***** Vulture (Armor Wars) *****

658_2

I hit a couple champed Vultures on pvp. Boosted Vulture is going airborne almost every match and he’s an absolute pain once that happens. I wiped to a 550 Evo/OR/Vulture. Once Vulture went airborne I was getting assaulted from all angles all of a sudden. Definitely has good defensive value. Dunno how impactful he’ll be on offense

KGB

Anyone else notice that you can sometimes hit Vulture when he is airborne with an AoE?

Over multiple battles I noticed when my own Vulture fired Green that he was able to hit the enemy Vulture when he was airborne. Didn't happen 100% of the time but it happened enough that it was very noticeable. It's almost as if one of the airborne powers doesn't quite make him fully airborne. I think it's the Purple power which the enemy Vulture got off way more than the Blue (since I was prioritizing Blue for my Polaris/BrB team).

KGB

Bad

@GrimSkald said:

Hmm, add SWitch to the list of "very good against OR." Her Damage Reduction/Revenge damage is much more effective against AoEs.

SW is an ok counter to him. However, she isn't as deadly at all as she is against ihulk.
Because Ihulk destroys 2 tiles damaging with them: that's 2 hits more for SW, then the AoE deals a lot less damage and SW hits harder.
Against omega, she prevents less damage and answers with less power.

jsmjsmjsm00

You are likely hitting him with aoe when he is invisible and assuming that he was still airborne. He goes invisible on returning from airborne, so it can be tough to notice which he is.

entrailbucket

@Bowgentle said:

@entrailbucket said:
I think his status as a staple in PvP or PvE very much depends on what else you've got, and what else is boosted that week. He's not a Chasm or Okoye.

We also need to see what Omega Red looks like when not boosted -- he's benefiting quite a bit from a longer-than-normal boost.

Unless you're rocking 550 Bill Apoc Polaris, he SHOULD be faster with Gorrkoye than iHulk - Assuming a 500+ Okoye.
I'm not beating the really crazy PVE people, but it's keeping the Shang clown rosters at bay.

Of course if you're using a turn 0 kill team, this won't move the needle for you.

Yeah that's fair. I'm just saying -- wait a bit for the metagame to shake out before we decide exactly what he is (or before anybody decides to go all in on him).

bbigler

I think people will go all in on Vulture whether they want to or not because they want Omega and (most likely) the next 5* after him.

WhiteBomber

@KGB said:
Anyone else notice that you can sometimes hit Vulture when he is airborne with an AoE?

Did you perhaps have Deathlok on your team? *suggestive eyebrows

StanleyBurrell

@Bowgentle said:

@entrailbucket said:
I think his status as a staple in PvP or PvE very much depends on what else you've got, and what else is boosted that week. He's not a Chasm or Okoye.

We also need to see what Omega Red looks like when not boosted -- he's benefiting quite a bit from a longer-than-normal boost.

Unless you're rocking 550 Bill Apoc Polaris, he SHOULD be faster with Gorrkoye than iHulk - Assuming a 500+ Okoye.
I'm not beating the really crazy PVE people, but it's keeping the Shang clown rosters at bay.

Of course if you're using a turn 0 kill team, this won't move the needle for you.

I believe he has a place even unboosted. There is a lot to be said about damage that is good with boosts only, no supports required. From a PvP standpoint he’s an offensive tool. He can be hit but my hope is he’s another cog in the wheel of the float meta coming to an end. With 10 cover Omega and Apoc I had no losses against 550 Hulkasm. That’s good enough for me.

KGB

@WhiteBomber said:

@KGB said:
Anyone else notice that you can sometimes hit Vulture when he is airborne with an AoE?

Did you perhaps have Deathlok on your team? *suggestive eyebrows

Nope, I was running him with Polaris/BRB

KGB

Bowgentle

@StanleyBurrell said:

@Bowgentle said:

@entrailbucket said:
I think his status as a staple in PvP or PvE very much depends on what else you've got, and what else is boosted that week. He's not a Chasm or Okoye.

We also need to see what Omega Red looks like when not boosted -- he's benefiting quite a bit from a longer-than-normal boost.

Unless you're rocking 550 Bill Apoc Polaris, he SHOULD be faster with Gorrkoye than iHulk - Assuming a 500+ Okoye.
I'm not beating the really crazy PVE people, but it's keeping the Shang clown rosters at bay.

