The ChaHulk meta

Bowgentle

@DAZ0273 said:

@Bowgentle said:

@DAZ0273 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@entrailbucket said:
Again with this...I do not want them to "change the rules" to "optimize my roster."

There is only one rule, and that rule is "the developers can change any character they want, for any reason, at any time." They've turned the best character into the worst, and the worst into the best, many times over the years. They're in charge, not the players, and the decisions they make are arbitrary and capricious.

The only way to optimize for that "rule" is to make sure you have everyone and they're all high level. If you skip a guy, you risk them buffing him into the best character. If you go all in, you risk them nerfing him into the worst.

Minmaxing is, and has always been, a way to win in the short term, but it never pays off in the long term.

See you say this and then go on a diatribe about how you wish the game worked instead of how it has worked since the Gambit (as 5) and Worthy (as 4) nerf. So what four years? Three!? You want min maxing to not work but all the min maxers on Discord and Reddit point to their strategy being successful, since the beginning of the game, due to their top place finishes in PvE and PvP. This is the game the former developers chose to create and the current developers continue to suggest they want in their responses to questions.

Minmaxing has always been a bad idea, because the minmaxer is not in control of the game (unless you think the devs should "adapt the game to their rosters," hmmmm???) and has no alternative options if their one guy gets killed.

You know who you're NOT hearing from, on Discord and Reddit? All the players who maxed out Gambit, or OML, or xforce/4thor, who had no other options and literally quit the game because they couldn't play it after those nerfs. Minmaxing has been a bad idea since day 1, it's only in the last few years that it's worked at all, and only because they haven't bothered to fix their mistakes.

I don't "not want it to work," it simply hasn't consistently worked, and it's unlikely to do so in the future. I don't know why nobody has bothered to learn from the past and is so eager to get destroyed by a nerf again. I do know that I'm really going to enjoy fighting those players post-nerf, because I'm prepared for it and they chose not to prepare.

There is no evidence that any dev team encourages players to go all in on their mistakes, and in fact there's quite a lot of evidence that the intention is for all characters to be about the same, and for players to keep a diverse roster.

Hasn't Okoye been featured in like a record amount of special stores and vaults? If that isn't encouraging players to chase her I don't know what is. Interestingly I don't recall Chasm having such wide level of availability to rack up levels. I could be wrong - anyone know? All of this of course just distracts us from the Devs overall master plan - 550 Dr. Strange for all.

Chasm was in Latest for like, 84 years.

Oh he had a longer than normal run? Didn't realise that. Okoye just seems to stand out to me. She is always in the Lunar vault. She has been featured in plenty fan favourite stores and bundles. I might just not be remembering Chasm being as available.

Yeah he was in during that whole scheduling snafu, for what felt like forever.
That wasn't by design, though, it just happened.

entrailbucket

@DAZ0273 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@DAZ0273 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@entrailbucket said:
Again with this...I do not want them to "change the rules" to "optimize my roster."

There is only one rule, and that rule is "the developers can change any character they want, for any reason, at any time." They've turned the best character into the worst, and the worst into the best, many times over the years. They're in charge, not the players, and the decisions they make are arbitrary and capricious.

The only way to optimize for that "rule" is to make sure you have everyone and they're all high level. If you skip a guy, you risk them buffing him into the best character. If you go all in, you risk them nerfing him into the worst.

Minmaxing is, and has always been, a way to win in the short term, but it never pays off in the long term.

See you say this and then go on a diatribe about how you wish the game worked instead of how it has worked since the Gambit (as 5) and Worthy (as 4) nerf. So what four years? Three!? You want min maxing to not work but all the min maxers on Discord and Reddit point to their strategy being successful, since the beginning of the game, due to their top place finishes in PvE and PvP. This is the game the former developers chose to create and the current developers continue to suggest they want in their responses to questions.

Minmaxing has always been a bad idea, because the minmaxer is not in control of the game (unless you think the devs should "adapt the game to their rosters," hmmmm???) and has no alternative options if their one guy gets killed.

