{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/15/2019 5:43:39 AM
49
The crippling problem with Gambit
I think i know why Gambit is hated so much, or at least i've finally been able to pin down why I dislike it. For all the emphasis it SEEMS to place on PVE, your skill at killing minions of the darkness is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT if the enemy team is better in PVP.
A single good invader can turn the tide of an entire Gambit match, and yes, i think that was the intended purpose, but it has unintended consequences. Normally the sweaty PVPers are off playing competitive so us casuals dont have to deal with them. Gambit takes both groups and lumps them together, but gives the PVPers an overshield and a 30 second timer.
I'm often the first person to hit the banks, i'm good at tracking down high value targets, and i can kill envoys with just my melee. NONE of that matters because the invader brought a sniper. Really, nothing else in Gambit matters aside from being a good invader. If you can heal the primeval multiple times you basically guarantee a win unless the whole enemy team is running sleeper. This takes away the rewarding feeling of being a good banker and PVE'r.
Also gambit is WAY too long and tedious compared to Gambit Prime. The 3 gambit matches i have to do for the weekly challenge are so torturous i sometimes contemplate going AFK the whole time (of course i dont actually do that). I think Gambit would be better if it were just one round instead of three.
All in all, i really wish invaders werent as integral to the success of gambit matches. It really means Gambit is just another version of Competitive with a little PVE thrown in, rather than the other way around.
-
The problem is the invader has all the advantages. They know where you are. They have an overshield. They have 1 hit kill weapons. There is so much advantages that they have - you don't need to be good at PvP to be successful invading. You just need a sniper, a heavy machine gun, a linear fusion, a rocket launcher. Something like Truth makes Gambit unenjoyable.
-
2 RepliesA team should have invasion tokens, maybe two per player for an entire game, once you use them that's it.
-
The worst part is the invasions, most notable the ones during the prime evil spawn. Enemy invades and 30 seconds of him killing your team goes by, he leaves. Immediately they invade again, same thing, 30 seconds of killing and hes out. Then a 3rd invade right after that one. Some times we don't even have time to burn down the envoys and attack the prime evil before we get blasted by a truth rocket or some sniper shot from across the map. While this is all going on the other team banks 15 motes per person spawns their prime evil and we are sitting here waiting for our portal to open but they burn their prime down before it does. Very frusterating.
-
Edited by ScrubLord199901: 7/15/2019 6:28:16 PMBungie lied when they said Gambit was a PvE game mode with a PvP element. It's quite the opposite. It's a PvP game mode with a PvE element. Invasions are what determine whether you win or lose. They happen too frequently. I wonder how Gambit would play out if the invasions didn't exist? It also doesn't help that there are a variety of exotics that can be used to exploit the game mode. You have the godly Truth with it's insane tracking and proximity detonation and the Izanagi's Burden one shotting people in the pinky toe. That's all I'm naming. Don't want Gambit being cheesed anymore than it already is. Also, if you're playing Gambit Prime, all of the armor sets are underwhelming except for the invader set. Ammo regeneration, extra strong over shield, can drain motes and lock the bank. That's some real bullsheeit. That's on top of having wall hacks. It doesn't help that heavy spawns so often that upon each invasion the invader can just collect some heavy and go on a murder spree. Heavy spawns too often in PvP too. Coincidence? I think not. Not only does Invading determine the win/lose outcome but so does heavy. There is no real skill involved in anything in this game. I just grin and bare it for the powerful gear or a quest for something I really want.
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 7/15/2019 6:25:24 PMInvasions happen way too frequently in my opinion. And Prime seemed better at first, but I have found that most matches are pretty one sided, OR there is no real advantage to summoning the Primeval first unless both teams summon them at close to the same time. I have been on both sides of PLENTY of matches where the following happens. One team summons their Primeval while the other team has banked barely any motes. What happens here is, the team that summoned first gets no invasions for quite some time, meanwhile the team that has barely banked any motes is now banking them uninterrupted, ON TOP of getting to invade frequently. So the team that summoned first is now dealing with goblin blockers shielding the Primeval, captain blockers spamming their attack, knight blockers setting the Primeval slayer zone on fire, ALL while having to worry about frequent invasions by the other team. So a team is stuck with taking out blockers, trying to damage the Primeval, and worrying about the invader simultaneously over and over again in a vain attempt to damage the Primeval. Overwhelmingly, when this happens, the team that summoned first has done no real damage to their Primeval by the time the other team summons. The amount of times that the team that summons first, which SHOULD be a decent if not significant advantage, they still lose like half the time anyway. This has been my experience with Prime and I have been on both sides of it. At first it felt like staging an awesome come back, but after having been on the receiving end of that kind of match I realized it’s just indicative of a broken setup. I’ve been saying it since the original Gambit first launched. BOTH Primevals should spawn at the same time, and the team that met the goal for summoning them first should get some sort of advantage for doing so.
-
Edited by olly5656: 7/16/2019 7:42:52 AMGambit is fine to me honestly I think it’s always received far too much hate for a mode you can completely ignore (outside of those stupid exotic quests) Maybe lower the amount of invasions allowed during the boss phase but besides that gambit and GP serve their purpose as a PvEvP mode. I’ve had games slog out to to the timer while each team invades every 10 seconds and I’ve also had instant matches where we burn the primeval before the other team can get a third of the way to summon and vice versa. Both are fine it’s the nature of the mode. Without the weight of the PvP element Gambit turns into another stale mindless mode like strikes and the other mini-horde modes. And this is coming from a “PvE’er”
-
2 RepliesThere's no real need to balancing the invasion role. Make it weaker, and it's just irrelevant. Also, a good sniper means nothing against a coordinated team in gambit. If your team has a decent sniper, that can be a counter. Machine guns have literally infinite range, if you don't want to run an LMG, go for Blast Furnace. If you're in a party, don't just challenge one by one. There's also supers, or, I don't know, a wall. Plenty of people can hide behind a wall and due to the map size and short timer, if you're smart you're unkillable.
