PDA

View Full Version : Season 6 State of balance?



Buggy.Blaster
09-05-2018, 09:37 AM
Can anyone link this? or has it never been released to the public due to the 70% win rate of Concs? Please let me know if there is one, I can't find anything newer than season 5.

Also, is there a place to see the current popularity of characters picked? I would like to see what the warden percent played right now is. My real guess is somewhere in the 30-40% bracket at least for 1v1 and 2v2. It feels like there are too many wardens running around here. Please people play some other characters too before I get too bored of facing only Wardens :D

Charmzzz
09-05-2018, 09:50 AM
There is a similar Thread from last week. Answer of Mods was: not ready.

Several people had the same thoughts as you: they do not want to show us the ridiculous Winrate of Conq in Duel in S6. Or that Raider, LB and Kensei are still the Top Dogs in Dominion. Or that the PK Rework dropped her below 50% Winrate in all Modes. Maybe they are still figuring out how to present this to us in a way that it looks like it was all planned and is fine. ;)

Klingentaenz3r
09-05-2018, 10:42 AM
really growing impatient on this one

David_gorda
09-05-2018, 12:09 PM
There is a similar Thread from last week. Answer of Mods was: not ready.

Several people had the same thoughts as you: they do not want to show us the ridiculous Winrate of Conq in Duel in S6. Or that Raider, LB and Kensei are still the Top Dogs in Dominion. Or that the PK Rework dropped her below 50% Winrate in all Modes. Maybe they are still figuring out how to present this to us in a way that it looks like it was all planned and is fine. ;) lol, zerk Warden gladiator s tier in duels, zerk Warden s tier 4vs4. Pk balanced across the Game modes finally :D

Tyrjo
09-05-2018, 05:05 PM
They are probably going to release it when they can release fight updates in conjunction to those heroes who are either too high or too low.

ArchDukeInstinct
09-05-2018, 10:29 PM
I hope Conqueror is first place in duel but is at a 54% winrate as that will agitate Anti-Conqs the most. And then we can see the conspiracy theory they have change from "they're hiding the stats on purpose" to "the stats are rigged"

DefiledDragon
09-05-2018, 10:51 PM
I hope Conqueror is first place in duel but is at a 54% winrate as that will agitate Anti-Conqs the most. And then we can see the conspiracy theory they have change from "they're hiding the stats on purpose" to "the stats are rigged"

I'm not "anti conq" but he is what I consider to be a broken character. He's like Centurion in that he's a one trick pony, making him both boring to fight and boring to use. Unlike Centurion however, it's almost impossible to punish Conqueror even if you dodge his bash and that needs to be changed.

NHLGoldenKnight
09-05-2018, 11:56 PM
I am not pro Conq but it is interesting how hero such as PK ( just as an example ) can be top tier for many seasons and as soon as Heavy gets to be top tier for just a short time now, outrage is worse than that for PK or any other assasin.

ArchDukeInstinct
09-06-2018, 12:16 AM
I'm not "anti conq" but he is what I consider to be a broken character. He's like Centurion in that he's a one trick pony, making him both boring to fight and boring to use. Unlike Centurion however, it's almost impossible to punish Conqueror even if you dodge his bash and that needs to be changed.

Sadly Anti-Conqs just get in the way whenever you try to advocate buffing Conqueror's other offensive options to be at least decent while degrading shield bash even though it's a no-brainer. That's why I call them Anti-Conqs, because they don't want a win-win situation, they want a free-win situation that they got accustomed to pre-season 5.

DefiledDragon
09-06-2018, 01:12 AM
Sadly Anti-Conqs just get in the way whenever you try to advocate buffing Conqueror's other offensive options to be at least decent while degrading shield bash even though it's a no-brainer. That's why I call them Anti-Conqs, because they don't want a win-win situation, they want a free-win situation that they got accustomed to pre-season 5.

Well I would welcome a rework for Conqueror. I like the look of the character. Played him, only to rep 1, but found his kit way too limited. They need to drop the infinite chain and give him some actual chains with finishers and an unblockable that he doesn't have to spool up for a month. Oh and nerf the shield bash so it's at least punishable on dodge by every other character.

bannex19
09-06-2018, 03:50 AM
Well I would welcome a rework for Conqueror. I like the look of the character. Played him, only to rep 1, but found his kit way too limited. They need to drop the infinite chain and give him some actual chains with finishers and an unblockable that he doesn't have to spool up for a month. Oh and nerf the shield bash so it's at least punishable on dodge by every other character.

