tph_james said: I think an easy way to counter overpowered characters without nerfing them is:Create one 5* character that can completely seal off one single opponent's power of your choice for the entire game either passively or with cheap ap.Imagine u can prevent gambit's stacked deck, Thanos' court death, OML die hard, BB energy channeling, DD fighting spirit, JJ damning evidence... etc.In this way, all characters are balanced. Dev will never need to nerf anyone in the future.
LavaManLee said: Going back to the OP, there is one sentence that concerns me more than any other. The developer's own comments said:"Archangel's Aerial Superiority and Captain America (Infinity War)'s Man Without a Country powers were both designed with the intention of creating counter-play with Gambit."This screams out "none of us really play this game at the 5* level and have no idea how it operates". Did a room full of people who supposedly know the game actually think that either of those powers would counter Gambit? Each of those powers needed the player to gain the appropriate AP in the first place and then fire to create a countdown tile. Neither of those powers do more than shoot a spitball at a Gambit team.If you had asked anyone in the forums with 5* experience, they would have been able to tell you that neither of those powers would be any kind of counter-play with Gambit. This also explains the megaton-nerf of Gambit : there was no idea how to really balance him so you just destroyed him as a player.My concern for the longevity of the game is that the 5* game is in the hand of developers who don't really understand 5* play. JMHO.
LifeofAgony said: tph_james said: I think an easy way to counter overpowered characters without nerfing them is:Create one 5* character that can completely seal off one single opponent's power of your choice for the entire game either passively or with cheap ap.Imagine u can prevent gambit's stacked deck, Thanos' court death, OML die hard, BB energy channeling, DD fighting spirit, JJ damning evidence... etc.In this way, all characters are balanced. Dev will never need to nerf anyone in the future. So you go from requiring one OP toon gambit to requiring new OP power blocker X? Doesn’t seem a great plan either.
Hoser said: Typical D3.....Completely destroy any character that players are using alot. This is Old Man Logan II. Why even spend time AND MONEY on this game if D3 is just going to bow to all the new player complaints. These newer people think they should be able to just jump into the game and be competitive. I have played this game since it came out over 4 years ago and I have played EVERY day and have worked to build up my roster, and yes, Gambit. But because newer players express their concerns, forget the players that have played this game religiously for years. This is twice D3....how many more times do you think your dedicated players will put up with this again. //Removed Insult -Brigby
thedarkphoenix said: I mentioned this to a friend also, there is no way a 5 team of players thought AA or CA was a decent counter to gambit.And even if they did, how did they go from clearly feeling like AP was the problem to nerfing everything for utility to damage.For AS to even be close to a counter it would have to cost 6-7, and placed on two different tile colors of choice, otherwise if you put it on red, it gets over written by purple and if you put it on purple you get get blown up by red. They would also need to be fortified. And the green needs to hit a tad harder or be aoe.
ramoramo86 said: Interesting replies and reactions so far. I would like to point out that the same people that threatened to quit and stop spending on this game when OML was nerfed are the same people that did NOT quit playing and kept spending on Gambit. Which are also the same people making the same "threats" again on this thread. Maybe those players need to stop the empty "threats" and actually start taking action.
tph_james said: LifeofAgony said: tph_james said: I think an easy way to counter overpowered characters without nerfing them is:Create one 5* character that can completely seal off one single opponent's power of your choice for the entire game either passively or with cheap ap.Imagine u can prevent gambit's stacked deck, Thanos' court death, OML die hard, BB energy channeling, DD fighting spirit, JJ damning evidence... etc.In this way, all characters are balanced. Dev will never need to nerf anyone in the future. So you go from requiring one OP toon gambit to requiring new OP power blocker X? Doesn’t seem a great plan either. This new character X doesn't need to be OP, he/she can be just a support character like America. And he/she can only block one single power of one single opponent.
WEBGAS said: thedarkphoenix said: I mentioned this to a friend also, there is no way a 5 team of players thought AA or CA was a decent counter to gambit.And even if they did, how did they go from clearly feeling like AP was the problem to nerfing everything for utility to damage.For AS to even be close to a counter it would have to cost 6-7, and placed on two different tile colors of choice, otherwise if you put it on red, it gets over written by purple and if you put it on purple you get get blown up by red. They would also need to be fortified. And the green needs to hit a tad harder or be aoe. Don't you think it should have been better to Buff AA or IWCap or both than killing Gambit?
Soft counters are only as good as the characters they are on, and if the character they're countering is honest-to-goodness OP, as opposed to having an OP side effect, the only "soft counter" is to raise the bar. As people said, they either needed to make every new character as powerful as Gambit (and thereby invalidate every character before Gambit,) or else nerf Gambit. They clearly did not do the former, so the latter is absolutely necessary.
whitecat31 said: ramoramo86 said: Interesting replies and reactions so far. I would like to point out that the same people that threatened to quit and stop spending on this game when OML was nerfed are the same people that did NOT quit playing and kept spending on Gambit. Which are also the same people making the same "threats" again on this thread. Maybe those players need to stop the empty "threats" and actually start taking action. Took an actual survey did you?
WEBGAS said: Don't you think it should have been better to Buff AA or IWCap or both than killing Gambit?
Hoping so. That team is a legend in my head and was such a wonderful hidden nugget to play with.
Straycat said: WEBGAS said: Don't you think it should have been better to Buff AA or IWCap or both than killing Gambit? No! Buff the weak and/or niche 5*s? Yes please!Nerf vs overnerf Gambit? Sure, change one or two powers, but keep him top tier. Overnerfing vs not nerfing at all? Overnerf him. There's no way to buff others enough to deal with him if he was left as is. His auto ap gets him started before any counter can, and his ap destruction makes sure of it. I guess you could turn some of it passive, or make more Gambit specific moves, but longterm that just makes them too niche. As is, AA is a mess because he is all reactionary. He is a Vulture counter and a Gambit counter, but on his own he is nothing. Besides, Gambit already had a counter, another Gambit.