You know who you're NOT hearing from, on Discord and Reddit? All the players who maxed out Gambit, or OML, or xforce/4thor, who had no other options and literally quit the game because they couldn't play it after those nerfs. Minmaxing has been a bad idea since day 1, it's only in the last few years that it's worked at all, and only because they haven't bothered to fix their mistakes.

I don't "not want it to work," it simply hasn't consistently worked, and it's unlikely to do so in the future. I don't know why nobody has bothered to learn from the past and is so eager to get destroyed by a nerf again. I do know that I'm really going to enjoy fighting those players post-nerf, because I'm prepared for it and they chose not to prepare.

There is no evidence that any dev team encourages players to go all in on their mistakes, and in fact there's quite a lot of evidence that the intention is for all characters to be about the same, and for players to keep a diverse roster.

Hasn't Okoye been featured in like a record amount of special stores and vaults? If that isn't encouraging players to chase her I don't know what is. Interestingly I don't recall Chasm having such wide level of availability to rack up levels. I could be wrong - anyone know? All of this of course just distracts us from the Devs overall master plan - 550 Dr. Strange for all.

I don't know about that one, I think she tends to win one slot in the polls, but not every time? She was just in the red envelope vault thing too, because she has a red costume. Dr Strange is in way more stuff than she is.

On her design -- it's just, like, a strategy/team spirit thing, she's a general after all. But she also fights on the front lines, so she wants to tank. I don't think it's a crazy concept for that character.

Yes, for Wakanda. Wakanda Forever. There is no mention of anything other than Wakanda, a secretive African nation that shuns outsiders!

FINE, you win!

I still think she's a cool design, even if it doesn't fit the character necessarily. The problem is that she's only balanced/interesting/fun in the old version of the game, where you have to match tiles and cast stuff to win. In passiveworld she's way too good.

entrailbucket

Oh, I must be wrong about all the players I personally knew, who quit back then for that reason!

If the "most vocal minmaxers" didn't learn their lesson the first several times they got burned, maybe they're not as smart as they think they are.

mani82

@DAZ0273 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@Sekilicious said:

@entrailbucket said:
Again with this...I do not want them to "change the rules" to "optimize my roster."

There is only one rule, and that rule is "the developers can change any character they want, for any reason, at any time." They've turned the best character into the worst, and the worst into the best, many times over the years. They're in charge, not the players, and the decisions they make are arbitrary and capricious.

The only way to optimize for that "rule" is to make sure you have everyone and they're all high level. If you skip a guy, you risk them buffing him into the best character. If you go all in, you risk them nerfing him into the worst.

Minmaxing is, and has always been, a way to win in the short term, but it never pays off in the long term.

See you say this and then go on a diatribe about how you wish the game worked instead of how it has worked since the Gambit (as 5) and Worthy (as 4) nerf. So what four years? Three!? You want min maxing to not work but all the min maxers on Discord and Reddit point to their strategy being successful, since the beginning of the game, due to their top place finishes in PvE and PvP. This is the game the former developers chose to create and the current developers continue to suggest they want in their responses to questions.

Minmaxing has always been a bad idea, because the minmaxer is not in control of the game (unless you think the devs should "adapt the game to their rosters," hmmmm???) and has no alternative options if their one guy gets killed.

You know who you're NOT hearing from, on Discord and Reddit? All the players who maxed out Gambit, or OML, or xforce/4thor, who had no other options and literally quit the game because they couldn't play it after those nerfs. Minmaxing has been a bad idea since day 1, it's only in the last few years that it's worked at all, and only because they haven't bothered to fix their mistakes.

I don't "not want it to work," it simply hasn't consistently worked, and it's unlikely to do so in the future. I don't know why nobody has bothered to learn from the past and is so eager to get destroyed by a nerf again. I do know that I'm really going to enjoy fighting those players post-nerf, because I'm prepared for it and they chose not to prepare.

