New Gambit nerf

12357

Comments

  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    sinnerjfl said:
    Daredevil217 said:
    JHawkInc said:

    Look man, when you've got a field of grass, and one blade is sticking out too far, and you want them to be even, you don't invest energy in trying to grow the entire rest of the field except for that one blade to make them even. You get out your little pair of scissors and do some trimming.
    I like this analogy. Problem is you are assuming that the field is even. It isn’t. The grass is all over the place from Banner to Gambit. You take out your scissors and go to work.. and... look over there. That Thor blade is way taller than the others. And unlike Gambit he’s best for PVE AND PVP meaning he dominates the entire game and not just one game mode.  The field as it were, remains uneven and people who have the best character will use him, and people who don’t will be tinykitty out of luck because they didn’t bust their hoard at the right time.  
    One big difference with Gambit and your example, Thor.

    Not easy to counter Gambit without your own. You can certainly counter Thor because as long as he's at +50% health, not too difficult to deal with, plan accordingly.
    Is Gambit really not easy to counter with your own Gambit? The AI is so dumb that I feel a human mirror team should almost always win. 
  • Sm0keyJ0e
    Sm0keyJ0e Posts: 730 Critical Contributor
    I have a problem with people having a problem with nerfs. When is bad character design going too far?

    Gambit originally generated 3 red and purple ap, each and every turn, without conditions other than his teammates cannot fire their sorry powers. What if he generated 6ap of each color each turn? That's fine? No nerfs cuz they're bad? 

    The problem is he was broken from the beginning. I agree he shouldn't need a nerf at this point because he never should have passed QA and been released to the general population. He is the only toon who unconditionally generates the resources in the game to fire powers. You cannot prevent this without downing or stunning or sending airborne. The problem there is this requires moves of your own. While you're making those moves, he's collecting his colors and denying you yours. This is a fact.
  • udonomefoo
    udonomefoo Posts: 1,630 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2018
    Me with neither Gamit or Thor champed watching people argue that if you nerf Gambit you'll have to nerf Thor too:


  • sinnerjfl
    sinnerjfl Posts: 1,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    Daredevil217 said:
    sinnerjfl said:
    One big difference with Gambit and your example, Thor.

    Not easy to counter Gambit without your own. You can certainly counter Thor because as long as he's at +50% health, not too difficult to deal with, plan accordingly.
    Is Gambit really not easy to counter with your own Gambit? The AI is so dumb that I feel a human mirror team should almost always win. 

    Let me re-phrase for clarity.

    If you have Gambit on your team, it is easy to defeat other Gambit teams.

    If you do NOT have Gambit, it is quite problematic to beat Gambit teams (mainly because he generates/destroys AP every single turn without any conditions).
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    sinnerjfl said:
    Daredevil217 said:
    sinnerjfl said:
    One big difference with Gambit and your example, Thor.

    Not easy to counter Gambit without your own. You can certainly counter Thor because as long as he's at +50% health, not too difficult to deal with, plan accordingly.
    Is Gambit really not easy to counter with your own Gambit? The AI is so dumb that I feel a human mirror team should almost always win. 

    Let me re-phrase for clarity.

    If you have Gambit on your team, it is easy to defeat other Gambit teams.

    If you do NOT have Gambit, it is quite problematic to beat Gambit teams (mainly because he generates/destroys AP every single turn without any conditions).
    Eehhh, i would argue that isnt exactly 100% true.  

    See below:

    Daiches said:
    This just in: Offense trumps Defense in a game designed to give the player a 90% win rate over the AI.

    I keep telling people, i stopped using gambit when i got JJ.  Paired with thor, it is just a faster and imo more fun match.  I have no problem beating gambit teams.  I avoid gambolt teams, but just to save on health packs.  And sometimes if he is paired with thanos, they might get lucky and get thor and it can go down hill from there.

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    Spudgutter said:
    sinnerjfl said:
    Daredevil217 said:
    sinnerjfl said:
    One big difference with Gambit and your example, Thor.

    Not easy to counter Gambit without your own. You can certainly counter Thor because as long as he's at +50% health, not too difficult to deal with, plan accordingly.
    Is Gambit really not easy to counter with your own Gambit? The AI is so dumb that I feel a human mirror team should almost always win. 

    Let me re-phrase for clarity.

    If you have Gambit on your team, it is easy to defeat other Gambit teams.

