April 11th 2017 Update Discussion

[blackbolt]

Sparton, a new "SACRO8" error code appears when I'm in the sacrifice screen...it seems to occur regularly every 3 or 4 consecutive sacrifices.

[HomemLivre]

@HomemLivre ... cheers! So I put some more shards on the DM as I really like this beast. Perfect against taunting teams.

My team does or did perfect hits actually quite a fair bit even taunted.

Since I pulled a DM the game has however changed a fair bit. I build it up to get guaranteed perfect hits against taunting teams. These teams have much less fun against me these days as I can hit back very very hard and don't even need to touch the screen for that

Yep, Its easy to manage almost every team, especially with this such good guy DM hahahah
I like him so much, his criticals are monstruous! lol

[Sparton_LOTB]

@Sparton: What about Sacrifice essence reward scales that was not right? (Reward II (500 essences) is given only when sarifying 501 essences, etc etc...)
It is fixed?

Edith: AFAIS in ingame update description it is announced as fixed.

Ah, yes, my bad, that is indeed fixed.

@Sparton what about matchmaking? I am being attacked even more after the update so have now completely given up on PVP apart from iron coins. Really sad as I loved the arena...

I'm experiencing the same. Back to good old 300+ weeks for sure. I was almost missing the feeling, good that I have it again

Same here. But my hold ratio is way better then it used to be, with the same team...

+1 from me.

Ah, damnit, I think the matchmaking is prioritizing people with similar attack:defense ratios, not people with more attacks than defenses...

I'll follow up with the progammer who worked on the matchmaking and see if he can confirm/fix accordingly.

The notes say burden of the damned reduced to 30%, my mummy skill says it's 25%.

Is it lower now then advertised on notes?

It looks like the skill description is under-reporting; it functions 30% of the time as far as the data is concerned. We'll get that corrected for a subsequent update.

one example: you nerfed corrupt general/axis commander because of his ridiculous stun %. and what did you do now, create a toon blue CR who can stunn 100% for 2 turns with accuracy up??Sorry but WTF??? Yes i have one (in fact i have 3 of them) and i will abuse them but this is really bad. I can name you certain setups where you can stun 3/4 enemies even if you go first. thats really bad overtuning. and there are many more of these examples. (end of the "gonzo memorial rant", for those who remember :P)

That's a legitimate concern, but comparing potential 100% stun rate for a basic attack to potential 100% freeze rate for a [EDIT] 5 power skill is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. In addition, we have new things like the Harpy passive and Immunity talismans, and in the future, we'll have other kinds of passive effects (on characters and on talismans) that could make relying on 100% freeze rate very, very risky. Obviously, if we did overtune we'll have to revisit, but we feel that because the power cost is so high and the proliferation of anti-CC methods is rising and continuing to rise, this will help with making the character appealing (as opposed to benchwarming material).

Totally agree with Slauki, Vision's Take is too much , he removes beneficial effects from 3 of 4 toons. AI always uses it first and your team is without defenses and will be taunted or freezed for 2 turns. Take should remain for one opponent, make it 100% but only one.

or drasticly reduce proc % or let him remove only one buff or something like that...otherwise the next mummy eddie is born
but he won't be that common, because he is rare, so many more will complain which will lead to changes pretty fast hopefully.

I'll discuss this more with Kaz, but he did point out to me that Visions Eddie is mostly utility and largely no damaging capabilities. It's just now that his utility is a lot more reliable.

Overall, we have a lot of single target remove beneficial effect options in the game (and added more with this update), and we felt for Visions Eddie to shine, he needed to have some form of AoE removal instead of trying to buff his single-target removal, which is why we went the direction we did with Take.

Also, it's 50% from all enemies, so against 4 enemies, on average 2 will lose buffs, not 3 or 4. There's as much a chance of 3 or 4 losing their buffs as there is 1 or 0.

Prisoners debuff trumps immunity - wtf? So the only toons that might benefit from the nerf are the ones that use a passive move every round or have a permanent passive. Toons with 1st round buffs are screwed even with immunity talismans on. Every other toon I hoped for I can use with immunity talis on them are still on the bench because they are still not usable. I had high hopes on Desert Maurauder but against the Prisoner he doesn't give the party 2 rounds of perfect hits. At a certain point it was said that immunity helps against the Prisoner and because of that I started sharding the Desert Maurauder. I should have waited really.

As HomemLivre noted, Immunity talismans not always working against the Prisoner is a known issue, and we hope to have a fix for this soon.

Sparton, a new "SACRO8" error code appears when I'm in the sacrifice screen...it seems to occur regularly every 3 or 4 consecutive sacrifices.

The programmer says that's a timeout error. Is it possible you're in a place with a connection that's not that great?