I take it you haven't played the new reworked conq yet huh?

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 07:42 AM
lol, zerk Warden gladiator s tier in duels, zerk Warden s tier 4vs4. Pk balanced across the Game modes finally :D

Oh boy, you got so much wrong...

1. Warden got his Rework later (S7), he wont be anywhere near the top in those Stats.
2. Gladiator had a 45% Winrate in Duels in S5 -> they did not change anything about him back then (and even now only veeery minor things).
3. Zerk is not S-Tier in Dominion. Top 3 will be Kensei, Raider and Lawbringer again cause nothing changed about them.
4. PK was massively nerfed and plenty of other Characters were buffed. Dominion Winrate will be under 50% due to how low her Damage is and Duel, maybe, just maybe, she will be around 50% due to Console players. On PC though, definitely under 50%.

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 07:45 AM
I hope Conqueror is first place in duel but is at a 54% winrate as that will agitate Anti-Conqs the most. And then we can see the conspiracy theory they have change from "they're hiding the stats on purpose" to "the stats are rigged"

Your dream would come true, wouldn't it? But what if, just if, Conq is still at 60% or even higher? What will be your arguments then about him being "totally fine"? ;)

NHLGoldenKnight
09-06-2018, 08:00 AM
Better question will be, what if he did drop down to 54-56%? Should he still get nerf to put him in line with others when it comes to shield bash recovery?

And if so, how much would he realistically dropped down without getting something in return?

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 08:02 AM
Better question will be, what if he did drop down to 54-56%? Should he still get nerf to put him in line with others when it comes to shield bash recovery?

And if so, how much would he realistically dropped down without getting something in return?

You are asking a "better question" without answering the first one. Nice smoke bomb throwing, we had that in the other thread already... Answer my question and I will return the favor.

NHLGoldenKnight
09-06-2018, 08:23 AM
I can't answer your questions unless you can tell me how much would he drop down if he gets nerfed? Because if his shield bash is such op tool as many claim to be, then it would hurt him a lot if removed. So instead of 60% he could end up at 40%. After multiple seasons of being pretty weak hero, it is not something Conq mains deserve. They don't deserve to have too much, I agree on that as well, but something must be offered in return.

E1seNw0Lf
09-06-2018, 08:25 AM
The message is clear enough - There is no balance. https://static-cdn.jtvnw.net/emoticons/v1/70433/1.0

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 08:32 AM
I can't answer your questions unless you can tell me how much would he drop down if he gets nerfed? Because if his shield bash is such op tool as many claim to be, then it would hurt him a lot if removed. So instead of 60% he could end up at 40%. After multiple seasons of being pretty weak hero, it is not something Conq mains deserve. They don't deserve to have too much, I agree on that as well, but something must be offered in return.

Making SB punishable on a correct read would, my personal estimate, drop him by 5-10%. It is still a good tool being a 500ms Bash from neutral with guaranteed Damage. We are only complaining about the Recovery, nothing else...

I cannot take the argument serious that because a Character was low for a very long time now deserves to be OP for a certain amount of time. That's exactly the same argumentation about PK which has been too strong for a long time now deserves to be bottom to "compensate". It is ridiculous and pathetic to even think about this and then calling for "balance" in the same sentence.

NHLGoldenKnight
09-06-2018, 08:42 AM
It is ridiculous for you because you are probably playing mostly as PK so you are being biased. For those who were stuck with Conq, it is a poetic justice. :p

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 08:49 AM
It is ridiculous for you because you are probably playing mostly as PK so you are being biased. For those who were stuck with Conq, it is a poetic justice. :p

"Stuck with Conq" -> why that? Just play something else.

I am rarely playing PK anymore, she is just too bad against all the other Reworked Characters. And even before her Nerf I played other Characters, namely Warden and Gladiator. I recently picked up Zerker to have something viable when I have to deal with a Team full of Conqs, Raiders, Kenseis and Highlanders.

