Clarification on behalf of beta testers, to the anti-nerf crowd

And the extremely rare lady locke

Ah, yes, I always forget about her, until it’s time for the pirate event. Would still really like her.

2 Likes

And that is why the anti-nerf crowd is getting so little sympathy from me. This has nothing to do with gatekeeping and everything to do with logic.

The best heroes in the game should be the rarest ones. Why would you spend more money to get worse heroes? it makes no sense. Why spend lots of money to pull for guin when telluria can be had for far, far less and perform just as well if not better?

If you need 1500 pulls for a 95% chance to pull a hero then it better be better than the hero that would require just a shade over 200 pulls.

So yes, 100% the best heroes should not be available to the majority of the players. If they would be then there would be zero incentive to spend more for the rarer heroes and the games revenue would drop off which in time would in time kill the game.

An extreme example to prove a point. If the best 20 heroes in the game would be TC20 heroes. Event heroes, Hotm’s, seasonals are all worse than those you can train for free and that everyone has. How much do you think people would spend as compared to now and how many of the worse and more expensive heroes would you see do you think? Everyone would have the same, every fight would be identical and everyone would probably be playing something else.

HOTM’s are easier to pull than event heroes, S2 and s3 heroes and as such should be generally worse.

For the record : I do not own Guin, GM, or any top event heroes. I do own Vela and Telluria ( and every other HOTm that I wanted up until now for that matter ) though… I am not a gatekeeper. I only want what is best for this game in the long run even if it means that the HOTM’s that I am pulling are worse.

I will gladly discuss how rare heroes should be. Maybe event heroes are too hard to get or HOTm’s are too easy to get or whatever. What I will not discuss is whether or not a hero that is easier to get should be stronger. The answer is no, no matter how you spin it.

1 Like

Like I said 3/2 should be highest stack. Would stop these underdeveloped teams from thinking they doing something and then soon as a color estriction or reflect not in their favor they in here whining. Mono is terrible for the game and artificially inflating your offense to combat RNG is not skill but to each their own. As ivy stated i dont like it and I’m in agreement as to why and the downfalls of it.

2 Likes

Yeap and that sure as hell didnt happen with Francois believe that. However he is nice to play with with telluria as a tank, but so is playing aegir if your opponent has no dispells…

We have temporarily closed this topic due to multiple inappropriate posts and personal attacks. Everyone, please review the Forum Rules - Please Read and think twice before posting. We do not tolerate any personal attacks or inappropriate behaviour on the forum.

5 Likes

This topic was automatically opened after 15 hours.

Moderator Note.

While this thread has reopened, further violations of the #forum-rules will not be tolerated and may result in the thread being closed permanently & offending comments removed.

Once again, keep the discussion Civil and on topic.

Carry on.

3 Likes

Thanks for being honest .
So spending money for 1.3% chance at a great hero is bad for game and has to be even lower odds.
The reason to nerf a hero should be due to hero being broken and not some ulterior motive to keep the best hero away from people and protect those that have best hero from 2 years ago . This is the reason @Mr_Style_Points why there is heat for people that advocate nerfing ( especially when there always seems to be more passion to nerf gm replacement heroes rather than other great heroes that are not gm replacements) . whilst I don’t believe impiosube is in beta I’m sure he is not the only one with this mentality that is actually in beta and this why not matter how anyone spins it or argues it (Even if correct) is viewed with sceptiscism

1 Like

image

Pity it’s small and can’t hear it, seems like a good one

Feel like the convos run it’s course personally and I’m not actually seeing anything new that hasn’t been said for the past couple of years now

Every hyped hero release stirs up the same conversations and the same baseless accusations get thrown around

I think the OP was well written and this thread had some potential to go a different path

But until players stop using “i dont have a hero like this hero others do so i can’t be competitive in the game”, progress will never be made in this sort of debate

It always boils down to just players outraged they don’t have the hero the next guy does and decides to start blaming, shaming, and finger pointing anyone they feel hindered their chances at getting a hero similar to the one they lust over

There’s no ill intent involved in the hero feedback from testers or the “pro-nerf” crowd from what I’ve read over the past couple of years

Just boils down to tryin to keep the game from becoming too imbalanced. As simple as that.

Anyways @Mr_Style_Points thanks for kickin it off, has been entertaining but i don’t see anything changing from this thread.

I’d suggest players with the different mindsets i mentioned above just isolate themselves away from each other and eliminate all the bs

Conspiracists and finger pointers can hang out in 1 corner

“Pro-nerfers” and players in favor of prolonging the life of a game they enjoy can hang out in the other…

3 Likes

Yeah, not sure what happened there. Works on Line and photo library. It definitely perfectly sums up my feelings on the entire matter

1 Like

Are you arguing for the nerfing of the word nerf? :wink:

3 Likes

I agree with this. Complaining that the end result after the Beta process is different than when Beta began with a hero is—for lack of a better term—silly. Of course it’s different. A true nerf happens after a hero is released after beta, and it does happen, just as buffing happens. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

I am sure many of the Beta testers are not, but there are countless instances of people wanting to stay at the top in almost every facet of life, and many of them used unscrupulous ways of maintaining it. It’s not beyond belief for a decent amount of people not in beta to think that players are putting roadblocks or obstacles for them to reach the top as well.

And for the record I dont think most beta players are… but unless they are some extraordinary group of people, it will mirror a slice of the real life population, which means there are some who will want to prevent others from doing well.

I think a small acknowledgment to that would help ease some of those peoples minds.

1 Like

Sure, but the necessary implication of that particular conspiracy theory is that either the majority of beta testers fall into that category, or that a tiny minority are the true Bildabergs and the rest of beta testers follow their lead regarding nerf recommendations and are too stupid to see that they are being used.

Surely we can acknowledge that much while we are at it.

I agree with this, generally. I am not sure if it pertains to the beta group or not.

But I’m also not sure how much it matters to me. The common names on the top 100 leaderboard do not stop me from posting a very high raid win percentage myself. Similarly, the small number of people who excel in the monthly events have not yet become good enough to stop me from completing the event. If they get stronger…well…I relish a challenge.

To the extent that more and powerful heroes are released,

Bring It On

1 Like

I’m just going to say this. At the beginning of my time here, I had no idea what the beta testers jobs were. So, like so many in this thread I resented them for what I didn’t know. That was a long time ago.

I have now since discovered that their job is purely bug testing and reporting and they give their feedback on heroes based on personal (beta) experience. Many times their suggestions go unnoticed or ignored because SG will do as SG pleases (looking at the Guin release and the Kingston bug as evidence).

Beta testers get a crummy wrap that isn’t deserved. The reasoning behind many of your arguments are fruitless because they don’t make sense from an objective point of view. Why would a whale in beta want a hero nerfed knowing full well they are gonna drop money to pull said hero? Make that make sense for me.

I think all of this finger pointing should be placed on the real culprits… Us, because SG and the developers look and listen in on here more often then I think we realize. Crying that a hero is too strong before they are released and blaming beta for not “trying hard enough” or “doing their jobs” is simply incorrect. If you really want to blame someone, blame the creators who don’t listen to their own beta program.

P.S. I’m not in beta.

8 Likes

Here’s the basic way it goes when an overpowered hero is released in beta:

Beta testers: “This hero is too strong at present and needs toned down. We recommend trying X/Y/Z minor changes in beta before release to see how they play”

SG: drastically changes the hero in question

Beta testers: “Umm… that may have been a few steps too far. This needed addressing, but this was unnecessarily heavy handed. Can we try splitting the difference?”

SG: releases the hero as-is

11 Likes

Cookie Settings