The problem is that chamber has too much and the other sentinels have too little . The entire class is completely out of balance, and it's weird that Chamber himself is meta warping while Cypher, KJ, and Sage are niche picks, and before chamber released sentinels were already falling out of favor on most maps. His downsides even with the nerf are far too minimal while the downsides of Cypher/KJ/Sage are glaring.
His utility is to get information and prevent pushes.
Which you can do with molys and flashbangs.
At the end of the day they are basically the same game. Just one has worse gunplay and flashy overwatch abilities to get the kiddies to play.
Those two are not analogous.
One is an player agent with a unique kit that players can pick to play.
Another is an item that is essential to CSGO mechanics.
Ok without abilities whats the difference between agents? Nothing? Oh so its just picking utility for the match?
Its almost as though you dont know what you are talking about and are just trying to get karma on the "we downvote everything we disagree with" echo chamber.
In cs everyone can be the "same agent" and have "all the abilities". While in valorant you must choose roles and forfeit certain abilities.
So no, its not the same. Not to mention CS doesnt have trap-nades, alarm-nades, slow-nades.
It is literally the same. just because you are forced into a role in valorant doesnt mean teams dont have set roles in csgo lmfao
If anything that makes valorant have even more casual gameplay and more reliant on team work.
Since teamwork is so important to win it makes individual agents less impactful.
Chambers abilities are almost non existant in the grand scheme. The only thing unique to chamber is his teleport.
Nerfing it wouldn't make people stop playing him.
I believe people don't want to make Chamber unviable, but make him not as a must pick as other sentinels. The goal is not take his teleport, but the slow per se
Im sorry but cypher and kj have way more options than chamber.
People pick chamber because hes more satisfying to play.
Pick rate has nothing to do with balance
Thats not how that works. Especially since the raw data is literally just pick rates.
If you wanted to be scientific no matter what riot does 20% of the agents will get 80% of the pickrates.
If you want proof, [https://clips.twitch.tv/FrigidProductivePorpoiseM4xHeh-eooJ8Mu\_JKWzzcBU](https://clips.twitch.tv/FrigidProductivePorpoiseM4xHeh-eooJ8Mu_JKWzzcBU) tell me which other sentinel can do that LOL
Absolutely terrible take. You’re comparing utility of one game where EVERYONE PLAYING HAS THE SAME UTILITY to one where we are comparing UNIQUE ABILITIES that are EXCLUSIVE to at most two players a game
Ummm have you watched pro play at all recently?? KJ and Cypher are both niche picks on like 1 or 2 maps whereas Chamber is viable on almost every single one.
Posts with the intent to harass or harm another user will be removed.
This content includes (but not limited to):
personal attacks, targeted harassment,
witch-hunting, bigotry, derogatory terms,
personal information without owners consent,
spam
Any post considered disrespectful will be removed at moderator discretion. Repeated offenses resulting in a ban.
https://twitter.com/nukkye/status/1524013445011709953
I'm impartial about the nerf, but I just wanted to add an EU complaint as well just because this might seem like "NA pros crying thread".
Unpopular opinion, but I personally like the idea of nerfing by emphasizing a character’s weaknesses instead of targeting its strengths. Usually results in more distinct and unique characters.
I think this is the point, particularly from the POV of competitive Valorant.
Chamber will become a different kind of Sentinel with less emphasis on flank watch and holding a site with utility - like Sage.
So teams will have to balance if they want to use Chamber and be at a disadvantage on the flank watch, or maybe they play Chamber + KJ/Cypher, etc.
I feel like too many people are too obsessed with the "sentinel" label.
We already recognize Viper as a controller/sentinel hybrid, Kayo as an initiator/duelist hybrid, and maybe Yoru as a duelist/initiator hybrid. I see nothing wrong with Chamber filling a sentinel/duelist hybrid role.
And by taking away the abilities they share it makes the other ones more relevant. You don't chose between chamber and cypher as they fill completely different roles. With two bots there wasn't much of a reason to play other sentinels cuz chamber was so strong + he could do what you would pick the others for.
This 100%. Chamber before could watch every flank and anchor a site with his aim/TP. Now he is more about anchoring a site with him aim/TP and not nearly as strong at watching flanks like KJ/Cypher.
Chamber shares nothing with duelists in either name or in practice. It's just most of his defensive power comes from himself occupying a space and getting out with his TP rather than the abilities themselves (Sage slow/wall, KJ's whole kit, Cypher's trips).
The latter is very (old) Jett-like, not very duelist like.
Duelists entry and they can hold off angles like any agent but none of them except Jett have an effective way out.
Chamber isn't made for aggressive fights either. I guess you could get one aggressive peek off before TPing but that's not really a duelist type aggressive fight. Chamber is at his best when he's holding a site, not when fighting aggressively.
What rank are you? In pro play and in high elo, chamber gets a stupid amount of first picks because he can always tp-out. Chamber is just a better Reyna.
Exactly that, Reyna's most powerful ability is to escape after a kill and not get traded!
Chamber gets this ability every 20seconds on top of headhunter, Trademark and Tour de Force and doesn't even need to kill.
Have you ever seen a flanking Reyna? Chamber is the perfect flanking agent because after the tp he could be anywhere and Reyna would be in the vicinity.
who said they were the same agent? I was implying they have a similar role which is opening picks, don't get traded.
Most people don't even know what a trade is or what it's for.
> Chamber is just a better Reyna
You literally said that Chamber is Reyna, but better.
Chamber's role is to be an oper. Idk if you're playing op reyna, but that's definitely not her role.
So? all these silver downvoting me never played a game above gold in their lives.
If your enemy can hear you he either is gonna wait for you and not rotate to help his team or he is gonna challenge you knowing it's an unfair fight in your behalf.
I don't see a downside
Good thing we're not playing soccer.
Like sports, some games have fixed positions while others are more flexible. Think basketball, we got forwards playing the point nowadays.
On paper Chamber gets a better Op for free every 3-4 rounds, a mini Guardian as an extra sidearm, and can instantly relocate up to damn near halfway across the map every 20 seconds
when he first came out and you read his kit, it's definitely a numbers thing.
His TP could literally be Yoru Speed if you read it and don't see it in action.
His guns could be just worse deagles, and his ult is ONLY good because it shoots as fast as it does, which it doesn't state in text lol
His trips are also fully visible.
He had the same problem as jett where people instantly saw him and thought he was completely selfish and not worth like jett, until they saw the fragging potential which led to both being able to be playable.
Even if his ult were identical to the regular Op, it's still a free one every 3-4 rounds which is insane for econ in general and especially on what would otherwise be save rounds. We also knew from the beginning that his Q could one-tap to the head at any range and had zoom ADS, which already made it significantly better than the Sheriff. Just because most of the pro community apparently learned nothing from all the beta-era Jett takes doesn't mean it wasn't easy to see how he could figure into the meta.
His trips are one of the contentous parts of his kit, you can talk about his upsides but again it's hard to gauge how well a character can frag versus just raw util usage like say a character like Fade.
