@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). An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat.
@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).
An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat.
That's an interesting take on what you consider an effective Chasm counter to be. It would mean that the character doesn't actually have to beat Chasm at all, but rather just be more difficult to beat on defense so that players wanted to leave that character out instead of Chasm. Would that really be considered a counter to him or simply a replacement meta on defense?
I suspect the reason there is a still wall of Chasms out there is because the non-550 crowd simply has him (and a few other characters) at much higher levels than the rest of their roster. As most of us know, players tend to have the best characters at the highest levels so for someone with a baby champed roster with most characters in the 450 range, they tend to get their Chasms/Shangs/Apocs/Okoyes/MThors etc into the 480-500 range. That means those characters are still preferential to use over 450's because of the +30-50 levels and that boosted characters are only 50-70 levels better than their non-boosted Meta characters which isn't enough to get them to use those non-boosted characters. So it's the age old problem of meta characters in general being a lot better than non-meta instead of being just a little bit better. That's why Chasm counters that aren't themselves meta don't appear much in queues.
KGB
@DAZ0273 said: 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?
@DAZ0273 said:
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?
PVP post 900 points in attack, and post 600 in retaliation, in both cases u have very big chasms that act as roadblock, and I'm pretty sure at these level anyone who see a non chasm opponent will take it over a chasm opponent I dont know what you call broken mmr.
@DrClever said: Things that can almost always be achieved are easy.
@DrClever said:
Things that can almost always be achieved are easy.
Interesting definition. I disagree with it. you cannot look at "thing done" without looking at the cost of doing it, and the requirements for doing it. in this case you need pretty specific teams, and it will cost you time and HP. Also you need to compare alternatives. If you need to go to a place 50km away, you can walk 10 hours go get there, its "easy", but in a world where you can take a train and be there in 30 minutes its extremely tedious and ineffective.
so ofc give me 10M iso and 20 grand I will manage to go to 5* land and get chasm counters covered, then chasm will be "easier". Immortal bros will still be hard compared to most other defensive 5* team. They will still cost time and HP too
@KGB said: @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). An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat. That's an interesting take on what you consider an effective Chasm counter to be. It would mean that the character doesn't actually have to beat Chasm at all, but rather just be more difficult to beat on defense so that players wanted to leave that character out instead of Chasm. Would that really be considered a counter to him or simply a replacement meta on defense? I suspect the reason there is a still wall of Chasms out there is because the non-550 crowd simply has him (and a few other characters) at much higher levels than the rest of their roster. As most of us know, players tend to have the best characters at the highest levels so for someone with a baby champed roster with most characters in the 450 range, they tend to get their Chasms/Shangs/Apocs/Okoyes/MThors etc into the 480-500 range. That means those characters are still preferential to use over 450's because of the +30-50 levels and that boosted characters are only 50-70 levels better than their non-boosted Meta characters which isn't enough to get them to use those non-boosted characters. So it's the age old problem of meta characters in general being a lot better than non-meta instead of being just a little bit better. That's why Chasm counters that aren't themselves meta don't appear much in queues. KGB
@KGB said:
That hurts on so many levels. You have no idea what a 450 boosted by 100 levels does, with your softcapped roster. Any decent 5, boosted, will absolutely OBLITERATE a level 500 unboosted Jane. Like, boosted Surfer and Starlord decent. It's only Hulkasm that's still being run unboosted.
@DrClever said: @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. An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat. 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.
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.
At this point you're just arguing semantics vs addressing the actual issue.
If there was an effective Chasm counter, there wouldn't be a wall of Chasm teams in every single event. That's the bar. Currently none of the counters are effective enough to reduce usage.
There is a wall of Chasms because he's the best character in the game by like a million miles. He beats everything, including all of his "counters," trivially.
He literally cannot die. He has a free full-team stun that completely disables some of the best passives in the game, and he stuns the entire team every time he resurrects. He has a bigger match damage increase than Colossus, he has an EXTRA passive damage hit every turn, and he passively drains enemy AP to the point where it's impossible for the AI to ever cast anything.
He wins matches for you, passively, with zero player thought or effort, and essentially zero risk of losing or ever having to use health packs.
