Spudgutter said: huktonfonix said: Spudgutter said: Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos. Case in point. You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them." Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit. I dont use him and do just fine. Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit. Wait, what? We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite. Depending on who the other two are:Panthos. JJ/DD. DD/5trange. If i had him, SS/BB. JJ/BB. DD/thanos. Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense. That's obviously not the point you are trying to make. You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time. It's the costs that will be different. Thats why i like thor so much. He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense. You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him.
huktonfonix said: Spudgutter said: Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos. Case in point. You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them." Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit. I dont use him and do just fine. Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit.
Spudgutter said: Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos. Case in point. You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them." Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit. I dont use him and do just fine.
Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos.
Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top.
huktonfonix said: A whole lot of people are overlooking the critical distinction between how a character performs on offense (player controlled) and how they perform on defense (AI controlled).Thor being tossed around a lot here. Thor is easily top 2 characters in the game right now and is extremely powerful, but is balanced in a critical way that Gambit is not. Yes, on offense and played correctly, Thor can beat any team in the game, including Gambit. However, on defense, Thor is a glass cannon beatable by literally any 5* team. Defensive Thor enters the fight at 100% hp, which means he does nothing for a long time unless you play very stupidly against him. Don’t believe me? Do that idiot thing I keep doing where I decide to deliberately let 60-100% Thor tank instead of retreating him to 50%. Guaranteed horrible match costing 1-3 health packs.This is where Gambit stands alone. He’s powerful (maybe not the most powerful, but easily top tier) on offense, but on defense he’s extremely difficult to beat without either your own Gambit or Thor. There is no other 5* character that cannot easily and consistently be beaten by any 5* pairing. You might win one fight against Gambit with a gimmick team, stings, boosts, but there is absolutely no way you’re going to climb to 900-1200 in pvp off Gambit teams with DD/BP, SS/BB, or any of the other nonsense teams mentioned above without crazy luck and a Stark worth of health packs and boosts.With Gambit being the most common character in PvP, players with Thor and/or Gambit are locked out of high-level pvp. With both of those characters in classics, it would cost approximately 36000 cp to pull 13 covers for either. For the long term health of the game, this has to change. There are players with 550 ThorBit teams and no third 550 5 to replace Gambit campaigning for a nerf for that very reason in this thread. When someone who has spent thousands on a 550 Gambit with no obvious replacement rostered is begging for a self-nerf, that should speak volumes.
Spudgutter said: CharlieCroker said: Spudgutter said: huktonfonix said: Spudgutter said: Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos. Case in point. You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them." Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit. I dont use him and do just fine. Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit. Wait, what? We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite. Depending on who the other two are:Panthos. JJ/DD. DD/5trange. If i had him, SS/BB. JJ/BB. DD/thanos. Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense. That's obviously not the point you are trying to make. You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time. It's the costs that will be different. Thats why i like thor so much. He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense. You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him. Did you really just suggest using a team with Black Bolt against Gambit? Interesting....But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain. That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners. I got the idea from bowgentle. Like i said, it would depend on who the other two opponents were. SS heals, so if you keep him out front when gambit is getting ready to fire his red, it wouldnt have as much of an impact. Definitely wouldn't use it for a hop to get to 1200, but would certainly consider it on my climb to save health packs.
CharlieCroker said: Spudgutter said: huktonfonix said: Spudgutter said: Bowgentle said: Spudgutter said:I think he is a super strong character who could use a tweak, but it is not really that different from the panthos meta, where in order to do well you had to have the same team as a counter. Someone is always going to be on top. You never needed Panthos in that meta.I ran Surfer Bolt for months, that team absolutely destroyed Panthos. Case in point. You are right, i should have said "in order to do well, it helps to have them." Just like right now, you don't "need" gambit. I dont use him and do just fine. Name teams you beat similarly leveled Gambits with that don’t include Thor or your own Gambit. Wait, what? We are talking about gambit here, but i will bite. Depending on who the other two are:Panthos. JJ/DD. DD/5trange. If i had him, SS/BB. JJ/BB. DD/thanos. Some matches will take longer, some would require health packs and some would really get you a retal on defense. That's obviously not the point you are trying to make. You want to know who wins? Me, 90+% of the time. It's the costs that will be different. Thats why i like thor so much. He has a great balance because he is strong without being overpowered on defense. You have to bring him in at a disadvantage to get the best utility out of him. Did you really just suggest using a team with Black Bolt against Gambit? Interesting....But with regards to Thor, the thing is that if you have someone to tank for him (i.e. Gambit 15 levels higher tanks red, or other characters similarly higher) there is no real disadvantage, just the 5ap+ a turn gain. That's (but obviously) why he's so good and meshes so well with a variety of partners.
