An Analysis of Powered-Up Characters in Versus

Chirus

At this point, I almost want them to nerf everyone's abilities to do the same thing: create a strength 10 protect tile. If I understood the devs post, they are more likely to nerf someone than buff someone since a nerf affects the board more universally. A buff is basically a nice thing to have, but only affects that character (from their mouths, not mine). They'd much rather keep nerfing and introducing new characters than to revisit old ones. The only time I've seen an absolute buff to a toon was x force, and that was driven by a motive to make 4 stars more attractive. Beyond that the remaining "buffs" were tacking on a 3rd ability to 2 ability toons. I think it's fair to say the only revisions of old characters we can reasonably expect in the future will be nerfs. The rest will be buried in the wake of new releases. In other words, the sucky guys will continue to suck.

Colognoisseur

Trisul wrote:

simonsez wrote:

Colognoisseur wrote:

if buffed 3* Thor gets used over buffed 4*Fury by players who have both that will be an indication that the balance is off and the devs will be able to see this.

My concern is what conclusion do they draw? That LT needs a nerf, or Fury needs a buff? I'm afraid I won't like their answer.

Depends which one is the bigger outlier (obviously LT).

I remain hopeful despite what we have seen from the devs that it allows for gentler nerfs. If they compare the stats of buffed3* Thor and buffed 4* Fury and can find a slight buff for Fury and a slight nerf to Thorto bring them into line so that characters roughly adhere to the chart that is in the OP.
What we've seen with nerfs until now is the thought that too much is better than too little. If they get enough data they might be able to finally get it just right.

Trisul

Chirus wrote:

At this point, I almost want them to nerf everyone's abilities to do the same thing: create a strength 10 protect tile. If I understood the devs post, they are more likely to nerf someone than buff someone since a nerf affects the board more universally. A buff is basically a nice thing to have, but only affects that character (from their mouths, not mine). They'd much rather keep nerfing and introducing new characters than to revisit old ones. The only time I've seen an absolute buff to a toon was x force, and that was driven by a motive to make 4 stars more attractive. Beyond that the remaining "buffs" were tacking on a 3rd ability to 2 ability toons. I think it's fair to say the only revisions of old characters we can reasonably expect in the future will be nerfs. The rest will be buried in the wake of new releases. In other words, the sucky guys will continue to suck.

You kinda understand that they mean, right?

Lots of competitive games have an established meta. MtG commonly has a popular meta deck, and then decks that counter the popular deck, and decks that counter the counter, etc. If you nerf the meta deck, the whole upper tier gets shifted and changed. If you buff a deck no one uses to a somewhat playable state, it changes basically nothing.

Since buffing old characters to a non-overpowered state will change very little, I can understand why it's a low priority for them. Heck, even high priority stuff takes a while to do for Demiurge; look how long it took for 4hor/Sentry/CMags to get nerfed.

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Unknown

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Daredevil cyclops is actually a lot of fun, add loki for best results. really want to finish covering Scott for just that reason.

Colognoisseur

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Daredevil cyclops is actually a lot of fun, add loki for best results. really want to finish covering Scott for just that reason.

I'll give them credit for two good buffs; x-force and daredevil and two successful addition of third powers; Loki and Doom

They don't always get it wrong.

GuntherBlobel

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Daredevil cyclops is actually a lot of fun, add loki for best results. really want to finish covering Scott for just that reason.

I just bought my first 3* cover in forever (for Cyclops) just hearing about the direction that PvP may be taking. Until this recent test, I didn't realize that the dominance of 4* characters, combined with my lack of covers for them, completely inhibited me from spending HP on... anything really. Unless I had 25,000 HP to buy 10 4* Prof X covers, what would be the point of spending HP? At least with the Powered-Up PvP format, I can spend a reasonable amount of HP to finish a buffed character that I really enjoy playing.

4*s characters are too expensive and too rare to get my money (power is irrelevant). I bet I'm not alone.