@pepitedechocolat said: Immortal bros will still be hard compared to most other defensive 5* team. They will still cost time and HP too
Electro + HEvo makes that combination difficult to lose to.
I accept that beating Chasm without the right tools is less straightforward but that applies to a lot of MPQ teams; no one much complains because they generally do have the right tools.
It took me a while to work out, and then acquire the team to beat Chasm, but not as long as it took to get to the point where I could beat Hulkoye and waaay less time than it took to be able to beat name any 5star team you like after I got overenthusiastic with my early 5* covers.
Chasm's ghastly and I look forward to seeing less of, and particularly about him, but in the meantime he can be dealt with.
PvP is not a boss fight, and it's not a single-player game. It requires us to repeatedly, quickly win tens of fights, while we outpace multiple incoming attacks. There is no other character/team in the game that requires "special tools" to deal with, and this includes characters boosted to +100 or +200 levels higher than Chasm.
Meanwhile the Chasm player requires no special tools. His team trivially wins every fight he takes on, against any combination of characters at any level.
@entrailbucket said: PvP is not a boss fight, and it's not a single-player game. It requires us to repeatedly, quickly win tens of fights, while we outpace multiple incoming attacks. There is no other character/team in the game that requires "special tools" to deal with, and this includes characters boosted to +100 or +200 levels higher than Chasm. Meanwhile the Chasm player requires no special tools. His team trivially wins every fight he takes on, against any combination of characters at any level.
@entrailbucket said: PvP is not a boss fight, and it's not a single-player game. It requires us to repeatedly, quickly win tens of fights, while we outpace multiple incoming attacks. There is no other character/team in the game that requires "special tools" to deal with, and this includes characters boosted to +100 or +200 levels higher than Chasm.
Except mirrors. Those can last hours.
@DrClever said: Electro + HEvo makes that combination difficult to lose to.
Out of curiosity, what do you spec Electro and HEvo to and do you use boosts? Thanks.
@entrailbucket said: @KGB said: @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). An effective Chasm counter would mean that some other character has become the most difficult to beat. That's an interesting take on what you consider an effective Chasm counter to be. It would mean that the character doesn't actually have to beat Chasm at all, but rather just be more difficult to beat on defense so that players wanted to leave that character out instead of Chasm. Would that really be considered a counter to him or simply a replacement meta on defense? I suspect the reason there is a still wall of Chasms out there is because the non-550 crowd simply has him (and a few other characters) at much higher levels than the rest of their roster. As most of us know, players tend to have the best characters at the highest levels so for someone with a baby champed roster with most characters in the 450 range, they tend to get their Chasms/Shangs/Apocs/Okoyes/MThors etc into the 480-500 range. That means those characters are still preferential to use over 450's because of the +30-50 levels and that boosted characters are only 50-70 levels better than their non-boosted Meta characters which isn't enough to get them to use those non-boosted characters. So it's the age old problem of meta characters in general being a lot better than non-meta instead of being just a little bit better. That's why Chasm counters that aren't themselves meta don't appear much in queues. KGB There is a wall of Chasms because he's the best character in the game by like a million miles. He beats everything, including all of his "counters," trivially. He literally cannot die. He has a free full-team stun that completely disables some of the best passives in the game, and he stuns the entire team every time he resurrects. He has a bigger match damage increase than Colossus, he has an EXTRA passive damage hit every turn, and he passively drains enemy AP to the point where it's impossible for the AI to ever cast anything. He wins matches for you, passively, with zero player thought or effort, and essentially zero risk of losing or ever having to use health packs.
@entrailbucket said:
This is exactly the reason why gambit and bishop were nerfed. It's fine if a character is really good at one thing, or even a couple things, but they were great at everything.
Gambit generated ap, drained ap, removed special tiles, completely shut down your team and did massive damage while doing it. Bishop stun locked your team, reduced damage, retaliated for that damage, remove special tiles passively, and generated ap passively. They did too many things too well.
If chasm just revived but didn't drain ap, or drained ap but didn't stun, or stunned but didn't also heal he might be fine. The problem is he does everything and does it passively. You can't have a character that is great defensively because they heal and revive, AND great offensively because they do huge damage passively, AND shuts down the enemies offensive ability because they drain the ap they need for their powers AND prevents the other teams set up strategies because he turns off first turn passives.
