huktonfonix said: @Brigby Can we get a comment on the decision process behind who to include in the compensation vault? This is the second such vault in a row where every 5* in the game except Gambit (for obvious reasons) and Doctor Octopus are included. Was Ock deliberately left out because he is widely considered to be useless and therefore undesirable as compensation for selling off a 5*? This seems like a strange decision given that Banner is included and is perceived similarly to Ock.
Dormammu said: Do they lack the resources to do this? Do they not have a reliable source of QA data?
GrimSkald said: To be fair, Gambit nerfed down to the low tier (which is, I think, what's going to happen,) is much better for the long-term health of the game than leaving him God-Tier.
To be fair, Gambit nerfed down to the low tier (which is, I think, what's going to happen,) is much better for the long-term health of the game than leaving him God-Tier.
Daredevil217 said: GrimSkald said: To be fair, Gambit nerfed down to the low tier (which is, I think, what's going to happen,) is much better for the long-term health of the game than leaving him God-Tier. You know there are more than those two options, right? And that is what people are upset about. It's like they go way too far in either direction and can never truly balance.Blocking out friendly powers didn't really matter when you wouldn't fire any powers other than his anyway. Now that every single power has been gutted, leaving that restriction on him turns him into a liability. At least Ock and Banner don't do anything to actively harm their allies.When Gambit was tweaked the first time I swear a developer said they wanted to take a different approach and enact smaller changes and see how that goes, as not to obliterate a fan favorite. Now, that was when there was still tons of money to be made, but this seems like a complete 180 from that. Or, that was never actually stated, and I'm dreaming it. Not sure.
Daiches said: Meander said: Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you. This was a great idea that I didn't see addressed. @Brigby is there any way to make this happen so we still have Gambit for pve but still can sell off our excess? We will still need Gambit for Essentials in PVE, so selling fully is a fool's errand.This is a better proposition.However 46 Champ levels spread out over 20 characters in tokens helps me in no way. A bump of 2 levels per character, some Classics still unchamped, is in no way a recompensation.Letting us freely move as many Champ levels as we want to characters of our choice would be.
Meander said: Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you. This was a great idea that I didn't see addressed. @Brigby is there any way to make this happen so we still have Gambit for pve but still can sell off our excess?
Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you.
Straycat said: That was more about the 0/0/5 Gambat strategy, more specifically the 3* version. Giving that restriction to the 5* hurt those that only got his black cover, which is my guess to why they added the ap destruction in the first place.Now that the ap destruction is gone, a 0/0/x Gambit is useless until he is stunned or downed. So I think it makes sense to remove the teammate restriction. I just champed him, haven't even tried him out in pvp at full strength yet. I am not disappointed that he got nerfed, and I don't know how bad he will actually play. But I do hope they take a look and tweak him a little before release
CharlieCroker said: I'd like to express some opposition to this. People with higher level Gambits have been busy dominating competition and raking in top rewards (or just having easier fights) for 9 months. Now you just want to trade him in for a similarly levelled Thor, JJ or Okoye (or whoever). Imo you've already reaped rewards and shouldn't get any special treatment. It should be an all-or-nothing exchange if players wish to sell-off their Gambit.On top of that, you've already had a significant number of 5* champ rewards from adding levels to Gambit and these are very good. If you were allowed to say keep a 450 Gambit, but add 50 levels to JJ you'd be doubling down on all those extra LT's, cp, HP and iso.
Gold_Dragon said: He’s still usable. I don’t get the “he’ll never be used again!” Talk.
CharlieCroker said: Daiches said: Meander said: Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you. This was a great idea that I didn't see addressed. @Brigby is there any way to make this happen so we still have Gambit for pve but still can sell off our excess? We will still need Gambit for Essentials in PVE, so selling fully is a fool's errand.This is a better proposition.However 46 Champ levels spread out over 20 characters in tokens helps me in no way. A bump of 2 levels per character, some Classics still unchamped, is in no way a recompensation.Letting us freely move as many Champ levels as we want to characters of our choice would be. I'd like to express some opposition to this. People with higher level Gambits have been busy dominating competition and raking in top rewards (or just having easier fights) for 9 months. Now you just want to trade him in for a similarly levelled Thor, JJ or Okoye (or whoever). Imo you've already reaped rewards and shouldn't get any special treatment. It should be an all-or-nothing exchange if players wish to sell-off their Gambit.On top of that, you've already had a significant number of 5* champ rewards from adding levels to Gambit and these are very good. If you were allowed to say keep a 450 Gambit, but add 50 levels to JJ you'd be doubling down on all those extra LT's, cp, HP and iso.One caveat to this - you have a minor point as far as needing Gambit for PVE goes, but he'll be essential once in a blue moon. Perhaps CS should give one Gambit cover back as part of the process for anyone that does sell a champed Gambit.