I am not "biased" on an unpunishable and abuseable move. These just should not be in the game. PK had a similar thing: Zone Spam within Revenge was pretty much an "I win" Button. Even though I never used it, I knew it was possible and had to be removed. Now Conqs come in saying they want to keep a broken move because they "deserve" it? How biased is THAT!? ^^

NHLGoldenKnight
09-06-2018, 09:02 AM
Well, did you ask for PK to be nerfed?

Charmzzz
09-06-2018, 09:11 AM
Well, did you ask for PK to be nerfed?

Actually yes. I have asked to nerf the Revenge Zone Spam, like others. I have also asked for the Release Warden 50/50 Bash to be removed or changed, even though I played him. It is not about the asking anyway, it is about understanding how a move works and if / how it is punishable by others. That's why I think Conq SB, Highlander Kick/Grab and WL Headbutt should be changed.

Buggy.Blaster
09-06-2018, 10:57 AM
I'm actually quite sure the conc is over 60% from where the devs said he was before and this is why they are hiding the state of balance season 6. please just show us the stats UBI!! we already know the conc is broken, just show us the stats un changed for the public and just let us know when the conc nerf is coming. So tired of losing elo to a conc thats a whole league below me but can still win due to the lack of skill needed to spam this conc bs. and to the guy who defends conc in every post, literally the same one guy who thinks conc is in a good spot..there is no conspiracy, conc has already been proven to be op and needs a tune down. learn to play with an actual hero thats fair and balanced and then u can stop defending the conc. no reason to waste your time defending him, the nerf will and must come!! SHOW US THE STATS S6!!!

ArchDukeInstinct
09-07-2018, 03:15 AM
Your dream would come true, wouldn't it? But what if, just if, Conq is still at 60% or even higher?

My dream? No, but it will be highly amusing nonetheless. My arguments will remain the same as they never revolved around winrates to begin with.


What will be your arguments then about him being "totally fine"? ;)

I never said he was totally fine. What I have said is that shield bash is punishable by side dodge GB, which is a fact and needs to be restated because people keep lying and saying that it is not.
What I've also said is that while shield bash is effective and highly annoying, the rest of Conqueror's offensive options are bad, which is a fact as well. Infinite light/heavy chain? It's worse than Aramushas and we know he sucks. Charged heavy? That's a joke. Soft feint into shield uppercut? Dodge attacks will beat it which is ridiculous. The light openers are just Lawbringer's except lower damage of course. I provided some ideas on how it could be changed to nerf shield bash while providing some other decent options but all the Anti-Conqs mysteriously disappeared from the thread despite asking for the ideas in the first place. It's almost as if they got called on their bluff or something.


I am not "biased" on an unpunishable and abuseable move. These just should not be in the game. PK had a similar thing: Zone Spam within Revenge was pretty much an "I win" Button. Even though I never used it, I knew it was possible and had to be removed.

Wow Charmzzz, you're such a paragon of impartiality trying to get Conqueror's only effective offensive nerfed to the ground due to duel win rates while simultaneously scapegoating PK's roughly equivalent duel win rates onto a niche situation that won't even happen in the vast majority of duels.

Charmzzz
09-07-2018, 07:47 AM
I hope Conqueror is first place in duel but is at a 54% winrate as that will agitate Anti-Conqs the most. And then we can see the conspiracy theory they have change from "they're hiding the stats on purpose" to "the stats are rigged"


My dream? No, but it will be highly amusing nonetheless. My arguments will remain the same as they never revolved around winrates to begin with.

Wow Charmzzz, you're such a paragon of impartiality trying to get Conqueror's only effective offensive nerfed to the ground due to duel win rates while simultaneously scapegoating PK's roughly equivalent duel win rates onto a niche situation that won't even happen in the vast majority of duels.

Oh yeah, I can see that your arguments "never revolved around winrates". You joined the discussion with a suggested Winrate, now trying to throw a smoke bomb again?

If his only effective offensive tool is a broken OP move, that is pretty sad for Conq, but it does not negate the fact that the move is broken OP. On PK: she had a 58% Duel Winrate in S4, 57% in S5 -> then she received massive Nerfs because this Winrate is too high. Now you come in and say that a 60% Winrate Conq needs his broken OP move? Why does he NOT deserve Nerfs when he even excels PK's Winrate by a pretty large amount?

