Feedback Wanted: Character Balance

191012141519

Comments

  • Daredevil217Daredevil217 Posts: 2,571 Chairperson of the Boards
    bluewolf said:

    2.  The easiest to buy characters in the game - at least, once you are out of the 3 tier - are the Latest 3 5's (and I guess people in a special store).  Dilution makes anyone else very hard to finish or build up significantly other than through focused long term targeting.  Therefore it's incorrect to suggest that somehow it's not in the devs' best interest to power creep new 5's.

    New 5's are what whales chase - mostly.  So if you are a new whale (good luck!) you would want more powerful 5's in order to be competitive with existing whales.  If you are an "old" whale you could easily skip new 5's that weren't as good as the 550s you already have, so the devs definitely want to make the new ones as appealing as possible.

    For the non-whales, chance are good you are getting just a few covers for any 5 and giving the newer ones higher match dmg makes you happier since they help you from the get go, therefore making you more interested in pulling Latests and glad to get the newest 5's.

    Match damage is a default passive for all 5's, and making it go up helps the devs' (implied) argument that there is a point in continuing to add characters to a game with 202 of them.
    I know it works this way in theory but not in practice. I remember when Carol dropped, the only good thing I read about her was “well I guess she at least has high health and match damage”. And guess what? No one played her. Carnage’s special tiles should have been much much better. Instead they they bumped up those numbers and he was coined Carbage. 

    It is a lazy design strategy that doesn’t work!  The 4* tier doesn’t do this. They make characters with power sets compelling enough for us to want to chase even after 80 characters (not even the broken ones, but characters like Juggs, Sabretooth, even a Ronin). 

    Using your argument we shouldn’t rebalance at all. We want to keep the newest characters better so the whales have something to chase. If we make Wasp good she still won’t be chased/used over Kitty/Thorkoye. If we make her meta then the whales can easily “skip” new characters not as good as their already champed Wasps. 

    Luckily I don’t think that the developers see it the same way you do. A survey about this in game and a request for qualitative feedback here leads me to believe they are open to the discussion. They probably know that whales/addicts of this game are likely going to spend regardless. 6 years committed and richer than god... those fish are hooked. The main thing is that shards have created a new revenue source for them. I recently had a Phoenix bundle pop up and Wasp is in my shard store. Wasp isn’t close to champed and that Phoenix cover would’ve finished her. I didn’t bite on either deal.  I wonder how many other people chose not to bite on Phoenix but bit on that other classic 5* Kitty? By  making old 5* viable (starting with that match damage/health bump) it makes those old 5* more appealing to chase via these new avenues AND it gives consumers incentive to spend NOW knowing their lastest legends won’t be obsolete with regards to health and match damage in a year. Just a different perspective. 
  • SpudgutterSpudgutter Posts: 715 Critical Contributor
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    tiomono said:
    tiomono said:


    I shared a SS on discord of a SIM match against HE/Hammer Cap with my A team of 516 OK,  505 Thor and 490 JJ. 

    1st move:
    Me:  match 3 that hit a cascade which I ended with 9 AP. 
    AI:  PRE 1st move after all the Hammer Cap tiles  do their countdown thing. 
    blue AP:30
    Red AP:26 

    Yes that was before AI made 1 move they had over 30 blue and 26 red AP. You cannot make a match against Hammer or Bishop without their passive going off.  If that is not broken, then I have no idea what is.  

    C'mon, i don't remember what logical fallacy this falls under, but it is pretty blatant. You think you represent anything resembling the average player?  I'm top 50 cl9 pve with 900/1200 pvp.  Day 2221 with 10 million Iso sitting in the bank and 400+ pulls waiting on the next 5* so i can champ whomever it is with carbage and brb and add them to my 27 other 5* champs.  And even with all that, my best 5* are between 460 and 463, and i only just recently maxed out my second 4* champ literally yesterday.  

    Of course the AI is going to have maximum ap in that scenario. No one is surprised by this.  Show me when you do that with 4*, and I'll listen.  But just as an example, my 366 Coulson, boosted in pvp right now, does 1137 in his strongest color, just barely enough to trigger the 1059 requirement of my level 297 bishop.  But again, the number of people with almost maxed coulsons cannot come close to those that don't. 

    jp1 said:

    If they do nerf Bishop my life is likely to become less complicated when it comes to PVP, so I stand to gain nothing from coming to his defense. Other people, those in transition with maybe 1 or 2 five star champs or those deeply rooted in 4 star land having to deal with under leveled fives who are still dominating their play experience might need those tools.


    This right here is what it comes down to, those that are annoyed are only thinking of themselves and not others.  Nerfing bishop or hammer does absolutely nothing to me or my game, but I takes away options from others.  No offense to those asking for nerfs, but it comes off as kind of selfish, imo.


    DAZ0273 said:
    Despite all this talk about nerfs though I don't see any changes in leaderboards. I don't see 5* players not hitting 2000 in Sim. There is still collusion in PvP which makes Bishop etc irrelevant. Bishop isn't even an issue in pick 2 Pvp. I see 5* players who want 4* characters nerfed without their 5* characters touched or treated in equal fashion. I wonder at players talking about healthpacks when they have hundreds stockpiled. This whole thread/poll is a strange exercise which none of us will win I fear, especially when players continue to vote one way but their comments suggest they want to play both ends against the middle. Fun I guess?
    This right here.  Top winners rarely change, even as the meta changes.  Taking away tools because it inconveniences you, with no regard to how it impacts those who are trying to come up, is the wrong way to come about.  
    Was the 5* or 3* gambit nerf just taking away players options?

    Maybe, sure.  Bad character design and fixing them is a different conversation altogether.  I, and i think i am not alone in this opinion, do not trust the people responsible for this game to properly nerf a character.   History with gambit alone proves this.

    But you still don't address the core of the issue: are these characters preventing you from getting rewards you think you would get if they were otherwise changed.  If so, please elaborate.  

    I have already said that i do just fine.  I get to 900 really easy, both in slice 1 and 5, and get to 1200 in slice 1 when i remember to join early enough or care enough to do it.  The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.  And the only reason i skip around hammer is because it is so boring.  I went out of my way to champ 5hawkeye recently, even buying his last cover when he was essential, just to see what all the fuss was about.  What a snoozefest.
    One could also argue they do not trust the devs to make working counters. Archangel and lumbercap to battle gambit for example.

    For me the core issue is not who is getting what rewards. Its needing a strategy to play a game by running away from half the teams you encounter as you play, especially with a roster as deep and successful as yours.

