I'm against NERF

Prev13
sL_Spinoza
404 posts Member
People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

Old Ben - B2 and Zam
Wiggs-Shore
Zmaul - R2d2

This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.

Replies

  • sL_Spinoza
    404 posts Member
    Sorry about my horrible English
  • Iceih_SWG
    301 posts Member
    The problem with your logic is that R2D2 is unlocked by an event that ends in a few days and many people will not unlock a 7* and others will not unlock it at all, mine has 5* and I m level 82, so soon I'll have to face those Zaul teams with a 5* R2D2 until the next rotation of the event.
  • No. NERF Rey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    #AcolyteShootsTwice
  • Veritasum
    753 posts Member
    Iceih_SWG wrote: »
    The problem with your logic is that R2D2 is unlocked by an event that ends in a few days and many people will not unlock a 7* and others will not unlock it at all, mine has 5* and I m level 82, so soon I'll have to face those Zaul teams with a 5* R2D2 until the next rotation of the event.

    Well you can't start nerfing so that lower level players have an easier time in arena either. You can't start nerfing so players who put less resources into the game have it easier. I'm not sure how that makes sense to you. It takes time, resources to develop the toons, the rosters and the counters. The problem is time that people in your position do not really want it to take. There is a fix of course and that is to spend money to "catch up." That is your decision to participate in the business model or not.
  • sL_Spinoza wrote: »
    People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

    Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

    For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

    Old Ben - B2 and Zam
    Wiggs-Shore
    Zmaul - R2d2

    This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

    No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.

    And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.
  • c3pe0n
    120 posts Member
    sL_Spinoza wrote: »
    People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

    Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

    For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

    Old Ben - B2 and Zam
    Wiggs-Shore
    Zmaul - R2d2

    This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

    No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.

    And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.

    zboba, zkylo, b2 all counter chaze nicely...I run rex lead gk b2 zylo and shore in my arena...about to fight for top 20...b2 cleanses/buff immunity, zylo inflicts heal immunity, it usually comes down to my zylo vs chaze and i win 99% of the time.

    While i dont have zoba...all those hots = nice execute
  • And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.

    zKylo can 1 v. 2 Chaze. They don't have the damage to take him down, their counters boost his damage, and he can inflict heal immunity with his basic (which his retribution will use). He's a solid counter.

  • Allenb60
    2137 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    I'm not. It's super lame when two characters take most of the same resources but one can perform better
  • Iceih_SWG
    301 posts Member
    Veritasum wrote: »
    Iceih_SWG wrote: »
    The problem with your logic is that R2D2 is unlocked by an event that ends in a few days and many people will not unlock a 7* and others will not unlock it at all, mine has 5* and I m level 82, so soon I'll have to face those Zaul teams with a 5* R2D2 until the next rotation of the event.

    Well you can't start nerfing so that lower level players have an easier time in arena either. You can't start nerfing so players who put less resources into the game have it easier. I'm not sure how that makes sense to you. It takes time, resources to develop the toons, the rosters and the counters. The problem is time that people in your position do not really want it to take. There is a fix of course and that is to spend money to "catch up." That is your decision to participate in the business model or not.

    What I meant is about the way to unlock R2D2, thats why I pointed only to R2D2 and not the other counters the OP mentioned. There is no way to catch you up with money because it is a rotational event and even with the current imperial pack it is not enough to 7* the imperials.

    I like a lot those events for characters like Yoda, but they should not be the way to unlock the counter to a hard to defeat or OP character.
  • Vertigo
    4352 posts Member
    Iceih_SWG wrote: »
    Veritasum wrote: »
    Iceih_SWG wrote: »
    The problem with your logic is that R2D2 is unlocked by an event that ends in a few days and many people will not unlock a 7* and others will not unlock it at all, mine has 5* and I m level 82, so soon I'll have to face those Zaul teams with a 5* R2D2 until the next rotation of the event.