Unknown

GuntherBlobel wrote:

Cryptobrancus wrote:

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Daredevil cyclops is actually a lot of fun, add loki for best results. really want to finish covering Scott for just that reason.

I just bought my first 3* cover in forever (for Cyclops) just hearing about the direction that PvP may be taking. Until this recent test, I didn't realize that the dominance of 4* characters, combined with my lack of covers for them, completely inhibited me from spending HP on... anything really. Unless I had 25,000 HP to buy 10 4* Prof X covers, what would be the point of spending HP? At least with the Powered-Up PvP format, I can spend a reasonable amount of HP to finish a buffed character that I really enjoy playing.

4*s characters are too expensive and too rare to get my money (power is irrelevant). I bet I'm not alone.

I am in that boat also. Would I be comfortable throwing 5-10 bucks at the game from time to time? Yes, but then I ask what I am getting for that amount and the game seems to say, "$5 you can't get anything of value for $5, how abouts you give me a 20 instead?, or we can get you something real nice for 100" And so I keep my 5 dollars and don't waste it on a trivial upgrade. If things had a better value/cost ratio I would cave in more often and they would get more out of me, as it is now, I have too many characters who would all be fun to play, but I have enough projects to be working on already to feel the need to jumpstart yet another iso sink. And no, not gonna buy iso at its pricepoint either...

Trisul

Cryptobrancus wrote:

I am in that boat also. Would I be comfortable throwing 5-10 bucks at the game from time to time? Yes, but then I ask what I am getting for that amount and the game seems to say, "$5 you can't get anything of value for $5, how abouts you give me a 20 instead?, or we can get you something real nice for 100" And so I keep my 5 dollars and don't waste it on a trivial upgrade. If things had a better value/cost ratio I would cave in more often and they would get more out of me, as it is now, I have too many characters who would all be fun to play, but I have enough projects to be working on already to feel the need to jumpstart yet another iso sink. And no, not gonna buy iso at its pricepoint either...

Yeah iso's especially bad. I said this before, but if they increased iso yields to 10x the current amount, I'd probably drop $100 on it.

Unknown

So like with everything there is a bell curve to the power levels of 3*s, from Doc Ock/Beast on the totally useless end, with a clump in the middle of "decently balanced characers" like Human Torch, to Thor and Patch on the OP end. A comment Miles made in the changes video thread made me think they are balancing to land on the middle, which places characters under the threshold of awesome. I can understand the theory that "everyone should be near this middle ground, and this middle ground is comprised of good characters" but that's just sadly not true. Since it's a game of 3 man teams, all we need are the 3 strongest on the OP end of the curve.

All a typical player wants or needs to care about is the top 10 characters in the game. Everyone else is wasted space for essentials only typically. When you buff someone from the middle of the pack they can clear the threshold of awesome for that event, again as an example Human Torch. He's pretty good if he's level 280. If someone is so far an outlier as to make them the ONLY choice viable (Spiderman, Magneto) that is a good sign they need changes. I don't think 4Thor was there, or that 3Thor is there. They are very very good, but not the only viable choice. No broken combo, no infinite turn generation, no cheap stun locking. I feel if they had done the Vs boost change before the 4* Thor change they might have reconsidered it entirely, or at least reigned it in a little.

Now here's the tricky part as well. Shifting the bell curve won't fix any of the perceived problems. Someone will always be the power outlier. It may as well be and since those are popular characters/brands. Having a majority of the characters inside the well balanced band who then become awesome on buff is good, but you can't stop the outliers from existing you can only move where that "balanced" band exists.

Unknown

If anybody other than NP wrote this, I could get behind it. NP is clearly gaming for an Elektra buff. Also, S.H.I.E.L.D guys love them some Fury and 2* Cap teams. Silly bastards.

Unknown

Great post, really well thought out.

I also like that on top of my normal PVP team I can use the featured 3 stars to help win some fights while everyone is healing, as well as I just generally enjoy mixing up my teams and this gives me an excuse to do it.

