Valiant Force Forum

I get that it seems like Sven Zerk is totally unviable. But perhaps you need to look harder to see how you can still maximize his strength. We didn't stomp him into the ground! I promise!

How to maximize his strength? If Sven gained the same amount of ATK boost similar to other Berserker heroes, then maybe he would be more viable. But seriously, he's useless now in PvE. Even if they somehow increase the ATK boost, if the pet dies beforehand there would be ZERO opportunity to cast the ATK buff. Still essentially useless.

The developers should really do some internal testing prior to making sudden changes. Everyone was open to discussing the Valiant changes so at least people had a say on what could be done, changed, or improved upon, but by making this unnecessary and clearly reckless change without giving us a thought about it, well, looks like they've just upset most of the user base judging from the recent feedback. I'm already having flashbacks with the Summoner nerfs, that was an equally absurd move on the developers as well.

The thing is, these nerfs were supposed to only affect PvP. Why didn't the developers THINK of applying them in a PvP setting only, instead of gutting him on everything? 
The biggest irony here is that he's still very strong in PvP. It's so obvious they didn't test it out beforehand.

It took me 1 hour to figure out that a lifesteal slave negates the entire fucking debuff. How's that a major nerf in PvE? They obviously left the backdoor open in PvE while restricting his output in PvP. You probably need to do testing before slamming them. Everything that doesn't go your way is absurd, but someone else is happy. The difference is, the happy ones don't speak up and the devs are left with the unhappy players, basing their judgment on you guys. Why do you think Sven was nerfed in the first place? Go scroll through the forums and read. 

It took me 1 hour to figure out that a lifesteal slave negates the entire fucking debuff. How's that a major nerf in PvE? They obviously left the backdoor open in PvE while restricting his output in PvP. You probably need to do testing before slamming them. Everything that doesn't go your way is absurd, but someone else is happy. The difference is, the happy ones don't speak up and the devs are left with the unhappy players, basing their judgment on you guys. Why do you think Sven was nerfed in the first place? Go scroll through the forums and read. 

Hi guys! 

The nerf in Sven for PvP is to prevent him from killing EVERYTHING in one turn while retaining his explosive nature.

The "unintentional nerf" in PvE... I need to say this. Did you guys really think we didn't test it out...... There is a way around it, it's just not conventional. 

Sven and Talissa's nerf is not slight or minor rebalancing. It is clear destroy of those heroes main functionality. Sven became useless in PVE because of suicidal pet and Talissa in PVP.
I am new player and sven berserker is my main and the only the force in event actions. I was able to clear master in last event using Sven. But now I can't. I have only 3 valiants - Lucielle, Shizu and Darrion. Will they replace my Sven - NO, any way to quickly get Freya - NO way. Do I have plans to get the Gwen - after Sven's nerf - NO.
I am losing the trust into this game company.

Why can't you guys understand the meaning of "Be it slight or minor nerf, AS LONG AS SOMETHING IS TAKEN AWAY".

Can you guys please stop the selective reading? The main point is not the slight or minor, it's the one in BOLD.

Hi Jayle, actually sorry to say this but, you are the one that needs to be corrected. When someone use the phrase "be it..." it usually follows up with 2 different scenarios. The problem comes when you use "be it..." and follows up with "slight or minor" which in my vocabulary technically means the same (or close to the same) thing.

If you were using the phrase/context correctly, your sentence is basically saying that you think the changes are slight AND minor.

I'm not selective reading here.

I agree with Revenance that the nerf was totally unintentional - i.e. they planned to nerf Sven in PVP but instead, the nerf did basically nothing to him in PVP (5 hits by the pet in PVP still means certain death to a few units), but instead hurt him in PVE unintentionally.

Hi guys! 

The nerf in Sven for PvP is to prevent him from killing EVERYTHING in one turn while retaining his explosive nature.

The "unintentional nerf" in PvE... I need to say this. Did you guys really think we didn't test it out...... There is a way around it, it's just not conventional. 

Hi guys! 

The nerf in Sven for PvP is to prevent him from killing EVERYTHING in one turn while retaining his explosive nature.

The "unintentional nerf" in PvE... I need to say this. Did you guys really think we didn't test it out...... There is a way around it, it's just not conventional. 

If you really tested it out, then you would have probably realized by now that Sven's nerf barely did anything to his prowess in arena. That -20% hp aura is BASICALLY NOTHING. He will still kill everything he targets or at least heavily damages them.

Now the issue here is that why did you guys think making a change that would affect PvE such a good idea? You guys don't realize that you're killing squad diversity by making him completely dependent on specific squad set-ups? And if this was really your intention, then perhaps you should have made it clear in the first post that you didn't want Sven to be trigger happy by himself, at least then the complaints would go over how ridiculous the change is and how it's killing squad diversity rather than how it's not supposed to happen.

Why can't you guys understand the meaning of "Be it slight or minor nerf, AS LONG AS SOMETHING IS TAKEN AWAY".

Can you guys please stop the selective reading? The main point is not the slight or minor, it's the one in BOLD.

Hi Jayle, actually sorry to say this but, you are the one that needs to be corrected. When someone use the phrase "be it..." it usually follows up with 2 different scenarios. The problem comes when you use "be it..." and follows up with "slight or minor" which in my vocabulary technically means the same (or close to the same) thing.

If you were using the phrase/context correctly, your sentence is basically saying that you think the changes are slight AND minor.

I'm not selective reading here.

I agree with Revenance that the nerf was totally unintentional - i.e. they planned to nerf Sven in PVP but instead, the nerf did basically nothing to him in PVP (5 hits by the pet in PVP still means certain death to a few units), but instead hurt him in PVE unintentionally.

Well isn't my two scenarios presented to you??? "Slight and minor nerf" is 1 scenario and "anything taken away from you" is another scenario? Aren't this two different scenarios for you to compare? "Anything" doesn't contain a definite value. Slight and minor have a minimal value. When you compare an indefinite value and a minimal value, you can't say it's the same. 
Have you totally miss the "Anything taken away from you" instead of just "Slight" or "minor" or "SLIGHT or MINOR". 
As for nerfing Sven being unintentional, well I can't tell you how to relate it. But have you ever for ONCE thought about replacing your Sven for something else? If not, then I don't have to explain anything because that's the intention and you without anything to replace, will always disagree because you won't bother to find an alternate to retain your scores. 
It's sad, really. To see the players looking at scores and ranking base on damage just like how companies in Singapore always look for paper qualification. Try asking them to look at experience or something else but no, it has to be that paper qualification, that piece of paper.