    If you do NOT have Gambit, it is quite problematic to beat Gambit teams (mainly because he generates/destroys AP every single turn without any conditions).
    Eehhh, i would argue that isnt exactly 100% true.  

    See below:

    Daiches said:
    This just in: Offense trumps Defense in a game designed to give the player a 90% win rate over the AI.

    I keep telling people, i stopped using gambit when i got JJ.  Paired with thor, it is just a faster and imo more fun match.  I have no problem beating gambit teams.  I avoid gambolt teams, but just to save on health packs.  And sometimes if he is paired with thanos, they might get lucky and get thor and it can go down hill from there.

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
  • huktonfonix
    huktonfonix Posts: 214 Tile Toppler
    Spudgutter said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
    Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    huktonfonix said:
    Spudgutter said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
    Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
    Why can’t Thor be included? He’s not the one people are debating about nerfing. Or, should he be considered for a nerf too after Gambit is gutted?
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    huktonfonix said:
    Spudgutter said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
    Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
    Wait, what?  We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite.  Depending on who the other two are:

    Panthos.  JJ/DD.   DD/5trange.  If i had him, SS/BB.  JJ/BB.  DD/thanos.  

    Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense.  That's obviously not the point you are trying to make.  You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time.  It's the costs that will be different.  

    Thats why i like thor so much.  He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense.  You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him.
  • CharlieCroker
    CharlieCroker Posts: 254 Mover and Shaker
    Spudgutter said:
    huktonfonix said:
    Spudgutter said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
    Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
    Wait, what?  We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite.  Depending on who the other two are:

    Panthos.  JJ/DD.   DD/5trange.  If i had him, SS/BB.  JJ/BB.  DD/thanos.  

    Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense.  That's obviously not the point you are trying to make.  You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time.  It's the costs that will be different.  

    Thats why i like thor so much.  He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense.  You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him.
    Did you really just suggest using a team with Black Bolt against Gambit?  Interesting....

    But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain.  That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners.
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    CharlieCroker said:

    But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain.  That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners.
    So to quote someone earlier in this thread in why Gambit should be nerfed. 

    “Gambit originally generated 3 red and purple ap, each and every turn, without conditions other than his teammates cannot fire their sorry powers. What if he generated 6ap of each color each turn? That's fine? No nerfs cuz they're bad? “

    Half health Thor does this, except he collects 5 AP in three colors, gets the damage and cascades from destroying tiles... oh, and he doesn’t block other teammates from using active powers. I get it’s “conditional” in that you have to bring him in half health but that takes place before the match begins. Once in the match there are no conditions to his AP gen and he’s just as powerful as Gambit. So... nerf? I mean he seems to be a pretty big advantage against those who don’t have him. Way more so when Gambit is gutted. 
  • Jaedenkaal
    Jaedenkaal Posts: 3,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    Daredevil217 said:
    CharlieCroker said:

    But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain.  That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners.

    Half health Thor does this, except he collects 5 AP in three colors, gets the damage and cascades from destroying tiles... oh, and he doesn’t block other teammates from using active powers. I get it’s “conditional” in that you have to bring him in half health but that takes place before the match begins. Once in the match there are no conditions to his AP gen and he’s just as powerful as Gambit. So... nerf? I mean he seems to be a pretty big advantage against those who don’t have him. Way more so when Gambit is gutted. 
    Sure. Could change that condition to be "half the health that he began the match with." No change if you start with (near) full health, harder to pull off and riskier than current.
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    That’s pretty much Grocket in the 4* tier. Yeah you can beat him, but it’s goin to cost you some serious health packs. It’s annoying as a player in that tier seeing him everywhere and knowing that he’s going to consume what for me is a valuable resource. Also like Gambit’s AP gen, Grocket has to do zero to get the strikes... no conditions. And yet I would be upset if they nerfed him. 
  • justsing
    justsing Posts: 510 Critical Contributor
    Daredevil217 said:
    That’s pretty much Grocket in the 4* tier. Yeah you can beat him, but it’s goin to cost you some serious health packs. It’s annoying as a player in that tier seeing him everywhere and knowing that he’s going to consume what for me is a valuable resource. Also like Gambit’s AP gen, Grocket has to do zero to get the strikes... no conditions. And yet I would be upset if they nerfed him. 
    Except you can match away his strikes or use the damage you get to trigger various passives. You can’t stop Gambit’s AP gen or destruction without getting enough AP to fire a stun or some other power. There really isn’t a character like Gambit in 4* land.
  • CharlieCroker
    CharlieCroker Posts: 254 Mover and Shaker
    Daredevil217 said:
    That’s pretty much Grocket in the 4* tier. Yeah you can beat him, but it’s goin to cost you some serious health packs. It’s annoying as a player in that tier seeing him everywhere and knowing that he’s going to consume what for me is a valuable resource. Also like Gambit’s AP gen, Grocket has to do zero to get the strikes... no conditions. And yet I would be upset if they nerfed him. 
    But Grockett isn't complimented by two more top tier powers and once you clear those strikes they stay gone.  