Unknown

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.)

Don't forget Dr. Doom too. He's pretty fun to play as well, at least for me. Get 10 , wait for 6-8 , do 9,000 damage to kill someone.

Raffoon

Trisul wrote:

(All this being said, no one gives them credit for the Daredevil buff. He's actually pretty fun to use now.).

If he had another 5-10k hp I'd use him over 4thor.

Unknown

Agree with Northern polarity on most of the points made here. I love the idea this change is trying to incorporate into the game. They really try to smooth out the experience from beginning with 1* characters onward.

If you look at the game design, our option and strategy opens up more and more as you transitioned from 1* to 2* to 3*. With the addition of 4* power since X-force was buffed and the introduction of 4Thor however, our options become much more narrower as a result (one option?). And suddenly we ended up playing with less content in the game as a result after the taxing 3*-4* transition.

As you can see from the match damage of 4* characters which are comparable to 3* characters (and have been since the game's release), it is very clear that the developer intended for 4* to be played in the same pool as 3* characters. This change accomplish this with minimal effort on rebalancing the characters.

So my opinion on this Powered-Up change in PVP is generally positive since I get to experience bigger chunk of my roster again and I'm also seeing some unusual team composition. I still think there's a lot of balancing work to be done but I believe we are heading in the right direction.

See you all in PVP

Square

NP, there have been a lot of threads on the topic, in support and against it, but I think this one will be the one that sticks longest, since it has some actual content.

Could you add a poll to the original post about people's opinions? Somewhere, devs will want to see what people think in an easy to digest way, and this seems like the thread to do it.

Unknown

It's a band-aid fix for PvP and to prolong the lifespan of the game.

I'm not complaining and this is the first freemium game where I've dropped close to 100 $ already, but unless "PvP" is drastically revamped the current business model can't last much longer. There's only so many unique characters you can introduce until repetition sets in (look at the coming character and then compare it to GSBW). It makes sense for them to increase the importance of a wider range of characters instead of reducing it to only 2 4*s: X-Force and Thoress. The nerf to Thoress fits in nicely with my theory and I expect that X-Force will be either nerfed directly (not complaining about that) or indirectly (buffing a wider range of other characters for specific events, like what is being done now).

I wish they would change "PvP" to something actually resembling PvP (the current implementation is a joke), but I don't see that happening. I'm giving this game less than a year until it dies, but until then I'm sure going to enjoy it.

Tinfoil-hatting: Guessing from that "Make-a-video-and-get-1000-HP"-Promotion player numbers seem to be dropping. Aside from those ridiculous terms and conditions (hell yeah, I'm gonna waive all my rights and am totally okay with Marvel using my name and pictures of me however they want), they are still not allowing synching between mobile and Steam versions of the game. Expecting someone to pull 1000 views without continually refreshing their own video themselves of a recording of a mobile game is beyond ridiculous and points to an increasingly desperate company.

Oh, and Northern Polarity:

Expand my roster? Invest in more characters? This sounds like a cash grab, just like how nerfing 4or is a cash grab because they want players to buy professor X!

By that logic, literally anything that Demiurge does at ALL balance wise is considered a cash grab. Nerf a character? Cash grab because they want to sell more covers in other characters. Buff a character? Cash grab because they want to sell more covers of that character. Change the PvP system? Cash grab because they want players to pay more money to invest in their rosters. I hope you get the point about how stupid this sounds. Give me a balance change that ISNT a cash grab, because any change that betters the balance of the game can inevitably be twisted into some ridiculous complaint about being a cash grab because of how it changes the meta.

Everything a company does is for one reason: to earn money and to maximize profit. They don't let us play this game because they're feeling charitable. Belittling others who are looking for the monetizing reasons behind changes this company makes is not something you should be doing, to be honest. I do like most of your posts, however.

Unknown

redo your analysis becasue your background info is worng.

