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

So I maybe in type 2 category that ask vote to JF and Maggy because I think they are need a bit buff .
I can use them, or choose to not give him 4* mats, :blush:
That not the end of my gaming, if SG choose not buff them, and will be very grateful if they buff him of coz. I will still play the game , enjoy it as usual, and move forward.

1 Like


Idk lagun, you’ve always seemed pretty sensible

But what i don’t get is why should those 2 heroes see a buff just because you don’t want to use them?

Think that’s the part that confuses me

It’s not so much that i have an issue with requesting for buffs for heroes post release

It’s that i simply don’t understand why

I mean there’s 100s of heroes in this game

Don’t like 1? Max a different one

I mean the heroes are introduced into a general metric of the game and the very wide playerbase playing the game

Isn’t it a bit of an unrealistic expectation to think every single hero released is going to be liked and used by every single player that gets said hero?

I mean we’ve been seeing “should i max hero x, hero y, hero z” threads for years. If every hero was able to be used the same way as the next and liked just as much by every single player that gets the hero etc then it means we would have bigger issue at hand which would be lack of diversity in the heroes that have been released and lack of strategy variety within the game which would make everything as cookie cutter as candy crush which would be insanely boring and a game i would have lost interest in years ago

I don’t like kadilen, others love her
I don’t like ranvir, others like him
I wouldnt max boss wolf, others would
Etc etc

Guess my point is that just because i don’t like a hero, doesn’t mean it needs a buff

The only hero i really went to bat for was aegir and that’s because his original version was pretty horrid and i still haven’t seen such a wide spread feeling about a hero since then. He was broken.

I’ve made minor suggestions for some heroes that i would think make them better but never felt strong enough about them Needing the changes to harp on it or spend too much time on it(wanted perseus to hit harder and effect nearby, wanted drake to extra damage vs dark, etc)


Maggy I don’t have her, but my hubby have her, He is never complain and like u, he is surely type 1 player, he even say obakan and mook arr is not bad :wink:
But He said, he try using maggy and can’t love her :grinning:
JF, I don’t said he is bad heroes, just So-So ,in Defense I face him easy to take down. in Titan , He is not good, offense he good to blue flank and deff down, but I prefer to knock down the tank first , so my mono red usually use to green tank, and Azlar with Falcon, Wilbur, BT and Ares make and awesome synergy. Try JF in here and There, but I still can’t enjoy using him to much.

Ps : agreed with u. If I don’t like one heroes, I have other heroes to use.
But as a customer , I like to give a review, but not force SG to grant it. This just a wish like when we making wishlist to Santa hoping our parents hear it. :rofl:

1 Like

Not every hero is going to be stellar on both sides of the board

Not every hero is going to be good for titans

As far as offense, he’s just different but not ineffective

In your current red team, yup i agree he wouldn’t be effective and that’s not abnormal for any hero to not fit in well in every lineup

But there are other synergies out there

1 Like

Will line you to learn more about JF Rigs :heart_eyes:
Thx so much!!!

1 Like

OK I’ve hidden quite a bit in my drop downs as with this post I’m back on top waffling form and for a good deal just kick sand all over the line between on and off topic but anyway here goes…

Rules I have for viewing humanity.
  1. Never underestimate how scummy some people can get. To anyone who either lives in the UK or ever plans to visit London I strongly recommend that they visit the Tower of London to see the sort of torture devices people not only dreamt up but were quite happy to inflict on each other just a few hundred years ago. Evolution is not that fast, the machinery of the human brain that allowed people to do stuff like that is pretty much the same now as it was then and that the “civility” of societies today is fragile as demonstrated by tyrannical regimes of the last century turning people on each other.

  2. Never underestimate how utterly awesome and brilliant some people can be. As coronavirus wreaks havoc around the world so many awesome people are working and volunteering to help in the response to it. Honestly I am struggling to think of how to do justice to this so shall leave it there but this is far from the only example.

In the end whatever trait you want to try and characterise or think people are like there’s a whole bunch of people on the total other side of that characteristic such that it is useless to try summarise humanity in any one way however much people like to try to do so - the diversity is always bigger than they realise.

