Gambit and the 5* Rebalance

2

Comments

  • Jarvind
    Jarvind Posts: 1,684 Chairperson of the Boards
    I think you greatly overestimate how good Gambit will be with lowered red damage, slower AP gen, and no ability to overwrite countdown and invis tiles, while still blocking friendly red/purple powers.

    Obviously we'll need to see it live, but I predict he'll be solidly middle of the pack. 

    As for your list, which appears to be like, most of the 5* tier, there will always be one or two characters that dominate the PVP scene. Before Gambolt, it was Panthos. Before that it was I-don't-know-because-I-was-still-a-4*-player, but I'm sure there was a ubiquitous pairing, just as there always has been since 5*s were introduced. I think you'll actually see a bit of variety after Gambit's nerf just because while Thor is stellar on offense, he is relatively easy to beat, so it's not absolutely mandatory to use him all the time.

    The rest are perfectly fine for PVE or for early climbing. The only 5* that really, truly needs a rework is Banner, because he's just so hands-down utterly garbage. I'd give an honorable mention to Black Suit Spidey as well - he hasn't really been useful since the days when OML was top of the heap.


  • supergarv
    supergarv Posts: 410 Mover and Shaker
    edited July 2018
    Currently playing gambit vs gambit plus a synergetic 4/5* can get you out of PVP matches without using healthpacks. Most 5* players adapted to this, you rarely see BB as accelerator because of this.

    The „nerf“ will still make Gambit viable, but not without getting seriously injured in a mirror match due to no CD overwrite.

    Thats what D3 wants you to do, buy buy health packs and shields. Thats all the balancing they need, deal with it, and don‘t expect them to really adjust 5* equality.
  • MgoBlue51
    MgoBlue51 Posts: 111 Tile Toppler
    Should we be afraid moving forward that they might nerf whoever is currently at the top of the heap in 5s... while releasing boring or “off” new characters like wasp? There will always be a “best” character in every tier. And while gambit was too good, they have now (in my opinion) over nerfed the last 2 consensus best 5s. Not into trash but definitely harder than necessary (feels like a knee jerk reaction... someone is too good for too long? Hit them harder than necessary) I don’t see it as doomsday, but I do see it as a problem. Why should we chase anything awesome, when there’s a big chance that it will be nerfed hard enough to warrant a usability question? The only way to be safe is to assume everyone worth having will someday be not worth having. 
  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    MgoBlue51 said:
    Should we be afraid moving forward that they might nerf whoever is currently at the top of the heap in 5s... while releasing boring or “off” new characters like wasp? There will always be a “best” character in every tier. And while gambit was too good, they have now (in my opinion) over nerfed the last 2 consensus best 5s. Not into trash but definitely harder than necessary (feels like a knee jerk reaction... someone is too good for too long? Hit them harder than necessary) I don’t see it as doomsday, but I do see it as a problem. Why should we chase anything awesome, when there’s a big chance that it will be nerfed hard enough to warrant a usability question? The only way to be safe is to assume everyone worth having will someday be not worth having. 
    Of course you should be afraid.
    That's why you don't put all your eggs into one character basket.
    Get a broad roster instead of a tall one and you will never have to fear a nerf.
  • Dragon_Nexus
    Dragon_Nexus Posts: 3,701 Chairperson of the Boards
    supergarv said:
    Currently playing gambit vs gambit plus a synergetic 4/5* can get you out of PVP matches without using healthpacks. Most 5* players adapted to this, you rarely see BB as accelerator because of this.
    I figured it was because, like me, the first time people got the meta 5* was well after the point where they could have comfortably gotten BB champed.
  • thedarkphoenix
    thedarkphoenix Posts: 557 Critical Contributor
    supergarv said:
    Currently playing gambit vs gambit plus a synergetic 4/5* can get you out of PVP matches without using healthpacks. Most 5* players adapted to this, you rarely see BB as accelerator because of this.

    The „nerf“ will still make Gambit viable, but not without getting seriously injured in a mirror match due to no CD overwrite.

    Thats what D3 wants you to do, buy buy health packs and shields. Thats all the balancing they need, deal with it, and don‘t expect them to really adjust 5* equality.
    I completely agree with this, truthfully the only OP things that have been nerfed or changed in the games are the ones that let you play without using health packs or pick up shields.
  • thedarkphoenix
    thedarkphoenix Posts: 557 Critical Contributor
    HoundofShadow said:
    The Gambit nerf was made due to players' months of requests to nerf Gambits, and not because sales are poor for healthpacks and shielding. If you think they nerfed Gambit due to wanting players to spend more on shield or healthpack, then you must be posting in a different forum for the past six months or so.