    Another issue is if these teams are so easy they are boring but you still choose to skip that's arguably not good for a game either.


    Also of note is that archangel and lumbercap were released 2 and 6 months after gambit respectively. I forget bishops release date bur he was announced in November of 2019. That's around 14 months with no workable attempt at a counter as far as I can tell. 


    I agree, i don't trust them to do a good counter, just like I don't trust them to do a good nerf.

    And i am not running away from half the teams i encounter. Its only a couple of matches, typically the same people who just pop back up after i skip them or fight someone else. 

    I "run away" from pvp matches all the time because they are way higher level than me, or because they are not worth the points.  If we want to fix pvp so i don't skip tinykitty teams, please do that instead.  If every match was 75 points, i would probably hit them more often.  Or if the points listed before the fight matched what i got after the fight, i would hit them.  Or if i didn't get hit 5 times while i am in one match, i would hit them.  

    As it is, i use 3 times as many 5* now than i did just a few months ago.  So i am utilizing my deep roster.  And i even break out 4* from time to time as well.  The boredom comes from the resolution of the all those CD tiles.  If it was 10 times faster i would totally run hammer more often.  The bad design is in the delay, not the character. 

    So we agree, the devs thought gambit was tweaked too high, so they attempted counters.  So, 14 months later, no bishop counter is even attempted.  I choose to infer that they don't think he is tweaked too high. 
  • A_Wise_ManA_Wise_Man Posts: 124 Tile Toppler
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    bluewolf said:
    1.  At some point you can't run software on old hardware.  I'm not sure what model you consider "5 generations old" but MPQ won't run on an old enough iphone.  And it's just a match3 game with 2D art.

    2.  The easiest to buy characters in the game - at least, once you are out of the 3 tier - are the Latest 3 5's (and I guess people in a special store).  Dilution makes anyone else very hard to finish or build up significantly other than through focused long term targeting.  Therefore it's incorrect to suggest that somehow it's not in the devs' best interest to power creep new 5's.

    New 5's are what whales chase - mostly.  So if you are a new whale (good luck!) you would want more powerful 5's in order to be competitive with existing whales.  If you are an "old" whale you could easily skip new 5's that weren't as good as the 550s you already have, so the devs definitely want to make the new ones as appealing as possible.

    For the non-whales, chance are good you are getting just a few covers for any 5 and giving the newer ones higher match dmg makes you happier since they help you from the get go, therefore making you more interested in pulling Latests and glad to get the newest 5's.

    Match damage is a default passive for all 5's, and making it go up helps the devs' (implied) argument that there is a point in continuing to add characters to a game with 202 of them.
    Match damage isnt why people chase latests vs classics.  They could release every new 5 from now in with a mid to low match damage range compared to the existing set of 5s and people could chase latests.  It's 300 pulls or 7500cp worth of pulls to finish a latest.  That's like 50 buy clubs if you start from scratch and dont play at all.  A classic is about 1100 pulls assuming you favorite both them and their feeder and pull classics and get the random classic cover.  That's 22000cp or like 157 buy clubs, again assuming no play.   It's not the match damage or health, it's the cost that drives folks to latests.
  • tiomonotiomono Posts: 1,549 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    tiomono said:
    tiomono said:


    I shared a SS on discord of a SIM match against HE/Hammer Cap with my A team of 516 OK,  505 Thor and 490 JJ. 

    1st move:
    Me:  match 3 that hit a cascade which I ended with 9 AP. 
    AI:  PRE 1st move after all the Hammer Cap tiles  do their countdown thing. 
    blue AP:30
    Red AP:26 

    Yes that was before AI made 1 move they had over 30 blue and 26 red AP. You cannot make a match against Hammer or Bishop without their passive going off.  If that is not broken, then I have no idea what is.  

    C'mon, i don't remember what logical fallacy this falls under, but it is pretty blatant. You think you represent anything resembling the average player?  I'm top 50 cl9 pve with 900/1200 pvp.  Day 2221 with 10 million Iso sitting in the bank and 400+ pulls waiting on the next 5* so i can champ whomever it is with carbage and brb and add them to my 27 other 5* champs.  And even with all that, my best 5* are between 460 and 463, and i only just recently maxed out my second 4* champ literally yesterday.  

    Of course the AI is going to have maximum ap in that scenario. No one is surprised by this.  Show me when you do that with 4*, and I'll listen.  But just as an example, my 366 Coulson, boosted in pvp right now, does 1137 in his strongest color, just barely enough to trigger the 1059 requirement of my level 297 bishop.  But again, the number of people with almost maxed coulsons cannot come close to those that don't. 

    jp1 said:

    If they do nerf Bishop my life is likely to become less complicated when it comes to PVP, so I stand to gain nothing from coming to his defense. Other people, those in transition with maybe 1 or 2 five star champs or those deeply rooted in 4 star land having to deal with under leveled fives who are still dominating their play experience might need those tools.


    This right here is what it comes down to, those that are annoyed are only thinking of themselves and not others.  Nerfing bishop or hammer does absolutely nothing to me or my game, but I takes away options from others.  No offense to those asking for nerfs, but it comes off as kind of selfish, imo.


    DAZ0273 said:
    Despite all this talk about nerfs though I don't see any changes in leaderboards. I don't see 5* players not hitting 2000 in Sim. There is still collusion in PvP which makes Bishop etc irrelevant. Bishop isn't even an issue in pick 2 Pvp. I see 5* players who want 4* characters nerfed without their 5* characters touched or treated in equal fashion. I wonder at players talking about healthpacks when they have hundreds stockpiled. This whole thread/poll is a strange exercise which none of us will win I fear, especially when players continue to vote one way but their comments suggest they want to play both ends against the middle. Fun I guess?
    This right here.  Top winners rarely change, even as the meta changes.  Taking away tools because it inconveniences you, with no regard to how it impacts those who are trying to come up, is the wrong way to come about.  
    Was the 5* or 3* gambit nerf just taking away players options?

    Maybe, sure.  Bad character design and fixing them is a different conversation altogether.  I, and i think i am not alone in this opinion, do not trust the people responsible for this game to properly nerf a character.   History with gambit alone proves this.

    But you still don't address the core of the issue: are these characters preventing you from getting rewards you think you would get if they were otherwise changed.  If so, please elaborate.  

    I have already said that i do just fine.  I get to 900 really easy, both in slice 1 and 5, and get to 1200 in slice 1 when i remember to join early enough or care enough to do it.  The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.  And the only reason i skip around hammer is because it is so boring.  I went out of my way to champ 5hawkeye recently, even buying his last cover when he was essential, just to see what all the fuss was about.  What a snoozefest.
    One could also argue they do not trust the devs to make working counters. Archangel and lumbercap to battle gambit for example.

