Enslaved wrote: Nobody. Chess would be terrible if every piece was a rook. People shouldn't be rewarded for making mistakes. If my opponent sacrifices a rook to save a pawn and later in the match the tourney director changed my opponents pawn into a rook because they complained that the pawn isn't as good as a rook i'd be furious. Besides, every character in the Marvel universe isn't equal in power and some characters powers are a complete joke. Like Squirrel Girl for example should be bad and i'm thankful that she is. Just because a character isn't as strong as another doesn't mean they are broken and need to be "fixed".
wymtime wrote: So if MPQ is chess if I use Squirrel Girl against you and she is a pawn in your book, when I hit you with Fury Friends shouldn't she be able to upgrade to my strongest character? Every character should be playable and have a solid fit. There are some characters like Rags, Collosus, Spider-Man that can be adjusted to become more playable. In 4* land Cho, Star lord, and IW need some tweets or overhauls to be better than the majority of 3*. If someone levels any 4* that 4* should be at least a top 3 3* character. That is not the case in the game today.
alphabeta wrote: Your analogy is wrong - player can't control who they will be given by a token - any 4* is supposed equivalent to a knight or a bishop and drawing Cho is like being told at the start of the match that although both players have the same pieces your bishop can only move one space at a time while everyone else's can continue to move along their axis as many spaces as they want. They should be reworked so that 3*s are better than 2*s and 4*s are better than 3*s - there should absolutely be a range within the *s but some of the characters mentioned on this thread are atleast 1 * below their rating - I can't think I'd ever be concerned going up against a maxed champ Cho with even a decent 3* roster.
Enslaved wrote: wymtime wrote: So if MPQ is chess if I use Squirrel Girl against you and she is a pawn in your book, when I hit you with Fury Friends shouldn't she be able to upgrade to my strongest character? Every character should be playable and have a solid fit. There are some characters like Rags, Collosus, Spider-Man that can be adjusted to become more playable. In 4* land Cho, Star lord, and IW need some tweets or overhauls to be better than the majority of 3*. If someone levels any 4* that 4* should be at least a top 3 3* character. That is not the case in the game today. The chess analogy was used to illustrate that a pawn is integrally important to the overall quality of the gameplay and perfectly capable of beating the queen despite being vastly inferior in power. I didn't mean MPQ was literally chess. *rolls eyes* In MPQ all of the characters are playable and the worst characters within the tiers can and do beat the best ones under normal playing conditions. They do fit and already serve a purpose. You said it yourself, what you want is "more playable" which means "stronger" which is completely self-serving and has nothing to do with the health of the game itself.
Enslaved wrote: wymtime wrote: So if MPQ is chess if I use Squirrel Girl against you and she is a pawn in your book, when I hit you with Fury Friends shouldn't she be able to upgrade to my strongest character? Every character should be playable and have a solid fit. There are some characters like Rags, Collosus, Spider-Man that can be adjusted to become more playable. In 4* land Cho, Star lord, and IW need some tweets or overhauls to be better than the majority of 3*. If someone levels any 4* that 4* should be at least a top 3 3* character. That is not the case in the game today. The chess analogy was used to illustrate that a pawn is integrally important to the overall quality of the gameplay and perfectly capable of beating the queen despite being vastly inferior in power. I didn't mean MPQ was literally chess. *rolls eyes* In MPQ all of the characters are playable and the worst characters within the tiers can and do beat the best ones under normal playing conditions. They do fit and already serve a purpose. You said it yourself, what you want is "more playable" which means "stronger" which is completely self-serving and has nothing to do with the health of the game itself. alphabeta wrote: Your analogy is wrong - player can't control who they will be given by a token - any 4* is supposed equivalent to a knight or a bishop and drawing Cho is like being told at the start of the match that although both players have the same pieces your bishop can only move one space at a time while everyone else's can continue to move along their axis as many spaces as they want. They should be reworked so that 3*s are better than 2*s and 4*s are better than 3*s - there should absolutely be a range within the *s but some of the characters mentioned on this thread are atleast 1 * below their rating - I can't think I'd ever be concerned going up against a maxed champ Cho with even a decent 3* roster. Your perception of the players control over their own team is what is wrong. If you pull Cho from a token you are not forced to recruit him, you are not forced to spend any resources on Cho and you are never forced to bring Cho into a match even if you had. If you did any of these things it was your own choice and if you aren't happy with the result of those choices it is your own fault. Also in regards to characters power in different tiers. The devs have said time and time again that the star rating has no relation to the characters power in the Marvel universe or in MPQ. It is purely there to signify the rarity of the characters. So no the worst 4* shouldn't necessarily be better than the best 3*.