He does too much too well, just like gambit did in his time and bishop did in his. Its not healthy for the game to have one singular character that is extremely better then the next best characters.
Bishop was fine - the problem was that he triggered on every match 3 from a 5* character. With a higher threshold, they could left him as is. If 5* players wouldn't have used him, he'd still be in game.
@LavaManLee said: @DrClever said: Electro + HEvo makes that combination difficult to lose to. Out of curiosity, what do you spec Electro and HEvo to and do you use boosts? Thanks.
@LavaManLee said:
I never remember boosts unless I have a daily task to use them.
HEvo at 355.
iHulk AoE means free yellow from Electro which means free health and damage boost for HEvo whose black sees off Chasm with two successive uses.
@entrailbucket said: Meanwhile the Chasm player requires no special tools. His team trivially wins every fight he takes on, against any combination of characters at any level.
Sounds like you should get hold of this Chasm character - seems ideal for your purposes.
@BriMan2222 said: AND prevents the other teams set up strategies because he turns off first turn passives.
IMO this should be addressed by making them first active turn effects.
I quite like the first round team stun (leaving aside the question of whether Chasm in particular should have it on top of everything else) but that secondary effect spoils too much.
@DrClever said: @entrailbucket said: Meanwhile the Chasm player requires no special tools. His team trivially wins every fight he takes on, against any combination of characters at any level. Sounds like you should get hold of this Chasm character - seems ideal for your purposes.
Well, exactly. Other players (who are rational actors) see that there is one extremely powerful option, much more powerful than anyone else, with no downsides and no weaknesses, and because they are rational actors they use that option for everything.
I don't blame players for using this character. Why would anyone sane ever use anyone else?
@DrClever said: @LavaManLee said: @DrClever said: Electro + HEvo makes that combination difficult to lose to. Out of curiosity, what do you spec Electro and HEvo to and do you use boosts? Thanks. I never remember boosts unless I have a daily task to use them. HEvo at 355. iHulk AoE means free yellow from Electro which means free health and damage boost for HEvo whose black sees off Chasm with two successive uses.
I must have done something wrong. Tried this twice in Lightning Round and got totally massacred both times. Definitely didn't work.
@entrailbucket said: Why would anyone sane ever use anyone else?
Well that's dealt something of a blow to my optimism for us as a species.
I wonder what percentage of players complaining about the ubiquity of Chasm are also regularly playing Chasm.
But it does present an interesting way out of this - how about hiding Chasm teams from players that haven't used Chasm in the past month?
@DrClever said: @entrailbucket said: Why would anyone sane ever use anyone else? Well that's dealt something of a blow to my optimism for us as a species. I wonder what percentage of players complaining about the ubiquity of Chasm are also regularly playing Chasm. But it does present an interesting way out of this - how about hiding Chasm teams from players that haven't used Chasm in the past month?
Probably a lot, to be honest. Unless you're like me and refuse to use him out of pure, dumb spite, accepting a massive competitive disadvantage for doing so, any player who's trying to win will need to use him. The alternative is losing.
Hiding these teams would just be a free shield for them, so that's right out.
@entrailbucket said: Probably a lot, to be honest. Unless you're like me and refuse to use him out of pure, dumb spite, accepting a massive competitive disadvantage for doing so, any player who's trying to win will need to use him. The alternative is losing.
Not quite true. I am lucky enough, though, to have a 550 SC and a 505 MT. I never use Chasm in PVP as I find him boring and a slog. I still manage T20ish or so depending on the event.
@LavaManLee said: @entrailbucket said: Probably a lot, to be honest. Unless you're like me and refuse to use him out of pure, dumb spite, accepting a massive competitive disadvantage for doing so, any player who's trying to win will need to use him. The alternative is losing. Not quite true. I am lucky enough, though, to have a 550 SC and a 505 MT. I never use Chasm in PVP as I find him boring and a slog. I still manage T20ish or so depending on the event.
What kinds of offensive teams win against your defensive team in PvP?