    If they are so concerned about shield or healthpack, there won't be win-based pvp today. 
    I dont think that is the reason but I do think that if gambit didn't allow extended gambit without the need for health pack in pvp and pve he might have got sat on a little be longer.

    Don't be naive, when a character allows a player to ignore the "road block" and skip the toll... you can almost count on them being looked at or adjusted at some point in time.

    Gambit was tricky because he also made them a ton of money and people used a ton or resources when he was released.
  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    It's kind of difficult to envision that the devs nerfed Gambit due to healthpacks or shielding. I think you must have missed the topic spanning 36 pages of Gambit discussion and other topics that sprung up every now and then calling for nerfs by the vets.

    The main target for spending HP is on Roster Slots (~60%) and Comic Packs (~30%). Assuming you are correct that they want players to spend more HP on healthpacks and shielding, and that's why they decided to nerf gambit.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the number of healthpacks every players have, instead of increasing it from 5 to 10, increase the timer to regenerate healthpack from 36 minutes to 45 minutes or even cap the maximum number of healthpack any players can hold to 10.

    As for shielding, they implemented win-based pvp and more players are getting higher progression rewards without using shields. So, all in all, it doesn't make sense, and I haven't seen many posts saying that devs nerf gambit due to poor healthpack or shielding sales. The two of you are the first that I've seen using this line of reasoning.
  • wymtime
    wymtime Posts: 3,759 Chairperson of the Boards
    MgoBlue51 said:
    Should we be afraid moving forward that they might nerf whoever is currently at the top of the heap in 5s... while releasing boring or “off” new characters like wasp? There will always be a “best” character in every tier. And while gambit was too good, they have now (in my opinion) over nerfed the last 2 consensus best 5s. Not into trash but definitely harder than necessary (feels like a knee jerk reaction... someone is too good for too long? Hit them harder than necessary) I don’t see it as doomsday, but I do see it as a problem. Why should we chase anything awesome, when there’s a big chance that it will be nerfed hard enough to warrant a usability question? The only way to be safe is to assume everyone worth having will someday be not worth having. 
    When you take a look at any game that has will have a meta team during a period of time.  As developers they will determine how long they want a meta to last.  They way they will change the Meta will be with Buffs, Nerfs, and power creep.  The Devs grosly miscalculated howxstrong Gambit was and thought Ghost Rider and of Lumber cap had powers that would help counter Gambit.  You don’t want to massively chase one character.  You want to get a top tier character and then use that character to develope a deep roster tier so when there is a buff, nerf, power creep you are in good position to stay strong.
  • grunth13
    grunth13 Posts: 608 Critical Contributor
    edited July 2018
    Jonny1Punch said:
    I totally agree with Viral. The new updated “nerf to the nerf “barely touched his core problems. Extremely disappointing. We better see some massive reworks and buffs next season or a massive exodus of players/spenders will leave the game.

    Time to do some major quality of life upgrades to most older classic bargain bin 5*. Buff health, match damage, increase power output with lowered AP costs for starters.
    Actually the nerf and the nerf of the nerf completely changed gambit and fixed the things that everyone was asking for.   Many options were given in this forum, sadly they used almost all of them on their initial nerf and over nerfed him to the point someone might make a video of selling him and throw a hissy fit.   The nerf of the nerf took back some of his nerf which saved him from trash tier.   His ap generation,  his overwrite ability and red damage per ap were all nerfed in the end and like @Sm0keyJ0e said, let's see what actually happens in actual play.   He might surprise us... heck I'm seeing less of gambit now and he's not even nerfed yet because okoye and jj do just as much damage in just as short of a time as gambit. 
  • thedarkphoenix
    thedarkphoenix Posts: 557 Critical Contributor
    HoundofShadow said:
    It's kind of difficult to envision that the devs nerfed Gambit due to healthpacks or shielding. I think you must have missed the topic spanning 36 pages of Gambit discussion and other topics that sprung up every now and then calling for nerfs by the vets.

    The main target for spending HP is on Roster Slots (~60%) and Comic Packs (~30%). Assuming you are correct that they want players to spend more HP on healthpacks and shielding, and that's why they decided to nerf gambit.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the number of healthpacks every players have, instead of increasing it from 5 to 10, increase the timer to regenerate healthpack from 36 minutes to 45 minutes or even cap the maximum number of healthpack any players can hold to 10.