    For me the core issue is not who is getting what rewards. Its needing a strategy to play a game by running away from half the teams you encounter as you play, especially with a roster as deep and successful as yours.

    Another issue is if these teams are so easy they are boring but you still choose to skip that's arguably not good for a game either.


    Also of note is that archangel and lumbercap were released 2 and 6 months after gambit respectively. I forget bishops release date bur he was announced in November of 2019. That's around 14 months with no workable attempt at a counter as far as I can tell. 


    I agree, i don't trust them to do a good counter, just like I don't trust them to do a good nerf.

    And i am not running away from half the teams i encounter. Its only a couple of matches, typically the same people who just pop back up after i skip them or fight someone else. 

    I "run away" from pvp matches all the time because they are way higher level than me, or because they are not worth the points.  If we want to fix pvp so i don't skip tinykitty teams, please do that instead.  If every match was 75 points, i would probably hit them more often.  Or if the points listed before the fight matched what i got after the fight, i would hit them.  Or if i didn't get hit 5 times while i am in one match, i would hit them.  

    As it is, i use 3 times as many 5* now than i did just a few months ago.  So i am utilizing my deep roster.  And i even break out 4* from time to time as well.  The boredom comes from the resolution of the all those CD tiles.  If it was 10 times faster i would totally run hammer more often.  The bad design is in the delay, not the character. 

    So we agree, the devs thought gambit was tweaked too high, so they attempted counters.  So, 14 months later, no bishop counter is even attempted.  I choose to infer that they don't think he is tweaked too high. 
    You said you play 18-25 matches and encounter from 3 to 10 bishop or hammer teams. That is getting close to half. 

    We didnt even know archangel and lumbercap were attempted counters until they were nerfing gambit. That's how ineffective they were. So how do we know some of the characters released since bishop have not been attempts to counter him?

    The game tends to always show you people at a higher level than you to face. You choose to skip them because they are too strong. Bishop players choose to hit them because he negates higher level rosters.
  • SpudgutterSpudgutter Posts: 715 Critical Contributor
    edited 24 January 2020, 17:23
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    tiomono said:
    tiomono said:
    tiomono said:


    I shared a SS on discord of a SIM match against HE/Hammer Cap with my A team of 516 OK,  505 Thor and 490 JJ. 

    1st move:
    Me:  match 3 that hit a cascade which I ended with 9 AP. 
    AI:  PRE 1st move after all the Hammer Cap tiles  do their countdown thing. 
    blue AP:30
    Red AP:26 

    Yes that was before AI made 1 move they had over 30 blue and 26 red AP. You cannot make a match against Hammer or Bishop without their passive going off.  If that is not broken, then I have no idea what is.  

    C'mon, i don't remember what logical fallacy this falls under, but it is pretty blatant. You think you represent anything resembling the average player?  I'm top 50 cl9 pve with 900/1200 pvp.  Day 2221 with 10 million Iso sitting in the bank and 400+ pulls waiting on the next 5* so i can champ whomever it is with carbage and brb and add them to my 27 other 5* champs.  And even with all that, my best 5* are between 460 and 463, and i only just recently maxed out my second 4* champ literally yesterday.  

    Of course the AI is going to have maximum ap in that scenario. No one is surprised by this.  Show me when you do that with 4*, and I'll listen.  But just as an example, my 366 Coulson, boosted in pvp right now, does 1137 in his strongest color, just barely enough to trigger the 1059 requirement of my level 297 bishop.  But again, the number of people with almost maxed coulsons cannot come close to those that don't. 

    jp1 said:

    If they do nerf Bishop my life is likely to become less complicated when it comes to PVP, so I stand to gain nothing from coming to his defense. Other people, those in transition with maybe 1 or 2 five star champs or those deeply rooted in 4 star land having to deal with under leveled fives who are still dominating their play experience might need those tools.


    This right here is what it comes down to, those that are annoyed are only thinking of themselves and not others.  Nerfing bishop or hammer does absolutely nothing to me or my game, but I takes away options from others.  No offense to those asking for nerfs, but it comes off as kind of selfish, imo.


    DAZ0273 said:
    Despite all this talk about nerfs though I don't see any changes in leaderboards. I don't see 5* players not hitting 2000 in Sim. There is still collusion in PvP which makes Bishop etc irrelevant. Bishop isn't even an issue in pick 2 Pvp. I see 5* players who want 4* characters nerfed without their 5* characters touched or treated in equal fashion. I wonder at players talking about healthpacks when they have hundreds stockpiled. This whole thread/poll is a strange exercise which none of us will win I fear, especially when players continue to vote one way but their comments suggest they want to play both ends against the middle. Fun I guess?
    This right here.  Top winners rarely change, even as the meta changes.  Taking away tools because it inconveniences you, with no regard to how it impacts those who are trying to come up, is the wrong way to come about.  
    Was the 5* or 3* gambit nerf just taking away players options?

    Maybe, sure.  Bad character design and fixing them is a different conversation altogether.  I, and i think i am not alone in this opinion, do not trust the people responsible for this game to properly nerf a character.   History with gambit alone proves this.

    But you still don't address the core of the issue: are these characters preventing you from getting rewards you think you would get if they were otherwise changed.  If so, please elaborate.  

    I have already said that i do just fine.  I get to 900 really easy, both in slice 1 and 5, and get to 1200 in slice 1 when i remember to join early enough or care enough to do it.  The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.  And the only reason i skip around hammer is because it is so boring.  I went out of my way to champ 5hawkeye recently, even buying his last cover when he was essential, just to see what all the fuss was about.  What a snoozefest.
    One could also argue they do not trust the devs to make working counters. Archangel and lumbercap to battle gambit for example.

    For me the core issue is not who is getting what rewards. Its needing a strategy to play a game by running away from half the teams you encounter as you play, especially with a roster as deep and successful as yours.

    Another issue is if these teams are so easy they are boring but you still choose to skip that's arguably not good for a game either.


    Also of note is that archangel and lumbercap were released 2 and 6 months after gambit respectively. I forget bishops release date bur he was announced in November of 2019. That's around 14 months with no workable attempt at a counter as far as I can tell. 


    I agree, i don't trust them to do a good counter, just like I don't trust them to do a good nerf.

    And i am not running away from half the teams i encounter. Its only a couple of matches, typically the same people who just pop back up after i skip them or fight someone else. 

