Poll: should 4* PVP exist -instead- of 3*?

jffdougan

I would respond by proposing that simultaneous, mutually-exclusive events both makes it easier to keep the current Season scoring system as-is and introduces a level of strategic/tactical choice that some people might feel is missing.

I'm open to both as proposals, though.

SnowcaTT

What I wonder with results is I never really clarified "same rewards" or "new rewards" in the 2nd highest voted option - the "mix of 3*'s and 4*'s". I sort of meant as-is - like Elektra coming up with (presumably) the same 3* at 800 and 4* at 1K.

Slarow

jffdougan wrote:

I would respond by proposing that simultaneous, mutually-exclusive events both makes it easier to keep the current Season scoring system as-is

Remember that the 4* bracket would have none of the 3* "cannon fodder" that those who get over 1K use to get there. Scores in the 4*/5* tier would therefore be very much lower. Lower end 4* teams would be like the 2*/3* teams are now, and only the max-5* teams would have a hope of get to the 1K range.

jffdougan wrote:

and introduces a level of strategic/tactical choice that some people might feel is missing.

The lower end 4*'s will very quickly become tired of being cannon fodder, and drop back to the regular event. Next, the mid range 4*'s will become the canon fodder, and drop back also. Finally, the advanced 4* teams will become the cannon fodder, and drop back. Eventually you will only have maxed 5* teams in the vet bracket, as no one will want to be the cannon fodder. They too will decide to head back to the regular event because they can run up their scores there, but not in the vet event.

"do I play the vet event or the regular event" is meta-choice, not strategy, which time and time again has shown to not be fun and strategic, but a pain point for people. It's up there with "Do I roster this 5* and blow out my scaling, or sell him".

rawfsu

4* PVP should exist, but on a limited basis. I like the current system now, where you get to play with the new 4* for an event during the season they premiere. I also liked it during Anniversary Week, when the last PVP of the season was a 4* as well. I don't think it would be fair to the player-base at large to institute anything more than two 4* events per season. This issue could possibly be addressed using the good old buy in event that MPQ would host in the past with the guarantee of at one recruite token if I remember right.

TxMoose

Slarow wrote:

Remember that the 4* bracket would have none of the 3* "cannon fodder" that those who get over 1K use to get there. Scores in the 4*/5* tier would therefore be very much lower.

completely disagree here. the machine that builds points in all the higher scoring slices will do the same here. trust me, the top alliances will figure out ways to make it work and will do exactly what they're doing now.

if you're referring to baking, it might look different if 2s and 3s are locked out, but the same principles will apply. instead of mnmags and cstorm (or jugs/mstorm if you're good) it will be level 70 gwen and venom or something similar. I have to agree that it will be quite the slog facing champed 4s right off the bat for climbing.

BTW, not sure that 3s should be locked out anyway. some 3s have very good synergy with 4s/5s and get chosen over 4s anyway. im40 (with ice or 4thor or cyke) and fist (with OML) and witch (with several) come to mind.

Lidolas

TxMoose wrote:

Slarow wrote:

Remember that the 4* bracket would have none of the 3* "cannon fodder" that those who get over 1K use to get there. Scores in the 4*/5* tier would therefore be very much lower.

completely disagree here. the machine that builds points in all the higher scoring slices will do the same here. trust me, the top alliances will figure out ways to make it work and will do exactly what they're doing now.

if you're referring to baking, it might look different if 2s and 3s are locked out, but the same principles will apply. instead of mnmags and cstorm (or jugs/mstorm if you're good) it will be level 70 gwen and venom or something similar. I have to agree that it will be quite the slog facing champed 4s right off the bat for climbing.

BTW, not sure that 3s should be locked out anyway. some 3s have very good synergy with 4s/5s and get chosen over 4s anyway. im40 (with ice or 4thor or cyke) and fist (with OML) and witch (with several) come to mind.

I agree. The way I imagined it was that there would be just replace the 3* required/borrowed center figure with a 4* and have a similar rotation. You could still bring anyone for the left and right positions.

Crowl

SnowcaTT wrote:

Might as well let folks run both, right? If you eliminate all 5*'s and boosted 4*'s (or even all the 4*'s!) in the lower tier PVP, you'll still have folks that perhaps have no maxed 4* competing with anyone who has all the 4*'s, since they can use the 3*'s to T100 in these with a bit of effort (shielding). 3* could still be the lower reward (800) to help finishing that transition, 4* could still be the upper rewards to get to the next level.

The problem with letting people run both is that while that would be great for the 4* rosters, it would result in the 3* rosters being stuck in almost exactly the same situation that they are now, just slightly lower level maxed sides taking rewards from people that needed them more.

Unknown

I think it would be awesome to have 4 separate consistent PvP events that run all month. Then the random event. Now the first of the constant ones is strictly a 1* only format that offers a mix of 1* and 2* covers with other standard rewards. Then their is 2* only with the covers reflecting 2*and3* covers being prizes. Then the 3* only event has 3* covers and a small small number of 4*s say maybe 2 at most. The reason the 4*s where lowered is because the final event is the Simulatior that is currently configured with it being the anything goes battle royal that it is.

