Please nerf 5* Gambit

jackstar0

The game should aspire to have a Rock, Paper, Scissors level of balance.

Right now it's Gambit's game. He overpowers all other competitive pieces. He's beatable, sure, but that's due as much to luck as making the right moves. If he were reigned in just slightly, he'd still be very strong in the meta without warping the game around him.

I personally find his AP destruction to have been an insanely powerful buff.

OneLastGambit

aesthetocyst said:

OneLastGambit said:

So A bunch of players who were winning 95% of the time are complaining? Sounds to me as though whatever team you were using to win 95% of matches needs nerfing.

As for gambit this is no different than anytime the meta changes. I just think people are overreacting. 

Is it a problem ? Probably not. Each tier has its ubiquitous characters and teams. I'm fed up of seeing gamorusarocket in every match in sim. Should they be nerfed? Some characters are naturally more ubiquitous due to them having good synergy doesn't mean they need nerfing and honestly gambit isn't all that scary without a charge tile producer. He's tough no doubt but unbeatable? Nobody is. 

Having recently completed 2 x 5* and a third almost done I'll actually be moving up a tier so who knows maybe in a month I'll be singing the same song as everyone else and eating humble pie. Seems like devs can't win, when they make a good character he needs nerfing. When they make a bad one people moan. When they make an average one everyone sighs 'meh' 

Lolz. Congrats on soon knowing what you're already talking about.

Good characters are great. Gamebreaking characters are not good.

Would you like a slice, or just skip ahead to the whole pie? May as well get it warmed up.

Perhaps the PW3 boys could have you on for the pie segment.

aesthetocyst said:

OneLastGambit said:

So A bunch of players who were winning 95% of the time are complaining? Sounds to me as though whatever team you were using to win 95% of matches needs nerfing.

As for gambit this is no different than anytime the meta changes. I just think people are overreacting. 

Is it a problem ? Probably not. Each tier has its ubiquitous characters and teams. I'm fed up of seeing gamorusarocket in every match in sim. Should they be nerfed? Some characters are naturally more ubiquitous due to them having good synergy doesn't mean they need nerfing and honestly gambit isn't all that scary without a charge tile producer. He's tough no doubt but unbeatable? Nobody is. 

Having recently completed 2 x 5* and a third almost done I'll actually be moving up a tier so who knows maybe in a month I'll be singing the same song as everyone else and eating humble pie. Seems like devs can't win, when they make a good character he needs nerfing. When they make a bad one people moan. When they make an average one everyone sighs 'meh' 

Lolz. Congrats on soon knowing what you're already talking about.

Good characters are great. Gamebreaking characters are not good.

Would you like a slice, or just skip ahead to the whole pie? May as well get it warmed up.

Perhaps the PW3 boys could have you on for the pie segment.

Remind me again why Gambit should be nerfed for winning? Before Gambit came along most vets were winning most of the time. As evidenced by most the vets complaining in this post. So why not nerf gambit panther and thanos at the same time? Hell why not the entire tier. Then nobody can complain that any one meta is dominating. 

Simple truth is people without gambit are moaning about gambit. People with him, aren't. It has little to do with Gambit being gamebreaking and more to do with some people being mad that all of a sudden they are not dominating with ease like they used to, and shock horror they're feeling what it's like to be on the other end of that spectrum. 

Let's assume that they do Nerf Gambit some more and the vets complaining about suddenly being on the receiving end of the stick go back to waving it. That be better?IF so whats the point? Are vets so obsessed with having easy victories where the odds are stacked massively in their favour that they can't handle more competition? 

I hope the devs nerf the entire tier, it's been a disaster from start to now. Eliminating the entire tier would be the only fair way to fix all these issues, make the game competitive at the same time. That would honestly be my solution, no tier has been more rife with issues in my time on the game

Everyone said Peggy would be gamebreaking. She was not. Everyone said OML was gamebreaking and I think now in retrospect we can agree he was not. Everyone said Panthos was gamebreaking, it is not. Everytime someone says someone is gamebreaking, I don't see a broken game with no user base. It's hyperbole and nothing more. This forum is renowned for its hyperbolic knee jerk reactions. This is just the latest. 

