Quick Poll: Do you TANK?

BearVenger

I unintentionally tanked on the GSBW tourney.

When the tourney before it (Torch?) wrapped, I opened the Hollowpoint Kiss tourney, just because I was curious to see the prize. That loaded up the seed teams in my lineup.

I picked the seed team in the top position of the 3-opponent ttiangle, and continued playing whomever showed up in that slot. Once I hit the 300-point prize, my roster and health packs were sufficiently depleted and I was ready to quit. So, I took one of the seed teams in the lower slot and put in the freebie GSBW, Deadpool (to get his daily points), and some other schlub. I won that round and quit for the day.

The next day came, and I only had time for PvE, so I left GSBW alone and chuckled at how much my duct-tape team was getting rolled in the pop-ups. I must have lost ~150 points, despite only being midway through the tourney.

When I finally had time to play on the final day of the tourney, just about everyone I faced was in the unmaxed 2* range, until I got to 700. It was pretty monotonous and not high-value targets, but it was easier than my usual mid-to-max 3* opposition.

GothicKratos

Just for reference, I am right on the threshold of having a 'max' 2* team (Wolverine is fully covered at level 94 and a fully covered level 90 Magneto - as well as having Hawkeye missing 2 covers and at level 62, Widow missing 4 covers and at level 62, and Torch missing 6 covers and at level 41 - my other 2*s aren't even close) and I don't have more than 2 covers in any given 3*, except Hood and Psylocke, whom have 4 and 3, respectively.

All that being said, I tanked for the first time for the Webslinger event, both intentionally and unintentionally. To cover the former first, I missed quite a few event because I was busy (read: the last set of events I participated in netted me those Hood covers), and I noticed a gigantic difference in the opponents I was facing in the nodes straight out of the box. In the event following right after the Hood events (Deadpool, wasn't it?), I was pinned up against fully developed 2* teams pretty quickly (around 300?) and it felt like a unnecessary evil to try and slog through that much of a grind and aggravation, so I just did other things and well slept for a change lol. I did join on the second day, but I noticed that I didn't even start seeing partially developed 2* teams until able 400, but by the time I got to 500 I was A) fighting off attackers and starting to see those fully developed 2* teams that I can't readily dispatch, but I did manage to just barely fishnet 500 points for that Torch cover. I went to bed.

The next morning, I lost quite a bit of points, but I was pretty happy with getting the progression awards, since I didn't expect to actually place anything decent, even though I ended the night in 5 or so place - been there, done that - it means nothing in the reality of the bracket. So I just told myself I'd do whatever retaliations I could manage and play a few quick games to get my fix and be on my way to play something else for a bit, but after doing just that I was really close to 600 and that beloved Hero Point goal. I got to 598 before hitting that lovely 166 wall. So sad. I figured I'd give tanking a go, since my bracket hadn't really blossomed into anything high scoring (and it never did). Went into SS and retreated my team down to minimal health, lost on purpose, rinse and repeat with two or three sets of characters I don't really use (most under-covered 3* and my remaining 1* roster) and gave it my ado for the time being because my my team was down and I was out of health packs.

Came back a few hours later. Lost a metric ton of points, of course. I was somewhere around 300 again. Skipped my current nodes and bam, I have wieney 1* teams again. I did find that by the time I reached 500 again, between seeing a lot of semi-developed 3* teams and getting attacked left and right because the event was ending, I wasn't able to break 500 again, until literally the remaining last 5 minutes.

I learned a fair bit from this experience. At this point, it really feels like, for me, it's pointless to tank without having the expendable income to shield. With proper tanking, I could have easily climbed to 700 and shielded and I would have gotten 2nd without much effort. That being said, I am happy with my 6th place (though evenly sad about missing out on all three covers by 4 event points) and I probably won't be tanking again any time soon, unless there happens to be an attainable progression award I *really* want.

End transmissi---wall'o'text.

Phillipes

GothicKratos wrote:

I learned a fair bit from this experience. At this point, it really feels like, for me, it's pointless to tank without having the expendable income to shield. With proper tanking, I could have easily climbed to 700 and shielded and I would have gotten 2nd without much effort. That being said, I am happy with my 6th place (though evenly sad about missing out on all three covers by 4 event points) and I probably won't be tanking again any time soon, unless there happens to be an attainable progression award I *really* want.

End transmissi---wall'o'text.

