bbigler said: I believe the real problem that many people have here on this forum is that they invest too much of themselves into this game. It becomes their life, their purpose of living. So, when things change, they don't handle it very well on a psychological or emotional level. If you set your heart on something that can change, you're setting yourself up for disappointment and frustration. In the words of Yoda "Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose".On the bright side, if someone quits the game because they're so upset about some change, then it is surely good for them to quit, because they're addicted to it.
Damn, I just had to log in and show some support to J1P. I was pretty serious player but didn't drop much on this game.
That said writing was on the wall ages ago. When the only way to actually see results was to hoard a ton of CP and use it strictly on Legendary tokens it moved into the time to retire zone. Best decision I made. Hopefully in a few weeks you will be much happier too J1P.
The fact that 5s remain only available from Leg tokens and the fact that only current Legs were available for dupe switching showed Dem only cares to appease the whales. After all whales have the old 5s all champed so not like they would get any unusable covers.
Anyways long story short. Loved the original OP, they def did wrong and have yet to make amends. I hope others take your comments to heart.
Ripley27 said: I'm showing my support too, not just cos it's infamous J1P but because he and everyone that's commented is absolutely right.D3 should be ashamed for changing something that people have poured their precious time, money and energy into buying while leaving all the things that should be updated, debugged and fixed in their rear view mirror. It must really be great for them to be paid to just sit back and design new charaxters!!! There's no protection for gamers out there, the developers take the money but don't deliver full satisfactory goods and what can we do about it but rant in complaint messages that get "bot answered"!!And the only reason, I do mean the ONLY reason majority of us "over used" OML is because the drop rate is so bad you can't win high enough 5* to replace them. All the suggestions Johnny gave were spot on, scrub out events and put out new ones, fix the characters you have instead of pumping out a new one every other week and would it kill anyone to sort the broken MMR??All of these players have given D3 the information needed to make this game great again, question is now, what are they going to do about it?? Don't tell me "bot answer"...
Jonny1Punch said: [D3 could still make this right and fix this giant mess ...]
CPU randomly selects 3 from your roster vs 3 from the unknown opponent's roster using same-MMR level (whether 2*, 3*, 4*, 5*) so that you are relatively closely matched.
Not boosted like Balance of Power...
You click and have no idea who or what you will face: Just you vs. the machine.
Whenever the events expire, the scores/rankings are posted and you see for the first time how you did on that event with the randomness throughout the event.
This might prove a better test of depth of game knowledge,
may add a bit of refreshing diversity (especially for those with comprehensive rosters).
Very Respectfully,
…::: SeveredSynapse :::…
Roster: https://mpq.gamependium.com/rosters/SeveredSynapse/
Jonny1Punch said: Nickaraxnos you are absolutely correct and the legal avenue is being pursued aggressively at the moment.
Phaserhawk said: One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding.
beyonderbub said: Phaserhawk said: One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release.
Daredevil217 said: beyonderbub said: Phaserhawk said: One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. Not only that, but D3 is protected (I'd imagine) because no one here purchased OML outright. The only thing you can buy with dollars is virtual currency (lots and lots of it) and hope RNG is kind. They don't guarantee anything. Essentially they are selling virtual currency to purchase virtual lotto tickets.
Phaserhawk said: Daredevil217 said: beyonderbub said: Phaserhawk said: One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. Not only that, but D3 is protected (I'd imagine) because no one here purchased OML outright. The only thing you can buy with dollars is virtual currency (lots and lots of it) and hope RNG is kind. They don't guarantee anything. Essentially they are selling virtual currency to purchase virtual lotto tickets. Not completely agreeing or disagreeing but if you purchased covers with cp and spent money for that purpose only, then yes you did purchase covers outright and trust me the 720cp is cheaper than hoping for a cover. And the hearsay and misinformation may be correct but if that was said depending on the state a verbal promise such as that is legally binding. Essentially they created an addendum to the EULA if indeed that was what was stated. So while under EULA they would be covered that is an addition to it thus if such a thing was said and the state that they made the comment in does allow verbal contexts/agreements to be binding then they are in violation of their own EULA contract and thus open to litigation if one chooses to do so.