Update on the Finn/Threepio Raid Interaction: Resulting Finn Modifications [MEGA]

Replies

  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    If they care about what community wants why not put up a vote poll.

    a. Leave Finn alone modify interaction in HSTR
    b. Change Finn based on proposed changes.
    b1. return zeta
    b2. no zeta refund

    Pretty simple poll and there would be no perception that CG is not listening and not having a clue of what the community wants.
    Because that's a terrible idea.

    Mob rule is not leadership. The playerbase is inherently biased. The player base is not composed of professional game designers.

    Finn's leadership zeta as it currently exists is unhealthy for the game and for Resistance as a faction. It's healthier for the game for Finn's lead to change, regardless of how popular or unpopular a decision is, and oftentimes the responsible decision is not the popular one.

    Caring about feedback and going along with mob rule are not remotely the same thing.

    This is well said. And a great argument for the change. I’m in for the refund though. Even though I’ll make him keep it.

    It’s unhealrhy to have Revan dominating every game mode also. Why isn’t that opinion ever presented?

    Phase 2 in HSR in my guild lasts like ten minutes because of all the Revan teams.

    The arena meta is, what, 87% Revan? Doesn’t sound healthy to me.

    Pretty sure Revan teams can solo HAAT also. If Finn doing this isn’t healthy, then neither is it healthy for Revan to be able to do so.

    Get it?

  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    If they care about what community wants why not put up a vote poll.

    a. Leave Finn alone modify interaction in HSTR
    b. Change Finn based on proposed changes.
    b1. return zeta
    b2. no zeta refund

    Pretty simple poll and there would be no perception that CG is not listening and not having a clue of what the community wants.
    Because that's a terrible idea.

    Mob rule is not leadership. The playerbase is inherently biased. The player base is not composed of professional game designers.

    Finn's leadership zeta as it currently exists is unhealthy for the game and for Resistance as a faction. It's healthier for the game for Finn's lead to change, regardless of how popular or unpopular a decision is, and oftentimes the responsible decision is not the popular one.

    Caring about feedback and going along with mob rule are not remotely the same thing.


    I agree on this referendum stuff. It seldom works out (say hello, Brexit!), because, among other things, people in general don't have all the information needed to weight in properly the consequenses of a choice.

    I'm glad you agree it's a nerf. Because it is, really. Let's not fool ourselves here.

    If Finn's rework is healthier for the game, refunding zetas and omegas is also not only healthier for the community, but also the no-brainer decent thing to do. For any rework in the future too.

    Taking flak is an integral and indissociable part of any job related to costumer relations. And, yes, someone has to be there to take flak when unpopular decisions are taken.

    I also recommend players and moderators make an effort together to put this "be civil" thing behind us all - we will never agree on this, so let's agree to disagree and move on - and focus on the ZFinn issue. CG has responded and, at this point, the topic should center around the character.
  • YaeVizsla
    3448 posts Member
    mvmss wrote: »
    I agree on this referendum stuff. It seldom works out (say hello, Brexit!), because, among other things, people in general don't have all the information needed to weight in properly the consequenses of a choice.

    I'm glad you agree it's a nerf. Because it is, really. Let's not fool ourselves here.

    If Finn's rework is healthier for the game, refunding zetas and omegas is also not only healthier for the community, but also the no-brainer decent thing to do. For any rework in the future too.

    Taking flak is an integral and indissociable part of any job related to costumer relations. And, yes, someone has to be there to take flak when unpopular decisions are taken.

    I also recommend players and moderators make an effort together to put this "be civil" thing behind us all - we will never agree on this, so let's agree to disagree and move on - and focus on the ZFinn issue. CG has responded and, at this point, the topic should center around the character.
    When did I agree it was a "nerf?"

    I've already done the "nerf" rant here, so short version.

    The way the word "nerf" is used is terrible and worthless, because it's a definition shell game.

    Definition 1: An update that renders something ineffectual.

    Definition 2: An update that decreases something's effectiveness to any degree no matter how small.

    "Nerf" is an extremely loaded term because the first one is regarded as inherently bad, so using the word in either context carries an inherently negative connotation, and an implication that it means the more emotionally loaded definition. "Nerf" is a useless word because it's purely a vehicle for bile, with so little firm meaning.

    The Finn rework takes his lead from an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist to a strong lead. Is a strong lead weaker than an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist? Sure. Is it a nerf? Depends on how you define "nerf." Finn himself has a much stronger chassis, and a strong lead. Post-rework Finn as posted is a much better unit with an overall improved kit, a strengthened baseline lead, and a weakened zeta lead. Is a complex mix of buffs and improvements a "nerf?" Not by any useful definition of the word.


    Though, going to useful feedback on the rework that isn't just, "No," or saying CG is obligated to give refunds...

    The reworked kit looks much better than it does now, but also seems incoherent. He has three moves, but they seem to be saying different things about what Finn's supposed to be doing.

    The basic is raw damage with 20% stacking damage per repeated use on the same target. This says you wanna stack the basic's damage bonus to really hurt someone. Maybe use 3PO and Rey to call assists and build it up, or use General Kenobi's team retribution to get out-of-turn attacks to build those stacks. So far, so good.