    Well you can't start nerfing so that lower level players have an easier time in arena either. You can't start nerfing so players who put less resources into the game have it easier. I'm not sure how that makes sense to you. It takes time, resources to develop the toons, the rosters and the counters. The problem is time that people in your position do not really want it to take. There is a fix of course and that is to spend money to "catch up." That is your decision to participate in the business model or not.

    What I meant is about the way to unlock R2D2, thats why I pointed only to R2D2 and not the other counters the OP mentioned. There is no way to catch you up with money because it is a rotational event and even with the current imperial pack it is not enough to 7* the imperials.

    I like a lot those events for characters like Yoda, but they should not be the way to unlock the counter to a hard to defeat or OP character.

    Theres the faction pack that you can buy. You can also buy more and more chromiums. You can buy your way to R2. It's not cheap, but it's possible. Plus it's not like there was a way to get Shoretrooper after his tournament ended for a while. Hell, Jyn and Cassian couldn't even be bought for a while.
  • Jedi_Reach_
    1337 posts Member
    sL_Spinoza wrote: »
    People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

    Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

    For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

    Old Ben - B2 and Zam
    Wiggs-Shore
    Zmaul - R2d2

    This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

    No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.
    This logic that nerfing is bad is so horribly misguided.

    This is a GAME.

    It is impossible for things to always be balanced, especially in an ever changing RPG environment. New level caps will be added, as will new characters, gear, abilities, and many other elements. Nerfing is equally as important as buffing to maintain a healthy, playable environment.

    It's natural.
  • I'm generally anti-nerf for the reasons already stated. The only times a "nerf" should happen is if something isn't working as intended (like the zeta Barris nerf that happened awhile back).

    But that said, I think it's EXTREMELY important that the devs get abilities and such for new toons right from the start. Test the hell out of it, and make sure it's working right before release so nerfs don't have to happen.
  • DrewR
    272 posts Member
    Obviously you never seen my $19.99 Nerf Star Wars Rogue One Nerf Sergeant Jyn Erso Deluxe Blaster. It is motorized and come with 7 bullets cartridge. Absolutely my favorite.
    OK, I am trolling.......... o:)
  • DarthR244D
    292 posts Member
    I hate the nerf cries on toons. There is always a counter to whatever toon someone is using. Just farm that toon or jump on the bandwagon of whatever toon is giving you problems. Eventually, if you are too new to have the toons it will cycle back and you will have it over someone else and then when the next drop happens, you will be on the other side of the curve because you either played longer or spent more money.
  • Lebronaims
    262 posts Member
    You cant just have a game where p2p are always better than f2p that is **** logic. When you p2p I n this game you are paying to win early. When EA intorduces new characters that stop certain p2p characters like 6 months later its not a nerf its balancing . Nerfing implies they reduced abilities. R2 is balancing the meta. 6 months of dominating becuase you spent money is more than enough time and its also just a smart business model for EA .
  • YarYarYinks
    79 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    sL_Spinoza wrote: »
    People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

    Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

    For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

    Old Ben - B2 and Zam
    Wiggs-Shore
    Zmaul - R2d2

    This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

    No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.

    And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.

    Zader + Boba + B2 + Death Trooper + Palpatine
    That's an ideal team, but boba or b2 can do it by themselves
    Nihilus can also be helpful.
  • fascizio
    572 posts Member
    Lebronaims wrote: »
    You cant just have a game where p2p are always better than f2p that is **** logic. When you p2p I n this game you are paying to win early. When EA intorduces new characters that stop certain p2p characters like 6 months later its not a nerf its balancing . Nerfing implies they reduced abilities. R2 is balancing the meta. 6 months of dominating becuase you spent money is more than enough time and its also just a smart business model for EA .

    No, it's actually the opposite. It's a really poor business decision to nerf a premium toon because it sets the precedent that EA/CG doesn't respect your investment. And when paying players fell that way they become free players (or quitters) and the game subsequently fails. There's a reason they're so rare, nerfs are bad for business.
  • Ailouran
    113 posts Member
    [/quote]

    And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.[/quote]

    Nihilus was also intended as a counter. Dispel on basic and well annihilate is self explanatory.
  • Ailouran wrote: »
    Nihilus was also intended as a counter. Dispel on basic and well annihilate is self explanatory.