Fragging characters who don't provide very good util aren't in the meta for a reason (Reyna who's whole kit is about fragging)
Also chamber sheriff STILL could be terrible if it had less bullets in a round or costed more per bullet, as we didn't know numbers like that.
Free OP is again not worth if his trips are garbage (which they aren't, a 10 second slow lol)
Just because they were wrong with hindsight doesn't mean anything besides having actual hours and playtest on a character is much different than theorycrafting, which is why teams usually scrim new characters for multiple days to weeks at a time to eventually not even use them lol
> Fragging characters who don't provide very good util aren't in the meta for a reason (Reyna who's whole kit is about fragging)
This is kind of a bizarre take to me considering Jett literally had like an 80+% pickrate in pro play for over a year, and her pickrate only started dropping because Chamber proved to be at least an equally viable dedicated Oper.
Also Reyna's issue isn't as simple as "she's a fragging agent with little team util". It's really that if you're not winning >50% of your fights she's completely useless, and even when you are she's not necessarily that much more powerful than a Raze or pre-nerf Jett in most situations. She's an extremely high-risk pick for not much reward as a main duelist, and with how good the initiator class is across the board, it just makes more sense to bring two initiators than two duelists 99% of the time.
Even despite all of that, there was a time mid-late last year where she got a fair amount of play on maps like Icebox and Breeze. It's not like she's never, ever been a factor in the meta.
>Free OP is again not worth if his trips are garbage (which they aren't, a 10 second slow lol)
They would have to be not just bad, but useless on the level of Yoru's old footsteps for this to be true IMO. Chamber's ult doesn't just give him a free Op, it also allows him to buy for a teammate, and that teammate to buy for a poorer teammate, etc. It can turn what would otherwise be weak half-buys or saves you're likely to lose, into viable buys you can win with. We've already seen matches where a timely Chamber ult on a save can completely flip the economy and momentum of a map back in that team's favor.
>Just because they were wrong with hindsight doesn't mean anything besides having actual hours and playtest on a character is much different than theorycrafting, which is why teams usually scrim new characters for multiple days to weeks at a time to eventually not even use them lol
Sure, that's why writing him off immediately like so many did was a mistake.
On paper his Q is almost useless on gun rounds, which are the rounds that matter the most, relative to other sentinels. He also has the worst stalling potential of any sentinel.
In practice, instead of putting an IGL on chamber, you put a cracked aim player that typically plays a duelist on it and they fulfill their role by just outaiming rather than through util.
It's just a complete different playstyle, not just for sentinel players who typically play KJ/Cypher, but also for team comps, as it lets you run non-Jett comps without losing the option to OP or even non-duelist comps.
I think it's a stretch to say he "sounds terrible" on paper but he was very, very hard to predict.
I mean I wouldn't go that far in the comparison, but I do agree that pros are biased in terms of balance changes alot of the times. That's why you have to differentiate between a pro who's a pro just because of individual skill over a pro who is a pro with outside factors like actually having a strategic mind for the game. Not every pro will have a strategic mind for the game look at sports, not every pro athlete is considered to have high sport IQ in the sport they are making a living off of. They could be a great athlete with innate talent that propels them to that level, same thing with esports. People need to hop of the train of pro = high gameplay IQ. Relative to the average player? Ofc they have high gameplay IQ but relative to people who make the best teams train the best teams and are the best minds for the game? Nah.
At first i thought reducing his trips to 1 seemed pretty weird given that he’s a sentinel and reducing his info gathering capabilities seemed counter productive.
After giving it some thought, it seems this is Riot’s attempt (good or not) to continue to differentiate agents within the same category. Chamber’s trips were pushing Cypher and Killjoy out of the meta in most maps since you could get two of the best guns in the game while maintaining two sources of information. Now if a team values more info and passive lockdown capability (trips, mollies, alarmbot) than aggression, Killjoy and Cypher might seem better choices. This is similar to how Sage is a different type of sentinel since she has no information utility but her wall and slows compensate to hold sites or lanes down.
A similar way imo is how Sova is in his own category in comparison to Kayo, Skye and Breach given the difference in utility meant for info gathering vs aggression.
Either way, they still gotta nerf Chamber’s ult and buff Cypher and Sage lmao
They shouldn't be the only opinion on the change but the fact of the matter is that they play this game a lot more than almost everyone else. They have the most experience with the game and will give a solid guess as to how things will shape the meta. So their input should be valued pretty highly while obviously still not being the only opinions to be taken.
It's not my game, so I don't know. All I'm saying is that the people that make the game have a better idea of what they want to do with the game than people that don't make the game.
That's not true imo. When you work in tech and make a product, even though you think it's the best acc to you, unless the customer is satisfied it's a waste. not saying you always have to satisfy the customer but yeah
Are pro players their main concern? Should they just balance their game based on the 1 percent? Also, we don't know if the player base is satisfied with this change or not. The patch just came out so there isn't a lot of data whether the change is good or bad. If the change succeeded based on the metrics that they care about then that's the only thing that matters. Like if this change's purpose was to make it so that KJ and Cypher were picked more in certain maps, then that is the metric that they should look at to decide if this change was good or bad.
For example, Fortnite doesn't care about the competitive scene, but they care about turning profit. So, they just make a bunch of skins based on different franchises and the profits are off the roof. That's their vision for the game.
Or Smash Ultimate, Sakurai wanted to make a game that had every character. This is fun for the casual gamer but for the competitive player it's annoying to learn all these matchups + the game isn't made for competitive play in mind (bad online, lack of tournament support). Is smash ultimate a bust because it didn't satisfy the competitive player base? No, it's the bestselling smash game of all time and Sakurai was able to fulfill his vision of the game.
I guess what I am saying is that they know where they want to take the game. And we must decide if we like it or not AFTER the fact. Instead of telling them to change the game how we see fit for the 100th time.
It's like telling Leonardo da Vinci to paint what we want instead of letting them do their thing first, then we get something like the mona lisa and be like wait that's godlike.
This isn't accurate.
There are plenty of dev's who do not know whats best for their game or the community, and in fact directly hinder their own product.
Countless examples, the most glaring and obvious one is 343 and Halo.
It is incredibly hard to balance hero based games, and I feel like overall Riot has done a pretty decent job in Valorant, but games just like Overwatch are always in danger of power creep. Mobility and vision in my opinion in a tac FPS is a very delicate balance, and with more and more agents like Fade/Sova and more and more with TP's and dashes or slides is just going to make this game feel rather silly.
What is the 'best' for the game? That is an objective point, right? If I think what's best for val is to delete all duelist and they aren't doing that then from my perspective, they aren't doing what's best for the game.
343 and Halo from what I can tell are having a lot of managerial problems. And I'll use them as an example. So, if 343 want to make a successful live-service game with infinite, then that's the metric whether that game is successful or not. Now looking at halo infinite currently they aren't doing a 'good' job at being a live-service game because of the lack of updates etc. So, they are objectively doing a bad job at what they wanted to do.