Maybe youre right and I will hate the 5* tier, but that doesn't make the rest of what I said any less true. 

OneLastGambit

jackstar0 said:

The game should aspire to have a Rock, Paper, Scissors level of balance.

Right now it's Gambit's game. He overpowers all other competitive pieces. He's beatable, sure, but that's due as much to luck as making the right moves. If he were reigned in just slightly, he'd still be very strong in the meta without warping the game around him.

I personally find his AP destruction to have been an insanely powerful buff.

This part I 100% agree with. This should have been the design from the start. 

Pollozz

I like gambit the way he is. They already rebalanced him. Why do u guys cry so much, probably the next character will take the spot as number 1 and everybody will be crying to be nerf. Just enjoy the game as it is. And if u don't enjoy it or like it anymore, there are sure to be plenty of games out there.

LifeofAgony

thedarkphoenix said:

This is what it boils down too... I've been playing this game forever and this is what it all comes back around too. Usually I'm right outside the meta and gambit is just like all the other strong characters or teams that I could beat but take damage in the process.

You must have a very loose definition of being just outside the meta since you have a whole 5 champ 5* that includes no version of the meta ever.  

You’re a neophyte to 5* land who happened to make the jump to what you assume is the meta but is really a game-breaker. 

As multiple people continue to say, none of this thread is about the heirarchy being “disrupted”.  Every team takes losses.  From a myriad of team combinations.  That’s not a problem nor has it ever been.  It’s a big reason why people don’t enjoy pvp because you’re vulnerable to attack from lots of people using lots of different teams, usually levels lower than your own.  It’s part of the game.

Gambit has mechanics that no other toon can boast.  And it’s not a single skill (like quake AoE reduction, or AA being an airborne counter) but multiple.  

His AP gen is unmatched.
His AP destruction is unmatched:
His ability to overwrite basically any tile type (including invisibility) even at 3 purple is unmatched.

Give him any 1 of those and he still might be too OP.  Add them together and he’s better than almost all the boss rush 5* (member them).

xKOBALTx

OneLastGambit said:

Simple truth is people without gambit are moaning about gambit. People with him, aren't. 

Absolutely false. The majority of this thread's most active voices (and "Like/Insightful" voters) are players that have their own Gambit. 

entrailbucket

My Gambit is lvl455, and I run him with my lvl495 Black Bolt, so I'm not really having trouble winning fights.  If I wanted to dominate I'd just shut up about it and use those two for every single fight ever. 

Most of us here that are asking for a nerf are doing it because Gambit is too good and he's bad for the game.  Personally I'd like to be able to occasionally use one of my three lvl500+ 5* in a fight, or any of the other 5* besides Archangel, all of whom are championed. 

Again, how is it ok that a lvl450 character is better than a lvl500+ character?

j0nats

one thing that hasnt been discussed is the apprporiate compenaation if they do nerf gambit to oblivion....

gambit was obviously designed to be tops in current meta.   starting from scratch is not acceptable... cos a lot of people invested time/money/both to cover him.  especially for those who blew their hoard on him.

those that are very vocal about the nerf probably have backup plans.. , having champ bolt, thanos to fall back on.  but how bout those that dont?

John Wayne74

There is one way that they could leave him be but nerf him at the same time.  (Not that I am a propponent of having to use these to win).  Since they are into this specific boost era, they could just make a boost that at +1 negates all passives for 3 turns and for +2 for 6 turns.  That would shut him down long enough for most other 5*’s to get enough AP to deal with him.  He would still be a beast on offense, but that would nullify his defensive capabilities.

Did not read this entire thread, so I apologize if someone already thought that up.

Bowgentle

John Wayne74 said:

Did not read this entire thread, so I apologize if someone already thought that up.

Nobody brought that up because it's not a very good idea.

In one fell swoop you'd nerf half of the characters in the game, including Bolt, DD, BSSM, Spidey, Strange, Thor, Thanos, Spidey, Panther, BW, Phoenix, Carol, Medusa, Blade, Rulk... you get the idea.

Maybe easier to just nerf the one character who needs it.

