@C0ntr1v3d said in Hack and Corruption Nerf:
I really wish that changes were thought through completely and implemented holistically rather than in a scattergun thought-bubble fashion. I grow tired of the continual dissatisfaction seething through the community, much of which could be avoided or reduced by adequate planning and impact analysis.
I agreed with this statement 100%. Far too many changes and adding in new functionality that is not tested or mapped out. A simple flowchart, use-case testing would go a long way . The changes really need to slow down - we would much rather have one set of new monsters a month that are all 100% tested and maybe one new feature every 3 months than this mess. At this point you can't even call it a game - it's just a complete mess. Look at PVP - mess. Look at wars with maxed diamond relics vs teams with zero relics - mess. Look at new monsters - mess.
@C0ntr1v3d said in Hack and Corruption Nerf:
The costs involved in this game are too high to make experimental changes. If a player spends USD 120 for a ranked Hackster (assuming maximum discount on both monsters and gems: 225x18÷1700xUSD50), it is entirely to be expected that radically altering the reason for buying it (a couple of months after making a change that prompted its purchase, no less) will provoke outrage. If the prices were 1/10th of what they are then there is considerably more lattitude.
Couldn't have said it better myself - if i paid even $10-20 for my full rank Hackster and Glitch - I wouldn't be nearly as concerned. That's the part that I feel keeps getting lost in these disagreements.
Drastically lower the prices of the game then by all means feel free to A/B test on your end users.
In my opinion it would not have been hard to test Undertaker against the all the possessors - could have been narrowed down in an hour as to what worked and what didn't against his trait and then performed the required development needed to make his trait as described. Now they are taking a shortcut and saying oh lets change 6-12 month old monsters cause its a quick fix for Undertaker. Not good.
Prior to 5.8 update these changes should have been 100% nailed down it seems like someone had an idea in a meeting, sounded good, implemented then work backwards trying to fix - then rolled 6.0 on top of it. I think most of us are getting very concerned about QA, development and testing procedures - most of this stuff is not complex programming - it's updating some key value pairs in a database.
Any talk of a new feature right now and I'm extremely concerned.
We can argue about whether Hackster is too OP or not but i would first look at the nemesis monsters before jumping on the little rodent. The main debate here I think is the principle.