What does it take to get a complete roster now ?

NorthernPolarity

arktos1971 wrote:

That's right, I'm a completionist collector (just imagine my MTG collection for a minute).

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20. And let's start from there.

X-Force,
Nick Fury,
Sentry,
Hood,
Daken,
Cmag,
Colossus,
Falcon,
Human Torch,
Deadpool,
Black Panther,
Blade,
Lcap,
LThor,
Captain Marvel,
Patch,
Ares,
OBW,
Daken 2*,
Storm 2*,
Juggernaut,
Venom

Have I missed something on the list ?

How is this necessary at all to be in the top 20?
For PvP, here are the only 4 characters that matter as you can easily top 20 with the loaner featured character having either:
Sentry + Hood
X-Force + C. Mags

Literally the only reason why you would use any other character on your list is for variety. If you're talking bare bones, "what do I need to have a competitive roster". all you need is Sentry + Hood or XF + C.Mags. 1* / 2*s are irrelevant because you can easily build those up without spending money.

I think there is this big disconnect for you between what is actually needed and what would be nice. The thing about this game is that 75% of the rewards are from PvP, therefore all you need for a new player to instantly be competitive and start becoming self sustaining is a 2 person team that is a top tier PvP team. Since most PvPs don't restrict your character usage, Sentry + Hood or XF + Cmags will literally work in like 90% of the PvPs out there. If you want to have variety, do well in PvE, etc, then sure, I guess having the top 15 maxed 3*s would be very helpful, but it's not necessary at all.

cg2912

NorthernPolarity wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

That's right, I'm a completionist collector (just imagine my MTG collection for a minute).

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20. And let's start from there.

X-Force,
Nick Fury,
Sentry,
Hood,
Daken,
Cmag,
Colossus,
Falcon,
Human Torch,
Deadpool,
Black Panther,
Blade,
Lcap,
LThor,
Captain Marvel,
Patch,
Ares,
OBW,
Daken 2*,
Storm 2*,
Juggernaut,
Venom

Have I missed something on the list ?

How is this necessary at all to be in the top 20?
For PvP, here are the only 4 characters that matter as you can easily top 20 with the loaner featured character having either:
Sentry + Hood
X-Force + C. Mags

Literally the only reason why you would use any other character on your list is for variety. If you're talking bare bones, "what do I need to have a competitive roster". all you need is Sentry + Hood or XF + C.Mags. 1* / 2*s are irrelevant because you can easily build those up without spending money.

I think there is this big disconnect for you between what is actually needed and what would be nice. The thing about this game is that 75% of the rewards are from PvP, therefore all you need for a new player to instantly be competitive and start becoming self sustaining is a 2 person team that is a top tier PvP team. Since most PvPs don't restrict your character usage, Sentry + Hood or XF + Cmags will literally work in like 90% of the PvPs out there. If you want to have variety, do well in PvE, etc, then sure, I guess having the top 15 maxed 3*s would be very helpful, but it's not necessary at all.

But his premise is based on doing well in all formats. He didn't just say PVP.

HailMary

arktos1971 wrote:

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20...

There's a big difference between "needed" and "useful." For PVP, only Sentry or XF is borderline-qualifying-as-almost-needed for consistent T20. Those two aren't even necessary: I've literally never seen Thorzhamer hop with Sentry or XF (he usually includes LT/BP on his teams), and JoseMartins has lately been hopping at monster points with Colossus + GSBW.

But, let's generously assume Sentry is "necessary" for consistent PVP T20. That takes care of all PVP (including BoP & CA) and SHIELD Sim. On to PVE...

From your list, Fury and Venom immediately stand out as the opposite of "necessary." Fury was, in one lonesome PVE, one of several Essential characters. I don't recall Venom ever being required. Of the useful PVE characters, none need to be level-maxed. Rogers & Falcon are extremely useful in PVE, and I place very well in PVE with them covermaxed, but only leveled to L100. I also don't recall Ares, Juggs, or CStorm ever being Essential characters, but it's possible they were.

Further, since you're declaring "always T20 in everything" as a condition, then you hardly even need to buy or separately acquire covers for most of the Essential characters, since their covers are given out as placement rewards in previous PVEs (the same PVEs you presumably always get T20 in).

P.S. - You wrote down no time calculations. You just listed characters.

mohio

I think d3 really needs to at least marginally balance 3* characters to alleviate these issues. As an added bonus then you help out those transitioning guys too, cause then all you need are the first two 3* you can max out (as long as they don't overlap in colors too much) and they should be able to take on any other team in pvp. Then arktos' list just gets thrown out and people can get their first two and then only spend their time on the guys they really want the most.

cg2912

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20...

