4* DDQ, a debate

lukewin

BlackSheep101 wrote:

How many points are those 3* teams worth? Because I struggle to find teams worth more than 38 points when I get to the 900 point range that don't have at least one fully covered 4*.

To me, the boosted 3* teams are usually worth between 35-40 points. You're gonna have to hit multiples of them, to get to 1k. That's why I try to get to 1 match from 1k before I shield. If I can see them, they can see me. And we can trade pts all day and get nowhere, while staying out and allowing more people to join the party. I get 1 match from 1k, shield and let the shield take the blows. Then I take time during the next 3 hrs trying to find better targets, by checking my leaderboard for a possible queue or just skipping thru after a certain time to find fresher targets. I hit 1k and do not worry about having to keep trading pts and not getting anywhere.

If you want to take on weaker teams for less points per match, you'll have to win multiple matches, to come out ahead. If you do this, I suggest shielding right after winning, because your retal will be a very juicy one to them and if they hit you, you'll lose more points than you gained and be in a worse position than if you did not hit them at all.

Linkster79

I thought the 4* node would have carried on with the Deadpool Daily theme. You need the required 4* character, even with just one cover and bring a couple of 3* or lower buddies along for the ride. After seeing it in action I have accepted that it probably isn't aimed for people like me, so on the days it is there, I will give it a shot and if it is clear I have no chance I stop throwing health packs at it and move on. I really hope the Devil Dino one will be a bit easier considering the rarity of actually being able to obtain covers.

scottee

A lot of good has already been said, but I think people "expect" the 4* transition to be too easy. (I know, I know, it's the game's fault, not our expectations' fault.)

Some people here think they're ready for the 4* transition when their roster clearly isn't. 3-5 maxed 3*s is not ready. You need at least 10-12 166's, and all of the high powered ones, so that you can compete in PVP when your 3*s are boosted.

Some people think a maxed 3* roster cannot reach the 1000 pt progression in PVP. Actually, TONS of people here are posting that they do it. All the time. The solution is not to ask the devs to make it easier. The solution is to learn more about the nuances of shield hopping so that you're successful. If you can get to 950-980, you should be able to get 1000 90% of the time. One of the keys to shield hopping that I'll give away for free: speed.

And if you're getting slammed at 800, ask the question, What defensive team are people seeing that they're hitting me so bad? Maybe you need more maxed 3* so you always have the boosted ones. Maybe you're leaving in slightly underleveled heroes that are attractive targets. Maybe you're using lower health heroes who are easy to hit fast. Maybe you need to start shielding sooner. If you always get to 800 and then get hit back, then put up a shield when you get to 800.

I'm baffled that people get stuck in their progression and don't try to improve what they're doing. And don't say "I already doing everything perfectly," if others are hitting 1000, and even 1300, as F2P players and you're not.

If people don't want to learn from experience, fine. Sure, the transition was easier for me when I had to actually earn 2* covers, and fight against 3* Magneto loops and Sentry bombing when I didn't have those tools, and when 31 point matches seemed juicy. Go ahead and listen to all the amazing theorists who haven't been there, but somehow know what you should do. Yes, things are different, but figure out the new meta. Those who do, make the transition. Those who don't, complain about it.

mrflopwelligan

scottee wrote:

A lot of good has already been said, but I think people "expect" the 4* transition to be too easy. (I know, I know, it's the game's fault, not our expectations' fault.)

I agree with a lot of what you said. Both sides have made good points. Like the Galactus event, once it was clarified that the 4* was NOT meant to be a 4* transition, I felt better about it.

Someone said this (I don't remember who) but I think it bears repeating: If you're not doing well in the 4* DDQ then you're not ready for the 4* DDQ. Meaning, once you're 3* roster improves you'll start doing better in PVP and PVE and thus gaining more 4*s. THEN you'll be ready for the 4* DDQ.

My only complaint is that those 4*s are just so fun to play with I would love to take them for a real spin with all their covers!

