Just what exactly stands in the way of making all heroes GOOD CHOICES? Not even "equally strong", just GOOD and WORTHWILE?


#1

I’ve made a topic about this before asking people to throw around some ideas for hero rebalancing. This time I want to straight up ask - why won’t someone (as in - devs, not us players derping around on the forums) review all the heroes and make them a fine ascension choice?

I just read that Quintus topic on the front page here. It’s ridiculous that someone has ONE purple 5* and NO real expectations to get another one in the near future, but is STILL raking their mind wondering just how horrible a choice it is to invest the Tabards into his LEGENDARY hero.

He should be GLAD he got that hero. He should only be wondering whether he’s worth ascending if he had another that does the same or if he had two and was wondering which one will work better for his team and playstyle.

Right now too many heroes are in the “garbage” category. “Better than nothing, but maybe not even”.

Small Giant, please do something about this. It’s killing the joy of playing this game sometimes.

a) top-tier teams are so similar to each other, it reduces the fun of making tactics
b) receiving a long-awaited 5* hero can be a bitter disappointment
c) it’s not FUN to have to hold onto your ascension items for gods know how long even though you do finally HAVE a hero who could use them
d) it’s AWFUL to be a player who doesn’t sit with their nose in charts to find out they have ascended a useless hero and have to wait another year for the ascension items
e) it’s dumb to have to resort to using 4* heroes when one has 5*s at hand because they’re that unworthy of using

Why is it not something on the list of things to do? Why not talk to your extra experienced players (no, I don’t mean myself) and fix the shitty heroes to help them match up to the likes of Hel, Athena, Alberich, or Ares?

Wouldn’t it be fun to NOT face Ares in 80% of the battles backed up by Hel and Alberich?

Wouldn’t it be fun to actually want to collect ALL the heroes (for the end-gamey players) and have reasons to use them? To have to plan out various teams and mix and match the best compositions?

It’s not something that requires long hours of coding, it’s not something that will make the community mad (buffs, not nerfs). It’s not something that will make people spend less, or enjoy the game less, or play it less. I don’t understand why the only thing done are some miniscule buffs that don’t really change the balance of power at all.


#2

I have noticed that there is much less strategy in planning titan hits with the most recent changes. It has gone from carefully selecting the proper heroes for the battle to basically a “Hulk Smash” approach. Just pick your biggest hitters, add Wu Kong and step in there. It has made titan battles much less interesting and much more frustrating.


#3

There cannot be any real strategy as long as there aren’t any real choices.

And I don’t mean a choice between “Well I will assume that I won’t ever roll a good hero so I shall ascend this trash” and “I will wait indefinitely in hopes of getting a good hero and not throw away my materials.”

That is not a fun or engaging choice to make in a game. As long as some heroes are better than others at everything, no amount of new content will help. No Mega Titans, no Alliance Wars, no Season 2.

Yay Season 2, I’m gonna take my Sartana/Hel.
Yay Alliance Wars, I’m gonna take my Sartana/Hel.
Yay Challenge Events, I think Sartana and Hel will do great (unless no purple hero does great, which doesn’t solve anything here).
Yay Mega Titans, guess who I’m gonna roll?

Eech. Boring. Not to mention frustrating to people who don’t get those heroes and it’s entirely possible to roll a bunch of Quinti or Obakans or Domitias instead. I don’t recall ever seeing a Sargasso in the raids, Thoth is being hated on all over. Players don’t want them. Same goes for a big % of heroes in all colors. Especially Blue and Green, I suppose Red is somewhat holding on, but they could use some evening up too.

I want to see a top 100 leaderboard with all sorts of heroes there, depending on the compositions and the other heroes present. Depending on someone’s attacking playstyle and their in-game priorities. Not 90 Aresi and 80 Hels.

And I really just don’t understand why it’s not an important upgrade point as it’d be easier and faster to achieve than big features :stuck_out_tongue:


#4

I am sorry that you are so frustrated. I went through a horrid dry spell too, but I held my ascension items until I obtained heroes worth ascending. I think I had 14 hidden blades by the time I got a hero worth using them on. Yes, it was frustrating, but there were other things to work on while I waited. I was able to get a training ground to the point where I could develop a decent 3 star team, which still comes in handy for some events. Now I have two level 20 training grounds and they have produced six 5 star heroes at this point with only one repeat and 3 of them were heroes that I had not previously summoned.

I disagree on Thoth. I do see him in some high level raids and I personally do like the Hero. I have him maxed out at Third Tier and probably won’t ascend him to 4th, but who knows. I think he’s fun to play. He’s no Sartana or Hel, but he is definitely unique.

