Discussion on player experience facing Chasm

System
System Posts: 1,032 Chairperson of the Boards
in MPQ Character Discussion
This discussion was created from comments split from: Developers response.
«13

Comments

  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,011 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    @entrailbucket said:

    What's really crazy is that Chasm, Thor, and Kang presumably went through this same process, and presumably those characters had winrates less than 90%, meaning they didn't require any fixing.

    That means these testers were wiping more than one out of every ten fights using Chasm, or Thor, or Kang. How is that even possible? Can we get these players in our PvP queues?

    Chasm/iHulk is very beatable it just takes a longer time to do so. I'd imagine that in AI vs AI battles that dynamic doesn't factor in. The reason that combo has a much higher float point is that it takes time to whittle down and because it eats healthpacks not because it can't be beaten. mThor and Kang are much quicker to beat but unlike the revivers a single big cascade can down them no problem. I also doubt all of their tests are using 550s since there is an absurdly small percentage of the player base running those.

    At my MMR (around 470 unboosted, 30 5* champs) I still see Chasm/iHulk particularly in SHIELD Sim but not nearly as much as I had. With a good boost list I don't typically see them at all. I still see unboosted Chasm with a boosted character occasionally but I'm auto hitting that combo any time I have two boosted. I know from talking to folks in my family of alliances that the 550 Chasms are a very different animal than in my MMR especially if paired with a low enough iHulk who won't tank even if he dies a few times so I'm glad I'm not dealing with that but it really is a problem that affects a tiny portion of the folks playing the game, even if its a larger percentage of the folks posting in the forums.

  • ThisisClemFandango
    ThisisClemFandango Posts: 837 Critical Contributor

    Speaking from my experience a chasm vs chasm match is unbearably repetitive, even if you do manage to get rid of his partners the Web match triggers on both and the game is a stalemate until you quit out losing the match.
    Hit monkey to me isn't viable as his Health is too low and you need ap which you don't get, and wong isn't even in the same league because he doesn't really do much of anything.
    What am I seeing with each 5 star since chasm is low health and low damage, permanent or otherwise.
    I can see I'm not alone in this and after defending chasm since release I have to agree that the only way out is a nerf, he is too good and is more or less a guaranteed match winner, due to his Swiss army knife powers or a broken res mechanic.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    Again, it's just proves that it's a mindset problem. There are counters out there against Chasm/iHulk but players continue to devalue them because they provide poor defensive values. I've seen such arguments being brought up multiple times for the past few different metas.

    The current latest batch of 5* (HM, Wong and Kang is good against Chasm/iHulk and they are good for even 550 players. I'm sure they have enough pulls to bring them to 500 and you don't need to bring them to 550.

    The problem BCS has to solve is this: How can you create anti-meta characters that are good on defense against all other characters and yet is easy to beat?

  • ThisisClemFandango
    ThisisClemFandango Posts: 837 Critical Contributor
    edited March 2023

    @HoundofShadow said:
    Again, it's just proves that it's a mindset problem. There are counters out there against Chasm/iHulk but players continue to devalue them because they provide poor defensive values. I've seen such arguments being brought up multiple times for the past few different metas.

    The problem BCS has to solve is this: How can you create anti-meta characters that are good on defense against all other characters and yet is easy to beat?

    Yes I understand your opinion completely but when the game is built on a rock paper scissor mechanic when you make it so the other team can't do any of them how do you move the game forward?.
    Chasm is beatable I have beaten him, but the res mechanic along with the crippling of the powers doesn't make the game enjoyable for people who don't have chasm and can't compete with the restrictions put on them by 1 character?
    Also you seem to think people are concerned with defensive losses, I have yet to find an absolute 100% winning team, and tbh as long as I get my wins in I don't care about defensive losses.
    I think this is only important to the hyper high ups of which the majority of us don't belong to.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,857 Chairperson of the Boards

    @HoundofShadow said:
    Again, it's just proves that it's a mindset problem. There are counters out there against Chasm/iHulk but players continue to devalue them because they provide poor defensive values. I've seen such arguments being brought up multiple times for the past few different metas.

    The current latest batch of 5* (HM, Wong and Kang is good against Chasm/iHulk and they are good for even 550 players. I'm sure they have enough pulls to bring them to 500 and you don't need to bring them to 550.

    The problem BCS has to solve is this: How can you create anti-meta characters that are good on defense against all other characters and yet is easy to beat?