OJSP said: elko90 said: As i said before an alliance mate beat me everytime with JJ and Cap(IW) my team was thor and gambit... They have about 2 months before both go to Classics. Okoye has a bit longer. If the solution for transitioning players is to get one or two latest 5*s so they could fight classic characters released over 9 months ago or get your own Gambit, something is not right.
elko90 said: As i said before an alliance mate beat me everytime with JJ and Cap(IW) my team was thor and gambit...
Daredevil217 said: So to quote someone earlier in this thread in why Gambit should be nerfed. “Gambit originally generated 3 red and purple ap, each and every turn, without conditions other than his teammates cannot fire their sorry powers. What if he generated 6ap of each color each turn? That's fine? No nerfs cuz they're bad? “Half health Thor does this, except he collects 5 AP in three colors, gets the damage and cascades from destroying tiles... oh, and he doesn’t block other teammates from using active powers. I get it’s “conditional” in that you have to bring him in half health but that takes place before the match begins. Once in the match there are no conditions to his AP gen and he’s just as powerful as Gambit. So... nerf? I mean he seems to be a pretty big advantage against those who don’t have him. Way more so when Gambit is gutted.
Daredevil217 said: I’m not in the tier which is why I’m asking questions.
Sm0keyJ0e said: Daredevil217 said: I’m not in the tier which is why I’m asking questions. Well to be honest, you are not really asking questions, you are making a lot of uninformed statements, such as:That Thor blade is way taller than the others. And unlike Gambit he’s best for PVE AND PVP meaning he dominates the entire game and not just one game mode. Once in the match there are no conditions to his AP gen and he’s just as powerful as Gambit. So... nerf? I mean he seems to be a pretty big advantage against those who don’t have him. Way more so when Gambit is gutted. So the issue isn’t that he’s head and shoulders better than everyone else on offense (as Thor will be post nerf), and that those who have him will be better than everyone else.I don't know anyone deep into the 5* tier that thinks Thor dominates the entire game, even after Gambit's impending nerf. I can only assume you are theorizing this as you're not in the tier and have never used a champed Thor in PVE or PVP. There are many better/faster options in PVE. And saying Thor is a big advantage against those who don't have him is, again... completely your opinion and not based on anything. Please listen to the masses here: Thor is not difficult to beat--with ANY team, including boosted 4*'s. Those who have Thor, post-nerf, will NOT be better than everyone else. 5* players will once again have options.Please just stop. You're out of your element and spewing non-truths all over the place.
The rockett said: Smokey is 100% correct here. Thor is not bad, You just have to no how to handle him. There is no need to nerf him. While he might be near the top of the 5* then, he is NOT the meta that Gambit is. There is a huge differance.
Daredevil217 said: It’s weird that you responded to the intro of my most recent post but none of the content in it after. Is anything in my most recent post concerning Gambit (and I guess Thor) false or no? Like I said, I believe they’re true based on what others are saying but if I’m wrong please correct me. The rockett said: Smokey is 100% correct here. Thor is not bad, You just have to no how to handle him. There is no need to nerf him. While he might be near the top of the 5* then, he is NOT the meta that Gambit is. There is a huge differance. This is on defense where you’re saying he’s not a problem though right? I get Thor is easily beatable. On offense he’ll be the best character for PVE (though Thanos is still there with him) and PVP due to the AP gen, cascades, and no limitations on who can fire active powers?
maguirenumber6 said: It seems strange to me that some would quit the game if they rebalanced Gambit again. It'll be your loss at the end of the day. If you don't want your points and prizes I'll gladly have them instead