Prevalence of MThor and could she be the target of a rebalance?

LavaManLee

I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

revskip

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

BriMan2222

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

People defended chasm (and gambit and bishop) cause he was so strong and they didn't want him taken away from them. He detered being hit, people skipped matches involving him and ihulk, and he was unfun to play against (or with).

I defend mthor because she is so incredibly easy to beat, and if she's nerfed the other (stronger and harder to deal with) team will take their place. I almost never use her, unless she's boosted or I'm messing around in shield sim, so I don't care if she's taken away from my list of characters to use. I do care that she would be taken away from my endless buffet of easy teams in pvp.

entrailbucket

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

These are the same reasons the community was against the Bishop nerf, the Gambit nerf, the Force/4thor nerfs, the Sentry nerf, the Magneto nerf, the Ragnarok nerf...ad infinitum. Most of these are now accepted as being good for the game.

It's the exact same conversation every single time, it doesn't matter how strong the character is. The anti nerf people will defend a character that immediately wins every match by making one move. "Oh he's fine! Superheroes are supposed to be strong! Just use him yourself! Give us a counter!"

Bad

Find the differences:
-Chasm didn't let any character play. Mthor gifts AP.

• Chasm was a floating crazy deterrent. Mthor just gifts points
• Chasm was a slog slow match. Mthor is fast
• Chasm was always in the 500 points and above. Mthor is mostly before 500 points.
• Mthor is acknowledged by devs as one of the characters losing more matches this year.
  Wow! The same arguments it must be true!

BriMan2222

@entrailbucket said:

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

These are the same reasons the community was against the Bishop nerf, the Gambit nerf, the Force/4thor nerfs, the Sentry nerf, the Magneto nerf, the Ragnarok nerf...ad infinitum. Most of these are now accepted as being good for the game.

It's the exact same conversation every single time, it doesn't matter how strong the character is. The anti nerf people will defend a character that immediately wins every match by making one move. "Oh he's fine! Superheroes are supposed to be strong! Just use him yourself! Give us a counter!"

Out of all those examples given I've been pro nerf each time. This is the first time I'm against it. All those characters were very over tuned and difficult to beat, even with their intended counters. Mthor is smashed easily by just about any boosted characters or a good old collosus.

Chasm could easily beat characters 100 levels higher than him. I can squash 550 mthor with 550 collosus or just about any boosted combo level 570 or higher, and when 450 mthors try to retal my 550 collosus it usually ends up with blues for me (450 Chasm didn't usually wipe to my 550's). She is no where near chasm/bishop/gambit level.

entrailbucket

@BriMan2222 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

These are the same reasons the community was against the Bishop nerf, the Gambit nerf, the Force/4thor nerfs, the Sentry nerf, the Magneto nerf, the Ragnarok nerf...ad infinitum. Most of these are now accepted as being good for the game.

It's the exact same conversation every single time, it doesn't matter how strong the character is. The anti nerf people will defend a character that immediately wins every match by making one move. "Oh he's fine! Superheroes are supposed to be strong! Just use him yourself! Give us a counter!"

Out of all those examples given I've been pro nerf each time. This is the first time I'm against it. All those characters were very over tuned and difficult to beat, even with their intended counters. Mthor is smashed easily by just about any boosted characters or a good old collosus.

Chasm could easily beat characters 100 levels higher than him. I can squash 550 mthor with 550 collosus or just about any boosted combo level 570 or higher, and when 450 mthors try to retal my 550 collosus it usually ends up with blues for me (450 Chasm didn't usually wipe to my 550's). She is no where near chasm/bishop/gambit level.

I agree that she's weak on defense. I have lost to her occasionally when she goes off, though, and "occasionally" is more than every other character. I don't know that she's overused currently, although she does seem to be used quite a bit. I see her among the 550 crowd but also unchampioned, paired with Polaris.

The issue for me is that she's the best or close to the best at a lot of things that matter, and that's not good. She's the best damage character, a strong AP generator, the best anti special tile character, the best cascade generator...I don't even know what else.

There are other anti-tile characters, like Kitty, but those characters don't also do massive damage. There are plenty of characters who do huge damage, but they don't also passively remove all special tiles every turn. She does too much stuff.

Who is Thor weak against? Who can't she beat? Is there any team that you'd switch her out against?

Bad

Of course. SC and Mthor were weak against chasm.
Mthor is pretty weak against a hulkoye team.
Mthor can't do a thing vs ascended 4 boosteds.

Pantera236

I wasn't around for Gambit's reign but Bishop I didn't mind and Chasm I came to actually like. Him and Ihulk was always worth 75 points and I learned to take them down easy. I'll admit that for Bishop I had to use my own but Chasm I almost never used him. I even sold my 47x and just faved him to get a cover for PvE.

Jane on the other hand is somewhere in the middle. I don't HAVE to use her against her, sometimes I do but can easily beat her with just about anything, but also don't despise using her as I did Chasm. Only team I do mirror is Jane Riri, just because they can get out of hand QUICK. Have you ever had the pause button grey out but then it took 4 or 5 turns before they beat you lol.