    Gambit keeps generating and destroying ap every turn and there is no counter to that other than stunning/killing/sending him airbourne.

    I personally do consider Thor OP and would adjust the threshold for his green.  But as pointed out by Sinnerjfl, he is not a huge threat on defense unless you're careless enough to reduce him to 50% without killing him (or he has mounds of red ap left after you kill Gambit).
  • Daredevil217
    Daredevil217 Posts: 3,967 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2018
    OJSP said:
    The main complaint about Gambit is not how powerful he is on offense, it’s when he’s on defense.
    I see. So the issue isn’t that he’s head and shoulders better than everyone else on offense (as Thor will be post nerf), and that those who have him will be better than everyone else.  It’s that he’s annoying to fight on defense?  And you can’t skip him because he’s 90% of the matches you see?

    Is it true that you can’t beat Gambit without your own Gambit?  Some say it’s “impossible”. Others say they never use their own and do fine.  Hard to sift through what is hyperbole. 

    Edit:

    CharlieCroker said:

    I personally do consider Thor OP and would adjust the threshold for his green.  
    And this is exactly what I was talking about this whole thread. Cut one blade of grass and all of a sudden there’s a new tallest and now HE needs a nerf too!?
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    CharlieCroker said:
    Spudgutter said:
    huktonfonix said:
    Spudgutter said:
    Bowgentle said:
    Spudgutter said:

    I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter.  Someone is always going to be on top.
    You never needed Panthos in that meta.
    I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
    Case in point.  You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them."  

    Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit.  I dont use him and do just fine.  
    Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
    Wait, what?  We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite.  Depending on who the other two are:

    Panthos.  JJ/DD.   DD/5trange.  If i had him, SS/BB.  JJ/BB.  DD/thanos.  

    Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense.  That's obviously not the point you are trying to make.  You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time.  It's the costs that will be different.  

    Thats why i like thor so much.  He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense.  You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him.
    Did you really just suggest using a team with Black Bolt against Gambit?  Interesting....

    But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain.  That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners.
    I got the idea from bowgentle.  Like i said, it would depend on who the other two opponents were.  SS heals, so if you keep him out front when gambit is getting ready to fire his red, it wouldnt have as much of an impact.  Definitely wouldn't use it for a hop to get to 1200, but would certainly consider it on my climb to save health packs.
  • sinnerjfl
    sinnerjfl Posts: 1,275 Chairperson of the Boards
    Daredevil217 said:
    I see. So the issue isn’t that he’s head and shoulders better than everyone else on offense (as Thor will be post nerf), and that those who have him will be better than everyone else.  It’s that he’s annoying to fight on defense?  And you can’t skip him because he’s 90% of the matches you see?



    Is it true that you can’t beat Gambit without your own Gambit?  Some say it’s “impossible”. Others say they never use their own and do fine.  Hard to sift through what is hyperbole. 

    First part, yes thats the current the situation. It also pretty much forces you to use your own Gambit for 2 reasons: easy to be beat in a mirror match, people are actively looking for non-Gambit teams to beat.


    2nd part, its not impossible to beat Gambit if you don't have him but he's certainly one of the harder opponent to beat. These are the 3 chars people typically list:

    - Thor at 50% health, the boardshake does chip damage while you get AP to fuel him or someone else.
    - JJ, her traps do enough damage to take him down somewhat quickly, but this is not 100% reliable.
    - Okoye (I dont have her so I can't really comment. From what I can tell, damage boost is based on AP and Gambit doesnt target that).


    Thor: the green passive, yes it is very strong but requires him to be half-dead, that balances it out pretty nicely IMHO.

Categories