I will not go into detail but this is just your standard response to anyone disagreeing with you. It’s always about the point only you can see.
Thats really no point at all. Every monster has the „potential“ to be broken. But if a very underwhelming monster like ura suddenly becomes good because of a new monsters being released then this doesn’t say anything about the formerly underwhelming monster actually.
For example: A new Mythic named „JerboGod“ gets released. It boosts a friendly jerbo by 2000 %, Jerbo becomes stun and sleep immune, all his attacks are now piercing. Is Jerbo suddenly good? Or is JerboGod making him good? Should we nerf Jerbo or JerboGod?
No, I think your case is a bit different because you own all the mythics so your incentive to avoid a nerf of a particular one isn’t that high. But in general: Carmilla is a great example because most people defending her are people who own her and she’s probably 1 of 5 or 6 awakened myths in the account and arguably the best. So the incentive for those users to come out and defend their best monster is very high. And that’s fine. Of course the opposite is also true: People who dont have a monster will ask for a nerf way more lightly. Thats why threads like this are important: to hear both sides. And balance things out between the both sides in the end. But that changes nothing about the fact that Mythic-Owners do have a very biased view on the mythics they own. I include myself here.
In general: I think we need to stop to view „being biased“ as something negative. It’s human nature to be biased. „Unbiased“ doesn’t exist. What’s important is to be aware of your own bias and work against it. Thats how we can come closer to being relatively unbiased.
This is a “biased” opinion of you towards me, I am way more reasonable than you think, last example I can make you is Prixis, at first I didn’t catch her potential then once I realised it I admitted my misjudgement.
The fact is that you (like many others), sometimes cannot accept that some nerf/buff proposal are made genuinely, and jump on the offensive calling who made the proposal “biased” or even “super biased”.
The encounter point is understanding that each person has his own opinion, you might share it or not but each opinion deserves respect.
You might have a point on this, but setting up an extreme example does not push the conversation in the right direction in my opinion, on the other hand increasing radioactive fallout from 50 to 60 or 70 is a far more reasonable example, but I agree that heavy pre-nerfs are always risky so what you said is relatively true for me.
(If I was a Dev I’d have nerfed Radioactive Fallout at least before VD release).
This is a complex concept, I suggest buffs and nerfs in line of what I think can benefit the community (even though nobody seem to believe me when I say so), so theorically I am trying my best to maintain my opinions unbiased as much as possible, is not my fault if people see my opinion as biased.
Probably not a good way to beat “You’re being stubborn a lot” accusations
Don you’re right sometimes and wrong sometimes but I think Sherlock’s point is you tend to have the same “you’re not seeing this right” approach anytime anyone questions your opinion, which does get tiresome after seeing it so often.
I’m certain that Uraniumedhus will not be broken with these new SEs. It’s slow, low defence, chrono+toxic weakness and you’re still having to do a combined 180TU to kill an enemy. If the VD were sleep immune then we might have a problem, but not with how they currently are. I think a much stronger combo would be to use them with Akane.
This is true, but it’s not the case when you make more general suggestions for the game. In those cases you still claim this. Also, when people disagree with your suggestion (whether it’s a monster buff/nerf or something general) and it becomes clear the majority don’t agree you’ll still claim you believe it’s for the benefit of people, which logically means you think you know better or (more likely) you’re too stubborn and closed off to other perspectives when you feel strongly enough about something to make a thread about it.
You’re not alone in being like this, but the way how you’re unaware of how you come across and how you’ll confront other people’s posts rubs people up the wrong way.
^ I’m saying this to express what the people talking to DonT should say and now we can put this to bed before we start any DonT personal arguments. Let’s talk about the poll and the ideas brought up in it please!
Just another thread where @DonT89 makes it about him and his world of insecurities.
In all honesty I haven’t seen a single thread that haven’t derailed from the orginal topic since a long time here. Focus on the balance changes people!!