Every move on PK that was too strong was nerfed. Zone, Dodge-Attacks, Recovery, Damage on Lights and Heavies. Where is the scapegoat? She received plenty of Nerfs due to her Winrate, but Conq does not need tuning? Biased af...

Buggy.Blaster
09-07-2018, 08:06 AM
Arch is delusional about the conq. the pk zone was op but it was actually possible to hold your block to the right to disarm it. the conq bash is ridiculous, it can't safely be dodged and its super safe. just no reason to have a move like this in the game. its game breaking and simply not fun. No reason to argue it being op or not because its 100% getting nerfed which means its OP. who cares about win rates, conc wins way too much and is way too broken. the nerf is coming and u concs who think your good at the game are going to actually have to use skill like the other classes. incoming cute snark comment from the arch.lord.....cant wait!

ChampionRuby50g
09-07-2018, 08:07 AM
Lo and behold, the day I actually agree with Charmzzz has come.

ArchDukeInstinct
09-08-2018, 04:42 AM
Oh yeah, I can see that your arguments "never revolved around winrates". You joined the discussion with a suggested Winrate, now trying to throw a smoke bomb again?

I said I hoped it was 54% so we could see the meltdown from Anti-Conqs as they formulate new conspiracy theories. I never said anything about it proving shield bash wasn't broken.


If his only effective offensive tool is a broken OP move, that is pretty sad for Conq, but it does not negate the fact that the move is broken OP.

Where's all these decent offensive options? Charged heavy? A lower damage version of Lawbringer's light openers? 500ms combo lights that still do 13 damage? 800ms shield uppercut that doesn't even catch a lot of dodge attacks? Shield crush that takes half of Conq's stamina and doesn't even guarantee damage?

We'll just be back to turtling and Anti-Conqs will be back to complaining that Conquerors only turtle.


On PK: she had a 58% Duel Winrate in S4, 57% in S5 -> then she received massive Nerfs because this Winrate is too high. Now you come in and say that a 60% Winrate Conq needs his broken OP move? Why does he NOT deserve Nerfs when he even excels PK's Winrate by a pretty large amount?

Let me guess, the first thing you thought upon seeing Peacekeepeer's season 4 win rates was "Wow, these chumps in the top 2.5% need to learn how to put their block on the right"?

On a more serious note, there was 5 seasons of Peacekeeper dominating in duel and so far there's only one season where Conqueror has a high winrate after being garbage for the rest and yet you act like there's equal amounts of evidence for both to be nerfed. So "biased af" indeed.

Furthermore, season 5 introduced a lot of changes including the parry nerfs, 3 major character reworks (which of course included Conqueror), and 2 smaller character balance passes. So I don't think it's really that odd that there's some abnormalities. And don't forget that Conqueror even had an exploit on his shield bash for the first week that basically allowed you to infinitely shield bash someone into OOS or off a ledge. So yea season's 5 win rate alone is not exactly the most fair metric.


Every move on PK that was too strong was nerfed. Zone, Dodge-Attacks, Recovery, Damage on Lights and Heavies. Where is the scapegoat? She received plenty of Nerfs due to her Winrate, but Conq does not need tuning? Biased af...

And none of that came from you, all you did was complain how you thought Peacekeeper was actually an underdog simply because they didn't have an unblockable and that all you have to do is "block right" and Peacekeeper is somehow unable to do anything..And then to top it off you turn around and pretend Conqueror will be just fine on the offensive front with his 600ms lights. Okay, dude.

ChampionRuby50g
09-08-2018, 04:51 AM
When seasons go for 3 months are you are using one week off those 3 months to state that the stats wonít be fair is plain wrong. 2 months and 3 weeks of stats is plenty of time to balance out that one week.

Thereís no way Conq will be below 55% win rate, probably will stay around 60% which clearly indicates something needs to change, wouldnít be suprised if it was over 60%. Conq needs his SB nerfed, but does need something else to balance that out. Doesnít excuse the fact heís got a broken move, and that move needs to be nerfed regardless.

Tyrjo
09-08-2018, 08:20 AM
When seasons go for 3 months are you are using one week off those 3 months to state that the stats won’t be fair is plain wrong. 2 months and 3 weeks of stats is plenty of time to balance out that one week.