It’s been a familiar theme that people have questioned whether the internet is bad for society however it is nothing more than a tool that acts as a mirror for humanity. Whereas before people could walk around ignorantly believing all people are one way or another the internet challenges those perceptions and shows just the total spectrum of humanity from those doing awesome things with Just Giving pages to the scumbags trolling and cyberbullying others. The personalities and individuals doing both these things would still be acting within their nature internet or not just that with the internet the rest of us can’t pretend what we don’t like doesn’t happen when it does. Even before the panic buying we are witnessing around this crisis the signs of what ills our societies have been there but unfortunately we lack the leadership to tackle them.

It is perhaps unfortunate that recent political leaders have not been particularly wary about poking at the fragile rules of civility by pointing blame for social ills at specific groups to turn people against each other that if that is going on in real life I’m not too surprised people are turning against other members of the E&P playing community.

Fear of not looking to be wrong vs actually finding what is right

Whilst I can’t speak for other countries but unfortunately where I am this is a product of the education system, the BS promises we tell our kids and behaviour of our political/media classes. We tell our kids that if they want to succeed they have to really well in their exams to then go to a decent uni and what not.

Our education system is not set up to teach them how to think but to regurgitate information they may or may not understand in ways that they can’t be seen to be wrong so as to get the marks for that question. With such an emphasis on perfectionism we create individuals who are more terrified of being seen to be wrong than they are of actually interested in being right. Rather than admit they don’t know they would rather pretend they do. But everyone makes mistakes and if they’d rather cover them up than learn from them they cannot grow to be any better.

Unfortunately this mindset of must always be right permeates through our society such that debate these days have become competitions to see who can own the other rather than an attempt to discover a more fundamental truth. Any political leadership acknowledges its made a mistake and changes its approach to something is accused in the media of weak leadership or making an embarrassing U-turn whereas pigheadedly pursuing dumba##ery is supposedly strong. Why strong leadership is seen as better than wise leadership is baffling but usually the first is often the sign of the lack of the other for a wise leader would realise the branch that cannot bend will inevitably break and that water from a spring remains flexible in the path it takes but always winds up getting to the sea at some point.

As such in a society that encourages and values BSing over pretty much all else sadly it is a rare person who still has the humility to be able to hold up their hand at some point and say they got it wrong and learn something from it. There is also the sad irony that those able to do so are so much more qualified to lead people than those that aren’t however they are unlikely ever to be voted into those positions that matter.

Anyhu as I run the risk of my waffle in those drop downs at the strengths and ills of people in general and the community might be considered as going off topic I’m gonna make a handbrake turn back into the race with:

How a must-have hero is damaging to the players community

This section has become so familiar to many players by now that most probably skip it at the top of each hero guide it appears in but honestly its the most important point. Far too many people, especially newbies (for which this point goes out to) assume they’re naturally gonna get that hero that looks awesome in the beta beat - after all you’ve got a few HOTM before that took you on average 50ish pulls before and so you’re quite happy to chase that awesome new hero…

However as any big spender in this game will tell you in this game that even with the better HOTM odds you will eventually hit a streak in which a particular HOTM that absolutely refuses to drop. It’s happened a number of times with me I can tell you - the one that stick most in my mind was Miki that took me more than 400 pulls to land. Whilst I have spoken before in this thread that the likes of an uber all-round brilliant centralising hero is bad for the game meta it is also bad socially for the community as the idea of a “must-have” hero puts pressure on people to spend to try and get it and unfortunately that means a lot of people will spend all they can and lose out by not getting it and that person could very well be you despite however much you want that hero.

Just as I started this post saying how there are so many people out there who are scumbags but there are also so many awesome people as well, the same goes for how much self control people have. Many out there are disciplined enough to ensure they never spend outside of a budget (or spend at all - shout out to you F2Pers) but at the other end of the spectrum there are those who have self-control issues either temporarily going through a bad time that’s knocked them out of a right frame of mind or it may be pathological as the result of a mental health issue. The game has absolutely no protections to ensure these people won’t totally self-destruct themselves rage-pulling past what they can afford for a “must-have” hero. If we are actually a community we should be trying to look out for all of our fellow players which includes ensuring that heroes are not so “must-have” that a vulnerable player would be tempted into self-destructing going for it as SGG certainly doesn’t care so long as the money rolls in.

