Best Of
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
The only way this would make any sense is if the frequency of crashes is increased.
Otherwise this is an extremely bizarre design decision.
Otherwise this is an extremely bizarre design decision.
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
What do people who want/need a Big Enchilada character 4 star supposed to do now?
fmftint
5
Re: A Mostly Accurate 4* Ranking (Updated 6/21)
Made a few minor tweaks after reading and considering the suggestions that have come in since the rework on this:
- Thing and Winter Soldier both lowered a bit more. Sorry Bucky & Ben.
- Star-Lord increased a bit.
- Sadly, I agree that Hulkbuster is no longer the raging hurricane of assbeat that he once was. He's been lowered from top tier to the high end of Solid.
- Conversely, Carnage is good enough now to be used somewhat consistently, so he's been bumped out of B-list to the low end of Solid.
- 4Thor is probably next on the chopping block to drop out of the top tier. She performs well enough on her own, and with a handful of 4* partners, that I'm comfortable leaving her there for now. Her dependence on IM40 for true savagery is a sticking point, though.
- Nova, Jean Grey, Agent Venom and Sandman are staying put for now. Nova's fast and his strike production is second only to Bl4de, which makes him pretty phenomenal and one of the few characters I regularly use unboosted; Jean Grey is indeed awesome but her powers are expensive and she's a bit on the squishy side. Sandman looks pretty bad, and while my initial assessment of his yellow was off (this has been fixed in his description), his green is pretty low-caliber for his star level and his yellow production is unreliable at best. If he proves better than anticipated, the list is always open to revisions.
Agent Venom does pretty good damage boosted, but when he's not, he's extremely underwhelming in virtually every way.
Regarding some common questions:
- Still undecided on whether Medusa is truly meta-defining or just really annoying on defense. She's godmode with Carnage, yes, but without him she's less "oh god why" and more "ugh that's really irritating." She remains ranked very highly either way.
- Rankings are an aggregate of usefulness for both PVE and PVP. If I were just ranking on PVE utility, Starlord would probably be #1, and Quake would be much higher as well - likewise, a PVP-only ranking would look substantially different. Obviously this is quite subjective and everyone has their characters they love no matter what, so the list is never gonna be 100% accurate in everyone's eyes.
- Thing and Winter Soldier both lowered a bit more. Sorry Bucky & Ben.
- Star-Lord increased a bit.
- Sadly, I agree that Hulkbuster is no longer the raging hurricane of assbeat that he once was. He's been lowered from top tier to the high end of Solid.
- Conversely, Carnage is good enough now to be used somewhat consistently, so he's been bumped out of B-list to the low end of Solid.
- 4Thor is probably next on the chopping block to drop out of the top tier. She performs well enough on her own, and with a handful of 4* partners, that I'm comfortable leaving her there for now. Her dependence on IM40 for true savagery is a sticking point, though.
- Nova, Jean Grey, Agent Venom and Sandman are staying put for now. Nova's fast and his strike production is second only to Bl4de, which makes him pretty phenomenal and one of the few characters I regularly use unboosted; Jean Grey is indeed awesome but her powers are expensive and she's a bit on the squishy side. Sandman looks pretty bad, and while my initial assessment of his yellow was off (this has been fixed in his description), his green is pretty low-caliber for his star level and his yellow production is unreliable at best. If he proves better than anticipated, the list is always open to revisions.
Agent Venom does pretty good damage boosted, but when he's not, he's extremely underwhelming in virtually every way.
Regarding some common questions:
- Still undecided on whether Medusa is truly meta-defining or just really annoying on defense. She's godmode with Carnage, yes, but without him she's less "oh god why" and more "ugh that's really irritating." She remains ranked very highly either way.
- Rankings are an aggregate of usefulness for both PVE and PVP. If I were just ranking on PVE utility, Starlord would probably be #1, and Quake would be much higher as well - likewise, a PVP-only ranking would look substantially different. Obviously this is quite subjective and everyone has their characters they love no matter what, so the list is never gonna be 100% accurate in everyone's eyes.
Jarvind
4
Re: Keep this Scaling!
ROFL let's slow that hyperbole train down some:sh81 said:Within SCL8, for the last 2 years, Ive gone from a top 5% to top 2% finisher. Thats where Ive placed, everytime.
1. SCLs came out in August 2016 and only went to 7.
2. SCL8 came out in October 2016.
broll
5
Re: Vaulting and its fallout are still significant issues in the game. . .
I mean, I don't think anyone is laboring under the delusion that the old system was good. It's just that the new system only solves part of the problem, and unless you're willing to only level one vaulted character at a time, makes the other part significantly worse.
Jarvind
5
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
I tried to flag this announcement as abuse, it's not allowed
fmftint
5
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
@Brigby When are they shutting down the forums? Nothing we say really matters, so why have them?
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
Thanks for this info brigby, but can you respond to the much more important question of why is this change being made? Slowing down the h4h cycle is a terrible idea. Why is demi trying to create aritifical scarcity at the 4* tier? If it's money, then demi should just say as much. Very few players got bent out of shape when IceIX said, effectively, "we are looking at capping roster slot costs, but it's tricky because they are a revenue source." most of us kinda liked the honesty.Brigby said:@deadtaco
The reason we wanted to provide this news on Friday was not to avoid backlash, but to give players a couple more days to decide if they'd like to take advantage of a current Heroes for Hire opportunity before the update is implemented on Tuesday.
And it was a hell of a lot more enjoyable than the frankly asinine marketing puffery that has been used to sell unfriendly (or at best mixed) changes like vaulting, vintage heroics, higher h4h pricepoint, and now this. . .
Vhailorx
4
Re: Update to Heroes for Hire (6/23/17)
This is a really strange decision. It seems aimed at that narrow segment of players who have a surplus of HP and feel like if they had just one more cover of a particular hero they could beat the crash. So they spend 3600hp and additional ISO so they can improve a 3/2/3 character (for example) enough to beat the crash and get... an LT that will get them one of the current 12 4's, which you can get a ton of without really trying.
And everyone outside of that segment of players, the people for whom one 4* cover will make no difference because they have few or no covers for that hero, or conversely those who have most or all the needed covers, this change is pointless and punitive.
HfH could give out three covers, one in each color. That, at least, would represent enough value that players could make some interesting decisions.
And everyone outside of that segment of players, the people for whom one 4* cover will make no difference because they have few or no covers for that hero, or conversely those who have most or all the needed covers, this change is pointless and punitive.
HfH could give out three covers, one in each color. That, at least, would represent enough value that players could make some interesting decisions.
Re: Vaulting and its fallout are still significant issues in the game. . .
Can we all just agree on a couple of things and just take the fight to the devs instead? Because from what I am reading everyone agrees that:
1. The old system sucked tinykitties
2. The new system is an improvement but needs some tweaks
3. A new token for old 4* would be a great solution.
At least those are the three points I keep seeing in most of these discussions. Everything else seems like an argument on semantics
1. The old system sucked tinykitties
2. The new system is an improvement but needs some tweaks
3. A new token for old 4* would be a great solution.
At least those are the three points I keep seeing in most of these discussions. Everything else seems like an argument on semantics
Skrofa
6