There is no evidence that any dev team encourages players to go all in on their mistakes, and in fact there's quite a lot of evidence that the intention is for all characters to be about the same, and for players to keep a diverse roster.

Hasn't Okoye been featured in like a record amount of special stores and vaults? If that isn't encouraging players to chase her I don't know what is. Interestingly I don't recall Chasm having such wide level of availability to rack up levels. I could be wrong - anyone know? All of this of course just distracts us from the Devs overall master plan - 550 Dr. Strange for all.

I literally rolled over laughing at the last line 😜

Sekilicious

@entrailbucket said:
Oh, I must be wrong about all the players I personally knew, who quit back then for that reason!

If the "most vocal minmaxers" didn't learn their lesson the first several times they got burned, maybe they're not as smart as they think they are.

I wouldn’t say completely wrong. It was certainly true before gambit. But since Okoye was op and marketed as such you do like to only choose to notice evidence that fits your narrative. Because the leaderboards in both PvE and PvP sure has a lot of minmaxers on it.

entrailbucket

I don't see any evidence that Okoye was "marketed as" overpowered. I think she was a mistake, and the minmaxers are always looking to exploit the developers' mistakes. Look at how many raced Bishop to 370.

I don't know why they chose not to fix her, but I think it was bad for the game -- it taught a generation of players that it was now ok to go all in. Those players think they're smarter than the game and they think they're in control...they are not. If/when Chasm gets fixed, it will remind them that they're not in control, it's not their game, and they don't make the rules. Everyone is subject to the arbitrary whims of the developers; we live in their world.

Anyway those players will deserve it, and it'll be hilarious! I can't wait.

Bowgentle

Not sure it'll be as hilarious as you think.
Most of those will just go back to weekly boosted... Although with 550 MMR that might be painful.
I dunno.

Sekilicious

@entrailbucket said:
I don't see any evidence that Okoye was "marketed as" overpowered. I think she was a mistake, and the minmaxers are always looking to exploit the developers' mistakes. Look at how many raced Bishop to 370.

I don't know why they chose not to fix her, but I think it was bad for the game -- it taught a generation of players that it was now ok to go all in. Those players think they're smarter than the game and they think they're in control...they are not. If/when Chasm gets fixed, it will remind them that they're not in control, it's not their game, and they don't make the rules. Everyone is subject to the arbitrary whims of the developers; we live in their world.

Anyway those players will deserve it, and it'll be hilarious! I can't wait.

I recall Okoye being in every lunar New Years store for a few years now. She was in an fan favourites store with Apocalypse during or soon after a nerf thread was going on for her. So yeah, marketed though it was the various forums calling her OP. I’m ok with decision, it is the developer’s game after all. They can run it however they like.

I also remember the cries and predictions for the nerf of Wanda, though only 550 players were affected since boosted characters dominated low 5* MMR. There are good long nerf threads for Chasm, and the new developers might very well blink and nerf him. I’m sure the people who unhoarded for him will take solace in the mThor, Colossus meta that will follow. Since if you unhoarded for Chasm, chances are good you have mThor champed or 550 depending on the hoard. They will probably have Colossus maxed as well, since minmaxers last unhoarded for Wanda.

entrailbucket

If Okoye being in those vaults was being "marketed as overpowered" then what does that say about Dr. Strange?

Also, can you show me in the game where it says that Okoye is meant to be better than other characters? If I was going to market a character as better than others, to induce sales, I'd make sure that every player knew I intended that character to be better.

Maybe they could use some sort of star system?

entrailbucket

BTW, you're right about those long-time minmaxers. They have other 550s, so they don't have all their eggs in one basket, and they won't get killed by a single nerf.

Who will? The newer players who blindly took their advice and broke their first big hoard.

Sekilicious

You seem to have missed the part where I said the forums market Okoye for them. Strange has been a fan favourite since forever, of course they’re going to make him available as well. As for Okoye being better is unfair to the rest, that is the strategy adopted by the developers. It would be unreasonable for new players to not target her and instead opt for the 7k pulls it would take to champ the 5s in the classics store.