    Special 2 is damage, stun, 2-turn cooldown that can be reduced with either main Resistance lead, expose, and a 60/120% damage stacking. Control, rapidly stacking damage, engages in the faction's core mechanic in Expose, and I can probably use this every turn. About all I can ask for from an attack. However, that much higher parallel damage stacking tells me the basic is useless; my goal is to get Finn to go as often as possible so I can use Takedown and stack it up. Crack Shot is fairly superfluous, and calling assists to build it up seems moot compared to stacking Takedown, as the two don't contribute to one another. Regardless, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me Finn is a damage dealer who you want to stay on the field a long time so he can keep stacking damage and clutch a win at the end with a big damage stack. If Crack Shot could feed Takedown, it would make more sense as a complete package.

    Special 1: I am confused. Team health and protection is good. Team cleanse is great. Resistance has use for that. It puts you back a stack on Takedown, but there are plenty of cases where that healing and cleanse are totally worth it. Advantage and defense up? Sure. Nice side benefits.

    Taunt and Determination, though, I question. Finn isn't particularly bulky, and isn't getting a unique that will help him tank blows. Also, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me I want Finn to stick around; that I want to protect Finn so that he can build those stacks. That Finn, despite the tank tag, is an attacker. So if he uses this ability, it's forcing the enemy to do exactly what I don't want them to do; focus down my damage source. And Determination is also confusing. On using Hold the Line, Finn gains Taunt and Determination for two turns. When determination expires, Finn gains Retribution, which does mesh with Crack Shot, but for that to happen, either Finn needs to survive two turns, be cleansed (meaning retribution without taunt), or Determination needs to trigger from another ally going below half health, which would require the enemy going around the taunt or using AoEs yet somehow leaving not-particularly-bulky Finn in a condition to eat directed fire. Determination seems to raise more questions than it answers. Even setting aside that Finn as a taunting tank is questionable due to his dubious bulk and lack of sustain, why have Determination at all instead of just having Hold the Line give Finn Taunt and Retribution from the outset? Or why not have it give Determination without giving taunt, so that Finn's taunt isn't keeping the enemy from attacking other allies and triggering it? Then, the enemy can keep focusing on, say, Holdo, and then when Holdo is hurting, Determination triggers and Finn draws their attention as a countering off tank.

    But without some sort of unique that gives Finn more ability to stick around, I see the reworked kit and its strategy as, "Use Takedown every single turn because it is amazing and occasionally maybe heal/cleanse even though it gives a taunt you probably don't want.
    Still not a he.
  • mvs84
    33 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    I agree on this referendum stuff. It seldom works out (say hello, Brexit!), because, among other things, people in general don't have all the information needed to weight in properly the consequenses of a choice.

    I'm glad you agree it's a nerf. Because it is, really. Let's not fool ourselves here.

    If Finn's rework is healthier for the game, refunding zetas and omegas is also not only healthier for the community, but also the no-brainer decent thing to do. For any rework in the future too.

    Taking flak is an integral and indissociable part of any job related to costumer relations. And, yes, someone has to be there to take flak when unpopular decisions are taken.

    I also recommend players and moderators make an effort together to put this "be civil" thing behind us all - we will never agree on this, so let's agree to disagree and move on - and focus on the ZFinn issue. CG has responded and, at this point, the topic should center around the character.
    When did I agree it was a "nerf?"

    I've already done the "nerf" rant here, so short version.

    The way the word "nerf" is used is terrible and worthless, because it's a definition shell game.

    Definition 1: An update that renders something ineffectual.

    Definition 2: An update that decreases something's effectiveness to any degree no matter how small.

    "Nerf" is an extremely loaded term because the first one is regarded as inherently bad, so using the word in either context carries an inherently negative connotation, and an implication that it means the more emotionally loaded definition. "Nerf" is a useless word because it's purely a vehicle for bile, with so little firm meaning.

    The Finn rework takes his lead from an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist to a strong lead. Is a strong lead weaker than an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist? Sure. Is it a nerf? Depends on how you define "nerf." Finn himself has a much stronger chassis, and a strong lead. Post-rework Finn as posted is a much better unit with an overall improved kit, a strengthened baseline lead, and a weakened zeta lead. Is a complex mix of buffs and improvements a "nerf?" Not by any useful definition of the word.


    Though, going to useful feedback on the rework that isn't just, "No," or saying CG is obligated to give refunds...

    The reworked kit looks much better than it does now, but also seems incoherent. He has three moves, but they seem to be saying different things about what Finn's supposed to be doing.

    The basic is raw damage with 20% stacking damage per repeated use on the same target. This says you wanna stack the basic's damage bonus to really hurt someone. Maybe use 3PO and Rey to call assists and build it up, or use General Kenobi's team retribution to get out-of-turn attacks to build those stacks. So far, so good.