    Or...and hear me out, this is an insane idea...you could just not make crazily overpowered characters in the first place. Then you wouldn't have to worry about counters for a "meta" at all.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    There's a match-3 game with your kind of how powers in MPQ should be designed. I can only say that it's such a boring gameplay that I stopped playing completely within 3 months.

    With the latest batch of 5*, HitMonkey/Kang will take care of them easily with ease.

    Players' winrates are around 90%. I'm not talking about 100% defense win rate. Some are expecting Chasm/iHulk level of defense but want to cheese them through in mirror match. We had such meta actually and it was Hulkoye meta. Easy to beat and great on defense but you eat tons of healthpacks. If you don't want to eat healthpack, then use Kitty/BRB for slower matches.

  • ThisisClemFandango
    ThisisClemFandango Posts: 837 Critical Contributor

    @HoundofShadow said:
    There's a match-3 game with your kind of how powers in MPQ should be designed. I can only say that it's such a boring gameplay that I stopped playing completely within 3 months.

    With the latest batch of 5*, HitMonkey/Kang will take care of them easily with ease.

    I meant as in a counter for every special tile whether it be s, a or p or charged or webbed. Each of these have more than enough counters but what beats abyss tiles and no ap gain? Apart from mirror matches.
    We are all entitled to our opinions and while I share yours you don't seem willing or able to see mine.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    The reasons you think that I don't see your views is because I've been beating Chasm/iHulk teams with various 5* from each boost weeks for the past two-three months. Real life matter messing up my pvp schedule aside, I've been hitting 1200 points in 18-22 wins without fail and I don't even shield hop. I even beat 550 Chasm with 4XX iHulk using those boosted characters, provided that they are worth high points. Only mirror match can beat Chasm/iHulk is not a reality. And there are players even from reddit who can beat them without mirror matches.

    Now you have Kang/Hit Monkey to take care of revive and ap destruction. Down iHulk with HM red and Chasm is useless. It's a fact and many would agree, Chasm is useless without iHulk. Look back his thread when players weren't teaming him up with iHulk and they also talked about how Chasm doesn't give much problem, except some annoyance. Abyss tiles can be countered with tiles destruction ability. It's not like it's permanently on the board for the rest of the game, unless you keep firing Thano's purple.

  • Bad
    Bad Posts: 3,146 Chairperson of the Boards

    This I said it already.
    Chasm has a lot of broken things: collective stun right on the start, nerfing many characters. The best AP drain on useful colors in the game. He negates AP with voids. The best regeneration and the best revive in game, plus collective stun for to keep the gear working.
    All totally for free.
    He is strong without Ihulk only for his AP drain and a boosted character.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards

    I like how some players like to abuse the word "nerf". A nerf, to me, applies permanently to all game matches, and not selected game matches. Gambit was nerfed and Bishop was nerfed. Chasm didn't nerf everyone. Let's not make it look as if Chasm appears in the entire MPQ as opponents. Time to stop abusing the word, "nerf".

  • ThisisClemFandango
    ThisisClemFandango Posts: 837 Critical Contributor

    So because it isn't a problem for you personally it isn't a problem for newer players or players who can't fully cover a new character as soon as they come out?
    You, as a long time player enjoy the luxury of having a full and substantial roster, which is the benefit of the amount of hours you have put in.
    I'm sure you aren't advocating pay to win where if someone wants to stay relevant they have to fork out substantial sums of money to get the newest character who may help them in getting high ranking pvp?
    Also Chasm isn't useless without ihulk, she hulk is extremely viable as is SpiderGwen or even Silk for Web based heals, but this also helps the apposing chasm and then the game goes on ad infinitum.
    Anyway I am no where near your level, roster or your aptitude at pvp so we don't have the same view, I just hope that bcs can come up with a way to make everyone happy again.

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    It's impossible to make sure that every players can deal with new meta. Also, the moment you use new players as shield, there's nothing much to talk about. If new players can't cover x anti-meta character fast enough is a valid reason for nerf, then Polaris, iHulk, BRB, mThor and many should be nerfed.

    I didn't start the game with over 60 5* champed. I jumped into full 5* land when the meta was Hulkoye and I didn't even have BRB champed. All I had was Polaris and Kitty Pryde. I didn't have Kitty/BRB to help me deal with them. I ate healthpacks but I still beat a sea of Hulkoye.