    I "run away" from pvp matches all the time because they are way higher level than me, or because they are not worth the points.  If we want to fix pvp so i don't skip tinykitty teams, please do that instead.  If every match was 75 points, i would probably hit them more often.  Or if the points listed before the fight matched what i got after the fight, i would hit them.  Or if i didn't get hit 5 times while i am in one match, i would hit them.  

    As it is, i use 3 times as many 5* now than i did just a few months ago.  So i am utilizing my deep roster.  And i even break out 4* from time to time as well.  The boredom comes from the resolution of the all those CD tiles.  If it was 10 times faster i would totally run hammer more often.  The bad design is in the delay, not the character. 

    So we agree, the devs thought gambit was tweaked too high, so they attempted counters.  So, 14 months later, no bishop counter is even attempted.  I choose to infer that they don't think he is tweaked too high. 
    You said you play 18-25 matches and encounter from 3 to 10 bishop or hammer teams. That is getting close to half. 

    We didnt even know archangel and lumbercap were attempted counters until they were nerfing gambit. That's how ineffective they were. So how do we know some of the characters released since bishop have not been attempts to counter him?

    The game tends to always show you people at a higher level than you to face. You choose to skip them because they are too strong. Bishop players choose to hit them because he negates higher level rosters.
    3 to 10 teams, typically the same people.  Sorry that i didn't clarify that earlier.

    Out of 18 wins yesterday on my way to 950, i saw bishop 3 times, and only 3 times, and it was the same person each time.  When i see him 10 times is when it is 2 different people when i am cycling through them and the other wall of high end rosters.  

    It is my opinion that the number of people running bishop at the 5* tier is overestimated. The problem has more to do with mmr than anything else.  Their are thousands of rosters similar to mine, yet i can fall in a well and only see the same 5-7 when i get to a certain point.

    Also, i choose to skip them for different reasons. Higher levels i skip because i may lose, bishop and hammer i skip because it takes too long.  Fix pvp so i am not punished for a long battle, and they will get skipped a lot less.  You are aiming the nerf cannon at the wrong thing, we should be fixing mmr.
  • Daredevil217Daredevil217 Posts: 2,571 Chairperson of the Boards
    I’m sorry, but who is saying anything about rewards? Contrary to popular belief, it’s not just about rewards for some people. Some people care about how the game itself plays. All of us clamoring for the return of gauntlet aren’t doing so for those sweet sweet rewards. Being stunlocked 4 turns while your team gets obliterated is simply unfun. And a character getting 30 AP on turn 0 is broken. 

    “The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.”

    If that’s your way of “handling” them, then what that means to me is those players get a free shield. I mean I do the same (both use Bish as my shield and skip other Bish teams) so I’m not judging. Just pointing out that this is what people mean by “free shield”. 

    To your last point... I could run any team and not know how many chose to skip me and who hit me just to avoid Bishop and top tier 5. I know for me I would skip a Bishop/Goblin team in favor of hitting a Thorkoye or Gritty team easily. Which is kind of crazy. But Bish is that good (and Gobby is underrated!). 

    I also skip people that are way into the 515+ levels and above, way more than the number of bishop i see.  Should we nerf their roster as well, since their level advantage has me give them a "free" shield?

    I also want people to enjoy how they play, which is why i am listening to those that say bishop helps them punch up or deal with gritty.  The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.  You are asking them to remove something that is basically annoying to you, while not taking into account how it may hurt others.  So what if they get a "free" shield? How is that impacting your play?  Do you also think we should remove names from pvp, to reduce outside communication for shield hops?  *edit*

    And goblin is fun, but a) i don't think many people believe he is top tier and b) i believe you would get hit a ton if you ran that team.

    Edit*  I'm dumb, this is a thread about fixing characters, so this dialogue is exactly what they are looking for, so i took out that last line.  Heck, who made me the arbiter for the game either?  Opinions are meant to be shared, even when we disagree 
    1- The 515 rosters aren’t getting a free shield. They’re getting hit by other 515 rosters. Also, see: Wise Man’s wise post. Apples and oranges. 

    2- You want people to “enjoy how they play” but are against players wanting something removed that they find annoying (to use your words). Do you NOT see the contradiction here? I don’t know how many things you find annoying (I’d personally use a stronger word) but also enjoyable. I also haven’t heard many players say the ENJOY using Bishop. I’ve heard people say they rely on him/need him to reach their goals, punch up, deal with Kitty, ward off attacks (free shield). But,  I haven’t heard people say they enjoy him. I find him to be one of those unfun characters to both play and play against personally. 

    3- “The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.” 

    Again, you don’t get it. Getting 900/1200 is not the only thing I want out of this game. In between the parts where I collect my rewards there’s this whole other part of the game where I’m matching tiles and firing powers. That part of the game is MUCH less enjoyable for me as a 5* player with Bishop in the mix.  This has nothing to do with “getting my rewards”. I’ve already explained this and you’re still beating the same drum. You say you want the game to be more enjoyable. Bishop makes my game less enjoyable. 

    4- Yes! Absolutely remove names from PVP. I’m constantly hitting friendlies because I still don’t look at names and have irked more than a few people (truly sorry to anyone here I may have attacked).  I’m not in any Shield Check rooms, and while I don’t think you could shut down down outside communication, removing names would make it way harder to coordinate. So I’m on board. Don’t know what it had to do with this topic.  Seems really off topic.  But you asked so I’m answering. 
  • SpudgutterSpudgutter Posts: 715 Critical Contributor
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    I’m sorry, but who is saying anything about rewards? Contrary to popular belief, it’s not just about rewards for some people. Some people care about how the game itself plays. All of us clamoring for the return of gauntlet aren’t doing so for those sweet sweet rewards. Being stunlocked 4 turns while your team gets obliterated is simply unfun. And a character getting 30 AP on turn 0 is broken. 

    “The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.”

    If that’s your way of “handling” them, then what that means to me is those players get a free shield. I mean I do the same (both use Bish as my shield and skip other Bish teams) so I’m not judging. Just pointing out that this is what people mean by “free shield”. 

    To your last point... I could run any team and not know how many chose to skip me and who hit me just to avoid Bishop and top tier 5. I know for me I would skip a Bishop/Goblin team in favor of hitting a Thorkoye or Gritty team easily. Which is kind of crazy. But Bish is that good (and Gobby is underrated!). 

    I also skip people that are way into the 515+ levels and above, way more than the number of bishop i see.  Should we nerf their roster as well, since their level advantage has me give them a "free" shield?