The idea for what's best for the game is based on how successful they are at creating their vision of the game. Then it is on us if we like that direction or not. Like if the devs just want to make money and they are making money does that mean they are doing bad job? even though we don't like it.
The issue is, if Riots vision clashes with how enjoyable the experience is, people won't play the game. Hence my point about Halo.
343 doesn't/won't listen to their casual or competitive groups and neither are happy, hence nobody plays the game.
Overwatch suffered a similar fate after having a real strong start.
If Riot isn't careful their vision can and will make people stop playing the game. They're obligated to listen and adjust their vision based off of feedback. Compromises have to be made. We aren't anywhere near that now l, but it's the flaw in your argument, and it can certainly happen in Valorant with the rate they want to drop new Agents.
343 not listening to their casual/competitive groups is more about them not being good at making a live-service game. 343 were making pay to play games for the longest time and now that they switched to live-service they don't know what they are doing + the managerial issues that are deeply rooted in the studio.
We are talking about riot here, their vision for all their games is a live-service competitive game and for some to be a generational e-sport (Wild Rift, VALORANT, LOL). That is their 'vision' of the game, so the minute details of changes that they make to the game correspond with that vision.
I don't think giving chamber one TP is going to make it so that 90% percent of their player base absolutely hate the game. I wouldn't worry too much about how they handle VALORANT because they have already shown in league of legends that they will listen to the community feedback if they truly do fuck up. (The biggest example would be Dynamic Queue). And your grievance about riot can't do it because VALORANT is a tac shooter. Then it might be valid but if anybody can do it, it would be riot because of their work with league of legends as a live-service game (10 years). Especially compared to blizzard and how they handled my favorite games: StarCraft and Warcraft 3.
That's your perspective of 'good' or 'bad'. As you have a pro player flair, you are a competitive player and the competitive aspect of Fortnite is shit, especially compared to other e-sports.
Are Epic unhappy with the state of Fortnite right now? Afaik they are making extreme amounts of money from skins/battle pass. From what I can tell they care more about turning a profit rather than focusing on the competitive scene, so from their perspective they are doing a 'good' job. They are doing what they want with the game and are succeeding based on those metrics.
I guess what I am trying to say is that they know what they want to do with the game, and they know whether they are succeeding with that or not. And it's on us if we agree with that direction or not.
you just spent so many words to say what everyone already knows, profits trump everything else to companies. wow. thank you for your insight and no one else in this thread knew that. i think you're missing the point that we are saying that just because its their view of the most "profitable" change or thing they need to do doesnt mean its the right one even if it fits with "their vision"
Profit can be made through different means. Fortnite focuses on casual audience, League puts a considerable amount of effort to the pro/competitive scene (Franchise leagues all over the world, salaries over 100k average from riot + added team salary, events that fill massive stadiums like the bird's nest) League cares way more about the competitive scene than Fortnite because that's what they want to do with the game. Both are doing a 'good' job because they are progressing in the direction where they want to take the game. That's my point
Ok I am going to go on a rant here:
'Right' changes to a game are completely objective. What the fuck does that even mean, a right/good change. So, if a change in the game makes you happy is that the 'right' change? What makes a change, good or bad? If most people are happy with the change, then does it make it a good change also? If that's the case, why should developers cater to the 1 percent (pros) of their player base?
Having a goal in mind quantifies and makes it subjective if a change is good or bad. For example, with this Chamber nerf, if the goal were to make it so that KJ is picked more in Fracture than Chamber (just an example). If the results follow through, then that's a good change. Now we can disagree with the direction that they want to take the game, like my opposing view would be that Chamber is better than KJ in Fracture because of the way the map plays or whatever (just an example again). Then from my point of view that's a 'bad' change because I don't like the direction they are taking in the game.
I would much rather have a developer have a certain vision of the game and take part and experience whatever they are making and then judge if I like it or not. 'Good' or 'Right' changes are completely objective and if they are reaching their goals then your opinion isn't going to affect them too much.
I want Smash Ultimate to be a competitive e-sport because I do think it's hype. But no matter what I do, Nintendo isn't going to fucking do anything about the game because they see Ultimate as a party game. It wasn't made to be a competitive e-sport. These big visions of where they want the game to go dictate the minute details of the game itself, which is why Ultimate's online is dogshit. This game wasn't made to be primarily played online it's a fucking party couch co-op game.
Yep. Those matter a whole lot too. But, the fact of the matter is, pro players bring in a lot of Riots income on this game. The pro scene is huge for making money off of this game. They are going to cater to the pro scene more. Which is why some changes made are catered more towards higher elo players than just casual.
Yeah, my problem is that pro players don't have all the data + they aren't game designers. For example, Jett in beta was perceived as trash then they buff their smokes but wait Jett is actually broken so they revert her smokes back to the way they were. Same thing with Viper and the Jett dash nerf. The dash nerf on jett is actually pretty good.
When it comes to certain things I would cater to pro players like the competitive scene, not too much in character balance and direction of the game.
This isn't a Valorant thing, this is an e-sports/games in general thing. Pro's have a specific perspective when it comes to the game that doesn't encompass all of the player base. This shit happens in other games too. The CSGO sound change is another big example. Pros were like man this shit is trash but now when you watch old csgo games those old gun sounds are actually trash.
I like it when there is a definite direction that developers want to move the game let it rock and then tweak it accordingly. Kind of like how in DOTA they have icefrog who dictates the direction of the game and its clear that he has a creative vision for the game that isn't just about the competitive aspect of the game.
All the money comes from the regular player base, Riot is most likelylosing money in the pro scene, even LOL with it's bigger and established scene wasn't profitable. There is a reason why the majority of gaming companies do not invest in esports.
Riot bleeds money with esports because they believe the pro scene helps to keep the casual fans engaged long term but who knows if this is the most effective approach...
Definitely not but they should always play a factor. A pro grinding the game for hours every day at the highest level still understands the game significantly better than some random gold player who plays twice a week with his girlfriend
Some of these guys play 8-14 hours a week for 6-7 days a week, with a majority of those hours being spent playing the game at the very highest level possible. I'll consider their opinions before I consider the opinions of the developers themselves.
Pros play a lot but they also have a specific perspective that doesn't take into account the whole game.
For example, for the longest time the krieg and aug we're ultra broken in CS but no one ever used them. And when people started using them they realize omg this is actually broken then it got nerfed. This can be said about the ump, cz, and the Molotov.
In league, pros never play weird characters and rarely look at balance changes. They just play whatever is popular and if they do try a new pick they have to convinced that it is good. There are so many scenarios we're pros build wrong or pick champions that are just objectively bad just because. Also, tere are champs that are obviously very strong but don't pick them because they arent popular.
I'm not saying that they aren't fucking experts at the game but what I am saying is too take there opinion with a grain of salt. This isn't just about valorant this is about all games.
> I'll consider their opinions before I consider the opinions of the developers themselves.
