New Gambit nerf

12357

Comments

  • sinnerjfl
    sinnerjfl Posts: 1,276 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: 4,019 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: 4,019 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: 4,019 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: 512 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: 4,019 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: 1,276 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.
  • Pants1000
    Pants1000 Posts: 484 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.
    Most of those teams would get crushed by Gambit.  Yes he can be beaten by a handful of teams, but my guess is most people that don’t have Gambit probably don’t have Thor/JJ/Okoye either.

    I have 6 champed 5’s, but they mostly older ones because I don’t like hoarding and spend CP on classics.  Yes I realize that wasn’t the best strategy, but I’m not the only one in my situation.  I can beat Gambit teams, but my loss rate and health pack usage is much higher than against any other opponent.  I’d rather hit a 480 Panthos than a 450 Gambit with any other 5.

    The only unboosted team I have that stands a decent chance against Gambit is Hawkeye/Coulson, and that’s risky.  The only time I’m confident against a Gambit team is when Grocket or Peggy is boosted.  Grocket along with another boosted GotG can take him out before he gets going, and Peggy can slow him down enough.
  • Lystrata
    Lystrata Posts: 322 Mover and Shaker
    Towards the end of last season I got really, really sick of skipping Gambit teams. It was a massive waste of time and iso, so I just started hitting them. And honestly... he's pretty weak on defense, given the right team. At the time  in pvp I was running Thor, AA (one of the most under-appreciated/over-looked chars, imo) and America (for shield).

    They crushed him. Mass cascades, stuns, ap denial, near rainbow... and since many people use Gambit with Thor themselves, a large amount of the time Gambit doesn't even use his red. Saves it for Thor, who can typically also be stunned (or downed entirely*), by the time you've gotten rid of Gambit. 

    This season I've switched to Thor and JJ, and I haven't lost to a Gambit team yet.

    But the key point there is... given the right team. If you aren't fortunate enough to have gotten one of about 4 characters that can reliably take Gambit... I can only imagine how horrendous PvP is. Actually, I know how horrendous it is. And it isn't healthy for the game, to have people refusing to, or incapable of, playing half the content because of one character. 

    I think the main problem with the discussion is we've been conditioned to fear nerfs, as many past nerfs have outright destroyed a character's usefulness. Gambit does need to come down a little, but we instinctively fear that - because in the past, the devs have swung wayyy too far in the opposite direction and suddenly a character is useless. With the time, effort and / or money invested in getting a 5* to a champed level, the fear compounds because a lot more work went into getting such a great character. To have him rendered useless would be crushing for many people.

    For me, the question isn't really if he should be nerfed (yes), but how far will he be nerfed? 

    ---

    * This being why Thor isn't actually OP or much of a threat. You really need different mindsets with Thor. On offence, awesome. On defense, pretty lackluster. 
  • huktonfonix
    huktonfonix Posts: 214 Tile Toppler
    A whole lot of people are overlooking the critical distinction between how a character performs on offense (player controlled) and how they perform on defense (AI controlled).

    Thor being tossed around a lot here. Thor is easily top 2 characters in the game right now and is extremely powerful, but is balanced in a critical way that Gambit is not. Yes, on offense and played correctly, Thor can beat any team in the game, including Gambit.  However, on defense, Thor is a glass cannon beatable by literally any 5* team. Defensive Thor enters the fight at 100% hp, which means he does nothing for a long time unless you play very stupidly against him. Don’t believe me? Do that idiot thing I keep doing where I decide to deliberately let 60-100% Thor tank instead of retreating him to 50%. Guaranteed horrible match costing 1-3 health packs.

    This is where Gambit stands alone. He’s powerful (maybe not the most powerful, but easily top tier) on offense, but on defense he’s extremely difficult to beat without either your own Gambit or Thor. There is no other 5* character that cannot easily and consistently be beaten by any 5* pairing. You might win one fight against Gambit with a gimmick team, stings, boosts, but there is absolutely no way you’re going to climb to 900-1200 in pvp off Gambit teams with DD/BP, SS/BB, or any of the other nonsense teams mentioned above without crazy luck and a Stark worth of health packs and boosts.

    With Gambit being the most common character in PvP, players with Thor and/or Gambit are locked out of high-level pvp. With both of those characters in classics, it would cost approximately 36000 cp to pull 13 covers for either.  For the long term health of the game, this has to change.

    There are players with 550 ThorBit teams and no third 550 5 to replace Gambit campaigning for a nerf for that very reason in this thread.  When someone who has spent thousands on a 550 Gambit with no obvious replacement rostered is begging for a self-nerf, that should speak volumes.

Categories