MPQ Developer Q&A April 2023 (ANSWERS)

135678

Comments

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Most people who got Chasm to 550 got a 550 Jane thanks to that crazy release cycle.
    They'll be fine.
    Otherwise yeah, don't go all in on completely broken characters where you can see a nerf coming from day one.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,828 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Bowgentle said:

    @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!

    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.

    Eh, you CAN run into a wall of other 550s, but it really depends on when and where you play. There's not enough of us to create a full-time solid wall everywhere at all times. Also almost everyone with maxed characters is already coordinating in PvP, so the problems can be mitigated.

  • LavaManLee
    LavaManLee Posts: 1,434 Chairperson of the Boards

    Thanks @entrailbucket and @Bowgentle. Appreciate the information!

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,828 Chairperson of the Boards

    Really the way they treat 550 is dumb. You can have a very high level roster in general, perfectly capable of beating those guys, except the 550 players will be invisible -- you won't be able to see them without doing some weird tricks.

    If you can handle high level enemies (you can!), it's to your benefit to get to 550 so you'll be able to queue these players, because they often have a ton of points. Plus they can probably already attack you, anyway.

  • Pwuz_
    Pwuz_ Posts: 1,214 Chairperson of the Boards

    “15. @CarnageWing [Official Forums]
    Question: How do you plan to make new costumes for the characters? They're one of my favorite additions to the game with the new characters (except the pixels).”

    Personally I’m a HUGE fan of good pixel art. That said a couple of the more recent Pixel skins have felt more like just taking the existing character sprite and shoving it into a low res filter to emulate that look while not having that proper pixel art quality.

    Just my 2 cents.

  • Timemachinego
    Timemachinego Posts: 492 Mover and Shaker

    @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

    I mean, I'm not going to suggest that BCS would get this right, but the obvious solution is to return x amount of tokens to a closed vault with a single item... 500 favorite shards. That way players get to pick where they go.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards

    Maybe they can take Chasm sideways instead of nerfing to oblivion? To me his AP drain is what makes him fundamentally not fun to use as a player, let alone an opponent. Tone down his healing. He might be fine and no need for compensation? We all know it is the fact there are 2 unkillable characters (whith a third mostly unkillable one for SHIELD SIM) that makes him such a favourite but if toned down on his own without the Hulks he isn't too big of a deal.

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:
    Maybe they can take Chasm sideways instead of nerfing to oblivion? To me his AP drain is what makes him fundamentally not fun to use as a player, let alone an opponent. Tone down his healing. He might be fine and no need for compensation? We all know it is the fact there are 2 unkillable characters (whith a third mostly unkillable one for SHIELD SIM) that makes him such a favourite but if toned down on his own without the Hulks he isn't too big of a deal.

    So you're saying ihulk is the one who needs the nerf...

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Bowgentle said:

    @DAZ0273 said:
    Maybe they can take Chasm sideways instead of nerfing to oblivion? To me his AP drain is what makes him fundamentally not fun to use as a player, let alone an opponent. Tone down his healing. He might be fine and no need for compensation? We all know it is the fact there are 2 unkillable characters (whith a third mostly unkillable one for SHIELD SIM) that makes him such a favourite but if toned down on his own without the Hulks he isn't too big of a deal.

    So you're saying ihulk is the one who needs the nerf...

    Probably both? But we all know there are even more players out there with very big Okoye than Chasm who rely on iHulk for PvE and I don't blame the Devs for not wanting to jump down that rabbit hole.

  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,812 Chairperson of the Boards

    @DAZ0273 said:

    @Bowgentle said:

    @DAZ0273 said:

    >

    Probably both? But we all know there are even more players out there with very big Okoye than Chasm who rely on iHulk for PvE and I don't blame the Devs for not wanting to jump down that rabbit hole.

    I don't want it to happen because I'm one of those players. But even if you took all revives from hulk it wouldn't matter to me in PVE. He rarely tanks anything and rarely dies.

    I'm also fine with going 3 only at 550 if the damn devs would give me a vault with Shang/okoye and one of BRB/Kitty/Apoc/Thor in it :D

  • Tony_Foot
    Tony_Foot Posts: 1,812 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Before my time, but didn't Blacksuit work well against the strikes? And Switch certainly worked against Hulk before the other revive characters came along. I don't even think OML needed the nerf compared to others.