Unknown

Saw this on the D3 forums, thought it might be relevant here.

"While grinding's potential to cause players to stop being entertained may be seen as contradictory to good game design, it has been justified in several different ways.
The first explanation is that it helps ensure a level playing field. According to the Pareto principle, players with better aim, faster reactions, or more extensive tactical knowledge will quickly dominate the entire game, frustrating the now-powerless vast majority. By creating a direct correlation between in-game power and time spent grinding, every player has the potential to reach the top 20% (although the Pareto principle will still apply to the amount of time spent grinding).

The problem may not be that talent and skill are rewarded, but that the rewards are based on relative talent and skill. If only the top 20% of a game's players are rewarded, 80% must be receiving little reward, even if objectively they are highly talented. If there is no hope in the future of these players being rewarded, they will likely leave the game, causing the population to shrink, and thus reducing the number of people who can be in the top 20%. Grinding has the benefit that, although only 20% of the population may be rewarded at any given time, 100% of the population will have the potential to be rewarded in the future, and will have no reason to quit. Raph Koster also addressed this issue, explaining that "... the average user is below average — meaning, the median user lies below the mean on the win-loss curve, because the win-loss curve turns out to be a power-law distribution."

DFiPL

scottee wrote:

Some people here think they're ready for the 4* transition when their roster clearly isn't. 3-5 maxed 3*s is not ready. You need at least 10-12 166's, and all of the high powered ones, so that you can compete in PVP when your 3*s are boosted.

This is probably the 37th time I've said this: **** that noise. "You're not ready for 4* if you don't play the game exactly the way I think you should" is neither helpful nor a valid argument. Insisting that people have to be able to hit 1000 or 1300 in PVP (and oh buy shields) has nothing the **** to do with "readiness" and everything the **** to do with "pay to win." It has nothing to do with what a given player "deserves" and everything to do with what a given player is willing to pay for.

And if that's what you really mean, just come right out and say it: "If you want to build your 4* roster, start spending money."

Because otherwise what you're doing is a tired song and dance designed to justify "well, *I* got there by doing it this way so that's how everybody should get there" and it's ****.

"Yes, they need to address this, but until they do, here are some tips I can give you for how to get started given the current environment: blah blah pvp blah blah" <-- yeah, okay.

"You're not ready/you don't deserve (yes I know you specifically didn't use that one but others making the same argument have) until you can blah blah PVP" <-- elitist horse apples. MPQ doesn't have to be as free with the covers as, say, Future Fight is with its biometrics. That's a game I've barely played until recently and I still have all but like six or seven of the available characters. Yeah, that's overkill.

But the way the system is set up now, it's a feedback loop. You need 4* to get 4* unless you're fortunate with your token draws (and that's especially true if you have 3* but don't have the elite 3* you referred to, or have those undercovered).

Look at DDQ. Did it accelerate the 3* transition? Yeah, absolutely. But 6 1/2 months after I started tracking the daily available covers in an effort to see if I could predict what was coming, I'm only just now approaching having my 3* fully covered. DDQ helped. Tacos helped. My occasional dalliance with PVP helped courtesy of placement rewards in the non-vet brackets. Standard/Heroic tokens helped. My point: it was not one single avenue that got me from having a dozen or so 3* in various stages of low covers to approaching full coverage. It was a multivariable attack.

And that's been the issue with 4*. There are more avenues now than there used to be, but the one people keep harping on is hitting 1000 or 1300 via shield hops in PVP. Legendary tokens have provided another avenue, and that's valuable. 4* DDQ appears to be largely another example of the feedback loop. If you don't have the weekly 4* with sufficient covers (or else have just the right cover for a 4* like IW), it's not happening for you. So for a lot of people who maybe have multiple 4* and would like to at least be able to start adding covers for what they've got, what looks like a three-pronged approach is really only a single prong: chase the legendary tokens via the PVE grind.