OneLastGambit

Maybe they should just create a new character. Who has a passive that cancels all passives except his own. 

Problem solved lol 

Good for devs since everyone will spend like crazy to acquire him in order to shut down gambit, also has the side effect of making every match slower so the player engagement is increased. 

And everyone not liking gambit will have an answer to their problem which doesn't affect gambit. Meaning all those people who like gambit can still use him. 

Let's not forget some of the people using gambit may not even play PvP and he might be their only 5* they use in pve. Seems a bit unfair to punish their pve game because he's ubiquitous in PvP 

Bowgentle

OneLastGambit said:

Let's not forget some of the people using gambit may not even play PvP and he might be their only 5* they use in pve. Seems a bit unfair to punish their pve game because he's ubiquitous in PvP 

Who cares? PVE doesn't scale to your roster any longer.

OneLastGambit

Bowgentle said:

OneLastGambit said:

Let's not forget some of the people using gambit may not even play PvP and he might be their only 5* they use in pve. Seems a bit unfair to punish their pve game because he's ubiquitous in PvP 

Who cares? PVE doesn't scale to your roster any longer.

Who cares? PVE doesn't scale to your roster any longer.So we should spoil their fun in order to fix our own? Seems a bit selfish. 

Although I was kind of joking with my last post about creating a character to counter it's obvious to me the solution is pretty simple. There are a bunch of characters in the 5* tier who could really use a work over. 

The answer isnt nerfing gambit it's buffing someone else instead. For example:

Let's imagine that Banner gets a buff which includes a new passive which causes damage to the opposing character whenever a charge tile is destroyed. 

All of a sudden Gambit becomes much easier to beat (it's almost an auto win) we breathe life and usefulness into an old character that a lot of people have covered but NOBODY uses and at the same time we did not ruin the game for those who actually enjoy Gambit. 

I am never in favour of nerfs no matter who it is because in all honesty it sucks to suddenly have a useless character, which is what every nerf does. Instead of making one useless make another more useful and presto now I have roster diversity.

fight4thedream

While I am not opposed to Banner getting a (much needed) buff, I personally would prefer to see Bishop be the counter to the current Gambit meta. He has both the power set (energy absorption and resistance) and history.

OneLastGambit

fight4thedream said:

While I am not opposed to Banner getting a (much needed) buff, I personally would prefer to see Bishop be the counter to the current Gambit meta. He has both the power set (energy absorption and resistance) and history.

Hell why not have both be a gambit counter. Bishop can help with the energy absorption giving one option and give banner the skill I mentioned and you have countered his red as well. Anything that gives MORE options is good. Nerfing just removes options from a tier which people already complain is too sparse. 

broll

I pulled my 13 Gambit yesterday.  I'm about 4 days ISO income from champing him.  So expect a nerf in the next 4-12 days...

Sm0keyJ0e

broll said:

I pulled my 13 Gambit yesterday.  I'm about 4 days ISO income from champing him.  So expect a nerf in the next 4-12 days...

Oh boy! Your usable roster is about to decrease by [totalRosterSize - 1] toons!

broll

Sm0keyJ0e said:

broll said:

I pulled my 13 Gambit yesterday.  I'm about 4 days ISO income from champing him.  So expect a nerf in the next 4-12 days...

Oh boy! Your usable roster is about to decrease by [totalRosterSize - 1] toons!

My usable roster was knocked over and mugged by an army of Gambits a few weeks ago.  This is the return of a usable roster....  If you can't beat em join em right?

entrailbucket

Show me one example from this game's history of a dominant character getting a counter that actually impacts the metagame.  We're all still waiting on that Sentry/Hood counter.  I'm not saying it's not possible for them to design an elegant, non-overpowered counter character, but if it hasn't happened once in 4+ years...

While I'm at it, I feel like the word "nerf" is not being understood.  Every change to a character is either a buff or a nerf.  Buff means "make better," nerf means "make worse." Asking for a nerf does not mean "make this guy totally useless," it means "make this guy worse."

TF1977

OneLastGambit said:

aesthetocyst said:

OneLastGambit said:

So A bunch of players who were winning 95% of the time are complaining? Sounds to me as though whatever team you were using to win 95% of matches needs nerfing.