Of course if you're using a turn 0 kill team, this won't move the needle for you.

I believe he has a place even unboosted. There is a lot to be said about damage that is good with boosts only, no supports required. From a PvP standpoint he’s an offensive tool. He can be hit but my hope is he’s another cog in the wheel of the float meta coming to an end. With 10 cover Omega and Apoc I had no losses against 550 Hulkasm. That’s good enough for me.

Yeah I think the Chasm nerf will come after we all moved on to a different team.
Like EVERY meta nerf they've ever done.

DrClever

Yeah I think the Chasm nerf will come after we all moved on to a different team.
Like EVERY meta nerf they've ever done.

So none of the other nerfs were necessary, and this won't be either because they fix things in other ways?

DAZ0273

@DrClever said:

Yeah I think the Chasm nerf will come after we all moved on to a different team.
Like EVERY meta nerf they've ever done.

So none of the other nerfs were necessary, and this won't be either because they fix things in other ways?

Well let's see (not gonna speak to the VERY early ones as I was not here for them):

OML - From a player perspective this nerf was definitely not necessary but I guess the Devs thought otherwise
Gambit - This nerf was "necessary" due to 5* players complaining
Bishop - This nerf was "necessary" due to 5* players complaining
Worthy Cap - Well if ya gonna nerf Bishop then what the hell...I mean it was literally one team but...

Since these nerfs (and even during and before them) we have had:

1.) Abilities that undo healing or cause permanent damage. Would this have stopped OML? Well...he sort of didn't really need stopping so I don't think it made any difference.
2.) Abilities that drain AP and explode the board and punish charge tiles. Would this have stopped Gambit? It would have slowed him down probably and made him manageable so I am going to say yes.
3.) Anti-stun and pre-opening turn stun. Chasm would have completely nerfed Bishop allowing you to get in a significant first hit whilst he was stunned with no consequences making it easier to kill Bishop before he could do anything. Apocalypse and others are immune to stun, Kamala can clear stun statis. Would this have stopped Bishop? Hmm...it is hard to tell without trying but I think it would have had a level of impact that reduced the use of Bishop. Of course the easiest thing to have done would have been adjust his damage threshold/blue AP generation but nah...
4.) As above but Worthy Cap - I think MThor would have been able to blow up the countdowns and again we have anti-stun so I am going to say yes.

Bowgentle

@DrClever said:

Yeah I think the Chasm nerf will come after we all moved on to a different team.
Like EVERY meta nerf they've ever done.

So none of the other nerfs were necessary, and this won't be either because they fix things in other ways?

The nerf is very necessary, but it's 9 months late.
Their "fix" is to get everyone to spend on the new shiny that is slowly replacing the meta that is about to be nerfed.
I very much want Chasm burnt to the ground, but it should have happened 2 months after his release, not a year after.

GrimSkald

@DAZ0273 said:

@DrClever said:

Yeah I think the Chasm nerf will come after we all moved on to a different team.
Like EVERY meta nerf they've ever done.

So none of the other nerfs were necessary, and this won't be either because they fix things in other ways?

Well let's see (not gonna speak to the VERY early ones as I was not here for them):

OML - From a player perspective this nerf was definitely not necessary but I guess the Devs thought otherwise
Gambit - This nerf was "necessary" due to 5* players complaining
Bishop - This nerf was "necessary" due to 5* players complaining
Worthy Cap - Well if ya gonna nerf Bishop then what the hell...I mean it was literally one team but...

Since these nerfs (and even during and before them) we have had:

1.) Abilities that undo healing or cause permanent damage. Would this have stopped OML? Well...he sort of didn't really need stopping so I don't think it made any difference.
2.) Abilities that drain AP and explode the board and punish charge tiles. Would this have stopped Gambit? It would have slowed him down probably and made him manageable so I am going to say yes.
3.) Anti-stun and pre-opening turn stun. Chasm would have completely nerfed Bishop allowing you to get in a significant first hit whilst he was stunned with no consequences making it easier to kill Bishop before he could do anything. Apocalypse and others are immune to stun, Kamala can clear stun statis. Would this have stopped Bishop? Hmm...it is hard to tell without trying but I think it would have had a level of impact that reduced the use of Bishop. Of course the easiest thing to have done would have been adjust his damage threshold/blue AP generation but nah...
4.) As above but Worthy Cap - I think MThor would have been able to blow up the countdowns and again we have anti-stun so I am going to say yes.