I think the best solution here really would be what so many others have advocated: an intermediate token between heroic and Legendary that contains 3* and 4*. Make standards 1/2, heroic 2/3, the new token 3/4 and legendary 4/5, and now you've got tokens for every transition currently in the game.

You have 2/3/4* Essentials in PVEs. Use those as a way to disseminate tokens. "regular" nodes can continue to offer a Standard. your 2* Essential could offer a Heroic. The 3* essential could offer the new token. Leave Legendary as a progression grind, if you like, and have the new token also in the 4* essential. The point is, offering a 1* character as a reward possibility for the essentials kind of ignores that someone who can regularly play in multiple essentials probably doesn't have a roster for which a 1* does any good any longer.

That would be a much more constructive way to approach getting people onto whatever transition on-ramp they need than saying "you're not ready/you don't deserve the transition until you can XYZ."

scottee

DFiPL wrote:

scottee wrote:

Some people here think they're ready for the 4* transition when their roster clearly isn't. 3-5 maxed 3*s is not ready. You need at least 10-12 166's, and all of the high powered ones, so that you can compete in PVP when your 3*s are boosted.

This is probably the 37th time I've said this: tinykitty that noise. "You're not ready for 4* if you don't play the game exactly the way I think you should" is neither helpful nor a valid argument. Insisting that people have to be able to hit 1000 or 1300 in PVP (and oh buy shields) has nothing the tinykitty to do with "readiness" and everything the tinykitty to do with "pay to win." It has nothing to do with what a given player "deserves" and everything to do with what a given player is willing to pay for.

And if that's what you really mean, just come right out and say it: "If you want to build your 4* roster, start spending money."

Because otherwise what you're doing is a tired song and dance designed to justify "well, *I* got there by doing it this way so that's how everybody should get there" and it's tinykitty.

"Yes, they need to address this, but until they do, here are some tips I can give you for how to get started given the current environment: blah blah pvp blah blah" <-- yeah, okay.

"You're not ready/you don't deserve (yes I know you specifically didn't use that one but others making the same argument have) until you can blah blah PVP" <-- elitist horse apples. MPQ doesn't have to be as free with the covers as, say, Future Fight is with its biometrics. That's a game I've barely played until recently and I still have all but like six or seven of the available characters. Yeah, that's overkill.

But the way the system is set up now, it's a feedback loop. You need 4* to get 4* unless you're fortunate with your token draws (and that's especially true if you have 3* but don't have the elite 3* you referred to, or have those undercovered).

Look at DDQ. Did it accelerate the 3* transition? Yeah, absolutely. But 6 1/2 months after I started tracking the daily available covers in an effort to see if I could predict what was coming, I'm only just now approaching having my 3* fully covered. DDQ helped. Tacos helped. My occasional dalliance with PVP helped courtesy of placement rewards in the non-vet brackets. Standard/Heroic tokens helped. My point: it was not one single avenue that got me from having a dozen or so 3* in various stages of low covers to approaching full coverage. It was a multivariable attack.

And that's been the issue with 4*. There are more avenues now than there used to be, but the one people keep harping on is hitting 1000 or 1300 via shield hops in PVP. Legendary tokens have provided another avenue, and that's valuable. 4* DDQ appears to be largely another example of the feedback loop. If you don't have the weekly 4* with sufficient covers (or else have just the right cover for a 4* like IW), it's not happening for you. So for a lot of people who maybe have multiple 4* and would like to at least be able to start adding covers for what they've got, what looks like a three-pronged approach is really only a single prong: chase the legendary tokens via the PVE grind.

I think the best solution here really would be what so many others have advocated: an intermediate token between heroic and Legendary that contains 3* and 4*. Make standards 1/2, heroic 2/3, the new token 3/4 and legendary 4/5, and now you've got tokens for every transition currently in the game.

You have 2/3/4* Essentials in PVEs. Use those as a way to disseminate tokens. "regular" nodes can continue to offer a Standard. your 2* Essential could offer a Heroic. The 3* essential could offer the new token. Leave Legendary as a progression grind, if you like, and have the new token also in the 4* essential. The point is, offering a 1* character as a reward possibility for the essentials kind of ignores that someone who can regularly play in multiple essentials probably doesn't have a roster for which a 1* does any good any longer.

