truth:


OML heals.

Your grasp of maths is bad

If every combination that could be made from every player was equally played (perfect balance) and every player had him his play percentage should probably be in something like 0.8% of matches.

I'd love the developers to show the top ten characters with the same stat. If IM40 is second with 2% would people still think 10% is acceptable?

JVReal

Azoth658 wrote:

Ratvader wrote:

Maybe my grasp of math is bad but if 10% of wining teams use him that means 90% DONT!!!!!!!!!!

Thats by no means unbalanced! The argument is a fraud. Its a straw man designed to distract from the truth:


OML heals.

Your grasp of maths is bad

If every combination that could be made from every player was equally played (perfect balance) and every player had him his play percentage should probably be in something like 0.8% of matches.

I'd love the developers to show the top ten characters with the same stat. If IM40 is second with 2% would people still think 10% is acceptable?

That might be true if we won a fully covered version of the character upon release... but alas all is not equal in the world of USABLE characters and AVAILABLE characters.

therightwaye

this is a bad idea

fmftint

Why put a feed back link in an announcement if it's really not wanted? The auto -FU- replies are beginning to roll out.
Advice? If you don't like the change SELL THE CHARACTER

Thank you for contacting D3 Go! Customer Support.

We thank you for the feedback on this upcoming character change. It is unfortunate that you feel negatively affected by the recent changes, but balance changes are an important part of any competitive game. These changes are only meant to balance this character, and make the game more balanced and interesting moving forward.

If you find that you are unhappy with the recent changes, we do offer an bonus for selling recently changed characters. This bonus offer becomes active and lasts for a few weeks immediately after changes to a character go live and the offer includes an increased amount of Iso-8 and an additional amount of Hero Points that normally are not given when selling a character. No further compensation or refunds will be offered outside of the enhanced sell rate.

We also encourage you to consider the updates as a whole rather than focusing on a single change or two. The metagame and how characters match up against one another is altered with each change, so looking at one single character when trying to assess the updates can be less useful than trying out all changes after they are released. If you are still dissatisfied with the changes after taking the time to **** them post-release, we encourage you to take advantage of the temporary sell bonus so you can invest your Iso-8 and Hero Points into other characters more suited to your style of game play.

Dormammu

Azoth658 wrote:

If every combination that could be made from every player was equally played (perfect balance) and every player had him his play percentage should probably be in something like 0.8% of matches.

Yeah, but this is Wolverine. He's the most popular character in the Marvel Universe and has been since the mid-80s. He also has a really popular movie out right now, a version of which is based on... Old Man Logan. Oh, and he heals. All self-healers get a lot of play, especially in PvE.

Also, are we expected to play Bagman .8% of the time? Yelena? 3-star Spidey? I wonder how much play Reed got before his buff.

That 10% statistic they threw out, by itself in no way indicates the power level of OML. We'll see what the nerf is. My guess is they'll limit his healing and that's it. If that's the case, all the people accusing the developers of wanting to sell more health packs are going to be proven right. If they **** more than that we could be looking at a similar situation to the 4-star Wolverine nerf, where he simply disappeared.

DrDevilDinosaur

This too shall pass.

Ratvader

Azoth658 wrote:

Ratvader wrote:

Maybe my grasp of math is bad but if 10% of wining teams use him that means 90% DONT!!!!!!!!!!

Thats by no means unbalanced! The argument is a fraud. Its a straw man designed to distract from the truth:


OML heals.

Your grasp of maths is bad

If every combination that could be made from every player was equally played (perfect balance) and every player had him his play percentage should probably be in something like 0.8% of matches.

I'd love the developers to show the top ten characters with the same stat. If IM40 is second with 2% would people still think 10% is acceptable?

My math is perfect, your grasp of what i said isnt. Lets review, and i will use small words so you will understand:

10% of wining matchs use OML. That means 90% dont.

You adressed possible cover use which has absolutely nothing to with the 90/10 stat i addressed.

Congratulations, you fell for d3's strawman and proved a lack reading comprehension at the same time.

Alkyoneus

So here's my personal problem (this may or may not apply to others):

The random number generators in this game determined that I receive 13 +1 covers for Old Man Logan. Phoenix has 11 covers, IM46 has 11 covers, Spider-man (back in black) has 10 covers. I championed Old Man Logan, and rightfully so! He had 13 covers +1! Your system determined that I got these, I spent no on covers directly. Had another character gotten 13 covers first, I would gladly have championed that character!

Now, you're telling me I use my only championed 5* character too much! Story Mode scaling issues? Sorry, you weren't supposed to use him, why not try a lower level boosted 4* and 3* team? PvP giving me double champion 5* teams to fight against? Try 2 boosted 4* characters and see if you win! Just leave your single 5* on the bench so he can rest.