Ok. We can not talk about the nerfs previous to this because they were early in the game and weren't 5*s -- for myself I think some nerf was necessary for them, but the actual nerfs were too harsh. In order:

The devs stated that at the time OML was nerfed, he was in a substantial number of matches in the game. Something like 70-90%, and that's across all player levels. Most of how they acted was to make him less useful to non 5* players. He probably should have even got a boost at the 3-5 levels in each color, but what have you, that was the old set of devs.

Gambit had an absolute reign of both PVP and PVE. He was just plain too good. He made most of the 5* tier obsolete. Now this was before boosted 5*s, and that may have changed things somewhat, but I guarantee if he was never nerfed people would still be using him frequently today (yes, even against Chasm,) that is if the game survived at all.

Bishop was way too effective against 5* teams. It was really hard to face any kind of Bishop team without getting stun-locked. Literally match damage would have him leaping in front, gaining blue, and stunning you next turn. It just plain sucked.

WorthyCap probably didn't need a nerf since he was much easier to avoid triggering his passive, but I guess they decided they didn't like the mechanic and he was kind of "part and parcel" with Bishop.

Regarding your other points, permanent damage is still overcosted and not terribly effective, but as you say OML didn't really need a nerf because of how good he was when champed.

AP drain would hurt Gambit, but he also had pretty good AP gain as well in both his passive and his red. He'd be a good anti-Chasm, and would probably pair great with MThor. The only real anti-charged power I can think of is Cosmo, and while he's good at that one thing, he doesn't bring enough else to justify bringing a 4* to a 5* fight.

Apocalypse is only immune to stun sometimes, as is Doc Ock. I'm pretty sure I've never used Kamala's "clear stun" ability effectively, I can't even remember what power it's on, it's not really significant.

Worthy Cap was never really an issue, I think they just didn't like that he could winfinite with CoulHawk in PVE.

entrailbucket

@DAZ0273 the VERY early nerfs were more timely than the later ones.

Loki got fixed pretty quickly -- weeks after the game's release. Ragnarok was the top of the meta for a month or two. Spidey and Magneto both dragged on a bit longer, but less than 6 months. Sentry was on top for a similar amount of time. 4thor and xforce were about the same.

The point bow is making is that by the time OML got his nerf, we in the top .5% had already moved on to a newer, stronger team. By the time Gambit was nerfed, Okoye existed, etc.

The conspiracy theory is that overpowered characters are nerfed ONLY when a new overpowered character exists, forcing players to spend on the new overpowered guy. This could be true, or it could be that they just take absolutely forever to fix obvious problems now.

658_2

Yeah, Bishop and Worthy were the only two significant blue batteries in the five star era, and I don’t think we’ll ever see another, not because 5* players will complain, but because the devs don’t want stunlocking to be a strategy. The devs have had a very light touch with stuns (and crits) in general in the 5* tier, although since we’ve seen a 4 turn and cheap 3 turn in the last few months maybe they’re relaxing on it.

Gambit needed a nerf because he closed off special tile play. As IceIX might say, he crowded out design space. The rest of the nerf was so heavy because, the old devs nerfed to reduce usage, rather than to attempt balance. The old head dev Wil, in so many words, said so on the forum. I can only assume the primary reason the Chasm nerf is taking so long is because the new devs are taking the other route.

Vhailorx

@658_2 said:
Yeah, Bishop and Worthy were the only two significant blue batteries in the five star era, and I don’t think we’ll ever see another,

BRB says hello!

jsmjsmjsm00

BRB is nowhere near bishop and worthy cap in AP generation.

Vhailorx

@jsmjsmjsm00 said:
BRB is nowhere near bishop and worthy cap in AP generation.

He may not be bishop levels of guaranteed, but he is definitely significant as a blue battery insofar as he can generate infinite blue/green ap in the right conditions. There are winfinite teams built around his battery. He just doesn't give 8-12 on round 2 like bishop did

I imagine people will try to figure out how to run him with vulture to fuel 5V's airborne.

entrailbucket

And it won't matter one bit, because those infinite on offense/awful on defense teams are all over the place already -- there's like 12 of them. Bishop and Cap got nerfed because they trivially went infinite on defense.