    Also, Nihilus lead means no crits, means no HOTs from Chirrut's unique.

  • Lebronaims
    262 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    fascizio wrote: »
    Lebronaims wrote: »
    You cant just have a game where p2p are always better than f2p that is **** logic. When you p2p I n this game you are paying to win early. When EA intorduces new characters that stop certain p2p characters like 6 months later its not a nerf its balancing . Nerfing implies they reduced abilities. R2 is balancing the meta. 6 months of dominating becuase you spent money is more than enough time and its also just a smart business model for EA .

    No, it's actually the opposite. It's a really poor business decision to nerf a premium toon because it sets the precedent that EA/CG doesn't respect your investment. And when paying players fell that way they become free players (or quitters) and the game subsequently fails. There's a reason they're so rare, nerfs are bad for business.

    I dont think you know what the word nerf means.. making f2p toons after 6 months for someone to compete with a p2p player forcing them to spend more or learn how to play better is exactly how you make money
  • Jedi_Reach_
    1337 posts Member
    fascizio wrote: »
    nerfs are bad for business.
    That is literally nothing more than your assumption. You have no statistical data to back that up. Furthermore, the idea of nerfs is so misplaced that it has become a 'shame' and a 'bad' thing to even mention or talk about, which is laughably asinine, considering this is you know, a game, and an RPG game with power creep etc. and the like, meaning that perfect balance is impossible to achieve from being static.

    Nerfs are inevitable whether you like it or not. Because it's... well, you know, logical.
  • fascizio
    572 posts Member
    Lebronaims wrote: »
    fascizio wrote: »
    Lebronaims wrote: »
    You cant just have a game where p2p are always better than f2p that is **** logic. When you p2p I n this game you are paying to win early. When EA intorduces new characters that stop certain p2p characters like 6 months later its not a nerf its balancing . Nerfing implies they reduced abilities. R2 is balancing the meta. 6 months of dominating becuase you spent money is more than enough time and its also just a smart business model for EA .

    No, it's actually the opposite. It's a really poor business decision to nerf a premium toon because it sets the precedent that EA/CG doesn't respect your investment. And when paying players fell that way they become free players (or quitters) and the game subsequently fails. There's a reason they're so rare, nerfs are bad for business.

    I dont think you know what the word nerf means.. making f2p toons after 6 months for someone to compete with a p2p player forcing them to spend more or learn how to play better is exactly how you make money

    Wat? Making toons F2P is not nerf...
    fascizio wrote: »
    nerfs are bad for business.
    That is literally nothing more than your assumption. You have no statistical data to back that up. Furthermore, the idea of nerfs is so misplaced that it has become a 'shame' and a 'bad' thing to even mention or talk about, which is laughably asinine, considering this is you know, a game, and an RPG game with power creep etc. and the like, meaning that perfect balance is impossible to achieve from being static.

    Nerfs are inevitable whether you like it or not. Because it's... well, you know, logical.

    Game's been going for a year and a half and actual nerfs can be counted on your hands, but yeah... inevitable...
    You can go take a look at CG's previous game and see the same thing, even though players on those forums whined for nerfs too.

    Consumer confidence is not an assumption, it's a reality of business. Also, thinking this game is an RPG is "laughably asinine." There's no roleplaying here...
  • sL_Spinoza wrote: »
    People invest time and money sometimes in a toon and a nerf is frustrating.

    Pvp is not the only game mode, an NERF can disrupt utility in AAT for example.

    For me the way the DEVs have solved this has been very appropriate: to launch a toon (not a leader) that balances the pvp a little.Let's see the examples:

    Old Ben - B2 and Zam
    Wiggs-Shore
    Zmaul - R2d2

    This is a very simple solution that does not displease the vast majority.

    No one feels like buying a Ferrari and shortly after forced to put a speed reducer.

    And what toon was added to balance Chaze ? Because both Krennic and DT failed miserably since Chaze are to powerful for only a toon or a pair to balance them, if that toon is not a leader like Zaul.