    Special 2 is damage, stun, 2-turn cooldown that can be reduced with either main Resistance lead, expose, and a 60/120% damage stacking. Control, rapidly stacking damage, engages in the faction's core mechanic in Expose, and I can probably use this every turn. About all I can ask for from an attack. However, that much higher parallel damage stacking tells me the basic is useless; my goal is to get Finn to go as often as possible so I can use Takedown and stack it up. Crack Shot is fairly superfluous, and calling assists to build it up seems moot compared to stacking Takedown, as the two don't contribute to one another. Regardless, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me Finn is a damage dealer who you want to stay on the field a long time so he can keep stacking damage and clutch a win at the end with a big damage stack. If Crack Shot could feed Takedown, it would make more sense as a complete package.

    Special 1: I am confused. Team health and protection is good. Team cleanse is great. Resistance has use for that. It puts you back a stack on Takedown, but there are plenty of cases where that healing and cleanse are totally worth it. Advantage and defense up? Sure. Nice side benefits.

    Taunt and Determination, though, I question. Finn isn't particularly bulky, and isn't getting a unique that will help him tank blows. Also, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me I want Finn to stick around; that I want to protect Finn so that he can build those stacks. That Finn, despite the tank tag, is an attacker. So if he uses this ability, it's forcing the enemy to do exactly what I don't want them to do; focus down my damage source. And Determination is also confusing. On using Hold the Line, Finn gains Taunt and Determination for two turns. When determination expires, Finn gains Retribution, which does mesh with Crack Shot, but for that to happen, either Finn needs to survive two turns, be cleansed (meaning retribution without taunt), or Determination needs to trigger from another ally going below half health, which would require the enemy going around the taunt or using AoEs yet somehow leaving not-particularly-bulky Finn in a condition to eat directed fire. Determination seems to raise more questions than it answers. Even setting aside that Finn as a taunting tank is questionable due to his dubious bulk and lack of sustain, why have Determination at all instead of just having Hold the Line give Finn Taunt and Retribution from the outset? Or why not have it give Determination without giving taunt, so that Finn's taunt isn't keeping the enemy from attacking other allies and triggering it? Then, the enemy can keep focusing on, say, Holdo, and then when Holdo is hurting, Determination triggers and Finn draws their attention as a countering off tank.

    But without some sort of unique that gives Finn more ability to stick around, I see the reworked kit and its strategy as, "Use Takedown every single turn because it is amazing and occasionally maybe heal/cleanse even though it gives a taunt you probably don't want.


    Ok, too many arguments without meaning for me.
    It is your opinion and it is as respectable as any other, but do not try to convince us.

    The first thing is that Finn has been in the game for years, with the same kit. It was never a problem that it was a tank and it had those attacks that you say now does not correspond to it because it looks like an attacker. During all this time, Finn was not an unhealthy character. Rey Jedi is a tank too and behaves like an attacker, should they do a Rey rework for that? No, because that's a bad excuse.

    With the release of C3PO, suddenly, Finn is an unhealthy character.

    What is the role of C3PO in the last trilogy? Does C3PO play any role with the resistance or is it just an endearing character?

    I do not agree with you when you say:
    "The Finn rework takes its lead from an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist to a strong lead".

    This is not true, if a team with Luke, Han, Chewbacca and other 2 characters that you want with high tenacity, there is no infinite loop.
    This is an example of team, but applicable to any team with high tenacity.

    Finn can't melt anything.

    This is a forum, it is a topic dedicated to Finn in which we are supposed to express our opinion about rework. If the only thing we are going to receive is an attempt to convince us of "how wonderful" is the rework, please, tell us: "This is what we have, we close the topic". And we will go to other forums to express our opinions.

    As I have said many times, we, the users, are the community. If a forum about the game has been created, it is so that we can give our opinion and be taken into consideration. If we express our opinion and you are going to try to impose your opinion, close the forum and make a static web page where only the impositions of the developers are placed.

    We are the weak part of this business.

    It was very nice when they said they wanted to improve our quality of life. Do you want to know what quality of life is for me in the game?
    Have a character that can automatically do the HAAT. Have a character that can do one phase (and only one phase) of the horrible STR. There is only one gray character in my character board (the last one to activate), Traya, and if Finn's rework becomes firm, the possibilities of my guild to be able to make the HSTR disappear. My quality of life gets worse because I feel frustrated. As there are prizes that depend on the guild (win 4 territorial wars). That reward can not be earned by myself in any way, I will always depend on a group of people. That is not healthy for the game and it worsens my quality of life.

    In conclusion, close the topic and tell us: "It is what you have, you have to accept everything we want to impose, even if the error is ours and you all get hurt".

    If this is explained when downloading the game, I would have saved a lot of money.
  • YaeVizsla wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    I agree on this referendum stuff. It seldom works out (say hello, Brexit!), because, among other things, people in general don't have all the information needed to weight in properly the consequenses of a choice.

    I'm glad you agree it's a nerf. Because it is, really. Let's not fool ourselves here.

    If Finn's rework is healthier for the game, refunding zetas and omegas is also not only healthier for the community, but also the no-brainer decent thing to do. For any rework in the future too.

    Taking flak is an integral and indissociable part of any job related to costumer relations. And, yes, someone has to be there to take flak when unpopular decisions are taken.

    I also recommend players and moderators make an effort together to put this "be civil" thing behind us all - we will never agree on this, so let's agree to disagree and move on - and focus on the ZFinn issue. CG has responded and, at this point, the topic should center around the character.
    When did I agree it was a "nerf?"

