The ChaHulk meta

Daredevil217

It all depends on how you define “counter”. If it’s just a character that can beat Chasm, then we already have “counters”, and Kang doesn’t move the needle. For me personally the problem has never been about “beating Chasm” (and it’s hilarious when people try to make it about that). The issue is around variety. I’m tired of facing the same boring team.

Now you may counter with, “there’s always going to be a best team”. Whether Colossus/Switch, BRB/Kitty, Hulkoye, or Thorkoye, your queues will be littered with whatever the meta of the moment is.

To that I say, god boosts fixed that problem. The game will never be balanced completely, but if all of your characters fall within a certain delta, then the “best” will be the ones with 100 levels tacked on. And each week what you play is different and what you see is different.

Chasm obliterated this. Hulkgasm became a better pick than characters 100+ levels higher. Now what you see is Hulkgasm, and you better play them too, lest you be a target.

So would I rather play as a team that can beat Hulkgasm, or one that can beat all teams trivially, is AI-proof, and costs anyone who attacks me health packs. Of course I’m going to choose the latter. And if everyone else feels the same, then while Kang may counter an aspect of Chasm’s kit, he will not have countered the Chasm meta.

In my mind, Chasm broke the power scale. Pretty much every character (and one reworked oldie) have tried to counter with no avail. Kang feels like significant power creep with his auto-win. It’s concerning because this level of busted or better is the level we need in order for a new character to be worth playing. Before they could shoot for average/mid-pack knowing that they’ll be the go-to when boosted. This is no longer the case in Chas-land. The last time a character was smashing people 100+ levels greater and was clogging up all the retals… Bishop. Coincidentally the last nerf. It was the right call then…

DAZ0273

If Kang isn't meant to be a Chasm/iHulk counter then I am not sure what he is supposed to be because I really don't see how an auto-win character benefits MPQ myself. I am glad Kang is fun but the AP restore would have been enough and that affects more than just Chasm. Auto-win is potentially off the scales OP apart from against the team that people are moaning about which seems crazy. My god boosted 500+ character is no use if some cheesy Kang team can just send them away and beat me without trying. We are now going to have to watch the next few releases very carefully for any sort of blue AP generation or AP cost reduction which puts Kang completely beyond control.

Time (ha!) will tell I guess.

Sekilicious

@entrailbucket said:
Oh see, I had the opposite experience with Scarlet Witch and Okoye. Virtually overnight after their release, Okoye/Hulk completely disappeared from queues and was replaced by SW/Colossus. Different matchmaking/slices, I guess?

People broke their hoards to get to the 550 MMR for Colossus and Wanda. And they were good defensively. People broke their hoards for Chasm, mThor and their hoards have not had time to regenerate, since that takes a year. Only whales can get their Kang to 550. But even at 550 if Kang relies on getting 9, 18, or 27 blue he will not be good defensively. Closer to Okoye than Wanda.

entrailbucket

@DAZ0273 said:
If Kang isn't meant to be a Chasm/iHulk counter then I am not sure what he is supposed to be because I really don't see how an auto-win character benefits MPQ myself. I am glad Kang is fun but the AP restore would have been enough and that affects more than just Chasm. Auto-win is potentially off the scales OP apart from against the team that people are moaning about which seems crazy. My god boosted 500+ character is no use if some cheesy Kang team can just send them away and beat me without trying. We are now going to have to watch the next few releases very carefully for any sort of blue AP generation or AP cost reduction which puts Kang completely beyond control.

Time (ha!) will tell I guess.

This is the problem with the "counters, not nerfs" philosophy that players say they want. Chasm is overpowered. A counter to Chasm (that isn't incredibly narrow) will also have to be overpowered, or it won't work. Except then you've created a new problem, and now that problem needs a counter too.

You end up in this arms race where the overall power level goes crazy, when all you really had to do was fix the problem character.

Bowgentle

Isn't power creep included in the business model?
Why keep spending, if new guys aren't massively better than old guys?
Which is why it's so surprising seeing them do balance passes on old 5s.

Daredevil217

@entrailbucket said:

@DAZ0273 said:
If Kang isn't meant to be a Chasm/iHulk counter then I am not sure what he is supposed to be because I really don't see how an auto-win character benefits MPQ myself. I am glad Kang is fun but the AP restore would have been enough and that affects more than just Chasm. Auto-win is potentially off the scales OP apart from against the team that people are moaning about which seems crazy. My god boosted 500+ character is no use if some cheesy Kang team can just send them away and beat me without trying. We are now going to have to watch the next few releases very carefully for any sort of blue AP generation or AP cost reduction which puts Kang completely beyond control.

Time (ha!) will tell I guess.

This is the problem with the "counters, not nerfs" philosophy that players say they want. Chasm is overpowered. A counter to Chasm (that isn't incredibly narrow) will also have to be overpowered, or it won't work. Except then you've created a new problem, and now that problem needs a counter top.

You end up in this arms race where the overall power level goes crazy, when all you really had to do was fix the problem character.

That’s exactly what I was saying (just longer winded). Chasm broke the curve. Characters are either DOA or have to be massively overpowered to matter. The reality is that Chasm made all other characters (aside from Hulk) mostly unnecessary/obsolete in PVP. That’s not good for the health of the game. GhostPool/Ronin/Kamala were good levels to shoot for when designing a character. Great boosted, otherwise you won’t use them when other characters are boosted instead. Now you can just use Hulkgasm no matter what (with the exception of some specific boost lists). So now that Hulkgasm has broken the curve, you can’t make a character like Ronin and make them matter anymore. Instead we get broken mechanics to make a character worth chasing (I.e. Kang).