There’s no way Conq will be below 55% win rate, probably will stay around 60% which clearly indicates something needs to change, wouldn’t be suprised if it was over 60%. Conq needs his SB nerfed, but does need something else to balance that out. Doesn’t excuse the fact he’s got a broken move, and that move needs to be nerfed regardless.

Everyone talks about the SB only to forget his Zone attack, which also is broken.

Buggy.Blaster
09-08-2018, 09:24 AM
hes prob closer to 70% to be realistic here. And the devs won't really say a word i guess. rip

ArchDukeInstinct
09-08-2018, 10:37 AM
When seasons go for 3 months are you are using one week off those 3 months to state that the stats wonít be fair is plain wrong. 2 months and 3 weeks of stats is plenty of time to balance out that one week.

Thereís no way Conq will be below 55% win rate, probably will stay around 60% which clearly indicates something needs to change, wouldnít be suprised if it was over 60%. Conq needs his SB nerfed, but does need something else to balance that out. Doesnít excuse the fact heís got a broken move, and that move needs to be nerfed regardless.

They're 10 weeks long so just one week alone is already 10% of the stats skewed but sure there's going to be absolutely 0 effect from it because you said so.

You also conveniently ignored all the examples of major changes that happened during season 5 constantly destabilizing everything but that seems to be a reoccurring theme here.

ChampionRuby50g
09-08-2018, 10:52 AM
They're 10 weeks long so just one week alone is already 10% of the stats skewed but sure there's going to be absolutely 0 effect from it because you said so.

You also conveniently ignored all the examples of major changes that happened during season 5 constantly destabilizing everything but that seems to be a reoccurring theme here.

Youíve forgotten to take into something called ďthe averageĒ into account.

ArchDukeInstinct
09-08-2018, 11:05 AM
You’ve forgotten to take into something called “the average” into account.

I haven't forgotten anything, chump. The average will gradually pull down the abnormalities but it's not going to completely get rid of them, especially when at least 10% of the results are affected.

ChampionRuby50g
09-08-2018, 11:27 AM
I haven't forgotten anything, chump. The average will gradually pull down the abnormalities but it's not going to completely get rid of them, especially when at least 10% of the results are affected.

Righto, bucko.

Iím sure the developers have live stats they are looking at and for each period of the season when they make changes. So they would have seen how Conq was performing after they removed the exploit compared to when he had it. So they can make a more accurate stat sheet than just by taking everything over a 10 week time period.

Klingentaenz3r
09-08-2018, 04:23 PM
this is getting out of hand.

can't we just wait and morne more about the fact that we still don't have the numbers? Devs.--. hello? Anybody home?


https://media.giphy.com/media/xUySTSlQhmoVMGNamI/giphy.gif

ArchDukeInstinct
09-08-2018, 10:58 PM
Righto, bucko.

I’m sure the developers have live stats they are looking at and for each period of the season when they make changes. So they would have seen how Conq was performing after they removed the exploit compared to when he had it. So they can make a more accurate stat sheet than just by taking everything over a 10 week time period.

Jeez "bucko", it looks like your story changed. It's almost like your argument fell apart or something. What a shame.

Anyway, this is nothing more than just an assumption on your end and again failing to take into account any of the other reasons I stated because nitpicking just one supporting point out of multiple and then failing to rebut even that one is just your style I suppose.

ChampionRuby50g
09-09-2018, 12:37 AM
Jeez "bucko", it looks like your story changed. It's almost like your argument fell apart or something. What a shame.

Anyway, this is nothing more than just an assumption on your end and again failing to take into account any of the other reasons I stated because nitpicking just one supporting point out of multiple and then failing to rebut even that one is just your style I suppose.


Nah ďchumpĒ, I just added another chapter to it. But if your too dense to see how that works, should I even bother explaining that to you?

Not just my end, Iíve seen others on this forum suggest and agree that the developers would 100% have live stats on how their game is performing. After all, would you expect a AAA game studio to not have that? My story still is that the stats would take into account everything thatís happened over the season and reflect that in the blog post. That never changed. Iím under no obligation to respond to your reasons, as I was responding to you saying how 1 week of an exploit is going to screw the stats and how I disagree.

UbiInsulin
09-09-2018, 01:15 AM
Pls no more "bucko" and "chump."

