Not sure about anyone else, but the daredevil pvp is a wall of Chasm/iHulk (with a sheHulk/Chasm sometimes mixed in) for me.
The devs can’t predict the meta, they can only nerf overused characters and wait to see the new meta that emerges. It’s good for the game to keep changing the meta though, otherwise the game gets stale.
BTW, I’m back and playing “casually” until the anniversary. I’ve been gone for a year and now have this Chasm + IHulk problem in pvp. I don’t have any of the new 5s, so dealing with them is quite problematic, which turns into an auto-skip. It’s the instant revival of both that’s the issue. Having 2 in the game is broken. Imagine how new 5 players would play against this.
So, I hope they delay his revival and the meta changes. Or at least introduce a character that stops enemies from reviving.
@dianetics said: It's not really a counter. Its a team that works and doesn't use a bunch healthpacks against the immortal bros. It works and its effective. Just throwing out an option to use thats all.
No one who rails against the Immortal Bros is actually concerned with counters. They have seen countless counters put forth and instead of using them just circle back here to complain. They can beat him but "its boring seeing him all the time" or "he made me use my healthpacks" or any of the other complaints that will invariably shift to the next meta once he's nerfed into uselessness.
He's beatable but slow to beat on defense. So people skip him which raises the float point of teams with him in them. This argument was used plenty in the Steel Witch meta too, another defensive meta. The only thing that quieted that down was the switch to the boosted list where suddenly the meta switched to whatever the best two boosted were or the normal meta if the boost list was terrible. Which is where we still are. When the boost list is good you don't see much Chasm. When it isn't you do. There are definitely pockets where that isn't the case, at the very top level for instance with 550 Chasm teams and for people who are softcapping it is a different experience to be sure.
@revskip said: @dianetics said: It's not really a counter. Its a team that works and doesn't use a bunch healthpacks against the immortal bros. It works and its effective. Just throwing out an option to use thats all. No one who rails against the Immortal Bros is actually concerned with counters. They have seen countless counters put forth and instead of using them just circle back here to complain. They can beat him but "its boring seeing him all the time" or "he made me use my healthpacks" or any of the other complaints that will invariably shift to the next meta once he's nerfed into uselessness. He's beatable but slow to beat on defense. So people skip him which raises the float point of teams with him in them. This argument was used plenty in the Steel Witch meta too, another defensive meta. The only thing that quieted that down was the switch to the boosted list where suddenly the meta switched to whatever the best two boosted were or the normal meta if the boost list was terrible. Which is where we still are. When the boost list is good you don't see much Chasm. When it isn't you do. There are definitely pockets where that isn't the case, at the very top level for instance with 550 Chasm teams and for people who are softcapping it is a different experience to be sure.
@revskip said:
I think people rarely hit them bc
1) that means inviting instant attacks by all teams, including Hulk/Chasm. Putting out any other team will cause that
2) it’s health-pack intensive to target them. They’re beatable, but will probably cost an average of 2 health packs per fight
@BurntOutGamer said: Not sure about anyone else, but the daredevil pvp is a wall of Chasm/iHulk (with a sheHulk/Chasm sometimes mixed in) for me.
Not for me. All the teams I see have at least one of MThor or Shang-Chi.
FWIW this is slightly annoying as I lose more often (which is to say sometimes) to MThor than to Chasm/iHulk (who I now always target and always beat).
If the Chasm counters were effective, Chasm would be easy to beat.
If Chasm was easy to beat, people would stop using him.
If people stopped using him, we wouldn't see a wall of Chasm teams in these unboosted events.
Since the wall is still there, the counters haven't worked.
@entrailbucket said: If the Chasm counters were effective, Chasm would be easy to beat. If Chasm was easy to beat, people would stop using him. If people stopped using him, we wouldn't see a wall of Chasm teams in these unboosted events. Since the wall is still there, the counters haven't worked.
@entrailbucket said: If the Chasm counters were effective, Chasm would be easy to beat.
"If Chasm was easy to beat, people would stop using him. "
The question isn't whether or not he is easy to beat now. The question is whether their are easier to beat teams (both in terms of time required AND health packs) if you are willing to skip a few more times.