While we are at it, let’s change Sakuralisk’s passive so it affects both allies and enemies, just so we are consistent with Kanna’s proposal. Satomi’s bloodfury to bloodthirst/bloodlust and Prixis shouldn’t be able to skip turn. Oh, and nerf Lime, cos why not (edit: #sarcasm for those lost in translation…)
Not like they are S tier Mythics that are sought after and played by the top players, oh wait…
Of course it’s a matter of opinion, but to say there’s no personal agenda at all is simply not possible.
.
.
.
.
.
I am talking about myself here FYI I have both Satomi and Prixis awakened.
These threads should consider how the proposed change would affect the overall balance of the game, what could be the potential ripple effect?
Will it promote certain line ups to feature more often?
Or certain combination are now more prominent as there’s nothing to hold them in check?
How will it affect the meta based on what’s being played the most and what people have?
Apologies, I support feedbacks and suggestions on changes but I find it hard to agree on getting people to vote on “choices” that are subjective and limited, even if it’s as credible as Duck or other posters are. I don’t think this is the best way of convincing the Devs to balance the game.
All of those suggestions except for satomi would kill the affected mythic. I took great care in giving suggestions that wouldn’t ruin the monster in question.
No one is saying that lol. It’s just another factor that you have to take into account when determining the worth of a suggestion. (edit: this was referring to the options in the poll)
Umm, how about a better pvp experience because a 50k defense mythic can’t heal to full health every 42tu?
Most of the suggested monsters aren’t really holding anything in particular in check. They’re just ruining the meta. The exception in this case would be myst, which ruins pvp every other restriction list when the frontline monsters (suikenshi, maeve, orca) that hold it in check are restricted.
That’s a very subjective opinion no? A Kanna user might argue the same. Anyone who propose this would say the exact same thing. But this is not the point.
Let’s hope everyone is aware of that.
Payback Killer? Isn’t that why Aviaeronix is so popular at the 6th?
Just like getting sleep without any cleanse in your team, getting stunlocked/sleeplocked while they repulse all your stun absorb/counter, cleanse. It goes both way
By that logic, they will have to balance it again when those mons aren’t restricted.
To be honest my posts was not to debate further about monster balances as it’s one person’s opinion against another. My point is more about the nature of biasness, perceived “choice” and considerations on potential ripple effects.
Until now I honestly thought you’d be too smart to post stuff like that. You do realize Sakura is a 20 % to sleep an enemy while Kanna blocks 100 %. These passive aggressive posts clearly aimed at ducks roster just bring us nowhere.
Nobody said that. Just many top players stating that duck has a history of being pretty good at identifiying problematic monsters and making reasonable suggestions.
Good news is: This thread does exactly that.
Nobody forces you too vote or agree with anything. You can make your own thread or post your own suggestions. Which would be much more interesting btw.
It’s called sarcasm… hence the Lime nerf. FYI I find Gremoris really tough for me to deal with, but if she’s nerfed what will be the implication? How about people who spent thousands to get her? I don’t have her and I think it’s hard to justify telling someone who spent thousands of dollars that what they bought is no longer as potent/useful based on one person’s suggestion. (This is unless it promotes non-interactive experience.)
I am not voting, merely voicing my opinion. And I have posted on suggestions mostly on buffing mons, as I mentioned before, gacha games are better off with buffs than nerfs due to the financial investment involved.
Thats actually not true. There are existing studies that show that Gacha games are way better off with nerfs than buffs because by buffing everything you get into a power creep loop which will kill the game. The thing with buffs is that every buff will make stuff you did not buff look exceptionally weaker. Especially in a game like Neo that exists for so long. Imagine buffing the first Gen legends like Talo to the current power level. It would take immense effort and the second gen legends would look insanely bad afterwards. So you would have to buff them. And so on and so on. Once you start buffing its a vicious circle.
In terms of money involved: I have spent a lot in this game but I am relatively unemotional when it comes to that: I read the ToS, I know that ZigZa reserves the right to change anything at any time. I know I spend for Gems not for monsters. I made an informed decision to spend nonetheless. I cant complain if they do what they announce to do in their ToS.
Aviaeronix has been one of the most popular 5th slot monsters way before carmilla was released. Check the pvp reports and you’ll see what I mean. Aviaeronix users also have to get past the APs that many carmilla users run or else payback killer gets blocked. That’s usually enough time for them to kill it before payback killer can be used. Aviaeronix is also completely useless against jocodragon users so I don’t consider it a viable solution.
