Spell Scaling Feedback Thread


#1188

There was actually a list of other outliers such as Jormungandr, a Mythic Vanguard who had flash freeze adjusted from 20% of base health down to 10% of modified health. So where most dragons need the 30% consumable to break even, and Pathox needs about a 47% boost to break even, Jormungandr now has to double his health to break even. But I guess that’s okay right?

Relative to other divines, Pathox is still an absolute monster. Axi isn’t magically better than Pathox now. Pathox performs at a higher level than it previously did unless you suck at the game. Name one dragon besides Oni that received such a massive buff you find better success with than Pathox. You can’t.

It’s not that hard to understand.


#1193

They do. They should also test the dragons properly before they are released so the dragons don’t require nerfs.


#1194

We (mods) can’t stop posts from being flagged, can only respond to them. I get flagged all the time. Just keep it constructive and we can overturn the flag.


#1195

Wasn’t meaning to accuse forum mods. It’s not a job I would want to have because it’s kind of a pain. I’m not of the correct temperament to constructively contribute to this discussion anymore so I’m out. :+1:


#1196

I dislike disorder and chaos on the forums so I applied for the position. And I read soooo much of the threads here, so it’s hard to hide from me :eyes:

As ModMat’s tag says: Be constructive, I’m watching you.


#1197

It’s like you’re not even reading what you’re saying. Let me say it another way.

IT WAS WRONG TO SCALE DOWN DRAGONS PEOPLE SPENT MONEY ON SO PG COULD MAKE ADD-ONS THAT COST MORE MONEY REQUIRED TO GET BACK TO THE DRAGON’S BASELINE.

Are you telling me there was no other way to implement spell scaling for these dragons? Perhaps a more complicated formula? Or a different way of coding?


#1198

It is much worse to scale down bases people spent more money on.

sooo…

-edit-
The nerf considers applied boost as well.


#1199

No argument here. The ploy was to make these add ons a pre-requisite. That is the problem. Whether you look at it from the base perspective or the dragon perspective, the end result is the same.


#1200

I’m usually the one saying they make it all about pre-requisites, mainly Atlas stuff, but this spell scaling is not one of those instances. Spells should have always been based off modified stats so this just made it the way it always should have been.
Since they had balance set for base stats and were changing to modified stats they had to nerf spells and knew boosts that everyone can obtain the amount of would counter it.


#1201

Divine mythics that i had spent my rubies that i could have spent elsewhere is nerfed.

Definitely not satisfied.

But the nerf wasnt direct, as in “pathox is too op. NERF!” It was in an indirect manner to balance out the performance between dragon types.

So yeah, i am not satisfied with it. But i can accept this kind of nerfs.

Flew pathox some times in atlas, still seems a good dragon to fly.

Tbh i was a little worried that it would be trashy after the nerf. Thank god it still isnt. XD

Edit: but then i see some spells became a little too OP now. I wonder what pg will do about them and how long it will take for them to move their fat asses to make that change.


#1202

These OP spells, other unpowered spells, and others that shouldn’t have changed but did (War Cry) are the ones we need to look into and get off this Pathox train.

Will need to take a look if said spells really are OP or not as with base to modified things like % of a high warriors HP is going to change substantially pre to post, but that’s the way it always should have been. Not saying a spell ain’t OP but can’t just keep saying it’s OP or it’s NERFED blanket statements just because things have changed.


#1203

Oh im talking about the old spells becoming too OP after the mechanism change xD not the newer-ly introduced spells of newer dragons. X)

But to think of it after what u said, maybe it is okay…?


#1204

Any spell changed by spell scaling should be talked about here, new or old. Which spell are you referring to and why, if you want balance to be fixed, or keep it to yourself if you’d like things out of balance.


#1205

Actually, it was direct. After changing for spell scaling they went ahead and lowered the damage on crippling chill some more as a blanket fix for a problem that only showed at the highest level (being too OP). So relative to the other affected dragons he got weaker, particularly if you’re below Vanguard. The question is he still worth the 3 times more you spent for him? If so, good for you. For others, not so much.


#1206

Yeah reinstalling changes things in this case. Dunno why. I found that out when all the changes were applied. Each time needed a reinstall to apply the changes.


#1207

Balance for the PG bottom line perhaps. If you still claim that PG hat any other balance in mind, the Surt disaster would not be happening. All the information about game inbalance regarding Surt and spell scaling was provided to PG before the number game about the spell scaling started to play out here. The faction did provide enogh information ahead of time.

Also the issue is not just about Pathox.


#1208

I fully believe spell scaling was done with the intent of better balance to the game. Of corse any project they have, especially ones expensive in engineering time, they will try to recapture expenses and even turn a profit.

That being said the issue is highly complicated. Changes always have winners and losers. I don’t know that where it ended up isn’t best. I do think I would have done something to keep consumer confidence in the value of mythic divines. (That is to say I would have given current season sigils out to everyone who had gotten pathox, it likely would have had a net profit due to having two mythics again)

The change had to happen. But it could have been done better.


#1209

You are applying way too much logic. PG would never make a move like this, when the bait and switch of mythic divines keeps folks on the tread mill with nothing to show for it a few weeks into each new season. 7 weeks from now or sooner, Surt will be nerfed and there will be some other bright shiny dragon sitting on yet again the most expensive tab ever to purchase and folks will do it. Long term customer satisfaction is not a factor at play. :sob::sob::sob:


#1210

Pg has some very smart engineers, but just like all of us, they have their operating boundaries. I’d be surprised if anyone here hasn’t had to do what they are told even when they formally disagreed.

No doubt financial decisions are made that go against what engineering strongly advised.

Let’s not pretend the mobile market didn’t spawn originally to prey on psychology both of adults and children.

If I was guessing, I’d say that they are concerned about impacting this quarters profits which likely has a strong impact by projected sales of Sert. Not many noticed that Aristrat was significantly stronger than Oni pre-scaling. They have made sure we know Sert is the guaranteed win, must have dragon. And they made sure the bigger spenders spent on UVS first. (A dragon that may have in its own right been a game changer)

But that has nothing to do with Pathox. More likely Pathox is simply last quarter and no longer making them any money. Spell scaling definitely helps people who don’t spend much a lot more than big spenders who are already mostly as maxed as they can be. They aren’t selling more gear to spenders largely. And bases are far more profitable than dragons will ever be. (Which just took a nerf)

Pathox probably wouldn’t have suffered compared to other dragons had it been last quarter when spell scaling was performed. But it’s tbis quarter.

Feel free to disagree.


#1211

I’ve been in this situation more times than I would like to admit. It’s the most painful part of my job, when i fundamentally disagree with something but have to do it anyways.

I’m always trying to arm PG engineers with any information they need to fight for what i believe we are all on the same page for; aka trying to give them evidence from an outside source to assist them in letting the decision makers know what people are thinking. How successful i’ve been is up for question, but that’s what I always try to do when discussing topics with them.