No, I totally understand what you’re saying and the points you’re bringing up. But you’re comparing Dodge Neons to Chevy Cruzes here. They’re both in the same class/category with similar use cases, but one’s newer and the other is older. While the Dodge Neon should be maintained to keep it competitive and appealing to use, it can’t exactly compare. If they now start buffing older heroes to be on par with the current ones, then who’s going spend to buy new things when they could just keep that old thing running. Newer will always get more attention, especially when that portal is most sought after, but not because of Rayne. I think that making sure that if you do happen to pull something out of the CoK portal, even if it’s not a Ludwig or Wolfgang or Quintin, you’ll have something you’ll want to use more often than not. Damn, my Sargosso has been sitting on a shelf for years now at 1/5. So, point is, people WILL pull on this portal whether they changed Rayne and Lewena or not. But the fact that they made them more appealing, people might use them more often.
I see what you are getting it. But, my only thing is this whole hero utilization metric as a reason to buff heroes is a red herring. Regardless of how you buff Rayne, he’s not someone you will likely see on the defence. Lewena is about the same. I personally would have probably put her on defense because my red roster is a bit lacking, and she does have an interesting special. However, for someone who has more options, it won’t make much difference.
So that leaves raids, do those buffs really mean that people will start to use them over their existing roster? I’d say unlikely.
And you’re probably right. But definitely don’t think it has anything to do with the timing of the event or a cash grab. After all, there are a bunch of heroes in that portal people will shoot for. So pulls will happen regardless. Anyways, too much time on the forum today for me. Take care man.
Keep spending, be happy, for my part you won’t see the color anymore.
I think it’s too cheap to buff the heroes before the event.
run the wallets.
be smart.
wake up
Why SG buff hero? because it works for them. Players will spend a lot of money to chase that buffed heroes that already OP in the 1st place. That’s why they always do it right before the event to get those heroes. Villain heroes, Circus family, and now CoK heroes. everyone should be able to see the pattern here.
Why SG Nerf hero? because it had served its purpose. A lot of players already spend their money to get that hero. Most likely they are already happy with their squad, so they will hold their spending. by making that hero obsolete, SG will make those player unhappy with their squad and spend again to get a better hero. That’s why the timing to nerf a popular hero is done together with buff session. to create demand. Demands equal money.
it works for them, and they will do it again and again and expect it will never end, until the players stop spending altogether.
Why are you talking about other games as if “nerf/buff” are equal across all games? We’re talking about E&P match 3 game. The nerf/buff wand can do many things. It can do what you said it could (make gaming better) or it can do evil things like spur demands or artificially create in-game demand for further sales. But they ALL masquerade as “game balancing”
LOL
Kindly explain how buffing Director Zuri, Milena, Faline just to name a few, is anywhere close to “game balancing”
Please, for the love of God, explain that to us.
It does seem to be the case they keep selling overpowered heroes then nerf them after they have been sold right before they are selling new overpowered heroes. Small Giant should be much better at balancing before release because a lot of people will stop chasing after these OP heroes.
I understand comprehension is rough sometimes, however nerfin/buffing is exclusively tied to game balancing. You are entitled to make it as conspiratorial as you wish, it still isn’t true without providing evidence besides what is in your mind.
PS: nerfs/buffs will never be the same across different games because….they’re different games. But you probably didn’t know that.
I’ve explained it already. If it’s hard for you to understand/comprehend, then I’m sorry I can’t help ya. Cheerio!
Not really.
I remember the time where the unholy trinity ( Telluria, Vela, GM ) was everywhere in raids and it was difficult to find opponents without Telluria tanks during war.
I also remember the time where Guin was everywhere in raids and it was difficult to find opponents without Guin tanks during war.
This was boring and bad for the game and was therefore corrected.
On the other side it MIGHT be that SG errs a little to often on the powerlevels of heros, even after betatesting which seems to be only a nice input to have, and then has to nerf these op heros.
From this point of view the argument that SG produces op heros which they nerf later, to increase their sales, might have a certain validity.
I am ftp and drew Telly as my first hero of the month ( began playing april 2018 ) and still think her nerfing was necessary after they “overlooked” the synergy between Vela and Telly.
If only they had nerfed them both together first, then they could have nerfed her a little less! 
And you just supported the concept you tried to fight against… That buffs/nerfs are not balancing but supporting sales.
So please point to me where exactly did you explain the merit in buffing Director zuri/milena/Faline?
Well, beyond various sculpting tinkerings, that often seems to be a key motivation - but it’s a dangerous form of game for SGG to be playing.
If players invest (actual money) into premier heroes only to find that these heroes get nerfed or that other heroes get buffed, then players wise up and stop spending.
Players maybe more likely to pay to win if their winners stay better able to remain in winning ways.
I got out my 
during the Krampus nerf debuckle. People were rightly losing their ■■■■ in context of SGG’s wrong action and several vowed not to buy again or at least to slash spending. C’est la vie! 
If u read the T&C, nothing that we are had purchased belong to us. The Terms rules everything and we cannot argue or sue them. Once we agreed to use the game app we basically surrendered our rights.
If you park your car in a private car park, there’s a caveat that states you understood the risks of parking your car and the operator is not liable for any and all damage. Guess what? There were people who manage to sue and win.
When you get paid for a service, no matter what T&C you impose on the paying customer it will only cover you so far. I’m waiting the day these gaming giants get hauled in front of congress like Zuckerberg to answer on their “Gambling” odds in game. I hope that will result in an oversight by, for example, gaming committee of Vegas.
Absolutely, but it’s also worth noting that this is a virtual “park”. If something you get there gets relatively devalued, you can be discouraged from buying again. That’s my point.
People are selling virtual land for millions!
I just hope the gaming world can be progressive. Currently who is overseeing these gaming company and check if they are selling their product at the odds they so abundantly advertised? You wouldn’t step into an illigal casino and bet on roulette would you?
Sure didn’t. That’s only in the minds of people who don’t want to understand the concept of old and new. But want to believe they’re entitled to have their older things compete with the newer ones on the same level so they don’t have to spend money on newer things. A product that is years older than the current one will never cost the same or be worth the same.
Take a car model, for example. Car manufacturers don’t make drastic model changes every year. Each model is around for a few years. But every year, that model receives some tweaks to make it more safe, reliable, efficient, etc. under the hood until a newer model comes out. Does it make sense to bring the old model up to par with the newest one besides taking care of the recalls to keep it safe and serviceable? Of course not. Same concept applies here. From time to time a new costume will come out for an older hero (call it a recall) while buffs/nerfs will be more common for newer ones.
I believe you’re just not happy your older “car” is not up on the same playing level with my newer “car” so you feel you’re being targeted to spend more, when clearly you’re not. Your old “car” is still useable, you’re just upset you can’t be at the front of the race any longer. This is literally the case with every company that produces some product or service.