There is more than one facet to this game. If you only focus on one, you will absolutely get frustrated. If you get frustrated with one part of the game, shift your focus to another or try to find a way to solve or get around the issue that’s frustrating you. I wish you well.


#5

I am not that frustrated personally (yet :stuck_out_tongue: ) as I haven’t spent a lot of money trying to get them and I’ve yet to build my TC20. My point is, some people will not have luck in getting the one/two specific heroes that are just so much better than the rest. It shouldn’t be that way. It’s frustrating to many, boring to others, unfair to those, who don’t know they’re getting fed garbage in a shiny packet.

Someone who gets said Quintus, let’s say, cannot really utilize that hero well. Raids - too slow mana, titans - AoE damage, events - doesn’t bring anything that key to the table.

There’s many heroes like that who may be fine if someone doesn’t care about being competitive. But should competitive players be required to build cookie-cutter teams they may never even get a chance to get? It’s just… lame :slight_smile:

Not to mention reducing the joy players get from rolling 5* heroes if they can’t really use them if they want to make good use of their materials. It can be fixed, I think it should be fixed, and that’s why I’m ranting on the forums :slight_smile:

I wish you well, too! Good luck with your TC20s.


#6

Great topic, @Ellilea

Start by asking, why do people so dearly want a reprise of the 2017 HotM? It’s not because there’s a Pokémon “gotta get’m all” mentality, but because each of those heroes is really good (at least in some situations), and most are top of their class (I’m looking at you, Athena and Hel).

The implication is that if you don’t have these excellent heroes, your team won’t be competing effectively against the hardest foes. And you’d be right.

It’s particularly sad when SG develops three new standard heroes—Khagan, Domitia and Obakan—and receive a collective yawn from the player base. I can’t recall anyone saying that they were rolling extra red or purple so that they could get one of these three. I understand that SG wants to put event and monthly heroes a notch above the regular offerings, but surely some tweaking is in order.

My favorite heroes are those that benefit by thoughtful use and/or team composition. Captain Kestrel should be triggered at the right time and target; Falcon pairs nicely with another yellow,

I’ll give some thoughts to specific changes that would make me as excited about drawing any 5* as I was when I got Marjana or Joon.


#7

For now i guess the answer is “much work”.
They have already their hands full of other stuffs to think/test/program some major changes like this.

Generally speaking, i guess they just want to give to us very different heroes, and some (sadly) have to be weaker then others.
You can’t have all defence debuffers/dispellers/healer/fast mana snipers/high attack heroes among 5*.

To have more “variability” they have to give us tank and no skill heroes too as long of “brand new” skills that they already give to us.

Personally i even think that “5* heroes” doesn’t have to mean “the best” by any means.
They have already better stats, not necessary always better skills.


#8

At the risk of sounding hopelessly PC, “different” needn’t imply that one is “better” than another. In chess the knight and bishop are different but equally valuable (generally valued at 3 pawns). As the OP noted, even if you had every hero, fully leveled, at your disposal, you’d use a core set almost all the time, and others would never get off the bench. That’s sad.

I evaluate heroes by thinking about their use cases—when would this be the right tool? A balanced set of heroes would have a non-trivial role for each hero (recognizing that a 3* hero might be dominated by a 4*, and a 4* by a 5*). If a particular hero is the go-to choice in nearly every role, there’s a balance problem.

Sometimes these use cases are team-dependent. Joon is great in many roles, but on a team with an Ares center, using Musashi in the corner gives you a self-healing yellow attacker. With a Boldtusk center instead, the healing is across the team and so Joon might be better. Similarly Falcon isn’t much on his own, but he can be paired with a strong red hitter to devastating effect.


#9

Ok, compare this game to chess is a little extreme for me, but take just 1 thing for reference: speed.

We all agree that fast is better then average, and most of all of slow.
So, all the 5* heroes must be fast? Nope.
But to be attractive they must have some incredible skills to fill that gap.

So, all slow heroes must be something like… Alberich. 2 or 3 amazing skills.
Thats just crazy.

And thats just for speed, now we can talk about snipers vs tanks, buff all vs buff nearby and so on…

And 4* heroes? They became just useless, another gap between F2P and P2W.

And even if you do something like this, it’s not even sure that people prefer using always the same heroes from before.

No matter what, defence debuff is always better then attack debuff.


#10

Sure, defence debuff is better than attack debuff if they’re equally as powerful. Make the attack debuff severe enough and suddenly it will be far from useless (for instance, it could become MUCH better during raid attack, and even help out on the very strong titans. But debuffing attack by 30% is never going to matter).

