I wish someone would nerf ludia like there nerfing everying else at the moment

The rate ludia are nerfing everyting is gonna end up with us all having proper weak dinos, not gonna be worth playing soon if ludia keep nerfing everything smh.

3 Likes

It all comes down to whether you want to see people complain about the fact that creatures are overpowered or complain about the fact that creatures are underpowered.

1 Like

Community doesn’t realize how much they influence the game. If you work on anything, do it on your own caution. I learned my lesson with monomimus back in the day. Every decision ive done since its nerf was because of that dino.

2 Likes

I’m not convinced we really do honestly. Most nerf requests go unfulfilled, and even those that are are HEAVILY requested, and even then Ludia checks the stats internally to see what they’re saying is true.

2 Likes

Like them or not, nerfs are just a neccesary part of balancing a game. Sure it can get annoying to see all the nerf requests on the forums, but the game would be exponentially more difficult to balance without nerfs.

5 Likes

They are nerfing because of the player base, we all are asking if they could nerf this or that because we want less challenge and when they do it nobody is happy

What? None of that is true, at least not for everyone. First of all, anyone who says Ludia actually listens to what the playerbase wants just makes me laugh. Even if they do, they’ve shown every time that they check their internal data before doing anything (meaning that any time they did nerf a dino that people asked to be nerfed, they were statistically correct to ask for a nerf - Ludia has to be the one to decide if nerfs are neccesary before adding them, NOT the players).

What part of that is players dictating the balance of the game entirely on their own? If I didn’t know better, it actually looks like a healthy relationship between the developer and players. Ludia takes in our feedback, but does their own analysis to confirm that our feedback isn’t unfounded.

People ask for nerfs because they want a balanced game, not because they’re lazy. A balanced game has more variety in the meta, and is simply more fun. When Ludia does get a nerf right (which is unfortunately few and far between with them; they tend to either overnerf or undernerf), people ARE happy because the game is more fun to play when a few creatures aren’t dominating all the others (practically requiring you to use them whether you want to or not). But that kind of a fun, balanced experience is what all players want, right?

“Get good” just doesn’t really apply in a game like JWA. You do improve over time, but only by understanding matchups better and leveling up your team - you can’t practice your aim like in a shooter, or improve your endurance like in a sport. JWA is actually a very rigid game. Every version of a particular dino has the same base stats, and many matchups will go a certain way almost every time: it gets to a point where some matchups are simply unbeatable no matter what you do. People asking for nerfs are really asking for the devs to fix the game, not because they’re lazy. I could just as easily say that people who don’t want nerfs just don’t want to lose their crutch dinos; but that COULDN’T be true, now could it??? :scream:

13 Likes

Ok, I might be false,

It’s down to people’s mind set. There will always be one or two dinosaurs that are the “meta”. So with any nerf like Cera and Lux tomorrow losing 200 attack or the equivalent of roughly 4/5 attack boosts each (essentially between 16k 20k green cash for those who but boosts)

All that will happen is people will work.out the next OP dino…so that one will become the new meta…that will get its nerf when people moan about that.

What people need to learn is to stop moaning. If you stop moaning then things don’t get changed. Then everyone is in the same boat with the meta dino…you can all get them if you put the work in.

But I believe its the lazy ones who moan the most. And as I’ve said in previous posts…if you haven’t realised that this game is in constant BETA test mode. You will be constantly disappointed when things change. And just do what many are doing…and retire…invest time and effort in a different game. As games should be fun not stressful

Well you are entitled to believing that. I just observed from a average neutral perspective. Sure some things take a while and some dont. As necessary as nerfs may or may not be, he should definitely level up everything with a precaution that i can be nerfed.