    I've already done the "nerf" rant here, so short version.

    The way the word "nerf" is used is terrible and worthless, because it's a definition shell game.

    Definition 1: An update that renders something ineffectual.

    Definition 2: An update that decreases something's effectiveness to any degree no matter how small.

    "Nerf" is an extremely loaded term because the first one is regarded as inherently bad, so using the word in either context carries an inherently negative connotation, and an implication that it means the more emotionally loaded definition. "Nerf" is a useless word because it's purely a vehicle for bile, with so little firm meaning.

    The Finn rework takes his lead from an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist to a strong lead. Is a strong lead weaker than an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist? Sure. Is it a nerf? Depends on how you define "nerf." Finn himself has a much stronger chassis, and a strong lead. Post-rework Finn as posted is a much better unit with an overall improved kit, a strengthened baseline lead, and a weakened zeta lead. Is a complex mix of buffs and improvements a "nerf?" Not by any useful definition of the word.


    Though, going to useful feedback on the rework that isn't just, "No," or saying CG is obligated to give refunds...

    The reworked kit looks much better than it does now, but also seems incoherent. He has three moves, but they seem to be saying different things about what Finn's supposed to be doing.

    The basic is raw damage with 20% stacking damage per repeated use on the same target. This says you wanna stack the basic's damage bonus to really hurt someone. Maybe use 3PO and Rey to call assists and build it up, or use General Kenobi's team retribution to get out-of-turn attacks to build those stacks. So far, so good.

    Special 2 is damage, stun, 2-turn cooldown that can be reduced with either main Resistance lead, expose, and a 60/120% damage stacking. Control, rapidly stacking damage, engages in the faction's core mechanic in Expose, and I can probably use this every turn. About all I can ask for from an attack. However, that much higher parallel damage stacking tells me the basic is useless; my goal is to get Finn to go as often as possible so I can use Takedown and stack it up. Crack Shot is fairly superfluous, and calling assists to build it up seems moot compared to stacking Takedown, as the two don't contribute to one another. Regardless, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me Finn is a damage dealer who you want to stay on the field a long time so he can keep stacking damage and clutch a win at the end with a big damage stack. If Crack Shot could feed Takedown, it would make more sense as a complete package.

    Special 1: I am confused. Team health and protection is good. Team cleanse is great. Resistance has use for that. It puts you back a stack on Takedown, but there are plenty of cases where that healing and cleanse are totally worth it. Advantage and defense up? Sure. Nice side benefits.

    Taunt and Determination, though, I question. Finn isn't particularly bulky, and isn't getting a unique that will help him tank blows. Also, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me I want Finn to stick around; that I want to protect Finn so that he can build those stacks. That Finn, despite the tank tag, is an attacker. So if he uses this ability, it's forcing the enemy to do exactly what I don't want them to do; focus down my damage source. And Determination is also confusing. On using Hold the Line, Finn gains Taunt and Determination for two turns. When determination expires, Finn gains Retribution, which does mesh with Crack Shot, but for that to happen, either Finn needs to survive two turns, be cleansed (meaning retribution without taunt), or Determination needs to trigger from another ally going below half health, which would require the enemy going around the taunt or using AoEs yet somehow leaving not-particularly-bulky Finn in a condition to eat directed fire. Determination seems to raise more questions than it answers. Even setting aside that Finn as a taunting tank is questionable due to his dubious bulk and lack of sustain, why have Determination at all instead of just having Hold the Line give Finn Taunt and Retribution from the outset? Or why not have it give Determination without giving taunt, so that Finn's taunt isn't keeping the enemy from attacking other allies and triggering it? Then, the enemy can keep focusing on, say, Holdo, and then when Holdo is hurting, Determination triggers and Finn draws their attention as a countering off tank.

    But without some sort of unique that gives Finn more ability to stick around, I see the reworked kit and its strategy as, "Use Takedown every single turn because it is amazing and occasionally maybe heal/cleanse even though it gives a taunt you probably don't want.

    Yes I agree it is a hard nerf to Finn. Refund the zeta.
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    I agree on this referendum stuff. It seldom works out (say hello, Brexit!), because, among other things, people in general don't have all the information needed to weight in properly the consequenses of a choice.

    I'm glad you agree it's a nerf. Because it is, really. Let's not fool ourselves here.

    If Finn's rework is healthier for the game, refunding zetas and omegas is also not only healthier for the community, but also the no-brainer decent thing to do. For any rework in the future too.

    Taking flak is an integral and indissociable part of any job related to costumer relations. And, yes, someone has to be there to take flak when unpopular decisions are taken.

    I also recommend players and moderators make an effort together to put this "be civil" thing behind us all - we will never agree on this, so let's agree to disagree and move on - and focus on the ZFinn issue. CG has responded and, at this point, the topic should center around the character.
    When did I agree it was a "nerf?"

    I've already done the "nerf" rant here, so short version.

    The way the word "nerf" is used is terrible and worthless, because it's a definition shell game.

    Definition 1: An update that renders something ineffectual.

    Definition 2: An update that decreases something's effectiveness to any degree no matter how small.

