"Refund this, refund that" fiasco of 1.5

Sooooo…

People that abused Stegodeus and / or Monomimus now complain that they apparently need coins and / or DNA refunded because their OP dinosaurs aren’t OP anymore.

OK. But by that logic, them, the players should refund trophies, incubators, strike event rewards and tournament rewards won by those said dinosaurs.

For real. This is not how this works. You make and investment and you reap the benefits. That is exactly what people were doing. Then, when it no longer benefits you, you can’t just demand your resources back and jump straight into the next “super milking” investment.

When did that ever worked that way, when you could just trade away a no longer high-profiting investment into a top-profiting investment without costs / penalties? Oh wait, never…

People need to get a grip. They abused the best dinosaurs, reaped rewards for it, now their overpowered dinosaurs are no longer overpowered. Though, they are still usable… If you want to abuse the next big gun, invest in it.

Like, for real. You made a choice, an investment into using a clearly broken dinosaur. Noone forced you to do so. But now take the consequences of your own decision and learn to deal with it.

13 Likes

Thats why devolving at a cost would be an option right?
Also, when this is the way it works, why is it abuse?

Seriously though, way too many people start hating on people because they were hating.

2 Likes

Because it is annoying like high hell people think they are entitled to… Well, anything when they clearly got so much goods out of a badly balanced selected few dinosaurs.

Devolving dinosaurs would defeat the purpose of the game. You are supposed to go further, adapt, evolve. Not just jump the gun on like only 8 dinosaurs.

If you could devolve things, you could reach a point when you only need to stack coins and the moment a balance change hits, you devolve everything you used before and pump up the next best dinosaurs.

People who evenly spread their resources should triumph in the long run in these kind of games, cause meta hardly ever affects them. Meanwhile people who only abuse OP characters on the short run shall triumph, then fall short on the long run.

And that is exactly what is happening. Short-term investors are paying for their choice finally while long-term investors finally have the edge. Everything is working as intended.

6 Likes

I agree on your logics, but under different circumstances.
In a free market with many people pushing and pulling this works fine, like gold.
When 1 party decides what the balance is and makes mistakes with consequences, they are sued for manipulation etc.

If gold plummets in a free market because of falling demand, its the risk you took.
If you buy it at a store with wrong info, you’d go back.

all of this wasnt really my point however.
When people respond emotionally to whatever, establish a connection to them, they will calm down.
educate them about wiser choices next time (erlidominus) for example.

The hate-cycle will only grow stronger if people feed it.

1 Like

My end goal is have each legendary and unique at least at 25+, so i can swap teams whit future metas whitout losing team power

4 Likes

This is not a free market world since it’s made by Ludia and Ludia is the one who handle this.

It’s the way game is working. If something is too strong they have to adjust it.
We can only pray they don’t make too many mistakes but it will happen again because even if they test it, few beta tester is not the same than tons of people playing the game h24. We will find default that they can’t find (see every other game with balancing issues it’s the same no matter how many tester they have)

Not exactly. There is no guaranteed investment in this game sinc ethere are too many variables. And there is a point in the game where you need to level your legendaries over 20 if you want to compete.
I would rather say “latecomer short coiners are paying the price for following the hype too late and be left without coins”

My stegodeus is 30, my monomimus is 25 (only because I stacked mono long before update to prepare for this) and I’m just going to level up other dino if they are stronger and replacing them if they are proven to be not stronger enough anymore. I’m not paying any price since they allow me to reach the top and I have some top dino contenders ready to get the spot (tryo , tryko…)

2 Likes

Im not saying its a free market, just stating the same rules dont apply @quakeur

I’m not really into mobile games b4 JWA, n it’s the first mobile game I have put in serious time n money on a consistent basis, I consider myself a casual gamer, n for me, I usually go into a game without considering abt risks to how a game changes over time. So this is new for me as well, n I can understand how ppl feel when a product changes after u have “bought it”.
Its akin to say I buy SF5 game, a few mths later capcom says OK bcoz Zeku is not a popular char, so they gonna remove it from the game after update 2.5.
I’m exaggerating the scenario a bit, but for those players who have learnt to use Zeku, I can imagine they will feel a sense of unjust, as they did not consider such games require risk considerations in the first place in terms of learning char movesets.
So the risk consideration mindset is not in place for such gamers (me included)

All in all, perhaps such disclaimer can somehow be made known to gamers in the first place? Esp for those new to such games.
Sorry for long post.

