Der_Lex wrote: ShionSinX wrote: So you pointed XF's true healing, but did not pointed PX's invencibility? A bad board is all it takes to make you not reach that invisible tile, no matter if he was at full or 1 HP only, until you take it or has an AoE he might land from none to 10 criticals. Its a gamble for him to be able or not to deal damage back, but the longer it takes the higher the chances are that somehing goes bad for you. If not because you lost, because it took so much time to win that you were attacked 5 times on defense. So just by one out of three abilities you alredy want to skip him on hops, and its not even the power people want to be balanced. I already mentioned when I replied to your previous post that there are several ways of dealing with X's invisibility tile: purple denial, team damage, targeted board destruction or overwriting it with cap. If you go into a fight against X without any of those means, it's your own mistake. As you say, it's a gamble to fight him, just like it's a gamble to fight any high-level character. Despite their nerfs, xthor will still ruin your day really fast if the AI gets a couple of cascades and/or 8 blue. If Fury gets his Demolition off, you can pretty much kiss a character goodbye unless you can kill him fast enough. If you're not willing to risk that gamble, hit the skip button. But as someone who actually does take on teams with prof X in them pretty regularly, with a bit of planning and if you make him your primary target (just like you'd target Hood, Loki, Thoress or any other troublesome character first), Prof X will be dead 9 times out of 10 before he can do any real damage. And that final 1 out of 10 bad luck factor is there against any opposing team.
ShionSinX wrote: So you pointed XF's true healing, but did not pointed PX's invencibility? A bad board is all it takes to make you not reach that invisible tile, no matter if he was at full or 1 HP only, until you take it or has an AoE he might land from none to 10 criticals. Its a gamble for him to be able or not to deal damage back, but the longer it takes the higher the chances are that somehing goes bad for you. If not because you lost, because it took so much time to win that you were attacked 5 times on defense. So just by one out of three abilities you alredy want to skip him on hops, and its not even the power people want to be balanced.
reckless442 wrote: Der_Lex wrote: ShionSinX wrote: So you pointed XF's true healing, but did not pointed PX's invencibility? A bad board is all it takes to make you not reach that invisible tile, no matter if he was at full or 1 HP only, until you take it or has an AoE he might land from none to 10 criticals. Its a gamble for him to be able or not to deal damage back, but the longer it takes the higher the chances are that somehing goes bad for you. If not because you lost, because it took so much time to win that you were attacked 5 times on defense. So just by one out of three abilities you alredy want to skip him on hops, and its not even the power people want to be balanced. I already mentioned when I replied to your previous post that there are several ways of dealing with X's invisibility tile: purple denial, team damage, targeted board destruction or overwriting it with cap. If you go into a fight against X without any of those means, it's your own mistake. As you say, it's a gamble to fight him, just like it's a gamble to fight any high-level character. Despite their nerfs, xthor will still ruin your day really fast if the AI gets a couple of cascades and/or 8 blue. If Fury gets his Demolition off, you can pretty much kiss a character goodbye unless you can kill him fast enough. If you're not willing to risk that gamble, hit the skip button. But as someone who actually does take on teams with prof X in them pretty regularly, with a bit of planning and if you make him your primary target (just like you'd target Hood, Loki, Thoress or any other troublesome character first), Prof X will be dead 9 times out of 10 before he can do any real damage. And that final 1 out of 10 bad luck factor is there against any opposing team. Let me add one other major point. Prof X's invisibility is the same color as the two best pairings for match-5s -- IF and GSBW. So when you play Prof X, you often have to choose whether to rely on invisibility (a very slow way to win) or use purple for a different task. It is rare to use his blue and purple in the same game. When it happens, it is usually because the character with the other purple power is dead.
aesthetocyst wrote: orionpeace chose to question one point of a post without bothering to respond to the rest. I answered his question. Not enjoying receiving inconvenient information, he shifted his goalposts. Had I bothered to anticipate and provide the information in the original post, this tangent could have been prevented.
aesthetocyst wrote: I would prefer the devs offered alternatives, counters to powerful characters. They present problems to solve. Problems to solve, in a puzzle game. Hmmm.