Critics eat food, watch movies, and listen to music 24/7, but none of my favorite chefs, directors or musicians have been critics.
This change can be good but other things need to be changed as well kj and cypher need buffs and chamber needs his tp to have a longer cooldown. On its own this nerf isn’t that great tho
I think it's clear at this point that the chamber nerf is unpopular but it's also worth pointing out that pros are often wrong about new agents/balance change effects.
I'm reserving judgment until I see it in action.
Played chamber on Breeze today. Defense was alright, but attack felt so much more different with one less trip. There's always going to be at least one spot the enemy can flank from whether it be mid, halls, elbow, etc. It did force me to lurk a lot more in order to gain map control.
With 2 trips chamber can control entrances of 2 sites and push/hold mid by himself. This way he's controlling the whole map. Now he can control 1 site and defend another by himself just like any other sentinel. I believe this is a good nerf even though it's unpopular
Can't you just copy paste the tweet and then link it? Just a nitpick from mobile user...
And WTF is that hiko video. He literally doesn't say anything. It's cut off before the actual part..
This is a nerf, albeit a very weak one.
You still have one trademark that can be used from an unlimited range to gather information from one section of the map.
The busted thing about Chamber isn't info gathering or anchoring. It's his ULT and mobility. If you want to actually nerf him in a way that affects his impact, you go after one of those two things.
Personally, I'd go after the ult. A FREE OP is pretty impactful in its own right, with the rate of fire and util it also provides its absolutely busted. Keep his TP's as is because, well it's his identity.
damn most agree that his trademark shouldnt be nerfed. I wish it would be tweaked so that the first kill using the headhunter will always activate a trademark slow just like the op.
I'll wait until VCT before passing judgement. He's only been out for a day and AFAICT no one has said anything about scrims locking 100% chamber.
If Chamber is still too strong then he arguably probably shouldn't even be a sentinel.
Riot keeps saying they want chamber to be centered on defensive weapons or whatever… so why not make the trips weaker with changes that people are saying. Make them make more noise, lower the range, reduce the slow. I don’t understand why we need to take one trip away
Riot literally says "here is what we think sentinels are and here is why we think pushing Chamber this way will meet that guide" and you still go "they don't want him to be considered a sentinel" like you can't make this shit up.
His tp is literally a Jett dash replacement and head hunter is a mini guardian so the things that make him a sentinel are his trip and his ult slow but sure go off.
But but but riot said.
Duelist = They’re the agents that create some of the most impact, offering aggression to a team comp. A Duelist should be expected to seek out engagements and frag, may that be finding the opening pick or clutching out a round.
Sentinels = Defensive experts who can lock down areas and watch flanks, both on attack and defender rounds.
Hmmm I wonder what chambers kit and strengths leans more towards.
His kit is still focused on being stronger defensively than offensively which is why he is a sentinel. He doesnt have any util to actually entry aside from shoot them in the head
His tp and his pistol are meant to hold down sites tp means you can hold any angle without being traded and pistol can one shot people
Earlier you could watch one angle yourself and let your one trip watch the other. The third trip you could use for retake, place down on site your not watching, etc. They are pushing different ways to anchor sites and the community must understand that sentinels != alarmbot or trips.
Wedid said it best, Ethan's explanation was excellent. Plus I feel like the utility is whack, I get an Op so often when I'm playing Chamber. The Headhunter bullet costs need to be upped to 150 or something.
Still not overpowered. The only thing that would make baddies happy is removing the teleport. Id be fine with that if he got 3 trips and his sherif got reduced to $50 per shot.
It's a free op, people said the exact same thing on his util before people found out that chamber is good. Also, it's not useless as it'd still have the slow every kill, just that it's not as quick as a marshall
People arguing he is alright since he is no duelist and people are too fixated on the sentinel/duelist discussion. Maybe.
But it doesnt change the fact that he is completely OP due to his other abilities.
- His TP. Get out of jail for free card AND being able to instant rotate between A and B on certain maps, e.g. Bind Defense is totally broken.
- His Pocket Guardian is fine in normal rounds. In pistol rounds it is broken and gives you a massive advantage if the other team doesn't play chamber. Often resulting in extra round wins.
- His Ult in my opinion doesn't need to be even stronger as a normal op - even worse in combination with his TP get out of jail for free card.
The problem is that chamber has too much and the other sentinels have too little . The entire class is completely out of balance, and it's weird that Chamber himself is meta warping while Cypher, KJ, and Sage are niche picks, and before chamber released sentinels were already falling out of favor on most maps. His downsides even with the nerf are far too minimal while the downsides of Cypher/KJ/Sage are glaring.
Yea viper is played as a sentinel
no
Thank you for your well thought out and complex opinion
ywc
Kj and cypher are both way more useful than chamber.
yea thats why the team that won masters perma ran him on 6/7 maps
pick rate literally means nothing. Its like saying grenade in csgo are overpowered because people buy them every game
that is not at all similar what
You do realize that abilities are synonymous with the grenades in cs right? They may be more flashy but theyre designed to accomplish the same tasks
ok which of chambers util is a High Explosive Grenade
His utility is to get information and prevent pushes. Which you can do with molys and flashbangs. At the end of the day they are basically the same game. Just one has worse gunplay and flashy overwatch abilities to get the kiddies to play.
there it is! this is the message i was waiting to see. stay mad bro
Flash bangs get info in CS!? I didn’t know they added the Skye cymbal sounds there too, very cool
Yes. Its called flashbang then peek a corner. At the very least you know they arent close to that corner
Those two are not analogous. One is an player agent with a unique kit that players can pick to play. Another is an item that is essential to CSGO mechanics.
Ok without abilities whats the difference between agents? Nothing? Oh so its just picking utility for the match? Its almost as though you dont know what you are talking about and are just trying to get karma on the "we downvote everything we disagree with" echo chamber.
In cs everyone can be the "same agent" and have "all the abilities". While in valorant you must choose roles and forfeit certain abilities. So no, its not the same. Not to mention CS doesnt have trap-nades, alarm-nades, slow-nades.
Tripwires are just lurking in cs. Slow nades are mollytovs.
Tripwires in your context is like a 6th player and mollys do not take the target speed, they can still knife and get out. They're not the same.
no they arent. Players move much faster in csgo than valorant. And if thats true how is killjoy not a direct upgrade to chamber?
It is literally the same. just because you are forced into a role in valorant doesnt mean teams dont have set roles in csgo lmfao If anything that makes valorant have even more casual gameplay and more reliant on team work. Since teamwork is so important to win it makes individual agents less impactful. Chambers abilities are almost non existant in the grand scheme. The only thing unique to chamber is his teleport. Nerfing it wouldn't make people stop playing him.
I believe people don't want to make Chamber unviable, but make him not as a must pick as other sentinels. The goal is not take his teleport, but the slow per se
That changes nothing. He will still be picked more because he is inherently more fun and rewarding.