    Counterplay can most definitely work. There's been a ton of good ideas on how to counterplay that chasm meta.

    As for old gambit, I'd love to be able to go against him now, even without a chasm team to see how easy he is now the game has moved on.

  • BriMan2222
    BriMan2222 Posts: 1,287 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Tony_Foot said:

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Before my time, but didn't Blacksuit work well against the strikes? And Switch certainly worked against Hulk before the other revive characters came along. I don't even think OML needed the nerf compared to others.

    Counterplay can most definitely work. There's been a ton of good ideas on how to counterplay that chasm meta.

    As for old gambit, I'd love to be able to go against him now, even without a chasm team to see how easy he is now the game has moved on.

    Yeah, OML was never really a problem for players. The reason they gave for nerfing him was that over half of all wins in MPQ involved him on the team. I don't recall anyone ever really complaining about facing him. I'm 1000000% sure the reason they nerfed him is that with just one yellow cover low level players could use him as a meat shield. He could tank everything and heal back up, allowing players to never us health packs (the same reason they nerfed healing in general)

  • Captain_Trips88
    Captain_Trips88 Posts: 268 Mover and Shaker

    for me it is just the AP drain that should go from Chasm's kit. All other aspects of him are annoying but not game changing. But not being able to fire powers either with him on your team or without just sucks all the fun out of it. And that's the issue, he isn't fun to play with, let alone against.

  • DAZ0273
    DAZ0273 Posts: 10,275 Chairperson of the Boards

    @BriMan2222 said:

    @Tony_Foot said:

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Before my time, but didn't Blacksuit work well against the strikes? And Switch certainly worked against Hulk before the other revive characters came along. I don't even think OML needed the nerf compared to others.

    Counterplay can most definitely work. There's been a ton of good ideas on how to counterplay that chasm meta.

    As for old gambit, I'd love to be able to go against him now, even without a chasm team to see how easy he is now the game has moved on.

    Yeah, OML was never really a problem for players. The reason they gave for nerfing him was that over half of all wins in MPQ involved him on the team. I don't recall anyone ever really complaining about facing him. I'm 1000000% sure the reason they nerfed him is that with just one yellow cover low level players could use him as a meat shield. He could tank everything and heal back up, allowing players to never us health packs (the same reason they nerfed healing in general)

    He was fantastic for me at 3* level. I could have him out front absorbing all the damage, punching people with 5* match damage and healing whilst my 3* Thor or whoever quietly collected the AP they needed to batter the opponents.

  • revskip
    revskip Posts: 1,010 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Captain_Trips88 said:
    for me it is just the AP drain that should go from Chasm's kit. All other aspects of him are annoying but not game changing. But not being able to fire powers either with him on your team or without just sucks all the fun out of it. And that's the issue, he isn't fun to play with, let alone against.

    I find him plenty fun but YMMV.

    That is what is going to make a chasm nerf interesting. Everyone has a different thing they hate about him. Some people hate the AP drain, some people think he's fine unless there is another reviver on the team, some hate the initial stun and keeping other characters initial passives from firing. Some like me don't mind any of his kit. I'm not going to be ruined if they nerf him but I personally have enjoyed using him. I imagine the folks that are really going to be put out are the ones who unhoarded for him. Which is again fine, you live by the sword you die by the sword.

  • ThaRoadWarrior
    ThaRoadWarrior Posts: 9,454 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2023

    I won’t miss Chasm one bit. I don’t use him outside of his boost week when he is basically required.

  • entrailbucket
    entrailbucket Posts: 5,828 Chairperson of the Boards

    @Tony_Foot said:

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Before my time, but didn't Blacksuit work well against the strikes? And Switch certainly worked against Hulk before the other revive characters came along. I don't even think OML needed the nerf compared to others.

    Counterplay can most definitely work. There's been a ton of good ideas on how to counterplay that chasm meta.

    As for old gambit, I'd love to be able to go against him now, even without a chasm team to see how easy he is now the game has moved on.

    They actually did try to counter OML's healing. Kate Bishop was one try (her blue prevents healing) and I think there were one or two others. Nobody really used BSS against him, that I remember.