    If you're going for high ranking in pvp, you need to play smart and not hard. I was getting T1-T10 placements in pvps even when I was a 2* player. I didn't whale the game, nor did I spend a single cent on my main.

    Lastly, it's impossibe to make everyone happy. It's logically impossible. Not even God can make everyone happy. What makes you think mere mortals like BCS can achieve that? >:)

  • Codex
    Codex Posts: 305 Mover and Shaker

    @HoundofShadow said:
    I like how some players like to abuse the word "nerf". A nerf, to me, applies permanently to all game matches, and not selected game matches. Gambit was nerfed and Bishop was nerfed. Chasm didn't nerf everyone. Let's not make it look as if Chasm appears in the entire MPQ as opponents. Time to stop abusing the word, "nerf".

    I don't understand this. Are you saying developers nerf? The characters they release are "tools" to deal with other characters. Sounds familiar.

    What word do you propose we use?

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    I don't see how nerfs are the same as tools. Tools are counters. Nerfs are last resort. If you want to play with words, then there's nothing much to say. Let me use some objective definition of nerf.

    Nerf: (in a video game) to reconfigure (an existing character or weapon), making it less powerful.

    Saying that Chasm nerfs all other characters is abusing the word "nerf".

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    Because this is a discussion forum. Discussion forum means there are different points of views being brought up. If you want to hear the same thing, go back to Line.

  • Codex
    Codex Posts: 305 Mover and Shaker

    @HoundofShadow said:
    I don't see how nerfs are the same as tools. Tools are counters. Nerfs are last resort. If you want to play with words, then there's nothing much to say. Let me use some objective definition of nerf.

    Nerf: (in a video game) to reconfigure (an existing character or weapon), making it less powerful.

    Saying that Chasm nerfs all other characters is abusing the word "nerf".

    That was not my intention. The examples you gave were (i.e gambit, bishop) were examples of developers doing the nerfing since it was across all game states. I am trying to understand what word would suffice for you.
    If tools is not the right word then how about
    counter. Chasm counters all characters in the game.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,857 Chairperson of the Boards

    @HoundofShadow said:
    Because this is a discussion forum. Discussion forum means there are different points of views being brought up. If you want to hear the same thing, go back to Line.

    So your point of view is that Chasm has zero effect on your in game experience, and you're adamantly opposed to changing him...why? If it has no effect on you why do you even have an opinion? How can you have an opinion on him at all?

  • HoundofShadow
    HoundofShadow Posts: 8,004 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited March 2023

    I think one of the key word many of you missed out in the dev reply is this:

    Hit Monkey, Wong, Kang, and now Magik all are part of that toolkit, allowing players to strategically deal with the Chasm threat.

    A lot of Chasm haters just want to breeze through Chasm/iHulk just like how Wanda/Colossus breezed through Hulkoye. Chasm/iHulk didn't counter all other characters. What they countered was players' abilities to sail through matches with ease.

    And Chasm/iHulk has a big impact in my gameplay. I don't think I've said he has zero impact to my gameplay. They contribute to ~20-25% of my wins or 250--300 points out of 1200 points in pvps while the rest of my 900 points are contributed by boosted 5* and other non-boosted 5*. Also, they helped me save some time against Mindless Ones in pves easy nodes.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,857 Chairperson of the Boards

    @HoundofShadow said:
    I think one of the key word many of you missed out in the dev reply is this:

    Hit Monkey, Wong, Kang, and now Magik all are part of that toolkit, allowing players to strategically deal with the Chasm threat.

    A lot of Chasm haters just want to breeze through Chasm/iHulk just like how Wanda/Colossus breezed through Hulkoye. Chasm/iHulk didn't counter all other characters. What they countered was players' abilities to sail through matches with ease.

    And Chasm/iHulk has a big impact in my gameplay. I don't think I've said he has zero impact to my gameplay. They contribute to ~20-25% of my wins or 250--300 points out of 1200 points in pvps while the rest of my 900 points are contributed by boosted 5* and other non-boosted 5*. Also, they helped me save some time against Mindless Ones in pves easy nodes.

    Chasm users want to breeze through matches with ease. That's why they use him. Is that ok then?

    You're opposed to extremely powerful, autoplay passive characters that can beat Chasm, but you have no problem with Chasm himself, an extremely powerful, autoplay passive character?

Categories