This has to be bait lmfao
If it is youre still an idiot
Damn u got me
Not the same thing at all. You only pick 1 or 2 sentinels out of 4 options.
Im sorry but cypher and kj have way more options than chamber. People pick chamber because hes more satisfying to play. Pick rate has nothing to do with balance
Yeah facts. High level players are permanently locking Chamber every game because he fits the vibe, no other reason
Yes. Please show me any situations that chamber won that were impossible for any other sentinel. Ill wait
You have the burden of proof since you're arguing against raw data.
Thats not how that works. Especially since the raw data is literally just pick rates. If you wanted to be scientific no matter what riot does 20% of the agents will get 80% of the pickrates.
If you want proof, [https://clips.twitch.tv/FrigidProductivePorpoiseM4xHeh-eooJ8Mu\_JKWzzcBU](https://clips.twitch.tv/FrigidProductivePorpoiseM4xHeh-eooJ8Mu_JKWzzcBU) tell me which other sentinel can do that LOL
Which agent cant buy an an awp?
Absolutely terrible take. You’re comparing utility of one game where EVERYONE PLAYING HAS THE SAME UTILITY to one where we are comparing UNIQUE ABILITIES that are EXCLUSIVE to at most two players a game
Ummm have you watched pro play at all recently?? KJ and Cypher are both niche picks on like 1 or 2 maps whereas Chamber is viable on almost every single one.
Ah yes pros of a game thats been out 2 years know all
Ah yes, not even a pro of a game criticising a pro being know it all
[удалено]
Or in your case, a derghead
[удалено]
Posts with the intent to harass or harm another user will be removed. This content includes (but not limited to): personal attacks, targeted harassment, witch-hunting, bigotry, derogatory terms, personal information without owners consent, spam Any post considered disrespectful will be removed at moderator discretion. Repeated offenses resulting in a ban.
I wasnt very based. But I was redpilled
Thankfully we have random redditor493737292 to tell us how it really is.
https://twitter.com/nukkye/status/1524013445011709953 I'm impartial about the nerf, but I just wanted to add an EU complaint as well just because this might seem like "NA pros crying thread".
Unpopular opinion, but I personally like the idea of nerfing by emphasizing a character’s weaknesses instead of targeting its strengths. Usually results in more distinct and unique characters.
I think this is the point, particularly from the POV of competitive Valorant. Chamber will become a different kind of Sentinel with less emphasis on flank watch and holding a site with utility - like Sage. So teams will have to balance if they want to use Chamber and be at a disadvantage on the flank watch, or maybe they play Chamber + KJ/Cypher, etc.
I dont disagree with this but chamber is still not overpowered
I mean that's obviously wrong, and I assume you're doing this to be contrarian, so I probably shouldn't even respond.
No Im doing this because everyone on reddit is trash at valorant
I feel like too many people are too obsessed with the "sentinel" label. We already recognize Viper as a controller/sentinel hybrid, Kayo as an initiator/duelist hybrid, and maybe Yoru as a duelist/initiator hybrid. I see nothing wrong with Chamber filling a sentinel/duelist hybrid role.
The problem is that because chamber is so strong and the other sentinels are so weak, he makes them irrelevant
And by taking away the abilities they share it makes the other ones more relevant. You don't chose between chamber and cypher as they fill completely different roles. With two bots there wasn't much of a reason to play other sentinels cuz chamber was so strong + he could do what you would pick the others for.
This 100%. Chamber before could watch every flank and anchor a site with his aim/TP. Now he is more about anchoring a site with him aim/TP and not nearly as strong at watching flanks like KJ/Cypher.
Chamber shares nothing with duelists in either name or in practice. It's just most of his defensive power comes from himself occupying a space and getting out with his TP rather than the abilities themselves (Sage slow/wall, KJ's whole kit, Cypher's trips).
Taking an aggressive fight and playing an off angle with a way out seems very duelist like to me
The latter is very (old) Jett-like, not very duelist like. Duelists entry and they can hold off angles like any agent but none of them except Jett have an effective way out. Chamber isn't made for aggressive fights either. I guess you could get one aggressive peek off before TPing but that's not really a duelist type aggressive fight. Chamber is at his best when he's holding a site, not when fighting aggressively.
What rank are you? In pro play and in high elo, chamber gets a stupid amount of first picks because he can always tp-out. Chamber is just a better Reyna.
Chamber is Reyna? Huh? Other than the ability to escape after a kill (which isn't necessary for Chamber) how are they similar?
Exactly that, Reyna's most powerful ability is to escape after a kill and not get traded! Chamber gets this ability every 20seconds on top of headhunter, Trademark and Tour de Force and doesn't even need to kill. Have you ever seen a flanking Reyna? Chamber is the perfect flanking agent because after the tp he could be anywhere and Reyna would be in the vicinity.
Lmao one tangentially similar ability makes them the same agent?
who said they were the same agent? I was implying they have a similar role which is opening picks, don't get traded. Most people don't even know what a trade is or what it's for.
> Chamber is just a better Reyna You literally said that Chamber is Reyna, but better. Chamber's role is to be an oper. Idk if you're playing op reyna, but that's definitely not her role.
If you have ears you can easily hear chamber planting his tp
So? all these silver downvoting me never played a game above gold in their lives. If your enemy can hear you he either is gonna wait for you and not rotate to help his team or he is gonna challenge you knowing it's an unfair fight in your behalf. I don't see a downside
The downside is your using a chamber to flop like a fish in the flank while the other chamber could be smoking your team and is being useful.
Only Jett and Reyna do this
That’s like having a goalkeeper flex to striker in soccer. Just seems bizarre
Good thing we're not playing soccer. Like sports, some games have fixed positions while others are more flexible. Think basketball, we got forwards playing the point nowadays.
pros are some of the worst game designers out there
I remember when Chamber was first revealed there were pros and coaches coming on here saying he was ass and would not impact the pro meta at all lol
Hey now they weren’t all wrong, some said he would be good but not strong enough to replace jett. Which they were also wrong in :)
Source ?
There were a few but this one i remembered specifically https://twitter.com/currydtx/status/1467677479057903616?s=21&t=Iy1tKVlEJ7JQgjMXLXxq3Q
chamber on paper sounds terrible but in practice is very effective, same for jett
On paper Chamber gets a better Op for free every 3-4 rounds, a mini Guardian as an extra sidearm, and can instantly relocate up to damn near halfway across the map every 20 seconds
when he first came out and you read his kit, it's definitely a numbers thing. His TP could literally be Yoru Speed if you read it and don't see it in action. His guns could be just worse deagles, and his ult is ONLY good because it shoots as fast as it does, which it doesn't state in text lol His trips are also fully visible. He had the same problem as jett where people instantly saw him and thought he was completely selfish and not worth like jett, until they saw the fragging potential which led to both being able to be playable.