Enjoy your sharding while it still lasts.. I have fully developed 2* roster and Im mega happy when I end in 48th - 50th place. 150 HP shield is ofc needed. And also risky 2 games 5 minutes before end to grab last 20 - 30 points.

Tharos

I need an answer "Not yet".
I stopped tanking when season 4 started, because it is soooo boring.
But now, I really think I will tank again: with only two maxed 3*, it's a pain to climb againt a wall of maxed CMag/Daken/LThor/Sentry from the start.
I usually can only make 100/200 point before running out of health pack, and be attacked very often (-70 points in a single day when you have only 200 points should never happen).

So I am really thinkink to tank again, to made my initial climb easier, be less attacked on the initial points, and stop finishing at only 500/600 points.

(yes, there is some things more important to fix in this game that add TU powers and on patrols characters, but the devs does not have the same points of view in their games)

Unknown

I can only play for an extended time in the evening; I can only get a a handful of matches in at other times of day (except on the weekend). As a result, I see tanking as absolutely essential. The combination of teamups, the elimination of healing, as well as the fact I'm running unmaxed 3*s means that if I want to stay competitive I have no choice but to tank. Otherwise, I take too much damage.

That being said, the main reason I tank it to reduce defensive losses. I don't tend to get hit with the random 30+ point losses (or many at all) until I get over 800, most of the time now, and so I make a point of not crossing 800 until I'm making my final push. Not having to deal with the defensive losses means I don't have to keep grinding, which means I don't run out of health packs.

Back when I could prologue heal I didn't tank as much. I also had a lot more fun in PVP.

Cragger

Kelbris wrote:

To a answer this, I used to back when you could in LRs, but then

1. I realized this game is really freaking mediocre and I only enjoy it while also watching Netflix (still feels like a minorly polished beta/decent alpha, and that will never change)

2. I figured out how to get 2* teams almost every PvE as soon as I hit ~400 with minimal effort AND winning 95% of my fights.

So you only sorta enjoy this unpolished game, but you love spending money on it? And you "figured out" how to get the benefits of tanking, but you don't tank? You make no sense man.

tl:dr- feeding trolls.

Phaserhawk

HairyDave wrote:

I don't see a huge benefit from doing it - it makes the first 400-500 points fairly easy by picking on 2* rosters but after that it's like a switch gets flipped and all I see are maxed 3* teams.

this

franckynight

as long as fighting a 3x lvl 166 team for 5 min give me the same reward as fighting a 3x lvl 1 team for 30 sec, i dont see why i will stop tanking.. QED..

Unknown

_RiO_ wrote:

Paintsville wrote:

I know I am in the vast minority, but I see tanking as a snowball. The top guys tank, then the mid guys see only top guys; so the mid guys tank. Now the little guys see only mid guys, so they have to tank. If tanking was ever truly removed, I really believe the problem would fix itself.

^ This.

My best is a 114 Punisher, yet I continue to be matched with walls of 166s that tank their way down for easy pickings in the climb to ~700pts. I can tank just enough to get rid of those 166s, careful to not drop down too far and start bullying even lower level players for too low a points return value. I can score about ~400pts before those 166s return that way, which makes PvP largely a wasted effort. The most valuable part in it is building up the required 5000 season points for the 10 pack. But with scores being artificially capped to ~400pts per event, reaching those 5000 points means playing each and every event in the season and making them all count.

PvP would be so much better with tanking killed off. I don't give a damn that this would cost high tier players their sheltered and cushioned easy climb against low level teams. Lower tiers of players don't get an easy climb either, so why should they?

I laughed and laughed when I read this. Same story ever time. Players with lesser rosters think players that have spent time and effort improving their roster so that their roster is better than others, should be penalized for doing so.

I wish tanking was unnecessary as well, but I also think think teams that come up in your node should be random. Your MMR should determine the point value of targets based on their MMR. So, high mmr against low MMR should be worth less points and against higher MMR worth more points. I also think you should only be able to pull up targets within 100 points of your score.

If retal values were lower, or if your defensive team was based on the team you used most in that particular PvP, this would help roster diversity.

I've also suggested in past that PvP have different paths that you can select which would restrict your usage of *'s to a certain she, and I'm too lazy to retype it link it now.

SnowcaTT

HairyDave wrote:

I don't see a huge benefit from doing it - it makes the first 400-500 points fairly easy by picking on 2* rosters but after that it's like a switch gets flipped and all I see are maxed 3* teams.

I never have intentionally, but I think I did unintentionally once in S4, simply because of time constraints I had. It made it really easy to hit almost 600, then exactly as stated: all max teams as soon as I crossed whatever the win/loss threshold was to get to all 3* maxed-ish teams.