Applying a skill similar to time-stop that would postpone enemy autoattacks by X turns would be a solid alternative too.

There’s many, many things that could be added/changed amongst these heroes to make them interesting and worthwhile.

And I definitely do not agree that any 5* heroes should be weaker than the 4*. On 3rd ascension? Sure, absolutely, but if a hero that requires six of VERY hard to come by items isn’t significantly better than 4* heroes, that means this hero is just a way for developers to troll their players into investing in a horribly subpar and redundant thing. I wouldn’t straight out call it a “scam”, but it’s certainly not fair.


#11

That extremely rare 6 items serves to get that hero stronger then a 4* ALWAYS.
There’s no full ascended 5* heroes weaker then a 4*. Never.
Secondary skills are another story.

I think that have some 4* with unique skills that 5* don’t have is really interesting.
Having heroes both much stronger and with better skills of 4* heroes sounds just too much of a difference for every single 5* heroes.

This way screw you tactics, just place your 5* heroes and win.


#12

As the original poster, @Ellilea, pointed out, I think that just a little tweaking is all you’d need to make every hero viable in some facet of the game.

It wouldn’t take much to help the Thornes and Quintuses and Elkanens (and Kashreks) of the game be worth owning and investing in alongside the others. The devs have tried buffing them a bit before; just a little more is all that’s needed.


#13

And this discussion is another reason why you SHOULD hold on to all your epic and legendaries. Because SG might just buff some of them.

It’s a real shame Obakan got nerfed before even landing in the game. I would have enjoyed playing him. Oh well, I’ll hold on to him. It’ll be a year before I get 6 tabards again, but in the meantime, Sartana HAS BEEN ASCENDED and she’s comin’ for ya!


#14

Kashrek is not lame for a mid-level tank (4*). Better than Cyprian certainly and people aren’t complaining there.


#15

Agreed. on my alt I reroll Kasshrek 70 tanks and don’t hesitate to attack Cyprian tanks. he just tops right there.


#16

Yes, some 5* with slow specials are really boring, like justice. I mean slow and then less accurate for only 4 rounds. Why not 6 (if she ever gets to fire away)? Or make her average!


#17

Been sitting on the ascencion mats and wondering if I should ascend Justice or not. 6 turns blindness or average would convince me for sure :grin:. I’m a little bored by heroes which only are useful in a defense team, which you never get to play actively. Now if you could PvP and actually play your defense, that would add quite a bit of incentive to ascend my Justice or Kashhrek. I hope this is gonna happen when alliance wars are introduced, active PvP!


#18

Developer’s never learn from past game mistakes. Should of never been set heroes with set abilities and thats what you get, no changes to that hero ever less its a rare nerf/buff.

Should broke it down into class type heroes with the mmo type stats were use to seeing in mmo type games like Str, dex, agl, wis, intell, luck, ac and hps. The real fun stuff comes to the ARMOR slots your hero wears and how now all sudden you have a wizard type hero wearing ac/hp armor foregoing the good intell armor he has banked to take more hits but do less dps.

Set heroes with set stats with no change and the only change you get is new heroes that add to the already mess of useless heroes which now makes rng less in your favor will cause much angst and will eventually be the death of the game. New heroes is not what i want, buffed worthless heroes and ways to tweek heroes stats and abilities would be a start in the right direction.


#19

@Cthulhu let me try to unpack your ideas; please excuse me if I mischaracterize them:

  1. Heroes should have a richer set of stats, not just Att/Def/HP. More stats would only help if there was some game mechanics that used them. The game is fairly simple, which seems to be popular, so I’m not sure what exactly would use an int or wis stat.
  2. Equipment should be able to modify stats. Agreed, and some ideas along those lines have been kicked around elsewhere. Equipment can’t address the problem to OP flagged, though. If heroes are unbalanced, equipment (available to all heroes) can’t rebalance them.
  3. Adding more heroes doesn’t help. Here I disagree. New heroes keep things interesting, not only because of the novelty but also because they can change a team’s strategy.

#20

Intell=more damage for casters
Wis=stronger heals for healers
Str=more melee damage
Dex=higher crit chance
Agl=more ranged damage

Not difficult really, i get it though. The game has been tremendously dumb down to appeal to a larger audience but they could add so much more to make it much better.

Right now as it sits you get what you roll and nothing more and no way to fix that, hell you can’t even roll on past HoTM to be competitive in pretty much all aspects of the “end game”.