    "Nerf" is an extremely loaded term because the first one is regarded as inherently bad, so using the word in either context carries an inherently negative connotation, and an implication that it means the more emotionally loaded definition. "Nerf" is a useless word because it's purely a vehicle for bile, with so little firm meaning.

    The Finn rework takes his lead from an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist to a strong lead. Is a strong lead weaker than an infinite loop that can melt anything and should not exist? Sure. Is it a nerf? Depends on how you define "nerf." Finn himself has a much stronger chassis, and a strong lead. Post-rework Finn as posted is a much better unit with an overall improved kit, a strengthened baseline lead, and a weakened zeta lead. Is a complex mix of buffs and improvements a "nerf?" Not by any useful definition of the word.


    Though, going to useful feedback on the rework that isn't just, "No," or saying CG is obligated to give refunds...

    The reworked kit looks much better than it does now, but also seems incoherent. He has three moves, but they seem to be saying different things about what Finn's supposed to be doing.

    The basic is raw damage with 20% stacking damage per repeated use on the same target. This says you wanna stack the basic's damage bonus to really hurt someone. Maybe use 3PO and Rey to call assists and build it up, or use General Kenobi's team retribution to get out-of-turn attacks to build those stacks. So far, so good.

    Special 2 is damage, stun, 2-turn cooldown that can be reduced with either main Resistance lead, expose, and a 60/120% damage stacking. Control, rapidly stacking damage, engages in the faction's core mechanic in Expose, and I can probably use this every turn. About all I can ask for from an attack. However, that much higher parallel damage stacking tells me the basic is useless; my goal is to get Finn to go as often as possible so I can use Takedown and stack it up. Crack Shot is fairly superfluous, and calling assists to build it up seems moot compared to stacking Takedown, as the two don't contribute to one another. Regardless, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me Finn is a damage dealer who you want to stay on the field a long time so he can keep stacking damage and clutch a win at the end with a big damage stack. If Crack Shot could feed Takedown, it would make more sense as a complete package.

    Special 1: I am confused. Team health and protection is good. Team cleanse is great. Resistance has use for that. It puts you back a stack on Takedown, but there are plenty of cases where that healing and cleanse are totally worth it. Advantage and defense up? Sure. Nice side benefits.

    Taunt and Determination, though, I question. Finn isn't particularly bulky, and isn't getting a unique that will help him tank blows. Also, Crack Shot and Takedown tell me I want Finn to stick around; that I want to protect Finn so that he can build those stacks. That Finn, despite the tank tag, is an attacker. So if he uses this ability, it's forcing the enemy to do exactly what I don't want them to do; focus down my damage source. And Determination is also confusing. On using Hold the Line, Finn gains Taunt and Determination for two turns. When determination expires, Finn gains Retribution, which does mesh with Crack Shot, but for that to happen, either Finn needs to survive two turns, be cleansed (meaning retribution without taunt), or Determination needs to trigger from another ally going below half health, which would require the enemy going around the taunt or using AoEs yet somehow leaving not-particularly-bulky Finn in a condition to eat directed fire. Determination seems to raise more questions than it answers. Even setting aside that Finn as a taunting tank is questionable due to his dubious bulk and lack of sustain, why have Determination at all instead of just having Hold the Line give Finn Taunt and Retribution from the outset? Or why not have it give Determination without giving taunt, so that Finn's taunt isn't keeping the enemy from attacking other allies and triggering it? Then, the enemy can keep focusing on, say, Holdo, and then when Holdo is hurting, Determination triggers and Finn draws their attention as a countering off tank.

    But without some sort of unique that gives Finn more ability to stick around, I see the reworked kit and its strategy as, "Use Takedown every single turn because it is amazing and occasionally maybe heal/cleanse even though it gives a taunt you probably don't want.

    You agreed it was a nerf when you stated that Finn's current kit gives Resistance a boat load of TM and the new kit doesn't give as much.

    Regarding your interpretation of the word "nerf", you should know that words are not absolutes and their meaning can change, when inserted in a given context, such as video games. Here's what I extracted from wikipedia:

    "Nerf (computer gaming):

    In video gaming a nerf is a change to a game that reduces the desirability or effectiveness of a particular game element. The term is also used as a verb for the act of making such a change.The opposite of nerf is buff (in one of that term's two usages).

    The term originated with Ultima Online, and refers to the Nerf brand of toys which are soft and less likely to cause serious injury.It is used in the context of virtual worlds such as MMORPGs (like UO) and MUDs, but has become a part of the general vocabulary of gamer slang and can be found in various places where adjustment of power levels from one version of a game to the next is relevant."

    Now you understand why we call it a nerf, because it is a nerf?? Every game changer I saw labeled it as a buffs to his abilities and a hard nerf on his lead. Just like Rex, Finn's value lies on his lead much more than his abilities or basic.

    Reducing the value of his lead makes it a nerf. You and everybody else are entitled to their own opinion on the matter. Calling it a nerf on my end, is merely my own opinion too, based on the daily use I make of him.

