If the multi-character buff becomes permanent...

Unknown

1. Epic reduction in differentiation of the different levels on 's, especially for characters. Don't see the point of having different tiers of characters then. May as well make'em all 3 tier damage and health (but nerf juggernaut's damage).

2. What's the point of having (single) character featured PVP's if multiple characters are gonna be buffed? The others should be buffed less (maybe by 50 levels) than the main featured character. Doesn't make sense to me unless this is done.

3. I understand the direction D3 wants to take in promoting roster diversity by exploring these changes (or secretly encouraging people to buy covers for 3* characters since they're more viable now), but at the end of the day, people are still gonna find the best combo to climb after 650 or 700 with the 2 best buffed characters for that pvp (or 1 with their XF) so that plan will backfire anyway.

Nice try, D3, but keep trying.

Druss

I kind of like it for several reasons:

1) It was getting really stale facing X-F every single battle from 250 onwards in PvP.

2) Makes the X-F Lv 270 + 2 maxed 2* rosters not so attractive (which I believe is a good thing)

3) More scope for finding working synergies with characters that would sit on the sidelines normally.

4) Always found the featured character level boost annoying, as tended to make him/her tank every colour & therefore only last a couple of matches. With other characters receiving big boosts there is a chance to alleviate this.

5) Facing boosted Jugs/Ares is hardly new - seem to remember them being boosted in the last PvE, and the one before that, and the one before that..... oh! wait, this is a separate issue.

Unknown

Druss wrote:

I kind of like it for several reasons:

1) It was getting really stale facing X-F every single battle from 250 onwards in PvP.

2) Makes the X-F Lv 270 + 2 maxed 2* rosters not so attractive (which I believe is a good thing)

3) More scope for finding working synergies with characters that would sit on the sidelines normally.

4) Always found the featured character level boost annoying, as tended to make him/her tank every colour & therefore only last a couple of matches. With other characters receiving big boosts there is a chance to alleviate this.

5) Facing boosted Jugs/Ares is hardly new - seem to remember them being boosted in the last PvE, and the one before that, and the one before that..... oh! wait, this is a separate issue.

To reply to your above points.

1) Completely agree. But you're still gonna see XF in PVP. (til they nerf him anyway)

2) They're still gonna be fish-food for those with more accomplished 3* rosters, leaving them to infight among other transitioning to 2* rosters.

3) Can't speak for everyone, but that's what I use PVE for. As it may not be as practical in terms of speed when it comes to competitive PVP.

4) This point is a WINNER! But since the featured character is going in the centre he/she/it's gonna be ahead of the curve anyway in terms of most powerful colour, regardless of whether your other boosted members cover the colour.

5) Yes I'm talking about PVP only, specifically about PVP after the 650 points range. (That's what the changes are about - PVP )

Unknown

I love it. My torch, Hood, Loki team is awesome. This is something I never would've considered running in a PVP ever. It has made PVP fun! I hope they keep it.

GrumpySmurf1002

Deadpooool wrote:

1. Epic reduction in differentiation of the different levels on 's, especially for characters. Don't see the point of having different tiers of characters then. May as well make'em all 3 tier damage and health (but nerf juggernaut's damage).

2. What's the point of having (single) character featured PVP's if multiple characters are gonna be buffed? The others should be buffed less (maybe by 50 levels) than the main featured character. Doesn't make sense to me unless this is done.

3. I understand the direction D3 wants to take in promoting roster diversity by exploring these changes (or secretly encouraging people to buy covers for 3* characters since they're more viable now), but at the end of the day, people are still gonna find the best combo to climb after 650 or 700 with the 2 best buffed characters for that pvp (or 1 with their XF) so that plan will backfire anyway.

Nice try, D3, but keep trying.

1.Not sure what you're getting at. 270 XF is still >>>>>> 100 Juggernaut, or 170 Ares. The gap between Elektra and Juggernaut is less about boosted level and more about the strength of 4*s in the game.

2. What other characters do doesn't really affect having a featured. Like events before it, having the featured maxed is still better than not (in most cases). The idea of the boosted characters is to make the other, non-featured options more attractive.

3. Yes, people are still going to find the best combo for their roster, but the point of this is to make the definition of 'best' a lot more blurry, which it seems to accomplish early on.

GrimSkald

I'm playing IM40 (5/5/1 level 127,) Daken (5/5/3 maxed,) and Johnny (5/3/5 153) right now and I'm seriously digging this "other character boosted" thing. I would never have thought to use IM40 before they did that, and he is definitely bringing something very nice to the table (mainly a lot of red for Johnny to use.) We'll see how thye stands up against the 4* teams once I get into the 5-600s, I've only been creeping up my X-Force (5/5/3, but just level 201) to prevent out of whack PVE scaling. Besides, I keep leveling up my 3*s... But anyway, this allows me to cover more colors than I would with my normal climbing team (Daken, Patch) and my normal Team A (X-Force, CMags.) It seems fun.

So unless they do something weird, I expect to be an absolute nightmare in the next PVP - Daken (see above,) Patch (3/5/5 166,) Loki (5/3/5 139.) We'll see, but that team may be quite something even against a Thor/X-force team - which I suspect is exactly what they intended.

