I dunno, none of the stuff they did to try to counter Chasm had any effect at all. I suppose it's possible that they'll go easy on him, because I guess he's allowed special privileges or something, but if they do, they're going to have to hit him again at some point.
Maybe BCS will be different when it comes to this stuff. Demiurge's philosophy on nerfs seemed to be "hit them hard once so we never ever have to touch them ever again."
There's no reason this should have to work that way, though. I'd love to see them do balancing with small, frequent changes. Hit Chasm a little, observe for a month, and if it doesn't fix the problem, go hit him a little again, repeat. If the first hit goes too far, then go buff him a bit. People are only traumatized by MPQ nerfs because they're always these massive swings.
I don't think you are being entirely fair. Kang/Hawkeye/4* Deadpool have definitely given players an almost surefire way to deal with Chasm/iHulk in pick 3. Riri and Mighty Thor are also effective, although admittedly I don't see them much in pick 2 unless one of them is boosted.
And once supports are a thing in PvP, Wong and Shang-Chi can at least on paper be included into the mix.
So the board is definitely being set up in a way to take Chasm/i-Hulk down another notch or two but it remains to be seen whether Broken Circle will be merciful in their usage of the nerf bat.
On the point of more frequent, smaller balance passes we are in agreement.
The problem is that Chasm is now beatable by more teams, but he still beats absolutely everything. They haven't released a counter good enough to make running Chasm a liability, so there's no reason not to use him for everything.
The counters have helped somewhat in that there are now more ways to win a match against Chasm/Hulk, but there were always plenty of ways to win that match. They've had zero impact on his usage because he can trivially beat all of those counters.
@entrailbucket said: The problem is that Chasm is now beatable by more teams, but he still beats absolutely everything. They haven't released a counter good enough to make running Chasm a liability, so there's no reason not to use him for everything. The counters have helped somewhat in that there are now more ways to win a match against Chasm/Hulk, but there were always plenty of ways to win that match. They've had zero impact on his usage because he can trivially beat all of those counters.
@entrailbucket said: The problem is that Chasm is now beatable by more teams, but he still beats absolutely everything. They haven't released a counter good enough to make running Chasm a liability, so there's no reason not to use him for everything.
This is exactly right. It’s been my assertion from the beginning.
If they nerf him and it's not good enough you will see pitchforks. I'll be clear I don't want nerfs, and I am not a fan of them. But if they do it they need to cut his balls off. If they don't go far enough and it changes nothing you will see a bunch of people very angry. So they need to make sure 100% that the changes are a one off.
I don't care what they do. I play the game in front of me, so if he put into garbage tier I won't use him. If he is still high level I will use him.
I don't think his offense needs to be nerfed, but if they could make his abyss tiles count as HIS special tiles, that would give a lot more options like morbius and mThor.
I know this isn't a nerf Chasm thread (yet!) but it was only during his boost week that I actually paid attention and realized his health on resurrection is based on web tiles NOT abyss tiles.
Point made for 2 reasons. The character builds these days are getting overly complicated, it's work to wade through the descriptions to figure out what is going on with most of the new characters. With 4* I just ignore as they are now generally irrelevant (all that dev time for no reward), for 5s I wait and see but for the most part stick with old faves when they pop up in boosts. Occasionally learning new ones when it seems like the meta has figured out they are worth it (not often!).
Highly Complicated just another example of way too convoluted an approach to character design that doesn't really play out to a success.
My other quick thought down the Chasm nerf path... If you modified his resurrection health to be based on abyss tiles at death rather than web tiles would that be a simple change that makes him more manageable? When fighting him, I feel I have more control over the abyss tile count than web tiles.
With more limited resurrection ability you take away a piece of his kit without totally nerfing him. He's still potent but there's a more definite route to downing him and keeping him down. After 1 resurrection he might have time to get a few abyss tiles on the board to resurrect again, but his health will be lower so you can take him down again quickly. He also naturally takes away part of his health regen when he resurrects rather than the current set-up where web tiles stay untouched during the regen cycle.
Guys, hear me out. Before jumping into any conclusion, read on and don't scroll down too far.
Instead of "balancing" Chasm and throwing a black sink or monkey wrench at him, how about giving him a new friend ? Hulk every match, yada yada, it is getting old and stale.If you're a member of the old days, think Okoye with Thor, new friend = Hulk ! No more Thor ! New friend from work !
Cough** Cough** Wink** Wink**
Or Dev, you can just simply ......
Nerf Hulk.