    They tried to counter Gambit a ton of times, and none of that worked either. Scarlet Witch was the one time their counter did something, and that was because she's pretty overpowered all on her own (they basically just made a character that counters "damage" -- she'd really even work against Chasm if he didn't resurrect infinitely).

    I agree that there are ways to counter Chasm that will work. There are even ways to do it that aren't overpowered! One simple one is a passive that turns off resurrection. Another is a passive that converts all void tiles to basics every turn.

    I don't know why they haven't done those, or others like them. Both groups of devs tend to create these really soft, active counters to passives, and they just never do anything.

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards

    @entrailbucket said:

    @Tony_Foot said:

    @entrailbucket said:
    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.

    Before my time, but didn't Blacksuit work well against the strikes? And Switch certainly worked against Hulk before the other revive characters came along. I don't even think OML needed the nerf compared to others.

    Counterplay can most definitely work. There's been a ton of good ideas on how to counterplay that chasm meta.

    As for old gambit, I'd love to be able to go against him now, even without a chasm team to see how easy he is now the game has moved on.

    They actually did try to counter OML's healing. Kate Bishop was one try (her blue prevents healing) and I think there were one or two others. Nobody really used BSS against him, that I remember.

    They tried to counter Gambit a ton of times, and none of that worked either. Scarlet Witch was the one time their counter did something, and that was because she's pretty overpowered all on her own (they basically just made a character that counters "damage" -- she'd really even work against Chasm if he didn't resurrect infinitely).

    I agree that there are ways to counter Chasm that will work. There are even ways to do it that aren't overpowered! One simple one is a passive that turns off resurrection. Another is a passive that converts all void tiles to basics every turn.

    I don't know why they haven't done those, or others like them. Both groups of devs tend to create these really soft, active counters to passives, and they just never do anything.

    Well, Kamar-taj exists.
    But by the time supports go live in PVP Chasm hopefully won't be a problem anymore.

  • BriMan2222
    BriMan2222 Posts: 1,287 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited May 2023

    @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!

    Something else interesting happens when you have only one 550. Generally (at least in S1 in my experience) you become visible to the rest of the people with over 3 550's. You now become a nice climbing soft target for all of them frustrated by the clog of dual 550 teams. There are a few players in S1 that went all in on just a single 550 and played the hit and dump game that now have a lot more difficulty, their climbs tend to resemble a bucket of crabs with one trying to escape.

    A lot of those rosters are single Okoye, single Apoc, or single Shang due to various offers and opportunities. Which is okay if their choice is boosted, somewhat, but building a level roster lets you fully experience the possibilities every week with the boost list. Well, absent Chasm that is, but even then plenty of boost weeks present alternatives that overpower a Chasm option.

    In my opinion, this game was at it's best immediately prior to Chasm, where the boost weeks actually rewarded people that had a broad roster rather than just a two or three 550s.

    I was one of those single 550 rosters. I decided to hoard my apocalypse to 550 for a few reasons. First because after I played my 450 apocalypse boosted to 550 while he was super boosted during his introduction I thought he was awesome and wanted to be able to have him like that all the time, secondly because weekly boosts didn't exist at the time and him with beta ray bill was the best counter to hulkoye I had found and pvp was all hulkoye all day every day, and third just because he's one of my favorite characters.

    Once I had successfully 550'ed him I only found my entire experience to improve. In pve half thor and 550 apocalypse made my grind much easier and in pvp I play in slice 2 where once I was climbing high enough I was often only being matched against 550 okoye plus baby champ ihulk so having my apocalypse at 550 just made fighting those teams much easier.

    Yes, once boosts were introduced before chasm was great and having a 550 apocalypse just gave me more options. If there was a week where I only had one of the boosted 5 stars champed I could use apocalypse along with them since he was basically always a boosted character, and on his boost week things were really great.

    Since then I've also got collosus to 550 and several others over 500, and champed all the 5 stars except BSS (thanks for all the retro rewards!) so I don't have to lean on my 550's very often anymore. If I had to do it over again I would do it the same way. I now have a robust roster plus a few meta characters that are extra great when boosted.

Categories