    As for shielding, they implemented win-based pvp and more players are getting higher progression rewards without using shields. So, all in all, it doesn't make sense, and I haven't seen many posts saying that devs nerf gambit due to poor healthpack or shielding sales. The two of you are the first that I've seen using this line of reasoning.
    Again I'm not saying the reason for his nerf was because of that directly I'm saying its more of "as a matter of fact" and they wouldn't change the foundation of the game for one character... And its consistent with every srong (single ) character they've nerfed from spider man to X-force wolverine to gambit. Even okoye got a quick nerf as soon as she dropped (even though that was probably more to do with gambit and thor) 

    Do I think he would have gotten checked sooner if more people didn't have him... yes
    Why? He trivialized lots of pve and boss events. He also allowed fast pushes with very little packs or needs for shields.


    Even with the win base vs point base that probably really only affects players that are super casual in pvp or newer to the game.

    People who can get to 900 or 1200 aren't especially those in 5 land aren't about to slog through 75 wins.
  • Qubort
    Qubort Posts: 203 Tile Toppler
    Okoye, JJ, and Thor already better than Gambit and after the nerf takes place, he'll be bottom third. The fact you don't think that's a significant enough nerf shows your blatant bias. 
  • ViralCore
    ViralCore Posts: 168 Tile Toppler
    MgoBlue51 said:
    Should we be afraid moving forward that they might nerf whoever is currently at the top of the heap in 5s... while releasing boring or “off” new characters like wasp? There will always be a “best” character in every tier. And while gambit was too good, they have now (in my opinion) over nerfed the last 2 consensus best 5s. Not into trash but definitely harder than necessary (feels like a knee jerk reaction... someone is too good for too long? Hit them harder than necessary) I don’t see it as doomsday, but I do see it as a problem. Why should we chase anything awesome, when there’s a big chance that it will be nerfed hard enough to warrant a usability question? The only way to be safe is to assume everyone worth having will someday be not worth having. 
    Why be afraid of nerfs? More are coming, that's just a reality of the current gaming industry. I want to be able to use more of my roster. That's the whole point of the thread.
    Qubort said:
    Okoye, JJ, and Thor already better than Gambit and after the nerf takes place, he'll be bottom third. The fact you don't think that's a significant enough nerf shows your blatant bias. 
    If you think pre-nerf Gambit is weaker than those 3, it shows your misunderstanding of how to play the game.
  • jackstar0
    jackstar0 Posts: 1,280 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited July 2018
    If I manage to get my last 3 needed Okoye covers to finish her, that would take my only mild concern away. As it stands, with 1/2Thor+JJ, I expect to be fine overall, and able to mess around with some other combos during climbs where speed doesn't matter.

    Might even use Gambit/Goblin for the heck of it.

    I'm just generally feeling positive about the next season, even knowing I'm never going to come close to an Infinity Gem.

    Honestly, I expect to see a ton of Okoye/Thor out there as they are very fast and Okoye can keep her health. Really, other than Thor, the meta seems like it could open up a bit while people seek out those speedier teams.

    I don't know why this is all in a quote window...
  • ZeiramMR
    ZeiramMR Posts: 1,357 Chairperson of the Boards
    One thing I am waiting to see that I haven't spotted from the forum threads is how the repeater appears. Does it only appear on black basic tiles? Does it turn a tile into a black Repeater, that might auto-match like the Scarlet Witch CD? Does it appear on any color? 
  • GrimSkald
    GrimSkald Posts: 2,644 Chairperson of the Boards
    ZeiramMR said:
    One thing I am waiting to see that I haven't spotted from the forum threads is how the repeater appears. Does it only appear on black basic tiles? Does it turn a tile into a black Repeater, that might auto-match like the Scarlet Witch CD? Does it appear on any color? 

    That's a really good question.  Here's the image of the changed power:


    Based on the text of the change, I'd say that the repeater will appear in a random tile and be a random color.  It shouldn't change the color of the tile it appears on.  They may be leaving out some key information - the text sometimes is vague.  It's not impossible that it will always appear on a black tile, for example, but almost certainly won't change a tile to black.

    That seems to maximize it's utility, but does make it really unpredictable.

  • Basepuzzler
    Basepuzzler Posts: 180 Tile Toppler
    ZeiramMR said:
    One thing I am waiting to see that I haven't spotted from the forum threads is how the repeater appears. Does it only appear on black basic tiles? Does it turn a tile into a black Repeater, that might auto-match like the Scarlet Witch CD? Does it appear on any color? 
    I believe on discord they said it would be on a currently black tile.  
  • Basepuzzler
    Basepuzzler Posts: 180 Tile Toppler
    ANd if no black tile exists then he does not create one

Categories