The problem I have is tanking has become almost "must do" for the 3* teams, and I see so many obvious tank teams in my 2* roster climb to 600-700. I know to skip them, or it will be auto-retaliation - so I'm skipping matchups I normally wouldn't. And they are wasting time tanking, which the devs have said is not their intent - but it's become quite prolific (half and half right now on the poll).

It also has made folks push later, which makes it brutal for 2* teams. I can't climb early, because I'll be a team well worth attacking if I hit 500 points 8 hours before end of event. But I can't climb late, because the 2* rosters don't have enough options to have any length in play sessions.

_RiO_

stephen43084 wrote:

_RiO_ wrote:

Paintsville wrote:

I know I am in the vast minority, but I see tanking as a snowball. The top guys tank, then the mid guys see only top guys; so the mid guys tank. Now the little guys see only mid guys, so they have to tank. If tanking was ever truly removed, I really believe the problem would fix itself.

^ This.

My best is a 114 Punisher, yet I continue to be matched with walls of 166s that tank their way down for easy pickings in the climb to ~700pts. I can tank just enough to get rid of those 166s, careful to not drop down too far and start bullying even lower level players for too low a points return value. I can score about ~400pts before those 166s return that way, which makes PvP largely a wasted effort. The most valuable part in it is building up the required 5000 season points for the 10 pack. But with scores being artificially capped to ~400pts per event, reaching those 5000 points means playing each and every event in the season and making them all count.

PvP would be so much better with tanking killed off. I don't give a damn that this would cost high tier players their sheltered and cushioned easy climb against low level teams. Lower tiers of players don't get an easy climb either, so why should they?

I laughed and laughed when I read this. Same story ever time. Players with lesser rosters think players that have spent time and effort improving their roster so that their roster is better than others, should be penalized for doing so.

That's nice. Now re-read what I wrote. I am not saying higher tier players should be penalized compared to lower tier players; I'm saying higher tier players should no longer be favored by being able to abuse tanking to prey on lower tier players. This doesn't only hold true for 3* players compared to 2* players, but for all tiers of players. As a 2* -> 3* transitioning player I should also not be able to prey on lower level 2* players. Just as well as 2* players should not be able to prey on 1* players. etc.

SnowcaTT

_RiO_ wrote:

That's nice. Now re-read what I wrote. I am not saying higher tier players should be penalized compared to lower tier players; I'm saying higher tier players should no longer be favored by being able to abuse tanking to prey on lower tier players. This doesn't only hold true for 3* players compared to 2* players, but for all tiers of players. As a 2* -> 3* transitioning player I should also not be able to prey on lower level 2* players. Just as well as 2* players should not be able to prey on 1* players. etc.

I agree completely.

That's why I don't understand why tanking is needed - pretty much once I hit five or six max 2*'s, I never saw a 1* roster again. So their MMR bucket works to keep me from beating up on the newbs, which the devs have said is their intention - they don't want those folks getting scared off.

Then why is my 2* roster visible for 3*'s to move their way up? If they can fix the MMR bucket so 2*'s don't see 1*'s, they have to be able to use similar metrics to make the 3*'s not see the 2*'s.

The problem of course is "what is 3*?": where should the 115/122/94 player go? I don't know how the MMR works, maybe it should look at the average level of the top six characters and place those folks in the same bucket. [Sorry, this is probably going against the OP of "don't talk about it".]

Unknown

_RiO_ wrote:

stephen43084 wrote:

_RiO_ wrote:

Paintsville wrote:

I know I am in the vast minority, but I see tanking as a snowball. The top guys tank, then the mid guys see only top guys; so the mid guys tank. Now the little guys see only mid guys, so they have to tank. If tanking was ever truly removed, I really believe the problem would fix itself.

^ This.

My best is a 114 Punisher, yet I continue to be matched with walls of 166s that tank their way down for easy pickings in the climb to ~700pts. I can tank just enough to get rid of those 166s, careful to not drop down too far and start bullying even lower level players for too low a points return value. I can score about ~400pts before those 166s return that way, which makes PvP largely a wasted effort. The most valuable part in it is building up the required 5000 season points for the 10 pack. But with scores being artificially capped to ~400pts per event, reaching those 5000 points means playing each and every event in the season and making them all count.

PvP would be so much better with tanking killed off. I don't give a damn that this would cost high tier players their sheltered and cushioned easy climb against low level teams. Lower tiers of players don't get an easy climb either, so why should they?