I always thought they were going to have to nerf Hulk eventually, because infinite resurrection is an ability nobody should ever have in this game (hello Chasm!) and an every-turn passive AoE is too strong. Hulk existing really limits their design space for new characters -- they have to be very careful with resurrection powers (hello Chasm!) but also with power boosters and strike tile makers.
But fixing Hulk, or giving Chasm a better partner, fixes the wrong problem. The problem with Chasm is NOT that he's hard to beat, although he is. The problem with Chasm is that he's miles ahead of everybody else on offense. If Hulk got nerfed we'd see an endless sea of Chasm/Thor, or Chasm/She-Hulk, or some other Chasm/x that may not even exist yet. That's a massive problem for a game that's trying to sell you as wide a roster as possible. It reduces the entire game to Chasm Puzzle Quest.
The problem with Magik's repeaters is simple. They are 2 turns repeaters. Magik needs to match them for to multiply them and for gaining AP and firing his active and multiply more. Each time one repeater is matched it stars from 2 turns: it's possible to kill a magik Al just matching all her repeaters and so no taking damage at all. That's just her flaw design. That means everything she does is slow and there is no motive to level her above other characters for having her tanking.
Chasm. His broken collective stun, out. Or if not, change all characters placing things at the start of battle for doing it before stun, like Evo. But better just remove it, that 6* skill makes him a deterrent to fight because of the cascades helped by Ihulk, and him dealing huge damage without having to work out nothing from turn 0. His AP draining. There is no active power draining so much and also on the useful target colors, one after another. Just tune down this a lot, or better draining his AP more than the enemy AP. His abyss tiles. Just make them giving the AP they should. Web tiles. He regenerates too much, way more than any other character, locking the match forever. That should'nt happen, just tune it down. And chasm should be a character able to play him when boosted, LIKE ANY OTHER CHARACTER IN THE GAME.
I wish this came about after EVO was released to the public.
Hello devs what is Evos purpose what slot does he fill. Why did you develop this guy?
@dianetics said: If they nerf him and it's not good enough you will see pitchforks. I'll be clear I don't want nerfs, and I am not a fan of them. But if they do it they need to cut his balls off. If they don't go far enough and it changes nothing you will see a bunch of people very angry. So they need to make sure 100% that the changes are a one off. I don't care what they do. I play the game in front of me, so if he put into garbage tier I won't use him. If he is still high level I will use him.
@dianetics said: If they nerf him and it's not good enough you will see pitchforks. I'll be clear I don't want nerfs, and I am not a fan of them. But if they do it they need to cut his balls off. If they don't go far enough and it changes nothing you will see a bunch of people very angry. So they need to make sure 100% that the changes are a one off.
If they take a big swing with the nerf bat they better come big with the compensation rewards for anyone who wants to sell. At least Demi got that part right when nerfed into oblivion.
@First311 said: @dianetics said: If they nerf him and it's not good enough you will see pitchforks. I'll be clear I don't want nerfs, and I am not a fan of them. But if they do it they need to cut his balls off. If they don't go far enough and it changes nothing you will see a bunch of people very angry. So they need to make sure 100% that the changes are a one off. I don't care what they do. I play the game in front of me, so if he put into garbage tier I won't use him. If he is still high level I will use him. If they take a big swing with the nerf bat they better come big with the compensation rewards for anyone who wants to sell. At least Demi got that part right when nerfed into oblivion.
@First311 said:
You think Demiurge got that part right? I actually agree, but that was...not...the consensus in the community at those times.
The compensation for selling OML or Gambit was a number of tokens equal to the covers you sold, that went to a special token pool that only had 5* covers (so a 450 gave 13 tokens, 460 gave 23, etc). So it was a 1:1 conversion from the nerfed guy to random 5*.
I think that's pretty good compensation, especially in a world where boosted 5* now exist, and the trash tier shrinks a bit every month. But, at least from what I saw here and on Line, there were tons of complaints saying that instead of random covers, it should be covers of the player's choice.
@entrailbucket said: @First311 said: @dianetics said: If they nerf him and it's not good enough you will see pitchforks. I'll be clear I don't want nerfs, and I am not a fan of them. But if they do it they need to cut his balls off. If they don't go far enough and it changes nothing you will see a bunch of people very angry. So they need to make sure 100% that the changes are a one off. I don't care what they do. I play the game in front of me, so if he put into garbage tier I won't use him. If he is still high level I will use him. If they take a big swing with the nerf bat they better come big with the compensation rewards for anyone who wants to sell. At least Demi got that part right when nerfed into oblivion. You think Demiurge got that part right? I actually agree, but that was...not...the consensus in the community at those times. The compensation for selling OML or Gambit was a number of tokens equal to the covers you sold, that went to a special token pool that only had 5* covers (so a 450 gave 13 tokens, 460 gave 23, etc). So it was a 1:1 conversion from the nerfed guy to random 5*. I think that's pretty good compensation, especially in a world where boosted 5* now exist, and the trash tier shrinks a bit every month. But, at least from what I saw here and on Line, there were tons of complaints saying that instead of random covers, it should be covers of the player's choice.