(An aside: I’m sure most alliance leaders who’ve been going for quite awhile have had a player at some point they could tell had self control issues - who probably then burned out later after bad pulls at an event or whatever - would be interesting to know if having realised that you attempted to try to advise them to find another game before they crashed and burnt or whether you let them get on with it happy to have the additional body against Titans for awhile however I guess the question is more rhetorical as even if some did do the later it’d be difficult admitting it publicly that you knew how it might end for them yet said nothing that we’re unlikely to get an accurate picture)

One day that could be you but maybe you have more self-control than that and will stop yourself before bankrupting yourself but whilst you won’t have had it that bad you certainly won’t feel great knowing that you blew everything you had been saving and budgeting to try get this particular hero to try be more competitive whilst the vast majority of the top 1000 players will have landed that hero for less than you spent further widening the gap you hoped to close (though in reality you and they both having it wouldn’t close it - just maintain what it already was) as you can be sure that those top players will also have been saving up for that hero.

So yeah whilst earlier in this thread I explained that when judging a hero that I believed:

But that whilst they should provide a measurable improvement for any player that anything too OP not just undermines the value of previous heroes and damages the game’s meta it also has the potential to damage the community. So whilst a player may be begging for an uber hero to not be re-balance properly as they’re fantasising what they’ll be able to do with it as a community minded beta tester I also need to consider the implications for that exact same player in the scenario that they wind up not getting that hero with what they can safe budget for both in terms can they remain competitive in the game without the hero they so wanted and not to provide too great a temptation for them to do something stupid they can’t take back.


I typically don’t tell players how to spend their money outside of “don’t spend beyond your means” and even when we made the shift in the alliance to be more competitive i said “we’re not going to require spending but we will have common goals of a team, if the goals are too much for a player to reach then that doesn’t mean spend more than you want to or more than you can afford, just means you should find an alliance that suits you better”

I didn’t bother quoting but this response was in reference to how we handled players spending money and what not

I mean i have np givin players advice but at the same time I’m not playin the game to babysit or manage a fellow player’s finances for them. If they’re goin to go for broke spending on this game then they would just go for broke on somethin else if that’s the mindset they’re in. Self destruction is typically a mindset and not always triggered by a certain game or other activity

I mean I’m not self destructive. But definitely been times when I’ve had more money than i need and have “looked for ways to blow it”. If i go over budget, that’s on me, no one else.

I typically agree with your posts(and even the majority of that post up until you went off track a bit into another topic) but the victim mentality of society is a subject I’d rather players veer away from throwin into game discussions. Should have it’s own thread for those that enjoy that type of discussion in my opinion but I’m just 1 guy

Idk. “This game made me ruin my life” just isn’t something I’ll ever be able to get behind. I know i know evil arrogant etc, heard it all before but doesn’t change anything.


This is becoming an interesting discussion, but somewhat OT from OP :rofl:.

There are many different kinds of people, really as many kinds as there are people since no two are the same, but you can generalize a bit.

In this game there are players who are self-assured enough to know exactly what it is they want and what they expect to get out of the game. I would put @Rigs and myself and many others here on the forums in that category. Those players will not spend more than they want to or budget to because there is no reason to. Some compete at the top, others (like me) compete in the middle. It’s a question of where you are comfortable and what you are comfortable with spending.

There are also players who lack that self-assurance. Sure, they enjoy the game but they need something back as a reinforcement of their enjoyment. These are the players susceptible to binge spending to chase the “shiny”. They generally want to compete at the top but don’t really understand the commitment required to do so.

To tie this back into the OP, it seems to me that most of the vocal anti-nerfers are not beta testers and really are wanting a “superpower” to propel them to the top. They have no hands-on experience with the hero and don’t know how that hero works in the context of the game. They just see a really powerful hero that they want to have and drool over. Beta testers OTOH have used the hero in the context of the game. And I personally value their opinions a little bit higher.


Whilst I also agree with much of what you’ve written so far in this post this one I find more problematic.

As I said in my previous points about humanity as a whole people try too hard to define people as being a certain way when in reality we are far more diverse and with large enough sample sizes you will get a sufficient number of people at each extreme of any attribute however many standard deviations away from the average it my be by virtue of that large sample size.