wymtime wrote: First I got your chess analogy and decided to troll you a little bit. As far as the worst characters in each tier beating the best in the lower tier that in my opinion is not true. Look at he DPDQ of Mr F. Doom was destroying Mr. F. Other 4* like HB 4Thor were a cake walk. Look at X-Force vs Cyclops. Cyclops does massive damage and can take many 4* even at level 270. the issue is there are some characters that are so outclassed that they are not used by the majority of players. Look at Spider-Man. I use him only in Enemy of the State for survival nodes. I use his protect tile for Falcon, and his stun for wolvie rinse when he comes out and that is it. His yellow is bad, and there are now much better characters who can stun an opponent and do damage there is not much reason o use him. By asking the buff this character I am telling he developers I want to use this character more, but his power set does not fit into the way I feel the game is played today. He is too situational and because of that I feel he is worth looking into which will make the character more diverse and useful to more people. This whole thread is a wY for people to say pull like to use character X more and if his powers were better I would. The health of the game is fine, but no game should have characters that a lot of players choose to sell instead of roster, or if they have roster end never use unless essential. The Dev's put a lot of work into these characters and I am sure hey would like to see more players actually enjoy using some of the characters they created. This is an opportunity to say who you would like to use more. If that is selfish in your mind maybe you should look at another topic.
alphabeta wrote: Except essential characters do force you to hold and use characters to place highly. Yes I could opt out but if you accept the premise is to compete that not an option because someone else will always have him - the nature of the game forces the holding of useless characters which dissatisfies the customer base - ergo it's just good business sense to not piss off the people who pay your wages. If you don't see need to recruit cho how does it hurt you if he's reworked to be useful (or any of the other characters listed - thread has some good suggestions).
Enslaved wrote: What if I said that my favorite character is Yelena Belova and that its a shame that I have to use Old Man Logan all the time so Yelena should be buffed into stronger than OML so i can be using her instead.
Enslaved wrote: wymtime wrote: First I got your chess analogy and decided to troll you a little bit. As far as the worst characters in each tier beating the best in the lower tier that in my opinion is not true. Look at he DPDQ of Mr F. Doom was destroying Mr. F. Other 4* like HB 4Thor were a cake walk. Look at X-Force vs Cyclops. Cyclops does massive damage and can take many 4* even at level 270. the issue is there are some characters that are so outclassed that they are not used by the majority of players. Look at Spider-Man. I use him only in Enemy of the State for survival nodes. I use his protect tile for Falcon, and his stun for wolvie rinse when he comes out and that is it. His yellow is bad, and there are now much better characters who can stun an opponent and do damage there is not much reason o use him. By asking the buff this character I am telling he developers I want to use this character more, but his power set does not fit into the way I feel the game is played today. He is too situational and because of that I feel he is worth looking into which will make the character more diverse and useful to more people. This whole thread is a wY for people to say pull like to use character X more and if his powers were better I would. The health of the game is fine, but no game should have characters that a lot of players choose to sell instead of roster, or if they have roster end never use unless essential. The Dev's put a lot of work into these characters and I am sure hey would like to see more players actually enjoy using some of the characters they created. This is an opportunity to say who you would like to use more. If that is selfish in your mind maybe you should look at another topic. My opinion on this subject is perfectly valid and you were the one that attacked me first and have now even admitted to trolling and yet I should leave? What if I said that my favorite character is Yelena Belova and that its a shame that I have to use Old Man Logan all the time so Yelena should be buffed into stronger than OML so i can be using her instead. Also while we're at it we should start a petition to make Magikarp stronger than Mewtwo not cause of any gameplay concerns or anything but because Magikarp is my fav Pokemon. Would you then agree my presence is more than welcome in this topic? Further your DDQ example only emphasizes my point further. Nearly any character can beat nearly any other character under many circumstances and conditions proving there is nothing inherently wrong with them. You can use anybody you want anytime you want to beat anybody you want, its just you may be able to do so more effectively with someone else. Nobody is stopping you from using Spider-Man in every fight and hes perfectly capable of beating any character in the game. For example a lvl266 champ 3* spidey would obliterate a 0/0/1 Old Man Logan and it wouldn't even be a close fight, spidey wins in a landslide.
cyineedsn wrote: Um, I think the idea is that people want characters that are comparable in power level to other characters in their respective * tiers. An analogy comparing a 1* character to 5* is uh... I don't even know how we got here to be honest.
wymtime wrote: Third the fact that you think 3* spidey would destroy OML you are wrong. OML match damage alone would make this a tough fight And you are not even giving him an ability to use.
wymtime wrote: The Hulk PVP is a perfect example of the buffed characters not being up to snuff.
wymtime wrote: Lastly If you like Yelena and want to use her more post about why you feel she deserves to be buffed instead of telling everyone else they are wrong for wanting some of their favorite characters to be more useful.
Enslaved wrote: If you think its even remotely plausible to lose via match damage from a lvl255 with no active powers when you have higher match damage with a lvl266
Marvelfamily wrote: Ragnarok His green is the 2nd ability I won't use like Hulks red. Why does it hurt the own team? He was designed to be a 'better Thor', right? Reduce the team damage. That is old-school.
alaeth wrote: (Moonstone) - way too situational as a 2*, she needs more "generality" obviously (Vision) - the abilities are cool, but the fact that the AI cannot play him effectively makes him not worth the ISO to invest (Elektra) - the first 4* I got half-decently covered. So excited until I tried to use her against - wehat I thought was - the main targets she is designed for... strike tile spammers. Her red trap gets over-written almost immediately, black depends on her being in front (but when it triggers whee!) and purple is too expensive to make it worth the use.