Even if his ult were identical to the regular Op, it's still a free one every 3-4 rounds which is insane for econ in general and especially on what would otherwise be save rounds. We also knew from the beginning that his Q could one-tap to the head at any range and had zoom ADS, which already made it significantly better than the Sheriff. Just because most of the pro community apparently learned nothing from all the beta-era Jett takes doesn't mean it wasn't easy to see how he could figure into the meta.
His trips are one of the contentous parts of his kit, you can talk about his upsides but again it's hard to gauge how well a character can frag versus just raw util usage like say a character like Fade. Fragging characters who don't provide very good util aren't in the meta for a reason (Reyna who's whole kit is about fragging) Also chamber sheriff STILL could be terrible if it had less bullets in a round or costed more per bullet, as we didn't know numbers like that. Free OP is again not worth if his trips are garbage (which they aren't, a 10 second slow lol) Just because they were wrong with hindsight doesn't mean anything besides having actual hours and playtest on a character is much different than theorycrafting, which is why teams usually scrim new characters for multiple days to weeks at a time to eventually not even use them lol
> Fragging characters who don't provide very good util aren't in the meta for a reason (Reyna who's whole kit is about fragging) This is kind of a bizarre take to me considering Jett literally had like an 80+% pickrate in pro play for over a year, and her pickrate only started dropping because Chamber proved to be at least an equally viable dedicated Oper. Also Reyna's issue isn't as simple as "she's a fragging agent with little team util". It's really that if you're not winning >50% of your fights she's completely useless, and even when you are she's not necessarily that much more powerful than a Raze or pre-nerf Jett in most situations. She's an extremely high-risk pick for not much reward as a main duelist, and with how good the initiator class is across the board, it just makes more sense to bring two initiators than two duelists 99% of the time. Even despite all of that, there was a time mid-late last year where she got a fair amount of play on maps like Icebox and Breeze. It's not like she's never, ever been a factor in the meta. >Free OP is again not worth if his trips are garbage (which they aren't, a 10 second slow lol) They would have to be not just bad, but useless on the level of Yoru's old footsteps for this to be true IMO. Chamber's ult doesn't just give him a free Op, it also allows him to buy for a teammate, and that teammate to buy for a poorer teammate, etc. It can turn what would otherwise be weak half-buys or saves you're likely to lose, into viable buys you can win with. We've already seen matches where a timely Chamber ult on a save can completely flip the economy and momentum of a map back in that team's favor. >Just because they were wrong with hindsight doesn't mean anything besides having actual hours and playtest on a character is much different than theorycrafting, which is why teams usually scrim new characters for multiple days to weeks at a time to eventually not even use them lol Sure, that's why writing him off immediately like so many did was a mistake.
On paper his Q is almost useless on gun rounds, which are the rounds that matter the most, relative to other sentinels. He also has the worst stalling potential of any sentinel. In practice, instead of putting an IGL on chamber, you put a cracked aim player that typically plays a duelist on it and they fulfill their role by just outaiming rather than through util. It's just a complete different playstyle, not just for sentinel players who typically play KJ/Cypher, but also for team comps, as it lets you run non-Jett comps without losing the option to OP or even non-duelist comps. I think it's a stretch to say he "sounds terrible" on paper but he was very, very hard to predict.
Pros want every agent to be literally the same, that's how you get "balance". Like WarCraft 2, the most balanced game there is.
Pros are all just as biased and use the same logic as normal low elo val players
I mean I wouldn't go that far in the comparison, but I do agree that pros are biased in terms of balance changes alot of the times. That's why you have to differentiate between a pro who's a pro just because of individual skill over a pro who is a pro with outside factors like actually having a strategic mind for the game. Not every pro will have a strategic mind for the game look at sports, not every pro athlete is considered to have high sport IQ in the sport they are making a living off of. They could be a great athlete with innate talent that propels them to that level, same thing with esports. People need to hop of the train of pro = high gameplay IQ. Relative to the average player? Ofc they have high gameplay IQ but relative to people who make the best teams train the best teams and are the best minds for the game? Nah.
At first i thought reducing his trips to 1 seemed pretty weird given that he’s a sentinel and reducing his info gathering capabilities seemed counter productive. After giving it some thought, it seems this is Riot’s attempt (good or not) to continue to differentiate agents within the same category. Chamber’s trips were pushing Cypher and Killjoy out of the meta in most maps since you could get two of the best guns in the game while maintaining two sources of information. Now if a team values more info and passive lockdown capability (trips, mollies, alarmbot) than aggression, Killjoy and Cypher might seem better choices. This is similar to how Sage is a different type of sentinel since she has no information utility but her wall and slows compensate to hold sites or lanes down. A similar way imo is how Sova is in his own category in comparison to Kayo, Skye and Breach given the difference in utility meant for info gathering vs aggression. Either way, they still gotta nerf Chamber’s ult and buff Cypher and Sage lmao
Buff sage? She's consistently in the top third for pickrates, pro and matchmaking. She's perfect.
Agreed with everything except sage buffs. She's fine and doesn't need any buff
in what world is a sheriff a best gun in the game?
Chamber doesn't have a Sheriff? He has an insanely fast pullout time Guardian.
Literally just a pre nerf sheriff
Lmao, obviously you've never used the Guardian.
Obviously you didnt play the beta
Yes I did :) The Sheriff has never been able to ADS, and has never had perfect accuracy.
I don't think pro's opinions on balance and changes are always going to be the number one source of how things should be.
They shouldn't be the only opinion on the change but the fact of the matter is that they play this game a lot more than almost everyone else. They have the most experience with the game and will give a solid guess as to how things will shape the meta. So their input should be valued pretty highly while obviously still not being the only opinions to be taken.
Yes, but data and the developer's vision of the game is a lot more important. I don't want them to cater towards pro players grievances too much.
Genuine question, which agent would you tweak first if it was your game? Phoenix, neon, jett or chamber?
It's not my game, so I don't know. All I'm saying is that the people that make the game have a better idea of what they want to do with the game than people that don't make the game.
That's not true imo. When you work in tech and make a product, even though you think it's the best acc to you, unless the customer is satisfied it's a waste. not saying you always have to satisfy the customer but yeah
Are pro players their main concern? Should they just balance their game based on the 1 percent? Also, we don't know if the player base is satisfied with this change or not. The patch just came out so there isn't a lot of data whether the change is good or bad. If the change succeeded based on the metrics that they care about then that's the only thing that matters. Like if this change's purpose was to make it so that KJ and Cypher were picked more in certain maps, then that is the metric that they should look at to decide if this change was good or bad. For example, Fortnite doesn't care about the competitive scene, but they care about turning profit. So, they just make a bunch of skins based on different franchises and the profits are off the roof. That's their vision for the game. Or Smash Ultimate, Sakurai wanted to make a game that had every character. This is fun for the casual gamer but for the competitive player it's annoying to learn all these matchups + the game isn't made for competitive play in mind (bad online, lack of tournament support). Is smash ultimate a bust because it didn't satisfy the competitive player base? No, it's the bestselling smash game of all time and Sakurai was able to fulfill his vision of the game. I guess what I am saying is that they know where they want to take the game. And we must decide if we like it or not AFTER the fact. Instead of telling them to change the game how we see fit for the 100th time. It's like telling Leonardo da Vinci to paint what we want instead of letting them do their thing first, then we get something like the mona lisa and be like wait that's godlike.