I note that your assertion here is qualified by the word “typically” and “not always” but I am not arguing about the majority of cases. By definition mental health issues like those I refer to are atypical and before I changed career into software development I studied experimental psychology and worked in advertising and media and I can safely say that it is quite possible to lead a neurotypical individual into self destruction if you know what you are doing and don’t particularly care.

Billions are spent in advertising and marketing to influence people to buy stuff they don’t really need because it frankly works on so many. SGG didn’t spend so much of their time developing their own analytics to segment and profile its spenders by lifetime spending and when to place offers in front of them because it didn’t work ( The reality is even if only 1% of people playing the game at any one point are vulnerable for atypical reasons that is not their fault in a game of 2 million people that is still 20,000 people.

Frankly if a community is not interested in the welfare of its vulnerable it is not a community, it is just people paying lip service whilst just pursuing their own selfish means.

Whilst you may wish to ignore the minority of cases that don’t conform to your “typical” cases it is however a concern that I take into account whilst carrying out my role beta testing as whilst there remains no safeguards for these players I wish to ensure what I do minimises any exploitation of that small group. As such it very much plays a role in this discussion for me whether you like it or not.

You are free to not want to consider it but that doesn’t mean it isn’t an issue and I’m just as free to consider it among the many factors I use in assessments in beta.


Just curious, what are other JF synergies you mentioned?

I don’t know what he had in mind, but seeing how HotM and other hero releases have gone lately, my thought is:

JF, Vela, Clarissa, Tyr, Victor, Gravy (who overlaps with JF but if you don’t have JF…) and maybe one or two more that I’m missing at 5*: All fast/very fast. All with unique abilities (bleed, poison, burn, drown, health drain, etc.) that drain health quickly and will ignore defenses.

Alone they may seem weak/support in some cases.

Together with a couple of chains on a first move attack to charge them and they’ll devastate a side.

Locke (an exception here in that she is not fast) also has a unique drain, so she can stack with them.

It’s very possible if they keep producing these fast/very fast heroes with unique drains, we’ll need more cleansers to combat it, but we may be a little ways out from that.

1 Like

Another good set which is unique is the Sand Empire DoT

Plus Morgan Le Fey

And jabberwock is an overlap with Clarissa

(I love DoT :stuck_out_tongue: )

1 Like

Yeah, knew I was forgetting some. So if I wanted to rainbow and be unique DoT (for arguments sake):

Morgan le Fay, Gravy, Rana, Clarissa, and Vela

If they all fired (per round damage):

134 for Rana
168 for Morgan
52 for Vela
149 for Gravy
149 for Clarissa

652 damage per round potentially on one group of heroes.

1304 damage in two rounds on the same group.

This doesn’t take into account the initial damage that Vela, Gravy, Clarissa and Rana would do.

In short: most heroes = dead by round 2 of this if the cleanser isn’t firing, and as most cleansers are average speed at best and not the tank…yeah.

Could get it rolling for everyone but Rana by move 2 if the tiles fell right in attack.

1 Like

Yup :stuck_out_tongue:

If you wanted more effect you’d run Lady Locke in the place of Morgan as she does more DoT to 3 heroes.

Also those numbers are pre-emblems & Troops :stuck_out_tongue:

My Morgan with +19 nodes:

My Morgan in battle with a level 11 mana troop:

Anyways back on topic lol


Aye luck be capricious ba dum tss :drum:

That fell flat, it would have made more sense if my ign was my forum name :c

Actually, before the Beta Beat threads, those not in Beta would attack/complain due to all the secrecy. I think the Beat threads provide a window into the process, and some much clamored for transparency.


Actually, I was being devil’s advocate there.

Rats! I missed it :grin:

1 Like

This topic actually has been debated a couple times in a Line chat I’m in… Definitely been debated and discussed a couple times between @zephyr1 and myself.

We sorta reached the conclusion that, yes while the beta beat theqds are creating a platform for the arguments and sense of “how dare you beta testers stop me from getting xyz hero” they are doing a lot in terms of reducing the level of misinformation that’s used to be spread by the circulation of outdated hero cards which were “leaked” from beta.

There have been a bunch of times when people in line chats pull up the old cards by simply saying “hey, that’s not right anymore. Check out this thread on the forum”

So there is a lot of good that’s coming from them, not just in removing the “secrecy” or whatever but also by removing the misinformation which was being inadvertently spread.


Cookie Settings