OK, so now he's being nerfed. What do I get as a reward? Hp and ISO. 2 resources specifically not designed to help me obtain more 5* covers to replace my much-less-useful Old Man Logan.

ZeiramMR

DrDoMe wrote:

Just an aside, I'm amazed anyone thought it would be good to post an announcement with no details. This is so amateurish.

There was an unofficial thread earlier today about the change, linking to the write-up before the official announcement. Not to mention a few people posting with datamining knowledge who have been modded in the last couple days. It kind of forced their hand.

Tony_Foot

To make people buy health packs? Really? It's not something in nearly 2 years that has ever crossed my mind once. Two or three times at my absolute worst with a poor run of games I have had to bust open some tacos to get a 5 pack but anyone running a max OML surely has a roster diverse enough to not need to buy packs.

I think a slight nerf if a year late, now it's not so relevant at all. They should have nerfed him a bit last year and then edged him back up when more people had loads of 5's rostered. I think this is all a bit premature, let's at least wait and see how bad it is. People saying they want to sell him etc, that's just ****, no one will sell him for HP.

Jarvind

As with most threads like this, I'm super late to the party and just reiterating at this point, but:

- He's not that powerful. It takes ages to get all the AP to transform him - you can easily win matches much faster and more decisively with Green Goblin, Phoenix, Thanos - hell, virtually any other 5* except Surfer, and even he's debatable since his red and black were buffed.

- He gets used a lot because he saves health packs, and is useful for clearing trivials with very few covers. Now, if that cuts into profits, I get it, but the pretense of "he's too powerful" is immediately transparent to anyone who has ever actually played the game. He's the 5* version of Daken or Patch, not Iceman or Peggy.

- Does this mean anyone who gets used a lot is automatically a nerf candidate? I can't get a SHIELD sim match without Peggy on the other team unless I skip at least five times, so I assume she's next up on the chopping block.

undrtaker

All this will do is make getting rid of the 1st 3 PVE nodes take longer, which doesn't help the players or the game

therightwaye

First they came for OML, and I did not speak out - because I did not play OML...

FaustianDeal

Random Musings about this impending change:
Of course Logan is everywhere, Logan:
* Was the 2nd 5* released. So we have had more chances to get his covers. He existed before dilution was a thing. His odds were 5% then - effectively the odds in latest now.
* When Phoenix was added she was the first 'latest' legend. During that period Logan was in both Classics *AND* Latests.
* There are already 2x Logan covers in Daily Resupply

When 5*s were originally launched, conceptually, they were supposed to be usable at 1/1/1 - because covers were supposed to be hard to come by.

I would argue that Black Bolt and Thanos are unquestionably more powerful than Logan. But most of the user base doesn't know that yet because they haven't gotten those 2 characters covered enough to use them. A more valid way to address the high amount of favor given to Logan would be to make other legendary characters easier to come by.

There are several things that seem to be intentionally misinterpreted in order to justify a preordained outcome.

Our attempts at logic will fall on deaf ears. The decision has been made.

Our only hopes are that:
* They will be gentle. Which they have historically not been; most nerfed characters fell to the bottom of the power rankings and have never recovered. Given OML is NOT the top of the power ranking right now that doesn't bode well for where he could possibly land if he is being 'weakened'.
* The buyback is generous. Which they have recently not been. But recent changes were cast as 'buffs' and this one is not.

carrion_pigeons

This change is way too late, and you just know it's going to be hugely over-done. They could have nerfed him a year ago and lots of people would have been behind them, because he was ruining PvP for everyone, including a majority who didn't have him covered. Now, a lot more people have reason to be upset and a lot fewer people are frustrated by his presence in PvP. I guess the reasoning is that now that he isn't such a selling point, there's no reason to let people abuse him so heavily? Somehow I doubt this is the change that's suddenly going to let SS and Cap shine in 5* play.

My own 2/1/0 OML is pretty unlikely to have a major impact on my play, either before or after the nerf, so I have reason to be thankful for my poor-ish luck, I guess.

It does kinda seem like they're putting out a bunch of pretty unpopular changes all in a row. I wonder what the reasoning behind timing them this way is? I know I quit for like a year and a half after a similar series of dumb decisions, back when Magneto got nerfed, so even though this change doesn't affect me much, I guarantee there's going to be a fair few who quit over it.

firethorne

therightwaye wrote:

First they came for OML, and I did not speak out - because I did not play OML...

Then they came for Black Bolt, and I did not speak, because I'm Black Bolt.

*credit to Loyal for this joke*