2 Likes

The thing is, the next “op” dino may not actually be op. Let’s say Dino A has a power level of 10 on a scale of 1 to 10, while most of the endgame dinos are at an 8. Dino B, meanwhile, is at a 9. Dino A being the “most op” dino is then nerfed to an 8. That makes Dino B the new strongest dino: but it’s power level is less than Dino A was (only a 9 vs 10), so the game is overall more balanced than it was. Maybe only 4 dinos were meta when Dino A was strongest, but now that a weaker dino in Dino B is strongest, maybe 10 dinos are meta. A more balanced meta breeds diversity in which dinos are viable, which makes the game more fun. As long as Ludia doesn’t overbuff any new dinos (which undoubtedly happens quite often), the game consistently improves.

And that’s the important bit. While isn’t fun to have a constantly changing meta and constantly needing to invest in new dinos, having a stale meta where every match comes down to the same handful of dominant dinos is perhaps even worse. It gets irritating to face the same nearly unwinnable matchups over and over again, and I’m sure some people quit for that reason as well as having to deal with meta shifts. What really doesn’t help is Ludia not offering boost refunds, since it makes meta shifts much more painful for players to deal with than they need to be.

Absolutely. If a particular dino seems to be carrying your team and most others, it probably is going to be nerfed. At the same time, players should NOT be faulted or punished for playing optimally (investing in the best dinos, which also happen to be the most likely to get nerfed). But that punishment really comes down to Ludia not offering sufficient compensation for neccesary balance changes (e.g. boost resets when op dinos rightfully get nerfed).

1 Like

I agree with your points. There is the odd occasion where the nerfs are too great. I agree there should be more scope for reshuffles…or even where people have invested in some dinos which are treated with a huge nerf…then a new dino comes out with one of the same fuse components that gets people wound up too.

There should be balance, so a couple of features I would vote for is maybe quarterly reshuffles of boosts. And even the possibility of de-levelling maybe for half dna back and maybe a percentage of coins back. But I know neither will ever happen.

I strongly believe though that apex should be the strongest range of dinos…and that new uniques shouldn’t come in which over power them greatly. If they are going to bring in a new op dino…it should have a new category and instead of raids…the dna should come from a dino already level 30 and excess dna from that dino. That would stop low level players gaining access to them and being carried. And making the low level arenas totally unbalanced

1 Like

I agree with your points here too. Better compensation is key for making a more dynamic (and otherwise balanced) meta like they’re going for here work, but they also seem to be exploiting these neccesary changes (from a balance perspective) to make a quick buck instead of curating a fair player experience.

Apex should be the strongest, as long as it isn’t the case that only apex dinos are viable. And I agree that a lot of problems have arise from Ludia introducing new dinos (CompC, Scorpius Rex 3) and buffing dinos (Skoonasaurus, Testacornibus) up to the Apex level when they really shouldn’t be. That’s why I prefer nerfing Ceramagnus and Hadros a bit to bring them more in line with the other Apexes instead of buffing all the uniques up to the Apex level.

Well I think a balance comes as apex never are used in weekend tournaments. So they are excluded there. Most raids strats don’t account for apex as they can only be used in other apex battles.

Of those apex which most of us have unlocked, ref being the newest and not everyone has, it’s only mortem and the occasionally gbax that have raid potential. Cera and lux aren’t really useful in raids. So the only position they have in the game is pvp. So me personally I believe they shouldn’t have been nerfed as they only have one role in the game.

Whereas some epic, legendary and uniques are more widely used throughout the whole of the game. In mutiple different tournaments, raids and when buffed and levelled correctly are viable choices in pvp. Its hard to see just yet where hasst Eagle, refer, and hydra will sit in the apex meta

1 Like

Well there’s balance in terms of use throughout the game like you’re talking about, but also balance within each aspect of the game. Example: lots of people say that Andrewsarchus is too strong, but that’s because of it’s tournament results: it doesn’t really translate to normal arena. So you kind of have to prioritize which aspects of the game to balance for regarding each individual dino. Using Magnus and Hadros as examples, I agree that they aren’t really used in raids (despite having some great team moves) and aren’t in tournaments, so they’re primarily used in arena. So with that being their main area of use, I would think they should mainly be balanced with arena in mind.

I too am very curious to see how the other apexes shake out in terms of strength.