There's a big difference between "needed" and "useful." For PVP, only Sentry or XF is borderline-qualifying-as-almost-needed for consistent T20. Those two aren't even necessary: I've literally never seen Thorzhamer hop with Sentry or XF (he usually includes LT/BP on his teams), and JoseMartins has lately been hopping at monster points with Colossus + GSBW.

But, let's generously assume Sentry is "necessary" for consistent PVP T20. That takes care of all PVP (including BoP & CA) and SHIELD Sim. On to PVE...

From your list, Fury and Venom immediately stand out as the opposite of "necessary." Fury was, in one lonesome PVE, one of several Essential characters. I don't recall Venom ever being required. Of the useful PVE characters, none need to be level-maxed. Rogers & Falcon are extremely useful in PVE, and I place very well in PVE with them covermaxed, but only leveled to L100. I also don't recall Ares, Juggs, or CStorm ever being Essential characters, but it's possible they were.


Further, since you're declaring "always T20 in everything" as a condition, then you hardly even need to buy or separately acquire covers for most of the Essential characters, since their covers are given out as placement rewards in previous PVEs (the same PVEs you presumably always get T20 in).

P.S. - You wrote down no time calculations. You just listed characters.

I'm probably wrong on this, but I am assuming he is talking about the time it takes from starting out to top 20. How do you get a max Sentry right out of the gate? I still don't have one. I think that is why he is including all those other characters, b/c you need them to get the others. What about heroics where only a few guys are avail? BoP/CA/Shield all require 3 since there's no featured. My thought is most of those are necessary/useful in order to get to Sentry/xforce, etc. But I'll stop talking for Arktos now since my assumptions could be way off.

NorthernPolarity

cg2912 wrote:

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20...

There's a big difference between "needed" and "useful." For PVP, only Sentry or XF is borderline-qualifying-as-almost-needed for consistent T20. Those two aren't even necessary: I've literally never seen Thorzhamer hop with Sentry or XF (he usually includes LT/BP on his teams), and JoseMartins has lately been hopping at monster points with Colossus + GSBW.

But, let's generously assume Sentry is "necessary" for consistent PVP T20. That takes care of all PVP (including BoP & CA) and SHIELD Sim. On to PVE...

From your list, Fury and Venom immediately stand out as the opposite of "necessary." Fury was, in one lonesome PVE, one of several Essential characters. I don't recall Venom ever being required. Of the useful PVE characters, none need to be level-maxed. Rogers & Falcon are extremely useful in PVE, and I place very well in PVE with them covermaxed, but only leveled to L100. I also don't recall Ares, Juggs, or CStorm ever being Essential characters, but it's possible they were.


Further, since you're declaring "always T20 in everything" as a condition, then you hardly even need to buy or separately acquire covers for most of the Essential characters, since their covers are given out as placement rewards in previous PVEs (the same PVEs you presumably always get T20 in).

P.S. - You wrote down no time calculations. You just listed characters.

I'm probably wrong on this, but I am assuming he is talking about the time it takes from starting out to top 20. How do you get a max Sentry right out of the gate? I still don't have one. I think that is why he is including all those other characters, b/c you need them to get the others. What about heroics where only a few guys are avail? BoP/CA/Shield all require 3 since there's no featured. My thought is most of those are necessary/useful in order to get to Sentry/xforce, etc. But I'll stop talking for Arktos now since my assumptions could be way off.

Yeah, I'm not sure I quite follow. For one thing, why do you need 10 other maxed 3*s in order to get a max Sentry? If we're talking about buying Sentry covers, all you need is to get 1 of each Sentry cover, and you can do that randomly through PvE or PvP over the course of however long it takes for them to release 2 cycles of Sentry covers. Even being generous and saying that you need 2 other maxed 3*s to get Sentry, thats still far less than any of the previous estimates.

Unknown

Hello all, I apologize in advance for the novel. I’m a fairly new player and am currently 56 days in. I have been reading some of the threads on the 2-3* transition and even though I’ve never posted on these boards (and don’t plan to regularly) I’ve read lots and lots. I’m an avid long-time gamer and have played CCGs at a national competitive level since 1995.

I’ve currently put about $150 into the game (and would gladly spend some more if I thought it would really help me in any kind of cost efficient way) and have a really good start at a 3* roster. I have: 6 level 94 2* character; 40 total roster slots; 50k Iso in the bank; 5600hp still in the bank; a LCap with 11/13 covers; X-Factor 2 covered; Invisible Woman 3 covered; DD 3 covered; Psylocke/Punisher/BP with 6 covers; and a whole lot of 3*s with 1-2 covers each. I’m reasonably happy with my progress so far.

