What needs to be improved in the 4* transition

CrookedKnight

We're okay with the DDQ cover rate because it supplements the other ways of getting 3* covers - better than 1 in 4 heroic/event tokens will net a 3*, and a transitioning player can easily get two of those per PvP event and one per day from PvE. Push a bit higher in PvP and you also get a guaranteed 3* cover from every event even if you can't finish in the top 100.

The 1K progression reward isn't supplementing other ways to get 4* covers, it is the way to get 4* covers, with token pulls providing a very occasional bonus.

mjh

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

While there were initial complaints about the timeline of 3* DDQ, overall people seem to be ok with 520 days to max cover every one simply through DDQ.

No, you missed a very valueable point, the one that makes all the difference, you can earn up to 4 3* covers x 3 times a week in PVP. That's 12 covers a week + DDQ.

GrumpySmurf1002 wrote:

Overall cover flow from 4* is ok right now. Not great, but ok. The biggest immediate improvement they can make is keeping PvP rewards consistent. Nefarious Foes rewards 100 players a Daredevil cover. Vision (or maybe Kamala's) will award one player a FalCap cover. That discrepancy needs to end.

And tokens need another bump from 3.45% to 5%.

I'd say no, it's not OK based on what you just said. New players would look at this game and just immediately delete it.

mohio

If we look at a typical 3* player (i.e. one who can usually get 1k using a single shield hop (or 2 if things go badly)) then the "normal" case scenario for covering a 4* is as follows:

Release PvE: this is a "typical" player, so I'll assume they're not going to grind for top 2. Most probably won't even grind to top 10, but I'll go ahead and give them top 10. With the alliance cover, that puts them at 4 covers
"Release" PvP, 1 week after release: They hit 1k, now at 5 covers.
2-4 weeks after release they now enter the normal 1k,1.3k 4* rotation
4 weeks after release(estimate, probably not accurate, for when we first see it show up in progressions): 1k, now 6 covers
(at this point I'll calculate based on an average of 18 4* chars since that's a nice number divisible by 3 - this takes 6 weeks to full rotate through the stable of 4*)
10 weeks after release : 1k, 7 covers
et. al. - sum it all up and the next 6 covers take an additional 36 weeks, totaling 46 weeks from release to fully covered.

If we now assume that this player really wants this particular character's covers and will spend a bunch on shields to get to 1300, and additionally will grind out all their PvEs for as many covers as possible, we have a new "best" case scenario:

Release PvE: top 2'd, 5 total covers
Release PvP: hits 1k, 6 covers
4-6 weeks after release: 1k, then subsequent 1.3k, 8 covers
10-12 weeks: 1k, then 1.3k, 10 covers
12-15 weeks, char comes around in PvE rotation at 1-2: 11 covers
18-20 weeks: 1k, then 1.3k, 13 covers

So, in this "best" case scenario it takes "only" 20 weeks to fully cover a new 4*, and this is ignoring the likely 1 or 2 covers obtained as either a season reward, 2k in Sim, or both. This cover can make up for the fact that people are unlikely to grind as hard in PvE (and it's quite difficult, more so than 1300 in PvP for those that can do that).

In reality, there are 3 new 4* characters every 6 weeks it takes to rotate through the full stable of 4*, so the first time through the rotation might take 6 weeks, but the second time it takes 7 weeks since there are 3 more chars (3 more PvPs so 1 more week), then the next time 8 weeks, then 9 weeks, etc. This really lengthens the first scenario by quite a lot (the last 8 covers take 6+7+8+9+10+11+12+14 = 77! weeks with the current status quo), which is why people are clamoring for additional methods of obtaining 4*. If they keep pumping out more and more 4* it becomes untenable to fully cover them only through hitting PvP progressions.

mjh

mohio wrote:

If they keep pumping out more and more 4* it becomes untenable to fully cover them only through hitting PvP progressions.

Exactly why this game has to shift to the 4* meta in terms of rewards, where 4* covers are given out as PVP rewards in place of where 3* rewards are now. So in a PVP for t5 you can earn six 4* covers (3 covers + alliance cover + 1k + 1.3k).

If they simply did one 4* pvp and the other two 3* regular pvps every week, we would be at a reasonable rate of progression.

Keep in mind if this happened, of those earning six 4* covers, we still have and soon :mrfantastic: taking up space

Konman

Unreallystic wrote:

I had never really thought about that, all those covers that I sell trying to get 4*s…

Maybe THAT is the solution, some system of trade in. Maybe (3) 3* covers could be traded in for (1) 4* token….debatably this could be done at all levels…
(5) 1* Covers = > (1) 2* Cover Token
(5) 2* Covers = > (1) 3* Cover Token
(3) 3* Covers = > (1) 4* Cover Token
(5) 4* Covers = > (1) Infinity Gem
(6) Infinity Gems = > (1) 5* Thanos cover
(I know I’m just saying…it will happen…)

Sure there would need to be discussions on the ‘value’ of a cover, I mean going off ISO
1* = 100
2* = 250 (so ‘3’ 1* covers)
3* = 500 (so ‘2’ 2* covers, which is way too low even I admit)
4* = 1000 (so ‘2’ 3* covers, which is again too low)
So there is no real consistency between value and rarity (if so ‘10’ 1* pulls would be close to get a 4* pull), but the idea could fix some of the cover issues, I know I get sick of not being able to donate 3* to my alliance and just selling them for change…heck my Colossus has 5 in red and somehow yesterday between events and token, I got (3) more reds…turned into 1500 ISO, which isn’t even a lvl for him.
(shrug)
Just spit balling
-Unreall

Like an MPQ crafting system, with covers or tokens as crafting materials...could still have the element of chance involved, as MPQ is want to do, but would also give additional opportunities to get a desired cover. Interesting

Konman

Start with a simple increase in the % chance from a heroic token. Reduce the chances of 2* from token pulls, because those covers are pretty much everywhere nowadays, and move that % change over to the 4* probability.

mjh

babinro wrote:

One problem that I feel deserves attention here is how 4* players/transitioners are blocking out 3* transitioners from their covers to advance.

Many people who actually NEED the 2-3 *** covers found in the top 25 of a pvp are being pushed behind by those playing for 4* covers.

I have no idea what you're talking about.



BTW I had to make another 70pts hop and ended with 1399pts to keep the same position (23rd). I really feel bad for anybody trying to just get t100 to transition their 3*s