It's time to balance Baze/Chirrut

"Varlie;c-1058851" wrote:
I didn't read the whole thread so I apologize if this has been brought up.
Nothing needs to be done to the characters as the game is always in progress and something will come by to make them obsolete (See every other meta over the past 1.5 years). Rey was not modded but she is rarely seen anymore. Sid was not changed (well he got better with a Zeta) but is rarely seen anymore. Biggs and Wedge were not changed but are becoming more and more rare in arena teams.

The game grows. Just because Chirrut and Baze are near the top now, they won't be for long. Something else will come along to knock them out of their lead.

Basically this.

But further, they cannot be considered "OP" because there are a *ton* of ways to beat them, and you don't even have to spend money to do it, or use them to beat them. Not sure what else to tell you, other than please stop asking for nerfs. Nerfs are never good. This game seems to be doing a good job of controlling power creep by reworking existing chars to also be good.

They won't nerf them anyway.

Soon, they will instead create a character that gives his whole team 30% TM whenever an enemy gains a HoT effet. And another one that heal his whole team for 30% of their health whenever an enemy counter-attacks.

Chaze will be out of the meta, whales will have new toys to spend money on and dominate Arena with.

Instead of a targeted nerf to make room for other teams, EA will create a P2P counter and everyone but whales will lose. Chaze will become useless and won't even be viable in top 100.

The meta will revolve around these new toons, diversity will decrease once again, and the cycle will go on.

And somehow most people here are OK with that.
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

"fascizio;c-1058910" wrote:

"JediGhost117;c-1058898" wrote:

"scuba;c-1058885" wrote:

"Gamorrean;c-1058861" wrote:

"scuba;c-1058796" wrote:

"Gamorrean;c-1058762" wrote:

"Dooku_for_days;c-1057982" wrote:
Is chaze very good? Yes. Are they unbeatable? Like anything in this game, far from it. They have many effective, F2P counters. To name a few: boba, nihilus, death trooper and anyone with a stun. I feel the people who make these threads believe chaze aren't F2P, which of course, they are. You can farm baze in shipments alongside his hard node and you'll unlock him pretty quickly depending on your crystal income.

Why is it guys like you don't get the point? Counters, counters, counters.. Like its your motto.. They do freaking too much? With Chaze in the game like they are, most of the new characters are gonna be wasted and forgotten.

A simple question I wanna ask about: Is there any character in game that makes you wanna switch out a maxed chaze? No, because those so called counters are bad on defence and chaze just Relax in a corner. They are the must lame and easy charcters to use in the game and FULL TEAM SYNERGIES should be more powerfull.. Which is why zMaul teams without chaze are not OP, they are great but still not an easy win..

Same could be said for the other side.
Nerf, Nerf, Nerf. Like its your motto.

Well, at least I don't spell it like that
I just hate that the devs went too far with them, when they could have done something less but still great with them.
But why eould whales want that? And isn't it you running full rogue one?

I am and I could really care less about this argument. I see my R1 team get beat by teams with out Chirrut and Baze all the time.

I like reading them for fun because no matter what it is the same arguments over and over and over and over and over. Guess what... more than likely nothing is going to be changed with them. There has been plenty of time to change/balance/nerf them and guess what it hasn't happened yet so most likely won't.

There will always be a nerf call for whatever the current flavor is, and it will always been an entertaining argument.

Some of them are warranted though. This just happens to be one that doesn't require a nerf as they are already balanced. I think the next one will be GK threads as he becomes more common.

Kenobi is already second on the meta report. Above Baze. Nihilis is first by a significant margin. If Chaze was a problematic as people contend neither of those things would be true.

Right but Nihilus was released to everybody for participation, whereas GK is a lot more exclusive, a word that Chaze nerfers hate. So I would assume that once they start coming up against GK they will start to whine about GK being OP and forget about Chaze

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

If it works, then it does. Look at Paragon. Aurora was flat out OP and they needed her damage and people stopped complaining. It's funny how when you do what the fans want they stop having reasons to complain about the game.

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

Lol what kind of advanced denial is that
That's how you end up as the only country not using the metric system.

"JediGhost117;c-1059000" wrote:

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

If it works, then it does. Look at Paragon. Aurora was flat out OP and they needed her damage and people stopped complaining. It's funny how when you do what the fans want they stop having reasons to complain about the game.

Never played that game, so can't say. But also, just because people complain doesn't mean it's a real issue. The forums (i.e. where people come to complain) is a very small percentage of the game's population in this game. Can't speak to other games, but I assume it's similar. The devs will have enough data to know whether something needs to be nerfed or not.

"Waez;c-1059001" wrote:

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

Lol what kind of advanced denial is that
That's how you end up as the only country not using the metric system.

So you would just have them do what every other game does for anything without any thought put into it then? Your argument is that Bobby jumped off the bridge, so I should too, because that's the best decision?

"Waez;c-1059001" wrote:

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

Lol what kind of advanced denial is that
That's how you end up as the only country not using the metric system.

So you would just have them do what every other game does for anything without any thought put into it then? Your argument is that Bobby jumped off the bridge, so I should too, because that's the best decision?

What a terrible analogy. You can't just say that it's "jumping off the bridge because someone else jumped".

Every single competitive game uses nerfs because:

- Nerfs balance gameplay and make things more enjoyable for everyone. This creates diversity for players to choose from. It allows more possibilities, more play styles, more GAME. Because that's what a game is about, fun, using different characters and strategies, always trying to perfect your skills.

- Nerfs prevent power creep. If you say there's no power creep in SWGOH, then I admire you, because you can reach a level of denial that I didn't even know was possible.

