Give us 4* rewards for 4* meta

TxMoose

madsalad wrote:

OK, but, if you are winning more 4* covers instead of 3* covers, that is double the ISO from selling them if you already have them full covered but not maxed/champed.

yep, that is double the iso on about 2% of the iso we bring in. unfortunately that does nothing to increase the places where we actually go get iso from, you know, playing the game... like progressions, placements, and match drops/rewards.

xKOBALTx

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

I gave the OP a thumbs-up and intend to keep it there, but you know what? I kinda actually agree with simonsez, too. His post rang true to me, so I took a quick look at my roster to get specifics. Of the 27 4* characters I have 18 fully covered, 6 with 9+ covers and only 3 with less than that (also Venom, Nova & Gwen). I'm not hurting for covers here. But the ISO to level them? Good Thor almighty, that's where the pain truly is. No doubt about it. None.

fmftint

BlackBoltRocks wrote:

Ahh I'll just chip in

PvE: add a guaranteed 4* cover to DDQ every fifth day. With the new 4* coming out (not gonna spoil for anyone), that's like 27 or 28? It will take players 135-140 days to earn ONE cover of ONE 4*. Hardly game-breaking, especially with championing now. Make the Big Enchilada for that day correspondingly harder. Say, opponents from lv147-166 or something. Oh, and add a 4* cover as a progression reward.

PvP: lower the 4* cover requirement to 800 or 900 points. I can usually hit 800 with my championed 3*; again, one 4* cover every 3 days is hardly game-breaking, is it?

Miscellaneous: please increase the rate of 4* in tokens. Oh, and increase the number of 4* in vaults.

Pve needs a progression 4☆ (essential character)

firethorne

simonsez wrote:

Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered.

First and foremost, I don't disagree that ISO is a huge problem. But, the existence of a second problem isn't a good excuse for not fixing the first.

And also, you are a lot further along in 4* than the average player. I have all 3*s fully covered. I have zero Ghost Riders, zero X23s, 3 Miles, 3 Chos. It's nice that you have a deep roster of 4*s that help you consistently place and continue to get more. But some of us don't have that luxury. And now, usually to hit 1000, my measly 3*s are getting matched against 5*s with every skill covered. The power divide is growing. I'm happy you're on the good side of it. Most of us are not.

Dragon_Nexus

fmftint wrote:

Pve needs a progression 4☆ (essential character)

Swap the final HP reward right before the CP reward for a 4* cover. Job done.

rkd80

Significantly increase iso value for sold 4* covers? 2 birds one stone...but I am not sure how to fix the issue of championing is those progression rewards are designed to be iso neutral.

notamutant

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

I think you are using a bad strategy for leveling up your 4 stars. Why waste iso on bad characters you would only use once every 3-4 months for their Deadpool event, or for the rare occasion they are boosted? You already said yourself covers is not the issue, but iso is. In that case, you can miss out on that Deadpool legendary and the 3 events a **** character will be boosted for once every 2 months. Play smart, and save your iso for only good characters, not **** ones like Cho and Failcap.

SnowcaTT

xKOBALTx wrote:

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

I gave the OP a thumbs-up and intend to keep it there, but you know what? I kinda actually agree with simonsez, too. His post rang true to me, so I took a quick look at my roster to get specifics. Of the 27 4* characters I have 18 fully covered, 6 with 9+ covers and only 3 with less than that (also Venom, Nova & Gwen). I'm not hurting for covers here. But the ISO to level them? Good Thor almighty, that's where the pain truly is. No doubt about it. None.

I also thumbed-up OP (and it will stay there) - and thumbed-up simonsez as well. This is a point I though of overnight as well.

Similar experience to these - five 4* champed, nine sitting at 172 that have 13 covers, and I'm not moving them up - I'm busy moving the six or seven others that can get to that level up there for DDQ purposes.

If covers fell more frequently, it's not like we'd be seeing IW, SL, Elektra, Cho, or Falcap championed on all rosters - you would just see the top five or seven only, while folks hoard that ISO for the 5* collection. At least a slower rate gives us a little more variety I guess - maybe if someone max covers X23 or KP first, you might see them out there.