    Preaching on eirher side will not convert anyone, by the way so, again, let's agree to disagree and move on.
  • mvs84
    33 posts Member
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.
  • mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Madlax
    119 posts Member

    Ok, now let’s work that McDonald’s example into something that more closely resembles this scenario, because it’s definitely not the same as just waiting for your food.

    Imagine you ordered and paid for a cheeseburger. Now imagine instead of getting said cheeseburger, you were handed a salad, and the staff member says “We’re giving you this salad because we think you need this healthier option”. You, rightfully so, are a little miffed and ask for your correct order or at least a refund. The staff member then turns around to face the kitchen and proceeds to ignore you. Are they even listening? Maybe, but they’re not acknowledging, so you can’t be sure. They definitely don’t appear to be doing anything to rectify or defuse the situation. You’re just left there at the counter staring at a salad you didn’t want or order.

    If I saw all this going on as an impartial observer, I would not fault that customer one bit for getting a little heated or upset over the situation, especially if the staff member continued to keep their back turned and appear to ignore the customer.

    I mean who the heck wants a salad when they were looking forward to that cheeseburger?

    ETA: Now, if I saw the staff member engaging and trying to have a constructive dialogue with the customer to resolve the situation and the customer was still screaming their head off, that’d be a different situation to me. Then they’d be a ****. You seem to think that’s what’s happening here, whereas I see the former scenario.

    Gonna say in advance that I'm in no way defending CG or the nonsense they plan on pulling with zFinn

    buuut:

    you guys gotta stop with those useless real-life examples that have no similiarities whatsoever with this game.

    Do you sign a paper that you are willing to eat whatever they put on your tablet when you enter MCdumb? no! Cause thats what you signed when you downloaded this game and created an account.
    Again, its the same in every single game. You pay for the right to use their service, but that service can be modified at any point. Why do you think is it illegal to buy and sell accounts? Correct, because you dont own them. Same way you dont have any right to a fixed set of rules concerning zFinn.

    I do absolutely want to keep him like he is, but Im not deluded enough to think that this would be our moral or lawful right lol..
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.

    So, in your opinion, this has been 48 pages (and counting) of venting in futility?
  • mvmss wrote: »
    mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.

    So, in your opinion, this has been 48 pages (and counting) of venting in futility?

    No, I don't think feedback is ever futile. It's good to always express one's self.

    I guess for me to better judge the situation, I'd need to hear their reasons behind the Finn changes / Refund. I just don't see a change happening. Of course, I could be wrong.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • mvmss wrote: »
    mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.

    So, in your opinion, this has been 48 pages (and counting) of venting in futility?

    No, I don't think feedback is ever futile. It's good to always express one's self.

    I guess for me to better judge the situation, I'd need to hear their reasons behind the Finn changes / Refund. I just don't see a change happening. Of course, I could be wrong.

    Let me add to my post.

    On page 46? SBCrumb said they'd offer more insight into their decision. So the 1st 46 pages, brought the official response as let me show you our thought process, not "based on 46 pages, we're changing our strategy".
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • mvmss
    213 posts Member
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.

    So, in your opinion, this has been 48 pages (and counting) of venting in futility?

    No, I don't think feedback is ever futile. It's good to always express one's self.

    I guess for me to better judge the situation, I'd need to hear their reasons behind the Finn changes / Refund. I just don't see a change happening. Of course, I could be wrong.

    I think it is, in practical terms, if you are just asking people for their opinions, just for the sake of it, keen on doing what you wanted to do in the 1st place and unwilling to take a single step back from the original stance.

    Indeed, better judgement of the situation will only be possible when the rework goes live. I do hope for a change on the refund policy, at the very least, but it remains to be seen.
  • mvmss wrote: »
    mvmss wrote: »
    mvs84 wrote: »
    For those of you who want to convince us that FINN's rework is good.

    Please review the 47 pages of the topic and tell how many people think that change is good and how many do not want it.

    To the evidence I refer.

    CG, I don't want you to wake up every morning and shout:
    Show Me the money! I Love black people! Like Jerry Maguire.

    I just want you to listen and leave things the way they are.

    We all want that except a tiny group of people.

    I don't think CG measures changes to their game mechanics with a popularity contest. I believe with the zFinn lead change, it's about Balance within the broader context of current toons (C3pO) changing the dynamics of a 2 year old toon along with the foresight of future toons having to work in a balanced way with zFinn. Obviously zFinn needs to be changed in their views. That's what I think is possibly not being grasped, or maybe it is understood but is discarded for personal game play over the broader balance of the game.

    CG has already said this change is going through, and the zeta will not be refunded. They haven't rolled back on that position, but only offered more upcoming communication into their decision-making regarding toon changes/buffs/reworks/nerfs. While SBCrumb said he reads the feedback and collates it for others at CG, from what I've read, I don't see the feedback changing the strategic reasons regarding the rework or changing the decision for not giving a refund. Dev communication has indirectly signaled a refund of Finn is different than a refund of Daka, Barris, etc.

    So, in your opinion, this has been 48 pages (and counting) of venting in futility?

    No, I don't think feedback is ever futile. It's good to always express one's self.

    I guess for me to better judge the situation, I'd need to hear their reasons behind the Finn changes / Refund. I just don't see a change happening. Of course, I could be wrong.