As for the rest, the newly unhoarded will have mThor and Kamala champed so they definitely will not be hurting. They can pair either with Polaris and can handle at least as much as those who unhoarded for Shang-Chi, Ultron, and Gamora like I did. If they waited until 1800 and got the 550s they have other options since swaps mean they can boost the the level of their other meta characters.

entrailbucket

Sorry, but that's all the same cargo cult nonsense that other guy constantly says. If Okoye (or chasm, or whoever else) was meant to be better, or somehow designed to increase sales, they'd give her more stars, or different color stars, or something to indicate that she's better.

A tiny, tiny percentage of players go to these forums, or Line, or Reddit. This is not a marketing strategy, and again, there is no evidence that they've marketed her or anyone else as being overpowered. You're the one ignoring evidence to suit your narrative here.

Anyway, if everyone will be just fine, and won't be affected by a nerf at all, why does anyone care? Seems like that's a really good reason to do the nerf.

Bowgentle

I mean we have to talk about SOMETHING here.
What else are the 5 of us going to do.

Sekilicious

I hope you didn’t hurt yourself moving that goal post. Funny how you are pro developer when calling for nerfs but then need the game changed when it doesn’t suit your roster. But yeah, ignore all the evidence you like.

entrailbucket

@Sekilicious said:
I hope you didn’t hurt yourself moving that goal post. Funny how you are pro developer when calling for nerfs but then need the game changed when it doesn’t suit your roster. But yeah, ignore all the evidence you like.

I still don't have any idea what you're talking about with this. How do I "need the game changed when it doesn't suit my roster?" I have never said anything like that. If I wanted the game to suit my roster I'd have done the hoarding thing forever ago, or quit.

And what goal post moved? YOU said the nerf would have no impact.

HoundofShadow

The correct statement is "... When it doesn't fit my vision of what MPQ should be."

Everyone has a vision of how MPQ should be runned. They think that their vision is the "right" way, and the dev's way, if it doesn't align with them, the "wrong" way.

entrailbucket

Yeah... I mean, everyone here is just stating our opinions about how the game should be, and most people have different opinions and perspectives.

HoundofShadow

That's right. However, "problems" occur when players think the dev and other players should follow their way, and when the dev doesn't, some became unhappy and some even threatens or berate the dev. This is where things start to go haywire. The thing is, this seems to be something difficult to control for those players.

Daredevil217

There is a whole lot of projection and straw armies in this thread. It’s actually been entertaining to read but geez.

EB is flat wrong about the minmaxers screwing themselves using that strategy. If you are using data from 4+ years ago (and a different development team to boot) to fuel your argument, it’s probably not a great one. I made the argument when god boosts happened that the 550 meta players would be just fine and continue to rule the leaderboards and that’s exactly what happened. Nerf Chasm and the same will be true. Even if the developers did somehow change the rules so the “all in on meta” strategy was no longer best practice, they still would have half a decade of W’s under their belt having used that strategy. So I don’t exactly get how you could laugh at them and call them foolish.

Sekilicious and (AN OLD CHALLENGER HAS ENTERED THE ARENA) Hound are also wrong. I don’t get how EB wants the game to cater to his roster or vision. That keeps getting tossed out and I see no evidence to support that. EB has repeatedly said that this is the developers’ game, not the players. So if anything he’s stating the opposite.

A lot of people don’t like Chasm. Myself included. I’ve stated all the reasons why I don’t like him (I think the forum is the right place to give that kind of feedback). I hardly think that equates to berating, threatening, or quitting for not getting your way. But “players” often use hyperbole, strawmen, conjecture, and out of context examples to win arguments against made up detractors. Happens all the time.

Okay, pot stirred. Going to refill my popcorn.

Kross

I don't feel like reading through 38 pages here, but I want to ask those people who keep saying they have no problems with Chasm/iHulk/Shulk teams who are they using?

I have been using Wanda, Crystal, and Monkey and I have been having success, but that team will often need 2-3 health packs after one match.