    I also want people to enjoy how they play, which is why i am listening to those that say bishop helps them punch up or deal with gritty.  The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.  You are asking them to remove something that is basically annoying to you, while not taking into account how it may hurt others.  So what if they get a "free" shield? How is that impacting your play?  Do you also think we should remove names from pvp, to reduce outside communication for shield hops?  *edit*

    And goblin is fun, but a) i don't think many people believe he is top tier and b) i believe you would get hit a ton if you ran that team.

    Edit*  I'm dumb, this is a thread about fixing characters, so this dialogue is exactly what they are looking for, so i took out that last line.  Heck, who made me the arbiter for the game either?  Opinions are meant to be shared, even when we disagree 
    A roster with level 515+ 5 stars isn't free.  Comparing it to a roster with a 450 5 star and a 270 bishop doesn't really hold water.  For the record I 100% support removing names from pvp and anything else that would make outside coordination more difficult.  I realize that question wasn't directed at me, but there is a segment of the playerbase that feels that way.
    Neither is free, but in the context of why someone skips, i think it absolutely matters.  I just posted above this, part of the reason i skip is because of the match length. I would love to go in with some high level, boosted 4* and have some fun against bishop/jj.  But by the time i do see them, i am at 600+, and i am climbing.  I don't have time to mess around and have "fun" because the game actively punishes me for it!

    Also, i agree with you that they should remove names.  Even the playing field out a little more.  Fixing pvp as a whole would do a lot to alleviate the problems people have with it.  Better mmr, locked in points, and not taking hits while in battle would probably negate a lot of complaints.
  • tiomonotiomono Posts: 1,549 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    I’m sorry, but who is saying anything about rewards? Contrary to popular belief, it’s not just about rewards for some people. Some people care about how the game itself plays. All of us clamoring for the return of gauntlet aren’t doing so for those sweet sweet rewards. Being stunlocked 4 turns while your team gets obliterated is simply unfun. And a character getting 30 AP on turn 0 is broken. 

    “The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.”

    If that’s your way of “handling” them, then what that means to me is those players get a free shield. I mean I do the same (both use Bish as my shield and skip other Bish teams) so I’m not judging. Just pointing out that this is what people mean by “free shield”. 

    To your last point... I could run any team and not know how many chose to skip me and who hit me just to avoid Bishop and top tier 5. I know for me I would skip a Bishop/Goblin team in favor of hitting a Thorkoye or Gritty team easily. Which is kind of crazy. But Bish is that good (and Gobby is underrated!). 

    I also skip people that are way into the 515+ levels and above, way more than the number of bishop i see.  Should we nerf their roster as well, since their level advantage has me give them a "free" shield?

    I also want people to enjoy how they play, which is why i am listening to those that say bishop helps them punch up or deal with gritty.  The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.  You are asking them to remove something that is basically annoying to you, while not taking into account how it may hurt others.  So what if they get a "free" shield? How is that impacting your play?  Do you also think we should remove names from pvp, to reduce outside communication for shield hops?  *edit*

    And goblin is fun, but a) i don't think many people believe he is top tier and b) i believe you would get hit a ton if you ran that team.

    Edit*  I'm dumb, this is a thread about fixing characters, so this dialogue is exactly what they are looking for, so i took out that last line.  Heck, who made me the arbiter for the game either?  Opinions are meant to be shared, even when we disagree 
    A roster with level 515+ 5 stars isn't free.  Comparing it to a roster with a 450 5 star and a 270 bishop doesn't really hold water.  For the record I 100% support removing names from pvp and anything else that would make outside coordination more difficult.  I realize that question wasn't directed at me, but there is a segment of the playerbase that feels that way.
    Neither is free, but in the context of why someone skips, i think it absolutely matters.  I just posted above this, part of the reason i skip is because of the match length. I would love to go in with some high level, boosted 4* and have some fun against bishop/jj.  But by the time i do see them, i am at 600+, and i am climbing.  I don't have time to mess around and have "fun" because the game actively punishes me for it!

    Also, i agree with you that they should remove names.  Even the playing field out a little more.  Fixing pvp as a whole would do a lot to alleviate the problems people have with it.  Better mmr, locked in points, and not taking hits while in battle would probably negate a lot of complaints.
    I'm with you on mmr spud. My only issue would be not taking hits while in battle. Too easy to abuse and just leave your game sitting on one match while you take a break. Now that's a free shield.
  • jackstar0jackstar0 Posts: 1,202 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    As a data point, I am much more likely to hit a 550 team than a team with Bishop. My top characters are ~470. I can hit those 550s because of Bishop and Worthy and sometimes with luck, with Thorkoye.

    I try not to be dumb about who I take on and make sure the points are worth it, but here's a thing, I can take on 550 teams and potentially whale them (3* DP TU), but against a decent Bishop team, or other stun-centric team, there's a fair chance I'll never get the needed TU tiles to pull that out (assuming I can't just win).
  • SpudgutterSpudgutter Posts: 715 Critical Contributor
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    tiomono said:
    I’m sorry, but who is saying anything about rewards? Contrary to popular belief, it’s not just about rewards for some people. Some people care about how the game itself plays. All of us clamoring for the return of gauntlet aren’t doing so for those sweet sweet rewards. Being stunlocked 4 turns while your team gets obliterated is simply unfun. And a character getting 30 AP on turn 0 is broken. 

    “The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.”

    If that’s your way of “handling” them, then what that means to me is those players get a free shield. I mean I do the same (both use Bish as my shield and skip other Bish teams) so I’m not judging. Just pointing out that this is what people mean by “free shield”. 

    To your last point... I could run any team and not know how many chose to skip me and who hit me just to avoid Bishop and top tier 5. I know for me I would skip a Bishop/Goblin team in favor of hitting a Thorkoye or Gritty team easily. Which is kind of crazy. But Bish is that good (and Gobby is underrated!). 

    I also skip people that are way into the 515+ levels and above, way more than the number of bishop i see.  Should we nerf their roster as well, since their level advantage has me give them a "free" shield?

    I also want people to enjoy how they play, which is why i am listening to those that say bishop helps them punch up or deal with gritty.  The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.  You are asking them to remove something that is basically annoying to you, while not taking into account how it may hurt others.  So what if they get a "free" shield? How is that impacting your play?  Do you also think we should remove names from pvp, to reduce outside communication for shield hops?  *edit*

    And goblin is fun, but a) i don't think many people believe he is top tier and b) i believe you would get hit a ton if you ran that team.