Player1575 said: CharlieCroker said: Daiches said: Meander said: Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you. This was a great idea that I didn't see addressed. @Brigby is there any way to make this happen so we still have Gambit for pve but still can sell off our excess? We will still need Gambit for Essentials in PVE, so selling fully is a fool's errand.This is a better proposition.However 46 Champ levels spread out over 20 characters in tokens helps me in no way. A bump of 2 levels per character, some Classics still unchamped, is in no way a recompensation.Letting us freely move as many Champ levels as we want to characters of our choice would be. I'd like to express some opposition to this. People with higher level Gambits have been busy dominating competition and raking in top rewards (or just having easier fights) for 9 months. Now you just want to trade him in for a similarly levelled Thor, JJ or Okoye (or whoever). Imo you've already reaped rewards and shouldn't get any special treatment. It should be an all-or-nothing exchange if players wish to sell-off their Gambit.On top of that, you've already had a significant number of 5* champ rewards from adding levels to Gambit and these are very good. If you were allowed to say keep a 450 Gambit, but add 50 levels to JJ you'd be doubling down on all those extra LT's, cp, HP and iso.One caveat to this - you have a minor point as far as needing Gambit for PVE goes, but he'll be essential once in a blue moon. Perhaps CS should give one Gambit cover back as part of the process for anyone that does sell a champed Gambit. I think you may be a bit confused. They aren't asking to exchange their 40 champ levels on gambit for 40 levels on thor/jj/etc. They're asking for 40 tokens to the marvel Legends store in exchange for their champ levels. A store that has over 20 5*s in it. Meaning with 40 pulls they likely wouldn't even get 5 covers of thor/jj/etc.
Daiches said: Player1575 said: CharlieCroker said: Daiches said: Meander said: Balefire said: @Brigby I picked up Gambit when opening a hoard so have a fair number of extra levels. While it sounds like he has lost a lot of viability, completely selling him off with no way to rebuild him easily to 450 seems like overkill. Please float the idea of allowing to break champ levels for cashing in to the Marvel Legends store while still retaining the fully covered and max level character for PVE 5E node use. Thank you. This was a great idea that I didn't see addressed. @Brigby is there any way to make this happen so we still have Gambit for pve but still can sell off our excess? We will still need Gambit for Essentials in PVE, so selling fully is a fool's errand.This is a better proposition.However 46 Champ levels spread out over 20 characters in tokens helps me in no way. A bump of 2 levels per character, some Classics still unchamped, is in no way a recompensation.Letting us freely move as many Champ levels as we want to characters of our choice would be. I'd like to express some opposition to this. People with higher level Gambits have been busy dominating competition and raking in top rewards (or just having easier fights) for 9 months. Now you just want to trade him in for a similarly levelled Thor, JJ or Okoye (or whoever). Imo you've already reaped rewards and shouldn't get any special treatment. It should be an all-or-nothing exchange if players wish to sell-off their Gambit.On top of that, you've already had a significant number of 5* champ rewards from adding levels to Gambit and these are very good. If you were allowed to say keep a 450 Gambit, but add 50 levels to JJ you'd be doubling down on all those extra LT's, cp, HP and iso.One caveat to this - you have a minor point as far as needing Gambit for PVE goes, but he'll be essential once in a blue moon. Perhaps CS should give one Gambit cover back as part of the process for anyone that does sell a champed Gambit. I think you may be a bit confused. They aren't asking to exchange their 40 champ levels on gambit for 40 levels on thor/jj/etc. They're asking for 40 tokens to the marvel Legends store in exchange for their champ levels. A store that has over 20 5*s in it. Meaning with 40 pulls they likely wouldn't even get 5 covers of thor/jj/etc. No. I am going a step further in my comment and asking straight swaps to specific characters, as tokens don't help me in the slightest with such a giant dilution. Raising a dozen characters from 460to 462 does not replace a near 500 in any way you look at it.