That would be a much more constructive way to approach getting people onto whatever transition on-ramp they need than saying "you're not ready/you don't deserve the transition until you can XYZ."

I admit, I only read the first half of your post. It was just too long. I didn't say you have to pay. I'm completely F2P. If you pick which 4* covers you're targeting, you should always have enough HP for a couple shield hops.

And yes, if you don't have Cage, Cyclops, KK, Iron Fist, Hood, Hulk/Patch, Scarlett Witch, LThor, Daken, Blade maxed, then you're not really done with the 3* transition. And yes, with those characters, people are making 1000 regularly. In fact, they're doing it with only Patch/Hulk.

But it's ok, continue to say the game is too hard. Other people are making 1000 with F2P 3* rosters and you are not. That's not the game's fault.

scottee

BTW, 1000 PVP is only the start of the 4* transition. It's the first step. Win a couple 4* covers for a given character and, oh, look, now you can win the 4* DDQ.

Malcrof

This topic is about 4* DDQ and not about PVP, please try to remain on topic, there are plenty of pvp threads over in the Tips and Guides section to debate PVP

smkspy

I think what is frustrating is that lower players ARE getting many four star characters and even a 5, while we're still transitioning from 2 to 3. Then we get scaled up because of this, can't compete, and that 4/5 is essentially worthless. But who seriously is going to let go of a great cover?

Lower players need a way to hold onto these covers where they don't affect our rosters and scaling. The simplest solution is taking away the time limit in the roster waiting area or whatever it is called. Let people have a vault where they can store their unused covers indefinitely and then slot them into their roster whenever they are ready.

I don't think that's really too much to ask. Just remove the expiration date on covers. Transitioning people can still compete with people on their level and higher end players can keep moving their progress forward. Win win for everyone and no entitlement.

What I keep noticing from the people with great rosters is the "suck it up" attitude, thing is, you've all had this slowly given to you as you've played longer, but for new players we're having this all thrown at us at the same time. You guys have slowly transitioned as the game evolved, so every new character or new addition is just a baby step to you. To us, it's a bombardment of something new what seems like every week, and too much isn't always fun. It was big deal when I finally was able to completely beat the DDQ now they added this and it's like ****. You guys already have a massive advantage over us, do you really need another? Entitlement is a two way street.

PeterGibbons316

smkspy wrote:

I think what is frustrating is that lower players ARE getting many four star characters and even a 5, while we're still transitioning from 2 to 3. Then we get scaled up because of this, can't compete, and that 4/5 is essentially worthless. But who seriously is going to let go of a great cover?

Lower players need a way to hold onto these covers where they don't affect our rosters and scaling. The simplest solution is taking away the time limit in the roster waiting area or whatever it is called. Let people have a vault where they can store their unused covers indefinitely and then slot them into their roster whenever they are ready.

I don't think that's really too much to ask. Just remove the expiration date on covers. Transitioning people can still compete with people on their level and higher end playing can keep moving their progress forward. Win win for everyone and no entitlement.

There is no expiration date on tokens. If you aren't ready for a 5*, then don't open a token with a chance to get a 5*.....or be prepared to sell it if you get it.

smkspy

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

smkspy wrote:

I think what is frustrating is that lower players ARE getting many four star characters and even a 5, while we're still transitioning from 2 to 3. Then we get scaled up because of this, can't compete, and that 4/5 is essentially worthless. But who seriously is going to let go of a great cover?

Lower players need a way to hold onto these covers where they don't affect our rosters and scaling. The simplest solution is taking away the time limit in the roster waiting area or whatever it is called. Let people have a vault where they can store their unused covers indefinitely and then slot them into their roster whenever they are ready.