Vhailorx

@entrailbucket said:

@BriMan2222 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

These are the same reasons the community was against the Bishop nerf, the Gambit nerf, the Force/4thor nerfs, the Sentry nerf, the Magneto nerf, the Ragnarok nerf...ad infinitum. Most of these are now accepted as being good for the game.

It's the exact same conversation every single time, it doesn't matter how strong the character is. The anti nerf people will defend a character that immediately wins every match by making one move. "Oh he's fine! Superheroes are supposed to be strong! Just use him yourself! Give us a counter!"

Out of all those examples given I've been pro nerf each time. This is the first time I'm against it. All those characters were very over tuned and difficult to beat, even with their intended counters. Mthor is smashed easily by just about any boosted characters or a good old collosus.

Chasm could easily beat characters 100 levels higher than him. I can squash 550 mthor with 550 collosus or just about any boosted combo level 570 or higher, and when 450 mthors try to retal my 550 collosus it usually ends up with blues for me (450 Chasm didn't usually wipe to my 550's). She is no where near chasm/bishop/gambit level.

I agree that she's weak on defense. I have lost to her occasionally when she goes off, though, and "occasionally" is more than every other character. I don't know that she's overused currently, although she does seem to be used quite a bit. I see her among the 550 crowd but also unchampioned, paired with Polaris.

The issue for me is that she's the best or close to the best at a lot of things that matter, and that's not good. She's the best damage character, a strong AP generator, the best anti special tile character, the best cascade generator...I don't even know what else.

There are other anti-tile characters, like Kitty, but those characters don't also do massive damage. There are plenty of characters who do huge damage, but they don't also passively remove all special tiles every turn. She does too much stuff.

Who is Thor weak against? Who can't she beat? Is there any team that you'd switch her out against?

She's not the best damage character. She is reasonably fast damage because she is cheap and can sometimes self-accelerate. But her damage output caps pretty low compared to SC or okoye.

And need I point out the rhetorical futility of pointing out that similar arguments are deployed against nerfs every time. Similar arguments are also used in support of nerfs every time. The question isn't "have you made this argument before?" It's "is this argument valid here?"

entrailbucket

@Vhailorx said:

@entrailbucket said:

@BriMan2222 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@revskip said:

@LavaManLee said:
I'm with Bad here. It may not be fun and you might not like it, but if you bring your own MT and then SC as your pick 2, you will win 19 out of 20 if not 20 out of 20, assuming you are evenly matched. Bring boosts of +2 colors and it will definitely be 20 out of 20. If you keep SC going, their MT turn doesn't even happen often enough to matter.

It is very amusing that all of the reasons sombunall folks had for why Chasm was untenable are now trotted out to defend mThor.

Use boosts, mirror match if you have to, pair them with other metas, etc.

I just want to see consistency here. If Chasm was too powerful because he was usable unboosted, was only able to be beat by certain other slower teams, caused too much damage passively and manipulated AP then Jane is just as OP because she does all of those things too albeit in a very different way.

These are the same reasons the community was against the Bishop nerf, the Gambit nerf, the Force/4thor nerfs, the Sentry nerf, the Magneto nerf, the Ragnarok nerf...ad infinitum. Most of these are now accepted as being good for the game.

It's the exact same conversation every single time, it doesn't matter how strong the character is. The anti nerf people will defend a character that immediately wins every match by making one move. "Oh he's fine! Superheroes are supposed to be strong! Just use him yourself! Give us a counter!"

Out of all those examples given I've been pro nerf each time. This is the first time I'm against it. All those characters were very over tuned and difficult to beat, even with their intended counters. Mthor is smashed easily by just about any boosted characters or a good old collosus.

Chasm could easily beat characters 100 levels higher than him. I can squash 550 mthor with 550 collosus or just about any boosted combo level 570 or higher, and when 450 mthors try to retal my 550 collosus it usually ends up with blues for me (450 Chasm didn't usually wipe to my 550's). She is no where near chasm/bishop/gambit level.

I agree that she's weak on defense. I have lost to her occasionally when she goes off, though, and "occasionally" is more than every other character. I don't know that she's overused currently, although she does seem to be used quite a bit. I see her among the 550 crowd but also unchampioned, paired with Polaris.

The issue for me is that she's the best or close to the best at a lot of things that matter, and that's not good. She's the best damage character, a strong AP generator, the best anti special tile character, the best cascade generator...I don't even know what else.

There are other anti-tile characters, like Kitty, but those characters don't also do massive damage. There are plenty of characters who do huge damage, but they don't also passively remove all special tiles every turn. She does too much stuff.

Who is Thor weak against? Who can't she beat? Is there any team that you'd switch her out against?

She's not the best damage character. She is reasonably fast damage because she is cheap and can sometimes self-accelerate. But her damage output caps pretty low compared to SC or okoye.