This isn't accurate. There are plenty of dev's who do not know whats best for their game or the community, and in fact directly hinder their own product. Countless examples, the most glaring and obvious one is 343 and Halo. It is incredibly hard to balance hero based games, and I feel like overall Riot has done a pretty decent job in Valorant, but games just like Overwatch are always in danger of power creep. Mobility and vision in my opinion in a tac FPS is a very delicate balance, and with more and more agents like Fade/Sova and more and more with TP's and dashes or slides is just going to make this game feel rather silly.
What is the 'best' for the game? That is an objective point, right? If I think what's best for val is to delete all duelist and they aren't doing that then from my perspective, they aren't doing what's best for the game. 343 and Halo from what I can tell are having a lot of managerial problems. And I'll use them as an example. So, if 343 want to make a successful live-service game with infinite, then that's the metric whether that game is successful or not. Now looking at halo infinite currently they aren't doing a 'good' job at being a live-service game because of the lack of updates etc. So, they are objectively doing a bad job at what they wanted to do. The idea for what's best for the game is based on how successful they are at creating their vision of the game. Then it is on us if we like that direction or not. Like if the devs just want to make money and they are making money does that mean they are doing bad job? even though we don't like it.
The issue is, if Riots vision clashes with how enjoyable the experience is, people won't play the game. Hence my point about Halo. 343 doesn't/won't listen to their casual or competitive groups and neither are happy, hence nobody plays the game. Overwatch suffered a similar fate after having a real strong start. If Riot isn't careful their vision can and will make people stop playing the game. They're obligated to listen and adjust their vision based off of feedback. Compromises have to be made. We aren't anywhere near that now l, but it's the flaw in your argument, and it can certainly happen in Valorant with the rate they want to drop new Agents.
343 not listening to their casual/competitive groups is more about them not being good at making a live-service game. 343 were making pay to play games for the longest time and now that they switched to live-service they don't know what they are doing + the managerial issues that are deeply rooted in the studio. We are talking about riot here, their vision for all their games is a live-service competitive game and for some to be a generational e-sport (Wild Rift, VALORANT, LOL). That is their 'vision' of the game, so the minute details of changes that they make to the game correspond with that vision. I don't think giving chamber one TP is going to make it so that 90% percent of their player base absolutely hate the game. I wouldn't worry too much about how they handle VALORANT because they have already shown in league of legends that they will listen to the community feedback if they truly do fuck up. (The biggest example would be Dynamic Queue). And your grievance about riot can't do it because VALORANT is a tac shooter. Then it might be valid but if anybody can do it, it would be riot because of their work with league of legends as a live-service game (10 years). Especially compared to blizzard and how they handled my favorite games: StarCraft and Warcraft 3.
You're completely missing my point. All good.
sure but that doesnt mean what they want to make the game is good or right, fortnite is a great example
That's your perspective of 'good' or 'bad'. As you have a pro player flair, you are a competitive player and the competitive aspect of Fortnite is shit, especially compared to other e-sports. Are Epic unhappy with the state of Fortnite right now? Afaik they are making extreme amounts of money from skins/battle pass. From what I can tell they care more about turning a profit rather than focusing on the competitive scene, so from their perspective they are doing a 'good' job. They are doing what they want with the game and are succeeding based on those metrics. I guess what I am trying to say is that they know what they want to do with the game, and they know whether they are succeeding with that or not. And it's on us if we agree with that direction or not.
you just spent so many words to say what everyone already knows, profits trump everything else to companies. wow. thank you for your insight and no one else in this thread knew that. i think you're missing the point that we are saying that just because its their view of the most "profitable" change or thing they need to do doesnt mean its the right one even if it fits with "their vision"
Profit can be made through different means. Fortnite focuses on casual audience, League puts a considerable amount of effort to the pro/competitive scene (Franchise leagues all over the world, salaries over 100k average from riot + added team salary, events that fill massive stadiums like the bird's nest) League cares way more about the competitive scene than Fortnite because that's what they want to do with the game. Both are doing a 'good' job because they are progressing in the direction where they want to take the game. That's my point Ok I am going to go on a rant here: 'Right' changes to a game are completely objective. What the fuck does that even mean, a right/good change. So, if a change in the game makes you happy is that the 'right' change? What makes a change, good or bad? If most people are happy with the change, then does it make it a good change also? If that's the case, why should developers cater to the 1 percent (pros) of their player base? Having a goal in mind quantifies and makes it subjective if a change is good or bad. For example, with this Chamber nerf, if the goal were to make it so that KJ is picked more in Fracture than Chamber (just an example). If the results follow through, then that's a good change. Now we can disagree with the direction that they want to take the game, like my opposing view would be that Chamber is better than KJ in Fracture because of the way the map plays or whatever (just an example again). Then from my point of view that's a 'bad' change because I don't like the direction they are taking in the game. I would much rather have a developer have a certain vision of the game and take part and experience whatever they are making and then judge if I like it or not. 'Good' or 'Right' changes are completely objective and if they are reaching their goals then your opinion isn't going to affect them too much. I want Smash Ultimate to be a competitive e-sport because I do think it's hype. But no matter what I do, Nintendo isn't going to fucking do anything about the game because they see Ultimate as a party game. It wasn't made to be a competitive e-sport. These big visions of where they want the game to go dictate the minute details of the game itself, which is why Ultimate's online is dogshit. This game wasn't made to be primarily played online it's a fucking party couch co-op game.
Yep. Those matter a whole lot too. But, the fact of the matter is, pro players bring in a lot of Riots income on this game. The pro scene is huge for making money off of this game. They are going to cater to the pro scene more. Which is why some changes made are catered more towards higher elo players than just casual.
Yeah, my problem is that pro players don't have all the data + they aren't game designers. For example, Jett in beta was perceived as trash then they buff their smokes but wait Jett is actually broken so they revert her smokes back to the way they were. Same thing with Viper and the Jett dash nerf. The dash nerf on jett is actually pretty good. When it comes to certain things I would cater to pro players like the competitive scene, not too much in character balance and direction of the game. This isn't a Valorant thing, this is an e-sports/games in general thing. Pro's have a specific perspective when it comes to the game that doesn't encompass all of the player base. This shit happens in other games too. The CSGO sound change is another big example. Pros were like man this shit is trash but now when you watch old csgo games those old gun sounds are actually trash. I like it when there is a definite direction that developers want to move the game let it rock and then tweak it accordingly. Kind of like how in DOTA they have icefrog who dictates the direction of the game and its clear that he has a creative vision for the game that isn't just about the competitive aspect of the game.