-
2 RepliesI believe the biggest problem with Gambit is including bounties in it that make some players focus on other objectives more than winning
-
On console it’s different. the invader (it can be anyone) makes easy kills by only using truth and It’s not just truth. heavy ammo are the main problem during invasion. In the past it was possible to kill the invader, but now with truth it’s literally impossible unless the invader runs straight to the middle or you use the truth yourself. invader has an overshield and wallhacks which makes everything more difficult. then there also the raid mods by killing a taken/hive with a grenade you’ll get heavy ammo from it. Gambit becomes slowly unplayable like competitive/crucible.
-
1 ReplyNot too sound dismissive but you know Truth is a weapon that does exist and is extremely good and killing invaders and vice versa
-
Bad omens is a pretty good tracking rocket launcher. Hammerhead, easy to get or use Thunderlord. Truth is ok if you can get a good luck on. Whacking with a big hammer or a huge void missile also work.
-
Edited by ArmyKnight75: 7/16/2019 7:33:23 AMSolution: If you want one round... play a Gambit Prime. Although that doesn’t fix the sweaty PvP players that you were mentioning.
-
you could just get good at PvP, Its really not that hard to snipe/super/heavy ammo rush an invader. This isnt CSGO or overwatch where they allow insane skill gaps. There are easy routes to killing a person far superior at aiming than you
-
[quote]I think i know why Gambit is hated so much, or at least i've finally been able to pin down why I dislike it. For all the emphasis it SEEMS to place on PVE, your skill at killing minions of the darkness is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT if the enemy team is better in PVP. A single good invader can turn the tide of an entire Gambit match, and yes, i think that was the intended purpose, but it has unintended consequences. Normally the sweaty PVPers are off playing competitive so us casuals dont have to deal with them. Gambit takes both groups and lumps them together, but gives the PVPers an overshield and a 30 second timer. I'm often the first person to hit the banks, i'm good at tracking down high value targets, and i can kill envoys with just my melee. NONE of that matters because the invader brought a sniper. Really, nothing else in Gambit matters aside from being a good invader. If you can heal the primeval multiple times you basically guarantee a win unless the whole enemy team is running sleeper. This takes away the rewarding feeling of being a good banker and PVE'r. Also gambit is WAY too long and tedious compared to Gambit Prime. The 3 gambit matches i have to do for the weekly challenge are so torturous i sometimes contemplate going AFK the whole time (of course i dont actually do that). I think Gambit would be better if it were just one round instead of three. All in all, i really wish invaders werent as integral to the success of gambit matches. It really means Gambit is just another version of Competitive with a little PVE thrown in, rather than the other way around.[/quote] It helps to have one guy whos only banking 5 at a time and their sole purpose at invasion is to find the invader and send him to respawn.
-
1 ReplyBungie forces players into a game mode meant to be competitive to complete objectives for quests that quite often [b]DON'T REQUIRE[/b] winning. The PvP invasions further sully the experience. Winning at Gambit is heavily skewed towards which team has more people who showed up to play the mode rather than complete quest objectives. Gambit's crippling problem is that it is, and always has been, a terribly designed game mode. Simple as that. The whole mode reeks of critical design flaws regarding every aspect.
-
So you hate gambit because it’s gambit Invading can turn a match around That’s the dam point Your basic problem is you get wasted by a sniper and cry Yet no word on crucible snipers being a problem This is just a waste of time First it was sleeper in gambit Then queen breaker Then “add weapon here” Now every sniper ever
-
use tracking rockets...problem solved.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Timewaster504: 7/16/2019 12:11:12 AMI do feel like that the invader should not have the overshield, that, or revive their recovery, so even if they win an engagement, they might be at a disadvantage the next time they go in for a kill Or, make it so if the invader dies, their team would loose motes
-
On the other side of things I've seen a Primeval's health bar go down dramatically and within seconds your opponents win. Some subclasses are better at dishing out this damage along with certain weapons and/or a coordinated team. This is just how Gambit is.
-
Thats because gambit is pvp and always has been. How people dont understand this still makes no sense.
-
The biggest problem with gambit is the people play it. No tactics, no team work and communication. 1 Reaper 1 Collector 1 Sentry 1 Invader Decent weapon and class loadout. You'd be surprised how easy it is. Its a "Team" game mode. Stop complaining about one part being the problem.
-
Edited by Gigafloh: 7/15/2019 10:51:45 PMInvading and wiping out the PvE-only teams is my favourite activity in the game since gambit released. Always makes me laugh when I see how dumb and clunky some of you react when faced with a human opponent instead of a predictable AI enemy. Also gambit made the PvE part of the game and Power grind relevant for me, although I was before a PvP-only player.
-
You're correct, Gambit is tedious.
-
Also add in players are trying to get that pinnacle bow and Gambit can be a really bad experience. Too many bad players trying to get a weapon they may or may not ever use.
-
While reading that I came up with an idea. Banking motes helps you create your own over shield. Stays active until death in that round. Also the invader should ping on the radar every 6 or 7 seconds.
-
Easily fixable with Team Shooting, also hitting the bank first is good in classic gambit, not very much so in prime unless you can slot in 25 immediatley and rush to the other sides bank and wipe them. Invader sniping? Every map has a multiple routes with plenty of cover to get to them. For real a lot of issues in gambit and other modes are easily solved by Getting in a group instead of solo queue-ing