And need I point out the rhetorical futility of pointing out that similar arguments are deployed against nerfs every time. Similar arguments are also used in support of nerfs every time. The question isn't "have you made this argument before?" It's "is this argument valid here?"

Somehow you guys keep pulling me back into this thing after I'm already out! I'm out! There's no wall of Thor! It's fine!

BriMan2222

Yes, there's a wall of thor. The difference though is that the wall of chasm/Ihulk was a steel wall covered in barbed wire. The wall of thor/shang is a wall of ginger bread covered in delicious frosting.

entrailbucket

@BriMan2222 said:
Yes, there's a wall of thor. The difference though is that the wall of chasm/Ihulk was a steel wall covered in barbed wire. The wall of thor/shang is a wall of ginger bread covered in delicious frosting.

I'm really not seeing that. But I play at sort of a weird time (granted, in the same slice as you).

BriMan2222

@entrailbucket said:

@BriMan2222 said:
Yes, there's a wall of thor. The difference though is that the wall of chasm/Ihulk was a steel wall covered in barbed wire. The wall of thor/shang is a wall of ginger bread covered in delicious frosting.

I'm really not seeing that. But I play at sort of a weird time (granted, in the same slice as you).

That may be the difference. I play pretty early in the event, and usually I am greeted to a bunch of high point mthor/shang. I've had a much easier climb to 1200 since mthor/shang became so prevalent. They're usually the easiest teams to beat. I'll skip boosted 5's if I can find more mthor teams, and once I break mmr I can start seeing low level mthor/polaris teams for decent points.

entrailbucket

@BriMan2222 said:

@entrailbucket said:

@BriMan2222 said:
Yes, there's a wall of thor. The difference though is that the wall of chasm/Ihulk was a steel wall covered in barbed wire. The wall of thor/shang is a wall of ginger bread covered in delicious frosting.

I'm really not seeing that. But I play at sort of a weird time (granted, in the same slice as you).

That may be the difference. I play pretty early in the event, and usually I am greeted to a bunch of high point mthor/shang. I've had a much easier climb to 1200 since mthor/shang became so prevalent. They're usually the easiest teams to beat. I'll skip boosted 5's if I can find more mthor teams, and once I break mmr I can start seeing low level mthor/polaris teams for decent points.

I DID see a wall of Chasm though, so that's why I'm saying she's ok. For now.

Bowgentle

Goose might counter her, too.
We'll see.

bbigler

@BriMan2222 Regarding matching her charged tiles as a solution: first, she creates 3 charged tiles at battle start, so even if you match 1 per turn while she creates 1 per turn, she still has 3 every turn to blow things up. Second, you can’t always match her charged tiles every turn, so then she gets ahead of you with 4, 5, 6 and so on. Third, even if you match her charged tiles every turn, you’re being forced to take those colors, which means you may be missing the colors you need or getting match 4-s. The match goes much better if I collect the colors I need to take her down quickly. If I focused on matching charged tiles, it would take longer and thus give her even more time to hurt me.

BriMan2222

@bbigler said:
@BriMan2222 Regarding matching her charged tiles as a solution: first, she creates 3 charged tiles at battle start, so even if you match 1 per turn while she creates 1 per turn, she still has 3 every turn to blow things up. Second, you can’t always match her charged tiles every turn, so then she gets ahead of you with 4, 5, 6 and so on. Third, even if you match her charged tiles every turn, you’re being forced to take those colors, which means you may be missing the colors you need or getting match 4-s. The match goes much better if I collect the colors I need to take her down quickly. If I focused on matching charged tiles, it would take longer and thus give her even more time to hurt me.

She only creates 3 charged tiles at the beginning of the match if you have her blue at 4 or above. Maybe it's different in your MMR, but most of the 550 players are in agreement that all out offense on her red and yellow with a 5/3/5 build is the optimal set up for her. This means she only creates 2 charged tiles at the start of the match.

It's rare that you can't match at least one of them to start the game. Then she is at only 1 charged tile on the board and it's pretty easy to match one away each turn. You should also have an outlet for most colors, unless you are running a team with too many overlapping colors. I usually have an outlet for any color, or at worst there is one color I don't have a use for. Playing a team with too much overlap by choice is a problem you are creating for yourself.

You've stated that you are using teams that are not good against her because you don't want to have to worry about be being attacked as much with another team (You'll probably be attacked just as much using those teams anyway) and allowing her to hang around for a super long time (8+ turns) and now you're saying that you are choosing teams with too much color overlap to have a use for most AP. A lot of your problems with Mthor seem to be self inflicted.

bbigler

Here’s the irony: when browsing PVP teams to fight, I always choose to fight MThor teams over Omega teams or Boosted 5-stars. Everyone else is easy except Switch, Electro and Kitty who counter my Omega. But with all teams, I know what to expect, except MThor. Matches with her are more unpredictable. Sometimes she goes down easy and sometimes she bashes my team.

Bowgentle

I don't know.
Out of 30 times, she goes berserk maybe once on me, and that mostly with yellow because Shang is kind enough to use his red over hers.