As for gambit this is no different than anytime the meta changes. I just think people are overreacting. 

Is it a problem ? Probably not. Each tier has its ubiquitous characters and teams. I'm fed up of seeing gamorusarocket in every match in sim. Should they be nerfed? Some characters are naturally more ubiquitous due to them having good synergy doesn't mean they need nerfing and honestly gambit isn't all that scary without a charge tile producer. He's tough no doubt but unbeatable? Nobody is. 

Having recently completed 2 x 5* and a third almost done I'll actually be moving up a tier so who knows maybe in a month I'll be singing the same song as everyone else and eating humble pie. Seems like devs can't win, when they make a good character he needs nerfing. When they make a bad one people moan. When they make an average one everyone sighs 'meh' 

Lolz. Congrats on soon knowing what you're already talking about.

Good characters are great. Gamebreaking characters are not good.

Would you like a slice, or just skip ahead to the whole pie? May as well get it warmed up.

Perhaps the PW3 boys could have you on for the pie segment.

aesthetocyst said:

OneLastGambit said:

So A bunch of players who were winning 95% of the time are complaining? Sounds to me as though whatever team you were using to win 95% of matches needs nerfing.

As for gambit this is no different than anytime the meta changes. I just think people are overreacting. 

Is it a problem ? Probably not. Each tier has its ubiquitous characters and teams. I'm fed up of seeing gamorusarocket in every match in sim. Should they be nerfed? Some characters are naturally more ubiquitous due to them having good synergy doesn't mean they need nerfing and honestly gambit isn't all that scary without a charge tile producer. He's tough no doubt but unbeatable? Nobody is. 

Having recently completed 2 x 5* and a third almost done I'll actually be moving up a tier so who knows maybe in a month I'll be singing the same song as everyone else and eating humble pie. Seems like devs can't win, when they make a good character he needs nerfing. When they make a bad one people moan. When they make an average one everyone sighs 'meh' 

Lolz. Congrats on soon knowing what you're already talking about.

Good characters are great. Gamebreaking characters are not good.

Would you like a slice, or just skip ahead to the whole pie? May as well get it warmed up.

Perhaps the PW3 boys could have you on for the pie segment.

Remind me again why Gambit should be nerfed for winning? Before Gambit came along most vets were winning most of the time. As evidenced by most the vets complaining in this post. So why not nerf gambit panther and thanos at the same time? Hell why not the entire tier. Then nobody can complain that any one meta is dominating. 

Simple truth is people without gambit are moaning about gambit. People with him, aren't. It has little to do with Gambit being gamebreaking and more to do with some people being mad that all of a sudden they are not dominating with ease like they used to, and shock horror they're feeling what it's like to be on the other end of that spectrum. 

Let's assume that they do Nerf Gambit some more and the vets complaining about suddenly being on the receiving end of the stick go back to waving it. That be better?IF so whats the point? Are vets so obsessed with having easy victories where the odds are stacked massively in their favour that they can't handle more competition? 

I hope the devs nerf the entire tier, it's been a disaster from start to now. Eliminating the entire tier would be the only fair way to fix all these issues, make the game competitive at the same time. That would honestly be my solution, no tier has been more rife with issues in my time on the game

Everyone said Peggy would be gamebreaking. She was not. Everyone said OML was gamebreaking and I think now in retrospect we can agree he was not. Everyone said Panthos was gamebreaking, it is not. Everytime someone says someone is gamebreaking, I don't see a broken game with no user base. It's hyperbole and nothing more. This forum is renowned for its hyperbolic knee jerk reactions. This is just the latest. 

Maybe youre right and I will hate the 5* tier, but that doesn't make the rest of what I said any less true. 

The difference here is that Gambit is gamebreakinig. No one wants him to be nerfed into oblivion (ala OML). There should be balance at all tiers of the game and currently there is not.

Panthos is a tough combo, but beatable with other 5* teams.

If I were nerfing him, I'd make his Rajing Cajun ability deal the same damage but only replace 1 enemy special tile (The other 2-3 would replace randomly). It's the combo of replacing special tiles and his battery power that makes him OP. Take the edge off.