I had to weigh in on this whole transition thing though as suddenly, even after only a month and a half into the game, I’m feeling the strain now starting with the PVE Event before last. Now I’m not saying I’m going to quit playing, especially since I just found an active alliance I like, but I do find myself playing a lot less suddenly. Not cause I don’t want to, but because of the following:

In the PVE even where GSBW was the prize, I played constantly. I did the math and realized that the optimal strategy is to play a mission down once and let the timer refill unless I couldn’t play again in 2.5 hours. This nets you 74 points per hundred the mission is worth per 11 hours of play. I played it all constantly, stopping only to sleep basically and still barely made the top 50. And trust me, I have all the time in the world to play.
The lightning rounds were worth it when I first played, and still kinda are a little for the ISO and the extremely outside shot of a 2* from the Silver Token. Now I really only need the Gold Tokens. However after I tried in, many, many founds to place top 100 playing from the second the round starts, I realized it’s not really possible for me at this stage without shielding which isn’t cost effective really. I can break into the top 100 but frequently I do so just to get hit with 3-8 retaliations with 15 minutes left leaving me no chance to make those points back up and pushing me out of the top 100. In some cases, it’s clear that even shielding wouldn’t help.
The monthly PVP event isn’t worth squat. The only reason I even play it is to help get to the 10 pack from the seasonal rewards.
The Gauntlet is a great way to do PVE but it doesn’t really encourage me to play past the first 2 days in which it took me to clear it the first time. The replay value of the missions is really low and I really only went back over the first leg to ge the Silver Tokens because of the REALLY outside shot of pulling a 3*. As opposed to the last few PVE events where I played every 2.5 hours constantly. So nothing really to do there.
The last PVP event really highlighted to me how impossible it is for me to be competitive in a PVP event now for a reasonable price that gets me the top 100 finish I need for it to be worth my time. I played up to 604 points and 3 hour shielded with 2.5 hours left in the event and didn’t make the top 100 whereas 500 points was getting me a top 75+ finish just two weeks ago. I don’t mind 3-hour shielding because with a good alliance finish, that shield only cost me 25hp and got me a 3*. The problem is I’m now in brackets with 166s and I hit of wall of 166s at 500-550 points so I’m really at my point earning potential cap with my current roster. And I have no interest in shield-hopping, not putting that kind of time and money into this game. That’s really next level crazy to me.
The current PVP event ends at 10am my time and that means if I want to have a shot at 3* cover for a reasonably priced 75hp shield, I have to get up around 7am and play for about an hour and then shield. Sounds horrible to me. Don’t wanna do it. Now maybe I’ll try staying up til 2am and buying an 8hour shield but the economics of doing that regularly means I’d be out of hp reserves in roughly 18 events (if I only spent hp on that) from now on or about 7 weeks or so and I don’t really plan to put more money into this game at this point in my life.

So that’s really it. So to recap, nothing is really worth playing until maybe the next PVE event for a day or two. So when I think about the future of my 2-3* transition I think about it like this:

I’ll get a 10 pack once a month for the seasonal reward if I’m willing to play the PVP events and shield at least twice with possibly sub-top 100 scores in those events.
I’ll buy the daily 100hp pack even though there’s only a 16% chance of getting a 3* or better. I would buy the other packs daily if they were priced at 133hp since that matches the expected return increase to about 21% chance of a 3* or better but won’t since they’re 200hp.
I currently don’t know if I’ll ever be able to place in the top 100 again in a PVP event in the near future but even trying will cost me at least 25hp per attempt net to shield if I do and will cost me at least 50hp if not 75hp every three days if I fail. And that’s IF I can make it to the game in the three hour window before the event ends.
I’ll probably want to buy two more roster slots but that’s just holding myself back cause I’d really like to collect everything.
I’ll play in about 4 PVE Events and hope that I average 1.5 covers for the whole time since the most I’ll win is 2 covers and I don’t anticipate getting less than 1. I got both covers in this Gauntlet event.

