Investigate other GLs too - they can undersize

Replies

  • Which I understand, I do, but can we not buff LV more instead of nerfing other teams?

    We don't like to make changes to kits post-launch if we can avoid it. So, it's not done lightly...which means I'm sure all options were considered.

    Surely if LV is meant to be the new meta, he could use a buff as opposed to nerfing other teams? He does require a hefty investment and the only reason he is worth working towards right now is because it involves gearing up good toons like Bad Batch.
  • dgree
    502 posts Member
    edited January 14
    Which I understand, I do, but can we not buff LV more instead of nerfing other teams?

    This kinda makes the most sense, tbh. The things that are making LV vulnerable to such counters are intentional weaknesses in his kit. CG could change a bunch of kits and AI behaviors of other teams so that they struggle more against LV, but... it's part of LV's kit that he kinda sits there, doesn't do anything, and drops dots while he waits to pop ult a couple times.

    Most of his debuffs aren't locked and he gets stuck behind taunt. He can't stop any sort of revive, he can't gain TM, etc. Maybe the point is for him to get stuck behind GK for 4 minutes. IDK. But that's the way CG designed him, and of course there are going to be various comps that can take advantage of these weaknesses.


    But they probably won't buff LV--even though he's the most expensive and newest GL--because they want to make sure that JMK and the next GLs are sufficiently strong against him. So the next option is to nerf even older characters, and if you don't like it then you should just whale harder on the new **** when it comes out.
  • Sorry to be a little off but when are you going to ban cheaters? Already reported one to Lucifer 2 month ago an he still kills 7 stars Executors and Negotiatiors (R8-9 GK) with a Chimaera 6 stars and a 4 or 5 stars HT... you must be blind not to ban this, cmon....really? Cheaters do exist in this game and you must do something about them.
  • The problem with all of this is that they made the first four GLs well balanced with who they could beat, then JMK with CAT can beat everyone but LV can't with his much tougher requirements.
  • XgerNaph wrote: »
    It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    There seems to be a somewhat obvious flaw in this though, when combined with previous statements:
    • GLs should be on par with one another
    • You don't want each new GL to require a conquest toon
    • GL + Conquest is "above" just GL

    Wouldn't that mean that, unless you add further conquest toons to pair with a GL, that JMK/CAT and LV/Maul will always be the top? Because if the new GLs don't have a conquest toon, how is it going to be okay that they beat GL + Conquest toon?

    Please just leave it be. If you insist on doing something, buff LV, don't nerf other teams/toons.

    Where was statement #2?
  • Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Veers Piett DT Range and Iden deletes

    LV Maul Storm Tooper Royal Guard Vader

    Without them taking a turn. A non GL taking out a GL without the GL taking a turn
    How is it possible for that trooper team to start before LV? He should at least be fastest and go first, no?

    g3d5qecggkgj.jpg

    He is the fastest but she starts with 100% TM if there are no other leaders on her team. They probably forgot to add the clause "if no GL present"
    So the statement I replied to is wrong, based on your own comment.
    A team with Veers, Piett and Dark in it have 3 reasons why Iden would NOT start at 100% TM. So LV will go first, and if he use a special Maul will go second.

    I'm not questioning if the team can beat LV/Maul, but it would not be without LV/Maul ever taking a turn. I've seen no proper testing of that particular trooper comp vs. LV, so it could be it's consistent, but the initial statement at least shows a lack of reading Idens kit.

  • It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    If thats a case shouldnt each GL have its own conquest character to play with? Its GL we are talking about not some journey character…

    I was talking about undersize because this is straight up what post said.

    That being said - cant you just change zombie to revive only with NS leader then? Zombie has been an issue for a really long time for you
  • It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    IT beat LV without conquest charcter. Doesn't bother?
    JML beat JMK/LV without conquest charcter. Doesn't bother?

    At first you were embarrassed that SEE and SLKR easy beating JMK. Now - embarrassed that SLKR easy beating LV.

    What is your electoral embarrassment.
    We don't like to make changes to kits post-launch if we can avoid it. So, it's not done lightly...which means I'm sure all options were considered.
    Remind you 2 upgrades JMK & Executor?
  • If Galactic Legends are supposed to be so legendy, why do they get beaten so easily in Conquest? Hmm? Sometimes I have to manually play them because the AI running my team appears to be a calculator while the AI on defense is a NASA super computer. (Not to mention the 400% TM Load, 800,000 health and protection, 900 speed, etc etc.)