I'd also love to have the "bad" 4*'s maxed for PVE and DDQ, but there just is almost no reason to even bother with them - for anyone. An ISO influx (or a similar solution) might fix that, and promote diversity.

xKOBALTx

notamutant wrote:

I think you are using a bad strategy for leveling up your 4 stars. Why waste iso on bad characters you would only use once every 3-4 months for their Deadpool event, or for the rare occasion they are boosted? You already said yourself covers is not the issue, but iso is. In that case, you can miss out on that Deadpool legendary and the 3 events a **** character will be boosted for once every 2 months. Play smart, and save your iso for only good characters, not **** ones like Cho and Failcap.

I'll speak only for myself here, but I actually like using all of my characters. I had all of my 2* and 3* characters maxed before the Champion update was rumored. I want to have the same eventual goal for my 4* tier. Obviously I'm prioritizing the top characters to max first and realize the goal is long-term, but even at my level of play it's taking a significant amount of time and play to level each one. Longer than the release schedule, that's for sure. I only have two 4* completed since the Champion update went live and both of them had a decent start in leveling to begin with.

GrumpySmurf1002

notamutant wrote:

I think you are using a bad strategy for leveling up your 4 stars. Why waste iso on bad characters you would only use once every 3-4 months for their Deadpool event, or for the rare occasion they are boosted? You already said yourself covers is not the issue, but iso is. In that case, you can miss out on that Deadpool legendary and the 3 events a **** character will be boosted for once every 2 months. Play smart, and save your iso for only good characters, not **** ones like Cho and Failcap.

Leveling 7 **** characters to a servicable DDQ level (160) costs less than maxing one good character from scratch. (355k vs 366k)

The Iso shortage isn't (primarily) coming from a mismanagement of funds by players.

The problem arises from a developer mindset that "you should have to choose who to level" competing directly with their gameplay model of "everyone can be essential"

Vhailorx

I have been saying exactly this since at least the summer 2015. the pace for building 4*s is totally unreasonable and getting worse as more are introduced. pushing out 4* covers to top 10 in pve events was a start, but it's nowhere near enough. in the 3* meta world, finishing top 10 in pve events gave you 4 3* covers for a particular character (and a 5th prog reward for a different character). The same level of performance in PVE now gives you 1 4* and an LT. But the character release rate is the same, and direct buy is no longer really a practical option.

Treading water is extremely difficult right now, let along making real roster progress. I get that we are supposed to keep playing and aren't every really supposed to have everything in the game, but this is too far in the other direction right now. And that says nothing about ISO.

And I disagree with Simonsez, insofar as it will not be as easy to build new 4*s as it was during the summer and fall of 2015. as the 4* tier grows, the value of LTs drops. And LTs are really the only way to stay ahead of the current pace of character release (since it's still very hard to get multiple covers for any 4* after their release event). I would bet that simon's nova/gwen etc sit on the bench with relatively few covers longer than JG or Iceman did when they were released last year. . .

Dragon_Nexus

Ya know, it's odd. Most free to play games have a steady stream of free currency and lock things behind the premium currency which is much more scarce. MPQ does things the opposite way, it seems.

_Ryu_

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

I can remember some mounth ago when at any corner everyone complained how broken this game was/is and the progress in fixing it bit for bit was very slowly by the devs. Somewhere i wrote give the iso shortage 2 mounth and it will be fixed... that was for over 2 mounth and there is no fix to that.

At this time I do really believe ISO is a moneybringer for D3 and there never will be a fix for it, some communication from the devs would be nice what we can expect from this bottleneck effect, even Ice wrote about company things like the price policy for roster slots are not discussed because they are bringing a huge amount of money in, so every slight change to it has to be done very very very carefully.

Its not wrong to give us some insight how decisions are made by the publisher of the game, really, we are grownups and do know that everyone has to earn his paycheck, just tell if its the money or are there other reasons.

TxMoose

FYI - if they're covered, my 4* ddq level of 145 has served me well - most finish first try. a couple have needed 2 or 3 tries. I don't think they need 160 or 172 (except for MFer - mine needed more last run). and at 145, when they're boosted, they can be played with unboosted 3s just fine. used to be 180 I think, but now they're 218 and can help some. 145 spread over a dozen characters or so would save some iso.

Dauthi

So there are 2 competing ideas here, one for more covers, and one for more ISO, and both are at odds with each other.