@entrailbucket said:
I remember that. I personally think there should be no compensation. Flame suit activated and all that, but I think the reason why these characters go unchecked for so long is because the developers don’t want to deal with the headache surrounding compensation. I think if the developers didn’t have to worry about that aspect of it, they would be more apt to rebalance characters (nerfs along with buffs) in incremental ways, and we’d have a more balanced game overall. I think that the old devs took a hatchet to characters to make sure they didn’t have to offer compensation more than once. So couldn’t do small changes.
I say, you enjoyed the free shields and PVP dominance Chasm provided for months. That’s your compensation. I doubt anyone is going to give back all the prizes they won due to 550 Chasming. No meta is meant to rule forever. I would just say that characters are going to be subject to rebalances for the betterment of the game. If the devs didn’t have to fear entitled players demanding high level compensation, they’d have more freedom to balance. I hope the new devs approach this in that way.
Players choice makes the most sense now even if random covers made more sense then. A 550 is worth WAY more than 70+ 5s raised from L450 to 451 which is what's most likely to happen if you pull 120 covers for 70+ diluted 5.
More importantly, if you happened to only have a pair of 550's and you lose 1 in Chasm, having a single 550 is going to wreck your MMR.
KGB
@KGB said: Players choice makes the most sense now even if random covers made more sense then. A 550 is worth WAY more than 70+ 5s raised from L450 to 451 which is what's most likely to happen if you pull 120 covers for 70+ diluted 5. More importantly, if you happened to only have a pair of 550's and you lose 1 in Chasm, having a single 550 is going to wreck your MMR. KGB
@KGB said: Players choice makes the most sense now even if random covers made more sense then. A 550 is worth WAY more than 70+ 5s raised from L450 to 451 which is what's most likely to happen if you pull 120 covers for 70+ diluted 5.
This is an excellent reason to not have only one pair of 550s.
Yeah you know what you're getting into when choosing to go 550. That's why sensible people aim to go there with 6-8 characters, not 3.
I just hope that BCS learns something from the whole fiasco. MPQ devs cannot ever "counterplay" their way out of a character who's that big a problem. It didn't work for OML and it didn't work for Gambit. It didn't work for Chasm and it won't work for whoever the next mistake is.
We all knew Chasm was a disaster, from day 1, and they chose to dither and "gather information" and let the problem fester for months. Some of the player attitude stuff Daredevil is describing could have largely been avoided, had they acted more quickly. They could also have been MUCH more clear in their communications around the issue.
I also hope this generation of players learns something. There are a relatively large number of folks out there with 550 Chasm and very little else, and they're not going to be happy.
I understand that BCS has given you no reason to think going all-in is bad (and in fact, by their unbalanced design choices and general inaction, one could say they encouraged it more than Demiurge ever did), but...going all-in is bad. Everybody who lived through the past meta cycles understands it, because many of us got burned in the past.
@Bowgentle said: Yeah you know what you're getting into when choosing to go 550. That's why sensible people aim to go there with 6-8 characters, not 3.
I actually have no idea what happens once I get two or three to 550. I'm assuming you will only see 550 in PVP? Or is it something worse? My SC is currently at 530 with the next closest around 500. Wasn't planning to get him to 550 yet but he punches way above his weight on offense.
Is there something more specific that makes it awful? Serious question and appreciate any feedback. Thanks!
@LavaManLee said: @Bowgentle said: Yeah you know what you're getting into when choosing to go 550. That's why sensible people aim to go there with 6-8 characters, not 3. I actually have no idea what happens once I get two or three to 550. I'm assuming you will only see 550 in PVP? Or is it something worse? My SC is currently at 530 with the next closest around 500. Wasn't planning to get him to 550 yet but he punches way above his weight on offense. Is there something more specific that makes it awful? Serious question and appreciate any feedback. Thanks!
@LavaManLee said:
Not sure what happens with just one 550. But with two 550s you will only see other 550s, yes. Which, from what I've heard, is pretty awful.
I'll let actual 550 players fill in the details.