I don't think that's really too much to ask. Just remove the expiration date on covers. Transitioning people can still compete with people on their level and higher end playing can keep moving their progress forward. Win win for everyone and no entitlement.

There is no expiration date on tokens. If you aren't ready for a 5*, then don't open a token with a chance to get a 5*.....or be prepared to sell it if you get it.

So basically never open any token ever cause their may be a chance of getting something cool or helpful, but if it's too good then sell it. That's just dumb. Does it really hurt your egos for developing players not have covers expire? It wouldn't hurt a single persons game, and the only reason to object to it is you had expiration dates when you first started playing. Think we can call that early player entitlement. Nothing should change, but what helps me.

Cause let not kid ourselves here, we can already get a 4 star from everything but a standard token, so it won't be long before 5 stars are added to all other recuit or higher tokens.

PeterGibbons316

smkspy wrote:

PeterGibbons316 wrote:

smkspy wrote:

I think what is frustrating is that lower players ARE getting many four star characters and even a 5, while we're still transitioning from 2 to 3. Then we get scaled up because of this, can't compete, and that 4/5 is essentially worthless. But who seriously is going to let go of a great cover?

Lower players need a way to hold onto these covers where they don't affect our rosters and scaling. The simplest solution is taking away the time limit in the roster waiting area or whatever it is called. Let people have a vault where they can store their unused covers indefinitely and then slot them into their roster whenever they are ready.

I don't think that's really too much to ask. Just remove the expiration date on covers. Transitioning people can still compete with people on their level and higher end playing can keep moving their progress forward. Win win for everyone and no entitlement.

There is no expiration date on tokens. If you aren't ready for a 5*, then don't open a token with a chance to get a 5*.....or be prepared to sell it if you get it.

So basically never open any token ever cause their may be a chance of getting something cool or helpful, but if it's too good then sell it. That's just dumb. Does it really hurt your egos for developing players not have covers expire? It wouldn't hurt a single persons game, and the only reason to object to it is you had expiration dates when you first started playing. Think we can call that early player entitlement. Nothing should change, but what helps me.

Cause let not kid ourselves here, we can already get a 4 star from everything but a standard token, so it won't be long before 5 stars are added to all other recuit or higher tokens.

Doesn't hurt my ego at all. I don't take joy in other's suffering, and I don't think others should suffer just because I did. I want everyone to have an enjoyable game experience. I want more people playing the game. Without a strong and growing playerbase the game that I enjoy goes away, and I don't want that.

The game has to make money too though, and one of the primary moneymakers is roster slots - largely because of the expiring cover mechanic. So if you aren't willing to spend money to support the game that we all enjoy to buy a roster slot that you need, then don't open the token. You have no right to complain about not being willing or able to roster a new character that you opened yourself. You took on the risk when you opened the token, so either suck it up and support the game, or sell it off for ISO and hope you get it again later when you are ready for it.

I've been busting my **** trying to get legendary tokens, I've opened 20 since they improved the 5* draw rate to 10%, and I have zero 5* characters to show for it. So don't come crying to me when you took a shot at something you can't use and got it - especially when there are those of use that want them, CAN use them, but haven't been lucky enough to get them.

smkspy

Like I'm not busting my **** either to do the same. We're talking game mechanics, not crying over anything. I've spent my money on roster slots, just like nearly everyone else, so yeah, right to complainas a paying customer. I was just tryIng to throw in an easy solution to what many are complaining about, and what few can agree on or see the other person's side.

How About this then, 30 day expiration days on pulled covers. Oh wait, no it doesn't get D3 money fast enough.Yep, got it. Suck it up and never suggest anything that might make the game a more enjoyable.experience for everyone.

AtlasAxe

scottee wrote:

A lot of good has already been said, but I think people "expect" the 4* transition to be too easy. (I know, I know, it's the game's fault, not our expectations' fault.)

Not my expectation. At. All.

scottee wrote:

Some people here think they're ready for the 4* transition when their roster clearly isn't. 3-5 maxed 3*s is not ready. You need at least 10-12 166's, and all of the high powered ones, so that you can compete in PVP when your 3*s are boosted.

