What Hero Change Would You Rather Have Implemented?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandalhat

My question to you was simple:

In a game developed by a successful company such as SC, do you play the game fully expecting them to change the stats of one of the units that deal the highest dps into one that has one of the lowest?

Bear in mind that the hero rebalancing only came out more than one year since the release of heroes.

---

The idea that they would change heroes into level 1 barbs is ridiculous but well within their power. This will never happen so it leaves it purely hypothetical.

I expect them to act in the games best interests, and it is their sole discretion what is in the best interests of the game. If I do not agree, I will voice my displeasure in a thoughtful and respectful manner, hope for resolution and then if unsatisfied I will discontinue my use of their services. Hanging around, being nasty, rude or mean spirited looks too much like a jilted lover who can not accept it.


No answer expected, but can you satisfy my curiosity, did you leave rising or just lunar?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BandOfBandits

You really, really, REALLY sound like you have a business and/or legal degree and are paid to speak on behalf of Supercell.

---

I sincerely hope that Coathanger is not a lawyer RL, for his own sake.

He clearly doesn't know much about the law, and is making things up as he goes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coathanger

The idea that they would change heroes into level 1 barbs is ridiculous but well within their power. This will never happen so it leaves it purely hypothetical.

---

They did change the BK to a melee troop that is worst than a PEKKA. So, not exactly a level 1 barb, but close. A giant maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coathanger

No answer expected, but can you satisfy my curiosity, did you leave rising or just lunar?

---

I left rising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandalhat

They did change the BK to a melee troop that is worst than a PEKKA. So, not exactly a level 1 barb, but close. A giant maybe.

---

The stats, functions or abilities do not equate to worse than a PEKKA or equal to a giant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandalhat

It's hardly hating. SC's intention for us to spend more gems is clear as day especially with the latest hero nerf.

The chain of events for Heroes are as follows:
1) Introduce heroes, 30 levels
2) Add 10 more levels to heroes
3) Add new ability for both heroes
4) Reduce heroes average hp, average dps, changes heroes' abilities, changes the way Rage Spell works on heroes, etc.

When did you think they started to realize heroes are imbalanced? If it is anywhere before Stage 3, it is clear that they are trying to swindle money from players because they continue to make them OP (to attract players to gem them) while having intentions to nerf them in the future. If they realized it only after Stage 3, they should probably fire the entire team of testers.

---

the point is what they did is wrong.
+2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben1234

I missquoted i was responding to this; "Sorry OP, but I think SC does not care about any feedback which is given to them for their game on this forum. There has been many threads stating unhappiness due to lack of loot/bad hero update/not enough loot in Clan Wars. All ignored". That's a more unreasonable comment than his second post

---

Why is my comment unreasonable? It is a statement, SC asks for feedback, when they get approximately 80% of negative feedback for Loot (December 13 update) and heroes nerfs (latest update) they ignore it and move on. My earlier comment does not slate SC, I am just saying how it is. SC is the developer of this game and can do what it likes to it (and they do) but I do think it is funny that they ask for feedback then ignore it.

I think since December they are more focused on their revenue than our enjoyment of the game. SC is a commercial company and needs to generate profit for its shareholders, I wish some of this forum would realise this.

They are not developing this game due to their kindness of their hearts. SC generating profit is a good thing, it employs people and they can reinvest to drive the game onwards and upwards. But there is a very fine line between "generating as much profits as they can from their customers" to "driving their customers away due to decreased enjoyment of the game and lack of trust".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by S3an

Why is my comment unreasonable? It is a statement, SC asks for feedback, when they get approximately 80% of negative feedback for Loot (December 13 update) and heroes nerfs (latest update) they ignore it and move on. My earlier comment does not slate SC, I am just saying how it is. SC is the developer of this game and can do what it likes to it (and they do) but I do think it is funny that they ask for feedback then ignore it.

I think since December they are more focused on their revenue than our enjoyment of the game. SC is a commercial company and needs to generate profit for its shareholders, I wish some of this forum would realise this.

They are not developing this game due to their kindness of their hearts. SC generating profit is a good thing, it employs people and they can reinvest to drive the game onwards and upwards. But there is a very fine line between "generating as much profits as they can from their customers" to "driving their customers away due to decreased enjoyment of the game and lack of trust".

---

And for several top players, they crossed that line this update. The reports of refunds from apple is intense right now, I have never heard of such masses claiming refunds from this game before in my entire Clash career. That is clear evidence they messed up this time.

Whether they man up and do it, or just basically say "screw the top players, our new players will replace them".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gallantblade

Whether they man up and do it, or just basically say "screw the top players, our new players will replace them".

---

SC had already made it clear that they don't give a damn about top players.

Of course they didn't have their CEO specifically say those exact words, instead they have SC forum representatives sugarcoat it with words like "fixes that only benefit less than 1% of players", "not being considered at the moment", "continue to monitor the situation", "not our highest priority" etc etc.

Well, looking back, we can say SC did really well. Most of the gamers are happy with the new Heroes and the Hogs nerf because they are not OP anymore. They were OP because SC wanted them to be OP. They baited people to gem them and nerfed them (several times for Hogs).

Conclusion ? SC can continue to release OP troops, wait for a lot of people to gem them and then nerf them, while gamers will still be happy because those troops wouldn't be OP anymore. People don't realize that it was SC's fault in the first place if the game was unbalanced.

The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.

Why not?

okay, maybe not exactly...

I'd like to see the regen time decreased, i currently have to wait 2 hours for my heroes to recover (feel for those with level 40 heroes) maybe not quite halved but a bit of help would be great!

As for the heroes stats i think they are pretty good, but I think a slight boost would be good, especially considering the cost and time it takes to get decent heroes.

lastly, I'd love to see some tweaking done to their defensive AI. I actually didnt mind it when they could be lured and smashed in the corner but maybe simply having their radius follow them rather than be based only on thier altar would be better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lloopy14

I would however like her to be slightly more intelligent - what's the point of invisibility if neither her nor the archers she generates attacks the defence that is killing her? And why, given the completely free choice of taking out an archer tower or an air defence, does she chose the thing that can't harm her? Why did she completely ignore the cannon and run to the other side of the base to target something else. argh.

On the king I have no comment. I used to kill him before easily - 5 more levels up I can still kill him just as easily!

---

^^

Queen AI seems to be worse now in general.

SC should make the Queen and her archers automatically switch targets onto a defense turret that is damaging her.

If there is more than one defense turret damaging her, the Queen should target the defense that is doing the most DPS to her. She's a hero -- she should be smarter than normal units.

I would rather see the regeneration time halfed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duvangrgata1

Would you prefer heroes

a) Be changed back to their old selves or:

b) Have their regeneration time halved?

Please leave your opinion and reasons why you chose what you chose below. Thanks!
-Duv

---

What I want to see is my offensive troops treat the opponents heroes as they would any other defensive unit. Ridiculous that a queen can sit there and pot shot my meat troops and they won't attack her until all the defensive buildings have been mowed down. If heroes are supposed to be better defenses now, let my troops treat them as such.