Why is APEX weaker than unique?

So top 10 creatures used by the top players are 10 uniques. There are 0 APEXes in the top 10. The only strong ones were Hadros & Cera and they got nerfed so bad last patch that they got swapped out for uniques.

@Ludia_Developers is this intentional? If so, what is the point of having an APEX class?

5 Likes

Less use does not mean weak or overpowered, let’s draw a Testacornibus and Mortem rex together?

11 Likes

Why? Because the bulk of the players are in the Aviary or Library. Many of them didn’t bother to raid, so they started complaining that Apex were beating their Unique (even if it takes one year to make an Apex, and often just a few days for some players to make a Unique). Ludia listened to them by nerfing Apexes and giving them new Uniques that can beat them (so some of those players can pay for them and get those quickly, bringing extra cash to Ludia). Now, we just have to find a new name for the Apexes, because it’s silly to call them Apexes when they are no longer top of the food chain.

38 Likes

Explained perfectly.

1 Like

Less use amongst top players means its weaker. Top players are benching Apexes because they cannot compete with the strongest uniques.

13 Likes

Or things literally jsut came out and the top are play testing? You give me each of the new creatures at team level and see what happens over the course of 2 weeks. Lots of swapping around and possibly boost changes.

8 Likes

Woah that was perfect

1 Like

Maybe but i know the apexes had a little nerf but the main thing is they added straight up counters to them

Can you remember one other update where the top players have totally dropped Apexes (since they became available) to do some “play testing”… Yes, they love new dinos, and yes, they can afford to test them, but never did it until now, by flushing Apexes to make spots for them…

4 Likes

@real_gambler has explained this perfectly

3 Likes

The new uniques are more of a problem in my opinion. Players don’t like it when new dinos are bad, so they had to make them strong in order to get a good reception at launch. Every new unique since Compsocaulus has been this way. They also buffed a few uniques like Testa and Skoona up to this level. Now the Apexes (or at least Hadros and Magnus) did need to be nerfed: they were outperforming everything else (Magnus for instance was basically on 100% of teams, and NO dino should be a must-pick). Plus this wasn’t Ludia giving in to complainers: they looked into these dinos themselves, and their own internal data suggested that they were in fact too strong.

But now that means that the uniques that were made so strong are now stronger than the Apexes. But it’s these uniques (and only these uniques, not the enitre rarity) that are out of line, NOT the Apexes.

That’s just the thing. You only have 8 spots, and currently it happens that a few uniques were overtuned so they’re the best 8 choices right now. It doesn’t mean the Apexes are bad, or even worse than the unique class as a whole. It just means that some uniques are stronger than they should be.

8 Likes

Well the Apexes have never been nerfed before, so no.

Those top players should give Ref a shot. It’s actually underrated

1 Like

Well, they often make any new Uniques literally overnight, if not, in a few days. But even if many are saying that Apexes are too easy to make, the best those guys can do right now is a level 26 Ref (that’s what’s so nice about Apexes, things are even across the board, in fact, guess what, mine is 26 as well!). So, as good as it is, currently, there’s better Uniques. On top of that, I’m guessing in the next few months, we will see more of it, at level 29 or 30, and then most players will ask for a nerf, so why invest into it… It’s only an Apex after all, so it should not be better than Uniques.

3 Likes

Remember Pouka? Could not have been worst when it came out. We all had a good laugh when it came out, but nobody went crazy about the fact that it was bad. Nobody started yelling, nobody said they would quit the game.

Only reason dinos are so OP since Compso, is the fact that it’s making money for Ludia, not because players were mad because they came out with a bad dinos. And if nobody is complaining about that, then we truly have a problem…

5 Likes

Thats completely correct too, and money is absolutely a primary motivator for them. They make more money if we actually want to invest in these dinos. But the important thing here is the effect of Ludia making a bunch of extra-powerful uniques, not the reason why they did it.

2 Likes

@real_gambler We’ve gone back and forth on this before. Your narrative is generally correct, but I don’t think you’re really telling the full story, or at least not emphasizing the right elements. I think we both agree that at least some Apexes are definitely weaker than some uniques (particularly ones that fulfill similar roles), and that this is a problem. The question is, are the Apexes too weak, or are the uniques too strong? That’s where I think we disagree. I maintain that the Apexes (or at least the Apexes in question, Hadros and Magnus) are generally fine, but the problem is that certain uniques are still too strong.