    I'm really surprised you didn't even consider the handful or more toons that have been updated or released since Chaze that can easily take care of the infamous duo.

    SnakesOnAPlane
  • fascizio wrote: »

    Consumer confidence is not an assumption, it's a reality of business. Also, thinking this game is an RPG is "laughably asinine." There's no roleplaying here...

    Oh indeed there is, many pretend a great deal.

    Leader "Grey Area 51" Guild
  • Jedi_Reach_
    1337 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    fascizio wrote: »
    Game's been going for a year and a half and actual nerfs can be counted on your hands
    Thanks for proving my point that it has happened, even if it was 1 time.

    You can go take a look at CG's previous game and see the same thing, even though players on those forums whined for nerfs too.
    But it still happened already. You've lost this argument. Let it go.
    Consumer confidence is not an assumption,
    As is entitlement.
    it's a reality of business.
    You do not have the slightest clue of mobile gaming business. You are clearly not a part of the industry and you have zero experience working on the backend.

    How do I know this?

    Because your posts are devoid of business to game mechanic knowledge.
    Also, thinking this game is an RPG is "laughably asinine." There's no roleplaying here...
    Are you being serious? This is actually the worst counter I have seen in my life. No, really, this is so bad I have to wonder if you even tried or you're trolling.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game
    and
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_Galaxy_of_Heroes

    Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes is a mobile collectible card game RPG developed by Capital Games and published by Electronic Arts. The game received a soft launch in Australia during October 2015, and was formally released on November 24, 2015.


  • WompWompRat
    1833 posts Member
    I honestly don't see the point of nerfing anything. There's too much flak they or anyone will take from the people who either spent money or dedicated time and energy towards building up those toons. Let power creep handle the rest.
  • Waez
    286 posts Member
    Nerfs would be better for F2P. This would give them a chance to fight the previously OP teams.

    The devs understood that very well, and use Power Creep instead.

    ZMaul is OP? Here, have R2-D2! Well now you need to gear/level/Zeta/Omega him, but there's a counter!

    Wiggs are OP? Have Shoretrooper, that pre-taunts and can be obtained in the very expensive tournaments! Or Baze, that is just completely unavailable for F2P (Now we got a hard node, let's cheer to that)

    They could have just nerfed ZMaul and created a better kit for R2 that would make him something else than a ZMaul couter. But that means not everyone would spend to get him to max!

    They could have nerfed Wiggs and create more diversity, but no, they decided to make a P2P counter instead.

    If you're against nerfs, you're either a whale or you just don't understand much of what's going on in this game.
  • fascizio wrote: »
    Game's been going for a year and a half and actual nerfs can be counted on your hands
    Thanks for proving my point that it has happened, even if it was 1 time.

    You can go take a look at CG's previous game and see the same thing, even though players on those forums whined for nerfs too.
    But it still happened already. You've lost this argument. Let it go.

    Devs have said repeatedly that it's not happening again. Why? Because people spent a bunch of money on Barriss back in the day, she was nerfed, and there were mass complaints and demands for refunds. My understanding of what happened was that Google and Apple basically agreed with the consumers -- EA/CG had changed the product that was purchased after-the-fact, and therefore refunds were owed.

  • leef
    12585 posts Member
    i don't think we need to worry about nerfs that much in this game. The devs only chose to nerf on very rare ocasions.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Jedi_Reach_
    1337 posts Member
    Devs have said repeatedly that it's not happening again. Why? Because people spent a bunch of money on Barriss back in the day, she was nerfed, and there were mass complaints and demands for refunds. My understanding of what happened was that Google and Apple basically agreed with the consumers -- EA/CG had changed the product that was purchased after-the-fact, and therefore refunds were owed.
    We're barking up an inevitable tree that things will not be nerfed or buffed. Vader is about to get nerfed for example (again). You cannot get away from this because this is an RPG game. Things will need to be changed whether you, me or anyone else likes it.

    Nerfs are not a bad thing. They are mandatory, just like mowing a lawn.
This discussion has been closed.