    I think it is, in practical terms, if you are just asking people for their opinions, just for the sake of it, keen on doing what you wanted to do in the 1st place and unwilling to take a single step back from the original stance.

    Indeed, better judgement of the situation will only be possible when the rework goes live. I do hope for a change on the refund policy, at the very least, but it remains to be seen.

    That's fair feedback. Watching the forums I've come to the conclusion that CG team and communication is like the titanic. It takes a great wide turn, and things just don't happen on a dime. Feedback is not just taken on an individual post imo, but maybe they look at the persistence of that feedback to boil it all down. The forums are complex, and not everyone is on the same page. So maybe they try to listen to everyone. And then, over time, CG response has become more and more measured because people quote every word, every period, every comma and cry foul if their are any misspeaking.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • mvs84
    33 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    Personally, I think Finn's rework is very different from Barris or Daka.
    I think it is a much more drastic change than a malfunction of a particular skill. Now, Finn will be a whole new character, with different attacks.

    There are many more people affected by this change and it has been shown on the topic. It is also true that many pages are critical to comments from moderators or users, but the essence of the discontent of users is there.

    That does not count all those users who write in other forums or directly do not write anywhere and remain with discontent.

    Therefore, it should set a precedent in the politics of the game, especially since they have returned to take the event of C3PO without having solved the problem.
    Many people who do not speak English, nor know the change that will be made, so many will have gotten to C3PO with all the illusion of the world and even many will have put the Z to Finn without being aware of what will happen. Others will do it only by the possibility of making phase 3 of the HSTR until they make the change effective.

    Unlike other forums, this forum is dedicated to the game and all the changes that affect us. We did not ask that they read all the Internet forums by listening to the opinions of the users and answering, but at least to the official. Even without having anything to say, simply by taking care of the community of the game and that we can see that they are there listening to us. That should be the purpose of a forum dedicated to the game.

    I wish they had really read all the comments (they should have been reading them on the fly during these months) and offer us something to compensate for all this.
  • This is an utter joke. Don't leave such a massive bug lie for months. Make Traya immune to exposes until you figure out what you're going to do to Finn. You'll at least stop the raid being a joke and it should be simple to change without breaking anything else.
  • New player for you guild!!! my ally code: 662-111-872
  • This is an utter joke. Don't leave such a massive bug lie for months. Make Traya immune to exposes until you figure out what you're going to do to Finn. You'll at least stop the raid being a joke and it should be simple to change without breaking anything else.

    I think SBCrumb does read the feedback and collates it for others at CG who might need to know. Organizations often have certain things that have to happen (red-tape if you will) that forums don't have. Everyone here comments at the speed of light. I don't think in my opinion CG moves as fast as the forums. Please continue to provide feedback! I'm only saying in my opinion, CG is only at the point of proving clarity around their decision to rework finn and not refunding the zeta lead. Maybe with continued feedback they move the organization to revise it's stance and maybe refund the zeta. I'm only saying it doesn't look like they are there.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Remember too the mega thread on the "Toon Ban" for TW. CG in fact did listen to the forum's feedback, and revised their stance. Now, CG won't ban toons in the future, and instead look at other ways to make TW fun, fresh and exciting. But it took maybe a month or more of feedback and pages of feedback before CG changed course.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Remember too the mega thread on the "Toon Ban" for TW. CG in fact did listen to the forum's feedback, and revised their stance. Now, CG won't ban toons in the future, and instead look at other ways to make TW fun, fresh and exciting. But it took maybe a month or more of feedback and pages of feedback before CG changed course.

    It's quite incredible that they needed that much feedback to arrive at that decision.
  • Remember too the mega thread on the "Toon Ban" for TW. CG in fact did listen to the forum's feedback, and revised their stance. Now, CG won't ban toons in the future, and instead look at other ways to make TW fun, fresh and exciting. But it took maybe a month or more of feedback and pages of feedback before CG changed course.

    It's quite incredible that they needed that much feedback to arrive at that decision.

    It is what it is. They're an organization who has input from CG Management.then I'd imagine maybe some input from EA, and I'd further imagine maybe some input from Disney. Don't know anything about it, but maybe something along those lines causes delays.
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Remember too the mega thread on the "Toon Ban" for TW. CG in fact did listen to the forum's feedback, and revised their stance. Now, CG won't ban toons in the future, and instead look at other ways to make TW fun, fresh and exciting. But it took maybe a month or more of feedback and pages of feedback before CG changed course.

    It's quite incredible that they needed that much feedback to arrive at that decision.

    It is what it is. They're an organization who has input from CG Management.then I'd imagine maybe some input from EA, and I'd further imagine maybe some input from Disney. Don't know anything about it, but maybe something along those lines causes delays.

    Or none of that is the case and they're just really really slow at grasping the obvious.
    We can speculate all we like, but there are other Disney/EA games that get by without banning parts of people's rosters
  • Remember too the mega thread on the "Toon Ban" for TW. CG in fact did listen to the forum's feedback, and revised their stance. Now, CG won't ban toons in the future, and instead look at other ways to make TW fun, fresh and exciting. But it took maybe a month or more of feedback and pages of feedback before CG changed course.