I am 100% aware I am not ready for the 4* transition. I've sold quite a few and the ones that I have rostered are my lowest priorities for ISO. I actually don't even try for LTs because I don't have anywhere to put them and can't afford the ISO or scaling issues if I did.

scottee wrote:

Some people think a maxed 3* roster cannot reach the 1000 pt progression in PVP. Actually, TONS of people here are posting that they do it. All the time. The solution is not to ask the devs to make it easier. The solution is to learn more about the nuances of shield hopping so that you're successful. If you can get to 950-980, you should be able to get 1000 90% of the time. One of the keys to shield hopping that I'll give away for free: speed.

Yes, with a maxed 3* roster, which I don't have, it should be fairly standard. I have a couple of maxed characters and a mish-mash of others. 1000 is a goal for when I get there.

scottee wrote:

If people don't want to learn from experience, fine. Sure, the transition was easier for me when I had to actually earn 2* covers, and fight against 3* Magneto loops and Sentry bombing when I didn't have those tools, and when 31 point matches seemed juicy. Go ahead and listening to all the amazing theorists who haven't been there, but somehow know what you should do. Yes, things are different, but figure out the new meta. Those who do, make the transition. Those who don't, complain about it.

You seem to think I'm implying I don't know this stuff happened. We all face those sorts of things still, they haven't gone away. I relish those experiences. I do well for what I have: I frequently scan surrounding rosters in PVP and find myself way out of league in terms of my neighbors. What I don't particularly enjoy is facing rosters that look like the one early in this thread with my roster. Every single node I click on sometimes.

I welcome nodes with just one 4* and some maxed 3*. I started seeing those as my main opponents from the moment a single character got maxed, with one other at 153, and a few at 140 and 127. That is a clear scaling issue. I was primarily PVE at the time and in comparison, it didn't have that impact on my PVE scaling. That is plain strange as a player. If you are maxing 2*s, and I was there, you don't see that jump in competition when you get your first 94. Scaling is just not even in PVP, and while it's well known on the forums that you soft cap to manage PVP s, that's really managing around a weak scaling and competition model.

A lot of times in brackets I play in there's a clear "L" distribution of scores: 6-8 people at 1k+ and a whole bunch of people hundreds of points below.

If you think I'm talking about "free stuff". I'm looking and focusing on competitiveness. Here's a thought on a model for PVP: what if all the overall T100 alliances (or other arbitrary top number) only faced other T100 alliances in each bracket, with similar competition all down the line. Scoring would be representative of bracket you're in - if you're not in T100, you're not going to see 60-100 matches. This is a standard model in many competitive events. Restrict the winnings for the lower brackets to levels appropriate to those brackets. When you start hitting some level in your competitive level, next time you play with the bigger hitters in the next level up. If you can't keep up you fall back. It would be a better challenge both for those who have stunning rosters and for those who are growing. That's a rough thought, not a proposed implementation.

As I've stated, DDQ is fun, but I'm not a big fan of its original stated intent. I will say though if you're giving one group a benefit from it, all groups should experience that benefit. If you have a 1* to 2* transition, and a 2* - 3* transition, and a 4* to 5* transition, you should also have a 3* to 4* in the same frame. That is fair. Otherwise do away with it. I won't shed a tear. I won't be using a hypothetical 3* - 4*, or at least I wouldn't win it a good chunk of the time, the exact same as when I started the 3* transition in DDQ. In fact, it didn't give me an opportunity to earn new 3* characters at all, it just helped me develop them a bit more quickly.

*Edited a couple of times for clarity and grammar issues.

Malcrof

Ok, topic is the 4* DDQ.. please stay on topic.. or the thread goes poof! Many threads on 4* transition, legendary token earning etc out there..

whoami24601

Der_Lex wrote:

I don't think 4* DDQ will be changed much, because it does serve more or less the same purpose as 3* DDQ: to help people with 8-10+ covers in a certain character get those final covers (although with random pulls it does a much crummier job at that than 3* DDQ). It's never going to be a tool for starting 3-4* transitioners to build their 4* roster.