That means in the next 30 days, I’ll:

Spend a total of 1000hp on slots + 3000hp on packs + 500hp on shields = 4500hp leaving me 1100hp for the future and will last me about another week after that
Get a total of 30 bought packs + 10 seasonal packs + 10 PVP score 300 packs = 50 packs netting me approximately 8 3* covers
Hopefully win a 3* cover in half the PVP events netting me another 5 3* covers
Win approximately 6 3* covers PVE events

That means if I’m good and lucky and win my average amount (which seems unrealistic right now) I’ll net a total of 19 3* covers. Now since I have 27 3* and 4*s that need covers and at least one more coming out (even ignoring those that are going out of rotation in the packs) and I’m looking at an average of less than 1 cover per character that needs it per month. And to maintain that average, I have to spend about 3500hp ($20 at the anniversary hp price or if you buy 8500hp at a time regular price) per month to maintain that pace.

If I wanted to fill out my current roster completely then and I know there will be a few new characters and more that I don’t currently have that I’d like to cover, it would take approximately 1 year since I currently need 236 3* covers (not counting the 44 4* covers I need even before Thoress comes out, 57 with her).

TL;DR - You’ll need to spend about $240 over the next year after investing about $150 and play constantly if you want to have a fully covered 3* roster of all the characters. And that’s if you play well and don’t get screwed by brackets completely. You also have to never pull a duplicate 3* and hope you earn enough ISO during that period.

Yeah, I don’t really think I see the light at the end of the tunnel and really don’t see myself spending $20 a month on this game. So maybe I’ll give up now and save myself the trouble. LOL

I’d be doing a lot better if the brackets weren’t suddenly screwing me (which I was doing at first) but now it just seems hopeless even with this optimistic assessment. I think it was a lot easier for people before but now it seems not really worth it.

Just thought I’d throw that out there.

homeinvasion

did you include the cost of roster slots?

cg2912

NorthernPolarity wrote:

cg2912 wrote:

HailMary wrote:

arktos1971 wrote:

So, let's make another calculation, this time not based on money, but on time required to complete the "necessary roster" to play correctly.

Here is the list of characters I think could be needed/useful (in all formats : PvE, PvP and SIM), and say you want to be in the Top 20...

There's a big difference between "needed" and "useful." For PVP, only Sentry or XF is borderline-qualifying-as-almost-needed for consistent T20. Those two aren't even necessary: I've literally never seen Thorzhamer hop with Sentry or XF (he usually includes LT/BP on his teams), and JoseMartins has lately been hopping at monster points with Colossus + GSBW.

But, let's generously assume Sentry is "necessary" for consistent PVP T20. That takes care of all PVP (including BoP & CA) and SHIELD Sim. On to PVE...

From your list, Fury and Venom immediately stand out as the opposite of "necessary." Fury was, in one lonesome PVE, one of several Essential characters. I don't recall Venom ever being required. Of the useful PVE characters, none need to be level-maxed. Rogers & Falcon are extremely useful in PVE, and I place very well in PVE with them covermaxed, but only leveled to L100. I also don't recall Ares, Juggs, or CStorm ever being Essential characters, but it's possible they were.


Further, since you're declaring "always T20 in everything" as a condition, then you hardly even need to buy or separately acquire covers for most of the Essential characters, since their covers are given out as placement rewards in previous PVEs (the same PVEs you presumably always get T20 in).

P.S. - You wrote down no time calculations. You just listed characters.

I'm probably wrong on this, but I am assuming he is talking about the time it takes from starting out to top 20. How do you get a max Sentry right out of the gate? I still don't have one. I think that is why he is including all those other characters, b/c you need them to get the others. What about heroics where only a few guys are avail? BoP/CA/Shield all require 3 since there's no featured. My thought is most of those are necessary/useful in order to get to Sentry/xforce, etc. But I'll stop talking for Arktos now since my assumptions could be way off.

Yeah, I'm not sure I quite follow. For one thing, why do you need 10 other maxed 3*s in order to get a max Sentry? If we're talking about buying Sentry covers, all you need is to get 1 of each Sentry cover, and you can do that randomly through PvE or PvP over the course of however long it takes for them to release 2 cycles of Sentry covers. Even being generous and saying that you need 2 other maxed 3*s to get Sentry, thats still far less than any of the previous estimates.

I agree w/you if we are talking about buying covers, but I thought he shifted the discussion from buying covers to the time it took to get the roster to compete for t20 across all events. Idk...

Unknown

I have a huge post pending, granted it was my first post but I can tell you what I'm starring down right now and it looks bleak.

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

benben77 wrote:

A bracket is a must for different level player. You can identify them with different rewards ( veteran player get more)

There is a "different" bracket. Some form of sharding where newer players are "protected".

But just in this thread alone, you are players asking not to have no "sharding" at all. You can't please all the groups of players.

Every good and long last game is easy to join , easy to get strong but difficult to get championship.