    Edit*  I'm dumb, this is a thread about fixing characters, so this dialogue is exactly what they are looking for, so i took out that last line.  Heck, who made me the arbiter for the game either?  Opinions are meant to be shared, even when we disagree 
    A roster with level 515+ 5 stars isn't free.  Comparing it to a roster with a 450 5 star and a 270 bishop doesn't really hold water.  For the record I 100% support removing names from pvp and anything else that would make outside coordination more difficult.  I realize that question wasn't directed at me, but there is a segment of the playerbase that feels that way.
    Neither is free, but in the context of why someone skips, i think it absolutely matters.  I just posted above this, part of the reason i skip is because of the match length. I would love to go in with some high level, boosted 4* and have some fun against bishop/jj.  But by the time i do see them, i am at 600+, and i am climbing.  I don't have time to mess around and have "fun" because the game actively punishes me for it!

    Also, i agree with you that they should remove names.  Even the playing field out a little more.  Fixing pvp as a whole would do a lot to alleviate the problems people have with it.  Better mmr, locked in points, and not taking hits while in battle would probably negate a lot of complaints.
    I'm with you on mmr spud. My only issue would be not taking hits while in battle. Too easy to abuse and just leave your game sitting on one match while you take a break. Now that's a free shield.
    There has to be a way to set it to a clock, though, right?  I get my daily log in at 942am every day(1042 during dst), so maybe set it to 30 minutes, if no activity, it loses the connection?  Or, like in pve, if i start a match and end it after the slice ends, the points don't count.  I'm not asking for indefinite matches, just would love to try to solve puzzles.  As it is, the game is designed to be quick, and be defensive, thus the conundrum we are in

    The other thing would be if you did pause yourself into a free shield(for an amount of time to be determined), you can't queue anyone else, you can't see what place you are in, and you can't play pve.
  • bluewolfbluewolf Posts: 3,787 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited 24 January 2020, 20:05
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    I never said I wasn't in favor of buffs, to be clear.  I just expect them to be few in number and do not expect a tier-wide leveling of match damage.

    I just am laying out what I think is the argument (never to be officially stated, I presume) that the devs make internally for match damage power creep.

    It is an under-the-table power creep.  It is also (apparently) a way you balance out things like a character having less offense (in terms of nukes or whatever), where they up the match damage because the character is otherwise slow to get things going.  Examples:  Iceman and 5 CM, as well as Carbage.  BRB is sort of fast, his blue is cheap but he makes protects and green is kind of expensive and you would take a bit to get enough without Thor.

    And while it is true that you are forced by circumstance (smothering, horrible, creeping dilution) to focus on Latests or maybe a special store when you want to pull for a 5, it is still in the developers' best interest to make the newest 5's as relevant as possible.  I realize people aren't making a choice exactly, but if your game design is forcing one choice to be clearly the best choice in terms of providing the most bang for your buck - the most progress for your pulls, it also makes sense to make the characters you are getting be good and interesting and powerful.

    If they DON'T make the newest characters seem more powerful, then people won't open their wallets.  Even if it is a modest tweak, a shallow upward slope, there is ultimately no point in making a new character every two weeks if they aren't somehow making the newest ones seem (overall) more important to have than (most of) the older ones.

    And yes!  They mess up!  5CM is a massive disappointment relative to the character's popularity.  That does not mean they aren't somehow trying to make them more relevant, that they have some internal yardstick that they are very gradually moving upwards.  And moving the match dmg number higher is a way to do that.

    Lastly, it is simply the case that a rebalance doesn't force the playerbase as a whole to chase anyone as much as a new character does.  I don't care if lots of people skipped someone (like Wasp); there are plenty who didn't, or who are almost done, or whatever and therefore the devs don't exert as much resource pressure on you when a character is rebalanced.  I have a champed Wasp and Kingpin and Cable and every lame character (and good one) from Banner forwards.

    They tried really hard with Ock. They put in him a new release store (with Kingpin, oops) in combination with a rebalance and featured him in a PVE where you could buy one of his covers as an HfH.  They buffed his match dmg and health.  Unfortunately he was still the same basic design (slow, plotting character) and no one got excited about it.  I don't know if they took too much from that experience but they tried and I assume didn't see what they wanted to see.  I mean I hope they try again, and try differently, and everyone wins and we enter a new golden age of rebalancing but I'm also not holding my breath.
  • A_Wise_ManA_Wise_Man Posts: 124 Tile Toppler
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    tiomono said:
    I’m sorry, but who is saying anything about rewards? Contrary to popular belief, it’s not just about rewards for some people. Some people care about how the game itself plays. All of us clamoring for the return of gauntlet aren’t doing so for those sweet sweet rewards. Being stunlocked 4 turns while your team gets obliterated is simply unfun. And a character getting 30 AP on turn 0 is broken. 

    “The number of bishop or hammer teams vary from at least 3, to maybe 10, that I skip around in my 18-25 matches.”

    If that’s your way of “handling” them, then what that means to me is those players get a free shield. I mean I do the same (both use Bish as my shield and skip other Bish teams) so I’m not judging. Just pointing out that this is what people mean by “free shield”. 

    To your last point... I could run any team and not know how many chose to skip me and who hit me just to avoid Bishop and top tier 5. I know for me I would skip a Bishop/Goblin team in favor of hitting a Thorkoye or Gritty team easily. Which is kind of crazy. But Bish is that good (and Gobby is underrated!). 

    I also skip people that are way into the 515+ levels and above, way more than the number of bishop i see.  Should we nerf their roster as well, since their level advantage has me give them a "free" shield?

    I also want people to enjoy how they play, which is why i am listening to those that say bishop helps them punch up or deal with gritty.  The point of bringing up the rewards is that everyone is still getting what they want out of the game.  You are asking them to remove something that is basically annoying to you, while not taking into account how it may hurt others.  So what if they get a "free" shield? How is that impacting your play?  Do you also think we should remove names from pvp, to reduce outside communication for shield hops?  *edit*

    And goblin is fun, but a) i don't think many people believe he is top tier and b) i believe you would get hit a ton if you ran that team.

    Edit*  I'm dumb, this is a thread about fixing characters, so this dialogue is exactly what they are looking for, so i took out that last line.  Heck, who made me the arbiter for the game either?  Opinions are meant to be shared, even when we disagree 
    A roster with level 515+ 5 stars isn't free.  Comparing it to a roster with a 450 5 star and a 270 bishop doesn't really hold water.  For the record I 100% support removing names from pvp and anything else that would make outside coordination more difficult.  I realize that question wasn't directed at me, but there is a segment of the playerbase that feels that way.
    Neither is free, but in the context of why someone skips, i think it absolutely matters.  I just posted above this, part of the reason i skip is because of the match length. I would love to go in with some high level, boosted 4* and have some fun against bishop/jj.  But by the time i do see them, i am at 600+, and i am climbing.  I don't have time to mess around and have "fun" because the game actively punishes me for it!