For one, the Apexes needed to be nerfed, or at least Magnus and Hadros did. Magnus was doing far too much swap in damage, and an increase in vulnerability didn’t help. It was used on basically every team. The meta clearly revolved too much around it. Hadros was a bit more balanced, but it was still capable of one-shotting one of its biggest would-be counters in Mortem, which was a big problem. And again, Ludia’s own data confirmed that these two were a problem. Now I think Mortem gaining vulnerability immunity did more to help that matchup than anything else. But the rest of the kit changes are more of a rework than an intended nerd. Ludia gave Hadros deceleration for more variety, and in exchange the attack lost some damage, which I think is a fair trade. Give Hadros Cleansing Decelerating Strike so it can beat distraction and a small damage buff and I think it would be fine. Frankly though, it’s GOOD that Apexes aren’t towering over uniques anymore (though they should still always be worth putting on your team). No one wants only 7 dinos to be viable in the endgame. It’s much better to have an endgame meta of the 7 Apexes AND the 32 uniques, but unfortunately (and probably deliberately) Ludia removes dinos from the meta as quickly as they add them.

Additionally, the actual nerfs they got weren’t that bad; not enough to drop the dinos from your team. Magnus only does slightly less damage on a swap in and overall. Hadros lost perhaps a bit too much attack like I said before, but got a reworked kit that should on paper be just as good otherwise - it still has medium resilient counter and a rampage after all. These nerfs don’t strike me as enough to explain the drop in usage we’ve seen.

So if the changes to the Apexes themselves not only were warranted, but also don’t explain why these Apexes are losing favor, what does? It has to be the influx of new, strong uniques. These new uniques are the only uniques that ARE actually better than the Apexes, not the entire unique rarity. There was a time when Procerathomimus was better than pretty much every legendary, but that didn’t mean that legendaries were worse than epics as a whole. No matter the reason why they did it, if Ludia had not introduced or buffed certain strong uniques, we would not be in this situation right now. The problem isn’t that they nerfed the Apexes, it’s that they didn’t finish the job by nerfing the power-crept uniques as well. I don’t even think CompC or Scorpius are too strong (at least right now). It’s really just Testa and Skoona (who happen to directly compete with Hadros), Phorurex (who directly competes with Magnus) and Indotaurus. Since you only have 8 slots, you really can’t fault players for using these dinos, but that doesn’t mean that the Apexes are bad, or even worse than uniques when you compare them to the class as a whole.

4 Likes

Yeah. And if they want a Ref nerf, we can always argue on its poor resistances

@Mudkipz First I always value your input a lot!! (probably already told you that in the past) That being said, yes, I always expect a couple dinos from a lower class, to show in their upper class. That’s a great thing about the game. Quite often, those are easier to make, so it does give a chance to newer players to have fun with some strong dinos. But almost overtaking the whole upper class? Why would you use Cera when Monolorhino is better. Why would you use Mortem when Indotaurus is better, why using Hadros when Testa is better, and the list goes on. Is there room in the team, when the other spots can be filled with Phorurex, Skoona, Grypo, Compso, Scorpius, Spino, Antarc, etc… All those dinos can hold their ground against Apexes. I love diversity, but if everybody goes: “well it’s fine, it’s good for the game” then this game will only be good for those with big wallet. It used to be: Top 100 players had huge wallets, but now, you find them in the Spheres, and expect them soon in lower arenas. By then, it will be too late to complaint about what Ludia is doing right now.

3 Likes

If the standard at which the strength of a creature was determined solely by the teams the top ten players have, absolutely no one would be using anything other than what they have.

Hadros, Mortem, and Ceras are all incredibly common in the lower ranks of Nublar Shores and everywhere in Gryosphere. And if your opponent draws a fast Mortem and you don’t draw a decent Cunning creature (or a Cunning-Fierce) OR a faster Mortem that can one-shot the opposing Mortem, you can pretty much kiss any chance of victory goodbye.

1 Like