One of the dumbest arguments to not nerf a creature

I have seen a lot of people saying that para tops shouldn’t get needed because of para lux and arctops which are extremely valuable.However if I were to apply that logic to apexs Cera and Hadros should not have been needed because they can take over 8 months to unlock,let alone maxing them up.There’s also albertocevia,who is made from Alberto dna,which is more valuable than arctops for some people simply because Alberto has only been out for lees than a year while arctops has been in game since it’s release/very early on in the game.

I guess I can continue this buying addressing something else someone brought up. @PheonixLord5017 ,who stated that rexy doesn’t need a nerf,because Ludia will nerf her to the ground/make her useless.I think the majority of people want rexys dominant roar and swap in nerfed,while the latter should be completely removed.What are your thoughts

2 Likes

The argument for Parasauthops not needing a nerf because its difficulty to unlock and invest in is very much a valid one on paper. However, when Ludia make new creatures and updates, they don’t care about pretty much any creature not many people are bringing up. Because of this, Parasauthops is better than creatures more difficult to unlock than it. No one’s making a thread about buffing Arctovasilas, making them believe it’s a good as players want it to be and therefore gets ignored, when in reality it’s getting powercrept and is worse than Parasauthops.

Another issue is that, when creatures need nerfing, Ludia often makes the nerf way too little or way too much. Refrenantem is still one of the meta’s top threats, while Ceramagnus got completely gutted during its nerf and became non-viable in in the time of its nerf. This in turn makes people want creatures not to be touched since Ludia could completely ruin the creature.

9 Likes

There was also a time when people went raptor hunting at nights to level up their Indoraptors. Bear used to be exclusive only months ago. Whatever ”valuable” means, it tends not to last.

3 Likes

It’s funny how many complained of Cera and its swap in but now defend Paratops and its even more broken swap in. How the times have changed.

While I enjoy swapping, I simply can’t defend ParaT. While it’s components can be hard to come by, it’s raidable, which makes it much easier to unlock and level. Therefore, the argument that it shouldn’t be nerfed due to the rarity of its ingredients really doesn’t hold water.

One way to keep it viable for both raids and PVP would be to remove the swap in or adjust it to a regular swap in strike with no armor or shield breaking. Even giving it swap in savagery would be an improvement (balance wise) over its current swap in.

And don’t get me started on the broken monstrosity albertocevia…that thing desperately needs a rework.

5 Likes

Buff Arctovasilas
Are you sure bout that…

1 Like

Tbf it was made before my initial post. Someone could’ve just seen my post and decided to make one because of it.

True, just thought it was a funny coincidence

1 Like

Just because something is hard to unlock doesn’t mean it does not need a nerf,para lux is pure tnt and arctops is not that hard to come by,if people used this argument for other creatures rexy shouldn’t get nerfed because of how difficult it is to unlock her f2p,

People should specify what needs a nerf,for para it’s the swap in,not the heals or anything else,I think Ludia just reads the title of any nerf threads and they just nerf random stuff

I’m guessing you didn’t read literally anything else I said in that paragraph, also Rexy was literally the worst example you could’ve possibly given because it was given for free to pretty much everyone. F2P players can already have this creature at lvl 22-23, which is definitely usable in Aviary.

There are several ways a creature could be effectively nerfed. It’s nearly impossible for all players to agree upon one nerf, as it will always have its benefits and flaws. Also Ludia isn’t gonna listen no matter what, and that’s been made obvious several times on the past.