    Also, i agree with you that they should remove names.  Even the playing field out a little more.  Fixing pvp as a whole would do a lot to alleviate the problems people have with it.  Better mmr, locked in points, and not taking hits while in battle would probably negate a lot of complaints.
    I'm with you on mmr spud. My only issue would be not taking hits while in battle. Too easy to abuse and just leave your game sitting on one match while you take a break. Now that's a free shield.
    There has to be a way to set it to a clock, though, right?  I get my daily log in at 942am every day(1042 during dst), so maybe set it to 30 minutes, if no activity, it loses the connection?  Or, like in pve, if i start a match and end it after the slice ends, the points don't count.  I'm not asking for indefinite matches, just would love to try to solve puzzles.  As it is, the game is designed to be quick, and be defensive, thus the conundrum we are in

    The other thing would be if you did pause yourself into a free shield(for an amount of time to be determined), you can't queue anyone else, you can't see what place you are in, and you can't play pve.
    Ok but as long as I immediately load a match I dont lose points as long as I just keep playing?  Or people can maybe find me the 4 seconds between matches but then when  I enter a match I cant get hit?  So what happens to the guy who just loaded me up in a match?  He gets nothing?  Or does he get points and I lose no points?  If I spend 2 hours trading hits with the exact same person but we make sure we're both in match when the other one finishes, do we both take no hits?  Actually that wouldnt work, but if you had 3 guys it would, in a train.  You think pvp coordination is bad now?  You think repeating queues are bad now?  Wait til everyone's invisible all the time except to their friends.  You wont get past seeds.
  • tiomonotiomono Posts: 1,549 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    @fight4thedream

    I just can't take surfer as a counter to bishop seriously. Sure he cannot be stunned. But by the time you have gathered 7 red to do about 9k damage bishop has already hit you for about 12k damage and gained 15 blue. Or if you can get 4 straight blue matches on surfer to heal for about 17k bishop has done about 16k damage and gained 20 blue.

    I bet bishop, plus any 5* (maybe even wasp) with an active blue that's not a stun would crush those surfer/thor teams. 
  • purplemurpurplemur Posts: 371 Mover and Shaker
    edited 25 January 2020, 00:45
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    Ever had to fight against 3* Daken? It’s not fair every time I make a match in green he makes 2 strikes! I shouldn’t be punished for making a match 3 in a match 3 game! I should be able to use the 4* characters that have green AoE without being obliterated by his Cheap blue? There is no ability In 4 land that is that cheap! And he true heals- he’s a total healthpack saver!Why as a 4* player should I have to fight him so much? 
    Also: what about traps? what about Lockjaw? What about 4 Jean? what about Deadpool.... I mean the ridiculousness of the entitlement is staggering. It really is a pedantic sentiment. I should make more money, I shouldn't have to wait on the subway, I shouldn't have to listen to my wife tell me about her day, but boy if I just buffalo her over or ignore her and play mpq: reality going to ruin my fun. Just like MPQ if you can look at the MMR pairing and see a bishop, do something about it! If I see my wife has red eyes and a glass of wine when I come home I better change my stride and deal with the situation at hand, then go back to grinding mah puzzlz!

    I used IM40 to punch up, I use OBW to punch up, I used juggs to punch up. This idea of the tier below shouldn't be a viable option in the tier above is such close minded stinkin thinkin.

    I enjoy playing with bish and worthy in PvE, I really like Mysterio/bishop/Blondwidow to climb in sim: It is just fun, fun stuff. I use Bish against mindless ones, Ultron goons, he's great w/ strange to keep his health up so transitioners can use him,  etc. I use Bishop against the 500 level rosters that clog my MMR too. I use worthy for his charged tile interactions as well as with 4carol. There is a lot more going on with a character than how you or others use them. There are some people who use his shield removal ability at 5 covers instead of overclocked. It is only a case of breaking your little sisters dolly because you have to do homework and you don't want her to have fun if you have to think hard. 

    Remember the players who are causing "problems" in 5* PvP are 5* players using one 4*; there is no lower tier obliterating the tier above - 5/5/4 vs 5/5/5 is very close to parity or with pick 2 5/3/4 vs 5/3/5. So if you take bishop from them they are still 5* players with all the greatness that entails. Meanwhile we are still 1/2/3/4 players without that tool. It doesn't affect everyone equally. They can go back to their options they have been successful with before Bishop came around, and will probably have some really good additions to their arsenal (BRB) since. Meanwhile we would have Northstar, and some gimpy has-been. Seems totally fair that everyone else suffers so you can go back to ... what is it that is so much more fun? uhhm something to do with how broken kitty or half health thor, okoye.....What is this experience in PvP that was so fun and varied? What are these halcyon fields of bliss that have been trampled by the Bishop Hordes? 5* players gonna whine about boring 5* play. NO MATTER WHAT. 
    The status quo has not been disrupted by Bishop. The prizes have not been absconded by the lower tiers, Okoye/halfthor/JJ are still widely used and still very effective at what they do. Nerfing Bishop doesn’t mean that all those 5* players would suddenly be allowed to run 5Carol, Cable, Cap to great success. So if you want 5* players to "have fun" then you need to buff their bench warmers not nerf a 4* character. 

    Imagine if they straight doubled Phoenix: heath/specials/dam #’s, What If? if Kravens trap mechanic worked with any traps, imagine if Flaptain instantly trips a random CD instead of by one turn or affected all cd/repeaters by 1, imagine if buckys powers were all 2 cheaper, imagine if emma/carol had twice the number of *fortified* Repeaters, imagine if Talos had no cap to his %, imagine if Namor put out twice as much blue and the Aoe wasn’t conditional, imagine if Rayne had a passive damage attached to being invisible, If calling the storm was a finisher or group stunned or replaced storm tiles with charged tiles, If Hulk kept his AP &had stunproof (I really like see ghosts ability!), I say double-down on jump in front: If Starlord stole more and had a mild passive that did something niche when a teammate jumps in front(and gave drax a jump in front ability) What if parkers spidey sense let him stun someones who jumps in front, Imagine if Thanos was stunproof, If Goblin black had an aversion ability with his glider similar to nightcrawler, If surfer healed more and had higher HP he would be chased (that red needs a buff too though), If BSSM stun was extended/and the web-do was conditionally cheaper, he wouldn't only be a counter. Look at 5HE: all it takes is just some synergy and people will pivot immediately. rather than creating a power vacuum like the absence of Gambit, empowering player choices through a wide toolbox is the way to go forward and keep more people happier vs making it easier/simpler for t20 SCL9 to grind mindlessly.

