Roswulf wrote: IceIX wrote: Vhailorx wrote: For the DDQ node, for players that haven't really covered their 4*s yet, it's not very useful. The same can be said of the 3* node for those transitioners too however, as people with low covers on most 3*s also tend to have underdeveloped rosters, so that survival node is rough. For players in the transition area (like myself) it's a likely 4* cover every 5 days with what could be a difficult battle. For people past my stage, it's the start of the 5* transition. I don't think that's true- when DDQ launched, my most covered 3* was a 7-covered Cap. And yet, using almost exclusively 2* characters, I've managed to beat DDQ fully every day of its existence. Indeed DDQ has been the central tool in transitioning to what is now a very developed 3* roster (more than half fully covered, most of the rest close). My most covered 4* when the weekly version of DDQ launched this week was a 7-covered X-Force. Most of my 4 stars have only a single cover. Barring insane luck, the new variant of DDQ is completely useless to me. Traditional DDQ tests you on the quality of your 2* roster, and rewards you with 3*. The new version tests you on the quality of your 4* roster, and rewards you with 4*. That's a fundamental difference.
IceIX wrote: Vhailorx wrote: For the DDQ node, for players that haven't really covered their 4*s yet, it's not very useful. The same can be said of the 3* node for those transitioners too however, as people with low covers on most 3*s also tend to have underdeveloped rosters, so that survival node is rough. For players in the transition area (like myself) it's a likely 4* cover every 5 days with what could be a difficult battle. For people past my stage, it's the start of the 5* transition.
Vhailorx wrote: For the DDQ node, for players that haven't really covered their 4*s yet, it's not very useful. The same can be said of the 3* node for those transitioners too however, as people with low covers on most 3*s also tend to have underdeveloped rosters, so that survival node is rough. For players in the transition area (like myself) it's a likely 4* cover every 5 days with what could be a difficult battle. For people past my stage, it's the start of the 5* transition.
CrookedKnight wrote: IceIX said that while the client doesn't allow turning off team-ups for a particular fight it's possible to disable enemy team-ups for an entire event, and would that really be such a bad thing? Are the team-ups ever decisive in any of the regular DDQ fights?
IceIX wrote: Roswulf wrote: I don't think that's true- when DDQ launched, my most covered 3* was a 6-covered Cap. And yet, using almost exclusively 2* characters, I've managed to beat DDQ every day of its existence. Indeed DDQ has been the central tool in transitioning to what is now a very developed 3* roster (more than half fully covered, most of the rest close). To be honest, you're very much the exception there. The vast majority of players clearing the 3* node (and improving rosters) are ones that are using 3*s to start with. That node is supplementing most player's 3* roster, not creating it. I mean, definitely grats on the skill needed to pull that victory day after day, just know that most players don't do that.
Roswulf wrote: I don't think that's true- when DDQ launched, my most covered 3* was a 6-covered Cap. And yet, using almost exclusively 2* characters, I've managed to beat DDQ every day of its existence. Indeed DDQ has been the central tool in transitioning to what is now a very developed 3* roster (more than half fully covered, most of the rest close).
scottee wrote: Just as a point of feedback, I like the 4* DDQ node. I like singular hard battles that take puzzling instead of just RPG leveling/overpowering. My favorite part of original Puzzle Quest was the last boss battle, where every swap mattered, and you had to deny well and minimize what the AI could get.But I realize most that play this game are pretty casual and want to just match their color, fire a big ability, and win.
Vhailorx wrote: scottee wrote: Just as a point of feedback, I like the 4* DDQ node. I like singular hard battles that take puzzling instead of just RPG leveling/overpowering. My favorite part of original Puzzle Quest was the last boss battle, where every swap mattered, and you had to deny well and minimize what the AI could get.But I realize most that play this game are pretty casual and want to just match their color, fire a big ability, and win. I think that is a big part of the problem here scottee. Like IceIX did in some of his other posts on this topic, you are conflating people not wanting something that is extremely difficult with people wanting something very easy. No one (or more likely almost no one) wants a complete pushover node. People don't just play through the prologue over and over again because they enjoy easy. Super easy nodes are just boring. This topic isn't a fight between lazy, entitled players who just want everything for free, and good, noble players who enjoy a challenge and are talented and skilled at the game. It's a discussion over the difficulty of a node relative to the reward offered. Players, by and large, do enjoy a challenge and enjoy achieving something in the game. That's why people, for the most part, really like the gauntlet, despite the fact that there are almost always a few threads complaining about the difficulty of the later nodes. What players don't like is feeling that they will never be able to achieve anything, or that they must face a tremendous challenge in order to achieve a marginal reward. That's why people complained about the endless grind of 4* release events when only the top 10 even got 2 covers. Or when placing well in PVE required scoring well in excess of 2x the max prog-reward, but only offered a 3* prog. It's also why people didn't like the second run of the ultron event, when the difficulty was so hard that only 2 alliances in all of MPQ managed to pass round 8. I think it is possible to construct a reasonable argument that this 4* node is too hard, particularly if you view the feature as intended for the 3*-->4* transition (which demiurge clearly doesn't. hence a lot of this misunderstanding). (And to be clear, this is not meant as a personal attack on Scottee, whom I think is a valuable member of the forum community. I am just getting very tired of people framing this debate in moral terms. Asking for certain things to be easier in the game is not a morally inferior position to those who advocate for higher difficulty. It's just a difference of opinion (that may not be correct, but is perfectly valid)).
CrookedKnight wrote: I like a challenge but I also think that after 6+ months of DDQ people have an expectation for what the mode is supposed to accomplish, and how hard it's supposed to be, that the 4* fight just blows straight through. That plus the messaging from Ice led to a big gulf between what people thought was coming and what we actually got.