    LV needs a boost, pretty simple concept there. (Stop nerfing when the appropriate response should be a buff)
  • I noticed .GG counters have JML teams beating LV+Maul, some with KAM others without. Are TB characters about the same level as Conquest characters? If so, SLK+WAT would seem to qualify as the same level then.

    Can we get a breakdown of the strength of each character, since apparently Daka and Zombie are considered "weak" characters? Maybe some in-game indicator of character strength?
  • Screerider wrote: »
    I noticed .GG counters have JML teams beating LV+Maul, some with KAM others without. Are TB characters about the same level as Conquest characters? If so, SLK+WAT would seem to qualify as the same level then.

    Can we get a breakdown of the strength of each character, since apparently Daka and Zombie are considered "weak" characters? Maybe some in-game indicator of character strength?

    Would that not be their power rating?
  • Screerider wrote: »
    I noticed .GG counters have JML teams beating LV+Maul, some with KAM others without. Are TB characters about the same level as Conquest characters? If so, SLK+WAT would seem to qualify as the same level then.

    Can we get a breakdown of the strength of each character, since apparently Daka and Zombie are considered "weak" characters? Maybe some in-game indicator of character strength?

    How about 1 / (# of players with character G13+)
  • KingOfLosing
    381 posts Member
    edited January 15
    Errataing(if that even is a word) a toon in this game SHOULD be a last resort. Rewording a toons kit in a way that Nerfs them makes you guys at the dev table look Really bad and worse if it happens consistently. and this motion should only be used to fix or update a characters kit to provide more clarity. When you guys do this you are basically baiting and then switching aka ducking us in the **** and tossing our investment in a character out the window and is unacceptable.

    The people here invested in kylo for a reason and for you to nerf him after their investment is just plain stupid and this move just doesn't fit this game. Complete bait and switch. Either work harder or hire more devs to do playtesting before releasing another horrible mistake. You guys should be shamed of yourself. Or better yet work harder in trying to rework LV and bring him up to par with JMK even better. I'm sure all LV investors would be proud and would keep other GL owners happy thus creating a even playing field while still maintaining your guy's agenda in making these new toons the new meta.
    Okay my rant is done
    Post edited by KingOfLosing on
  • Another solution could be implementing a ban system since this is a competitive game mode but I'm probably reaching too far out on this one. Each round players can ban 2 toons each or something like that
  • TargetEadu wrote: »
    XgerNaph wrote: »
    It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    There seems to be a somewhat obvious flaw in this though, when combined with previous statements:
    • GLs should be on par with one another
    • You don't want each new GL to require a conquest toon
    • GL + Conquest is "above" just GL

    Wouldn't that mean that, unless you add further conquest toons to pair with a GL, that JMK/CAT and LV/Maul will always be the top? Because if the new GLs don't have a conquest toon, how is it going to be okay that they beat GL + Conquest toon?

    Please just leave it be. If you insist on doing something, buff LV, don't nerf other teams/toons.

    Where was statement #2?

    I can't remember where it got said. Maybe one of those streams w/ a dev interview? I remember hearing it, though. Basically, after they released LV and he was just a lump on a log and everyone realized we'd have to wait for Maul to make him worthwhile, people stopped/didn't whale on LV. That's not what they want. They basically killed their own profit potential by so closely tying the new GL to the new Conquest toon. So, strictly from a business standpoint, they won't be doing that again. At least, not so obviously. JMK & CAT worked much better, because JMK was good w/o CAT; the comp just went to the next level after adding her.
  • So much for GLs having nice rock-paper-scissors relationships.
  • papaofmom wrote: »
    It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    If thats a case shouldnt each GL have its own conquest character to play with? Its GL we are talking about not some journey character…

    I was talking about undersize because this is straight up what post said.

    That being said - cant you just change zombie to revive only with NS leader then? Zombie has been an issue for a really long time for you

    1. That's a nerf, and should always be frowned upon, but
    2. That screws raid comps, most notably the SLKR Sisters for CPit, and
    3. While I totally get what you are saying, Zombie is one of the very few examples we have in this game of the game actually being fun for theory crafting.