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6ZsZWkJ2DSXabrb2/giphy.gif

Still no ETA on the State of Balance article. Keep in mind it's been a little busier lately with the Open Test, as well as Gamescom and PAX being back to back. :)

ArchDukeInstinct
09-09-2018, 02:19 AM
Nah “chump”, I just added another chapter to it. But if your too dense to see how that works, should I even bother explaining that to you?

Oh yes Champion, dummies like me just can't grasp your 10th dimensional chess moves wherein you repeatedly claim that 10% of the stats being skewed will have no effect on the overall result because "it'll just average out" as you would so elegantly put it. Then you immediately trash all of that "reasoning" by saying "well that part of the stats just ain't in there at all anymore". So I guess just disregard all of your previous posts then, right?


Not just my end, I’ve seen others on this forum suggest and agree that the developers would 100% have live stats on how their game is performing. After all, would you expect a AAA game studio to not have that?

Well duh they have the stats. Nobody's saying the stats don't exist. What I was calling an assumption was that they would go in and trim 10% of the sample size off. There's 0 evidence that they actually did that.


My story still is that the stats would take into account everything that’s happened over the season and reflect that in the blog post. That never changed. I’m under no obligation to respond to your reasons, as I was responding to you saying how 1 week of an exploit is going to screw the stats and how I disagree.

LOL @ "I'm under no obligation to respond to your reasons". That's the saddest cop out that I've ever read.

ChampionRuby50g
09-09-2018, 03:43 AM
Oh yes Champion, dummies like me just can't grasp your 10th dimensional chess moves wherein you repeatedly claim that 10% of the stats being skewed will have no effect on the overall result because "it'll just average out" as you would so elegantly put it. Then you immediately trash all of that "reasoning" by saying "well that part of the stats just ain't in there at all anymore". So I guess just disregard all of your previous posts then, right?



Well duh they have the stats. Nobody's saying the stats don't exist. What I was calling an assumption was that they would go in and trim 10% of the sample size off. There's 0 evidence that they actually did that.



LOL @ "I'm under no obligation to respond to your reasons". That's the saddest cop out that I've ever read.

And thereís 0 evidence to suggest that 1 week of an exploit is enough to keep Conq at 60% win rate.

Why would I respond to something thatís not relevant to what Iím talking about at the time? Iím talking about that one week of exploit, and youíre throwing in ďa whole seasons worth off changesĒ like itís a part of what Iím talking about. Do you really think that the developers would also consider a exploit that wasnít intended in their end of season stats too? Because I have a hard time imagining that they would include that.

ArchDukeInstinct
09-09-2018, 05:26 AM
And there’s 0 evidence to suggest that 1 week of an exploit is enough to keep Conq at 60% win rate.

Champ is back to his previous failed argument for whatever reason.

I'm not saying it's responsible for all 10 points over 50 or that the win rate without being skewed would even be 50. However, it could easily sway a few points overall. As an example, let's simplify it down to single digits. 5 points (50%) for 9 weeks and 8 points (80%) for 1 week with the exploit ongoing. The average would be 5.3. Even though it was only 1 week, that's at least 0.3 (3%) shifted overall. So no, it doesn't just get "averaged out", there's clearly a decent shift from even only one week.


Why would I respond to something that’s not relevant to what I’m talking about at the time? I’m talking about that one week of exploit, and you’re throwing in “a whole seasons worth off changes” like it’s a part of what I’m talking about.

Because the overall point is that Conqueror having a 60% winrate in just one season alone isn't as reliable as a justification for nerfing as PK dominating from season 1 to season 5. Especially when there were so many large changes during season 5 and an exploit occurring during 10% of the season's duration.

Sure you can just ignore all of that but don't complain about being called out on nitpicking because that's exactly what you did.


Do you really think that the developers would also consider a exploit that wasn’t intended in their end of season stats too? Because I have a hard time imagining that they would include that.

Wow an argument from personal incredulity.

Klingentaenz3r
09-09-2018, 06:26 PM
Pls no more "bucko" and "chump."

https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6ZsZWkJ2DSXabrb2/giphy.gif

Still no ETA on the State of Balance article. Keep in mind it's been a little busier lately with the Open Test, as well as Gamescom and PAX being back to back. :)

Thanks Insulin for shooting that info towards us. Please let them know we are eager to see whatever those numbers are. No sugar coating needed. :)