As long as there is a reasonable supply of easier to beat teams, players will skip Chasm teams which means his teams float higher.
KGB
@KGB said: @entrailbucket said: If the Chasm counters were effective, Chasm would be easy to beat. If Chasm was easy to beat, people would stop using him. If people stopped using him, we wouldn't see a wall of Chasm teams in these unboosted events. Since the wall is still there, the counters haven't worked. "If Chasm was easy to beat, people would stop using him. " The question isn't whether or not he is easy to beat now. The question is whether their are easier to beat teams (both in terms of time required AND health packs) if you are willing to skip a few more times. As long as there is a reasonable supply of easier to beat teams, players will skip Chasm teams which means his teams float higher. KGB
@KGB said:
Does this not mean that the counters are ineffective?
The reason why the counters are ineffective is pretty simple: there isn't any broken character countering/they don't make a broken duo.
Okay, so this is flawed as an argument but works as something like a definition of terms which is well overdue.
Chasm is easy to beat - even those of us on the Chasm-is-awful side of things have said as much in this thread and others.
In particular the combination of Chasm + iHulk is now very easy to beat, whereas it used to be seen by many as the real problem.
So we can say the counters (whether they were designed as such or not) are effective by the first definition.
But all teams are easy to beat - the AI is remarkably weak and the player base is so used to winning every game that losing one in twenty is seen as evidence of a wildly overpowered defensive team, and even taking damage is resented.
So as KGB says, Chasm will only see reduced usage if he's easier to beat (and is recognised as easier to beat) than some other team that most people are able to put together - this may be happening, we don't have the data, but looks like he's still considered as the best option on defence in a game that offers next to nothing in the way of defensive options.
So by the final definition the counters have failed.
No wonder the bickering has been so tedious / enjoyable (select according to preference).
@DrClever said: Chasm is easy to beat - even those of us on the Chasm-is-awful side of things have said as much in this thread and others.
Your statement here is misleading (or a troll)! Many people that admit to beat chasm also admit they spend their healthpack doing so, which is not really compatible with "easy to beat" chasm, if you need to use limited ressource to do so.
besides I already explained it above : non 5* champ rosters struggle a lot to burn the 100+ level chasm they are offered, which is not true for any other 5*. (you can make a case for mthor cascading, but it is a different / rng problem)
The game offers nothing in the way of Defensive options because players are the ones who created "Defensive" teams, not the Devs. If anybody thinks that the release of Scarlet Witch & Colossus next to each other was intended as an intentional "meta" then I think this would be news to the Devs who created them. You would think that it would be obvious that having two characters who can endlessly revive would be a big red flag to the Devs but clearly not - mostly because their playtesting is based on looking for bugs and flaws and whether the character is performing within the parameters of the design budget, not potentially broken interactions that stop players from gaining wins. If they were aware of it they obviously weren't concerned, most likely because at that point they had no reliable in game data to use which is understandable.
@pepitedechocolat said: @DrClever said: Chasm is easy to beat - even those of us on the Chasm-is-awful side of things have said as much in this thread and others. Your statement here is misleading (or a troll)! Many people that admit to beat chasm also admit they spend their healthpack doing so, which is not really compatible with "easy to beat" chasm, if you need to use limited ressource to do so. besides I already explained it above : non 5* champ rosters struggle a lot to burn the 100+ level chasm they are offered, which is not true for any other 5*. (you can make a case for mthor cascading, but it is a different / rng problem)
@pepitedechocolat said:
Health packs are not a limited resource. They regenerate for free. If players are fighting against Chasm they are most likely 5* players or soft capped and such players should have multiple options to acquire additional health packs as they might need. Many such players have hundreds of hoarded health packs.
Where are non 5* players coming across 100+ level difference Chasm in non Chasm boost weeks? How could they see them unless they have broken MMR? If they have broken MMR presumably they did so climbing off non-Chasm teams?
By the way, I don't know if I missed it amongst all the back and forth but have we addressed the REAL issue with Chasm?