The only free buffed up characters are the ones in the PvP events that could come out now once every week and they are also wide open grade rosters. And the way you could fix the championed vs non championed in the 2*&3* leauges is easy if ranked under 500 you can't use a championed character if get above 400 you can use one 2 at 300 and above 200 it's a free for all because those are the actual competition players.

Unknown

I forgot to address the alliance rank issue that was brought up. If this new format was to come to be the score system would change in a big way. It's currently how ever many points each player scores get added together. In this format all that would be counted is their rank in each event with a total reverse on how you win. It's not the highest score that wins but the alliance with the best ranks in events and their has to be a minimum of 20 players in a alliance to be allowed to participate in alliance competition. Now they don't all have to be active but this will drive the teams average up and make it harder on the active players.
If you need me to do a sample matrix I can just request one ok

Slarow

TxMoose wrote:

Slarow wrote:

Remember that the 4* bracket would have none of the 3* "cannon fodder" that those who get over 1K use to get there. Scores in the 4*/5* tier would therefore be very much lower.

completely disagree here. the machine that builds points in all the higher scoring slices will do the same here. trust me, the top alliances will figure out ways to make it work and will do exactly what they're doing now.

The mechanism (cupcakes and shield hopping) would have to start from 0 points instead of starting from ~1100 as it does now. Hence the lower points overall.

I am not talking about eliminating the 3* characters, I am talking about the 3* players who won't be in the vet tourney, so the only players will be those with a good 4* roster, and therefore the means by which current players get to 1k (feeding off 3* and 4* transitioning teams) are not going to be there. Result: Much lower scores.

Stax the Foyer

I think the 1st, 4th, 7th, and 10th events of a season should be 4* events, and the others should be 3* events. That's a 40/60 ratio, which is pretty much in line with the current 3* to 4* ratio.

With the changes to loaner characters, it's still pretty fun to play with a loaner, and it'll give transitioning players a feel for what 4* characters they might like to focus on. You could even put the 4* character cover at 800, and leave the 1000 point cover part of the usual rotation.

Slarow

Stax the Foyer wrote:

I think the 1st, 4th, 7th, and 10th events of a season should be 4* events, and the others should be 3* events. That's a 40/60 ratio, which is pretty much in line with the current 3* to 4* ratio.

With the changes to loaner characters, it's still pretty fun to play with a loaner, and it'll give transitioning players a feel for what 4* characters they might like to focus on. You could even put the 4* character cover at 800, and leave the 1000 point cover part of the usual rotation.

So half the time the 3* population is going to be crippled with a loaner 4*, and the other half, the 4* population is going to be crippled with a forced 3* team up.

Why not simply have a 3* AND a 4* featured character in each PVP, and let the player chose between a loaner 3*, their own 3*, or their own 4*. It would be the least complicated change, and would allow both 3* and 4* players to play full teams of their current level, without being crippled with an unwanted teamup from a level that they are not on.

Stax the Foyer

Slarow wrote:

Stax the Foyer wrote:

I think the 1st, 4th, 7th, and 10th events of a season should be 4* events, and the others should be 3* events. That's a 40/60 ratio, which is pretty much in line with the current 3* to 4* ratio.

With the changes to loaner characters, it's still pretty fun to play with a loaner, and it'll give transitioning players a feel for what 4* characters they might like to focus on. You could even put the 4* character cover at 800, and leave the 1000 point cover part of the usual rotation.

So half the time the 3* population is going to be crippled with a loaner 4*, and the other half, the 4* population is going to be crippled with a forced 3* team up.

Why not simply have a 3* AND a 4* featured character in each PVP, and let the player chose between a loaner 3*, their own 3*, or their own 4*. It would be the least complicated change, and would allow both 3* and 4* players to play full teams of their current level, without being crippled with an unwanted teamup from a level that they are not on.

Sure, that could work, but you'd have times when you've got a top-tier 4* character featured, along with a bottom-tier 3* character. That seems like it'd be extra rough on the 3* tier.

I think it's good for all of the characters to see some playtime in PvP. Right now, the mid-to-bottom-tier 4*s really aren't being touched in PvP after their release PvP. Especially with a wider selection of boosted 4*s weekly. That's kind of a shame.

Slarow

Stax the Foyer wrote:

Sure, that could work, but you'd have times when you've got a top-tier 4* character featured, along with a bottom-tier 3* character. That seems like it'd be extra rough on the 3* tier.

Even when this isn't the case, a top 3* team isn't going to be able to take on a top 4* team, that's just how it is. Sure, they may be able to take on an underleveled 4* team, or a bad 4* team, but expecting a 3* team to take on 4* teams without losing most of the attacks is an unrealistic expectation, and if you shoot for that, it only cheapens 4* teams when they get there.

Stax the Foyer wrote:

I think it's good for all of the characters to see some playtime in PvP. Right now, the mid-to-bottom-tier 4*s really aren't being touched in PvP after their release PvP. Especially with a wider selection of boosted 4*s weekly. That's kind of a shame.

True, but there is a reason for that, and that is that no one is going to spend the ISO to level Mr Fantastic, forcing them to have a crippled roster for an entire "Mr Fantastic" event. Sure some may level him, and the proposed solution would reward them for doing so, but why not keep that choice in the hands of the players? They can choose to run an underleveled Mr Fantastic or their max Spidey in the "SpideyFan" event