If it's a 3*, I'm expecting level 240-260, and a few class of characters: Self feeding big nuke types: Thor, Mystique, Cyclops, Scarlet, Hulk, Doom Self heals: Groot, Patch, Daken, Spidey PITAs: Gorgon, Fist, Cage Quick strikes: Deadpool, Gamora (plus her black 1v1 could be devastating)
Drummerboycroy wrote: Roswulf wrote: IceIX wrote: Vhailorx wrote: For the DDQ node, for players that haven't really covered their 4*s yet, it's not very useful. The same can be said of the 3* node for those transitioners too however, as people with low covers on most 3*s also tend to have underdeveloped rosters, so that survival node is rough. For players in the transition area (like myself) it's a likely 4* cover every 5 days with what could be a difficult battle. For people past my stage, it's the start of the 5* transition. I don't think that's true- when DDQ launched, my most covered 3* was a 7-covered Cap. And yet, using almost exclusively 2* characters, I've managed to beat DDQ fully every day of its existence. Indeed DDQ has been the central tool in transitioning to what is now a very developed 3* roster (more than half fully covered, most of the rest close). My most covered 4* when the weekly version of DDQ launched this week was a 7-covered X-Force. Most of my 4 stars have only a single cover. Barring insane luck, the new variant of DDQ is completely useless to me. Traditional DDQ tests you on the quality of your 2* roster, and rewards you with 3*. The new version tests you on the quality of your 4* roster, and rewards you with 4*. That's a fundamental difference. Figured I would just quote this in its entirety, as it says exactly what I would have wanted to say. DBC
Vhailorx wrote: In light of the ongoing discussion about ddq's utility for 2* players, I tried the big enchilada with only 2*s today. OBW 94 3/5/5 Thor 94 3/5/5 Daken 94 4/4/5 I would say that I had moderate board luck. no big, lucky cascades for me, but the board did give me a a steady supply of green and blue. didn't have as much yellow as I would have liked however. It took a bit longer than my normal 3* tactics, but it was not hard at all. Overall the ai made a total of 6 moves (2 in wave 2 and 4 in wave 4), and never fired a power. I was a little lucky in that the enemy countdowns were always placed in accessible spots, so I could usually match them away. Had any of them threatened to go off, I always had plenty of blue in reserve to extend the countdowns. At the end of the match OBW was down to ~3k, Thor had 4.3k and Daken had 2.7k. Whether or not a majority of players use 3*s to finish that node, and on the basis of this admittedly anecdotal evidence, I am satisfied that 2* players can finish it with a modicum of effort (except maybe for the one day with "turn to smoke" ninjas). Even if they wipe a few times, it shouldn't take more than few tries. And I didn't even use one of the top tier 2* teams.
TxMoose wrote: very surprised by their comments on the big enchilada. if it helps the data, i'll go back to using my 2s like I did for months before getting a good group of 3s high enough. sure I haven't used them in a while, but once I learned how to use them I can count the number of wipes I had on one hand, and one of those was the ninja bug (actually still finished with my 2* 94s that day after a few tries). sure, full fledged 3* players use 3s. that doesn't mean they have to or the node cannot be consistently, reliably, routinely (not rarely) beaten with 2s.
mohio wrote: I'm still not exactly happy about converting specific covers at 1300 to tokens since that now means you need to get lucky with pulls as opposed to a guaranteed path, but I accept that they need more tokens in the game to at least get some 5* out there, so that is at least a logical change to make.
To summarize recent changes to boost 4-Star output to players: - (Season 16) Increased odds of 4-Stars by about 50% in Heroic and Event packs. - (Season 18) Added Legendary Tokens as progression rewards at the top end of each Story Event. - (Season 18) Switched in Legendary Tokens as progression rewards at 1300 Progression in each Versus Event. - (Season 18) Added Legendary Tokens as part of the Deadpool’s Daily Quest. - (Season 18) Switched in 1 Legendary Token for a 4-Star cover in the Taco Vault. - (Season 18) Added a Legendary Token for each 40-pack purchased.
Konman wrote: To summarize recent changes to boost 4-Star output to players: - (Season 16) Increased odds of 4-Stars by about 50% in Heroic and Event packs. - (Season 18) Added Legendary Tokens as progression rewards at the top end of each Story Event. - (Season 18) Switched in Legendary Tokens as progression rewards at 1300 Progression in each Versus Event. - (Season 18) Added Legendary Tokens as part of the Deadpool’s Daily Quest. - (Season 18) Switched in 1 Legendary Token for a 4-Star cover in the Taco Vault. - (Season 18) Added a Legendary Token for each 40-pack purchased. Lets look at these already implemented, D3 described 4* transition goodies. Odds from a heroic token went from infinitesimal to merely miniscule and are currently 2.8% chance to get some 4*, likely Starlord yello. Legendary tokens in story PVE events, equaling 1 new token every 4 or 7 days, at twice the previous top progression reward, welcome to Grindtown: population You. 1300 PVP progression is being achieved by the exact same players as previously, only now its a token instead of a cover. DDQ 4* token is what all this hub bub is about in the first place. What the event is vs what players seemed to think it was going to be. Not exactly the transition we were looking for. Vault token introduction is a non factor, either relying on long odds or long waits while you stockpile those tacos to even the odds. No one is using the vaults as a source of tokens. 40 packs cost around $70 US. I hope this isn't a sincere suggestion on how to transition our rosters. The other items in the list are yet to be seen, so I won't comment on their efficacy at the moment.