That’s not how it works since carmilla isn’t an entire archetype.
Well, that’s more of a flaw in the sh*tty restriction list tbh. Myst is a bit of a special case because of how AP spam reliant most of the setups are.
When your suggestions were to make dream world affect allies and to give prixis frenzy at the expense of one of its other passives, no it’s not that subjective at all. If secret seal has to go both ways, kanna users will still be able to hide it behind a bunch of protectors while knowing things like orca, nikki, and haze frontlines won’t be able to do anything about it.
I am interested in these studies, do you have a link? Gacha games will never be balanced, power creep will happen, that’s how they make money. But I actually think buffing the older mons is a good way to recycle existing content while giving them a new life. Neo Monsters have a lot of cool mons that just get left behind over the years. And buffing and nerfing can both induce a vicious cycle, it’s not exclusive.
I mean everyone “read” the ToS, doesn’t mean it’s nice to have what they bought changed. I am no stranger to gacha games, while the likes of me and you have a decent collection, not everyone are in the same boat.
@NMEduck The point of that post was not to debate what needs to be changed, but more for you to feel what it’s like if it were from the other side. One can easily say “Dreamworld is too powerful together with how tanky she is.” or “It’s too easy to charge up Satomi’s blood move.” The person can justify it by a million reasons, as can you.
Anyhow, I will try to summarise one last time what I am trying to bring across.
1). I am actually not against on all the suggestions, some makes sense and will even be in my favour with what I have. Although I am hesitant because of the ripple effect on overall balance.
2). What I am advocating against is pigeonholing options and considered those are the only choice. I would have less problem with it if it wasn’t a poll.
3). Everyone is biased, and it doesn’t matter who made this thread, of course it will bring more scrutiny and questions when it mostly involves Mythic mons that you do not use or possess while leaving top tier Mythic mons you own/favour untouched. Not saying whether these mons are under or overpowered, but this can be how it will be viewed. Of course being an experienced user helps, but it doesn’t mean it’s not based on one person’s collection/experience only, which can be misleading.
I will need to dig through my files but I will post them as soon as I find it.
I think this is your main problem. You view this like its someone wanting to nerf all the stuff he doesnt own while leaving the things untouched which he does own. And thats simply not the case. As many people stated: Theres a history of these nerf polls. Duck has carefully collected suggestions from a lot of top players. This is not his list. This is the result of speaking to the majority of the best pvp players currently around. It really is not based on his collection. Its also a bit weird to claim that. What would be his incentive? He got #1 last PvP. He got #1 several times before. Its not like there would be reason for him to nerf strong stuff so he could improve in PvP. You cant get better than #1.
That is only one of the point I am trying to bring across. As I mentioned, this not being a poll would be less subjective. There’s no doubt his credibility as a top PvP player, but it doesn’t mean you don’t favour certain mons or hate facing some others. Especially when it’s limited to certain selection. I see your point, but hopefully you can see mine too.
We can agree to disagree this has taken far too much of our time.
You do realize Sakura and kanna passive are literally not the same.
You might go an entire battle where Sakura passive doesn’t sleep anything, can be countered with purify, insomnia monsters, lava entrance and stuff
While kanna literally has no counters. If you face a kanna, you just have to simply deal with
That was more as a sarcasm… maybe I will do a #sarcasm next time…
But by that logic I can also say Bastia’s passive prevent all my entry mons and has no counter, if I have her I simply have to deal with her. Or Aethereon completely nullify a stun team etc etc… Then one will argue Kanna only affects enemy, well if you run Bastia or Aethereon you won’t run entry or stun next either. You get my point.
Although funny enough Prixis do well against Kanna no?
It also would likely have a lot less chance of resulting in any meaningful change, especially since the last few balance patches haven’t addressed the clearly popular issues in the poll.
Other than the lime suggestion it really didn’t seem like sarcasm. For all we know, you’re just backtracking and passing off what you previously said as sarcasm when that wasn’t your initial intention.
(edit: 