Buffed 1* Character > Unbuffed 2* Character
Buffed 2* Character > Unbuffed 3* Character
Buffed 3* Character > Unbuffed 4* Character

MarvelMan

noisnam wrote:

redo your analysis becasue your background info is worng.

Buffed 1* Character > Unbuffed 2* Character
Buffed 2* Character > Unbuffed 3* Character
Buffed 3* Character > Unbuffed 4* Character

I tend to agree with this, but with a caveat. If they buff a good char from any tier, they will be better than the unbuffed average from the next tier (ie Ares vs SuperSteve...maybe a bad example though as he is PVE centric). Its why we see Ares all over the place now, tough for the AI to screw up (other than Onslaughting early) too. The thing is that very few people would argue that an unbuffed Ares isnt better than Beast. Maybe even a buffed Beast.

Unknown

noisnam wrote:

redo your analysis becasue your background info is worng.

Buffed 1* Character > Unbuffed 2* Character
Buffed 2* Character > Unbuffed 3* Character
Buffed 3* Character > Unbuffed 4* Character

He did say "Ideally this is how it works". And it's true. They just happened to buff half of the top 10 list for 3*s and the best 2* there is.

Unknown

Lerysh wrote:

So like with everything there is a bell curve to the power levels of 3*s, from Doc Ock/Beast on the totally useless end, with a clump in the middle of "decently balanced characers" like Human Torch, to Thor and Patch on the OP end. A comment Miles made in the changes video thread made me think they are balancing to land on the middle, which places characters under the threshold of awesome. I can understand the theory that "everyone should be near this middle ground, and this middle ground is comprised of good characters" but that's just sadly not true. Since it's a game of 3 man teams, all we need are the 3 strongest on the OP end of the curve.

All a typical player wants or needs to care about is the top 10 characters in the game. Everyone else is wasted space for essentials only typically. When you buff someone from the middle of the pack they can clear the threshold of awesome for that event, again as an example Human Torch. He's pretty good if he's level 280. If someone is so far an outlier as to make them the ONLY choice viable (Spiderman, Magneto) that is a good sign they need changes. I don't think 4Thor was there, or that 3Thor is there. They are very very good, but not the only viable choice. No broken combo, no infinite turn generation, no cheap stun locking. I feel if they had done the Vs boost change before the 4* Thor change they might have reconsidered it entirely, or at least reigned it in a little.

Now here's the tricky part as well. Shifting the bell curve won't fix any of the perceived problems. Someone will always be the power outlier. It may as well be and since those are popular characters/brands. Having a majority of the characters inside the well balanced band who then become awesome on buff is good, but you can't stop the outliers from existing you can only move where that "balanced" band exists.

This is where I struggle, I play (well played) fighting games religiously, as well as did “City of Heroes” for years, so I FULLY understand the difficulty that can be ‘balance changes’, but this game is NOT complex. It shouldn’t take a mammoth effort to re-align existing characters, often the issues surrounding the balance of a character are tied to things such as “AP needed”, “Dmg done”, or “board shake-up”. I look at Moonstone, her AP is simply WAY out of wack, or for the current AP, say her control changing power – should affect more tiles. It’s not difficult to make her more useful without breaking her. Sentry could be fixed by simply reducing the damage he does to hiw own team with Supernova. Increase the damage of Smash for Hulk. Increase punisher’s health, dmg on strikes, or make Molotov burn ‘faster’. It’s NOT rocket science.

“Yet it’s easier to make a new character”. Marinate on that, its easer to put together powers, playtest them, code, introduce them, etc – than it is to change a few parameters? THAT my friend is the cash grab. What’s so difficult about fixing Beast? His blue shouldn’t pop up in the same place, and should have higher numbers, end story. To make Falcon usable in PvP, make Birdstrike also drop strike tiles. Why havne’t they copied LCap’s numbers and ‘add-ons’ to regular Cap, like they did with Daken? It simply has no priority because it won’t make them as much money as introducing a ‘Red Hulk’ could.

Introduce a Red Hulk…
-Unreall