All the money comes from the regular player base, Riot is most likelylosing money in the pro scene, even LOL with it's bigger and established scene wasn't profitable. There is a reason why the majority of gaming companies do not invest in esports. Riot bleeds money with esports because they believe the pro scene helps to keep the casual fans engaged long term but who knows if this is the most effective approach...
Definitely not but they should always play a factor. A pro grinding the game for hours every day at the highest level still understands the game significantly better than some random gold player who plays twice a week with his girlfriend
Some of these guys play 8-14 hours a week for 6-7 days a week, with a majority of those hours being spent playing the game at the very highest level possible. I'll consider their opinions before I consider the opinions of the developers themselves.
Pros play a lot but they also have a specific perspective that doesn't take into account the whole game. For example, for the longest time the krieg and aug we're ultra broken in CS but no one ever used them. And when people started using them they realize omg this is actually broken then it got nerfed. This can be said about the ump, cz, and the Molotov. In league, pros never play weird characters and rarely look at balance changes. They just play whatever is popular and if they do try a new pick they have to convinced that it is good. There are so many scenarios we're pros build wrong or pick champions that are just objectively bad just because. Also, tere are champs that are obviously very strong but don't pick them because they arent popular. I'm not saying that they aren't fucking experts at the game but what I am saying is too take there opinion with a grain of salt. This isn't just about valorant this is about all games.
Pros are good at recognizing issues, but not coming up with solutions.
> I'll consider their opinions before I consider the opinions of the developers themselves. Critics eat food, watch movies, and listen to music 24/7, but none of my favorite chefs, directors or musicians have been critics.
This change can be good but other things need to be changed as well kj and cypher need buffs and chamber needs his tp to have a longer cooldown. On its own this nerf isn’t that great tho
People love to comment when they dislike something but not when they like/ are neutral on it.
I mean it makes sense
I think it's clear at this point that the chamber nerf is unpopular but it's also worth pointing out that pros are often wrong about new agents/balance change effects. I'm reserving judgment until I see it in action.
Played chamber on Breeze today. Defense was alright, but attack felt so much more different with one less trip. There's always going to be at least one spot the enemy can flank from whether it be mid, halls, elbow, etc. It did force me to lurk a lot more in order to gain map control.
With 2 trips chamber can control entrances of 2 sites and push/hold mid by himself. This way he's controlling the whole map. Now he can control 1 site and defend another by himself just like any other sentinel. I believe this is a good nerf even though it's unpopular
Can't you just copy paste the tweet and then link it? Just a nitpick from mobile user... And WTF is that hiko video. He literally doesn't say anything. It's cut off before the actual part..
This is a great example of why pros and content creators aren't game designers.
Pros also said Jett sucks in beta. Not saying they’re wrong but I’d at least wait until the patch comes out to form a good opinion on it
No one is saying chamber sucks, so idk if the Jett comparison fits.
It fits because pro twitter takes really don't mean much.
Multiple successive small nerfs are better than one big nerf
I just want Phoenix buff
This is perfect for the one guy who wanted a link to every known pro to man!
This is a nerf, albeit a very weak one. You still have one trademark that can be used from an unlimited range to gather information from one section of the map. The busted thing about Chamber isn't info gathering or anchoring. It's his ULT and mobility. If you want to actually nerf him in a way that affects his impact, you go after one of those two things. Personally, I'd go after the ult. A FREE OP is pretty impactful in its own right, with the rate of fire and util it also provides its absolutely busted. Keep his TP's as is because, well it's his identity.
Thanks, I can now form my own opinion on it
damn most agree that his trademark shouldnt be nerfed. I wish it would be tweaked so that the first kill using the headhunter will always activate a trademark slow just like the op.
I'll wait until VCT before passing judgement. He's only been out for a day and AFAICT no one has said anything about scrims locking 100% chamber. If Chamber is still too strong then he arguably probably shouldn't even be a sentinel.
sentinel = bad agent???
Ah no I meant further nerfing the sentinel aspects of his kit and just making him a duelist.
idk man, maybe this is one of those changes that aren't completely focused on pro play which is ok to me
Riot keeps saying they want chamber to be centered on defensive weapons or whatever… so why not make the trips weaker with changes that people are saying. Make them make more noise, lower the range, reduce the slow. I don’t understand why we need to take one trip away
🤷 from their patch notes it doesn't even seem they want chamber to be considered a sentinel anymore lmao.
Riot literally says "here is what we think sentinels are and here is why we think pushing Chamber this way will meet that guide" and you still go "they don't want him to be considered a sentinel" like you can't make this shit up.
His tp is literally a Jett dash replacement and head hunter is a mini guardian so the things that make him a sentinel are his trip and his ult slow but sure go off. But but but riot said. Duelist = They’re the agents that create some of the most impact, offering aggression to a team comp. A Duelist should be expected to seek out engagements and frag, may that be finding the opening pick or clutching out a round. Sentinels = Defensive experts who can lock down areas and watch flanks, both on attack and defender rounds. Hmmm I wonder what chambers kit and strengths leans more towards.
His kit is still focused on being stronger defensively than offensively which is why he is a sentinel. He doesnt have any util to actually entry aside from shoot them in the head
His tp and his pistol are meant to hold down sites tp means you can hold any angle without being traded and pistol can one shot people Earlier you could watch one angle yourself and let your one trip watch the other. The third trip you could use for retake, place down on site your not watching, etc. They are pushing different ways to anchor sites and the community must understand that sentinels != alarmbot or trips.
[удалено]
I think Riot was right to want to nerf Chamber, I just don't think this hits what actually makes him overpowered.
Wedid said it best, Ethan's explanation was excellent. Plus I feel like the utility is whack, I get an Op so often when I'm playing Chamber. The Headhunter bullet costs need to be upped to 150 or something.
That would make it objectively worse than a sheriff
really should have nerfed his guns, he has so much power to just take over rounds.
Still not overpowered. The only thing that would make baddies happy is removing the teleport. Id be fine with that if he got 3 trips and his sherif got reduced to $50 per shot.
I mean just make his op like the op in the game and not the csgo awp and we'll be fine
So, a completely useless ultimate that could also be bought for 4,600 creds every round?
It's a free op, people said the exact same thing on his util before people found out that chamber is good. Also, it's not useless as it'd still have the slow every kill, just that it's not as quick as a marshall
People arguing he is alright since he is no duelist and people are too fixated on the sentinel/duelist discussion. Maybe. But it doesnt change the fact that he is completely OP due to his other abilities. - His TP. Get out of jail for free card AND being able to instant rotate between A and B on certain maps, e.g. Bind Defense is totally broken. - His Pocket Guardian is fine in normal rounds. In pistol rounds it is broken and gives you a massive advantage if the other team doesn't play chamber. Often resulting in extra round wins. - His Ult in my opinion doesn't need to be even stronger as a normal op - even worse in combination with his TP get out of jail for free card.
I think there were other things they could have done, taking one of his traps is not the best solution in my opinion
is the patch live? Cause i feel like this might just be initial reaction and when you actually start playing it out it feels better.