That being said, the game really does need a tool for beginning 3-4* transitioners to build their 4* roster. There are simply too many 4*s out there now for the 1000 prog reward and the random egendary tokens to be sufficient. The devs have hinted at this in the past, and I think the time has come for it to be implemented.

There seems to be a basic disconnect between your two paragraphs. (And maybe this has been addressed, I didn't keep reading much further but will do so now.)

DDQ for 3* characters starts working with a single cover, not 8-10 as you say. You can win with the prior star level in order to advance to that star level. 2* teams and a single cover 3* can defeat the 3* DDQ in order to build a 3* roster and transition from 2* to 3*.

You yourself say that this is lacking for the 3* to 4* transition. The reason it is lacking is because the 4* DDQ is in no way serving the purpose as the current 3* DDQ is. The 4* DDQ does what you say, in that it rewards well-covered 4*, although you don't always need as many as 8-10 covers. Currently 4* DDQ enables a 4* to 5* transition more than anything else, while leaving people with well established 3* rosters no transition method beyond 1000 in PvP which you yourself say is insufficient.


It really reads as if you are arguing that 4* DDQ needs to be fixed to match 3* DDQ, while stating the opposite.

herm1978

scottee wrote:

BTW, 1000 PVP is only the start of the 4* transition. It's the first step. Win a couple 4* covers for a given character and, oh, look, now you can win the 4* DDQ.

That right there is just what many people are complaining about. A couple is nowhere close to enough. Unless a couple means 6+ (number may vary depending on color).

TheWerebison

A little off topic, but let's stop saying "basic disconnect".

It brings up...unhappy memories...

TOO SOON! XD

smkspy

whoami24601 wrote:

Der_Lex wrote:

I don't think 4* DDQ will be changed much, because it does serve more or less the same purpose as 3* DDQ: to help people with 8-10+ covers in a certain character get those final covers (although with random pulls it does a much crummier job at that than 3* DDQ). It's never going to be a tool for starting 3-4* transitioners to build their 4* roster.

That being said, the game really does need a tool for beginning 3-4* transitioners to build their 4* roster. There are simply too many 4*s out there now for the 1000 prog reward and the random egendary tokens to be sufficient. The devs have hinted at this in the past, and I think the time has come for it to be implemented.

There seems to be a basic disconnect between your two paragraphs. (And maybe this has been addressed, I didn't keep reading much further but will do so now.)

DDQ for 3* characters starts working with a single cover, not 8-10 as you say. You can win with the prior star level in order to advance to that star level. 2* teams and a single cover 3* can defeat the 3* DDQ in order to build a 3* roster and transition from 2* to 3*.

You yourself say that this is lacking for the 3* to 4* transition. The reason it is lacking is because the 4* DDQ is in no way serving the purpose as the current 3* DDQ is. The 4* DDQ does what you say, in that it rewards well-covered 4*, although you don't always need as many as 8-10 covers. Currently 4* DDQ enables a 4* to 5* transition more than anything else, while leaving people with well established 3* rosters no transition method beyond 1000 in PvP which you yourself say is insufficient.


It really reads as if you are arguing that 4* DDQ needs to be fixed to match 3* DDQ, while stating the opposite.

Yeah, to get my new 3 star cover every day, I just need the required character,but use a team without that character to win their cover. DDQ 4 star should be something similar. Make us use the 4 star required, and build a 3 star team around it. Just like third times the charm except we can only use 3 stars and not our 2s or 1s.

Add two more enemies if it needs to be harder, but I've a couple of 4 stars with a few covers and cannot come close to winning as it stands now. Yet, I'm told not to open up LT tokens, cause if I get 5 I must sell it off as not to destroy my roster scale, yet a simple way to guarantee development of the four stars that I already is scoffed at.