Personally, as a player who gets top 50 every PVP and PVE, hits 1k every PVP, and gets all the 3*/4* alliance rewards, the balance is perfect. My 4* characters are finishing around the same time I have the ISO to finish them (not counting the really bad ones). I don't know if I am an anomaly, but if I had more ISO I would need more covers, and if I had more covers I would need more ISO. I am curious what other players are doing that they have too many covers or too much ISO.

TheOncomingStorm

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

First, I respect all your posts.

Second, we're actually making the same argument. Progression in mpq is limited by iso and/or covers. I'm saying iso should be what controls the rate of progression, not covers. You appear to be arguing that covers should limit the rate of progression not iso.

I think it should be covers that way players have the option of choosing how to use their rare, limited iso resources. They can spread it around, they can pump their favorite character, or they can level their most powerful character. The bottom line is that players have more control over their roster and get to play with more of these characters.

Let's not forget, mpq pumps a large portion of their resources into characters (every two weeks minimum), not content. Furthermore, some content (essential nodes) is inaccessible without the proper character.

And it's not like I'm asking for something revolutionary here. 3* meta had 3* rewards. This also means traditionally mpq progression has been limited more by iso, than covers. Today's mpq is a 4* meta. Logic and common sense dictate 4* placement rewards are in order.

Regardless if one sides that iso or covers should be used to control the rate of game progession, there is no need to have TWO means of control. It is overkill.

bpcontra

"I wish I never opened this post....I'm now depressed "

-Every 3* transitioner

TheOncomingStorm

bpcontra wrote:

"I wish I never opened this post....I'm now depressed "

-Every 3* transitioner

You realize, we're arguing that 3* rewards replace 2* rewards make your 3* progression more accessible as well?

This affects everyone. The current antiquated rewards structure also makes it harder for newer players, such as yourself.

TLCstormz

simonsez wrote:

I can't believe I have to disagree with a post headed towards triple-digit upvotes. Just speaking personally, I don't need any more 4* covers. Am I stressed that my Gwen, Venom and Nova are woefully undercovered? Hell no, because by the time I have enough ISO to level up my full-covered X23, GR, Miles and Cho (he's gonna be in DDQ4 eventually, so you have to), those characters WILL be full covered. And I'll still have no ISO. I also have at least a dozen 3*s that will never be champed because of no ISO. I'd also like to champ even the low-tier 4*s, because hell, who wouldn't want a 35k nuke during Falcrap's boost week? And don't even get me started on the ISO hole in my 5*s.

So until the ISO economy changes, the rate at which we're getting covers is working for me, and probability a lot of people. ISO is the overwhelming constraint, not cover availability.

It's selfish posts like these that make anyone that's NOT a veteran want to stop playing AND stop posting.

Do you really think that the OTHER 90% of the player population ( and most would argue it's more like 98% - 99%, actually ) should be neglected because you already have TOO MUCH of an item?

Y'all are so troubling, on here.

stowaway

Dauthi wrote:

Personally, as a player who gets top 50 every PVP and PVE, hits 1k every PVP, and gets all the 3*/4* alliance rewards, the balance is perfect. {snip} I am curious what other players are doing that they have too many covers or too much ISO.

First of all, by definition you're a top 10% slash top 5% player, according to your own description of yourself. And not just in one gameplay mode, but both. Not many players compete equally in both PvP and PvE. It shouldn't surprise you that your experience isn't typical.

Second, you've been playing a long time. The longer you've played, the more likely you are to have hoarded iso, or to have already spent it on mid-tier characters because you had nothing better to do with it. Nick Fury is a great gauge for this. When championing hit, did you already have Nick Fury at 270? Newer players may have worked hard to get him max covered, but not bothered to invest as much iso in him because the meta had passed him by. So that's someone who competed to be equal to you in terms of covers, but who will always be behind you due to days played. Oh well!

Finally, there's the complicated issue of Championing having flooded the market with covers. If you were a solid 3* player, but struggling to transition to 4* (and especially if you were hoarding tokens and keeping covers in your queue because you'd been spoiled that Championing was coming), you probably got 10, 20, 30 random 4* covers in the first week. Suddenly you were a 4* player, past the transition, but with no iso because you spent it all championing 3*. I suspect those are the people who are feeling the iso crunch the worst.

I don't mean any criticism by it. You said you were curious, so I explained it.