Edit: I believe capcom make small changes to char movesets, though generally it is addition rather than subtraction, like adding extra v skills,if I’m not wrong?

1 Like

JW Alive is more similar in that regard to MOBA games like SMITE, League of Legends or skill based character games like Overwatch.

Now even there kits change, buffs and nerfs happen. They don’t just refund you if xy is nerfed and you have been spending money on said characters (like skins or in LoL’s case, runes)

1 Like

I am not at all in agreement with the initial message of this post. I am not one of those who have complained about nerfs or buffs. Some benefit me and others hurt me but I’ve always thought there should not be nerfs or buffs. Doing that is changing the rules of the game.

You complain about people with big tanks or monomimus but these people only played with the rules of the game and decided, that is, played as they should play. Changing the rules of a game halfway through is not fair. I hate the monominus, I wish it did not exist, but when I had to decide between Monomimus and Monostegotops I had to decide according to the rules of the game and comparing both creatures it was evident that I had to merge Monomimus. And I did that. Now in half game the rules are changed, nerfs Monomimus and Buff Monostegotops and my decision is possibly not correct. It does not affect me too much because my rivals had Monomimus stronger than mine but I understand that there are people angry and disappointed with the game.

I keep saying what I have said many times. There should be neither buff nor nerfs and especially in those cases where there are two branches of different hybrids. To make a Buff of, for example, Blue or Brachiosaurus does not affect too much (except for those who in a weekly event prioritized other options) but to make Buff or Nerfs of hybrids that have two different branches does not only mean to have wasted coins, but also implies having wasted DNA that costs a lot to collect.

If a creature was created too strong (example Monomimus) what they can do is create a new creature with specific characteristics that can make it a good Counter of Monomimus, but not changer monomimus.

Said all the above and repeating for the umpteenth time that I do not like nerfs or buffs and I consider them unfair, I think this time at least they have done with good judgment.

1 Like

Problem is, not fixing a mistake, but making a specific thing to cover up the existing mistake is called rubberbanding. If you keep doing that, sooner or later the whole game becomes a hot mess with impossible to do balance and powercreep levels higher than the Moon.

Many games attempted this and vanished in the abyss of being forgotten, it never works. Fighting fire with fire, OP with OP results in a forest fire that smolders the innocent bystanders and ultimately demises the game as nothing remains but ashes.

1 Like

Same thing happens in Hearthstone.
That sparked a more serieus debate about ownership of digital content, im curious to see what will come out of this debate.

1 Like

Well, the solution is very simple. Do not do anything. If you think Monomimus is too strong, just learn from the mistakes and do not make the mistake again. Monomimus is strong but everyone can have one.

2 Likes

image

3 Likes

100% agree. Am I sad clown cause I feel monomimus got way too brutal nerf? Yes I am, cause it was my only great indoraptor counter. Do I feel like I should get some coins back cause I invested in monomimus or stegodeus? Nope, that is just the way how these games work.

2 Likes

After update 1.6 everyone will ask refunds on Bleeders that they have levelled up. No…?
:thinking::rofl:

If these kind of things don’t happen, then, who are going to buy coins? Great way of making money from the game.

Just a thought. Some said balance are needed in the arena. After this update, Bleeders will swarm the arena. However, the new dinos to be introduced none of them are immune (I suspected based on the ingredients). So, where’s the counter balance?

Don’t nerf the bleeders if they get out of hand.

Just give all other dinos immunity :ok_hand: