**** Clea (Sorcerer Supreme) ****

KGB

I just ripped through Shield Training with Valk and a 1 cover L255 Mordo.

Her Blue (thanks to Valk) absolutely shut down both the Riri and Thing nodes and when you get a couple of them out there (neutering 2 characters) they start doing 24K damage a turn. It's an awesome power the way it shuts down actives and passives.

KGB

KGB

@entrailbucket said:
They're in complete control of every aspect of the game, and they can change any part of it at any time they want, with no notice.

We had enough information to say that Gambit was overpowered and completely game-breaking 2 weeks after his release, and the previous devs dragged their feet, tried to make counters unsuccessfully, and unnecessarily deferred the problem for months while it festered.

They can indeed. But they also know that angering a lot of players who spent cash chasing a nerfed character is not good business, nor do they want to give out lots of compensation like they did after Gambits nerf.

So it makes sense for them to do everything possible to avoid annoying players and giving out compensation. It also takes time for counters to be released (they at least release 5* faster now) and more importantly to be leveled up past basic champ level (450) esp if the rest of the 'lastest' aren't worth busting a huge hoard for. It's very possible that a decent counter will be developed for players in the 450 range where it's easy to reach but not for the 550 crowd which is vastly harder to reach as you well know.

KGB

entrailbucket

This is Clea's thread so I won't continue down this path, but just wanted to correct one thing --

They didn't give out any exceptional compensation for Gambit, it was a token that only had 5* in it. Selling Gambit got you a number of those tokens equal to the number of Gambit covers you had. It's been the same for every nerfed 5* so far.

Alex502

@GrimSkald said:

@Alex502 said:

@MrDupaTM said:
It is Chasm’s nerf? Oh, it isn’t. So who cares.

No, they haven't brought about a balance for that just yet, but frankly the meta mindset just hurts the overall experience anyway. I feel like the dev's thought Hit Monkey was a good enough response? And yet they still haven't fixed his team-up power, so. I can't really disagree with you, but then again I've been jaded against PvP forever anyway.

The last we heard from a dev was that they were waiting to see if the increased availability of Kang and HM in the wild had any impact on Chasm's prevalence, since they weren't hugely available until pretty recently.

Rebalances take time and consideration. It took over a year for Gambit to get nerfed and he was very clearly head and shoulders above other characters (still would be, tbh.) Griping about it every week is not particularly productive.

Lord, I remember that year with Gambit.

Anyway, I'm not the kind of player to come here and complain, I really like to highlight the dynamics that work well, and tend to bring up the play tested errors we all see. We agree, actually, the continuous complaint cycle doesn't get any traction. And speaking of Gambit, I was at first shocked they brought back X-Force Wolverine's previous power set, and yet he hasn't made such a splash either.

The issues with Chasm are relatable to the issues with Gambit, and I think that the truest issue here is a lack of sychronicity between characters released. No matter what the characters themselves are, there should be a clear and dedicated direction for powersets as they come so that the intergration is recognized at the priority the players place it at, like myself and what I see here in the forums. To the topic of feedback and progress on current errors, there could maybe be some clearer communication from them to us about what's in the works to get fixed, but I honestly couldn't expect it.

Back to the topic at hand, as entrailbucket said, this is Clea's thread, and I thought that I'd say my Wong is 1 cover, 255, and I brought Jessica Jones, 453, and both got knocked out in the second to last round of Welcome to Shield, the one against Mordo, Thing, and Starlord? Clea single handly took that entire match. I kept her red high and in Faltine mode, I dropped really precise purples to control the enemy, and I used her blue to dominate the rest of the way. She's incredibly effective, and a great character.

Can she change the MPQ Meta-Verse by herself? No, she's not all powerful, but she's an incredible teammate, especially if she covers her own colors.

EienRyuu

You know.... since I have been a fan of Princess Hinoto from the anime X (if someone remembers it), she looks good.
For those who don't know Hinoto here's how she looks in the anime:
As for abilities - as I have been using her in her PVP + the current PVE (Webbed Wonder where she is the required 4 star) it feels a lot like 3* Strange. A bit different nonetheless.
Although there's this thing - since I am using Polaris and 3 Strange (I have the Sanctum support slapped on him which makes Protect tiles for Polaris (I know, I know....)) and if the goons or the opposite hero fires a power, her banner doesn't appear. The animation for Strange and banner appears and he deals the damage.
In her PVP she does deal damage. And I think the banner appears, haven't paid attention. Is it supposed to be like that or not?? I guess it's only for PVE. I think she does deal dmg but can't see it from the quickness of Strange. xD

AlexR

What I would like to know is why a 4* that is clearly meant to be a direct upgrade to 3* Strange's yellow does less damage than his yellow. 3* Strange does ~1800 at baby champ / 2100 at max champ. Clea does 900 damage baby champ and probably 1200 while in Faltinian form.

I like her blue and her purple is fun. But frankly, for the people that take 3* Strange into PvE for his passive, she is a downgrade and I find that kinda baffling.

Borstock

@AlexR said:
What I would like to know is why a 4* that is clearly meant to be a direct upgrade to 3* Strange's yellow does less damage than his yellow. 3* Strange does ~1800 at baby champ / 2100 at max champ. Clea does 900 damage baby champ and probably 1200 while in Faltinian form.

I like her blue and her purple is fun. But frankly, for the people that take 3* Strange into PvE for his passive, she is a downgrade and I find that kinda baffling.

I doubt they consider 3* characters when designing the upper tiers.

HoundofShadow

They probably do because they design 3/5 together.

AlexR

@Borstock said:

@AlexR said:
What I would like to know is why a 4* that is clearly meant to be a direct upgrade to 3* Strange's yellow does less damage than his yellow. 3* Strange does ~1800 at baby champ / 2100 at max champ. Clea does 900 damage baby champ and probably 1200 while in Faltinian form.

I like her blue and her purple is fun. But frankly, for the people that take 3* Strange into PvE for his passive, she is a downgrade and I find that kinda baffling.

I doubt they consider 3* characters when designing the upper tiers.

Usually? Sure. But in this case all of Clea's abilities seem designed like they want to be an upgrade to Strange's kit. From the passive to the healing to the blue to the color scheme. It'd be pretty strange if they forgot 3* Strange existed when Clea's kit is so clearly meant to echo it. Not considering 3* Strange in this context seems like a massive oversight, especially because that seemed the design idea? To make a 4* upgrade to the most popular 3* . Except, it's a downgrade for some bizarre reason.

entrailbucket

The damage on her passive does seem really low.
Maybe the number is a mistake/bug?

Bowgentle

@entrailbucket said:
The damage on her passive does seem really low.
Maybe the number is a mistake/bug?

Put it on the growing pile of "clarification would be nice".

AlexR

I'd be surprised if it was a bug. In-game Shield Training Clea matched the values posted here, so it seems intentional. I suspect it's more a design oversight than bug.

Either way it's unfortunate, because for 4* use frankly she's borderline dead on arrival like this. #buffClea'sYellow

Borstock

@AlexR said:

@Borstock said:

@AlexR said:
What I would like to know is why a 4* that is clearly meant to be a direct upgrade to 3* Strange's yellow does less damage than his yellow. 3* Strange does ~1800 at baby champ / 2100 at max champ. Clea does 900 damage baby champ and probably 1200 while in Faltinian form.

I like her blue and her purple is fun. But frankly, for the people that take 3* Strange into PvE for his passive, she is a downgrade and I find that kinda baffling.

I doubt they consider 3* characters when designing the upper tiers.

Usually? Sure. But in this case all of Clea's abilities seem designed like they want to be an upgrade to Strange's kit. From the passive to the healing to the blue to the color scheme. It'd be pretty strange if they forgot 3* Strange existed when Clea's kit is so clearly meant to echo it. Not considering 3* Strange in this context seems like a massive oversight, especially because that seemed the design idea?

I'm more thinking along the lines of her scaling and partners. Once you hit 4* land, you're probably not using 3* Strange except for the occasional PvE where he can hide behind a booster. But you can actually use Clea, which means her numbers have to be considered relative to that tier's typical usage. And 3* Strange probably doesn't offer helpful data in that case.

Assuming this logic, they're probably looking at the numbers for when she's boosted and comparing them to a champed 5* Strange.

I'm guessing. I could be wrong.

KGB

I think her Yellow is meant to mimic 5* Strange, not 3*.

That's because her both hers and 5* Strange have an active component that does damage (831/turn for her) in addition to the passive when an enemy fires a power. 5* Strange only does 1448 damage when champed (450) on his passive Yellow so hers doing 900 when champed is in line with that.

Whether its a downgrade depends on whether you plan to use the active part of her Yellow. Against goons 3* Strange is a better choice since they tend to fire a lot of CDs but against tile movers Clea is probably better because she can make use of the active part of her Yellow.

KGB

AlexR

@KGB said:
I think her Yellow is meant to mimic 5* Strange, not 3*.

That's because her both hers and 5* Strange have an active component that does damage (831/turn for her) in addition to the passive when an enemy fires a power. 5* Strange only does 1448 damage when champed (450) on his passive Yellow so hers doing 900 when champed is in line with that. (...)

huh?? No, that can't be, 1448 is unleveled 5* Strange.

Look at mine, who is unleveled lvl 255:

I have an alliance mate who has a champed lvl 458 Strange, and the passive part of his yellow says it does 6k damage.

So it goes 3* Strange does roughly ~2k and 5* Strange does roughly ~6k. Clea... does 900-1200.

If she was supposed to fit into the middle, she should do 3-4k!

HoundofShadow

Electro reduces AoE by 6622 damage at 450.
Quake reduces AoE by 3394 damage at 270. That's 1.95x more.

5 Strange deals 5824 at 450 but he doesn't heal allies. That's why he's dealing more damage to compensate for that.

5824/1.95 = 2986.67
Clea should be dealing 2986.67 without healing her allies. Add in her healing, it should be dealing 2986.67 - 540x 3 = 1366.67
Since she also boosts her power by 35%, her yellow with healing should deal 65% x 1366.67 = 888.33 damage, which is pretty close to 900.

AlexR

You are aware that 3* Strange also heals allies, right? He does ~2k AND a little bit of AoE healing. She does 900-1200 and a little bit of AoE healing. So no, that scaling logic does not work. It should not be this much worse than the 3* version of the same passive.
You mentioned Quake and Electro for scaling. Imagine if they were flipped, Quake reducing AoEs by 6+k and Electro by 3.4k. Would that not be bizzare that the higher form of that passive is worse? That's Clea.

I could see it if she only did a little more than 3* Strange in normal form like maybe 2.5k and the Faltinian form boost then pushed her to ~3.3k. That would give you a rough average of 3k for a scaling factor of 1.95 for 5* Strange and at the same time not be worse than 3* Strange. That would make sense. 900 does not.

entrailbucket

It really, for-real, honestly, seems like a mistake.

Maybe submit a bug report?

AlexR

So, I asked about it. Got the following reply from customer support:

Based on our current information Clea (Sorcerer Supreme)'s stats and damage values are as intended.

So yeah, Clea is stuck with this until she gets a rebalance some years down the line, I guess. Unfortunate, because I think a 4* version of Strange's kit would have potential otherwise, but what can you do.

HoundofShadow

You cared enough about Clea to email them.
Maybe I should try emailing them about 5* Wasp.