The_Valeyard wrote: daibar wrote: I still think that an appropriate nerf to Thoress would be to change the value of charged tiles: Make them 2X AP, 4X Damage as opposed to 3X AP & 3X Damage. It'd greatly reduce the effectiveness of Power Surge, slightly increase the chance that the opponent can escape from perma-stun, and make damage easier to understand. Match 3: 1 charged tile -> damage 167% -> 200% normal match 3 2 charged tiles -> damage 233% -> 300% normal match 3 3 charged tiles -> damage 300% -> 400% normal match 3 I disagree. 4or is slow to get started. This the new spin on the old build up of thor red, then yellow, then green. Instead, it's match until you can cast PS; then, try and build up AP. However, unlike the 2* and 3* versions, these tiles are open to either side to match. A player can cast PS, but the AI can match tiles, and let's face it, of the two, the AI is more likely to get a cascade and really clean up. The problem seems to not be with the AP, but either the PS followed by Smite move. So even if the chargers were worth less AP, the move is still as potent as before. Lessening the AP from the chargers would soften the drawback of creating charge tiles. I'm not sure at this point after reading the thread how the balance should go. Clearly, 4or is 4* and should remain top tier after the changes (sorry detractors, but it's true). However, her combo needs to be reeled in some as well (sorry other detractors, but it's true). In the TAT PVE, I beat the 395 C Mags/Hood time after time like it was nothing using 4or/IM40/OBW. That should not happen. So hopefully the balance either makes both sides happy, or both sides unhappy.
daibar wrote: I still think that an appropriate nerf to Thoress would be to change the value of charged tiles: Make them 2X AP, 4X Damage as opposed to 3X AP & 3X Damage. It'd greatly reduce the effectiveness of Power Surge, slightly increase the chance that the opponent can escape from perma-stun, and make damage easier to understand. Match 3: 1 charged tile -> damage 167% -> 200% normal match 3 2 charged tiles -> damage 233% -> 300% normal match 3 3 charged tiles -> damage 300% -> 400% normal match 3
Arondite wrote: Dauthi wrote: I find it funny how the OP still hasn't replied to the 3* Thor vs 4* Thor argument when scaled equivalently. When 3* is boosted close to, but still under 4*s maximum level his yellow did 3.7k(ish) damage, and green did 3.6k ish damage (x2 to the main target). This equaled out to around 18k damage across the team, why is this damage ignored just because it isn't targeted on one character? 3* Thor can do this without having a double edged sword at his throat like 4* with charged tiles to boot. Nine green dropping on the board is also more likely to create cascades of alternate colors creating more AP generation and damage, vs 4*s random charge tile drops and wasted turns having to match these.Their HP is also similarly equivalent when 3* is scaled. I can understand OP's feelings towards how strong she is offensively, I don't think he understands how useless she is defensively and underestimates this downfall. When more 4*s come out that are competent in both defense and offense like X-Force, she may be replaced for the same reason characters like 3* cap and 2* mags are replaced in PVP. I can see maybe a slight nerf in how many charge tiles she drops with her blue, but that is about all I can get on board with. She is a character that has risk/reward and deserves to get boosted damage due to this. I haven't addressed this argument because its a non argument. If this character you're arguing existed, we could see whether or not it was too strong for the game in practice and make a decision then. But this character doesnt even exist. Why would I go around with you about something that's not even real? Of course you'd like to do this, since arguing about a character that doesn't exist distracts from the actual, existing hero that's a bit too powerful in the weak-featured-character metagame. But id rather focus on real problems lmao.
Dauthi wrote: I find it funny how the OP still hasn't replied to the 3* Thor vs 4* Thor argument when scaled equivalently. When 3* is boosted close to, but still under 4*s maximum level his yellow did 3.7k(ish) damage, and green did 3.6k ish damage (x2 to the main target). This equaled out to around 18k damage across the team, why is this damage ignored just because it isn't targeted on one character? 3* Thor can do this without having a double edged sword at his throat like 4* with charged tiles to boot. Nine green dropping on the board is also more likely to create cascades of alternate colors creating more AP generation and damage, vs 4*s random charge tile drops and wasted turns having to match these.Their HP is also similarly equivalent when 3* is scaled. I can understand OP's feelings towards how strong she is offensively, I don't think he understands how useless she is defensively and underestimates this downfall. When more 4*s come out that are competent in both defense and offense like X-Force, she may be replaced for the same reason characters like 3* cap and 2* mags are replaced in PVP. I can see maybe a slight nerf in how many charge tiles she drops with her blue, but that is about all I can get on board with. She is a character that has risk/reward and deserves to get boosted damage due to this.
Trisul wrote: "D3 should not nerf GT, but instead buff everyone else" <---- This is functionally similar to just nerfing GT, except a million times more work. If we are working on everyone, I'd actually rather they nerf EVERYONE. I think the pace of the game is too fast right now and offense is too good overall.
kensterr wrote: The old XF was lame so people were complaining that he's too lame. He got buffed. Now he works so well with TGT that people complain TGT is too OP. People complain that Baglady is too lame for a 4* and she is being reworked. If she comes out having super great buffs then people might complain that Baglady is too OP when she works with XF and TGT. Complain complain complain. First world problems.
3uphoria wrote: You are absolutely worthless on defense. I never lose to you and you net me 0 defensive wins. I miss putting Lazy Thor and OBW on defense and going positive 60-90. P.S. You just got crushed 3 times by MMags and XF. You make me sick... Let's talk about good defensive teams
atomzed wrote: 3uphoria wrote: You are absolutely worthless on defense. I never lose to you and you net me 0 defensive wins. I miss putting Lazy Thor and OBW on defense and going positive 60-90. P.S. You just got crushed 3 times by MMags and XF. You make me sick... Let's talk about good defensive teams I actually have lost my fair share of games against Xforce and GT. I will deal with Xforce first, but sometimes cascades will give GT enough AP for power surge. Then the red ap and blue roll more, and eventually I lose to a smite and sometimes striking distance. The truth is that regardless the defensive team, as long as people go in with full boosts, they should win 90% of the time.
onimus wrote: A defensive team has risen: IF + Xforce. I've been on the forums so far today for 5 minutes and this is all I can come up with to say. There is no appropriate offensive approach to that team.