    In a game with this many playable characters and the push for us to devise multiple comps, theory crafting should be encouraged instead of discouraged, and nerfing Zombie to only ever work w/ a NS lead is a prime example of the worst move to make at this point. So many players have built her up to use in comps other than NS, and it would just be crapping all over their investment to nerf her now. Not to mention the impact it would have on guilds that are struggling to clear CPit or even HSTR. I know the whale guilds will not care, but there are other guilds out there.
  • The biggest issue here (and with the QGJ omi change) is that GAC is now the most important game mode, and these off-meta balance changes affect everyone. CG needs to also establish a policy of refunding mats and rolling back gear/abilities when they make huge changes like this.

    I applied the QGJ omi about 6 hours before they announced they might be changing it.

    I bumped SLK from r7 to r8 after I had the counter time out vs a particularly beefy LV team.

    CG should have access to this information and be able to perform rollbacks on related toons.

    Agreed. This is a whole separate issue, but one nonetheless. Even when we get refunded, it is not enough. Just because they give back a Zeta, or maybe a couple of the highest relic levels doesn't make it right. Players boosted:
    1. That toon much higher than they would have had it not worked the way it did, and
    2. They also boosted other toons to pair w/ it.

    Acting like those resources aren't relevant to the nerf is shameful, TBH. I mean, resources are hard to come by in this game, and allowing the player base to invest heavily in something just to take it away later is easily the most infuriating thing this company does.
  • Which I understand, I do, but can we not buff LV more instead of nerfing other teams?

    We don't like to make changes to kits post-launch if we can avoid it. So, it's not done lightly...which means I'm sure all options were considered.

    The last 6 months or so of CGs changes to kits in this game tell an entirely different story than this comment.
  • SemiGod
    2996 posts Member
    edited January 14
    It's not simply about the squad being undersized. GLs can (and should be able) to beat other GLs. It's more so that a GL + Conquest character is the current pinnacle, and they should not be defeated by a GL in a much weaker squad.

    Wb GL + conquest character getting countered by 5 marquees? ;)

    Rip LV, imperial troopers + Iden or Shaak making the most expensive gl a joke lol

    Yall should just be buffing LV and not nerfing SLKR since the root of the problem is obviously in LVs kit/squad itself. I’d much rather have a GL being able to undersize another GL + conq char than 5 marquee units doing it.
  • You know what guys. Don’t screw with Iden. Don’t screw with Kylo. Buff LV. It’s obvious you want him great, and he isn’t, so buff him. Stop changing everything else to suit him. You nerfed Wat, Luke, Thrawn, and Gas all for him. Just so his one thing, his high health, wouldn’t be shredded through. You built an all tanky type team; that wouldn’t work, changed everything that would really mess with the tanky-ness, it didn’t work.

    Stop reinventing every toon in this game to fix Lord Vader. Fix Lord Vader. Jesus wept.

    Iden requires you to spend real money or your crystal hoard which means the investment you are making is more important than the old investment in SLKR wat. They must have hired a second PR guy the new spin they are putting on the decisions being made assume CG isn't a despicable company.
  • TVF
    31655 posts Member
    Another solution could be implementing a ban system since this is a competitive game mode but I'm probably reaching too far out on this one. Each round players can ban 2 toons each or something like that

    Go to your room and think about what you said!
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of the change to the shipment tab. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • SemiGod
    2996 posts Member
    Which I understand, I do, but can we not buff LV more instead of nerfing other teams?

    We don't like to make changes to kits post-launch if we can avoid it. So, it's not done lightly...which means I'm sure all options were considered.

    Wouldn’t have to if y’all didn’t half fast making the kits all the time ;)
  • Meh... I wrote a whole spiel on nerfing, & great nerf of 2021... and toon protection.
    I've been constructive in the past, and it was ignored.... so I'll just say that this is 💩... another example of closing the variety of how this game can be played.
    Less counters (even soft ones) is just less fun.
  • ShawDou
    276 posts Member
    edited January 15
    Veers Piett DT Range and Iden deletes

    LV Maul Storm Tooper Royal Guard Vader

    Without them taking a turn. A non GL taking out a GL without the GL taking a turn

    Not if you have decent speed DV. With 265 speed DV, Iden will never take a turn.
Sign In or Register to comment.