I honestly don't know how you can say that nerfs are a bad thing and that every single competitive game is wrong. I really don't know.

"Waez;c-1059039" wrote:

"Waez;c-1059001" wrote:

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:

If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

Lol what kind of advanced denial is that
That's how you end up as the only country not using the metric system.

So you would just have them do what every other game does for anything without any thought put into it then? Your argument is that Bobby jumped off the bridge, so I should too, because that's the best decision?

What a terrible analogy. You can't just say that it's "jumping off the bridge because someone else jumped".

Every single competitive game uses nerfs because:

- Nerfs balance gameplay and make things more enjoyable for everyone. This creates diversity for players to choose from. It allows more possibilities, more play styles, more GAME. Because that's what a game is about, fun, using different characters and strategies, always trying to perfect your skills.

- Nerfs prevent power creep. If you say there's no power creep in SWGOH, then I admire you, because you can reach a level of denial that I didn't even know was possible.

I honestly don't know how you can say that nerfs are a bad thing and that every single competitive game is wrong. I really don't know.

You make a lot of assumptions here. First of all, I didn't make the analogy, you did. You say that because "every other competitive game" (which I doubt, by the way) uses nerfs for balance, SWGOH should too. That is literally the same thing as the bridge jumping.

But, to your specific points:

- Maybe they don't make it more enjoyable for everyone. In this game, you had to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to get Chaze up and running. To then turn around and nerf those characters would make the game much less fun for the portion of your playerbase that is funding your game. Further, you don't need Chaze to beat Chaze. I have zero problems with Chaze, and do not have them. Sounds like I used some strategy and skills for that, eh?
- I never said there is no power creep. 100% there is. A little further up I mentioned that I think that's the correct way to handle it. New characters are released, making previously requested nerfs irrelevant, and then they rework existing characters to keep things in line. So far it seems to be working just fine.

And really, I never said that every single competitive game is wrong. Nerfs in this game, as has been previously well documented, are bad. Which is my entire point in the bridge jumping analogy. Just because someone else is doing a thing, does not mean that is the best thing in every situation. Sometimes it is, but you can't just go "oh, hurr durr, they do it let's do it too!"

"StarSon;c-1059046" wrote:

"Waez;c-1059039" wrote:

"Waez;c-1059001" wrote:

"StarSon;c-1058995" wrote:

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:

If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.

Just because other games do it, doesn't mean it's the best solution.

Lol what kind of advanced denial is that
That's how you end up as the only country not using the metric system.

So you would just have them do what every other game does for anything without any thought put into it then? Your argument is that Bobby jumped off the bridge, so I should too, because that's the best decision?

What a terrible analogy. You can't just say that it's "jumping off the bridge because someone else jumped".

Every single competitive game uses nerfs because:

- Nerfs balance gameplay and make things more enjoyable for everyone. This creates diversity for players to choose from. It allows more possibilities, more play styles, more GAME. Because that's what a game is about, fun, using different characters and strategies, always trying to perfect your skills.

- Nerfs prevent power creep. If you say there's no power creep in SWGOH, then I admire you, because you can reach a level of denial that I didn't even know was possible.

I honestly don't know how you can say that nerfs are a bad thing and that every single competitive game is wrong. I really don't know.

You make a lot of assumptions here. First of all, I didn't make the analogy, you did. You say that because "every other competitive game" (which I doubt, by the way) uses nerfs for balance, SWGOH should too. That is literally the same thing as the bridge jumping.

But, to your specific points:

- Maybe they don't make it more enjoyable for everyone. In this game, you had to spend THOUSANDS of dollars to get Chaze up and running. To then turn around and nerf those characters would make the game much less fun for the portion of your playerbase that is funding your game. Further, you don't need Chaze to beat Chaze. I have zero problems with Chaze, and do not have them. Sounds like I used some strategy and skills for that, eh?
- I never said there is no power creep. 100% there is. A little further up I mentioned that I think that's the correct way to handle it. New characters are released, making previously requested nerfs irrelevant, and then they rework existing characters to keep things in line. So far it seems to be working just fine.

And really, I never said that every single competitive game is wrong. Nerfs in this game, as has been previously well documented, are bad. Which is my entire point in the bridge jumping analogy. Just because someone else is doing a thing, does not mean that is the best thing in every situation. Sometimes it is, but you can't just go "oh, hurr durr, they do it let's do it too!"

So we're circling back to my first point, which is that power creep is worse than nerfs.
Everyone but whales lose.

Instead of having a new, healthier environment where Chaze were nerfed and we had more room for diversity, EA creates counter toons that end up as the only viable option.

Look at R2: People put him in Rex teams to counter ZMaul. That doesn't prevent ZMaul from shitting all over every other team.
By introducing R2, they actually reduced diversity.

Anyway I'll just copy my previous post because I feel like I'm just saying the same things all over again.

"Waez;c-1058975" wrote:
They won't nerf them anyway.

Soon, they will instead create a character that gives his whole team 30% TM whenever an enemy gains a HoT effet. And another one that heal his whole team for 30% of their health whenever an enemy counter-attacks.

Chaze will be out of the meta, whales will have new toys to spend money on and dominate Arena with.

Instead of a targeted nerf to make room for other teams, EA will create a P2P counter and everyone but whales will lose. Chaze will become useless and won't even be viable in top 100.

The meta will revolve around these new toons, diversity will decrease once again, and the cycle will go on.

And somehow most people here are OK with that.
If you think nerfs are bad in a game, take a look at, I don't know, every single competitive game out there.