Remember how Chasm “broke MPQ” with all the bugs and weird interactions that needed to be patched? I’d argue he’s still “breaking the game”. For some I get he isn’t a problem. Either they aren’t seeing him nearly as much as others or are and don’t mind fighting a wall of the same team. But for me, it’s a definite quality of life suck, and I’m not excited for Kang giving any 3* a fast track to beating any team they want. Ah well… this is where we’re at now.

DAZ0273

@Bowgentle said:
Isn't power creep included in the business model?
Why keep spending, if new guys aren't massively better than old guys?
Which is why it's so surprising seeing them do balance passes on old 5s.

Yeah and not really monetise the rebalances as much as they could have. They even tried to give long term players a "fix" to the Chasm situation with the Silver Surfer re-work. Mine isn't high enough that I ever really tried him out but feedback otherwise says it didn't work but that seems over and above just a standard rebalance. Maybe they just saw Surfer's kit and thought it was a workable fit but the fact they even thought about it is interesting.

Daredevil217

@Bowgentle said:
Isn't power creep included in the business model?
Why keep spending, if new guys aren't massively better than old guys?
Which is why it's so surprising seeing them do balance passes on old 5s.

I think that was indeed the old business model. I think god boosts made the new business model, “don’t skip anyone or you will miss out on the weekly meta”. I think it was a better model. It deterred going “all in” on three characters and riding them for a year while you stack resources to 550 another 3 and not spend a dime. The champ em all model is better for the devs (more than 3-5 characters that they part hard work into get to matter) and it deters hoarding. Chasm broke that business model.

entrailbucket

@Bowgentle said:
Isn't power creep included in the business model?
Why keep spending, if new guys aren't massively better than old guys?
Which is why it's so surprising seeing them do balance passes on old 5s.

This game has never, and probably will never, get a significant amount of income from selling characters. They sell roster slots, and they sell them mainly to lower tier players than us. The whales are all extinct anyway. They could release the most OP 5* in the history of the game, and it'd just be f2p hoarders who maxed him out. Nobody is spending $10,000 on a character these days.

entrailbucket

Incidentally, the whales all went extinct because spending money stopped being an advantage. F2p players could max out the very few good characters easily, and everyone else was useless.

Basically you could max out the Okoyes and Apocalypses without spending. Spending would be necessary if you wanted to also max out Kingpin and Abigail Brand and Elektra, except there was zero incentive to do that.

Boosts and buffs were a step on the path to fixing that problem, and then Chasm.

Sekilicious

Your causation is backwards. I have played many games with viable F2P models that make millions per day through whales. Treating your customers like trash doesn’t bring in whales, though it does seem that with more whales the more developers treat their customers like trash. Besides, there are likely a couple of 550 Kangs out there right now so they aren’t extinct yet. Shang-Chi had videos of him on this forum at 550 with only his hp store available.

DAZ0273

@entrailbucket said:
Incidentally, the whales all went extinct because spending money stopped being an advantage. F2p players could max out the very few good characters easily, and everyone else was useless.

Basically you could max out the Okoyes and Apocalypses without spending. Spending would be necessary if you wanted to also max out Kingpin and Abigail Brand and Elektra, except there was zero incentive to do that.

Boosts and buffs were a step on the path to fixing that problem, and then Chasm.

Well if the Devs want to have a pop at hoarding and f2p players AND introduce incentives to chase every character then you introduce time expiry limits on LT's OR you introduce Character Specific tokens. I mean it wont impact all those enormous CP mountains but it will start to eat into them. And we might get a 71 page thread to read!

entrailbucket

@Sekilicious said:
Your causation is backwards. I have played many games with viable F2P models that make millions per day through whales. Treating your customers like trash doesn’t bring in whales, though it does seem that with more whales the more developers treat their customers like trash. Besides, there are likely a couple of 550 Kangs out there right now so they aren’t extinct yet. Shang-Chi had videos of him on this forum at 550 with only his hp store available.

Those videos you see are from sandboxed accounts (notice they're always on Steam?).

I'm confused about how creating a balanced, diverse metagame is "treating your customers like trash."

Sekilicious

Oh good. We have reached the ‘taking points out of context’ phase of your argument style. I will tap out before you reach the ‘making up data’ phase.

entrailbucket

Can you explain what you mean by "treating your customers like trash," then?

killahKlown

Winner: Sekilicious

entrailbucket

Also, just out of curiosity, in which real world business would you consider a person who spends $0 a "customer?" Remember MPQ doesn't have ads, so they're not monetizing the time you spend playing.

liminal_lad

I find the level of aggression here really confusing. It's a mobile game. It is still profitable. We don't need to backseat MBA their choices.

I'm not really sure what the argument here is. I think the current state of the meta is unpleasant. It also inspired me to spend some money to ensure I had a Kang. I'm not sure if that's good for me as a player, but I assume it's good for them as a business.

liminal_lad

To be fair, I think Chasm should be nerfed but that is a topic for another thread.

Sekilicious

@liminal_lad said:
To be fair, I think Chasm should be nerfed but that is a topic for another thread.

Nope. Chasm is the topic of this thread.