It may warrant some further tweaking, but we'll see how it goes. As of right now, I distinctly like it - it has the potential to shake up the end game, which it pretty badly needs. We'll see if I feel differently after having to eat through all the hit points of a boosted 4*.

MojoWild

I like it and hope they try it for a whole season. I have a maxed Torch, but thinking of times when I may not have a maxed featured but should be able to bring a couple of buffed buddies to the team. I think we need to keep the featured so that those teams have to be based on who works best with the featured.
Also, any new best team is really only going to be around for that event and then we'll be moving on to the next pvp where another team will be the best.
With multiple options, I think it does open things up more. I've hardly even used my maxed X Force this pvp.

Trisul

@OP

NP wrote an epic post about why this change promotes healthier gameplay.

Your point seems to be "This change isn't THAT great." Well, that's fine. But it doesn't make the game worse, either.

PeterGibbons316

I like it because it really mixes up the rosters you see. It makes you think about what characters to use yourself, and how to fight the various builds you see. Much better than the constant XF/4hor teams you see.

I think it makes PvP a little more viable for transitioners as well - if they happen to have the buffed characters they can actually do well in PvP for a change.

westnyy2

I'm not opposed to continuing this experiment but I've noticed 2 things. First, even on the climb I am using more health packs than before. A 170 Ares will get his pound of flesh. Please keep in mind I have all characters sans the last few 4* and Squirrel Girl fully covered and at a decent level. My previous climbs have been nice easy cake walks to 650 with the usual suspects of or . Above 650, I'm seeing a little variety but not much. I can honestly say I'm seeing the same 5 or 6 character over and over and they are all the boosted ones. I guess that is better than seeing the same two.

My issue is still the health packs. I'm the type of player who usually plays in 1 or 2 bites. I do not get into the shield hopping wars to 1300 but I almost always get my 1k cover. With all this increased firepower out there including the 2 stars, is it out of line to ask that health packs regenerate to 7 or 8 before maxing out?

Unknown

The increased use of health packs I also noticed, but there were more characters availible to spread the damage out over, instead of "the climb team I have chosen to use today"

Oops was using hood, and he got axemurdered, do I heal hood and keep going or do I sub in Lthor for a while?

Also I loved that this tournament had a learning curve. First day I lost a few matches, and conversely got several defensive wins. I learned who to avoid with my playstyle or how to counter that particular combo and continue forward, as did I assume everyone else because the defensive wins dried up after a while.

Each new rotation of characters should have a new meta, a new "best lineup" and there will be no promise that you have the team for it forcing improvisation. And that sounds absolutely fun and fantastic to me. Even if it means i may not be able to guarantee secure rewards I personally might have otherwise.

westnyy2

Several good points Cryptobrancus. I do agree with you that there are more options of who to use which keeps it fun, but our options were Hood, 3hor, Ares, etc. What happens when it's Nuts from above and co.

I am for the change but for once I would like something to come our way for once. We now have increased damage thrown at us, nerfs galore and even a team up nerf. The one buff was horrible. Bagnarok is just plain bad and I'm a glass half full kind guy. Like I said, I'm all for making it challenging and I like what they are doing by trying different things but an increase to 7 health packs would allow me to participate in the game even more. I'm not sure what you're scaling is like in PVE but mine is not fun. If 7 health packs is too much then leave it at 5 but allow us to buy extra with ISo instead of HP. I'm flexible.

Unknown

I do agree that they need to do something with healthpacks, and was of that opinion before these changes. Even giving a set number of packs per day, that resets when DDQ does would almost be preferable to the current system encourages playing every three hours or so, even though we just fought tooth and nail to make PVE refreshes on an 8 hour cycle because we don't want to have to be glued to the screen all day to play "optimally"

user311

Using up the health more this event as well, but I suspect its more due to the build of my team (Hood and XF) who both are still squishy when boosted compared to the 170 Ares and 280 Thor. I'm hopeful that the set of characters will be more rounded out. Boosting Hood pretty much puts him on every team so not only is he squishy but he tanks a lot of the colors. From what I have seen it doesn't necessarily result in a diverse roster.

Unknown

Trisul wrote:

@OP

NP wrote an epic post about why this change promotes healthier gameplay.

Your point seems to be "This change isn't THAT great." Well, that's fine. But it doesn't make the game worse, either.

Yeah. I think it just needs to be tweaked which was why I made this post. I don't think it's a bad change overall (the only people really suffering are those with 2* rosters who bought 4* characters, bless them) and is heading in the right direction.

They just need to make it so that insane characters like Ares and his damage corresponds to roughly how much damage (and health) is done alongside regular 3* since they buff him up this pvp and might make this change a permanent thing. I guess I'm just telling them to work out the "balancing" which I feel is tipping in the wrong direction and make a clear distinction as to why bother with 4 , 3 , 2 and 1 tiers since they neutered the 4 (I smell an XF nerf coming soon, too).

They might as well change the system if this becomes permanent. Not sure how they're gonna do this.

Unknown

to me, this PVP so far feels like a micro-version of Balance of Power. Lots more fights, lots more retals, lots more retal wars. Kinda grindy.

I agree in theory the concept under test seems logical with a constructive aim, but I'm not sure I'm having more fun. Will take more time to draw a conclusion perhaps.