aesthetocyst wrote: raisinbman wrote: orionpeace wrote: I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I am expressing my concern for how D3 executes tuning characters down - nerfing. He provided an example. One. The only one. Of when they tuned a character up after a nerf. And I pointed to how long that took. No blame. Just observations and concern. Please don't put words in my mouth. Your concern is irrelevant. This thread is about fixing characters. Not how long. Not how often. Not how much or how little. It's a call to nerf. I mean honestly, the person gave you exactly what you ask for and you derail with a BUT BUT BUT orionpeace chose to question one point of a post without bothering to respond to the rest. I answered his question. Not enjoying receiving inconvenient information, he shifted his goalposts. Had I bothered to anticipate and provide the information in the original post, this tangent could have been prevented. This thread, according to the OP, is not about fixing characters in general, it's about an assumption by some players that a specific character needs fixing. Based on past experience with such complaints (Sentry, XF, 4Thor being prominent in my mind), this causes other players to groan: "Here we go again". Some characters need tweaking because they're really irritating. Cmags, the original rags, spidey are all good examples, all examples of the devs early tendency to provide hilariously cheap powers. These characters needed tweaking, badly, because playing with/against them was mind-numbing. Sentry, XF, 4Thor, now Prof X, did not suffer from the same defect. Yes, they were powerful. They presented problems to be solved. In a pay-to-win game, some players can acquire these powerful characters over night. Most players, not being big spenders, require months to build them. In the interim, the spenders can lord over their less spendy competition. Well ... this model offers to paths to progress, time and money.The devs have to walk a fine line between driving away those willing to spend money, and those reluctant to spend. I would prefer the devs offered alternatives, counters to powerful characters. They present problems to solve. Problems to solve, in a puzzle game. Hmmm. Nerfs are a shortcut for the devs. An apparent easy out in attempt to appease the playerbase. (Remember the defense offered of the recent adjustments? "We got PMs that thanked us.") Easier to nerf what exists than to make new. Read my other comments. I have plenty of criticism of the devs. Their desicions/actions in regards to character design and balance, and implementation of those actions/decisions, are atrocious. In short, I, too, groan, "Here we go again." Leave X alone. If I used to beat Sentry with OBW, I can take down X with [mumblemumble], and I do. Puzzle solved. Next!
raisinbman wrote: orionpeace wrote: I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I am expressing my concern for how D3 executes tuning characters down - nerfing. He provided an example. One. The only one. Of when they tuned a character up after a nerf. And I pointed to how long that took. No blame. Just observations and concern. Please don't put words in my mouth. Your concern is irrelevant. This thread is about fixing characters. Not how long. Not how often. Not how much or how little. It's a call to nerf. I mean honestly, the person gave you exactly what you ask for and you derail with a BUT BUT BUT
orionpeace wrote: I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I am expressing my concern for how D3 executes tuning characters down - nerfing. He provided an example. One. The only one. Of when they tuned a character up after a nerf. And I pointed to how long that took. No blame. Just observations and concern. Please don't put words in my mouth.
Lerysh wrote: aesthetocyst wrote: orionpeace chose to question one point of a post without bothering to respond to the rest. I answered his question. Not enjoying receiving inconvenient information, he shifted his goalposts. Had I bothered to anticipate and provide the information in the original post, this tangent could have been prevented. After the above, forgive me for questioning only a portion of your post. aesthetocyst wrote: I would prefer the devs offered alternatives, counters to powerful characters. They present problems to solve. Problems to solve, in a puzzle game. Hmmm. This, sadly, can never happen because of the PvP world we live in. You can't bring a team to solve 1 problem that has a glaring weakness, because you then get immediately devoured for having a defense team with a glaring weakness. Attackers get to see your team before deciding to commit a team of their own, which is a huge advantage. But that advantage is limited in the sense they also have to bring a team that stands up on defense. It's like if you were playing Rock Paper Scissors and saw what your opponent used before you had to pick, but the guy behind you sees what you use. In this choice you either win the first match handily, and lose the second, or you throw Elemental Nuke which defeats everything. Guess which one gets used? Until retaliations are taken out of PvP entirely, hard counters to specific OP characters will never work. I mean, look how well Doc Ock was received as a Sentry counter. You can use problem solver characters in PvE, but even there your Elemental Nuke is probably the best option.
Xenoberyll wrote: I've never read a complaint about OBW or Ares at least.
Phaserhawk wrote: It's simple, why do you run Prof X? Why did you run old Spidey, Old Rags, Old C.Mags, why did you Sentry bomb? What they all have in common, especially in PvE, was it was a way to do the absoutely most with the lowest amount of resources possible. The game wasn't about--get 5 blue and win with Spidey or C.Mags. It wasn't get a little green and Red, win with Rags. It's not get 7 green, 8 yellow and destroy the other team with Sentry What PX does is the same as those others. Get a certain color with someone quickly and win the game. You don't want him nerfed because he provides you with a cheap and efficient way to win. Well, guess what, that's lame. I can already see the problems with Prof X and Hulkbuster. Get 9 blue, create red, get match 5 from cascade, Prof X triggers and creates more blue to feed Hulkbuster into another match 5. It's one of those, IF and KK, and Cyclops, and all the other AP generators really bend the line of balance, but Xavier breaks it. And when the breaker is the one allowed to exist while all the benders are nerfed that's where I have a problem. Benders can always be bent back in line, like they did with Iron Fist, but when you nerf characters into non existance all so a breaker can continue to exist, yeah, I don't like that. I like that pX can create AP on match 5's, I'm just saying you should get it at the start of your next turn, not instantly.
Phaserhawk wrote: I can already see the problems with Prof X and Hulkbuster. Get 9 blue, create red, get match 5 from cascade, Prof X triggers and creates more blue to feed Hulkbuster into another match 5. It's one of those, IF and KK, and Cyclops, and all the other AP generators really bend the line of balance, but Xavier breaks it. And when the breaker is the one allowed to exist while all the benders are nerfed that's where I have a problem. Benders can always be bent back in line, like they did with Iron Fist, but when you nerf characters into non existance all so a breaker can continue to exist, yeah, I don't like that. I like that pX can create AP on match 5's, I'm just saying you should get it at the start of your next turn, not instantly.
djvkool wrote: Wow, lucky you, how did you manage to level him up and maxed level so quick?