[Enti]

Ah, damnit, I think the matchmaking is prioritizing people with similar attack:defense ratios, not people with more attacks than defenses...

Soooooooooo.... correct me if I'm wrong. But based on this information - if I start to attack like mad and drive my attack # up to 2-3 times the number I was attacked, I will less probably be on others' list? That would explain many players' posts claiming top scorers rarely appearing on attack lists

This should definitely be treated asap imo

[R1ck]

Sparton: just had a battle vs Gmacs team and his visions removed beneficial effects from all my toons, that is not ok. I can make a video if you want to show you that Take is triggering more than intended but I assume you have a test team. Again I did won the battle but that is not the point, also The Prisoner passive is being applied more than intended, 50%. I do use one but still I think is not ok.

[HomemLivre]

Thanks for your quickly reply about all of concerns, Sparton.

I'll discuss this more with Kaz, but he did point out to me that Visions Eddie is mostly utility and largely no damaging capabilities. It's just now that his utility is a lot more reliable.

Overall, we have a lot of single target remove beneficial effect options in the game (and added more with this update), and we felt for Visions Eddie to shine, he needed to have some form of AoE removal instead of trying to buff his single-target removal, which is why we went the direction we did with Take.

Also, it's 50% from all enemies, so against 4 enemies, on average 2 will lose buffs, not 3 or 4. There's as much a chance of 3 or 4 losing their buffs as there is 1 or 0.

Thats what I understand while playing with/against the Visions, no damage (really, 800 damage first turn?) and avarage 2 buff removes.
Noticed while defending against a Visions: (1 time 3 buffs remove / 7 times 2 buffs remove / 4 times 1 buff remove / 4 times 0 buffs remove)

Again, thanks for your reply.

Cheers.

[BenjaminBreeg]

I use Visions:
That beneficial effects of 1 are removed seems to me way more often than of 3, of 4 I remember once and of 0 I remember 5 times.
What I want to say with this: it is 50% and I feel it's OK. For you the times where more were removed will be better in mind than times where less than 2 were removed, simple psychology...
I think visions became first time useful, and as Sparton told, he doesn't really deal damage...

[slauki]

That's a legitimate concern, but comparing potential 100% stun rate for a basic attack to potential 100% freeze rate for a 6 power skill is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. In addition, we have new things like the Harpy passive and Immunity talismans, and in the future, we'll have other kinds of passive effects (on characters and on talismans) that could make relying on 100% freeze rate very, very risky. Obviously, if we did overtune we'll have to revisit, but we feel that because the power cost is so high and the proliferation of anti-CC methods is rising and continuing to rise, this will help with making the character appealing (as opposed to benchwarming material).

okay, fair arguments, i don't know what the future will bring, but imagine the following situation from today:

Visions Eddie, Alliance General, Pruple Troll (or red ABB) and blue Rescuer

you go first: AG will steal power 105% of the time (lol). So we have 7 Power from the start. Visions will remove the beneficials from 3 chars on avarage and blue rescuer will stun this guys 100% of the time for 2 turns. I tested it and it works damn good. When they enemy can act again Visions Eddies Fury will make them stunned again. Okay you need a specific setup, but this is pretty badass OP i think Even when going 2nd this is a win situation >97% of the time if you use it against appropriate teams. For me this is completly broken. and it doesn't matter that visions doesn't do that much damage in this case...

[HomemLivre]

okay, fair arguments, i don't know what the future will bring, but imagine the following situation from today:

Visions Eddie, Alliance General, Pruple Troll (or red ABB) and blue Rescuer

you go first: AG will steal power 105% of the time (lol). So we have 7 Power from the start. Visions will remove the beneficials from 3 chars on avarage and blue rescuer will stun this guys 100% of the time for 2 turns. I tested it and it works damn good. When they enemy can act again Visions Eddies Fury will make them stunned again. Okay you need a certain setup, but this is pretty badass OP i think Even when going 2nd this is a win situation >97% of the time if you use it against appropriate teams. For me this is completly broken. and it doesn't matter that visions doesn't do that much damage in this case...

Hey Slauki, this is a nice combo, indeed!
Did you face Prisoner teams with this team of yours?

[gmac]

Soooooooooo.... correct me if I'm wrong. But based on this information - if I start to attack like mad and drive my attack # up to 2-3 times the number I was attacked, I will less probably be on others' list? That would explain many players' posts claiming top scorers rarely appearing on attack lists

This should definitely be treated asap imo

Hi everybody, here goes my stats so far this week, for ratio comparison and matchmaking purposes.

Never saw any top 10 on my list this week so far, currently 5th

Attacks: 463
Defenses: 172

The differences between rations are remarkable, something that needs to be addressed.

Having said that, It is also tough staying up there early during the week, 20 points per any loss and 12 for every win is also unbalanced.

Good luck devs balancing both issues