    #doublephoenix
  • tiomonotiomono Posts: 1,549 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    purplemur said:
    Ever had to fight against 3* Daken? It’s not fair every time I make a match in green he makes 2 strikes! I shouldn’t be punished for making a match 3 in a match 3 game! I should be able to use the 4* characters that have green AoE without being obliterated by his Cheap blue? There is no ability In 4 land that is that cheap! And he true heals- he’s a total healthpack saver!Why as a 4* player should I have to fight him so much? 
    Also: what about traps? what about Lockjaw? What about 4 Jean? what about Deadpool.... I mean the ridiculousness of the entitlement is staggering. It really is a pedantic sentiment. I should make more money, I shouldn't have to wait on the subway, I shouldn't have to listen to my wife tell me about her day, but boy if I just buffalo her over or ignore her and play mpq: reality going to ruin my fun. Just like MPQ if you can look at the MMR pairing and see a bishop, do something about it! If I see my wife has red eyes and a glass of wine when I come home I better change my stride and deal with the situation at hand, then go back to grinding mah puzzlz!

    I used IM40 to punch up, I use OBW to punch up, I used juggs to punch up. This idea of the tier below shouldn't be a viable option in the tier above is such close minded stinkin thinkin.

    I enjoy playing with bish and worthy in PvE, I really like Mysterio/bishop/Blondwidow to climb in sim: It is just fun, fun stuff. I use Bish against mindless ones, Ultron goons, he's great w/ strange to keep his health up so transitioners can use him,  etc. I use Bishop against the 500 level rosters that clog my MMR too. I use worthy for his charged tile interactions as well as with 4carol. There is a lot more going on with a character than how you or others use them. There are some people who use his shield removal ability at 5 covers instead of overclocked. It is only a case of breaking your little sisters dolly because you have to do homework and you don't want her to have fun if you have to think hard. 

    Remember the players who are causing "problems" in 5* PvP are 5* players using one 4*; there is no lower tier obliterating the tier above - 5/5/4 vs 5/5/5 is very close to parity or with pick 2 5/3/4 vs 5/3/5. So if you take bishop from them they are still 5* players with all the greatness that entails. Meanwhile we are still 1/2/3/4 players without that tool. It doesn't affect everyone equally. They can go back to their options they have been successful with before Bishop came around, and will probably have some really good additions to their arsenal (BRB) since. Meanwhile we would have Northstar, and some gimpy has-been. Seems totally fair that everyone else suffers so you can go back to ... what is it that is so much more fun? uhhm something to do with how broken kitty or half health thor, okoye.....What is this experience in PvP that was so fun and varied? What are these halcyon fields of bliss that have been trampled by the Bishop Hordes? 5* players gonna whine about boring 5* play. NO MATTER WHAT. 
    The status quo has not been disrupted by Bishop. The prizes have not been absconded by the lower tiers, Okoye/halfthor/JJ are still widely used and still very effective at what they do. Nerfing Bishop doesn’t mean that all those 5* players would suddenly be allowed to run 5Carol, Cable, Cap to great success. So if you want 5* players to "have fun" then you need to buff their bench warmers not nerf a 4* character. 

    Imagine if they straight doubled Phoenix: heath/specials/dam #’s, What If? if Kravens trap mechanic worked with any traps, imagine if Flaptain instantly trips a random CD instead of by one turn or affected all cd/repeaters by 1, imagine if buckys powers were all 2 cheaper, imagine if emma/carol had twice the number of *fortified* Repeaters, imagine if Talos had no cap to his %, imagine if Namor put out twice as much blue and the Aoe wasn’t conditional, imagine if Rayne had a passive damage attached to being invisible, If calling the storm was a finisher or group stunned or replaced storm tiles with charged tiles, If Hulk kept his AP &had stunproof (I really like see ghosts ability!), I say double-down on jump in front: If Starlord stole more and had a mild passive that did something niche when a teammate jumps in front(and gave drax a jump in front ability) What if parkers spidey sense let him stun someones who jumps in front, Imagine if Thanos was stunproof, If Goblin black had an aversion ability with his glider similar to nightcrawler, If surfer healed more and had higher HP he would be chased (that red needs a buff too though), If BSSM stun was extended/and the web-do was conditionally cheaper, he wouldn't only be a counter. Look at 5HE: all it takes is just some synergy and people will pivot immediately. rather than creating a power vacuum like the absence of Gambit, empowering player choices through a wide toolbox is the way to go forward and keep more people happier vs making it easier/simpler for t20 SCL9 to grind mindlessly.

    #doublephoenix
    3 star dakens strikes are about on par with 2 star dakens in strength. You get 1 more with 3 star daken. Bishop passively does almost as much damage on a 5* match 3 being made as 5* dr strange does when someone fires a power. 

    Daken is a bad example to prop up.
  • purplemurpurplemur Posts: 371 Mover and Shaker
    Some characters could use super soldier serum
    Are you saying we need to buff 3*Daken?
     I would take that over a nerf
  • tiomonotiomono Posts: 1,549 Chairperson of the Boards
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    purplemur said:
    Are you saying we need to buff 3*Daken?
     I would take that over a nerf
    Actually I think I just had a great idea. We buff 5* strange and give him the damage on basic matches. But the devs like to take power from somewhere so we can give bishop strange's passive so it works on enemy active powers.

    It's a buff that would make a character from a tier above more effective than a comparable power from the tier below.
  • BriMan2222BriMan2222 Posts: 82 Match Maker
    Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder
    purplemur said:
    Ever had to fight against 3* Daken? It’s not fair every time I make a match in green he makes 2 strikes! I shouldn’t be punished for making a match 3 in a match 3 game! I 
    Daken mildly  punishes me for making a match 3 in green specifically in a match 3 game.  Bishop punishes all matches of any color and the punishment is that all of your characters can't do anything for 4 turns,  a bit harsher than a few weak strike tiles added for the enemy team.   

    I would be perfectly fine with bishop doing exactly what he does but only if I make a green match,  or any other color,  or even 3 colors.   I would be fine if I could do literally anything without him stun locking my team,  the problem is that I can't.  Any match of any type sets him into overclock. 
Sign In or Register to comment.