He is boring. He is boring to fight against. He is boring to use. He doesn't have any fun powers. People like him because he is "good on defence" - think about that - people like a character that they aren't using. That tells you a lot. Switch & Colossus might be tough to fight against but they both have interesting powers, Switch in particular. Colossus is great against Kacelious. What does Chasm do that is fun? I have no idea because I like others use him once to get him on a defensive team and then never so much as look at him again.
At least iHulk has some entertaining powers and you can punch things.
@DAZ0273 said: the REAL issue with Chasm? He is boring. He is boring to fight against. He is boring to use.
@DAZ0273 said: the REAL issue with Chasm?
He is boring. He is boring to fight against. He is boring to use.
Oh, god, so much this.
@pepitedechocolat said: @DrClever said: Chasm is easy to beat Your statement here is misleading (or a troll)! Many people that admit to beat chasm also admit they spend their healthpack doing so
@DrClever said: Chasm is easy to beat
Your statement here is misleading (or a troll)! Many people that admit to beat chasm also admit they spend their healthpack doing so
I'm not trying to mislead.
He's easy to beat. When you try and beat him you almost always succeed.
Things that can almost always be achieved are easy.
You might use a health pack afterwards but that doesn't change the fact that he was beaten.
If the game abandoned health packs and just healed to full at the end of each game Chasm wouldn't be any easier or harder to beat.
The worst you could possibly say is that Chasm's the hardest character to beat in the whole game. I don't think that's true in every sense any more, but even if it was it's something that has to be true of one character or another.
@DrClever said: even those of us on the Chasm-is-awful side of things have said as much in this thread and others.
@DrClever said:
even those of us on the Chasm-is-awful side of things have said as much in this thread and others.
That made me laugh. Thanks!
This is just redefining the word "easy." If he's still the best defensive character in the game, then he's not "easy" to beat. That actually means that he's quite difficult to beat, when compared to all the other MPQ characters (and that's the only frame of reference that's relevant).
An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat.
@DrClever said: @pepitedechocolat said: @DrClever said: Chasm is easy to beat Your statement here is misleading (or a troll)! Many people that admit to beat chasm also admit they spend their healthpack doing so I'm not trying to mislead. He's easy to beat. When you try and beat him you almost always succeed. Things that can almost always be achieved are easy. You might use a health pack afterwards but that doesn't change the fact that he was beaten. If the game abandoned health packs and just healed to full at the end of each game Chasm wouldn't be any easier or harder to beat. The worst you could possibly say is that Chasm's the hardest character to beat in the whole game. I don't think that's true in every sense any more, but even if it was it's something that has to be true of one character or another.
Easy to beat is a relative phrase. Just because you find him easy to beat doesn't mean everyone does. If you have the couple of characters that are capable of beating him with the correct boosts and team ups he's easy to beat. If you don't he isn't.
If he was so easy to beat so many of my alliance mates wouldn't have gone from being able to easily hit 1200 in pvp to having to hit teams worth much less points over and over again to gain 50 wins because they are unable to reliably beat chasm. Especially the couple we have who have just recently returned to the game and don't have the newest characters that were specifically designed to beat chasm.
They shouldn't need those specific characters though. If they have a bunch of high level older characters, they should be able to beat much smaller chasms' with their older 5 star characters. If we want balance all 5 star level characters should be on more or less equal footing and one newer character should not be much, much more powerful than 95% of the rest of the roster in his tier.
Unless you are bringing a character vs another character specifically designed to beat them (IE bringing Ihulk vs Wanda) then any 5 star characters should have a reasonable chance to beat another 5 star character. a 450 chasm and 450 ihulk should not be absolutely tearing apart slightly older 550 five star characters. This is the type of thing we had with gambit and bishop, it was OP then it's OP now, it was nerfed then and it's set to be nerfed now.
@entrailbucket said: This is just redefining the word "easy." If he's still the best defensive character in the game, then he's not "easy" to beat. That actually means that he's quite difficult to beat, when compared to all the other MPQ characters (and that's the only frame of reference that's relevant).
Strong disagree. The most difficult of a set of easy things is still easy. It's redefining "difficult" to attach it to something that is generally likely to be achieved if attempted.
This simply does not follow logically.
Although fwiw if you define "difficult to beat" as "more likely to beat you" which seems like one possible option then for me at the moment MThor outranks Chasm.