I laughed and laughed when I read this. Same story ever time. Players with lesser rosters think players that have spent time and effort improving their roster so that their roster is better than others, should be penalized for doing so.

That's nice. Now re-read what I wrote. I am not saying higher tier players should be penalized compared to lower tier players; I'm saying higher tier players should no longer be favored by being able to abuse tanking to prey on lower tier players. This doesn't only hold true for 3* players compared to 2* players, but for all tiers of players. As a 2* -> 3* transitioning player I should also not be able to prey on lower level 2* players. Just as well as 2* players should not be able to prey on 1* players. etc.

The problem here is that you seem be tunnel visioned and unable to see the big picture, which is why you are mistakenly thinking I missed your point.

I will be genuinely nice and walk you through this, so you can understand how I came to my conclusion.

1. Your first premise is that with tanking higher level rosters are preying on lower level rosters.

2. Your second premise is that to correct this higher level rosters should not be able to attack lower level rosters.

3. Your conclusion is that this does not penalize higher level rosters.

(I'm hoping we are on the same page so far.)

1. My first premise is that higher level rosters have typically spent more time and effort than lower level rosters playing the game.

2. My second premise is that players develop roster depth and levels to improve their rosters and have competitive or better rosters than other players. In other words, I want to get a 3* maxed character so that I am better than the players at my current level and I can better compete with players above my level.

3. My third premise is that if we took your action of preventing higher level rosters from attacking lower level rosters; then, the result is there is no benefit to playing hard or developing a roster. I work hard to get that 3* maxed, but now I don't get to play the players that I just outworked to get an advantage. I play other rosters like mine or better. I did all that work; I get no benefit, no advantage.

4. My conclusion is that higher level rosters are penalized by the fact they would not gain any benefits from developing their rosters. In other words, there is no motivation to develop a roster.

5. Conversely, lower rosters are actually rewarded. Player A has been playing longer than Player B and put more effort than Player B, but don't worry Player B won't have to play Player A.

* Moreover, this was not the only point I made if you had read my entire post. I actually gave alternatives to help alleviate the situation. Ironically, they're all to help lower level rosters (without penalizing higher level rosters).

1) Ironically, the first provided an incentive for higher level rosters to not attack lower level rosters by making the higher level rosters worth more points.

2) I also gave a alterntaive that would help smaller rosters lacking depth by suggesting a defensive team be based on the team composition used to get most of their wins. This means if a 2*'s Ares/OBW, A Wolvie/Daken teams are all down and they have to use MMN/C Storm, while it might show as the defensive team for retaliations, their defensive teams would still be Ares/OBW if that was the teams that had the most wins for that particular PVP event.

3) I have also suggested in the past, a PVP structure that the only way a higher level roster could attack a 1* roster was with 1* characters up to a certain number of points, then the 1* star roster could be attacked with 1* or 2* characters only up to another point level, etc.

Unknown

I don't tank either, my only strategy is skipping all matches I can that are my own score or lower and go only for matches worth around 30. I still get beat on pretty good buy]t at least I don't have people I beat all the time re-attacking me because its not worth the points they would gain.

Unknown

I used to when i was more serious about the game, but these days I can't be bothered.

Phillipes

stephen43084 is abolutely right. + 1 man.

When I was in 1* land, I fought only 1* teams. When I played PVP and reach 2* teams, I knew that there was my treshold.
I wanted do beat 2* teams, so I developed mine 2*. Now, ofc, I see 2* teams, and after reaching 500 points in PVP I see 3*, but I dont see 1* anymore.
But that is wrong.
Im penalized for having complete 2* roster. Why shouldnt I be rewarded with possibility to beat 1* teams? Why did I developed my roster?
It is the same with developed 3*. Veteran players compete only each other, there have in same brackets, have same sharding. T
hey are maybe 1% of all players, but they know eachother so well - because thats how the game and MMR works right now.
I think the& should have the opportunity to crush 1* and 2* teams. They played for months, they should have the advantage - they should gain some award for it!
When I will get complete 3* roster I WANT to have the advantage!
In the past (1* team, or early 2*) I thought I will never tank. HAHA! It is absolutely neccesary to tank !

RIght now, it is best to have just 1* roster and when MMR climbs high, then tank a little.
Is this bad?
Of course IT IS !
But that is how the game works now (working as intended).
Tanking can be removed, but devs have to change how MMR works.