Current enviorment is every level of rewards restricted to that level of players. If you want candy you need to have candy first!....how to progress?

My last game is PC diablo3 . Tons of complaints but compare to this game. Blizzard do much better

over_clocked

benben77 wrote:

My last game is PC diablo3 . Tons of complaints but compare to this game. Blizzard do much better

Did you just compare Blizzard to Demiurge

Unknown

BTW, my post and cost assumes that every single cover I pull is the correct one. No duplicates. This is literally the most expensive free-mium ever created.

Unknown

locked wrote:

benben77 wrote:

My last game is PC diablo3 . Tons of complaints but compare to this game. Blizzard do much better

Did you just compare Blizzard to Demiurge

He may have but honestly, I compare almost all freemium games to two benchmarks costs when making a decision on how much to play it. I compare them to the cost of a typical CCG and to WoW.

Basically, if a freemium costs more than the subscription price of WoW per month, I find that most people really won't play the game in a manner that gives you interesting progress. Keep in mind that almost every other MMOs can't even make it that well with a F2P model.

In addition, CCGs all but died out because of how expensive they were to play competitively. The price of games like WoW and the realization that CCGs were too expensive compounded by the desire for people not to have to go to their local card shop every week is why competitive M:TG is honestly all but dead compared to its former glory.

My analysis says that this game basically has an upkeep cost of ~$20 per month with a minimum initial investment of at least $30 for it to really be playable in a way that will make the majority of people happy with real progress. Even though there will be a few people who will be happy with totally free play (which isn't what D3P/Demiurge wants) and who will gamble immensely with the horrible pack drop rates in this game for way too expensive mass pack deals (what D3P/Demiurge wants most), most people who will play a game like this will be reasonable or are cost restricted.

So net net, if you have a game that costs more than the subscription cost of WoW per month, you probably will get a lot of people leaving for alternatives. If you have a game that has a cost in line with a CCG with no possible financial gain (the alternative for people here is Hearthstone these days), you will have an increasingly dwindling player base over time with each passing expansion raising the bar for entry.

I mean, look at Heroes of Dragon Age, another game I recently started playing. They really just started giving away a ton of common and rare drops with events and created a pack that guarantees legendary/epic drops probably because their player base is dying out. They wanted to try to bring in new players at any cost and damn the torpedoes.

The makers of this game are probably facing a very similar life-cycle issue and instead decided to RAISE the bar for entry for new players three times over by introducing too many new characters too fast, rotating characters out of packs AND changing the tournament bracketing which punishes 2* > 3* transitioning players forcing them to shield more often. Add that to an already completely unsustainable business model for earning a top competitive spot for the most loyal customers, namely shield hopping, and I'm sure this game is facing a significant loss in players within the next year if they don't change their ways drastically in the next few months.

Unknown

The only thing keeping me here is the Marvel name. If they lost the license and kept the game running by changing the name of the game and the characters to John the Wizard and Bob the Knight, I would be gone. The company has not earned my loyalty. So I agree that changes need to be made for the well being of the game, because sooner or later even the Marvel name wont be enough to keep me around. I say this not because of some feeling of self-importance, but because I believe that many players feel the same way.

Unknown

Paintsville wrote:

The only thing keeping me here is the Marvel name. If they lost the license and kept the game running by changing the name of the game and the characters to John the Wizard and Bob the Knight, I would be gone. The company has not earned my loyalty. So I agree that changes need to be made for the well being of the game, because sooner or later even the Marvel name wont be enough to keep me around. I say this not because of some feeling of self-importance, but because I believe that many players feel the same way.

And actually, with Marvel Contest of Champions about to come out in December, many Marvel fans who would be potential new players will choose that as an alternative while others will leave who are Marvel fans.

noobprime

noone_, a particularly well written post, well worth the read. that being said, get out while you can. if you go much further, you'll start progressing just a little bit faster, giving yourself the illusion of progress, but really you'll be going backwards with the release of new characters. there is no end game.

Unknown

noobprime wrote:

noone_, a particularly well written post, well worth the read. that being said, get out while you can. if you go much further, you'll start progressing just a little bit faster, giving yourself the illusion of progress, but really you'll be going backwards with the release of new characters. there is no end game.

LOL trust me I'm almost already there. I'm really looking forward to Marvel Contest of Champions and am hopeful I like it enough to replace this game.

Unknown

This reminds me of an old joke.

Hey D3, can I pay you $12,000 for a fully completed roster?

D3: Sure

Can I pay you $10 for a fully completed roster?

D3: What kind of company do you think we are?

We've already established that. Now we are just haggling over the price.