    It's quite incredible that they needed that much feedback to arrive at that decision.

    It is what it is. They're an organization who has input from CG Management.then I'd imagine maybe some input from EA, and I'd further imagine maybe some input from Disney. Don't know anything about it, but maybe something along those lines causes delays.

    Or none of that is the case and they're just really really slow at grasping the obvious.
    We can speculate all we like, but there are other Disney/EA games that get by without banning parts of people's rosters

    Banning toons is a none issue now. These are not the droids you are looking for... ;)
    what an ugly thing to say... does this mean we're not friends anymore?
  • Who cares why? Who cares about their poor lack of communication and incompetence? Guess what it’s been that way for years and isn’t going to change, yet here we are still playing. Just refund people the zeta for the completely NEW Finn so we can move on. Or you can just wait until after 3po event to drop the nerf and then try to divert people with a new puzzle and character release. We know what’s up.
  • Suprème_Lèader_Tsao
    122 posts Member
    edited March 2019
    Eventually you get to a point where so many people have taken advantage of a near-infinite loop that it doesn’t even make any real sense to fix it anymore. How many people have already used this bug to get 7* Trayas and G12+ in the three months that we’ve known there has been a problem?

    I mean, my guild hasn’t been able to do it. We’re still on the outside of HSTR looking in, though we’ve almost got it... once we have enough squads to get through P3. Honestly, a lot has already been done to make sure that guilds that were just a little bit better than ours are now a LOT better.

    If I’d known it was going to take so long for the fix, I’d have zetaed my Finn. Might have Traya by now. Guess that’s my fault?

    SMH
  • Gorem
    1185 posts Member
    Eventually you get to a point where so many people have taken advantage of a near-infinite loop that it doesn’t even make any real sense to fix it anymore. How many people have already used this bug to get 7* Trayas and G12+ in the three months that we’ve known there has been a problem?

    I mean, my guild hasn’t been able to do it. We’re still on the outside of HSTR looking in, though we’ve almost got it... once we have enough squads to get through P3. Honestly, a lot has already been done to make sure that guilds that were just a little bit better than ours are now a LOT better.

    If I’d known it was going to take so long for the fix, I’d have zetaed my Finn. Might have Traya by now. Guess that’s my fault?

    SMH

    This is my concern, like, they said they would fix this C3 thing with Finn Before the end of last year. It is now March.

    3 potential farming months for guilds gone past. The guilds who had it ready before a "Fix" was announced to happen were able to do it, Finn still remained an excellent Zeta to have outside of HSTR. His lead is awesome, one of the best zeta leads in the entire game. Then later we get word that Finn's lead will be getting the fix to close the loop (And just Finn's, not even CLS's). So now we find out that Finn's lead, one of the best leads to zeta in the game, will be forever worse then it ever was? But then that still doesn't come into effect for weeks and still hasn't.

    So, even if you'd zeta'd Finn at the start of this, 3months of HSTR would be way worth it.

    This whole situation could have been avoided quite easily. Just from the start they could have said "HSTR is over a year old now, one phase being solo'd is fine" and be done with it. But that is why I have always thought that this change was happening because Finn could beat Revan. There are a lot less Finn lead arena teams now then there would have been, beating Revan, if they had never announced this change. Because seriously. CLS can solo p3.
  • @ImYourHuckleberry all great points. Feedback from the forums have made many changes. From implementation of the credit heist to the non banning of toons. Our feedback is important.
    YaeVizsla wrote: »
    If they care about what community wants why not put up a vote poll.

    a. Leave Finn alone modify interaction in HSTR
    b. Change Finn based on proposed changes.
    b1. return zeta
    b2. no zeta refund

    Pretty simple poll and there would be no perception that CG is not listening and not having a clue of what the community wants.
    Because that's a terrible idea.

    Finn's leadership zeta as it currently exists is unhealthy for the game and for Resistance as a faction.

    Do you know who is really the most unhealthy for the game and their faction?
    Revan dominates the top 400 in my arena, not Finn.
    Revan dominates GA, not Finn.
    Revan walls dominate TW, not Finn.
    Revan dominates P1 and P2 sith raid, Finn works in P3.

    Final Score
    Revan 4 - Finn 1

    As far as the future goes how can they release a decent Jedi Luke later if they don't nerf Revan first?

    Its just absurd to say Finn is unhealthy for the game without considering how unhealthy Revan has made this game. If your making decisions based on how unhealthy for the game someone is then lets just be honest and put Revan on the nerf chopping block for the health and longevity of the game.

    This is all by design. He’s the top of the foodchain. You either have him or wish you did. In almost every aspect of the game.

    Also sets the precedent for the next journey toon—> don’t miss out or swgoh life will be **** double hockey sticks
  • I didn’t Zeta my Finn because I thought he’d get nerfed. So I missed out on possibly getting Traya easily, like other guilds have.

    I didn’t get JK Revan the first go around because I wasn’t close, and I figured: “How powerful could he really be?” So I missed out on hundreds of rewards and crystals that I could’ve gotten in Arena and elsewhere.

    No matter who usurps JKR as undisputed king/queen of the meta, there will always be only one meta: the FOMO meta.
This discussion has been closed.